Ian Paisley and other relics of the past

A recent article in the Guardian acknowledged the tributes to Ian Paisley after his death as being privy to the theory of 'live long enough and all is forgiven'. The media coverage surrounding his death focused on Paisley as a peacemaker, with David Cameron saying he would be remembered as the ''big man' of Northern Ireland politics' and would be 'greatly missed'. This is a far cry from the images of Paisley as a flat track bully, whose violent rhetoric inspired a far right stance amongst unionism throughout the early peace process. Further to this, the Reverend for a long time backed loyalist paramilitarism in its defence of a mid 20th century political system which even the staunchest supporter of the union would now admit was unjust and unethical. His passing is the passing of a relic which the political mindset of the North must move on from, but many others remain.

The death of Paisley and the obituaries which followed in the mainstream media, have highlighted many important ideas for those who hope the North can progress from its current malaise. His deposition by those who now run the DUP was well covered by the media earlier this year and shows the deep underlying issues which exist within the NI Assembly. As was heartily discussed at the time, Paisley had overstayed his usefulness to the DUP, faced with the rise of TUV they removed him so as to retain their position as the hardiest defenders of the union.

Success in the following election then allowed them to maintain a power base from which they instituted the Red Sky scandal, giving public finances to DUP donors whilst they destroyed housing executive property. Nelson McCausland (DSD minister at the time) further proved his superior usefulness in social housing trade offs with Sinn Féin, perpetuating the electoral majority of key party members, some of whom had led the deposition of the party founder.

This failure to progress to a consensus based system where parties set a joint agenda for the good of the people - as opposed to the current bilateral strategies based on maintaining the electoral relevance of green and blue parties is a deep wound in the system which sees no signs of healing under the leadership of the current incumbents of the OFMDFM.

Paisley's disposal at the hands of those who now lead the DUP has not however succeeded to maintain their unchallenged position as dictators of the agenda which the loyalist vote follows. Failures of the party to manage PR and promote new changes such as the removal of flags and symbols; growing multiculturalism in the North with the influx of new ethnocultural groups; and the secularisation of public policy with movements towards equal marriage based on sexual orientation has led to the growth of a new far right element in Loyalism. The growth of the 'Protestant Coalition' outlook from Loyalism is undoubtedly a consequence of disastrous management by an adversarial party in a political system based on progressive consensus and tolerance. This consensus, due to the leadership of Sinn Féin and the DUP has given way to stand off and trade off.

Peter Robinson was quoted earlier this week as saying the Stormont system was 'no longer fit for purpose' and he would look to the Westminster government to engage in further talks for a solution. This comes less than a year after the huge amount of money spent bringing in US diplomat Richard Haass offered no results in solving issues over flags, parades and dealing with the past. This unveils a basic incompetence in the leadership of the Stormont executive.

DUP failure to properly lead in the progressive changes to policy on flags and symbols which must take place to become a less confrontational society, failure to govern in a responsible way which benefits the people, and failure to come up with any solutions to the problems they are paid to solve leads to a simple conclusion. Paisley is a relic which the North are better moving on from, but he is not the only one, until the relics still sitting in the executive office on the hill are also disposed of, progress cannot be made. We can't however wait until they dispose of themselves as they did with the Doc, the people of the North must stand up to the relics in OFMDFM, in Sinn Féin and in the DUP and take a leaf from Reverend. Ulster must say no to the powers that be or we will 'never, never' move on and become the fantastic multicultural, tolerant society we believe we can be.

Is there an anti Islamic agenda in the UK?

Anyone watching the BBC news this evening would have seen their propaganda machine in full flow, in outlining of the structure of the Islamic State, quotes such as 'married to sister' were casually interspersed with the relevant information being conveyed - pictures of a crying British mother shown while a solicitor read a statement about her daughter's indoctrination into IS.

An executive who confirmed they would offer only humanitarian aid to fighters in Iraq only a few weeks ago are now fully involved in a system of air strikes against IS and the leaders of both government and opposition are proposing a tough response to the fighting; suggestions even being made that passports of UK muslims who travel to Syria could be revoked. We have always been at war with Eastasia.

This draconian response, cracking down on those who offer aid in Syria is not new, post 9/11 the Blair government used invocation of a state of emergency to pass the anti terrorism, crime and security act (ATCS act) - the most drastic reaction of any European state to an attack which took place on a different continent. The ATCS act allows the UK to indefinitely intern those suspected of 'terror charges' pending deportation, whether that deportation was granted or not. This new policy of revoking the passports of even British nationals suspected of such is an extension of the draconian, authoritarian school of thought in dealing with the threat of fundamentalism.

But is this reaction based on previous successes? Succinctly, no, since the ATCS act was brought in in 2001, stop and searches amongst the muslim community have increased drastically, anti immigration politics has come to the fore electorally and parties such as UKIP and the BNP have gained widespread support at local level. The demonisation of the muslim people in Britain as an 'enemy within' has been motivated by the increased securitisation and aggressive foreign policy implemented by the Blair government and now continued by the coalition.

This culture of fear has not been allayed in many cases by the mainstream media within Britain. Of course the main news outlets such as News International and BSkyB distribute a 'Fox-lite' geared towards the conservative elements within UK society, but other more traditionally balanced outlets such as the BBC fail in their depictions of society in many cases as well, as outlined in the beginning of this article.

Choudary on the Immigration Row
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJxn8AYtfq8

There is a major issue in Britain at the minute with framing the arguments of fundamentalist Islam. In Channel 5's 'Big Immigration Row', muslim cleric Anjem Choudary was introduced to the audience as, 'radical muslim Anjem Choudary, hate figure to some as you may hear,' as jeers were thrown from the studio audience. Whilst the author would not give support to the perspective of Islam held by Choudary, framing him in this light drastically dilutes his ability to convey any perspective whatsoever, the message that the killing of Lee Rigby in Woolwich was at least partially motivated by the global nature of the 'war on terror' which Britain has got itself involved in. This lack of interest in understanding the motivations of radical Islam generates hate towards the normal, functioning members of British society.

The ignorance of the mainstream media in helping us understand the motivations of IS and others in a rational and balanced way remains a problem in the ongoing and escalating conflict, and allows for the situation to continue to escalate; with liberal values of the multicultural, tolerant society we aim to build giving way to securitisation and marginalisation of some within our communities. Bourgeois conservative David Cameron, hate figure to some as you may hear does not seem to be leading us out of this mess.

Do you agree? Leave your comments below.