Commemorate 1798 with a 'United Irishmen' Day petition

Nodin

Bond-007 wrote: »

Just because there are no unionist parties in the south don't mean there are none here. You do realise there are orange lodges in the south. I would bet money that the members are unionists.

Theres a few in Donegal allright. The head of one bought me a pint when I was a lad many years ago....discussion of politics wasn't the done thing though. As for affiliation obviously there were (and presumably are) certainly some of a loyalist/unionist persuasion south of the border, but they would be few and far between.

brianthebard

I haven't heard many complaints from Unionists about the monuments to 1798 that are scattered across the country (I'm sure everyone knows of a local one) why should a bank holiday be any different? Its not as if it would even be 'imposed' on the North.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

FTA69

donegalfella wrote: »

You can't ignore the fact that generations of radical republicans have used the United Irishmen's legacy to further their militant separatist agenda.

Indeed, the United Irishmen were the founders of Irish Republicanism, an ideology which stressed egalitarianism and Irish independence. I don't see anything negative in that, you might view the concept of Irish Republicanism as abhorrent, I don't, and I doubt most Irish people view the concept of Irish seperatism from the British Empire as abhorrent either.

Mention Wolfe Tone today, and many people will think of the Irish rebel music band that co-opted his name and associated it with songs such as "The Rifles of the IRA."

I would say that if you mentioned Theobold Wolfe Tone most people would think of 1798 and the United Irishmen to be honest.

As such, you have to consider not only the original intentions of the United Irishmen, but how their legacy has been manipulated, exploited, and even distorted over the course of the past 209 years.

I take pride in the United Irishmen, the same way I take pride in all those who devoted their lives to the cause of Irish freedom.

You also have to appreciate that, for the unionist, Ireland has never been a "colony."

I couldn't care less what anyone thinks in that regard, whether Unionist or otherwise. The fact was Ireland was colonised, completely colonised, it was only our proximity to Britain which led to us being politically tied to them in 1801.

It has never been the victim of "imperialism." The "concept of Irish freedom" means only the endorsement of unwanted and even traitorous separatism.

And so what? Of course Unionists saw merit in the union, it provided them with the means of gaining political, cultural and economic hegemony in Ireland. They formed the ascendancy of this country, of course they would view any ideology opposing that with disdain. French Algerians probably viewed Ben Bella as a suubversive traitor too, it didn't mean he was though. Why the fear of confronting Unionist assumptions?

FTA69

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I agree with that actually, Easter Monday provides ample oppurtunity to serve as a national day of remembrance.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

A Dub in Glasgo

Libertarian individualist?

You will take decades to explain that one to the electorate!!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Joey the lips

Anybody know who is the originators of this petition? Dont say petitions on line,

O'Coonassa

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

That fecker ruined this country :mad:

Nodin

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I actually don't know where to start with that.....Suffice to say thats not my concept of Republicanism nor do I believe it to be that of PSF. Certainly the SF that became the Workers Party were pointing their ship in that direction, but they're gone with the wind now....

Nodin

O'Coonassa wrote: »

That fecker ruined this country :mad:

Aye, we were better off taken heads and robbin cattle. There was at least an honesty in it.

Cavehill Red

Joey the lips wrote: »

Anybody know who is the originators of this petition? Dont say petitions on line,

http://skinflicks.blogspot.com/2009/05/commemorate-1798.html

Joey the lips

Cavehill Red wrote: »

http://skinflicks.blogspot.com/2009/05/commemorate-1798.html

and who in the name of god is jcskinner and does he really care about politics!

FTA69

You will take decades to explain that one to the electorate!!

Decades? Try centuries! Sure the auld peasants in this country wouldn't even know who Theobold Wolfe Tone was!

DF,

As a libertarian individualist, I find both movements in the province antithetical to virtually everything I believe in.

Just to clarify, Irish Republicanism and to a lesser extent Irish Unionism, are not confined to "the province" and predate the existence of the northern state.

The Republican movement is intolerant, violent, statist, and collectivist

Well I disagree that Republicanism is intolerant, elements of it have been in the past but generally it is built on pluralist and egalitarian foundations. The violence employed by Republicans has usually been a response to the conditions in which it found itself, ie it isn't inherently bound to arms or armed struggle (although again a few elements of it are.) As for it being statist and collectivist, I don't see that as a bad thing as I view co-operation and collectivism as the natural methods of organising human society. Social cannibalism (or "individualism" as you call it) doesn't appeal to me at all. But perhaps that's a debate for a different thread.

The question we are debating here, though, is the foisting of nationalistic perspectives on the country as a whole.

I don't think a national day of remembrance would be "foisting" anything, rather it would serve as a reminder of the ideals which forged the concept of Irish freedom. However, Easter Monday is a perfect time to do that, so I don't see any need for new holidays.

Unfortunately, not caring less what others think leads to a dangerously exclusivist perspective on history and politics. In reality, your interpretation of history is only one among many possible interpretations.

I never said I didn't care about what others think full stop, rather I would be very dismissive of the notion that Ireland wasn't colonised. If someone wants to bend over backwards in order to justify the centuries of repression that went on in this country then leave them off, but I won't be entertaining them.

A British monarch has ruled over Northern Ireland since 1169, at which time Genghis Khan was approximately five years old. You can't sweep away 840 years of history just like that—as generations of revolutionaries have discovered.

Unionists in their current incarnation have been here for 400 years. Neither do genuine Republicans advocate "sweeping away" the Unionists far from. I view Unionists as equal to anyone else on this country, they were born and raised here and as such they have as equal claim to this country as anyone else. That having been said, I also acknowledge the fact they are a minority in this country, and as such have no right to over-rule the wishes of the rest of the country in order to set up a sectarian state in Ireland.

brianthebard

Just to note, unionism and the possibility of people identifying with the union can only be traced back as far as the Act of Union, so I would say their current incarnation is less than 200 years. Besides which the possibility of a partitioned Ulster was only conceived in the 1910s. So we are talking about a very recent phenomenon, which is separate from 1798.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

gurramok

That part you labelled red still has a substantial population that identifies with the part marked green hence they belong to this country.

An artificial line drawn in 1922 does not divide a nation.

sink

gurramok wrote: »

That part you labelled red still has a substantial population that identifies with the part marked green hence they belong to this country.

An artificial line drawn in 1922 does not divide a nation.

All land dividing lines drawn on a map are artificial!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

gurramok

sink wrote: »

All land dividing lines drawn on a map are artificial!

Which never divide a nation. Ask the Koreans

donegalfella wrote:

This post has been deleted.

No, as we were not united with New York state previously. We were united under British rule pre-1922, you can't wriggle out of that one

sink

gurramok wrote: »

Which never divide a nation. Ask the Koreans

Nation states are intangible arbitrary social constructs invented by humans. They have no inherent value beyond some vague emotional attachment related to tribal instinct. From a purely objective perspective they are barriers to prosperity and sources of conflict, completely absent of merit.

gurramok

sink wrote: »

Nation states are intangible arbitrary social constructs invented by humans. They have no inherent value beyond some vague emotional attachment related to tribal instinct. From a purely objective perspective they are barriers to prosperity and sources of conflict, completely absent of merit.

So lets scrap Ireland, EU and nation states within it and outside it as they are.

Roll on the Utopia?:rolleyes:

Souljacker

gurramok wrote: »

So lets scrap Ireland, EU and nation states within it and outside it as they are.

Roll on the Utopia?:rolleyes:

You should read Benedict Arnold's 'Imagined communities' nation states are a concept conceived from the French revolution. If History has taught us anything it's that nothing lasts forever least of all political systems.

No, the end of nationhood will not bring us closer to utopia, but nationhood is far from ideal and has been minipulated by those in power to cause conflict for as long as it has existed.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

brianthebard

Therefore, New York is ours for the taking?

Sand

It seems so...

Happy Monday

gurramok wrote: »

That part you labelled red still has a substantial population that identifies with the part marked green hence they belong to this country.

An artificial line drawn in 1922 does not divide a nation.

All nations by their nature are artifically drawn - look at the USA for example.

sink

gurramok wrote: »

So lets scrap Ireland, EU and nation states within it and outside it as they are.

Roll on the Utopia?:rolleyes:

No, i'm not calling for any extreme action. To prematurely attempt to abolish nations could lead to civil strife as many people are strongly emotionally attached to their artificial nation and would resist with force any move to abolish it. We are moving slowly towards a future without nation states with proto-world governance already taking shaping in the form of institutions like the UN and the EU. As more laws and rules are placed upon nation states it is almost inevitable that one day the concept of sovereignty will been seen as archaic and outdated.

junder

gurramok wrote: »

That part you labeled red still has a substantial population that identifies with the part marked green hence they belong to this country.

An artificial line drawn in 1922 does not divide a nation.

perhaps in your Mysty eyed world maybe but in the real world. Northern Ireland is a separate nation as recognized by international law so as such no unionists are not the minority in their country. Let me ask you this are you against Scottish independence?