Martin Galvin addresses the England Get Out Of Ireland controversy in today's Irish News.

It is remarkable to see continuing misunderstanding of "England Get Out of Ireland" banners in St. Patrick’s Day Parades. Horrified reactions about mass unionist emigration or renewed armed struggle are wrong, simplistic, and perhaps, to use Naomi Long's words, "profoundly stupid". Events like the ongoing Brexit fiasco, Karen Bradley's blunders and the crown's legacy strategy, show the true meaning goes to the heart of Ireland's problems.

"England Get Out of Ireland" first and foremost is an expression of support for a sovereign 32 county united Ireland, but the meaning goes far deeper. The specific mention of England recognizes that British rule from Westminster really serves English interests rather than the interests of all Irish people.

The main inspiration, according to Michael Flannery, who helped compose the wording, was Wolfe Tone's aim "to break the connection with England" by means of "uniting Protestant, Catholic and Dissenter." Rather than attacking unionists it invites them to take equal citizenship in a united nation serving all Irish people, instead of giving allegiance to British hegemony based on sectarian privilege.

Why should any Republican hesitate to stand behind those words? Surely this is a legitimate aspiration and analysis. It is especially ironic to see the reaction from quarters whose slogan seems to be "Ulster Says No!"

The slogan was formulated in 1948, when there was neither an armed campaign nor hunger strike and Westminster ruled through a one party Orange State. The words remained true, as Westminster introduced sectarian power sharing to defuse the IRA campaign in the 1970s. Banners are carried proudly today by many contingents, who see Stormont dormant more than two years because of "deliberate provocation, arrogance and disrespect".

Look at the Brexit fiasco which threatens disaster for Ireland north and south. Ireland got little say and less thought, as England voted fears about immigrants, European regulations and the loss of empire glory days. Brexit policies are set to suit English politics. Ireland is collateral damage. Why does May's major concern about Ireland, seem limited to DUP votes?

Karen Bradley was appointed six county secretary before ever visiting the north. She did not even know about historic links between religion and political allegiances. With Ballymurphy Massacre Inquest testimony making headlines, an oblivious Bradley told Westminster, crown force killings were not crimes. Would blundering Bradley be kept if the north mattered more than her parliamentary vote?

Why does Britain deny and delay legacy truth as family members die, twenty-one years after the Good Friday Agreement?

Those who cannot understand the relevance of "England Get Out of Ireland" simply refuse to understand the reality at the heart of Ireland's problems.


Martin Galvin is a US Attorney-At-Law.


What England Get Out Of Ireland Means

Martin Galvin addresses the England Get Out Of Ireland controversy in today's Irish News.

It is remarkable to see continuing misunderstanding of "England Get Out of Ireland" banners in St. Patrick’s Day Parades. Horrified reactions about mass unionist emigration or renewed armed struggle are wrong, simplistic, and perhaps, to use Naomi Long's words, "profoundly stupid". Events like the ongoing Brexit fiasco, Karen Bradley's blunders and the crown's legacy strategy, show the true meaning goes to the heart of Ireland's problems.

"England Get Out of Ireland" first and foremost is an expression of support for a sovereign 32 county united Ireland, but the meaning goes far deeper. The specific mention of England recognizes that British rule from Westminster really serves English interests rather than the interests of all Irish people.

The main inspiration, according to Michael Flannery, who helped compose the wording, was Wolfe Tone's aim "to break the connection with England" by means of "uniting Protestant, Catholic and Dissenter." Rather than attacking unionists it invites them to take equal citizenship in a united nation serving all Irish people, instead of giving allegiance to British hegemony based on sectarian privilege.

Why should any Republican hesitate to stand behind those words? Surely this is a legitimate aspiration and analysis. It is especially ironic to see the reaction from quarters whose slogan seems to be "Ulster Says No!"

The slogan was formulated in 1948, when there was neither an armed campaign nor hunger strike and Westminster ruled through a one party Orange State. The words remained true, as Westminster introduced sectarian power sharing to defuse the IRA campaign in the 1970s. Banners are carried proudly today by many contingents, who see Stormont dormant more than two years because of "deliberate provocation, arrogance and disrespect".

Look at the Brexit fiasco which threatens disaster for Ireland north and south. Ireland got little say and less thought, as England voted fears about immigrants, European regulations and the loss of empire glory days. Brexit policies are set to suit English politics. Ireland is collateral damage. Why does May's major concern about Ireland, seem limited to DUP votes?

Karen Bradley was appointed six county secretary before ever visiting the north. She did not even know about historic links between religion and political allegiances. With Ballymurphy Massacre Inquest testimony making headlines, an oblivious Bradley told Westminster, crown force killings were not crimes. Would blundering Bradley be kept if the north mattered more than her parliamentary vote?

Why does Britain deny and delay legacy truth as family members die, twenty-one years after the Good Friday Agreement?

Those who cannot understand the relevance of "England Get Out of Ireland" simply refuse to understand the reality at the heart of Ireland's problems.


Martin Galvin is a US Attorney-At-Law.


10 comments:

  1. Perfidious albion? Sure it's not like the south turned a blind eye to IRA ops on the border, safe houses in the south, arms dumps throughout and not a peep regarding the ethnic cleansing of Prods along the border either. When you point a finger there's always three being pointed back at you, so the saying goes.

    As usual, this article by Galvin misses the point. The Unionist population in the 6 counties believe themselves to be British. No Westminster Government can be seen to turn their back on citizens, and that's including Labour.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Steve - the shortcomings of Dublin still fall far short of those of London. The biggest satin on Dublin, which you do not mention, is the collusion between it and London in matters regarding the cover up and failure to properly investigate Dublin-Monaghan.


      You rather than Galvin miss the point which is that the demand for England to get out of Ireland is as old as Irish republicanism itself. As a strand of republicanism it has its provenance in Tone. It seems it is okay to demand that England be in Ireland (a sentiment encapsulated in your closing sentence) but not that it be out of Ireland.


      The very real obstacles that your closing sentence poses to any demand for England to get out of Ireland is something those behind the demand need to take on board. It does not make the demand any less legitimate.

      Delete
    2. "The biggest satin on Dublin, which you do not mention, is the collusion between it and London in matters regarding the cover up and failure to properly investigate Dublin-Monaghan."

      As opposed to the indifference to the ethnic cleansing of prods on the border, when gangs including the Kingsmill slaugterers nipped back over the border and remain untouched? Or how about the R&R camps in Buncrana or Bundoran, the caravan parks used to 'lay-up' after an operation in the 6 counties? The South knew all about these and did nothing. Why focus solely on Monaghan and Dublin?

      "The very real obstacles that your closing sentence poses to any demand for England to get out of Ireland is something those behind the demand need to take on board. It does not make the demand any less legitimate."

      Fair enough, but is it semantics when we supplant 'England' for 'British'?

      Where does one end and the other begin?

      Delete
    3. Steve - few other than propagandists make the charge of ethnic cleansing. Having both been a member and student of the IRA, I came across nothing about ethnic cleansing. And I can hardly be accused of being an apologist. The IRA could easily have stepped up a campaign against Protestant civilians if they were intent on driving them out. They would have been the easiest if targets. Dublin hassled and harried the IRA for the most of its campaign. Arrests were frequent in the so called R&R areas. While not having been in either I was arrested twice in 11 days by the GardaĆ­ in 74 as part of hassling republicans. Why did I select Dublin-Monaghan? The worst incident of the conflict seems as good as any.

      Irish people have right to call for an end to British rule. As John Cleese once said of British soldiers, they will fight and die to keep China British. Are you telling me that it is right to call for England to be in Ireland but not England to be out of Ireland? It really is that simple.

      Delete
    4. Whether you were aware of it or not Anthony, the South Armagh Provo's were under no such confusion.

      http://www.irishnews.com/news/2016/06/07/news/unionist-react-angrily-to-ira-ethnic-cleansing-plan-550226/

      I'd submit that the plan may have been vetoed at Army Council level but on the ground the reality was very different.

      Again i'd ask, were do the 'English' end and 'British' begin?


      Delete
    5. Steve - the weakest of cases. It shows that there was no ethnic cleansing but an allegation of a proposal for one which was then vetoed. Unionists such as Jean Coulter called for nationalists areas to be bombed from the air by the RAF - nobody really believes the view of a deranged individual represent a policy. The British and the English are synonymous in terms of the banner. Calling for the British/English government leave Ireland is a wholly legitimate demand.

      Delete
  2. There is no such political entity as "England".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Barry - England is a euphemism for the Westminster parliament. But I guess you know that. If people want to be technical they could simply claim England is not actually in Ireland, it is across the Irish Sea

      Delete
    2. Anthony

      England is not coterminous with either the island of Great Britain or the United Kingdom. I am not being pedantic when I make this distinction because of the beast of English nationalism that Brexit has unleashed upon these islands. Many English nationalists refuse to enter "British" on census and ethnic group monitioring forms and put down "English" as an expression of discontent with the lack of devolution arrangements for England that Scotland, Wales and NI (though obviously in abeyance) have. English nationalism is of the ethno-nationalist variety; an expression of nativist resentment agsainst the multi-cultural UK; the confidence of Scottish civic nationalism and against immigration and the EU.

      Delete
    3. Barry even if any or all of that is accurate it is hardly germane to the point being raised. Ireland is not bound by English or British custom and practice: none of the above changes the meaning for republicans of England get out of Ireland

      Delete