Will the 100th anniversary of the 1916 Rising be less devisive than the 50th was?

Nodin wrote: »

What was this "doctrine of militarism" they were trying to force on people?

If 'Militarism' was so unpopular, why were so many off fighting in WW1?

The Irish people did not support the kind of proto fascism paramilitarism that Pearse insisted was in the national interest, without ANY popular support whatsoever. Its legacy has been the creation of an utter monstrosity in the north, and of a group of people who feel they are entitled to murder and maim so long as 'Ireland is unfree'. Pearse was a monster, 1916 was a travesty, and its inheritence is murder.

A "weirdo" eh? I'm glad you're using such scientific terms. Well, we can't be harbouring any 'weirdos'. I'm sure a test for such creatures is carried out when applying for any public office or position of responsibility. We really do owe much to technology ( I hear theres an iphone app that can spot them at 10 paces )

As to "asexual" - lets imagine, for the sake of it, that Mr Pearse was in fact asexual, established beyond argument. How would that make his views and actions any less or more valid than if he was either homosexual, or heterosexual?

Come on Nodin, don't do this shrug of the shoulders thing. He was a strange chap, learn to accept it.

If you are true Irishmen and Irishwomen and if you truly love your country you must unashamedly honour the men and women of 1916.
1916 inevitably is divisive - tell me of one revolution that isn't?
In 1914 the Home Rule Bill had been passed by both houses of the British parliament. The IPP majority was won in 1910 because the Irish people demanded Home Rule. The UVF, their Tory supporters and the British Army conspired to suppress the democratic will of the majority of the Irish people. The UVF was allowed to import 20,000 German rifles and mobilise to oppose Home Rule while the British Army in Ireland refused to implement the law while the Tories openly supported this treason.
When the Irish Volunteers organised to defend Home Rule, they faced DMP and RIC harrasment, arrest and imprisonment.
John Redmond meanwhile duped tens of thousands of Irishmen to fight for Britain in the Great War and as many as 50,000 perished. At the Irish Convention in 1917 the Unionists refused to support Home Rule or any other arrangement.
Quite clearly the democratic will of the Irish people had been usurped.
Pearse had been a Home Ruler as were many nationalists whether in Sinn Féin or the IPP and they were betrayed at every turn.
It was quite clear the after the Great War that Irish Home Rule already suspended would be opposed at every turn by the Tory government.
That is why the patriots who fought in 1916 deserve recognition for their sacrifice.
They had no democratic backing but when national aspirations are usurped what rebel group ever had democratic backing? Did the French Resistance seek democratic support the defeat the occupation of their country? It is clear that the groundwell of support for Irish republicanism following 1916 justified the rising. People who were sitting on the fence became radicalised over night.
After their victory in 1918 when Sinn Féin MPs were jailed and imprisoned the remainder called the British bluff and established Dáil Éireann.
Men like Dan Breen, Seán Treacy and others began the War of Independence and when their actions were met by the British establishment of an openly tyrannical military regime and the introduction of the Tans and Auxilliaries who attempted to cow the people, it was clear there was no alternative but armed struggle.
The British were at war with the Irish people - their attempts to kill Irish nationalism with kindness had failed ignominously and they resorted to their old tactic of brute force.
Anyone who fails to acknowledge the heroism of the rebels of 1916 who lit the spark of the fire that gave this nation its liberty is clearly delusional or else tragically ignorant of history.
The Rising and the War of Independence and most tragically the Civil War were not pretty but they were necessary to create the democratic freedoms we all enjoy today no matter what our political opinions are.
The Irish Revolution of 1916-1923 lit the spark of other revolutions around the world and inspired other nations to break the link with tyranny and empire and dictatorship around the world.
Before 1916 the Irish people were serfs, slave-minded and men like Pearse and the patriots who took up arms sought to lift the nation out of the shadow of Britain.

KeithAFC wrote: »

Ulstermen wanting freedom you mean?

The UVF and their unionist fellow travellers in the rest of the country sought to crush Irish nationalist aspirations entirely not just in Ulster but across the island of Ireland.
In the end they got their six county sectarian statelet.
But had Irish nationalists not fought for the Irish Republic there would have been no 26 county Free State let alone a 26 county Irish Republic.
The British Army and the Anglo-Irish Protestant elite in the south sought to crush the Irish people's aspirations for independence.

LordSutch wrote: »

But of course, there was no revolution in 1916, and regarding your long winded ramble in praise of the rebels

I didn't ramble. I spoke the facts of history. If you would bother to read about the history of the period - Max Caulfield, Tim Pat Coogan, Michael Hopkinson, Peter Hart, Mena Ryan, Richard English etc. would be a good place to start - it would be immediately clear that 1916 radicalized fence sitting Irish nationalists.

I for one would not buy into the "heroes of 1916" who to my mind were opportunist rebels and nothing more

What other kind of rebel is there except an opportunist? The French resistance were opportunists. The Libyan rebels were opportunists.

, who then took it upon themselves (without widespread support) to declare and then start a rebellion!!!

How else was an Irish Republic going to come about? The British had suspended even the limited Home Rule which was on offer before 1916. The subsequent brutality of the British to the Irish people during the Tan War clearly shows force would have to have been used somewhere down the line. The Treaty signatories had a gun to their head when they signed the Treaty in 1922 - "war in three days". The people had no arms or organization so a small secretive militant group would have to do for them. That's what patriotism and sacrifice about. That's why men like Pearse took it upon themselves to light the spark.

Many people were killed, including many policemen, many civilians, many soldiers, many rebels too. Homes and shops were burnt down and Dublin was in ruins (thank you rebels), and I say this in the full knowledge that most people milling around Dublin in that week of 1916 would agree with me 100%.

And of course when the Allies were fighting through France, the bombs and shells they were firing killed only German soldiers? No innocent French civilians were killed at all no? Nobody should ever fight a war because of civilian casualties eh?

Pearse read out the proclamation to a handful of supporters and a dog

So what? Men like the O'Rahilly and John McBride and others who had opposed an uprising were stirred to take part.

, so there was no great Revolution in 1916, and there was no great groundswell of support either

Between 1918-1922 there was a groundswell of support and large areas of the country became ungovernable by the British. The people voted for Sinn Féin repeatedly at local and national level. They endorsed the Irish Republic that Pearse et al proclaimed. Flying columns could not have operated without the popular support across much of the country and the flow of intelligence into the hands of the IRA GHQ. There wasn't armed action across all of the country but there were mass campaigns of civil disobedience, roads cut, railroads cut and other acts of sabotage.

but there certainly was lots of anti rebel feeling in that Easter of 1916

That soon changed after the executions and when the rebels returned from Frognach and other prisons they were greeted as heroes by large crowds. Willie Redmond's seat was won by De Valera in 1917.

, and the rebels got to know about that as they were led away to the jibes to jeers from the public at large, many of whom had their sons fighting & dying on the western front against ze Germans. From many an Irishman's point of view in 1916, the rebels stabbed them in the back while they were fighting the Germans in Europe. Nothing too controversial there I hope.

When those men who had fought in World War I came home and voted in the 'khaki' election of November 1918 they voted overwhelmingly for Sinn Féin. Men like Tom Barry who had fought in Mespotamia and many others joined the IRA and fought for their country. People who supported the war effort including members of Redmond party turned to Sinn Féin. The conscription crisis demonstrates that the majority of people turned against the Great War in 1918 which fed into the tide of nationalism.

As I said - read the history of the period before demonstrating your historical ignorance.
How do you think in the space of a little over 2 years Sinn Féin won such an overwhelming majority unless 1916 had something to do with it?

These electoral maps say it all :

LordSutch wrote: »

Thing is, I was talking about Easter 1916, but you are muddying the waters by bringing in 1917-1922.

The events of 1917-1922 would not have happened only for the events of 1916 and are inseparable from the Rising. The rebels clearly captured the mood of the country. The person who is trying to muddy the waters is you. There is clear link between the repeated frustration of Irish constitutional nationalism since the 1880s and 1890s by British conspiracy and the explosive consequences of the suspension of Home Rule once again in 1914. 1916 and the 1919-1922 independence struggle came about when democratic alternatives had been crushed.

murphaph wrote: »

Says you. The rebels became martyrs when the British executed them. If they had merely imprisoned them the sequence of events may have been entirely different.

Sure. Believe what you want.
It would have made no difference. The popular desire for Irish freedom was a wave that could not be held back.
You are ignoring the fact that tens of thousands across Ireland rushed to join the Irish Volunteers in order to defend Irish Home Rule prior to 1914?
The Tories and Unionists were opposed to Irish independence in any form.
The Treaty that was imposed on Collins and Griffith et al with the explicit threat of immediate and terrible war flew in face of the democratic aspirations of the majority of the Irish people who had voted for Sinn Féin. The national mood was clearly in favour of a Republic.
If the rebels had been imprisoned they still would have gained support anyway.
Pearse was an inspirational figure. Imagine if he had not been shot?
Consider that De Valera returned as hero and was elected easily by the voters of Clare? Pearse would have been met with even greater enthusiasm.
You are deluding yourself.