How to define an, er…

A Twitter correspondent raised the interesting issue of definitions of Northern Ireland people and “communities” before Christmas. Not unlike me, he has no problem remaining in the Union but it is not at the forefront of his thoughts every morning; not unlike me, he would not in any way regard himself as “Loyalist” or associated with any parading culture or such; not unlike many people, he has no particular religious belief, even if he was brought up nominally “Protestant”. So a definition like “PUL” (“Protestant-Unionist-Loyalist”), sometimes applied to whole communities, has absolutely zero reference to him whatsoever. And yet he is probably to be taken as on the same broad “side” as those who live in “PUL” communities…

He was not arguing (and nor would I argue) that he didn’t belong to a particular “side” of Northern Ireland society, although I think we came to agree over our correspondence that it would be helpful to recognise that there are those for whom “sides” matter more than others, and there are those for whom there are more than two “sides” (we may not have agreed this, by the way, it is merely my inference from a few 140-character notes). This does raise some interesting points, however:

- if someone is not a practising Protestant, not a particularly avowed Unionist, and has no sense of affinity to “Loyalist” culture, what does link them to those who live in “PUL communities” (an academic term, but one often readily accepted for self-identification)?

- is the notion of moving from allegedly lazy terms such as “Protestant” or “Catholic” to academic-looking terms such as “PUL” or “CNR” in fact liable to pigeon-hole us all further, necessitating not just a religious or political affiliation but a whole raft of affiliations all of which must be held by all of the people living within a particular community?

- ultimately, would it not make more sense to change the terminology to more “nationality”-based (since we all have a nationality but not necessarily a particular political identification or religious faith)?

There are those, of course, who suggest we should just move away from these “labels” altogether. Certainly, I am greatly discomforted by terms such as “PUL” (for the aforementioned “pigeon-holing” reasons). Yet it is equally dangerous to suggest that we are all free agents free of any influence placed upon us by parents and peers in childhood or by our general social culture and biases even in adulthood. It is ludicrous to suggest that if “government” were simply to stop even hinting at a broad Protestant/British versus Catholic/Irish divide, the Shankill would suddenly become just like the Falls – plainly, it wouldn’t! Seeking overall labels to place on communities is as descriptive as it is prescriptive – even if, either way, it is always imperfect!

I myself have always had two things to specify on the subject, first about the nature of the divide itself, and second about the importance of an overarching civic identity of some sort.

Although it is not always wrong to “label” communities (noting particularly that people who live within them are often to ones who label them), it is important to recognise that we do not have “mirror images” in Northern Ireland. Where religious affiliation may be more important to one community, national affiliation may be more important to another; where one group may find the symbolism of historical and military imagery important, another may find the symbolism of a language important; where some people may take a particular political viewpoint to be inherent to their identity, another may wish to avoid politics altogether. The most serious mistake government makes, therefore, is not “labelling” in itself (problematic though this can be), but the notion that because one “side” gets something, the other “side” needs something similar – often the value of one thing (say, a language or a flag) may be much higher to one community (however defined) than to another.

Also, for all this “labelling”, there must also be a focus on our responsibilities to each other as citizens of the same jurisdiction; or, put another (perhaps slightly less comfortable) way, no matter how “Loyalist or Republican” we are, or “Protestant or Catholic”, or whatever combination of whatever identities and backgrounds, we are all ultimately “Northern Irish” citizens. It is that which gives us our rights (legally, in fact), and it is that which also gives us responsibilities as people with a common designation (referred to in the 1998 Agreement as being “people of Northern Ireland”).

Advertisement