Challenging the Utterly Ludicrous

Sean Bresnahan of the 1916 Societies responds to a Bernard Mulholland letter in the Irish News on 22 August 2014. Sean Bresnahan's letter was carried in the Irish News earlier this month.
Bernard Mulholland (August 22) proclaims we have a 'perfectly good Northern Ireland Assembly at Stormont that can adequately govern NI within the EU'. Really? The track record of that Assembly, as reported on umpteen occasions in this very paper, demonstrates conclusively otherwise. The six-counties is clearly a failed political entity in a permanent state of crisis and all efforts to prop it up are destined to founder on the zero-sum intransigence that is a constant feature of politics in an illegitimate statelet of this type.

The idea of the six-counties remaining under the undemocratic control of Westminster rather than re-uniting with its own hinterland makes less and less sense in a fluid, rapidly changing situation but beyond that Bernard's notion of an 'independent Northern Ireland' is utterly ludicrous. Leaving aside the poisonous sectarianism that would inevitably cripple ANY six-county political system, the north is not in a position to stand on its own in a manner say as that proposed for Scotland, not even remotely. But if we were to re-join the rest of our country and achieve a real measure of independence a new situation would emerge.

His notion the European Parliament would dare challenge the British sovereign claim is fanciful in the extreme but shifting the problem to Europe will not in itself change a thing regardless, the reason being it would still ignore the democratic will of the Irish people. Talk of the six-counties having a right to self-determination is simply a way to circumvent that will and another way of saying Britain and Unionism should be allowed to dictate the parameters of Irish democracy and must first agree to Irish reunification.

But why should that be the case and why should a small minority be granted veto power over the vast majority? Protection for minorities is one thing and to be encouraged but this is something entirely different and basically an attempt to reason away the historical context of how we arrived at this point to begin with. Those who argue the virtues of such a position willingly submit the democratic rights of the Irish people to an occupying power and it's schemes to subvert genuine self-determination in order to control our country.

No matter the passage of time the historical fact remains Britain has occupied Ireland, in whole or in part, for centuries and has done so against the express wishes of the people who live here. You can't get around that simply by ignoring it or moving the goal-posts. Irish Unity, as the only truly democratic model, needs examined at this point, despite the refusal of naysayers like Bernard to countenance such an arrangement under any circumstances. It's time for fresh thinking if Ireland is to progress, either that or remain stuck in the time-warp that passes for politics in our still-partitioned land.


  1. This is quite a difficult letter to make any sense of. Is he saying that the democratic wishes of the people of NI are irrelevant?

  2. With Sinn Féin's eyes on the South and Unionists lurching right, the North is paralysed

    (Suzanne Breen, Irish Mail on Sunday)

    Sinn Féin's position on welfare reform isn't that of a principled party of the left. This is opposition for the optics only. Martin McGuinness actually reached a deal with Peter Robinson on welfare reform which would have averted the crisis.

    Sources say Gerry Adams then stepped in to veto it. The orders from Dublin were that Belfast couldn't compromise on the issue before a Dáil election. For Sinn Féin to implement cuts in the North, while opposing austerity measures in the South and savaging the Labour Party's record, would look hypocritical.

    Basically yes Cue Bono.. Deffo on the nationalist side of the oxymorons. And I'd say in the 26counties too... If Gerry Adams say's jump they (PSF from the DFM down) ask 'How high?'....

  3. Sinn Fein insists it won't let Stormont collapse

    Alex Maskey, who chairs the Stormont committee overseeing the long-stalled benefits upheaval, insisted: "Gerry Adams is not suggesting for one second that we are happy to let the institutions collapse. We are working very hard to keep them afloat. "Why would we want to hand over any power back to a British minister who may fly in and out one or two days a week?"

    I tell you what I think.. Suzanne Breen is a lot more right than she is wrong and PSF will let the executive fall and allow for a short period of direct rule to be implemented so call me Dave can impose the welfare cut's and bring the six counties into line with the UK.. And then PSF can lay the blame at n° 10....(even though McGuinness has agreed in principal with Robinson to go ahead with them. What Gerry Adams said was simply "Stall until next years elections).. Then after the election next year, Peter steps down and gets a peerage in the House of Lords....