Month: September 2020

I understand the “divide of beliefs/ideas within oneself” is a huge connection in the content we have seen so far. More specifically, the conflict a character experiences with their own ideas when faced with traumatic events and backlash from others. A great example of this is the play “Mickeybo and Mojo.” Within the story, Mickybo, a catholic, and Mojo, a protestant, become unlikely friends. During the story, Mickeybo’s father is shot in the head, by the protestants, for being catholic, and this creates an internal struggle within him and his views on Catholics. Mickeybo and Mojo friendships begin to unravel and this demonstrates this divide within the individual’s ideas/beliefs. Mickybo begins to agree with Fuckface and Grank and expresses things to Mojo he doesn’t mean. Mickeybo has now developed a conflicting view of his friend and is now more involved with the tension of his society.

Another example of this internal struggle is presented in the movie Uptight. Within Uptight, Tank has been identified as the informer and this is due to his push back from the black revolutionary group. The group kicks Tank out due to his inconsistent behavior and the threat of this to their cause. This event leads to Tank’s conflict within himself and the decision to betray his friend, Johnny, and the revolution. This betrayal demonstrates an action that goes against Tank’s ideals and beliefs, and this presents the internal struggle this character faces due to ideas from others.

Overall, the content of this class focuses on the conflicts between various groups and how these disagreements play out. Additionally, these opposing views bring internal conflicts within individuals and this creates struggles and actions that go against their beliefs.  

After reading and discussing Mojo Mickybo this week, I definitely gained more of an emotional sense of what went on in Northern Ireland during “The Troubles.” By writing about problems through the eyes of children, Owen McCafferty criticizes Northern Ireland’s culture of violence and division. The portrayal of these young boys’ loss of innocence makes the audience realize the profound impacts of violence and hate that perpetuate society. People tend to see children as universally innocent and deserving of no harm, no matter where they come from or to what group they identify. McCafferty uses this human tendency to demonstrate how the violence and hate perpetuated by the adults in kids’ lives affects how children think, act, and feel. He implies that hate is not a natural human tendency, but is taught to us through socialization. The boys live in a world filled with childlike wonder even though they are surrounded by violence and war. At the end, when the boys are no longer friends, McCafferty shows how there is no hope for unity and friendship among groups as long as the societies that they are living in teach them to hate one another. 

When reading this text, I made the connection to how it is common for young people now to generalize all old people as racist. We mostly attribute it to the generation in which they were born, where they were taught the racism and hate in their households, schools, and other communities growing up. The fact that kids in America now seem to have less racial prejudice than their elders shows that prejudice is not a natural human tendency but taught by society. So although there is still much work to be done in terms of racism in America, today’s children show that there is hope, as long as we try our best to not teach them hate and prejudice.

In Mojo Mickybo, we witnessed the tale of a childhood friendship destroyed by the long-standing tensions between Protestant Unionists and Catholic Nationalists in Northern Ireland.

Mojo, a young Protestant boy, and Mickybo, a Catholic boy, seemed to transcend the brutal conflict that defined the region during “the Troubles” by being friends. However, at the end of the play, the boys get into a fight and later ignore each other as adults; the end of their friendship showed that the Unionist–Nationalist divide was too much for them to overcome.

Mojo Mickybo demonstrated that Northern Ireland during the Troubles was an impossible place for kids to be able to grow up as children. The action that the boys admired in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid was actually somewhat present in their lives. Mickybo’s dad was killed and often they would go to sleep to the sound of bombs exploding. They simply could not escape the conflict.

Martin Luther King, Jr. wrote that one of the greatest threats facing the US Civil Rights Movement was the white moderate. He was afraid of the danger that white moderates who were too afraid to get involved presented. He said this because what the white moderate didn’t entirely comprehend was that the problems black people faced affected nearly every single part of their lives; it wasn’t just a political issue.

Mojo Mickybo is an example of that same concept. The sectarian divide in Northern Ireland affected everything from marriages to childhood friendships. Two boys ultimately couldn’t get along because of which side of the bridge they grew up on. The conflict in Northern Ireland and America during the 60’s and 70’s affected real people’s lives on a deeply personal level. It was inevitable.

One of the topics that we discussed in class is why do we use fiction to depict extreme times of violence and duress in history? The two books that we discussed were Mojo Mickybo, which reflected the violence of the Troubles in Belfast and The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, which reflects the extreme violence of the Holocaust. Why do we need to come up with stories like these to explain events in history that are already regarded as tragic and catastrophic?

I believe the answer to this question is that by making up these stories, it makes the tragedy real for its readers. For members of the younger generation, the Troubles and other events that occurred decades ago are very hard to relate to on a personal level. Yes, we can recognize struggles of the time and realize how terrible it was, but to a certain extent there is not enough of a personal effect on us to understand the true pain of the time. 

These stories allow people to feel that personal effect. Through reading, we develop a relationship with the characters. We begin to understand their life, thoughts, and emotions, which creates a genuine bond and connection. In Mojo Mickybo, we develop a relationship with the two boys and come to care for them and their friendship throughout the story. This connection makes it even more painful when Mickeybo’s father is shot in the back of the head and killed. Mickeybo’s friendship with Mojo is ended and him and his mother are now left to fend for themselves. This story is sad and although we know it is fiction, it still shines a light on the true pain of the time. The violence of The Troubles in general was not like a Hollywood movie, where killing is always justified and romanticized. The same can be said about the Boy in the Striped Pajamas, when both boys are mercilessly killed, leaving their families shattered. Stories like Mojo Mickeybo and The Boy in the Striped Pajamas shows how violence is often heartless and tears families, friendships, and lives apart. It affects the innocent just as much as those directly involved. This isn’t the story people want to hear, but it is the truth and that is why fictional stories like these hold value. It forces people to acknowledge the true pain and suffering from the time, instead of only looking at the Hollywood version. 

The struggle in Ireland for equal rights between religious groups is a story even older than racism. Before mankind was divided based upon melanin content, ethnicities and societies distinguished themselves from others based upon a certain system of beliefs in a higher power, or oftentimes, multiple higher powers. Even before monotheism came to dominate the religious landscape, particularly in the developed world, ancients would often persecute or justify war, enslavement, and pillaging upon divine inspiration. The advent of monotheism was marked by centuries of religious-inspired conflicts, the Jewish conquest of the Canaanites, for example. Two other important examples are the centuries of oppression, execution, and torture endured by Christians at the hands of the Roman Empire. Charlamagne’s conquests in the north of Europe are also well known for their brutality.

What is the common theme between all these infamous examples of religious warfare and persecution? Not necessarily that the parties involved are religious, after all, the Quakers, Amish, Jain, and most Christians today are well known for their pacifism. The true link between violence, oppression and injustice via religious discrimination is a wedding of religion and the power of the state. The human institution of government as usual poisons the well.

The logic I followed in class holds that when a state and religious ideology are successfully melded, any dissent from the religious body is essentially dissent from the government that is in cahoots with the religious body. By wedding the auspices of the state with the divine power of religion, governments not only obtain ultimate authority on earth but also have the ability to dictate the eternal afterlife – creating the ultimate coercive apparatus. In essence, I argue that the root problem is not religion itself, as there are arguably more examples of religions coexisting and living in peace with one another than there are of conflicting ideologies. Rather, I argue that the uniquely toxic combination of religion and the powers of earthly government creates a wholly unacceptable society rife with religious discrimination, persecution, and violence.

In reading and hearing from McCann I was struck most by the religious divide. I had always known that Northern Ireland was predominantly protestant and the Republic of Ireland was Catholic, but I did not know the extent to which this contributed to the troubles that occurred. I feel that this is something that we take for granted in the United States. While religious discrimination most certainly still exists, I feel that religious communities are pretty well integrated. That is, people of every religion live, work, and form relationships with each other. I was especially surprised that the religious discrimination came between different sects of Christians. From my personal background I have never experienced any Christian who felt that their sect was superior to any other. Further, I have never encountered any Christian who even seemed to care what denomination other Christians were. Perhaps this is unique to my experience, but I feel that in general Christians feel closely enough related in their beliefs that there is little quarrel between them. Additionally, I was also surprised to learn that the conclusion of the troubles in Derry did not resolve the religious divide. It shows just how much the Irish align themselves to their religious views. Religious participation in the United States, by contrast, has declined steadily over the years to the point where I have never personally witnessed religious discrimination— individuals with strong beliefs simply seem to be more rare. McCann wrote about how peace was mostly brought about due to the people not having the stomach to continue the slaughter. It seems to me that this peace was shoddily struck and a true conclusion to the separation of Ireland has never occurred. There remain calls for a united Ireland yet many in Northern Ireland remain loyal to the UK. It is a wonder whether there will ever be a resolution to this seemingly forever ongoing division. I am curious to see if religious communities in Ireland will set aside their differences and begin to coalesce as the religious of the United States seemingly have. Will the Protestants of the north and the Catholics of the south make up and form a united Ireland?

Hearing this week from Eamonn McCann, I was struck by the truth of his statement that “history is painted in primary colors.” For example, the Troubles in Northern Ireland is often described as the battle between the orange (unionists) and the green (nationalists). I think this fixation on different colors and this historical framing that pits one against the other reveals the human tendency to reduce complex situations to easily digestible stereotypes of opposing forces. War and an Irish Town demonstrates that the Troubles were not simply a battle of Catholics vs Protestants, and yet most people generally understand the conflict in those simplistic terms. I think part of what makes the Troubles and 68 in general so overwhelming and difficult to comprehend is the inability to reduce the events to a set of clear definitions, and any attempts to explain the events of 68 in terms of “this” vs. “that” runs the risk of obscuring the nuanced stances and shifts that manifested throughout the era.

            The “colour-coding of Northern politics” lamented by McCann is not only an issue in historical analysis today; sectarianism was also very much a reality in 68 itself. In War and an Irish Town, McCann described how the Good Friday Agreement only heightened sectarian divisions between nationalists and unionists, effectively forcing Northern Irish citizens to pick a side and preventing opportunities for a united working class of both Protestants and Catholics to come together and realize its common goals. Similarly, in the U.S. Civil Rights Movement Martin Luther King recognized that a serious obstacle to the movement was the black vs. white division that prevented white moderates from expressing solidarity with their oppressed black neighbors. These sectarian impulses even extended across the Atlantic, such as when McCann lost speaking engagements in the U.S. after showing public support for the Black Panthers. To many Irish Americans, African Americans were an enemy whose experiences were completely separate from their own, whereas McCann viewed the struggle for racial equality and the struggle for Irish civil rights as pieces of the same fundamental struggle against oppression. These constructed boundaries of black and white, orange and green, accentuate people’s differences, causing neighbors to forget their similarities as human beings seeking universal freedoms.

            The “us vs. them” mentality promoted by this sectarianism is often a catalyst for violence, as seen in the films, novel, and memoir we’ve read so far. For example, the Committee in Uptight, modeled on the Black Panthers, barred whites from participating in their meetings or activities because they didn’t believe they could trust any white people to actually help their movement. The Committee also utilized violence to forcefully advocate for racial equality since the nonviolent means promoted by King had resulted in little progress and in King’s assassination. In his memoir, McCann reflects on the blind generalized hatred Catholics and Protestants felt for one another in Derry, a sentiment that facilitated people’s adoption of violence in the fight for Irish civil rights. When people lack a sense of solidarity with their neighbors, the colorful divisions between people become their entire identities, and when one’s identity is attacked, it’s hard not to violently retaliate. Reading War and an Irish Town in light of our discussions on the readings of previous weeks has helped me recognize the polarization that incites violent action and reaction, as well as the importance of solidarity to make nonviolent protest fruitful.

From all the speakers we’ve had in class who have been a part of 68, its easy to see the passion they have for their role in the movements of the time. You could literally see Geoff, Sam, and Sarah lighting up as they recounted the old days in the poster workshop. The same goes for Eammon McCann as he remembered marching in protests and feeling connected to fellow protestors across the Atlantic shouting the same rallying cries he was. At the time of the protests, I’m sure none of them imagined those moments in the poster workshop or on the streets as being some of the best of their lives. They were focused on effecting change and I would imagine that was by far the dominating component of their thoughts. However, even as they focused on achieving the social progress they yearned for, they were forming deep connections with the people around them, the movement itself, and that point in history. It seems like those connections created a consolation of sorts for 68ers and the movement of 68. Yes, 68ers are often very assertive that not enough was achieved, but because of their deep connection to their place in history, they’re still able to wistfully remember those “glory days” with fond memories. While these important social movements may not always achieve as much in society for the target populations, it’s important to acknowledge that they do have positive effects on many of their participants, giving them meaning and happiness well into the future.

In addition to the satisfaction all 4 of these 68ers exhibited, being a part of 68 also clearly caused a lifelong commitment to standing for social progress. I believe it was Sam who proudly mentioned that he was still a radical to this day, and Eammon McCann was probably the best example. He spent his entire life fighting for social justice and admits he is most proud of raiding Raytheon in Derry to protest the creation of deadly weapons in his hometown. Although he did say he grew up to politically active parents, I think its unfair to not attribute some of his future life to the way growing up and being active in 68 shaped him.

In short, I think that when judging the successes of 68, it’s important to not discount all the positive outcomes that happened on the level of the individual. Not only did many protesters find personal fulfillment through the roles they played, a clear positive, but many like Eammon McCann were motivated to devote their lives to social justice, carrying the work of 68 on many many years later.

Recently, I have been taken aback by our guest speakers with direct experiences of revolutionary Ireland. Eamon McCann and Geoff Brown in particular showed a youthful exuberance and tenacity that I did not expect. I expected a drawn-out historical narrative told by a few tired old men, but to them, their movement was still happening, and they showed such a passion and exuberance for their beliefs and past actions that I was genuinely surprised.

In War and an Irish Town, McCann documents many violent events and their surrounding circumstances. What struck me the most about this writing, however, occurs in the dedication of the writing. McCann lists over 50 people who were presumably killed in the events which he spoke about in the reading. It is a very somber reading accompanied by a very somber dedication, which led me to think that McCann’s presentation would be equally sullen.

I was surprised by his excitement and energy. This was not a man broken by past experiences or loss, though it was clear that they weighed heavily on his mind. McCann was the embodiment of a man who was dedicated to Irish freedom and peace, even to the present day, in which he remains a devout socialist. His demeanor compared with the material of the text showed him as a very strong and committed person.

One of the things that has been on my mind for the past couple of weeks is the idea of radicalism, and how it is perceived by others and the radicals themselves. This was especially so after listening to Eamonn McCann speak during class. I suppose that there are varying degrees of trust of radicals, but it seems that the average person is generally distrustful of radicals. There are probably many reasons for this, but it seems that most of this distrust simply comes from the idea of change, especially change to the extent where you enter the realm of the unknown. Even if the system in place is problematic and sets up people to suffer, the idea of entering the unknown often is seen as more problematic that maintaining the status quo. I suppose this is the same logic many people apply to the fear of death. Despite many people’s belief that death is the ultimate neutral state, they would rather continue living in moderate pain. Of course, this is not to suggest that a radical revolution is the same thing as death, it is simply to point out the shared feature: uncertainty.

I suppose this idea of uncertainty must also be present in the mind of radicals, just probably to a lesser extent. I seriously doubt that radicals can dedicate great chunks of their lives to a cause without the constant weight of some amount of doubt about how their visions will actually manifest themselves. Maybe it’s just me, but I have a hard time believing people can be so sure of their imagined future. Based on this assumption, which to me seems perfectly reasonable, I wonder what exactly keeps radicals going, and how they deal with that uncertainty. Maybe it’s the belief that their future will at the very least be better than the current system. This further begs the question of whether or not radicals base their beliefs more in the hope for a new future or in the hatred of the current system. What is scarier to the average person?