Hmm, interesting. I don’t really pay all that much attention to Ireland’s politics so it’s nice to see some insight. However, I don’t know if your issue here is with devolution, or more shared governance between ideologically opposed sides?

David,

Interesting extract from Frank Millar’s forthcoming book over at Slugger: http://tinyurl.com/6qekbh

so it’s nice to see some insight

Well it would be – but there’s none here. For example…

This is just one of the reasons that I think devolution to be an expensive waste of time, unless it should established on the basis of working class unity rather than sectarian division.

If there were ‘working class unity’ in what one assumes is the hopelessly utopian way you imagine, there’d be no need for devolution, would there? But then again, there would have been no troubles either. I’m sorry but I don’t understand what the point of this post is. The war is over. Are you seriously suggesting that Sinn Fein’s/the DUP’s participation in devolution – grudging and infuriating though it may be – has nothing to do with this? Or at least represents this? Grow up.

All views are insight, it’d be silly to take it as gospel truth I agree.

My problem with devolution is manifold. The first major problem is that there is an inbuilt bias to the mechanisms of government. Most obviously, in order to pass any law, a party designated ‘nationalist’ and a party designated ‘unionist’ must agree to pass it and have a majority in the chamber. Surely direct rule and a coterie in Westminster would be better than deliberately sectarianising Northern Irish politics?

In one respect this isn’t really a problem with the conception of devolution per se; devolution merely reflects a situation in which the four major parties largely agree on political issues outside of the sectarian issues, and disagree where those sectarian issues are concerned. Sinn Fein and the DUP are largely the representatives of the cultural and economic elites on either side of the divide – and both in turn appeal to large donors on the basis of neo-liberal economic policies.

All of this rather incestuous living on the part of NI political elites has a natural correlate: indulgence in hypocritical populism. For example, the DUP, party of “No Surrender” have in essence conceded the majority of things they swore they never would. The political views of their followers however demand these periodical denunciations of “Sinn Fein/IRA” on whatever issue can be found to hand. It’s the same on the other side too, with pictures of Bobby Sands interposed with pictures of Che Guevara and so forth.

The point of this article is simply that I’m pissed off with it all. It is necessary to Northern Irish politics for as long as the largest parties are based upon covering over their socio-economic policies with sectarian rantings. It has become enshrined into the structures of devolved government in the method outlined above. It is also the fault of the labour movement insofar as they have been content to relegate Northern Irish issues to the purview of the SDLP, a party with a basis only among Catholics.

On the subject of Comment #3, there is no reason to suppose that working class unity (regardless of the sneering with which you can inflect the word “utopian”) would obviate the desire for devolution. After all, a working class movement in Ireland of ninety years ago ultimately resulted in the populist reaction which overturned British imperialism to create the Irish Free State. Similarly, the SNP’s desires are as much sustained by working class discontent with Labour and how modern economics are panning out as much as by any conceptual desire for Scottish independence, if not moreso.

You are of course correct; had there been working class unity, there would have been no “Troubles” – but the persistence of this division means that the Troubles have not been put entirely behind us, and this division will not be healed by the participation of the DUP and Sinn Fein in the current governance structures. That too is another objection of mine to devolution; the rhetoric that attends it assumes it will solve everything, and yet sectarian violence has rumbled on even since 1998, even since St. Andrews and all the rest of it.