MIRROR, mirror on the wall, which is the fairest Easter Rising commemoration of them all?

The question arises from tomorrow’s marches and speeches by the Dublin government, political parties and other groups, all honouring the men and women of the 1916 Rising.

The ceremonies are part commemorative and part competitive, in that each organisation claims to be the true inheritor of the 1916 Proclamation.

So, where would its signatories be found among tomorrow’s republican fashion parades? (Black berets optional.)

DUP man’s praise for GAA points way to shared future - The Irish News view

Chris Donnelly: Take action on powerful e-bikes now before another life is lost

The mirror might reply that there are three ways of looking at the matter: faith, doubt and reason.

The faith-type answer is based on the observation that history is the lens through which the Irish often justify their beliefs and behaviour.

It is a bit like religious faith. All Christians presumably believe that if Christ were to return to earth, He would be a member of their church.

So depending on your political beliefs, the 1916 rebels would now be members of Fianna Fáil, Sinn Féin, the IRSP, Saoradh, Republican Sinn Féin, the Republican Network for Unity, Irish Labour, any of a number of other organisations, or one of the 75 modern varieties of the IRA. (God be with the days when there were only two IRAs.)

The second area of explanation lies with what might be termed the doubters.

These political agnostics argue that it is difficult to fast forward the beliefs and ideals of those who lived in a different world from ours and then apply them today.

For example, had Constance Markievicz been killed during the 1916 Rising, she would have been a martyr.

However, she survived and helped to found Fianna Fáil, which others might regard as having abandoned the ideals of 1916.

Kathleen Clarke followed that same path. Having spent 15 years in English prisons, her husband, Dungannon’s Thomas Clarke, was the first signatory of the Proclamation.

He was executed along with her brother, Ned Daly. However, she too helped to found Fianna Fáil.

The dead have the advantage of not having had to negotiate their way through the world which came after them.

Being dead, they can do no wrong – a benefit denied to those who have the misfortune to live longer.

The agnostics also argue that history is not always reliable.

For example, until recently Senator George Mitchell was close to sainthood. Now references to him have been removed by Queen’s University, which shows that history is flexible.

However, despite the logic of the doubters, it is still hard to envisage Pearse sitting in Stormont, or Connolly accepting a £14,200 pay rise while more than 20% of children here are in poverty.

The third possible explanation lies in applying reason.

It suggests that the test for those claiming to be the true inheritors of 1916 lies in matching their policies and practices against the Proclamation and the writings of its signatories.

The Proclamation advocates, for example, “the unfettered control of Irish destinies”.

That control disappeared with Irish entry into the EU, so most marchers would appear to be out of step with the Proclamation.

In terms of individual writings, Pearse has gone out of fashion. While his works, both in and on Irish, are still relevant, his views on the sovereignty of the Irish nation oppose the Good Friday Agreement, by arguing that everyone on this island is Irish.

He also said that Ireland unfree will never be at peace, which some use as historical cover to continue to engage in violence.

So, can we commemorate the bits of Pearse we like, or does he come as a complete package?

Connolly’s writings were different and perhaps the most applicable to today’s Ireland, north and south.

He argued that replacing the British flag with an Irish one makes no difference unless the causes of social and economic inequality are tackled – which renders irrelevant those repetitive and endlessly boring arguments about a united Ireland versus union with Britain.

Connolly offered a framework for explaining the inequality, poverty and deprivation which blight our society today, over a century after he was executed.

However, he would probably not be marching tomorrow. He would most likely be working voluntarily in a food bank, or campaigning against poverty.

It would be more in the spirit of 1916 than hanging tricolours from lamp posts.

So, for the Dublin government and all those groups involved in tomorrow’s ceremonies, the moral is that rather than talk to a mirror, you might learn more by looking at your reflection in it.

If you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article and would like to submit a Letter to the Editor to be considered for publication, please click here.

Letters to the Editor are invited on any subject. They should be authenticated with a full name, address and a daytime telephone number. Pen names are not allowed.

© The Irish News