On calls to return to "the values of the early years of the state" (OBFUSCATION)

roc_

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2009
Messages
6,369
We have heard Inda Kenny call for this yesterday in the Dail. Then, the Irish Times editorial today is along the same lines. Spurious nonsense for many reasons. Not least, the way things really were back then, allied to the pure absurdity of institutions like Inda Kenny and the Irish Times evoking the legacy of 1916 (with an eye to the kind of things that really lay in the hearts of those who participated in it, and the reaction of the establishment to this, which has not changed a jot in its outlook from then).

This 4 minute video extract sets out the truth of the matter. (Peter Lennon documentary from 1969).

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kg77zby11iI]YouTube - The early years of Fianna Fail in this state[/ame]

And the only reason these people are worried about the loss of sovereignty is for reasons along the lines set out in this thread here - http://www.politics.ie/economy/142589-why-cowen-et-al-so-afraid-accepting-emergency-funds.html and this - http://www.politics.ie/current-affairs/142729-sovereign-question.html
 
Last edited:


Toland

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 26, 2008
Messages
63,162
Website
www.aggressive-secularist.com

Mousey

Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2010
Messages
11
+1 Required viewing for the current times and the perfect antidote to all this guff about Roisin and her sons. Borrowed it from the video shop last week. Wonder if Peter Lennon could be persuaded to start on a sequel.
 

Nemi_

Active member
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
252
Values of the early years of the State? Was that Roman Catholicism, Irish language revival and establishing as many families as possible upon the land?

What are these allegedly shared values?
 

ppcoyle

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 11, 2010
Messages
1,995
John Waters recently wrote an article for the Irish Mail on Sunday in which he referred to a speech made in the Treaty Debates of 1922 by a Roscommon TD who lived in John's home town of Castlerea. Out of curiousity I looked up the speech and what Dan O'Rourke said was as follows:

Dail Debate 7th January 1922

MR. D. O'ROURKE: I have very little to say; and what I have to say is rather by way of personal explanation than in support of the Treaty. When I came here first I was opposed to the Treaty; and on principle I am opposed to it still. I was elected without my knowledge; the first thing I knew about being elected a member of Dáil Eireann was to see my name in the public Press; had I known my name was to be put forward I would have objected; I want to make that clear. Until I came here I didn't know how matters stood; when I found out how things happened I must say I did not like, and I do not like, the idea of the plenipotentiaries having signed without having brought back the Treaty for consideration. That is my opinion, although others who vote for the Treaty are against me in that. My great ambition and prayer was that unity would be achieved by some means. I was prepared to vote for Document No. 2 provided a substantial majority of the House was for it; my reason for doing so was to secure unity; I am quite prepared to do anything for unity because I realise that the curse of this country has been disunion. I say I will do anything yet to achieve unity. If a division had been taken before Christmas I say, undoubtedly, that I would have voted against the Treaty. That is my position. I returned to my constituency at Christmas and I went there to the people—not the resolution passers— to the people who had been with me in the fight, the people whose opinion I valued, the people who are, I believe, Die-Hards; and I consulted them about this question and I must say that unanimously they said to me that there was no alternative but to accept the Treaty. Everything that is personal in me is against this Treaty; I yield to no man in my hatred of British oppression, and in my opposition to any symbol of British rule in Ireland; but I say I would be acting an impertinent part by putting my own views and opinions against the views of my best friends, the men who are the best fighters with me. I have taken only one oath to the Republic—that was the Republican Army oath; the oath to the Saorstát was not a Republican oath. My oath to the army I will keep; I will not join the Saorstát Army and I don't care who takes exception to that. I will join no other army but the Irish Republican Army; when the fight begins for the Republic again I will take my part in it. My only hope now is that when this decision is taken there will be unity; that there will be a meeting afterwards; that the members of the Dáil will come together and come to some common understanding to work our country in the interests of the people. I say this for myself: that while I would vote for the Treaty I am just as well pleased if the Treaty is thrown out; but I will not take the responsibility of doing what I consider would be driving the young men of the country, and all the country, into war for I know what war has meant. I would not vote to bring war upon those people; but if this Treaty is rejected, and if war is the result, I promise I will do everything I possibly can to unite the people to fight the common enemy; and I promise to fight to victory or death to secure the Republic (applause).

What makes Dan's contribution interesting is that he voted for the treaty against his own deeply help opinion but in line with the requests of his constituents. At that time there were no party whips around the Dail and TD's could, if they choose, represent the views of their constituents in important debates. The power that the executive yields in our political system today was not a major factor in the 1922 debate. Our political system has been transformed into one which allows cronyism to determine policy and subverts the democratic process.

I understand that Dan O'Rourke, in spite of voting for the treaty, served for many years the Roscommon constituency as a Fianna Fail TD.
 

Aindriu

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 28, 2007
Messages
8,633
Early values of the state? So are we to go back to the dark ages when Bishops ruled the Daíl and kiddy fiddling priests and Brothers buggered and beat young boys in industrial schools whilst young girls were cast into magdalene Laundries to be beaten and abused by sadistic nuns?

Are we feck as like! :mad:

Inda will need to come up with something better than that one!
 

louis bernard

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 6, 2008
Messages
2,698
Early values of the state? So are we to go back to the dark ages when Bishops ruled the Daíl and kiddy fiddling priests and Brothers buggered and beat young boys in industrial schools whilst young girls were cast into magdalene Laundries to be beaten and abused by sadistic nuns?

Are we feck as like! :mad:

Inda will need to come up with something better than that one!
+ 10
You beat me to it, I was just about to post something very similar.
 

GreenIsGood

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 26, 2010
Messages
1,536
Wow!

Never saw that before.

O'Faolain nails it .. "urbanised peasants"

..cowards who always look the other way..
 

roc_

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2009
Messages
6,369
Anyway. What stands out is how little has changed. Same shi t, different day. That's all.
 

fluffykontbiscuits

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 7, 2010
Messages
7,063
Early values of the state? So are we to go back to the dark ages when Bishops ruled the Daíl and kiddy fiddling priests and Brothers buggered and beat young boys in industrial schools whilst young girls were cast into magdalene Laundries to be beaten and abused by sadistic nuns?

Are we feck as like! :mad:

Inda will need to come up with something better than that one!
Excellent point well made! +1
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top