Until I was 16 or 17 I thought the end of our national anthem was a crescendo of airhorns and shouting "G'wan Heffo ya big hoor, give him timber"Quote:
Originally Posted by awec
Printable View
Until I was 16 or 17 I thought the end of our national anthem was a crescendo of airhorns and shouting "G'wan Heffo ya big hoor, give him timber"Quote:
Originally Posted by awec
That might have been a reaction against what FG saw as FF’s appropriation of Amhrán na bhFiann, and the “Sinne fianna fáil, atá fá gheall ag Éirinn” opening rather than the less partisan “Sinne laochra fáil”. But as FF had paid Peadar Kearney and Patrick Heeney’s estate £1,000 for the copyright in 1933 change was unlikely.Quote:
Originally Posted by backtowalsall
Cumann na nGaedheal hoped people would just get used to the anthem and they wouldn’t have the problem of officially adopting one. The air and lyrics were considered substandard for an anthem, and it was often derided as a Sinn Fein marching song. It wasn’t until Col Fitz Brase of the Army School of Music arranged the air that it got some gravitas. Even FF didn’t legislate for it as an anthem.
The most popular alternatives were A Nation Once Again (considered unsuitable while partition remained, and anyway, had been adopted by the Irish Parliamentary Party) Let Erin Remember (which has treachery and serfdom as its theme!) and God Save Ireland (which opens with a triple hanging, and gets progressively less cheerful!). In fact, Sean Lester in the Government publicity department suggested that eminent poets be asked to write new lyrics for Let Erin Remember which could be translated from English to Irish since most of those poets spoke no Irish! Alas, nobody listened and we are where we are.... I like the air, but I think we need new more relevant lyrics.
People like you make me sick. How can our interests be served being in that backward archaic institution? Nobody actually cares about it or gives it any credence. Why do people always wanna hang on the coat tails of Britain as if it will give us some sort of status?Quote:
Originally Posted by backtowalsall
There is a reason. We withdrew from it in 1949. Few of the other countries in it are EU provinces, like we are.Quote:
Originally Posted by backtowalsall
Tiocfaidh, take a chill pill if you're feeling discommoded. It's possible to explore the hypothetical desirability or otherwise of rejoining the Commonwealth without starting posts with "people like you make me sick" - antipathy to posters is contagious, you know. One moment you're feeling it, next you're a carrier...
As it happens, I think we have a very limited view of what the Commonwealth is about, and it has been made so by knee-jerk reactions to anything that threatens our sense of nationhood (without the nature of the threat being spelled out).
There's a lot of research over the last 20 years by historians that suggests our membership of the former British Commonwealth was what actually dragged it into the 20th century, and forced Britain to allow the dominions more authority eg Canada won the right to appoint a High Commissioner to Washington in about 1920, but didn't use the right until after the Free State appointed its HC around 1924. Free State passports from 1924 expunged the phrase "British Subject" from the cover - the Foreign Office was in consternation, but the Dominions Office simply accepted the decision. We need to seriously re-evaluate what we contributed to the Commonwealth and what it might contribute to us today before we resort to atavistic 1910s republicanism (with a deliberate lowercase r).
Ignoring the insult...Quote:
Originally Posted by TiocfaidhArmani
It has got nothing to do with hanging on anyone's coat tails, to suggest that is symptomatic of the chip on the shoulder mentality that has held this country back for generations. This country should be bold enough to define itself positively, rather than by not being part of Britain.
Can you explain to me what a clearly independent nation would have to fear from rejoining the commonwealth, or becoming a commonwealth realm? To my eyes Canada, Australia and New Zealand are no less independent of Britain than former British colonies who have chosen not to be members such as ourselves, the USA and Egypt.
In my opinion OUR interests could be served by taking one or both of those steps, because it could unite all the people of this island in a positive way. Take the commonwealth games for example. From Bantry Bay to Ballycastle the people of this island love their sport. All those people getting behind the same team every four years, under a common flag and anthem would be hugely powerful in allowing unionists to embrace their Irishness. I live in a fairly unionist area of the North, and in the weeks following the rugby Grand Slam kids here started wearing the green for the first time. BOD and the lads did a hell of a lot in 6 and a bit hours of rugby to unite this country in the hearts and minds of all its people.
For me this is about ending partition as quickly as possible, with as little hassle as possible, whilst retaining our independence. I don't think the technicalities and constitutional niceties are terribly important if that can be done, as I believe partition is the biggest problem the Irish nation has faced every day since 07/12/1922, and the biggest problem it will face tomorrow morning. I mean, we could just wait about for 50% + 1 in the North, and then drag Unionism kicking and screaming into Pearce's 32 County Republic, but it has to be better to let unionism reclaim their Irishness over time, and reduce what separates us to the point that everyone simply agrees we would all be better of not paying for 2 of everything.
They don't want to be Irish, they wreck the Irish flag in July, want their own "anthem" in rugby and cricket sung for the Irish team, swear allegiance to the Queen, and pay her taxes, amongst other things. In short, they want nothing to do with Ireland, so my attitude is "leave them be".Quote:
Originally Posted by backtowalsall
What a terribly ill informed post. Everyone born in Northern Ireland is irish (and also british), the clue is in the name. Sure, some of the hard liners try to deny this but that's the way it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by mypost
The rugby team is representative of 2 countries (under 1 rugby association), it's not actually that surprising that the other country would want their anthem sung if the team is playing north of the border. Personally I'm not bothered if it's sung or not.
Have to laugh at your "swear allegiance to the queen and pay her taxes" crap. What do you expect them to do? Every single person north of the border engage in tax evasion? Or do you just want everyone born up there to instantly move south of the border? I imagine the dail might have something to say about that.
It's people like you that give the irish a bad name, and it's people like you that are doing the most damage to the cause for an end to partition.
People who hang Union Jacks and sing anti-Irish songs at sports stadiums, are not doing things that Irish people do. People that desecrate the Irish flag every summer, and openly declare the rest of the year that they want nothing to do with Dublin or Ireland in general, are not Irish imo. I appreciate you see it differently, and technically there may be grounds to support your view, but that's what I think. I have made my point so I'll leave it at that.Quote:
Originally Posted by awec
Is that even a majority of people from unionist background? But sure what would us load a papist RA men know...Quote:
Originally Posted by mypost
btw looking at the photo's of all the Union Flags from 1912 and the fawning over the queen by many just last week, there's an awful lot of non Irish people in this part of the island too.
Seem to be 50,000 Yanks too!:usa::rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Macy
"You know you're a redneck if you think the last words of the National Anthem are "PLAY BALL"" - Jeff FoxworthyQuote:
Originally Posted by Lim till i die