This week has seen two attacks in Northern Ireland, perpetrated by post-IRA detritus with such awesome names as "Real IRA" and the even better "Continuity IRA." In general, the backlash has been immense, with political figures including former paramilitaries on both sides excoriating this subset of thugs who can't let go.
When a movement has basically achieved its cause, those leftovers who continue with the violence are the losers for whom the violence is fulfillment, and who aren't actually going to be satisfied by achieving their nominal goals. If there weren't any specific movement for them to attach to, they might have ended up hating immigrants, fantasizing about being international mercenaries, or just forlornly watching action movies and downloading online porn.
In the U.S., we have problems when these losers acquire guns. In Northern Ireland, unfortunately, the former prevalence of paramilitaries means that the guns are a given, and the losers were pre-recruited. In time, they will be marginalized even more, until they all age out, get a life, or end up in prison. Then it'll be back to the generic fantasies and normal, day-to-day criminality for people like this. It's something to look forward to.
Comments (2)
I don't offer any support to those involved but it is a somewhat simplistic to say that their "movement has basically achieved its cause"
The republican movement basically stands for a united Ireland ( a 32 county republic). The majority of republicans, both political and paramilitary, have come around to the idea that the only way to achieve that is peacefully.
While you may well be correct in saying that the current paramilitary activity is by a sub-set of people with a taste for violence, it isn't correct to say they have achieved their nominal goal. They're just sticking to violence as their means of achieving it.
For the record, I don't have a problem with the goal but their method is unacceptable
Posted by David | March 13, 2009 02:03 AM
Posted on March 13, 2009 02:03
I disagree that it's incorrect to say they've achieved their cause. The (old) IRA successfully used long-term violence to force the issue of devolution, home rule, and thus the possibility for eventual reunification. They reached a point where they could reasonably expect to achieve that goal via peaceful methods, and the goal-oriented people within the IRA gave up the tool of violence. That's what I mean by "basically achieved its cause" -- they have put themselves in a position of political power and probable inevitability.
I strongly suspect (as I advanced above, clearly) that the people who are still using violence are now doing so because it's their thing, and not because they think it's necessary for the old-school long-term goals of the IRA.
Posted by parakkum | March 13, 2009 09:00 AM
Posted on March 13, 2009 09:00