Oh my. The Plank makes a rather startling error:
And a Scots-Irish war veteran as the Republican nominee complicates predictions about whom Kennedy Country will support come November.
To the vast, vast majority of Irish-Americans who are Catholics (or descended from same), Scots-Irish≠Irish. Scots-Irish are also known as the Protestant bastards who were resettled in Ireland as a part of Britain's colonial policy for subjugating the island. Many of them joined the various rebel movements in the 19th century, but many more did not. Ian Paisley, the raving nutloon bigot First Minister of Northern Ireland, who is fond of referring to Catholics as "vermin" who "breed like roaches", and popularized the slogan "A Protestant nation for a Protestant people"1, taps into that community, even though I believe he is not himself Scots-Irish. Relations between the Scots-Irish and the Irish in America weren't all that much friendlier.
Now, this is all distant history, and while there might be some wizened old professional Irishman out there declaring that he won't vote for an Orangeman, he'd be an island in a sea of puzzled indifference. But McCain sure as hell isn't going to pick up votes from the Irish Catholic community because of his heritage.
1As of 1997, this slogan was still posted on an arch that spanned the main roadway going into the (half Catholic) town my family came from in Armagh. "Still" is perhaps the wrong word, as the arch, made of tubular steel, couldn't have been erected much earlier than the mid-eighties.
Update Alex Massie, one of my favorite Scots, and an alum of Trinity College in Dublin, points out that "A Protestant State for a Protestant Nation" originally came from James Craig the Scots-Irish first Prime Minister of Northern Ireland.
Well, now that Hillary Clinton has brought peace to Northern Ireland, maybe past grudges will be forgotten.
Speaking of ancient history, look up the uprising of 1798. The Scotch-Irish as Noncomformist Protestants were equally religiously disadvantaged as Catholics under the (Anglican) "Protestant Ascendancy". They united with the Catholics in 1898. When this rebellion failed, the American frontier received another big group of Scotch-Irish immigrants. (Many Catholic Irish also fled Ireland, but few of them came to the USA at this time. Napoleon's armies were Catholic and welcomed the "wild geese".)
So it appears to me that the present Catholic-Protestant emnity doesn't come down from the 17th century settlement of Scotch in Ireland, but from 19th century propagandists. E.g., the British needed the support of the remaining Scotch-Irish to maintain their rule, so they played up a few massacres of (mostly Anglican) Protestants in 1798, and never mentioned the Presbyterians, Methodists, Baptists, etc., who'd joined in...
I'm guessing it's like a John Kerry situation, where lots of people think he's an Irish Catholic because of his name and don't find out the truth until some newspaper makes a big deal about it.
Nor will the Rev Hagee win Mr McCain many Catholic voters.
At some point Mr McCain should be made to explain why he solicited Rev Hagee's endorsement, and Rev Parsely's, and his fliflop on Jerry Falwell . . . and most of all he should explain the cutlture and context of white Protestant fundamentalism.
We can think that we can just dismiss and denounce this culture, and then wish that it would just go away, but it won't. It is real and it needs to be understood.
No doubt everybody from the Alleghenies to the Sierra looks the same to the writers at TNR.
Millie,
Now "McCain" having "Mc" in front of his name will help with a small group of voters. The fact that he is pale will help with a larger group.
That being said his claims of being an "evangelical" will not go over well with many Catholics or those raised Catholic. He is actually an Anglican, but his current wife and latest children are church going Baptists.
Catholics are generally not comfortable with "praising" and "glorifying" and speaking about personal religious experience.
Now none of that means I expect Massachusetts to go "Red". Ain't gonna happen. McCain might do better among working class whites than would normally be expected, but Obama will do better among other groups.
As for the whole "Orange" and "Green" thing I don't think many people in this country really pay much attention to it. Those that did/do are dead or soon to be dead.
http://opinionjournal.com/ecc/calculator.htm
The larger question is what swing states do each candidate need to pick up to win.
I foresee a 269 to 269 tie. With the election going to the Dem controlled house. However, each state House delegation only gets one vote......now it gets interesting........
As for the whole "Orange" and "Green" thing I don't think many people in this country really pay much attention to it. Those that did/do are dead or soon to be dead.
Scots Irish don't pay attention to it, because they want to claim to be Irish. I think most actual Irish (Catholic) Americans are at least vaguely aware of the difference. Certainly my dad drilled it into me, and he's not that old (60 this year).
Some Scots-Irish pay attention, too. I always wore orange on St. Patty's Day. That said, if the Irish can claim U2 (Protestant as they are), why not McCain?
As a kid, I was always told to wear orange on St. Paddy's Day, but since that was back in the 50s, I suppose it puts me among the "dead or soon to be dead."
My grandfather, son of an Orangeman who emigrated from Armagh in the late 1800s, was as anti-English as they come. He cheered when Germany attacked England during WWII, believing that the English were finally getting what they deserved.
He was also a fan of Father Coughlin, the Irish-Catholic radio preacher. That probably had more to due with his political ideals than any religious or ethnic affinities, but it speaks to an Irish Protestant's lack of innate enmity toward a Roman Catholic.
So I've always been suspicious of the Irish divide being as simple as Orange/Green, Catholic/Protestant.
I was surprised when I learned a few years ago that most Americans who claim Irish ancestry are, in fact, Protestant, or at least, not Catholic.
i blogged this a few days ago....
http://scienceblogs.com/gnxp/2008/03/is_james_kirchick_stupid_or_do.php
So it appears to me that the present Catholic-Protestant emnity doesn't come down from the 17th century settlement of Scotch in Ireland, but from 19th century propagandists. E.g., the British needed the support of the remaining Scotch-Irish to maintain their rule, so they played up a few massacres of (mostly Anglican) Protestants in 1798, and never mentioned the Presbyterians, Methodists, Baptists, etc., who'd joined in...
these terms are confusing. remember that presbyterianism was basically the established church (kirk) in scotland. methodism was originally a revival movement within the anglican church.
but in any case, you don't need to root the enmity or rationale behind protestant unionism in the 17th century. just remember that until the past generation roman catholicism was operationally the established religion in the republic of ireland, and the catholic church's views had strong effect on public policy in the republic of ireland. why would the protestant majority (barely) want to become part of a small minority who would have to fight hard to get a place at the table? when the british oppressed the irish as irish and didn't confer upon their appropriate rights as members of the united kingdom of course protestant irish rallied to irish nationalism. but if the choice is relative autonomy under the british crown vs. majority catholic rule in the republic i think it all makes more sense.
The term "Scots-Irish" was invented in the 19th century by the descendants of the Ulster immigrants to distinguish themselves from the icky Catholic Irish. Before the Catholic influx, these folks were just Irish.
Finley Peter Dunne was appropriately derisive in a poem. All I remember is the last line, which was "We say we're not Irish, and God knows we're not Scotch!"
Ireland has had the advantage that it is at the end of Europe and not really on the road to anywhere. Unfortunately the English took a shine to it and suppressed the Celtic culture maybe as early as 1200 if I recall a nice exhibit at the Boston Museum some 30 years ago. They didn't much assimilate with the locals like earlier invaders but maybe we can't see through the fog of history to know what happened earlier. The Catholic Church doesn't seem to be into 'God Damn British' and besides there's no line really to form in for benefits; so it's more a matter of pride, 'Heh, we survived being picked on.' I feel bad for Michael, the Irish fellow who negotiated the split with England, and was killed back in the home country for it; so anger has been shown to be a 'moral hazard' for the Irish.
The term "Scots-Irish" was invented in the 19th century by the descendants of the Ulster immigrants to distinguish themselves from the icky Catholic Irish. Before the Catholic influx, these folks were just Irish.
Perhaps not, as witness this quote from a man of the 18th century:
"If defeated everywhere else, I will make my last stand for liberty among the Scots-Irish of my native Virginia" - George Washington.
That's found throughout the Internet and my particular source was BBC.
And while I could rightly and proudly wear Orange on St Patrick's Day given my McCarty, McCracken, Pentland, Kelley, etc. heritage I choose my red, white, and blue tie for the office on that day.
That's the colors that matter.
Finley Peter Dunne was appropriately derisive in a poem. All I remember is the last line, which was "We say we're not Irish, and God knows we're not Scotch!"
Of course, if we look back far enough, Scotia was a Latin name of Ireland and Scoti meant the Irish. To quote Isidore of Seville, "Scotia eadem et Hibernia," or "Scotland and Ireland are the same country." Caledonia became part of "Scotia" only after the Irish invaded and conquered the place.
Accordingly, all permutations of Irish/Scot rivalry constitute a family squabble.
Scots Irish don't pay attention to it, because they want to claim to be Irish
No. In fact, most 'scots irish' never even settled in Ireland. The scots irish were drawn from the English border with Scotland so settlers from that region all got tagged as scots irish. Or so I've been told.
Anyway, most descendants fo the Scots Irish are proud of their ancestors pugnacity, their taming the frontier (and, ahem, slaughtering all the Indians, but lets not get into details).
It's true that you can track the Scots-Irish population in the U.S. by seeing who lists "American" as their ancestry instead of German, Irish, Mexican, etc.
Ah, now we are reduced to arguing Irish cultural history? I should point out that the Scotch-Irish were lowlands Scots who were moved to Ireland. They were not Celtic Scots, which is why they didn't get along with the Irish and why so many moved to America in large numbers.
I should also point out that the first group of colonists from England, the Normans, did in fact adopt Irish culture. They became the Fitzes; Fitzpatrick, Fitzgerald, Fitzwilliam...you get the point.
As this argument demonstrates, there is a lot of confusion about Ireland even amongst the "Irish Americans", many of whom know not much besides "potato famine bad, green beer good". Essentially though, Megan is right. The Kennedy vote probably won't go to McCain due to identity politics. He is a Protestant Scotch-Irish and isn't really part of the identity of the great Irish migration; starving through potato famine, being an opressed Catholic in a place where Catholics are a majority, etc.
"Subjegating the island?" Wow, do you know anything about Irish/Scots-Irish history outside of passages in the Irish Republican Encyclopedia Rhetorica?
I beg leave to doubt the authenticity of that Washington quote. He may have said something like that, but I question whether he said "Scotch-Irish."
Here are the OED's instances of the word. Only one prior to 1789.
1744 W. MARSHE Jrnl. 21 June in Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc. (1801) 1st Ser. VII. 177 The inhabitants [of Lancaster, Pa.] are chiefly High-Dutch, Scotch-Irish, some few English families, and unbelieving Israelites. 1789 J. MORSE Amer. Geogr. 313 [The Irish of Pennsylvania] have sometimes been called Scotch-Irish, to denote their double descent. 1876 BANCROFT Hist. U.S. IV. iii. 333 But its convenient proximity to the border counties of Pennsylvania and Virginia had been observed by Scotch-Irish Presbyterians and other bold and industrious men. 1883 Harper's Mag. Feb. 421/2 The so-called Scotch-Irish are the descendants of the Englishmen and Lowland Scotch who began to move over to Ulster in 1611. 1897 Outing (U.S.) XXX. 136/2 Late in the afternoon we got into the Scotch-Irish part of the valley. 1903 J. FOX Little Shepherd of Kingdom Come x. 117 Broadcast, through the people, was the upright sturdiness of the Scotch-Irishman, without his narrowness and bigotry. 1916 J. WEBSTER Dear Enemy 187 That Scotch-Irish ancestry of mine. 1948 H. MACLENNAN Precipice (1949) i. 5 The Scotch and the Scotch-Irish who had flooded into Ontario. 1963 W. K. ROSE Lett. Wyndham Lewis I. 1 An English girl of Scotch-Irish descent. 1980 G. M. FRASER Mr. American xvii. 312 Reason is the last thing you can look for in a Scotch-Irish Protestant. Ibid. xix. 361 The Scotch-Irish who saw their freedom threatened.
"Ah, now we are reduced to arguing Irish cultural history? I should point out that the Scotch-Irish were lowlands Scots who were moved to Ireland. They were not Celtic Scots, which is why they didn't get along with the Irish and why so many moved to America in large numbers."
The Scots were all Celtic to a significant degree. For the most part, they were a mix of the Scotti (Invaders from Ireland) and the Picti, who were also Celtic. There was some mixing of Scandinavian invaders, but they were much lesser in number. There is some argument made that there were non-Celtic peoples in the far north of the British Isles, but I don't think they are widely accepted.
Freddiemac: I should also point out that the first group of colonists from England, the Normans, did in fact adopt Irish culture. They became the Fitzes; Fitzpatrick, Fitzgerald, Fitzwilliam...you get the point. "Fitz" meant "bastard child of", so I think the number of Fitzes demonstrates more about the Norman appreciation for Irish women (although usually not as wives) than their appreciation for the culture. And the Fitzes would have been raised mostly by their Irish mothers, so they would have been culturally Irish whether or not their full-Norman half-siblings adopted the culture.
My family's ancestors, both Irish Catholic and Scots-Irish Protestant, came from Antrim in the 17th century; all apparently looking for a better life in American than they had in Ulster. I'm glad they put their religious and ethnic differences aside and married in the 19th century!
The McCains are not Scots-Irish BTW. There has been considerable research into the origins of the family, which included DNA testing. They do come from County Antrim and Couny Donegal, are Gaelic, have both Catholic and Protestant branches in the family. The DNA results strongly suggests they were what is called a Gallóglaigh Irish family. These are basically Highland and Hebridean Gaels that moved to Ireland in service of various Irish lords, circa anno domini 1200 to the mid 1500s; they were a warrior caste, not unlike the Japanese Samurai.
Other Gallóglaigh families are the McSweenys, McAllens, etc. Very much a little known aspect of Irish history. These Gaels settled prior to the Ulster Plantation, which began circa 1610, are really part of the old Gaelic order.
The McCains on their maternal side they did marry into bona fide Scots-Irish families, so there is that. Now how do I know all this wonderful minutiae? I headed up the research...
Google The Ulster Heritage Magazine to read more.
The McCains till have cousins in Donegal, Antrim and Dublin. I know as I chat with them.
BR McCain
The McCains are not Scots-Irish BTW. There has been considerable research into the origins of the family, which included DNA testing. They do come from County Antrim and Couny Donegal, are Gaelic, have both Catholic and Protestant branches in the family. The DNA results strongly suggests they were what is called a Gallóglaigh Irish family. These are basically Highland and Hebridean Gaels that moved to Ireland in service of various Irish lords, circa anno domini 1200 to the mid 1500s; they were a warrior caste, not unlike the Japanese Samurai.
Other Gallóglaigh families are the McSweenys, McAllens, etc. Very much a little known aspect of Irish history. These Gaels settled prior to the Ulster Plantation, which began circa 1610, are really part of the old Gaelic order.
The McCains on their maternal side they did marry into bona fide Scots-Irish families, so there is that. Now how do I know all this wonderful minutiae? I headed up the research...
Google The Ulster Heritage Magazine to read more.
The McCains still have cousins in Donegal, Antrim and Dublin. I know as I chat with them.
BR McCain