Sir, – Speaking at the Fine Gael national conference on Saturday, Prof Ronan Fanning suggested that we should have a "shameless celebration" of the Easter Rising in 2016, and that the government of the day "must unwaveringly lead the nation at home and abroad in unabashed celebration of the seminal moment in the birth of the Irish Republic" ("Easter Rising centenary should be 'shameless celebration', says UCD professor", February 23rd).
I accept, as a matter of historical fact, that the current Irish state does “derive” from 1916. It is, however, also a historical fact that 1916 was not a popular uprising but, in the words of the late Prof FX Martin, “a conspiracy of a conspiracy of a minority”. This has resulted in a dangerous, destabilising paradox at the heart of the State since 1922 – namely, that the 1916 Rising, the “foundation event” of the state, could be used as a precedent for subverting the state and for violence in Northern Ireland.
If we “celebrate” 1916, then is it not open to any crackpot “conspiracy of a minority” to claim that their actions are justified by an imagined or hoped-for retrospective vindication? This consideration alone should cause us to temper our “celebration” of the Easter Rising. I admit that the paradox to which I refer may not be unique to Ireland.
In support of his argument for a “celebration” in 2016, Prof Fanning points to the precedent of the celebration of the 200th anniversary of the American declaration of independence, and he asks “did the American government shrink from the bicentenary of the decisive moment in the birth of the United States because that state was born out of war”?
He further asks, “does the French government shrink from the annual celebration of Bastille Day notwithstanding the appalling bloodshed of the French Revolution?”
I would make two observations in response to these questions. First, in more than 90 years of independence we in Ireland have not managed to “square the circle” in regard to the paradox of being a democratic, constitutional state born in revolution as well as the other instances of such which Prof Fanning has mentioned. We have had more than our fair share of those who engage in extra-constitutional action and of those who have a sneaking regard for them.
Second, the utter lack of popular support for the Easter Rising at the time of its outbreak makes the “seminal moment” in the birth of our republic somewhat different from that of the American and French republics. – Yours, etc,
FELIX M LARKIN,
Cabinteely,
Dublin 18.
Sir, – Prof Ronan Fanning is on extraordinarily dangerous ground in advocating a “shameless” celebration of the 1916 Rising. There is no point in gainsaying its significance in the foundation myths of the State but there are reasons to challenge its legitimacy.
Relying on it as the moral bedrock of independent Ireland throws up a number of problems. Principally, of course, the Rising was the work of a tiny cabal of completely unmandated and unrepresentative urban intellectuals, who decided, by themselves, to go out and kill people and destroy property. This is reflected in the arrogances of the Proclamation, where legitimacy for the violence is claimed from two sources – God, and the dead generations – neither of which, conveniently for the rebels, could be interrogated by the living, to see if they actually approved of the course taken by the insurgents.
It does not take a genius to see where this “shameless” glorification can lead. Republican violence since 1916 has been precisely predicated upon post-event justification; and, in the philosophical sense, it is open to any group – loyalists, jihadists and so on – to use the same methodology to claim legitimacy for, well, anything.
We perhaps can afford to recognise as historical fact the importance of 1916 in influencing the State’s formation, while at the same time not according it a spurious legitimacy that goes against every democratic principle that characterises that State now. – Yours, etc,
IAN d’ALTON,
Naas,
Co Kildare.
Sir, – Prof Fanning’s call for a “recognition of historical reality” is fair, reasonable and entirely sound. It is also guaranteed to drive some to distraction. – Yours, etc,
JAMES KEATING,
Crumlin,
Dublin 12.