How did the Irish government contribute to the consolidation of democracy 1922-1932?
#625Lab – History, marked 72/100, detailed feedback at the very bottom. You may also like: Leaving Cert History Guide (€).
In the foundation of the Irish Free state a pro-treaty party called Cumann na nGaedhael (CnaG) led by Willam T.Cosgrave who had been involved in Irish government from even before the Free state they went into government in 1923. they took charge a destroyed nation who like Germany or Italy could have easily slid into extremist ideologies such as Fascism or Communism. The Anglo-Irish treaty of 1921 which saw Ireland with a “dominion” status. This treaty had divided the country into pro-treaty and anti-treaty camps. Michael Collins who was one of the original people to sign the treaty had recently been assassinated by anti-treaty IRA. The assassination of Collins mixed with Cosgrace coming to power is what let Irish consolidate power at Dev didn’t accept the treaty vote and thought that the masses couldn’t be trusted to vote so if he was elected then it would mean the normalization of that thought and therefore would have weakened democratic institutions.
As already mentioned, when William T. Cosgrave became the leader of the Irish Free State in after the elections of 1922, the civil war which was between two thoughts of democracy and more than just pro-treaties and anti-treaties but about how democracy should be ruled throughout the isle. Dev believed in “republican democracy” and that the people when ill-informed democracy shouldn’t be granted to them that why when he walked out of the Daíl he wasn’t turning his back on democracy but more so the thought of liberal democracy. Collins and Griffith did, however, believe in the modern sense of democracy called “Liberal democracy” which was everyone was entitled to a vote. The IRA being of the thought of Republican democracy were on Dev’s side and used guerrilla tactics similar to those which had been used against the British only a few years earlier. To combat the rise of this thought and more so, to put order on the Free state Many IRA prisoners were dealt with very severely, many were even executed. The IRA that had contributed so much to the Anglo-treaty was now revoluting against and therefore A zero-tolerance policy was adopted in the fight against the IRA’s violence the IRA leader Liam lynch was unwilling to a free to a ceasefire, however when he was killed in 1923, his successor, Frank Aiken decided to put an end to the violence. This brought the end to the civil and the two train of thoughts on how democracy should work in the Ireland with the system we have today, Liberal Democracy. This of course helped consolidate power as there was now only one main ideology in the Free state as any Fascist or Communist parties wouldn’t become dominated in Ireland.
The IRA has mentioned previously was of the belief of Republican democracy and therefore didn’t accept the treaty vote and they didn’t accept the treaty as they wanted full separation of the country no partition. The IRA was always an independent political movement outside of the government as they had been founded before the Daíl. They weren’t beholden to them and more so associated to the Daíl. The government failed to make the IRA apart of the government by not sanctioning them until March 1921 and therefore making the precedent of an autonomous military authority. From all of this the existence of the IRA as an autonomous military authority itself was a danger to the democracy CnaG and therefore needed to be curtailed. This happened when CnaG decided to decrase the army’s personal removing even high-commanding officers many of whom fought in the civil war. This of course, angered them as they had been loyal to the IRA and were now being unemployed. There were talks of a potential uprising among the solders from the CnaG. After making the decision to arrest the plotters, Cosgrave’s minister for defense was forced to resign. The garda commissioner, Kevin Ó Higgins (who near his death toyed with the idea of monarchism and Arthur Griffith idea of a dual monarchy) took over control of the army. The end of the independent IRA by making it smaller and putting it under control is what let the Irish Free State consolidate democracy as now they had the backing of a large military force and it would have been harder for any other ideologies to break through and become the dominate one either through war or political power.
The Boundary Commision report was a big issue of CnaG and the consolidation of democracy. This is because if the land of the Free State was giving to the North it would be seen as a act of treason as the whole point of the Anglo-Irish Treaty was to get the British out of the country and give Ireland autonomy and if the British were gaining land just after being evicted it would reflect poorly on the Irish government and both unrest and deceit for the government would grow. The Boundary Commision was formed as part of the Anglo-Irish treaty negotiations, The Irish delegations were promised that a boundary commission would be established to redraw the border between the Free State and the North Lloyd George assured Collins, Griffith and the other members that the Irish delegation that the boundary commission would make Northern Ireland unviable and would result in the boundary commission would make Northern Ireland unviable and the end of partition. The setting up of the Boundary commission was delayed by the Irish civil war and by James Craig refusal to appoint the Northern representative, when it was eventually set up Eoin McNeill was appointed as the FreeState representative. Just before the Commission’s report was due out, its recommendations/decisions, were leaked. The commission was only giving small parts to the north to the free state and small parts of the Free state would go to the north. There was uproar in the Free State over this and McNeill was forced to resign his ministerial post. Cosgrave went immediately to London and agreed with the British prime minister not to publish the report. This was a major threat to democracy in Ireland and its undermined support for the treaty and those who has agreed to it.
Dev seeing that CnaG was on the balance pool to all this decided to capitalize on these weaknesses by forming a new party called “Fianna Fáil” they would not enter parliament due to the oath. To combat this Cosgrave brought in the Electoral Amendment Act in 1927. This made all those who won seat in the General election to take their seats. This obviously consolidated democracy because there was more diversity in the Dáil and on top of that it stops CnaG from having a monopoly on the Dáil and therefore acting as they see fit almost like a dictatorship.
Over the next few years, Fianna Fáil (FF) succeeded in building up very strong national group of branches throughout the country. The support for them increased and they now made up along the Labour party, a reasonably large opposition in the Dáil. This meant that the Cosgrave gov could no longer get away without criticism in the Dáil. This, as said before leads to more democratic approaches as they must listen to all parties.
In conclusion, the start of the Free State unlike other European countries had a democratic approach but the question was which flavor of democracy was to be the ruling one? Republican democracy or Liberal democracy? With both Dev and the IRA losing the Civil war Liberal democracy became the dominate ideology in the Free state. In my option the Republican idea of democracy is very ignorant and ignore the demand of the poor as they believe the “ill-informed” shouldn’t have the right to vote (poor, protestant, non-white) and lends itself for oligarchies or plutocracies for the elite to rule. If the elite were to only rule their actions could led to the oppression of the lower classes. CnaG did a very strong job of making sure this train of thought didn’t chokehold Irish discourse as it would have made the consolidation harder and possible impossible. CnaG did a fantastic job of making sure it didn’t fall into extremist and hurtful ideologies such as Nazism and it’s aestheticization of politics and authoritarian left which while seeks to give the means of production to the poor it fails as they set up a dictatorship to achieved which doesn’t work and leads to its collapse (USSR) or it doing the exact opposite and taking more of the means of production away from the workers (CHINA). Both parties, FF and CnaG did a good job to stablish the nation and stop these ideologies from seeping in by taking actions that would have otherwise weaken democracy
Feedback
This essay is full of accurate and relevant information, which shows that you know the course well. You mention loads of key personalities and key terms, and you make good use of abbreviation. Just make sure that if you’re going to abbreviate, you need to always spell it out in full first – you didn’t do this with de Valera here, but did with others.
Your writing style is clear but make sure you keep it consistent! Some of your paras are very long and others are quite short, and some of your sentences run a bit too long. Cut them down to make it easier for the examiner to follow your train of thought.
In terms of language, your choice of words sometimes reads as a bit too biased/ subjective for a historical essay. For example, words like ‘fantastic’ come across as a little bit too over-the-top, and phrases like ‘in my opinion’ should be avoided. I’d also recommend avoiding phrases like ‘obviously’, as it assumes that the reader knows, and rhetorical questions, as it makes it seem as if you don’t know the answer yourself. You also overuse phrases like ‘as previously/ already said/mentioned’ and ‘as said before’.
You do a good job of linking every paragraph explicitly to the question, but you need more paras! 7 paras of this standard aren’t enough to hit the max cumulative mark. Your introduction lays out the essay well, but your first sentence doesn’t make grammatical sense – this is the first thing the examiner will read – be careful! Your conclusion is also good, but make sure you’re not making irrelevant judgements, like what you say about China. It reads as biased.
Cumulative mark: As it stands, this essay would only achieve about 45 out of 60 for cumulative mark. You should split some of your longer paragraphs into two if possible, or add some more – you need about 10.
Overall Evaluation mark: This would achieve about 27/40 for OE. To bring this up, you can bring in quotation from historians and historical figures, and try to make deeper (objective) commentary on the information you’re presenting.
Total: 72/100