Should the 1981 Hungerstrike be Comemorated by the State?

Rovers'Til IDie · 23/10/2006, 11:23 AM

Originally Posted by Lim till i die

I think it opens quite a can of worms.
:

Opening up a can of worms might be a bit insensitive, considering what they went through.
The state wouldn't be interested in a commemoration and besides Gerry 'I'm not a brit spy (honest)' Adams and Martin 'neither am I (honest)' McGuinness are the ones who decide where and when the memory of the hunger strikers is used or abused.

**Partizan** · 23/10/2006, 11:28 AM

Always knew that the Provies were riddled with MI5 spies. Though in saying that, the struggle of the Hunger Strikers bear very little resemblance to the policies of PSF today who have all sense in purpose have sold out. The State if it ever did try to commemorate them would as pointed out in earlier posters smack of gross hypocracy and cynical vote catching.

Then again anything is possible with FF.

Rovers'Til IDie · 23/10/2006, 11:34 AM

Originally Posted by Partizan

Always knew that the Provies were riddled with MI5 spies. Though in saying that, the struggle of the Hunger Strikers bear very little resemblance to the policies of PSF today who have all sense in purpose have sold out.

The hunger strikes was where it all began for adams & co., they started using the hunger strikers as Sinn fein promotional material.

**dcfcsteve** · 23/10/2006, 12:45 PM

Originally Posted by Partizan

Though in saying that, the struggle of the Hunger Strikers bear very little resemblance to the policies of PSF today who have all sense in purpose have sold out.

If "selling out" equates to not trying to bomb, bully and coerce up to 1 million unionists into accepting your point of view re the future for them and their families, then thank feck they've sold out....

**Dr.Nightdub** · 23/10/2006, 1:08 PM

Originally Posted by dcfcsteve

Most people could do with education about the Hunger Strikes - but I suspect not in the way you're suggesting. They had feck all to do with 'the struggle' and the advancement of Irish freedom in themselves, and were just about trying to get POW status for Republican prisoners - the ability to wear civilian clothing, mingle freely in prison etc like a World War 2 camp. Which was never, ever going to happen in all seriousness.

Don't forget that the prisoners had freedom of association, no prison clothing, etc, etc previously, so "never, ever going to happen" isn't quite accurate.

Without getting into a debate about the rights and wrongs of the five demands (which'd be a bit pointless now, 25 years after the event) my guess is that Republicans at the time viewed struggle inside the prisons as part of the wider struggle against the British i.e. same fight, just a different battlefield.

By the way, I'm not neccesarily advocating a form of education about the Hunger Strikes that'd meet with the approval of Sinn F�in's department of propaganda, it would obviously have to be put in the context of a wider history of the north, so 1921 and the Government of Ireland Act would probably be the logical place to start.

**dcfcsteve** · 23/10/2006, 2:24 PM

Originally Posted by Dr.Nightdub

Don't forget that the prisoners had freedom of association, no prison clothing, etc, etc previously, so "never, ever going to happen" isn't quite accurate.

As much as I hate saying "never" about anything, it is a fact that the Hunger Strikers were "never" going to get their demands under Thatcher. That is why 10 men died, and that is why the strike was called off - everyone realised they were just lining up to commit suicide.

As for having many of the demands previously - that is exactly the point. They ahd them in the past. They were consciously and deliberately removed. They never got them back, and they never would've under Thatcher. Witches used to get burned at the stake in this part of the world. That doesn't make it likely that it'll start happening again any time soon...

I agree with you that it was part of the broader struggle, but the average person in the street probably doesn't know exactly what the strike was all about (particularly in the Republic), and would probably be a bit disappointed to learn the mandane level of the strikers demands. Starving yourself for Ireland is seen as glorious -starving yourself for the right to wear whatever jeans you want and to hang out with your buddies in jail wouldn't be seen to have the same ring to it.

Are the Troubles not taught in the South as part of modern Irish History ?

**Dodge** · 23/10/2006, 2:40 PM

What troubles?

Rovers'Til IDie · 23/10/2006, 2:42 PM

Originally Posted by dcfcsteve

Starving yourself for Ireland is seen as glorious -starving yourself for the right to wear whatever jeans you want and to hang out with your buddies in jail wouldn't be seen to have the same ring to it.

Talk about a simplistic interpretation of history. They were on hunger strike in protest over thatchers policy of 'criminalisation'. They saw their actions as politically motivated and not acts of criminality. Their 5 demands reflected this. Whether you agree or not at least get the facts straight.

**dcfcsteve** · 23/10/2006, 3:18 PM

Originally Posted by Rovers'Til IDie

Talk about a simplistic interpretation of history. They were on hunger strike in protest over thatchers policy of 'criminalisation'. They saw their actions as politically motivated and not acts of criminality. Their 5 demands reflected this. Whether you agree or not at least get the facts straight.

RTID - I'm more than familiar with the facts thanks, as my initial post on this topic illustrated. That was my tongue-in-cheek account of how Seamus Public would see it, not my own view of history.

Rovers'Til IDie · 23/10/2006, 3:40 PM

Originally Posted by dcfcsteve

RTID - I'm more than familiar with the facts thanks, as my initial post on this topic illustrated. That was my tongue-in-cheek account of how Seamus Public would see it, not my own view of history.

Fair enough. I suppose I should really start reading these threads from the start.....but then again why waste my time when I can just spout out the first thing that comes to mind

"Michael Sands...we'll always remember you"

Rovers'Til IDie · 23/10/2006, 3:48 PM

Originally Posted by Lim till i die

If anything those islamic fundamentalist suicide bombers are far more courageous than the I.R.A man who say, blew up the pub in Guildford for example

As John McEnroe might say (in the course of a political debate no doubt),
"You cannot be serious". Neither act took any courage.

**osarusan** · 23/10/2006, 3:55 PM

Originally Posted by Rovers'Til IDie

Fair enough. I suppose I should really start reading these threads from the start.....but then again why waste my time when I can just spout out the first thing that comes to mind

"Michael Sands...we'll always remember you"

.

Like it very much.

**Lim till i die** · 23/10/2006, 4:12 PM

Originally Posted by Rovers'Til IDie

As John McEnroe might say (in the course of a political debate no doubt),
"You cannot be serious". Neither act took any courage.

I was merely pointing out (in my admitedly badly worded way) the rank hypocrisy of anyone who can look upon a Provo as some kind of heroic freedom fighter while looking at an Islamic fundamentalist terrorist as a raving lunatic

You'd be amazed at the hypocrisy of some people, particularly around closing time

**OwlsFan** · 23/10/2006, 4:54 PM

They did nothing in my name and I would vociferously resist any attempt to erect a moment by the State to people who didn't even recognise the State in any event.

Rovers'Til IDie · 23/10/2006, 5:01 PM

Originally Posted by OwlsFan

They did nothing in my name and I would vociferously resist any attempt to erect a moment by the State to people who didn't even recognise the State in any event.

By that logic we'll have to rename Pearse st., Connolly station etc. as none of the 1916 leaders recognised the 'state' that they lived in.

**jebus** · 23/10/2006, 5:03 PM

Originally Posted by Rovers'Til IDie

By that logic we'll have to rename Pearse st., Connolly station etc. as none of the 1916 leaders recognised the 'state' that they lived in.

Sure why not, always thought Bono St. and Sir Bob Geldof station had a better ring to it anyway. Although I'm not too sure if Bono counts as being Irish anymore, or if Sir Robert recognises the Republic either!

Rovers'Til IDie · 23/10/2006, 9:42 PM

Originally Posted by jebus

Sure why not, always thought Bono St. and Sir Bob Geldof station had a better ring to it anyway. Although I'm not too sure if Bono counts as being Irish anymore, or if Sir Robert recognises the Republic either!

You'd have to have those badly done irish translations as well, Sr�id an Bh�n�n...Ar�s Riobaird MacGeld�bha

**Dr.Nightdub** · 23/10/2006, 10:46 PM

Originally Posted by dcfcsteve

Are the Troubles not taught in the South as part of modern Irish History ?

Dunno about now, but I left school in 1980 so the Hunger Strikes hadn't even happened at that point. From what I recall, "modern Irish history" finished sometime in the 60s with all the economic progress stuff under the Whittaker plan. I s'pose the troubles were too fresh and raw to be included and anyway, the usual rule of thuumb that "history is written by the victors" couldn't be applied as there weren't any.