1916 Centenary

Noticed this on another board. At least one bigoted view.
http://www.wsc.co.uk/forum-index/28-...6-and-all-that

See good and bad coming out of it all this year.

Celebrating failure and the creation of a Catholic Elite... discuss

Perfectly described Bonnie.

If Maxwell did not order the killing of the rebel leaders and they were just prisoners, this event would just be a small memory today.

Sorry, not sure I'll be discussing it here - I might head to an English football forum to show my disgust at the modern Ireland and display my republicanism...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheBoss

Perfectly described Bonnie.

If Maxwell did not order the killing of the rebel leaders and they were just prisoners, this event would just be a small memory today.

---

Not so I agree with Bonnie - there was already a Catholic Elite by that stage.

Hard to know how it would've played out without the executions. Would there have been the impetus for the War of Independence? Would Home Rule have been implemented, which could’ve taken the sting out of an armed campaign? A lot of "What If's" with no definitive answer imo.

It's only the 6th of Jan, but every time I see something to reference 1916 - I wish it was 2017 already.

Yeah, my thoughts exactly. Hopefully it will peter out after Easter.

Ironic twist?
http://www.irishnews.com/news/2016/0...am=ds1.2rif76F

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/ne...-34335257.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheBoss

Perfectly described Bonnie.

If Maxwell did not order the killing of the rebel leaders and they were just prisoners, this event would just be a small memory today.

---

That's what I always maintained when discussing it. When I first went to Kilmainham Gaol I was just aghast at how stupid the Brits were with the executions. Especially of that of Connolly. Mindboggling.

When I think of how Redmond got shafted by the whole thing and it gets me so mad.
It just shows how often we stuck our foot in it. See Parnell's fall from grace...

I hated the Rising as a kid as it moreorless sowed the seeds of partition and I have no pride or want to celebrate or commemorate partition.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macy

Sorry, not sure I'll be discussing it here - I might head to an English football forum to show my disgust at the modern Ireland and display my republicanism...


Not so I agree with Bonnie - there was already a Catholic Elite by that stage.

Hard to know how it would've played out without the executions. Would there have been the impetus for the War of Independence? Would Home Rule have been implemented, which could’ve taken the sting out of an armed campaign? A lot of "What If's" with no definitive answer imo.

---

I think the war of Independence doesn't happen without the Rising in the fashion that it occurred. Home Rule would have softened any want for "Independence" straight away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BonnieShels

When I think of how Redmond got shafted by the whole thing and it gets me so mad.
It just shows how often we stuck our foot in it. See Parnell's fall from grace...

I hated the Rising as a kid as it moreorless sowed the seeds of partition and I have no pride or want to celebrate or commemorate partition.

---

Surely it was northern Unionist opposition to Home Rule that sowed the seeds of partition?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macy

Surely it was northern Unionist opposition to Home Rule that sowed the seeds of partition?

---

You could say that as well. But there's a consideration to be made that Northern Unionist opposition to HR was always in existence.

Despite the Covenant and this opposition; HR was going ahead once the war was over. (Bear in mind that no one thought that WWI was gonna last til 1918)

What I feel the Rising did was solidify the fomenting "us v them", Dublin v Belfast attitude. This made partition inevitable. It was a perfect storm of ****-up after ****-up since Parnell that brought us to where we are.

Once the Rising failed and the instigators became martyrs the similarities between Unionism and Nationalism petered out and the "us v them" attitudes became more entrenched than before.

When you consider from what the United Irishmen had developed from this is a huge change in attitudes within 100 years or so.

Was asked to put something together today for Proclamation Day at work. Guaranteed I'll annoy somebody. It's the little motivators that mean so much!:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eminence Grise

Was asked to put something together today for Proclamation Day at work. Guaranteed I'll annoy somebody. It's the little motivators that mean so much!:D

---

Are DIT doing anything officially?

Please have Ruth Dudley-Edwards on your list.

It's the FE college where I work full-time. I'm sure DIT will get round to organising something, probably around 2017 or so.:D It's all about the merger at the moment, so we're not supposed to think about separatism. Or revolution! I don't know yet if it's going to be confined to our students/staff or open to the public. If it's the latter will I send you the details?

I'm a post-revisionist, Bonnie. I view Ruth Deadly Edwards and her ilk with the same scepticism as anything published by Mercier and Collins Press!! That's why I know I'll tread on some bunions, but in fairness, that's something to look forward to!

[QUOTE=BonnieShels;1854254

I hated the Rising as a kid as it moreorless sowed the seeds of partition and I have no pride or want to celebrate or commemorate partition.
[/QUOTE]
Poppycock Bonnie and that doesn't read as the sentiments of a kid.
In northern parts of Ireland the seeds of partition were sown decades before the 1916 rising, with roots going way back to the plantation.
Partition was not caused or reinforced by the 1916 rising, where on earth do you get such ideas from?
Do you not have a basic overview of British imperialism around the world ,in the 18C, 19C and 20C?

Of course, it's a healthy development in terms of historical debate that the old personality cults surrounding Pearse and Dev have long been slain, even if Connolly is now in danger of becoming another sacred cow (clearly as a participant he can't have been a committed democrat). As for the Rising approach, it's fair to say it acted as an accelerant of political change, even if to celebrate it risks endorsing the Provo campaign. Still, the failure to enforce the enacted Home Rule Act, and the expansion of partition to six counties demonstrates Redmond's political impotence, so while devolution was on the tanle by 1920, to state that any concession would have occurred without the Rising is an unprovable counterfactual. Finally, commemoration should be placed in the historical context, alongside the Battle of the Somme and international developments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by geysir

Poppycock Bonnie and that doesn't read as the sentiments of a kid.
In northern parts of Ireland the seeds of partition were sown decades before the 1916 rising, with roots going way back to the plantation.
Partition was not caused or reinforced by the 1916 rising, where on earth do you get such ideas from?
Do you not have a basic overview of British imperialism around the world ,in the 18C, 19C and 20C?

---

I agree Geysir. I've noticed a little bit of snobbery and belittling from certain quarters in the run up to the centenary celebrations and the faux-intellectual "analysis" really gets under my skin. These men were proud nationalists one and all who laid their lives down for independence. They deserve a lot better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by culloty82

Of course, it's a healthy development in terms of historical debate that the old personality cults surrounding Pearse and Dev have long been slain, even if Connolly is now in danger of becoming another sacred cow (clearly as a participant he can't have been a committed democrat). As for the Rising approach, it's fair to say it acted as an accelerant of political change, even if to celebrate it risks endorsing the Provo campaign. Still, the failure to enforce the enacted Home Rule Act, and the expansion of partition to six counties demonstrates Redmond's political impotence, so while devolution was on the table by 1920, to state that any concession would have occurred without the Rising is an unprovable counterfactual. Finally, commemoration should be placed in the historical context, alongside the Battle of the Somme and international developments.

---

A lot more poppycock in parts, nothing wrong with Connolly, the Rising/Provos of circa 100 years ago, were worlds apart from the more modern version, never mind the likes of IS FFS.
The impotence thing may be valid, but of course there would have been no devolution without 1916. Or for instance the GFA 80 years later, without the more prelonged and clumsier slaughter that preceded that.

As for the Somme, without belittling those that died, just a coincidence in 4 years of brutal slaughter in much of the Northern hemisphere.

A good read from Diarmaid Ferriter on Boris Johnson's patronising praise for our 1916 centenary commemorations last year: http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/di...aise-1.2987112

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diarmaid Ferriter

There has been much justifiable comment in recent years about the extent to which Anglo-Irish relations have improved, but maybe you can have too much of a good thing.

That was the conclusion I came to on receiving a bizarre invitation earlier this month.

It was from the British ambassador to Ireland, Robin Barnett, to a reception in the British embassy in Dublin “to congratulate those who delivered the remarkable 2016 commemorations”.

I found that idea inappropriate and patronising, so I did not attend, and that is just as well, because it was subsequently reported that at the reception a letter was read out from the British foreign secretary, Boris Johnson.

In it, he praised the commemorations as they “struck exactly the right note”, with “the utmost tact and delicacy combined with a profound understanding of the past and its relationship with the present” as well as “an abiding sense of reconciliation”.

Johnson also wrote that it was “entirely fitting” that President Michael D Higgins had attended events to mark the centenary of the Battle of the Somme.

Indeed he did, but perhaps Johnson missed the speech by President Higgins last year when he referred to the violent, “supremacist and militant imperialism” of Britain a century ago.

Johnson always has a fine welcome for himself and Britain’s glorious past.

He was centre stage in the Brexit referendum and trumpeted all sorts of damaging nonsense about making Britain great again, “getting our country back” and insisting “now is the time to believe in ourselves, and in what Britain can do, and to remember that we always do best when we believe in ourselves”.

What a monstrous lie that is, or what the late journalist AA Gill more gently dismissed as “snorting a line of that most pernicious and debilitating Little English drug, Nostalgia”.

We, of all people, should be aware of the potency of that drug given the record of British imperialism in Ireland and other colonies.

...

---

That looked like the beginning of an interesting exchange of views between Geysir, Bonnie & SkStu but alas, it never really got off the ground. Disappointing. :(