‘In Defence of Abstentionism: The Conscience of the Republican’   by Donal Lavery

‘’A passionate attachment of one nation for another is the most baneful foe of Republican government.’’ – George Washington

 The thrust of this article is, as the title suggests, an examination of why abstentionism is the only respectable approach for Irish MPs to take, but also explores the underlying reasons why. What forces and emotions define the republican conscience which makes it anathema for Irishmen and women to take their seats on the ‘’green benches’’ in the ‘’Mother of all Parliaments.’’

The first thing I want to outline is that I am not necessarily what is in popular parlance termed a ‘’nationalist’’. Yes I believe that Ireland and its people are one nation under God, but keep in mind that generations of ‘collaborators’ among the indigenous people of this land have also stood under that title, all without fruition. For the Irish people have elected ‘’nationalists’’ to Westminster for centuries now, yet Ireland remains a forcibly divided country despite this electoral trend.

My first loyalty is to the Republic; the Republic that was proclaimed and sealed with both the blood and tears of the dead generations of risen people, which gives it legitimacy and soul. The kind of nation I want was conceived in the ashes and minds of the GPO but which has still to be established as a sovereign entity, at harmony with itself and the world.

It was Bernadette Devlin who claimed, in her maiden speech in the House of Commons, that ‘’there was never born an Englishman who understands the struggles of the Irish people.’’ And she certainly wasn’t wrong. I have every admiration for Bernadette, she is a leader and is committed to the best material and spiritual interests of the Irish people; but she also went on to add some time after that she was naïve in believing she could simply go to the British Parliament and make them aware of the injustices happening in the North, to press them into rectifying these wrongs. She outlined her realisation after taking her seat there, that the British Government knew what was happening but didn’t care enough to spare us even a second thought.

Democracy and the will of any potential government will be swayed according to which demographic will decide the parliamentary make-up of that government – and MPs from the North do not decide who wields power in Britain; a certain demographic among the British electorate do.

Even during the Home Rule era, when the Liberals were actually dependent on Irish votes to remain in office, the Devolution Bill was routinely defeated by the anti-democratic forces which dominate Britain (in all parties). When it did pass, it was never implemented, with the very same Orange fanatics who were arming themselves against the British government subsequently invited to join the Cabinet. Lloyd George, in his records, noted that if the Easter Rebellion had not occurred, the British would have enforced partitioned Home Rule, betraying the Irish sacrifice in World War One even more.

The SDLP of those days, the Irish Parliamentary Party, found time after time that they had been outflanked and outplayed by what Connolly termed the ‘’Orange Aristocracy’’, who could rely on the support of the Tory right and British militarists to thwart any measures to remedy Irish grievances. For when the status quo is at stake, the entirety of British officialdom comes together as one vested interest under the Crown; determined to uphold any government that usurps the democratic will of the people within their perceived jurisdiction. Any of the recent historical arrangements, from the Good Friday Agreement to Saint Andrew’s, came about via direct negotiation with each of the governments/parties involved; not on the floor of Westminster.

Now, here’s a fact to support what I’m saying. The Scots elect far more nationalist MPs than the Irish, and even they cannot collapse the stranglehold on power exercised by the British ruling clique. But you are being asked to believe that sending SDLP or other MPs to Westminster can do this; that these people could somehow inhibit the use of the Royal Prerogative (executive authority under the Crown not accountable to parliament) to ram through legislation and measures without a single parliamentary vote being cast. It’s a falsehood, and anytime it is brought up on this blog none of the ‘intrigues’, from Daniel McCrossan to Colum Eastwood, can offer any reassurances to the contrary. They do NOT matter to the make-up and direction of any British government. The one occasion when their vote counted for something, although couldn’t better the ideological direction towards Ireland, was when Gerry Fitt helped to bring down the Callaghan government and usher in Margaret Thatcher (getting a peerage in return).

Now, Colum Eastwood can’t even persuade too many Nationalist people to follow his political direction, yet he thinks he’s going to be able to twist the arm of any sovereign British government? The people in Derry no longer take him seriously, never mind the Establishment in London.

For to sit on the green benches is to align with the occupants of the green benches; becoming an integral part of their system and structures via fraternisation. It means accepting that a parliament in London has legitimacy over Irish affairs; it means a British government is given authority over the inalienable destiny of the Irish people; and it reinforces the mutilation of this island by caucusing in the House which colonised and divided it. Imagine a party, calling itself ‘’Irish’’ and ‘’Nationalist’’ – but standing candidates only to a British and European parliament.

If you go back for a moment to the 1918 General Election, when the Irish people voted overwhelmingly for abstentionist, Sinn Fein candidates put Ireland on the British government’s agenda and forced them to sit down and negotiate with people like Michael Collins – for they knew that there was no longer a legitimate basis for Britain governing Ireland.

Think for a moment to the time when the Japanese colonised China – would the Chinese people have recognised the renaming of cities along the lines of ‘Tokyo-Shanghai’? Would self-respecting Chinese people, assuming they were even permitted, have denied their right to be a separate nation by sending politicians to a parliament in Tokyo, which had slaughtered, raped and starved their population and where they held no influence? The Chinese would have said No!

The role of any leaders in those circumstances is to involve themselves in the internal constituent affairs of the communities they represent; emancipating the citizens they represent – making problems brought to them by their people into their own problems. Carrying the cross of your neighbour, as your brother’s keeper. In the contemporary context, that means being a recognisable and cohesive social unit, which liaises with all the statutory and private organisations that impact the lives of communities, from hospitals to schools. It means ditching the individualist green benches and luxury of Westminster for the protests and picket-lines of the masses engaged in collective struggle here. It involves maintaining the mandate of the first Dail, that only a parliament elected freely by the Irish people has the right to govern the lives of the Irish people. If you elect a sufficient number of MPs who stick to that principle, then you will eventually be granted a referendum on making it into a reality.

Take all these great anti-colonial leaders, like Mr Gandhi, Mr Nehru, Mr Kenyata, Mr Collins. They all went to Downing Street (not Westminster) to demand one thing: the right to hire and fire the people who rule over the lives of their citizens. The inalienable right to national self-determination. Mr Eastwood and Mrs Foster aren’t going to be able to sack the next British Prime Minister, whatever road they embark on.

So, it’s simple. I want no more right than the Indians and Kenyans requested – to govern myself free from outside interference. For it was Shakespeare who opined that the purpose of life is ‘’To be or not to be. That is the question!’’ To be ourselves, or not to be ourselves. We in Ireland, as a sovereign, self-respecting people with tremendous talents, values and resources, are good enough to be ourselves.