Challengers to provisional republicanism: the official republican movement, people’s democracy and the Irish republican socialist party, 1968–98

The Provisional IRA and its political wing Sinn Féin have attracted by far the greatest scholarly interest of all the players in the Northern Irish conflict. This emphasis is perfectly legitimate, given the centrality of the Provos to so many turning-points in the conflict, from the collapse of Stormont in the early 1970s to the hunger strikes of the following decade and the ceasefires which were followed by the Belfast Agreement. My project, however, looks at political groups that at one time or another challenged the Provos for leadership of the militant, anti-state constituency in Northern Ireland (chiefly based in the Catholic working class). Although never as large or influential as the Provisional republicans, groups such as the Official IRA and the Irish Republican Socialist Party sometimes had a discernible impact on the course of events which is overlooked by most studies, and often pioneered ideas and tactics that were later adopted by the Provos themselves. The idea that republicans should embrace political action and work in broad campaigning alliances was promoted by the IRSP and socialist groups such as People’s Democracy before it was taken up by Gerry Adams and his allies, while the Official IRA supported the principle of a settlement based on democratization of the Northern Irish state, which was later accepted by Sinn Féin in the form of the Belfast Agreement. The goal of my research is to provide a novel perspective on the conflict in Northern Ireland, while engaging with theoretical debates about its character.

The Catholic Church and revolution in Ireland

Despite the involvement of radical socialists like James Connolly and the Irish Citizen Army in the 1916 Rising and the unanimous passing of the Democratic Programme (a socialist manifesto for the new Government) by the First Dáil in 1919, the Irish state has since its inception exhibited a highly conservative approach to social and economic policy, and politics generally in Ireland, North or South, have never faced a serious challenge from those seeking radical change. Several factors have played a part in this and this article focuses on one of these - the power and conservatism of the Catholic Church and its influence in shaping the political landscape. Despite a decline in recent years, the Church remains influential north and south of the Border in education provision, the current debates in relation to abortion and in culturally important aspects of life - baptism, communion and burial. In the past the Church’s political influence among Ireland’s majority Catholic community had been even more pronounced. The article begins by looking at the Church’s attitude to revolutionary change in Ireland historically before focusing on its influence in the North during the Stormont years and during the more recent ‘Troubles’ – 1969 - 98. It shows how the Church attempted to influence political thought and discourse in Ireland when it was at the height of its power. Whilst it is true that the Church was not a monolith, and there have always been individual priests who have adopted a more radical approach, the general thrust of the Church was conservative, attempting to ally itself with the power elites of the day where possible. It is this influence which appears to have stood the test of time despite attempts in past generations to radicalise the Irish population.

Uncomfortable 'truths' and the centenary anniversary of the 1916 Rising in Ireland

How to deal with uncomfortable ‘truths’ from the past has long posed problems for historians and politicians alike and this is exemplified by attempts to ‘deal with’ the centenary anniversary of the 1916 Easter Rising in Ireland. How do we recognise the revolutionary ‘heroes’ of the past and their contribution to the building of the new ‘nation’ state to which we may pledge allegiance, without exposing the contradictions inherent in the way that ‘nation’ state has transformed, subverted and indeed corrupted many of the ideas for which they fought? More controversially, how do we honour the actions of revolutionaries in the past which led to death and destruction in pursuance of a grand ideal, while at the same time condemning others today who claim to have been likewise engaged, using similar methods, during the recent ‘Troubles’ (1969-98 and counting)? Attempts by the Irish state to deal with the centenary seem to illustrate the point.