Coincidance - Principia Discordia

186 COINCIDANCE
independence. There was a liberation war here, between 1918 and 1921,
just like your American Revolution, We had to resist the British army of
occupation in our cities, just as you did, in order to achieve national
independence.
Why did you stay in the l.R.A. after the Irish Free Stale was formed in 1922?
Many of us could not accept the terms of the London Treaty of 1921,
particularly in regard to the partition of Ireland. We also objected to the fact
that the Free State was made part of the British Commonwealth and
members of the Dail hEirann had to sign an oath of allegiance to British
monarch. In our opinion, that oath made it legally impossible for the Free
State to continue the struggle for Irish independence and unity.
And why did you quit the l.R.A. in 1937?
The whole situation had changed by then. DeValera had accomplished so
much in his first five years as Taoiseach (Chief Executive) that armed struggle
was neither necessary nor desirable; it was counter-productive. The
abolition of the oath of allegiance, which he had accomplished by then, made
it possible for complete independence to be achieved by legal means, as in
fact happened in 1947. I also belive the re-unification of Ireland can be
accomplished without further armed struggle.
How many times were you sentenced and imprisoned, by the way?
I was never sentenced. I was imprisoned without trial by the British in
1918 and 1919 and by the Free State in 1922 and 1930.
Some Irish-American readers will be interested in this: Is it true that when DeValera
Dail hEirann in 1927, he signed the oath of allegiance to the British monarch but refuse
put his hand on the Bible, and thereby in his own mind nullified the oath?
I believe that is true, yes.
You are still fiercely opposed to the partition of Ireland?
Absolutely.
Where does the question of armed struggle come into it? You say that it is no longer n
or desirable in Ireland but you have said that some wars of liberation are justified. Whe
draw the line?
I'm not a Quaker and I'm not an absolute pacifist. I believe that in certain
circumstances you have the right to use violence to defend yourself. This
applies to peoples as well as individuals. If a government pursues a policy
that threatens to reduce a whole people to servitude or to exterminate
them, they have the right to resist violence with violence. But even there,
you see, I would say that they may only resort to violence when no other
means remains open to them, when there is literally no legal recourse. For