Gerry Adams, if he has a free minute and is reading the papers these days, must cast a wry thought towards Cardinal Sean Brady. You’ll remember that a lot of people who wouldn’t dream of darkening a church door suddenly became very concerned for the Catholic Church in Ireland, that it should have a fit leader. Right now we’re getting much of the same about Gerry Adams. He’s been President of Sinn Féin too long, he talks about rubber ducks, he isn’t acceptable in the south, he has too much baggage…
Fact 1: there are a considerable number of people in Ireland, among them a good number of ‘journalists’ (quotation marks intentional) who detest Gerry Adams. For some it’s his past, for some it’s his beard, for some it’s his Irish. But one way or another they truly detest him.
Fact 2: there are a considerable number of people in Ireland, among them a good number of ‘journalists’ (quotation marks intentional) who detest Sinn Féin. For some it’s Sinn Féin’s past, for some it’s the way they replaced the SDLP, for some it’s their use of Irish at the beginning of speeches, for some it’s that they’re making inroads in the south and destabilising the cosy political set-up down there.
And yet many of these people who detest the Sinn Féin party and its leader are expressing their anxiety that Gerry Adams should step down because Sinn Féin needs a new leader, it’d be for the good of republicanism.
They dodge a few other facts too. Such as the fact that Sinn Féin at most elections in the south double or treble their representation. That Gerry Adams topped the poll when he was elected in Louth. That it appears only a matter of time before Martin McGuinness becomes First Minister of Northern Ireland. These are uncomfortable facts so they get shoved out of the picture.
It’s so much easier to present Stormont as a failure of ‘both parties’ to agree. To say the Haass talks were a waste of time because ‘politicians failed to agree’. When Martin McGuinness mentions that three-quarters of DUP people in Stormont still can’t bring themselves to say ‘Hello’ when they pass a Shinner in the corridors of power, it’s interpreted as McGuinness jockeying for power within his own party.
I sometimes wonder if the many critics of Sinn Féin are deliberately deceiving themselves as well as the public in the way they rehash and interpret politics here, or is it that they’ve brought themselves to the point where they believe their own propaganda? Because anyone with an ounce of political judgement would know that Sinn Féin and Irish people generally are indebted to Gerry Adams. Like it or lump it, he is the one man who found a way to lead republicans from war to peace and power-sharing, at the risk of his own life. He is also the Sinn Féin leader who brought the party to where it stands at present in the north, and on the growth road it is currently walking in the south. Why would anyone want to get rid of someone with such abilities?…Oh right. I forgot. There are a lot of people who detest Sinn Féin. And especially Gerry Adams. It’s the old grudges that make their little world go round.
Yes Jude, I would have to agree and most of that detestation originates from a certain social class North and South of the border. A certain class of individuals has done quite well out of the status quo and progressive changes might threaten this favourable status!
Because anyone with an ounce of political judgement would know that Sinn Féin and Irish people generally are indebted to Gerry Adams.
No mention of John Hume David Trimble?
I was talking about GA, Neill – I never promised you either a rose garden or an exhaustive list of people to whom we are indebted, starting with Wolfe Tone…But yes, we are indebted to John Hume.
And of course we are in indebted to the leaders of the IRA (whoever they were!) for kindly agreeing not to kill anymore of their fellow countrymen.
How did Gerry persuade them?
Like the magicians say, it was all done with mirrors!
Jude :
There’s a lot to get the teeth into in this latest essay. I am not privy to any of the behind the scenes machinations of either pressmen and women attempting to make stirring copy for their various media; nor am I unaware that a lot of these career politicians[north and south] are in it, soley for financial reasons and a means of furthering their social status.
People like John Hume and Gerry Adams were not in it for the money. That’s for sure. There is an air of some mystery about Adams of course. I’ve lived through all those times and read all the newspapers, a few of the books ,and watched the various television programmes with their individual journalistic takes.I’m the same as everyone else and therefore I have a second- hand view of what Adams did and didn’t do. There is always a backstory to all of this and we don’t usually get to see it for another thirty years.
It sticks in the craw of many that Adams will not admit to being a member and then leader of the IRA. He says he wasn’t in it. Is it possible that he can say this because he can say to his mind that the IRA was simply a made up shorthand by the media to describe the republican movement? Maybe it’s like the “Micky Mouse Fan Club” in that you are not actually, semantically, a member unless you get the membership card which actually says you are a member.. Maybe as guide/instructor of the movement at the time , he saw himself as one step removed from the actual organisation and can therefore rationalise to himself that ….he wasn’t actually in it.[ As Groucho Marx is quoted ” I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member. !”] maybe it was divided into so many tiny “cells” that it could be seen as not a single organisation , but rather an organism of individuals like a beehive with each individual in the hive unique to it’s own particular destiny.
I believe that Adams was from a very republican family going back generations, so that lineage obviously stretches back to the early days of the twentieth century when the entire island of Ireland was ruled by Britain. He is very aware therefore that no-one in government north or south has clean hands when both parts of Ireland were born out of conflagration, murder and political chicanery. That goes for every political faction both north and south. All the political parties both nationalist or unionist have skeletons to hide going back generations . There are bodies all over Ireland. The same goes for England’s past of course, lest we forget how kings are made.
In the grand scheme of things at the end of the 1960s and early 1970s republicans were small beer. They were not not to be seen except as the oddity. They were given life by the actions of the aggressive unionist political establishment. As far as i can see the new provisionals were born because the old official guys did nothing to protect these communities from aggression by the state and out of control unionist mobs. I remember beatings and killings on the streets of northern ireland and houses being burned out before there was any mention of the IRA. The original idealistic ideas of reforming the state were trampled into dust by whole communities under threat. Granted , the entire population was still divided between those who still sought to reform the state and those who thought it was irredeemable[ and those on the unionist side who thought everything was perfectly fine the way it was and everything would be hunky dory if those nasty nationalists would just go away and shut up or we’ll lock them up or kill them if we’re allowed!]
Young media types in the south who have not lived through any of this are also getting it second- hand, so have no idea of the fears we lived through. Even now there are echoes of those fears when we can see how the powers that be will still not protect us from the hooligan elements on the streets. The politicians are still not giving moral leadership because they feel it will damage their perceived fanbase.. If I lived in Dublin or Cork I would feel as far away from Belfast as any Londoner . None of the antics of citizens in Belfast would mean that much to me. I dare say that many in Northern Ireland in remote places never saw any of the Troubles either and don’t know what all the fuss was about either.
You are right, Jude , when you say….” Like it or lump it, he is the one man who found a way to lead republicans from war to peace and power-sharing, at the risk of his own life. He is also the Sinn Féin leader who brought the party to where it stands at present in the north, and on the growth road it is currently walking in the south. Why would anyone want to get rid of someone with such abilities?…”
I am no particular lover of Mr. Adams but you are so right in this observation. I had thought at one point that this horror of slaying [which a lot of people forget already] would just keep on going.It was almost inconceiveable that anyone could figure out how to end it. We all knew the killing stalemate could and would continue until everything was razed. Oh, nobody would win but themmuns weren’t going to get away with anything[on both sides!] Remember we had politicians of every stripe consorting with all sorts of outlaws here …from the Willie MCCrea/King Rat double act to the funeral of a Shankill Butcher to name only two incidents….There are plenty more on each side .
Adams did pull a rabbit from the hat[in backstory, behind the scenes] Hume was involved and he and Trimble had to sell it. Adams had a harder time selling it to a generation who were prepared to keep it going at any bloody cost and for as long as grass grew….and with tons of weaponry in the background. Nobody was going to win but nobody was getting their ball back either. Unionists hardly knew what to think when a solution was there for the taking…..nothing new there.They still talk about who won….missing the point completely that tthere will never be winners until we all win.
Somehow Adams steered the conflict to a conclusion and by doing so he wrong-footed a lot of people.
It may now be time to let someone younger front his party though. From recent statements i’m thinking his mate Martin is preparing to shake up things by allowing someone else a shot at First Minister if and when the chance arrives. There comes a time when the old have to make way for the new. …someone too young to be tainted by warfare…someone who can’t remember it all like some of these “journalists”.
That’ll be another game then.
Thank you, Paddk – very detailed and thoughtful analysis. Would you like to do a guest blog at some point? Talk to me at judejcollins@gmail.com if you would…
I’m sure the Mc Conville family appreciate all that Gerry Adams and his associates did for their mother!
Argenta : ..and your point is what exactly? Have you something you’d enjoy sharing with the other readers?
Paddykool
Most people but possibly not yourself have heard of the “disappearing” of Jean Mc Conville by the I R A.If we believe the testimony of Brendan Hughes,Gerry Adams had some role in that action,although he would strenuously deny that.In Jude’s blog,he asserts that “the Irish people are indebted to Gerry Adams”.My point was that the Mc Conville family (and probably families of the other”disappeared” may not feel the same degree of indebtedness to Mr Adams.
I believe Brendan Hughes also said that Jean McConville was being used by British Intelligence and she had already been caught using a transmitter and had been warned before she reinstalled it and the IRA took action – it was an awful thing what happened to Jean McConville and the other disappeared and i hope all the remains of the disappeared are returned soon but we cannot use partial facts to attempt to demonise one person – either Brendan Hughes is telling the whole truth or none at all
The fact that those that have the most to lose,ie the southern political/media establishment want Gerry Adams gone,and someone who they feel more comfortable with in(Mary Lou) tells the whole story.
Argenta : Of course I’ve heard of “the disappeared” and Mrs McConville…like yourself and nearly everyone else, I wasn’t in the room so any information on that score is Chinese Whispers unless some living witness puts Mr Adams in a courtroom and attaches blame to him. I’ve read the books and newspaper reports only and those witnesses are dead..
.My point ,which I thought I’d covered , was that those times were not in any way “normal”, for one thing ,and actions were being taken within very strict conditions where what we’d call ordinary life did not attach.. I didn’t live in that street but a lot of us have seen ordinary neighbours being shot in the streets . I have a neighbour, for example, whose father was murdered from a passing car. Nobody went to trial for that. Another, friend, forty five years ago, watched another man being murdered by a bustling and excitable carload of B specials. Like I said in another blog , I had friends and classmates on both sides, sucked into that conflict by circumstance ,who are now dead. I’ve seen illegal “militias” and movements being formed to frighten governments and bend their will. Nothing ordinary about any of it.
.
I didn’t want Jude’s blog to degenerate into a few one-liner, snappy comebacks, or lists of “whataboutery” , like a lot of other blogs because if we all produce our lists, the likes of Tony Blair would be on trial for taking war to Weapons of Mass Destruction in iraq [which turned out to be imaginary} or Thatcher’s attack on the Belgrano….not to mention the deaths on camera in Derry/ Londonderry of a bunch of protesters. Like I said, nobody’s hands are really clean. I think Gerry Adams problem is that he’s lived as leader of a party longer than anyone else from those times and unlike Paisley, Trimble ,Hume or Mallon or a succession of Prime Ministers, is still around. . A bit like Castro in that respect .
The establishment media detest Adams and SF in general and will use any situation and any individual to further their agenda.I have to laugh at the “Irish news” in particular who give us hand wringing editorials about the dissidents and then go on to give them a platform on virtually every page.The incoherent ramblings of non-entities are elevated to pronouncements of earth shattering significance and their demos are talked up weeks in advance.,only to be glossed over after the event when they do not live up to expectations.They so detest SF that any sort of damage inflicted even by those beyond the pale is to be hoped for.
“You’ll remember that a lot of people who wouldn’t dream of darkening a church door suddenly became very concerned for the Catholic Church in Ireland, that it should have a fit leader.”
Hey Jude,
As one of those who wouldn’t dream of same I’d be more concerned about dispensing with the Great Leader Himself, the lingering, imaginary One in all the sectarian dunderheads of Ireland and beyond.
Zzzzzz…I think after listening to that speech that Gerry is already pulling the armchair up to the fireplace.
It will be a right while mr Colman before you get to listen to whatever alphabet soup “leader” you support on primetime TV.
Aye ,if Brendan Hughes said it it must be true then.You believe him when he says she was operating a trans mitter then?
Think before you lose the run of yourself there Michael. If it comes to credibility, I think your leader will come out on the short end of the stick everytime. I thought Gerry’s speech was that of a tired man, devoid of passion and ideas. It was a real downer. Just my opinion…something I get to vocalize because I am not dictated to by any parties policy.
No matter what Gerry said ,it would have merited the same response from you Colman.Go back to studying the great works of the various disso “leaders”,who increase in numbers weekly in parallel with the laughable number of “organisations” that now populate “disso” land.
Four things…
1) The the zealous focus many seem to have on Adams is a little bizarre – of all the political entities out there, Sinn Féin and the Republican movement is run by a team think leadership (yes it is ruled centrally, but that central spine has many, many heads, unlike the counting on your 1 or maybe 2 hands in other parties). For the said zealots it will be the mother of all anticlimaxes once Adams does step aside and the internal leadership feuds don’t develop and it ends up being business as usual. Does anyone in their right mind think any decision ever was made by Adams alone? …will any future leader make maverick moves? haha
2) Over in the LAD bunker I note that they are jumping to the defense of Ellis O’Hanlon on twitter over a comment regarding some journalists being paid British agents. I’m not commenting on an allegation towards her but in general, are LAD and other politically aware progressives really that naive as to think every trick in the book used by the Brits, the Yanks etc the world over haven’t been and aren’t being used here on this Island? Go look up some Chomsky or watch some Pilger docs, the world is a shitty place, last time I checked Ireland was part of the world.
3) Journos/commentators/haters love to point out the hypocrisy of SF, an unrivaled spotlight like no other. It’s a little weird then when some of the same SF hating media court dissident republicans to the point were you feel like telling them “to get a room” …so Provo Republicans who have embraced peace and the democratic process = bad because they threaten the established order and have the strength and smarts for that threat to be tangible, but Dissident Republicans = bad …BUT then kind of down trodden by mainstream Republicans and aren’t a real or tangible threat to the established order so are a natural ally against Provo Republicans, so in some twisted way the continued shooting and bombing can sometimes be kind of over looked as long as it potentially damages SF. Journos only see hypocrisy and such in others though.
4) Did no-one question at a macro level why every major party in the south except Sinn Féin backed Lisbon 1 and 2 despite it being bad for Ireland? Really, think about that. There is an establishment apple cart which cannot be allowed to be disturbed that goes well beyond the cosy political/media/business establishment cronyism in the south. SF sends the heebie jeebies up a lot of people. The movement was to have been initially humoured post GFA and then shrivel into the dustbin of history or kept at bay as a joke of a pet dog at best – the sneaky fenians didn’t read the script though. Ireland is a small country which for many reasons punches WAY above its weight in terms of national profile and relevance – don’t kid yourself folks – it would have an impact if Ireland went left wing and associated with other left countries at a governmental level. Do you think the policy think tanks in the big nations establishments haven’t gamed that scenario, if they have taken the time to make contingencies for alien invasion..? Anyone who is not with SF is against them, middle ground is a small traffic island in Bangor with standing room for half a dozen.
On your number two OI, the same lad accused me of being in the pay of the British. He later admitted he was fair gaming (http://goo.gl/NSiwz) to take a rise out of me. It’s a nasty sport, normally indulged in by folk who cannot deal with the criticism that comes in any democratic public square.
Jude,
I long ago I ‘sort of’ argued that Adams should step down (Comment is Free, Jul 2009 http://goo.gl/gExQ97), but I’ve not said that for a long while now, not least since opportunity is long gone. Adams (and his foibles) IS the party now.
Truth is that if he had followed my advice he’d have been toast within a year.
My only problem with Adams is that for him the truth is little more than an abstract notion. An alpha male personality thing perhaps?
He has a tractor beam charm with his allies which also repels his opponents. I try to work a recognisable middle ground between the two.
I’ve no doubt that his career will add up to something, although I’m much less certain than yourself just what that will come to.
I think that it is fairly obvious from the very highest regard in which Gerry Adams was held by men as awe inspiring as Nelson Mandela and Father Alec Reid that they were friends with someone who brought something very special and dynamic to the table.
We Irish tend to be very harsh on our own but I think history will be much kinder to Mr Adams. In time I think the full extent of his contribution of the Irish peace processes can be fully realised maybe even by his many opportunistic knockers.
Sorry Pontis if you are right that will say a lot about Ireland.
Gerry Adams will be judged harshly because he deserves to be judged harshly at least to his credit M McGuiness has been more open about his past.
I agree with you Jude. Personally I’d like to see a party which had a limitation on the number of years someone can be President – as in Irish and USA Presidential elections. It allows for new energy and ideas and might prevent the development of the cult of the leader. However, I certainly don’t think Gerry Adams should stand down just because anti-republican elements North or South want him to. I think he has been treated badly by an anti-republican media and indeed by those republicans who oppose the SF line. It’s easy to pin all the criticisms one might have of the IRA struggle or Sf’s current policies, on one man. But it is also ridiculous. I’d much prefer a politics where criticism was based on policies and actions of the group involved (SF or the IRA or whatever), and not simplisitic name calling which advances no new ideas or policies or debate..
Bravo,you have hit the nail on the head.Mr adams and his party have exposed the VAST amount of corruption in our policital parties and system….What he has not said is certain members of the press and rte have been bought and paid for by labour fine gael and fianna fail.We do not have an honest press but we do have an excess of slanted news media,i wonder who has the balls to open this can of worms????
I hope for his sake that history has as poor a memory as Gerry himself appears to have. Anyone who has read his lamentable testimony in the Liam Adams affair, could not help but be amazed at all he has forgot.
‘And still they gazed and still the wonder grew,
that one small head had forgotten all he knew.’
He should have resigned in shame at that point, but clearly he hopes to stumble on until the glorious 1916 centenary.
What axe have u to grind????To expose your father and then your brother as an abuser takes great courage,not just personaly but policitaly.Take your biased head out of your ass and look at the real world…..
Personal abuse is not helpful.
The evidence is there, you should read it.
some people have a soft spot for adams suspecting that he played a leading role in possibly one of the longest phases of insurgency on this island and some people detest him for it. just saying.
You are totally correct as usual Jude, nothing more need be said about the attitude of the Free State partitionists. They not only hate Gerry Adams and Sinn Féin but Nationalism as a whole. Perhaps it is because they feel shame because they deserted their fellow Irish citizens or maybe they resent the way the north eastern Nationalists refused to be beaten down by the Orange statelet. Every time they read about resistance it brought home to them what they themselves had done in similar circumstances. As for the Disappeared, God bless them and their loved ones, but I never heard them mentioned until a few years ago. Like Anne Travers they are being used for political ends, does anyone seriously think Jim Allister and co. give a hoot about a Catholic girl gunned down in the street ? It was only because she was killed by the IRA that Jim even gives her a second glance I await Jim`s campaign to gain justice for the victims of the Ballymurphy Massacre.. Shameless.
“As for the disappeared,God bless them and their loved ones” These are people whom the I R A have admitted killing and burying their bodies.Do you not think that their families deserve a bit more respect than your suggestion that they are being used for political ends?
On the money again Jude. I don’t believe GA should step aside at all. He’s a thorn in the side of the establishments on both sides of the ‘partition’ and long may it continue. There are many more stnes to look under.
The problem here is you are making the man immune from criticism. That is more akin to what happens in a cult than a political party. The long reign, the blind adulation, the comparisons to Mandela (laughable really) all indicate a cult like status.
So what would it take for us to be allowed to criticise Gerry?
If he had himself been directly involved in child abuse (and I state clearly he was not, I am speaking hypothetically) would he be open to criticism?
Or would it still be dismissed as a conspiracy of jealous free staters and bitter unionists?
Gio
I think you have hit the nail on the head and the “cult” analogy is appropriate .In most other parties the leader is rarely immune from criticism but then Sinn Fein is unlike most other parties.Tom Kelly’s opinion piece in today’s Irish News is worth reading.One of his sentences describes Gerry Adams as Sinn Fein’s Moses.”He talks to God and then tells the faithful what God wants them to do”.Of course Shinners and their polemicists will no doubt point out that Kelly is a former S D L P activist but his analysis of S F is not far off the mark.
uppa stickies
Unless you have lived through the troubles you will never know the terror, fear, loss, hopelessness and humiliation that the Catholic community went through. Gerry is and was a voice for the people when we had no voice. Long may he continue. The late great Nelson Mandela approved of the President of Sinn Fein and I don’t recall any other Irish politicians as the guard of honour at the recent funeral of Madiba.
If we accept that some (not all, by a long way) Catholics feel that way does that then make him immune from criticism?
Can we not ask questions about what he he knew when his brother was working with children?
Can we not ask questions about the accuracy of his recollection of his part in the ‘troubles’?
Can we not ask questions about his knowledge of the disappearance of Jean McConville?
Can we not ask questions about his success or failure in helping the most impoverished in West Belfast during his time as their MP?
Should we just turn a blind eye to all that?
Yet he led a movement that killed many Catholics he was as wicked as Ian Paisley and as callous
I will certainly point out that Tom Kelly was and still is SDLP but also he was awarded an MBE for services rendered .
Michael C
That doesn’t make his analysis any less valid! I seem to remember the D F M shaking hands with the Queen!
They shook hands as equals,standing toe to toe with no bowing or scraping.Kelly bowed and became a “member of the british empire”
Whatever Martin’s status as he shook hands with the Queen,it was quite a turnaround on the part of Sinn Fein as they had opposed her visit to the South previously .What did you think of the article by Tom Kelly?You will note that he praised Martin Mc Guinness in comparison to Gerry Adams.
I would congratulate Gerry and warn Martin to examine his conduct.If a stoop praises you,be careful,very careful !