Dublin Still a cold house for Unionists

troubleshooter

http://realnationalistsonline.myfreeforum.org/Dublin_Still_A_Cold_Place_For_Unionists_about311.html



Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2010 12:40 pm Post subject: Dublin Still A Cold Place For Unionists Dublin Still A Cold Place For Unionists
http://www.grandorangelodge.co.uk...ndard/1007-July2010/article5.html

Article 5 ~ July 2010

The author has a point, history on tours etc should be objective and the unionist contribution pointed out.

On a recent visit to Dublin, my itinerary included a conducted tour of the Dail, the seat of the Southern Parliament.

I am grateful to my hosts, and to the tour guide who gave us a talk on the history of Leinster House, once city home of the famous Fitzgerald family, and Dukes of Leinster.

Some 90 years since British rule ended in the 26 counties, there are still glimpses of the enormous impact which the Crown exerted in the South.

There is a statue of Prince Albert, Consort of Queen Victoria, in the grounds of Leinster House, but the statue of the Queen which once adorned the grounds has gone, and I am told it is now proudly possessed by the city of Melbourne in Australia.

A companion who was with me on the tour of the Dail, and also to other historic parts of Dublin, remarked that so many of the famous buildings in what was once the second city of the British Empire were built by the British.

That applies to the former Vice-Regal Lodge in the Phoenix Park, now the home of the President of the Republic, Dublin Castle, to the Four Courts, the Customs House, and of course the marvellous Georgian houses which still adorn much of central Dublin.

But successive Southern Governments have done their best to erase the evidence of the once strong links with Britain, and to airbrush into history the service which was rendered to the Crown and to Britain by huge numbers of Southern people.

The talks by tour guides in the Dail, Dublin Castle, and other famous buildings, hardly refer to the British connection, and when they do, it is in a not so thinly disguised disapproval.

All the personalities of the Dublin Rising of 1916 are eulogised and presented as the heroes, while the British are very much portrayed as the 'bad guys'.

Fair enough, as it has often been said that history is written by the victors.

Nevertheless, it is regrettable that the information given to overseas visitors, and indeed to those from the United Kingdom, omits to mention that the vast majority of the Irish people disapproved of the actions of those who fired the shots at the GPO in Dublin at Easter 1916.

Only a small number of men and women were involved in the Rising, a minute number compared to the tens of thousands of Southern Irishmen fighting in France and other theatres of war in the British Army.

Many of those men displayed great heroism and brought honour to their country in fighting for the right of small nations like Belgium.

Sadly, their legacy has been one of being downplayed at least, or completely ignored as is so often the case.

None of the guides mentioned that the Protestant population in the South of Ireland in 1916 amounted to 350,000, and that had dropped to just over 100,000 less than 10 years later.

Or that most of the Southern counties in the 1920s contained Orange lodges, and the headquarters of the Order were in the Fowler Hall in Dublin, a building taken over by the anti-Treaty element of the IRA, and many priceless documents and artefacts destroyed.

In spite of the welcome improvement in relationships between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, the clear impression is that the South remains a 'cold house' for Protestants and not a scenario likely to attract Ulster Protestants to supporting any form of a united Ireland.

And, incidentally, of the dozens of flags of many nations flying from hotels, guesthouses, taverns and public buildings in the Dublin central area, I noticed that not one of them was the flag of the United Kingdom, the country which provides so many tourists, and also jobs for hundreds of thousands of Southern Irish people who live and work in Britain. Need I say more!

oscarBravo

Per the forum charter, please add your own thoughts to this.

Cavehill Red

From the tone (and slanted depiction of events) it seems that the author of article the OP cites would prefer an Ireland which portrayed itself as a grateful vassal to the British Empire which repeatedly conducted genocide on Irish soil.
Not tremendously surprising when one notes that the article is sourced from the sectarian Orange Order.
That narrative fails to note the current notable INCREASE in the Protestant community in the Republic, nor the existence of Orange lodges there to this day despite their triumphalist and contentious marches through Nationalist areas of the North.
Unlike the sectarian statelet still occupied by Britain, the Republic is a genuinely pluralist and secular society where religion is no bar to progress and no denial of merit.
The only cold house on this island remains the one where the occupants were forced to flee for the 12th fortnight due to intimidatory marches by triumphalist drunks past their doorstep.

Notorious97

To be honest, i don’t see why we need to ‘praise’ the British connection to this country. I agree that relations are always improving which is welcome, but our past is our past. They were not welcome rulers, they neglected the country to be honest, i don’t see the harm in removing statues and objects which are from an era of an imperial regime in this land which wasn’t again welcome.

Our past until 1922 specifically with Britain wasn’t a happy one, you don’t have to be a genius to see this. I personally welcome the involvement of unionists (who are usually protestant but not always) in a united Ireland one day, plenty of Irish heroes have been protestant and religion should play no part in who gets a say in the running of a country.

I don’t see why they were expecting to see southern Ireland full of praise for being ruled by a tyrant? Irish peoples experiences under a foreign crown who our people never pledged any allegiance to would of course be different to unionists who welcome the crown into their affairs etc.

As for WW1, well i never agreed with Irishmen and women joining the British army and fighting for a foreign power (even if it was for money only) and i have both great grandfathers who fought in this war for Britain. I do personally think people who enlisted were obviously brave to do so, but to be honest they joined an occupying powers armed forces which to me is a traitor. Yes there was lower numbers involved in the Rising, but if the others had stayed at home and ignored the sh*te deal that home rule was and the promise of it after the war, who knows how the Rising would have turned out.

Interesting view all the same in the article, but i don’t see why we need to praise Britain in our history, when it was far from happy times.

sensibleken

I think this guy would feel like this regardless and came here to prove to himself that its not welcoming to protestants. I think most people know protestants, i have some in my family, and no body gives two sh1ts.

yes the british built most of the buildings, such as college green and trinity which were highly prejudiced towards the Irish Catholics and the georgian houses used as tenements when the upper classes got bored.

Its attitudes like his which stops things moving on

troubleshooter

Cavehill Red wrote: »

From the tone (and slanted depiction of events) it seems that the author of article the OP cites would prefer an Ireland which portrayed itself as a grateful vassal to the British Empire which repeatedly conducted genocide on Irish soil.
Not tremendously surprising when one notes that the article is sourced from the sectarian Orange Order.
That narrative fails to note the current notable INCREASE in the Protestant community in the Republic, nor the existence of Orange lodges there to this day despite their triumphalist and contentious marches through Nationalist areas of the North.
Unlike the sectarian statelet still occupied by Britain, the Republic is a genuinely pluralist and secular society where religion is no bar to progress and no denial of merit.
The only cold house on this island remains the one where the occupants were forced to flee for the 12th fortnight due to intimidatory marches by triumphalist drunks past their doorstep.

How is the republic secular when the church owns most of the schools and hospitals and many other things.

Cavehill Red

troubleshooter wrote: »

How is the republic secular when the church owns most of the schools and hospitals and many other things.

They don't own the health or education system. There are schools and hospitals with a Protestant ethos, and those with no religious ethos.
Unlike our close neighbour, which remains constitutionally a feudal kingdom under the rule of the head of a single religious sect.

sensibleken

ok. i now see where this is going. outta here

troubleshooter

Cavehill Red wrote: »

They don't own the health or education system. There are schools and hospitals with a Protestant ethos, and those with no religious ethos.
Unlike our close neighbour, which remains constitutionally a feudal kingdom under the rule of the head of a single religious sect.

Go and look up the meeting of the word feudal, its a country ruled by an absolute monarch.

Thankfully Oliver Cromwell overthrew feudalism and gave power to parliament.

Google wiki schools Ireland you will see the church owns many schools and has a major say in education.

Cavehill Red

troubleshooter wrote: »

Go and look up the meeting of the word feudal, its a country ruled by an absolute monarch.

Thankfully Oliver Cromwell overthrew feudalism and gave power to parliament.

Hmm, you're really making a great case citing Cromwell on an Irish forum.

getz

sensibleken wrote: »

I think this guy would feel like this regardless and came here to prove to himself that its not welcoming to protestants. I think most people know protestants, i have some in my family, and no body gives two sh1ts.

yes the british built most of the buildings, such as college green and trinity which were highly prejudiced towards the Irish Catholics and the georgian houses used as tenements when the upper classes got bored.

Its attitudes like his which stops things moving on

are you for real ? in england 30,years ago we used to say we all know a black man,and some of us said we have one in the family

sensibleken

getz wrote: »

are you for real ? in england 30,years ago we used to say we all know a black man,and some of us said we have one in the family

maybe you did buddy. my sis is married to a protestant from the north and serveral mates are from there. we dont give a sh1t, its how adults behave.

Fratton Fred

Cavehill Red wrote: »

From the tone (and slanted depiction of events) it seems that the author of article the OP cites would prefer an Ireland which portrayed itself as a grateful vassal to the British Empire which repeatedly conducted genocide on Irish soil.

how do you repeatedly commit genocide? isn't that a bit like killing something twice?

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Unlike the sectarian statelet still occupied by Britain, the Republic is a genuinely pluralist and secular society where religion is no bar to progress and no denial of merit.

The Republic of where?

Cavehill Red wrote: »

They don't own the health or education system. There are schools and hospitals with a Protestant ethos, and those with no religious ethos.
Unlike our close neighbour, which remains constitutionally a feudal kingdom under the rule of the head of a single religious sect.

that'a a bit like saying we are secular because we have nice little buckets in which we can accomodate people. I live in what for ireland is a pretty multicultural/multi faith area, but apart from the CoI schools (who make a point of saying they are for children of any faith, or none) I know of very very few non religious based schools. The country may be secular, but it matters not when (7% of the country is being educated as a Catholic. Technically the UK is not secular, but in practice it is a million times less dominated by the Church than Ireland is.

I'd agree that the article is very biased and I would guess has been written for a spcific audience. A lot of what he has written is simply not true, wherever I see somewhere flying a group of flags, there is generally a union flag there as well. Plenty of Englsih flags flying from bars when the six nations is on as well.

There is certainly a selectiveness about Irish history, but it is nowhere near as biased as the author of that article is making out.

Fratton Fred

sensibleken wrote: »

maybe you did buddy. my sis is married to a protestant from the north and serveral mates are from there. we dont give a sh1t, its how adults behave.

But you know he is a protestant......

sensibleken

Fratton Fred wrote: »

But you know he is a protestant......

indeed. unlike those ninja protestants. sneaky feckers

Nodin

troubleshooter wrote: »

http://realnationalistsonline.myfreeforum.org/Dublin_Still_A_Cold_Place_For_Unionists_about311.html



Posted: (......)also jobs for hundreds of thousands of Southern Irish people who live and work in Britain. Need I say more!

There is a fine line between airbrushing history and trying to present a valid objective perspective. I fear that letter seems to be another form of airbrush.

Cavehill Red

Fratton Fred wrote: »

how do you repeatedly commit genocide? isn't that a bit like killing something twice?

I suggest you look up the meaning of the word. An attempt to cause mass murder of a population, by either warfare, starvation or deliberate neglect of their circumstances is defined as genocide under the UN charter. Therefore, Cromwell's clearances, the 1847 'famine' and a number of other instances all count as genocide, as do the Highland 'clearances' incidentally.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

The Republic of where?

Really?

Fratton Fred wrote: »

that'a a bit like saying we are secular because we have nice little buckets in which we can accomodate people. I live in what for ireland is a pretty multicultural/multi faith area, but apart from the CoI schools (who make a point of saying they are for children of any faith, or none) I know of very very few non religious based schools. The country may be secular, but it matters not when (7% of the country is being educated as a Catholic. Technically the UK is not secular, but in practice it is a million times less dominated by the Church than Ireland is.

The Republic is secular because it has not institutionalised any religion over any other. There are as many schools for Protestants as required, and the same goes for Jews, Muslims and those of no creed. There are hospitals with a Catholic ethos and those with a Protestant ethos. However, neither really matters much in this day and age when the creed of modern healthcare trumps all that. It simply remains risible to suggest that because a significant majority of the population identify as Catholic that the state is not secular. It clearly is.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I'd agree that the article is very biased and I would guess has been written for a spcific audience. A lot of what he has written is simply not true, wherever I see somewhere flying a group of flags, there is generally a union flag there as well. Plenty of Englsih flags flying from bars when the six nations is on as well.

There is certainly a selectiveness about Irish history, but it is nowhere near as biased as the author of that article is making out.

All very true.

troubleshooter

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Hmm, you're really making a great case citing Cromwell on an Irish forum.

In response to your point that GB is feudal, I simply informed you cromwell overthrew feudalism, its a historical fact, he even brought in a law banning it, if you dont like the answer dont post inaccurate posts.

getz

sensibleken wrote: »

maybe you did buddy. my sis is married to a protestant from the north and serveral mates are from there. we dont give a sh1t, its how adults behave.

in england being catholic or protestant never comes up except when it comes to marriage, then its the church of rome that has the problem,[and untill the 1920s it was not a problem in ireland]

Cavehill Red

troubleshooter wrote: »

In response to your point that GB is feudal, I simply informed you cromwell overthrew feudalism, its a historical fact, he even brought in a law banning it, if you dont like the answer dont post inaccurate posts.

I didn't post anything inaccurate. I pointed out that, of the two states, only one is a monarchy which institutionalised the head of a single religious creed as the head of state. And that one isn't Ireland.
Tell me how the relationship between the House of Lords and the monarch isn't feudal, if you can.

sensibleken

getz wrote: »

in england being catholic or protestant never comes up except when it comes to marriage, then its the church of rome that has the problem,[and untill the 1920s it was not a problem in ireland]

never much comes up here either, which is what im saying. countering what the article is alleging

the_syco

sensibleken wrote: »

ok. i now see where this is going. outta here

There should be a law like Godwin's law for these matters.

sensibleken

the_syco wrote: »

There should be a law like Godwin's law for these matters.

first mention of cromwell while talking about the good friday agreement?

getz

sensibleken wrote: »

first mention of cromwell while talking about the good friday agreement?

cromwell killed more englishmen than irishmen,he was not loved this side of the water ,

sensibleken

getz wrote: »

cromwell killed more englishmen than irishmen,he was not loved this side of the water ,

what was the death toll on the royalist side?

BehindTheScenes

troubleshooter wrote: »

http://realnationalistsonline.myfreeforum.org/Dublin_Still_A_Cold_Place_For_Unionists_about311.html

Article 5 ~ July 2010

The author has a point, history on tours etc should be objective and the unionist contribution pointed out.

Why should they, one thing you should know about history it's that the victor always gets to write and rewrite it.

That's what happened here and it's what will happen with the North when reunification occurs.

oscarBravo

Bah. This is already all over the place, and I don't see it going anywhere useful.