1.
People who today regard themselves as Irish are either perpetuating a fraud or victims of it. That’s because the “Irish” are not a people and the idea that they have continuously inhabited the island of Ireland over a period going back two thousand or more years is a myth invented by the revivers of the ideology known as “Irish nationalism” in the nineteenth century.
2.
The “Irish” are, in fact, a mongrel mixture of Celtic, Norman, Viking, Huguenot and English blood. Until the third quarter of the nineteenth century most of them were quite happy with a British identity; they spoke and dreamed in English, they fought in Britain’s wars and helped administer its Empire. The idea that the “Irish” were a separate people entitled to a state of their own had certainly been around for a long time but it was pretty marginal phenomenon in day to day life. Then something sinister started to happen. A group of artists and intellectuals took it into their heads that the Irish were indeed a separate people with their own culture and identity and set about convincing ordinary people of this.
They had some success but when the First World War broke out Irishmen enlisted in droves in Britain’s armed forces and died in their thousands to defend its empire in France, Gallipoli, Iraq and elsewhere. However, a small group of fanatical nationalists thought that they knew better than the bulk of people in Ireland and launched an armed revolt against British rule in Ireland in 1916. The revolt resulted in heavy civilian casualties and failed to achieve popular support. However, the British made the mistake of executing its ringleaders and the popularity of the Irish nationalist ideology grew quickly.
After the First World War ended Irish nationalists launched a successful terrorist campaign against British rule in Ireland and those who wished to retain a British identity. This campaign concluded with the achievement of partial independence from Great Britain in 1922. However, a large number of people in the North East of Ireland resisted all attempts to convince them that they were in fact Irish or coerce them into joining the new Irish polity and they secured the right to continue to be ruled by Britain and to maintain their British identity. Ireland achieved full independence from Britain in 1948.
3.
Though proponents of Irish nationalism make great play of the handful of Protestants that have embraced it, there can be no serious doubt that it has been very difficult for non-Roman Catholics to be regarded as truly Irish. The Roman Catholic Church ran a state within the Irish state for many decades, a state which enslaved and abused children, and women who were perceived as leading immoral lives. In spite of this, it still controls the vast majority of primary and secondary schools in Ireland.
4.
Being born in Ireland doesn’t necessarily make you Irish. If your parents are non-EU nationals then you’ll have to wait till you are 18 to apply for Irish nationality, which the state can choose to deny you. Contrast this with the preferential treatment given to the millions of members of the Irish diaspora. Just one Irish grandparent gets you an Irish passport, it doesn’t matter if you’ve never set foot in Ireland and can’t speak English.
5.
In view of the foregoing, the following measures must immediately be taken. The state known as “Ireland” must immediately be made a UN trusteeship. The mission of the trusteeship will be to make Ireland into a state of all its people, not just those who adhere to Irish nationalism or continue to believe in the fiction that they are “Irish”.
In order to do this it will have to:
i) remove control of primary and secondary education from the Catholic Church and prosecute those members of it suspected of crimes against women and children. As Irish nationalist ideology is so deeply imbued with respect for and fear of the Catholic Church it may well be impossible to try the suspects in Ireland itself and consideration should be given to setting up a special UN court to deal with them in another country,
ii) end discrimination against people born in Ireland of non-EU parents and in favor of members of the Irish diaspora,
iii) educate “Irish” people about the lie that holds that they are a people with the right to organize themselves and determine their future in a state,
iv) help Irish people find their true identities, the ones that were silenced and excluded by Irish nationalism and
v) consider what form of government and national identity might be suitable for Ireland once the trusteeship ends. A range of possibilities will have to be considered but, of course, the ideology of Irish nationalism and the national identity “Irish” will be excluded.
That’s just brilliant. Nicely done.
My only criticism is that this might have worked better on St. Patrick’s Day. But you can always re-post it then.
I’m certain anybody who knows enough and choses to, could make the same case for lots of people(s) - but these just as your Irish have all one mitigating factor, they aren’t Jews.
I have my suspicions why Jews are so interesting though that’s why I propose the following solution: skilled artists/scientists, egg heads of all disciplines get together and prove once and for all that the Bible, i.e. the Old Testament in my lingo, isn’t of Jewish origin. There are of course attempts like that made with Homer again and again to not much avail. His works refuse to stop being Greek but with a worldwide effort it might be possible to prove that the Bible originated with some proto-catholic tribe living in the vicinity of what later became Rome or better even why not locate its original writing to Greenland of which nothing is known for that period - all it would need to substantiate such a scenario would be a graffiti in what would later evolve into Hebrew.
Once that authorship question has been taken care of and the religions with their feeble from an artistic point of view follow-up books can claim to be the originals instead of slightly dubious piggy-backing things, the Jews might be left in peace provided they all convert and hide their ancestry for at least a dozen generations really carefully.
Excelente, la he linkeado en mi blog.
One quibble,
Ireland became independent with the (other) Balfour Declaration in 1926. This was formally enshrined in British law with the Statute of Westminster in 1931. The theoretical potential links with the UK Parliament (s. 4 of the S. of W.) were terminated with the 1937 Constitution. The Republic of Ireland Act, 1948 (which only came in effect in 1949) simply removed the King of Ireland (who was also, but separately, the King of the United Kingdom as well as various other Dominions) as the formal head of the Irish state.
For example, in 1936, the Free State passed the Executive Authority (External Relations) Act which recognized Edward VIII abdication. Had Ireland not passed this Act, Edward would have continued to be “King of Ireland” whereas George VI would have been the “King of the United Kingdom.”
Saying that Ireland became independent in 1948 is like saying that Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the other Commonwealth Realms are not independent.
However, I understand the rhetorical purposes of emphasizing 1948 for the purposes of this parody.
Hi RC: Tx. for your entirely accurate comments.
Fantasic! I love your writings, Eamonn.
This is brilliant Eamonn.
I am curious…
Do the Irish realize that their government’s foreign minister…Martin…is merely spouting Vatican policy…when he criticizes Israel…
Irish policy is Vatican foreign policy…no different…
Being a Zionist I enjoyed it thoroughly, mostly because I grew up with my Ira crazy dad and all kinds of books and songs of Irish rebellion.
Saucy and refreshing.
In your very modest proposal(ahem). . .
You could say the same sorts of things about Israel of course, which would result in the same argument you make here for dismantling the Jewish state, placing it under UN trusteeship, eliminating “the preferential treatment given to the millions of members of the Irish [Jewish] diaspora,’ and so on.
A couple of factual errors:
It is not a “lie” that the Irish “are a people with the right to organize themselves and determine their future in a state.” If anything it is a truth of international law, at least no less true than the right of Jews to organize themselves and determine their future in a state. That right is vested no less in Irish Protestants, dissenters or people from any auld background who are no less Irish for it, of course, and it should be possible and proper to “remove control of primary and secondary education from the Catholic Church and prosecute those members of it suspected of crimes against women and children” without dismantling the Irish state.
“Until the third quarter of the nineteenth century most of them were quite happy with a British identity; they spoke and dreamed in English. . .”
I know of no evidence to support the first clause of that sentence, and the second is plainly false. I think you’ll find that it wasn’t until the third quarter of the nineteenth century that the majority of the Irish were even starting to become conversant in English, let alone capable of “dreaming” in it.
Say what you will about absurd constructions of Irish history and identity, but do you really want to try to have some Eurogruppen autocracy instruct the people of Ireland in how to “find their true identities” and then further instruct them in what forms of government and “identity” they are permitted to possess, so long as it specifically excludes an “Irish” national identity?
You’ll need more than just a few aromatherapy sessions up in Finglas for that sort of thing, Eamonn.
But I’ve played along. Odd no commenter has noticed the game.
TG
TR- arrr dude… it was part of the criticism against Shlomo Sand, not a claim at the truth.
I meant TG…
Somewhere recently I stumbled on a piece teaching me that the Germanic people were invented by Cesar with the goal to make his writings easier. In real life Romans knew only tribes, fought ones and buddied up with others
Silke:
What have the Romans ever done for us?