Civil Protest in Northern Ireland
| Author | Paul F. Power |
| Published date | 01 September 1972 |
| Date | 01 September 1972 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/002234337200900303 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Civil
Protest
in
Northern
Ireland
*
PAUL
F.
POWER
University
of
Cincinnati
1.
Introduction
The
methods
of
conflict
in
Northern
Ireland
include
civil
protest
as
well
as
much
publicized,
violent
means.
Although
there
have
been
some
dysfunctions,
civil
protest
has
had
several
ob.
jective
consequences
that
have
aided
the
sub.
system’s
democratic
development.
’Civil
pro-
test’
is
an
extra-parliamentary
method
of
polit-
ical
opposition,
operating
outside
of
the
re-
gime
while
being
vitally
concerned
with
and
often
critical
of
its
inputs,
decisions,
and
out-
comes.
An
essential
characteristic
of
civil
pro-
test
is
the
absence
of
demonstrable
physical
force,
whatever
a
precise
insight
into
intent
might
show
toward
the
objects
of
protest.’
At
times
civil
protest
may
be
’contestation’,
a
form
of
opposition
which
Georges
Lavau
has
described
as
not
only
anti-normative
but
also
inconsistent
with
the
dominant
cultural
model.2
But
even
as
contestation,
civil
protest
is
not
compatible
with
the
use
of
physical
violence
against
others,
however
often
this
behavior
may
capture
deviants
or
be
’provoked’
in
other
structures.
Whether
the
scrupulosity
of
civil
protest
is
a
result
of
necessity
or
choice
is
an
open
question
that
does
not
impinge
signifi-
cantly
on
its
functionality.
Civil
protest
includes
legal
picketing,
strikes,
boycotts,
demonstrations,
and
marches.
An
im-
portant
form
is
civil
disobedience,
whereby
re-
gime
rules
are
broken.
The
political
ethics
of
civil
disobedience
require
that
it
be
a
deliberate,
public,
articulated
infraction
that
focuses
on
changing
a
regime’s
law
or
policy.
It
is
non-
injurious
to
the
physical
person,
considerate
of
the
rights
of
others
(including
the
right
of
counter-protest),
and
pursued
within
the
sys-
tem’s
jurisdiction.
Civil
protest
as
civil
dis-
obedience
need
not
meet
the
Gandhian
tests
of
prior
exhaustion
of
legal
remedies,
submission
to
punishment,
and
’conscientiousness’.
Civil
disobedience
does
not
duplicate
the
general
functions
of
a
conventional
party
subsystem
but
is
an
autonomous
subsystem
within
the
total
configuration
of
oppositions.
Without
be-
ing
a
para-legal
right,
civil
disobedience
may
be
functional
opposition
which
seeks
to
reform
or
transform
the
political
system
without
con-
vulsing
or
deflating
it.3
If
civil
protest
is
an
oppositional
method
with
several
forms,
its
possible
functions
and
dysfunctions
must
be
clarified.
Denying
the
anti-dynamic
emphasis
of
conventional
func-
tionalism,
we
adopt
the
interpretation
that
the
function
of
a
structure
may
be
to
change
a
sys-
tem
as
well
as
to
preserve
it.
The
dynamic
change
emphasis
has
notable
support
from
the
traditions
of
Simmel,
Coser,
and
Dahrendorf.
Functions,
of
course,
have
to
do
with
objec-
tive
consequences,
not
motives.
But
conse-
quences
ought
to
answer
norms.
Two
are
pos-
ited :
One,
conflict
should
be
managed
so
as
to
reduce
the
frequency
and
intensity
of
violence
without
necessarily
resolving
its
basic
causes.4
A
second
is
democratic
development,
e.g.,
movement
toward
political
and
social
life
char-
acterized
by
a
semipopulist
organization
of
power
and
a
highly
equitable
sharing
of
public
and
private
goods
through
fully
accountable
and
representative
decision-makers.
2.
The
background
A
summary
of
the
recent
conflict
will
help
in-
dicate
the
context
for
civil
protest.
Although
there
are
ecological,
legal,
linguistic,
economic,
and
military
forces
that
work
for
socio-politi-
cal
unity,
Northern
Ireland
has
two
political
communities.
In
a
major
study,
Richard
Rose
describes
the
polity
as
having
a
dominant
com-
munity
that
has
governed
without
consensus
through
a
regime
that
is
neither
fully
legiti-
mate
nor
fully
repudiated.5
From
the
contro-
To continue reading
Request your trial