Celebrating 1916 in 2016

LordSutch

Re Colony; May I suggest that you take a look at Posts 116 & 121.

Deedsie

Ireland was worse off than a colony. At least colonies got to make some of there decisions. We were ruled directly from London. We were in the UK for 120 years, we were treated like muck for the first fifty, we endured famine, oppression, we staged an uprising to show our want to be independent of britain, got crushed for it. We then gave 40 years trying to gain independence democratically through the home rule movement. Nothing doing.

The Unionists began to arm, So did the Republicans. Europe was in revolutionary mood during the first twenty years of the twentieth century. A blood sacrifice was taken to inspire Irish people. Defence of the realm Act and the Tans imported into Ireland despite Republicans winning 75 out of a possible 105 seats in the 1918 Elections.

Our mandate for an Irish republic completly seperate from Britain should have been a democratic decision.

The treaty spat in the face of democracy.

Ireland a colony, would have been great.

LordSutch

But was Ireland any worse off than any other part of the UK? was Ireland treated differently & 'Oppressed' when compared to say Yorkshire, Scotland, Wales or Cornwall, thats what I would like to know.

I suspect that Ireland did very well, until it left the Union, anyone got any FACTS?

Deedsie

Camelot wrote: »

But was Ireland any worse off than any other part of the UK? was Ireland treated differently & 'Oppressed' when compared to say Yorkshire, Scotland, Wales or Cornwall, thats what I would like to know.

I suspect that Ireland did very well, until it left the Union, anyone got any FACTS?

I suspect Catholic Ireland did very poorly in the union. And what concern is it of Ireland what happens, Scotland, Wales or Cornwall. Those regions have accepted there place in the UK, and fair play to them. Our concern was Ireland, just because they are willing to be ruled by London doesnt mean we had too. There was agitation in Ireland from 1801 until this very day as a result of Ireland being forced into the UK.

Is that not oppression enough? As a FACT, two famines, FACT, mass emmigration, FACT, Riots between Catholics and Protestants in the North, FACT, the Land war, FACT. The majority of Ireland wanting Home Rule being ignored, Fact. Landlords treatment of Catholic farmers.

A history of oppression, plantation and genocide of the Irish people and Irish culture. Can you not even accept on those grounds why Ireland is different from Britain, because Britain has helped shaped us this way.

OhNoYouDidn't

Camelot wrote: »

But was Ireland any worse off than any other part of the UK? was Ireland treated differently & 'Oppressed' when compared to say Yorkshire, Scotland, Wales or Cornwall, thats what I would like to know.

I suspect that Ireland did very well, until it left the Union, anyone got any FACTS?

Compare and contrast the London reaction to the Scottish and Irish famines.

Did Cromwell kill half the population of Yorkshire, Scotland, Wales or Cornwal?

Was the language of Yorkshire, Scotland, Wales or Cornwal supressed?

Was the religion of Yorkshire, Scotland, Wales or Cornwal supressed?

This is revisionism at its most crude.

LordSutch

I was just asking the question in Post 214.

Did somebody say 'Genocide' ?

partyguinness

Did Ireland make a democratic choice to join the Union in 1801?

No. In fact, Catholics i.e. 95%-99% of the Irish population didnt even have a vote. That very basic point is conveniently ignored when castigating the 1916 Rising as undemocratic.

Erin Go Brath

Camelot wrote: »

But was Ireland any worse off than any other part of the UK? was Ireland treated differently & 'Oppressed' when compared to say Yorkshire, Scotland, Wales or Cornwall, thats what I would like to know.

I suspect that Ireland did very well, until it left the Union, anyone got any FACTS?

Are you for real? Ireland was treated appalingly by the UK for hundreds of years particularly during Cromwells era and for most of the 19th and 20th centuries, much worse than the people in those places you've mentioned were treated. Note British army soldiers whose job was to control and subjugate the Irish came from Yorkshire, Scotland, Wales, Cornwall amongst other places.

It defies belief that anyone would think Ireland did well from UK rule. Ireland and Dublin before revolution and independence was one of the poorest places in Europe. Coupled with the famines, especially the 1845-1848 famine which occured on 'Britains watch' and arguments abound whether it was genocide or just gross negligence and its easy to see why we were always better off going it on our own where we could control our affairs.

British rule was NEVER good for Ireland. They plundered our nation, divided our land, and killed anyone who got in the way of their interests here.

Mario007

no offence people but you're talking about something that happened like almost a hundred years ago...and still complaing about a the british rule about how the bad(by the way it wasnt, it helped ireland be a republic in the long run) etc...

Acacia

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

There's a difference between being independent and being self-governing. Until the 70's we were so stupidly dependent on Britain for trade that we were still part of the "informal empire" for all intents and purposes. Decisions taken by the British had direct and far reaching consequences for us. That's hardly independence.

I agree that we were heavily dependent on trade, but I don't think this made us any less 'independent'. Is economics the sole reason that you believe we were not independent?


What do you expect really, with such close proximity to Britain? That what happened there wouldn't affect us at all?

I don't believe we were/ are any less independent than any other country which trades with other countries.

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

But if calling it such makes people feel better, who am I to wreck that?

Don't worry, this isn't about making anyone 'feel better'.

So the war from 1919 to 1921 shouldn't be referred to as the 'War of Independence' then? What should it be called, if we didn't gain independence?


On a different point, I must say it's astounding the amount of people here defending the British Empire ( or at least their actions here). Why is it so hard for people to accept that we suffered under the Empire? Why is the notion of independence so unsavory?

It's like some people are embarrassed or ashamed that we broke away from the Empire. I don't understand why that is.

I have a feeling that if we had this kind of attitude back in 1916 we would never have gained our independence. But, I suspect, that's exactly what many people here would like, by the sounds of things.

LordSutch

Acacia wrote: »

I have a feeling that if we had this kind of attitude back in 1916 we would never have gained our independence. But, I suspect, that's exactly what many people here would like, by the sounds of things.

But you see that is the problem, we didnt have the attitude back then either, remember the rebels were pelted with rotten tomatoes, rotten eggs, by the good people of Dublin, because of their wreckless actions!

And although the idea of an independent Ireland became a reality in the following years, the way in which it was conceived has left a sour/confused taste in many Southern Irish people (of an Anglo/Irish nature) down through the decades, not forgetting Northeners either.

Hope this helps.

Acacia

Camelot wrote: »

But you see that is the problem, we didnt have the attitude back then either, remember the rebels were pelted with rotten tomatoes, rotten eggs, by the good people of Dublin, because of their wreckless actions!

And although the idea of an independent Ireland became a reality in the following years, the way in which it was conceived has left a sour/confused taste in many Southern Irish people (of an Anglo/Irish nature) down through the decades, not forgetting Northeners either.

Hope this helps.

Thank you for your polite response , Camelot.

I'm not entirely sure that an independent Ireland wasn't wanted at all back then. I know that the 1916 leaders were spat on and all the rest. But there were calls for independence before the Rising (Home Rule movement, etc).

I can't say what Anglo-Irish people feel about independence (as I come from a fairly Irish nationalist background), but I don't have a problem with how it was conceived. I know I'll see things differently to you (I think you mentioned before that you were a Unionist), but I view the War of Independence as getting our country back. I see the 1916 Rising as the beginnings of this, so in that way, I want to celebrate it.

I meant in my previous post that I find it baffling that people who would probably come from a similar background (i.e. they would consider themselves Irish, as opposed to Anglo-Irish or Northern Irish, ) as myself have a problem with the notion of independence. I don't mean that they're not entitled to their views, of course they are, I just find it difficult to grasp ,that's all.

I understand that the actions of the IRA have made people wary of voicing support of any republican/nationalist ideas. But I just don't get why people feel the need to condemn the 1916 rebels as 'terrorists' because they had a similar hope for a United/ Independent Ireland.

Acacia

Camelot wrote: »

Easter 1916 is not hailed by all Irish people.

I understand that, I just don't really get the reasons why. If you understand me. :pac:

LordSutch

The reasons probably go right back to 1916 itself, and the divisions between the massive loss of life in the Great War (35.000+) Irish War dead, Versus the supporters of the Rebellion in Ireland (Same year) which was guaranteed to split peoples minds & Irish Family allegiances for many decades to come.

Thats 'my' theory Acacia.
Goodnight.

sceptre

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Compare and contrast the London reaction to the Scottish and Irish famines.

Did Cromwell kill half the population of Yorkshire, Scotland, Wales or Cornwal?

Was the language of Yorkshire, Scotland, Wales or Cornwal supressed?

Was the religion of Yorkshire, Scotland, Wales or Cornwal supressed?

This is revisionism at its most crude.

You do realise that not all of those questions have a "no" answer, right? Definite keywords off the top of my head are "prayerbook rebellion AND Cornish" and "Cromwell AND dundee". As for religious suppression, the 16th century was a very interesting time in the island to the east of us whether you were C of E, RC or Presbyterian. The Penal laws weren't exclusively limited to Ireland either.

Here's a funny Cromwell quip from an English friend of mine:

Nonetheless, I did have a tour guide in Dublin who informed me that a number of Catholic Churches were damaged by Oliver Cromwell on the orders of Henry VIII. I was quite amazed that they had time travel back then.

I blame Cromwell when I can't match my socks. Makes a more convenient scapegoat than an ethnic minority group.

Some day we'll all realise that it isn't about who's been most grievously wrong'd and get on with things. Apparently not today.

Of course this thread isn't about Cromwell, I just thought we should at least be aware that it wasn't a fun day in Dundee when his soldiers came to call there either. Obviously we had it way harder because, well, because we're Irish and there's a secret masochist inside all of us.

I'm sure 2016 will be a wonderful time with no-one blaming anyone else for things that happened 100 years, 200 years or 400 years afore.

yomchi

Mario007 wrote: »

no offence people but you're talking about something that happened like almost a hundred years ago...and still complaing about a the british rule about how the bad(by the way it wasnt, it helped ireland be a republic in the long run) etc...

Welcome to the politics forum.

"He who controls the past controls the future"

walrusgumble

monosharp wrote: »

Celebrate what exactly ?

If its celebrating the last time some Irish people stood up for themselves against the foreign ruler then OK.

It its celebrating our "independence" and our "country" then I'd rather spend the time watching re-runs of glenroe.

We got our country, at least most of it, and what did we do with it ? Look at the country, the culture and the government we have today. If any of the people who actually fought and died for that cause were around today they'd be so ashamed they'd wish they never bothered.

Honestly, look at our "politicians", you need to go to the deepest darkest swamp in Africa to find diseased scum like them and I mean every single solitary one of them.

Look at our "culture", 90% of it an exact copy of British culture. Tracksuit knackers walking the streets doing what they please to who they please. Fat drunks walking around with Man Utd jerseys.

Look at our "police", the most useless crowd of eejits in uniform the world has ever seen. Honestly, anyone even remotely familiar with police forces in REAL country's know that they actually DO serve and protect the public. I presently live in the middle of a city in the middle of a metropolitan area, population 23 million. You can walk anywhere any time of the day or night and NEVER get harrassed, theres no knackers standing on street corners asking you for a "light bud".

Look at our economy. Needs no explanation.

Look at our mindset. Greedy, grabbing, selfish bastards the lot of us and the worst thing is, when one of us gets into power or money by been a greedy, grabbing selfish bastard he is now above us. Average Joe gets **** on but Average Joe wants to become the guy taking the ****, he doesn't want to change the system, he wants to get higher up the food chain.

i dont think anyone could disagree with you. but look at how other countries have gone... even "mother england". not all the changes have being for the worse, no doubt you would agree.

this country does have the power and ability to change things... pitty about the will of our leaders. but, then again, the local elections are coming up soon, it wont be too far away for the dail elections, people can stand and vote for real change.

maybe events like the 100th anniversary could be a time to evaluate this country and its place in the world (as you will agree if we have to wait a further couple of years to do that, we have some serious questions to ask our selves)

Mario007

Jon wrote: »

Welcome to the politics forum.

"He who controls the past controls the future"

ha thanks, but i just thinks weird talking about something that happened ages ago. i mean if ya look back then 1916 was hated by the people because it went terribly wrong. the executions now that was a different matter, they were the ones that did the turning around and voting sinn fein instead of home rule because sinn fein had better political leaders who could use this opportunity. so was 1916 a start to the independce? well not really, cos strictly speaking it was the executions that got the irish piseed off so...

walrusgumble

Mario007 wrote: »

ha thanks, but i just thinks weird talking about something that happened ages ago. i mean if ya look back then 1916 was hated by the people because it went terribly wrong. the executions now that was a different matter, they were the ones that did the turning around and voting sinn fein instead of home rule because sinn fein had better political leaders who could use this opportunity. so was 1916 a start to the independce? well not really, cos strictly speaking it was the executions that got the irish piseed off so...

as far as pearse was concerned, and you know this, 1916, after news of casement's arrest and o'neill's counter command, was not inteded to be a military success. pearse knew there was only one way it was going to conclude. james connolly knew they were doomed from the start.

pearse, realised that unlike himself, many in ireland did not have seperatist mind frame who favoured a complete break from the union of britain, as oppose to home rule. many after all were home rulers which took over the mind frame after the rebellions in the 1840's and 1860's (even they were not popular enough to really strike fear into the english). he believed some blood needed to be spilled to awaken the country and turn away from home rule which carried so many let downs before. (pearse intially supported home rule, and by 1915ish stated that if britian messed ireland about again, he himself would lead an insurrection) note his idea of all things english such as the school teachings "the killing machine" as he called it.

pearse was not stupid in the sense that his own people would not be impressed with what they were doing. no doubt he got a very good idea withn a day or two of fighting what some peole thought, many of home had family in europe fighting as sweet f&ck all in the establishment helped the working class during their struggle in 1913. pearse knew at some point people would see his point of view, however way they did. his speech at court martial shows this.


people also turned away from the ipp when they realised what a complete disaster world war 1 was for the irish death toll was becoming. (like you say sinn fein capitalised- with extremely significant propaganda later). one needs also to look at how thouand of innocent people were rounded up and imprisioned after the rising, the conscription threat.

1916 was the start, the foudation of this country, the actions of 1919 dail eireann emphaises this with the declaration of independence which is heavily influenced by the 1916 proclamation.

yomchi

ha thanks, but i just thinks weird talking about something that happened ages ago. i mean if ya look back then 1916 was hated by the people because it went terribly wrong. the executions now that was a different matter, they were the ones that did the turning around and voting sinn fein instead of home rule because sinn fein had better political leaders who could use this opportunity. so was 1916 a start to the independce? well not really, cos strictly speaking it was the executions that got the irish piseed off so...

You have it a little messed up my young friend but you're on the right path

Was 1916 the start of independance? Well no not really. Infact insurgencies went way back before that to 1798 and beyond. Each insurgency didn't fight for a 26 county Republic. So have we realised the ambitions of all these people that went before us? No, we haven't.

1916 was the start, the foudation of this country, the actions of 1919 dail eireann emphaises this with the declaration of independence which is heavily influenced by the 1916 proclamation.

Sorry for being picky. 1916 set in motion the events that lead to the treaty and the foundation of this state. This country has 32 counties. The first Dáil Éireann was founded on the principles of the 1916 and governed over the 32 counties, not the Free State as it came to be known.

note his idea of all things english such as the school teachings "the killing machine" as he called it.

Close! It was the 'Murder machine' and it was a short policy document he wrote.