Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
will we ever see a 32 county republic
Options
Comments
-
-
-
-
Another point of view
In my GPs surgery in Dalkey there are a dozen or more pictures of Queen Victoria's last visit to Ireland in 1900, and there for all to see are thousands of Union Jacks flying from shop windows in Cork, Kingstown (Dun Laoghaire), Dublin, Blackrock, and all over the South, with tens of thousands of people cheering > but then virtually overnight (1916-1922) the South decided that it was not British anymore! the collective Nationalist memory was subtly adjusted, and we became a new race, a new Irish breed, De Valera's children, fervently IRISH, Gaelic speaking, Mono cultural, (very Anti-British), isolationary, totally independent
a new Irish identity was being manufactured, and we wanted to pull the North along with us ~ but the North stayed firm & remained faithful to the rest of the UK.
This post is full of many holes. Those urban areas you mentioned were settled by planters and returned Unionist candidates in elections hence were the small minority of the population at the time. This anti-Nationalist section would hate the rebels for obvious reasons, the rest of the population who formed the thumping majority cheered them on.
The Irish have always had an identity for centuries, what you posted is absolute rubbish and insulting to my Irish identity.
'The North stayed firm'- because it was majorly settled by an Unionist population, that was obvious!When the men of 1916 surrendered they were spat upon and jeered by the people of Dublin.
This post is also full of rubbish. If you do any research, you will find that they were spat upon by well-off Dubliners of Unionist extraction at the time but they were cheered on by people in the poorer parts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter_RisingAccording to Berresford Ellis this perspective became less tenable when a long obscure eyewitness account of the period resurfaced in 1991. Canadian journalist and writer, Frederick Arthur McKenzie, [52] was one of the best-known and reputable war correspondents of his day according to Berresford Ellis. He was one of two Canadian journalists who arrived in Dublin with the English reinforcements sent to put down the insurrection. McKenzie had no sympathy for the Irish ‘rebels’ and German sympathizers, as he perceived them, and was no anti-imperialist. [53]
McKenzie published The Irish Rebellion: What happened and Why, with C. Arthur Pearson in London in 1916, he notes, "I have read many accounts of public feeling in Dublin in these days. They are all agreed that the open and strong sympathy of the mass of the population was with the British troops. That this was in the better parts of the city, I have no doubt, but certainly what I myself saw in the poorer districts did not confirm this. It rather indicated that there was a vast amount of sympathy with the rebels, particularly after the rebels were defeated." Berresford Ellis then cites a passage by McKenzie describing how he watched as people were waving and cheering as a regiment approached, and that he commented to his companion they were cheering the soldiers. Noticing then that they were escorting Irish prisoners, he realised that they were actually cheering the rebels. The rebels he says were walking in military formation and were loudly and triumphantly singing a rebel song. McKenzie reports speaking to a group of men and women at street corners, "shure, we cheer them" said a woman, "why wouldn’t we? Aren't they our own flesh and blood." Dressed in khaki McKenzie was mistaken for a British soldier as he went about Dublin back streets were people cursed him openly, and "cursed all like me strangers in their city." J.W Rowath, a British officer had a comparable experience to McKenzie and observed that "crowds of men and women greeted us with raised fists and curses."[54]
Brian Barton & Micheal Foy cite Frank Robbins of the Irish Citizen Army who records seeing a group of Dubliners gathered to cheer the prisoners while being marched into Richmond barracks.[55] They also report de Valera’s surrendered Boland’s mill, were crowds lined the pavement in Grand Canal Street and Hogan Place and pleaded with the insurgents to take shelter in their houses rather than surrender. Foy and Barton concluded "Public attitudes locally were not uniformly hostile in an area which the police had come to regard as increasingly militant in the months before the Rising. Some of the British soldiers who fought there noted a strong antipathy towards them." At the South Dublin Union, Major de Courcy Wheeler noted that there was no hostility from the people towards the insurgents: "It was perfectly plain that all their admiration was for the heroes who had surrendered." [56]
This account flatly contradicts most of the contemporary accounts, says Berresford Ellis. [57] This is a view shared by Michael Foy and Brian Barton [58] also highlighting expressions of sympathy from the people who watched the prisoners being marched away. Quoting the diary of John Clarke a shopkeeper who writes "Thus ends the last attempt for poor old Ireland. What noble fellows. The cream of the land. None of your corner-boy class." [59]
Foy and Barton felt the contradictions could be modified by other factors. They examined the routes which the British soldiers took the prisoners. Michael Mallin’s column of prisoners they say were marched two miles to Richmond barracks through a "strongly loyalist and Protestant artisan class district." It was from this district that the Royal Dublin Fusiliers and other Irish regiments of the British army drew their recruits. It was around Richmond barracks they say, lived people who were economically dependent on the military. Another aspect they raise was the degree of hostility from Dublin women whose sons were serving in the army in France. They note that some priests at Church Street rebuked the insurgent prisoners and wounded. However the generally accepted account of the population of Dublin being uniformly hostile to the surrendered insurgents is one of the myths repeated so often as to become 'history.'0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
Hmm, looking at it through 'my prism' it was the South who broke away from the UK leaving the North behind, thus the border had to be erected to distinguish between the (still British) residents of the North, and the newly invented 'Ultra Irish' breed being bred by De'velera in the Republic.
No, it was the North who broke away from the rest of Ireland. The Government of Ireland Act allowed for a 32 county free state. Unionists had the option to opt out and they did. It was their decision to partition their country.
Another point of view
Come on, the authorities would hardly allow protesting and tricolors would they. On all visits by the English Monarch there is always an onus on the hosts to make things look good. You seem to regard this as evidence of a royalist and loyalist Ireland. You dont really believe that do you?In my GPs surgery in Dalkey there are a dozen or more pictures of Queen Victoria's last visit to Ireland in 1900, and there for all to see are thousands of Union Jacks flying from shop windows in Cork, Kingstown (Dun Laoghaire), Dublin, Blackrock, and all over the South, with tens of thousands of people cheering
Where did all the flags come from anyway?
>but then virtually overnight (1916-1922) the South decided that it was not British anymore! the collective Nationalist memory was subtly adjusted, and we became a new race, a new Irish breed, De Valera's children, fervently IRISH, Gaelic speaking, Mono cultural, (very Anti-British), isolationary, totally independent a new Irish identity was being manufactured, and we wanted to pull the North along with us ~ but the North stayed firm & remained faithful to the rest of the UK.
Camelot, we were never British. Were all the risings made up before then by mind adjusting nationalists? Was 1798 made up? Were all the election results in Ireland indicating a collective will in Ireland to weaken the link with Britain indicate that we were British and loyalists.
You seem to be suggesting that everybody in Ireland was British before 1916 and then suddenly changed to being Irish?
Ireland was invaded by "Right of Conquest" by England in the 15th century (I think). There was no friendly realisation that we were all British or all Irish , we were invaded by a foreign army. The same as if a French or Prussian army had invaded.The Republic was created, it walked out of the Union, hence the creation of the artificial border!
The Unionists partitioned Ireland (and Ulster) by walking out of the free state in 1921.A few pages ago T-runner you wrote " Protestants are told from an early age that Catholics and southerners, are inferior/underclass/bad etc. and under no circumstances are we to be ruled in a united Ireland. " lol lol.
Glad it made you laugh out loud twice, I guess that increases the impact of your statement.
Unionists are not taught Irish (inc. Ulster) history. Where do they learn about it? Do you think what they are told about catholics/southerners is positive or negative, judging by what you have witnessed re. attitudes in NI?T runner, Junder has a different view on things to you. What appears logical to him, may not appear logical to you! There is no substantiating to it! He feels he has more in common with his fellow NI citizens rather than ROI cotizens. Perfectly logical.
Dont misrepresent him. He said he has as much in common with someone from Outer Mongolia as someone from Rep of Ireland (He gave Donegal as an example).
Given that Donegal is in the same Province as Antrim where he is from, given that 40% of the population of NI are Irish, given that 40% of NI have the same culture as ROI, given that the are both on the same small Island, given that they both are partitioned parts of Ireland, given that there are several all Ireland official, national as well as sporting and cultural bodies, then I would say that his position is comnpletely illogical.
Not only that but I would say his position is dishonest (and the Unionist viewpoint if that position is representative).Is it that hard to understand?
I unerstand its completely illogical and false.As for the whole GB, UK thing, I'm not getting into Semantics. It's British, full stop, different currency, different Govt. etc.! No amount of arguing will change that.
The difference between GB and UK is Northern Ireland. That is not semantics.
If you are going to talk about Irish and British politics at least make an effort to understand the basics. Again if you are crossing the border into co Down are you entering Great Britain? Yes or No.
The fact that Irish or N Irish history is not taught in NI makes the distinction between GB and UK more pertinant. Do you agree?You did say all Catholics. I pointed it out to you and now you are back tracking. You could have just said you were generalising.
You said , I said all catholics were the same (in every sense). I said all catholics (and msot protestants in south) were the same in nationality. Stop trying to misrepresent me. Move on.Similar to some sections of the Communities do not talk to each other, but the vast majority do. NI has moved on from the 70's.
The walls are still there. The relationship hasnt improved much. Infact the upcoming generations are even more vicious towards eachother. This now seems to include more of the young catholics who tarditionally would be more respectful of their neighbours.
Yes the British told the IVF if they fought they would get home rule, they told the UVF if they fought there would not be home rule. Looks like the loyalists got their way.Nobody mentioned that. Do not forget far more Irish people volunteered and fought in British uniforms than were ever in 1916.When the men of 1916 surrendered they were spat upon and jeered by the people of Dublin.
So the entire population of Dublin spat on the men of 1916?
Or perhaps that suited the establishment of the time?Of course, after that, as another poster wrote "we became a new race, a new Irish breed, De Valera's children, fervently IRISH, Gaelic speaking, Mono cultural, (very Anti-British), isolationary, totally independent"
80% of people wanted to break the link with Britain. That was the democratic will of the Irish people. There was evidence of this will in elections long before De Valera came on the scene.
The Irish people lived under British rule and voted this way. But perhaps it suits you to think of the Irish as stupid?More like any other group of islands in the world. Eg New Zealand. Japan. Island groups naturally stick together. It makes more economic and political sense.
And what about the Carribean Islands, Polynesian Island, Malaysia, Papau New Guinea? to name but a few. Why dont they naturally stick together. Is it perhaps that they are sperate nations?0 -
-
-
Wrong. People in the poorer parts jeered and spat on them too. Even Exile 1798 - a Republican of definite views, sometimes hardline, I think fair to say - in his post no. 301 in this thread, ( only a few posts ago ) in reply to "When the men of 1916 surrendered they were spat upon and jeered by the people of Dublin." wrote "Again I know this and acknowledge that. In fact the main Nationalist newspaper in Dublin called for them to be executed."
Do not believe hearsay - what someone else writes what someone else said or saw nearly 100 years ago - or indeed everything you read on wikipedia. Anyone can post that drivel.
Nope, wrong again. Look up the location of the Richmond Barracks. Wealthy areas of Dublin especially on the southside near the city centre were of Unionist extraction.
Which newspaper you referring to?
The Irish Times which called for their execution was a Unionist paper at the time, undeniable.
If you're reffering to the Irish Independent, that was indeed a Nationalist paper at the time associated with Redmond which called for some executions.. They really made a balls of that call which just shows you how out of touch newspapers can be with popular opinion.
Regarding hearsay. Well, i can tell you the crowds around Bolands Mills cheered the rebels at the time as you know alot of my family orginated from around that district with the utmost praise of the rebels passed from generation to generation unless they are all liars of course
0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
The Irish Times which called for their execution was a Unionist paper at the time, undeniable.
If you're reffering to the Irish Independent, that was indeed a Nationalist paper at the time associated with Redmond which called for some executions.. They really made a balls of that call which just shows you how out of touch newspapers can be with popular opinion.
When you do not agree with them you call them out of touch ! Do not forget 100,000 Irishmen volunteered and served with British forces. Many more people were involved in industries supporting the war effort at the time. Far fewer people took part in the Easter rising than that. They were looked on as traitors, spat at and jeered. I am sure they were pockets where that was not the case ; I am talking about the prevalent mood of the people at that point in time.Regarding hearsay. Well, i can tell you the crowds around Bolands Mills cheered the rebels at the time as you know alot of my family orginated from around that district with the utmost praise of the rebels passed from generation to generation unless they are all liars of course
Maybe there were some people around Bolands Mills in favour of the "terrorists" ( as most people saw them at the time ) - as well as from the media, I know from people whose parents witnessed events that was not typical in Dublin at the time. The other posters pictures of Queen Victoria visiting Dublin and all the Union Jacks out tells its own story. Is'nt that why Dubliners are sometimes called " Jackeens" ? After they were executed + the Republican propoganda machine got going, public sympathy swung a bit, but still far far more people chose to serve in the British forces than ever fought in 1916.0 -
-
-
last time i cheacked i had a British passport er go i am British
I assume you mean one of these?"In gods name will you go to the country that your affections lie in" Eamon de Valera on ulster unionists, 1948 do you agree or disagree with Eamons sentiments
While it would solve a lot of problems (I wouldn't shed tears if you did decide to show your loyalty this way :pac:). We cannot expect that Unionists will up stake and leave. But the fact of the matter is that we have two sides wanting very different things. Is there any possible way to combine the demands of both sides satisfactorily?0 -
-
I assume you mean one of these?
While it would solve a lot of problems (I wouldn't shed tears if you did decide to show your loyalty this way :pac:). We cannot expect that Unionists will up stake and leave. But the fact of the matter is that we have two sides wanting very different things. Is there any possible way to combine the demands of both sides satisfactorily?
I think we have the best way and that is the GFA, its by no means perfect but atleast it brought the 2 extremes of the DUP and sinn fein right into the spotlight and shackled them together and atleast it has removed the roi's consitutional claim to northern ireland but also has a mechanism for a referendum on a united ireland should the majorty wish it0 -
-
How do you know ? Have you spoken to a million people ?
On numbers, how do you know there are one million?When you do not agree with them you call them out of touch ! Do not forget 100,000 Irishmen volunteered and served with British forces. Many more people were involved in industries supporting the war effort at the time. Far fewer people took part in the Easter rising than that. They were looked on as traitors, spat at and jeered. I am sure they were pockets where that was not the case ; I am talking about the prevalent mood of the people at that point in time.
Newspapers are always out of touch, just look at the standard of journalism these days!
Yes, one of those 100,000(not sure if it was this many for but sakes sake) was my grandfather who was conned by Redmond to 'fight for home rule' via WW1. When he came back, he joined the IRA, now isn't that irony if they were proud to be British? :rolleyes:
Those jeering people you describe were mostly from the small Unionist community here in Dublin who were wealthy. To add, they were not exclusively Protestant, some Catholics of the merchant class thought alike.Maybe there were some people around Bolands Mills in favour of the "terrorists" ( as most people saw them at the time ) - as well as from the media, I know from people whose parents witnessed events that was not typical in Dublin at the time. The other posters pictures of Queen Victoria visiting Dublin and all the Union Jacks out tells its own story. Is'nt that why Dubliners are sometimes called " Jackeens" ? After they were executed + the Republican propoganda machine got going, public sympathy swung a bit, but still far far more people chose to serve in the British forces than ever fought in 1916.
Those 'terrorists' as you call them were freedom fighters. Nice revisionist history there about a republican propaganda machine, that post belongs to the humour forum
You have not stated what your ancestors role in Ireland was in 1916, care to elaborate?
Again, the demographics of Dublin at the time need to be looked at. The minority Unionist community was at the forefront of the mocking, having pics of Queen Vic, hanging Union Jacks, after all alot of the shops were owned by them.
They did not 'chose' to serve, they were urged to serve by the leader of the time Redmond to help Ireland gain Home Rule, a huge con.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement