On Ireland’s own human rights failings?

Interesting response from El Nuevo Pantano to Newton Emerson’s satire on the unconscious way people in the Republic lecture other countries on human rights, apparently blissfully unaware of how the state came to be 97% (nominally) Catholic.

, ,

  • joeCanuck

    As an athiest, I wouldn’t shed a tear if the figures in that plot went to zero (so long as the other religions numbers responded in like).
    But as a citizen of a country supposedly free to worship in whatever way you wish, I am saddened by the continuous decline in the numbers of non-RC numbers.
    There would appear to be some extent of a “cold house”.

  • Frank Sinistra

    And the fact the most recent census showed Protestantism is the fastest growing religion in Ireland means what? While Catholicism fell? Catholic oppression? Give me a break. Stats can be spun how you want, just like the wee graph deals in percentages not numbers because they wouldn’t fit the bias of the author quite as well.

  • Maggot

    “the fact the most recent census showed Protestantism is the fastest growing religion in Ireland means what?”

    Apart from the fact that Protestantism isn’t “a religion” per se, when you start from a very low baseline, in the words of the song – “the only way is up!”

  • Frank Sinistra

    If you look at Appendix A on the dopey angst site link he gives a Protestant figure of just over 100K in 1991 (I don’t believe it, think it’s just CoI) if it’s true using the minimum level of identifiable protestants in the 2006 census 180K plus, in just 15 years the level of protestants in the south has increased by 80% and is at it’s highest level since 1936.

    2006 census

    Sort of fecks us his wee graph and angst levels a tad.

  • Frank Sinistra

    And btw: cutting a 100% graph down to a 10% range is a deceitful statistical ploy designed to inflate a minor change – it shows manipulation not presentation is the aim.

  • Frank Sinistra
  • Maggot

    Has the representation of protestants in police and civil service increased proportionately ? If not should there be a period of positive discrimination?

  • Frank Sinistra

    and with 2006

    Just look at that ethnic cleansing.

  • DC

    “Stats can be spun how you want, just like the wee graph deals in percentages not numbers because they wouldn’t fit the bias of the author quite as well.”

    Hmmm you talk like a Unionist defending the reasons not to back a single equality Bill.

  • Frank Sinistra

    DC,

    It’s numbers, he spun on a short scale to create an impression of a huge differential. I have a problem with bad statistical presentation.

    With the actual numbers on a correct scale you get

    My only complaint is bad presentation of stats.

    Same numbers very different graph. Mine is the proper one and as close to a straight line as you are likely to see in demographics over a 115 year period.

  • joeCanuck

    So a 50% decrease is insignificant?

  • The Dubliner

    “Until recently, there was discrimination against Protestants in the labour market of the Republic of Ireland. For example, Trinity College, although a Dublin University, was mainly attended by Protestants. (Even today it is a stronghold of Irish Unionism.) In many jobs, Trinity College was not accepted as a source of education, so applicants who had attended Trinity were automatically rejected. This had the effect of preventing most Protestants from applying for the jobs.”

    What a load of crap. Naturally, this amateur sectarian propagandist provides no examples whatsoever to support his claim that a degree from Trinity was a hindrance to seeking employment and not – as is the actual fact – a huge help to it.

    Apart from luminaries such as Charles Haughey, Brian Lenihan, Mary McAleese, Mary Robinson, Mary Harney, et al, holding Trinity degrees, Wolfe Tone, Robert Emmet and Douglas Hyde were also past students.

  • Maggot

    The Dubliner – because of the Church ban on Catholics attending Trinity, was it not the case that Trnity Graduates could not get jobs as teachers at Catholic schools ?

  • jaffa

    Apparently Wolfe Tone wouldn’t have got a job in a county Clare library.

    Some anecdotal evidence.

    My Jaffa grandfather was born a bit south of Dublin some years before partition. He was sent up North to the same school his dad had attended before moving South. Instead of going to an Irish University he went to an English one and when he set up in business he chose to do so in Belfast.

    I’ve no idea whether he did this for economic reasons or because he felt potentially oppressed down south. Maybe he just thought there was more money to be made up north and more stability for his family and perhaps that introspective nationalism was sending the south into a declining economic spiral.

    Frank – you seemed to change your tone when you put the figures in and realised there was an absolute drop. Did you think Ireland’s population had doubled in the period or something?

    The Ne Temere argument seems a good one to me. Blame the mean spirited control freak priests.

    Wolfe Tone would have.

  • barnshee

    oh dear
    the numbers just will not go away

  • jaffa

    Cryptic Barnshee,

    Do you mean the evidence or the last couple of hundred thousand pesky prods?

  • DK

    I have to take issue with Frank Sinistra suggesting that you have to use all 100% in the graph. The reason you confine the scale to the relevant data is so you can see the relevant data. If you have 0.1% muslims increasing over 1 year to 0.5% – a five-fold increase, you would be desperately stupid to use a graph with a scale going up to 100%.

    The graph does show a bigger drop in the immediate independence period and then a decline afterwards (although its not up to date to show the more recent rise).

    The reason for the steady decline is suggested as intermarriage and the children having to be brought up catholics, and the sudden drop at independence is given as protestants moving out of the republic for whatever reason.

    Anyway – it might be interesting to speculate on reasons why the protestant numbers in the republic drop, while the catholic numbers in Northern Ireland rise. My hypothesis would be that in both states, catholics were at the bottom of the heap, and those at the bottom of the heap tend to have bigger families. Now that I assume we have equality in both states, we should see the numbers stabilise, although the protestant numbers in RoI are apparently increasing, probably more through immigration than conversion (people from Britain make up about 5% of the republic’s population now, and while some of these may be returning Irish emmigrants, the bulk are probably recent economic migrants or marriages).

  • D Hobs

    ” because of the Church ban on Catholics attending Trinity, was it not the case that Trnity Graduates could not get jobs as teachers at Catholic schools ?”

    No.

  • andy

    any figures for concentration of wealth by religion in RoI.

    A distinctly non-republican (and indeed diabolical) poster on this site was implying prods in the south had a disproportionately high proportion of national wealth…

    Aside from that I though a lot of professional jobs had a distinctly disproportionately high protestant make up (no figures for this I am afraid).

    As well as this – may I make the obvious point that if you felt British and lived in what became the IRish Republic – you may have wanted to move to Britain / NI post -22 without any extra disxriminatory incentives.

    However I take Jaffa’s argument about the pernicious catholic church

  • The Dubliner

    Maggot, it’s a bit like the Chruch saying don’t wear condoms – who the fuck listens to them? Charles Haughey, et al, certainly didn’t.

    In Ireland, unlike in the United Kingdom, the head of the state is not the head of the official church, nor does this country ban you from becoming head of state based on your religion. Now, it was Protestants who chose to live within the United Kingdom. It was not the wish of the Irish that they should do so. They chose to live apart – and those who didn’t migrate immediately upon partition, did so as soon as they had disposed of their assets in the south. Those who chose not self-segregate in that manner enjoyed prosperity and influence in the south well beyond their tiny numbers – including contributing two presidents to the Irish state.

    If you wish to show otherwise, then you need to show that protestants have experienced a standard of living in the south that is below that of Catholics. While you won’t be able to show that in the south, you can easily show the converse in the north where the Catholics experienced horrendous discrimination and victimisation at the hands of their protestant neighbours.

  • Maggot

    “Maggot, it’s a bit like the Chruch saying don’t wear condoms – who the fuck listens to them?”

    Are we only talking recent times ? Sorry I thought we were talking since partition.

    Of course things have changed a lot , and for the better, since then – though if I was a Southerner I’d be might peeved at Bertie giving the Church a Billion Euros – no connection to them turning a blind eye to his adultery of course.

  • Maggot

    “In Ireland, unlike in the United Kingdom, the head of the state is not the head of the official church, nor does this country ban you from becoming head of state based on your religion.”

    On the other hand – the Head of State and Church of England does not excomunicate politicians who vote against her wishes.

    and isn’t “horrendous discrimination and victimisation at the hands of their protestant neighbours.” a bit ‘Noraid’ ? If we accept your claim that the Protestant president disproves that there was discrimination against protestants then surely all those RC University students and graduates who were so influential in NICRA disproves your claims about NI ?

  • andy

    Maggot
    Not sure if having a few graduates = having two presidents!

  • George

    Mick,
    why should we take the views of El Nuevo Pantano seriously rather than consider the linking to this comment a feeding the trolls exercise?

    In what way is his response “interesting”?

  • Hmmm?

    The relative Protestant population fell sharply (by over 30%) between 1911 to 1926.

    And how many British soldiers and family left the country in this time?

  • hotdogx

    I would also like to point out that mary lou of sf is yes herself a proud graduate of Trinity, it is the best university in ireland, stronghold of irish unionism, what a joke! there isnt a protestant in the rep that believes in unionism, as ive yet to meet one, being protestant myself we were the original republicans!

    while there is some truth in it,This is old info as well he talks about waiting for the 2001 census results! Protestants are much on the increase recently

  • kensei

    “The Ne Temere argument seems a good one to me. Blame the mean spirited control freak priests.”

    Ne Temere is almost without question responsible for most of the drop post independence. Kids changing religion will shred your population percentage astonishingly quickly.

  • Jimmy Sands

    The debate is beset with denial on both sides:

    1. Protestant decline began in the 1860s with disestablishment.

    2. Protestants were “cleansed” in the early 20s. That is not to say there were no other factors but this basic fact cannot be gainsaid. Church leaders were told by Collins himself that although the govt had no wish to lose them, they could not protect them either.

    3. Ne Temere was not simply a Church matter. The Courts in the Tilson case decided to make the written undertakings formerly required legally enforceable.

    4. The well known episodes of anti-protestantism, such as the Mayo librarian (oddly transplanted to Clare by this author) or Fethard are well known precisely because they were aberrational. The attempt to compare this to the sort of systematic sectarian discrimination that took place in the North is thoroughly disingenuous.

  • Aaron McDaid

    This article is a joke. Simplistically using and abusing numbers like that would be like saying that those Protestants that migrated to the North were doing so to move towards the discrimination, not away from discrimination.

    For all its faults, the South was nowhere near as bad as the North, and was probably better than the average European state.

    But then again, if you think the South was bad, then the obvious solution is/was to abolish North and South and create a 32 county republic with the necessary protections in the constitution. It should have been done then, and can still be done.

    PS: Does anybody think Paisley wouldn’t object to his kids being brought up Catholic?

    Apologies for feeding the troll, I just couldn’t help myself!

  • Mick Fealty

    George,

    You might as well ask ‘why take the views of anyone you don’t actually know seriously’?

    Interesting? Well yes, partly because it has a clarity that was often missing from the 100+ commenting thread here on Slugger. But also he is pointing out that the homogeneity that the Republic has enjoyed was generated by a set of dynamics that most of the population there have generally ignored.

    Indeed FS’s argument about statistical presentation only seems to underscore the propensity for individuals to minimise the significance of the ‘problem’ and betrays a certain carelessness for the life of minorities within the state.

    Let me re-contextualise it slightly in case this be misinterpreted as just a case of pointless ‘south bashing’. It makes absolute sense for Unionists who are genuinely interested in popularising the Union to take the idea that NI was a cold house for Catholics deadly seriously, and allow it to inform their future political actions. It is surely no less patriotic to raise questions about the past conditions for the Republic’s marginalisation of what was once its only significant minority, and similarly allow it inform their actions?

    To be sure, the conditions that led to such a decline were complex, as others have argued, and like NI jobs discrimination, not all of it was down to the conduct of the state. It was the GAA for instance that removed Douglas Hyde as its patron, and whilst he was actually president of Ireland, for attending an international soccer match towards the end of the thirties.

    It’s true too, that it has hardly given rise to the political turmoil that plunged NI into 30 years of darkness. And given the fact that that past dynamic appears to be in reverse, it is hardly a contemporary problem.

    But at the very least, Irish society south of the border could do worse than attend to the past shortcomings of its own homogeneous character, if only with a mind to the better handling of an emerging diversity in its population.

  • The Dubliner

    “Are we only talking recent times ? Sorry I thought we were talking since partition.” – Maggot

    Hardly, since I gave the late Charles J. Haughey as an example of a Catholic who was educated at Trinity College – and famously burnt the Union Jack outside it during his student days in 1945. 😉

    Yes, things have improved. Catholics no longer have to convert to Protestant religion before being allowed to enrol at Trinity, as they were required to do for the first two hundred years of the college’s inception. And despite the college now being close to 80% catholic, as the author is incorrect to cite his alleged (and unsupported) claim of anti-Trinity bias as being anti-Protestant bias since the college hasn’t been 100% protestant since 1878.

  • In his comment above Mick says pretty much what I think. I take the points about the presentation of the stats but I don´t think it lessens the force of what what I was trying to say. And I sure wasn´t trying to make make any sweeping comparison with things in the North.

    I was just trying to draw attention to something I think isn´t thought enough about in the south.

  • Maggot

    “Catholics no longer have to convert to Protestant religion before being allowed to enrol at Trinity, as they were required to do for the first two hundred years of the college’s inception.”

    I don’t think that is true – as TCD was founded by Elizabeth to educate Catholics in Ireland .

    Jimmy Sands – the Dispensary Doctor Scandal ?
    The Hubert Butler Scandal ?

  • The Dubliner

    “It was founded by Elizabeth I in 1592 in an attempt to stop students going to the continent and getting revolutionary ideas or being influenced by the Pope in Rome. For centuries the college was the centre of Protestant religion and Catholics couldn’t join unless they accepted the Protestant faith.”

    “It was founded by Elizabeth I in 1592 in an attempt to stop students going to the continent and getting revolutionary ideas or being influenced by the Pope in Rome. For centuries the college was the centre of Protestant religion and Catholics couldn’t join unless they accepted the Protestant faith.”

    It is true. Google it. It only offered education to Catholics on condition that they stopped being catholic and converted to the Queen’s faith.

  • The Dubliner

    Printed twice so that it may sink in on second reading. 😉

  • Aislingeach

    And that brings up the old story of the Catholic who died and was being quizzed by St Peter at the Gates…”Hmmm…there’s a note on your record that says you went to Trinity College without your Bishop’s permission. I’ll have to check Higher Up before I can let you in.”

    And the answer came down from Jesus Himself,”Let him in! I’m a Trinity man myself!”

  • Maggot

    I know it’s widely claimed online The Dubliner, but I don’t think it is true 🙂

    As the whole point of it was to stop Irish Catholic Students being indoctrinated abroad, there wouldn’t have been any point in banning … Catholic students – would there ?

    If I’m remembering correctly it was closed to Catholics in the 17th century – for it’s first few years it was open to Catholics – but the rebellion and battle with the Spanish etc changed
    everything?

    For all the talk of discrimination by the early 20th century Roman Catholics outnumbered Anglicans in the fields of law and medicine.

  • The Dubliner

    Aislingeach, don’t worry so much about oddball bishops. Oddly enough, the businessmen didn’t when they knew that condoms would sell here despite the bishops being agin ’em. They’re richer; and the folks who said “they won’t sell because the church says…” are considerably the poorer.

    Mick, unless you’re arguing that the GAA removed Douglas Hyde as its patron because he was a protestant who attended an international soccer match but would not have removed a catholic president for the same reason, you don’t have anything at all supporting your assertion that the south was a “cold house” for religious minorities. A cold house for non-GAA supporters, but let’s not confuse the idiosyncratic policies of private sporting organisations with the missing evidence of alleged protestant discrimination in the south that is the focus of this thread.

    Vague platitudes such as “learn from past mistakes so that we may do better” are all grand sounding but remain vacuous rhetoric without concrete examples of what exactly it is we are supposed to learn from – and if, indeed, we didn’t do best first time around.

  • The Dubliner

    Maggot, I’m not arguing with someone who won’t accept facts. I get enough of that from my local tax inspector… oh wait, I said facts.

  • Maggot

    Dr Moynihan has a lot to answer for aisling 😉

    http://www.threemonkeysonline.com/threemon_article-brendan-kennelly.htm

  • Jimmy Sands

    Maggot,

    I’m not sure what you mean by dispensary dotcor “scandal” unless you’re referring to Dev’s remarks about the Mayo case. As for the Butler “scandal”, if this is really represents the depth of southern sectarianism then I think you make my point.

  • Maggot

    The Dubliner – the dispensary doctor scandal?

  • Jimmy Sands

    “As the whole point of it was to stop Irish Catholic Students being indoctrinated abroad,”

    I think you have your stories mixed up. I suspect you’re thinking of Maynooth, founded essentially for that reason (albeit a little later).

  • Maggot

    “Maggot, I’m not arguing with someone who won’t accept facts.”

    This isn’t an argument The Dubliner – it’s a discussion. “Facts” are thin on the ground – there was a time when it was a “Fact” that the earth was flat and the sun whizzed round it 🙂

    S J Connolly’s take on the history of TCD does not agree with your “facts”. He is Professor of Irish history at QUB, editor of The Oxford companion to Irish History.

  • Mick Fealty

    The Dub,

    It’s just an example of a marginalisation that was conducted routinely outside the aegis of the state, to extent of excluding the President of the State in the conduct of his duties. It’s a feature that is rarely discounted in the discussion of government in Northern Ireland 1920-72. Indeed Ulster’s unionist government is routinely held solely responsible for all discrimination that occurred on its watch: almost as though it were a dastardly invention maliciously and contemporaneously inflicted upon the northern minority alongside partition. That is, of course, is as ludicrous as holding the southern state completely responsible for the drastic fall in its Protestant population.

    That’s why I couched my question in terms of southern society, rather than the southern state.

  • J Knox

    If it weren’t for its Protestant population how would Leitrim field a team?

  • Niall

    There was definitely ethnic cleansing of Protestants around the time of the troubles, particularly in the Cork area, but this is to be expected in any time of conflict when one group is perceived to hold the wealth.

    There was no systematic discrimination of Protestants in the Republic since then. If anybody can provide an example of a Protestant’s rights being denied by the ROI State system please do.

    Animosity between Catholics and Protestants down south was based along class lines, not strictly sectarian ones.

  • Southern Observer

    Michael,
    I must repeat an oft-stated criticism:
    Your decision to hop in on one side of the debate sits uneasily with your definitive role as neutral forum moderator.

  • Objectivist

    Unlike lily-livered states such as Israel, in Ireland we didn’t content ourselves just with ethnically cleansing our pesky national minority during our War of Independence, we made damn sure to keep encouraging them to leave afterwards too. As a result we now have an ethnically and religiously homogenous population and feel able to pontificate to other states about their human rights records.,

    “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”
    -Joseph Goebbels

  • Niall: so it was all to be expected, part of the game as it were. We don´t let others, Serbia, Israel etc, get away with that kind of discourse. Why should it be OK for us?

    Objectivist: I only said it once!

  • Objectivist

    This was posted some time ago but most of it is applicable here:
    This canard has already been done to death-deja vu all over again.
    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 Dail 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 1960.
    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.

  • Objectivist

    Part 2.
    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 govts, 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. But in a minority of cases people were driven out. However we were in a war and war isn’t pretty. Most of the previous rebellions in Irish history had been wrecked by informers. We had an election in 1918 which some Northern Unionists still refuse to respect the results of in the sense of them still agreeing with the use of force to suppress an election result with 58 Old SF MPs jailed before the fighting even broke out and before the Dail government and parliament were set up. It was the British that started the WOI not us. Those people, of whatever denomination, who were giving intelligence to the British in Dublin Castle to help subvert the democratically-expressed wishes of the Irish people had created their own harvest when they were targeted by the Old IRA. It was either them or us or else we would not have succeeded in setting up our state. But there was no general targeting of civilians.
    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 more 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.

  • Objectivist

    Part 3
    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.There have been two Protestant deputy Prime Ministers –the first being a Lisburn Presbyterian –Ernest Blythe.Contrast that with the record of the Stormont regime 1921-1971.
    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, hygeine, 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. That is but one example 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.
    Since the early 1960’s the Protestant proportion of the ROI population has been rising and the Catholic proportion falling (Central Statistics Office).Looks like the South is bent on exterminating it’s Catholic population so that the Protestants can take over whatever is left .Since the early 1960’s the Protestant proportion of the ROI population has been rising and the corresponding Protestant proportion in NI falling.Looks like,if you are a Protestant in Ireland,that the ROI is the place to be.

  • Objectivist

    Eamon,
    You are one of those who ‘eventually came to believe it’.

  • Mick Fealty

    Obj,

    That line about ‘Catholic pulchritude’ made me laugh out loud. I have to thank you too for both your passion and your considerable industry. There’s a lot to chew over.

    Notwithstanding Garret’s arguments on the multiple reasons for Protestant outmigration, I would quibble with your assertion that “since 1920 we have established a State that has made all feel welcome and valued. [Emphasis added]”

    Simply: how do you know?

    PS, the Donegal Protestants I know are quite capable of living happily in both worlds.

  • As soon as I can get around to it I´ll try to write a proper reply to Obj.

  • Maggot

    “The Republic has been based on equality from top to bottom.”

    http://www.nccri.ie/travellr.html

    “In 1991, the European Parliament Committee of Inquiry on Racism and Xenophobia reported that, in Ireland:

    “The single most discriminated against ethnic group is the Travelling People”

    . The Committee, referring to Ireland, recommended

    “that the only Member State which has not already signed the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, do so as soon as possible.” ”

    well worth reading the whole document.

    “excerpt from a written submission by an Irish MEP to the Committee of Inquiry into Racism and Xenophobia in 1990:

    “Ireland is a racially homogeneous country with no ethnic minority groups. As a consequence there are no racial problems of the kind experienced in countries with such groups. Neither is there a large presence of foreigners. . . the position could alter if the influx became sustained. . . there is however a minority group of travelling people giving rise to some of the problems associated with racism.3” “

  • useful idiot

    How come if Cromwell was so devastating there’s so many Catholics in Drogheda?

    Building a 3% population in 800 years isn’t much to write home about in the genocide stakes.

    Sort of hit and run holocaust?

    “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.

    Lucky old 1921 prods.

    and er…Peel’s 1800 abolition of the protestant parliament (against Orange Order wishes) followed by catholic emancipation?”

  • Brian Boru

    The website backs up what I have argued in the past in assessing the role of intermarriage in the decline of the Protestant population in the period concerned as well as the exodus sparked by fears over Home Rule after the 1911 Parliament Act. As far as I am concerned, these – and the withdrawal of the British security forces and their families – account for the vast majority of the decline. In any case, the Census of 2002 and especially 2006 have shown a considerable growth in both the numbers and proportion of the population that are Protestant. So it could not be said that a decline is continuing.

  • Brian Boru

    ““reland is a racially homogeneous country with no ethnic minority groups. As a consequence there are no racial problems of the kind experienced in countries with such groups. Neither is there a large presence of foreigners. . . the position could alter if the influx became sustained. . . there is however a minority group of travelling people giving rise to some of the problems associated with racism.”

    LOL There’s no way you could say that in 2006!

  • Ian

    Ne Temere was not followed by the parents of the Glasnevin Gobshite http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bono like many people of the time they just forgot about it unlike people seeking a mope.

  • Niall

    “How come if Cromwell was so devastating there’s so many Catholics in Drogheda?”

    Drogheda, not being in the Arctic or Sahara, was quite reachable by a lot of people on the island of Ireland. Ever heard of travel? You should try it – might do you good to leave your Protestant enclave and see some of the world.

    “and er…Peel’s 1800 abolition of the protestant parliament (against Orange Order wishes) followed by catholic emancipation?”

    Typical facetious colonial logic. Kick a guy in the face and then expect him to be grateful when you stop kicking him in the face. Hooray for the bootboys!

    Eamon McDonagh,
    You make the mistake of assuming that I was justifying the ethnic cleansing of 1920s. I was simply saying that it happened and that such actions always happen in times of conflict, especially when there’s a disparity of wealth. It’s human nature.

    However, there was no State discrimination of Protestants in the Republic since then as there was against Catholics in the North. Socially the two groups may not have had much dealings with each other but the idea that Protestants were in some way driven out is an outrageous lie.

  • manichaeism

    When I was growing up in Waterford in the 60’s and 70’s Protestants had the big houses in the “posh” part of town. They had the good jobs such as doctors , solicitors and banking and the best school in the town was the posh protestant boarding school.
    Yea, they were really suffering!!!

    I wish someone would deprive me of my human rights in that fashion!!

  • useful idiot

    “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”
    -Joseph Goebbels”

    “They had the good jobs such as doctors , solicitors and banking and the best school in the town was the posh [enter your despised industrious but still strangely undeserving national minority here] boarding school.”

  • manichaeism

    Did I ever say I was resentful of their status useful idiot? I wasn’t. I didn’t give it a second thought. I was busy leading my own life.

    You are displaying your own prejudices by your last post.

    I don’t know why you are quoting Goebbels here. Are you saying I am lying?

  • DorM

    Let us not remember the Cathedral that could not have the organ played for around 6 months because the guy who was hired to fix it was the wrong religion.

  • useful idiot

    1. Ireland’s “human rights” failings is an over the top title for this thread. accepted.

    2. People don’t like to feel “different” or resented.

    “they had the good jobs” Interesting “the”. No-one else have a job?

    “I don’t know why you are quoting Goebbels here. Are you saying I am lying?”

    Of course not. Post 24 by Objectivist.

  • I reply here,

    http://tinyurl.com/2akg2w

    to various ponts raised in these discussions about my post on “El Nuevo Pantano”

  • Maggot

    Great response Eamonn.

  • manichaeism

    Useful idiot

    You really read a lot into one word or sentence. OK then, some of the good jobs!

    Later in my life I dated one of the “posh” protestant teachers so I couldn’t have resented them as much as you would like to think!

    She never once mentioned to me that she had felt deprived of her human rights or that she was treated as different or indeed felt different in any way then other Irish people.

  • Objectivist

    The fact that we have had Protestant Presidents and the odd successful Protestant politician is a relevant factor to take in to account. It is not in itself a knock down argument though. You can have an overall situation of discrimination against a specific group yet individual members of that group can still do well.,
    That was just one of a myriad of points I made, Eamon, which painted a general picture.
    ,dismisses the ethnic cleansing that occurred during the War of Independence
    Can’t say I completely agreed with his/her posting.However you are using a bit of when-are-you-going-to-stop-beating-your-wife sleight of hand in your phraseology here which presumes ‘ethnic cleansing’ as fact.To be fair I think you are unwittingly passing on a multihandled baton from the Stygian dephths.
    Reminds me of the famous anecdote about Lyndon Johnson:
    Back in 1948, during his first race for the U.S. Senate, Lyndon Johnson was running about ten points behind, with only nine days to go. He was sunk in despair. He was desperate. And it was just before noon on a Monday, they say, when he called his equally depressed campaign manager and instructed him to call a press conference for just before lunch on a slow news day and accuse his high-riding opponent, a pig farmer, of having routine carnal knowledge of his barnyard sows, despite the pleas of his wife and children.

    His campaign manager was shocked. “We can’t say that, Lyndon,” he supposedly said. “You know it’s not true.”

    “Of course it’s not true!” Johnson barked at him. “But let’s make the bastard deny it!”

  • Owen

    El Nuevo Pantanois not as good a pontiff as the present one. His do not stand up.

  • you´ve lost me there owen, whose email address says margaret wilson :=)

  • Owen

    ponts