When Gerry met Jesus

The Sinn Fein president showed he lacked biblical wisdom just when it could have been of benefit.

Channel 4 is reported to be braced for a ritualistic public stoning over its decision to screen a documentary about Gerry Adams's own personal Jesus, to be broadcast this weekend. In fact, the first stones were cast at the station's big glass house in Horseferry Road, London, as soon as the news emerged, shortly before Christmas, that the man who has fronted the Irish republican cause for over a quarter of a century was heading off to the Holy Land to shoot his film.

Sinn Fein-IRA's dramatic rebranding as "Gerry and the Peacemakers" was never going to soften the self-righteous scribes who update the modern bible of Middle England every day. There was an almighty wail from the Daily Mail about how Adams was going to meet victims of the Troubles and talk about repentance and forgiveness. They don't do soppy notions like personal redemption at Northcliffe House. (Which is located in -- of all places -- London's Derry Street!)

This weekend, viewers across these islands will find out what all the fuss was about when the latest parchment of Channel 4's current Sunday-night God-slot offering, The Bible: a History, is aired. The series kicked off with Howard Jacobson on Genesis and then gave us Rageh Omaar on Abraham and Ann Widdecombe on the Ten Commandments. Gerry got Jesus.

 

Shinners' spin

But does he really get Jesus? Does Adams truly understand why this strange street preacher steadfastly rejected the path of political violence in the face of imperial atrocities? His answer: "Sometimes I was in tune with the Jesus message and sometimes not . . . I'm not a pacifist and I don't believe that non-violent protest would have got justice in Ireland."

Trailing the show on his personal blog, the Sinn Fein president wrote:

If Jesus had been Irish what would he have done? He too lived in an occupied country. There were a number of uprisings before, during and after his life. The desire of the Jewish people to be free of imperial rule was very strong. Indeed, many of them were waiting for a Messiah to liberate them and to bring back the Kingdom of David. Did any of them see Jesus as a liberator? Is this what the Romans feared?

If Jesus had been Irish . . . What a tragedy that that crucial hypothesis wasn't contemplated seriously before a terrible beauty was born in Dublin's General Post Office in 1916, or before a small band of zealots eschewed the nascent civil rights movement and plunged into their foolish and futile "armed struggle" against the British imperial state.

If you want to see through the Shinners' spin and understand what a whole sorry waste of time -- and thousands of lives -- their struggle was, read Henry McDonald's Gunsmoke and Mirrors: How Sinn Fein Dress up Defeat as Victory.

The year 1916 was dripping in Christian symbolism. The timing of the Easter Rising (still an event of totemic significance for northern nationalists) was anything but accidental.

This was insurrection as Resurrection. Patrick Pearse spoke of blood sacrifice and Michael Collins even subsequently called his crack assassination squad the "Twelve Apostles". Disappointingly, that vital historic dimension doesn't feature at all in the documentary that Channel 4 will screen on Sunday.

 

"Give us Barabbas!"

The film does contain a bit about Barabbas, who was banged up in a Jerusalem prison for taking part in an insurrection against the same city's ruling authorities -- and for murder.

"From someone else's viewpoint, he might well have been a freedom fighter," muses Adams, clad in a keffiyeh to demonstrate his solidarity with the Palestinians. No surprise there. Faced with the very same choice as Pontius Pilate put to the multitude in Jerusalem -- Jesus or Barabbas? -- generations of Irish republican zealots (what Joyce would have called the "Rabblement") have yelled back: "Give us Barabbas!"

They've done so unwittingly, for sure. As Adams acknowledges, an Irish Catholic upbringing doesn't tend to encourage critical interrogation of the gospels. Yet, in contrast to a growing number of his compatriots, the Sinn Fein leader still describes himself as "an Irish Catholic, despite all the let-downs and scandals that the Church has become embroiled in".

Paedophilia scandals now also engulf the Adams family. As Gerry was heading off to the Holy Land to shoot his film on Jesus, the sensational news broke back in Belfast that his brother Liam was on the run in the Republic after being charged with sexually abusing one of his daughters throughout her childhood. According to the victim, the Sinn Fein president failed to protect her.

Adams repudiated his niece's allegations straight away in a local UTV documentary, screened in Ulster in December, and has since spoken in some detail on Dublin's leading chat show about the traumatic impact of the revelations on his whole family and what he perceives as the cruel treatment of the Adamses by elements of the press. (One leading local satirist now delights in lampooning the "Perversional IRA").

The Channel 4 film sadly misses out on this fascinating angle, which surely demonstrates how abuses of power and cruel domination are sins committed not only by occupying imperial armies.

 

Moment of insight

Adams's audiovisual essay should have been about Judas as well as Jesus, because he had a fascinating take on the most infamous act of betrayal in human history but it ended up on the cutting-room floor. It certainly fascinated his theological mentor for the programme.

"I had always thought of Judas's betrayal as something active, something he chose to do, rather than a situation he was forced into, perhaps under duress," says Dr Helen Bond, a senior lecturer in divinity at Edinburgh University. "But Gerry instinctively understood the defection.

" 'That's what happens,' he said. 'They got to him.' "

In other words, Judas Iscariot was a "tout" (the Provo term for "informer").

Not surprising that Adams should have this piercing insight. As more and more darks truths about the Troubles emerge, even the dogs in the streets of Derry and Belfast now know that Sinn Fein and the Provisional IRA was thoroughly penetrated at every level by British security agents. In fact, it was riddled with supergrasses (even Adams's personal driver, Roy "the Rat" McShane, was a spook!).

 

Another Judas

The programme-makers should have listened to Michael Davitt, who was cured of his brutal fantasies after a long, dark spell in Dartmoor for terrorist activities on behalf of the IRB (Irish Republican Brotherhood) at the end of the 19th century.

Realising that underground, armed conspiracies would always be infiltrated and undermined by the Special Branch, Davitt turned his back on the physical force tradition to campaign for Irish self-determination and social justice by peaceful means, becoming leader of the Land League and then an MP.

Davitt inspired Mahatma Gandhi in his non-violent struggle against the British empire. But only since the onset of the peace process has the "one-armed patriot" been admitted to the pantheon of Irish republican heroes.

Until the signing of the Good Friday Agreement, Davitt was deemed a Judas. In truth, he understood what Jesus also clearly understood: an imperial state can be the coldest of cold monsters, and those who would seek to slay such leviathans need to be wise as serpents. Alas, Gerry Adams lacked such wisdom, just when it could have been of benefit to him.

Rob Brown is senior lecturer in journalism at Independent Colleges, Dublin.

Follow the New Statesman team on Twitter.

 

Getty
Show Hide image

By refusing to stand down, Jeremy Corbyn has betrayed the British working classes

The most successful Labour politicians of the last decades brought to politics not only a burning desire to improve the lot of the working classes but also an understanding of how free market economies work.

Jeremy Corbyn has defended his refusal to resign the leadership of the Labour Party on the grounds that to do so would be betraying all his supporters in the country at large. But by staying on as leader of the party and hence dooming it to heavy defeat in the next general election he would be betraying the interests of the working classes this country. More years of Tory rule means more years of austerity, further cuts in public services, and perpetuation of the gross inequality of incomes. The former Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Seema Malhotra, made the same point when she told Newsnight that “We have an unelectable leader, and if we lose elections then the price of our failure is paid by the working people of this country and their families who do not have a government to stand up for them.”

Of course, in different ways, many leading figures in the Labour movement, particularly in the trade unions, have betrayed the interests of the working classes for several decades. For example, in contrast with their union counterparts in the Scandinavian countries who pressurised governments to help move workers out of declining industries into expanding sectors of the economy, many British trade union leaders adopted the opposite policy. More generally, the trade unions have played a big part in the election of Labour party leaders, like Corbyn, who were unlikely to win a parliamentary election, thereby perpetuating the rule of Tory governments dedicated to promoting the interests of the richer sections of society.

And worse still, even in opposition Corbyn failed to protect the interests of the working classes. He did this by his abysmal failure to understand the significance of Tory economic policies. For example, when the Chancellor of the Exchequer had finished presenting the last budget, in which taxes were reduced for the rich at the expense of public services that benefit everybody, especially the poor, the best John McConnell could do – presumably in agreement with Corbyn – was to stand up and mock the Chancellor for having failed to fulfill his party’s old promise to balance the budget by this year! Obviously neither he nor Corbyn understood that had the government done so the effects on working class standards of living would have been even worse. Neither of them seems to have learnt that the object of fiscal policy is to balance the economy, not the budget.

Instead, they have gone along with Tory myth about the importance of not leaving future generations with the burden of debt. They have never asked “To whom would future generations owe this debt?” To their dead ancestors? To Martians? When Cameron and his accomplices banged on about how important it was to cut public expenditures because the average household in Britain owed about £3,000, they never pointed out that this meant that the average household in Britain was a creditor to the tune of about the same amount (after allowing for net overseas lending). Instead they went along with all this balanced budget nonsense. They did not understand that balancing the budget was just the excuse needed to justify the prime objective of the Tory Party, namely to reduce public expenditures in order to be able to reduce taxes on the rich. For Corbyn and his allies to go along with an overriding objective of balancing the budget is breathtaking economic illiteracy. And the working classes have paid the price.

One left-wing member of the panel on Question Time last week complained that the interests of the working classes were ignored by “the elite”. But it is members of the elite who have been most successful in promoting the interests of the working classes. The most successful pro-working class governments since the war have all been led mainly by politicians who would be castigated for being part of the elite, such as Clement Atlee, Harold Wilson, Tony Crosland, Barbara Castle, Richard Crossman, Roy Jenkins, Denis Healey, Tony Blair, and many others too numerous to list. They brought to politics not only a burning desire to improve the lot of the working classes (from which some of them, like me, had emerged) and reduce inequality in society but also an understanding of how free market economies work and how to deal with its deficiencies. This happens to be more effective than ignorant rhetoric that can only stroke the egos and satisfy the vanity of demagogues

People of stature like those I have singled out above seem to be much more rare in politics these days. But there is surely no need to go to other extreme and persist with leaders like Jeremy Corbyn, a certain election loser, however pure his motives and principled his ambitions.

Wilfred Beckerman is an Emeritus Fellow of Balliol College, Oxford, and was, for several years in the 1970s, the economics correspondent for the New Statesman