The SDLP and the Europeanization of the Northern Ireland Problem

This article explores the various ways in which the Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP) has used Europe – as a source of financial aid, political support, ideas and inspiration – in its attempts to resolve the Northern Ireland conflict. In this, the piece considers the SDLP, not as a subject, but rather as an advocate of the Europeanization of the Northern Ireland problem. In particular, it looks at the role of John Hume, a founding member and later leader of the SDLP, who inculcated a strongly pro-European outlook within the party. In doing so, the article considers the success of Hume and the SDLP in their efforts to bring a European influence to bear on Northern Ireland, especially in relation to the peace process and the 1998 Agreement. However, it also looks at both the limitations of this influence, and the problems involved with the SDLP's pro-European approach, particularly since Hume's departure as party leader in 2001. In conclusion, the article suggests that the party may have been ‘over-Europeanized’, with its long-term focus on European issues and ideas now becoming electorally disadvantageous. In this way, the Europeanization of the Northern Ireland problem, and by extension the SDLP, has proven costly to the party.

Horowitz’s Theory of Ethnic Party Competition and the Case of the SDLP, 1970-79

Donald Horowitz's theory of ethnic conflict suggests that a political party operating in a deeply divided society can be effected by a centrifugal pull even when it is not subject to formal electoral competition. This idea can be applied to Northern Ireland's SDLP in the 1970s, when the party faced no credible electoral rival within its primary political constituency. Doing so helps to explain why the SDLP failed in its original objective of mobilizing a cross-community constituency, and instead became what Horowitz terms an “ethnically based party,” representing the interests of only one side of the political divide in Northern Ireland.

Philosophy, Social Hope and Democratic Criticism:Critical Theory for a Global Age

The attempt to connect philosophy and social hope has been one of the key distinguishing features of critical theory as a tradition of enquiry. This connection has been questioned forcefully from the perspective of a post-philosophical pragmatism, as articulated by Rorty. In this article I consider two strategies that have been adopted by critical theorists in seeking to reject Rorty's suggestion that we should abandon the attempt to ground social hope in philosophical reason. We consider argumentative strategies of the philosophical anthropologist and of the rational proceduralist. Once the exchanges between Rorty and these two strands of critical theory have been reconstructed and assessed, an alternative perspective emerges. It is argued that philosophical reasoning best helps to sustain social hope in a rapidly changing world when we consider it in terms of the practice of democratic criticism.