The “O'Brien Ethic” as an Interpretative Problem

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    1 Citation (Scopus)

    Abstract

    The necessity of adopting or redefining illiberal measures—such as torture, internment, or targeted-killings of terrorists—to protect states places burdens on the meaning of liberalism around the world. After 1969, liberal intellectual responses to the so-called Troubles in Northern Ireland identified two conflicted groups of Irish liberals. Then academic and politician Conor Cruise O'Brien attempted to reduce responses to the crisis to the choice between supporting the state and condoning terrorism. “Consenting liberals” compromised professional practices in the law, journalism, broadcasting, and academia to support the state's counterinsurgency. Alternatively, “dissenting liberals” defended their “neutrality” alongside the freedom to criticize the counterinsurgency. Justifying infringements on individual freedoms, O'Brien and others said the democratic state was imperiled. But, anomalously, freedoms were sacrificed in defense of the Irish state, which in security terms did little to defend itself. Nevertheless, the counterinsurgency became an organizing principle in intellectual life, and over forty years colored self-perceptions of Irish society, past and present.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)908-939
    Number of pages32
    JournalJournal of British Studies
    Volume52
    Issue number4
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Oct 2013

    Fingerprint

    moral philosophy
    torture
    neutrality
    broadcasting
    journalism
    liberalism
    self-image
    politician
    terrorism
    Law
    present
    Group
    Counterinsurgency
    Society

    Cite this

    @article{62cca6c192714957bb4711dca28b6783,
    title = "The “O'Brien Ethic” as an Interpretative Problem",
    abstract = "The necessity of adopting or redefining illiberal measures—such as torture, internment, or targeted-killings of terrorists—to protect states places burdens on the meaning of liberalism around the world. After 1969, liberal intellectual responses to the so-called Troubles in Northern Ireland identified two conflicted groups of Irish liberals. Then academic and politician Conor Cruise O'Brien attempted to reduce responses to the crisis to the choice between supporting the state and condoning terrorism. “Consenting liberals” compromised professional practices in the law, journalism, broadcasting, and academia to support the state's counterinsurgency. Alternatively, “dissenting liberals” defended their “neutrality” alongside the freedom to criticize the counterinsurgency. Justifying infringements on individual freedoms, O'Brien and others said the democratic state was imperiled. But, anomalously, freedoms were sacrificed in defense of the Irish state, which in security terms did little to defend itself. Nevertheless, the counterinsurgency became an organizing principle in intellectual life, and over forty years colored self-perceptions of Irish society, past and present.",
    author = "Regan, {John M.}",
    year = "2013",
    month = "10",
    doi = "10.1017/jbr.2013.179",
    language = "English",
    volume = "52",
    pages = "908--939",
    journal = "Journal of British Studies",
    issn = "0021-9371",
    publisher = "University of Chicago Press",
    number = "4",

    }

    The “O'Brien Ethic” as an Interpretative Problem. / Regan, John M.

    In: Journal of British Studies, Vol. 52, No. 4, 10.2013, p. 908-939.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - The “O'Brien Ethic” as an Interpretative Problem

    AU - Regan, John M.

    PY - 2013/10

    Y1 - 2013/10

    N2 - The necessity of adopting or redefining illiberal measures—such as torture, internment, or targeted-killings of terrorists—to protect states places burdens on the meaning of liberalism around the world. After 1969, liberal intellectual responses to the so-called Troubles in Northern Ireland identified two conflicted groups of Irish liberals. Then academic and politician Conor Cruise O'Brien attempted to reduce responses to the crisis to the choice between supporting the state and condoning terrorism. “Consenting liberals” compromised professional practices in the law, journalism, broadcasting, and academia to support the state's counterinsurgency. Alternatively, “dissenting liberals” defended their “neutrality” alongside the freedom to criticize the counterinsurgency. Justifying infringements on individual freedoms, O'Brien and others said the democratic state was imperiled. But, anomalously, freedoms were sacrificed in defense of the Irish state, which in security terms did little to defend itself. Nevertheless, the counterinsurgency became an organizing principle in intellectual life, and over forty years colored self-perceptions of Irish society, past and present.

    AB - The necessity of adopting or redefining illiberal measures—such as torture, internment, or targeted-killings of terrorists—to protect states places burdens on the meaning of liberalism around the world. After 1969, liberal intellectual responses to the so-called Troubles in Northern Ireland identified two conflicted groups of Irish liberals. Then academic and politician Conor Cruise O'Brien attempted to reduce responses to the crisis to the choice between supporting the state and condoning terrorism. “Consenting liberals” compromised professional practices in the law, journalism, broadcasting, and academia to support the state's counterinsurgency. Alternatively, “dissenting liberals” defended their “neutrality” alongside the freedom to criticize the counterinsurgency. Justifying infringements on individual freedoms, O'Brien and others said the democratic state was imperiled. But, anomalously, freedoms were sacrificed in defense of the Irish state, which in security terms did little to defend itself. Nevertheless, the counterinsurgency became an organizing principle in intellectual life, and over forty years colored self-perceptions of Irish society, past and present.

    U2 - 10.1017/jbr.2013.179

    DO - 10.1017/jbr.2013.179

    M3 - Article

    VL - 52

    SP - 908

    EP - 939

    JO - Journal of British Studies

    JF - Journal of British Studies

    SN - 0021-9371

    IS - 4

    ER -