1916 Centenary Committee

Risteard

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 29, 2004
Messages
453
FutureTaoiseach said:
The Irish Army are not "terrorists".
Agreed. That's why I was saying that the Free State Brits are terrorists.
 


smiffy

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2004
Messages
1,279
Website
cedarlounge.wordpress.com
Risteard said:
smiffy said:
In fact, I was standing right in front of you at one point.
No. You were allegedly standing right in front of someone you perceived to be me at one point.
Ah, but I was standing in front of someone (not for very long though, and I didn't take one of your little leaflets). And it was you.

You know it, and I know it.

And just thinking of it now gives me a hard on and (around the back) a wide on.
 

Oldira

Member
Joined
May 11, 2004
Messages
41
FutureTaoiseach said:
ireland2004 said:
FutureTaoiseach said:
I disagree. The Provos targeted and killed hundreds of unarmed and innocent civilians. Unlike the Old IRA. I fail to see how Enniskillen contributed to Irish freedom.
The "Old" IRA :lol:

Did the IRA kill civilians in 1919-1923 (that's the period you Fianna Failers find it stylish to support the RA)

Btw, when did Berties auld boy leave the RA?
The Old IRA killed informers and those passing on information to the authorities but they did not plant bombs in shops to blow up innocent people and they didn't target random innocent people.

In the period 1/1/21 TO 30/04/21 45 civilians were killed in Dublin by bombs/grenades thrown at crown force patrols. No more than 6 of these were IRA men and the rest were predominately women and children. Cathal Brugha wanted all ambushs stopped on Saturdays(shopping day) due to the loss of life of innocent civilians.
 

Bogwarrior

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 3, 2004
Messages
322
smiffy said:
Risteard said:
smiffy said:
In fact, I was standing right in front of you at one point.
No. You were allegedly standing right in front of someone you perceived to be me at one point.
Ah, but I was standing in front of someone (not for very long though, and I didn't take one of your little leaflets). And it was you.

You know it, and I know it.

And just thinking of it now gives me a hard on and (around the back) a wide on.
Risteard's got himself a groupie. Btw, Smiffy, that kind of carry on was illegal, under General Tom Maguire, and as far as I know he didn't decriminalise it before his tragic death.
 

smiffy

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2004
Messages
1,279
Website
cedarlounge.wordpress.com
Bogwarrior said:
Risteard's got himself a groupie. Btw, Smiffy, that kind of carry on was illegal, under General Tom Maguire, and as far as I know he didn't decriminalise it before his tragic death.
But didn't General Tom Maguire also say, when recalling the decision of the Dáil to cede authority to the Army Council until such time as the Dáil could convene again, "How can it be wrong, when it feels so right?"
 

Marx

Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2004
Messages
73
Website
www.labour.ie
1916 is something that does not belong to one party or group. It is something that can unite us all. Rather than spiralling into a divisive issue we should all be proud. FF, FG, Labour, SF etc all have a claim to 1916.
It is wrong to play politcs with this, Connolly, Pearse and the other leaders of 1916 did not sacrifice themselves for party politics.
It was a great turning point in our nations history and the great men who led the rebellion should be respectfully remembered.
 

Bogwarrior

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 3, 2004
Messages
322
smiffy said:
Bogwarrior said:
Risteard's got himself a groupie. Btw, Smiffy, that kind of carry on was illegal, under General Tom Maguire, and as far as I know he didn't decriminalise it before his tragic death.
But didn't General Tom Maguire also say, when recalling the decision of the Dáil to cede authority to the Army Council until such time as the Dáil could convene again, "How can it be wrong, when it feels so right?"
That particular quote was taken out of context. At the time he was referring to killing Brits and Staters.
 

mjcoughlan

Active member
Joined
Feb 5, 2003
Messages
242
Website
www.bebo.com
Bogwarrior said:
smiffy said:
Bogwarrior said:
Risteard's got himself a groupie. Btw, Smiffy, that kind of carry on was illegal, under General Tom Maguire, and as far as I know he didn't decriminalise it before his tragic death.
But didn't General Tom Maguire also say, when recalling the decision of the Dáil to cede authority to the Army Council until such time as the Dáil could convene again, "How can it be wrong, when it feels so right?"
That particular quote was taken out of context. At the time he was referring to killing Brits and Staters.
Oh well, that's ok then!
 

BBoru

Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2005
Messages
34
I think it's too late for Bertie and FF to start trying to reaffirm themselves as Republicans. SF have never shied away from the cause and now they have finally gotten somewhere FF want to reclaim the title of true Republicans.

You could argue that the Irish Defence Forces have come along way, if they are the true successors of the 1916 volunteers then they will know what it is like to be unpopular amongst the vast majority.

Looks like FF are trying to pinch a few votes to me!
 

uncle joe

Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2005
Messages
8
its fianna fail trying to reclaim the green card,they should have been commemrating it for the last 30 years :roll:
 

ChrIreland

Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
82
Bogwarrior said:
smiffy said:
Bogwarrior said:
Risteard's got himself a groupie. Btw, Smiffy, that kind of carry on was illegal, under General Tom Maguire, and as far as I know he didn't decriminalise it before his tragic death.
But didn't General Tom Maguire also say, when recalling the decision of the Dáil to cede authority to the Army Council until such time as the Dáil could convene again, "How can it be wrong, when it feels so right?"
That particular quote was taken out of context. At the time he was referring to killing Brits and Staters.
If this just celebrates our 1916 heroes can't we all get together this once....and not squabble about who "owns", or who "gains most" from it, or whether it is a gimmick or not.? I welcome any genuine attempt to honour the men and women of 1916, and any other event which glorifies the sacrifice of our cutting the link 2ith England. I hope you do too.
 

edifice.

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 24, 2005
Messages
8,325
ChrIreland said:
If this just celebrates our 1916 heroes can't we all get together this once....and not squabble about who "owns", or who "gains most" from it, or whether it is a gimmick or not.? I welcome any genuine attempt to honour the men and women of 1916, and any other event which glorifies the sacrifice of our cutting the link 2ith England. I hope you do too.
What this does is to attempt to portray the present constitutional status of the island as acceptable to those who fought in 1916. And that is for party political and electoral considerations only.
 

smiffy

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2004
Messages
1,279
Website
cedarlounge.wordpress.com
FutureTaoiseach said:
Yes, that's the kind of thing I was getting at when I referred to an asinine understanding of what 'revisionism' actually consists of.
How is it "asinine"? :(

Also, I see in tomorrow's Irish Times that FG and Labour are complaining they were not consulted about the restoration of the annual 1916 parades. There you go. More West Britishness in our midst. :(

The apparent miscomfort on their part with the celebrating of Irish identity and freedom reflects - in my opinion - revisionist tendencies.
It's asinine because you're throwing around a term like 'revisionism' without either explaining or understanding what it actually means, or why it is a bad thing. You seem to believe that it just means 'West Britishness' (an even more stupid term, if that's possible), which is premised on some notion of a particularly narrow conception of what Irish identity actually is (in this case, compulsory admiration for the 1916 leaders and the Rising). Anyone who doesn't conform to this template apparently must be considered non-Irish or even British. I would have thought that you might be able to see why defining Irishness in such an exclusivist way might be somewhat dubious, but apparently not.

As for revisionism itself, all it actually is is a new approach to Irish history that came to prominence in the 1960s/1970s but was actually around earlier than that, most notably with The Bell. It was a challenge to the received wisdom of Irish history, or 'the story of Ireland', which looked at everything in terms of Anglo-Irish relations and in the framework of a long, slow, continuous struggle for 'freedom'. While this might be great for helping the Wolfe Tones come up with new songs, it's not very enlightening when it comes to a full and comprehensive understanding of the development of Irish society. Roy Foster gives this rough definition of 'revisionism':

What, after all, is historical 'revisionism'? To the scholars, it is quite simply a desire to eliminate as much as possible of the retrospectively 'Whig' view of history which sees every event and process in the list of what followed it rather than what went before: the effort to get behind hindsight.
It's important to note that there's nothing uniquely Irish about this kind of revisionism, but it's perhaps because historical interpretation here is so contested and so contentious that a particular kind of approach to history can be thrown around as a rather idiotic insult.

Obviously historians (including those who would have been labelled or even described themselves as 'revisionists') will have their own political views and biases. Equally their conclusions might well be informed by these. But that's true of all historians, not just the ones you don't like. But 'revisionism' didn't emerge just because of the conflict in Northern Ireland, or because of the amount of time that had elapsed since the foundation of the state, or because of economic and social modernisation in Ireland. It was also informed by the growing influence of social history and economic history, which was a recognition that there was far more to the past than just states and 'great men'.

There's nothing necessarily anti-republican or anti-nationalist about 'revisionism', although it will obviously post a challenge to particularly stupid nationalists (such as jjacollins). And it's perfectly fair to question the conclusions or the assumptions, or even the factual accuracy of 'revisionist' historians. But in doing so, you should realise that that kind of approach is revisionism, and is what historians should always do anyway. Which is why the term 'revisionist' is now, essentially, meaningless.

Now, I realise that you have some sort of mental condition whereby an idea lodges itself in your head, and you repeat it over and over despite people pointing out to you how daft it actually is, so I don't expect any of this to sink in, and I look forward to seeing you denounce 'revisionists' in plenty of future threads. However, in the light of the points I've raised here, would you now like to explain why 'revisionism' is such a bad thing?
 

edifice.

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 24, 2005
Messages
8,325
Revisionism in Ireland is concerned with sledgehammering history to conform to present populist politics. It means rather than pursuing a claimed stance it redfines it so you don't have to. And then you sanitise it with 'debating' inane noise.
 

smiffy

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2004
Messages
1,279
Website
cedarlounge.wordpress.com
edifice. said:
Revisionism in Ireland is concerned with sledgehammering history to conform to present populist politics. It means rather than pursuing a claimed stance it redfines it so you don't have to. And then you sanitise it with 'debating' inane noise.
Ah yes, the edifice approach to discussion. He is right about everything - so right that he doesn't have to back up his statements. Anyone who disagrees with him is either naive, educated or (if the disagreement is more than one or two lines, or involves words of more than two syllables) 'noise-making'.

Your second sentence is nonsensical, by the way.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top