Micheal Collins

Riamfada

Hey Just watched the movie there (im still in work) and i was wondering is there a statue of that man anywhere in the city?

Im aware that the movie is hyped for hollywood and all that but as a student of history I and everyone else is quite aware of what he did for the country.

And I just thought of a statue of phill lynott outside bruxelles? Whats the story there?

Another Poll

Collins Statue

yeay or nay

Peace

Grimes wrote:

Hey Just watched the movie there (im still in work) and i was wondering is there a statue of that man anywhere in the city?

Im aware that the movie is hyped for hollywood and all that but as a student of history I and everyone else is quite aware of what he did for the country.

And I just thought of a statue of phill lynott outside bruxelles? Whats the story there?

Another Poll

Collins Statue

yeay or nay

Don't forget that if the movie was filmed from Dev's side then MC would come off like a cnut.

Riamfada

Peace wrote:

Don't forget that if the movie was filmed from Dev's side then MC would come off like a cnut.

Well there are questions over Dev's actions and well from his Fianna Fail days he didnt do much for this country that no other man wouldn't have done and in the end it wasnt even him who implemented a republic. He also destroyed the cattle industry in the 30's for no real reason , perhaps just to spite the british ruining the lives of many Irish farmers .

He also kept the church in power in this country while the rest of the world grew up.

senordingdong

Peace wrote:

Don't forget that if the movie was filmed from Dev's side then MC would come off like a cnut.

Ah yeah, but the movie wasn't called.....'Eamon DeValera.'

Mr.Nice Guy

Alot of the stuff about Dev is unfair. For example people cite a speech he reputedly made talking about wading through rivers of Irish blood but historians will point out that if you read the entire speech, he actually warned that this could happen as opposed to actually calling for it to happen.

You say:

Grimes wrote:

he didnt do much for this country that no other man wouldn't have done

What about WW2? He kept Ireland neutral. Others might have caved in to pressure from America or Britain or accepted Churchill's sketchy offer of a united Ireland. Read his speech in response to Churchill's attack on Ireland after WW2 ended. It's a masterpiece.

Grimes wrote:

in the end it wasnt even him who implemented a republic.

Nonsense. Under Dev Ireland became "a Republic in all but name". I take it you're referring to the fact that Fine Gael took Ireland out of the Commonwealth and actually legally established the Republic? Big deal. By then, there was no risk involved. Under de Valera, the Oath of Allegiance was abolished, the Governal-General position was severely limited and eventually abolished, and a new constitution was established which provided for a President and the constitution of 1937 is largely the same as the one of today. All of this was risky. The reason de Valera didn't go ahead and establish the Republic legally as Fine Gael went on to do, was because de Valera felt, and history proved him right, that by doing so it would end the last link between north and south and thus make ending partition even harder.

I personally think de Valera was Ireland's finest politician of the 20th century.

By the way,that quote at the end of Micahel Collins, allegedly by de Valera, which goes along the lines of "In the fullness of history I believe history will judge me at the expense of Collins..."

That quote is bullsh*t. It's taken from Tim Pat Coogan's book on Collins and when Coogan was asked where he got the quote from he gave a very dodgy account that he was told it by a friend of de Valera's. Coogan also made a book on de Valera in which he depicted de Valera as being very nervous and edgy while the Rising was taking place and he basically made de Valera out to be incompetent and that he effectively had a nervous breakdown. This too is disputed by historians.

Tim Pat Coogan has an agenda. He wants to make Collins look good and de Valera look bad. The movie 'Micahel Collins' has a similar agenda.

People should read up on the facts and question everything instead of believing bullsh*t films like 'Michael Collins'. That film states that 'Broy' was killed by the British. In actual fact he lived for many more years and headed the famous 'Broy Harriers'!

Why let historical fact get in the way of a good propaganda tale though eh?

Riamfada

Dev attacked the treaty and refused to partake in the democratic process . His party of bandits even brought firearms to the transfer of power from Cumann na Gaedhael to Fianna Fail almost a decade after things had settled down.

He used a treaty he attacked to implement the changes to the "Free State"

Ireland missed out on many european opportunities after the war and invested the american aid in forestry which gave no benifits to post-war society.

He stayed neutral argualby to prevent a devsion among the anti-english and anti-german. Any right minded man would have done the same. Many would say that Ireland didnt openly stand and help in the defeat of the Nazis when millions were dying to preserve HER freedom.

Devs constitution has been described as written by a "priest and a terrorist" which is unbelievable that we still follow some of its rules.

The North would never join the south no matter what the circumstances. And never will

I said that the film was hyped and I dont believe Collins was perfect and wouldnt have made a good national leader if he lived. Cumann NaG set the ball rolling for Dev and he took the reigns. (they brought in changes to make Ireland a republic "in name" also and would have continued to do so)

Im not going on Coogans book but simply by the facts.IMO Dev Crippled this country well into the 60's until Lemass took over and at that stage the country took another 30 years to recover

Michael Collins is a ledge.if he hadnt been assasinated, he would have played a more prominent role than dev in politics.

Dev did incite violence against the free state. he supported the ira up untill 1933!

psicic

First – on-topic - there's no statue of Michael Collins in Dublin. One was erected in Cork (Clonakilty, I think) a few years back, but none in the capital.

Dublin statues are a mess anyway - if you ever wondered about why some (fairly obscure) people in Dublin are commemorated by statues and others aren't, the reason is that half these statues were erected by trusts, companies or individuals who no longer exist/are living. Dublin Corpo does not hold the rights to alter or remove many of the statues, and afaik the National Monuments Commission only has a role in relation to the monuments it erects.

There was talk of a streets commission to oversee all this, but that collapsed back in the mid-eighties.

I suppose if people felt passionately enough about it, an application could be made to the council for permission to erect a statue to the man. (hmmm....imagine the headlines - 'Forum users granted permission to erect statue commemorating Michael Collins.' )

!(rest of comment veers off topic)!
The man was brutally intelligent - and I mean that in all regards. He would have either been a disastrous or tremendous leader for the country - either way I think it's safe to say that Ireland would be a very different place if he had lived for another decade or two.

As for deValera....I don't think my opinion of him and the legacy he has left would be constructive to the original statue question. I cannot overlook the people who’ve gained power partly because of their tenuous link to the man, and their subsequent misuse of same – therefore I would be judging him on the actions of others. Is anyone else a little disturbed by the continued existence of Irish Press after shutting down their newspaper overnight in 1995 on an IR issue after receiving so much grant aid from State??? Anyone else disturbed by the makeup of their board???:mad:
Yet I tend not to give credit to others(like Lemass) who could be described as both a deV cronie and a brilliant leader!!!

there is actuallt a michael collins statue in beal na blath iirc.

Riamfada

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

Why let historical fact get in the way of a good propaganda tale though eh?

Thats the way the facts are interpreted by most people . Its all about how you percieve the facts. Unfortuantly Collins died a hero while Dev lived on to face the trials of attempting to run a country. He did have his good points but as a man and a national leader he failed. Sorry!


PS: Thanks Dazzler

Mr.Nice Guy

Grimes wrote:

Dev attacked the treaty and refused to partake in the democratic process .

The treaty shouldn't have been signed in the first place. That wasn't what was agreed with the delegates. They were to report back to him.

Grimes wrote:

He used a treaty he attacked to implement the changes to the "Free State"

Because sitting on the sidelines with Sinn Féin would have achieved nothing. SF made their feelings on entering the Dáil quite clear.

Grimes wrote:

Ireland missed out on many european opportunities after the war and invested the american aid in forestry which gave no benifits to post-war society.

Ireland could have been decimated though had things turned out differently.

Grimes wrote:

He stayed neutral argualby to prevent a devsion among the anti-english and anti-german. Any right minded man would have done the same.

Would they? When the Americans and the British are constantly harrassing you and warning that they will cut off supplies? When Irish Unity is tantalisingly put before your eyes? You shouldn't scoff at such massive life-altering decisions.

Grimes wrote:

Many would say that Ireland didnt openly stand and help in the defeat of the Nazis when millions were dying to preserve HER freedom.

Those people would be morons. Wouldn't you agree?

Grimes wrote:

Devs constitution has been described as written by a "priest and a terrorist" which is unbelievable that we still follow some of its rules.

If you read some of the books on the Irish constitution such as from UCD's own Garvin and Coakley, his constitution is largely praised as is the fact that he could have gone further with the role he gave the Catholic Church but yet he did not.

Grimes wrote:

The North would never join the south no matter what the circumstances. And never will

We'll have to agree to differ on that one.

Grimes wrote:

Im not going on Coogans book but simply by the facts.IMO Dev Crippled this country well into the 60's until Lemass took over and at that stage the country took another 30 years to recover

Perhaps de Valera was poor on the economic front but do you not concede that he was brilliant on the war issue?

Mr.Nice Guy

Deleted User wrote:

Dev did incite violence against the free state. he supported the ira up untill 1933!

Collins was supporting the IRA in the north and sending them aid.

Deleted User wrote:

He did have his good points but as a man and a national leader he failed. Sorry!

Keeping Ireland safe when pretty much all of Europe was being destroyed is the sign of a bad leader? I don't think so. He got elected often enough for someone you regard as a failure!

He was the oldest Head of State for crying out loud. Great man.

Mr.Nice Guy

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

Collins was supporting the IRA in the north and sending them aid.



Keeping Ireland safe when pretty much all of Europe was being destroyed is the sign of a bad leader? I don't think so. He got elected often enough for someone you regard as a failure!

He was the oldest Head of State for crying out loud. Great man.

i didnt quote the 2nd thing!how did that happen?

Riamfada

MNG I really respect you opinion but you seem to be looking at the mans individual decisions and not the man as a whole

With regard to those quotes
1)You say that the treaty shouldnt have been signed even under the threat of a , an i quote "immediate and terrible war"(the british delagation) which would have slaughtered the Irish and cemented her place in the Union forever. Then you say in 1939-1945 DeV was right to stay out of the war to protect Ireland and her people. He would let Ireland be destroyed over the treaty but not over global peace and Irelands saftey?

2) He seemed only to use democracy when it suited him. He walked outta the Dail. He didnt invite the Gov General to the Eucharistic Congress when it is diplomatic entiquite to do so.

3)Any right man would know that N.Ireland could not have simply been given to the South by Churchill and it was a bluff. (simular to the way Loyyd George Played The Irish on that point before)

4)Im proud of Irelands neutrality or should I say was proud of it. Dev made the right decision on the neutraility thing.

5) He was a poor economist and a mediocre politician , faced with difficult decisions he made the right ones but nothing Griffith or perhaps (PERHAPS) Cosgrave would have done.

Riamfada

DeV got votes in the thirties mainly because he was the last of the republican crowd from 1916. Loyalties and all that. Also CnaG were too moderate and the people wanted MORE and DeV was the only option.




ONE THING : While Collins saw the treaty as a stepping stone DeV attacked it as a cop out! It proved to be DeV's stepping stone to acchieve a republic. Surely he should have ripped it up no? Why? Becuase it was the only ticket to a united ireland under irish rule.He also clearly sent collins, an uneducated soldier to lead the irish delagates to take the fall. Dev was well aware that the treaty had to be signed and he wasnt going to be the one to do it.

The Politician outwitting the Soldier

Mr.Nice Guy

Grimes wrote:

MNG I really respect you opinion but you seem to be looking at the mans individual decisions and not the man as a whole

I respect your opinion as well but you seem to concentrate solely on the man's flaws rather than giving him credit where it's due.

Grimes wrote:

1)You say that the treaty shouldnt have been signed even under the threat of a , an i quote "immediate and terrible war"(the british delagation) which would have slaughtered the Irish and cemented her place in the Union forever.

Nonsense. You take what Lloyd George says seriously? The guy who insinuated the Boundary Commission would hand over huge chunks of territory to the Free State which was a downright lie? Do you really think the British would have risked opinion in America and indeed at home in Britain by obliterating Ireland? It was a bluff.

Grimes wrote:

Then you say in 1939-1945 DeV was right to stay out of the war to protect Ireland and her people. He would let Ireland be destroyed over the treaty but not over global peace and Irelands saftey?

Ireland wouldn't have been destoryed over the Treaty in my view. Nazism was a very real threat though. Far greater than the British would have been.

Grimes wrote:

2) He seemed only to use democracy when it suited him. He walked outta the Dail.

The delegates had betrayed the Republic. He acted on principle.

Grimes wrote:

He didnt invite the Gov General to the Eucharistic Congress when it is diplomatic entiquite to do so.

The Governer General was a British servant! So what!

Grimes wrote:

3)Any right man would know that N.Ireland could not have simply been given to the South by Churchill and it was a bluff. (simular to the way Loyyd George Played The Irish on that point before)

I agree it was a bluff but many would have fallen for it. How come you accept Churchill and George can bluff on that issue but yet you take Goerge's word on 'terrible war' as sacrosanct?

Grimes wrote:

4)Im proud of Irelands neutrality or should I say was proud of it. Dev made the right decision on the neutraility thing.

Agreed.

Grimes wrote:

5) He was a poor economist and a mediocre politician , faced with difficult decisions he made the right ones but nothing Griffith or perhaps (PERHAPS) Cosgrave would have done.

How is he mediocre? The sheer amount of time he spent in politics shows he was not. You cna only specualte on what Griffith, Cosgrave, you or I would have done. De Valera had to make the decisions though and he amde them well. That's not the sign of a mediocre politician.

Grimes wrote:

DeV got votes in the thirties mainly because he was the last of the republican crowd from 1916. Loyalties and all that.

Eh? Sean lemass wa a veteran of the Rising and he was around in the sixties!

Grimes wrote:

Also CnaG were too moderate and the people wanted MORE and DeV was the only option.

Guess he wasn't so 'mediocre' after all. The real reason Fianna Fáil were victorious in 1932 was because CnaG played on the whole 'Red Scare' issue and they portrayed de Valera as akin to a Communist. The voters rejected this notion entirely. CnaG messed up because they didn't focus on their strengths, namely the stability they brought to the Free State.

Grimes wrote:

ONE THING : While Collins saw the treaty as a stepping stone DeV attacked it as a cop out!

Collins was referring to the North. History proves Dev was right on that because Fine Gael took Ireland out of the Commonwealth ending the last north/south link. You don't think Collins simply wanted a 26 county Republic do you?

Grimes wrote:

It proved to be DeV's stepping stone to acchieve a republic.

Sorry Grimes but Dev stated that if he didn't unite the country before his death he would consider his political career a failure. Collins would have thought likewise.

Grimes wrote:

Surely he should have ripped it up no? Why? Becuase it was the only ticket to a united ireland under irish rule.

What are you saying here?

Grimes wrote:

He also clearly sent collins, an uneducated soldier to lead the irish delagates to take the fall.

First of all, Collins wasn't uneducated, he was inexperienced. There's a big difference. He didn't send Collins to take the fall. Dev was the President of the Republic and he didn't feel a Head of State should negotiate and he also wanted to keep an eye on extremists like Brugha. Collins was given orders not to sign anything without Dev's consent.

Grimes wrote:

Dev was well aware that the treaty had to be signed and he wasnt going to be the one to do it.

Why did it have to be signed? Was the word 'No' not in their vocabulary?

Riamfada

Ill tackle all that somtime tomorrow . Its 5:30 and i have two hours of work left and Im simply not up to it.

Nite MNG M8

flogen

Watch The Treaty rather than Michael Collins.
I'm not getting into a debate about who is better than whom, but if you want to see a less bias account of the event, then that's yer only man. (it also has Gleeson as Collins, a much better choice IMO on looks and acting ability)

Riamfada

Perhaps there should be a statue of both in town.
But not on the same street of course

the_menace

Dev was a poor-average politican and not a particularly likable character. Most people agree with this. Those who don't are entitled to their opinion of course. 100% of people I know that met/knew him personally, didn't like the man at all. At the end of the day it's been consigned to the history books so I wouldn't personally spend too much time thinking about it. Onwards and upwards.

Sparky

bloddy right there should be a statue, im one of the many few that have a real photo of him in our house in the hall.

OFDM

Grimes wrote:

Then you say in 1939-1945 DeV was right to stay out of the war to protect Ireland and her people. He would let Ireland be destroyed over the treaty but not over global peace and Irelands saftey?

Don't forget that the British and Americans were as much our enemies in the 1940's as the Germans were - the Allies even had a plan to invade Ireland if the D-Day landings failed.

Dyr

Read his speech in response to Churchill's attack on Ireland after WW2 ended. It's a masterpiece.

Absolutely, ive no time for dev but that speech is an excellent rebuke. One thing i didnt know was he reference to churchill making those remarks in the "flush of victory" was actually a swipe at winnie for being a little tipsy when he delivered his initial speech

Dave!

I love that speech too...

Got it off wiki, if anyone hasn't read it:

Churchill
"The approaches which the southern Irish ports and airfields could so easily have guarded were closed by the hostile aircraft and U-boats. This indeed was a deadly moment in our life, and if it had not been for the loyalty and friendship of Northern Ireland, we should have been forced to come to close quarters with Mr. de Valera, or perish from the earth. However, with a restraint and poise to which, I venture to say, history will find few parallels, His Majesty’s Government never laid a violent hand upon them, though at times it would have been quite easy and quite natural, and we left the de Valera Government to frolic with the German and later with the Japanese representatives to their heart’s content."

De Valera
"Allowances can be made for Mr. Churchill’s statement, however unworthy, in the first flush of victory. No such excuse could be found for me in this quieter atmosphere. There are, however, some things it is essential to say. I shall try to say them as dispassionately as I can. Mr. Churchill makes it clear that, in certain circumstances, he would have violated our neutrality and that he would justify his actions by Britain’s necessity. It seems strange to me that Mr. Churchill does not see that this, if accepted, would become a moral code and that when this necessity became sufficiently great, other people’s rights were not to count... that is precisely why we had this disastrous succession of wars - World War No.1 and World War No.2 - and shall it be World War No.3? Mr. Churchill is proud of Britain’s stand alone, after France had fallen and before America entered the war. Could he not find in his heart the generosity to acknowledge that there is a small nation that stood alone not for one year or two, but for several hundred years against aggression; that endured spoliations, famine, massacres, in endless succession; that was clubbed many times into insensibility, but each time on returning to consciousness took up the fight anew; a small nation that could never be got to accept defeat and has never surrendered her soul?"

PhoenixRising

To the OP - there is a memorial outside Leinster House for Michael Collins, Kevin O'Higgins and Arthur Griffith.

senordingdong

I think he should be comemerated but some historians believe that had he not died, Ireland could have become a military dictatorship.

There's something to think about it.