Leaving behind 'dysfunctional political and social past'
AMIDST all the economic grief, there are signs that we are maturing as a nation. Slowly but surely we are leaving behind our dysfunctional political and social past
The Minister for Finance, Brian Lenihan, did a good day's work at Beal na mBlath last Sunday when he gave the annual Michael Collins' oration.
Who would have thought, even relatively recently, that a Fianna Fail Minister would speak at the Fine Gael ceremony?
Some in Fianna Fail, over the decades, dismissed Collins as the inspiration for Fine Gael, "the Blueshirts''. Fine Gael was equally dismissive of Fianna Fail.
The rivalry between the two parties determined the shape of politics for decades. Charlie Haughey, that paragon of Fianna Fail values, used to dismiss the prominent journalist, Michael Mills, as a "Blueshirt''.
It was a term of abuse used by Mr Haughey, who was an impostor and a scoundrel, because Mr Mills was not prepared to write favourably about him. The Fine Gael leader, James Dillon, used to described Dev's paper, The Irish Press, as Pravda, claiming it was no more than the equivalent of Communist Russia's mouthpiece.
He was even reluctant to give an interview to RTE in retirement because he thought it was an instrument of Fianna Fail policy. It was all weird stuff, negative, backward and an indication of our political immaturity.
Civil War politics had left a terrible residue of bitterness. Sean Lemass stood back from it all, refusing to play the politics of the Civil War. Eamon de Valera, perhaps, not so much. He spoke privately in dark tones of his old rival, Michael Collins.
Indeed he once remarked to a historian vsiting him as President that his reputation would one day suffer at the hands of Collins' memory.
Mr Lenihan said that if Sunday's commemoration could be seen as a further public act of historical reconciliation, at one of Irish history's sacred places, then he would have been proud to have played his part.
He acknowledged that Fine Gael had been the custodian of the memory of Michael Collins, including at a time when some in Fianna Fail "were unwilling to recognise his importance''.
He went on to recall that his paternal grandfather, Paddy Lenihan, admired Collins and took the pro-Treaty side in 1922.
Years after the Civil War, following a decade as a civil servant, his grandfather went on to join Fianna Fail. This was because of his admiration for Sean Lemass, who shared many of the qualities he admired in Collins: the talent for organisation, great energy and a modernising tendency.
In truth, in terms of public service and commitment to the welfare of the State, Lemass had probably more in common with Collins than with some of those in Fianna Fail whose contribution began and ended with idle rhetoric. Full marks to the local committee for inviting the Minister.
Unfortunately, some within Fine Gael made asses of themselves in expressing opposition to the choice of Mr Lenihan to give the oration.
Senator Liam Twomey, not that long, relatively speaking, a member of the party, said he felt "quite put out'' about it all.
The Fianna Fail administration, he claimed, did not stand for transparency, accountability and taking responsibility for your actions, as Collins did.
This was all nonsense. Fianna Fail-led governments might have been truly wretched. But the blunt fact is that Fine Gael-led governments have been equally awful.
Remember the 1982 to '87 Coalition, led by Fine Gael, which failed hopelessly to make the kind of decisions necessary to turn the economy around? Inexplicably, Young Fine Gaelers were also opposed to the Lenihan invitation.
What kind of Ireland do these people want? An Ireland full of strife, bitterness and division?
Mr Lenihan summed it up when he said that the spirit of Collins was the spirit of the nation, and it must continue to inspire everyone in public life, irrespective of party or tradition.
Recognising Collins' contribution of Irish history is not to elevate him to superhuman status. He had his faults, of course. Had he lived, what kind of constitutional leader would he have been? Who knows really?
One can speculate. The evidence suggests that he would have had a more practical side to his sense of serving the country than was the case with his arch-rival Dev.
Dev stayed too long as Taoiseach, presiding over the economic wasteland that was the Irish nation in the 1950s.
Had he gone after piloting the country through its neutrality policy during the Second World War, he would probably now be remembered as an outstanding statesman and politician of international status.
Lemass was there to take over in the 1950s and should have been given his chance. But Dev craved power. And that made him a deeply flawed leader. Lemass, on the other hand, wanted power to serve the people. And he left the political stage when he felt his contribution was made. He also retired a man of modest means.
Dev took over the Irish Press newspaper group, turned into a family company, and put his son in charge. Pleading poverty in old age, he conveniently forgot that he had handed over his newspaper shares to his family. And he had handed over the old family home, a substantial property in south Dublin, to his son.
With the wisdom of hindsight, it could be argued that Dev was the main cause of the Civil War.
He should have gone to London, rather than relying solely on the Collins-led delegation to negotiate the Treaty. And he should have accepted the democratic decision of the Dail to accept it.
It is worth recalling the emotional words of Collins after the London signing of the Treaty.
"Think – what I have got for Ireland? Something she has wanted these past seven hundred years. Will anyone be satisfied at the bargain? Will anyone? I tell you this – early this morning I signed my death warrant. I thought at the time how odd, how ridiculous - a bullet may just have done the job five years ago.''
Prophetic words. Equally prophetic were his remarks during the Treaty debate. Realistic as always, he warned that Northern Ireland presented a complex problem not to be solved by any crude frontal attack.
"We have stated we would not coerce the north-east,'' he added. "What was the use of talking big phrases about not agreeing to the partition of our country?''
Partition, he argued, was a fact, it existed, and the only way of dealing with it was to try to reach mutual understanding between the two parts of Ireland. This, he believed, the Treaty had made possible.
Politicians like Sean Lemass, Jack Lynch and others would argue a similar case, in admittedly very different circumstances, decades latter.
Dev would support Lynch from the Aras when he held the ground in 1970 in the face of demands to send troops across the border.
Collins was the pragmatist, with the best interests of a then war-torn and suffering country at heart. Collins, the pragmatic patriot, emerges from the detail of his relatively short life.
Lemass, the great hero of Independent Ireland, would also be considered by commentators and historians to be a pragmatic patriot.
Lemass lost his brother in the Civil War when he followed Dev. Collins lost his life.
What happened in West Cork last weekend was an important bridge-building exercise.
Those within Fine Gael opposed to it should cop themselves on after a cursory study of Irish history..
Email to a friend
Print this page
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Weather for Tullamore
Wednesday 08 February 2012
Today
Sunny spells
Temperature: -5 C to -0 C
Wind Speed: 10 mph
Wind direction: South east
Tomorrow
Light sleet showers
Temperature: -0 C to 1 C
Wind Speed: 9 mph
Wind direction: South west
