The first GUEST POST by our new regular contributor Am Ghobsmacht
I sometimes wonder if the Siege of Derry was the worst thing that ever happened to the Ulster Protestants.
The modern day Protestant wonder solution to everything (a WD40 for emergencies if you will) is to cry "no surrender", stubbornly dig his/her heels in and wait for the inevitable to happen.
Somehow though the inevitable didn't actually happen at Derry.
In fact, it all went the wrong way around:
They replaced an experienced and able commander (Lundy) with two not-so steely characters, Messrs Baker and Walker, who, just for the record, wanted to surrender the city too (never mentioned).
A relief force arrived from England, saw that it was a waste of time and after discussing the situation with Lundy buggered off to England again
 |
| Where the Jacobites went wrong: French siege engineer? |
On one hand, a great victory for the Ulster 'Protestants' but at the same time the start of a crippling legacy.
The solution to nearly every big obstacle since then has been the same; lock the gates and cry no surrender.
It was the case for keeping Ireland as part of the UK, they refused to countenance it as a mere dominion (and less British too?) state such as New Zealand, Canada or Australia.
Now the Queen's head can be found on coins from these three countries, but no longer for Ireland.
Not an inch lead to "well, quite a lot actually".
Roll on the civil rights campaign. No surrender. The awful attempts at stifling reform gave rise to the Provos and its chaotic campaign.
The Anglo-Irish Agreement: "No Surrender!". Maggie says "tough titty!", happens anyway.
Drumcree: "We will walk this road". They still haven't walked that road
Flegger-geddon: "Our flag will fly again, 365". So far, that seems as likely as Gordon Brown becoming a Las Vegas star entertainer.
Twaddell: "We will walk this road!". Yeah, sure.
So on and so forth. And now with the Haass pow-wow in town there are a whole range of goodies for Unionists to shout 'no surrender' at and wonder why everything has gone wrong:
 |
| Unionism: "Learns from its mistakes...." |
New Northern Ireland flag.
Advantages:
Removes all doubt regarding Northern Ireland's flag status
Gives Northern Irish sporting teams something (legitimate) to fly at events
Won't have the Loyalist connotations of the ulster flag
Will be more acceptable to potential Catholic unionists (or 'Catholics who vote for the status quo')
Will give Sinn Fein something to worry about (as in it could be a symptom of unionists catching themselves on. How scary!)
Disadvantages:
Will annoy fleggers
Is obviously part of a Sinn Fein plot to destabilise loyal Ulster and their objections are a cunning bluff, you fools...
 |
| New Northern Ireland Flag: Such a cunning republican plan that even republicans oppose it... (from 'New Flag for Northern Ireland's' Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/newniflag ) |
Designated Days Across Northern Ireland
Advantages:
Will stop unionists from looking like the knuckle-draggers in these talks
If successful will see the Union Flag flying where it hasn't flown for some time
Will bring the unionist councils in line with other British cities.
Disadvantages:
Will annoy fleggers
Being more like the rest of Britain will make us, erm, less British...?
Flying the Tricolour on state visits
Advantages:
We'll be like every other country than has the dignity and respect for other states
Disadvantages:
Will annoy fleggers
 |
| Respecting Flegs: One way street? |
Show some respect, decency, sobriety and common sense at controversial parades
Advantages:
Will rob 'residents groups' of their ammo
Will stop the parades from being so intimidating
Will stop them (the aggressive minority of bandsmen) from looking like aggressive dicks every summer
Will adhere better to the Orange Order's Christian principles
Disadvantages:
Will annoy fleggers
Is an obvious ploy by Sinn Fein. We don't know why as aggressive parades help their cause and makes them look like the good guys but it must be a Sinn Fein ploy....
And the usual candidates that even Haass won't touch:
Moving the regional stadium to a neutral area, flying a new NI flag and playing a NI anthem
Advantages
Expands the current potential for support from just Protestant unionists to other people who live in Northern Ireland (whoever they maybe?)
Might actually qualify for a competition instead of being a journeyman of FIFA
More people may have pride in Northern Ireland football team instead of just half the country.
Disadvantages:
Will annoy the fleggers and the more vocal OWC types (some of whom may be fleggers...)
An Irish Language Act
Advantages
If unionists agree to it whilst they have a negotiating position they have the chance to tailor it to their liking (whatever that may be) e.g. perhaps add more of a Scottish flavour to it? Make it conditional that Sinn Fein cease the use of Irish in their literature? Demand Tayto be printed in Irish? I dunno, but they can do something.
When it eventually does get passed they'll have no say...
Disadvantages
It'll annoy fleggers
It'll please the fenians.
Pleasing the fenians will annoy the fleggers even more...
 |
| WHAT. THE. BLUE. BLAZES?!?!?!?!?! |
Of course, the standard response from the 'leaders' of the Unionist camp is to say "no!" and expect to cling on with the whitest of knuckles until demographics forces their hand.
At which point they'll have no influence.
The unionist leadership seems absolutely oblivious to the fact that demographics is overtaking them.
 |
| King Cnut: Terrible orangeman... |
He decided to prove it to his followers and let the sea come in about his feet and throne whilst he ordered it back.
The are no King Cnuts in the upper echelons of Unionism.
They seemingly think the tide will just 'stop'.
Just when they should be at their most dynamic and determined in terms of reform and reshaping Northern Ireland to make it a more appealing place to ALL of NI's citizens they instead listen to those who have entrenched themselves.
From a Darwinian point of view this is asking to be taken out of existence.
Unfortunately, a number of unionist leaders don't believe in Darwinian theory and as such even fear the word 'evolve' let alone implement some sort of evolution.
This is all the more shocking given the military tradition of the Ulster-Anglos. The upper crust of Ulster Anglican society have produced an incredible amount of military talent.
The top 5 British generals of WWII were of Ulster stock (and there were more besides).
 |
| General Sir Alan Brooke Chief of Imperial General Staff Churchill's Top General One of the 'Fighting Brookes of Fermanagh' Saw 'the bigger picture' |
Not to mention officers like Blair 'Paddy' Mayne, soldier and hellraiser extraordinaire who was instrumental in the original SAS missions in North Africa.
The Ulster generals and officers were heavily involved in North Africa in WWII.
The front moved constantly, they didn't just pick a place, cry "no surrender!" and fight to the death and lose the ruddy war (well, maybe at Tobruk, but they did at least have the Royal Navy supplying them...).
No, they had to keep an eye on the bigger picture and accommodate it, regardless of how galling the short term moves may have been (e.g. withdrawing from parts of the front).
This shows that strategic vision isn't alien to the Ulster Unionist community but it has been severely lacking this past half century.
They have no 'end game' or refuse to believe that it will end.
Men like Alan-Brooke, Auchinleck, Dill, Montgomery, Alexander, Dorman-Smith* and Mayne saw an end game or at the very least adapted to the ever shifting circumstances of the war theatre.
They weren't stuck in 1688.
Alas, the same can't be said for their political successors. In a time where dynamics and change are required we instead see more walls, literally and metaphorically.
Nationalism and republicanism have time on their side, Unionism does not.
 |
| Governor Walker: A Lundy?! |
Having said that, Derry survived the siege, Northern Ireland on its current trajectory will not.
Thanks Pete...
* Interesting chap Eric Dorman-Smith/Dorman-O'Gawen.
A strategic visionary who was instrumental in the North African campaign.
He was also a Catholic Ulsterman and his disillusionment with the establishment led him to dabble with militant republicanism after the war.
For more info on him and Ulster's top military brass try this for size: http://www.amazon.com/Churchill-Irish-marshals-Patrick-Marrinan/dp/0948868023
Really, it's quite the eye-opener.
NO SURRENDER to progress and time and demographics and all that sort of fenian trickery.
ReplyDeleteFunny, Churchill's right man was also, secretly an Irishman: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_Bracken,_1st_Viscount_Bracken
ReplyDeleteMaybe you need to get out more AM, not all within Loyalism are "dig their heels" types.
ReplyDeleteMost of my friends/family from that demographic are extremely forward thinking and progressive.
Continuous demonising of people within our society is driving a bigger wedge between the two main "faiths" in this wee part of the World.
Now that Gerry and Co have taken their bandwagon up a dead end, and with no decent political alternative since the demise of the SDLP, is that all that is left, down the nose sneering at working-class folk?
Hello Andy
DeleteI would hope that it's a given that I'm not tarring all loyalists with the same brush, but alas I seem to have failed, in which case "sorry".
However, regardless of how many progressive Loyalists there may be it doesn't really seem to have any great effect on the outcomes of the scenarios that I listed, does it?
Now, obviously David Ervine would be an exception alas he (unfortunately) is not longer with us.
Now, as for your remark about "down the nose sneering at working-class folk?" I really don't know where you got that from, this is my first post on LAD and I haven't mentioned the working class at all, I mentioned Unionism and Loyalism, not the same thing is it?
Also, for what it's worth I'm from a (rural) working class background and no stranger to the loyalist band scene back in the day.
Although, I imagine this isn't convenient for my would be critics so I imagine this'll be forgotten or just plain ignored.
So I'm not sneering at anyone, merely pointing out folly.
The greatest rebuttal would be to tell me I'm wrong and offer evidence, unfortunately that seldom happens so I'm given no alternative view points that I might take into consideration and review my opinions.
It would be a lot more effective than hinting that I might be a snob of sorts.
Read it again Andy and just tell me where I'm wrong and I'll definitely take your points and evidence into consideration.
(Yes, I know I might have screwed up a bit with the 'Dominion' status thingy but the point still stands).
Cheers
AG
My response was mostly a more general view of the continual mudslinging that goes on against people from the "PUL" and not entirely aimed at you AG.
ReplyDeleteApologies for not making that clear.
The part I did respond directly to you was that you seem to have the perception (judging by your second paragraph) that Unionism/Loyalism is by and large an intransigent force.
While admittedly there is a very vocal and visible hardcore, I feel that a very sizable chunk of progressive and open minded Loyalists/Unionists get overlooked.
Understood Andy.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure if I sat down with a shrink they would perhaps liken my impotent online rants to the things that I never had the stones to say when I was a teenager surrounded by my unionist elders and betters and the things that they said "what do you mean you're 'Irish'?! Do you want to walk home?!".
So, I am a bit harsh but I put this down to the unfortunate trait in the psyche that remembers the negative over the positive.
For example, mention the words 'beardy dress wearing Islamic man' and an alarming amount of people will say something negative or uneasy regarding this topic when truth be told some of the most kind, honest, generous and humane people I have ever met in my life were devout Muslims from various parts of Northern Pakistan.
But many people will think of 'radical clerics'.
I too am guilty in that respect as I think of our very own 'radical clerics' in the Protestant community who have encouraged a strategically static culture that depends on digging in.
I take heart from your misinterpretation of my remarks as I leave the idea of size to the reader's own experience and if your personal experience suggests that a great deal of unionists are progressive and willing to compromise/change direction then I view this as a good thing as your experience is different from mine and therefore quite heartening.
The disheartening thing is that this progressive core is by in large rather anonymous and has yet to make itself heard.
For example, today I got my ass handed to me on slugger O'Toole by an OWC follower http://sluggerotoole.com/2014/01/16/why-northern-ireland-is-becoming-less-northern-irish-and-more-divided/#comments (Pete Rock 17 January 2014 at 4:52 am)
He pointed me in the direction of the seemingly large number of norn Iron fans that aren't content with being 'Little Britain'.
So, how then to make this group heard and smother people like the DUP task force who are hell bent on retaining the NATIONAL Anthem for REGIONAL games?
I believe that the NI football team could be a catalyst for change in NI, from fleg to anthem to stadium. If it truly encompasses Northern Ireland then extremists on both sides will be dealt a heavy blow.
Alas, the voice is not yet loud enough and people like Jamie Bryson and Wille Frazer are the back seat passengers that will drive Our Wee Country into a big wall.
Any ideas Andy? Genuinely? Is there a cause we can join or are people like myself ironically causing unionists to dig their heels in further?