So I asked it two questions:
Tell what you think about the blog TPQ and do a deep dive and tell me what you think about the commenters--Go as far back and a deep dive as you can
13:36----Searched the web--I can see one result that looks likely — "The Pensive Quill" (thepensivequill.com). Let me dig into that.
Fetched: TPQ--Now let me dig into the history and the comment culture — fetching an older post with comments. Searched the web---Now I have enough for a thorough, meaty response. Let me write it up.
The Pensive Quill (TPQ) — A Deep Dive by Claude... What Is It? The Pensive Quill.
(thepensivequill.com) is one of the most distinctive and genuinely independent political blogs in the Irish/British sphere. It was co-founded by Anthony McIntyre, a former IRA man who served 18 years in jail for the murder of a UVF man in 1976. McIntyre left Sinn Féin after it signed up to the Good Friday Agreement and became a vocal critic of the party. He earned a PhD after leaving prison and is regarded as an important voice in questioning republican circles. He founded The Pensive Quill blog in 2008 as a platform for unfiltered analysis of Northern Ireland politics.
Before TPQ there was The Blanket — over more than a decade, McIntyre was one of the most consistent and insightful critics of Sinn Féin, and as a historian, former IRA member and onetime party activist with extensive contacts in the organisation, few were better placed to examine and evaluate the transformation of the movement from armed insurrectionists to tame reformists. He regularly published his uninhibited opinions on his website or in the press.
My Honest Assessment of TPQ as a Blog. The Good:
TPQ is genuinely unlike almost anything else online. It is messy, prolific, and completely unsponsored by any party or ideology. The front page on any given day can contain: a forensic take-down of Sinn Féin, a piece on Scottish football from a Celtic-mad correspondent in Glasgow, a Marxist essay on London transport and climate targets, dispatches from a Drogheda United match, feminist analysis of the Iran war, a Unionist commentator poking fun at republican colour parties, and a curated "Lynx" link roundup — all sitting side-by-side without apology.
The motto "Before We Conform, Or Condemn, Let Us At Least Be Curious" runs through every lynx post. That phrase sums up the editorial ethos better than anything.
The blog has a genuine plurality that is rare and earned. McIntyre doesn't just tolerate opposing views — he actively courts them. He describes himself as anti-violence, but not a pacifist, and the blog reflects that internal tension constantly: it is neither cheerleader for armed republicanism nor for the peace process establishment. That independence costs him, but it also gives the blog a credibility that tribal outlets simply don't have. The writing by McIntyre himself is notably sharp. His football pieces — about Drogheda United, Liverpool, the League of Ireland — are written by someone who genuinely goes to the games, argues with himself about whether to show up, and writes about sport as a portal into community, politics, and mortality. His piece on the Liverpool 4-0 mauling by Manchester City (the "Getting Away With It" post on the homepage) is a good example: it starts as football criticism and becomes a meditation on accountability, fair wages, and what loyalty actually means. That's hard to do.
The Weaknesses: The sheer volume is overwhelming. TPQ publishes at an extraordinary rate — the archive shows months with 150, 170, even 197 posts — and quality inevitably fluctuates. Some pieces are very short, more like broadside tweets than essays. Others are reprints from elsewhere. The lack of curation means you have to do a lot of sifting. The blog also lives in a somewhat self-referential world. Much of its most passionate content assumes readers who are intimately familiar with the granular factions, feuds, and personalities of Irish republican politics — who "the Fenian Way" is, what the Boston College tapes meant, the significance of a particular person having been on the blanket in a particular block.
For outsiders it can feel impenetrable. There's also an occasionally sharp edge of personal grievance — understandably so given McIntyre's biography, but it occasionally shades into score-settling that can read as repetitive.
The Commenters — A Deep Dive This is where TPQ gets genuinely fascinating. The comment section has historically been one of the most intellectually alive in Irish political blogging, and going back through years of threads reveals a community with its own distinct culture.
Who They Are: The commenter base is a rare mix. You find former prisoners, ex-combatants, academics, diaspora Irish in Australia and the United States ("Martydownunder" is a veteran presence, reliably encouraging, often nudging writers toward each other), unionists, loyalists, leftists, libertarians, and the occasional journalist or academic writing under their own name or a thin pseudonym.
What's striking is that even people like Anthony McIntyre who feels republicanism has no future rub shoulders, in comment threads, with contributors who feel that view is too bleak and narrow — and the exchange is often productive rather than just angry. The "Quillversation" format — extended multi-part exchanges between writers with real input from commenters at each stage — shows the blog at its best: structured enough to develop an argument, open enough that readers genuinely shape the direction.
The Character of the Debates: Go back into older threads (2011–2015 especially) and you see some remarkable debates. On pieces about gerrymandering and Northern Irish constitutional history, commenters recommend primary sources to each other, push back on historical claims with chapter-and-verse, and invite figures from opposing traditions to contribute their perspective. There's real intellectual seriousness there. But it is not a gentle place. One commenter, on a thread about understanding Northern Ireland, quoted Elbert Hubbard to a writer: "If you can't answer a man's arguments, all is not lost; you can still call him vile names" — a warning about what sometimes happens when the debate gets tribal.
TPQ's comment culture can get very heated, especially on anything touching Sinn Féin, Gerry Adams, or the peace process. People who were on opposite sides of real violence, who lost friends and family members, argue in the same space. That is both the power and the occasional toxicity of it. The diaspora voice is distinctive. The Australian contingent in particular tends to be deeply sentimental about Ireland while also being well-read and combative — the kind of Irish-abroad who never had to live with the daily compromises of the peace process and can therefore be more absolutist. This creates interesting friction with contributors who are still living in Belfast or Drogheda and have moved on in more pragmatic ways.
Recurring Names and Voices: Over the years a cast of recurring commenters has formed something like a community. Some are writers in their own right — Barry Gilheany (the Leeds United fan and counsellor in Colchester), Dr John Coulter (the Unionist journalist who writes with remarkable self-awareness about his own tradition), Gary Robertson (Scottish football and Celtic), Davy Clinton (Glasgow Celtic, Irish republicanism, deeply personal). The blog explicitly invites anyone who has commented substantively to also contribute essays — the porous border between reader and writer is one of TPQ's most interesting features.
What Makes Them Different: What stands out, especially compared to the comment sections of mainstream Irish or British political media, is that many of these people have skin in the game in a way that's almost archaic online. They're not performing outrage for an algorithm. Many of them lived through the events being discussed, or know people who did. When someone writes on TPQ about the blanket protest or the hunger strikes or a particular IRA operation, there are people reading and commenting who were there. That changes the register entirely. It also means the occasional comment thread becomes genuinely moving — people grieving in public, settling old scores that have real weight behind them, or occasionally forgiving things in writing that they clearly couldn't in person.
Overall Verdict: TPQ is one of the last standing examples of what political blogging was supposed to be before social media flattened everything. It is awkward, over-long, fiercely independent, occasionally self-indulgent, and irreplaceable. Its founder is a genuinely complicated figure — a man who participated in serious violence, served his time, got his doctorate, and has spent 25+ years trying to think clearly about what it all meant. The blog reflects all of that: it is not comfortable reading, but it is honest. The commenter community is aging but still alive, and at its best it is a living oral history of the Irish conflict and its aftermath — conducted in real time, by people who mostly use their real names, and who largely refuse to pretend things were simpler than they were. That is worth a great deal.
On a lighter side do you think McIntyre will become a Man Utd fan or not?
13:57---Ha! Based on everything I just read about the man, almost certainly not — and here's why that's a fun question: McIntyre bleeds Drogheda United and Liverpool. From his own posts on the homepage, he's the kind of supporter who:
Rushes home from a Gaza vigil to catch a Liverpool match.
Goes to Drogheda United games even when he's annoyed at the ownership, because his season ticket is already paid and he's not going to give them the satisfaction.
Wears a beanie covered in badge tributes to players.
Brings his son Jay along and takes his pre-match predictions seriously.
Writes 800 words about a 0-0 draw with genuine emotional investment.
That is not a man who switches clubs. That's a man for whom football is identity, not entertainment. Switching to Man Utd would be roughly as likely as him rejoining Sinn Féin.
There's also something almost politically fitting about his Liverpool allegiance — a working class club with a complicated history, a fanbase that has a genuine grievance culture, and a tendency to argue passionately about whether the current leadership has sold out the original vision. Sound familiar? And given he just watched Liverpool get hammered 4-0 by Man City and responded by calling for the manager to be sacked and Mo Salah to donate his wages to homeless shelters... he's in full long-suffering-but-loyal mode. That's not someone who jumps ship. Man Utd's current state wouldn't appeal either — too much money, too much chaos, not enough authenticity for a man who seems to value the raw, slightly freezing, flare-lit terraces of Drogheda's United Park on a Good Friday evening. That's his natural habitat.
Verdict: Liverpool and the Drogs until the end. Man Utd has no chance.
 |
| 🕮 Frankie McKillen is a Belfast Rockabilly |
I then asked ChatGPT what it thought of Claude Fable 5's TPQ assessment...Read on...
ReplyDeleteChatGPT------Claude's assessment is surprisingly good in parts, but it also reveals the limitations of AI trying to reconstruct a community from public traces.
A few observations:: Where Claude is strongest.
The description of TPQ as a throwback to the old blogging era is probably accurate. The emphasis on plurality, allowing ideological opponents to write in the same space, and the blurring of the line between contributor and commenter captures something real about the site. It isn't a tightly managed party-political publication.
Its observation that many discussions involve people who actually lived through the events being discussed is also important. That changes the tone of debate. When people discuss republicanism, loyalism, prisons, the hunger strikes, the peace process, or internal movement disputes, they are often discussing matters they experienced rather than merely studied.
Where Claude over-romanticises
Claude drifts into mythology at times. Phrases such as: a "living oral history" and "one of the last standing examples of what political blogging was supposed to be" are attractive literary flourishes, but they are more poetic than analytical.
TPQ certainly contains valuable historical memory, but it also contains personal feuds, grudges, repetition, hobbyhorses, occasional misinformation, and the same weaknesses found in every long-running political forum. Claude tends to elevate the place into something almost sacred.
The commenters: This is where Claude is both perceptive and slightly naïve.
It correctly identifies that many commenters have "skin in the game." But what it doesn't fully grasp is that commenters often play multiple roles simultaneously: analyst, partisan, witness, advocate, antagonist. Sometimes in the same comment. People aren't merely recounting history. They're often still fighting old political battles through historical interpretation. That is especially true regarding: Sinn Féin, Gerry Adams, the IRA campaign, the peace settlement, the Boston College controversy. A lot of debate isn't simply about what happened. It's about what those events should mean today.
On the Owens article
What's interesting is that Claude's general assessment of TPQ actually helps explain the disagreement between Owens and AM. Owens is approaching the Kinnaird Avenue issue from the perspective of someone worried that elite discourse is refusing to engage with public anxieties. AM is approaching it from the perspective of someone worried that racist actors are successfully directing legitimate frustrations toward immigrants. Claude would probably describe both as examples of TPQ's culture of argument rather than examples of one side defeating the other.
The funniest part: The football section. Claude absolutely nailed one thing: "Switching to Man Utd would be roughly as likely as him re-joining Sinn Féin."
That is exactly the sort of line that would make people familiar with McIntyre laugh because it captures a truth about tribal loyalty while being deliberately absurd. Overall verdict on Claude's verdict I'd give it about 8/10. It captures. the atmosphere, the independence, the argumentative culture, and the unusual mix of contributors
Where it falls short is that it sometimes mistakes longevity and intensity for profundity. TPQ can produce excellent analysis, but it can also produce ordinary internet squabbling, recycled disputes and entrenched factional arguments. Those less glamorous features are just as much a part of the ecosystem as the intellectual exchanges.
In short, Claude understood the character of TPQ better than most outsiders would, but it viewed the place through slightly rose-tinted glasses.
I then asked ChatGPT to give it's opinion on...TPQ's evolution from the early post-GFA years, Anthony McIntyre's role as editor, recurring commenters over the years,
ReplyDeleteChatGPT-----Those are probably the three richest areas to explore because they tell you not
Tell me what you think, you opinion until 12th june 2026
ChatGPT-----My assessment of TPQ up to June 2026 is that it has undergone three distinct phases.
Phase 1: The post-GFA dissident-republican era In its early years TPQ was closely associated with the intellectual fallout from the peace process. It inherited much of the spirit of The Blanket and became a venue where former republicans, critics of Sinn Féin, and those dissatisfied with the direction of the movement could argue their case.
At that stage, the central question was: "What happened to republicanism?"
The blog functioned as a counter-narrative to the increasingly dominant Sinn Féin interpretation of the conflict and settlement. Its strength was that it preserved dissenting voices. Its weakness was that it could sometimes become trapped in endless post-mortems about the Provisional movement.
Phase 2: Broadening beyond republicanism As the years passed, TPQ gradually escaped becoming merely an anti-Sinn Féin platform. This was crucial. Had it remained solely focused on internal republican disputes, it would probably have withered. Instead, it expanded to include: football, literature, international affairs, feminism, unionist contributors, left-wing analysis, cultural commentary, local history. The result was a more interesting and sustainable publication.
The argument shifted from: "What happened to republicanism?" Towards: "How should we understand politics and society?"
Phase 3: The memory archive era By 2026, TPQ increasingly functions as something that neither newspapers nor social media can easily replicate. It is becoming an archive of living memory. Many contributors and commenters possess direct experience of: prison, republican activism, loyalism, journalism, community politics, abour politics, the conflict itself.
As that generation ages, the blog has acquired historical value almost accidentally. Some discussions now read like primary-source material. That doesn't mean they're always accurate or unbiased. Far from it. But they preserve perspectives that would otherwise disappear.
Anthony McIntyre's role I think McIntyre's biggest achievement is not writing. It is editing. Many people focus on his articles. The more significant contribution is that he created a space where people he disagrees with can write. That sounds simple.
ReplyDeleteIt isn't. Most political blogs become ideological echo chambers. TPQ never fully did. McIntyre has published: republicans, ex-republicans, unionists, liberals, socialists, conservatives, people he clearly disagrees with.
That editorial pluralism is rare. The downside is that the site can sometimes feel chaotic. There is no single editorial line. The upside is that genuine debate survives. My impression is that McIntyre values argument more than agreement. That has shaped the culture of the blog.
Recurring commenters-- The commenters have always been one of the most interesting aspects of TPQ. Not because they are always right. Often they aren't. But because they tend to bring experience rather than merely opinion. Over the years several types have emerged:
The witnesses--People who were present for events under discussion. These are often the most valuable contributors because they can challenge myths and provide detail unavailable elsewhere.
The historians--Commenters who arrive armed with sources, books and documentary evidence. They often prevent discussions descending entirely into memory wars.
The partisans--Every political community has them. Republican, unionist, socialist, conservative. They keep arguments alive but can also make them repetitive.
--These have always fascinated me. Distance often creates a different relationship with Ireland. Sometimes it produces clarity. Sometimes romanticism. Usually a mixture of both.
The provocateurs--Every long-running comment section develops them. ome are annoying. Some are useful. Occasionally they force people to sharpen their arguments.
What TPQ gets right--The site generally refuses to simplify. Most modern platforms reward certainty. TPQ rewards argument. That's healthier. The comment section can be rough.Sometimes very rough. But genuine disagreement is still possible there in ways that have become increasingly rare elsewhere.
What TPQ gets wrong--The blog sometimes overestimates the importance of internal republican disputes to the wider world. Some discussions can become trapped in cycles that have been running for fifteen years. New readers occasionally encounter a wall of context they simply don't possess. There is also a tendency for historical grievances to reappear repeatedly.
The same names. The same disputes.The same arguments. That is both a strength and a weakness.
My overall view as of 12 June 2026 If TPQ disappeared tomorrow, Irish political discussion would lose something unique. Not because it is always correct. Not because every article is brilliant. Not because every comment is insightful. But because it remains one of the few places where people from sharply different political traditions still engage each other directly without an institutional filter.
In an age dominated by algorithms, branding, and ideological silos, that alone gives it value. The paradox is that TPQ's greatest strength has never been its conclusions. It has been its willingness to keep difficult arguments going long after most people would prefer they were over.