Friday, August 31, 2007
“Catholic sectarianism does not need to be confronted because it does not exist”
Interesting reworking of a recent Irish Times column by Fintan O’Toole. This time it goes just a bit deeper and cuts into some very dark territory largely hidden by powerful political grand narratives that sheltered many Catholics from the gruesome reality of things that were done in the name of their defence. Accordingly, he argues, Northern Ireland’s Catholics had never had to confront their own sectarian hard wiring, until Darren Graham “had the temerity to punch through the tribal stereotype by playing Gaelic football and not defining himself simply as a Protestant. It took the hate that dares not speak its name to make him one now”.
Still, he notes, many cannot understand why Nationalist/Republican violence should in the least compare with the blatantly sectarian campaigns of Loyalist paramilitaries:
Protestants have been told, rightly, that their religious and political attitudes contributed to the twisted mentalities of the Loyalist killers who murdered Catholics throughout the Troubles. Because those killings were categorised as sectarian, no one could argue with any seriousness that they were not, in some sense, manifestations of a wider bigotry that was itself the product of political, cultural and historical forces.
But Catholics have been insulated from the need to confront the same truths by the notion that the UDR men killed by the IRA were only incidentally Protestant. Catholic sectarianism does not need to be confronted because it does not exist. Thus, while Sinn Féin demands – often justly – public inquiries and accountability for the murders of Catholics by Loyalists or the forces of the state, it does not understand why such accountability might apply to itself.
Mick Fealty @ 11:40 AM
Lies, damned lies and what a certain newspaper columnist writes! Not only has Sinn Fein made it clear that they believe that republican violence should be investigated but so have their supporters. Gerry Adams in his recent call for an investigation into collusion made it quite clear that that would also have to involve republican collusion.
Nobody has clean hands and we should not expect the unionist community nor the British Government to accept the truth of what happened in NI if Irish men and women are not prepared to do the same.
On a personal basis I know of republicans who regret privately much of what happened and the republican leadership have publicly regetted all the deaths. In fact I’ve never met a republican who doesn’t admit that Catholic sectarianism exists.
Posted by on Aug 31, 2007 @ 12:53 PMthink it should read SF and the IRA need to confront….., i dont think most catholics have any trouble seeing a sectarian undercurrant to UDR RUC deaths
Posted by on Aug 31, 2007 @ 12:54 PMOk Mick,
Seeing as you have raised this issue on a very transparent level…
I think that there is any amount of evidence to show that sectarianism among what is termed the ‘majority’ community has been far more prevalent than vice versa. There are literally decades of historical data to suuport this.
Furthermore, I do not believe that the situation has (in any significant way) fundamentally changed. Even a cursory glance at many threads on this particular forum will show the very raw hatred that exists among many Unionist/Loyalists correspondants for the ‘other community’. The one clear difference is that their much more prevalent degree of pure religous intolerance.
Posted by on Aug 31, 2007 @ 01:02 PMLib
Gerry Adams in his recent call for an investigation into collusion made it quite clear that that would also have to involve republican collusion.
We’re not talking about collusion.
We’re talking about cold, sectarian murders.
What did he have to say about those?
jpeters
think it should read SF and the IRA need to confront
You’ve fallen at the first hurdle.
The sectarian attitudes of the Garden Centre Prod are part of the same pyramid that leads to Loyalists spraying bullets around pubs.
The sectarian attitudes of Malone Catholics are likewise.
There’s much more to it than merely “seeing a sectarian undercurrent” (but I’d dispute even that). It is about coming to terms with the sectarian poison in this society, and our own responsibility for removing it. Which requires a lot more than just blaming everyone else.
Posted by on Aug 31, 2007 @ 01:04 PMmacswiney
You need to provide evidence for your claims.
Otherwise they constitute, in themselves, the very blind sectarian bigotry of which we are talking.
Posted by on Aug 31, 2007 @ 01:05 PMjpeters
i dont think most catholics have any trouble seeing a sectarian undercurrant to UDR RUC deaths
macswiney has already produced staggering evidence to the contrary.
Posted by on Aug 31, 2007 @ 01:06 PMIJP,
The whole point of republicanism is a belief in equality and a hatred of sectarianism. That fact has been stated time and time again although I have to agree that there are always some people who don’t appear to be able to appreciate even the most evident facts.
I referred to the Gerry Adams speech simply because it was recently discussed here. If you expect to play games like asking whether republicans have stopped beating their wives then go elsewhere.
No prominent republican I am aware of has made the sort of sectarian remarks which were commonplace amongst unionists until very recently. It’s simply not the problem amongst republicans that it is amongst unionists, partly because of history but more importantly because of the nature of the republican ideal.
That said, of course I admit not all republicans, including this one, live up to their ideals all the time.
Posted by on Aug 31, 2007 @ 01:16 PMIJP
think you mis understand me i think most catholics recognise the sectarian nature of those acts because they understand that there is a sectarian sentiment within their community, anyone with an elderly catholic relative knows this. How those atitudes shaped the violence of the lunatic fringe on either side is debateable though i doubt you will find many garden centre prods or malone catholics who will be putting there hands up.
Posted by on Aug 31, 2007 @ 01:17 PMProtestant Home Attacked Twice in One Night
Posted by on Aug 31, 2007 @ 01:25 PMlib2106: On a personal basis I know of republicans who regret privately much of what happened and the republican leadership have publicly regetted all the deaths.
Really - I thought they only regretted the acknowledged, accidental deaths. So, no apology or regret for Teebane (not accidental), and certainly none for Kingsmills (neither accidental nor acknowledged).
Posted by on Aug 31, 2007 @ 01:27 PMEammon McCann, in an excellent piece he wrote after the death of George Best, suggested that..
“…there’s a sometime awkwardness about Prods, particularly Prods from a proletarian background…sometimes expressed in drunkenness, grumpiness or uncool outbursts of atavism, perhaps resenting the way their identity isn’t esteemed, perhaps resenting their identity. Or maybe just confused. Northern Protestants have never been any good at guff.”
Therefore, I would argue, prod sectarianism just expresses itself in a less sophisticated way than catholic sectarianism. With their greater political awareness and ‘PR skills’, nationalists are simply much more adept at ‘guff’ and can therefore tart up their sectarianism to appear to be a justifiable expression of their Nationalism and their rejection of British imperialism, the ‘pariah Orange state’ etc.
Catholics less sectarian than prods?? Load of oul’ guff mate!
Posted by on Aug 31, 2007 @ 01:30 PMAs a catholic i have to say it does exist , hate exists on both sides but what i noticed after living close to a loyalist area that hate exists for them as a culture that has 2 change as so does the bigots in the GAA
Posted by on Aug 31, 2007 @ 01:31 PMLib2016 - Enniskillen killed it for me you know. Such an atrocious sectarian act against a community commerarating it’s dead finished any romantic sympathy I had for the Provos. Indeed, it led me to re-evaluate my whole understanding of the troubles. How could such people be republicans ?
Posted by on Aug 31, 2007 @ 01:35 PMMick, are we talking Catholic sectarianism, Republican sectarianism, Nationalist sectarianism Celtic sectarianism or Irish sectarianism ? or a combination there-of ?
Or do they all get lumped together under Catholic ? Why ?
I’d like to know what the stats are on how many times the elected representaives from each side use the term Protestant or Unionist compared to Catholic or Nationalist over the years.
Posted by on Aug 31, 2007 @ 01:48 PMLib
You do a fantastic job at trotting out the rhetoric - so closely do you cling to it that you’d nearly think that you believe all that tripe.“The whole point of republicanism is a belief in equality and a hatred of sectarianism.”
The theory may be true - but the practice is usually somewhat different. Once people get involved the theories are hard to live up to. The Orange Institution has rules which order members not to engage in anything other than kindness to their Catholic neighbours - however I dont for one minute claim that therefore there is no sectarianism within the Orange Institution. Its something which has to be recognised and tackled. However, if you dont even admit it exists then how do you tackle it?
“No prominent republican I am aware of has made the sort of sectarian remarks which were commonplace amongst unionists until very recently.”
Maybe not, but their involvement in sectarian crimes, or at the very least with an organisation which carried out sectarian crimes doesn’t exactly help.
“It’s simply not the problem amongst republicans that it is amongst unionists, partly because of history but more importantly because of the nature of the republican ideal.”
You keep telling yourself that big fella. It would seem that you’re only managing to convince yourself though.
“That said, of course I admit not all republicans, including this one, live up to their ideals all the time.”
Does that include sectarianism then? Because it would seem that you can admit that people have the ability to be sectarian, but just not if they profess to be a republican. How’s that then?
Posted by on Aug 31, 2007 @ 01:49 PMlib2016
You seem to argue that the RM could not be sectarian because they are republicans and therefore uphold the virtues of republicanism which is contrary to sectarianism.
What nonsense.
Is this the same group which dragged the ideals of republicanism through the gutter and debased the very values simply because they never understood what REAL REPULICANISM meant.
They denied civil and human rights to their fellow Irishmen including the right to life.
If they did this without a pang of conscience they could easily embrace sectarianism which by any measure is a lesser offence.
They were as sectarian as any other part of society and this explains why they spent so much effort attacking the Protestant community.Posted by on Aug 31, 2007 @ 01:51 PMDewi,
Personally I rejected all violence much earlier than Enniskillen but that is possibly because I was exposed ti the horror of seeing a ‘kneecapping’ very early on.
As for Enniskillen itself - the nationalist population was under attack from the British Army and the community which backed them. They fought back and when there is violence innocent people get hurt….end of story.
For the mothers who have lost their children in Palestine and Israel or who are losing them in Iraq today do you think there is some romantic ideal which justifies their suffering?
War is shit, period. I’ve had unionist friends killed by the IRA and nationalist friends killed by loyalists. The pain was the same in both cases.
Posted by on Aug 31, 2007 @ 01:59 PM“As for Enniskillen itself - the nationalist population was under attack from the British Army and the community which backed them. They fought back and when there is violence innocent people get hurt….end of story. “
Shudders.
Posted by on Aug 31, 2007 @ 02:02 PMlib
So you would justify lining up Protestant workmen and shooting them too whilst telling the Roman Catholic in the van to run away?“As for Enniskillen itself - the nationalist population was under attack from the British Army and the community which backed them. They fought back and when there is violence innocent people get hurt….end of story.”
That’s just sick.
“War is shit, period. I’ve had unionist friends killed by the IRA and nationalist friends killed by loyalists. The pain was the same in both cases.”
And by your rationale the loyalists were justified in shooting innocent Catholics because their “community was under attack by republicans, and the community which backed them. They fought back and innocent people got hurt.”
Sauce for the goose and all that.
Posted by on Aug 31, 2007 @ 02:04 PMinterested & confused,
I don’t accept any moral equivalence between organisations founded to defend the cause of liberty, equality and fraternity and those founded to defend inherited privilege.
Neither side is totally evil nor totally righteous but I do know which I support even though I have differed from the means they used in the past.
Posted by on Aug 31, 2007 @ 02:07 PMHello, is this thing on?
Posted by on Aug 31, 2007 @ 02:10 PMLets be striaght here for once,
one side was as murderes us as the other, each side had no call to kill anyone, you cannot justify one IRA killing, or one Loyalist killing, simply because they shouldnt have happened,
these people are not freedom fighters/Defenders, they are murdering secterian thugs, who should be serving time for what they done on the people of this country,
the killing of 11 protestent workers in bus (disgusting) the murder of innocnet cathoilc workers (revolting) any one who tries to defend this bullshit war, needs to have a serious reality check!
you no longer have to call Sinn Fein/IRA, its not Shinn Fein/MI5, they have so much blood on thier hands, the same as the murdering sumbags on the loyalist side!
March for half-truth my ass!
Posted by on Aug 31, 2007 @ 02:12 PMWhich part of ‘Personally I rejected all violence..’ is too difficult to understand?
Posted by on Aug 31, 2007 @ 02:12 PMsoz i meant its now Sinn Fein/MI5
Posted by on Aug 31, 2007 @ 02:13 PMOh well coming on top of the Derry thread why shouldn’t I throw my tuppence ha’penny worth in?
Much of the IRA campaign in Derry in the mid to late 1970’s was carried out by a surprisingly small group of Provos. They were heavily involved in the organising of the bombing of Derry city centre but more to the point were behind a spate of assasinations against prominent (and not so prominent) protestant civilians in the town which resulted in Derry almost being tipped over into a sectarian tit-for-tat campaign like that of North Belfast with Loyalists ‘retaliating’ against innocent Catholics in the Waterside.
I have enough inbred pride in my native city to say that good old fashioned Derry common sense took hold and community leaders on both sides stopped the situation spiralling out of control. Well good old fashioned common sense and the fact that the peelers scooped the provie gang in ‘76 and that particular sectarian murder campaign came to an end.
So what’s my point? Well the ringleaders of that Provo sectarian murder campaign are still prominent in Derry Republican/Left wing circles today, indeed they are positively feted in certain bars. One is a prominent Sinn Fein member, another is a journalist, if you asked them they would tell you how committed they were to a non-sectarian, egalitarian, inclusive, modern Ireland.
Well they would tell you that if you were from the BBC or the Irish Times or the Guradian, if you were one of their drinking buddies and it was late on a Friday night and you ask them about the prod businessman whose brains they blew out on his doorstep, a strange gleam will come over their eyes, they’ll think for a while and then they’ll tell you about the Famine and the Plantation and how they’re sick of those Orange bastards even walking the same streets of their own Irish city and the sooner they just fucked off the better.
Yup, it’s only the huns who are sectarian bigots.
Posted by on Aug 31, 2007 @ 02:13 PM
