The FitzjamesHorse Guide To Truth And Reconciliation

I am a skeptic about Confict Resolution.

My basic premise is that our Conflict was not resolved. We deliberately chose vagueness……”creative ambiguity” was the catchphrase. I always believed it to be a very dodgy concept. Even more dodgy when having spent a lot of time being extremely creative about ambiguity……we are asked to be clear about things.

Frankly we cant handle the Truth. We dont deserve it. We dont need it. The Conflict Resolution “industry” is driven by outsiders and professionals. We cannot have a South African-style Truth Commission because that was a resolved conflict.

We buried Truth. Exhuming it will do no good.

The time for healing hands was three decades ago. The time for a group hug was three decades ago. We are told that people need a voice……especially victims. Well the Victims and ordinary people on the Falls Road, Shankill Road, the Bogside and the Waterside always had a voice. They…we…….screamed as loudly as we could scream. Nobody listened. Nobody that mattered.

Several months ago, I was at an event in the Black Box in Belfast. Organised by Platform for Change, it featured performances from a group of women including a woman widowed when the IRA murdered her husband. It was very moving but I learned nothing…..but one by one members of the audience from the leafier suburbs spoke “I never knew about this sort of thing”. Shame on them! Conflict Resolution does not exist to make victims feel better …….it exists to make the middle class feel better. At best it does no good or bad. At worst it is voyeristic.

What we are left with is a set of anecdotes. My children know them all. ….well they know all of mine. Someone should write a play and call it “The Troubles According to My Da”. Opps Martin Lynch has already done that.

But taking (say) Jean McConville. Dont we know the truth? Allegations are mumbled against a leading member of Sinn Féin? But the first time a vote was ever cast for Sinn Fein in West Belfast, wasnt more (rather than less) known about a lot of things. West Belfast endorsed Sinn Féin. No new allegation can damage Sinn Féin.

The British certainly dont want the Truth to emerge.

Nor do the unionists who call for Truth because thats just more creative ambiguity. If the “truth” ever did emerge about a lot of stuff in Belfast, Derry and Crossmaglen….unionists would have to disengage from the entire process. And thats the last thing they want.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to The FitzjamesHorse Guide To Truth And Reconciliation

  1. Sammy McNally's avatar sammymcnally says:

    The facts (or the truth) can of course be extremely dangerous and the presumtion which underpins the current arrangments is that ambiguity regarding the facts (and the settlement) will allow sufficent time to heal the wounds. There are of course scenarios where revelations regarding SF or the DUP or the British could destablise the current arrangements but I think that the general thrust of what went on has probably made its way into the public domain.

    In the last few weeks we have had Jackie Mc Donald from the UDA and Danny Morrison from the IRA telling it how it is/it was – effectively criticisng their own side (doing that whilst still alive rather than posthuously), that is surely to be welcomed – we need much more of the same – and dont need an expensive formal process that wrangles and argues over definitions and moral equivalence.

    I certainly would like to hear P.Oneill giving us run down on Bloody Friday, wouldnt you?

    • To be honest….no.
      The only memory I want to rely on is my own.
      Its more difficult than it appears.
      Admitting to the times I was scared, angry….or worse.
      After studying History for over 40 years I have come to the conclusion that the only valid histories are our own.

  2. bangordub's avatar bangordub says:

    Profound arguments both, Gentlemen. I would have thought, being, I think, somewhat younger than both of you, that perspective takes time and each persons truth only emerges when they are ready for it to do so. It is only then that a fuller picture emerges. Governments keep their secrets longer than individuals and only admit guilt when political damage is negligable as a result or indeed, there is a political advantage to be gained. In an Irish context, we have seen British Govt apologies for both the Famine and for Bloody Sunday in Derry. There is still unfinished business but that is a start. Both PIRA and Loyalist groups have offered somewhat qualified apologies and/or regrets for hurt caused.
    Civil war politics south of the border continued for at least 60 years, some would argue still do.
    As has been said before, the British never learn their lessons from History and the Irish never forget.

  3. Sammy McNally's avatar sammymcnally says:

    bangoddub, FJH,

    “It is only then that a fuller picture emerges”.

    “After studying History for over 40 years I have come to the conclusion that the only valid histories are our own.”

    I think the problem with not exploring/dealing with the facts is that it allows ‘folk memory’ to head off in some very unsavoury directions. I shall ignore Godwins Law and mention the attitude to the Jews in Germany/Austria where rumour and exaggeration fed a centuries old prejudice – and dare I say – was also in evidence within Republicanism in its attitude to Britian.

  4. bangordub's avatar bangordub says:

    Sammy, Can’t let you away with that my friend.
    You are talking about racial / ethnic stereotypes which may be, and indeed are, used as a means of attaining political objectives. Exactly what happened here and still is to an extent in my opinion.
    Can’t speak for Mr Fitz but for my part, I was arguing that you cannot force the pace of how quickly people or organisations come to terms with their responsibilities for historical events and actions. What can be done is to facilitate and encourage the process of confronting those demons and not passing them on to the next generation.
    An examination of Irish history is not, as commonly believed, a litany of risings and inter religious conflict, but actually far more complex.
    If I was granted a single wish, I would become education Minister and insist on Irish History being taught on the curriculum. Not, I hasten to add, a particular view of History, just the facts.
    What I am trying to say is that the way to combat rumour, folk history and downright ignorance is education. (Excuse the rant)

  5. Sammy McNally's avatar sammymcnally says:

    bd,

    “What can be done is to facilitate and encourage the process of confronting those demons and not passing them on to the next generation.”

    I’m not disagreeing with that – speaking on behalf of Nationalism (as I like to do) I think we are too slow and undemanding in reviewing our inherited folk memories and questioning our own unsavoury behaviour. SF and Gerry in particlular has played an absolute shocker on that one (and I say that as something of a fan.)

    The fact that the unionists are as bad/not as bad/worse – is a different debate.

    • Oh I think thats a fair point.
      My own perfect scenario for Truth..is Archive…..but the most celebrated Archive seems to have been done by a journalist and a “journalist” and certainly the latter is politically involved, if not politically motivated.
      The methodology was flawed…giving a head start to those who die first.
      A better method would have been release of all papers/interviews at a chosen date.

  6. bangordub's avatar bangordub says:

    Sammy,
    fair enough but it depends on your perspective and perspective is often shaped by personal experience. If your experiences reinforce the “folk memory” then nothing changes. I believe that in order for change to occur it is important to challenge assumptions and engage in debate. I also think that Nationalism is particularly good at having debates, as we are now.
    I think that is a good thing. Mr Fitz has had a somewhat ambiguous voting record I think it is fair to say, between the SDLP and the Shinners. I absolutely understand why having lived in the North for a few years.

    • I think I have always voted in terms of my ideals and interest….except for a period 1993- to (say) 1998 when my early SF votes were really anti-SDLP because of a dispute we were having.
      Id never vote against what is right for my family…and the older I get I care more about them than myself or “posterity”. How I am viewed by them is all that matters and you guys will live as long as me and feel the same.
      My ideals….socialism, republicanism, nationalism (not necessarily in that order) means I will always have a legitimate choice to make between the two parties representing that view.
      My position on violence has always been that there is no “absolute”. Clearly in that arc of events 1971-1972 there were times…..well lets just say “there were times”. Thats the fact that most people my age live with (and not just nationalists).
      Thats the dilemna for the Parties….SDLP believing in an “absolute” and SF believing in an “absolute”.
      It would be a mistake for them to believe that their voters were always and consistently on board.
      There are many more floating voters out there than generally realised.
      And maybe theres a different dilemna for nationalists….more uncomfortable than the Parties……because any Truth reflects on the passive as much as it reflects on the participants and their core support.

  7. Sammy McNally's avatar sammymcnally says:

    bd,

    re. “I also think that Nationalism is particularly good at having debates,.”

    When it comes to jabbering, like Eurovsions, tea-drinking, accumulating debt, supporting our footbal soccerball team, gaelic football, hurling, emigrating (have I Ieft anything out?) we are market leaders but I’m not sure about wea are so good at adjusting/reviewing our opinion as a result.

    FJH,

    “because any Truth reflects on the passive as much as it reflects on the participants and their core support”

    That is an important point and difficult to assess but one illustration of ‘passive’ attitudes to the troubles is the that when the IRA stopped its campaign Nats voted for them – indicating their ‘passive’ attitude to IRA violence.

  8. hoboroad's avatar hoboroad says:

    If the British Government can cover up this sort of thing for decades what chance have we of recovering any truth in the North?

    http://www.monbiot.com/2012/04/23/dark-hearts/

Leave a reply to fitzjameshorse Cancel reply