Correspondence (or lack of) with RTÉ Radio One’s Morning Ireland programme
This is the complete text of a letter sent to the RTÉ Radio 1 programme Morning Ireland in response to comments broadcast alleging that communism banned religion in the former USSR.
Dear Morning Ireland,
I refer to comments broadcast on your programme of Friday, 6th January. Your reporter Emer Lowe (hope I’ve spelt that right) finished her piece on the Russian Orthodox community in Ireland and their Christmas celebrations with the bizarre claim that 'religion was banned under the communism during the soviet period'.
Please could you ask Emer Lowe to provide a source for this contention. I am quite conversant with the history of the October Revolution and the construction of a socialist state that ensued. I can assure you, Emer Lowe and your listeners, quite categorically, that no such event as 'the banning of religion' ever took place. If there were tensions of a church-state or church-populace nature then all that this suggests is that soviet society was no different to any other social system, including our own, although every system throws up its own unique features and characteristics.
I do not know what Emer Lowe's position is on any of these matters and therefore can only make a guess at what might have prompted her to make such an extraordinary claim. I would suggest that, either she has been duped by some kind of fanciful, Dan Brown-style, potted history of the twentieth century, or else she just didn’t bother to start her research from facts. It is the job of a journalist to investigate. It is not my job to do Emer Lowe's job for her. But since she is obviously in way over her head I will share the following information with you, that hopefully you will pass on to her.
The first constitution to follow the October Socialist Revolution was the constitution of the Russian Soviet Federated Socialist Republic of 1918. On the question of religion it states:
Can also be read at here, with a slightly different translation but the sense remains the same.
The 1936 Constitution reiterates the same principles:
The 1936 constitution remained in force until 1977 when it was replaced by a new constitution. (Can also be read here.) The previous provision is re-worked, but the guarantee of religious freedom is retained and a new element to do with 'incitement to hatred' is introduced:
All in all this is a less than satisfactory formulation and represents a dilution of the previous position, enshrined in the 1936 constitution. It seems to infer that Freedom of Conscience is exclusively a religious matter. Also the question of 'incitement to hatred' is dubious because how is the 'prohibition' to be enforced? It would seem to me that provisions like these could be open to abuse. Nevertheless all the evidence shows that no such thing as 'religion being banned under communism in the Soviet Union' ever took place. [Quite the opposite in fact - O.D. 29/6/2007.] Of course I may have overlooked something in which case perhaps Emer Lowe or Morning Ireland could enlighten me. The pursuit of knowledge is a worthy endeavour and a reward in itself.
Incidentally if we take the 1936 soviet constitution and compare it with our own Bunreacht na hÉireann, which was enacted the following year, it doesn't take a great intellectual feat to ascertain which is the more enlightened and progressive. References to 'the Most Holy Trinity' and 'our Divine Lord Jesus Christ' or the state's acknowledgement that 'homage of public worship is due to Almighty God' bear testimony to a time and place where certainly, Atheists at least would have had to thread carefully. But indeed people of minority faiths too where left in no doubt as to they stood, with the state's recognition of "the special position of the Holy Catholic Apostolic and Roman Church as the guardian of the Faith professed by the great majority of the citizens". - Bunreacht na hÉireann.
History has shown how ultimately this stance proved near disastrous for almost everyone concerned, not least the Catholic Church itself. In the Northern Ireland it was seized upon by unionist reaction to implement their agenda of creating a 'protestant state for a protestant people'. Why not if catholics were up to the same lark down south?
In point of fact, unlike the 1936 constitution of the Soviet Union, Bunreacht na hÉireann, did not then, and does not now guarantee complete freedom of conscience and free profession of religion since Article 44.1 qualifies this by making such 'subject to public order and morality'. So who is living in a police state? You tell me.
So, to conclude on this point I look forward to hearing Morning Ireland issue a correction or clarification in the very near future. To be honest, as a license payer I was rather taken a-back to hear such shoddy presentation from our state monopoly broadcasting service. I suppose the notion of deliberate falsification on your part is a little too Orwellian to contemplate. Nevertheless, perhaps it’s just as well that the semblance of a free market is beginning to emerge in Irish broadcasting.
If standards deteriorate any further at RTÉ I might just float the idea that the license fee be re-distributed more fairly, so that enterprises and individuals genuinely interested in providing public service broadcasting can have a go. Share the wealth is what I say. A little bit of socialism never did anyone any harm.
Is mise,
Oscar Ó Dúgáin 7/1/2006
Feedback and Responses to Date:
E-mail reply received 07 January 2006 13:26:
Thank you very much for emailing Morning Ireland, your message has been passed on to the editor. You can access the programme online at: "http://www.rte.ie/news/morningireland.html"
******************************
----- Original Message -----
To: "mailto:morningireland@rte.ie"
Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2006 7:50 PM
Subject: Re-sending: Religion in the USSR
Dear Morning Ireland,
I wonder if you have had a chance to consider the issues raised in my e-mail of 7th January (see below) and if so, what are your comments? I would be most interested to hear what the state controlled media in this country has to say for itself on this occasion.
Is mise,
Oscar Ó Dúgáin
******************************
E-mail reply received 15 January 2006 19:51:
Thank you very much for emailing Morning Ireland, your message has been passed on to the editor. You can access the programme online at: "http://www.rte.ie/news/morningireland.html"
******************************
----- Original Message -----
To: "mailto:morningireland@rte.ie"
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2006 10:34 PM
Subject: Re- Re-sending: Religion in the USSR
Dear Morning Ireland,
Since you still have not replied to my letter of 7th January (re-sent on 15th January) I can only assume that you concede the points I made in relation to your broadcast. In which case I would now like to enquire as to when you intend to issue a correction. In the event that you have already done so, unbeknownst to me, could I humbly request a transcript or a statement of some sort from you.
Is mise,
Oscar Ó Dúgáin
******************************
E-mail reply received 21 January 2006 22:34:
Thank you very much for emailing Morning Ireland, your message has been passed on to the editor. You can access the programme online at: "http://www.rte.ie/news/morningireland.html"
******************************
This is the complete text of a letter sent to the RTÉ Radio 1 programme Morning Ireland in response to comments broadcast alleging that communism banned religion in the former USSR.
Dear Morning Ireland,
I refer to comments broadcast on your programme of Friday, 6th January. Your reporter Emer Lowe (hope I’ve spelt that right) finished her piece on the Russian Orthodox community in Ireland and their Christmas celebrations with the bizarre claim that 'religion was banned under the communism during the soviet period'.
Please could you ask Emer Lowe to provide a source for this contention. I am quite conversant with the history of the October Revolution and the construction of a socialist state that ensued. I can assure you, Emer Lowe and your listeners, quite categorically, that no such event as 'the banning of religion' ever took place. If there were tensions of a church-state or church-populace nature then all that this suggests is that soviet society was no different to any other social system, including our own, although every system throws up its own unique features and characteristics.
I do not know what Emer Lowe's position is on any of these matters and therefore can only make a guess at what might have prompted her to make such an extraordinary claim. I would suggest that, either she has been duped by some kind of fanciful, Dan Brown-style, potted history of the twentieth century, or else she just didn’t bother to start her research from facts. It is the job of a journalist to investigate. It is not my job to do Emer Lowe's job for her. But since she is obviously in way over her head I will share the following information with you, that hopefully you will pass on to her.
The first constitution to follow the October Socialist Revolution was the constitution of the Russian Soviet Federated Socialist Republic of 1918. On the question of religion it states:
Article 13. In order to ensure genuine freedom of conscience for the working people, the church is separated from the State, and the school from the church: and freedom of religious and anti-religious propaganda is recognized for all citizens.
Can also be read at here, with a slightly different translation but the sense remains the same.
The 1936 Constitution reiterates the same principles:
ARTICLE 124. In order to ensure to citizen’s freedom of conscience, the church in the U.S.S.R. is separated from the state, and the school from the church. Freedom of religious worship and freedom of antireligious propaganda is recognized for all citizens.
The 1936 constitution remained in force until 1977 when it was replaced by a new constitution. (Can also be read here.) The previous provision is re-worked, but the guarantee of religious freedom is retained and a new element to do with 'incitement to hatred' is introduced:
Citizens of the USSR are guaranteed freedom of conscience, that is, the right to profess or not to profess any religion, and to conduct religious worship or atheistic propaganda. Incitement of hostility or hatred on religious grounds is prohibited.
In the USSR, the church is separated from the state, and the school from the church.
All in all this is a less than satisfactory formulation and represents a dilution of the previous position, enshrined in the 1936 constitution. It seems to infer that Freedom of Conscience is exclusively a religious matter. Also the question of 'incitement to hatred' is dubious because how is the 'prohibition' to be enforced? It would seem to me that provisions like these could be open to abuse. Nevertheless all the evidence shows that no such thing as 'religion being banned under communism in the Soviet Union' ever took place. [Quite the opposite in fact - O.D. 29/6/2007.] Of course I may have overlooked something in which case perhaps Emer Lowe or Morning Ireland could enlighten me. The pursuit of knowledge is a worthy endeavour and a reward in itself.
Incidentally if we take the 1936 soviet constitution and compare it with our own Bunreacht na hÉireann, which was enacted the following year, it doesn't take a great intellectual feat to ascertain which is the more enlightened and progressive. References to 'the Most Holy Trinity' and 'our Divine Lord Jesus Christ' or the state's acknowledgement that 'homage of public worship is due to Almighty God' bear testimony to a time and place where certainly, Atheists at least would have had to thread carefully. But indeed people of minority faiths too where left in no doubt as to they stood, with the state's recognition of "the special position of the Holy Catholic Apostolic and Roman Church as the guardian of the Faith professed by the great majority of the citizens". - Bunreacht na hÉireann.
History has shown how ultimately this stance proved near disastrous for almost everyone concerned, not least the Catholic Church itself. In the Northern Ireland it was seized upon by unionist reaction to implement their agenda of creating a 'protestant state for a protestant people'. Why not if catholics were up to the same lark down south?
In point of fact, unlike the 1936 constitution of the Soviet Union, Bunreacht na hÉireann, did not then, and does not now guarantee complete freedom of conscience and free profession of religion since Article 44.1 qualifies this by making such 'subject to public order and morality'. So who is living in a police state? You tell me.
So, to conclude on this point I look forward to hearing Morning Ireland issue a correction or clarification in the very near future. To be honest, as a license payer I was rather taken a-back to hear such shoddy presentation from our state monopoly broadcasting service. I suppose the notion of deliberate falsification on your part is a little too Orwellian to contemplate. Nevertheless, perhaps it’s just as well that the semblance of a free market is beginning to emerge in Irish broadcasting.
If standards deteriorate any further at RTÉ I might just float the idea that the license fee be re-distributed more fairly, so that enterprises and individuals genuinely interested in providing public service broadcasting can have a go. Share the wealth is what I say. A little bit of socialism never did anyone any harm.
Is mise,
Oscar Ó Dúgáin 7/1/2006
Feedback and Responses to Date:
E-mail reply received 07 January 2006 13:26:
Thank you very much for emailing Morning Ireland, your message has been passed on to the editor. You can access the programme online at: "http://www.rte.ie/news/morningireland.html"
******************************
----- Original Message -----
To: "mailto:morningireland@rte.ie"
Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2006 7:50 PM
Subject: Re-sending: Religion in the USSR
Dear Morning Ireland,
I wonder if you have had a chance to consider the issues raised in my e-mail of 7th January (see below) and if so, what are your comments? I would be most interested to hear what the state controlled media in this country has to say for itself on this occasion.
Is mise,
Oscar Ó Dúgáin
******************************
E-mail reply received 15 January 2006 19:51:
Thank you very much for emailing Morning Ireland, your message has been passed on to the editor. You can access the programme online at: "http://www.rte.ie/news/morningireland.html"
******************************
----- Original Message -----
To: "mailto:morningireland@rte.ie"
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2006 10:34 PM
Subject: Re- Re-sending: Religion in the USSR
Dear Morning Ireland,
Since you still have not replied to my letter of 7th January (re-sent on 15th January) I can only assume that you concede the points I made in relation to your broadcast. In which case I would now like to enquire as to when you intend to issue a correction. In the event that you have already done so, unbeknownst to me, could I humbly request a transcript or a statement of some sort from you.
Is mise,
Oscar Ó Dúgáin
******************************
E-mail reply received 21 January 2006 22:34:
Thank you very much for emailing Morning Ireland, your message has been passed on to the editor. You can access the programme online at: "http://www.rte.ie/news/morningireland.html"
******************************
Copyright © Oscar Ó Dúgáin, 2006
No comments:
Post a Comment