Steve Bruce, a Sociology Professor from Aberdeen Uni, has produced a book about the Northern Irish militant Unionist, and Fundamentalist Protestant leader, Ian Paisley. His book is not a biography, more a thematic assessment of the influences that came to bear upon the formation of his religion and politics; his religious and political visions for Ulster; his successes and failures in seeking to achieve them; tensions between those ends - and a fascinating chapter about his relationship to the violence in general and to the various loyalist terror gangs in particular.Bruce writes as a social scientist who neither backs Paisley's political stance, nor believes in Paisley's God. What makes this book so fascinating is that he avoids the trap of so many books of writing simply to demonise a controversial figure - but rather seeks to understand and interpret him in context. He has taken the time to interview countless leaders and members of both the DUP and the Free Presbyterian Church in order to comprehend their world-view.
Bruce believes that the heart of Paisley's appeal has been harnessing the inherent distrust in middle-class liberal elites within both the political and religious spheres. The usual line is that Paisley has generated such distrust - but Bruce argues that given the UUPs increasing willingness to forge a conciliation with Nationalism (culminating in the post Good-Friday-agreement Trimble-ism, of government now - guns later) in the political world and the embracing of theological liberalism by the hierarchies of Irish Methodism and Presbyterianism, Paisley's non-compromising stands haven given voice to a section of society feeling deeply threatened and betrayed. Worse still, on many occasions elites were moving away from traditional views but publicly denying it! That gave Paisley his trump card, of declaring his opponents as hypocrites and traitors - which, when he was proved to be correct, gained him huge credibility. When he accused John Major of negotiating with the (then still active) IRA, Major famously denounced him and him thrown out of Downing Street, to great public acclaim. Yet, Paisley was proved to be the truth teller and Major the liar (even if one agreed 100% with both Major's aims, strategy, and economy of truth!). Likewise, it was Paisley's rejection of the Good-Friday deal, that actually put pressure on Sinn Fein to persuade the IRA on decommissioning, Bruce thinks.
There are two weaknesses with this otherwise remarkable book. The first is that it ends prior to the recent massive changes in Northern Irish politics and in the Free Presbyterian Church - despite its very recent publication date. It does not deal with the DUPs post-IRA weapons disposal, partnership in government, does not address the infamous "chuckle-brothers" routine with Martin McGuiness, and does not discuss his retirement from both his major roles, following increasing unpopularity amongst his own followers. Perhaps a second volume is required. The other disappointment is the way in which the author repeatedly makes the very error that he accuses Paisley of. He explains the way in which Paisley's analysis of the world reduces everything from the SDLP to the EU to the opening of shops on Sundays to a 'Romish Plot' - and so fails to perceive the huge differences within these bodies. Yet, Bruce repeatedly uses the phrase, "evangelicals think" to describe Paisleyism, or "in evangelicals' eyes" to describe the DUP position. In so doing he fails to see the vast differences between the Paisleyite extreme and a hugely varied landscape of belief within Ulster Evangelical Protestantism, in which on many issues 'the big man' speaks with a decidedly unrepresentative voice.
Bruce is however very good when he comes to discerning the tensions within Paisleyism (and between Paisley-ites), making his discussion sensitive and nuanced in seeing neither the DUP nor the Free Presbyterians as a monolithic block, but riven with differences of emphasis and aspiration. The sometimes awkward relationship between the Free-Ps and the DUP is also probed, and the massive overlap in personnel between the two not assumed to mean that the two are the sides of one coin. Tensions have specifically arisen, he argues, between the DUPs need to reach out to as wide an electoral coalition as possible; and the Free P's constant haranguing of others about their heresy, apostasy, treachery, spiritual adultery and so forth. Bruce nicely argues that the differences between the two can be seen clearly in the issues of Sunday Trading. While the Free P's fervently (prophetically they would claim) have denounced the "Republican Sunday", as a violation of God's laws under the influence of the antichrist; DUP councillors have often voted to allow such activities. What unites both is a belief in democracy, for the Free P's it is a gift that comes from the Reformation; for the DUP it is the basis for a secular political philosophy, based not on biblical commands but on fairly traditional social contract theory. What both accuse the Republic of Ireland of having is undue church influence in the state, which they denounce - and so allow popular opening of sports facilities on the Sabbath, even where it is perceived as offensive to God.
Social Contract theory is in itself fascinating. If the state and the people are locked together in mutual agreement of protection and compliance respectively, then all well and good. Where Paisley has been most controversial is where he has begun to suggest that the state is either beginning to, or planning to violate its requirements, leaving the people to enforce the rule of law themselves. His repeated denunciations of terror and violence (from both sides of he sectarian divide), have been infamously accompanied by various flirtations with "third forces". Bruce analyses all of these and contends that while Paisley has on occasions contributed to the environment which others have used for terror, has consistently opposed terror, denounced violence, expelled people drifting towards it, and is absolutely hated by all the loyalist terror gangs - not least because he so fervently calls their violence "sin", calls for the execution and fought against their early release under the Belfast Agreement. In Bruce's analysis, Paisley is a brandisher of unpleasant words, provocative placards and civil disobedience, but not weapons. Bruce compares the percentage of young men involved in terror in Northern Ireland's loyalist population, with the percentage of them in the Free P church. He finds that a member of Paisley's church is less likely to be involved in sectarian violence than a non-member. Fascinating!
This is a very well researched and illuminating insight into one of the most colourful, controversial and strange political and religious characters of recent times. If it could be completed with a chapter on the chuckle-brothers era and retirement, it would be much improved.
Bruce believes that the heart of Paisley's appeal has been harnessing the inherent distrust in middle-class liberal elites within both the political and religious spheres. The usual line is that Paisley has generated such distrust - but Bruce argues that given the UUPs increasing willingness to forge a conciliation with Nationalism (culminating in the post Good-Friday-agreement Trimble-ism, of government now - guns later) in the political world and the embracing of theological liberalism by the hierarchies of Irish Methodism and Presbyterianism, Paisley's non-compromising stands haven given voice to a section of society feeling deeply threatened and betrayed. Worse still, on many occasions elites were moving away from traditional views but publicly denying it! That gave Paisley his trump card, of declaring his opponents as hypocrites and traitors - which, when he was proved to be correct, gained him huge credibility. When he accused John Major of negotiating with the (then still active) IRA, Major famously denounced him and him thrown out of Downing Street, to great public acclaim. Yet, Paisley was proved to be the truth teller and Major the liar (even if one agreed 100% with both Major's aims, strategy, and economy of truth!). Likewise, it was Paisley's rejection of the Good-Friday deal, that actually put pressure on Sinn Fein to persuade the IRA on decommissioning, Bruce thinks.
There are two weaknesses with this otherwise remarkable book. The first is that it ends prior to the recent massive changes in Northern Irish politics and in the Free Presbyterian Church - despite its very recent publication date. It does not deal with the DUPs post-IRA weapons disposal, partnership in government, does not address the infamous "chuckle-brothers" routine with Martin McGuiness, and does not discuss his retirement from both his major roles, following increasing unpopularity amongst his own followers. Perhaps a second volume is required. The other disappointment is the way in which the author repeatedly makes the very error that he accuses Paisley of. He explains the way in which Paisley's analysis of the world reduces everything from the SDLP to the EU to the opening of shops on Sundays to a 'Romish Plot' - and so fails to perceive the huge differences within these bodies. Yet, Bruce repeatedly uses the phrase, "evangelicals think" to describe Paisleyism, or "in evangelicals' eyes" to describe the DUP position. In so doing he fails to see the vast differences between the Paisleyite extreme and a hugely varied landscape of belief within Ulster Evangelical Protestantism, in which on many issues 'the big man' speaks with a decidedly unrepresentative voice.
Bruce is however very good when he comes to discerning the tensions within Paisleyism (and between Paisley-ites), making his discussion sensitive and nuanced in seeing neither the DUP nor the Free Presbyterians as a monolithic block, but riven with differences of emphasis and aspiration. The sometimes awkward relationship between the Free-Ps and the DUP is also probed, and the massive overlap in personnel between the two not assumed to mean that the two are the sides of one coin. Tensions have specifically arisen, he argues, between the DUPs need to reach out to as wide an electoral coalition as possible; and the Free P's constant haranguing of others about their heresy, apostasy, treachery, spiritual adultery and so forth. Bruce nicely argues that the differences between the two can be seen clearly in the issues of Sunday Trading. While the Free P's fervently (prophetically they would claim) have denounced the "Republican Sunday", as a violation of God's laws under the influence of the antichrist; DUP councillors have often voted to allow such activities. What unites both is a belief in democracy, for the Free P's it is a gift that comes from the Reformation; for the DUP it is the basis for a secular political philosophy, based not on biblical commands but on fairly traditional social contract theory. What both accuse the Republic of Ireland of having is undue church influence in the state, which they denounce - and so allow popular opening of sports facilities on the Sabbath, even where it is perceived as offensive to God.
Social Contract theory is in itself fascinating. If the state and the people are locked together in mutual agreement of protection and compliance respectively, then all well and good. Where Paisley has been most controversial is where he has begun to suggest that the state is either beginning to, or planning to violate its requirements, leaving the people to enforce the rule of law themselves. His repeated denunciations of terror and violence (from both sides of he sectarian divide), have been infamously accompanied by various flirtations with "third forces". Bruce analyses all of these and contends that while Paisley has on occasions contributed to the environment which others have used for terror, has consistently opposed terror, denounced violence, expelled people drifting towards it, and is absolutely hated by all the loyalist terror gangs - not least because he so fervently calls their violence "sin", calls for the execution and fought against their early release under the Belfast Agreement. In Bruce's analysis, Paisley is a brandisher of unpleasant words, provocative placards and civil disobedience, but not weapons. Bruce compares the percentage of young men involved in terror in Northern Ireland's loyalist population, with the percentage of them in the Free P church. He finds that a member of Paisley's church is less likely to be involved in sectarian violence than a non-member. Fascinating!
This is a very well researched and illuminating insight into one of the most colourful, controversial and strange political and religious characters of recent times. If it could be completed with a chapter on the chuckle-brothers era and retirement, it would be much improved.
No comments:
Post a Comment