Tuesday, June 19, 2007
Confronting the elephant- Part 1
A number of days ago I started a thread suggesting that, if the Loyal Orders were serious about engendering trust within the nationalist community and working towards an inclusive 12th July celebration, then tackling the elephant that is the overtly sectarian dimension to the Loyalist marching season would be a prerequisite.
And so to a case study: June 2007 and its Groundhog Day in the normally quiet village of Stoneyford, County Antrim. However, as in the previous two years, a loyalist band has applied to march on the 11th Night into a number of newly-built mixed housing developments. A number of years ago, the band completed the parade wearing ‘Orange Volunteers’ paramilitary t-shirts, no doubt to make the numerous catholic and mixed marriage homeowners in particular feel welcome, though they were banned from the housing developments last year. The new housing developments have been the scene of a number of sectarian attacks on homes and cars, with a number of catholic families fleeing their homes in the past three years.
Now, this isn’t a Loyal Order parade as such- no, the local Brethren will be marching up the main street as usual the following day, without any complaints. But the band will be involved in the 12th July parade as usual, with many of its members making up the membership of local lodges- and the parade will be starting and finishing in the local Orange Hall.
As an interesting aside, the leading Stoneyford loyalist, Mark Harbinson, is a senior member of the band, not to mention new supporter and election worker for local Ulster Unionist MLA, Basil McCrea.
And so to my proposition: it is clear that there is a section of the Orange Order and broader unionist community which loathes such calculated acts of sectarian harassment.
Would it not send a hearteningly positive message of Orange intentions were senior members of the Order to publicly condemn such antics and, at least in this example, recommend the band follow the lead of the local lodge?
Chris Donnelly @ 08:20 PM
I don’t have any problem with people marching but when it is only trying to stir things up, then it shouldn’t be allowed.
I know in Stoneyford nearly every flagpole has been flagged out since the start of June. Nothing like rubbing people’s noses up the wrong way.
At least show respect, and when the flags are tattered have the decency to take them back down rather than fade away.
Posted by on Jun 19, 2007 @ 09:51 PMIs orange volunteer & senior orangeman Mark Harbinson & his ‘men’ still running the orange order in Stoneyford, Glenavy & Crumlin ?
And is he still the keyholder for Stoneyford orange hall ? :)
Posted by on Jun 19, 2007 @ 10:39 PMHarbison may have changed?
He is now working for/with the UUP and has requested funding for a cultural family focused 11th night beacon lighting in Stoneyford instead of a huge illegal bonfire leaking pollutants into Stoneyford reservoir.
But if he is still requesting to have his blood and thunder band parade down cul-de-sacs maybe the change is superficial and the beacon idea will be in addition to the ridiculous bonfire on Water Service property that has required trenches to be be dug to reduce water contamination?
Crumlin will be a teller, will he try to bus in hundreds of bands to the village this year to stir up the shit again?
Basil McCrea has vouched for this UUP election worker and asked people to accept change can happen. The early signs from Stoneyford indicate the change may be very, very slow. Stoneyford and Harbison are now an issue for the UUP.
Posted by on Jun 19, 2007 @ 11:16 PMThough the bonfire now becomes a SF issue too.
Will Minister Murphy stand by and let this environmental disaster on government land providing drinking water occur again?
Who will do sweet FA first? McCrea or Murphy? Or will one surprise?
Posted by on Jun 19, 2007 @ 11:24 PMChris Donnelly - Frankly I’m bored at your one-sided posts. Given what has happened in Northern Ireland society over the last 35+ years, there are bound to be exceptions to the rule. I’m especially concerned that you are naming individual Loyalists on this site with implications about their activities. If you have evidence of wrong doing, go to the police.
Look at things from a Unionist point of view for a change. We have to put up with Sinn Fein IRA murderers in Government - people who have literally got away with murder. Yet you seem unconcerned about that.
So why don’t you stop your one-sided sectarian anti-Orange posts. I’m sure there are plenty of other forums for such sectarianism.
Posted by on Jun 20, 2007 @ 12:00 AMAs opposed to your fair and balanced ones huh peace and injustice
Posted by on Jun 20, 2007 @ 12:14 AMPeaceandJustice
To be fair to Chris, Harbinson was a Class A shit-stirrer in the past.
If he has changed, he’ll have to go out of his way to prove it, given his past associations, such as former LVF leader Mark Fulton.
Wouldn’t you just love to tear up the floorboards in Stoneyford Orange Hall to see if anything’s still there?
Posted by on Jun 20, 2007 @ 12:59 AMGonzo - SF and it’s members are very quick to cry “smear” and “prove it” or to cry foul about guilt by association if a republican is under the microscope - yet have no problems with putting allegations on their own website.
Published: 3 November, 2005
“leading Stoneyford loyalist Mark Harbinson a leader of violent protests at Drumcree and suspected of involvement in the intimidation of Catholics in Stoneyford and the surrounding areas”
http://www.sinnfein.ie/gaelic/news/detail/11818
Posted by on Jun 20, 2007 @ 01:17 AMI’m well aware of SF’s inability to take flak when the boot is on the other foot, but my point about Harbinson stands.
Posted by on Jun 20, 2007 @ 01:41 AMIt’s a shame the 12th of July falls on a weekday this year. I’d like to see one of these parades up close, in order to get a better understanding of them (or, at any rate, one of them). I’ve become so cynical about Sinn Fein that I tend to dismiss their utterences on parades into part shit-stirring, part sectarianism and part vote-grabbing with between 1% and 5% of truth in it (their insurance policy against being dismissed as outright BS’ers).
Posted by on Jun 20, 2007 @ 01:45 AMI think you’d be disappointed at how ordinary the majority are. OK, maybe marching with an Orange collarette wearing a bowler might not seem ‘ordinary’ to a Dub, but the bulk of parades are fairly innocuous pageants.
Posted by on Jun 20, 2007 @ 01:53 AMGonzo, that’s the part that worries me: boredom.
I suspect that is exactly what they are: a mundane tradition that really isn’t very interesting to an observer who is on the outside. Now, if they had American-style cheerleaders…
Still, I’ve heard and read so many negative and positive stories concerning them that it’s something I will get around to observing at some point… just to ‘suss’ it out for myself.
Posted by on Jun 20, 2007 @ 02:08 AMDubliner
The issue is not with OO parades per se. I am not a Sinn Fein voter, member or supporter. However, in this case I don’t think they are shit-stirring.
There are Nationalist objections to less than 5% of OO parades. If the OO want to parade through neighbourhoods where they are welcome - they can do so twice a day, every day as far as I’m concerned.
The OO bleat on about being able to march the Queen’s Highway and the right to free assembly. This is a typical OO myth. With rights come responsibilities. The OO have a responsibility to ensure that their parades do not deliberately cause offence to the residents who neighbourhood they are parading through. Unfortunately, past experience has shown that the OO are good at demanding their rights but aren’t so good at meeting their responsibilities.
In a democratic society, if they cannot meet their associated responsibilities - they have no claim on the rights.
After all, the BNP would not be allowed to march through Brixton for the same obvious and sensible reasons.
If the OO really is changing, then they should be able to meet the residents in the contentious neighbourhoods and guarantee that that there will be no banners/bands/songs commemorating “loyalist” terrorism.
If these conditions are agreed to, then I believe a parade should be allowed. If the OO breaks any agreement then they should know up front that there will be no parade for at least the following 3 years. Alternatively, if the parade goes off peacefully, they should be guaranteed a parade the following year (adhering to the same conditions).
The OO refuse to even meet with Catholic residents on the ridiculous premise that the Catholic residents don’t really mind but are provoked by Sinn Fein.
I have many friends and relatives around NI and very few of them are Sinn Fein voters (mostly SDLP). I can assure you that most Catholics do not want a parade through their neighbourhood with “Fuck the Pope” bands, offensive songs, banners commemorating “loyalist” terrorists and the usual drunken hangers-on in Rangers tops looking for a riot.
One only has to look at Drumcree or the Whiterock to see the type of behaviour that OO supporters indulge in when they don’t get what they want.
My family, friends and I needed no provocation from Sinn Fein to object to this sort of behaviour from the OO. No-one of any creed or colour should have to tolerate this sort of behaviour.
The way forward is with the OO. Unfortunately the OO “leadership” seen unable to grasp the reality of the situation. The days of “We are the people” and them being able to parade where they liked (irrespective of the wishes of the residents) are gone forever.
If they can cleanse themselves of the “loyalist” paramilitary connections and be prepared to negotiate with the residents, then I’m sure a compromise can be reached.
However, to date they have taken precious little (if any) action to sever the links with “loyalist” terrorism. Their stance of refusing to talk to Catholic residents and/or the Parades Commission has simply shown them to be arrogant, unreasonable and ensured that their public “image” continues to decline.
In my experience, the Catholic community in NI is not adverse to OO parades through Catholic neighbourhoods if they can be assured that the behaviour we have witnessed before will not be repeated. However, if the OO simply want to demand the “right” to march through Catholic neighbourhoods without taking real steps to rid itself of it’s provocative/thuggish element, they will continue to be disappointed.
Posted by on Jun 20, 2007 @ 04:11 AMAm I alone in thinking that the leadership of the Order is of a poor intellectual quality?
Certainly, their leaders come across very badly in the media (condone and condemn and all that...)Is this because intelligent and astute members of the unionist community , whilst perhaps supportive of the Order, have no wish to be publicly associated with it?
Posted by on Jun 20, 2007 @ 06:38 AMThe problem with Orange Order parades has always been the hangers on. However, most people’s pre-conceptions about the OO being just a trumped up organisation for loyalist bigots might be challenged if they ever bothered to go a parade in a rural area instead of making their opinions on the back of seeing the actions of the hangers on in sectarian flashpoints like the Ardoyne shops and Drumcree.
The only thing that is likely to offend at a rural parade is boredom.
As for the topic at hand, the story at the top of the thread looks like its been taken straight from the Sun, and as PeaceandJustice rightly points out - it’s typical of Chris’s wearisome anti-Orange, anti-Unionist tirades. Don’t get me wrong; the man in question may be or may not be a scumbag - the trouble is that no-one actually knows for sure unless they have paid a visit to Stoneyford. If the boot was on the other foot and a local Republican was named in relation to civil disturbances, despite having not been charged with any offence, then there would be uproar, but then, silly me, we only reserve such moral standards for Republicans.
With regards to parades through Catholic areas, isn’t about time we all wised up about this and that the Lodges responsible for those particular parades be made to sit down and talk with concerned residents? It’s 2007 for heaven’s sake and this recurring debacle each summer surrounding these clashes only serves to detract from the current relatively peaceful times we live in.
Posted by on Jun 20, 2007 @ 07:13 AMDO,
sadly it isn’t always the hangers on who cause the trouble. A useful excuse by the Orange but their own members have been the architect of problems on occasion as well.
That having been said, there is a lot more dialogue going on, last summer was relatively trouble free and there’s no reason to think this summer will be as well.
Oh, and the gentleman in question is a scumbag.
Posted by on Jun 20, 2007 @ 07:37 AMSorry, meant to say there’s no reason to think this summer won’t be relatively trouble free.
Posted by on Jun 20, 2007 @ 07:37 AM“But the band will be involved in the 12th July parade as usual, with many of its members making up the membership of local lodges- and the parade will be starting and finishing in the local Orange Hall”.
Now jst how do you know that, Chris? I’m in the Orange Order and I have no idea whether any of the band members in Stoneyford is an orangeman.Have you membership lists, or..er.. are you making it up? Heck , I don’t even know the name of the band, or whether it’s out on the 12th at all.And where would an Orange parade start and finish from , if not the lodge hall?
Yet you post with such authority.The inference is clear-the band is bigotted; the lodge itself doesnt actually do anything wrong, but let’s nail them by association.
For what it’s worth, I don’t like 11th night parades, particularly in residential areas, extra-particularly in mixed residential areas, and all I’ve read about Harbinson or heard from him on talkback makes me dislike him, and I’m just amazed that the UUP’s golden boy is associated with him
as far as “keep on keeping on“‘s point is concerned, what is clear is that being associated with the Orange is perceived by the ambitious and middle class as detrimental to careers, and they either don’t join or keep quiet about their membership. I know one of our most senior quango chiefs who is an Orangeman, but never parades, really attends his Lodge, and certainly never volunteerrs his membership. I believe his reasoning is that his career would be over.
It’s also the case that a generation of people- now in their 40s and 50s- were dissuaded from joining by the real fact that membership singled you out for IRA interest- remember the murder of an accountant in County Armagh because he was a ditrict treasurer and because of his involvement in the Orange credit Union movement. That generation also largely opted out of Unionist politics leaving the field to dull plodders - or “the UUP” as we used to call them.
There is a group of extremely talented and intelligent Orange mid-level leaders in their thirties and younger who will significantly change the public perception of Orangeism in the next decade as they progress up the ranks. But they’re still going to have to swim against the tide of government antipathy. They’ll need stickability to compete against the government’s preferred partners in loyalism- the paramilitaries, who are determined to replace the Orange
Posted by on Jun 20, 2007 @ 07:49 AMIt’s a simple fact that if it wasn’t for the Troubles the OO would have died out long ago. The leadership can tell the blue bag brigade to go away all they want both know it’ll never happen.
Before I became an athiest I was actually in the OO & Apprentice Boys but left both disgusted at the behaviour of the members. Throw away all the hangers on they want it’s no improvement if the members are alcholics who can barely last 30 minutes without drinking or trying to make a scene.
Posted by on Jun 20, 2007 @ 07:54 AMChris I challenged you on two previous threads regarding your sectarian posts and you refused to address any on my points.
I am sick of your anti Protestant/Orange threads you have now started three or four in the space of a week yet Slugger has not balanced the scales with some pro Orange threads. I am beginning to believe this board is very left wing in which Protestant views/traditions are not welcome.
You created a timeline for the order cesation this timeline is 2015, you harp on about the fact that the order is dwindling all the time and is becoming an irrelevane. Yet you make it very relevant with your mundane posts etc that offer nothing new and only highlight your own insecurities about accepting Unionist culture, God help us if there was a UI with people like you in charge.
Its time for Slugger to clamp down on your inaccurate and pathetic attacks on the institution, as long as there is only one person who believes on the OO tradition it will remain alive, I’m sorry if this upsets you.
Posted by on Jun 20, 2007 @ 07:56 AMPounder
I find it hard to believe that you were ever in the OO, besides you leaving speaks volumes about yourself. You were so weak and insignificant that instead of trying to changes things from within you left and cried foul from outside. It should also be noted that the Order was going very strong before the outbreak of the troubles and if you were in the OO you would have known this.
Posted by on Jun 20, 2007 @ 08:02 AMWould it be true to say that this proposed ‘parade’ is unlikely to be allowed by the Parades Commission?
Posted by on Jun 20, 2007 @ 08:05 AM‘Its time for Slugger to clamp down on your inaccurate and pathetic attacks on the institution, as long as there is only one person who believes on the OO tradition it will remain alive, I’m sorry if this upsets’
roger
a bit like your commemts on the Ormeau rd orangemen giving the five handed signs about the uff bookmakers murders in 1992. You said they were not orangemen, bur had simply put on sashes to march past local residents etc…
innacurate, pathetic.....& fantasy island stuff.
Take your heads out of the sand.
Posted by on Jun 20, 2007 @ 08:12 AMroger,
I’ve had a number of emails on the same topic. And I guess there are a couple of things to say.
One is a fundamental part of the deal on Slugger. Chris is as free as any other blogger to mention what he wants. Slugger would have little value as a group blog, if I were to intervene each time someone says something uncomfortable about any institution in Northern Ireland. I’ve just had to knock back a similarly heartfelt complaint from a Republican source unhappy about our blogging of the Ballymurphy story.
Instead, I would recommend opponents of an indivdual blogger’s point of view to follow Darth’s example and take on each piece you disagree with toe to toe and detail by detail. There is a huge amount of shared ignorance around, and this is as good an opportunity to tell it straight from the Orange’s point of view as any.
Some of the anti Orange polemic we see flying around is based on real feeling arising from real experience. Some of it is part of a political struggle. And some of it is based on very real and determinedly unreconstructed anti Orange bigotry.
In dealing with such criticism, it is probably important to try to distinguish between them, and deal with the first earnestly, the second seriously, and possibly just ignore the last.
Posted by on Jun 20, 2007 @ 08:41 AMOrange order membership in NI, estimated at 50 000 by the Order themselves.
Number of Prods in Northern Ireland?
Do the math.
Posted by on Jun 20, 2007 @ 08:47 AM
