Few things more sickening than self-pity of the manufactured, self-serving kind. Except, maybe, someone making a semi-career out of ‘oh, look at how I was able to change’
I occasionally meet people on the street, ordinary decent people from different backgrounds, who know me. But they walk silently past. Their attitude is wholly justified.
I occasionally meet people on the street, ordinary decent people from different backgrounds, who know me. But they walk silently past. Their attitude is wholly justified.
I was once an apologist for a loyalist paramilitary organisation (the UDA) and its actions. These people, quite rightly, have nothing but disdain for paramilitaries and their past or present excuse-makers. Some in media have a similar attitude where I am concerned. Hardly surprising, given that they too are members of, and care deeply about, our society.
I am told that their thinking is along the lines of: “This guy has some cheek pontificating about how things should be, given his past. A past that he has never sought to address or explain.” They too are wholly justified in taking that position.
I should long ago have publicly addressed my past. I will try to do that here – and explain the reason for my recent pontificating.
Continue reading @ Irish Times.
Behind a paywall, Anthony. Can you send me full text by email or some other way?
ReplyDeletesent
DeleteDespite my gut reaction of extreme dislike can you please flick me this article via the alternative route Anthony?
ReplyDeletesent
Delete@ Steve R
DeleteYou've got me curious... Why the reaction of extreme dislike? Davy in particular, UDA in general, or this type of article?
I've a massive personal issue with the UDA Brandon, nothing against David.
DeleteThe author screenshotted the article on twitter - don't know if this link will work:
ReplyDeletehttps://x.com/davidadams10/status/1800635343122694166/photo/1
Thanks for that FG - It work. I'll also send the text to the people who asked for it.
DeleteHonest and wise words.
ReplyDeleteDavy has thought long and hard about things. Over the years he has injected some very thought provoking ideas into the political discourse and conversation. As a personal account of his reflections it works but I don't think we ever get to the bottom of structural problems through introspection. But I always think it worthwhile when people come to think that there were other ways and that the ways chosen ultimately violated more rights than they redressed.
DeleteThose who think before they speak will consider what is said. Those who speak before they think will call him names.
Davy Adams hasn't a plausible explanation for his joining a paramilitary organisation and Gerry Adams claims he never was in one?
DeleteAvoidance, denial, or what?
Hard to trust any of the Adams boys.
"The ery point of the Belfast agreement was reconciliation. Yet there has been no sustained effort by our politicians and other 'influencers' to advance it. In fact the reverse is often the case."
ReplyDeleteMost of the blame for this can be left at the door of the DUP and SF, and those who vote for them. I'm reading Burned at the moment and it shows that both parties are simply despicable.
Whereas I don't disagree with your sentiment Peter, I think it is probably useful to allow a degree of latitude in regards to the electorate; rather than deeming them despicable, I'd propose they've been doing the best they can according to their level of understanding, with that level in turn subject to allowance for their level of education or conditioning.
ReplyDeleteAny possibility for reconciliation firstly needs to take into account pre-existing and inherent historical limitations, and secondly, allow for the provision of structural interventions to support it. The possibility for robust reconciliation processes has been consistently frustrated by HM Government. Opportunities for reconciliation have been repeatedly negated by the British Establishment to preserve its agents, to protect the reputation, and identities of its personnel across all levels of its security apparatus.
In my view truth and reconciliation do not gel - mixing oil and water. Truth will more than likely lead to revulsion rather than reconciliation. I think that two separate processes are needed to secure both.
DeleteSF and the DUP seem to believe in neither. They both hug the lie tree and use its fig leaves to conceal past actions while reconciliation risks putting them out of business.
Interesting comment AM.
DeletePerhaps you'd elaborate at some stage.
@ Steve R
ReplyDeleteIs it something you'd ever write about? I quoted a history of the UDA written by John White. His animus against the UVF is striking, and casts a fascinating light over the 2000 loyalist feud in my opinion.