Aims for Reform

Madam

Niall Cusack's scurrilous sideswipe against the Reform Movement (letters,
September 23rd) and Tom Cooper's misrepresentation of Reform's aims
(letters, September 28th) cannot be allowed to pass unchallenged. Reform
is not, as Mr. Cusack's letter implies, "racist", "supremacist", "West
British" or "unionist".

Reform's agenda for change in Irish society is liberal and pluralist. It
stands for tolerance and for the harmonious co-existence of all the
different identities and traditions in this country, including those of
recent migrants who are changing Ireland into a multicultural and
multiracial society.

Reform does not aim at the restoration of the Union with Britain, as
implied by Mr. Cooper, and nor does it support Protestant supremacism in Northern
Ireland. Reform stands for better Anglo-Irish relations and for the
closest possible co-operation and integration across these Islands, including in a
modern, changed Commonwealth context, which we think Ireland should
consider joining.

Reform is not a "West Brit" or a even Protestant organisation. It is a
non-denominational, non-party movement that includes in its ranks people
of different faiths (religious and secular) and different Irish identities.
Reform does value the British connection and the Protestant tradition in
Ireland, but that does not mean that we are not Irish patriots.

Reform's aim is to provoke and contribution to a debate about how we can
continue to move beyond the sectarian and divisive traditions of the past
and reshape Ireland as a postnationalist, pluralist society. Our
conference was a contribution to that agenda and we fully intend to continue to make
our voice heard, notwithstanding the efforts of Mr. Cusack and Mr. Cooper
to silence us by abuse and misrepresentation.

Robin Bury

Shaw's Pearse is the real one

I think that we three are on the same wave-length; we beleive that Ruth
> pulled her punches regarding Pearse. I've been re-reading ''Triumph of
> Failure,' after nearly twenty years. She undermined Father Francis Shaw's
> credibility regarding a corrosive article on Pearse he had published in
> 1972, by insisting that Shaw made the same mistake as Pearse's
> propagandist's, and lost sight of Pearse as a human being.Only Ruth had
> discovered the ''real'' Pearse. I beg to differ; I think Shaw found the
> real Pearse that mattered regarding posterity, in all his Mitchelite/Hyde
> like reality.
>
> Ruth's accomplishment was very important; she removed Pearse from his
> iconic plane, and revealed indeed the human being: the real Pearse.
> However the real: Pearse was not only the gentle, cultural educational
> nationalist, but also the hate-filled, Mitchilite, who in fact went even
> further than Mitchel regarding his hatred of England, and Ireland's duty
> to punish her.Ruth also covers for Pearse in another respect. She gives
> Pearse the benefit of the doubt concerning Mitchel's pro-slavery rhetoric,
> and racism.She had no right to do this. At the very least she should have
> wrote, that on balance it is difficulty to accept that Pearse didn't know
> about Mitchel's notorious pro-slavery polemic, nor the death's of his two
> son's in the Confederate cause.The article will now of necessity, involve
> a degree of criticism of Ruth. She won't like it, but so be it.
>
> Pierce

Absorbing matter of Irish culture

The response from Tomai O Conghaile (Write Back, June 22) to my earlier letter about a proposed Celtic Cup was very disappointing. Having acknowledged the accuracy of my analysis, he then reverted to an old-fashioned Irish nationalist position and spoke of "our country's native culture".

According to his view, there is only one "native culture" in Ireland and he is not going to let the facts get in the way of prejudice.

Such a narrow mono-cultural perspective was the hallmark of late 19th century Irish cultural nationalism. Its leaders sought to create an exclusively Gaelic Ireland, which could only accommodate other cultures by absorbing them. That nationalist vision was reflected in the statement, 'The Gael must be the element that absorbs'.

With four centuries of history and heritage, the Ulster-Scots culture is as much a "native culture" as Irish culture and, if we are to build A Shared Future in Northern Ireland, it is imperative that we challenge Gaelic cultural imperialism.

Perhaps, when he is reflecting on this, Tomai O Conghaile might also reflect on the research, published in The American Journal of Human Genetics in 2004, which showed that the 'genetic legacy' of people in Ireland, both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, is actually pre-Celtic, rather than Celtic.

I have been accused of 'pedantic paranoia' and so, in case the writer thinks that this research was the product of such paranoia, I would point out that the project was funded by the Dublin Government under the Genetic History of Ireland programme.

Nelson McCausland, MLA Belfast

Welcome to our Blog

Welcome to the Reform Movement Blog!