Thursday, March 13, 2008
Normalisation and the politics of protest
Garibaldy in the comments on this thread noted how the politics of protest are not in the interests of the Stormont parties wedded firmly to political office. Though it isn’t completely off the Irish agenda as the recent protest against a proposed English royal visit shows. (discussed on RTE’s Seoige and O’Shea below)
With normalisation of British influence in the 6 counties so progressed that a visit by Elizabeth Windsor can be announced in advance for the first time in 50 years, street protest refuses to go away as éirígí will be on the streets of Armagh to voice opposition on Holy Thursday (March 20).
Mark McGregor @ 09:37 AM
“the name-calling antics of vulgar schoolgirls”
A tad sexist, Rory?
Posted by on Mar 13, 2008 @ 12:22 PMRory
Gerry Adams often refers to her as Mrs Windsor is that an improvement.
Posted by on Mar 13, 2008 @ 12:28 PMI think it only fair that the Queen gets to visit occasionally as the proper head of state(s) Mary Mac is in and out of Non Iron all the time.
Posted by on Mar 13, 2008 @ 12:31 PMI awoke this morning to see the light, thank you God. This windsor woman can go kiss my ass, I mean there I was calling her your majesty, what kind of an idiot was I. Lets hope she gets banged good and hard when she comes to Ireland.
Posted by on Mar 13, 2008 @ 12:32 PMRory,
Whilst the people of Britain may indeed choose to have a monarch, although I’m not entirely sure that they have had an opportunity to choose recently, there is no obligation upon others to use titles which spring from divinity in relation to her.
Any republican which could bestow such title and honour and honour on anyone who represents inhereited priviledge and sueriorty isn’t much of a republican.
By this logic, republicans who happened to live in France pre-revolution would have been morally required to use titles which, in their eyes, legitimised and illegitimate form of rule?
Back to the books with you.
Posted by on Mar 13, 2008 @ 12:32 PM* apologies for the typos - I inadvertantly sent the post before proof reading.
Posted by on Mar 13, 2008 @ 12:34 PMSpot on Rory, the Daily Telegraph used to refer to the late Cardinal Tomas O’Fiach as “Thomas Fee”, it was petty, offensive and showed small mindedness on their part, they were rightly castigated by Irish nationalists for such churlishness.
Calling Queen Elizabeth “Betty Windsor” is equally puerile, as is calling Pope Benedict “Ratzinger” as some idiot poster did on these forums the other day.
Posted by on Mar 13, 2008 @ 12:35 PM“Whilst the people of Britain may indeed choose to have a monarch, although I’m not entirely sure that they have had an opportunity to choose recently, there is no obligation upon others to use titles which spring from divinity in relation to her.”
Obviously this same token applies to that funny wee man in Rome with the nice line in comedy hats too.....In all seriousness though I would hope that Mr Ratzinger and Mrs Windsor are both afforded the respect any visiting dignitaries expect whilst on any theoretical future visits to ROI/Northern Ireland - It’ll be interesting to see exactly who lets the side(s) down!Posted by on Mar 13, 2008 @ 12:40 PMAnd bang on cue up pops Democratic!
RedHaze do you refer to Spain’s King Juan Carlos as “Johnny Bourbon”?
Posted by on Mar 13, 2008 @ 12:42 PMWell said Rory.
From another republican.
Posted by on Mar 13, 2008 @ 12:51 PMSeimi - despite the Tricolour being one of many flags i possess, my own preference for St Patricks Day would be the largely apolitical St Patricks Cross which to the best of my knowledge has never been hijacked by any political organisations/parties or paramilitaries or left hanging in tatters from lamposts for months on end - save the Church of Ireland who i think fly it on the 17th March. Just because the rest of the world fly the Tricolour around now is no reason in itself why should. Dare to be different.
Posted by on Mar 13, 2008 @ 12:51 PM*St Patricks Cross which to the best of my knowledge has never been hijacked by any political organisations*
Except of course for the United Kingdom government which incorporated it into their national flag.
Posted by on Mar 13, 2008 @ 12:59 PM“And bang on cue up pops Democratic!
RedHaze do you refer to Spain’s King Juan Carlos as “Johnny Bourbon”?”
Lighten up Harry FFS!! - it’s all a bit tongue in cheek........
Posted by on Mar 13, 2008 @ 01:11 PMI find myself in the unusual position of being of the same mind as Harry Flashman on this issue and Harry has rightly pointed to the Daily Telegraph’s long campaign of slight against Cardinal O’Fiach by continually choosing to refer to him as “Thomas Fee”. Republicans, catholics, nationalists, Irish language enthusiasts - all were rightly offended by this campaign. We do ourselves and our cause and tradition a great disservice when we take to emulating behaviour which we find offensive when directed at us.
To reply to Cut the Bull, I do not approve of Gerry Adams’s sometime references to Her Majesty as “Mrs. Windsor”. It is not only puerile and offensive it assumes a familiarity which he does not have and one, I can only presume, that as a republican he would not choose to have were that at all possible.
Éirigí argue that they are protesting against “Windsor” who “masquerades as queen” becuse she is titular head of the armed forces who shot dead three volunteers in Gibraltar. I oppose the monarchy not for that reason - it would make no difference to me if Her Majesty showered bounty of chocolate and fine wines on all republicans - I would still oppose the monarchy. It is the institution
of monarchy to which I am opposed.However, despite my best efforts, the monarchy remains and the office of monarch holds a title which I use if am am referring to that monarch, whatever of my personal opinion of the title which attaches to that office.
I have no problems at all with the cruel and merciless humourous banter to which the monarchy and indeed the Royal Family are subject on stage, on radio and television and I heartily laugh along with everyone else at the QE lookalike sliding across the banquet table spread legs revealing her knickers in Naked Gun - 331/3 (or whichever) because that lampooning of the monarchy by its own citizenry is healthy and has a long tradition in England as Hogarth and Gillivray the cartoonists and many essayists and broadsheet writers have demonstrated. But when taking a public stance of opposition I owe it more to my own dignity than to the monarch’s to always use the form of address that attaches to the office.
If the tumbrils again begin to trundle I would possibly take the monarch to the guillotine but I hope that I would escort her with tender grace and ask her to “Step this way, if you please, your majesty”. Only a lout hurls abuse at his enemy.
Posted by on Mar 13, 2008 @ 01:16 PMthe tricolour predates the partition of this country, and represents all the people of Ireland, though some choose to ignore this. The tricolour is the IRISH flag, and so will more than suffice for St Patricks day. I wonder if those buckos will feel the need to fly the union jack from the flagpole at custom house square on St Patricks day again this year, like they did last year.
Posted by on Mar 13, 2008 @ 01:19 PM“I wonder if those buckos will feel the need to fly the union jack from the flagpole at custom house square on St Patricks day again this year, like they did last year.”
Any reason why they can’t Republicanstones - Irish only symbols allowed is it?
“The tricolour predates the partition of this country, and represents all the people of Ireland, though some choose to ignore this”
No it doesn’t as you very well know........
Posted by on Mar 13, 2008 @ 01:34 PMWhile I find it a tad odd those proclaiming themselves Republicans find the major issue with a protest over a royal visit is not enough deferance is being paid to the English monarch, I find it even odder that they will then complain about the abuse in this lack of deference while calling others ‘vulgar schoolgirls’ and ‘louts’.
Posted by on Mar 13, 2008 @ 01:38 PMRS, you can’t argue that the Tricolour represents everyone in Ireland any more than the Union Jack does because it has the Cross of St Patrick.
In both cases the intention was to be inclusive. You know as well as I that in both cases, the result has not been as intended.
Posted by on Mar 13, 2008 @ 01:48 PMRory
Calling her Mrs. Windsor is not assuming familiarity and treating her with respect afforded an equal. Calling her bettie is assuming familiarity that is not proper unless invited
Calling her “her majesty” is affording her status above a common person and as a republican it should be an anethma to afford anyone respect they have not earned.
therefor Mrs. Winsor is the correct thing to call her unless you are invited to call her bettie
Posted by on Mar 13, 2008 @ 02:00 PM“What is monarchy? From whence does it derive its sanction? What has been its gift to humanity? Monarchy is a survival of the tyranny imposed by the hand of greed and treachery upon the human race in the darkest and most ignorant days of our history. It derives its only sanction from the sword of the marauder, and the helplessness of the producer, and its gifts to humanity are unknown, save as they can be measured in the pernicious examples of triumphant and shameless iniquities
Posted by on Mar 13, 2008 @ 02:05 PMYou’re not a fan then Harry?
Posted by on Mar 13, 2008 @ 02:10 PMFair play to you Rory you are entitled to your opinion,but I myself care little for titles no matter what they are and no matter who they are bestowed upon.
Posted by on Mar 13, 2008 @ 02:14 PMWllowfield you dont sound like your useual self
Posted by on Mar 13, 2008 @ 02:15 PMI’ve changed, I’ve seen the light. Praise Jesus.
Posted by on Mar 13, 2008 @ 02:20 PMI have contacted Mick to take action against over troll on this thread.
The above is not ‘willowfield’ but another contributor using a sock-puppet.
Posted by on Mar 13, 2008 @ 02:23 PM
