Why Northern Ireland’s anti sectarianism is semi permanently stuck in “the crawler lane”…
Cillian McGrattan
Feb 15
In a couple of recent Belfast Telegraph articles Malachi O’Doherty has developed the idea that the core division in Northern Ireland is about more than sovereignty and divided loyalties to either Ireland or Great Britain.
‘We are divided territorially’, he argues. This includes education, schooling, residential segregation, sport, religion, cultural preferences, language ‘and whatever issue some councillors we’ve rarely heard from will choose to quarrel over next’.
That the British government has resiled from tackling that fundamental problem of sectarianism is something to be regretted. Amidst the furore over amnesty, the fact that the government had strengthened its language in that regard was largely overlooked.
For instance, the July 2021 Command Paper ‘Addressing the Legacy of Northern Ireland’s Past’ went beyond previous platitudes about tackling sectarianism to promoting ‘anti-sectarianism’. This more assertive tone was dropped in the subsequent Bill, though an amendment currently before the Lords requests that it be reinserted.
What is anti-sectarianism?
Part of the reason for the reversion to the idea of ‘reconciliation’ and promises to challenge sectarian division might be that it is difficult to imagine legislating for anti-sectarianism. It’s perhaps easier to see what anti-sectarianism is not rather than defining what it is.
Extrapolating from O’Doherty’s columns, anti-sectarianism really ought to be decoupled from reconciliation (which itself, is impossible to define being both a (transitive) verb and a noun – in short, a process and an event). Whereas the latter depends on a vague hope that the ‘two communities’ can come together on some imagined common ground, the former involves resisting and questioning the exclusivist ethno-religious assumptions that are the preserve of the ethnic blocs (and that are taken as a given by that two communities model or way of thinking).
It is difficult to underestimate the depth of that way of conceptualizing the ‘Northern Ireland problem’ and the extent to which it saturates the way politics are thought about and done here.
Arguably it operates as a fully fledged ideology: It describes the world (divided sovereignty, divided communities), it provides a roadmap for overcoming problems (reconciliation and moving forward), and, in the coinage of Michael Freeden, the doyen of ideology studies, it decontests meaning – it provides a common language and frame of reference for people to get the gist of understandings.
What it’s not
That ideology is epitomized in the work and ethos of the Community Relations Council. Companies Housereturns suggest that the CRC gets an annual budget of around £3m from the Executive, £2m of which it uses to fund various local projects. The CRC’s ‘vision’ goals are terms that are difficult to argue with but equally difficult to substantiate: ‘interconnectedness’, ‘diversity’, ‘equity and equality’, ‘respect and dignity’ and so on. But, on that point of substantiation, with the litany of incidences of sectarian division outlined above together with the fact that there has been an uptick of sectarian hate crime offences reported to the PSNI (2020-21: 1,067 reports), if the CRC did not exist would anyone notice?
Of course, in part, the answer to that is Yes: the middle-class do-gooders who subscribe to the ideology of two communities because it enables them to preach reconciliation while demarcating themselves as not part of the problem.
As O’Doherty says, this is a political issue for Alliance, all of whose most recent Assembly seats come from the unionist-dominated east of the Province – they can’t be seen as being too patronizing to their voters in case it will cost them transfers: to amend E.P. Thompson’s famous phrase, no one likes being subject to the enormous condescension of prosperity.
Knowing it when it’s seen
Sectarianism itself is never far from the Northern Irish Overton Window – thanks to ill-judged communal singing and malignant Twitter contributors. But anti-sectarianism resides as a kind of photo negative indirectly relating to a range of topics. It can be read, for instance, in Mick Fealty’s, allusion to the resilient moral compass of Patrick Kielty in disavowing Tommy Tiernan’s minimizing of rebel songs (‘That’s so harmless’): If the bloody follies of the last fifty years have taught us anything useful, it’s surely that forcing the matter is deeply counterproductive?
This could be described as anti-sectarianism in a positive form (positive implying change or intervention, rather than a value judgment): It is a refusal and a resistance to the idea of tolerating the banter and craic of ethnic sentimentality. This is the exact opposite of the type of nudging paternalism and wishful thinking behind the CRC and the two-communities-reconciled ideology.
A complementary negative form might look like the kind of self-educating that, in another recent and widely shared interview, Jarlath Burns spoke about unionist sensitivities and the need to respect cultural values simply because ‘[the GAA] can’t be our culture and nobody else’s’. There is a performative dimension to this – Burns is a school principal and is running to become the next GAA president. In other words, on the one hand one might expect him to say such things, but, on the other, he doesn’t necessarily need to.
Fealty quotes Trevor Ringland who also mentions ‘respect’ and frames it similarly in relation to stating hard truths and the avoidance of both whataboutery and the seemingly cultural constant of the politeness involved in not mentioning the elephant in the room. In his Newsletter article, Ringland highlights one of those hard truths: ‘There was always an alternative to the violence that involved cooperation while respecting differences’.
The notion alternatives is important because it points to the limits of respect – it is simply incommensurable to, for instance, Michelle O’Neill’s repeated claim that the ‘war … came to [republicans]’. The incommensurability means that, unlike Burns, O’Neill’s putative aspiration to try’ to find ways in which to ensure that those of a British identity feel protected’ falls flat: things are too far gone for that.
Getting there
Getting the history right is one way to challenge anti-sectarianism. It is a challenge to the contradictory hopes of republicans that, time out of mind, the conflict will be reframed as an inevitable civil rights struggle. And it is a pre-emptive corrective to the fundamental sectarian temptation to ‘remember the past not in order to get it right, but in order to get it wrong’.
Secondly, given that ethno-religious identities are not essentialist or essentializing, then they can be changed. If the government is serious about anti-sectarianism, then, it might begin by looking at the banal nationalism inculcated in our sectarian education system.
Finally, we need not be waiting to hear ‘from political leaders and others that this is what they want’. O’Doherty suggestion is caustic because the very structuring of Northern Irish politics around the two communities model means that sectarianism is precisely what politicians want and need; though, of course, they cannot say that.
Better to look to people and organizations that have been on the frontline of resisting sectarianism – trades unions, for instance, or the nonaligned groups who have traditionally be pushed to the margins of a society that valorizes conformity, sameness and exclusion.
The politics of dissent and resistance have as long a history on this island as those of sectarianism. These pages are another iteration of that history. These pages play a role in fostering change – in challenging the ideology that two communities and sectarianism are ubiquitous and inevitable.
In that regard, O’Doherty suggests that, 25 years after the 1998 Agreement, it might take us another quarter century to get beyond the two communities model. Beginning to imagine possibilities and potential beyond that model, in short, to take anti-sectarianism seriously would be a first step to shortening that timescale.
A Letter from Ireland The State of the Union a Chara, I am back in Ireland, and it’s good to be home. The sun is out. Snowdrops are blossoming, and daffodils are sprouting. I’m planning the next set of trips around St. Patrick’s week and Easter. While the seasons are changing, unionism remains frozen. The leaders of unionism joined together to take a case to the Supreme Court claiming that the agreement struck between the British Government and the EU, the Irish Protocol, was illegal. That challenge was lost this week. The unionists had claimed the protocol was “unconstitutional”, which is a strange claim to make as Britain has no constitution. The parliament elected by the people is sovereign and can make and change any law. The British government ultimately believes that it is bound by no law as it can always change the rules. That culture and that practice are not compatible with international law and agreements. So the British believe that it can make and break international agreements and laws. They believe that they can make and break agreements on Brexit. That elections can be canceled, suspended, or rescheduled to suit their political interests. That they can undermine the Good Friday Agreement and European Convention on Human Rights by denying families access to the courts, inquests, and judicial investigations into the killing of their loved ones in the past. While the British parliament is sovereign in its jurisdiction, it cannot unilaterally change the rules of international agreements. That is why the international community is crucial to safeguarding progress in Ireland. The EU and the Irish Government are signatories to agreements and have recourse to legal actions. The US acts to remind the British Government of its responsibilities. It is always better to resolve issues before they get to court. The Irish Government should make clear to the British Government that it should stop its proposals on the past and return to the previous agreements or face action by the Irish Government in the European Courts. The Irish government should be prepared to stand over the rights of Irish Citizens killed in the North of Ireland during the conflict. The Good Friday Agreement paved the way for a Bill of Rights which would protect the rights of citizens from parliamentary interference. These proposals have been objected to by the unionists with the support of the current British government. It appears unionists only want constitutional protections when it suits them. Have a great weekend. Is mise, Ciarán Ciarán Quinn is the Sinn Féin Representative to North America
Shillelagh Law, one of the undisputed greatest Irish bar bands working today, catches up with Mike Farragher on the TAYSHT podcast as they embark on their 25th-anniversary tour.
Shillelagh Law chats with Mike Farragher on the TAYSHT podcast.
If you’re an Irish American, then Shilelagh Law is your story.
Your story, that is, if you’ve won All-Ireland championships, have a penchant for pizza and late-night White Castle runs, and amassed a rabid following of fans up and down the Northeast corridor!
Shilelagh Law was born out of the close-knit Irish American neighborhoods of Yonkers and The Bronx. After a few years of wandering around after graduating college, Terence Brennan, Richard Popovic, and Stephen Gardner re-connected over their mutual love of old Irish songs.
When a heavily distorted version of “Wild Rover” found its way onto their punk and hardcore set list, Terence soon picked up the bodhrán, and a new direction was born. The fast and rowdy liberties they took with old Irish standards gave the songs new life and dragged them kicking and screaming into the light of a new day.
Denis McCarthy joined Shilelagh Law after hearing about them from his brother Kevin and seeing a flyer in a men’s room. He wisely tore the flyer down to remove any other fiddling competitors, not that he needed to. Denny won multiple All-Ireland championships in a number of categories.
“It came at a perfect time in his life,” Kevin McCarthy reveals on the latest TAYSHT episode. “After our father died, he kinda walked away from music for a while, and this brought him back.”
Kevin, a masterful piano accordion in his own right, soon joined the band, and a legendary lineup was formed.
To immerse oneself in a conversation with this band is to immerse oneself in a high school locker room, where verbal towel snapping and chops busting is the primary mode of communication. What lurks beneath, however, is a tight musical brotherhood and an incendiary jam band chemistry when they hit the stage.
They’ve become a regular at Citi Field for the New York Mets Irish Heritage night, and have seen their music featured in movies (including one I made), a Honda web commercial, and, most recently, the CBS cop drama “Blue Bloods.
I caught up with the band before their latest barnstorming tour to celebrate 25 years together. Popovic has recently unearthed old diaries, planners, and videotapes from the early days, and they reveal on the TAYSHT podcast that there is a loose plan to drop that on their fans throughout this anniversary year.
March will be here before you know it! Get your calendar now and play lotto with us. For $20 you are in the game with 31 chances to win cash prizes each day.
Raymond McCord outside the Royal Courts of Justice in Belfast (Liam McBurney/PA)
David Young, Rebecca Black and Jonathan McCambridge, PA
31 January, 2023 14:24
Victims’ campaigners have urged the EU to “stand up” to the UK in opposing controversial laws to deal with the legacy of the Northern Ireland Troubles.
Bereaved relatives called on the EU for support and also asked MEPs to hold a debate in the European Parliament and pass a resolution criticising the Government’s proposed legislative changes.
The Legacy Bill, which is going through its parliamentary stages at Westminster, would see a form of immunity offered to those suspected of killings during the conflict if they agree to co-operate with a new truth recovery body.
It would also prohibit future civil cases and inquests related to Troubles crimes.
It has been almost universally opposed by parties across the political divide in Northern Ireland, as well as all victims’ groups. The Irish Government is also opposed to the plan.
The Government has proposed several amendments to the Bill as it proceeds through its legislative stages, though the core elements of it remain.
A film about a number of killings during the Troubles in Northern Ireland was shown to a gathering of MEPs in Brussels on Tuesday.
It came on the same day the Legacy Bill was back on the parliamentary schedule in London for further consideration in the House of Lords.
The film, made by Mobile Media and the Truth and Justice Movement, features eight people who have lost family members in a number of atrocities, including the Omagh bomb, the Ballymurphy massacre and Bloody Sunday.
It has already been shown to parliamentarians at Westminster, members of the Oireachtas parliament in Dublin and Northern Ireland Secretary Chris Heaton-Harris.
Victims’ campaigner Raymond McCord, who attended the screening was part of a campaign of opposition to the UK Government’s controversial plans to deal with the legacy of the Northern Ireland Troubles.
Mr McCord, whose son Raymond Jnr was killed by loyalist paramilitaries in 1997, said the European Parliament had a reputation for supporting justice and human rights.
“We ask for this shameful legacy/amnesty bill of human rights abuse and cover-up, along with the violation of truth and justice, to be debated in the EU parliament,” he said.
“We ask to speak in front of the 705 MEPs who have been elected to make Europe a better and safer place with equality and human rights for all.
“We need not only a resolution from the EU parliament with full support for our group and victims in total rejection of this bill and the betrayal of victims and justice, we also need the EU to stand up to a British government that has no regard for truth and justice and deals it signs.”
Mr McCord said 3,600 deaths in the Troubles would equate to 1.2 million deaths among the population of the EU.
“Unlike the British government, please stand with us, the victims not the murderers,” he urged MEPs.
“Remember the children blown up with bombs and shot in the head, the women raped and murdered, men and women murdered in front of their families, men lined up and riddled with bullets, the sectarian murder gangs and imagine if it was your own son, daughter or mother or father being buried in a closed coffin because of their horrific injuries.
“This film clearly shows the pain and injustice inflicted on thousands of victims.
“Who are those in this EU parliament who believes that murder is a crime unlike what this Bill proposes?
“Who are those in this EU parliament see justice as paramount to democracy?
“Our murdered family members must be respected by the EU parliament by rejecting this Bill not only in this parliament but in the European courts.
“We believe that not one MEP would support this Bill.
“Whether it’s one murder or 3,600 murders, the EU parliament has a choice, solidarity with victims or complicit in washing their hands of truth, justice and human rights.
“No sectarian agenda, no political agenda, only truth and justice.”
Irish MEP Frances Fitzgerald said: “This is a hugely important and heartbreaking film which gives voice to the trauma of the families of some of those murdered during the Troubles, on both sides.
“It shows how important it is to speak up in opposition to the proposals before the UK Parliament, which would prevent the perpetrators from being prosecuted.
“Such a proposal is outrageous and devastating for families seeking justice.
“The Irish Government and all parties in Leinster House have been very clear in their opposition to this proposed legislation.
“Now this campaign is coming to the European Parliament and I encourage all my colleagues from all member states to come and see the film and show their support for the campaigners.”
Irish senator Emer Currie praised the victims for bringing their campaign to Brussels.
“This is a really important day for victims,” she said.
“They continue to grow their campaign against the Legacy Bill, which has been criticised and condemned by everyone from the United Nations High Commissioner on Human Rights and Council of Europe Committee of Members to members of US Congress.
“Today the victims bring their personal and powerful stories of loss and trauma to the European Parliament, with the message that international human rights obligations must be upheld and we all have a role in ensuring that.”
