Questioning the Easter rising and other media coverage

Arsemageddon

recipio wrote: »

I struggle to understand why the '16 generation including Redmond would want a one way ticket to independence. Its a bit like Alaska wanting the leave the US ? The British Empire at the time offered security and no end of career opportunities. Of course various factors like WW1, Catholic resentment and land lust were at play.The images of our little army ( which is more of a gendarme ) marching is a bit ironic. A military display was inevitable but could we not have left the schoolchildren out of it ? It would also been good to hear a Unionist like John Taylor put the contrary argument in the media.

The most obvious reason is that the Irish were treated as second class citizens within the UK and measures to remedy this inequality consistently had to be dragged from Britain. Catholic emancipation, land reform, vetoing of Home Rule and the Famine made this starkly clear to people at the time.

Had the British made concessions to Ireland in a timely fashion over the course of the nineteenth century then perhaps things could have been different.

Your comments about the Defence Forces are both obnoxious and ill-informed.

Del.Monte

@ Arsemageddon

Your post is almost conciliatory. Perhaps there's hope of peace yet.

maryishere

recipio wrote: »

I struggle to understand why the '16 generation including Redmond would want a one way ticket to independence. Its a bit like Alaska wanting the leave the US ? The British Empire at the time offered security and no end of career opportunities. Of course various factors like WW1, Catholic resentment and land lust were at play.The images of our little army ( which is more of a gendarme ) marching is a bit ironic. A military display was inevitable but could we not have left the schoolchildren out of it ? It would also been good to hear a Unionist like John Taylor put the contrary argument in the media.

Correct. Pupils being dressed up in IRA para-military uniforms and being given guns is an aabhorrent way to mark the rising. The army visiting every school to delivery a national flag and read the proclamation is wrong and talk about the Rising "heroes" is wrong. Facebook and every school - well many schools - are full of little children extolling the bravery of the 7 leaders.
Indoctrinating children that there are just good fellas and bad fellas in the tapestry of Irish history is wrong on so many levels.
The commeroration committe initially said it would encompass different traditions but it ended up "celebrating" one.
Not surprising a million people north of the border, including many Catholics, do not want a "united" Ireland.

A Dub in Glasgo

Well you are on your crusade to spread the smear

maryishere

maryishere wrote: »

Correct. Pupils being dressed up in IRA para-military uniforms and being given guns is an aabhorrent way to mark the rising. The army visiting every school to delivery a national flag and read the proclamation is wrong and talk about the Rising "heroes" is wrong. Facebook and every school - well many schools - are full of little children extolling the bravery of the 7 leaders.
Indoctrinating children that there are just good fellas and bad fellas in the tapestry of Irish history is wrong on so many levels.
The commeroration committe initially said it would encompass different traditions but it ended up "celebrating" one.
Not surprising a million people north of the border, including many Catholics, do not want a "united" Ireland.

How could it have been anything other than celebrating one tradition though?? and how could they ever encompass unionist ones ( which is I assume what you are getting at )

Those guys have their own annual commemoration and I don't here cries from nationalists to be included in those

I do very much agree with your other point regarding good guys/ bad guys in Irish history , it should never be attempted to be made so black and white or sugar coated even.

jonniebgood1

maryishere wrote: »

Correct. Pupils being dressed up in IRA para-military uniforms and being given guns is an aabhorrent way to mark the rising. The army visiting every school to delivery a national flag and read the proclamation is wrong and talk about the Rising "heroes" is wrong. Facebook and every school - well many schools - are full of little children extolling the bravery of the 7 leaders.
Indoctrinating children that there are just good fellas and bad fellas in the tapestry of Irish history is wrong on so many levels.
The commeroration committe initially said it would encompass different traditions but it ended up "celebrating" one.
Not surprising a million people north of the border, including many Catholics, do not want a "united" Ireland.

Cobblers.
Pupils in paramilitary uniforms, rubbish.
Given guns...., are you for real. Your argument lacks credibility given your hyperbole as quoted.

The rising whether you like it or not was a significant moment in irish history. Since this is a thread on media coverage I will refer to the media coverage which has been largely in praise of how the commemorations have been handled. The programs have been as inclusive as possible, not everyone will want to be involved- particularly the extremes from both sides in the north (some irony there...).

recipio

Deleted User wrote: »

How could it have been anything other than celebrating one tradition though?? and how could they ever encompass unionist ones ( which is I assume what you are getting at )

Those guys have their own annual commemoration and I don't here cries from nationalists to be included in those

I do very much agree with your other point regarding good guys/ bad guys in Irish history , it should never be attempted to be made so black and white or sugar coated even.

No doubt we will have a re-run of all this in 2022. The point is that the legitimacy of the 'rising' is very questionable. It was an attempted coup d'etat against a stable democracy in which we had our vote, the same as the rest of the UK. The commemorations seem to me be pushing a very one sided Nationalist agenda which is best reserved for the 2022 debate. It legitimized violence in Irish society which lingers to this day.

jonniebgood1

recipio wrote: »

No doubt we will have a re-run of all this in 2022. The point is that the legitimacy of the 'rising' is very questionable. It was an attempted coup d'etat against a stable democracy in which we had our vote, the same as the rest of the UK. The commemorations seem to me be pushing a very one sided Nationalist agenda which is best reserved for the 2022 debate. It legitimized violence in Irish society which lingers to this day.

You are missing the point. The celebrations are for the culture and heritage as much as anything else. Noone is claiming that the rebels thought they were democratically elected, they would not be rebels if that were the case.

Grandeeod

maryishere wrote: »

Correct. Pupils being dressed up in IRA para-military uniforms and being given guns is an aabhorrent way to mark the rising.

They weren't. The IRA didn't exist in 1916.

My daughter was dressed up in child attire from the period.

riffmongous

recipio wrote: »

No doubt we will have a re-run of all this in 2022. The point is that the legitimacy of the 'rising' is very questionable. It was an attempted coup d'etat against a stable democracy in which we had our vote, the same as the rest of the UK. The commemorations seem to me be pushing a very one sided Nationalist agenda which is best reserved for the 2022 debate. It legitimized violence in Irish society which lingers to this day.

Really? If you want to see what a one sided agenda actually looks like go up north in July

maryishere

Deleted User wrote: »

How could it have been anything other than celebrating one tradition though??

The rebels who killed unarmed constables and others are heroes while no mention is made of the other strands of Dublin life. Plenty of other people died as well. The unarmed constable shot in Harcourt st was just as heroic and just as Irish as the 7 leaders of the rising. More Irishmen died fighting the Germans that week than all the casulties of the rising ; they were stopping what would have been the invasion of these islands (after Germany invaded Catholic Belgium and France.) Then you would really have known what a colonial master was (after the rape of Belgium). No mention of those Irishmen fighting for our freedom.

Grandeeod wrote: »

My daughter was dressed up in child attire from the period.

Good for you / your daughter

Some other children have been dressed up with face masks of the 1916 rising leaders and strut about for the camera complete with imitation guns.

A Dub in Glasgo

maryishere wrote: »

The rebels who killed unarmed constables and others are heroes while no mention is made of the other strands of Dublin life. Plenty of other people died as well. The unarmed constable shot in Harcourt st was just as heroic and just as Irish as the 7 leaders of the rising

The leaders of the rising affected change, the unarmed cop did not... that is the difference. You may not like that change but that is historical fact that you cannot change. There were ceremonies to remember all who died in the Rising, maybe you missed them in your rush to come on here and sully the Rising

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/1916-centenary-tributes-paid-at-glasnevin-cemetery-1.2588751

Edit because of the edit above

maryishere wrote: »

More Irishmen died fighting the Germans that week than all the casulties of the rising ; they were stopping what would have been the invasion of these islands (after Germany invaded Catholic Belgium and France.) Then you would really have known what a colonial master was (after the rape of Belgium). No mention of those Irishmen fighting for our freedom.

Surely you are aware that there is separate commemoration for WW1? As for the rest, that is shrieking hyperbole

jonniebgood1

maryishere wrote: »

The rebels who killed unarmed constables and others are heroes while no mention is made of the other strands of Dublin life. Plenty of other people died as well. The unarmed constable shot in Harcourt st was just as heroic and just as Irish as the 7 leaders of the rising. More Irishmen died fighting the Germans that week than all the casulties of the rising ; they were stopping what would have been the invasion of these islands (after Germany invaded Catholic Belgium and France.) Then you would really have known what a colonial master was (after the rape of Belgium). No mention of those Irishmen fighting for our freedom.
.

Are you deliberately forgetting about all the commemorations of our fallen heroes from wwi??? Again you are ignoring the facts.

recipio

riffmongous wrote: »

Really? If you want to see what a one sided agenda actually looks like go up north in July

There might not be a 'North' if the 1916 leaders had used their heads instead of forcing their agenda through. However, they were never interested in a democratic solution.It was to be their Catholic Republican State or nothing.

A Dub in Glasgo

recipio wrote: »

There might not be a 'North' if the 1916 leaders had used their heads instead of forcing their agenda through. However, they were never interested in a democratic solution.It was to be their Catholic Republican State or nothing.

What do you think using their heads would look like? forcibly removing the folk who do not recognise democracy from the NE of Ireland?

riffmongous

recipio wrote: »

There might not be a 'North' if the 1916 leaders had used their heads instead of forcing their agenda through. However, they were never interested in a democratic solution.It was to be their Catholic Republican State or nothing.

I'm starting to wonder if the media has been unbalanced by failing to emphasisee the role of the Ulster volunteers and the curragh incident, as they rarely seem to be mentioned.

Grandeeod

recipio wrote: »

There might not be a 'North' if the 1916 leaders had used their heads instead of forcing their agenda through. However, they were never interested in a democratic solution.It was to be their Catholic Republican State or nothing.

So the Plantation of Ulster had nothing to do with it?

micromary

This is just myself and sorry if I upset anyone. Nothing against the Rising which of course was a significant event in Irish history but I am tired of the media overkill. There seems to be nothing but 1916 on Irish media. Seriously thought of taking a holiday abroad to avoid it last week but could not. Glad the whole thing is over.

Disgruntled Badger

jonniebgood1 wrote:

What are peoples views of this narrative. Without judging the Rising I think it is good to at least look at it from both sides of the argument. What are peoples views on the media coverage of the commemorations thus far???

There were less than a handful of programmes challenging the preferred narrative of the political classes, or academics who might differ from that opinion.

RTE, in particular, has romanticised it in favour of the rebels. Debating its justification or not on prime time, but then putting out hours of commemorative matter, especially on news broadcasts, and Indepth biographies of the rebel protagonists, their values and views, and their eventual executions.

There has been virtually no mention of those who were not executed and went on to rule, De Valera, Collins etc, who themselves held very different views of the merits of the rising afterwards, but you can't escape an unrepentant Countess Markovitz, who has been massively over credited with her involvement.

I think what has been most worrying is the heavy focus on kids. Flag ceremonies in schools, young children being rolled out in front of cameras reading the proclamation. As these kids grow up, unless they study history in depth, will have this ladybird book version of the events.

On the other hand, has this all been anything other than a day out for most. Judging by the smaller than expected crowds, in part due to the Luas strikes, it will become as relevant as 1798 or any of the other failed rebellion, and people will go back to knowing where they are but ignorant and ambivalent to how they got there.

Grandeeod

micromary wrote: »

This is just myself and sorry if I upset anyone. Nothing against the Rising which of course was a significant event in Irish history but I am tired of the media overkill. There seems to be nothing but 1916 on Irish media. Seriously thought of taking a holiday abroad to avoid it last week but could not. Glad the whole thing is over.

Your opinion is an honest one and I personally appreciate it because it's not filled with vitriol and simply expresses that you are pissed off with it at this stage. I completely take you point.

A Dub in Glasgo

Disgruntled Badger wrote: »

There has been virtually no mention of those who were not executed and went on to rule, De Valera, Collins etc, who themselves held very different views of the merits of the rising


Judging by the smaller than expected crowds, in part due to the Luas strikes, .

The next 6 years will have plenty to say about all that

What was the expected crowd numbers and how does it compare with reality?

Disgruntled Badger

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

What was the expected crowd numbers and how does it compare with reality?

Well bigger than St Patrick's Day for instance. Didn't come close

A Dub in Glasgo

Disgruntled Badger wrote: »

Well bigger than St Patrick's Day for instance. Didn't come close

Says who?

jonniebgood1

Disgruntled Badger wrote: »

Judging by the smaller than expected crowds, in part due to the Luas strikes, it will become as relevant as 1798 or any of the other failed rebellion, and people will go back to knowing where they are but ignorant and ambivalent to how they got there.

Not sure what crowds you expected badger but im sorry to inform you .......
http://www.irishexaminer.com/video/news/1916-centenary-commemoration-draws-huge-crowds-to-capital-as-thousands-join-dignitaries-for-historic-ceremony-389751.html

Or
http://utv.ie/News/2016/03/27/Massive-crowds-attend-1916-centenary-commemorations-56405

Or

http://m.rte.ie/news/ireland/2016/0327/777698-easter-rising/

Or


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-3510998/Large-crowds-expected-Easter-Rising-centenary-events.html

What are ya on about small crowds?

Disgruntled Badger

jonniebgood1 wrote:

Not sure what crowds you expected badger but im sorry to inform you .......

I don't see any figures here...but I did see lots of empty streets

A Dub in Glasgo

Disgruntled Badger wrote: »

I don't see any figures here...but I did see lots of empty streets

Talking of figures

'What was the expected crowd numbers and how does it compare with reality? '

Disgruntled Badger

Disgruntled Badger wrote: »

I don't see any figures here...but I did see lots of empty streets

Who needs figures ???? Anyone who can see and watched TV yesterday could tell you the empty streets you mention were ones not along the parade route

Or maybe you mean the empty streets along the alternative SF parades held across the country ?

jonniebgood1

Note: Off topic posts deleted back to last reference to media.

Any queries on this by PM.

Moderator.

a148pro

maryishere wrote: »

Plenty of other people died as well. The unarmed constable shot in Harcourt st was just as heroic and just as Irish as the 7 leaders of the rising. More Irishmen died fighting the Germans that week than all the casulties of the rising ;

I agree that it would have been nice to acknowledge those who died in WW1 at the same time because the two events are quite closely linked and the losses of life in both so tragic, but in fairness as others pointed out there are separate commemorations for WW1. In so far as people have pointed to the lack of support for the rising at the time I suspect that was intrinsically linked to the fact that so many Irish were off fighting in WW1.

I also think the civilians and indeed RIC and British soldiers should have been acknowledged. The rebels did not go out wanting to engage in gratuitous slaughter and I don't think they would have begrudged an acknowledgement of those losses this far on. I was watching the Tg4 rerun of the documentary on MacDiarmada and was reminded of his words from I presume, one of his letters from Kilmainham before his execution, where he said he was going to his grave without any ill will to anyone.

But the comparisons to terrorism are not well made (unless confined to perhaps the belief in the blood sacrifice referred to in the proclamation and clearly to the fore in Pearse's mind). The rebels fought essentially for equal rights for all, something which remains a commendable (and arguably as yet unattained) goal. They didn't kill on the basis of sectarianism or imposing one religion over others as the terrorists they are being compared to.

I am looking forward to reading / listening / watching (and hopefully de-constructing:)) some of the critical analyses of the rising over the next while, including the ones posted already above. Anyone got any more?