Sir, – Charlie Flanagan is quite wrong in stating that there are two traditions on this island that must be respected. He means, of course, sectarian traditions. However, 1916 was not about sectarianism, it was about conflicting political ideologies, between those who sought independence and those that favoured an empire and all that it entailed. There were of course other political ideologies around, such as Redmond's. To reduce it to two respectable "traditions" is a travesty of history. You cannot celebrate the slaughter in the name of empire that was the Somme and a rebellion against the empire that hurled young men at the cannon. Perhaps Mr Flanagan has forgotten that for most of the 19th century the revolutionary nationalist leaders were Protestants, as were a significant number of the leading constitutional nationalists and leaders of the Land League. Where would they fit in his two traditions notion? Where do those Protestants who supported Irish independence fit in? Or are we to pretend they were Catholic for the sake of the political expediency of apologising to Britain? – Yours, etc,
GEARÓID Ó LOINGSIGH,
Bogotá,
Colombia.
Sir, – Charlie Flanagan writes that “since the beginning of the decade of centenaries in 2012 much effort has been invested in commemorating key events in a more inclusive and historically accurate way”. This is very laudable, even if there is not a suspicion that it simply masks a desire to include more mindless romanticisation of the slaughter at the Battle of the Somme as part of next year’s 1916 commemorations. His article calls for respect for all traditions, but implicitly recognises only two, ie the Orange and the Green, imperialist and republican.
If we are to be historically accurate, by 1916 only a minority of Irish people supported the Rising or participation in the Great War. The only movement that had majority popular support in the 1916-18 period was not motivated by any blood lust or death cult at all. I refer of course to the anti-conscription movement. Although supported by Sinn Féin, the Irish Party and even the clergy, it was derived from and powered by the Labour movement. On April 23rd, 1918, a general strike against conscription paralysed most of the country and put an end to any possibility of extending conscription to Ireland. Some 50 years before the hippies forced the US out of Vietnam, Irish trade unionists called a halt to the sacrifice of a nation’s young men in a meaningless war, by passive resistance. Ireland’s final refusal to fully participate in the war and England’s inability to force it to were effectively the end of the Union. Would any modern European country ignore such an extraordinary event in its history? It is a date as significant as April 24th or July 1st, 1916, but it is a safe bet its centenary will pass unnoticed. Who’d want to celebrate peace, love and understanding? – Yours, etc,
TIM O’HALLORAN,
Finglas,
Dublin 11.