are Irish people actually calling the rising terrorism?

Victor

briangriffin wrote: »

Penal laws? British governance of Ireland?

The penal laws were Irish laws, voted by and implemented by an Irish parliament in Ireland, that many a British government were embarrassed about at the time.

jack923 wrote: »

I doubt the catholic church would have stole all the food and let millions starve to death

Mother Teresa was more interested in sending people to heaven than using the church's assets to help them.

fran17

Phoebas wrote: »

If people had waited for the promised implementation of the 1914 Home Rule Act we would have got concentration camps instead?

That's quite a stretch.

Not really though.When you consider concentration camps by their definition and park the Nazi Germany element to one side.

noodler

Fairly predictable thread.

Some people aren't willing to have long standing misperceptions challenged.

baldbear

fran17 wrote: »

Really,peaceful and democratic means.This being the same colonial power which brought to our shores the plantations,Cromwellian conquests and the famine.If history has taught us anything about the British Empire and its eventual retreat from its colonies its that peace and democracy is far far down their list of priorities.If we had engaged in peaceful and democratic means I fear our history books would include chapters similar to Boar war concentration camps,Amritsar massacres,Cyprus internment and Kenyan camps.Peace and democracy my eye.
And the Catholic church being responsible for worse oppression than the British,well that's just ill founded.Sure,its popular to say in 2016 but still grossly ill founded.

We were heading for independence after the home rules acts anyway. It would have been still a divided country to keep the peace up North with the majority unionists.

But at least their would of been thousands left alive.

Eugene Norman

wnolan1992 wrote: »

There's a huge difference between acknowledging that the methods used in 1916 were similar to terrorist actions of the current time, and not being immensely proud that those people carried out those actions which set us on the course we've followed over the past 100 years to lead us to the present day.

If you want to celebrate the Rising, at least acknowledge what it actually was. It was dudes butchering other dudes for a political aim. Just because I agree with their aim, and ultimately their aim was achieved, doesn't change that.

It wasn't terrorism in the modern sense as it didn't target civilians. It wasn't terrorism in the older sense as it wasn't a state act of terror.

wnolan1992

baldbear wrote: »

We were heading for independence after the home rules acts anyway. It would have been still a divided country to keep the peace up North with the majority unionists.

But at least their would of been thousands left alive.

Or alternatively, the Home Rule Bill could have been enacted, the country could have erupted into civil war between pro-HR people, full independence or nothing people, and Unionists. The ensuing chaos over the next five years would have brought the country to its knees, the HR bill would have been overturned because Britain would have said "Jesus these lads can't be trusted to rule themselves."

Then, at the outbreak of WW2, Ireland would have been invaded and used as a staging ground for German attacks, causing hundreds and thousands of deaths.



See? That's the problem with alternate history. There's always another alternate.

Eugene Norman

baldbear wrote: »

We were heading for independence after the home rules acts anyway. It would have been still a divided country to keep the peace up North with the majority unionists.

But at least their would of been thousands left alive.

There was no way home rule was going to happen peacefully. Probably the UVF would have gone on a murdering rampage or the British army in Ireland would have revolted, or mutinied.

Eugene Norman

Victor wrote: »

The penal laws were Irish laws, voted by and implemented by an Irish parliament in Ireland, that many a British government were embarrassed about at the time.

Ludicrous. It was a Protestant only parliament of landowners installed by the British. Anti Catholic legislation survived the union as well.

12Phase

I think you've got to distinguish between the UK in 1916 and now though. They're very, very different places.

In many ways the UK then and how it behaved is probably more akin to Putin's Russia now. Aggressive, territorial, land grabbing, saw nothing wrong with brutally putting down a political movement for independence and so on.

You'd a relative fresh history of a famine occurring under British administration - a living memory then. You'd on going issues with deep poverty and an ingrained and formalised class system.

Britain like several other former empires in Europe went through a total transformation in the post WWII era which saw them all morph into modern, liberal, social democracies.

The bit I find hard to take is that Ireland's revolutionaries had high ideals that weren't ever lived up to. We ended up creating a hugely conservative and socially oppressive state that was for much of the 20th century being far more oppressive than the very oppressors we had thrown off.

The scandals of things like the industrial schools, the Magdalene laundries, the use of state power to socially engineer the country to suit Catholic Church policies, lack of divorce, lack of contraception and so on are absolutely contrary to the the ideals of this progressive, modern republic we spend so much time talking about.

Living up to the idea of creating an actual republic with real values of transparency, democracy, secularity (division of church and state), freedom of expression (not a history of deep conservative censorship and book banning etc etc) would be more of a tribute those men and women than some military parade up and down O'Connell St that we'll all forget about in a few years anyway.

Eugene Norman

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Well the reality is the rising didn't have popular support, and many saw it as an insult to the men who were putting bread on the table back home by fighting in the war.

If the rising didn't have any popular support at some level then killing the protagonists wouldn't make people vote for Sinn Fein. It's not as if we become pro-Isis because some of its members get killed by police or kill themselves.

m1ck007

Based on a few posts on this thread, the americans and british are the biggest terrorists on the planet. Period

Barlett

I think it's very easy to sit here & judge others for their actions 100 years ago. We now live in a republic & for that I am grateful.

Mourinho

No their not. I have never heard anyone in real life spouting this guff.

The only place I've ever witnessed this and other "being ashamed to be Irish" rubbish is on this site which is far removed from the general attitudes and opinions of the vast vast majority of people as you can get.

Arkady

Barlett wrote: »

I think it's very easy to sit here & judge others for their actions 100 years ago. We now live in a republic & for that I am grateful.

A Banana Republic, where we swapped the British gangsters for Irish ones.

Even the Brits didn't saddle the ordinary Irish people with the private debts of the super rich for generations to come . . .

42% of Europe’s banking crisis paid by the Irish people . . .

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/42-of-europes-banking-crisis-paid-by-ireland-219703.html

but sure as long as we can wave coloured flags at the lorry trailer people like charlie, bertie, enda, and jarry sit outside the GPO we're grand . . .

noodler

m1ck007 wrote: »

Based on a few posts on this thread, the americans and british are the biggest terrorists on the planet. Period

That's fine. Period.

You don't need an example in another country to justify what is being discussed here. Period.

Fr Tod Umptious

Eugene Norman wrote: »

If the rising didn't have any popular support at some level then killing the protagonists wouldn't make people vote for Sinn Fein. It's not as if we become pro-Isis because some of its members get killed by police or kill themselves.

Yes there was support for groups like the citizen army and the Irish Volunteers, but the people involved in the rising were a minority of a minority of a minority.

As we all know it was the executions afterwards that helped turn the tide towards SF, but I believe the conscription crisis later may have been a bigger factor.

There is a very good lecture serires from a UCD proferssor on podcast that goes through the whole thing from the home rule crisos right up to the 3rd Dail or so, well worth a listen.

K-9

More suited to History and Heritage really, plus a good few posts are below the standard expected in the forum.