Sean FitzPatrick and “those establishment f**kers”, aka southern Protestants…
Excellent quote from McWilliams’ Follow the Money
which uncovers the calibre of the man running the dirtiest (so far as we know) bank in Ireland... which were obviously not intended for publication…
“Then he came closer, squeezed my arm and practically hissed between clenched teeth: “No f***ing Protestant is coming near us. Those establishment f***ers and Bank of Ireland have been running our country before we came along, and those f***ers are not going to bring me down. None of them are ever going to look down on us again. We are the outsiders, and this is our moment. Those f***ers don’t own us any more.”
Dave
First you argue that he probably didnt say it. But then you argue that even if he did say it, it was fine because he was only talking about *some* Protestants.
And presumably when Nick Griffin talks about hating Muslims he doesnt mean all but only those Islamists who are a “fifth column” and who want to bomb Britain and set up a Sharia state?
“At any rate, if he did use them, then it is clear that he does not object to Protestants but to the treason of those who remain loyal to the British state and who denigrate the culture of the nation that controls the state in which they live. In other words, he doesn’t object to those who might say protestant prayers but to those who act as a fifth column undermining the Irish state, the Irish nation and its culture, from within.”
Its pure sectarianism / racism which you are trying to rewrite.
Your position seems quite close to saying that its OK to hate Prods for their ethnicity but not their theology.
I’m very interested that you see the hidden hand of a secret Protestant fifth column working against Ireland to undermine it and which (you seem to be arguing) wants to re-join the Union? Whats your evidence for this.
In light of your concerns perhaps all Prods should be subject to a thorough interregation by the Police to see where their loyalties lie, and be sent ‘back’ to England if they are not Irish enough for you? This sounds pretty much identical to BNP policy and a rather extreme version of Tebbits cricket test.
It also closely echoes the classic anti-semitic view of Jews as a secret fifth column working against ‘Germany’ or whatever country it is with a different loyalty (and since 48 a true loyalty to Israel).
What about Irish “ethnic Catholics” who think classic Irish nationalism stupid or outdated – is it OK for them to denigrate and harm Irish culture?
You have given a very clear example of the fascistic elements of certain types of Irish nationalism/Republicanism.
Erasmus
“There have been two Protestant presidencies, two deputy prime ministries, and a number of cabinet ministries since the beginning of the state.”
and how many former Irish unionists were among them ?
and dont forget didnt Hyde originally lose his Senate seat once it became electable following a smear campaign by the “Catholic Truth Society” or something to that effect ? But of course such organisations didnt exist in your Republican Utopia.
“Please name one *elected* Catholic who ascended to cabinet office in Stormont between 1921 and 1972 when the unionists ran the show all by themselves.”
Unfortunately in NI the Catholics (on the most part) kept joing and voting for parties that didnt win majority elections and hence never got the opportunity to serve in NI Govt. There was no equivalent position of NI President.
However I have no doubt that those elected Catholics played a full part in the NI Parliament and Senate. Catholics were appointed to many high positions in the judiciary and other public bodies as well.
I dispute your 10% statistic and when I get the time I will look up the numbers myself.
As I said unionists in the north have put their hands up that not all was perfect but when the NI regime and unionism is slagged off it is not very difficult for me to hold up a mirror.
Brit,
I hope you understand that whatever crazy stuff may be going through the mind of Mr Fitzpatrick it is entirely fallacious to try and equate the level of sectariansim in the Southern Irish Territories with that in the North – it is a bit like stumbling across a KKK member in New York and then declaring it the same as Mississippi.
A brief visit to the Southern Irish Territories and a quick chat with a few Prods there would make this absolutely clear – unfortunately that is something Ulster Prods simply cannot bear to admit – and as prejudice stops many of them actually travelling to the land of the the Papal-Whore-of-BallyGoVatican-Anti-Christ-Land they never actaully find this out.
“A brief visit to the Southern Irish Territories and a quick chat with a few Prods there would make this absolutely clear – unfortunately that is something Ulster Prods simply cannot bear to admit – and as prejudice stops many of them actually travelling to the land of the the Papal-Whore-of-BallyGoVatican-Anti-Christ-Land they never actaully find this out.”
Sammy-you seem to know a huge amount about the mindsets and prejudices of just about everybody and very little about how your comments reflect upon yourself.
JEB-useful map here: http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/images/maps/protestants_in_ire.gif
So that’s that then folks, only Prods are bigots are RC’s who behave in a sectarian manner are are just having a bit of craic.
Forget the ethnic cleansing in the border areas, forget the massive decrease in the Protestant population in Eire and concentrate on the past of Ulster Unionists.
There was me thinking this poison and drivel was a particularly Scottish problem. You know what I mean? Paint the Unionist as the bad guy and the Catholic as the set upon victim
How quaint!
Now was this Fitzpatrick guy being a bigot or not? Would it have been acceptable for the Bank of Scotland head to say, I’ll not let an effin Catholic anywhere near my bank or not?
I can just see all the hard done by now, screaming about bigots and Prods are evil etc. RC’s and Nationalists are the perfect revionists, deny, deflect and denounce at any costs.
Catholic bigots – who would have thought it?
Tommy-get used to it. Sammy@3 on this page starts by lecturing Brit on how awful it is to make sweeping statements and then promptly goes all fallacious on us…..at least it gets a slow day in
Sammy – from what I read on here I think that your description (and backed up by a RoI Prod) is closer to the truth than the account given by others.
Tommy – different point to the above but there is certainly a strand in Irish nationalism / republicanism in NI and Scotland which basically sees sectarianism as a Unionist disease (inherent in the Unionist/partitionst mindset) – whilst seeing Catholic sectarianism as a kind of understandable ‘striking out’ by the oppressed against the Orangies who in some cases probably deserved it.
Springfield, Tommy,
dont want to burst your little self-righteous bubble there but any of you actually venture down south and talk to some Prods – just to check the accuracy of your opinions?
Do share.
Lived in Douglas for a year and Dublin for 4 interspersed with regular trips to girlfriends folks in Tralee. Hold an Irish passport-anything else you want to know?
Let me say this one more time, just for the Nationalist revisionists out there.
If I as a Scottish Unionist attack any faith, regardless of who it is, where they come from or If I discriminate against someone on the grounds of religion, I would rightly be called a bigot.
However it appears bigots from Southern Ireland who hate others, simply because of their religion, are to be supported and anyone dares to criticise this bigot, are in the wrong.
If it walks like a bigot, quacks like a bigot…..
This advert does not concern Irish RC’s and is aimed solely at the Prods.
Deny, deflect and denounce, it’s the only way lads.
And your point is Sammy????
Erasmus
You seem very proud of the fact that the R.O.I have had a number of Presidents who were protestants. Are you also proud of the fact that the goverment of the day refused to attend President Hyde’s funerals service because it was being held in a protestant church?
I also am led to believe( but I could be wrong) that a protestant president cannot have a protestant chaplain during his/her term. It has to be a R.C. chaplain. Could you enlighten me on this point.
Sprigfield,
Anyone North or South who makes sectarian remarks we should assume to be a sectarian bigot.
Given your experiences in the Southern Irish territories I take it, if you were lucky enough to interact with some Prods from there, that you can confirm my contention above that it is “entirely fallacious to try and equate the level of sectariansim in the Southern Irish Territories with that in the North”.
‘Seanie Fitzpatrick spoke for nobody but himself ‘
Precisely and when they’re caught with their hand in the till it matters a shite what religion they are or none -the game is up – and the bastards will lash out at anybody or anything that might show them in a positive life .
Even Bernie Madoff the American World Champion Ponzi operator mentioned his ‘philantrophic ‘ contributions to Jewish charities in his defence of stealing from other Jewish charitieis ?
Fitpatrick was /is an eejit and he’s so anti Brit that he managed a bank called Anglo Irish ? Now I ask ye ?
Like hundreds of others in financial centres from here to Wall St to the City of London these past few years he was caught .
Capital punishment for capital crimes might help to reduce the redeliction these types have for abusing their positions and acting with people’s investments like a drug crazed zombie pulling the handles of the one armed bandits in Las Vegas
No Sammy- I refer you to your number 8 above-what was that all about?
Springfield,
re. “No Sammy.”
So do you agree with the statement in post 13?
“that it is “entirely fallacious to try and equate the level of sectariansim in the Southern Irish Territories with that in the North”. ”
re. “I refer you to your number 8 above-what was that all about?”
I was replying to your earlier post which started “Sammy@3 on this page starts by lecturing Brit “
I’m outta here-before I go Sammy:
“I hope you understand that whatever crazy stuff may be going through the mind of Mr Fitzpatrick it is entirely fallacious to try and equate the level of sectariansim in the Southern Irish Territories with that in the North – it is a bit like stumbling across a KKK member in New York and then declaring it the same as Mississippi.”
I don’t think anyone has alleged that sectarianism is any longer as big an issue in the south as it is in the north-I certainly didn’t. Probably something to with the almost monotheistic demographic that exists today in the 26. Southern prods are almost an irrelevance now in number ipso facto no visible sectarianism. How you can dare to convince me or others that no sectarianism exits in the south however is just horseshit. I speak from personal experience of a number of occasions of explicit sectarian verbal abuse being directed my way. Usually this surfaces after alcohol has been introduced into the mix and is usually boringly predictable-used to happen a fair bit in Mitchells GAA in Tralee actually. As for southern prods? I couldn’t tell you if I met one or not, not something that was ever top of my agenda to determine.
“A brief visit to the Southern Irish Territories and a quick chat with a few Prods there would make this absolutely clear – unfortunately that is something Ulster Prods simply cannot bear to admit – and as prejudice stops many of them actually travelling to the land of the the Papal-Whore-of-BallyGoVatican-Anti-Christ-Land they never actaully find this out.”
The sentiment behind that statement makes you as guilty of sectarianism as Fitzpatrick-can you not see that? I’m living breathing proof of the antithesis of your sweepingly general vision of northern protestants. In fact how many northern prods have you actually spoken to face to face about sectarianism and thier experience of it?
Do share.
Not sure if anyone on here has ever of the chap who appears to get about a bit in Scotland called “Juan Guy”
This Juan Guy is consistenly accused of anti Protestant bigotry north of the border. They seek him here, they seek him there, but no one ever finds this Juan Guy.
Juan Guy is the only anti Protestant bigot within the RC community apparently. Indeed, he’s so well known, that whenever RC bigots are caught on camera or by the Police, they all accuse the crime on this Juan Guy.
Has Juan Guy moved to Ireland?
I think we Scots should be told if this serial bigot has fled our shores for pastures new. One Guy doesn’t have the same ring to it though…..
re. “The sentiment behind that statement makes you as guilty of sectarianism as Fitzpatrick”
You are letting your selfrighteousness get the better of you – by my suggesting that sectarianism is prevalent amongst Ulster Prods means I’m a sectarian bigot myself. Great stuff. The usual upside-down Unionist logic.
re. “How you can dare (I do so like the self-righteous tone) to convince me or others that no sectarianism exits in the south however is just horseshit.”
I have not attempted to suggest anything of the sort – excellent tactics – make a statement that you cant back up and then do a runner.
I have made a suggestion which in turns out you agree with that it is “entirely fallacious to try and equate the level of sectariansim in the Southern Irish Territories with that in the North”.
Sammy. You haven’t answered my question, continue to pretend that sectarianism is a “prod” only phenomenon and deny that Fitzpatrick’s sentiments are not quite as unusual in the south as you would like us to believe.
As long as sweeping generalistic sectarian statements and caracaturing of entire communities is attempted to be passed off as fact then we may as well be talking different languages. Why don’t you just come out and state your utter contempt and hatred for all Ulster prods and be done with it. You are no different from Fitzpatrick. End of.
Springfield,
you are attempting to put 2 sets of words in my mouth, firslty that there is no sectarianism in the South and all Northern Prods are sectarian.
I dont beleive either of those things. If you look at the remarks of Brit above he accept the remarks of Stephen about his experiences as Southern Prod as do I.
For the record I think that Ulster Prods are in denial about the extent of sectarianism in their community – you only have to look at the fact that the leaders of the ‘moderate’ UUP have to belong to the Orange Order – a deeply sectarian organsiation – to get elected. It must be deeply embarassing for ordinary decent non sectarian Prods to be represented by such politicans and you have to wonder why they dont stand up and be counted.
I have no hatred for Prods or anyone else who lives in my country North or South unless they are personally deserving of it – Mr Fitpatrick for his sectarian remarks and his behaviour with his bank comes very close.
The much-dissected Hyde funeral saga is a part of what I would call the ‘sectarian south triad’ – the other two being Fethard-on-Sea and the Mayo librarian.
Concrete verifiable instances of anti-Protestant sectarianism in the southern state were so few and far between that they can be individually documented and so have propagandistically acquired a certain cult status.
Apropos Douglas Hyde’s funeral, the Catholic dignitaries who remained outside were obeying *Church* and not national strictures. A Catholic member of the British cabinet of the same era, for example, would have been under an identical obligation under similar circumstances. But because of the obvious predominance of Catholics in southern Irish public life at the time it stuck out like a sore thumb. The relevant authority here was the Vatican and not the southern state. Fortunately the Catholic Church has moved beyond such pettiness – unlike, it must be said, the Loyal Orders.
I dispute your 10% statistic and when I get the time I will look up the numbers myself.
Feast your eyes. Like the illustrious Mr Waugh you obviously have not bothered to do your homework with the CSO site.
http://beyond2020.cso.ie/Census/TableViewer/tableView.aspx?ReportId=74640
and how many former Irish unionists were among them ?
You seem to be shifting the goalposts here: ‘they were non-unionist Southern Protestants, they don’t really count’.
The Dockrell political dynasty started off as unionists, their founding father being the only unionist elected, outside the Trinity pocket borough, in the 26 co. area in 1918. They then moved on to distinguished careers, spanning decades, in the southern parliament.
Alan, your point about presidential chaplains is so daft it doesn’t bear commenting on.
“First you argue that he probably didnt say it. But then you argue that even if he did say it, it was fine because he was only talking about *some* Protestants.”
Wrong. He is referring to the national allegiance of certain protestants and criticising that rather than criticising the finer points of theological belief systems, so his comment is overtly political (if he actually said it) The Patten Report also uses the interchangeable designation of Catholic/Nationalist and Protestant/Unionist, and it is a virtually interchangeable designation in Northern Ireland.
Fitzpatrick is far more likely to have said “West-Brit” since that is the class that he is actually referring to, and that is the term that would be most commonly used in Ireland to refer to Irish citizens who have an irredentist longing to see Ireland rejoin what they would refer to as “the mainland.” That class is mostly Protestant (but does include some Catholics such as Sir Tony O’Reilly) because that is the religion of the ‘planted’ people. That class have no loyalty to the Irish nation or to its state, and are consequently not well-regarded in Ireland.
“And presumably when Nick Griffin talks about hating Muslims he doesnt mean all but only those Islamists who are a “fifth column” and who want to bomb Britain and set up a Sharia state?”
Silly boy. It is highly histrionic of you to whip out comparisons to Nick Griffin. We are not talking about a racial group, idiot, but about a social group who are disloyal to the state wherein they reside. Do try harder to keep up with the theme.
“Your position seems quite close to saying that its OK to hate Prods for their ethnicity but not their theology.”
No, clown, despite your twitching fit of risible hysterics, it has nothing to do with either ethnicity or theology, but national loyalty. A fifth column is a group who are disloyal to their state and actively seek to undermine it. Now place a nice cool water bottle on your violently throbbing womb and ponder this: the issue is loyalty to the state.
“It also closely echoes the classic anti-semitic view of Jews as a secret fifth column working against ‘Germany’ or whatever country it is with a different loyalty (and since 48 a true loyalty to Israel).”
Oh I see… comparisons to Nick Griffin wasn’t comedy enough. Now it is elevated to anti-Semitism. Kid, your senseless lips are flapping faster than the sails on a clipper ship in a force nine gale.
“What about Irish “ethnic Catholics” who think classic Irish nationalism stupid or outdated – is it OK for them to denigrate and harm Irish culture?”
Irish nationalism is simply loyalty to the Irish nation and its state. They all have a duty of fidelity under the Irish constitution, and bar a few quislings who have co-operated with the British state, I’m not aware of any who are guilty of treason against it or who argue that it should rejoin the UK. For example, Patrick Crinnion, private secretary to the head of the Special Branch, Chief Superintendent John P Fleming, was an Irish spy who was recruited by British MI6 agent, John Wyman, to betray the Irish state by passing on its secret intelligence information to the British state. He was catholic but was of course encourage to betray his state by the British state. Others are protestant, such as as the example of the chief executive of the Irish Times. He offered to betray his state by using his newspaper to disseminate pro-British propaganda in Ireland. The West-Brit class are Irish citizens but remain loyal to the British state, so they form a very willing target for such treason.
“You have given a very clear example of the fascistic elements of certain types of Irish nationalism/Republicanism.”
I of course strongly disagree with that statement, but I will nevertheless defend to the death your right to make a complete and utter hysterical ass out of yourself by stating it.
Dave,
Aside from the hyperbolic language and man tackling you have failed to address my points. Just further apologia for racism and sectarianism.
“Wrong. He is referring to the national allegiance of certain protestants and criticising that”
You are simply re-writing and sanitising what he said. He talked about “f@cking Protestants”, not certain individuals and there is no reference to anyone’s national allegiance.
If a racist talked about “f@cking Blacks” involved in drug dealing, or facking Muslims who were not real Brits, no one in there right mind would justify it as a legitimate criticism of certain individuals actions but not racist / sectarian and bigotted.
You also seem to be labouring under the delusion that a class of ‘West Brits’ are not fully Irish because they were planted in Ireland, and that they are all calling for re-unification with the UK and that this amounts to treason.
Firstly how does that stand with classic ideologicaly non-sectarian Republicanism which, on paper, seeks to identify an Irish nation of Protestants, Catholics and dissenters? And a history of irish nationalists who were, like Parnell, West Brits (a landonwer of English origin).
Second who are these people in Ireland calling for re-unification with the UK? No serious political thinker in the UK or elswhere has ever suggested this as a practical policy. I think you are imagining things.
Third, your definition of ‘treason’ sounds like that adopted by Stalin or more recently Ahmajinedad. i.e someone who does not agree with the government or a certain view of the national interest. They claimed that their opponents were disloyal to the state, undermining its values and loyal to third parties.
It is perfectly legitimate for people in Ireland (whatever their ethno-religious / national background)to call for a constitutional change so long as they are advocating it via democractic and constitutional politics. This is not treason and if it was Alex Salmond would be up for some Tower of London time.
Your calls for loyalty to the state and the nation, particularly when focussed on a minority ethno-religious grouping, are precisely analogous to the kind of demands the BNP places on British Muslims which they think are disloyal.
And your distinction between good Protestants and the West Brit bad ones, with treasonous impluses and dual loyalties, mirrors the old anti-semitic tradition of distinguishing the Good Jew from the Bad.
Pathetic apologia
BTW we’ve had plenty of Protestant TD’s and Ministers over the years too… ie Ivan Yeats as well as Jews – The Briscoes, Alan Shatter, and even a Hindu etc…
NI falls far short in it’s years of Unionist domination.
JEB lives in deNIal.
Thankfully we wiped the Southern Protestants to near extinction so Sean had nothing to fear.
Gregoir
Coming home from work there I was listening to the BBC Ulster “Short History of Ireland” series – episode 278 I think ?
Anyway it was about the Mother and Child act that was attempted to be introduced by Health Minister Browne around 1949. The purpose of the Act was to give free ante and post natal care to Irish women but the Irish Catholic Bishops objected. One of their objections was that it would mean Catholic women coming under the influence of Protestant Doctors or Catholic Doctors educated at Trinity College – a Protestant establishment.
Basically they brought down the Irish inter party government of the time.
Costello boasted he was a Catholic first and an Irish man second and he would take without qualification the instruction of the Mother Church on moral issues.
Considering the Ryan Report then the hypocrisy of the Catholic Church in this matter is stomach churning.
Dont tell me that policy in the ROI in the 1921 to pre Celtic Tiger era was not directed by the RC Church.
They were clearly deferred to at the top of the ROI Govt – honestly you dont know the meaning of Republican.
It is not me in Denial
JEB…
The radical Mother and Child Scheme that was to be introduced by the independent-minded (and atheist) Fine Gael Minister for Health, Dr. Noel Browne was to provide mothers with free maternity treatment and their children with free medical care up to the age of sixteen. Very socialist and before it’s time.
However, the bill was opposed by doctors, who feared a loss of income, and of course, Roman Catholic bishops, who feared the scheme could lead to Birth Control and Abortion – the two abhorrences of the Catholic Church.
The Cabinet was divided over the issue, many feeling that the state could not afford such a scheme.
Costello and others in the Cabinet made it clear that in the face of such opposition (including FF) they would not support the minister.
Browne resigned from the government in 1951, and the scheme was dropped.
Ironically, derivatives of the Mother and Child Scheme would be introduced in acts of 1954; 1957 and 1970 by subsequent FF and FG governments.
We don’t deny today the awful stifling influence of the Catholic Church in such matters of governance in the past. Their intrusion as they saw it was to uphold the Catholic Canon in Irish daily life, which of course clashed with the Protestant ethos. However, such intrusions by the Catholic Church were in the interests of their particular own tenets and were not just the sole reasons to beat down Irish Protestants with a big stick, as you believe.
This issue comes up with monotonous regularity. Being a single transferable issue here is my single transferable reply which I find invariably effective. As a WW2 general said ‘they came at us in the same old way and we stopped them in the same old way’:
________________________________________
This canard has already been done to death-deja vu all over again. But once more onto the breach dear friends. Once again we see the same wellworn propagandism. And the same visceral frustration of unionist propagandists towards those pesky southern Protestants who simply will not do their duty and whinge like hell about ‘oppression’ in the ROI.
First of all it must be clearly stated that it is highly misleading to speak in terms here of a Catholic and Protestant communities as per NI. There is one composite community whose members have diverse political, sociological, and religious delineations. I, for example would feel more on he wavelength of D4 Protestant than one of my coreligionists from a small farm in Connemara. As a yardstick of interpersonal evaluation nobody gives xxxx about religion. In the case of some of my acquaintances I have only discovered their religion, or lack of religion, after about ten years. By chance.And then it was only a matter of idle curiosity.
Occam’s razor (the simplest solution is most likely to be the correct one) stands you in good stead here.
Let us start applying it.
There are few, if any, complaints from Southern Protestants because there is little or nothing to complain about.
The propagandist rationalisation is that they are intimidated into silence -this in an open, liberal ,economically go-ahead, society at the heart of Europe. Some of the most vocal, outspoken, and regular panellists in Questions and Answers have been Protestant parliamentarians such as Jan O’Sullivan, Shane Ross, and David Norris.
When a senior unionist, such as David Trimble, berates the South for sectarianism often those who spring to the South’s defence are resident Protestants-the obvious corollary being that they are telling the truth as they see it and are trying to rebut a slight on their country.
The propagandist rationalisation is that they are Uncle Toms trying to keep on the right side of their Catholic co-nationals.
Part 2
________________________________________
Some of the ROI-bashers here and elsewhere would do well to research their subject a little more objectively before submitting the same jumble of half truths and dangerous nonsense that passes for debate in some quarters in Northern Ireland.
The claim has been made that the Protestant minority was alienated, humiliated and largely silenced.
This is nonsense.
With the setting up of the Irish Free State, the Protestant minority remained in as strong a position as ever and were, if anything, more secure.
They retained their land and property rights and maintained a very much over-representative position in the law and the judiciary, banking and insurance and in the professions, commerce and industry.
This was certainly very different to the treatment meted out by the winning side in the aftermath of the Elizabethan wars, the Cromwellian period, the Williamite wars and after 1798. Fourteen Protestants were elected to the Dáil in 1927 and special appointments of Protestants – many of whom had been militant unionists – were made to the Seanad to ensure more substantial representation there.
Proportional representation was retained and this provided a political voice for the small minority of Protestants.
There were some 60 English peers who still held Irish titles and lands in Ireland.
In later years Protestants went on to hold the position of President of Ireland.
It’s worth pointing out, even if it’s not mentioned here that the Ne Temere decree usually pops up at this stage in this specific debate.
This decree was issued in 1908 and – while certainly insensitive – was intended more as a control measure for Catholics rather than an attack on Protestants. It also emanated from the Vatican and not the ROI. With this rule in force, over which the ROI had no control, it was Catholic pulchritude and not Catholic oppression that ate away at Protestant numbers -at least until 1990.
Insensitive it may have been, but it did not rate in the same realm of cruelty as did the Penal Laws introduced in the early 18th century after the Glorious Revolution.
Have a read of Marcus Tanner’s ‘Ireland’s Holy War’ where you will find a detailed account of the why’s and wherefores of the relative decline in Protestant numbers during that period i.e 1922 to 1970 in ROI.
It is my contention that there was no mass-pogrom of Southern Protestants in the oft-quoted years of 1911-26. I contend that there was already a decline in Southern Protestantism from the late 19th century arising from the Land Acts in particular those of the Salisbury and Balfour governments, which broke up the aristocratic estates and gave loans to Irish tenants to buy out their landlords. This led to mainland British men (and their families) who had previously been sent over by absentee landlords in Britain to run their estates, returning to Britain. This accounts for a decline in the Protestant numbers from 356,000 in 1891 to 326,000 in 1911 (based on Census data). Then there is the Home Rule issue, brought to the fore by the Parliament Act’s removal of the House of Lords veto. This made it clear that Home Rule would pass at some stage. This lead to many more Southern Protestants leaving out of imagined fears of life under Home Rule. These fears had been drilled into them by irresponsible Unionist political leaders like Craig and Carson, evoking memories of wars like 1641 etc. to portray Catholics as enemies with slogans like “Home Rule is Rome Rule”. Then came WW1, partition, and the Boundary Commission. The latter 2 led to Southern Unionists mostly from border areas moving North. This was overwhelmingly simply because they were Unionists and wanted to live in the UK.
Part 3
During the same period following the setting up of the state the entire British army and the British government administration pulled out of Ireland – mostly, it appears from contemporary news coverage, in an orderly and in some cases a carnival atmosphere – which strongly influenced the religious statistics.
The remainder had the choice of staying in the state where they were treated just like everybody else or going northwards where they were guaranteed preferential treatment in jobs, housing etc. Not surprisingly many took the latter option.(cf. Marcus Tanner’s ‘Ireland’s Holy War’ ).The second most powerful politician in the state at this time was a Lisburn Presbyterian ,Ernest Blythe, which does to exactly tie in with the state-sponsored sectarianism model.
I would suggest that most Protestants in the Republic perceive themselves as Irish and feel no need for the patronage of some of their extreme co-religionists in NI. This would seem to be supported by a recent survey of Protestants in Donegal where most perceive their identity as Irish Protestants.
Certainly the Irish Free State was no paradise for the first 50 years or so of its existence but arguably Protestants fared better economically than Catholics who left in their hundreds of thousands.
However the stability developed during the years following independence was almost unique in western Europe and in recent years the Republic of Ireland is emerging as a prosperous and hopefully more tolerant and mature society.
No Protestant family gets attacked here as happened in NI to a clergyman who wished a Happy Christmas to a Catholic priest and was forced to leave the country.
No Protestant family gets attacked here as happened to the family of Eddie Ervine in the north when he went to live in Dublin.
Irishmen of the Protestant denominations have not abandoned their faith and their country because they ceased to have the support of the English government.
The decline in numbers of Protestants in the south in the early years had perfectly understandable reasons and has nothing to do with any fear of hostility.
They possess almost the same amount of property which they had when the state was set up.
Though they are less than five per cent of the population they retain 30 per cent of farms over 100 acres and some well known concerns, which were Freemason bailiwicks, did not employ a Catholic in administrative positions until after the second world war, a matter which was only remedied by the emergence of the trade unions.
Two of the first presidents of the state were Protestant and I would point out that both the two ladies who became president have not had
the slightest hesitation in opposing the teaching of the Catholic Church and its practice. There have been two Protestant deputy Prime Ministers –the first being a Belfast Presbyterian –Ernest Blythe .Contrast that with the record of the Stormont regime 1921-1971.
I get the impression that some unionist propagandists try to conjure up a mirage of southern anti-Protestant discrimination to deflect attention from the very non-miraginous of northern anti-catholic sectarianism. But simply wishing for something to be true does not make it true.
Part 4
I have a number of Protestant friends, all straight talkers, and none have complained of discrimination.
Judging by the comments here substantial education re the ROI is required.
In an article in the Irish Times published on 7th September 1996, Dr Garret FitzGerald explains that previously, nobody seemed to examine emigration from the south in religious terms. However he highlights a distorting factor, namely the higher rate of attrition in the early days of the state when life expectancy was not as long as it is now. The number of people dying before reaching their 30s or 40s was as high as 15%, half as great as emigration itself. It’s a lot smaller now, thanks mostly to improvements in medical care, hygiene, nutrition etc.
As for the emigration rate, there was a significantly higher level of emigration by Protestants than by Catholic young people in the pre-war period. Since 1945 this has been reversed, the Protestant emigration rate is now much lower than that of Catholics. Dr FitzGerald continues:
It may be recalled that in this column of November 8th last year, I reported that the latest (1991) census data for religion shows that 40 per cent of Protestants here are engaged in higher-income employments, (viz. administration, management, the major professions, or ownership of large farms) as against 20 per cent of Catholics. It might be helpful if these facts were better known to unionists in Northern Ireland.
In other words, southern Protestants are actually prospering and doing very well for themselves. There is no evidence of any maltreatment in this day and age.
A former fundamentalist Free Presbyterian, who used to contribute to the talkback board, once went tentatively to Dublin to examine the ‘plight’ of southern Protestants. He found no ‘plight,’ only a group of contented people who were living out their lives in peace.
Here in the Republic no oppression of the Protestant population has occurred similar to that endured by Catholics in NI 1921-1972. It is offensive to citizens of the State to suggest otherwise. The Republic has been based on equality from top to bottom. Hence, unlike Britain, a Catholic, Protestant, Hindu or Jew is free to seek election to the office of President. However look eastwards to Britain and a totally different state of affairs exist. Under the antiquated Act of Settlement a Catholic cannot inherit the throne. There is a de facto ban on Catholics becoming British Prime Minister consequent on the office’s role in appointing Anglican bishops to the House of Lords – hence T. Blair’s decision to convert *after resigning* That is but a few examples of a state not completely purged of sectarianism.. Thankfully we here in the South can say with not just a tad of pride, that since 1920 we have established a State that has made all feel welcome and valued – something which the more extreme type of Ulster unionist never even tried to do.
The standard down for Cold War western communists propagandising about ‘capitalist oppression of the workers’ was the question why, if their preferred system was so great, there was nobody attempting to get across the Berlin wall from *west to east*.
Accordingly the $64,000 dollar question:
If the ROI is so horrendous why is there not a stream northwards of distressed southern Protestants? Since the early 1990’s the Protestant proportion of the ROI population has been rising and the Catholic proportion falling (Central Statistics Office). It looks, if you are a Protestant in Ireland, that the ROI is the place to be.