The hysterical reaction by a significant section of the news media in the United Kingdom to the forthcoming visit by the British Labour Party leader, Jeremy Corbyn, to the country’s colonial outpost in the north-east of Ireland is a strong indicator that for some journalists in the UK, the historical Troubles of 1966 to 2005 are far from over. In response to the artificial outrage whipped up by pro-union parties in the contested region, particularly the ultra-right Democratic Unionist Party, the press in London has gone into overdrive, reviving stories of the bloody conflict and Corbyn’s supposed sympathy for Britain’s Irish republican opponents on the island. There is very little substance in the would-be controversy, since the Islington North MP is simply visiting or making a handful of speeches at a few key locations in and around the Six Counties, including at Queens University Belfast. No dramatic policy statements have been signalled or expected.
All this fuss stands in stark contrast to the now muted reaction by the British press to the nation’s current system of government, where a minority Conservative Party administration is reliant on the parliamentary votes of MPs from the DUP. Given the latter’s previous pariah status, this arrangement is the equivalent of the far-right National Front (NF) being given remote access to the levers of state power in France or the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) gaining the same in Germany. For be in no doubt, there are some elected representatives in the pro-union camp in the north of Ireland who sit on the same ideological spectrum as those groupings, albeit in a specifically colonial context.
While the newspapers in the United Kingdom fulminate over the alleged succour given to Irish insurgents by Jeremy Corbyn and his close political or Labour associates during the 1980s and ‘90s, it is worth remembering that the DUP has been closely linked with pro-UK or loyalist terror factions since its emergence as a militant and fundamentalist political party in the early 1970s. A record of support and cooperation which continues up to the present day, as noted during the recent elections in the Six Counties, when known terrorists and terrorist organisations were out campaigning for Democratic Unionist candidates, or during the latest round of failed talks at Stormont when loyalist leaders contributed to the last-minute pro-union collapse of the cross-party negotiations.
Whatever one’s opinions about Jeremy Corbyn, and I’m generally an admirer from afar, his political history cannot be compared to that of the men and women who currently head the anti-peace process DUP, a political grouping which is a by-word for ideologically aggressive bigotry and prejudice. Nor can the reaction of the London press to the Labour Party leader’s opinions on Ireland be seen in isolation from the UK media’s long record of regarding Irish lives of lesser value or import than British lives, especially during the three decades of insurgency and counterinsurgency struggle in the country’s first and last colony.
Absolutely correct, except that NI is not the last colony. There is still Scotland, the Malvina’s, Gibraltar and a few more. With any luck at all there will be a few less in the next couple of years.
Greater England will let go of the legacy colony in Ireland long before it will let go of Gibraltar. That is a weird geographical crush it has. Maybe because that is “proper foreign”, as in a hot southern climate, it has more of the veneer of empire about it?
Well, NI is inconvenient in various ways which I am sure you are familiar with (i.e. Brexit, financing) but unfortunately at present the DUP have a stranglehold on May. I think though that she will eventually get up enough courage to ditch them. Where else can they go anyway – they don’t want Corbyn in power! As for Gibraltar it has little strategic value now – it’s just a matter of pride like the Malvina’s. If May eventually manages to leave the EU (doubtful) maybe Argentina will drive a hard bargain – Spian seems more wimpish. As for Scotland things are hotting up – intransigence from May over the EU transitional powers and the facts of financial loss over Brexit plus all the broken promises and arguments of solidarity which have been shown to be false – “Yippee! is all I can say.
LikeLiked by 1 person
But would the Scots jump the sinking Brexit ship? A majority seem determined to go down with it, if the polls are to be believed.
Only a small majority are anti independence, and that’s before any new pro campaign. There was a large change to pro just before the first referendum, and we hope for another surge before the next. As for exiting the EU I’m not sure which way that will trend, but the full catastrophic consequences are still obscured by the tory governments Unicorn publicity. Unicorns don’t really exist though, as will become ever more clear to all concerned.
Hopefully a pro-independence majority will emerge, though recent polling indicates that even in the case of a “hard Brexit” the Scots remain quite divided. In any case, would London give another vote to Scotland on the matter? I doubt it. The UK state seems intent on clawing back control on the island of Britain not the reverse. Or even the present status quo.
Well, we’ll see. But denying a new referendum will get the tories nowhere – every act of clawback will have blowback too. Even Thatcher thought that if the SNP just got a majority in the Scottish Parliament it would be all over for the Union, so I don’t think Westminster’s “right” to allow or not a vote is very well founded. In my opinion we should just repeal our assent to the Act of Union if there is again a majority SNP government, and that should ie in the manifesto.
The Daily Mail and Express had their usual rant , Corbyn friend to IRA terrorists etc, failed to mention that the Queen had a handshake and dinner with the late Martin McGuinness at Windsor Castle in 2014
LikeLiked by 1 person