With respect and regret to the organizers of this debate. I do not - TopicsExpress



          

With respect and regret to the organizers of this debate. I do not feel obliged to explain why I cannot attend this debate. I am not a public figure to begin with, but I have written critically on 1916, and the subsequent narrative of hideous violence re-started by Fenian insurgents in 1919, and again in 1922. My critiques ( inclusive of early Fenianism and its inception in America in 1858 ) have been published in mainstream newspapers - though mainly in the letters columns of Irish, and Northern Irish newspapers. Suffice it to say - in passing - that even if I could attend, the odious sight of Mr. Tom McGurk would engender in me such disdain, and contempt as to make me sick. This man defines himself as a Republican, and yet all the evidence points to him being an ardent Fenian Nationalist, and committed to 1916 apologetics - and the romantic myth involved therein. In relation to Ruth Dudley Edwards I wish her well and know that she will give a good account of herself, in keeping with her long held opposition to 1916 fascism. And fascism is the word we should use concerning this event, which still continues to undermine democracy on the island of Ireland. According to James G. Murphy in his paper: Easter Ethics, the use of the word fascism came into common parlance after 1918; and the roots of fascism had already, anyway, been laid by Charles Maurras, and George Sorel in France in 1909. It is salutary to note that Patrick Pearse was influenced by Maurras, and German ideas of Nationalism, which reduced the individual to mere essences, of the nation, in opposition to the liberal democratic framework which placed individuals as the primary social and moral focus, and as central to political activity. Abraham Lincoln summed up this understanding of the individuals place at the heart of politics when he declared at the end of his Gettysburg Address, ....that government of the people, by the people, and for the people, shall not perish from this earth. In expressing this aspiration he was echoing the thoughts of that great, and true Republican Marcus Tullius Cicero, who was according to Siobhan McElduff ( Classics Professor )... the most brilliant orator in Classical history. To return briefly to Mr. McGurk. Perhaps this gentleman might derive some benefit ( though I heartedly doubt it ) by taking into account a quote by Aristotle. Humans are political animals, and part of their human fulfilment is to be involved in the discussion, and pursuit of the common good. This is as good a definition of republicanism ( a much abused and misunderstood word in Ireland ) as one might hope to get. Where and how - if those who took part in the 1916 insurrection were republicans - was the common good served by armed fanatical vigilantes subjecting the helpless citizens of Dublin to over six days, of terror, death, destruction, and heartache? Answer that during the debate Mr. McGurk. 1916 was the first manifestation of ultra-Nationalist fascism in Europe. We as modern democrats should long ago have come to this patently obvious conclusion. The fact that we are still debating the matter, says little of a positive nature about our common sense, and credentials, as even basic democrats. The verdict should be certain and indisputable: 1916 was a crime against humanity. Perhaps, if I might be so bold may I suggest that the motion should not read the self-implicating: This House Regrets the 1916 Rising. But instead something along the lines: This House believes that the 1916 Insurrection was a Crime. I doubt however that the organizers will for a moment, even consider this suggestion. Pierce Martin.
Posted on: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 22:39:45 +0000

Trending Topics



Recently Viewed Topics




© 2015