Why do people love hating on monuments we inherited from British rule.

walshb

Pkiernan wrote: »

Only because the Irish couldn't.

https://www.libraryireland.com/SocialHistoryAncientIreland/I-III-2.php


Not because they're in some way better.

Look how you treat your own Travellers.

This is absolutely true

Irish people would be no different to any other people. If Irish people had the clout and power and might, they too would have been imperialists and colonisers.

It’s part of human nature and history. People colonise and conquer, not countries. Countries are just made up names by people..

Sure look at the colonisation-brainwashing in Africa and its religions by Irish people..

Imperialism and colonisation should not have any negative connotations...it is what people do..It’s a human trait, specific to ALL people..

larva

Del.Monte wrote: »

Mate, the lockdown seems to be really getting to you. You should try relaxing in front of your TV with a pint of Bass and watch your favourite English soccer team.

with sound off tele while listening to come out ye black and tans on the radio, ya proper Irish

Zebra3

For those posting in here who don't understand basic geography, allow me to part to you a quick lesson.

Britain = England + Scotland + Wales.

whisky_galore

Pkiernan wrote: »

Only because the Irish couldn't.

https://www.libraryireland.com/SocialHistoryAncientIreland/I-III-2.php


Not because they're in some way better.

Look how you treat your own Travellers.

Travellers choose to live outside of mainstream society. A lot of their problems, let's be honest, are of their own making.

Number 1 problem is despite being provided with free education they prefer to withdraw from the school system, because that's what they're supposed to do by tradition.

No amount of money or "faciliteeeees" thrown at them will improve their lot if they can't help themselves first. They should have been force integrated years ago when they might have had a chance.

FVP3

Sean.3516 wrote: »

Did the Nazis give Poles representation in the Reichstag when they controlled Poland? Or the Israelis with Arabs living in the West Bank? We literally had seats in Westminster. That’s not how an occupation works.

They presumably would allowed Germans in Poland ( settlers) and their descendents to vote though, which was largely the situation in Ireland in 1801.

Sean.3516

Zebra3 wrote: »

For those posting in here who don't understand basic geography, allow me to part to you a quick lesson.

Britain = England + Scotland + Wales.

"Britain" is just the name of the island east of Ireland but the full name of the nation of which that island was apart was from 1801 to 1920 "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland". We were an integrated part of the UK from 1801 onwards. We weren't a colony and we weren't under an "occupation".

In 1920 they literally changed the name to "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" because we had become a separate nation state.

Zebra3

Sean.3516 wrote: »

"Britain" is just the name of the island east of Ireland but the full name of the nation of which that island was apart was from 1801 to 1920 "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland". We were an integrated part of the UK from 1801 onwards. We weren't a colony and we weren't under an "occupation".

In 1920 they literally changed the name to "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" because we had become a separate nation state.

Britain and UK are two different things.

Some people don't get that.

And Ireland was under occupation.

Britain had no democratic mandate to be here. The Viceroy (which India also had) wasn't accountable to the Irish people.

Sean.3516

FVP3 wrote: »

They presumably would allowed Germans in Poland ( settlers) and their descendents to vote though, which was largely the situation in Ireland in 1801.

Irish Catholics were allowed to vote as well at that and before but the property qualification meant that many couldn't. In 1791 the property qualification was lowered so anyone paying rental a value of £2 a year could vote which gave votes to a lot of Catholics.

Zebra3

Sean.3516 wrote: »

Irish Catholics were allowed to vote as well at that and before but the property qualification meant that many couldn't. In 1791 the property qualification was lowered so anyone paying rental a value of £2 a year could vote which gave votes to a lot of Catholics.

This is when the Brits were stealing money from Catholics on behalf of the CoI?

Sean.3516

Zebra3 wrote: »

And Ireland was under occupation.

Britain had no democratic mandate to be here. The Viceroy (which India also had) wasn't accountable to the Irish people.

Democratic mandate isn't what determines whether it's an occupation or not. An occupation is when one country maintains military control over another nation to which it had no political connection before the occupation.

For Ireland, this really stopped being the case in 1782 when Ireland is essentially granted the right to legislate for itself in Grattan's Parliament in Dublin. At that point the Viceroy was basically stripped of his power to dictate legislation in Ireland. This gets taken away in 1801 after a failed rebellion when we were absorbed into the UK. But this is also a different situation than pre-1782 because rather than being a colony which we essentially were from 1495 to 1782 we were a part of the UK with actual representation in Westminster. Calling that an occupation is absurd. How could the UK "occupy" itself?

This language of "occupation" really only starts being used from 1916 onwards. Since we declared ourselves an independent republic any British presence remaining in Ireland was by definition an occupation. Literally nobody in Ireland would have used the word "occupation" in the 150 years prior to that.

Junkyard Tom

Sean.3516 wrote: »

For Ireland, this really stopped being the case in 1782.

The RIC was a colonial police force not subject to local, or even national, oversight.

You are wrong.

WesternZulu

Sean.3516 wrote: »

This language of "occupation" really only starts being used from 1916 onwards. Since we declared ourselves an independent republic any British presence remaining in Ireland was by definition an occupation. Literally nobody in Ireland would have used the word "occupation" in the 150 years prior to that.

Nonsense - you're saying that all them rebellions and risings throughout Irish history were not grounded in the sentiment that Ireland was occupied!

FVP3

Sean.3516 wrote: »

Irish Catholics were allowed to vote as well at that and before but the property qualification meant that many couldn't. In 1791 the property qualification was lowered so anyone paying rental a value of £2 a year could vote which gave votes to a lot of Catholics.

They could vote, in an open vote, but only Protestants could take take office.

joseywhales

So are we saying that all we had to do was pass a motion in the Dublin parliament to have an Irish referendum on independence and if it passed we were an independent country recognized by the UK? Since we were not occupied?

Why didn't someone think of this before?

All people could vote right, irregardless of social class and wealth

wow we were always free

Odhinn

joseywhales wrote: »

So are we saying that all we had to do was pass a motion in the Dublin parliament to have an Irish referendum on independence and if it passed we were an independent country recognized by the UK? Since we were not occupied?

Why didn't someone think of this before?

All people could vote right, irregardless of social class and wealth

wow we were always free

Yep, the thousands of troops and armed police force were just here to help with the tourists and getting cats out of trees.

Sean.3516

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

The RIC was a colonial police force not subject to local, or even national, oversight.

You are wrong.

RIC was founded in 1822, Ireland wasn't a colony then. It's jurisdiction was the UK of which Ireland was a part. It wasn't a colonial police force.

Odhinn

Sean.3516 wrote: »

RIC was founded in 1822, Ireland wasn't a colony then. It's jurisdiction was the UK of which Ireland was a part. It wasn't a colonial police force.

.....course it was. All that spying and clamping down on nationalists was for the craic, nothing to do with bolstering the colonial regime.

fly_agaric

Sean.3516 wrote: »

RIC was founded in 1822, Ireland wasn't a colony then. It's jurisdiction was the UK of which Ireland was a part. It wasn't a colonial police force.

A rebellious/breakaway province or entity I suppose.
That's what the modern day imperialists (e.g. CCP) call it I think!

Zebra3

Sean.3516 wrote: »

Democratic mandate isn't what determines whether it's an occupation or not. An occupation is when one country maintains military control over another nation to which it had no political connection before the occupation.

For Ireland, this really stopped being the case in 1782 when Ireland is essentially granted the right to legislate for itself in Grattan's Parliament in Dublin.

But Ireland wasn't given the chance to legislate for itself.

The parliament did not reflect Ireland.

"The majority were excluded, whom were either Roman Catholics or Presbyterians; two-thirds of the members of the House of Commons were returned by small boroughs at the disposal of individual patrons, whose support was bought by the distribution of peerages and pensions."

It'd be like Iraq invading Kuwait and and a Kuwaiti parliament of Iraqis and collaborators voting to be part of Iraq and then claiming the occupation was over.

J Mysterio

walshb wrote: »

Nonsense....

That hatred does nobody no good....

Years in the past now....both nations have an excellent relationship....don't let the faux anti British sentiment fool you. We are infatuated with them if the truth be told.

Eradicate what, exactly? It's history. It happened. You can't eradicate it. It has been and gone.....

Tear down anything that Britain had a hand in? Jaysus, wouldn't be much bloody left...

My view would be that the relationship was approaching excellent up to Brexit.

Three big moments were Cameron's speech and unreserved apology RE Bloody Sunday, McGuiness meeting the Queen and their handshake and her subsequent visit and the worthy speech she gave here.

It has gone badly downhill since Brexit.

Are the Brits at it again?

LillySV

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Are you jokin me?

The Irish were on the receiving end of a policy of expropriation and `ethnic cleansing' every bit as ruthless as that which would be attempted in North America.


Subsistence agriculture -- with any surplus pocketed by an alien landlord class -- condemned the Irish to grinding poverty and, ultimately, starvation.

Is this infrastructure?

By 1820 income of the poor in Briton were nearly two-and-a-half times those in Ireland.


If this infrastructure was so great why were the people so poor? Why were they fleeing by the millions to the US ..fleeing from this great infrastructure??

:pac:

Our infrastructure was a joke compared to the UK.
Compared to most european countries!

We are talkin about infrastructure here, not about how badly the Irish were treated. The fact is that there was railways and roads connecting the whole country ... they had a train out to Connemara ffs.. went over a bridge on the coirib... they wouldn’t be able to achieve that now!!!! By the time the “consultants” come in and the brown envelopes are handout around , it would cost billions!

joseywhales

They would also have to pay workers a fair wage and have decent working condition.....

Sean.3516

Odhinn wrote: »

.....course it was. All that spying and clamping down on nationalists was for the craic, nothing to do with bolstering the colonial regime.

An Garda Siochana was "spying and clamping down" on the IRA in recent decades. Does that make them a colonial police force?

Odhinn

Sean.3516 wrote: »

An Garda Siochana was "spying and clamping down" on the IRA in recent decades. Does that make them a colonial police force?

reductio ad absurdum. There can be no comparison. Ireland was an occupied country.

Sean.3516

FVP3 wrote: »

They could vote, in an open vote, but only Protestants could take take office.

Irish history from the plantations onwards wasn't the Catholics vs Protestants power struggle it's often portrayed as. Irish nationalism had its roots in Protestant settlers in Ireland who wished to work with Catholics to further their rights and achieve self government for Ireland.

Henry Grattan who achieved Home Rule in 1782 was a Protestant and basically started the process of repealing the Penal Laws along with Daniel O'Connell. The 1798 rebellion was actually led by Protestants. Yes it was 1829 before the last of the Penal Laws were repealed and Catholics could sit in Parliament.

In a time when religious sectarianism was the norm the world over, going from no civil rights to full civil rights in 50 years isn't that bad.

Sean.3516

Sean.3516 wrote: »

Irish history from the plantations onwards wasn't the Catholics vs Protestants power struggle it's often portrayed as. Irish nationalism had its roots in Protestant settlers in Ireland who wished to work with Catholics to further their rights and achieve self government for Ireland.

Henry Grattan who achieved Home Rule in 1782 was a Protestant and basically started the process of repealing the Penal Laws along with Daniel O'Connell. The 1798 rebellion was actually led by Protestants. Yes it was 1829 before the last of the Penal Laws were repealed and Catholics could sit in Parliament.

In a time when religious sectarianism was the norm the world over, going from no civil rights to full civil rights in 50 years isn't that bad.

Catholics and Presbyterians werent allowed into or vote for grattan parliment,they made up 66% of irish population

Presbyterians were as much hated as catholics by prodestants here,hence why they had such influence over 1798 rebellion and birth of irish republicanism.......who were its prodestant leaders?

joseywhales

Deleted User wrote: »

Catholics and Presbyterians werent allowed into or vote for grattan parliment,they made up 66% of irish population

Presbyterians were as much hated as catholics by prodestants here,hence why they had such influence over 1798 rebellion and birth of irish republicanism.......who were its prodestant leaders?

Must be FR John Murphy

Zebra3

Sean.3516 wrote: »

Irish history from the plantations onwards wasn't the Catholics vs Protestants power struggle it's often portrayed as. Irish nationalism had its roots in Protestant settlers in Ireland who wished to work with Catholics to further their rights and achieve self government for Ireland.

Henry Grattan who achieved Home Rule in 1782 was a Protestant and basically started the process of repealing the Penal Laws along with Daniel O'Connell. The 1798 rebellion was actually led by Protestants. Yes it was 1829 before the last of the Penal Laws were repealed and Catholics could sit in Parliament.

In a time when religious sectarianism was the norm the world over, going from no civil rights to full civil rights in 50 years isn't that bad.

Hang on a second!!!

Full civil rights?????

In what year????

Del.Monte

Deleted User wrote: »

Catholics and Presbyterians werent allowed into or vote for grattan parliment,they made up 66% of irish population

Presbyterians were as much hated as catholics by prodestants here,hence why they had such influence over 1798 rebellion and birth of irish republicanism.......who were its prodestant leaders?

I hate to break it to you - Presbyterians are Protestants - as for for 1798 Protestant leaders....Lol what religion do you think Lord Edward Fitzgerald, Wolfe Tone and Bagenal Harvey were to name but a few. Fr.Murphy was a minor figure in the whole affair.

Del.Monte

Del.Monte wrote: »

I hate to break it to you - Presbyterians are Protestants - as for for 1798 Protestant leaders....Lol what religion do you think Lord Edward Fitzgerald, Wolfe Tone and Bagenal Harvey were to name but a few. Fr.Murphy was a minor figure in the whole affair.

Proderstants in the nationalist movement? Holy Mary mother of god, Sam Maguire would be turning in his grave.

We should remove any memorials to them forthwith and replace them with statues of good catholic gaelic people, like Robert Emmet and Thomas Davis.