Commemorating the Rising

Sat, May 17, 2014, 01:10

Sir, – It is a matter of record that the near-winning of Home Rule by peaceful means in 1912 was the occasion of the discussion of the partition of Ireland, the creation of the UVF, the formation of provisional administrative bodies in Northern Ireland and of support for extraconstitutional action by members of the British Tory Party.

I do not think readers should give credence to the clearly prejudiced view that 1916 was the primary cause of partition. Post hoc ergo propter hoc is a fallacy; Ante hoc ergo propter hoc is ignorance and prejudice. – Yours, etc,

FRANK FITZPATRICK,

St Kevin’s Parade,

South Circular Road,

Dublin 8.

Sir, – John K Rogers (May 15th) claims that Pearse and Connolly, as the principal proponents of the 1916 Rising, had no mandate from the general public to take up arms on their behalf.  May I remind Mr Rogers that it was British terror in Ireland that had no mandate, and revolutionaries by definition act first then seek a retrospective democratic mandate, which is what was given in the 1918 general election when Sinn Féin received a massive electoral endorsement, winning 75 of the 103 seats.

The right to resist foreign occupation does not necessarily stem from the ballot box. There is a long-established and internationally recognised right of people to resist foreign occupation, as expressed in UN resolutions 3070 and 3103, which acknowledge the status of combatants struggling against colonial domination and the rights of people to self-determination. – Yours, etc,

TOM COOPER,

Templeville Road,

Templeogue,

Dublin 6W.