A 'democratic mandate'

national | history and heritage | opinion/analysis Monday June 12, 2006 16:00 by SK

Kevin Myers and 1916.

Hopes that Kevin Myers regression to the Irish Independent would lead to him letting go of 1916 have been cruelly dashed.The whole thing borders on obsessionalism-do a search in the Irish Times archive using 'Myers’ and ‘1916’ and you’ll see what I’m talking about.And it’s an obsession revolving around a curious dependancy because without it he would have to tear his hair out to fill his half his columns.You could also take the cynical view that K.M.'s 1916 cut-and-paste mania vis a vis 1916 means he can fill slot after slot with essentially the same essay laced with occasional ad hoc replies to criticisms made in letters section.

K.M.’s ‘single transferable political essay’ knocking 1916 and all that takes a characteristically blinkered and dogmatic view on the morality of the Rising –an issue where agnosticism is the only intellectually defensible position.

His leitmotif here is the ‘lack of a democratic mandate’.

The best way of dealing with this is to use his own favourite device of the comic allegorical dialogue.Let us picture one between a canvasser and canvassee during the 1910 general election:

Canvasser.Sorry Sir,I won’take up too much of your time.I represent the Irish Rebellion Party.We are looking for a democratic mandate to start a rebellion sometime in the near future with a view to establishing an independent state..

Canvassee.A democratic mandate!

Canvasser Absolutely.We just don’t want a revolution.Before we get that far we want to incontrovertibly establish its democratic bona fides to future generations.And as soon as we get it the wheels of revolution will start grinding.But the mandate must come first.It may take a long time but get it we will.

Canvassee.You mean by getting a majority of Irish MPs or of just of votes cast in the general election?

Canvasser.Neither actually.A mandate arising from an election will still be open to question if issues like abstention , personation etc. are taken into account.The issue of having a clear mandate for posterity is absolutely crucial.Our ultimate aim is a national rebellion referendum.

Canvassee.You are not serious.

Canvasser.I am deadly serious.

Canvassee.Look sir let’s face facts here.You are talking about an unequal struggle-David and Goliath being an understatement.It will be even more unequal without the military advantages of subterfuge and surprise.What you are advocating is,to put it mildly,inconsistent with this.

Canvasser No.Success must take second place to moral openness and the historical record.It would be unethical to launch something as extreme as a separatist rebellion without establishing a popular mandate

Canvassee.Let’s put this another way.In the bizarrely hypothetical situation of a referendum being carried the British will have all the advance warning they need and would have resources in place to crush any embryonic rebellion immediately afterwards.

Canvasser.We have anticipated that..We’ll appeal to the British sense of fair play and ask for a Nelsonian blind eye period of 3 months or so after the date of a successful referendum to make our preparations unhindered before the official commencement of hostilities.

Canvassee.You naivety knows no bounds.Why argue for a rebellion in the first place?

Canvasser.Because there is no other option.The British have ignored demands for even limited self rule in election after election.

Canvassee.And yet you expect them to respect your ludicrously fanciful rebellion mandate.Do you not see the circularity in your thinking?

Canvasser (glazed look upon his face) You have me there.

Canvassee.This is all a bit academic anyhow.Looking for a mandate like that in the jurisdiction of the authority against which you want to rebel is a contradiction in terms.Anyway in a few days the whole lot of you will be arrested for sedition.

Canvasser We will place our faith in their sense of fair play.They will let us get on with our campaign and then have the decency to counterbalance the David/Goliath thing by giving us a fair shot at getting the rebellion going and then take the line of ‘may the best man win’.

Canvassee .Your innocence is touching.Let’s look at recent history.We have seen the British ruthlessly crush the Boers in South Africa –with the use of concentration camps etc.No sign of rebellion plebiscites or Nelsonian blind eyes there.If they travelled half way around the world to suppress a country they have only been involved with for 80 odd years they are hardly likely to easily let go of a territory at their doorstep which has been under their hegemony for centuries.If they interned Boer women and children in concentration camps it stretches credibility to envisage martial ‘fair play’.You mentioned mandates for restricted self-government being ignored.This being the case how would they tolerate a process that could lead to full separation?

Canvasser.Magnificent.I can’t argue against logic like that.

Canvassee.Well here’s some more logic – borrowing from Herr Marx and Herr Freud.Democracy is the free will of the people.But free will implies clarity of consciousness on a mass and a personal level.Is an individual who is punch drunk or in a hypnotic trance capable of exercising free will? By the same token national blurring of consciousness occurs in a nation which gone through a long colonisation.Focus in particular on the American Revolution – the only successful revolution ever against British rule.Did this have a democratic mandate? Probably not.But a single cataclysmic event focussed the national attention, penetrated through to the national subconscious, and set wheels in motion.

Here’s what I advise.If you want to penetrate to the psychological fog left by centuries of occupation and get to the core of the national psyche strike a blow.Especially a blow that will provoke atrocities and draconian measures which will force people in turn to question the legitimacy of Briitish rule.Figuratively speaking what is needed is a flash of lightning which banishes the darkness and throws the landscape into stark relief.Do not think in terms of a democratic mandate but of engineering a seismic,catalytic event.Like Fort Sumpter.Or the Boston Tea Party.Or the storming of the Bastille.Perhaps not immediately but shortly afterwards it will be clear if the national psyche is in tune with independence.But be warned.Even if this pivotal event occurs and things take the course you hope for people will still cavil 90 years later about the ‘lack of a democratic mandate’.

Dialogue over.

I rest my case.

And hopefully it’s a case that will never come to Mr.Myers’ attention otherwise he will have an excuse to rabbit on for a few more months.