Carrie Twomey ✍ writes of the stereotypical Irish content being farmed by MAGA accounts on social media to Irish American audiences
My family, who do not support Trump or MAGA, often send videos me they come across related to Ireland, videos fed to them by the Facebook algorithm alongside Irish dancing and travel videos.
The last 6 Facebook videos I was sent from family in the United States (all about the fuel protest) were from far right MAGA influencer accounts spreading propaganda.
The far right in Ireland is being supported by MAGA, Steve Bannon, and the US State Department under Trump (Sarah Rogers).
They want to create an Irish Trump - they were hoping they could get Conor McGregor elected and that's why he was at the White House St Patrick's Day in 2025.
They want to manipulate Irish Americans with propaganda presenting Ireland and stereotypical Irishness as being MAGA and pro Trump, so they push these false narratives on social media like these posts and videos.
There's millions of Irish American voters they are targeting with these fake accounts pushing this.
They are also working to destabilise the government here ahead of Ireland holding the EU Presidency.
Ireland has a lot of tech companies' EU headquarters here and is in charge of the data regulators.
The US wants to stop the EU from regulating tech companies.
It also wants to build more data centres and exploit Ireland's energy resources. It's all about money.
We had a week of a handful of farmers and truck drivers do "go slow" protests on major highways (just like the MAGA protest in Canada) and then they started blocking the ports which was becoming a national emergency. Gas stations ran out of fuel and stores were starting to empty.
At first people supported it because they thought the protests were about everyone's cost of living going up.
It quickly became apparent that this was a far right stunt for propaganda purposes and that the farmers and truck drivers involved were only interested in protecting themselves.
First, they were only focused on the Irish government. They called for our Taoiseach to be killed and drove gallows through Dublin. They said nothing about the war in Iran, or Trump, despite that being the reason fuel prices are going up.
Secondly, they stopped the protest as soon as the government deployed the police and agreed to a tax reduction for farmers and haulage.
In a couple weeks that reduction will be gone because the price of fuel will be rising further (Europe has less than 6 weeks reserves left). So it was a pointless protest for the Irish people as a whole. It gained nothing while creating fear and division ahead of a crisis.
But on Thursday, Trump's ambassador to the EU, Andrew Pudzer, met with Irish officials in Dublin to urge the government to keep using and investing in fossil fuels (which the protesters had advocated), and to keep fuel prices down.
Had the protests not just taken place (and almost bring down the government), the ambassador's reception would have been very different.
Ireland would have been more confident heading in a direction similar to Spain's, who are no longer majority dependent on fossil fuels, now relying on renewable sources of energy.
The protest scared officials and helped create a receptive atmosphere for the ambassador instead.
When you're looking at Facebook and Irish content, be very critical. The majority of it is either AI slop or far right propaganda designed to trick you.
Especially if it's Irish related, it is usually wrong and posted by really bad (and racist) accounts. They used to be the Qanon, anti-vaccine Covid denier type accounts.
Now they are using Ireland, its culture, and history, to further spread their disinformation and harm. The manipulation is to make Irish Americans feel proud they are carrying on 'Irish tradition' being MAGA.
⏩Carrie Twomey hates Illinois Nazis (just like the Blues Brothers)
Big wheels are being driven over democratic norms
Welcome to the dictatorship of the breakfast roll-atariat! All power to the HGV Soviets!
James Geoghegan, one of the leaders of the, declared on RTÉ’s Liveline the uprising “a revolution” that is “going to change Ireland forever”. Fair enough: this is arguably the most serious insurrection the State has experienced in a century.
But the rest of us are at least entitled to a little more information. A revolution against what? And what kind of permanent transformation does this truck-ulent vanguard intend to create in our lives?
There’s a point in any social upheaval when it shifts from being against the government to being against the state. The first is entirely healthy – a vigorous and disputatious citizenship is essential to a democracy. The second – and we’ve been here before through the long history of militant Irish republicanism – attacks the legitimacy of democracy itself.
It posits the existence of a superior group that is purer and more authentic than the rest of the citizenry and that therefore has the right to enforce its will. As Geoghegan crowed to The Irish Times, “It’s in our hands, we call the shots. Whatever we decide to do is what everyone else will do.”
Sigh.
It’s this doomer worldview that makes it impossible to have conversations with certain groups of people.
Yet, to an extent, I get it.
Not just because 2026 has been such a whirlwind so far that it’s impossible to know what’s coming up, but also because it’s easy to imagine that you have no control over your life and thus not take any risks. In other words, being a victim is an utterly seductive proposition for many, on both the left and right.
As Frank Furedi recently argued:
For the political right, the victim offered a new point of contact with what it regarded as an alienated silent majority. Amid moral uncertainty—when traditional conservative values seemed threatened by the so-called permissive society—the victim became a potential focus for renewing civic solidarity...a moral stance against crime and public empathy for victims would strengthen ties to family and community... But conservatives were not alone in turning towards victimhood...In the 1960s and 1970s, liberal and radical politics underwent a significant transformation: many groups once regarded as agents of change were increasingly cast as victims of the system. The women’s movement followed a similar trajectory. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, feminists often resisted representing women as victims. By the late 1970s, that position had shifted. Campaigns began to foreground the woman victim—battered, violated, raped. Suffering, too, became a political resource. Victimology was less challenged than politicised. Political forces began to contest which experiences entitled people to the status of victim, turning victim identity into a moral and political prize.
Hence why it’s now up for debate about whether protesting farmers are dupes for the far-right or whether government officials attacking the media coverage is a good thing.
The main problem with being a perpetual victim is that you become blind to the progress already made and end up living an unfulfilled life where everyone else is to blame except for yourself. You never unearth your potential to make the world a better place, nor do you see your fellow citizens as equals.
So now would be the perfect time to remind us how far women’s freedom has come.
Enter Zoe Strimpel.
Writing this book, her openly stated aims are to demonstrate that:
careerism is Good for women. Even mothers. And their children.
Women do Not (generally) belong behind the sink with a brood.
a lot of evolutionary psychology is Bunk. Regressive, sexist, dumb.
‘the female of the species’ is quite often the more promiscuous, and more deadly.
Attacking us should be dangerous.
Quite lofty aims and while the book isn’t a complete success, there is an awful lot to ponder within its pages.
One section in particular highlighted how conservatives and liberals both dislike the concept of women defending themselves from physical attacks:
..I have often thought about how good it would be for all girls and women...to go through mandatory martial arts training tailored specifically to attacks from men...As I went around making these points, I garnered incredulous disapproval and dismissive snorts. That’s because, in the mode of passive complaint favoured by progressive women, it is important never to do something that is not ‘your job’...underlying the...argument seems to lurk the assumption that it is somehow unnatural to ask women to respond violently to violence...
When considered further, the implications are disturbing.
Her unabashed view of capitalism as saviour will not go down particularly well in certain quarters but the ultimate message of how it has never been a better time to be a woman in the Western world is certainly a necessary antidote to the endless amounts of doomsayers in today's society.
On one hand, Good Slut is an attempt to demonstrate that women in 2026 need to stop thinking of themselves as perpetual victims and take chances. On the other hand, there are problems.
When trying to defend the right to abortion, she uses the “it’s just a collection of cells” argument which, though technically true, is not a persuasive argument for many. In fact, some would consider it, at best, infantilising and, at worst, callous. Abortion is something virtually every woman goes into with an understanding of what will happen and a deep awareness of the consequences. Most understand that it’s a human life so, if an abortion is requested, it’s better not to infantilise but confront the matter head on. Through this, we not only defend the right for a woman to choose but we also can offer help and understanding afterwards through frank and honest conversations.
Another eye roller is when she claims that Hillary and Kamala weren’t elected due to a lingering hostility among some in America about a woman being president. This viewpoint is utterly laughable considering Kamala dropped out of the 2019 primaries after being clocked by Tulsi Gabbard, only to be rescued by Biden when he needed a way to show how forward thinking he was, while Camille Paglia hit the nail on the head when she said that:
Hillary has benefited enormously from being a woman. People don't lay a glove on her. If she were not a woman...people would go after her—all of her opponents would have gone after her, you know, far, far more severely—for her corruption, her dishonesty, you know, for her...the woman has never succeeded at any job. She's created chaos after chaos, including now all of North Africa spilling its refugees into Europe is due to Hillary, you know, taking out Gaddafi and not thinking about what would happen afterward...
Finally, Strimpel’s argument that Bonnie Blue and Lily Phillips represent what a truly robust liberal society looks like may very well be true on the face of it, and Strimpel is correct that conservatives and liberals are uncomfortable with the notion that both consented to do what they did (hence why we’ve seen articles attacking the notion of consent), the situation does ask awkward questions about the pornification of society and how that is separate from casual sex.
Regardless, there is still a fair bit to chew on in here. Maybe it will inspire a few to remove the ‘victim’ mantle from their mindset before going on to change the world for the better. And if it does, then the book has done its job.
Zoe Strimpel, 2026, Good Slut: How Money, Sex and Power Set Women Free. Constable. ISBN: 978-1408720974
⏩ Christopher Owens was a reviewer for Metal Ireland and finds time to study the history and inherent contradictions of Ireland. He is currently the TPQ Friday columnist and is the author of A Vortex of Securocrats and “dethrone god”.
Ten links to a diverse range of opinion that might be of interest to TPQ readers. They are selected not to invite agreement but curiosity. Readers can submit links to pieces they find thought provoking.
Before We Conform, Or Condemn, Let Us At Least Be Curious
♜One recognizes one's course by discovering the paths that stray from it - Albert Camus♞
Cue Homer Simpson: “Doh!” It’s a short article, but worth unpacking—because there’s an important rebuttal to be made. To the casual Republican observer, it might seem those persistent MI5 snoops chalked up another success. The reality is far darker—and more disappointing.
Firstly, there were no plans. Strictly going by the court proceedings—since I was there—no plans, maps, targets, dates, or anything remotely suggestive were ever produced. The prosecution inferred plenty from the ASU activity, but that was about it. To be fair, the article did include a teeny caveat just to tidy up any exaggerated statements: “It said there was no clear indication of the intended targets.”
So yes, MI5 can claim another victory—but the starker truth is they remain victorious and must wonder how the charade continues. Let me add some perspective for my Republican comrades still wearing green-tinted glasses.
Again—going strictly by the court proceedings, for my own peace of mind—the two lads sent over had never met, nor communicated with anyone in England. It was, quite literally, a terrorist blind date—facetious as that may sound. Yet one of them, with no record or murky Fenian profile, was observed and photographed disembarking in Wales.
Which suggests MI5 knew well in advance—likely from the moment he started to pack his bags, despite having little time to prepare. The second lad, unknown to him, was also tracked via a separate route. At this point, incompetence seems unlikely; the odds of both making major errors from the outset are low. Later, the van sent from the north—allegedly for the ASU use—was tracked from departure. Meanwhile, the London crew had scant details of that operation until it reached them.
Now, without diminishing MI5’s brilliance in keeping the fading flame of imperialism alive, and despite their fingerprints being all over this, it’s abundantly obvious there was a Republican rat embedded in this tightly controlled department. Identifying suspects wouldn’t be rocket science—and just to clarify, it wasn’t the same devious character still collaborating with Belfast Republicans; he wasn’t promoted to that department until later.
In the end, the real story isn’t the Belfast Telegraph glorifying British spycraft, but the decades-long suppression of Republican touts by Republicans themselves. But more on that later.
Firstly, there were no plans. Strictly going by the court proceedings—since I was there—no plans, maps, targets, dates, or anything remotely suggestive were ever produced. The prosecution inferred plenty from the ASU activity, but that was about it. To be fair, the article did include a teeny caveat just to tidy up any exaggerated statements: “It said there was no clear indication of the intended targets.”
So yes, MI5 can claim another victory—but the starker truth is they remain victorious and must wonder how the charade continues. Let me add some perspective for my Republican comrades still wearing green-tinted glasses.
Again—going strictly by the court proceedings, for my own peace of mind—the two lads sent over had never met, nor communicated with anyone in England. It was, quite literally, a terrorist blind date—facetious as that may sound. Yet one of them, with no record or murky Fenian profile, was observed and photographed disembarking in Wales.
Which suggests MI5 knew well in advance—likely from the moment he started to pack his bags, despite having little time to prepare. The second lad, unknown to him, was also tracked via a separate route. At this point, incompetence seems unlikely; the odds of both making major errors from the outset are low. Later, the van sent from the north—allegedly for the ASU use—was tracked from departure. Meanwhile, the London crew had scant details of that operation until it reached them.
Now, without diminishing MI5’s brilliance in keeping the fading flame of imperialism alive, and despite their fingerprints being all over this, it’s abundantly obvious there was a Republican rat embedded in this tightly controlled department. Identifying suspects wouldn’t be rocket science—and just to clarify, it wasn’t the same devious character still collaborating with Belfast Republicans; he wasn’t promoted to that department until later.
In the end, the real story isn’t the Belfast Telegraph glorifying British spycraft, but the decades-long suppression of Republican touts by Republicans themselves. But more on that later.
⏩Michael Phillips is a former republican prisoner. Keep up with his work.
In this week’s bulletin
⬤ Russia’s abduction of Ukrainian children.
⬤ interview with renowned Ukrainian historian Serhii Plokhy.
News from the territories occupied by Russia
Brutal Russian reprisals against young student sentenced to 9 years for her pro-Ukrainian position (Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, April 10th)
Russian invaders sentence Tetiana Deviatkina to 6 years for criticizing them on social media (Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, April 10th)
The Face of Resistance: The Story of Crimean Tatar Activist Teymur Abdullayev (Crimea Platform, April 10th)
Russia’s FSB report the ‘arrest’ of a young mother 18 months after they abducted her in occupied Crimea (Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, April 9th)
Russia’s supreme court finds Ukrainian guilty of ‘international terrorism’ for opposing invaders (Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, April 8th)
Maryna Ryff disappears in Russian-occupied Crimea after refusing to hide her pro-Ukrainian position (Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, April 7th)
Weekly Update On The Situation In Occupied Crimea April 7th (Crimea Platform, April 7th)
Young Mariupol woman sentenced to 13 years for donating to Ukraine’s Army after her POW husband died in Russian captivity (Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, April 6th)
Russia sentences Crimean Tatar prisoner of war to 20 years for serving in Ukraine’s Armed Forces (Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, April 6th)
News from the front
Russia has violated ceasefire regime 2,299 times – Ukraine's General Staff (Ukrainska Pravda, April 12th)
Cut Off from the “Mainland” (Tribunal for Putin, April 8th)
News from Ukraine
New NGPU union in frontline region with female leader (KVPU, April 8th)
Kramatorsk: An attempt at normalcy and eighteen drones Ukrainer, April 3rd)
Research into human rights abuses
How Russia Abducts Ukrainian Children and Erases Their Identity (Tribunal for Putin,
April 12th)
Russians execute four Ukrainian POWs in Kharkiv Oblast – DeepState (Ukrainska Pravda, April 12th)
Russians kill wounded Ukrainian troops near Huliaipilske during "Easter truce" – DeepState (Ukrainska Pravda, April 11th)
Ukrainian Women in Captivity: Thoughts about Their Families Help Them to Survive (Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, April 10th)
War-related news from Russia
Russian losses in the war with Ukraine. Medizona count, updated (Mediazona, April 10th)
Novaya Gazeta raided in Moscow. Investigative journalist Oleg Rodulgin detained and taken for questioning (Mediazona, April 9th)
On the designation of “Memorial” as an extremist organisation. Statement by the Council of the Memorial HRDC (Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, April 9th)
Russian security forces raid Novaya Gazeta office in Moscow (Novaya Gazeta, April 9th)
Searches carried out at the offices of independent trade unions (ovd.info, April 9th)
A Russian children’s dance group won a competition after performing a routine set to Putin’s speech announcing the war against Ukraine (Meduza, April 8th)
Behind the curtain. A comprehensive guide to Russia's internet censorship in2026 – and what life feels like inside it (Medizona, April 7th)
Russia has shifted to a year-round conscription system. Here’s what that means for the country’s young men (Meduza, April 7th)
Russia Is Redefining Genocide for Political Purposes (Moscow Times, April 6th)
UPD: Search of the Confederation of Labour of Russia (Labour Mission, April 2026)
Analysis and comment
Putinism – a new form of fascism? (International Viewpoint, April 12th)
Webinar on care in Ukraine (Oksana Dutchak, Facebook, April 10th)
Historian Serhii Plokhy on Russian imperialism, de-colonization, and why Putin is so obsessed with Ukraine (Kyiv Independent, April 8th)
Italy’s campist left against Ukraine’s Solidarity Collectives (Europe Solidaire, April 8th)
“Privatization” as an Instrument of Crimea’s Occupation (Crimea Platform, April 7th)
Can social support programmes encourage people to return from abroad? (Cedos, April 7th)
US citizen went to army recruitment offices in both Moscow and Kyiv (IStories, April 6th)
The Killing Ledger of War (Medium, April 5th)
“All Jokes Aside” (Posle, April 1st)
How Ukraine is rewriting its role (IPS, March 31st)
Russia is crushing labour rights in occupied Ukraine – the ILO must go beyond declarations (Geneva Solutions, November 12th 2025)
Upcoming events
Wednesday 15 April, 6.0-7:30 pm. Try Me for Treason: Voices Against Putin's War - Part of the Think Human Festival 2026 Actors will perform extracts from speeches made from the dock by Russian oppositionists who have been tried for sabotage for actions taken against the Russo-Ukrainian war Clerici Building, Clerici Learning Studio, Oxford Brookes University, Headington Campus, Oxford.
🔴This bulletin is put together by labour movement activists in solidarity with Ukrainian resistance. More information at Ukraine Information Group.
We are also on twitter. Our aim is to circulate information in English that to the best of our knowledge is reliable. If you have something you think we should include, please send it to 2U022ukrainesolidarity@gmail.com.
We are now on Facebook and Substack! Please subscribe and tell friends. Better still, people can email us at 2022ukrainesolidarity@gmail.com, and we’ll send them the bulletin direct every Monday. The full-scale Russian assault on Ukraine is going into its third year: we’ll keep information and analysis coming, for as long as it takes.The bulletin is also stored on line here.
To receive the bulletin regularly, send your email to:
2022ukrainesolidarity@gmail.com.
To stop it, please reply with the word “STOP” in the subject field.
We are also on twitter. Our aim is to circulate information in English that to the best of our knowledge is reliable. If you have something you think we should include, please send it to 2U022ukrainesolidarity@gmail.com.
We are now on Facebook and Substack! Please subscribe and tell friends. Better still, people can email us at 2022ukrainesolidarity@gmail.com, and we’ll send them the bulletin direct every Monday. The full-scale Russian assault on Ukraine is going into its third year: we’ll keep information and analysis coming, for as long as it takes.
The bulletin is also stored on line here.
To receive the bulletin regularly, send your email to:
2022ukrainesolidarity@gmail.com.
To stop it, please reply with the word “STOP” in the subject field.
When the ‘Terms of the Agreement’ were signed by British and Irish delegates on 6th December 1921 which, once ratified by Westminster and Dublin Parliaments and voted on in what has been termed a ‘Treaty Election’ in 1922, the Terms of Agreement became a Treaty between Ireland and Britain.
To most who fought in the Irish Civil War, pro and anti-treaty factions of the once unified IRA the question was simple. If the Treaty was supported it would mean partition of the country and/or an oath of allegiance to the British Monarch, apparently minor details!
To anti-treaty supporters these conditions were unacceptable while to those who supported the Treaty, they were a ‘stepping stone towards full freedom’. The pro-treaty side won both on the battlefield and in the political chambers and the ‘Terms’ were passed by 64 in favour with 57 opposing. There was no formal public referendum but the public showed support by voting for pro-treaty representatives both at local and national elections. The question was, and perhaps still is, were the public furnished with all the facts about the treaty before voting for representatives supportive of said treaty? Considered by many as a betrayal of the republic there were many other hidden agendas contained within the Terms of the Agreement – immediate forerunner of the Treaty. One issue which remained and, apparently still does, is that of landlordism and its absentee variant.
Throughout the nineteenth century rural Ireland launched many campaigns, some armed and violent, against landlordism and those landlords absent living in Britain and England in particular. Absentee Landlords made huge amounts of money out of lands they owned in Ireland charging high rents from tenants to live on these estates. The struggle to end the system which facilitated ‘Absentee Landlords’ resulted in various Land Acts between 1870 and 1923 which supposedly broke the landlord system. However it appears the Duke of Devonshire, Peregrine Cavendish, and his son William Cavendish, the Earl of Burlington, owners of Lismore Estates in the Knockmealdown Mountains in County Waterford are practicing absentee landlordism and making a fortune in 2026. It is beyond belief these British parasitical aristocrats can do this in a country who supposedly achieved independence in 1922. It is evident the anti-treaty side were, in principle, correct in the Irish Civil War and the bullshit fed to the population by the fledgeling government side in order to gain their acceptance of said treaty did not contain the whole truth!
The Duke of Devonshire and his son live cosy lives in England doing next to fuck all in productive work. They cream off huge profits from their interests, estates, in Ireland and have decided within their wisdom to increase the rents of sheep farmers who lease 8,000 acres of land from €5 per hectare in 1924 to €50 per hectare by 2029. This represents an increase of 900% on farmers who cannot afford to pay. Lismore Estates will not provide a “letter of evidence” to prove land is being leased. Without such a letter no farm payments will be made and will not be while the dispute continues. It is these requirements on farmers to provide a “commonage evidence letter” which are proving problematic for the farmers which Lismore Estates and their owner, the Duke of Devonshire, are more than aware of and are weaponising.
Throughout the nineteenth century rural Ireland launched many campaigns, some armed and violent, against landlordism and those landlords absent living in Britain and England in particular. Absentee Landlords made huge amounts of money out of lands they owned in Ireland charging high rents from tenants to live on these estates. The struggle to end the system which facilitated ‘Absentee Landlords’ resulted in various Land Acts between 1870 and 1923 which supposedly broke the landlord system. However it appears the Duke of Devonshire, Peregrine Cavendish, and his son William Cavendish, the Earl of Burlington, owners of Lismore Estates in the Knockmealdown Mountains in County Waterford are practicing absentee landlordism and making a fortune in 2026. It is beyond belief these British parasitical aristocrats can do this in a country who supposedly achieved independence in 1922. It is evident the anti-treaty side were, in principle, correct in the Irish Civil War and the bullshit fed to the population by the fledgeling government side in order to gain their acceptance of said treaty did not contain the whole truth!
The Duke of Devonshire and his son live cosy lives in England doing next to fuck all in productive work. They cream off huge profits from their interests, estates, in Ireland and have decided within their wisdom to increase the rents of sheep farmers who lease 8,000 acres of land from €5 per hectare in 1924 to €50 per hectare by 2029. This represents an increase of 900% on farmers who cannot afford to pay. Lismore Estates will not provide a “letter of evidence” to prove land is being leased. Without such a letter no farm payments will be made and will not be while the dispute continues. It is these requirements on farmers to provide a “commonage evidence letter” which are proving problematic for the farmers which Lismore Estates and their owner, the Duke of Devonshire, are more than aware of and are weaponising.
Sinn Fein TD, Conor McGuiness, raised the issue with the Minister for Agriculture, Martin Heydon TD, in the Dail. Mr McGuiness said; “I know the Minister will not intervene but the department has effectively taken a side in an ongoing dispute by holding farmers over a barrel”. Mr Haydon responded by saying “I am aware of the case in Waterford which Deputy McGuiness has raised”. Some response!
If as Mr McGuiness claimed and the Minister did not refute Mr Haydon will “not get involved” what the fuck do we have Ministers for? The Minister for Transport will not get involved in transport disputes, the Minister for Health will not get involved in disputes in the Health Service and now the Minister for Agriculture will not get involved in a case which is a throwback to the nineteenth century, why are these highly paid government Ministers in office, what is their purpose?
Unlike Hauliers, and rich farmers these sheep farmers do not have huge tractors and articulated lorries, each costing a working life’s salary, to use as barricades as do those involved in the fuel dispute. The government are involved in talks with these millionaire farmers and Hauliers but refuse to have anything to do with tackling the Duke of Devonshire who is clearly exploiting these sheep farmers!
The truth is the Twenty-Six-County government are on the side of the rich and powerful, even English ones, and would be prepared to see Irish farmers go to the wall rather than upset the Duke of Devonshire! If this is the case what was the ‘War of Independence’ really all about? Here we have a man living a cushy life in England on money exploited from Irish Sheep Farmers in Ireland who would not be out of place alongside Captain Charles Cunningham Boycott back in 1880.
Despite these close similarities with those dark old days the Duke of Devonshire appears free to continue the practice of absentee landlordism unmolested by the Twenty-Six-County Government, what kind of administration are they? Why is an English Duke owning land in Ireland in the first place? This is not a little cottage with a few acres it is half a county! Was the War of Independence, among other issues, supposed to rid us of people like Peregrine Cavendish? Many good men and women fought to consign absentee landlordism to the dustbin of history from the Land league, and before, onwards did they really sacrifice their lives for this? Lives sacrificed in order an English Duke can exploit poor Irish Sheep Farmers with rent hikes of 900%?
It has been said the Devonshire’s have been historically good landlords providing money for their tenants during the ‘famine’ of 1845-51. The Cavendish family are and were part of the establishment who through their actions and British Government policies were greatly responsible for the ’famine’ in Ireland. If the Cavendish’s did give money, granted possibly more than others, could it have been conscience money? Guilt for being part of an establishment they refused to condemn as it provided them with a cushy living but, by the same token, felt a certain responsibility for their tenants? If they really wanted to do something they, and others, would have spoken out against the British rich exporting food from Ireland, other than gammy spuds, to be fed upon the tables of the rich and powerful of Britain. It was this removal of beef, dairy, and wheat produce thus leaving the Irish with only a rotten potato crop to live on which was greatly responsible for the ‘famine’ in Ireland which did not occur in other countries hit by potato blight.
It has been said the Devonshire’s have been historically good landlords providing money for their tenants during the ‘famine’ of 1845-51. The Cavendish family are and were part of the establishment who through their actions and British Government policies were greatly responsible for the ’famine’ in Ireland. If the Cavendish’s did give money, granted possibly more than others, could it have been conscience money? Guilt for being part of an establishment they refused to condemn as it provided them with a cushy living but, by the same token, felt a certain responsibility for their tenants? If they really wanted to do something they, and others, would have spoken out against the British rich exporting food from Ireland, other than gammy spuds, to be fed upon the tables of the rich and powerful of Britain. It was this removal of beef, dairy, and wheat produce thus leaving the Irish with only a rotten potato crop to live on which was greatly responsible for the ‘famine’ in Ireland which did not occur in other countries hit by potato blight.
The Devonshire’s would have been much more progressive putting their considerable weight behind stopping these exports of other food stuffs rather than just donating money in the form of various subsidies. The two could have complemented each other, stopping the exports and subsidies. Even allowing for this historical contribution, or lack of, it does not excuse the present Duke of Devonshire increasing rents to €50 per hectare by 2029 from €5 per hectare in 2024. It is the kind of move Captain Boycott would have been proud of especially given what appears to be government support or, at very best, inaction!
 |
| Caoimhin O’Muraile is Independent Socialist Republican and Marxist. |
Ten links to a diverse range of opinion that might be of interest to TPQ readers. They are selected not to invite agreement but curiosity. Readers can submit links to pieces they find thought provoking.
Before We Conform, Or Condemn, Let Us At Least Be Curious
♜One recognizes one's course by discovering the paths that stray from it - Albert Camus♞
The bungling amateurism of Trump is on display. He goes from knee-jerk reaction to knee-jerk reaction, bungling left, right and centre. A blockade is an Act of War in international law, not that that bothers Trump if he even knows it. It also came out that Hegseth is deliberately giving Trump false information to let him think the US is winning, when it isn't. Trump, famously unread, and who never reads his briefs, is easy to manipulate. He is a glorified man-baby who freaks out like a child when told 'no'.
Professor Clarke said before that if the war is still going on by May then it is out-of-control. He believes it is out-of-control right now, from Trump threatening Armageddon a week ago (and Hegseth wants to launch nuclear weapons against Iran), to an illegal blockade now. God knows what insane thing he will do next.
And of course the core failure was a typical Trump one - he failed to assemble a coalition of the willing in advance. Both Bush presidents had the common sense to do that.
A former Trump Defense Secretary said that Trump is incapable of thing strategically. Everything is a gut kneejerk reaction with no strategic thinking behind it.
Meanwhile, having burnt his bridges with the UK and long-standing allies, he has now burnt his bridges with Meloni, once a close friend, all over his dumb comment attacking Pope Leo.
Michael also was asked about Lord Robertson's attack on Starmer's complete failure to fix Britain's weak Armed Forces. He agrees 100% with Lord Robertson and Fiona Hill. The defence review aimed to fix the Britain's armed forces by 2035. Starmer has now wasted two of the ten years doing nothing despite time being of the essence as Britain (and Ireland as its weak defence means it relies on the British armed forces for defence) is in a dangerous situation. He also pointed out something I have repeatedly been making too. The way in dangerous times you avoid war is to strengthen your defence, following the Roman dictum by Vegetius, Si vis pacem, para bellum - if you want peace, prepare for war.
President Connolly like Michael D Higgins entirely misunderstand the rearming going on as indicating that countries rearming want to go to war. It is in fact the exact opposite. They want to avoid war. The weaker a country's defence is, the easier a target it is and so the more an aggressor is encouraged to attack. The stronger a country's defence is, the more risky an attack on it is, and so the less likely an aggressor is to invade. Vegetius's dictum is basically saying 'to avoid war, make your defence strong.'
Nor does a smaller state have to equal strength to a larger potential aggressor. All through history, large stronger countries have been defeated, or failed to win, against a smaller one. One only has to look at the failure of Putin's invasion of Ukraine to defeat Ukraine, though Russia on paper was far more powerful. We see it right now in America's inability to defeat Iran.
Both Ukraine and Iran have a critical advantage. They are being attacked. That means for them it is an existential threat, so their citizens and military are far more determined. In contrast the attacker is not in an existential threat. Their soldiers are not fighting for the survival of their country. They are being sent into someone else's country as part of their job. They are less emotionally committed to the war than the Ukrainian and Iranian militaries, for whom it is about their country's survival. That always gives the defender an advantage. To win, the attacked country just has to survive. That is victory. The attacker has to destroy the country they are attacking, collapse its institutions, etc.
All the advice of Lord Robertson and Professor Hill is that to deter an attack Britain has to properly up its defence. In failing to do so, the Starmer government without realising it is increasing the likelihood of attack.
Often it is a battle of psychology as well as military. It is a matter of the demonstrating in your military build-up that you are determined not to give in. You want the potential attacker to think "attacking them is too risky. We may win, but wars are unpredictable and we might not. That country will resist, so attacking them is too much of a risk."
Britain, in the rearmament in 1939 that Chamberlain ordered, messed with Nazi Germany's head. They already lacked aerial dominance when Britain won the Battle of Britain. The Nazis were sufficiently nervous about attacking Britain to put it off while it attacked the USSR. Thankfully it was defeated there as it intended to attack Ireland as well as Britain. The entry of the US into the war at the end of 1941 entirely changed the odd, so the invasions of Britain (Operation Sea Lion) and Ireland (Operation Green) were put off on the very long finger.
Psychology is everything, and in the war in Ukraine, Zelenskyy proved a far better leader in the psychological war than Putin. In the psychological war, he proved to be an FDR or Churchill both of whom were exceptional war time leaders and masters of psychological warfare. In contrast, Trump in the Iran War proved to be a disaster psychologically. He failed to bring Congress or the people behind him. He failed to communicate clear goals, and erratically changes his mind daily if not hourly.
So proper defence is not just about defence. It is about the psychological message it conveys to a potential attacker and how that can deter an attack.
⏩ Jim Duffy is a writer-historian.
Back the basic demands. Defend the right to protest. Oppose the frauds on the far-right and discuss the protest leaders, but let’s keep coming back to the real issue of unbearable price increases and where they come from. Workers, unions - let’s deepen the movement for a country we can all live in.
The basic demand is right!
For several days Ireland has seen some of the most militant protests in years: roads blocked, fuel depots and the Whitegate refinery targeted, fuel supplies thrown into chaos. The government is under real pressure because the core demand is right and massively popular: price caps on fuel during a cost-of-living crisis that is crushing ordinary people. We have been calling for such caps for years.
Because the government has failed to act we have a cost of living crisis on top of a cost of living crisis.
Continue @ ESSF.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
