Who would have believed it that some Ulster Unionist people
would become so hated by one another that feuding and rioting;
maiming and killing; persecution and eviction would be front-page
news about the Shankill Road of all places? Among the many
fearful things which have happened to us in 30 years none
may be regarded as being more serious than the violent unionist/loyalist
confrontation there. Whatever the reason nothing has highlighted
so tragically the continuing capacity of unionists to quarrel
with and divide from one another. It is the chronic illness
from which unionism suffers, and in this case prevents loyalists
living together much less acting together in what is their
declared objective the maintenance of the Union and the making
of a society so peaceful and prosperous. This Shankill confrontation
may have little or nothing to do with politics but it is symptomatic
of that disunity which bedevils unionism at every level. We
have not mastered the elementary lesson that we should work
together on what we agree and not refuse to co-operate because
of our disagreements. There is confrontation everywhere and
co-operation nowhere, or so it often appears. We deplore the
indifference and disinterest in politics of a large number
of Northern Ireland people. Many of them are in what is loosely
described as the middle and upper classes. People who express
their horror as what has been happening on the Shankill and
elsewhere. They condemn such uncivilised behaviour for they
have no difficulty working, playing and living with their
neighbours, regardless of religion, race or politics. They
want the peaceful, prosperous life, without the violence of
hand, or tongue, for they show little respect for the promises
and pledges of politicians and political parties. And yet
they have so much to lose through community unrest it is amazing
that they opt out of any political input to it. It even applies
to the franchise where as in South Antrim at the by-election
only about 40 per cent of the electorate put an X on paper
in the polling booth. The result of the election in the circumstances
could well have been no different had there been a larger
number of voters but their participation would have demonstrated
a proper citizen's concern for the well being of the country.
It is the elected from among us who help make the decisions
which affect the lives of all of us, so it is irresponsible
to ignore that duty to vote for the consequences could be
disastrous for all of us. It was Edmond Burke, among others,
who said, "Bad public officials are elected by good citizens
who don't vote." This withdrawal from political engagement
is often akin to that refusal to engage in social and organisational
groups and activities, except those they select for their
recreational facilities and convivial company in a carefree
setting. This attitude is pervasive even to its effect on
religion when there is a preference which excludes the church
and church going. Influential groups and organisations are
adversely affected by their inability to draw on the knowledge
and experience of these often well educated, able and articulate
people. Society is the loser when its citizens do not make
their proper responses as a recognition of their indebtedness
to it for the everyday things of life. It was John F Kennedy
who told Americans, "Ask not what your country can do
for you but ask what can I do for my country."
|
