General / Off-Topic The persecutions of the British
- Thread starter Patrick_68000
- Start date
Sorry, that was a bit too short an answer. I don't feel contempt for the media but I can see why you would feel like that.
Maybe you should brush up on your geography as well as your history. The North isn`t a country by any leap of the imagination, its not even a province by Irish standards as its only made up of six of the nine counties of Ulster, so it doesn`t even qualify as the province of Ulster. Facts are nasty things but they cut through the . It was just a grubby little power grab setup with a 2/3 protestant/unionist majority in the early 20`s that was run as an apartheid little statlet with blessing of the British government, that`s why they left the other three counties out.
Of course the trend is now for a catholic majority population within the next few years and every unionist`s nightmare, a Sinn Fein First Minister. Oh how the wheel always turns.
Last edited:
What you say is true in fact, but many people in Northern Ireland/whatever you want to call it do often refer to it as a country or a province. It is a region with a measure of self-autonomy. I would hardly say what he says is complete , given that it's difficult neatly defining it in such a way that someone who hadn't lived there would understand, or someone may be offended by.
Culturally yes, you could say NI is distinctly different to the rest of the UK, and the Republic of Ireland. Calling it a country I think isn't too far a stretch seen in this light.
Many people do call the 6/9 counties Ulster. Technically yes it is the nine counties - blame David Lloyd George and Carson etc for that.
Brushing up on the history of the six counties in depth is, quite frankly, a mammoth and difficult task.
Culturally yes, you could say NI is distinctly different to the rest of the UK, and the Republic of Ireland. Calling it a country I think isn't too far a stretch seen in this light.
Many people do call the 6/9 counties Ulster. Technically yes it is the nine counties - blame David Lloyd George and Carson etc for that.
Brushing up on the history of the six counties in depth is, quite frankly, a mammoth and difficult task.
Last edited:
Yep, to ensure a protestant majority. Sad, I agree. However, what is often forgot is that the Republic was rather sectarian in nature to protestants for many, many years. So you can understand to a certain extent why protestants might be fearful of being a minority.
Yes, there's beautiful irony there
Last edited:
Not a difficult task at all to anyone that can read a book or care to inform themselves and regardless of what anyone wants to call it, you can`t make a silk purse out of a sows ear. The facts speak for themselves and it is in no way, make, shape or form a country and nor can it be described as such or as the province of Ulster for the reasons I have outlined, no matter how much people may wish it to be so. Otherwise we could all wish ourselves to be millionaires, but reality doesn`t work like that I`m afraid. Its not even a self sufficient viable entity and nearly half its population have little or no allegiance to it, its just a contrivance that will pass into history with the passage of time, the British government and I`m sure the majority of the English public would privately agree.
As for the Irish people living there, they are as Irish as I am, I draw no distinction with them nor them with me, there is millennia of history and culture that binds us together, look at the GAA, Fleadh Cheoil, language and other such all Ireland organisations. Irish Culture survived against concerted efforts to eradicate it and against all odds. The North will become more greener over the coming years until one day it will just cease to be, you can be like King Canute and rail pointlessly against it or you can embrace the change, becoming part of it. Either way its only heading in one direction.
I`m afraid the usual tripe wheeled out, our first president was a protestant, many of our greatest patriots were protestant and protestants plus a few folk of the Jewish persuasion fought in the IRA in the War of Independence. Republicanism was never about religion, it was about nationalism, nationhood and equal rights for all citizens. Still plenty of wealthy protestant land owners here down south today, never had an issue. The masters of sectarianism were the ones of the unionist persuasion and they still have those beliefs today, just watch the carry on up North and the backwoodsman mentality, they cant help but show contempt for others not of their kind. Again the real history and facts are troublesome to the narrative.
Republicanism never was about religion - I give you that. It was about power, pure power and anti-English. Don't kid yourself about equal rights for all citizens (same lie as all countries, come on!). But yes, there was sectarianism towards Protestants in Ireland. You cannot deny that, and basic research will show you that - as you say, it's not a difficult task for anyone who can read a book. Of course, you can debate what level it happened on. Just because it's inconvenient to you, doesn't mean it didn't happen.
OK, so you are calling out 'tripe' - what about the tripe in what you say? (you know what you say about the GAA is simply not true?) I have my own hopes for the future of Ireland, but I can leave my private beliefs out of what I say, to try to come to a truth, however inconvenient that is. Can you?
In my experience, I find the vast majority of loyalists are full of rhetoric and do not know their history (David Irvine (not the holocaust denier), in private, an exception). I find many Republicans know history pretty well, much better than the Loyallists, but they tend to forget one or two 'inconvenient truths' which makes things very black and white for them. Not many of them know what life is like in a loyalist area, their concerns, their worries - simply because they don't care. It seems they think they have had the monopoly on suffering and discrimination is one-sided. Let me tell you, from someone who has lived in many communities, worked with politicians and political groups, lived in the filth and fury, and finally left it all behind - in case you didn't know - it is not. The Unionist sectarianism was obvious, and historically blatant. Nationalist sectarianism is alive and well. The Unionists are horrible at PR. The Nationalists and Republicans always win the PR wars.
Even worse - the romantic Republican from the South, who hasn't seen any bloodshed, who hasn't seen family members blown to bits - They think they're the same as us? Dream on. They're not. They haven't earned that through suffering, at least not for a few generations. You think Nationalists in the six counties are the same as the ones down south? No, actually, and I hate to tell you but many look down their noses at them. The 'Irish' people there are NOT the same as you - it's like saying a British-born Asian is the same as a Devon cider farmer. You're saying two brothers can be split for nearly 100 years, and then reunited and be the same? No. I wish what you were saying was true, but it's not.
The real history and facts isn't just one narrative. See both sides of the coin (if you can be bothered looking past loyalist rhetoric, because there is a lot of it) and embrace the whole truth, even if you find some parts of it unpalatable. Otherwise, you're just seeing a fantasy you want to see. That some would want you to see.
Brushing up on the history IS a difficult task - if you haven't lived it. I'm sorry, you appear to me to have an over-romanticised view of Republicanism in practice in Northern Ireland. Such views are unfair because they give the world a distorted picture of the way things are - such views encouraged funding of the IRA from America, as many were led to believe that Catholics didn't even have the vote in the 80s!
Northern Ireland is not a silk purse, it's a sow's ear like you say, it's a historical insult (by the way, the Irish Free State's beginnings were far from noble, a Civil War for goodness sake, and a pathetic aborted campaign against the British?!) - supposedly the 'kindest cut' yet a cut all the same - yet more and more people are calling themselves Northern Irish, and these aren't just disillusioned loyalists. They increasingly realise:
- they are not like their Southern neighbours, and they don't always like them that much
- they are proud of where they live, despite its faults
- they don't like the 'other side' but they have more respect for them then they'd let on, as there is shared experience - they certainly like them more than the Brits, the Staters, and the immigrants. MUCH more.
- the politicians benefit financially from Stormont and Sinn Fein get to be a big fish in a small pond. That won't be dismantled in a hurry.
- more and more refugees are coming from Poland etc and they simply don't care
- people are moving on from 1916 and all that.
How's that for a very inconvenient truth?
So, I think the country
of Northern Ireland will survive for A LOT longer than you think. Repeat after me - Ireland - what is Ireland, but a piece of land that keeps my feet from getting wet?
OK, so you are calling out 'tripe' - what about the tripe in what you say? (you know what you say about the GAA is simply not true?) I have my own hopes for the future of Ireland, but I can leave my private beliefs out of what I say, to try to come to a truth, however inconvenient that is. Can you?
In my experience, I find the vast majority of loyalists are full of rhetoric and do not know their history (David Irvine (not the holocaust denier), in private, an exception). I find many Republicans know history pretty well, much better than the Loyallists, but they tend to forget one or two 'inconvenient truths' which makes things very black and white for them. Not many of them know what life is like in a loyalist area, their concerns, their worries - simply because they don't care. It seems they think they have had the monopoly on suffering and discrimination is one-sided. Let me tell you, from someone who has lived in many communities, worked with politicians and political groups, lived in the filth and fury, and finally left it all behind - in case you didn't know - it is not. The Unionist sectarianism was obvious, and historically blatant. Nationalist sectarianism is alive and well. The Unionists are horrible at PR. The Nationalists and Republicans always win the PR wars.
Even worse - the romantic Republican from the South, who hasn't seen any bloodshed, who hasn't seen family members blown to bits - They think they're the same as us? Dream on. They're not. They haven't earned that through suffering, at least not for a few generations. You think Nationalists in the six counties are the same as the ones down south? No, actually, and I hate to tell you but many look down their noses at them. The 'Irish' people there are NOT the same as you - it's like saying a British-born Asian is the same as a Devon cider farmer. You're saying two brothers can be split for nearly 100 years, and then reunited and be the same? No. I wish what you were saying was true, but it's not.
The real history and facts isn't just one narrative. See both sides of the coin (if you can be bothered looking past loyalist rhetoric, because there is a lot of it) and embrace the whole truth, even if you find some parts of it unpalatable. Otherwise, you're just seeing a fantasy you want to see. That some would want you to see.
Brushing up on the history IS a difficult task - if you haven't lived it. I'm sorry, you appear to me to have an over-romanticised view of Republicanism in practice in Northern Ireland. Such views are unfair because they give the world a distorted picture of the way things are - such views encouraged funding of the IRA from America, as many were led to believe that Catholics didn't even have the vote in the 80s!
Northern Ireland is not a silk purse, it's a sow's ear like you say, it's a historical insult (by the way, the Irish Free State's beginnings were far from noble, a Civil War for goodness sake, and a pathetic aborted campaign against the British?!) - supposedly the 'kindest cut' yet a cut all the same - yet more and more people are calling themselves Northern Irish, and these aren't just disillusioned loyalists. They increasingly realise:
- they are not like their Southern neighbours, and they don't always like them that much
- they are proud of where they live, despite its faults
- they don't like the 'other side' but they have more respect for them then they'd let on, as there is shared experience - they certainly like them more than the Brits, the Staters, and the immigrants. MUCH more.
- the politicians benefit financially from Stormont and Sinn Fein get to be a big fish in a small pond. That won't be dismantled in a hurry.
- more and more refugees are coming from Poland etc and they simply don't care
- people are moving on from 1916 and all that.
How's that for a very inconvenient truth?
So, I think the country
of Northern Ireland will survive for A LOT longer than you think. Repeat after me - Ireland - what is Ireland, but a piece of land that keeps my feet from getting wet?
Last edited:
And back on topic - if you live in the country/six counties/province/WHO CARES of Northern Ireland/Ulster/WHO CARES and you want to do well on benefits, what do you do?
You find a Republican. They know all the tricks and take pride in shafting the welfare state, out of a sense of patriotic duty
Truth.
You find a Republican. They know all the tricks and take pride in shafting the welfare state, out of a sense of patriotic duty
Truth.
lol surprise surprise NI gets mentioned and you appear on your high horse again. I don't need to brush up on either especially not in the context I was using the word. The two people in here that appear to live there don't seem bothered and you better go and edit the Wikipedia entry because whoever wrote that has a similar leap of imagination.
Republicanism never was about religion - I give you that. It was about power, pure power and anti-English. Don't kid yourself about equal rights for all citizens (same lie as all countries, come on!). But yes, there was sectarianism towards Protestants in Ireland. You cannot deny that, and basic research will show you that - as you say, it's not a difficult task for anyone who can read a book. Of course, you can debate what level it happened on. Just because it's inconvenient to you, doesn't mean it didn't happen.
OK, so you are calling out 'tripe' - what about the tripe in what you say? (you know what you say about the GAA is simply not true?) I have my own hopes for the future of Ireland, but I can leave my private beliefs out of what I say, to try to come to a truth, however inconvenient that is. Can you?
In my experience, I find the vast majority of loyalists are full of rhetoric and do not know their history (David Irvine (not the holocaust denier), in private, an exception). I find many Republicans know history pretty well, much better than the Loyallists, but they tend to forget one or two 'inconvenient truths' which makes things very black and white for them. Not many of them know what life is like in a loyalist area, their concerns, their worries - simply because they don't care. It seems they think they have had the monopoly on suffering and discrimination is one-sided. Let me tell you, from someone who has lived in many communities, worked with politicians and political groups, lived in the filth and fury, and finally left it all behind - in case you didn't know - it is not. The Unionist sectarianism was obvious, and historically blatant. Nationalist sectarianism is alive and well. The Unionists are horrible at PR. The Nationalists and Republicans always
Even worse - the romantic Republican from the South, who hasn't seen any bloodshed, who hasn't seen family members blown to bits - They think they're the same as us? Dream on. They're not. They haven't earned that through suffering, at least not for a few generations. You think Nationalists in the six counties are the same as the ones down south? No, actually, and I hate to tell you but many look down their noses at them. The 'Irish' people there are NOT the same as you - it's like saying a British-born Asian is the same as a Devon cider farmer. You're saying two brothers can be split for nearly 100 years, and then reunited and be the same? No. I wish what you were saying was true, but it's not.
The real history and facts isn't just one narrative. See both sides of the coin (if you can be bothered looking past loyalist rhetoric, because there is a lot of it) and embrace the whole truth, even if you find some parts of it unpalatable. Otherwise, you're just seeing a fantasy you want to see.
Brushing up on the history IS a difficult task - if you haven't lived it. I'm sorry, you appear to me to have an over-romanticised view of Republicanism in practice in Northern Ireland. Such views are unfair because they give the world a distorted picture of the way things are - such views encouraged funding of the IRA from America, as many were led to believe that Catholics didn't even have the vote in the 80s!
Northern Ireland is not a silk purse, it's a sow's ear like you say, it's a historical insult - supposedly the 'kindest cut' yet a cut all the same - yet more and more people are calling themselves Northern Irish, and these aren't just disillusioned loyallists. They realise:
- they are not like their Southern neighbours, and they don't always like them that much
- they are proud of where they live, despite its faults
- the politicians benefit financially from Stormont and Sinn Fein get to be a big fish in a small pond.
So, I think Northern Ireland will survive for A LOT longer than you think. Repeat after me - Ireland - what is Ireland, but a piece of land that keeps my feet from getting wet?
David Irvine, I always took to be a very decent individual at heart and his death at a relatively young age was a major loss to his community. Republicans/Nationalists know their history because it has been lived and handed down thru the generations, it is also grounded in historical fact, the injustices don`t have to be invented. Unionism is clueless in relation to history because it doesn`t fit their narrative and they would rather live in lala curry my yogurt land and in ignorance rather then face the historical reasons for the mess left from Britain's colonial involvement & crimes in Ireland.
In relation to family experience, not in the recent troubles but my Grandfather and his brothers were all active during the 1920s in the War of Independence and obviously before my time but I know what happened during that period. I know Irish history as anyone with an ounce of whit should know the history of their country. Britain and it unionist proxies in Ireland birthed sectarianism in this country, It wasn`t the Irish people that created the penal laws but they were made suffer under them and many more, the Irish didn`t invent the concept of concentration camps, that was another British invention. Even the UK to this day is sectarian in its policy towards its head of state barring Catholics from same.There was nothing in the south like the pogroms that were perpetrated against the nationalist people in the North in the 20`s and later periods.
All wars are dirty, especially guerrilla warfare, there is no romanticising the killing of other human beings but that`s what happens when you invade other peoples lands, they fight back.They are the only just wars, the one`s for self determination & preservation and not the colonial adventures that are driven to provide plunder and exploit other peoples.
In relation to the unionist working class, they have been shafted by their own for years. The Catholic population were used to the jack boot of unionism and knew that education was the ticket to a better life and this was fostered within that community as they were excluded from employment & voting etc. The loyalist working class had it handed to them on a plate for years, with guaranteed employment to the exclusion of nationalist`s. When the old industries died they were no longer guaranteed work, the culture of education did not exist in such working class communities to the extent it did in the nationalist but the sense of entitlement did. The when Catholics looked for the right to vote during the civil rights they were coldly murdered on the streets by British paratroopers, unarmed men and boys. History repeating itself and the British and their unionist allies making the same stupid mistakes they always did in Ireland and it blew up in their face, literally.
The main problem in Ireland after the British were shown the door was the civil war over the treaty which was signed under duress and the threat of immediate and terrible war from Lloyd George and his cohorts. Britain and unionism showing a complete contempt for the democratic process and the wishes of the vast majority of people in Ireland. That was something that split my own family down the middle with members on both sides of the fight. Then out of that mayhem came the counter revolution by conservative forces as the new state was being formed. This led to the failure of the true tenets of republicanism being implemented fully and a certain whitewashing of the the teaching of James Connolly who was executed in 1916 by the British while tied to a chair. Connolly was a socialist to the core and its only in recent decades that he has come to the fore again in the story of Ireland`s struggle. There is quiet a complex story there in relation to the Irish soviets that came into being during the WOI, the Limerick Soviet being a good example. These were later closed/dismantled by conservative counter forces as the new state was being formed and yes the Catholic church should have been kicked into the long grass from the beginning. They hedged their bets during the 1916 rising until they saw what way the wind was blowing and were calculating in relation to the retroactive support of same. If Connolly had survived into the new state they would have been given short shrift and it would have made for a better beginning, but there was never any effort to discriminate against Protestants in the south as previously showed. The Northern statlet was blatantly apartheid and a total disgrace in the manner in which it treated the nationalist community as "the enemy within" and what`s worse was the fact the British government was complicit.
Regarding Irish people from the North, regardless what you say we are the same, the same mannerism`s, outlook and way of thinking. I have drank with them & chatted with them both here and there and have found them to be no different in their temperament and outlook to any other rural folk I have met elsewhere in the country. I would find the city/country divide in Ireland to be more pronounced.
Last edited:
On topic (apologies for dragging you all off it) I think it is a real shame that there is a need to make claiming benefits such a hostile environment. The truth of the matter is that there are people out there that want to defraud the system or can't be bothered to work. Out of work benefits got too generous for people with children and being out of work became a lifestyle choice. Also tax credits encouraged employers to pay less and the state ended up subsidising wages. The current system is trying to address that. However, it appears to me it's going a bit too far especially towards disabled or ill people. It seems to assume you are defrauding the system and you have to prove you aren't and sadly the people that are probably know all the tricks while genuine people get rejected and have to fight.
As I said the facts are tough to deal with and can be a bit of a shock to the old system, but I`m glad to educate you.
Last edited:
Take it from someone on benefits and in the system that you have just given a most masterly summing up of the whole situation. The biggest illusion people have is that "if you are genuine there wont be a problem". It is a fact that there are people who try to get things they are not entitled to - benefits do not pay enough for a comfortable life but they do make a nice little side income to pay for pub visits and holidays if you have another income stream. People get angry at governments who they think make it easy for people to con them. Yet the more fraud prevention barriers go up the more honest people are affected.
I think 2 areas you highlighted are critical - the money for children is one. It is a difficult one because of "the child did not choose to be born and if you deny money to the parent then the child suffers". I do believe some sort of number limits or parental registration is needed. The other is the tax credits debacle - like you say it has simply allowed big companies to transfer large amounts of their wage budget onto the tax payer, but also it creates a 2 tier system. It means 2 employees doing exactly the same job in exactly the same way will receive different rewards. The man with no children gets £7.20 an hour while the man with 2 children gets maybe £9 an hour. That does have a number of affects which may be subtle and not obvious but do exist especially psychologically.
OK I'll put my points across on Norn Iron then leave it because I don't want to bore people nor drift off topic too much, and I apologise if this post irritates some. But this topic is literally in my blood: I can't let it go just yet, no surrender
You may know most of your history. Living it is different. How you interpret it to support a romantic (or not) ideal is another thing. If you want to criticise British mistakes, it's easy because they were all over the world, and like big empires they had many areas and many years of mistakes to catalogue. They're a massive target. A wider view of history will teach that - and that's not apologism for the mess left in the Middle East etc. If the Irish had an Empire, would they have acted like the British did? Most probably. No sides suffering is legitimate. None. I don't think it's a cultural thing - it's a human thing, as can be seen over history.
The State didn't have to discriminate against Prods de facto - they let the Roman Catholic church get on with that. Testimonies from many in mixed marriages - such as Bono's father - will show that it certainly was not easy for inter marriages, so of course the rate of protestants dropped. There was discrimination, but it tended to be more subtle. Of course, it was not on the scale it was in the North. Yes, there was not a concerted effort to make it happen, but it did happen.
I can understand how the 1910s and 20s panned out. Votes from the Unionists and HRP affected the political situation at Westminster. Decisions were taken on Ireland with the British political situation in mind - to me that is disgusting. However, that's how the intransigent British establishment worked in those days - and often, towards their own citizens, like in the Peterloo massacre, the Feminist hunger strikes, problems over Chartism etc. I'm not surprised they were stupid enough to shell Dublin in Easter week, and to kill the rebels. Just not thinking about the wider issues, or thinking about what was best for Ireland. So yeah, I can see a notion of Socialism (thanks to Connelly, who like you I respect - much more than say de Valera) in the movement, a notion of creating a fair country. If any period can be romanticised then this can. I cannot see the modern 'troubles' in this light.
If I have to point a finger really at Unionism and the British, with a lack of sympathy, it will be for what was done in the 1960s. Civil rights should have been brought in. After Operation Black Harvest, the IRA were nowhere. There was no appetite for an armed struggle and people did not support it. If we had have had that period sorted out, O'Neill had been supported and Westminster opened its eyes, an awful lot of bloodshed could have been avoided. But no, that opportunity was completely lost. That's what I feel cross about. Once the battle lines were drawn, then the British could say they weren't "negotiating with terrorists" publicly and you get all the 70s rubbish. But it shouldn't have come to that. Civil Rights WAS infiltrated by the IRA, of course it was (the debate is at to when it actually was significant, of which I believe later rather than earlier), but I'm sorry to say that you saying that the British paratroopers coldly murdered civil rights citizens as if that's the stark total reality is misleading. The situation was far more blurred than that. They're not the ones who stretched the notions of what "legitimate targets" were - remember? Maybe if some of your family members were murdered by the IRA, simply because they were protestant and fixing a roof, perhaps you would feel differently about what a legitimate target was.
I completely agree with you on the Unionist working class - absolutely exploited and shafted. The Nationalist working class were more together, much more socially-looking and progressive. Unionist working class was reactionary and a counter-culture. "The loyalist working class had it handed to them on a plate for years, with guaranteed employed to the exclusion of nationalist. When the old industries died they were no longer guaranteed work, the culture of education did not exist in such working class communities to the extent it did in the nationalist but the sense of entitlement did." That's, once again, a rather simple and self-serving view of events. I wouldn't say they had it handed it to them on a plate. Entitlement - well, many believed - and to some extent, rightly so - that they had worked hard and built Northern Ireland into a thriving place of industry (and boy, did some of them work themselves to death, for a better life). All of a sudden, they're the evil oppressors responsible for the sins of Craig etc? The Protestant people may have benefited from this apartheid, but it was not their design - it was the design of their leaders, a complicient Westminster and from those who wanted power. Plus, they didn't want the North to end up like the South. Not everyone had de Valera's image of Ireland, for instance.
Your point about "invading other people's lands, they fight back" is a gross simplification when it comes to Ireland. That's the problem. The settlers were there for hundreds of years. They belong in Ireland as much as the woodkerne do. Your idea of it being a simple occupation is ridiculous. You know it's not as simple as that, and I'm sure you know about the plantations and all that.
Regarding the people from Nothern Ireland, we are one but we're not the same...we don't have the same outlook. Perhaps this is because you associate with people of similar beliefs to yourself, which is logical and understandable. Your frame of thinking is just different to mine - nothing to do with historical knowledge. Bizarrely, through accident, I did not - hence I can see the differences are much greater than you think. However, yes I can see there is a great difference in the city/country divide all over the 32 counties.
I hope modern Nationalism can learn from the mistakes made by itself and others in the past, and should it ever be in a majority position abused by Unionism's elite in the 1920s through until the 1990s, they would not seek to settle the old scores, but show how it should have been from the start - government by the people, for all of the people. I hope that's how the wheel turns. I bet Connelly would, too.
You may know most of your history. Living it is different. How you interpret it to support a romantic (or not) ideal is another thing. If you want to criticise British mistakes, it's easy because they were all over the world, and like big empires they had many areas and many years of mistakes to catalogue. They're a massive target. A wider view of history will teach that - and that's not apologism for the mess left in the Middle East etc. If the Irish had an Empire, would they have acted like the British did? Most probably. No sides suffering is legitimate. None. I don't think it's a cultural thing - it's a human thing, as can be seen over history.
The State didn't have to discriminate against Prods de facto - they let the Roman Catholic church get on with that. Testimonies from many in mixed marriages - such as Bono's father - will show that it certainly was not easy for inter marriages, so of course the rate of protestants dropped. There was discrimination, but it tended to be more subtle. Of course, it was not on the scale it was in the North. Yes, there was not a concerted effort to make it happen, but it did happen.
I can understand how the 1910s and 20s panned out. Votes from the Unionists and HRP affected the political situation at Westminster. Decisions were taken on Ireland with the British political situation in mind - to me that is disgusting. However, that's how the intransigent British establishment worked in those days - and often, towards their own citizens, like in the Peterloo massacre, the Feminist hunger strikes, problems over Chartism etc. I'm not surprised they were stupid enough to shell Dublin in Easter week, and to kill the rebels. Just not thinking about the wider issues, or thinking about what was best for Ireland. So yeah, I can see a notion of Socialism (thanks to Connelly, who like you I respect - much more than say de Valera) in the movement, a notion of creating a fair country. If any period can be romanticised then this can. I cannot see the modern 'troubles' in this light.
If I have to point a finger really at Unionism and the British, with a lack of sympathy, it will be for what was done in the 1960s. Civil rights should have been brought in. After Operation Black Harvest, the IRA were nowhere. There was no appetite for an armed struggle and people did not support it. If we had have had that period sorted out, O'Neill had been supported and Westminster opened its eyes, an awful lot of bloodshed could have been avoided. But no, that opportunity was completely lost. That's what I feel cross about. Once the battle lines were drawn, then the British could say they weren't "negotiating with terrorists" publicly and you get all the 70s rubbish. But it shouldn't have come to that. Civil Rights WAS infiltrated by the IRA, of course it was (the debate is at to when it actually was significant, of which I believe later rather than earlier), but I'm sorry to say that you saying that the British paratroopers coldly murdered civil rights citizens as if that's the stark total reality is misleading. The situation was far more blurred than that. They're not the ones who stretched the notions of what "legitimate targets" were - remember? Maybe if some of your family members were murdered by the IRA, simply because they were protestant and fixing a roof, perhaps you would feel differently about what a legitimate target was.
I completely agree with you on the Unionist working class - absolutely exploited and shafted. The Nationalist working class were more together, much more socially-looking and progressive. Unionist working class was reactionary and a counter-culture. "The loyalist working class had it handed to them on a plate for years, with guaranteed employed to the exclusion of nationalist. When the old industries died they were no longer guaranteed work, the culture of education did not exist in such working class communities to the extent it did in the nationalist but the sense of entitlement did." That's, once again, a rather simple and self-serving view of events. I wouldn't say they had it handed it to them on a plate. Entitlement - well, many believed - and to some extent, rightly so - that they had worked hard and built Northern Ireland into a thriving place of industry (and boy, did some of them work themselves to death, for a better life). All of a sudden, they're the evil oppressors responsible for the sins of Craig etc? The Protestant people may have benefited from this apartheid, but it was not their design - it was the design of their leaders, a complicient Westminster and from those who wanted power. Plus, they didn't want the North to end up like the South. Not everyone had de Valera's image of Ireland, for instance.
Your point about "invading other people's lands, they fight back" is a gross simplification when it comes to Ireland. That's the problem. The settlers were there for hundreds of years. They belong in Ireland as much as the woodkerne do. Your idea of it being a simple occupation is ridiculous. You know it's not as simple as that, and I'm sure you know about the plantations and all that.
Regarding the people from Nothern Ireland, we are one but we're not the same...we don't have the same outlook. Perhaps this is because you associate with people of similar beliefs to yourself, which is logical and understandable. Your frame of thinking is just different to mine - nothing to do with historical knowledge. Bizarrely, through accident, I did not - hence I can see the differences are much greater than you think. However, yes I can see there is a great difference in the city/country divide all over the 32 counties.
I hope modern Nationalism can learn from the mistakes made by itself and others in the past, and should it ever be in a majority position abused by Unionism's elite in the 1920s through until the 1990s, they would not seek to settle the old scores, but show how it should have been from the start - government by the people, for all of the people. I hope that's how the wheel turns. I bet Connelly would, too.
Last edited:
It was an occupation and the plantation was there to cement that, so they are not equal. You have the native indigenous people and those that were brought in to dispossess them. I`m afraid that`s another fact that can`t be brushed aside. It was only a more recent facet of of the colonial process began many centuries before. Regarding Dev, yeah I am no fan of his by any margin. Yes the IRA were out of business, a non entity till the British did what they do best in Ireland and kick themselves in the nuts while trying to take a swipe at the Irish. They never understood the Irish and were always clueless on that front. Regarding the civil rights, yes IRA had no sway in the early days, as I stated they were a non entity but the unionist & Britain would become their greatest recruiting agents.
In relation to bloody Sunday it was cold blooded murder, beyond dispute and there is ample witness evidence to prove same. Ballymurphy massacre 1971,http://www.ballymurphymassacre.com/cms/massacre/, 11 people murdered by the same regiment including including a Catholic priest FR. Hugh Mullan shot dead while giving aid to another man that had been shot just a short time before. The litany of murders carried out by British forces is legion, the carry on here during the War of Independence could fill a volume, just google the Black & Tans and the burning of Cork. On top of that you have British state collusion, reckoned to be responsible for 170 odd murders alone in the Mid-Ulster area by the Finucane centre, during the troubles. Even BBC panorama had ex British army FRU members admitting that in the early 70`s they visited nationalist areas at night & day in unmarked cars with modified weapons killing unarmed innocent civilians in order to give the impression that they were loyalists to create a sectarian war. Be under no illusion these individuals were psychopaths and scum of the earth types. This is a matter of record.
In relation to bloody Sunday it was cold blooded murder, beyond dispute and there is ample witness evidence to prove same. Ballymurphy massacre 1971,http://www.ballymurphymassacre.com/cms/massacre/, 11 people murdered by the same regiment including including a Catholic priest FR. Hugh Mullan shot dead while giving aid to another man that had been shot just a short time before. The litany of murders carried out by British forces is legion, the carry on here during the War of Independence could fill a volume, just google the Black & Tans and the burning of Cork. On top of that you have British state collusion, reckoned to be responsible for 170 odd murders alone in the Mid-Ulster area by the Finucane centre, during the troubles. Even BBC panorama had ex British army FRU members admitting that in the early 70`s they visited nationalist areas at night & day in unmarked cars with modified weapons killing unarmed innocent civilians in order to give the impression that they were loyalists to create a sectarian war. Be under no illusion these individuals were psychopaths and scum of the earth types. This is a matter of record.
Last edited:
Actually if you knew the history of the early Irish they were more interested in spreading the gospel than the sword and spread Christianity across large parts of Europe during the dark ages after it had retreated somewhat, so they brought the cross more than the sword as well as knowledge and education. Irish scholars were much prized by Charlemagne in the 700`s for their intellect and teaching. They also went on to setup monasteries in numerous areas from Saint Columbanus who founded numerous monasteries in the Frankish and Lombard kingdoms, most notably Bobbio Abbey in 614, others in Switzerland and St. Columba in Iona, Scotland. Even did the English a turn for all the good it did us.
See we Irish didn`t need civilising, as we were the ones spreading civilisation, but of course that does not suit the narrative of the conqueror and the thick bog Irish. You have to dehumanise a people before you set about destroying them, Hitler & co. knew that trick as well.
See we Irish didn`t need civilising, as we were the ones spreading civilisation, but of course that does not suit the narrative of the conqueror and the thick bog Irish. You have to dehumanise a people before you set about destroying them, Hitler & co. knew that trick as well.
Last edited:
Internment - stupid, stupid, stupid. Was the first time, was the second time. Special Powers Act - ugh.
Bloody Sunday - why didn't you say so, or were you waiting to say just to justify your sweeping statement? I'm glad you name what you are on about, specific incidents. I am not disputing that, and I do not need educating on that. I know my history - you are telling me nothing new. If you're talking with others in mind, please tell them the whole story.
I hate to say it, but what happened on Bloody Sunday has been widely known in NI for a very long time.
What I am disputing is how you can give the impression of a permanent situation of unlawful massacre from incidents. That's not on. Yes, there are incidents where what you say did happen that way, or mostly happened that way. I am utterly disgusted by them - but equally disgusted how young soldiers, who knew nothing of the situation, had to watch their comrades blown to bits or used as target practice in South Armagh. Many thought they were serving their country - now their time there is being rewritten by many who weren't even there - such as you - as being an oppressive force. That's not the whole truth, it's a snapshot.
Sadly NI was full of snapshots at that time...the most permanent thing was IRA bombs. Friday night is gelignite. That's a fact you can't look past.
Pat Finucane - I'm under no illusion, and I am very well aware of Pat Finucane and state collusion, sadly more aware of it than you can imagine. I will say - are you surprised, and do you think that's exclusively a British problem? And how many loyalist psychopaths have you spent time around? (not recommended) As I've said, reading it in a book and seeing it on TV are no substitute for actually experiencing it. Having said that, I am not saying that such experience is actually desirable in any shape or form!
Anyway enough, I agree with you on many things, just please refrain from distortion, it insults too many who cannot speak for themselves anymore because of Unionism, because of Imperialism, because of Republicanism.
Bloody Sunday - why didn't you say so, or were you waiting to say just to justify your sweeping statement? I'm glad you name what you are on about, specific incidents. I am not disputing that, and I do not need educating on that. I know my history - you are telling me nothing new. If you're talking with others in mind, please tell them the whole story.
I hate to say it, but what happened on Bloody Sunday has been widely known in NI for a very long time.
What I am disputing is how you can give the impression of a permanent situation of unlawful massacre from incidents. That's not on. Yes, there are incidents where what you say did happen that way, or mostly happened that way. I am utterly disgusted by them - but equally disgusted how young soldiers, who knew nothing of the situation, had to watch their comrades blown to bits or used as target practice in South Armagh. Many thought they were serving their country - now their time there is being rewritten by many who weren't even there - such as you - as being an oppressive force. That's not the whole truth, it's a snapshot.
Sadly NI was full of snapshots at that time...the most permanent thing was IRA bombs. Friday night is gelignite. That's a fact you can't look past.
Pat Finucane - I'm under no illusion, and I am very well aware of Pat Finucane and state collusion, sadly more aware of it than you can imagine. I will say - are you surprised, and do you think that's exclusively a British problem? And how many loyalist psychopaths have you spent time around? (not recommended) As I've said, reading it in a book and seeing it on TV are no substitute for actually experiencing it. Having said that, I am not saying that such experience is actually desirable in any shape or form!
Anyway enough, I agree with you on many things, just please refrain from distortion, it insults too many who cannot speak for themselves anymore because of Unionism, because of Imperialism, because of Republicanism.
Last edited: