RIC and DMP to be commemorated this month

Phoebas

Sir Oxman wrote: »

Well, well, well.

So much for the multiple attempts to say eminent experts gave the nod for it.
FG didn't even consult the all-part ctte either, despite multiple posts on here saying so in error (I'll kindly say in error)

This is Flanagans doing with Varadkars backing.
Well done lads, well done.:rolleyes:
FG are sickening.

"In a statement to TheJournal.ie, EAG member and Professor of Modern Irish History at UCD Diarmaid Ferriter said that Minister Charlie Flanagan issued a statement yesterday which, in his view, “misrepresents the position of the Expert Advisory Group (EAG) in relation to commemoration of the RIC”. He said that Minister Flanagan “should not refer to the event on 17 January in Dublin Castle as being as a result of our guidance”.

"He said that what the EAG had in mind “was an academic event – a conference or seminar – that would look at the issue of policing in Ireland during the revolutionary period, including the role of and disbandment of the RIC and the foundation of the Civic Guard, which became An Garda Síochána”.
Ferriter said that the EAG “should not be used by the government as a mudguard to provide cover for itself when it receives negative reaction to its solo runs in relation to commemoration”.

Here's what the expert group recommended:

Expert Advisory Group on Commemorations wrote:

The Advisory Group recommends that the foundation of the Defence Forces and of An Garda Síochána should be commemorated appropriately.
Consideration should also be given to the organisation of specific initiatives to commemorate the Royal Irish Constabulary (RIC) and the Dublin Metropolitan Police (DMP) and to acknowledge their place in history

That's the sum total of what they say about the DMP and RIC

It's a bit rich for Diarmaid Ferriter to now say that his "Advisory Group on Commemorations" had something other than a commemoration in mind, when his report specifically calls for a commemoration.

Plumbthedepths

Seems someone has been less than truthful about the expert groups recommendations.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/historian-accuses-government-of-using-advisory-group-like-a-mud-guard-1.4133051?mode=amp

20silkcut

cherryghost wrote: »

Irish history hasnt changed since 2011. It'd still be a scandalous decision back then. Nothing has changed in that aspect.

The only reason I said it because it was the year the queen was in the garden of remembrance.
It was the year of a British/Irish love in .
I would argue that relationships are gone backward since then.

This decision is up there with the love Ulster bull**** back in 2006.

jimgoose

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Seems someone has been less than truthful about the expert groups recommendations.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/historian-accuses-government-of-using-advisory-group-like-a-mud-guard-1.4133051?mode=amp

Mind you, it's possible that Ferriter is winding his neck back in as well. :pac:

gormdubhgorm

marieholmfan wrote: »

What points do you believe that you are making?

That the DMP and RIC deserve to be remembered as many were Irishmen from this state doing thier job. They just happened to be on the wrong side of history it could easily have gone the other way.

Remembering them also sends out a single to the Unionists in NI which is crucial for future relations in the midst of all these centenaries.

I honestly see nothing wrong with it and the single narrow viewpoint of Irish history needs to be expanded.

is_that_so

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Still hand-waving it all away.

Seem to remember that starting about Maria Bailey too....the better part of a year ago.

It was a civil question and there's no handwaving at all as I have no issues with it. That second bit is disappointing so I'll leave you to your playground taunts. Have a nice day now!

Bridge93

BarryD2 wrote: »

This thread is profoundly depressing reading for anyone with an aspiration for a united peaceful Ireland. We're talking about events of a century ago, best to remember them warts and all and then move on. If people are so mean spirited as regards a simple ceremony to acknowledge the many Irishmen who served in the RIC, what hope is there for any sort of mutual respect for our northern brethren?

I'd love to see a United Ireland in my lifetime but would not vote for it any time soon for a whole multitude of reasons that range from economic to political and most importantly socially. Neither side are ready to accept the other yet, that is plain to see in far more than just this topic (which I feel has limited enough to do with the issue of unification but nonetheless).

An issue i have with this 'remember them warts and all' attitude is where is the line drawn? When the famine 200 year anniversary comes round do we remember John Russell and his Liberal Govt and the appalling 'efforts' they made to appease the suffering? During these 100 year commemorations do we commemorate the Boundary Commission? Or the murders of the Cairo Gang? Where is the line? We'll be marking something everyday if everything is fair game. It should be reserved for significant events and protagonists on the road to successfully achieving independence. Not every man, organisation, event, location that played some role at all in the period.

marieholmfan

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

That the DMP and RIC deserve to be rememebed as many were Irishmen from this state doing thier job. They just happened to be on the wrong side of history it could easily have gone the other way.

Remembering them also sends out a single to the Unionists in NI which is crucial for future relations in the midst of all these centenaries.

I honestly see nothing wrong with it and the single narrow viewpoint of Irish history needs to be expanded.

They are remembered. The question is whether the state should 'honour' their memory.

Plumbthedepths

jimgoose wrote: »

Mind you, it's possible that Ferriter is winding his neck back in as well. :pac:

Don't see what difference it makes to Ferrites considering he won't be seeking anyone's votes.

Bridge93

The Unionists couldnt give less of a fcuk whether an Irish police force from 100 years ago are commemorated or not.

is_that_so

Sir Oxman wrote: »

FG ignored the expert Group, didn't consult the all-party ctte.
Why?
The recommendation was an academic seminar or something similar and that makes perfect sense.

The decade of commemorations is meant to be agreed.
It's funny that the expert group was being lauded for their foresight a few hours ago, now it doesn't matter.
The HARP crowd can have their ceremony as they have done for the past 6 or 7 years but it should not be an approved state commemoration for a force that opposed Irish independence.
All Irish who died in WoI will be commemorated in 2021.

No they didn't. They chose to act on the suggestion but apparently not in the way the expert group meant. There will be more of these contentious commemorations over the next few years as we head into the Civil war years.

Sir Oxman

Phoebas wrote: »

Here's what the expert group recommended:

That's the sum total of what they say about the DMP and RIC

It's a bit rich for Diarmaid Ferriter to now say that his "Advisory Group on Commemorations" had something other than a commemoration in mind, when his report specifically calls for a commemoration.

Read the full statement.
Also, Ferriter specifically outlines FG went on a solo run instead of obtaining agreement from the all-party committee.


Caught in the headlights.

is_that_so

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Don't see what difference it makes to Ferrites considering he won't be seeking anyone's votes.

He's "defending" himself. Some academics are very precise.

Ash.J.Williams

Mr Ferriter is essentially pointing out it's wrong to airbrush history but not necessary to hold a garden party for every aspect of it

buried

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

That the DMP and RIC deserve to be rememebed as many were Irishmen from this state doing thier job. They just happened to be on the wrong side of history it could easily have gone the other way.

What is this utter gibberish about the "wrong side of history" There is no such thing. When the organisation of the RIC were doing their various atrocities they weren't "in history" they were f**king living it and literally doing it! Wrong side of history me crack. I suppose the SS were on "the wrong side of history" were the Khmer Rouge also in this fairy realm of "the wrong side of history" too? Will the lads who flew the planes into the twin towers in 100 years time be commemorated for being "on the wrong side of history" Why not? Same twisted logic isn't it? Absolutely pathetic

Scoundrel

marieholmfan wrote: »

They are remembered. The question is whether the state should 'honour' their memory.

The poster in question is continually ignoring that point.

Hamsterchops

Bridge93 wrote: »

The Unionists couldnt give less of a fcuk whether an Irish police force from 100 years ago are commemorated or not.

You don't think they would dwell on what (might happen) at the commemoration on the 100th anniversary of the end of the RUC.....

All the talk about a United Ireland, yet all the talk about how Horrible the British are/were.

Either you lot Hate the British/Unionists past & present, or you want to unite with them, which is it?

FrancieBrady

is_that_so wrote: »

It was a civil question and there's no handwaving at all as I have no issues with it. That second bit is disappointing so I'll leave you to your playground taunts. Have a nice day now!

You have been 'taunting' people since yesterday by inferring they are over reacting to this.

Exactly the same thing as people were doing on the Bailey thread. Not accusing you of doing it, because I don't know if you did or not.

Sir Oxman

is_that_so wrote: »

No they didn't. They chose to act on the suggestion but apparently not in the way the expert group meant. There will be more of these contentious commemorations over the next few years as we head into the Civil war years.

As I said in a previous post, read the full statement from Ferriter.
It is quite clear and unambiguous - FG failed to follow their recommendations on locally led events and to minimise central events.
Soloheadbeg being an example.
It's very disingenuous now at this point to be fumbling in the dark for any sliver of defence for this govts solo decision to organise this event outside the parameters recommended and without consulting the other Dail parties.


I'm not going to continue rebutting what I can see now are party political defences being deployed.

J Mysterio

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

There are various distinctions though when people use the term black and tans they erroneously refer to all British forces as the Tans.

I noticed Mary Lou made a point of calling it the Tan war.

There was

The British Army
The RIC
The DMP
The Black and Tans (RIC reserve) - the catch all term that is used incorrectly.
The Auxiliary Division of the RIC (ADRIC) - former British Army officers

Within those there were various strains of individual from Criminals to Upright soldiers/police.
They were also from around Ireland, England etc etc

I don't buy into this one size fits all they were all murdering xyz.

Bolded above is the crux of the problem. All these elements are part of a greater RIC whole: what was a tool of the oppressive British aparatus in Ireland.

Ultimately, the RIC imposed British rule here. A rule, which at various times through history banned our language, games, religion, culture, took our land and resources and planted beligerents here. The effects are of course still felt today (e.g. Irish is barely spoken, e.g. the island partioned).

We should be continuing to celebrate the centenary of our winning independence from the British, not the tools of its oppression and control. We have not even yet reached the actual centenary of the creation of the Irish state (2022). Not yet a 100 years later we are a country which is now one of the most progressive in the world. At such a time as this, it's wholly inappropriate to deign to doff the cap to the institutional instrument of our former oppressors, or wrack ourselves with some sort of Stockholm Syndrome guilt or seek to somehow appease admirers of Britain.

It should be acknowledged that as the British progressively lost control of this island due to their impositions and cruelty, so Irelands desire was time and again renewed to cast off the shackles and pursue self determination. This is a constant theme throughout our hundreds of years of shared history. This desire always resulted in an escalation and the British becoming increasingly nasty, and so did their tools of control, in this case the RIC.

Accepting that at one point or another, there may have been a few RIC lads that may have been 'good' in their community or 'needed a job' or whatever, this 'commemoration' is of the RIC as a whole, in all its guises (and so including 'the Black and Tans' and the 'Auxillaries'). It's simply not appropriate for the Irish state to commemorate that. It is also not correct to simplify what is a long and complex history and then say 'this was your police force'. They can not simply be 'rehabilitated' in this way and history can not be scrubbed, sanatised or revised so trivially.

It is complex and so needs to be addressed in a nuanced way, and with more consultation and forethought .

My main issue is the tone of Varadkar in this: "it is regrettable" people do not agree. That to commemorate the RIC is 'mature' and so not to do so is of course 'immature'. That is a gross simplification, it's disrespectful to our history and a disservice to those who fought, died and suffered through British rule before eventually achieving a mostly independent Ireland.

Before I am accused of bitterness or hate - I don't hate the British/ English and I am not bitter, but neither do I forget our difficult history. Let's worry about us and acknowledge how far we have come, Brexit Britain is certainly concentrating on itself.

THE_SHEEP

Calm down , guys and gals . Its just Leo and co " in full swing " !!

No doubt , more " voting for niche agendas " on the way , along with " commemorating / rehashing historical events " , also to suit agendas !!

Its all part of the FG fun and games !!

Enjoy !!

Bridge93

Hamsterchops wrote: »

You don't think they would dwell on what (might happen) at the commemoration on the 100th anniversary of the end of the RUC.....

All the talk about a United Ireland, yet all the talk about how Horrible the British are/were.

Either you lot Hate the British/Unionists past & present, or you want to unite with them, which is it?

I think the event whether it goes ahead or not is so insignificant it will mean absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things. If unionists are at the negotiating table in the year 2100 looking to mark 100 years since the end of the RUC it wont be remebered let alone mentioned. A lot of far more important things have and will happen in the intervening 100 years. Whether unification is one of the we will see.

gormdubhgorm

marieholmfan wrote: »

They are remembered. The question is whether the state should 'honour' their memory.

A commemoration to me is an event where people are remembered there was no mention of 'honouring'.
All the Republican side has famous stories and songs about them. Even Cathal Brugha who was supposed to be a very serious fella, and no craic.

No mention in song about ordinary lads from the other side, during the War of Ind. they have been erased from history.

FrancieBrady

marieholmfan wrote: »

They are remembered. The question is whether the state should 'honour' their memory.

The massive and arrogant miscalculation by Leo, Flanagan etc is the fact that people remember very clearly and they will not be allowed to do this without being called out on it.

Plumbthedepths

is_that_so wrote: »

He's "defending" himself. Some academics are very precise.

It's not Ferriter that needs to defend himself. Flanagan and Ferriter can't both be telling the truth. Unfortunately for Flanagan his profession is not known for honesty or integrity.

Sir Oxman

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

Mr Ferriter is essentially pointing out it's wrong to airbrush history but not necessary to hold a garden party for every aspect of it

J Mysterio wrote: »

Bolded above is the crux of the problem. All these elements are part of a greater RIC whole: what was a tool of the oppressive British aparatus in Ireland.

Ultimately, the RIC imposed British rule here. A rule, which at various times through history banned our language, games, religion, culture, took our land and resources and planted beligerents here. The effects are of course still felt today (e.g. Irish is barely spoken, e.g. the island partioned).

We should be continuing to celebrate the centenary of our winning independence from the British, not the tools of its oppression and control. We have not even yet reached the actual centenary of the creation of the Irish state (2022). Not yet a 100 years later we are a country which is now one of the most progressive in the world. At such a time as this, it's wholly inappropriate to deign to doff the cap to the institutional instrument of our former oppressors, or wrack ourselves with some sort of Stockholm Syndrome guilt or seek to somehow appease admirers of Britain.

It should be acknowledged that as the British progressively lost control of this island due to their impositions and cruelty, so Irelands desire was time and again renewed to cast off the shackles and pursue self determination. This is a constant theme throughout our hundreds of years of shared history. This desire always resulted in an escalation and the British becoming increasingly nasty, and so did their tools of control, in this case the RIC.

Accepting that at one point or another, there may have been a few RIC lads that may have been 'good' in their community or 'needed a job' or whatever, this 'commemoration' is of the RIC as a whole, in all its guises (and so including 'the Black and Tans' and the 'Auxillaries'). It's simply not appropriate for the Irish state to commemorate that. It is also not correct to simplify what is a long and complex history and then say 'this was your police force'. They can not simply be 'rehabilitated' in this way and history can not be scrubbed, sanatised or revised so trivially.

It is complex and so needs to be addressed in a nuanced way, and with more consultation and forethought .

My main issue is the tone of Varadkar in this: "it is regrettable" people do not agree. That to commemorate the RIC is 'mature' and so not to do so is of course 'immature'. That is a gross simplification, it's disrespectful to our history and a disservice to those who fought, died and suffered through British rule before eventually achieving a mostly independent Ireland.

Before I am accused of bitterness or hate - I don't hate the British/ English and I am not bitter, but neither do I forget our difficult history. Let's worry about us and acknowledge how far we have come, Brexit Britain is certainly concentrating on itself.

One short, one long.
Hear, hear.

FrancieBrady

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

A commemoration to me is an event where people are remembered there was no mention of 'honouring'.
All the Republican side has famous stories and songs about them. Even Cathal Brugha who was supposed to be a very serious fella, and no craic.

No mention in song about ordinary lads from the other side, during the War of Ind. they have been erased from history.

How do you know about them if they have been 'erased'.

Over dramatisation perhaps?

People have songs written about them because people want to/think it is worthwhile to, remember them typically.
Does that tell you anything?

banie01

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Either you lot Hate the British/Unionists past & present, or you want to unite with them, which is it?

Remembering what occurred at the hands of the RIC/DMP and indeed when the time comes the RUC!

Does not mean commemoration...
It does not mean ignoring any and all acts of criminality, oppression or collusion.

It means remembering them, acknowledging them, and where possible correcting them.
Accepting that those things happened, that the very nature of the force itself was oppressive and often militantly so.

It means looking at where we are now, and being open to 1 simple fact.
That regardless of political or sectarian tradition we have come a long way, and that we should never allow ourselves to be dragged back.

We do that by ensuring remembrance, not commemoration.
We don't celebrate the actions of those who sought to deny us Statehood.
Rather we remember and acknowledge there was a price paid for our Nationhood.
That many of both traditions laid down quite a lot for that Statehood and we should not diminish our respect for the price paid by celebrating those who sought to extinguish the desire for independence by committing War Crimes and wholesale economic savagery to our nascent nation.

gormdubhgorm

J Mysterio wrote: »

.
Accepting that at one point or another, there may have been a few RIC lads that may have been 'good' in their community or 'needed a job' or whatever, this 'commemoration' is of the RIC as a whole, in all its guises (and so including 'the Black and Tans' and the 'Auxillaries'). It's simply not appropriate for the Irish state to commemorate that. It is also not correct to simplify what is a long and complex history and then say 'this was your police force'. They can not simply be 'rehabilitated' in this way and history can not be scrubbed, sanatised or revised so trivially.

It is complex and so needs to be addressed in a nuanced way, and with more consultation and forethought .

My main issue is the tone of Varadkar in this: "it is regrettable" people do not agree. That to commemorate the RIC is 'mature' and so not to do so is of course 'immature'. That is a gross simplification, it's disrespectful to our history and a disservice to those who fought, died and suffered through British rule before eventually achieving a mostly independent Ireland.

OK yeah that is a fair point maybe specfic a few fellas from the RIC specifically who were proven to be just doing thier duty and not blaguarding, mowing civilians out of it, or burning houses villages.

I was looking up that FP Crozier commander of the Auxileries he hated the carry of the Black and Tans etc. When he retired the British establishment despised him because he told it as it was.
They were not all murderous, ex-con loopers.
There are bound to be plenty more accounts of others in the archives.

I remember reading a book about the war of independence written in the 1930's/40's from the IRA point of view. To call it biased would an understatement.
Irish people have being force fed enough of that guff, it is about time a more rounded history was told. So it can be remembered.
It will be interesting to see what happens when the Civil War centenary arrives, will all the documents be released?
Nowhere to hide there in the Brit v Ireland narrative.

Sir Oxman

Dublin City Council - the 10 who voted against boycotting of Flanagan's event:
Declan Flanagan (FG)
Deirdre Heaney (FF)
Jane Horgan Jones (Lab)
Dermot Lacey (Lab)
Ray McAdam (FG)
Danny Byrne (FG)
Anne Feeney (FG)
Colm O'Rourke (FG)
Terence Flanagan (FG)
James Geoghegan (FG)