Saturday, May 13, 2006
As a result of already being separated…
Davy Adams puts the McIlveen killing in the context of a separate lives scenario which may be a pre-condition of current political priorities (subs needed), rather than a result of clear political choices.
After more than a decade of relative peace, Northern Ireland still consists, largely, of two tribal groups living in almost complete isolation from, and opposition to, one another. In most areas, shared ground has long ago been carved up into separate Catholic and Protestant districts where only those of like persuasion are welcome. Even in the occasional mixed community of private-ownership housing, there is little real interaction between neighbours from differing religious backgrounds. In the main, people in Northern Ireland actually prefer to live, work and socialise amongst their own religious affiliates. The communities happily reside separately, in virtual parallel worlds to one another, where stereotyping and demonising is given full rein.
It is within that kind of society that we raise our children. Protestant and Catholic youngsters do not live on the same streets, they do not play together, they do not go to school together and they do not socialise together.
Most of them have never knowingly had contact - or at least not enough to form an opinion of their own - with anyone outside their own community until they leave school and start work. By which time, in all probability, enormous damage has already been done.
Many have been taught to distrust, or even hate, those from what amounts to an alien background. Added to this mix, are varying degrees of problems now common within any western society: a more general lack of respect for authority, a high proportion of young men having been raised without any positive male role model in the home, and widespread drug and alcohol abuse.
Mick Fealty @ 07:46 AM
Not an unjustified opinion after what has happened in Ballymens, BUT
I think Davy is jumping to an awful lot of conclusions. the lack of a male model within the home, mixed marriages, and youngsters not having any respect for authority, are not features of N Irish society alone, but are problems which affect the whole of the western world. I think Davy is subtly suggesting that it is.Yes we prefer our own kind. It’s pretty evident from the way we live, but there is a shake up going on, with relative new comers coming in, and residing hapily among us.
Couldn’t Davy have pointed to that, and instead of looking inward and crying woe, and perhaps look at the more positive things that are happening.
We need a more positive outlook, and for the odd public person to point to our strengths rather than our weaknesses.
It would go a long way.
Have a nice weekend sluggerites.
Posted by on May 13, 2006 @ 08:06 AMI totally agree Busty.
We’re all in this mess together and can only get out of it together.There’s a majority of good folks out there, I’m convinced, and as i’ve quoted in a previous post “For evil to prosper, good men (I’m adding good women0 have only to do nothing” - Edmund Burke (a few hundred years ago).
Posted by on May 13, 2006 @ 08:29 AMDavy Adams’ proposes segregation is caused by sectarianism – but is it? It can equally be cogently argued that segregation is an outcome of sectarianism. Population shifts in North Belfast for example suggests increased segregation follows sectarian tensions.
Certainly, segregation gives greater freedom to sectarianism and makes it a more intractable problem to solve but getting there may have to start with tackling views and actions that contribute to distrust and hatred.
Posted by on May 13, 2006 @ 09:40 AMPeople such as Davy Adams can witter on for ever about the ‘two tribes’ we’ve all become and how ‘healing’ is needed and tackling ‘sectarianism’ is needed and all the rest of it. The bald fact of the matter is that it is partition, the political and military structures of the northern irish state as well as the powerlessness - to this day - of 44% of the population which is at the root of this; 44% of the population who are forced against their will to remain separated from the country with which they identify in a polity with which they don’t and which is controlled by those who are deeply antagonistic to their views.
That is what is wrong. Never mind all the blather about needing to cross bridges and get to know one another and all that. The real poison - the sump and source of all this - is the northern irish state and its insistence on coercing almost half its population into submission, to this day. It is partition and the character of the state that follows on from it that endlessly gives rise to threat, violent assertions and clashes, military suppression & political double-speak and triple-speak - a state set up to satisfy the 2 main players, unionism and the british, against the majority will of the people on the island and against what would by now be the majority of its citizens (nationalists) had they been able to live free from the political and physical supremacy of those who have beset them for 80 years.
That’s where the problem lies. It is the poison of unionist supremacy and british ruthlessness. If you want to fix this country that is where you must make changes.
Posted by on May 13, 2006 @ 09:42 AMHarry - with the signing of the GFA and its all-Ireland endorsement the nationalist argument moved on to; accepting the NI border, the removal of Articles 2 & 3 and the acceptance of constitutional change occurring by consent.
Ireland is seeking to move on, dropping the baggage that has contributed to ‘the troubles’ and build a peaceful future. It has required nationalist sacrifice some of its dogma – but not only them, unionists too.
Are you arguing against the GFA Harry? If so, whose views are you representing? Not those of the overwhelming majority of the people of Ireland anyway. The espousal of views such as yours contributes to segregation and isn’t segregation most aptly expressed by the border itself?
Posted by on May 13, 2006 @ 10:02 AMSorry Busty and Joe
that just sounds like “heads down and blinkers on” which might have been a viable approach before the divisive wedge of sectarian violence got in on the act.
To heal that chasm will require a more proactive stance, whereby people who want to make a difference, will have to venture into unfamiliar and uncomfortable areas, both geographically and socially.
For that to happen, we need people from both traditions not just to extend general invitations, but to make specific ones to aquaintances and neighbours, for them to come with them and experience first hand somthing of the others culture.
You might even be able to designate a particular day, week, month and give it a fancy title to popularise the concept and grab some funding .... then again maybe not!
Posted by on May 13, 2006 @ 10:02 AMI don’t know why you are so negative about my post rubicon, I merely diagnosed a problem. My diagnosis is correct. Why you’re talking about the GFA and ‘moving on’ without any real consideration of what I wrote suggests something of a unionist mindset to me, the type of mindset that wants to ‘tidy-up’ and brush away what it doesn’t really want to confront.
The GFA is not working. Nationalism offered an historic compromise to unionism. They really meant it. Unionism has chosen to throw that back in their face. Many nationalists were prepared to deal with the GFA as a compromise. Unionism’s inability to engage with that will lead to conflict. Nationalism is not impressed. This is what is at the root of sectarianism.
Unionism thinks it can rewrite the rules now that it has welched on the deal it signed up to. It wanted victory after all, without having to move on anything it didn’t want to. This is breaking a deal. Unless the GFA is implemented nationalists will not accept anything less. Many had problems with the GFA but were prepared to give it a go; I would say that quite a few are happy enough its not operative since the unionists are clearly not made of the stuff worth compromising with.If there is no resolution within 2 years I believe unionism will live to regret it’s dishonesty over this deal and its continuing supremacist viewpoint.
That is what is at the root of this problem rubicon. Don’t lecture me about ‘moving on’ - there are many others you’d be better to direct that phrase at, and they’re in power today.
Posted by on May 13, 2006 @ 10:20 AMI’m conscious of not getting off thread here since I agree with you Harry in as far as the GFA being in current jeopardy. It is not dead yet though and it may yet survive.
The GFA did facilitate review that allows the DUP to seek changes in Strand 1. There’s nothing wrong with them attempting to do so and some of their criticisms of collective executive responsibility are worth listening to without taking the knee-jerk response that the SDLP have adopted. Review of the GFA was and is allowed for.
The DUP delay however is not caused by their criticisms of the GFA – but by increasingly frail accusations of republican criminality. Their failure to implement the GFA for this reason I would consider a failure – but not a failure by a party that officially endorsed the agreement.
The GFA allows for joint working of government and a process that can contribute to building the trust that can tackle sectarianism and segregation. So far, it hasn’t been too successful but the blame for that can be pretty widely spread.
I don’t accept that partition is the principal cause of the sectarianism that contributes to segregation. Greater contributing factors have been the METHODS used to support or criticise partition.
Posted by on May 13, 2006 @ 10:43 AMHarry
whilst I personally think that home rule would have been preferable at the time. Sectarianism was alive and kicking (sic) long before that, and has been nurtured and formed into the large and problematic beast that it is today, primarily as Rubicon has suggested by the “METHODS” employed both by those for and against.
Davy Adams’ article was highlighting the “paralell tracks” problem where both traditions co-exist with little or no first hand knowledge of each other.
Have you anything other than the removal of the border and the achievement of a U.I. to suggest, that could work towards the eradication of sectarianism in the here and now?
Posted by on May 13, 2006 @ 11:07 AMI dont know if you would all be familiar with the SPED programme, the special purchase of evacuated dwellings.
I’ve pasted a link to allow you all to see the reality of life for some people.
While the good news is that forced evictions are reducing, the bad news is that last year, the segregation we talk about forced 120 families to flee for their lives because of intolerance of one kind or another.
I filled in about 7 of these SPED applications, and terror justly describes how people felt. I had one couple who had unwittingly bought a house in Dundonald and had to leave it within 3 months as they were catholic.
Harry, while I know the point you are making, you cannot ignore the majority population in NI and the choices they are making. That is our reality and that is what we deal with, not some nonsense about UI
Posted by on May 13, 2006 @ 11:23 AMFaugh
“Heads down and blinkers on”
That’s the exact opposite of what I said.
I implied that good people have to do something.Your suggestion is a good one. I would take it a little bit further, something I used to do when I still lived in N.I back in the darkness of the 70’s, and that was to ask to join in with “others” on their activities. For example, going to their sports clubs, go swimming with them etc. I made a lot of good friends that way.
Posted by on May 13, 2006 @ 11:27 AMrubicon wrote:
“I don’t accept that partition is the principal cause of the sectarianism that contributes to segregation. Greater contributing factors have been the METHODS used to support or criticise partition.”It is protestant supremacy that is at the root of sectarianism. That is all there is to it, pure and simple.
Catholics are not inclined to be sectarian, they are too arrogant for that metaphysically speaking. Also they seek compromise, which unionists consider - with a true Settler people mentality - to be a sign of weakness and an effort by the duplicitous indigents to ingratiate themsleves in the absence of the blunt power to do so.
Protestant supremacy has as its purpose the maintanance of the link with britain. Kicking the crap out of the natives was necessary to protestantism in northern ireland because it forced enough catholics out to maintain an artificial majority and it helped to consolidate their identity against a demonised ‘other’ who were ‘disloyal’ and potentially rebellious. It is protestant supremacy which is at the root of sectarianism, aided and abetted by the british who used it for their own ends. The refusal of unionism to come to an historic compromise with nationalism shows that it is the supremacist nature of unionism, backed up by guns, which is the real root cause of this. Even when the natives compromise - as they did in 1922 and for 50 years after and which they did again in 1998 - it is taken as a sign of weakness and duplicity and is always the preface to bigotry.
The northern state and partition were created precisely in order to accomodate all of these aspects of unionism and protestantism.
That is the long and the short of sectarianism in northern ireland.
Posted by on May 13, 2006 @ 11:30 AMAnother contribution I made was to send my children to a state school, even though I was (very) nominally a catholic. And I persuaded my parents to take my younger siblings out of a catholic high school and send them to a state school. Both myself and my parents lived in (seperate) mixed areas and I think that little action helped integration somewhat.
I think all of the children should be schooled together and that it would make a huge difference in a generation or so.Posted by on May 13, 2006 @ 11:34 AMJoe
apologies for my mistake, I’ve learnt to master both fife and tin whistle by doing somthing similar. (on second thoughts change master to sort of play :))
Posted by on May 13, 2006 @ 11:34 AMHarry
If ever the maxim about people in glasshouses throwing bouldes applied to anyone it applies to what you just wrote.I’m not being purposely ad hominem here, but honestly, how can you say that Protestants are supremist and bigoted, and demonstrate those exact qualities yourself?
Not all Protestants in NI are here as a result of Plantation. In the 19th century, when Belfast was the economic centre of the island of Ireland, there was a population expolosion in the North East with many skilled workers coming from England and remaining.
You are taking an over simplistic view of the situation, and one that does no credit to either side
Posted by on May 13, 2006 @ 11:36 AMFaugh
Apology accepted.
Posted by on May 13, 2006 @ 11:41 AM44% of the population who are forced against their will to remain separated from the country with which they identify in a polity with which they don’t and which is controlled by those who are deeply antagonistic to their views.
Harry, this is complete rubbish. 71% of the people in Northern Ireland - most of them nationalists - voted for the Good Friday Agreement which accept partition. The GFA has already addressed your whole argument - please try to get with the programme and move on.
The rest of your argument is pure sectarianism. “Catholics are not inclined to be sectarian” is probably one of the most ironic statements that could be made in the context of a discussion on NI politics.
Posted by on May 13, 2006 @ 11:56 AMHarry LOL
religous sectarianism has been a lever pulled by many states at many times. It seems a little disengenious to suggest that it has been soley the preserve of the “British-Protestant Ascendencey”.
I also seem to remember somthing of the 1798 rebellion being a bit of a cause celebre for Presbyterians at that time and shame that it failed, as it provided the flicker of an enchanting possibility, the possibility of an Ireland with church and state were entirely seperated.
On a personal note I have had first hand experience of Catholic sectarianism, whilst I was working just outside Galway on a project for the civil service, a supervisor whose job it was to select staff for training on a course that I ran was bemoaning the fact that she couldn’t select what she considered to be more able delegates as she had been told off the record to chose based on religion.
I have also lost work in the ROI due to my political views, my cousins, Roman Catholics meanwhile have experienced protestant sectarianism whilst living in the north. So please drop the pretense and suggest somthing positive.
Posted by on May 13, 2006 @ 11:58 AMHave you anything other than the removal of the border and the achievement of a U.I. to suggest, that could work towards the eradication of sectarianism in the here and now?
The question wasn’t addressed to me but I will answer it.
No. The state of Norn Iron is sectarian to its core and should be abolished. That is the only way to take religion out of politics in this country. Until then we are all prisoners.
Posted by on May 13, 2006 @ 11:59 AMelfinto
thanks for the answer! What tangible benefits with regard to the removal of religous sectarianism do you think would be manifest by the removal of the border?
Posted by on May 13, 2006 @ 12:09 PMComrade Stalin wrote:
“Harry, this is complete rubbish. 71% of the people in Northern Ireland - most of them nationalists - voted for the Good Friday Agreement which accept partition. The GFA has already addressed your whole argument - please try to get with the programme and move on.”They voted for peace, and the acceptance of partition under sufferance only insofar as the GFA was implemented and a much greater political and economic connection with their guarantor, the South, was put in place.
All of that has been thrown out by unionism, which now seeks to bask in the glow of victory.
The unionists have welched on the deal. To say ‘get with the programme and move on’ while dismissing the things I have laid out shows that you and those who think like you are not actually interested in why sectarianism exists. You want to hear things on your own terms and that’s it. Foolish and wilfully closed-minded, albeit masquerading as the reasonable view. It is in fact the unionist view.
Posted by on May 13, 2006 @ 12:12 PMThe hatred and sectarianism which exists in Ireland (north and south) will not evaporate following unification. People is this small island have developed and sustained an ability to loathe those who are different. Its a solution to this problem and not trite comments about border removal which is needed.
Posted by on May 13, 2006 @ 02:58 PM“I think Davy is jumping to an awful lot of conclusions. the lack of a male model within the home, mixed marriages, and youngsters not having any respect for authority, are not features of N Irish society alone, but are problems which affect the whole of the western world.”
I have read the above comment a few times and compared it to the article. I can’t understand the gripe. Does Adams not clearly state that he see this as a problem common throughout the western world?
But refers to it in the context of it adding an extra problematic dimension to the “two tribes” sectarianism that exists amongst many young people as well and how that manifests itself in many instances?Posted by on May 13, 2006 @ 05:33 PMFaugh: You say you were discriminated against in Galway. If you cannot document that, it is anecdotal, at best. The fact is, the Northern Protestant mindset is supremacist and sectarian: that is your history, whether it be in the shipyards, engineering, the docks or the linen mills. Like comparable bullies, you used your religion with your control of apprenticeships and skilled jobs to look down your noses at those, mostly Catholics, you correlled into the Bogside, Ardoyne and similar areas. You actively discriminated against places like South Armagh for generations. When all else failed, you used state and paramilitary violence again and again to make the Croppies (and others) lie down. You have a disreputable, disgusting history. Deal with it.
Posted by on May 14, 2006 @ 06:18 AMI always find the old republican line of “only prods are sectarian” to be very funny. The very words are a contridiction because painting all prodestants as secterain monsters is of course secterian.
And of course the notion that once the Brits are out prod false consciousness will lift and we will all live happly ever after.....
Posted by on May 14, 2006 @ 09:48 AM
