Partition was made inevitable by the Sinn Fein victory in Ireland in the Westminster general election of 1918. Sinn Fein swept to 70 of the 75 seats in what became the Irish Free State, but won just 3 of the 30 in what became Northern Ireland, and that only because of a pact with the more moderate Home Rulers. In constituencies in the North contested by both parties, the Home Rulers beat Sinn Fein. It is debatable whether Sinn Fein won a mandate in 1918 for the campaign of violence they subsequently launched, but they certainly had no mandate of any sort in Northern Ireland. They still don’t. No British government was going to hand one million Ulster Unionists over to the tender mercies of a movement which just a few years earlier, at the height of the Great War, had boasted of the support from “our gallant allies in Europe” for their violent rebellion even while tens of thousands of Irish troops were fighting and dying on the Western Front. As it happened, the Protestant ex-Unionist population of the South fell precipitously after partition, while, funnily enough, the population of oppressed Catholics in the North actually rose. To speak of anyone – Britain or Ireland – “owning” Northern Ireland without reference to the views of the people who live there is a very colonial mindset.
An excellent comment – what Eagleton is advocating is the annexation of Northern Ireland without reference to the views of those who live there, on the grounds that the current government in Dublin has an inherent right to the whole of the island of Ireland. Based on what, exactly? I don’t think they would agree – indeed it’s not at all clear that Dublin really wants NI, as Ulster Unionism would then become their problem rather than London’s to deal with.
Certainly the Northern Irish political system was rigged to deny Catholics full Civil Rights until the 1970s, but since then they have had them, and as you point out the population has risen in that time.
The really shameful thing about the modern British attitude to NI is how little most English, Welsh and even Scots seem to care about it, and how ignorant they are of its politics. That is probably the greatest threat to the Union, rather than revanchism bred in Dublin.
And the comparison with Ukraine is utterly grotesque. Apart from extreme (and usually violent) republicans, nobody disputes that NI is part of the Union under international law unless and until a border poll is held with a majority for unification with the Irish Republic.
Eagleton is a great example of the level of deludedness that is often found in the upper echelons of academia. Those who inhabit his world are far removed from the reality that the rest of us live in, and fundamentally believe that spending decades living in their elite bubble endows them with the right to dictate what is best for the little people, even when it is obvious to everyone outside that bubble that they have no idea what they are talking about.
Eagleton’s article can be succinctly described as an almost compete load of claptrap. He sounds like an English equivalent of the Irish-Americans who think nothing has changed since 1916
When I heard him lecture in the early 1980s, it never occurred to me that he was Irish. It came as a surprise when he started banging on about Ireland after his retirement from academe
When I heard him lecture in the early 1980s, it never occurred to me that he was Irish. It came as a surprise when he started banging on about Ireland after his retirement from academe
Eagleton’s article can be succinctly described as an almost compete load of claptrap. He sounds like an English equivalent of the Irish-Americans who think nothing has changed since 1916
In his comparison with Ukraine the author loses the plot.
As with Joe “I’m Irish” Biden, there are none so patriotic as the decedents of emigrants who have no intention of ever returning to live there.
Patriotic? Oh. I don’t know about that. A healthy dose of affection and strange loyalty. Well, can you blame them?
We grew up hearing stories about the filth and muck and degradation of the famine and then the troubles…then they ran to a country where they were indentured servants and viewed with suspicion and hate. But we also grew up with a healthy dose of romanticism about the old country. About all the old countries, actually. Ask an Italian American what they think about Italy. Or a Polish American about Poland.
Of course we would never return to live there, lol. This, per our ancestral decision’s, is our home. Don’t try to understand us. You can’t. You don’t understand what it is like to sometimes feel, as second or third generation Americans, like you have a foot in two countries. And not really a part of either. Only now are there testaments to that being written after having been told for years, “You’re an American now, that’s all that matters,” while still experiencing the culture of another country in your home.
Hmmm. I was born in Cork, raised in England by a Mum who always called Ireland “Home”, I now live in America. After 34 years (some of it spent living in the Middle East to be honest) in 2022 I became a U.S. citizen. However, I still hold an Irish passport. I don’t have any problem calling America home, while considering myself extremely lucky to divide my loyalties and affections between all three places. I am thrice blessed.
Hmmm. I was born in Cork, raised in England by a Mum who always called Ireland “Home”, I now live in America. After 34 years (some of it spent living in the Middle East to be honest) in 2022 I became a U.S. citizen. However, I still hold an Irish passport. I don’t have any problem calling America home, while considering myself extremely lucky to divide my loyalties and affections between all three places. I am thrice blessed.
Patriotic? Oh. I don’t know about that. A healthy dose of affection and strange loyalty. Well, can you blame them?
We grew up hearing stories about the filth and muck and degradation of the famine and then the troubles…then they ran to a country where they were indentured servants and viewed with suspicion and hate. But we also grew up with a healthy dose of romanticism about the old country. About all the old countries, actually. Ask an Italian American what they think about Italy. Or a Polish American about Poland.
Of course we would never return to live there, lol. This, per our ancestral decision’s, is our home. Don’t try to understand us. You can’t. You don’t understand what it is like to sometimes feel, as second or third generation Americans, like you have a foot in two countries. And not really a part of either. Only now are there testaments to that being written after having been told for years, “You’re an American now, that’s all that matters,” while still experiencing the culture of another country in your home.
Eagleton is a great example of the level of deludedness that is often found in the upper echelons of academia. Those who inhabit his world are far removed from the reality that the rest of us live in, and fundamentally believe that spending decades living in their elite bubble endows them with the right to dictate what is best for the little people, even when it is obvious to everyone outside that bubble that they have no idea what they are talking about.
In his comparison with Ukraine the author loses the plot.
As with Joe “I’m Irish” Biden, there are none so patriotic as the decedents of emigrants who have no intention of ever returning to live there.
This is Tosh! As an individual of Anglo-Irish background having lived in both the UK and now in Ireland I cannot relate to what Eagleton outlines here. The Irish have no qualms about confronting their past and indeed sporting it as a badge of honour. Simply because those south of the border don’t wish to adopt a confrontational approach does not mean the basic sentiments are not shared. However whilst recording history and commemorating it they see the benefit in not framing their present and future outlook solely through that optic. They know only too well the cost of their struggles and the poisonous nature of internecine conflict. I’d suggest Eagleton visits Rwanda and to see a similar approach in action. And should Eagleton wish to understand why Protestant numbers fell in the South he should look no further than the discrimination that was practiced on them post partition, but that would be to fall into his trap. The same trap that Mary Lou McDonald incessantly cranks out. The battle is done, natural birth rates will ensure Ireland is ultimately united. The question is will the South want to pick up the bill and take charge of managing those enmities in the North which have decades to run? Like most ex-pats or descendants thereof residing in the UK for a long period, my own family included, Eagleton’s grasp of this country is outdated and ill-informed.
Nonsense – partition was made inevitable by Unionist resistance. In 1912, the UK govt published a home rule bill for Ireland. In response, Ulster’s Unionists signed the Ulster Covenant, established a terrorist organisation, the UVF, to resist the UK parliament, and smuggled in 25,000 rifles and between 3 and 5 million rounds of ammunition from Germany to Larne. In the subsequent settlement after the Anglo-Irish war, the British govt excluded the northern counties and partitioned the country. Had it not been for the justifiable concern about Unionist terrorism in the NE of the island, the English would have been happy enough to grant dominion status to the entire island. Partition was seen as a temporary fix, and for the next 50 years, London happily washed its hands of the place.
Considering the thousands killed in the 1916 Rising, War of Independence and Civil War, all to achieve something little different from the Home Rule parliament already enacted in 1914, it was and is rather rich for Irish Republicans to complain about the threat of Unionist terrorism. Irish Republicans didn’t want dominion status – then as now they weren’t willing to make the concessions necessary to avoid partition.
You had better check your victim count.
There were 429 killed in the 2016 uprising, of which 116 were British military personnel, and 3 were policemen and 310.
If you are going to take people to task, you could at least bother to read what they wrote. Stephen Walsh rather clearly mentioned the Anglo Irish War and the Irish Civil War, which you curiously totally ignore.
If you are going to take people to task, you could at least bother to read what they wrote. Stephen Walsh rather clearly mentioned the Anglo Irish War and the Irish Civil War, which you curiously totally ignore.
You had better check your victim count.
There were 429 killed in the 2016 uprising, of which 116 were British military personnel, and 3 were policemen and 310.
In other words the Northern Ireland Protestants did not want to be forced into a Catholic dominated state. You might not agree with their position, but there was a political chasm between North and South.
The Irish Free State, with far less military and economic resources than Britain, would have had a huge challenge on its hands not only fighting a civil war with Republicans but another battle with Northern secessionists.
It is really difficult to see that would have been a better outcome than the messy one that prevailed and pretty much kept the peace for several decades.
Considering the thousands killed in the 1916 Rising, War of Independence and Civil War, all to achieve something little different from the Home Rule parliament already enacted in 1914, it was and is rather rich for Irish Republicans to complain about the threat of Unionist terrorism. Irish Republicans didn’t want dominion status – then as now they weren’t willing to make the concessions necessary to avoid partition.
In other words the Northern Ireland Protestants did not want to be forced into a Catholic dominated state. You might not agree with their position, but there was a political chasm between North and South.
The Irish Free State, with far less military and economic resources than Britain, would have had a huge challenge on its hands not only fighting a civil war with Republicans but another battle with Northern secessionists.
It is really difficult to see that would have been a better outcome than the messy one that prevailed and pretty much kept the peace for several decades.
Since NI didn’t exist (and wasn’t even conceived of) in 1918, that a majority there went to Unionists is beside the point. In greater Ulster, arguably the appropriate demarcation after Ireland itself, the split was 50: 50. But of course that wouldn’t suit – hence the gerrymandered state. Inconvenient perhaps but true.
There was a Unionist majority in the nine counties of Ulster which would probably have endured until the 1980s. But it would have been harsh to force the overwhelmingly Nationalist counties of Cavan, Monaghan and Donegal to remain in the UK against the wishes of the great majority of the people there. Provinces are notional collections of counties with no legal standing. The administrative unit was the county, and of the eight counties and county boroughs in what shortly became Northern Ireland, five had a large Unionist majority and three were evenly split (no clear majority for leaving the UK). All the counties which had a large majority for leaving the UK did so – those where there was no clear majority for doing so became Northern Ireland. Special pleading about gerrymandering does not address the reality that many people, and the majority of people in the north east of Ireland, did and do not want to leave the UK, partly because of very valid concerns of how they would be treated in a United Ireland. It would be better if Irish Nationalists respected and addressed these concerns, rather than sneering at them, and blaming Perfidious Albion for it all.
So concern for how the ‘majority’ of people in the North East enclave might have been treated in a United Ireland (first President a Protestant) does not extend to the actual treatment of the nationalist and indigenous minority that ensued for fifty years in that NE space.
You are conflating two different issues – partition, and the treatment of Catholics in Northern Ireland. Eagleton states “When Ireland cast off British rule in 1921, it had the same right as any other state to sovereignty over the whole of its territory.” This is garbage. Separately, the “Protestant Parliament for a Protestant People” was the tragic result of the Government of Ireland Act 1920, which should never have been enacted. There should have been continued direct rule over Northern Ireland, as there had been from 1801 to 1920. But the only Irish MPs left in Westminster to oppose it were the 6 Nationalists who had survived the 1918 election which had made partition of some sort inevitable. The Irish Presidency has no real power and was secured by two Protestants (one of whom was the son of English and American parents rather than being an Irish Protestant himself) by repudiating the political identity and beliefs of the vast majority of Irish Protestants at Partition. None of the senior Irish ministerial positions were ever held by Protestants after 1932 (other than Finance briefly from 1954 – 57).
You are conflating two different issues – partition, and the treatment of Catholics in Northern Ireland. Eagleton states “When Ireland cast off British rule in 1921, it had the same right as any other state to sovereignty over the whole of its territory.” This is garbage. Separately, the “Protestant Parliament for a Protestant People” was the tragic result of the Government of Ireland Act 1920, which should never have been enacted. There should have been continued direct rule over Northern Ireland, as there had been from 1801 to 1920. But the only Irish MPs left in Westminster to oppose it were the 6 Nationalists who had survived the 1918 election which had made partition of some sort inevitable. The Irish Presidency has no real power and was secured by two Protestants (one of whom was the son of English and American parents rather than being an Irish Protestant himself) by repudiating the political identity and beliefs of the vast majority of Irish Protestants at Partition. None of the senior Irish ministerial positions were ever held by Protestants after 1932 (other than Finance briefly from 1954 – 57).
So concern for how the ‘majority’ of people in the North East enclave might have been treated in a United Ireland (first President a Protestant) does not extend to the actual treatment of the nationalist and indigenous minority that ensued for fifty years in that NE space.
Almost any conceivable new state is “gerrymandered” by that definition. India and Pakistan? It was a very unsatisfactory solution but probably better than the decades long insurrection that would otherwise have occurred.
There was a Unionist majority in the nine counties of Ulster which would probably have endured until the 1980s. But it would have been harsh to force the overwhelmingly Nationalist counties of Cavan, Monaghan and Donegal to remain in the UK against the wishes of the great majority of the people there. Provinces are notional collections of counties with no legal standing. The administrative unit was the county, and of the eight counties and county boroughs in what shortly became Northern Ireland, five had a large Unionist majority and three were evenly split (no clear majority for leaving the UK). All the counties which had a large majority for leaving the UK did so – those where there was no clear majority for doing so became Northern Ireland. Special pleading about gerrymandering does not address the reality that many people, and the majority of people in the north east of Ireland, did and do not want to leave the UK, partly because of very valid concerns of how they would be treated in a United Ireland. It would be better if Irish Nationalists respected and addressed these concerns, rather than sneering at them, and blaming Perfidious Albion for it all.
Almost any conceivable new state is “gerrymandered” by that definition. India and Pakistan? It was a very unsatisfactory solution but probably better than the decades long insurrection that would otherwise have occurred.
On the 1st July, 1916, the 36th (Ulster) Division made the necessary sacrifice on the first day of the infamous ‘Battle of the Somme’.
By nightfall they had suffered 5,000 casualties, one third of their original strength.
See my book ‘Buried Lives. The Protestants of Southern Ireland. Between 1911 and 1926 the Protestant population of the Free State (26 counties0 declined by over a third. Then between 1926 ans 1971 the church of Ireland population declined by 40% when the Catholic numbers increaased. Colonialism? Ireland was not a colony any more than Britain. The Normans conquered both and in the case of Ireland, were invited to invade by an Irish chieftain.Irish men and women played a big role in building a British empire. Yes the comparison to Ukraine is grotesque. A country fightin against a feascit invasion. NI is part of a benign democracy enjoying heavy subsidies.
As you say the Protestant ex-Unionist population of the South fell precipitously after partition. But to be more accurate they were ethnically cleansed. https://www.historyireland.com/sectarianism-and-ethnic-cleansing/
Of course this is an unacceptable truth for Irish Catholics since it threatens their status as professional victims, a class to which the author clearly belongs
As to the authors statement “As British Catholics, being a minority, can understand something of the problems of their co-religionists in Derry or Newry”, what a load of cobblers I was born to Irish grandparents and was at school primary and secondary schools (but not a posh grammar school) in the 70s when the IRA was in full swing.
As I recall every last proper English person behaved with utmost decency and never did I hear anything directed at us for being Irish Catholics but there was more that a small amount of pro-IRA sentiment amongst my classmates, presumably passed down by the parents. I remember wondering why are these people in the country
I am so ashamed that I have Irish ancestry and I loath plastic paddies
An excellent comment – what Eagleton is advocating is the annexation of Northern Ireland without reference to the views of those who live there, on the grounds that the current government in Dublin has an inherent right to the whole of the island of Ireland. Based on what, exactly? I don’t think they would agree – indeed it’s not at all clear that Dublin really wants NI, as Ulster Unionism would then become their problem rather than London’s to deal with.
Certainly the Northern Irish political system was rigged to deny Catholics full Civil Rights until the 1970s, but since then they have had them, and as you point out the population has risen in that time.
The really shameful thing about the modern British attitude to NI is how little most English, Welsh and even Scots seem to care about it, and how ignorant they are of its politics. That is probably the greatest threat to the Union, rather than revanchism bred in Dublin.
And the comparison with Ukraine is utterly grotesque. Apart from extreme (and usually violent) republicans, nobody disputes that NI is part of the Union under international law unless and until a border poll is held with a majority for unification with the Irish Republic.
This is Tosh! As an individual of Anglo-Irish background having lived in both the UK and now in Ireland I cannot relate to what Eagleton outlines here. The Irish have no qualms about confronting their past and indeed sporting it as a badge of honour. Simply because those south of the border don’t wish to adopt a confrontational approach does not mean the basic sentiments are not shared. However whilst recording history and commemorating it they see the benefit in not framing their present and future outlook solely through that optic. They know only too well the cost of their struggles and the poisonous nature of internecine conflict. I’d suggest Eagleton visits Rwanda and to see a similar approach in action. And should Eagleton wish to understand why Protestant numbers fell in the South he should look no further than the discrimination that was practiced on them post partition, but that would be to fall into his trap. The same trap that Mary Lou McDonald incessantly cranks out. The battle is done, natural birth rates will ensure Ireland is ultimately united. The question is will the South want to pick up the bill and take charge of managing those enmities in the North which have decades to run? Like most ex-pats or descendants thereof residing in the UK for a long period, my own family included, Eagleton’s grasp of this country is outdated and ill-informed.
Nonsense – partition was made inevitable by Unionist resistance. In 1912, the UK govt published a home rule bill for Ireland. In response, Ulster’s Unionists signed the Ulster Covenant, established a terrorist organisation, the UVF, to resist the UK parliament, and smuggled in 25,000 rifles and between 3 and 5 million rounds of ammunition from Germany to Larne. In the subsequent settlement after the Anglo-Irish war, the British govt excluded the northern counties and partitioned the country. Had it not been for the justifiable concern about Unionist terrorism in the NE of the island, the English would have been happy enough to grant dominion status to the entire island. Partition was seen as a temporary fix, and for the next 50 years, London happily washed its hands of the place.
Since NI didn’t exist (and wasn’t even conceived of) in 1918, that a majority there went to Unionists is beside the point. In greater Ulster, arguably the appropriate demarcation after Ireland itself, the split was 50: 50. But of course that wouldn’t suit – hence the gerrymandered state. Inconvenient perhaps but true.
On the 1st July, 1916, the 36th (Ulster) Division made the necessary sacrifice on the first day of the infamous ‘Battle of the Somme’.
By nightfall they had suffered 5,000 casualties, one third of their original strength.
See my book ‘Buried Lives. The Protestants of Southern Ireland. Between 1911 and 1926 the Protestant population of the Free State (26 counties0 declined by over a third. Then between 1926 ans 1971 the church of Ireland population declined by 40% when the Catholic numbers increaased. Colonialism? Ireland was not a colony any more than Britain. The Normans conquered both and in the case of Ireland, were invited to invade by an Irish chieftain.Irish men and women played a big role in building a British empire. Yes the comparison to Ukraine is grotesque. A country fightin against a feascit invasion. NI is part of a benign democracy enjoying heavy subsidies.
As you say the Protestant ex-Unionist population of the South fell precipitously after partition. But to be more accurate they were ethnically cleansed. https://www.historyireland.com/sectarianism-and-ethnic-cleansing/
Of course this is an unacceptable truth for Irish Catholics since it threatens their status as professional victims, a class to which the author clearly belongs
As to the authors statement “As British Catholics, being a minority, can understand something of the problems of their co-religionists in Derry or Newry”, what a load of cobblers I was born to Irish grandparents and was at school primary and secondary schools (but not a posh grammar school) in the 70s when the IRA was in full swing.
As I recall every last proper English person behaved with utmost decency and never did I hear anything directed at us for being Irish Catholics but there was more that a small amount of pro-IRA sentiment amongst my classmates, presumably passed down by the parents. I remember wondering why are these people in the country
I am so ashamed that I have Irish ancestry and I loath plastic paddies
Last edited 1 year ago by Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Stephen Walsh
1 year ago
Partition was made inevitable by the Sinn Fein victory in Ireland in the Westminster general election of 1918. Sinn Fein swept to 70 of the 75 seats in what became the Irish Free State, but won just 3 of the 30 in what became Northern Ireland, and that only because of a pact with the more moderate Home Rulers. In constituencies in the North contested by both parties, the Home Rulers beat Sinn Fein. It is debatable whether Sinn Fein won a mandate in 1918 for the campaign of violence they subsequently launched, but they certainly had no mandate of any sort in Northern Ireland. They still don’t. No British government was going to hand one million Ulster Unionists over to the tender mercies of a movement which just a few years earlier, at the height of the Great War, had boasted of the support from “our gallant allies in Europe” for their violent rebellion even while tens of thousands of Irish troops were fighting and dying on the Western Front. As it happened, the Protestant ex-Unionist population of the South fell precipitously after partition, while, funnily enough, the population of oppressed Catholics in the North actually rose. To speak of anyone – Britain or Ireland – “owning” Northern Ireland without reference to the views of the people who live there is a very colonial mindset.
Nell Clover
1 year ago
In an article dripping with sectarian us versus them, the author writes “the standard English line on the question — that there were two warring sectarian communities in the North, each as bigoted and blood-stained as the other, and the role of the British government was to mediate between them. When in doubt, head for the middle ground. It’s hard to see how this very English even-handedness applies to women versus rapists”. Thereby comparing the morality of one side to rapists. This isn’t an article or an essay, it is the unhinged rantings of a racist.
It’s not for me to suggest the author has issues which he is projecting on to Ireland’s past, but the Ireland I know isn’t recognisable here. For example, “sweeping a history of famine and enforced mass emigration under the carpet”? EPIC is one of the most popular museums in Dublin, lavishly funded and winner of Europe’s Leading Tourist Attraction award and deals exclusively with the story of… Irish emigration. There are none so blind as those twisted by secondhand sectarianism.
The enormous demographic change now occurring across Ireland is bringing new people with their own stories, religion and different priorities. The Ireland and the Irish identity in the author’s head is being replaced. Ireland will no doubt be united but it won’t be a union of the Irish for the [Catholic] Irish. It will be a multi ethnic Irish minority globalised economic unit with only performative ritualistic Irish corporate branding. The stories of Cromwell that are as alive in the writer’s imagination as if they happened yesterday will become as politically relevant as the story of the vikings arriving at the black pool – Dubh Linn – in the 9th century.
Mr Eagleton’s problem here is that he is third – generation Irish- English and, like many I have encountered in my 55 years in England, he has a distorted and romanticised view of Ireland. Like the bizarre Americans, who tip up to find the ancestral cottage and dab their eyes over Cathleen Ni Houlihan, he is embarrassingly unaware of current reality and of historical fact. No mention here of the dreadful, oppressive and fascistic reign of Mr De Valera and his successors, which drove hundreds of thousands out of Ireland- up in Donegal and in the West of Ireland, electricity and piped water were still unavailable to many rural households in the 1990s, while the Catholic Church was synonymous with the state in coercive and repressive control of many aspects of social life.
I understand his point about feelings of alienation, but most of this essay is a word- salad of Marxist wishful thinking.
You obviously have a distorted view of what constitutes a Marxist. As it happens this Marxist completely agrees with your comment – except of course, the last sentence.
You obviously have a distorted view of what constitutes a Marxist. As it happens this Marxist completely agrees with your comment – except of course, the last sentence.
Mr Eagleton’s problem here is that he is third – generation Irish- English and, like many I have encountered in my 55 years in England, he has a distorted and romanticised view of Ireland. Like the bizarre Americans, who tip up to find the ancestral cottage and dab their eyes over Cathleen Ni Houlihan, he is embarrassingly unaware of current reality and of historical fact. No mention here of the dreadful, oppressive and fascistic reign of Mr De Valera and his successors, which drove hundreds of thousands out of Ireland- up in Donegal and in the West of Ireland, electricity and piped water were still unavailable to many rural households in the 1990s, while the Catholic Church was synonymous with the state in coercive and repressive control of many aspects of social life.
I understand his point about feelings of alienation, but most of this essay is a word- salad of Marxist wishful thinking.
Last edited 1 year ago by Geraldine Kelley
Nell Clover
1 year ago
In an article dripping with sectarian us versus them, the author writes “the standard English line on the question — that there were two warring sectarian communities in the North, each as bigoted and blood-stained as the other, and the role of the British government was to mediate between them. When in doubt, head for the middle ground. It’s hard to see how this very English even-handedness applies to women versus rapists”. Thereby comparing the morality of one side to rapists. This isn’t an article or an essay, it is the unhinged rantings of a racist.
It’s not for me to suggest the author has issues which he is projecting on to Ireland’s past, but the Ireland I know isn’t recognisable here. For example, “sweeping a history of famine and enforced mass emigration under the carpet”? EPIC is one of the most popular museums in Dublin, lavishly funded and winner of Europe’s Leading Tourist Attraction award and deals exclusively with the story of… Irish emigration. There are none so blind as those twisted by secondhand sectarianism.
The enormous demographic change now occurring across Ireland is bringing new people with their own stories, religion and different priorities. The Ireland and the Irish identity in the author’s head is being replaced. Ireland will no doubt be united but it won’t be a union of the Irish for the [Catholic] Irish. It will be a multi ethnic Irish minority globalised economic unit with only performative ritualistic Irish corporate branding. The stories of Cromwell that are as alive in the writer’s imagination as if they happened yesterday will become as politically relevant as the story of the vikings arriving at the black pool – Dubh Linn – in the 9th century.
Last edited 1 year ago by Nell Clover
R Wright
1 year ago
The Irish Republic has no more inherent right over Irish-speakers than Germany had over German-speakers in the Soviet Union. This article is a bizarre defence of colonialist irredentism dressed up in liberal sheep’s clothing.
Exactly. In truth the Irish have not generally been exceptional reticent in nursing their grievances and, even within Europe in the last 150 years, the suffering they endured from colonial powers compared to that endured by the peoples of for example Poland, Romania, the Baltic states or Ukraine was modest indeed. A fifth of all the people in Poland in 1939 were killed during the subsequent War, occupation, Holocaust and deportations. And we can see in Ukraine today where such irredentist territorial claims can lead.
Second that. There is a tendency of overseas Irish (especially “Irish” Americans) to conflate to Shoah-proportions the sufferings of the Ireland in the 19th Century and to romanticize the ghastly Irish Civil war and the IRA Campaigns in the late 20th Century.
Second that. There is a tendency of overseas Irish (especially “Irish” Americans) to conflate to Shoah-proportions the sufferings of the Ireland in the 19th Century and to romanticize the ghastly Irish Civil war and the IRA Campaigns in the late 20th Century.
Exactly. In truth the Irish have not generally been exceptional reticent in nursing their grievances and, even within Europe in the last 150 years, the suffering they endured from colonial powers compared to that endured by the peoples of for example Poland, Romania, the Baltic states or Ukraine was modest indeed. A fifth of all the people in Poland in 1939 were killed during the subsequent War, occupation, Holocaust and deportations. And we can see in Ukraine today where such irredentist territorial claims can lead.
R Wright
1 year ago
The Irish Republic has no more inherent right over Irish-speakers than Germany had over German-speakers in the Soviet Union. This article is a bizarre defence of colonialist irredentism dressed up in liberal sheep’s clothing.
Ian McKinney
1 year ago
Northern Irish person here. Consumed this ‘article’ with the usual feelings of despair at the pretty standard inaccurate ravings of a plastic paddy tankie.
Came to the comments and was pleasantly surprised at the level of insight here. Good to see the majority of commenters not taken in by the usual propaganda we are exposed to over and over – the ‘unherd’ in this case was not the writer but the commenters – well done all.
Why don’t you give them a pat in the head while you’re at it?
The demography of the Unherd readers is in stark display here, and – with some notable exceptions – their ‘British’ view of Ireland awash with stereotyping, as well as bland – and not so bland – generalisations. The subject is too large to go into in any detail but please bear in mind that Ireland was run like a colony and its partial independence (it didn’t emerge from an Empire) in 1922 was just that.
As for the violence, let’s not forget that the British army, as a reaction to the whole of Ireland being granted limited Home Rule, threatened a mutiny in 1914, and, around the same time, the importation of large quantities of ammunition by the loyalists. From where, you ask – from the German Empire!
Okay, Charlie Asterisk, you have supplied additional information which is of no use whatsoever – unless, that is, you are attempting to muddy the picture and distract from the realpolitik of British rule in Ireland.
Okay, Charlie Asterisk, you have supplied additional information which is of no use whatsoever – unless, that is, you are attempting to muddy the picture and distract from the realpolitik of British rule in Ireland.
Glad to hear we restored some of your faith in your fellow man and woman. For what it’s worth, Northern Ireland was the first place my wife and I went on holiday together (also the first member of my immediate family to go there) and I’ve always had an interest in the history so it is a special place in my heart for me.
Why don’t you give them a pat in the head while you’re at it?
The demography of the Unherd readers is in stark display here, and – with some notable exceptions – their ‘British’ view of Ireland awash with stereotyping, as well as bland – and not so bland – generalisations. The subject is too large to go into in any detail but please bear in mind that Ireland was run like a colony and its partial independence (it didn’t emerge from an Empire) in 1922 was just that.
As for the violence, let’s not forget that the British army, as a reaction to the whole of Ireland being granted limited Home Rule, threatened a mutiny in 1914, and, around the same time, the importation of large quantities of ammunition by the loyalists. From where, you ask – from the German Empire!
Glad to hear we restored some of your faith in your fellow man and woman. For what it’s worth, Northern Ireland was the first place my wife and I went on holiday together (also the first member of my immediate family to go there) and I’ve always had an interest in the history so it is a special place in my heart for me.
Ian, had exactly the same conclusion! Mixed feelings about Eagletons essay
then much relieved by the “little People’s “ intelligence in ‘Comments’
Ian McKinney
1 year ago
Northern Irish person here. Consumed this ‘article’ with the usual feelings of despair at the pretty standard inaccurate ravings of a plastic paddy tankie.
Came to the comments and was pleasantly surprised at the level of insight here. Good to see the majority of commenters not taken in by the usual propaganda we are exposed to over and over – the ‘unherd’ in this case was not the writer but the commenters – well done all.
The author appears to have fallen into the trap of treating Irish nationalist discourse and official Irish history as the same thing. Not once did I see anything referring to the Home Rule crisis of 1912-14 in the article and that the Unionists were even prepared to rise up against the British State to not be governed from Dublin. As another commenter explained, combined with the hardening of Irish nationalism during WW1 and Sinn Féin’s victory in the 1918 general election, there was absolutely no way the Protestant counties of Ulster were going to be part of this new Irish state.
Only the most deluded Irish nationalists at the time could possibly have thought otherwise.
Edit: Also, rather ironic that Ireland is simultaneously the most enthusiastic member of the EU, while easily the most nationalistic country in the EU. Will be interesting to see how this plays out when European federalism gets discussed in the future.
Last edited 1 year ago by John Dellingby
John Dellingby
1 year ago
The author appears to have fallen into the trap of treating Irish nationalist discourse and official Irish history as the same thing. Not once did I see anything referring to the Home Rule crisis of 1912-14 in the article and that the Unionists were even prepared to rise up against the British State to not be governed from Dublin. As another commenter explained, combined with the hardening of Irish nationalism during WW1 and Sinn Féin’s victory in the 1918 general election, there was absolutely no way the Protestant counties of Ulster were going to be part of this new Irish state.
Only the most deluded Irish nationalists at the time could possibly have thought otherwise.
Edit: Also, rather ironic that Ireland is simultaneously the most enthusiastic member of the EU, while easily the most nationalistic country in the EU. Will be interesting to see how this plays out when European federalism gets discussed in the future.
Last edited 1 year ago by John Dellingby
Katharine Eyre
1 year ago
I did generally enjoy reading this, but there were some pretty odd sentences in it. Like this: “When Ireland cast off British rule in 1921, it had the same right as any other state to sovereignty over the whole of its territory. It was deprived of that right by Ulster Unionism and the British government, and continues to be deprived of it today. Ukraine is fighting for that form of sovereignty at the moment, and the British are zealous in their support for it. They aren’t quite so keen on extending the same right to Dublin.”
The first half of it rings true enough and I’m sure you can have endless discussions about whether partition was a historic wrong etc etc. But the second half of the sentence descends into the ridiculous, heaving all those resentments whole and entire into 2023. The British government agreed to the GFA which contains mechanisms for reunification: to say that, post-1998, the British are in any way resisting Ireland’s right to full island sovereignty is absurd.
The author seems to be pressing the point that Ireland hasn’t “come of age” properly because it sweeps its history under the carpet. Maybe that’s not the case: maybe the Irish just realise that constantly rehashing old resentments from centuries past at the dinner table as if they happened yesterday is not worth it and would keep them anchored in the past rather than moving forward to become a modern European nation. And that sounds like a pretty sensible approach to me. Confident and hopeful rather than downtrodden and resentful. That sounds like a mature, modern nation to me.
Very sensible comment about Ireland and its relationship to its past, and the comment by John Dellingby that Ireland is easily the ‘most nationalistic country in Europe’ would be more accurate if it said ‘easily the most postnationalist country in Europe’ (compare with Poland, Hungary, Greece…) Comparisons that disregard historical and geopolitical realities are rarely helpful, but, despite their many differences, there are interesting historical parallels between Ireland and Ukraine (Velychenko, Ruane and Hrynevych eds. Ireland and Ukraine: studies in comparative imperial and national history, ibidem Verlag, 2022).
There was never an independent United Ireland before partition. So why the eff would there be after it? Ireland as such was a collection of mini kingdoms that generally loathed each other, fought endlessly and had no central power, institutions, bureaucracy etc. The idea they had a ‘right’ to ‘their’ territory is absurd. Eagleton is taking out of his arse.
I’m surprised the author doesn’t explain that India is in the same boat, waiting for Sovereignty over the whole of its territory of Pakistan and Bangladesh.
Very sensible comment about Ireland and its relationship to its past, and the comment by John Dellingby that Ireland is easily the ‘most nationalistic country in Europe’ would be more accurate if it said ‘easily the most postnationalist country in Europe’ (compare with Poland, Hungary, Greece…) Comparisons that disregard historical and geopolitical realities are rarely helpful, but, despite their many differences, there are interesting historical parallels between Ireland and Ukraine (Velychenko, Ruane and Hrynevych eds. Ireland and Ukraine: studies in comparative imperial and national history, ibidem Verlag, 2022).
There was never an independent United Ireland before partition. So why the eff would there be after it? Ireland as such was a collection of mini kingdoms that generally loathed each other, fought endlessly and had no central power, institutions, bureaucracy etc. The idea they had a ‘right’ to ‘their’ territory is absurd. Eagleton is taking out of his arse.
I’m surprised the author doesn’t explain that India is in the same boat, waiting for Sovereignty over the whole of its territory of Pakistan and Bangladesh.
Last edited 1 year ago by Bill Bailey
Katharine Eyre
1 year ago
I did generally enjoy reading this, but there were some pretty odd sentences in it. Like this: “When Ireland cast off British rule in 1921, it had the same right as any other state to sovereignty over the whole of its territory. It was deprived of that right by Ulster Unionism and the British government, and continues to be deprived of it today. Ukraine is fighting for that form of sovereignty at the moment, and the British are zealous in their support for it. They aren’t quite so keen on extending the same right to Dublin.”
The first half of it rings true enough and I’m sure you can have endless discussions about whether partition was a historic wrong etc etc. But the second half of the sentence descends into the ridiculous, heaving all those resentments whole and entire into 2023. The British government agreed to the GFA which contains mechanisms for reunification: to say that, post-1998, the British are in any way resisting Ireland’s right to full island sovereignty is absurd.
The author seems to be pressing the point that Ireland hasn’t “come of age” properly because it sweeps its history under the carpet. Maybe that’s not the case: maybe the Irish just realise that constantly rehashing old resentments from centuries past at the dinner table as if they happened yesterday is not worth it and would keep them anchored in the past rather than moving forward to become a modern European nation. And that sounds like a pretty sensible approach to me. Confident and hopeful rather than downtrodden and resentful. That sounds like a mature, modern nation to me.
Last edited 1 year ago by Katharine Eyre
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago
What an idiotic article. To contend that it was only an elite in Northern Ireland who opposed rule from Dublin is laughably ahistorical. Does Terry consider the inhabitants of the Shankhil part of an elite. I can’t remember who it was who said Eagleton had never grown up. It seems he is advocating a takeover of Northern Ireland by Dublin against the wishes of the majority of people in Northern Ireland. He refers to “the Irish” even though a considerable number of people in Ireland do not identify with the Ireland he does.
So what is he advocating? Deportation? Genocide?
I am glad I am cancelling my Unherd subscription. I can read drivel like this in the Guardian for free.
You can still read it for free, BUT only 8 articles a month but then a Tor browser means you can read it all, just not post comments on any article after the 8th per month. I find it interesting because the MSM is a total waste of space.
He is similar to Shane McGowan in being educated at elite English schools where he nursed a hankering for a romanticised literary and Guinness soaked paddyhood .
You can still read it for free, BUT only 8 articles a month but then a Tor browser means you can read it all, just not post comments on any article after the 8th per month. I find it interesting because the MSM is a total waste of space.
He is similar to Shane McGowan in being educated at elite English schools where he nursed a hankering for a romanticised literary and Guinness soaked paddyhood .
Last edited 1 year ago by Alan Osband
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago
What an idiotic article. To contend that it was only an elite in Northern Ireland who opposed rule from Dublin is laughably ahistorical. Does Terry consider the inhabitants of the Shankhil part of an elite. I can’t remember who it was who said Eagleton had never grown up. It seems he is advocating a takeover of Northern Ireland by Dublin against the wishes of the majority of people in Northern Ireland. He refers to “the Irish” even though a considerable number of people in Ireland do not identify with the Ireland he does.
So what is he advocating? Deportation? Genocide?
I am glad I am cancelling my Unherd subscription. I can read drivel like this in the Guardian for free.
Last edited 1 year ago by Galvatron Stephens
Paul T
1 year ago
Firstly: ‘the first colony in the world to achieve (partial) independence…’ It’s an odd colony that has full representation in the Parliament of the so-called oppressing country, but let’s take the claim at face value. What about 1776? If the author is limiting scope to the 20th century, not only is that a much less significant claim, it’s still wrong. Finland, Poland, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia all celebrate(d) their emergence from empires in 1917 or 1918. Historically sloppy.
Secondly, the author is doing some historical whitewashing of his own. I imagine the enmity between Catholicism and Presbyterianism has been much more significant then he suggests. People may not have been concerned about the finer theological points but they could see how the influence of the Catholic Church manifested itself. For two, maybe three generations after independence, the Republic of Ireland was a country where priests abused schoolboys and girls who had sex were locked away in laundries, sometimes for life. This is brushed under the carpet now as a failing of the Catholic Church, but it is part of the guilty history of the Irish state too.
Economically, the country was so incapable of providing even a basic standard of living, let alone a welfare state, that at any time perhaps a third of the working population emigrated. Many ended up here, where they did the worst jobs, suffered discrimination and bad housing, and became the butt of all sorts of jokes. But, for all that, it was still better than what was on offer at home. Like the author’s grandfather and the people of Ulster, people will always choose the better life.
I recommend Bob Geldof’s surprisingly good early memoir, “Is That It?”, for a vivid account of growing up in 1960’s Dublin and the grip the Catholic Church had on people’s lives.
A lot of Geldof’s memoir was a fashionable attitude already apparent in the Dublin middle classes to re-imagine themselves as heroic and standing up to a tyrannical Catholicism. Though there were certainly pockets of this a lot more recently than the 1960s, in South Dublin, it was already thin on the ground before this.
You’re right. By the early 1970s, the Catholic Church in the minds of South Dubliners was well on the way to becoming a straw man for increasingly dominant left-wing ideas.
You’re right. By the early 1970s, the Catholic Church in the minds of South Dubliners was well on the way to becoming a straw man for increasingly dominant left-wing ideas.
Geldof was a deeply conservative middle-class private-school educated prat masquerading as a social rebel. Always good for a quote, but don’t mistake him for someone with a balanced viewpoint on anything.
A lot of Geldof’s memoir was a fashionable attitude already apparent in the Dublin middle classes to re-imagine themselves as heroic and standing up to a tyrannical Catholicism. Though there were certainly pockets of this a lot more recently than the 1960s, in South Dublin, it was already thin on the ground before this.
Geldof was a deeply conservative middle-class private-school educated prat masquerading as a social rebel. Always good for a quote, but don’t mistake him for someone with a balanced viewpoint on anything.
I recommend Bob Geldof’s surprisingly good early memoir, “Is That It?”, for a vivid account of growing up in 1960’s Dublin and the grip the Catholic Church had on people’s lives.
Paul T
1 year ago
Firstly: ‘the first colony in the world to achieve (partial) independence…’ It’s an odd colony that has full representation in the Parliament of the so-called oppressing country, but let’s take the claim at face value. What about 1776? If the author is limiting scope to the 20th century, not only is that a much less significant claim, it’s still wrong. Finland, Poland, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia all celebrate(d) their emergence from empires in 1917 or 1918. Historically sloppy.
Secondly, the author is doing some historical whitewashing of his own. I imagine the enmity between Catholicism and Presbyterianism has been much more significant then he suggests. People may not have been concerned about the finer theological points but they could see how the influence of the Catholic Church manifested itself. For two, maybe three generations after independence, the Republic of Ireland was a country where priests abused schoolboys and girls who had sex were locked away in laundries, sometimes for life. This is brushed under the carpet now as a failing of the Catholic Church, but it is part of the guilty history of the Irish state too.
Economically, the country was so incapable of providing even a basic standard of living, let alone a welfare state, that at any time perhaps a third of the working population emigrated. Many ended up here, where they did the worst jobs, suffered discrimination and bad housing, and became the butt of all sorts of jokes. But, for all that, it was still better than what was on offer at home. Like the author’s grandfather and the people of Ulster, people will always choose the better life.
Hugh Bryant
1 year ago
Nice try. But it all falls apart with the comparison to Ukraine. Eagleton is an ethnic nationalist when that suits his argument and a constitutional democrat when it doesn’t.
The worldwide support is born of ignorance. they havnt asked the people of either Northern OR Southern Ireland whether they actually want to ‘merge.
I would not be surprised if the people of The South – would reject such a merger.
This idea exists in some utopian dream never to be actually implimented – including of ”Irish” Biden, who recently also said he was not Irish. Perhaps he read my post that his family largely came from Berkshire.
The worldwide support is born of ignorance. they havnt asked the people of either Northern OR Southern Ireland whether they actually want to ‘merge.
I would not be surprised if the people of The South – would reject such a merger.
This idea exists in some utopian dream never to be actually implimented – including of ”Irish” Biden, who recently also said he was not Irish. Perhaps he read my post that his family largely came from Berkshire.
Ireland is a uniquely privileged country that is able to have irrendentism as official policy and also receive worldwide support for it.
Hugh Bryant
1 year ago
Nice try. But it all falls apart with the comparison to Ukraine. Eagleton is an ethnic nationalist when that suits his argument and a constitutional democrat when it doesn’t.
Paul MacDonnell
1 year ago
Can we safely assume that a Sinn Fein victory in the 1918 election would have translated into a win for a referendum to leave the UK? It couldn’t be assumed with the success of the SNP in Scotland. An awful lot of patriotic Irish people would not have voted to leave the UK.
Sinn Fein’s campaign of violence likely frightened people on all sides of the issue. Of course it was all a legacy of 1916. But the Southern Irish psyche has never recovered. It still does not regard Ulster Protestants as really “Irish”.
It is entirely respectable in Dublin polite society to disparage Ulster Unionists as backward idiots. Southern Irish nationalists don’t really love Ireland – just their version of it.
In many of the seats Sinn Fein won, there was no challenger, even among the more moderate Irish Party. Doesn’t take much to wonder why.
Paul MacDonnell
1 year ago
Can we safely assume that a Sinn Fein victory in the 1918 election would have translated into a win for a referendum to leave the UK? It couldn’t be assumed with the success of the SNP in Scotland. An awful lot of patriotic Irish people would not have voted to leave the UK.
Sinn Fein’s campaign of violence likely frightened people on all sides of the issue. Of course it was all a legacy of 1916. But the Southern Irish psyche has never recovered. It still does not regard Ulster Protestants as really “Irish”.
It is entirely respectable in Dublin polite society to disparage Ulster Unionists as backward idiots. Southern Irish nationalists don’t really love Ireland – just their version of it.
Last edited 1 year ago by Paul MacDonnell
Cassander Antipatru
1 year ago
Northern Ireland was born of a cynical exercise in gerrymandering to ensure a permanent Protestant majority in the region.
It’s funny, when former colonial powers don’t bother changing the borders of multi-ethnic colonies, they get blamed for “forcing different peoples to live together” and “causing ethnic tension”; when they do change the borders, they get accused of “cynical gerrymandering”. A case of damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
When Ireland cast off British rule in 1921, it had the same right as any other state to sovereignty over the whole of its territory. It was deprived of that right by Ulster Unionism and the British government, and continues to be deprived of it today.
I’m surprised this needs pointing out, but Ireland wasn’t a state prior to independence, and hence cannot have had “the same right as any other state”. And what would this right be based on, anyway? Posession? There wasn’t an Irish government to possess anything. Self-determination? The northern Irish didn’t want to be part of the new country, they wanted to be part of Britain. Historical precedent? Ireland before the English conquest was a series of competing minor kingdoms; there only precedent for a united Ireland is under English/British rule.
One of the benefits of being a victor is that you don’t need to keep worrying about who you are. It is those who are oppressed or excluded who have to carry the problem of their identities around with them like a daily burden.
Lol, have you looked at discourse on British history recently? “Carrying the problem of their identities around with them like a daily burden” is exactly what happens to people constantly told that their race and nationality is inherently oppressive and racist.
Cassander Antipatru
1 year ago
Northern Ireland was born of a cynical exercise in gerrymandering to ensure a permanent Protestant majority in the region.
It’s funny, when former colonial powers don’t bother changing the borders of multi-ethnic colonies, they get blamed for “forcing different peoples to live together” and “causing ethnic tension”; when they do change the borders, they get accused of “cynical gerrymandering”. A case of damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
When Ireland cast off British rule in 1921, it had the same right as any other state to sovereignty over the whole of its territory. It was deprived of that right by Ulster Unionism and the British government, and continues to be deprived of it today.
I’m surprised this needs pointing out, but Ireland wasn’t a state prior to independence, and hence cannot have had “the same right as any other state”. And what would this right be based on, anyway? Posession? There wasn’t an Irish government to possess anything. Self-determination? The northern Irish didn’t want to be part of the new country, they wanted to be part of Britain. Historical precedent? Ireland before the English conquest was a series of competing minor kingdoms; there only precedent for a united Ireland is under English/British rule.
One of the benefits of being a victor is that you don’t need to keep worrying about who you are. It is those who are oppressed or excluded who have to carry the problem of their identities around with them like a daily burden.
Lol, have you looked at discourse on British history recently? “Carrying the problem of their identities around with them like a daily burden” is exactly what happens to people constantly told that their race and nationality is inherently oppressive and racist.
Paul T
1 year ago
“…because my skin was an acceptable colour”. Projection; don’t put your racist thought onto others. It is what you thought.
Paul T
1 year ago
“…because my skin was an acceptable colour”. Projection; don’t put your racist thought onto others. It is what you thought.
Roger Mortimer
1 year ago
“It’s hard to see how this very English even-handedness applies to women versus rapists, slaves against slave-owners…”
It’s also hard to see how such an analogy could possibly apply to Northern Ireland, with the UVF and UDA on one side and the various iterations of the IRA on the other. Remind me, which side are the helpless victims here?
As for Dublin being “denied” anything, I can guarantee you every Taoiseach since independence thanked God three times a day that the crazies listed above weren’t his problem. No doubt the day is coming when Catholics become the majority in the north, at which point they may well vote for unification, but I hope someone bothers to check whether the Republic actually wants this. Living next to a madhouse is a different matter from being asked to run it.
But my favourite part of the article has to be where you say the Irish don’t think enough about the past. This is the big island to the west of Britain we’re talking about?
The Irish live in the past and blame “England” for most of their problems. Its easy to blame someone else.
Roger Mortimer
1 year ago
“It’s hard to see how this very English even-handedness applies to women versus rapists, slaves against slave-owners…”
It’s also hard to see how such an analogy could possibly apply to Northern Ireland, with the UVF and UDA on one side and the various iterations of the IRA on the other. Remind me, which side are the helpless victims here?
As for Dublin being “denied” anything, I can guarantee you every Taoiseach since independence thanked God three times a day that the crazies listed above weren’t his problem. No doubt the day is coming when Catholics become the majority in the north, at which point they may well vote for unification, but I hope someone bothers to check whether the Republic actually wants this. Living next to a madhouse is a different matter from being asked to run it.
But my favourite part of the article has to be where you say the Irish don’t think enough about the past. This is the big island to the west of Britain we’re talking about?
Last edited 1 year ago by Roger Mortimer
Paul MacDonnell
1 year ago
Ireland never had a referendum to leave the UK. The 1918 election was no more a referendum than an SNP majority in Scotland is a referendum on that country leaving the UK. The IRA used violance against anyone who opposed them – including we can safely assume Southern Irish Catholic democratic nationalists. Irish nationalism was also a cultural disaster as the official education agencies tried to expunge “English” culture in favour of a fake rural ideal.
expunge “English” culture? Yeah why not take the English language out of Ireland and it would be a very much poorer country
Paul MacDonnell
1 year ago
Ireland never had a referendum to leave the UK. The 1918 election was no more a referendum than an SNP majority in Scotland is a referendum on that country leaving the UK. The IRA used violance against anyone who opposed them – including we can safely assume Southern Irish Catholic democratic nationalists. Irish nationalism was also a cultural disaster as the official education agencies tried to expunge “English” culture in favour of a fake rural ideal.
blackbear666.mt
1 year ago
Seems a most patronising article. Written from an expatriate and academic view.
blackbear666.mt
1 year ago
Seems a most patronising article. Written from an expatriate and academic view.
R S Foster
1 year ago
…I’m all for facing facts, so perhaps the Author might want to face these…
…at a time where upwards of 140,000 Volunteer Irishmen were fighting for Britain on the Western Front, the “Celtic Mist” Ethno-Nationalists of the IRA managed to raise no more than 5,000 for the Easter Rising…and the “blood and soil” romanticism that actuated them runs in a straight line through Facism to Bergen-Belsen…as indicated by the fact that when the whole free world was uniting against it, some Irishmen could only see “England’s Danger is Ireland’s Opportunity”…took the other side, and attempted a terrorist campaign against their nearest neighbours…
(…mind you, the forbears of the SNP were no better..!)
…they had “won” their Freedom only because the “Brutal” British Empire was unwilling to attempt more than a limited Police Action to contain them…where we could have sailed the Grand Fleet round their coast, flattened everything up to twenty miles inland, and then used the first “Combined-Arms” Army in History (with tanks, attack aircraft and bombers working in concert)…to finish off the survivors…
…which makes the comparison with the Ukraine offensively egregious, in light of Stalin’s “Holodomor”…conducted little more than a decade later, bringing a recalcitrant province to heel by a mixture of violence and starvation, and cold…just as his successors are seeking to do now…
…like it or not, the British Army were called on in 1968 to protect the Catholic Community…giving the IRA an opportunity to attack both them and the Unionist Majority in a (partly-successful) effort to turn a hotly-contested Civil Rights campaign into an actual Civil War, with no thought to possible casualties on both sides, civilian or otherwise…
…and, moving from fact to opinion…
…the Irish State is able to maintain it’s self-righteous neutrality…coupled with a foreign policy of being as obnoxious as possible to the neighbours…only because the “hateful” British allowed immense numbers of Irish Men and Women to live and work here freely, as though they were British…whilst sending their remittances home…not necessary now only because Ireland has become a tax haven for international capital, and a net recipient of EU largesse
…and their safety is guaranteed only because they know that we will not only not attack them…but also protect their Air and Sea space for them, as a part of our obligations to NATO…
…and if you doubt that, just imagine how very different Ireland would be if, since the end of the Great War…they had needed to defend themselves at the same cost and with the same vigour as the Finns have against their previous Imperial overlords…Finland has around six million people and spends nearly 6 Billion Euros on defence…Ireland has over five million and spends less than 1 Billion…so by that reckoning they would need to increase that budget five-fold…were we anything like the brutal savages he clearly sees us as…
Straight line from Pearse et al to Bergen Belsen is a bit much. They’re second cousins at best. Much as I disagree with Eagleton I’m not going smear him with responsibility for Stalin’s purges because he’s a Marxist. That’s the logic of the kind of cultural commissars who are trying to pin the entire history of racism on white students at universities and that has students turning away from the humanities in droves.
…my point is that the “Blood and Soil” ethno-nationalism of Sinn Fein is exactly the sort of thinking developed further in “Mein Kampf”…with results that were far from predictable when that wretched tome was published in 1924…but morphed into something truly unspeakable twenty years on, not least because it took root in a place big enough to be truly dangerous…as Germany was, but Ireland (fortunately) isn’t…
…which is just as well considering how savage the Civil War they had after we left was…featuring, among other delights…executions carried out by lashing groups of men together around a bundle of hand grenades and pulling out the pin…
…and on Stalin’s purges I’m not looking to hold Eagleton responsible for those…so much as point out the offensive stupidity of conflating what Russia did (and is doing) in the Ukraine…with the British relationship with Ireland both before and after partition…
Yes , you have to go back a bit farther to find Ukraine-level savagery from the Brits and proto-Brits, albeit on a scale permitted by the technology of the time.
Yes , you have to go back a bit farther to find Ukraine-level savagery from the Brits and proto-Brits, albeit on a scale permitted by the technology of the time.
…my point is that the “Blood and Soil” ethno-nationalism of Sinn Fein is exactly the sort of thinking developed further in “Mein Kampf”…with results that were far from predictable when that wretched tome was published in 1924…but morphed into something truly unspeakable twenty years on, not least because it took root in a place big enough to be truly dangerous…as Germany was, but Ireland (fortunately) isn’t…
…which is just as well considering how savage the Civil War they had after we left was…featuring, among other delights…executions carried out by lashing groups of men together around a bundle of hand grenades and pulling out the pin…
…and on Stalin’s purges I’m not looking to hold Eagleton responsible for those…so much as point out the offensive stupidity of conflating what Russia did (and is doing) in the Ukraine…with the British relationship with Ireland both before and after partition…
Straight line from Pearse et al to Bergen Belsen is a bit much. They’re second cousins at best. Much as I disagree with Eagleton I’m not going smear him with responsibility for Stalin’s purges because he’s a Marxist. That’s the logic of the kind of cultural commissars who are trying to pin the entire history of racism on white students at universities and that has students turning away from the humanities in droves.
Last edited 1 year ago by John Tangney
R S Foster
1 year ago
…I’m all for facing facts, so perhaps the Author might want to face these…
…at a time where upwards of 140,000 Volunteer Irishmen were fighting for Britain on the Western Front, the “Celtic Mist” Ethno-Nationalists of the IRA managed to raise no more than 5,000 for the Easter Rising…and the “blood and soil” romanticism that actuated them runs in a straight line through Facism to Bergen-Belsen…as indicated by the fact that when the whole free world was uniting against it, some Irishmen could only see “England’s Danger is Ireland’s Opportunity”…took the other side, and attempted a terrorist campaign against their nearest neighbours…
(…mind you, the forbears of the SNP were no better..!)
…they had “won” their Freedom only because the “Brutal” British Empire was unwilling to attempt more than a limited Police Action to contain them…where we could have sailed the Grand Fleet round their coast, flattened everything up to twenty miles inland, and then used the first “Combined-Arms” Army in History (with tanks, attack aircraft and bombers working in concert)…to finish off the survivors…
…which makes the comparison with the Ukraine offensively egregious, in light of Stalin’s “Holodomor”…conducted little more than a decade later, bringing a recalcitrant province to heel by a mixture of violence and starvation, and cold…just as his successors are seeking to do now…
…like it or not, the British Army were called on in 1968 to protect the Catholic Community…giving the IRA an opportunity to attack both them and the Unionist Majority in a (partly-successful) effort to turn a hotly-contested Civil Rights campaign into an actual Civil War, with no thought to possible casualties on both sides, civilian or otherwise…
…and, moving from fact to opinion…
…the Irish State is able to maintain it’s self-righteous neutrality…coupled with a foreign policy of being as obnoxious as possible to the neighbours…only because the “hateful” British allowed immense numbers of Irish Men and Women to live and work here freely, as though they were British…whilst sending their remittances home…not necessary now only because Ireland has become a tax haven for international capital, and a net recipient of EU largesse
…and their safety is guaranteed only because they know that we will not only not attack them…but also protect their Air and Sea space for them, as a part of our obligations to NATO…
…and if you doubt that, just imagine how very different Ireland would be if, since the end of the Great War…they had needed to defend themselves at the same cost and with the same vigour as the Finns have against their previous Imperial overlords…Finland has around six million people and spends nearly 6 Billion Euros on defence…Ireland has over five million and spends less than 1 Billion…so by that reckoning they would need to increase that budget five-fold…were we anything like the brutal savages he clearly sees us as…
Last edited 1 year ago by R S Foster
Man In A Shed
1 year ago
What happened to the protestant population in the free state ? Effectively it was ethnically cleansed.
what utter rubbish- there are many protestants in Ireland including big ” Anglo” landowners: don’t confuse Church of Ireland with Presbyterians, always assuming you actually know the difference.
is not ignorance the bedrock of this entire debate? The Church of Ireland does not have any ” borders”, neither does the Catholic church! No one comments as to how ( not least in Cork) there are many protestants in The Republic, and no Catholic – Protestant issues? because they are not Presbyterian quasi Scotch Orangemen?!!!
is not ignorance the bedrock of this entire debate? The Church of Ireland does not have any ” borders”, neither does the Catholic church! No one comments as to how ( not least in Cork) there are many protestants in The Republic, and no Catholic – Protestant issues? because they are not Presbyterian quasi Scotch Orangemen?!!!
Rubbish. The new Irish state was poor, and economic insecurity and depression encouraged many relatively well-educated and mobile Protestants to up sticks and go. A significant contributor to this population decline can be identified with the Great War. The horrific slaughter of young Irish Protestant men in the first World War had a devastating and disproportionate impact on the male Protestant population of the South.
This was reflected in the birth rate for decades following the war. In addition, the Northern Ireland regime led by Sir James Craig enticed large numbers of Protestants, through the offer of government jobs and housing, to relocate north of the Border in an attempt to offset Catholic majorities in Border counties. Some in government service chose to leave with their families rather than enter the civil/public service of the Free State.
In addition, there was a large British military establishment in Ireland which was stood down in 1922. This group was disproportionately Protestant.
It is worth noting that two Protestants who decided to stay south subsequently became presidents of Ireland.
In short, the reasonable view of middle-class Protestants after 1922 was that the new Ireland was a place of very limited prosects, and you’d simply have a better life in Britain, or in the North.
And, consider that, while Protestantism in Ireland has been increasing since the turn of the century, Catholicism has undergone a dramatic collapse.
Overall though, modern Ireland is largely a secular country where love of money triumphs over just about anything else.
what utter rubbish- there are many protestants in Ireland including big ” Anglo” landowners: don’t confuse Church of Ireland with Presbyterians, always assuming you actually know the difference.
Rubbish. The new Irish state was poor, and economic insecurity and depression encouraged many relatively well-educated and mobile Protestants to up sticks and go. A significant contributor to this population decline can be identified with the Great War. The horrific slaughter of young Irish Protestant men in the first World War had a devastating and disproportionate impact on the male Protestant population of the South.
This was reflected in the birth rate for decades following the war. In addition, the Northern Ireland regime led by Sir James Craig enticed large numbers of Protestants, through the offer of government jobs and housing, to relocate north of the Border in an attempt to offset Catholic majorities in Border counties. Some in government service chose to leave with their families rather than enter the civil/public service of the Free State.
In addition, there was a large British military establishment in Ireland which was stood down in 1922. This group was disproportionately Protestant.
It is worth noting that two Protestants who decided to stay south subsequently became presidents of Ireland.
In short, the reasonable view of middle-class Protestants after 1922 was that the new Ireland was a place of very limited prosects, and you’d simply have a better life in Britain, or in the North.
And, consider that, while Protestantism in Ireland has been increasing since the turn of the century, Catholicism has undergone a dramatic collapse.
Overall though, modern Ireland is largely a secular country where love of money triumphs over just about anything else.
Man In A Shed
1 year ago
What happened to the protestant population in the free state ? Effectively it was ethnically cleansed.
Charlie Two
1 year ago
What a load of tripe. Eagleton should be ashamed of his desperate lack of historical knowledge. Stick to literary criticism, it takes less brain power than history and facts and all of that stuff.
Charlie Two
1 year ago
What a load of tripe. Eagleton should be ashamed of his desperate lack of historical knowledge. Stick to literary criticism, it takes less brain power than history and facts and all of that stuff.
Malcolm Knott
1 year ago
Speaking as a cynical Englishman, it seems to me that many of the problems in Ireland could be resolved if the more unruly inhabitants of that blessed Isle simply refrained from hating and killing each other.
“Relative” peace – relative to what? There is still violence and intimidation there, just at a much lower level. You just seem like a clueless gimp who want to attack the English.
One of life’s little ironies is my Catholic friends in NI, who have members in the police, have basically a ‘clear view’ front garden devoid of walls, bushes, trees etc so as to afford no cover for assassins. They also check their cars before using them EVERY time. BUT not because of the UVF et al, but because there is always one of the 57 varieties of IRA trying to murder them because they did what Sinn Fein wanted, joined the NI police.
Actually it is because the afro Caribbean street gang drug dealers , stuck at the bottom end of the supply chain, have to fight for ever smaller patches, as the supply chain and power has been taken over by mainly Albanians.
Actually it is because the afro Caribbean street gang drug dealers , stuck at the bottom end of the supply chain, have to fight for ever smaller patches, as the supply chain and power has been taken over by mainly Albanians.
“Relative” peace – relative to what? There is still violence and intimidation there, just at a much lower level. You just seem like a clueless gimp who want to attack the English.
One of life’s little ironies is my Catholic friends in NI, who have members in the police, have basically a ‘clear view’ front garden devoid of walls, bushes, trees etc so as to afford no cover for assassins. They also check their cars before using them EVERY time. BUT not because of the UVF et al, but because there is always one of the 57 varieties of IRA trying to murder them because they did what Sinn Fein wanted, joined the NI police.
Knife crime in London is rampant. To what should I put that down to? The unruly inhabitants who kill each other?
Malcolm Knott
1 year ago
Speaking as a cynical Englishman, it seems to me that many of the problems in Ireland could be resolved if the more unruly inhabitants of that blessed Isle simply refrained from hating and killing each other.
Jeff Dudgeon
1 year ago
Eagleton says mindlessly: “Northern Ireland was born of a cynical exercise in gerrymandering to ensure a permanent Protestant majority in the region.”
Every state does exactly that (except those made by God) otherwise why have nation states?
So Pakistan and Bangladesh are gerry mandered from India? Applying the same criteria to those 3 areas would result in more bloodshed than could be possible with the elimination of every living being in ALL of Ireland.
So Pakistan and Bangladesh are gerry mandered from India? Applying the same criteria to those 3 areas would result in more bloodshed than could be possible with the elimination of every living being in ALL of Ireland.
Eagleton says mindlessly: “Northern Ireland was born of a cynical exercise in gerrymandering to ensure a permanent Protestant majority in the region.”
Every state does exactly that (except those made by God) otherwise why have nation states?
Leigh Collier
1 year ago
We British have no desire whatever to own any part of Ireland. I am sure the writer of this article knows this perfectly well but chooses to suppress or ignore that truth.
Surely if the nationalists/Catholics have the right to express their identity and have institutions of government that express it, then the unionists/Protestants have the same right. The nationalists/Catholics didn’t want to be part of the UK; the unionists/Protestants didn’t want to be part of an independent Ireland. Why is the former acceptable to the writer of this article but the latter is unacceptable? That kind of prejudice is pretty ugly.
Leigh Collier
1 year ago
We British have no desire whatever to own any part of Ireland. I am sure the writer of this article knows this perfectly well but chooses to suppress or ignore that truth.
Surely if the nationalists/Catholics have the right to express their identity and have institutions of government that express it, then the unionists/Protestants have the same right. The nationalists/Catholics didn’t want to be part of the UK; the unionists/Protestants didn’t want to be part of an independent Ireland. Why is the former acceptable to the writer of this article but the latter is unacceptable? That kind of prejudice is pretty ugly.
Jacqueline Walker
1 year ago
Ha! And I thought this article was actually going to be about all the things Irish politicians and government (and some sectors of Irish society) still do brush under the carpet like proper recompense for the Magdalen Laundries or the Tuam Babies or the current homelessness issues or even, if we do want to go back to those times of 100 years ago, the Civil War (probably needs another 100 years before that can be talked about) but no. Actually though this article is the unherd equivalent of Fintan O’Toole’s weekly anti-brit rant in the Irish Times.
Some people (Fintan) carry hate around with them far too long. They dont realise how it eats away at them. They should move on and free themselves of their self imposed tyranny
Some people (Fintan) carry hate around with them far too long. They dont realise how it eats away at them. They should move on and free themselves of their self imposed tyranny
Jacqueline Walker
1 year ago
Ha! And I thought this article was actually going to be about all the things Irish politicians and government (and some sectors of Irish society) still do brush under the carpet like proper recompense for the Magdalen Laundries or the Tuam Babies or the current homelessness issues or even, if we do want to go back to those times of 100 years ago, the Civil War (probably needs another 100 years before that can be talked about) but no. Actually though this article is the unherd equivalent of Fintan O’Toole’s weekly anti-brit rant in the Irish Times.
Anna Bramwell
1 year ago
Modern historians certainly whitewash Ireland’s sympathetic relations with Nazi Germany. Like Chandra Bose, De Valera , a conservative like Peguy, found Germany’s anti Anglo Saxon dogma very appealing. Blood and Soil, what wasn’t to like.,
Anna Bramwell
1 year ago
Modern historians certainly whitewash Ireland’s sympathetic relations with Nazi Germany. Like Chandra Bose, De Valera , a conservative like Peguy, found Germany’s anti Anglo Saxon dogma very appealing. Blood and Soil, what wasn’t to like.,
Alan Robinson
1 year ago
Partion was the least bad solution to the problem of having two strongly held identities in Ireland. The real problem was that Northern Ireland was allowed to become a one party state with limited checks. It is no longer such a state.
Alan Robinson
1 year ago
Partion was the least bad solution to the problem of having two strongly held identities in Ireland. The real problem was that Northern Ireland was allowed to become a one party state with limited checks. It is no longer such a state.
Matt M
1 year ago
This man is an idiot looking for something to be angry about. The sort of deluded Englishman with romantic ideas that the IRA used to use.
Yup. Born and raised here, to parents born and raised here. He’s less ‘Irish’ than I am Scottish, having one parent and two grandparents born and raised there and having been born there myself.
I have Scottish ancestry; I’m not a Scot, and Terry Eagleton isn’t ‘Irish’. Nor does he claim to be.
Yup. Born and raised here, to parents born and raised here. He’s less ‘Irish’ than I am Scottish, having one parent and two grandparents born and raised there and having been born there myself.
I have Scottish ancestry; I’m not a Scot, and Terry Eagleton isn’t ‘Irish’. Nor does he claim to be.
This man is an idiot looking for something to be angry about. The sort of deluded Englishman with romantic ideas that the IRA used to use.
Last edited 1 year ago by Matt M
David Giles
1 year ago
The photograph of Terry Eagleton doesn’t show a young man. Instead we see a man who has walked this Earth for many years but learned nothing. Nothing that is except self-reinforced bigotry. So we end up with a writer re-writing history. Ireland just needs men like Terry Eagleton, doesn’t it.
David Giles
1 year ago
The photograph of Terry Eagleton doesn’t show a young man. Instead we see a man who has walked this Earth for many years but learned nothing. Nothing that is except self-reinforced bigotry. So we end up with a writer re-writing history. Ireland just needs men like Terry Eagleton, doesn’t it.
Phil. I have bitched and moaned many times above in the comments. But we so have to make room in Unherd for this type of crap. Thats what its all about
You dont have to read ir
You dont have to agree with it.
Phil. I have bitched and moaned many times above in the comments. But we so have to make room in Unherd for this type of crap. Thats what its all about
You dont have to read ir
You dont have to agree with it.
Phil Rees
1 year ago
This article is a disgrace to the name ‘UnHerd’.
Philip Gerrans
1 year ago
Time to sack T.E. querulous sanctimonious bore. he was an enfant terrible in english departments in 1989. surely no reason to give him a platform here
Philip Gerrans
1 year ago
Time to sack T.E. querulous sanctimonious bore. he was an enfant terrible in english departments in 1989. surely no reason to give him a platform here
Will Longfield
1 year ago
You say “The Catholic population was denied the right to share in the self-determination enjoyed by its compatriots in what was then the Irish Free State. ”
The Free State was aggressively Catholic and utterly anti-British – it all but sided with the Nazis in WW2 just to get back at the UK. The Ulster Loyalist community (Protestant and proud of their British Heritage) would have been crushed and dissolved if they had joined that United Ireland in 1922.
Allbut sided with the Nazis. They dis absolutely side with their EU paymasters over the Brexit negotiations. The same EU paymasters who refused to bail out the Irish economy in 2010 – guess which country cut the Irish a £7bn cheque?
Its the one they love to hate so much (UK). Granted it was paid back – from the legalised money laundering side of their economy.
This has been the traditional attitude of (many) Irish throughout our fractious joint history. Ireland has always been seen by European powers as a weapon to use to control England. Cromwell, for example, was brutal in Ireland, but the Irish price for supporting the (all-but) Catholic Charles I was his public submission to the Pope – exactly the position that undermined his reign on this side of the Irish Sea. As for the ‘Battle of the Boyne’, could anyone but a determined Irishman imagine that was about the future of Ireland and not England?
This has been the traditional attitude of (many) Irish throughout our fractious joint history. Ireland has always been seen by European powers as a weapon to use to control England. Cromwell, for example, was brutal in Ireland, but the Irish price for supporting the (all-but) Catholic Charles I was his public submission to the Pope – exactly the position that undermined his reign on this side of the Irish Sea. As for the ‘Battle of the Boyne’, could anyone but a determined Irishman imagine that was about the future of Ireland and not England?
Allbut sided with the Nazis. They dis absolutely side with their EU paymasters over the Brexit negotiations. The same EU paymasters who refused to bail out the Irish economy in 2010 – guess which country cut the Irish a £7bn cheque?
Its the one they love to hate so much (UK). Granted it was paid back – from the legalised money laundering side of their economy.
Will Longfield
1 year ago
You say “The Catholic population was denied the right to share in the self-determination enjoyed by its compatriots in what was then the Irish Free State. ”
The Free State was aggressively Catholic and utterly anti-British – it all but sided with the Nazis in WW2 just to get back at the UK. The Ulster Loyalist community (Protestant and proud of their British Heritage) would have been crushed and dissolved if they had joined that United Ireland in 1922.
Last edited 1 year ago by Will Longfield
Jonathan Andrews
1 year ago
Quite an unpleasant article. My father visited Dublin in the 1950s. He took a trip out somewhere on the train and on his return got talking to an attractive young woman. “He was alright” she told him, my father is Welsh and unleashed a torent of anti-english bigotry.
Welsh nationalism is pretty silly or exhibited in enthusiastic and wonderful singing of our national anthem, particularly at the rugby. Wales is a conquered nation, so too is England if you go back far enough. Some Irish people, however, are fond of wallowing in the sins and crimes committed against them. Time to move on ladies and gents, time to move on.
The Irish invited in England’s conquerors, then blamed the English ever since (I’m English of Irish parents – the best thing my parents ever did for me was to have me born English – IF there is a God, he must surely be an Englishman)
Bill you are quite correct. In fact it was King Dermott Mc (i cant remember) of Leinster (I think) who begged Henry II to help him out against other Irish Kings – he also asked the English to stay on!
Bill you are quite correct. In fact it was King Dermott Mc (i cant remember) of Leinster (I think) who begged Henry II to help him out against other Irish Kings – he also asked the English to stay on!
The Irish invited in England’s conquerors, then blamed the English ever since (I’m English of Irish parents – the best thing my parents ever did for me was to have me born English – IF there is a God, he must surely be an Englishman)
Jonathan Andrews
1 year ago
Quite an unpleasant article. My father visited Dublin in the 1950s. He took a trip out somewhere on the train and on his return got talking to an attractive young woman. “He was alright” she told him, my father is Welsh and unleashed a torent of anti-english bigotry.
Welsh nationalism is pretty silly or exhibited in enthusiastic and wonderful singing of our national anthem, particularly at the rugby. Wales is a conquered nation, so too is England if you go back far enough. Some Irish people, however, are fond of wallowing in the sins and crimes committed against them. Time to move on ladies and gents, time to move on.
John Tangney
1 year ago
Most 20th century Irish historiography was written from the perspective of postcolonials reckoning with their past. The move away from postcolonial grievance is in the interests of getting along with the Americans rather than the Brits. As Noel Ignatiev announced 25 years ago, the Irish have become white in America. So now we’re getting with the program of atonement for the original sin of whiteness as dictated by our new overseers and mediated by the ideological fashion victims running our universities.
John Tangney
1 year ago
Most 20th century Irish historiography was written from the perspective of postcolonials reckoning with their past. The move away from postcolonial grievance is in the interests of getting along with the Americans rather than the Brits. As Noel Ignatiev announced 25 years ago, the Irish have become white in America. So now we’re getting with the program of atonement for the original sin of whiteness as dictated by our new overseers and mediated by the ideological fashion victims running our universities.
James Kirk
1 year ago
I always wondered at the lines on maps, how they were decided etc and assumed it was where wars stopped. I’ve come to expand that to ‘…and were argued about for centuries afterwards.’
In UK it used be if UK was attacked everyone rolled their sleeves up to fight off the aggressor. More recently the Welsh take no responsibility for history bar mining the coal for the Imperial Fleet. The Scots were wiping their hands on cotton waste in the engine rooms of tramp steamers off Argentina – unless they were inviting Rudolph Hess over to meet the SNP.
The Irish, I blame Cromwell and the Dutch King. Nothing to do with me. My forebears were peasants or fishermen so I wash my hands of slavery too. No mea culpa here, unlike the Guardian.
Speaking of lines on maps, the border between Northern Ireland and Ireland was never properly demarcated. A commission was appointed to do the job in 1922, but gave up in 1925. The provision border remains to today – over 300 miles, there are more than 300 crossings. Some roads cross the border several times over a distance of a few miles. Instead, Ireland and the UK agreed a Common Travel Area, and then joined the EEC at the same time.
Speaking of lines on maps, the border between Northern Ireland and Ireland was never properly demarcated. A commission was appointed to do the job in 1922, but gave up in 1925. The provision border remains to today – over 300 miles, there are more than 300 crossings. Some roads cross the border several times over a distance of a few miles. Instead, Ireland and the UK agreed a Common Travel Area, and then joined the EEC at the same time.
Quite right. I too refuse to imbibe some sort of guilt trip . I simply refuse. They can all “f” off.
James Kirk
1 year ago
I always wondered at the lines on maps, how they were decided etc and assumed it was where wars stopped. I’ve come to expand that to ‘…and were argued about for centuries afterwards.’
In UK it used be if UK was attacked everyone rolled their sleeves up to fight off the aggressor. More recently the Welsh take no responsibility for history bar mining the coal for the Imperial Fleet. The Scots were wiping their hands on cotton waste in the engine rooms of tramp steamers off Argentina – unless they were inviting Rudolph Hess over to meet the SNP.
The Irish, I blame Cromwell and the Dutch King. Nothing to do with me. My forebears were peasants or fishermen so I wash my hands of slavery too. No mea culpa here, unlike the Guardian.
Richard O'Callaghan
1 year ago
I wish it were otherwise but there’s no way you get a United Ireland in 1921 without terrible bloodshed. With the benefit of hindsight it might have been better for London to throw Ulster under a bus and insist on an all-Ireland Free State but be under no illusion that it would’ve have terrible immediate consequences and could hardly be regarded as an honourable decision. I suspect it would’ve been for the best in the longterm but it would’ve required statesmanship from Dublin and a more expansive and inclusive sense of Irish national identity than has ever existed in our timeline.
Richard O'Callaghan
1 year ago
I wish it were otherwise but there’s no way you get a United Ireland in 1921 without terrible bloodshed. With the benefit of hindsight it might have been better for London to throw Ulster under a bus and insist on an all-Ireland Free State but be under no illusion that it would’ve have terrible immediate consequences and could hardly be regarded as an honourable decision. I suspect it would’ve been for the best in the longterm but it would’ve required statesmanship from Dublin and a more expansive and inclusive sense of Irish national identity than has ever existed in our timeline.
rob drummond
1 year ago
Something else The Irish have airbrushed out of history is that “The British” troops that opened fire outside the post office?
Yes they were “British” as indeed were the citizens of the whole of Ireland at that point – but those Soldiers were made up of mainly guys from Dublin. Yes: They were Irish British.
I think Netflix or someone did an excellent 6 part series on it.
Look it up.
rob drummond
1 year ago
Something else The Irish have airbrushed out of history is that “The British” troops that opened fire outside the post office?
Yes they were “British” as indeed were the citizens of the whole of Ireland at that point – but those Soldiers were made up of mainly guys from Dublin. Yes: They were Irish British.
I think Netflix or someone did an excellent 6 part series on it.
Look it up.
Dougie Undersub
1 year ago
” …an immigrant culture learns to adapt its talk and behaviour to the mentality of its hosts.”
That may have been true of the Irish community in the 1950s but, sadly, doesn’t appear to be true of all immigrant communities today.
Dougie Undersub
1 year ago
” …an immigrant culture learns to adapt its talk and behaviour to the mentality of its hosts.”
That may have been true of the Irish community in the 1950s but, sadly, doesn’t appear to be true of all immigrant communities today.
Richard Barrett
1 year ago
I am Irish, but I still have no idea what Eagleton’s point is.
Richard Barrett
1 year ago
I am Irish, but I still have no idea what Eagleton’s point is.
Hibernian Caveman
1 year ago
G.K. Chesterton, (1874 – 1936), described in Encyclopaedia Britannica as
English critic and author of verse, essays, novels, and short stories, known also for his exuberant personality and rotund figure.
was a convert to Catholicism, an anti-Imperialist, and a champion of the Irish. Nevertheless, his assessment of national character is most pertinent here.
In the great matter of the War, [George Bernard] Shaw was upon one point absolutely and admirably right. He was wrong, as I think, in lumping England along with Prussia, or pretending that the English popular indignation was all hypocrisy; but he was right in one calculation about the English character. He was right in supposing that the popular anger would pass. For the English are a moody and a fickle people; contrasted in that with the Irish, who carry constancy to the point of a mortal sin; the sin of mere hatred.
Hibernian Caveman
1 year ago
G.K. Chesterton, (1874 – 1936), described in Encyclopaedia Britannica as
English critic and author of verse, essays, novels, and short stories, known also for his exuberant personality and rotund figure.
was a convert to Catholicism, an anti-Imperialist, and a champion of the Irish. Nevertheless, his assessment of national character is most pertinent here.
In the great matter of the War, [George Bernard] Shaw was upon one point absolutely and admirably right. He was wrong, as I think, in lumping England along with Prussia, or pretending that the English popular indignation was all hypocrisy; but he was right in one calculation about the English character. He was right in supposing that the popular anger would pass. For the English are a moody and a fickle people; contrasted in that with the Irish, who carry constancy to the point of a mortal sin; the sin of mere hatred.
John Dewhirst
1 year ago
It is difficult to make a case that Britain wants the expense and hassle of Northern Ireland. Arguably the state of NI came into being because it was the easiest option, to avoid further bloodshed and the revolt of the Protestant loyalists. Yet now the easiest option would be to grant Irish nationalists the unity that they crave but of course they wouldn’t want the cost or the impact of assimilating the Ulster brethren. NI suits the south as it allows them the psychological outlet of aspiring to unity without actually having the inconvenience thereof. It’s a bit like the citizens of the GDR getting their fix of life in the west from watching the TV from the comfort of their living room. Ultimately the Irish will have to put up or shut up and that will be when they can come to terms with their history.
Excellent piece I have to say. Even with the legalised money laundering operation in The South they still cannot afford the £14bn per year English subsidy (and it is England btw – as Scotland and Wales also receive considerable cash grants)
(A tangent) The Scots constantly argue they dont get a subsidy because of “their” oil. Tax revenues from “North Sea Oil” were £1.2nn last year vs the £16bn Barnett Formula English subsidy
Excellent piece I have to say. Even with the legalised money laundering operation in The South they still cannot afford the £14bn per year English subsidy (and it is England btw – as Scotland and Wales also receive considerable cash grants)
(A tangent) The Scots constantly argue they dont get a subsidy because of “their” oil. Tax revenues from “North Sea Oil” were £1.2nn last year vs the £16bn Barnett Formula English subsidy
John Dewhirst
1 year ago
It is difficult to make a case that Britain wants the expense and hassle of Northern Ireland. Arguably the state of NI came into being because it was the easiest option, to avoid further bloodshed and the revolt of the Protestant loyalists. Yet now the easiest option would be to grant Irish nationalists the unity that they crave but of course they wouldn’t want the cost or the impact of assimilating the Ulster brethren. NI suits the south as it allows them the psychological outlet of aspiring to unity without actually having the inconvenience thereof. It’s a bit like the citizens of the GDR getting their fix of life in the west from watching the TV from the comfort of their living room. Ultimately the Irish will have to put up or shut up and that will be when they can come to terms with their history.
rob drummond
1 year ago
Inconvenient truth: the Irish forget – as this article eludes – they too were British for a very long while. There remain Irish – English – Scottish and Welsh British to this day.
The Irish were enthusiastic participants in British History as they were part of it – even tho they whitewashed it out years ago.
Your point about The British Government not letting Ireland unite is plainly daft. Are you suggesting the people of Northern Ireland should have no say in that? The 25 year old agreement you refer to provides for that.
The business about how successful The Republic is is another matter. Its built on legalised money laundering by big corporations. Its why the highly inflated “Irish GDP” has zoomed up the charts. Its not real – the real Irish economy (removing the funny money) is about 66% of the recorded figures.
rob drummond
1 year ago
Inconvenient truth: the Irish forget – as this article eludes – they too were British for a very long while. There remain Irish – English – Scottish and Welsh British to this day.
The Irish were enthusiastic participants in British History as they were part of it – even tho they whitewashed it out years ago.
Your point about The British Government not letting Ireland unite is plainly daft. Are you suggesting the people of Northern Ireland should have no say in that? The 25 year old agreement you refer to provides for that.
The business about how successful The Republic is is another matter. Its built on legalised money laundering by big corporations. Its why the highly inflated “Irish GDP” has zoomed up the charts. Its not real – the real Irish economy (removing the funny money) is about 66% of the recorded figures.
agsmith.uk
1 year ago
His argument is essentially that the Irish deserve, somehow, to govern the whole of the island. It’s no different to the Argentinian’s argument that they deserve to govern the Falkland Islands. It takes no account whatsoever of the wishes of the people who inhabit these pieces of land.
His argument is essentially that the Irish deserve, somehow, to govern the whole of the island. It’s no different to the Argentinian’s argument that they deserve to govern the Falkland Islands. It takes no account whatsoever of the wishes of the people who inhabit these pieces of land.
Jürg Gassmann
1 year ago
I’m not as down on this piece as many of commenters – the point was to show the reality of trauma, and that comes through.
The throw-away line on the parallels to the Ukraine though are revealing. It has to be borne in mind that that the current war has a long history. In 2014, Russian-speaking Ukrainians in the Donbass refused to put up with cultural oppression by the central government, but the principle was so important to the central government that an eight-year brutal civil war ensued.
If that is what the Republic of Ireland had in store for Protestants in the North, the British Government can hardly be faulted for opting for partition.
I’m not saying that would have happened, just that the parallel with the Ukraine implies that it would. In the event, of course, the reverse scenario played out, in the smaller territory of the Northern Ireland.
Jürg Gassmann
1 year ago
I’m not as down on this piece as many of commenters – the point was to show the reality of trauma, and that comes through.
The throw-away line on the parallels to the Ukraine though are revealing. It has to be borne in mind that that the current war has a long history. In 2014, Russian-speaking Ukrainians in the Donbass refused to put up with cultural oppression by the central government, but the principle was so important to the central government that an eight-year brutal civil war ensued.
If that is what the Republic of Ireland had in store for Protestants in the North, the British Government can hardly be faulted for opting for partition.
I’m not saying that would have happened, just that the parallel with the Ukraine implies that it would. In the event, of course, the reverse scenario played out, in the smaller territory of the Northern Ireland.
Rob Nock
1 year ago
I often read that NI will soon have a Catholic majority and that reunification will have to happen then.
My wonder is whether Republic of Ireland will be minority Irish by then with Catholicism a niche religion.
I often read that NI will soon have a Catholic majority and that reunification will have to happen then.
My wonder is whether Republic of Ireland will be minority Irish by then with Catholicism a niche religion.
Perry de Havilland
1 year ago
“Ukraine is fighting for that form of sovereignty at the moment”
LOL. That analogy is 180 degrees wrong. Following Terry Eagleton’s tortuous logic, the Irish Republic is actually analogous to Russia, not Ukraine, trying to occupy lands it is “entitled” to but where a majority didn’t vote the way he thinks they should have.
The way Terry Eagleton sees how things should be in Northern Ireland, is the way Putin sees how things should be in Donbas & Crimea.
No they didn’t.
In Ukrainian independence referendum in 1991 both Donbas and Luhansk voted over 80% to be part of Ukraine. Even Crimea voted 54% for that.
You are just repeating Russian propaganda lies.
So situation in Ireland is completely different to Donbas because majority, at the moment, doesn’t want to be part of Ireland.
But bigger problem is Sourhern Ireland.
Would they want responsibility for NI both economically and militarily.
UK just about remain in control during Troubles.
How would they cope with Protestant insurgency supported by English?
No they didn’t.
In Ukrainian independence referendum in 1991 both Donbas and Luhansk voted over 80% to be part of Ukraine. Even Crimea voted 54% for that.
You are just repeating Russian propaganda lies.
So situation in Ireland is completely different to Donbas because majority, at the moment, doesn’t want to be part of Ireland.
But bigger problem is Sourhern Ireland.
Would they want responsibility for NI both economically and militarily.
UK just about remain in control during Troubles.
How would they cope with Protestant insurgency supported by English?
“Ukraine is fighting for that form of sovereignty at the moment”
LOL. That analogy is 180 degrees wrong. Following Terry Eagleton’s tortuous logic, the Irish Republic is actually analogous to Russia, not Ukraine, trying to occupy lands it is “entitled” to but where a majority didn’t vote the way he thinks they should have.
The way Terry Eagleton sees how things should be in Northern Ireland, is the way Putin sees how things should be in Donbas & Crimea.
Phineas Bury
1 year ago
Oh dear tiresome SINN FEIN rubbish. Go away Eagleton idiot
Phineas Bury
1 year ago
Oh dear tiresome SINN FEIN rubbish. Go away Eagleton idiot
Gordon Arta
1 year ago
‘Yet it was always an ethno-political conflict, not a religious one.’ Abject horlicks. The strongest bonds in and between communities are bonds of family, constructed by marriage. And what is the biggest barrier to intercommunal marriage in Ireland, the Balkans, the ME, and pretty well everywhere? Religion. Cleric clinging desperately to their powerbases, terrified that kids might not be indoctrinated to be the future little customers their franchise depends on.
Gordon Arta
1 year ago
‘Yet it was always an ethno-political conflict, not a religious one.’ Abject horlicks. The strongest bonds in and between communities are bonds of family, constructed by marriage. And what is the biggest barrier to intercommunal marriage in Ireland, the Balkans, the ME, and pretty well everywhere? Religion. Cleric clinging desperately to their powerbases, terrified that kids might not be indoctrinated to be the future little customers their franchise depends on.
rob drummond
1 year ago
Irish unification cannot be determined by the good people of Northern Ireland. The people South of the border will also have to be asked – and there is the real issue.
rob drummond
1 year ago
Irish unification cannot be determined by the good people of Northern Ireland. The people South of the border will also have to be asked – and there is the real issue.
Howard Gleave
1 year ago
Britain is certainly supportive of Ukraine in resisting Russian invasion. But whether that support extends to the expulsion of Russia from Crimea and the two puppet “republics” of Luhansk and Donestk remains to be seen. In that respect Britain is not being inconsistent in supporting Ukraine while “denying” the Republic of Ireland….what exactly? The right to deny a majority in the North their desire to remain part of the UK? Others posting here have made that point very persuasively.
Howard Gleave
1 year ago
Britain is certainly supportive of Ukraine in resisting Russian invasion. But whether that support extends to the expulsion of Russia from Crimea and the two puppet “republics” of Luhansk and Donestk remains to be seen. In that respect Britain is not being inconsistent in supporting Ukraine while “denying” the Republic of Ireland….what exactly? The right to deny a majority in the North their desire to remain part of the UK? Others posting here have made that point very persuasively.
Geraldine Kelley
1 year ago
I’m wondering why my comment of 10 minutes ago is “ awaiting approval “? I don’t think I said anything that could be construed as a Hate Crime!
Geraldine Kelley
1 year ago
I’m wondering why my comment of 10 minutes ago is “ awaiting approval “? I don’t think I said anything that could be construed as a Hate Crime!
Simon Neale
1 year ago
“But they are not entitled to own any of it, any more than the Irish are entitled to own the Home Counties.”
Unless, of course, they are Irish travellers flouting planning regulations.
Simon Neale
1 year ago
“But they are not entitled to own any of it, any more than the Irish are entitled to own the Home Counties.”
Unless, of course, they are Irish travellers flouting planning regulations.
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
What! No mention of the Act of Union of 1800 when the British Government destroyed the Ascendancy* Parliament and imposed a rather benign version of direct rule?
Completely exasperated by the sheer incompetence and corruption of the Ascendancy toadies, such the ridiculously faux ‘Englishmen’, otherwise known as the Duke of Wellington and his equally absurd forebears, there was simply no other course of action open to HMG.
Such a benign version of direct rule that millions died of starvation during the Great Hunger (an Gorta Mór).
Read Trevelyan’s diaries.
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
What! No mention of the Act of Union of 1800 when the British Government destroyed the Ascendancy* Parliament and imposed a rather benign version of direct rule?
Completely exasperated by the sheer incompetence and corruption of the Ascendancy toadies, such the ridiculously faux ‘Englishmen’, otherwise known as the Duke of Wellington and his equally absurd forebears, there was simply no other course of action open to HMG.
(*Protestant.)
Louise Henson
1 year ago
Ireland is not and never was a colony. Until 1801 it had its own parliament in Dublin and when that was abolished it sent its own members to Westminster. A colony does not have democratic representation.
It was the colonists who had democratic representation, not the native Irish. One doesn’t have to agree with Eagleton to be astonished at the level of self serving cope about Britain’s discreditable record in Ireland on display in this comment section.
It was the colonists who had democratic representation, not the native Irish. One doesn’t have to agree with Eagleton to be astonished at the level of self serving cope about Britain’s discreditable record in Ireland on display in this comment section.
Louise Henson
1 year ago
Ireland is not and never was a colony. Until 1801 it had its own parliament in Dublin and when that was abolished it sent its own members to Westminster. A colony does not have democratic representation.
Martin Smith
1 year ago
Poor Terry, so repressed in his Irishness by the English that he was forced by them to inhabit one of the most privileged social elites in human history. One can hardly imagine how he might fit with the modern natives of say East Wall.
Martin Smith
1 year ago
Poor Terry, so repressed in his Irishness by the English that he was forced by them to inhabit one of the most privileged social elites in human history. One can hardly imagine how he might fit with the modern natives of say East Wall.
Christopher Peter
1 year ago
The headline of this article suggested to me that Eagleton might be about to say something original, coherent or intelligent. I mean – Ireland, commit crimes!? Surely not. But no, the “crimes” are of course those of the British – aren’t they always? – and Eagleton seems to think that the Irish need to think and talk even *more* about colonialism. Which to me is the polar opposite of the “growing up” he seems to hanker after but fails to define. Might it mean, for instance, paying for the defence of your own air space from all those fabulous tax revenues, instead of relying on the RAF?
The comparison of Ulster with Ukraine is grotesque to the point of parody. At least there was some comedy value in the offhand and apropos-of-nothing comment about some of the Irish Republic actually being north of some of Northern Ireland – oh, those silly Brits can’t even read maps! Well, a small part of England is north of a small part of Scotland – so what? As with so much of Eagleton’s ramblings, I’m unsure of precisely what point he’s trying to make here. He’s like a drunk old uncle dozing in the corner, muttering mainly deranged nonsense interspersed with the occasional offensive cliche. Perhaps he’s better just ignored.
Christopher Peter
1 year ago
The headline of this article suggested to me that Eagleton might be about to say something original, coherent or intelligent. I mean – Ireland, commit crimes!? Surely not. But no, the “crimes” are of course those of the British – aren’t they always? – and Eagleton seems to think that the Irish need to think and talk even *more* about colonialism. Which to me is the polar opposite of the “growing up” he seems to hanker after but fails to define. Might it mean, for instance, paying for the defence of your own air space from all those fabulous tax revenues, instead of relying on the RAF?
The comparison of Ulster with Ukraine is grotesque to the point of parody. At least there was some comedy value in the offhand and apropos-of-nothing comment about some of the Irish Republic actually being north of some of Northern Ireland – oh, those silly Brits can’t even read maps! Well, a small part of England is north of a small part of Scotland – so what? As with so much of Eagleton’s ramblings, I’m unsure of precisely what point he’s trying to make here. He’s like a drunk old uncle dozing in the corner, muttering mainly deranged nonsense interspersed with the occasional offensive cliche. Perhaps he’s better just ignored.
Michael Hallihane
1 year ago
Good article. Partition was the mechanism which Britain used to keep Ireland subjugated and under British hegemony. It created what Connolly predicted, a ‘carnival of reaction’ both north and south. An illiberal, reactionary regime in the south and a repressive, sectarian one in the north. That the pressure cooker would blow at some point was inevitable.
Michael Hallihane
1 year ago
Good article. Partition was the mechanism which Britain used to keep Ireland subjugated and under British hegemony. It created what Connolly predicted, a ‘carnival of reaction’ both north and south. An illiberal, reactionary regime in the south and a repressive, sectarian one in the north. That the pressure cooker would blow at some point was inevitable.
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Let us not forget that Northern Ireland gave the British Army a wonderful ‘live firing training area’ for nearly 30 years.
After the withdrawal from Aden in November 1967 there was some disquiet as to where and when the next campaign would be. There was a little trouble brewing in Oman, but something larger was required to keep the troops busy.
Then Hallelujah! Ulster kicks off in 1969!
As the TV recruitment ads used to say “ Join the British Army, see the World, meet interesting people and kill them”!
Even you, Brigadier Blimp, were not quite so crass as to blurt out the truth that the British Army used civilian targets (unarmed) for target practice in Ballymurphy and then in Derry..
I would like to seriously invite you to explain what happened in Derry on Bloody Sunday.
The Conservative Prime Minister apologised in Parliament for the killing of fourteen innocent people by the Parachute Regiment.
How could such a thing come to pass?
Another contributer to UnHerd (not you) was crass.
He asserted that every person on that Civil Rights March was a supporter of the IRA..
That was far from being the truth.
Administrative massacre has been an effective tactic used throughout the British Empire..
Ask the Indians!
If, as I believe, Bloody Sunday was an administrative massacre authorized by Ted Heath, it resulted in enormous increase in support for the Provisional IRA..
It prolonged the war by many years.
Even you, Brigadier Blimp, were not quite so crass as to blurt out the truth that the British Army used civilian targets (unarmed) for target practice in Ballymurphy and then in Derry..
I would like to seriously invite you to explain what happened in Derry on Bloody Sunday.
The Conservative Prime Minister apologised in Parliament for the killing of fourteen innocent people by the Parachute Regiment.
How could such a thing come to pass?
Another contributer to UnHerd (not you) was crass.
He asserted that every person on that Civil Rights March was a supporter of the IRA..
That was far from being the truth.
Administrative massacre has been an effective tactic used throughout the British Empire..
Ask the Indians!
If, as I believe, Bloody Sunday was an administrative massacre authorized by Ted Heath, it resulted in enormous increase in support for the Provisional IRA..
It prolonged the war by many years.
Do let me know your thoughts, Charles!
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Let us not forget that Northern Ireland gave the British Army a wonderful ‘live firing training area’ for nearly 30 years.
After the withdrawal from Aden in November 1967 there was some disquiet as to where and when the next campaign would be. There was a little trouble brewing in Oman, but something larger was required to keep the troops busy.
Then Hallelujah! Ulster kicks off in 1969!
As the TV recruitment ads used to say “ Join the British Army, see the World, meet interesting people and kill them”!
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Having read the responses to this excellent piece, the QED is there in print!!!
And I do so look forward ,to contemplating Charlie Windsor’s ears during the merry month of May’s shenanigans!!
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Having read the responses to this excellent piece, the QED is there in print!!!
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
How beautifully put! Of course Thatcher, aided and abetted by that Mr Heome Ceounties lower middle class from central casting, appeared to be in awe of the Orangemen, as she and Dennis were straight out of the same petit bourgeois tribe to whom the golf club and masonic lodge, are and equivalent of White’s and The Jockey Club to their social superiors.
How ironic was it that it took Old Etonian and ex Household Division Officers in Whitelaw and Channon to actually secretly have to go to Adams and McGuinnes to start what became the peace process…. and Thatcher made Dennis a Baronet so that her useless son could have a hereditary title!
Of course to the upper ends of British and Irish society, all of this mattered not as the bloodstock breeding industry continued, many went to Ireland hunting and fishing, and Catholic and Protestant Officers in Guards and Cavalry regiments commanded and trained happy soldiers from both sides of the divide.
Sadly neither James Chichester-Clark (Eton & Irish Guards), Terence O’Neill, (Eton & Irish Guards) or Basil Brooke (Winchester & Royal Fusiliers, & later 10 Hussars) did any better.
The prod bigotry on this medium just says it all! As I have said before I’m staggered as to how many people do not know the difference between The Chuch of Ireland, which has no borders, and the presbyterian churches of varied hue?
The prod bigotry on this medium just says it all! As I have said before I’m staggered as to how many people do not know the difference between The Chuch of Ireland, which has no borders, and the presbyterian churches of varied hue?
Sadly neither James Chichester-Clark (Eton & Irish Guards), Terence O’Neill, (Eton & Irish Guards) or Basil Brooke (Winchester & Royal Fusiliers, & later 10 Hussars) did any better.
Ahhh Success! At least I’ve succeeded in winding up 18 settee leounge sitters!
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
How beautifully put! Of course Thatcher, aided and abetted by that Mr Heome Ceounties lower middle class from central casting, appeared to be in awe of the Orangemen, as she and Dennis were straight out of the same petit bourgeois tribe to whom the golf club and masonic lodge, are and equivalent of White’s and The Jockey Club to their social superiors.
How ironic was it that it took Old Etonian and ex Household Division Officers in Whitelaw and Channon to actually secretly have to go to Adams and McGuinnes to start what became the peace process…. and Thatcher made Dennis a Baronet so that her useless son could have a hereditary title!
Of course to the upper ends of British and Irish society, all of this mattered not as the bloodstock breeding industry continued, many went to Ireland hunting and fishing, and Catholic and Protestant Officers in Guards and Cavalry regiments commanded and trained happy soldiers from both sides of the divide.
Partition was made inevitable by the Sinn Fein victory in Ireland in the Westminster general election of 1918. Sinn Fein swept to 70 of the 75 seats in what became the Irish Free State, but won just 3 of the 30 in what became Northern Ireland, and that only because of a pact with the more moderate Home Rulers. In constituencies in the North contested by both parties, the Home Rulers beat Sinn Fein. It is debatable whether Sinn Fein won a mandate in 1918 for the campaign of violence they subsequently launched, but they certainly had no mandate of any sort in Northern Ireland. They still don’t. No British government was going to hand one million Ulster Unionists over to the tender mercies of a movement which just a few years earlier, at the height of the Great War, had boasted of the support from “our gallant allies in Europe” for their violent rebellion even while tens of thousands of Irish troops were fighting and dying on the Western Front. As it happened, the Protestant ex-Unionist population of the South fell precipitously after partition, while, funnily enough, the population of oppressed Catholics in the North actually rose. To speak of anyone – Britain or Ireland – “owning” Northern Ireland without reference to the views of the people who live there is a very colonial mindset.
An excellent comment – what Eagleton is advocating is the annexation of Northern Ireland without reference to the views of those who live there, on the grounds that the current government in Dublin has an inherent right to the whole of the island of Ireland. Based on what, exactly? I don’t think they would agree – indeed it’s not at all clear that Dublin really wants NI, as Ulster Unionism would then become their problem rather than London’s to deal with.
Certainly the Northern Irish political system was rigged to deny Catholics full Civil Rights until the 1970s, but since then they have had them, and as you point out the population has risen in that time.
The really shameful thing about the modern British attitude to NI is how little most English, Welsh and even Scots seem to care about it, and how ignorant they are of its politics. That is probably the greatest threat to the Union, rather than revanchism bred in Dublin.
And the comparison with Ukraine is utterly grotesque. Apart from extreme (and usually violent) republicans, nobody disputes that NI is part of the Union under international law unless and until a border poll is held with a majority for unification with the Irish Republic.
Eagleton is a great example of the level of deludedness that is often found in the upper echelons of academia. Those who inhabit his world are far removed from the reality that the rest of us live in, and fundamentally believe that spending decades living in their elite bubble endows them with the right to dictate what is best for the little people, even when it is obvious to everyone outside that bubble that they have no idea what they are talking about.
So well expressed, deserves more than the one uptick i can give it.
top day
I managed two.
top day
I managed two.
Eagleton’s article can be succinctly described as an almost compete load of claptrap. He sounds like an English equivalent of the Irish-Americans who think nothing has changed since 1916
Eagleton “English”? Speaking as an Englishman I can’t possibly accept that. I’m not sure that even he asserts it – does he?
When I heard him lecture in the early 1980s, it never occurred to me that he was Irish. It came as a surprise when he started banging on about Ireland after his retirement from academe
When I heard him lecture in the early 1980s, it never occurred to me that he was Irish. It came as a surprise when he started banging on about Ireland after his retirement from academe
Eagleton “English”? Speaking as an Englishman I can’t possibly accept that. I’m not sure that even he asserts it – does he?
Well expressed!
So True.
So ‘otherworldly’ they become useless in this one.
So well expressed, deserves more than the one uptick i can give it.
Eagleton’s article can be succinctly described as an almost compete load of claptrap. He sounds like an English equivalent of the Irish-Americans who think nothing has changed since 1916
Well expressed!
So True.
So ‘otherworldly’ they become useless in this one.
In his comparison with Ukraine the author loses the plot.
As with Joe “I’m Irish” Biden, there are none so patriotic as the decedents of emigrants who have no intention of ever returning to live there.
Patriotic? Oh. I don’t know about that. A healthy dose of affection and strange loyalty. Well, can you blame them?
We grew up hearing stories about the filth and muck and degradation of the famine and then the troubles…then they ran to a country where they were indentured servants and viewed with suspicion and hate. But we also grew up with a healthy dose of romanticism about the old country. About all the old countries, actually. Ask an Italian American what they think about Italy. Or a Polish American about Poland.
Of course we would never return to live there, lol. This, per our ancestral decision’s, is our home. Don’t try to understand us. You can’t. You don’t understand what it is like to sometimes feel, as second or third generation Americans, like you have a foot in two countries. And not really a part of either. Only now are there testaments to that being written after having been told for years, “You’re an American now, that’s all that matters,” while still experiencing the culture of another country in your home.
Hmmm. I was born in Cork, raised in England by a Mum who always called Ireland “Home”, I now live in America. After 34 years (some of it spent living in the Middle East to be honest) in 2022 I became a U.S. citizen. However, I still hold an Irish passport. I don’t have any problem calling America home, while considering myself extremely lucky to divide my loyalties and affections between all three places. I am thrice blessed.
Hmmm. I was born in Cork, raised in England by a Mum who always called Ireland “Home”, I now live in America. After 34 years (some of it spent living in the Middle East to be honest) in 2022 I became a U.S. citizen. However, I still hold an Irish passport. I don’t have any problem calling America home, while considering myself extremely lucky to divide my loyalties and affections between all three places. I am thrice blessed.
Patriotic? Oh. I don’t know about that. A healthy dose of affection and strange loyalty. Well, can you blame them?
We grew up hearing stories about the filth and muck and degradation of the famine and then the troubles…then they ran to a country where they were indentured servants and viewed with suspicion and hate. But we also grew up with a healthy dose of romanticism about the old country. About all the old countries, actually. Ask an Italian American what they think about Italy. Or a Polish American about Poland.
Of course we would never return to live there, lol. This, per our ancestral decision’s, is our home. Don’t try to understand us. You can’t. You don’t understand what it is like to sometimes feel, as second or third generation Americans, like you have a foot in two countries. And not really a part of either. Only now are there testaments to that being written after having been told for years, “You’re an American now, that’s all that matters,” while still experiencing the culture of another country in your home.
A better comparison for the author might be Serbian claims to Kosovo
Eagleton is a great example of the level of deludedness that is often found in the upper echelons of academia. Those who inhabit his world are far removed from the reality that the rest of us live in, and fundamentally believe that spending decades living in their elite bubble endows them with the right to dictate what is best for the little people, even when it is obvious to everyone outside that bubble that they have no idea what they are talking about.
In his comparison with Ukraine the author loses the plot.
As with Joe “I’m Irish” Biden, there are none so patriotic as the decedents of emigrants who have no intention of ever returning to live there.
A better comparison for the author might be Serbian claims to Kosovo
This is Tosh! As an individual of Anglo-Irish background having lived in both the UK and now in Ireland I cannot relate to what Eagleton outlines here. The Irish have no qualms about confronting their past and indeed sporting it as a badge of honour. Simply because those south of the border don’t wish to adopt a confrontational approach does not mean the basic sentiments are not shared. However whilst recording history and commemorating it they see the benefit in not framing their present and future outlook solely through that optic. They know only too well the cost of their struggles and the poisonous nature of internecine conflict. I’d suggest Eagleton visits Rwanda and to see a similar approach in action. And should Eagleton wish to understand why Protestant numbers fell in the South he should look no further than the discrimination that was practiced on them post partition, but that would be to fall into his trap. The same trap that Mary Lou McDonald incessantly cranks out. The battle is done, natural birth rates will ensure Ireland is ultimately united. The question is will the South want to pick up the bill and take charge of managing those enmities in the North which have decades to run? Like most ex-pats or descendants thereof residing in the UK for a long period, my own family included, Eagleton’s grasp of this country is outdated and ill-informed.
Nonsense – partition was made inevitable by Unionist resistance. In 1912, the UK govt published a home rule bill for Ireland. In response, Ulster’s Unionists signed the Ulster Covenant, established a terrorist organisation, the UVF, to resist the UK parliament, and smuggled in 25,000 rifles and between 3 and 5 million rounds of ammunition from Germany to Larne. In the subsequent settlement after the Anglo-Irish war, the British govt excluded the northern counties and partitioned the country. Had it not been for the justifiable concern about Unionist terrorism in the NE of the island, the English would have been happy enough to grant dominion status to the entire island. Partition was seen as a temporary fix, and for the next 50 years, London happily washed its hands of the place.
Considering the thousands killed in the 1916 Rising, War of Independence and Civil War, all to achieve something little different from the Home Rule parliament already enacted in 1914, it was and is rather rich for Irish Republicans to complain about the threat of Unionist terrorism. Irish Republicans didn’t want dominion status – then as now they weren’t willing to make the concessions necessary to avoid partition.
You had better check your victim count.
There were 429 killed in the 2016 uprising, of which 116 were British military personnel, and 3 were policemen and 310.
If you are going to take people to task, you could at least bother to read what they wrote. Stephen Walsh rather clearly mentioned the Anglo Irish War and the Irish Civil War, which you curiously totally ignore.
If you are going to take people to task, you could at least bother to read what they wrote. Stephen Walsh rather clearly mentioned the Anglo Irish War and the Irish Civil War, which you curiously totally ignore.
You had better check your victim count.
There were 429 killed in the 2016 uprising, of which 116 were British military personnel, and 3 were policemen and 310.
You get downvoted for being historically accurate. Curious
In other words the Northern Ireland Protestants did not want to be forced into a Catholic dominated state. You might not agree with their position, but there was a political chasm between North and South.
The Irish Free State, with far less military and economic resources than Britain, would have had a huge challenge on its hands not only fighting a civil war with Republicans but another battle with Northern secessionists.
It is really difficult to see that would have been a better outcome than the messy one that prevailed and pretty much kept the peace for several decades.
Considering the thousands killed in the 1916 Rising, War of Independence and Civil War, all to achieve something little different from the Home Rule parliament already enacted in 1914, it was and is rather rich for Irish Republicans to complain about the threat of Unionist terrorism. Irish Republicans didn’t want dominion status – then as now they weren’t willing to make the concessions necessary to avoid partition.
You get downvoted for being historically accurate. Curious
In other words the Northern Ireland Protestants did not want to be forced into a Catholic dominated state. You might not agree with their position, but there was a political chasm between North and South.
The Irish Free State, with far less military and economic resources than Britain, would have had a huge challenge on its hands not only fighting a civil war with Republicans but another battle with Northern secessionists.
It is really difficult to see that would have been a better outcome than the messy one that prevailed and pretty much kept the peace for several decades.
Since NI didn’t exist (and wasn’t even conceived of) in 1918, that a majority there went to Unionists is beside the point. In greater Ulster, arguably the appropriate demarcation after Ireland itself, the split was 50: 50. But of course that wouldn’t suit – hence the gerrymandered state. Inconvenient perhaps but true.
There was a Unionist majority in the nine counties of Ulster which would probably have endured until the 1980s. But it would have been harsh to force the overwhelmingly Nationalist counties of Cavan, Monaghan and Donegal to remain in the UK against the wishes of the great majority of the people there. Provinces are notional collections of counties with no legal standing. The administrative unit was the county, and of the eight counties and county boroughs in what shortly became Northern Ireland, five had a large Unionist majority and three were evenly split (no clear majority for leaving the UK). All the counties which had a large majority for leaving the UK did so – those where there was no clear majority for doing so became Northern Ireland. Special pleading about gerrymandering does not address the reality that many people, and the majority of people in the north east of Ireland, did and do not want to leave the UK, partly because of very valid concerns of how they would be treated in a United Ireland. It would be better if Irish Nationalists respected and addressed these concerns, rather than sneering at them, and blaming Perfidious Albion for it all.
So concern for how the ‘majority’ of people in the North East enclave might have been treated in a United Ireland (first President a Protestant) does not extend to the actual treatment of the nationalist and indigenous minority that ensued for fifty years in that NE space.
You are conflating two different issues – partition, and the treatment of Catholics in Northern Ireland. Eagleton states “When Ireland cast off British rule in 1921, it had the same right as any other state to sovereignty over the whole of its territory.” This is garbage. Separately, the “Protestant Parliament for a Protestant People” was the tragic result of the Government of Ireland Act 1920, which should never have been enacted. There should have been continued direct rule over Northern Ireland, as there had been from 1801 to 1920. But the only Irish MPs left in Westminster to oppose it were the 6 Nationalists who had survived the 1918 election which had made partition of some sort inevitable. The Irish Presidency has no real power and was secured by two Protestants (one of whom was the son of English and American parents rather than being an Irish Protestant himself) by repudiating the political identity and beliefs of the vast majority of Irish Protestants at Partition. None of the senior Irish ministerial positions were ever held by Protestants after 1932 (other than Finance briefly from 1954 – 57).
Well argued. These are “natural boundary” fallacies, as for example believed in and fought for in decades of bloody wars by Louis IV.
There never HAD been a single unified Irish state separate from the English crown in the whole history of the island.
Well argued. These are “natural boundary” fallacies, as for example believed in and fought for in decades of bloody wars by Louis IV.
There never HAD been a single unified Irish state separate from the English crown in the whole history of the island.
You are conflating two different issues – partition, and the treatment of Catholics in Northern Ireland. Eagleton states “When Ireland cast off British rule in 1921, it had the same right as any other state to sovereignty over the whole of its territory.” This is garbage. Separately, the “Protestant Parliament for a Protestant People” was the tragic result of the Government of Ireland Act 1920, which should never have been enacted. There should have been continued direct rule over Northern Ireland, as there had been from 1801 to 1920. But the only Irish MPs left in Westminster to oppose it were the 6 Nationalists who had survived the 1918 election which had made partition of some sort inevitable. The Irish Presidency has no real power and was secured by two Protestants (one of whom was the son of English and American parents rather than being an Irish Protestant himself) by repudiating the political identity and beliefs of the vast majority of Irish Protestants at Partition. None of the senior Irish ministerial positions were ever held by Protestants after 1932 (other than Finance briefly from 1954 – 57).
So concern for how the ‘majority’ of people in the North East enclave might have been treated in a United Ireland (first President a Protestant) does not extend to the actual treatment of the nationalist and indigenous minority that ensued for fifty years in that NE space.
Almost any conceivable new state is “gerrymandered” by that definition. India and Pakistan? It was a very unsatisfactory solution but probably better than the decades long insurrection that would otherwise have occurred.
There was a Unionist majority in the nine counties of Ulster which would probably have endured until the 1980s. But it would have been harsh to force the overwhelmingly Nationalist counties of Cavan, Monaghan and Donegal to remain in the UK against the wishes of the great majority of the people there. Provinces are notional collections of counties with no legal standing. The administrative unit was the county, and of the eight counties and county boroughs in what shortly became Northern Ireland, five had a large Unionist majority and three were evenly split (no clear majority for leaving the UK). All the counties which had a large majority for leaving the UK did so – those where there was no clear majority for doing so became Northern Ireland. Special pleading about gerrymandering does not address the reality that many people, and the majority of people in the north east of Ireland, did and do not want to leave the UK, partly because of very valid concerns of how they would be treated in a United Ireland. It would be better if Irish Nationalists respected and addressed these concerns, rather than sneering at them, and blaming Perfidious Albion for it all.
Almost any conceivable new state is “gerrymandered” by that definition. India and Pakistan? It was a very unsatisfactory solution but probably better than the decades long insurrection that would otherwise have occurred.
On the 1st July, 1916, the 36th (Ulster) Division made the necessary sacrifice on the first day of the infamous ‘Battle of the Somme’.
By nightfall they had suffered 5,000 casualties, one third of their original strength.
Thus ‘they’ can be forgiven anything!
See my book ‘Buried Lives. The Protestants of Southern Ireland. Between 1911 and 1926 the Protestant population of the Free State (26 counties0 declined by over a third. Then between 1926 ans 1971 the church of Ireland population declined by 40% when the Catholic numbers increaased. Colonialism? Ireland was not a colony any more than Britain. The Normans conquered both and in the case of Ireland, were invited to invade by an Irish chieftain.Irish men and women played a big role in building a British empire. Yes the comparison to Ukraine is grotesque. A country fightin against a feascit invasion. NI is part of a benign democracy enjoying heavy subsidies.
As you say the Protestant ex-Unionist population of the South fell precipitously after partition. But to be more accurate they were ethnically cleansed. https://www.historyireland.com/sectarianism-and-ethnic-cleansing/
Of course this is an unacceptable truth for Irish Catholics since it threatens their status as professional victims, a class to which the author clearly belongs
As to the authors statement “As British Catholics, being a minority, can understand something of the problems of their co-religionists in Derry or Newry”, what a load of cobblers I was born to Irish grandparents and was at school primary and secondary schools (but not a posh grammar school) in the 70s when the IRA was in full swing.
As I recall every last proper English person behaved with utmost decency and never did I hear anything directed at us for being Irish Catholics but there was more that a small amount of pro-IRA sentiment amongst my classmates, presumably passed down by the parents. I remember wondering why are these people in the country
I am so ashamed that I have Irish ancestry and I loath plastic paddies
An excellent comment – what Eagleton is advocating is the annexation of Northern Ireland without reference to the views of those who live there, on the grounds that the current government in Dublin has an inherent right to the whole of the island of Ireland. Based on what, exactly? I don’t think they would agree – indeed it’s not at all clear that Dublin really wants NI, as Ulster Unionism would then become their problem rather than London’s to deal with.
Certainly the Northern Irish political system was rigged to deny Catholics full Civil Rights until the 1970s, but since then they have had them, and as you point out the population has risen in that time.
The really shameful thing about the modern British attitude to NI is how little most English, Welsh and even Scots seem to care about it, and how ignorant they are of its politics. That is probably the greatest threat to the Union, rather than revanchism bred in Dublin.
And the comparison with Ukraine is utterly grotesque. Apart from extreme (and usually violent) republicans, nobody disputes that NI is part of the Union under international law unless and until a border poll is held with a majority for unification with the Irish Republic.
This is Tosh! As an individual of Anglo-Irish background having lived in both the UK and now in Ireland I cannot relate to what Eagleton outlines here. The Irish have no qualms about confronting their past and indeed sporting it as a badge of honour. Simply because those south of the border don’t wish to adopt a confrontational approach does not mean the basic sentiments are not shared. However whilst recording history and commemorating it they see the benefit in not framing their present and future outlook solely through that optic. They know only too well the cost of their struggles and the poisonous nature of internecine conflict. I’d suggest Eagleton visits Rwanda and to see a similar approach in action. And should Eagleton wish to understand why Protestant numbers fell in the South he should look no further than the discrimination that was practiced on them post partition, but that would be to fall into his trap. The same trap that Mary Lou McDonald incessantly cranks out. The battle is done, natural birth rates will ensure Ireland is ultimately united. The question is will the South want to pick up the bill and take charge of managing those enmities in the North which have decades to run? Like most ex-pats or descendants thereof residing in the UK for a long period, my own family included, Eagleton’s grasp of this country is outdated and ill-informed.
Nonsense – partition was made inevitable by Unionist resistance. In 1912, the UK govt published a home rule bill for Ireland. In response, Ulster’s Unionists signed the Ulster Covenant, established a terrorist organisation, the UVF, to resist the UK parliament, and smuggled in 25,000 rifles and between 3 and 5 million rounds of ammunition from Germany to Larne. In the subsequent settlement after the Anglo-Irish war, the British govt excluded the northern counties and partitioned the country. Had it not been for the justifiable concern about Unionist terrorism in the NE of the island, the English would have been happy enough to grant dominion status to the entire island. Partition was seen as a temporary fix, and for the next 50 years, London happily washed its hands of the place.
Since NI didn’t exist (and wasn’t even conceived of) in 1918, that a majority there went to Unionists is beside the point. In greater Ulster, arguably the appropriate demarcation after Ireland itself, the split was 50: 50. But of course that wouldn’t suit – hence the gerrymandered state. Inconvenient perhaps but true.
On the 1st July, 1916, the 36th (Ulster) Division made the necessary sacrifice on the first day of the infamous ‘Battle of the Somme’.
By nightfall they had suffered 5,000 casualties, one third of their original strength.
Thus ‘they’ can be forgiven anything!
See my book ‘Buried Lives. The Protestants of Southern Ireland. Between 1911 and 1926 the Protestant population of the Free State (26 counties0 declined by over a third. Then between 1926 ans 1971 the church of Ireland population declined by 40% when the Catholic numbers increaased. Colonialism? Ireland was not a colony any more than Britain. The Normans conquered both and in the case of Ireland, were invited to invade by an Irish chieftain.Irish men and women played a big role in building a British empire. Yes the comparison to Ukraine is grotesque. A country fightin against a feascit invasion. NI is part of a benign democracy enjoying heavy subsidies.
As you say the Protestant ex-Unionist population of the South fell precipitously after partition. But to be more accurate they were ethnically cleansed. https://www.historyireland.com/sectarianism-and-ethnic-cleansing/
Of course this is an unacceptable truth for Irish Catholics since it threatens their status as professional victims, a class to which the author clearly belongs
As to the authors statement “As British Catholics, being a minority, can understand something of the problems of their co-religionists in Derry or Newry”, what a load of cobblers I was born to Irish grandparents and was at school primary and secondary schools (but not a posh grammar school) in the 70s when the IRA was in full swing.
As I recall every last proper English person behaved with utmost decency and never did I hear anything directed at us for being Irish Catholics but there was more that a small amount of pro-IRA sentiment amongst my classmates, presumably passed down by the parents. I remember wondering why are these people in the country
I am so ashamed that I have Irish ancestry and I loath plastic paddies
Partition was made inevitable by the Sinn Fein victory in Ireland in the Westminster general election of 1918. Sinn Fein swept to 70 of the 75 seats in what became the Irish Free State, but won just 3 of the 30 in what became Northern Ireland, and that only because of a pact with the more moderate Home Rulers. In constituencies in the North contested by both parties, the Home Rulers beat Sinn Fein. It is debatable whether Sinn Fein won a mandate in 1918 for the campaign of violence they subsequently launched, but they certainly had no mandate of any sort in Northern Ireland. They still don’t. No British government was going to hand one million Ulster Unionists over to the tender mercies of a movement which just a few years earlier, at the height of the Great War, had boasted of the support from “our gallant allies in Europe” for their violent rebellion even while tens of thousands of Irish troops were fighting and dying on the Western Front. As it happened, the Protestant ex-Unionist population of the South fell precipitously after partition, while, funnily enough, the population of oppressed Catholics in the North actually rose. To speak of anyone – Britain or Ireland – “owning” Northern Ireland without reference to the views of the people who live there is a very colonial mindset.
In an article dripping with sectarian us versus them, the author writes “the standard English line on the question — that there were two warring sectarian communities in the North, each as bigoted and blood-stained as the other, and the role of the British government was to mediate between them. When in doubt, head for the middle ground. It’s hard to see how this very English even-handedness applies to women versus rapists”. Thereby comparing the morality of one side to rapists. This isn’t an article or an essay, it is the unhinged rantings of a racist.
It’s not for me to suggest the author has issues which he is projecting on to Ireland’s past, but the Ireland I know isn’t recognisable here. For example, “sweeping a history of famine and enforced mass emigration under the carpet”? EPIC is one of the most popular museums in Dublin, lavishly funded and winner of Europe’s Leading Tourist Attraction award and deals exclusively with the story of… Irish emigration. There are none so blind as those twisted by secondhand sectarianism.
The enormous demographic change now occurring across Ireland is bringing new people with their own stories, religion and different priorities. The Ireland and the Irish identity in the author’s head is being replaced. Ireland will no doubt be united but it won’t be a union of the Irish for the [Catholic] Irish. It will be a multi ethnic Irish minority globalised economic unit with only performative ritualistic Irish corporate branding. The stories of Cromwell that are as alive in the writer’s imagination as if they happened yesterday will become as politically relevant as the story of the vikings arriving at the black pool – Dubh Linn – in the 9th century.
That’s exactly what I got out of it.
Mr Eagleton’s problem here is that he is third – generation Irish- English and, like many I have encountered in my 55 years in England, he has a distorted and romanticised view of Ireland. Like the bizarre Americans, who tip up to find the ancestral cottage and dab their eyes over Cathleen Ni Houlihan, he is embarrassingly unaware of current reality and of historical fact. No mention here of the dreadful, oppressive and fascistic reign of Mr De Valera and his successors, which drove hundreds of thousands out of Ireland- up in Donegal and in the West of Ireland, electricity and piped water were still unavailable to many rural households in the 1990s, while the Catholic Church was synonymous with the state in coercive and repressive control of many aspects of social life.
I understand his point about feelings of alienation, but most of this essay is a word- salad of Marxist wishful thinking.
You obviously have a distorted view of what constitutes a Marxist. As it happens this Marxist completely agrees with your comment – except of course, the last sentence.
You obviously have a distorted view of what constitutes a Marxist. As it happens this Marxist completely agrees with your comment – except of course, the last sentence.
That’s exactly what I got out of it.
Mr Eagleton’s problem here is that he is third – generation Irish- English and, like many I have encountered in my 55 years in England, he has a distorted and romanticised view of Ireland. Like the bizarre Americans, who tip up to find the ancestral cottage and dab their eyes over Cathleen Ni Houlihan, he is embarrassingly unaware of current reality and of historical fact. No mention here of the dreadful, oppressive and fascistic reign of Mr De Valera and his successors, which drove hundreds of thousands out of Ireland- up in Donegal and in the West of Ireland, electricity and piped water were still unavailable to many rural households in the 1990s, while the Catholic Church was synonymous with the state in coercive and repressive control of many aspects of social life.
I understand his point about feelings of alienation, but most of this essay is a word- salad of Marxist wishful thinking.
In an article dripping with sectarian us versus them, the author writes “the standard English line on the question — that there were two warring sectarian communities in the North, each as bigoted and blood-stained as the other, and the role of the British government was to mediate between them. When in doubt, head for the middle ground. It’s hard to see how this very English even-handedness applies to women versus rapists”. Thereby comparing the morality of one side to rapists. This isn’t an article or an essay, it is the unhinged rantings of a racist.
It’s not for me to suggest the author has issues which he is projecting on to Ireland’s past, but the Ireland I know isn’t recognisable here. For example, “sweeping a history of famine and enforced mass emigration under the carpet”? EPIC is one of the most popular museums in Dublin, lavishly funded and winner of Europe’s Leading Tourist Attraction award and deals exclusively with the story of… Irish emigration. There are none so blind as those twisted by secondhand sectarianism.
The enormous demographic change now occurring across Ireland is bringing new people with their own stories, religion and different priorities. The Ireland and the Irish identity in the author’s head is being replaced. Ireland will no doubt be united but it won’t be a union of the Irish for the [Catholic] Irish. It will be a multi ethnic Irish minority globalised economic unit with only performative ritualistic Irish corporate branding. The stories of Cromwell that are as alive in the writer’s imagination as if they happened yesterday will become as politically relevant as the story of the vikings arriving at the black pool – Dubh Linn – in the 9th century.
The Irish Republic has no more inherent right over Irish-speakers than Germany had over German-speakers in the Soviet Union. This article is a bizarre defence of colonialist irredentism dressed up in liberal sheep’s clothing.
Exactly. In truth the Irish have not generally been exceptional reticent in nursing their grievances and, even within Europe in the last 150 years, the suffering they endured from colonial powers compared to that endured by the peoples of for example Poland, Romania, the Baltic states or Ukraine was modest indeed. A fifth of all the people in Poland in 1939 were killed during the subsequent War, occupation, Holocaust and deportations. And we can see in Ukraine today where such irredentist territorial claims can lead.
Second that. There is a tendency of overseas Irish (especially “Irish” Americans) to conflate to Shoah-proportions the sufferings of the Ireland in the 19th Century and to romanticize the ghastly Irish Civil war and the IRA Campaigns in the late 20th Century.
Second that. There is a tendency of overseas Irish (especially “Irish” Americans) to conflate to Shoah-proportions the sufferings of the Ireland in the 19th Century and to romanticize the ghastly Irish Civil war and the IRA Campaigns in the late 20th Century.
Exactly. In truth the Irish have not generally been exceptional reticent in nursing their grievances and, even within Europe in the last 150 years, the suffering they endured from colonial powers compared to that endured by the peoples of for example Poland, Romania, the Baltic states or Ukraine was modest indeed. A fifth of all the people in Poland in 1939 were killed during the subsequent War, occupation, Holocaust and deportations. And we can see in Ukraine today where such irredentist territorial claims can lead.
The Irish Republic has no more inherent right over Irish-speakers than Germany had over German-speakers in the Soviet Union. This article is a bizarre defence of colonialist irredentism dressed up in liberal sheep’s clothing.
Northern Irish person here. Consumed this ‘article’ with the usual feelings of despair at the pretty standard inaccurate ravings of a plastic paddy tankie.
Came to the comments and was pleasantly surprised at the level of insight here. Good to see the majority of commenters not taken in by the usual propaganda we are exposed to over and over – the ‘unherd’ in this case was not the writer but the commenters – well done all.
Why don’t you give them a pat in the head while you’re at it?
The demography of the Unherd readers is in stark display here, and – with some notable exceptions – their ‘British’ view of Ireland awash with stereotyping, as well as bland – and not so bland – generalisations. The subject is too large to go into in any detail but please bear in mind that Ireland was run like a colony and its partial independence (it didn’t emerge from an Empire) in 1922 was just that.
As for the violence, let’s not forget that the British army, as a reaction to the whole of Ireland being granted limited Home Rule, threatened a mutiny in 1914, and, around the same time, the importation of large quantities of ammunition by the loyalists. From where, you ask – from the German Empire!
The only stereotyping and bland generalisations I can see are from you and Mr Eagleton.
https://ayenaw.com/2021/04/19/historyofviolence/
Psst, wanna buy a bridge?
Psst, wanna buy a bridge?
https://ayenaw.com/2021/04/19/historyofviolence/
Does any of this really matter when the goal of the globalists is to make every country in the world 50% (used to be 10%) African?
“British army, as a reaction to the whole of Ireland being granted limited Home Rule, threatened a mutiny in 1914”.
No. Only the 3rd Cavalry Brigade in fact! And then mainly the Officers of the 5th* & 16 Lancers, plus the Brigade Commander.
(* Had been disbanded in the 1790’s for a similar act of indiscipline, but were later reinstated.)
Okay, Charlie Asterisk, you have supplied additional information which is of no use whatsoever – unless, that is, you are attempting to muddy the picture and distract from the realpolitik of British rule in Ireland.
Why is factual information correcting your inaccuracy of no use ? To have a proper debate facts, not feelings, are essential.
Why is factual information correcting your inaccuracy of no use ? To have a proper debate facts, not feelings, are essential.
Ease up on the gin there Lord Stanhope
Okay, Charlie Asterisk, you have supplied additional information which is of no use whatsoever – unless, that is, you are attempting to muddy the picture and distract from the realpolitik of British rule in Ireland.
Ease up on the gin there Lord Stanhope
Thank you all for those lovely red carnations.
The only stereotyping and bland generalisations I can see are from you and Mr Eagleton.
Does any of this really matter when the goal of the globalists is to make every country in the world 50% (used to be 10%) African?
“British army, as a reaction to the whole of Ireland being granted limited Home Rule, threatened a mutiny in 1914”.
No. Only the 3rd Cavalry Brigade in fact! And then mainly the Officers of the 5th* & 16 Lancers, plus the Brigade Commander.
(* Had been disbanded in the 1790’s for a similar act of indiscipline, but were later reinstated.)
Thank you all for those lovely red carnations.
Glad to hear we restored some of your faith in your fellow man and woman. For what it’s worth, Northern Ireland was the first place my wife and I went on holiday together (also the first member of my immediate family to go there) and I’ve always had an interest in the history so it is a special place in my heart for me.
Ian, had exactly the same conclusion! Mixed feelings about Eagletons essay
then much relieved by the “little People’s “ intelligence in ‘Comments’
Why don’t you give them a pat in the head while you’re at it?
The demography of the Unherd readers is in stark display here, and – with some notable exceptions – their ‘British’ view of Ireland awash with stereotyping, as well as bland – and not so bland – generalisations. The subject is too large to go into in any detail but please bear in mind that Ireland was run like a colony and its partial independence (it didn’t emerge from an Empire) in 1922 was just that.
As for the violence, let’s not forget that the British army, as a reaction to the whole of Ireland being granted limited Home Rule, threatened a mutiny in 1914, and, around the same time, the importation of large quantities of ammunition by the loyalists. From where, you ask – from the German Empire!
Glad to hear we restored some of your faith in your fellow man and woman. For what it’s worth, Northern Ireland was the first place my wife and I went on holiday together (also the first member of my immediate family to go there) and I’ve always had an interest in the history so it is a special place in my heart for me.
Ian, had exactly the same conclusion! Mixed feelings about Eagletons essay
then much relieved by the “little People’s “ intelligence in ‘Comments’
Northern Irish person here. Consumed this ‘article’ with the usual feelings of despair at the pretty standard inaccurate ravings of a plastic paddy tankie.
Came to the comments and was pleasantly surprised at the level of insight here. Good to see the majority of commenters not taken in by the usual propaganda we are exposed to over and over – the ‘unherd’ in this case was not the writer but the commenters – well done all.
Self indulgent whining bullshit!
That hits the nail squarely on the head.
That hits the nail squarely on the head.
Self indulgent whining bullshit!
The author appears to have fallen into the trap of treating Irish nationalist discourse and official Irish history as the same thing. Not once did I see anything referring to the Home Rule crisis of 1912-14 in the article and that the Unionists were even prepared to rise up against the British State to not be governed from Dublin. As another commenter explained, combined with the hardening of Irish nationalism during WW1 and Sinn Féin’s victory in the 1918 general election, there was absolutely no way the Protestant counties of Ulster were going to be part of this new Irish state.
Only the most deluded Irish nationalists at the time could possibly have thought otherwise.
Edit: Also, rather ironic that Ireland is simultaneously the most enthusiastic member of the EU, while easily the most nationalistic country in the EU. Will be interesting to see how this plays out when European federalism gets discussed in the future.
The author appears to have fallen into the trap of treating Irish nationalist discourse and official Irish history as the same thing. Not once did I see anything referring to the Home Rule crisis of 1912-14 in the article and that the Unionists were even prepared to rise up against the British State to not be governed from Dublin. As another commenter explained, combined with the hardening of Irish nationalism during WW1 and Sinn Féin’s victory in the 1918 general election, there was absolutely no way the Protestant counties of Ulster were going to be part of this new Irish state.
Only the most deluded Irish nationalists at the time could possibly have thought otherwise.
Edit: Also, rather ironic that Ireland is simultaneously the most enthusiastic member of the EU, while easily the most nationalistic country in the EU. Will be interesting to see how this plays out when European federalism gets discussed in the future.
I did generally enjoy reading this, but there were some pretty odd sentences in it. Like this:
“When Ireland cast off British rule in 1921, it had the same right as any other state to sovereignty over the whole of its territory. It was deprived of that right by Ulster Unionism and the British government, and continues to be deprived of it today. Ukraine is fighting for that form of sovereignty at the moment, and the British are zealous in their support for it. They aren’t quite so keen on extending the same right to Dublin.”
The first half of it rings true enough and I’m sure you can have endless discussions about whether partition was a historic wrong etc etc. But the second half of the sentence descends into the ridiculous, heaving all those resentments whole and entire into 2023. The British government agreed to the GFA which contains mechanisms for reunification: to say that, post-1998, the British are in any way resisting Ireland’s right to full island sovereignty is absurd.
The author seems to be pressing the point that Ireland hasn’t “come of age” properly because it sweeps its history under the carpet. Maybe that’s not the case: maybe the Irish just realise that constantly rehashing old resentments from centuries past at the dinner table as if they happened yesterday is not worth it and would keep them anchored in the past rather than moving forward to become a modern European nation. And that sounds like a pretty sensible approach to me. Confident and hopeful rather than downtrodden and resentful. That sounds like a mature, modern nation to me.
Very sensible comment about Ireland and its relationship to its past, and the comment by John Dellingby that Ireland is easily the ‘most nationalistic country in Europe’ would be more accurate if it said ‘easily the most postnationalist country in Europe’ (compare with Poland, Hungary, Greece…) Comparisons that disregard historical and geopolitical realities are rarely helpful, but, despite their many differences, there are interesting historical parallels between Ireland and Ukraine (Velychenko, Ruane and Hrynevych eds. Ireland and Ukraine: studies in comparative imperial and national history, ibidem Verlag, 2022).
There was never an independent United Ireland before partition. So why the eff would there be after it? Ireland as such was a collection of mini kingdoms that generally loathed each other, fought endlessly and had no central power, institutions, bureaucracy etc. The idea they had a ‘right’ to ‘their’ territory is absurd. Eagleton is taking out of his arse.
Please edit the last sentence!!!
Please edit the last sentence!!!
I’m surprised the author doesn’t explain that India is in the same boat, waiting for Sovereignty over the whole of its territory of Pakistan and Bangladesh.
Very sensible comment about Ireland and its relationship to its past, and the comment by John Dellingby that Ireland is easily the ‘most nationalistic country in Europe’ would be more accurate if it said ‘easily the most postnationalist country in Europe’ (compare with Poland, Hungary, Greece…) Comparisons that disregard historical and geopolitical realities are rarely helpful, but, despite their many differences, there are interesting historical parallels between Ireland and Ukraine (Velychenko, Ruane and Hrynevych eds. Ireland and Ukraine: studies in comparative imperial and national history, ibidem Verlag, 2022).
There was never an independent United Ireland before partition. So why the eff would there be after it? Ireland as such was a collection of mini kingdoms that generally loathed each other, fought endlessly and had no central power, institutions, bureaucracy etc. The idea they had a ‘right’ to ‘their’ territory is absurd. Eagleton is taking out of his arse.
I’m surprised the author doesn’t explain that India is in the same boat, waiting for Sovereignty over the whole of its territory of Pakistan and Bangladesh.
I did generally enjoy reading this, but there were some pretty odd sentences in it. Like this:
“When Ireland cast off British rule in 1921, it had the same right as any other state to sovereignty over the whole of its territory. It was deprived of that right by Ulster Unionism and the British government, and continues to be deprived of it today. Ukraine is fighting for that form of sovereignty at the moment, and the British are zealous in their support for it. They aren’t quite so keen on extending the same right to Dublin.”
The first half of it rings true enough and I’m sure you can have endless discussions about whether partition was a historic wrong etc etc. But the second half of the sentence descends into the ridiculous, heaving all those resentments whole and entire into 2023. The British government agreed to the GFA which contains mechanisms for reunification: to say that, post-1998, the British are in any way resisting Ireland’s right to full island sovereignty is absurd.
The author seems to be pressing the point that Ireland hasn’t “come of age” properly because it sweeps its history under the carpet. Maybe that’s not the case: maybe the Irish just realise that constantly rehashing old resentments from centuries past at the dinner table as if they happened yesterday is not worth it and would keep them anchored in the past rather than moving forward to become a modern European nation. And that sounds like a pretty sensible approach to me. Confident and hopeful rather than downtrodden and resentful. That sounds like a mature, modern nation to me.
What an idiotic article. To contend that it was only an elite in Northern Ireland who opposed rule from Dublin is laughably ahistorical. Does Terry consider the inhabitants of the Shankhil part of an elite. I can’t remember who it was who said Eagleton had never grown up. It seems he is advocating a takeover of Northern Ireland by Dublin against the wishes of the majority of people in Northern Ireland. He refers to “the Irish” even though a considerable number of people in Ireland do not identify with the Ireland he does.
So what is he advocating? Deportation? Genocide?
I am glad I am cancelling my Unherd subscription. I can read drivel like this in the Guardian for free.
but you won’t get the same level of quality comments, and you may get an offer hard to refuse.
You can still read it for free, BUT only 8 articles a month but then a Tor browser means you can read it all, just not post comments on any article after the 8th per month. I find it interesting because the MSM is a total waste of space.
He is similar to Shane McGowan in being educated at elite English schools where he nursed a hankering for a romanticised literary and Guinness soaked paddyhood .
but you won’t get the same level of quality comments, and you may get an offer hard to refuse.
You can still read it for free, BUT only 8 articles a month but then a Tor browser means you can read it all, just not post comments on any article after the 8th per month. I find it interesting because the MSM is a total waste of space.
He is similar to Shane McGowan in being educated at elite English schools where he nursed a hankering for a romanticised literary and Guinness soaked paddyhood .
What an idiotic article. To contend that it was only an elite in Northern Ireland who opposed rule from Dublin is laughably ahistorical. Does Terry consider the inhabitants of the Shankhil part of an elite. I can’t remember who it was who said Eagleton had never grown up. It seems he is advocating a takeover of Northern Ireland by Dublin against the wishes of the majority of people in Northern Ireland. He refers to “the Irish” even though a considerable number of people in Ireland do not identify with the Ireland he does.
So what is he advocating? Deportation? Genocide?
I am glad I am cancelling my Unherd subscription. I can read drivel like this in the Guardian for free.
Firstly: ‘the first colony in the world to achieve (partial) independence…’ It’s an odd colony that has full representation in the Parliament of the so-called oppressing country, but let’s take the claim at face value. What about 1776? If the author is limiting scope to the 20th century, not only is that a much less significant claim, it’s still wrong. Finland, Poland, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia all celebrate(d) their emergence from empires in 1917 or 1918. Historically sloppy.
Secondly, the author is doing some historical whitewashing of his own. I imagine the enmity between Catholicism and Presbyterianism has been much more significant then he suggests. People may not have been concerned about the finer theological points but they could see how the influence of the Catholic Church manifested itself. For two, maybe three generations after independence, the Republic of Ireland was a country where priests abused schoolboys and girls who had sex were locked away in laundries, sometimes for life. This is brushed under the carpet now as a failing of the Catholic Church, but it is part of the guilty history of the Irish state too.
Economically, the country was so incapable of providing even a basic standard of living, let alone a welfare state, that at any time perhaps a third of the working population emigrated. Many ended up here, where they did the worst jobs, suffered discrimination and bad housing, and became the butt of all sorts of jokes. But, for all that, it was still better than what was on offer at home. Like the author’s grandfather and the people of Ulster, people will always choose the better life.
I recommend Bob Geldof’s surprisingly good early memoir, “Is That It?”, for a vivid account of growing up in 1960’s Dublin and the grip the Catholic Church had on people’s lives.
A lot of Geldof’s memoir was a fashionable attitude already apparent in the Dublin middle classes to re-imagine themselves as heroic and standing up to a tyrannical Catholicism. Though there were certainly pockets of this a lot more recently than the 1960s, in South Dublin, it was already thin on the ground before this.
You’re right. By the early 1970s, the Catholic Church in the minds of South Dubliners was well on the way to becoming a straw man for increasingly dominant left-wing ideas.
Thank you – that’s informative.
You’re right. By the early 1970s, the Catholic Church in the minds of South Dubliners was well on the way to becoming a straw man for increasingly dominant left-wing ideas.
Thank you – that’s informative.
Geldof was a deeply conservative middle-class private-school educated prat masquerading as a social rebel. Always good for a quote, but don’t mistake him for someone with a balanced viewpoint on anything.
A lot of Geldof’s memoir was a fashionable attitude already apparent in the Dublin middle classes to re-imagine themselves as heroic and standing up to a tyrannical Catholicism. Though there were certainly pockets of this a lot more recently than the 1960s, in South Dublin, it was already thin on the ground before this.
Geldof was a deeply conservative middle-class private-school educated prat masquerading as a social rebel. Always good for a quote, but don’t mistake him for someone with a balanced viewpoint on anything.
I recommend Bob Geldof’s surprisingly good early memoir, “Is That It?”, for a vivid account of growing up in 1960’s Dublin and the grip the Catholic Church had on people’s lives.
Firstly: ‘the first colony in the world to achieve (partial) independence…’ It’s an odd colony that has full representation in the Parliament of the so-called oppressing country, but let’s take the claim at face value. What about 1776? If the author is limiting scope to the 20th century, not only is that a much less significant claim, it’s still wrong. Finland, Poland, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia all celebrate(d) their emergence from empires in 1917 or 1918. Historically sloppy.
Secondly, the author is doing some historical whitewashing of his own. I imagine the enmity between Catholicism and Presbyterianism has been much more significant then he suggests. People may not have been concerned about the finer theological points but they could see how the influence of the Catholic Church manifested itself. For two, maybe three generations after independence, the Republic of Ireland was a country where priests abused schoolboys and girls who had sex were locked away in laundries, sometimes for life. This is brushed under the carpet now as a failing of the Catholic Church, but it is part of the guilty history of the Irish state too.
Economically, the country was so incapable of providing even a basic standard of living, let alone a welfare state, that at any time perhaps a third of the working population emigrated. Many ended up here, where they did the worst jobs, suffered discrimination and bad housing, and became the butt of all sorts of jokes. But, for all that, it was still better than what was on offer at home. Like the author’s grandfather and the people of Ulster, people will always choose the better life.
Nice try. But it all falls apart with the comparison to Ukraine. Eagleton is an ethnic nationalist when that suits his argument and a constitutional democrat when it doesn’t.
Ireland is a uniquely privileged country that is able to have irrendentism as official policy and also receive worldwide support for it.
The worldwide support is born of ignorance. they havnt asked the people of either Northern OR Southern Ireland whether they actually want to ‘merge.
I would not be surprised if the people of The South – would reject such a merger.
This idea exists in some utopian dream never to be actually implimented – including of ”Irish” Biden, who recently also said he was not Irish. Perhaps he read my post that his family largely came from Berkshire.
Sussex, but otherwise, yes.
Sussex, but otherwise, yes.
The worldwide support is born of ignorance. they havnt asked the people of either Northern OR Southern Ireland whether they actually want to ‘merge.
I would not be surprised if the people of The South – would reject such a merger.
This idea exists in some utopian dream never to be actually implimented – including of ”Irish” Biden, who recently also said he was not Irish. Perhaps he read my post that his family largely came from Berkshire.
Ireland is a uniquely privileged country that is able to have irrendentism as official policy and also receive worldwide support for it.
Nice try. But it all falls apart with the comparison to Ukraine. Eagleton is an ethnic nationalist when that suits his argument and a constitutional democrat when it doesn’t.
Can we safely assume that a Sinn Fein victory in the 1918 election would have translated into a win for a referendum to leave the UK? It couldn’t be assumed with the success of the SNP in Scotland. An awful lot of patriotic Irish people would not have voted to leave the UK.
Sinn Fein’s campaign of violence likely frightened people on all sides of the issue. Of course it was all a legacy of 1916. But the Southern Irish psyche has never recovered. It still does not regard Ulster Protestants as really “Irish”.
It is entirely respectable in Dublin polite society to disparage Ulster Unionists as backward idiots. Southern Irish nationalists don’t really love Ireland – just their version of it.
Spot on.
In many of the seats Sinn Fein won, there was no challenger, even among the more moderate Irish Party. Doesn’t take much to wonder why.
Knees are very useful when they work.
Knees are very useful when they work.
Spot on.
In many of the seats Sinn Fein won, there was no challenger, even among the more moderate Irish Party. Doesn’t take much to wonder why.
Can we safely assume that a Sinn Fein victory in the 1918 election would have translated into a win for a referendum to leave the UK? It couldn’t be assumed with the success of the SNP in Scotland. An awful lot of patriotic Irish people would not have voted to leave the UK.
Sinn Fein’s campaign of violence likely frightened people on all sides of the issue. Of course it was all a legacy of 1916. But the Southern Irish psyche has never recovered. It still does not regard Ulster Protestants as really “Irish”.
It is entirely respectable in Dublin polite society to disparage Ulster Unionists as backward idiots. Southern Irish nationalists don’t really love Ireland – just their version of it.
It’s funny, when former colonial powers don’t bother changing the borders of multi-ethnic colonies, they get blamed for “forcing different peoples to live together” and “causing ethnic tension”; when they do change the borders, they get accused of “cynical gerrymandering”. A case of damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
I’m surprised this needs pointing out, but Ireland wasn’t a state prior to independence, and hence cannot have had “the same right as any other state”. And what would this right be based on, anyway? Posession? There wasn’t an Irish government to possess anything. Self-determination? The northern Irish didn’t want to be part of the new country, they wanted to be part of Britain. Historical precedent? Ireland before the English conquest was a series of competing minor kingdoms; there only precedent for a united Ireland is under English/British rule.
Lol, have you looked at discourse on British history recently? “Carrying the problem of their identities around with them like a daily burden” is exactly what happens to people constantly told that their race and nationality is inherently oppressive and racist.
It’s funny, when former colonial powers don’t bother changing the borders of multi-ethnic colonies, they get blamed for “forcing different peoples to live together” and “causing ethnic tension”; when they do change the borders, they get accused of “cynical gerrymandering”. A case of damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
I’m surprised this needs pointing out, but Ireland wasn’t a state prior to independence, and hence cannot have had “the same right as any other state”. And what would this right be based on, anyway? Posession? There wasn’t an Irish government to possess anything. Self-determination? The northern Irish didn’t want to be part of the new country, they wanted to be part of Britain. Historical precedent? Ireland before the English conquest was a series of competing minor kingdoms; there only precedent for a united Ireland is under English/British rule.
Lol, have you looked at discourse on British history recently? “Carrying the problem of their identities around with them like a daily burden” is exactly what happens to people constantly told that their race and nationality is inherently oppressive and racist.
“…because my skin was an acceptable colour”. Projection; don’t put your racist thought onto others. It is what you thought.
“…because my skin was an acceptable colour”. Projection; don’t put your racist thought onto others. It is what you thought.
“It’s hard to see how this very English even-handedness applies to women versus rapists, slaves against slave-owners…”
It’s also hard to see how such an analogy could possibly apply to Northern Ireland, with the UVF and UDA on one side and the various iterations of the IRA on the other. Remind me, which side are the helpless victims here?
As for Dublin being “denied” anything, I can guarantee you every Taoiseach since independence thanked God three times a day that the crazies listed above weren’t his problem. No doubt the day is coming when Catholics become the majority in the north, at which point they may well vote for unification, but I hope someone bothers to check whether the Republic actually wants this. Living next to a madhouse is a different matter from being asked to run it.
But my favourite part of the article has to be where you say the Irish don’t think enough about the past. This is the big island to the west of Britain we’re talking about?
I think you are conveniently forgetting the “near-genocidal” part
The Irish live in the past and blame “England” for most of their problems. Its easy to blame someone else.
I think you are conveniently forgetting the “near-genocidal” part
The Irish live in the past and blame “England” for most of their problems. Its easy to blame someone else.
“It’s hard to see how this very English even-handedness applies to women versus rapists, slaves against slave-owners…”
It’s also hard to see how such an analogy could possibly apply to Northern Ireland, with the UVF and UDA on one side and the various iterations of the IRA on the other. Remind me, which side are the helpless victims here?
As for Dublin being “denied” anything, I can guarantee you every Taoiseach since independence thanked God three times a day that the crazies listed above weren’t his problem. No doubt the day is coming when Catholics become the majority in the north, at which point they may well vote for unification, but I hope someone bothers to check whether the Republic actually wants this. Living next to a madhouse is a different matter from being asked to run it.
But my favourite part of the article has to be where you say the Irish don’t think enough about the past. This is the big island to the west of Britain we’re talking about?
Ireland never had a referendum to leave the UK. The 1918 election was no more a referendum than an SNP majority in Scotland is a referendum on that country leaving the UK. The IRA used violance against anyone who opposed them – including we can safely assume Southern Irish Catholic democratic nationalists. Irish nationalism was also a cultural disaster as the official education agencies tried to expunge “English” culture in favour of a fake rural ideal.
expunge “English” culture? Yeah why not take the English language out of Ireland and it would be a very much poorer country
Certainly Paddy Kavenagh would have though so.
Certainly Paddy Kavenagh would have though so.
expunge “English” culture? Yeah why not take the English language out of Ireland and it would be a very much poorer country
Ireland never had a referendum to leave the UK. The 1918 election was no more a referendum than an SNP majority in Scotland is a referendum on that country leaving the UK. The IRA used violance against anyone who opposed them – including we can safely assume Southern Irish Catholic democratic nationalists. Irish nationalism was also a cultural disaster as the official education agencies tried to expunge “English” culture in favour of a fake rural ideal.
Seems a most patronising article. Written from an expatriate and academic view.
Seems a most patronising article. Written from an expatriate and academic view.
…I’m all for facing facts, so perhaps the Author might want to face these…
…at a time where upwards of 140,000 Volunteer Irishmen were fighting for Britain on the Western Front, the “Celtic Mist” Ethno-Nationalists of the IRA managed to raise no more than 5,000 for the Easter Rising…and the “blood and soil” romanticism that actuated them runs in a straight line through Facism to Bergen-Belsen…as indicated by the fact that when the whole free world was uniting against it, some Irishmen could only see “England’s Danger is Ireland’s Opportunity”…took the other side, and attempted a terrorist campaign against their nearest neighbours…
(…mind you, the forbears of the SNP were no better..!)
…they had “won” their Freedom only because the “Brutal” British Empire was unwilling to attempt more than a limited Police Action to contain them…where we could have sailed the Grand Fleet round their coast, flattened everything up to twenty miles inland, and then used the first “Combined-Arms” Army in History (with tanks, attack aircraft and bombers working in concert)…to finish off the survivors…
…which makes the comparison with the Ukraine offensively egregious, in light of Stalin’s “Holodomor”…conducted little more than a decade later, bringing a recalcitrant province to heel by a mixture of violence and starvation, and cold…just as his successors are seeking to do now…
…like it or not, the British Army were called on in 1968 to protect the Catholic Community…giving the IRA an opportunity to attack both them and the Unionist Majority in a (partly-successful) effort to turn a hotly-contested Civil Rights campaign into an actual Civil War, with no thought to possible casualties on both sides, civilian or otherwise…
…and, moving from fact to opinion…
…the Irish State is able to maintain it’s self-righteous neutrality…coupled with a foreign policy of being as obnoxious as possible to the neighbours…only because the “hateful” British allowed immense numbers of Irish Men and Women to live and work here freely, as though they were British…whilst sending their remittances home…not necessary now only because Ireland has become a tax haven for international capital, and a net recipient of EU largesse
…and their safety is guaranteed only because they know that we will not only not attack them…but also protect their Air and Sea space for them, as a part of our obligations to NATO…
…and if you doubt that, just imagine how very different Ireland would be if, since the end of the Great War…they had needed to defend themselves at the same cost and with the same vigour as the Finns have against their previous Imperial overlords…Finland has around six million people and spends nearly 6 Billion Euros on defence…Ireland has over five million and spends less than 1 Billion…so by that reckoning they would need to increase that budget five-fold…were we anything like the brutal savages he clearly sees us as…
Straight line from Pearse et al to Bergen Belsen is a bit much. They’re second cousins at best. Much as I disagree with Eagleton I’m not going smear him with responsibility for Stalin’s purges because he’s a Marxist. That’s the logic of the kind of cultural commissars who are trying to pin the entire history of racism on white students at universities and that has students turning away from the humanities in droves.
…my point is that the “Blood and Soil” ethno-nationalism of Sinn Fein is exactly the sort of thinking developed further in “Mein Kampf”…with results that were far from predictable when that wretched tome was published in 1924…but morphed into something truly unspeakable twenty years on, not least because it took root in a place big enough to be truly dangerous…as Germany was, but Ireland (fortunately) isn’t…
…which is just as well considering how savage the Civil War they had after we left was…featuring, among other delights…executions carried out by lashing groups of men together around a bundle of hand grenades and pulling out the pin…
…and on Stalin’s purges I’m not looking to hold Eagleton responsible for those…so much as point out the offensive stupidity of conflating what Russia did (and is doing) in the Ukraine…with the British relationship with Ireland both before and after partition…
Yes , you have to go back a bit farther to find Ukraine-level savagery from the Brits and proto-Brits, albeit on a scale permitted by the technology of the time.
Yes , you have to go back a bit farther to find Ukraine-level savagery from the Brits and proto-Brits, albeit on a scale permitted by the technology of the time.
…my point is that the “Blood and Soil” ethno-nationalism of Sinn Fein is exactly the sort of thinking developed further in “Mein Kampf”…with results that were far from predictable when that wretched tome was published in 1924…but morphed into something truly unspeakable twenty years on, not least because it took root in a place big enough to be truly dangerous…as Germany was, but Ireland (fortunately) isn’t…
…which is just as well considering how savage the Civil War they had after we left was…featuring, among other delights…executions carried out by lashing groups of men together around a bundle of hand grenades and pulling out the pin…
…and on Stalin’s purges I’m not looking to hold Eagleton responsible for those…so much as point out the offensive stupidity of conflating what Russia did (and is doing) in the Ukraine…with the British relationship with Ireland both before and after partition…
Straight line from Pearse et al to Bergen Belsen is a bit much. They’re second cousins at best. Much as I disagree with Eagleton I’m not going smear him with responsibility for Stalin’s purges because he’s a Marxist. That’s the logic of the kind of cultural commissars who are trying to pin the entire history of racism on white students at universities and that has students turning away from the humanities in droves.
…I’m all for facing facts, so perhaps the Author might want to face these…
…at a time where upwards of 140,000 Volunteer Irishmen were fighting for Britain on the Western Front, the “Celtic Mist” Ethno-Nationalists of the IRA managed to raise no more than 5,000 for the Easter Rising…and the “blood and soil” romanticism that actuated them runs in a straight line through Facism to Bergen-Belsen…as indicated by the fact that when the whole free world was uniting against it, some Irishmen could only see “England’s Danger is Ireland’s Opportunity”…took the other side, and attempted a terrorist campaign against their nearest neighbours…
(…mind you, the forbears of the SNP were no better..!)
…they had “won” their Freedom only because the “Brutal” British Empire was unwilling to attempt more than a limited Police Action to contain them…where we could have sailed the Grand Fleet round their coast, flattened everything up to twenty miles inland, and then used the first “Combined-Arms” Army in History (with tanks, attack aircraft and bombers working in concert)…to finish off the survivors…
…which makes the comparison with the Ukraine offensively egregious, in light of Stalin’s “Holodomor”…conducted little more than a decade later, bringing a recalcitrant province to heel by a mixture of violence and starvation, and cold…just as his successors are seeking to do now…
…like it or not, the British Army were called on in 1968 to protect the Catholic Community…giving the IRA an opportunity to attack both them and the Unionist Majority in a (partly-successful) effort to turn a hotly-contested Civil Rights campaign into an actual Civil War, with no thought to possible casualties on both sides, civilian or otherwise…
…and, moving from fact to opinion…
…the Irish State is able to maintain it’s self-righteous neutrality…coupled with a foreign policy of being as obnoxious as possible to the neighbours…only because the “hateful” British allowed immense numbers of Irish Men and Women to live and work here freely, as though they were British…whilst sending their remittances home…not necessary now only because Ireland has become a tax haven for international capital, and a net recipient of EU largesse
…and their safety is guaranteed only because they know that we will not only not attack them…but also protect their Air and Sea space for them, as a part of our obligations to NATO…
…and if you doubt that, just imagine how very different Ireland would be if, since the end of the Great War…they had needed to defend themselves at the same cost and with the same vigour as the Finns have against their previous Imperial overlords…Finland has around six million people and spends nearly 6 Billion Euros on defence…Ireland has over five million and spends less than 1 Billion…so by that reckoning they would need to increase that budget five-fold…were we anything like the brutal savages he clearly sees us as…
What happened to the protestant population in the free state ? Effectively it was ethnically cleansed.
That’s a strong term but the discrimination practiced against them resulted in the same outcome.
what utter rubbish- there are many protestants in Ireland including big ” Anglo” landowners: don’t confuse Church of Ireland with Presbyterians, always assuming you actually know the difference.
is not ignorance the bedrock of this entire debate? The Church of Ireland does not have any ” borders”, neither does the Catholic church! No one comments as to how ( not least in Cork) there are many protestants in The Republic, and no Catholic – Protestant issues? because they are not Presbyterian quasi Scotch Orangemen?!!!
is not ignorance the bedrock of this entire debate? The Church of Ireland does not have any ” borders”, neither does the Catholic church! No one comments as to how ( not least in Cork) there are many protestants in The Republic, and no Catholic – Protestant issues? because they are not Presbyterian quasi Scotch Orangemen?!!!
Rubbish. The new Irish state was poor, and economic insecurity and depression encouraged many relatively well-educated and mobile Protestants to up sticks and go. A significant contributor to this population decline can be identified with the Great War. The horrific slaughter of young Irish Protestant men in the first World War had a devastating and disproportionate impact on the male Protestant population of the South.
This was reflected in the birth rate for decades following the war. In addition, the Northern Ireland regime led by Sir James Craig enticed large numbers of Protestants, through the offer of government jobs and housing, to relocate north of the Border in an attempt to offset Catholic majorities in Border counties. Some in government service chose to leave with their families rather than enter the civil/public service of the Free State.
In addition, there was a large British military establishment in Ireland which was stood down in 1922. This group was disproportionately Protestant.
It is worth noting that two Protestants who decided to stay south subsequently became presidents of Ireland.
In short, the reasonable view of middle-class Protestants after 1922 was that the new Ireland was a place of very limited prosects, and you’d simply have a better life in Britain, or in the North.
And, consider that, while Protestantism in Ireland has been increasing since the turn of the century, Catholicism has undergone a dramatic collapse.
Overall though, modern Ireland is largely a secular country where love of money triumphs over just about anything else.
‘It is worth noting that two Protestants who decided to stay south subsequently became presidents of Ireland’ Not that simple though, is it?
‘It is worth noting that two Protestants who decided to stay south subsequently became presidents of Ireland’ Not that simple though, is it?
That’s a strong term but the discrimination practiced against them resulted in the same outcome.
what utter rubbish- there are many protestants in Ireland including big ” Anglo” landowners: don’t confuse Church of Ireland with Presbyterians, always assuming you actually know the difference.
Rubbish. The new Irish state was poor, and economic insecurity and depression encouraged many relatively well-educated and mobile Protestants to up sticks and go. A significant contributor to this population decline can be identified with the Great War. The horrific slaughter of young Irish Protestant men in the first World War had a devastating and disproportionate impact on the male Protestant population of the South.
This was reflected in the birth rate for decades following the war. In addition, the Northern Ireland regime led by Sir James Craig enticed large numbers of Protestants, through the offer of government jobs and housing, to relocate north of the Border in an attempt to offset Catholic majorities in Border counties. Some in government service chose to leave with their families rather than enter the civil/public service of the Free State.
In addition, there was a large British military establishment in Ireland which was stood down in 1922. This group was disproportionately Protestant.
It is worth noting that two Protestants who decided to stay south subsequently became presidents of Ireland.
In short, the reasonable view of middle-class Protestants after 1922 was that the new Ireland was a place of very limited prosects, and you’d simply have a better life in Britain, or in the North.
And, consider that, while Protestantism in Ireland has been increasing since the turn of the century, Catholicism has undergone a dramatic collapse.
Overall though, modern Ireland is largely a secular country where love of money triumphs over just about anything else.
What happened to the protestant population in the free state ? Effectively it was ethnically cleansed.
What a load of tripe. Eagleton should be ashamed of his desperate lack of historical knowledge. Stick to literary criticism, it takes less brain power than history and facts and all of that stuff.
What a load of tripe. Eagleton should be ashamed of his desperate lack of historical knowledge. Stick to literary criticism, it takes less brain power than history and facts and all of that stuff.
Speaking as a cynical Englishman, it seems to me that many of the problems in Ireland could be resolved if the more unruly inhabitants of that blessed Isle simply refrained from hating and killing each other.
“Relative” peace – relative to what? There is still violence and intimidation there, just at a much lower level. You just seem like a clueless gimp who want to attack the English.
One of life’s little ironies is my Catholic friends in NI, who have members in the police, have basically a ‘clear view’ front garden devoid of walls, bushes, trees etc so as to afford no cover for assassins. They also check their cars before using them EVERY time. BUT not because of the UVF et al, but because there is always one of the 57 varieties of IRA trying to murder them because they did what Sinn Fein wanted, joined the NI police.
Knife crime in London is rampant. To what should I put that down to? The unruly inhabitants who kill each other?
Actually it is because the afro Caribbean street gang drug dealers , stuck at the bottom end of the supply chain, have to fight for ever smaller patches, as the supply chain and power has been taken over by mainly Albanians.
Actually it is because the afro Caribbean street gang drug dealers , stuck at the bottom end of the supply chain, have to fight for ever smaller patches, as the supply chain and power has been taken over by mainly Albanians.
“Relative” peace – relative to what? There is still violence and intimidation there, just at a much lower level. You just seem like a clueless gimp who want to attack the English.
One of life’s little ironies is my Catholic friends in NI, who have members in the police, have basically a ‘clear view’ front garden devoid of walls, bushes, trees etc so as to afford no cover for assassins. They also check their cars before using them EVERY time. BUT not because of the UVF et al, but because there is always one of the 57 varieties of IRA trying to murder them because they did what Sinn Fein wanted, joined the NI police.
Knife crime in London is rampant. To what should I put that down to? The unruly inhabitants who kill each other?
Speaking as a cynical Englishman, it seems to me that many of the problems in Ireland could be resolved if the more unruly inhabitants of that blessed Isle simply refrained from hating and killing each other.
Eagleton says mindlessly: “Northern Ireland was born of a cynical exercise in gerrymandering to ensure a permanent Protestant majority in the region.”
Every state does exactly that (except those made by God) otherwise why have nation states?
No they do not, what arrant nonsense?
So Pakistan and Bangladesh are gerry mandered from India? Applying the same criteria to those 3 areas would result in more bloodshed than could be possible with the elimination of every living being in ALL of Ireland.
So Pakistan and Bangladesh are gerry mandered from India? Applying the same criteria to those 3 areas would result in more bloodshed than could be possible with the elimination of every living being in ALL of Ireland.
The problem was the artificiality of it. In the interests of securing a Protestant ascendancy, it drove a coach and 4 through established communities. Divide and conquer works though, from the perspective of the colonist:
https://www.counterpunch.org/2004/07/14/divide-and-conquer-as-imperial-rules/
Yawn. As if divide and conquer isn’t everyone’s SOP.
Yawn. As if divide and conquer isn’t everyone’s SOP.
No they do not, what arrant nonsense?
The problem was the artificiality of it. In the interests of securing a Protestant ascendancy, it drove a coach and 4 through established communities. Divide and conquer works though, from the perspective of the colonist:
https://www.counterpunch.org/2004/07/14/divide-and-conquer-as-imperial-rules/
Eagleton says mindlessly: “Northern Ireland was born of a cynical exercise in gerrymandering to ensure a permanent Protestant majority in the region.”
Every state does exactly that (except those made by God) otherwise why have nation states?
We British have no desire whatever to own any part of Ireland. I am sure the writer of this article knows this perfectly well but chooses to suppress or ignore that truth.
Surely if the nationalists/Catholics have the right to express their identity and have institutions of government that express it, then the unionists/Protestants have the same right. The nationalists/Catholics didn’t want to be part of the UK; the unionists/Protestants didn’t want to be part of an independent Ireland. Why is the former acceptable to the writer of this article but the latter is unacceptable? That kind of prejudice is pretty ugly.
We British have no desire whatever to own any part of Ireland. I am sure the writer of this article knows this perfectly well but chooses to suppress or ignore that truth.
Surely if the nationalists/Catholics have the right to express their identity and have institutions of government that express it, then the unionists/Protestants have the same right. The nationalists/Catholics didn’t want to be part of the UK; the unionists/Protestants didn’t want to be part of an independent Ireland. Why is the former acceptable to the writer of this article but the latter is unacceptable? That kind of prejudice is pretty ugly.
Ha! And I thought this article was actually going to be about all the things Irish politicians and government (and some sectors of Irish society) still do brush under the carpet like proper recompense for the Magdalen Laundries or the Tuam Babies or the current homelessness issues or even, if we do want to go back to those times of 100 years ago, the Civil War (probably needs another 100 years before that can be talked about) but no. Actually though this article is the unherd equivalent of Fintan O’Toole’s weekly anti-brit rant in the Irish Times.
Some people (Fintan) carry hate around with them far too long. They dont realise how it eats away at them. They should move on and free themselves of their self imposed tyranny
Some people (Fintan) carry hate around with them far too long. They dont realise how it eats away at them. They should move on and free themselves of their self imposed tyranny
Ha! And I thought this article was actually going to be about all the things Irish politicians and government (and some sectors of Irish society) still do brush under the carpet like proper recompense for the Magdalen Laundries or the Tuam Babies or the current homelessness issues or even, if we do want to go back to those times of 100 years ago, the Civil War (probably needs another 100 years before that can be talked about) but no. Actually though this article is the unherd equivalent of Fintan O’Toole’s weekly anti-brit rant in the Irish Times.
Modern historians certainly whitewash Ireland’s sympathetic relations with Nazi Germany. Like Chandra Bose, De Valera , a conservative like Peguy, found Germany’s anti Anglo Saxon dogma very appealing. Blood and Soil, what wasn’t to like.,
Modern historians certainly whitewash Ireland’s sympathetic relations with Nazi Germany. Like Chandra Bose, De Valera , a conservative like Peguy, found Germany’s anti Anglo Saxon dogma very appealing. Blood and Soil, what wasn’t to like.,
Partion was the least bad solution to the problem of having two strongly held identities in Ireland. The real problem was that Northern Ireland was allowed to become a one party state with limited checks. It is no longer such a state.
Partion was the least bad solution to the problem of having two strongly held identities in Ireland. The real problem was that Northern Ireland was allowed to become a one party state with limited checks. It is no longer such a state.
This man is an idiot looking for something to be angry about. The sort of deluded Englishman with romantic ideas that the IRA used to use.
“Englishman”
Yup. Born and raised here, to parents born and raised here. He’s less ‘Irish’ than I am Scottish, having one parent and two grandparents born and raised there and having been born there myself.
I have Scottish ancestry; I’m not a Scot, and Terry Eagleton isn’t ‘Irish’. Nor does he claim to be.
Yup. Born and raised here, to parents born and raised here. He’s less ‘Irish’ than I am Scottish, having one parent and two grandparents born and raised there and having been born there myself.
I have Scottish ancestry; I’m not a Scot, and Terry Eagleton isn’t ‘Irish’. Nor does he claim to be.
“Englishman”
This man is an idiot looking for something to be angry about. The sort of deluded Englishman with romantic ideas that the IRA used to use.
The photograph of Terry Eagleton doesn’t show a young man. Instead we see a man who has walked this Earth for many years but learned nothing. Nothing that is except self-reinforced bigotry. So we end up with a writer re-writing history. Ireland just needs men like Terry Eagleton, doesn’t it.
The photograph of Terry Eagleton doesn’t show a young man. Instead we see a man who has walked this Earth for many years but learned nothing. Nothing that is except self-reinforced bigotry. So we end up with a writer re-writing history. Ireland just needs men like Terry Eagleton, doesn’t it.
This article is a disgrace to the name ‘UnHerd’.
Phil. I have bitched and moaned many times above in the comments. But we so have to make room in Unherd for this type of crap. Thats what its all about
You dont have to read ir
You dont have to agree with it.
Phil. I have bitched and moaned many times above in the comments. But we so have to make room in Unherd for this type of crap. Thats what its all about
You dont have to read ir
You dont have to agree with it.
This article is a disgrace to the name ‘UnHerd’.
Time to sack T.E. querulous sanctimonious bore. he was an enfant terrible in english departments in 1989. surely no reason to give him a platform here
Time to sack T.E. querulous sanctimonious bore. he was an enfant terrible in english departments in 1989. surely no reason to give him a platform here
You say “The Catholic population was denied the right to share in the self-determination enjoyed by its compatriots in what was then the Irish Free State. ”
The Free State was aggressively Catholic and utterly anti-British – it all but sided with the Nazis in WW2 just to get back at the UK. The Ulster Loyalist community (Protestant and proud of their British Heritage) would have been crushed and dissolved if they had joined that United Ireland in 1922.
Allbut sided with the Nazis. They dis absolutely side with their EU paymasters over the Brexit negotiations. The same EU paymasters who refused to bail out the Irish economy in 2010 – guess which country cut the Irish a £7bn cheque?
Its the one they love to hate so much (UK). Granted it was paid back – from the legalised money laundering side of their economy.
This has been the traditional attitude of (many) Irish throughout our fractious joint history. Ireland has always been seen by European powers as a weapon to use to control England. Cromwell, for example, was brutal in Ireland, but the Irish price for supporting the (all-but) Catholic Charles I was his public submission to the Pope – exactly the position that undermined his reign on this side of the Irish Sea. As for the ‘Battle of the Boyne’, could anyone but a determined Irishman imagine that was about the future of Ireland and not England?
This has been the traditional attitude of (many) Irish throughout our fractious joint history. Ireland has always been seen by European powers as a weapon to use to control England. Cromwell, for example, was brutal in Ireland, but the Irish price for supporting the (all-but) Catholic Charles I was his public submission to the Pope – exactly the position that undermined his reign on this side of the Irish Sea. As for the ‘Battle of the Boyne’, could anyone but a determined Irishman imagine that was about the future of Ireland and not England?
Allbut sided with the Nazis. They dis absolutely side with their EU paymasters over the Brexit negotiations. The same EU paymasters who refused to bail out the Irish economy in 2010 – guess which country cut the Irish a £7bn cheque?
Its the one they love to hate so much (UK). Granted it was paid back – from the legalised money laundering side of their economy.
You say “The Catholic population was denied the right to share in the self-determination enjoyed by its compatriots in what was then the Irish Free State. ”
The Free State was aggressively Catholic and utterly anti-British – it all but sided with the Nazis in WW2 just to get back at the UK. The Ulster Loyalist community (Protestant and proud of their British Heritage) would have been crushed and dissolved if they had joined that United Ireland in 1922.
Quite an unpleasant article. My father visited Dublin in the 1950s. He took a trip out somewhere on the train and on his return got talking to an attractive young woman. “He was alright” she told him, my father is Welsh and unleashed a torent of anti-english bigotry.
Welsh nationalism is pretty silly or exhibited in enthusiastic and wonderful singing of our national anthem, particularly at the rugby. Wales is a conquered nation, so too is England if you go back far enough. Some Irish people, however, are fond of wallowing in the sins and crimes committed against them. Time to move on ladies and gents, time to move on.
The Irish invited in England’s conquerors, then blamed the English ever since (I’m English of Irish parents – the best thing my parents ever did for me was to have me born English – IF there is a God, he must surely be an Englishman)
Bill you are quite correct. In fact it was King Dermott Mc (i cant remember) of Leinster (I think) who begged Henry II to help him out against other Irish Kings – he also asked the English to stay on!
Bill you are quite correct. In fact it was King Dermott Mc (i cant remember) of Leinster (I think) who begged Henry II to help him out against other Irish Kings – he also asked the English to stay on!
The Irish invited in England’s conquerors, then blamed the English ever since (I’m English of Irish parents – the best thing my parents ever did for me was to have me born English – IF there is a God, he must surely be an Englishman)
Quite an unpleasant article. My father visited Dublin in the 1950s. He took a trip out somewhere on the train and on his return got talking to an attractive young woman. “He was alright” she told him, my father is Welsh and unleashed a torent of anti-english bigotry.
Welsh nationalism is pretty silly or exhibited in enthusiastic and wonderful singing of our national anthem, particularly at the rugby. Wales is a conquered nation, so too is England if you go back far enough. Some Irish people, however, are fond of wallowing in the sins and crimes committed against them. Time to move on ladies and gents, time to move on.
Most 20th century Irish historiography was written from the perspective of postcolonials reckoning with their past. The move away from postcolonial grievance is in the interests of getting along with the Americans rather than the Brits. As Noel Ignatiev announced 25 years ago, the Irish have become white in America. So now we’re getting with the program of atonement for the original sin of whiteness as dictated by our new overseers and mediated by the ideological fashion victims running our universities.
Most 20th century Irish historiography was written from the perspective of postcolonials reckoning with their past. The move away from postcolonial grievance is in the interests of getting along with the Americans rather than the Brits. As Noel Ignatiev announced 25 years ago, the Irish have become white in America. So now we’re getting with the program of atonement for the original sin of whiteness as dictated by our new overseers and mediated by the ideological fashion victims running our universities.
I always wondered at the lines on maps, how they were decided etc and assumed it was where wars stopped. I’ve come to expand that to ‘…and were argued about for centuries afterwards.’
In UK it used be if UK was attacked everyone rolled their sleeves up to fight off the aggressor. More recently the Welsh take no responsibility for history bar mining the coal for the Imperial Fleet. The Scots were wiping their hands on cotton waste in the engine rooms of tramp steamers off Argentina – unless they were inviting Rudolph Hess over to meet the SNP.
The Irish, I blame Cromwell and the Dutch King. Nothing to do with me. My forebears were peasants or fishermen so I wash my hands of slavery too. No mea culpa here, unlike the Guardian.
Speaking of lines on maps, the border between Northern Ireland and Ireland was never properly demarcated. A commission was appointed to do the job in 1922, but gave up in 1925. The provision border remains to today – over 300 miles, there are more than 300 crossings. Some roads cross the border several times over a distance of a few miles. Instead, Ireland and the UK agreed a Common Travel Area, and then joined the EEC at the same time.
Quite right. I too refuse to imbibe some sort of guilt trip . I simply refuse. They can all “f” off.
Speaking of lines on maps, the border between Northern Ireland and Ireland was never properly demarcated. A commission was appointed to do the job in 1922, but gave up in 1925. The provision border remains to today – over 300 miles, there are more than 300 crossings. Some roads cross the border several times over a distance of a few miles. Instead, Ireland and the UK agreed a Common Travel Area, and then joined the EEC at the same time.
Quite right. I too refuse to imbibe some sort of guilt trip . I simply refuse. They can all “f” off.
I always wondered at the lines on maps, how they were decided etc and assumed it was where wars stopped. I’ve come to expand that to ‘…and were argued about for centuries afterwards.’
In UK it used be if UK was attacked everyone rolled their sleeves up to fight off the aggressor. More recently the Welsh take no responsibility for history bar mining the coal for the Imperial Fleet. The Scots were wiping their hands on cotton waste in the engine rooms of tramp steamers off Argentina – unless they were inviting Rudolph Hess over to meet the SNP.
The Irish, I blame Cromwell and the Dutch King. Nothing to do with me. My forebears were peasants or fishermen so I wash my hands of slavery too. No mea culpa here, unlike the Guardian.
I wish it were otherwise but there’s no way you get a United Ireland in 1921 without terrible bloodshed. With the benefit of hindsight it might have been better for London to throw Ulster under a bus and insist on an all-Ireland Free State but be under no illusion that it would’ve have terrible immediate consequences and could hardly be regarded as an honourable decision. I suspect it would’ve been for the best in the longterm but it would’ve required statesmanship from Dublin and a more expansive and inclusive sense of Irish national identity than has ever existed in our timeline.
I wish it were otherwise but there’s no way you get a United Ireland in 1921 without terrible bloodshed. With the benefit of hindsight it might have been better for London to throw Ulster under a bus and insist on an all-Ireland Free State but be under no illusion that it would’ve have terrible immediate consequences and could hardly be regarded as an honourable decision. I suspect it would’ve been for the best in the longterm but it would’ve required statesmanship from Dublin and a more expansive and inclusive sense of Irish national identity than has ever existed in our timeline.
Something else The Irish have airbrushed out of history is that “The British” troops that opened fire outside the post office?
Yes they were “British” as indeed were the citizens of the whole of Ireland at that point – but those Soldiers were made up of mainly guys from Dublin. Yes: They were Irish British.
I think Netflix or someone did an excellent 6 part series on it.
Look it up.
Something else The Irish have airbrushed out of history is that “The British” troops that opened fire outside the post office?
Yes they were “British” as indeed were the citizens of the whole of Ireland at that point – but those Soldiers were made up of mainly guys from Dublin. Yes: They were Irish British.
I think Netflix or someone did an excellent 6 part series on it.
Look it up.
” …an immigrant culture learns to adapt its talk and behaviour to the mentality of its hosts.”
That may have been true of the Irish community in the 1950s but, sadly, doesn’t appear to be true of all immigrant communities today.
” …an immigrant culture learns to adapt its talk and behaviour to the mentality of its hosts.”
That may have been true of the Irish community in the 1950s but, sadly, doesn’t appear to be true of all immigrant communities today.
I am Irish, but I still have no idea what Eagleton’s point is.
I am Irish, but I still have no idea what Eagleton’s point is.
G.K. Chesterton, (1874 – 1936), described in Encyclopaedia Britannica as
was a convert to Catholicism, an anti-Imperialist, and a champion of the Irish. Nevertheless, his assessment of national character is most pertinent here.
G.K. Chesterton, (1874 – 1936), described in Encyclopaedia Britannica as
was a convert to Catholicism, an anti-Imperialist, and a champion of the Irish. Nevertheless, his assessment of national character is most pertinent here.
It is difficult to make a case that Britain wants the expense and hassle of Northern Ireland. Arguably the state of NI came into being because it was the easiest option, to avoid further bloodshed and the revolt of the Protestant loyalists. Yet now the easiest option would be to grant Irish nationalists the unity that they crave but of course they wouldn’t want the cost or the impact of assimilating the Ulster brethren. NI suits the south as it allows them the psychological outlet of aspiring to unity without actually having the inconvenience thereof. It’s a bit like the citizens of the GDR getting their fix of life in the west from watching the TV from the comfort of their living room. Ultimately the Irish will have to put up or shut up and that will be when they can come to terms with their history.
Excellent piece I have to say. Even with the legalised money laundering operation in The South they still cannot afford the £14bn per year English subsidy (and it is England btw – as Scotland and Wales also receive considerable cash grants)
(A tangent) The Scots constantly argue they dont get a subsidy because of “their” oil. Tax revenues from “North Sea Oil” were £1.2nn last year vs the £16bn Barnett Formula English subsidy
Spot on!
At last someone can actually do the ‘maths’, I thank you!
Spot on!
At last someone can actually do the ‘maths’, I thank you!
Excellent piece I have to say. Even with the legalised money laundering operation in The South they still cannot afford the £14bn per year English subsidy (and it is England btw – as Scotland and Wales also receive considerable cash grants)
(A tangent) The Scots constantly argue they dont get a subsidy because of “their” oil. Tax revenues from “North Sea Oil” were £1.2nn last year vs the £16bn Barnett Formula English subsidy
It is difficult to make a case that Britain wants the expense and hassle of Northern Ireland. Arguably the state of NI came into being because it was the easiest option, to avoid further bloodshed and the revolt of the Protestant loyalists. Yet now the easiest option would be to grant Irish nationalists the unity that they crave but of course they wouldn’t want the cost or the impact of assimilating the Ulster brethren. NI suits the south as it allows them the psychological outlet of aspiring to unity without actually having the inconvenience thereof. It’s a bit like the citizens of the GDR getting their fix of life in the west from watching the TV from the comfort of their living room. Ultimately the Irish will have to put up or shut up and that will be when they can come to terms with their history.
Inconvenient truth: the Irish forget – as this article eludes – they too were British for a very long while. There remain Irish – English – Scottish and Welsh British to this day.
The Irish were enthusiastic participants in British History as they were part of it – even tho they whitewashed it out years ago.
Your point about The British Government not letting Ireland unite is plainly daft. Are you suggesting the people of Northern Ireland should have no say in that? The 25 year old agreement you refer to provides for that.
The business about how successful The Republic is is another matter. Its built on legalised money laundering by big corporations. Its why the highly inflated “Irish GDP” has zoomed up the charts. Its not real – the real Irish economy (removing the funny money) is about 66% of the recorded figures.
Inconvenient truth: the Irish forget – as this article eludes – they too were British for a very long while. There remain Irish – English – Scottish and Welsh British to this day.
The Irish were enthusiastic participants in British History as they were part of it – even tho they whitewashed it out years ago.
Your point about The British Government not letting Ireland unite is plainly daft. Are you suggesting the people of Northern Ireland should have no say in that? The 25 year old agreement you refer to provides for that.
The business about how successful The Republic is is another matter. Its built on legalised money laundering by big corporations. Its why the highly inflated “Irish GDP” has zoomed up the charts. Its not real – the real Irish economy (removing the funny money) is about 66% of the recorded figures.
His argument is essentially that the Irish deserve, somehow, to govern the whole of the island. It’s no different to the Argentinian’s argument that they deserve to govern the Falkland Islands. It takes no account whatsoever of the wishes of the people who inhabit these pieces of land.
Or China re Taiwan?
Or China re Taiwan?
His argument is essentially that the Irish deserve, somehow, to govern the whole of the island. It’s no different to the Argentinian’s argument that they deserve to govern the Falkland Islands. It takes no account whatsoever of the wishes of the people who inhabit these pieces of land.
I’m not as down on this piece as many of commenters – the point was to show the reality of trauma, and that comes through.
The throw-away line on the parallels to the Ukraine though are revealing. It has to be borne in mind that that the current war has a long history. In 2014, Russian-speaking Ukrainians in the Donbass refused to put up with cultural oppression by the central government, but the principle was so important to the central government that an eight-year brutal civil war ensued.
If that is what the Republic of Ireland had in store for Protestants in the North, the British Government can hardly be faulted for opting for partition.
I’m not saying that would have happened, just that the parallel with the Ukraine implies that it would. In the event, of course, the reverse scenario played out, in the smaller territory of the Northern Ireland.
I’m not as down on this piece as many of commenters – the point was to show the reality of trauma, and that comes through.
The throw-away line on the parallels to the Ukraine though are revealing. It has to be borne in mind that that the current war has a long history. In 2014, Russian-speaking Ukrainians in the Donbass refused to put up with cultural oppression by the central government, but the principle was so important to the central government that an eight-year brutal civil war ensued.
If that is what the Republic of Ireland had in store for Protestants in the North, the British Government can hardly be faulted for opting for partition.
I’m not saying that would have happened, just that the parallel with the Ukraine implies that it would. In the event, of course, the reverse scenario played out, in the smaller territory of the Northern Ireland.
I often read that NI will soon have a Catholic majority and that reunification will have to happen then.
My wonder is whether Republic of Ireland will be minority Irish by then with Catholicism a niche religion.
What do you mean?
What do you mean?
I often read that NI will soon have a Catholic majority and that reunification will have to happen then.
My wonder is whether Republic of Ireland will be minority Irish by then with Catholicism a niche religion.
“Ukraine is fighting for that form of sovereignty at the moment”
LOL. That analogy is 180 degrees wrong. Following Terry Eagleton’s tortuous logic, the Irish Republic is actually analogous to Russia, not Ukraine, trying to occupy lands it is “entitled” to but where a majority didn’t vote the way he thinks they should have.
The way Terry Eagleton sees how things should be in Northern Ireland, is the way Putin sees how things should be in Donbas & Crimea.
But the majority *did* vote to be part of Russia.
No they didn’t.
In Ukrainian independence referendum in 1991 both Donbas and Luhansk voted over 80% to be part of Ukraine. Even Crimea voted 54% for that.
You are just repeating Russian propaganda lies.
So situation in Ireland is completely different to Donbas because majority, at the moment, doesn’t want to be part of Ireland.
But bigger problem is Sourhern Ireland.
Would they want responsibility for NI both economically and militarily.
UK just about remain in control during Troubles.
How would they cope with Protestant insurgency supported by English?
No they didn’t.
In Ukrainian independence referendum in 1991 both Donbas and Luhansk voted over 80% to be part of Ukraine. Even Crimea voted 54% for that.
You are just repeating Russian propaganda lies.
So situation in Ireland is completely different to Donbas because majority, at the moment, doesn’t want to be part of Ireland.
But bigger problem is Sourhern Ireland.
Would they want responsibility for NI both economically and militarily.
UK just about remain in control during Troubles.
How would they cope with Protestant insurgency supported by English?
But the majority *did* vote to be part of Russia.
“Ukraine is fighting for that form of sovereignty at the moment”
LOL. That analogy is 180 degrees wrong. Following Terry Eagleton’s tortuous logic, the Irish Republic is actually analogous to Russia, not Ukraine, trying to occupy lands it is “entitled” to but where a majority didn’t vote the way he thinks they should have.
The way Terry Eagleton sees how things should be in Northern Ireland, is the way Putin sees how things should be in Donbas & Crimea.
Oh dear tiresome SINN FEIN rubbish. Go away Eagleton idiot
Oh dear tiresome SINN FEIN rubbish. Go away Eagleton idiot
‘Yet it was always an ethno-political conflict, not a religious one.’ Abject horlicks. The strongest bonds in and between communities are bonds of family, constructed by marriage. And what is the biggest barrier to intercommunal marriage in Ireland, the Balkans, the ME, and pretty well everywhere? Religion. Cleric clinging desperately to their powerbases, terrified that kids might not be indoctrinated to be the future little customers their franchise depends on.
‘Yet it was always an ethno-political conflict, not a religious one.’ Abject horlicks. The strongest bonds in and between communities are bonds of family, constructed by marriage. And what is the biggest barrier to intercommunal marriage in Ireland, the Balkans, the ME, and pretty well everywhere? Religion. Cleric clinging desperately to their powerbases, terrified that kids might not be indoctrinated to be the future little customers their franchise depends on.
Irish unification cannot be determined by the good people of Northern Ireland. The people South of the border will also have to be asked – and there is the real issue.
Irish unification cannot be determined by the good people of Northern Ireland. The people South of the border will also have to be asked – and there is the real issue.
Britain is certainly supportive of Ukraine in resisting Russian invasion. But whether that support extends to the expulsion of Russia from Crimea and the two puppet “republics” of Luhansk and Donestk remains to be seen. In that respect Britain is not being inconsistent in supporting Ukraine while “denying” the Republic of Ireland….what exactly? The right to deny a majority in the North their desire to remain part of the UK? Others posting here have made that point very persuasively.
Britain is certainly supportive of Ukraine in resisting Russian invasion. But whether that support extends to the expulsion of Russia from Crimea and the two puppet “republics” of Luhansk and Donestk remains to be seen. In that respect Britain is not being inconsistent in supporting Ukraine while “denying” the Republic of Ireland….what exactly? The right to deny a majority in the North their desire to remain part of the UK? Others posting here have made that point very persuasively.
I’m wondering why my comment of 10 minutes ago is “ awaiting approval “? I don’t think I said anything that could be construed as a Hate Crime!
I’m wondering why my comment of 10 minutes ago is “ awaiting approval “? I don’t think I said anything that could be construed as a Hate Crime!
“But they are not entitled to own any of it, any more than the Irish are entitled to own the Home Counties.”
Unless, of course, they are Irish travellers flouting planning regulations.
“But they are not entitled to own any of it, any more than the Irish are entitled to own the Home Counties.”
Unless, of course, they are Irish travellers flouting planning regulations.
What! No mention of the Act of Union of 1800 when the British Government destroyed the Ascendancy* Parliament and imposed a rather benign version of direct rule?
Completely exasperated by the sheer incompetence and corruption of the Ascendancy toadies, such the ridiculously faux ‘Englishmen’, otherwise known as the Duke of Wellington and his equally absurd forebears, there was simply no other course of action open to HMG.
(*Protestant.)
Such a benign version of direct rule that millions died of starvation during the Great Hunger (an Gorta Mór).
Read Trevelyan’s diaries.
Such a benign version of direct rule that millions died of starvation during the Great Hunger (an Gorta Mór).
Read Trevelyan’s diaries.
What! No mention of the Act of Union of 1800 when the British Government destroyed the Ascendancy* Parliament and imposed a rather benign version of direct rule?
Completely exasperated by the sheer incompetence and corruption of the Ascendancy toadies, such the ridiculously faux ‘Englishmen’, otherwise known as the Duke of Wellington and his equally absurd forebears, there was simply no other course of action open to HMG.
(*Protestant.)
Ireland is not and never was a colony. Until 1801 it had its own parliament in Dublin and when that was abolished it sent its own members to Westminster. A colony does not have democratic representation.
It was the colonists who had democratic representation, not the native Irish. One doesn’t have to agree with Eagleton to be astonished at the level of self serving cope about Britain’s discreditable record in Ireland on display in this comment section.
It was the colonists who had democratic representation, not the native Irish. One doesn’t have to agree with Eagleton to be astonished at the level of self serving cope about Britain’s discreditable record in Ireland on display in this comment section.
Ireland is not and never was a colony. Until 1801 it had its own parliament in Dublin and when that was abolished it sent its own members to Westminster. A colony does not have democratic representation.
Poor Terry, so repressed in his Irishness by the English that he was forced by them to inhabit one of the most privileged social elites in human history. One can hardly imagine how he might fit with the modern natives of say East Wall.
Poor Terry, so repressed in his Irishness by the English that he was forced by them to inhabit one of the most privileged social elites in human history. One can hardly imagine how he might fit with the modern natives of say East Wall.
The headline of this article suggested to me that Eagleton might be about to say something original, coherent or intelligent. I mean – Ireland, commit crimes!? Surely not. But no, the “crimes” are of course those of the British – aren’t they always? – and Eagleton seems to think that the Irish need to think and talk even *more* about colonialism. Which to me is the polar opposite of the “growing up” he seems to hanker after but fails to define. Might it mean, for instance, paying for the defence of your own air space from all those fabulous tax revenues, instead of relying on the RAF?
The comparison of Ulster with Ukraine is grotesque to the point of parody. At least there was some comedy value in the offhand and apropos-of-nothing comment about some of the Irish Republic actually being north of some of Northern Ireland – oh, those silly Brits can’t even read maps! Well, a small part of England is north of a small part of Scotland – so what? As with so much of Eagleton’s ramblings, I’m unsure of precisely what point he’s trying to make here. He’s like a drunk old uncle dozing in the corner, muttering mainly deranged nonsense interspersed with the occasional offensive cliche. Perhaps he’s better just ignored.
The headline of this article suggested to me that Eagleton might be about to say something original, coherent or intelligent. I mean – Ireland, commit crimes!? Surely not. But no, the “crimes” are of course those of the British – aren’t they always? – and Eagleton seems to think that the Irish need to think and talk even *more* about colonialism. Which to me is the polar opposite of the “growing up” he seems to hanker after but fails to define. Might it mean, for instance, paying for the defence of your own air space from all those fabulous tax revenues, instead of relying on the RAF?
The comparison of Ulster with Ukraine is grotesque to the point of parody. At least there was some comedy value in the offhand and apropos-of-nothing comment about some of the Irish Republic actually being north of some of Northern Ireland – oh, those silly Brits can’t even read maps! Well, a small part of England is north of a small part of Scotland – so what? As with so much of Eagleton’s ramblings, I’m unsure of precisely what point he’s trying to make here. He’s like a drunk old uncle dozing in the corner, muttering mainly deranged nonsense interspersed with the occasional offensive cliche. Perhaps he’s better just ignored.
Good article. Partition was the mechanism which Britain used to keep Ireland subjugated and under British hegemony. It created what Connolly predicted, a ‘carnival of reaction’ both north and south. An illiberal, reactionary regime in the south and a repressive, sectarian one in the north. That the pressure cooker would blow at some point was inevitable.
Good article. Partition was the mechanism which Britain used to keep Ireland subjugated and under British hegemony. It created what Connolly predicted, a ‘carnival of reaction’ both north and south. An illiberal, reactionary regime in the south and a repressive, sectarian one in the north. That the pressure cooker would blow at some point was inevitable.
Let us not forget that Northern Ireland gave the British Army a wonderful ‘live firing training area’ for nearly 30 years.
After the withdrawal from Aden in November 1967 there was some disquiet as to where and when the next campaign would be. There was a little trouble brewing in Oman, but something larger was required to keep the troops busy.
Then Hallelujah! Ulster kicks off in 1969!
As the TV recruitment ads used to say “ Join the British Army, see the World, meet interesting people and kill them”!
Charles. I know you to be an intelligent being. Therefore I enjoyed your humour
“Guilty as charged “!
“Guilty as charged “!
Even you, Brigadier Blimp, were not quite so crass as to blurt out the truth that the British Army used civilian targets (unarmed) for target practice in Ballymurphy and then in Derry..
I would like to seriously invite you to explain what happened in Derry on Bloody Sunday.
The Conservative Prime Minister apologised in Parliament for the killing of fourteen innocent people by the Parachute Regiment.
How could such a thing come to pass?
Another contributer to UnHerd (not you) was crass.
He asserted that every person on that Civil Rights March was a supporter of the IRA..
That was far from being the truth.
Administrative massacre has been an effective tactic used throughout the British Empire..
Ask the Indians!
If, as I believe, Bloody Sunday was an administrative massacre authorized by Ted Heath, it resulted in enormous increase in support for the Provisional IRA..
It prolonged the war by many years.
Do let me know your thoughts, Charles!
I thought there might not be a rapid response.
Not much scope for humour, really.
I thought there might not be a rapid response.
Not much scope for humour, really.
Charles. I know you to be an intelligent being. Therefore I enjoyed your humour
Even you, Brigadier Blimp, were not quite so crass as to blurt out the truth that the British Army used civilian targets (unarmed) for target practice in Ballymurphy and then in Derry..
I would like to seriously invite you to explain what happened in Derry on Bloody Sunday.
The Conservative Prime Minister apologised in Parliament for the killing of fourteen innocent people by the Parachute Regiment.
How could such a thing come to pass?
Another contributer to UnHerd (not you) was crass.
He asserted that every person on that Civil Rights March was a supporter of the IRA..
That was far from being the truth.
Administrative massacre has been an effective tactic used throughout the British Empire..
Ask the Indians!
If, as I believe, Bloody Sunday was an administrative massacre authorized by Ted Heath, it resulted in enormous increase in support for the Provisional IRA..
It prolonged the war by many years.
Do let me know your thoughts, Charles!
Let us not forget that Northern Ireland gave the British Army a wonderful ‘live firing training area’ for nearly 30 years.
After the withdrawal from Aden in November 1967 there was some disquiet as to where and when the next campaign would be. There was a little trouble brewing in Oman, but something larger was required to keep the troops busy.
Then Hallelujah! Ulster kicks off in 1969!
As the TV recruitment ads used to say “ Join the British Army, see the World, meet interesting people and kill them”!
Having read the responses to this excellent piece, the QED is there in print!!!
And I do so look forward ,to contemplating Charlie Windsor’s ears during the merry month of May’s shenanigans!!
And I do so look forward ,to contemplating Charlie Windsor’s ears during the merry month of May’s shenanigans!!
Having read the responses to this excellent piece, the QED is there in print!!!
How beautifully put! Of course Thatcher, aided and abetted by that Mr Heome Ceounties lower middle class from central casting, appeared to be in awe of the Orangemen, as she and Dennis were straight out of the same petit bourgeois tribe to whom the golf club and masonic lodge, are and equivalent of White’s and The Jockey Club to their social superiors.
How ironic was it that it took Old Etonian and ex Household Division Officers in Whitelaw and Channon to actually secretly have to go to Adams and McGuinnes to start what became the peace process…. and Thatcher made Dennis a Baronet so that her useless son could have a hereditary title!
Of course to the upper ends of British and Irish society, all of this mattered not as the bloodstock breeding industry continued, many went to Ireland hunting and fishing, and Catholic and Protestant Officers in Guards and Cavalry regiments commanded and trained happy soldiers from both sides of the divide.
The petit bourgeois are the curse of Britain.
Sadly neither James Chichester-Clark (Eton & Irish Guards), Terence O’Neill, (Eton & Irish Guards) or Basil Brooke (Winchester & Royal Fusiliers, & later 10 Hussars) did any better.
The prod bigotry on this medium just says it all! As I have said before I’m staggered as to how many people do not know the difference between The Chuch of Ireland, which has no borders, and the presbyterian churches of varied hue?
O’Neill tried, but was undone by the Paisley-ite yobbos.
The prod bigotry on this medium just says it all! As I have said before I’m staggered as to how many people do not know the difference between The Chuch of Ireland, which has no borders, and the presbyterian churches of varied hue?
O’Neill tried, but was undone by the Paisley-ite yobbos.
What are Heome Ceounties?
Pour yourself a cup of Earl Grey and I’ll see you for a large schooner of Bristol creme at the 19th of your local golf club…
Pour yourself a cup of Earl Grey and I’ll see you for a large schooner of Bristol creme at the 19th of your local golf club…
You chose to read the wrong Marx, the other one was far more entertaining.
Ahhh Success! At least I’ve succeeded in winding up 18 settee leounge sitters!
Sadly neither James Chichester-Clark (Eton & Irish Guards), Terence O’Neill, (Eton & Irish Guards) or Basil Brooke (Winchester & Royal Fusiliers, & later 10 Hussars) did any better.
What are Heome Ceounties?
You chose to read the wrong Marx, the other one was far more entertaining.
Ahhh Success! At least I’ve succeeded in winding up 18 settee leounge sitters!
How beautifully put! Of course Thatcher, aided and abetted by that Mr Heome Ceounties lower middle class from central casting, appeared to be in awe of the Orangemen, as she and Dennis were straight out of the same petit bourgeois tribe to whom the golf club and masonic lodge, are and equivalent of White’s and The Jockey Club to their social superiors.
How ironic was it that it took Old Etonian and ex Household Division Officers in Whitelaw and Channon to actually secretly have to go to Adams and McGuinnes to start what became the peace process…. and Thatcher made Dennis a Baronet so that her useless son could have a hereditary title!
Of course to the upper ends of British and Irish society, all of this mattered not as the bloodstock breeding industry continued, many went to Ireland hunting and fishing, and Catholic and Protestant Officers in Guards and Cavalry regiments commanded and trained happy soldiers from both sides of the divide.
The petit bourgeois are the curse of Britain.