{"id":1384,"date":"2013-02-18T14:15:51","date_gmt":"2013-02-18T14:15:51","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.longkeshinsideout.co.uk\/?p=1384"},"modified":"2013-02-18T14:16:02","modified_gmt":"2013-02-18T14:16:02","slug":"northern-irelands-lostopportunity-the-frustrated-promise-of-political-loyalism","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.longkeshinsideout.co.uk\/?p=1384","title":{"rendered":"Northern Ireland’s Lost Opportunity-The Frustrated Promise of Political Loyalism."},"content":{"rendered":"

This book is released at present but will be formally launched in early March.\u00a0 It’s author, Tony Novosel, a professor of politics at Pittsburgh University has kindly answered some questions in relation to the book, posed by LKIO.\"\"<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. 1.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/em><\/strong>\u00a0There has been little or no interest in Loyalist Politicisation either from the past or at present?\u00a0 How and when did you become interested?<\/em><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

     <\/p>\n

    As I said in the book, I had a very narrow vision of loyalism and unionism and did see it as fascist at worst and as a monolithic bloc that could never be anything but sectarian at best. It was only around the 1994 ceasefires that I began to read about the PUP and people like Gusty Spence, Billy Hutchinson, David Ervine and on and on.\u00a0 There was a brief time in 1987 when I got hold of a copy of the UDA\u2019s Common Sense<\/em> document, that gave me another view of loyalism, but there was not much else that I thought about loyalism.\u00a0 Anyway, because of what I read\/heard after the ceasefires, I eventually arranged to meet Billy Hutchinson.\u00a0 This really gave me a totally different insight into loyalism and its relationship to unionism.<\/p>\n

    I do remember one time in 1998 being out to dinner with some friends and telling them I wanted to do a history of the UVF.\u00a0 But, at the time, it seemed little more than an idle hope because, there was little time for me to do any work on this until about 2006.\u00a0 My work and personal life prevented that. But, it was always in my mind<\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    <\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

      \n
    1. 2.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/em><\/strong>Were you surprised to find the amount of literature from the UVF\/RHC of that time and of the forward thinking it contained?<\/em><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

       <\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      I remember the first time (2006) I read some old issues of Combat<\/em>, I found a long series on the United Irishmen. I was surprised by that.\u00a0 I was also surprised that there was as much material of a progressive political nature in Loyalist News <\/em>(RHC) Combat<\/em> and Orange Cross<\/em>.\u00a0 I expected some, but not as much as I found.\u00a0 I really didn\u2019t expect to find the materials that called for integrated education in 1973 and again in 1974, the complete separation of religion and politics, or the materials on creating a \u201cshared society,\u201d along with a proposal for a new assembly that would\u2019ve spread responsibility for running society to everyone.\u00a0 Having said that, I was also found many articles and proposals that were very right wing in their orientation and more in line or even to the right of traditional unionism. But, it was intriguing to find those documents like \u201cProposals for the Assembly\u201d \u2013 1973 and 1974, \u201cWithin the Context of Northern Ireland\u201d \u2013 1974, The VPP Manifesto \u2013 1974 and many of the articles of a progressive political nature.\u00a0 One of the best pieces I found was in Combat <\/em>in 1977.\u00a0 This was an article called \u201cThink or Perish.\u201d\u00a0 It was reportedly written by Billy Hutchinson and Billy Mitchell as a response to Gusty Spence\u2019s 12 July 1977 speech in Long Kesh and was, in my opinion, the best analysis and critiques of the loyalist community ever written from within that community.\u00a0\u00a0 Spence\u2019s speech and this article should be required reading for all within the loyalist community and the larger community in Northern Ireland.<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

        \n
      1. 3.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/em><\/strong>What has been the reaction of..(a)..loyalists and ..(b)..republicans..and (c)…others…to your findings?<\/em><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

         <\/p>\n

         <\/p>\n

        I\u2019ve done a number of talks within the loyalist community over the past 4 years and the response has been very positive.\u00a0 In many cases people were hearing this history for the first time and from the reaction wanted to know more.\u00a0 As I write in the book, many were hearing, for the first time, something about the positive actions that their community and\/or organizations took to end the conflict and to try and find a new way forward. \u00a0\u00a0So, they have heard about the findings in the book and have been very receptive. It will be interesting to hear what they think once they read the whole book.<\/p>\n

        I have done two talks in small groups with Republicans and loyalists in the same room and these have gone down well and have not had any negative response either during or after the meetings.\u00a0 Over the past year I have met with some republicans in a small group and delivered my findings on the politics of this period.\u00a0 In this meeting the discussion was around the findings rather than arguing over the facts and it was a very positive meeting.\u00a0 This past summer I spoke as part of the ACT presentation at the Feile on the Loyalist Prison experience and this also seemed to go well.\u00a0 I had no negative feedback from either meeting, but that doesn\u2019t mean there wasn\u2019t any.\u00a0 It will be interesting to hear the response once republicans read the whole book.<\/p>\n

        Amongst others, especially friends, it\u2019s been very interesting.\u00a0 I had one person I\u2019ve known for years poke his finger in my chest and tell me \u201cYou\u2019re writing about the wrong side.\u201d\u00a0 Others I\u2019ve known a long time are a bit upset that I did this project.\u00a0 That\u2019s both here and in America.\u00a0 At the same time a great number of my friends in the nationalist community, while initially sceptical, have given me great support in this project and have grown more and more interested in it and are always asking me questions about what I\u2019ve found and concluded.\u00a0 This is the same with my friends in the unionist community.\u00a0 Some were sceptical and more than a bit resistant, but many have become fascinated once they started asking me questions about my work.<\/p>\n

        My favourite responses have come in random conversations. On one occasion I ran into a friend of mine and she asked me what I was working on. I replied \u201cloyalist political thinking.\u201d\u00a0 Her response was \u201cDo they think?\u201d\u00a0 This past year I ran into a friend of mine on the street in Belfast and he was with someone from the media.\u00a0 He introduced me to this person, who then asked me about my work.\u00a0 I told this person \u201cI did a research project on the evolution of loyalist political thinking in the 70s and 80.\u201d The immediate response I got was \u201cIt is a very short book then.\u201d\u00a0 I just laughed and said \u201cNo. It\u2019s about 220 pages.\u201d<\/p>\n

         <\/p>\n

          \n
        1. 4.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/em><\/strong>Do you feel in light of the disclosures of positive and forward thinking from Loyalist it can dispel many of the myths currently held about their contribution or lack of it to the peace process?<\/em><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

           <\/p>\n

          Well, that is a good question.\u00a0 There is no doubt that the information in the book does undercut if not destroy the traditional narratives of loyalism.\u00a0 That\u2019s undeniable.\u00a0 The evidence is there and one has to accept that it is there. \u00a0We can disagree on the interpretation of it and its importance, but we can\u2019t deny its existence.<\/p>\n

          However, having said that, many people come to the table with their own biases and \u201cinherited histories\u201d and so it will be difficult to break those down.\u00a0 When dealing with this I am always reminded of the final line in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence<\/em>.\u00a0 After one character sets the record straight about what he had actually done years before, an act that had made his reputation, the reporter tore up the true story and said:\u00a0 \u201cWhen the legend becomes fact, print the legend.\u201d\u00a0 I think that will happen here with some people.\u00a0 But, I do think it is going to open up a field of study for younger researchers and people within the loyalist community to start examining the history of loyalism in a much more open way and beyond the narrow stereotypes that we have lived with for so long.\u00a0 In fact, two researchers, after reading the final draft of the book, have called it \u201ctrail-blazing.\u201d So, if they are thinking in those terms then that means this should open doors for others to walk through and continue to analyse loyalism beyond the stereotypes.<\/p>\n

           <\/p>\n

            \n
          1. 5.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/em><\/strong>Do you feel that if mainstream Unionism in particular had paid heed to the thinking emanating from UVF\/RHC leadership at that time that we may have has a settlement before 1998?<\/em><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

             <\/p>\n

             <\/p>\n

            I think, as the book, points out, the answer would be no. \u00a0Beyond the inability of unionism to engage with loyalism as a political movement, there were just too many obstacles, mistakes, problems, internal and external to the loyalist groups and their communities, and the simple reality of unionist\/loyalist politics as well as the nature of the Provisional IRA\u2019s struggle and politics, in this era for the progressive politics of loyalism, from the UVF and RHC and the UDA to have had any impact. \u00a0\u00a0I make the point in the book that it would\u2019ve taken a miracle for their work to have had an impact in ending the conflict.\u00a0 That miracle was not going to happen.<\/p>\n

            I think that the only time their politics could have had any chance was in 1987, a slim one at that, with the convening the Unionist Task Force.\u00a0 The eventual policy document that came out of this grouping, An End to Drift,<\/em> contemplated power-sharing on the basis of the UDA\u2019s Common Sense<\/em> and the PUP\u2019s Sharing Responsibility<\/em>.\u00a0 However, as we know the DUP and the UUP leaderships \u201cbinned\u201d this proposal. \u00a0\u00a0From that point on unionism and loyalism, to a certain extent, found themselves watching the evolution of a peace process that they had little control over.\u00a0 However, I would argue the loyalist groups were much better prepared for the peace process than unionism.\u00a0 That is too long to go into here.<\/p>\n

            Having said all that I would also argue that as forward thinking as these proposals were, \u00a0except for 1987, even if mainstream unionism would\u2019ve adopted loyalist ideas, something I don\u2019t believe was possible for it to do, I don\u2019t think it would\u2019ve made a difference because of all the other issues political loyalists faced.<\/p>\n

             <\/p>\n

            \"Share\"\/<\/a>