Despite differences in politics, generations and jurisdictions, there are many similarities between the Democratic Union Party and Fianna Fáil; both started out not just as political parties but as movements. Among other factors, Fianna Fáil’s aggression towards the pro-Treaty government helped its electoral rise in the South in the 1920s and ‘30s. In the North, from the 1970s onwards the DUP denounced unionists who sought a more moderate course and better relations with the Republic. As parties founded upon strong principles, discipline amongst the ranks allowed their respective leaderships to lead without criticism. However, for Fianna Fáil with the onset of ‘The Troubles’ and attempts at forging power-sharing government in Northern Ireland, and for the DUP with signing the St Andrews Agreement, events and happenings prompted the gradual erosion of this discipline. Without the endgame of a united Ireland, divisions and infighting strangled Fianna Fáil for decades. Years after the Northern Ireland constitutional question was settled, this week the DUP’s ex-Health Minister Edwin Poots’ apparent undermining of Peter Robinson’s leadership shows how quickly individual ambition can take hold of a political party after its revolution.

On the road to power, both the DUP and Fianna Fáil respectively galvanised the working classes, broadened their appeal and instilled loyalty among their ranks, presenting themselves as the only alternatives to the weak governing elites of the day and their socio-economic policies. Inside both camps paranoia was the norm. What followed in both cases, from the realisation by Fianna Fáil during the ‘70s that Northern Ireland would exist for the foreseeable future and from the DUP’s acceptance of power-sharing with Sinn Féin, was institutionalisation. Just like Fianna Fáil had experienced upon becoming the party of government in the South, from 2007 until recently the DUP has remained fairly static, so much so that political commentators have seriously discussed the idea of a merger with the UUP. Poots’ suggestion that Peter Robinson is ready to step down as DUP leader may or may not trigger a plot to replace the leadership, but there is little doubt that a generational shift is starting to occur, with ties to party ideology and tradition not as tight as they once were. To quote the Bible: “where there is no vision, the people perish.”

The challenge for any political party is always to adapt to the changing political landscape. In Northern Ireland, the UUP and SDLP failed to do so after the 1998 Agreement; in the Republic, following the economic crash, the ardent nationalism and founding socio-economic principles which Fianna Fáil had boasted for so long had ceased to exist, depriving the party of a soft landing in the 2011 election. Since replacing Ian Paisley, Peter Robinson’s difficulty has been in shaping his own vision for the DUP and for Northern Ireland; mere administration and reaction to events have tended to be the way of things, with a forward-looking strategy or narrative absent. Without reasons to win power other than for the sake of it, the fracturing of the party into opposing ambitious camps is not surprising. Compare this with Sinn Féin, continually on the rise on both sides of the border, forever adapting its narrative. Perhaps at some point it might follow suit; the succession of leadership in an altogether different Ireland from the one which its current leadership found will not be without its challenges. Yet, certainly for the time being the shared party vision continues to triumph over that of individual ambition, which is more than can be said of certain sections of the DUP.