Thoughts on Sinn Fein
Following on from Eoin O’Broin and Brian Feeney’s comments some weeks ago- carried on Slugger here- I feel compelled to add my own tuppence worth regarding the current position facing Sinn Fein and would welcome comments- critical, supportive or otherwise- from across the political spectrum.
Let me preface my comments by acknowledging that the party, as the largest nationalist electoral force in the North and even at 8% in the South, remains in the strongest electoral position since partition to potentially effect change and drive an all-Ireland agenda from the margins into the mainstream of political discourse on the island, a testament to the sometimes masterful manner in which the party leadership navigated the process of change from armed conflict to compromise over the past decade and more. Eoin O’Broin is correct to point to serious failings in the party’s approach to date in the South, but sitting at 8% the party still remains on course to be in contention for the role of coalition partners in any future post-election mix. The problem, as I see it, is that the Stormont experience to date suggests that, were Sinn Fein to secure a position in government within both jurisdictions in Ireland simultaneously, on current form the party would not appear to have anything close to resembling a plan to maximize such a position of influence and power to further nationalist objectives.Whilst Eoin has highlighted serious deficiencies with the party’s approach in the South, I would like to focus primarily on the party’s failings to date in the new northern administration and legislature, failings which are a cause for concern given that they point to the necessity of significant leadership-led changes to the party’s modus operandi if the party is to begin to plot a way forward which will maximize delivery for its constituency and begin planning seriously about how to not only grow support in the South but also utilize any potential electoral/ political strength for its wider objectives of Irish unity.
Let me state from the start that I haven’t been particularly impressed by what’s shaped up at Stormont to date across the board, with few of the 108 MLAs scoring highly in terms of articulation of policies, quality of debate within chamber/ committee or ability to deliver a pro-active Ministerial agenda. But, given I’m a republican, my most pressing concern has been the –to my mind- sluggish performance of Sinn Fein at both Executive and Assembly level to date, which indicates the need for decisive action from the party leadership to ensure that the tremendous potential of the current political environment is not lost.
There needs to be greater clarity regarding the strategic direction of the party at this time. Pursuit of Irish unity is its cornerstone, defining objective, but beyond seeking to hold the reins of power in the two administrations on the island, there isn’t a clear direction being provided from republicans about the way ahead. More than troubling, this is perplexing given that the canvass shouldn’t be that difficult to fill.
As I see it, the root cause of the current malaise is a failure to expedite the process of transforming Sinn Fein into a professional political party, with all that entails for the development- and delivery- of policies; for performing the multi-faceted roles of legislators in a competent and articulate manner; for addressing the deficit in professionally experienced and skilled advisors within party ranks; and for upgrading the constituency service provision to a level which no other party in the north should be able to match.
That’s not to say I believe the party is performing at a sub-par level in regard to each of the outlined areas when compared to the other main parties in the north; rather, I’m suggesting that the party needs to set itself higher targets and standards quite simply because a) it has the ability to do so and b) it needs to, given that its political project is much more ambitious than any of the other parties in the north at this time.
Too many of the party’s policies- spanning all areas of social, economic and cultural life, as well as regarding the constitutional question- are little more than broad brush vision statements, often lacking in both imagination and, most importantly, a sharpness and clarity of purpose that comes from a body politic embedded in the professional world. Maybe that’s harsh, but it’s true. Again, could be said of most other parties (perhaps with the exception of the DUP) but that isn’t my concern.
In most legislatures at any level, there are, broadly, two types of elected representatives: the good constituency representative, who owes his/ her election to a reputation built on familiarity with constituents through the hard graft of constituency work/ advocacy. And then there’s the policy legislator/ ‘wonk’, who along with party advisers drives the policy agenda of the party and helps formulate and articulate a party’s stance on the plethora of issues facing a political party.
It will hardly come as a revelation to political observers on Slugger to suggest that Sinn Fein is dangerously top-heavy with the former, to the extent that the party has been exposed in a number of policy areas as simply not having the professional experience within either its pool of elected representatives nor in the ranks of party advisers to cope with the broad range of issues facing the party at Executive level and within the legislature in a satisfactory manner –never mind being consistent with any ideological position.
Again, Sinn Fein is not alone in this regard, and anyone having watched or listened to any of the Stormont debates or studio discussions involving politicians in the past 18 months will see that all parties have their share of MLA’s with a painfully obvious level of ignorance when it comes to policy issues under discussion. But given that the party needs to avail of its access to power in the north to sharpen its ideological consciousness and policy platform to better equip itself for a successful southern relaunch, then the need for swift and decisive action from the republican leadership becomes clearer.
Ironically, it has been the continuing decline of the SDLP which has contributed to the lethargy within republicanism leading to the current predicament. The abysmal state of that party has ensured there is less of a sense of urgency to address such shortcomings within Sinn Fein. In this regard, the more robust level of competition within unionist politics in recent years has clearly benefitted unionism in keeping the DUP on their toes and by forcing the UUP to consider the imaginative (but ultimately doomed) option of linking up with the Tories to try and break the DUP’s dominance within unionism.
But governing politics has its own dynamic, which invariably poses electoral problems for incumbent parties, as the DUP and Sinn Fein essentially are, given their predominant position within the Executive.
The tendency of electorates to grow tired, disgruntled and ultimately impatient with the governing party(ies) is a common theme across western liberal democracies, hence the importance of Sinn Fein acknowledging and providing a simultaneous function to fill the opposition deficit within the consociational arrangements at Stormont. To this end, the party has shown a reluctance to pro-actively and effectively fulfill the opposition role it must assume in all but the three Departmental Ministries it holds. It needs to realize that the Executive ain’t no normal government: the gloves should be off for all but the party’s own Ministers.
In sum then, my proposals are simple. The party needs to invest in expertise and innovation, free itself of the shackles of laudable but otherwise counter-productive party rules and conventions and in the process equip itself with a refreshing and attractive policy platform to not only earn a place in government across the country but to utilize that position to transform the political scene in Ireland, in the process shifting others onto the ‘all-Ireland’ platform.
Chris
You mentioned the word compromise. Others might think of sell out.
They have surely turned their backs on socialism and repudiated republicanism.
It was inevitable that they will support the Establishment in the North and become non radical in the South—-a long decline awaits.
I suppose another thing they should think about is all their political leadership supporting the rule of law. Maybe that should include the agriculture minister suggesting that people go to the police about criminal attempted murder in her constituency.
Maybe assisting the police in the investigation of previous criminal activity would help. The fact that the Deputy First minister could not even give full evidence to the Saville enquiry due to an alleged oath to an illegal, sectarian murder gang. Then other SF MLAs might help with any information they might have about other murders in this part of the world. Maybe the Regional Development Minister could stop besmirching the name of one of his constituents immediately after he was murdered and maybe he (the minister) could stop running to talk to illegal organisations to discuss that murder.
If all that happened who knows SF might look a little more like a professional political party.
Chris,
I think your blog while laudable for addressing problems in your party is indicative of the failings in SF as a republican party.
The difficulties in moving from a militarist mindset, a necessity during decades of armed struggle, to a constitutional parliamentary party are inevitable but seeking to address this solely by improving the leadership cadre, both elected and administrative and concentration in improving ability as a ‘governing’ party stands in stark contrast to what I feel a republican and socialist movement should be about.
The absence of any focus on empowering the grassroots constituency, broader community, giving a sense of ownership over both the party and wider politics and concentration on making a power-focused, leadership driven, machine more efficient is bound to replicate mistakes of the past. Accountability, empowerment and connection with the masses are ignored in pursuit of possibly doomed attempts to improve a vanguard.
As a party that still describes itself as revolutionary this seems like Marxist-Leninist structures from a party of limited demonstrable socialism. I think upskilling of the top tier of the party could bring benefits but to further separate the elected from the people by ignoring any reconnection on the streets seems like missing the biggest failing of SF in the last decade.
(you did ask)
Mark.
Mark,
SF have rising stars like Daithi McKay, who would deny John O’Dowd is one of the most articulate of all the MLA’s.
Chris Gaskin of Balrog has been known to make sense on the odd occasion
I’m happy with the general direction of the Party.
Remember it was Paisley at the helm for 40 yrs.
Post-Paisley politics is the new era.
Carpe Deim.
SF’s biggest problems (in no particular order):
*being consistently out-manouevered by the DUP
*Ruane’s breath-taking incompetence
*being dismissed by the Southern electorate.
*aging leadership without obvious replacements
A serious, committed effort of engagement through practical policies toward people of the other tradition is needed IMHO. Would an office on the Shankhill get burnt down these days?
Perhaps the facilitation of cross-tradition agricultural co-operative organisations in the Steeples would be an idea?
And abstentionism at Westminster now seems anachronistic in the new world – especially wrt practical arrangements for Unification.
For the past few months Horseman has been, very elegantly, recording the demographic changes – most recently in the workforce, all advantageous to nationalism. It’s time for practical planning of the details of unification with especial focus on the fears of Protestants.
“Chris Gaskin of Balrog has been known to make sense on the odd occasion”
It’s the rank bigotry of odious individuals like Gaskin which means that PSF are a long way from “reaching out” to those they need to “reach out” too, in order to have a hope of a “united” Ireland.
“It’s time for practical planning of the details of unification with especial focus on the fears of Protestants”
They’d be better concentating on Unionists.
Realist,
I guess apologising unreservedly for their many members involvement in murdering people might help. Then they could try cooperating with the police and judiciary in order to bring the assorted criminals to justice. Maybe they could start with the likes of the murders of Frank Hegarty, Patsy Gillespie and the La Mon and Claudy bombings.
Turgon,
I think you’ll find Adams has made more apologies than any other of the parties in the conflict.
Also SF have been as open, if not more than anyone else vis-a-vis victims, when you consider the Britsh Secret Services and/or RUC/RIR and loyalists.
If you study the Omagh case for example, its clear there’s been a cover-up.
there is no plan to advance irish unity because there never really was one, just a fanciful set of slogans and half-worked out pipedreams manufactured to keep people like chris donnelly (if that’s his real name) happy with the gyrations of the adams leadership as they moved towards power and respectability – so wise up chris!
imo Gaskin’s blog after a good start spiralled into a very dark place of reactionary blogging. In recent weeks he seems to have made a genuine attempt to end this, has removed the worst offenders and seems on the road back to be a worthwile read (I hadn’t been reading regularly for a long time)
Percy,
Great so I assume that any members of SF with any information about Claudy, La Mon etc. etc. are about to come forward.
Turgon,
Its more important that you come to terms with the past.
Chris
Good of you to point up the fact that the SDLP strategy of minimising Sinn Fein’s influence while they are the largest party is working.
SF is all about putting on a show for their great unwashed. Their ‘strategy’ for a united Ireland is nonsense because they do not understand that unionists simply have no interest.
SF labour under the old republican myth that unionists are at their core republicans that just need to be persuaded to come out of the political and cultural closet.
It’s not going to happen and all the “outreach” or whatever other fanciful term they come up with is not going to change things.
If they honestly believe that people who have withstood forty years of murder and mayhem are going to engage meaningfully with those who prosecuted those outrages then SF are not only deluding those that vote for them but also themselves.
Working ‘together’ with unionists within the UK is as good as it gets. Even this, to quote a former PM, makes many many unionists “sick to their stomachs”.
percy,
No it is more important that there are more unsolved murders in Northern Ireland over the last forty years than in any other part of the UK. The fact that there are so many unsolved crimes and indeed so many murderers unconvicted is a cancer on this society: a cancer which SF has fed for years.
All SF and Adams can ask for is a quarter truth process whereby the British government tell the truth about any and all collusion that occurred between the British government and loyalists (I believe there was indeed some and it was utterly loathsome and unacceptable). What SF really do not want to come out is about any collusion between the IRA and the government. Best not to know exactly who set up the “heroes” at Loughgall.
Of course it goes without saying that SF do not want anything at all to come out about the IRA’s sectarian murder campaign. They do not want to tell us why so many people were murdered by them.
Indeed it is important that we all come to terms with the past. That involves truth and justice. SF seem interested in about one quarter truth and no justice.
As for me personally I believe that there will be both truth and justice: complete and total truth and justice; just not within the courts of this world.
Chris
*Sinn Féin does not want to be in opposition in NI. Therefore I think SF should aim to be a responsible left of centre party of government.
*Sensible and responsible ministers like Michelle Guildernew and Conor Murphy can attract votes from a broader base than could less able ministers who take a dogmatic attitude.
*Similar types of people in the ROI can hold a number of seats in Donegal and Dublin.
*This can be enough to get SF into government with FG or FF from time to time. SF should not ally themselves more closely to one than the other.
*SF should work/coopeate with Labour to develop the left wing vote.
*SF should emphasise an alternative to the low tax model of the ROI, with better public services and more intervention in the market (more like the Scandinavian models). Eoin’s comments are a very good (IMO) pointer for the best direction on economics.
Sinn Fein’s problems as I see them lie mainly in the fact that they have yet fully to make transition to becoming a party of democratic government. The party still bears the marks of the old quasi-Stalinist revolutionary millenarian movement, skilled in the politics of early transition but weak on contemporary policy and with a newly uncertain political touch.
During that early transition, they can scarcely be blamed for thinking they were dictating events. But now with cross community government becoming established in the North and the South not very interested, it must be obvious to them that they have inevitably lost traction. I suspect they will become as vulnerable to swing as any other party in the North as well as the South. Their difficulty in adapting to new circumstances is scarcely surprising given their history – toxic or heroic, according to taste.
They will have to shed the remnants of primitive Marxism and adapt their republicanism to convince a wider electorate that they has become fully respectable, which in spite of their electoral success they have not yet achieved. Signs that they are doing so will come when they can lead a policy debate, attract a significant brains trust from civil society and achieve a faster turnover of party leaders to stimulate diversity and change. Perhaps the latter is starting to happen. The old warriors, who were so essential for ending conflict and gave the party its charisma will leave a frightening hole. Who wants to become just another nationalist party? That surely is Sinn Fein’s big problem; but also its opportunity.
The DUP, who did not play an earlier “military” role despite their many antics and provocations had a similar quasi-Stalinist character, but have progressed to a more collective leadership. They have also proved themselves rather better at political adaptation, having been enthusiastic parliamentarians interested in the practice of government from the party’s inception in the 70s.
Plainly, Sinn Fein is by no means the “stupid party.” It needs to use its talents to evolve genuinely workable cross-community policies which are open goals for any party to score, like a replacement for academic selection instead of dogma, and above all build a credible economic policy. (Economic ignorance in NI politics is just about absolute).
Sinn Fein should do this not just to please unionists but to build a new momentum and fill a gaping policy vacuum – in the interests of a new Ireland if they like. The pragmatic route is their best option. Otherwise, they are fast becoming a dormant volcano, a party of protest and last-ditch defence at the mercy of events, prompting the potentially lethal question” what is Sinn Fein for?”.
Is turgon David Vance.
Brian,
A problem I’d see is the larger collective leadership of SF is hidden and people assume a personality cult based around Adams and to a lesser extent McGuinness when imo that movement has been lead by a much broader group of invisible strategists that have only ever put themselves in the public domain to a very limited degree.
This cuts into my point on accountability, a purely democratic and constitutional party cannot continue with structures where many of the senior leadership figures are not only hidden from the public and supporters but to a great level even many activists themselves.
Chris is clearly pointing out a party not fit for purpose but to address that issue not only does it need to examine what that purpose is but also requires an open an honest examination of largely hidden internal structures.
Mark
Who are we talking about when we speak of the hidden leaders of SF?
Surely that is just a SF myth. And you’re just bolstering up the mythology that SF are led by generals in the trenches who know how to outsmart every other party. There has been no evidence of hidden SF leaders in recent time when SF leadership has been extremely mediocre and transparently so.
I think there is a fundamental problem of vision and of skills in Sinn Fein. As a Unionist that worries me because I want politics here to work and in the longer term see them starting to fail.
Why do I say this?
1 as others have indicated SF’s policies often developed from shallow slogans designed to support a military campaign. One of the most obvious is’Brits out’ when the problem is not the Brits but 1 m + unionists who live on this island and have done foe generations. Here the sloganising becomes counter-productive as it deceives even the membership (and some of the thicker leadership) of the realities of political life here
2 a lot of the policies are threadbare. SF’s social agenda is stuck in the dark ages of the 1970s as comments here demanding a return to Socialism help show. By all menas return to socialist polices – and see how many votes you get. It’s a discredited philosophy but you havent found a new narrative.
3 the leadership is looking old and tired and threadbare and very male. Yes they have a few women but mainly for the optics. When all the heavy lifting needs to be done it’s the boys who do it and call the shots.
This is not a party poised for the future. it reminds me of our own dear UK Labour party. A hollowed out shell led by a man who has reached where he wants to be, has no idea what to do now he has got there and has surrounded himself by frit yes men.
John,
Forgive me but I have no intention of engaging in coversation with you on this or any other issue. So don’t waste your time asking me questions.
Cynic,
Women for the optics is a real issue. I know of one now supposedly senior member that was wheeled into ‘negotiations’ when in an electorally targetted area and immediately after the arrival photo op ended up sitting in the car with the party driver shooting the breeze while the boys carried out hours of negotiation.
I have nothing good to say about IRA/Sinn fein. does this count as a thought?
* They need to ditch the Marxist remnants. It simply isn’t reflective of where the party is now. But that alone is not enough. They have to replace it with a credible centre-left philosophy. In practice pragmatism will play a key role, but what are the general principles.
* They need to find some way of coming to terms with the past. They will never, ever convince a lot of people, but they have to deal with it to have any hope of reaching out beyond their current electorate. I’d go so far to say that they need to do it without any reciprocal moves from the British and take the short term consequences. And it would mean dropping or severely playing down some of the things that Nationalism can cope with, but Unionism never will.
* They need to invest in policy. Resources are limited here, but there should still be enough resource to get a few people targeting specific questions full time looking at what works elsewhere, reading relevant material, perhaps even commissioning or supporting some of their own research.
And if they are serious about unity, they’ll be constantly be looking for places where there are good candidates for sharing resources or policy or both. Unity is the ultimate in convergence and they need to realise that.
* I’d also be investing in polling if I could afford it. What do people really think. Where do Nationalists and Unionists share ideas or opinions, how dot hey react to policy North and South. If you are serious about expanding the vote, you have to know what people think.
* They need to looking to harness some the energy and the people they have behind them. I’d be paying particular attention to what Obama has been doing and how they could translate even a piece of that into something useful. They have all these people knocking doors or attending meetings. If they could get them to start discussing ideas and giving feedback, it would be a great win. You might be getting 95% crap, but it’d still be useful if you got 5% gold for minimum investment.
* I’d say they need to devolve power down, but that is a difficultly for all parties: the membership is always more extreme than the general populace and have the capacity to make difficulty for the leadership. If they can have a go, great.
Moving to match local candidates to speak on local issues is also important. It is good to see if they have started to do that.
* They need to get realistic on what can be achieved, in both jurisdictions. Going into Southern elections they should know they aren’t getting a majority, they aren’t getting a major partnership role. They can get a few policies enacted, some modifications of things they don’t like, probably a ministry in the best case. What is the top 3 targets SF want? Hammer them home.
In the North, they have got to start boxing clever on what they can get Unionism to do, and rather than looking for direct confrontation look for opportunities to trade off or opportunities where Unionist reactive opposition does not help them. There is room for direct confrontation but not often, and you have to pick your battles.
* Stick an SF office on the Shankill. And elsewhere. Seriously. There are prerequisites to doing that, and its tough, but working for people, asking for their vote, listening to their ideas: that’s outreach, not half arsed leaflets. Become a truly 32 county party.
* Develop links with immigrant communities. Lots to learn from the SNP there.
That’d do for starters.
Some good observations out there, though too many for me to comment on individually.
Mark
You make a number of good points, but I would disagree with regard to where republican politics needs to develop at this juncture.
Sure, republicans will face criticism regarding losing touch with grassroots, but in my experience this is somewhat wide of the mark and indeed wishful thinking from detractors.
There remains no other political party with the level of grassroots activism as Sinn Fein, and republicans to date have retained that sense of obligation to become involved in local community politics that has always been to the benefit of the broader struggle. Things may change in that regard, but I believe the focus for improvement at this time needs to be on the new arena of struggle, where (albeit limited) power and influence can be used to promote party policies and move towards securing objectives.
Brian
Again, some good points, particularly with regard to economic policy.
Slug
In full agreement with all your points.
I do believe it is important for republicans to avoid being caught up in a transparent ‘how to prove’ ourselves to unionists trap, which really will only perpetuate a MOPE-ish response from the more vocal and extreme elements of political unionism, and from which republicans can expect little.
To my mind, that was the mistake of the ‘Unionist outreach’ initiative launched by the party some time ago.
That’s not to say republicans need not be centrally concerned with developing support from beyond its traditional support base. That support needs to be cultivated by developing a strong, left of centre policy platform with policies which many non-nationalists would subscribe to whilst also continuing to articulate a republicanism which accepts and seeks to accomodate the British identity of unionism within a united Ireland.
Now, I’m not naive enough to suggest that’ll deliver votes to Sinn Fein from unionist heartlands; but it will open up interesting new alliances and relationships across the constitutional political spectrum.
Simultaneously, the party needs to continue with progressive policy advances with regard to promoting an equality agenda for unionism and nationalism, which may be vociferously opposed by the political leaders of unionism but to which many grassroots unionists would accept.
Mr. Donnelly,
You seem to have got some answers but seem to be avoiding the comments of those of us concerned about your party’s endless, murderous baggage and the difficulties it has with supporting the police against certain types of criminal activity. Not to mention your own personal problem with the murderous past of the likes of Paul Butler: I note you decided not to respond to that comment when I raised it yesterday.
The other issue which might be worth mentioning is that this blog seems suspiciously timed to deflect criticism away from you personally: oneill’s comments on your following in grandpa’s footsteps being the obvious example.
“Stick an SF office on the Shankill”
Why not put that bigoted, murdering, scumbag Sean Kelly in it?
All in the name of “outreach”, of course.
And maybe encourage the South to join the Commonwealth Kensei? – there are historical links which can be respected – and it’s easier to win medals at the Games….
Password – court – subtle or what?
Mark
Forgive me but I have no intention of engaging in coversation with you on this or any other issue. So don’t waste your time asking me questions.
What’s wrong now, Mark? Or is this just another egomaniac’s response to someone having the nerve to challenge your supposed insider knowlege of the republican movement. You know, the same movement that had to stop killing people on advice from the SDLP, or else face defeat. There weren’t many secret strategists on that shift.
Why are there so many phonies in republicanism? It’s full of pseuds, phonies, and depressives trying to foist their hollow agenda on people who really only ever use them to push their own interests anyway.
Turgon
Paranoia becomes you- think I’d have time to put this thread together just to avoid somebody’s comment?
It might disappoint you but I don’t spend too much time revisiting threads I’ve commented on- life is short and busy enough without having to respond to every blogger.
But to satisfy you, I shall respond to your points raised above and that of oneill.
Firstly, I’m not particularly vexed about your concerns, or those of similar minded unionists regarding Sinn Fein.
During the war/ conflict, there were many people killed and wounded, all with loved ones. As a republican, I’d be a hypocrite to say anything other than that such things happen during war; all loss of life being regrettable, I’m sure you’d agree, though I’m also sure your opinion of the killings of republicans by British forces- in uniform or out of uniform- differs considerably from mine.
Now, with regard to where Sinn Fein is today vis a vis an anti-agreement organisation which acts as a magnet for the most reactionary elements of this society, the TUV, I find your concern for the rule of law to be particularly ironic.
Regarding oneill’s angst on another thread, it remains a feature of Slugger that some unionists find it difficult to accept a spotlight being shone on certain issues. I note that nationalists/ republicans tend to avoid slinging the mud at unionist bloggers like yourself when you start a thread critical of republicans/nationalists. It is consistent with an inability of some to accept anything which challenges their narrative.
My advice to oneill is to get over it and simply accept the diversity of opinion on Slugger- which apparently differs from his own site.
I trust that answers your ‘concerns….’
Back on the thread, Kensei’s comments are excellent.
On the ‘Shankill’ office, I don’t think that’s plausible at this stage, though I do know that Gerry Adams’ office has handled many constituency issues for people from the Shankill.
But the point remains a good one. If not the Shankill, then other mixed/ majority unionist towns/ areas should be considered as a possible site for Sinn Fein offices as a statement of intent to work for all.
A good starting point would be to ditch the term Sinn Fein (Ourselves alone)in a world where ‘nationality’ is increasingly irrelevant. Incidentally the same applies to ‘unionist’ parties.
SF are not just the adjunct of a terrorist group (PIRA), they forge links with FARC, ETA, Hamas, Al Queda etc, and expect anyone with an IQ in double figures to respect them.
AND they maintain their Roman Catholic identity??
Simple question. What is their position on Abortion?
Fine Mr. Donnelly: you tried to suggest that I supported Mark Harbinson and when I unreservedly condemned him and asked you about the murderer Paul Butler you fell remarkably silent.
Also you seemed quite distressed about oneill’s comments at the time; you were far from ignoring them. Then all of a sudden what passes for an intellectual blog from you came out: I am sure it was just coincidence. Well if you want to pretend it is that is fine: just like you pretend that your murderous friends were fighting a war. Tell me what threat was Douglas Deering, what threat the Collie Club, Marie Wilson, the children who your mates thankfully failed to kill at Tullyhommon?
Mark,
I hope I’m not being a smartass here, but since the 1970s right up until the ceasefire period SF actively courted support from right-wing political elements in the USA, including pro-Israel Republican Party uberfanatics like the pro-Iraq War Peter “there are too many mosques in this country” King.
IIRC you were an SF member (or otherwise supporter) during that period. Did you not then think there was a danger of socialist ideals taking a back seat ?
Chris Donnelly – “articulate a republicanism which accepts and seeks to accomodate the British identity of unionism within a united Ireland.”
SF PIRA in Northern Ireland has never shown any respect towards the country they live in. McGuinness just about managed to say Northern Ireland during the swearing in process for the Assembly. Perhaps you could start this new-found respect tomorrow by asking your SF PIRA colleagues to start flying the NI and Union flags from all of the SF PIRA offices. If you can’t show respect today, no one is going to believe you about showing respect in some future scenario.
kensei – “Stick an SF office on the Shankill. And elsewhere. Seriously.”
You want to set up offices amongst the people who SF PIRA tried to murder? Which fantasy land do you live in? If SF PIRA want to say sorry to ALL their victims and if SF PIRA gang members want to start showing respect for the country they live in – then it will be a start.
Interesting post Chris.
My personal prefernence would be for social and economic policy to be founded in actual economic reality and possibilty rather than in apstract confessions of principal which in reality cannot mean anything as they are not subject to the laws of mathematics.
Rational in place of fundamentalism.
I believe that whilst social matters are of vital importance to Sinn Féin as a party, Irish Nationalism must take precident. To this end, I would propose that Sinn Féin style the party’s stand as Radical Social Democracy rather than Socialism, revolutionaly or otherwise.
Socialism will not take the party anywhere in the South.
a republicanism which accepts and seeks to accomodate the British identity of unionism within a united Ireland
What exactly does this mean?
Please be specific.
Lets stick close to the questions raised here and not go off in too many pre-defined directions.
Politics in NI are changing in ways that few can predict wit any degree of accuracy BUT what is apparent is the inability of the SF party to actually become democratic in the widest possible way.
No one could really describe SF as an inclusive party, unless you were from a background that venerated secrecy and hierarchy in organisations and then you might think that it was a model of democratic progressiveness.
The party achieved the greatest success when they were pushing the open door of the man who had the hand of history on his shoulder and now both it an the DUP having no persistent crisis to use as a convenient bolt hole to obscure rational debate are falling into potential electoral dis-interest.
Remember the adage that the only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about holds true here.
Sadly all that SF have achieved could have been done without the loss of any lives, though the Loyalist Murder gangs would still have mindlessly gone off killing people, Protestant and Catholic, anyway I suspect, but that really is conjecture.
What is not is that the British State run guerilla fighters of IRA/SF laboured long and hard so as in the end they would have a British funded re-emergence of peaceful British control over Northern Ireland. And they (SF) would be active participants in that British control being made a success.
When you take the somke and the mirrors away that really is what is left and the cracks that this will allow to develop in the geriatric leaderships legacy will be structural and not surface crazing on the plasterwork.
How come you didn’t know that you were being run by the Brits GerryA/MartinM/GerryK/PatD et al?
Did you not notice or were the Brits just too good for you?
Can the leopard change it’s spots?
Probably not but it will not matter since ultimately the Good Friday Agreement will politically have the same sort of impact as the meteor had with the dinosaurs, for both SF and DUP.
The problem for the DUP is that being deniers of pre-historical records they will not accept the meteor has already landed.
Reader
Why not put that bigoted, murdering, scumbag Sean Kelly in it?
All in the name of “outreach”, of course.
There are certain prerequisites; the party would really need to ask itself what parts of itself would never unacceptable to Unionism and let them go. But I think there is an important message contained within the suggestion. It is that where once SF were party to destroying those areas, now they are serious about building them up. Do I expect any great success? No. But if SF could convince even 5% of Unionists over the course of a decade by working really, really hard for them that would a fucking revolution.
I’m sorry if the suggestion blows your wee mind. Republicanism done right normally does.
Turgon
….and what threat the many hundreds killed or wounded by ‘your murderous friends’ in the British forces in the most recent outbreak of conflict or those preceding it?
We could go on, naming individual cases if necessary, but I fail to see the worth in that.
btw
So glad to be honoured with the ‘intellectual blog’ reference, or at least ‘what passes for’ one, ‘Mister’ Turgon (LOL).
What about a thread by Unionist/Loyalist bloggers demanding a start to Protestant paramilitary decommissioning? How about the DUP telling us where the still active guns of Ulster Resistance are buried? What about a bit of disclosure about the Loyalist terrorism campaign of the 60′s and the links between the UVF and well known Unionist politicians? How about a debate on Vanguard and it’s military threats with, again, well known Unionists fronting it? Maybe a bit of truth about the links between MI5 & BOTH Unionist parties and the British intelligence moles that are STILL there? Finally we need FULL disclosure on the part that Unionist politicians played in the Dirty War and their umbilical link to Loyalist death squads! Republicans and Nationalists are doing their bit for peace and a lasting settlement, it would be a lot easier if a reluctant Unionist community did likewise.
Chris,
Thanks for that post.
I assume that this post now is also maybe a response at some level to the recent announcements of leadership changes. Kearney into chairman especially. From what I have read he is a good organiser and capable of performing well in such a role.
Also I was struck by Adams mention of making the party fit for purpose.
Do you believe Declan Kearney’s appointment into the Chairman role will result in an improvement in party capacitY across the island.
Mr. Donnelly,
You asked me about Mark Harbinson and I answered: I asked about Paul Butler and you fell silent.
In terms of your blogs, I guess this one required a bit more intellectual effort than your usual fare. However, despite your claims at the outset that you would welcome critical comments you seem only to want critical comments from nationalists or neutrals.
Chris,
How could “the British identity of unionism” be accomodated within a United Ireland? Have you actually given this any thought or are you just repeating empty slogans?
>>On the ‘Shankill’ office, I don’t think that’s plausible at this stage, though I do know that Gerry Adams’ office has handled many constituency issues for people from the Shankill.<<
A constituency office on the Shankill was of course one of many suggestions from Kensei yonks ago. The fact that many ordinary working class Unionists use SF offices to deal with their complaints must hurt the dinosaurs. And of course one of these dinosaurs (sorry Turgs, but it fits) cites oneil for his attack on CD is totally ridiculous. Oneil for all his opposition to SF and nationalism is no bedfellow of the TUV, nor of the fundamentalist side of unionism.
LURIG,
“What about a thread by Unionist/Loyalist bloggers demanding a start to Protestant paramilitary decommissioning?”
Well how about these:
http://www.sluggerotoole.com/index.php/loyalist-decommissioning-deadline-extended/
http://www.sluggerotoole.com/index.php/meeting-loyalist-paramilitaries/
http://www.sluggerotoole.com/index.php/uda-facing-a-problem/
http://www.sluggerotoole.com/index.php/the-ongoing-uselessness-of-loyalist-paramilitaries/
http://www.sluggerotoole.com/index.php/loyalist-paramilitaries-their-uselessness-mk2/
http://www.sluggerotoole.com/index.php/loyalist-paramilitaries-their-uselessness-to-unionism/
Ger
I do think Kearney is an experienced and particularly skilled political character who’s promotion should concentrate minds on what needs to be done. I recall him using language very similar to the Adams’ quote you refer to in an APRN article some months ago.
Turgon
Sorry to burst bubbles again, but my ‘silence’ may have something to do with not being on Slugger nor likely anywhere near the computer since my post on your anti-McAleese rant.
I’m taking it you don’t have kids as if you did I’d be surprised you find the time to clock into our site so regularly- never mind concern yourself about others’ presence…
Finally, regarding your ‘thoughts’ on the thread, I’m fairly relaxed about who comments on threads. I guess some comments are more worthwhile than others, be they from unionists, nationalists or otherwise. Trying to reduce a thread to a MOPEish whinge might be your idea of a good Sunday night, but the final minutes of the 1st Half of the Steelers game and sleep are my only concerns for the remainder of this night.
I promise to clock in tomorrow night, Mister T- adios.
lets not pretend that SF are a ‘republican’ party. They are unashamedly a ‘Roman Catholic’ party. hence their policy on abortion. They follow the vatican completely.
Sinn Fein are a Roman Catholic ‘party’. just as the DUP are ‘Protestant’. The UUP, SDLP, Alliance do not have these religious hang ups.
I really hope the UUP/Tory link can get us out of this religious malaise, for all our sakes.
Do you learn your upper political class patronising from Gerry Adams, Donnelly.
My advice for Sinn Fein is to get real, get confidence and get over notions of culture cringe in the north and get on top of the aspiration gaps in west Belfast. The drugs, depression, deprivation and suicide.
Blog on that more often and it will help in part in trying to get real…perhaps you might get listened too.
But still you’re just following in el president’s footsteps.
Unite Ireland, you can’t even unite north Belfast nor even the education sector.
Great post Chris, I think your points and those of Kensei are really interesting.
One of the issues that has come up is resources. It has yet to be realised locally but the web presents a massive opportunity for any party willing to truly engage with it. I really wish Sinn Fein would put more energy into the area. Having the odd MLA or Gerry Adams write a blog isn’t enough anymore, those concepts are essentially static, publisher centric idea’s that while useful don’t provide a platform for open and transparent conversation with the public. Imagine an online research portal to drive policy with online discussions or webinars with experts from around the world. Give people the opportunity to talk about their area of expertise on a respected platform and they’ll do it, even more so if they feel that policy makers are listening and someone might even try to do something about it.