Fianna Fail - their place in Irish history ?

HellsAngel

I propose we discuss FF's influence on the country, all 32 counties of it, from 1926 to the present. My take on them was that they began Republican and genuinely out to improve the general well being of the country and bring about a United Ireland. Where and when it all became about cute hoorism and cronyism etc is hard to exactly pinpoint. Some say with the FF fund raising organisation controlled by Haughey called TACA, which was basically an early 60's version of the Galway tent with big dinners and business interests getting the ear of a relevant minister etc but I think it was happening much earlier.

Anyway, here's a good discussion on Tonight with Vincent Brown where they discuss the history and development of FF. One interesting aspect to the discussion about 13/14 minutes into the VB discussion is about the real FF and their attitude to the six counties. Despite wanting to achieve a United Ireland (UI) been it's number one priority in FF's constition, they in private were often hostile to their plight. For example Vincent Brown states how the documentary team Radharc made a programme about discrimination in Derry in the 1960's FF stepped in and wouldn't allow the program to be broadcast. And then of course their was the infamous line by Lynch in August 1969 about the Irish Government could "no longer stand by" regarding the pogroms in Belfast and Derry - and then that's exactly what they did !!!! It will surely go down along with Lenihan's "cheapest bailout in history....and we might make a few bob out of it " lies !!!!

So folks to kick off, with the snake oil salesman Dev at the leadership from it's inception, was FF always doomed to become a rotten, corrupt oragnaisation ? And what good did things they also did down the years, keeping us out of WW2, starting the electrification of the country, changing the education curriculum in the 30's to a more nationalist outlook etc

Vincent Brown's discussion on the history of FF, well worth listening to -

http://www.tv3.ie/shows.php?request=tonightwithvincentbrowne&tv3_preview=&video=39745

laoch na mona

they ruined it what else do we need to know

jonniebgood1

Discussing their place in history is speculative to a certain extent in relation to recent history but as we look further back to Haughey era and further back I think a general recorded view is accepted. To push the speculative side of this I would suggest that they will be remembered in stages,
i.e. 26-48 as important formative years,
48-70 playing an important role in developing the country,
70-92 beginning of more sinister elements,
92-now will be judged better from a greater distance but I suspect time may improve the judgement from the present situation. i.e. when we recover it will be easier for people to be objective.

Could you explain more how they changed

the education curriculum in the 30's to a more nationalist outlook

as stated in OP

Judgement Day

HellsAngel

laoch na mona wrote: »

they ruined it what else do we need to know

Which is a bit like someone starting a thread about say, the Treaty, and then some bright spark posting " the country was partitioned, what else do we need to know " :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

HellsAngel

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Discussing their place in history is speculative to a certain extent in relation to recent history but as we look further back to Haughey era and further back I think a general recorded view is accepted. To push the speculative side of this I would suggest that they will be remembered in stages,
i.e. 26-48 as important formative years,
48-70 playing an important role in developing the country,
70-92 beginning of more sinister elements,
92-now will be judged better from a greater distance but I suspect time may improve the judgement from the present situation. i.e. when we recover it will be easier for people to be objective.

Could you explain more how they changed as stated in OP

I agree with most of the above, but I actually think as jonnie states that the "sinister" side of FF was there in the back ground well before 1970. I'm going to post regarding Lemass and FF's pandering to the Catholic church which is well known but hope to find more examples regarding FF's cronyism pre 1970 which I will post.

" Compared to Archbishop of Dublin John Charles McQuaid, Cardinal Conway represented compassionate Catholicism and an easing of the authoritarianism of the bishops. And like Cardinal Conway, Lemass was a reformer. But when in office, Cardinal Conway and Lemass's relationship was one of conservative collusion in a decade of rapid social change.
As a 'moderniser', Lemass has been placed closer to Cardinal Conway than McQuaid. But McQuaid regularly corresponded with his superior in Armagh praising the "cooperation" of Lemass. When a book-sharing scheme which threatened McQuaid's sectarian principles was mooted, McQuaid marched to Leinster House; he was "glad to report that today I saw the Taoiseach and that the proposal to conjoin TCD new library and the National Library will not be heard of again".
Lemass had been granting McQuaid favours for quite some time. During the Emergency he'd given the archbishop a petrol allowance of 50 gallons per month when the general public made do with one. "

http://clericalwhispers.blogspot.com/2010/08/conway-saw-lemass-as-ally.html