What defines an 'Irishman' in context of upcoming centenaries

jonniebgood1

What is your definition of 'Irish people'? You should consider that alot of Unionists consider themselves as 'Irish people' when commenting as quoted.

EDIT> I have moved this series of posts to a separate thread to give it the possibility of gaining attention of other forum users.
Moderator.

Continuity Wolfe Tone

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

What is your definition of 'Irish people'? You should consider that alot of Unionists consider themselves as 'Irish people' when commenting as quoted.

A debate on what Unionists identify themselves as, Irish, British, Ulster Protestants, Ulster scot, a mishmash etc etc would be a lengthy one and I don't see much of a point. I've yet to meet a unionist who identifies his or herself primarily or solely as Irish. Unionists tend to identify themselves on the basis of what they are not, rather than what the are. Even Unionists themselves would tend to agree with that, I've talked to quite a few unionists about this, from average Joes to politicians. But this is all really off topic.

How do you define what an Irishman is? James Connolly had a go;

"We are out for Ireland for the Irish. But who are the Irish? Not the rack-renting, slum owning landlord; not the sweating, profit-grinding capitalist; not the sleek and oily lawyer; not the prostitute pressman - the hired liars of the enemy . . . but the Irish working class . . . The cause of labour is the cause of Ireland. The cause of Ireland is the cause of labour. They cannot be dissevered . . . Therefore, on Sunday, April 16th, the Green Flag of Ireland will be solemnly hoisted over Liberty Hall." - James Connolly

How do I define an Irishman? Those who identify themselves as such is good enough for me, and Irish people owe a debt of gratitude to all those countless people who laid down their lives for the cause of Irish freedom.

I'm reminded of this quote too:

"A nation reveals itself not only by the men it produces but also by the men it honors, the men it remembers." - JFK

CDfm

Continuity Wolfe Tone wrote: »

How do you define what an Irishman is? James Connolly had a go;

"We are out for Ireland for the Irish. But who are the Irish? Not the rack-renting, slum owning landlord; not the sweating, profit-grinding capitalist; not the sleek and oily lawyer; not the prostitute pressman - the hired liars of the enemy . . . but the Irish working class . . . The cause of labour is the cause of Ireland. The cause of Ireland is the cause of labour. They cannot be dissevered . . . Therefore, on Sunday, April 16th, the Green Flag of Ireland will be solemnly hoisted over Liberty Hall." - James Connolly

Was Connolly Irish ?

Why the Marxist analysis ?

Why

A debate on what Unionists identify themselves as, Irish, British, Ulster Protestants, Ulster scot, a mishmash etc etc would be a lengthy one and I don't see much of a point. I've yet to meet a unionist who identifies his or herself primarily or solely as Irish. Unionists tend to identify themselves on the basis of what they are not, rather than what the are. Even Unionists themselves would tend to agree with that, I've talked to quite a few unionists about this, from average Joes to politicians. But this is all really off topic.

OK, Scots-Irish have a particular heritage.

Would the "Jackeens" have been as supportive of the rebels if the army hadn't executed civilians.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9gwnKH15Xo

So heritage is important.

How do I define an Irishman? Those who identify themselves as such is good enough for me, and Irish people owe a debt of gratitude to all those countless people who laid down their lives for the cause of Irish freedom.

I'm reminded of this quote too:

"A nation reveals itself not only by the men it produces but also by the men it honors, the men it remembers." - JFK

Ireland historically was not a nation state and even Ireland itself was a loose "federation" of "tuath" (about 150 of them) where the "clan" members had allegience to the "tuath" and not any concept of an Irish nation.

Some of the national concepts were instilled into the people post independence.

What really defined us, IMO, is that we live here and were a colony and inferior to our colonial power. That defined us.

So called "revisionists" get slated for questioning the orthodoxy of "traditional" history when it does not add up.

Continuity Wolfe Tone

CDfm wrote: »

Was Connolly Irish ?

Why the Marxist analysis ?

Why


OK, Scots-Irish have a particular heritage.

Would the "Jackeens" have been as supportive of the rebels if the army hadn't executed civilians.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9gwnKH15Xo

So heritage is important.



Ireland historically was not a nation state and even Ireland itself was a loose "federation" of "tuath" (about 150 of them) where the "clan" members had allegience to the "tuath" and not any concept of an Irish nation.

Some of the national concepts were instilled into the people post independence.

What really defined us, IMO, is that we live here and were a colony and inferior to our colonial power. That defined us.

So called "revisionists" get slated for questioning the orthodoxy of "traditional" history when it does not add up.

What exactly is your point? I was merely saying that Irish people owe those who fought and/or died for their freedom a debt of gratitude, I don't quite understand why this statement has provoked this discussion.

CDfm

Continuity Wolfe Tone wrote: »

What exactly is your point? I was merely saying that Irish people owe those who fought and/or died for their freedom a debt of gratitude, I don't quite understand why this statement has provoked this discussion.

No probs with that.

I am replying to the definition of an Irishperson and you quoted Connolly who at that time he wrote that had little relevance to my grandfathers who were not in his contituency.

Wrapped up within Connolly's definition is his Marxism which neither of my grandfathers would have subscribed to.

Since independence, history was "rewritten" which makes parts of it incomprehensible to some of us.

jonniebgood1

Continuity Wolfe Tone wrote: »

What exactly is your point? I was merely saying that Irish people owe those who fought and/or died for their freedom a debt of gratitude, I don't quite understand why this statement has provoked this discussion.

I think it is difficult to define what an Irish man is, particularly in a historical context. I would agree that we owe a gratitude to people who gave their lives for our freedom, it should also include people who simply did what they had to do to survive in previous eras.

Continuity Wolfe Tone

CDfm wrote: »

No probs with that.

I am replying to the definition of an Irishperson and you quoted Connolly who at that time he wrote that had little relevance to my grandfathers who were not in his contituency.

Wrapped up within Connolly's definition is his Marxism which neither of my grandfathers would have subscribed to.

Since independence, history was "rewritten" which makes parts of it incomprehensible to some of us.

I quoted Connolly to demonstrate that there has always been difficulty in defining what an Irishman is, you can't put an exact definition on it, nor can you precisely define what an American person is, a French, etc etc, so it's not a unique difficulty.

Continuity Wolfe Tone

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

I think it is difficult to define what an Irish man is, particularly in a historical context. I would agree that we owe a gratitude to people who gave their lives for our freedom, it should also include people who simply did what they had to do to survive in previous eras.

In that case can I ask what your point was in pulling me up on what I said then?

jonniebgood1

Continuity Wolfe Tone wrote: »

In that case can I ask what your point was in pulling me up on what I said then?

Not everythings a battle- I wanted you to explain what defines an Irishman to you which you did. I think its worth teasing out opinions on this. The context for the discussion is us celebrating the 1916 rising and war of independence centenaries soon along with other smaller celebrations. We will celebrate what was achieved by Irishmen for Irishmen so establishing what an 'Irishman' in this context is important.

CDfm

Continuity Wolfe Tone wrote: »

I quoted Connolly to demonstrate that there has always been difficulty in defining what an Irishman is, you can't put an exact definition on it, nor can you precisely define what an American person is, a French, etc etc, so it's not a unique difficulty.

But in our world the democratic nation state is the structure.

Continuity Wolfe Tone wrote: »

In that case can I ask what your point was in pulling me up on what I said then?

The opposite from me , I thought you raised a good point well referenced and worthy of discussion.

Continuity Wolfe Tone

CDfm wrote: »

But in our world the democratic nation state is the structure.



The opposite from me , I thought you raised a good point well referenced and worthy of discussion.

In that case can I suggest we discuss what defines a person as being a certain nationality in a general sense, to focus on what defines an "Irishman" will only only lead, in my opinion, down an emotive, perhaps angry path.

MarchDub

Continuity Wolfe Tone wrote: »

In that case can I suggest we discuss what defines a person as being a certain nationality in a general sense, to focus on what defines an "Irishman" will only only lead, in my opinion, down an emotive, perhaps angry path.

I couldn't agree more -and further I can't see what this discussion is doing on a History forum anyway?

CDfm

Continuity Wolfe Tone wrote: »

In that case can I suggest we discuss what defines a person as being a certain nationality in a general sense, to focus on what defines an "Irishman" will only only lead, in my opinion, down an emotive, perhaps angry path.

Well we can discuss it historically and maybe there were several views.

Wherever we start we get caught in semantics and an Irishman could be described as someone from the island of Ireland. Those who live on here.

Historically, we were a colony. I saw this article on a native american thread but can't find the complete article.



So we are defined by ourselves and by others too.

Manach

Based on my reading of Anderson's Imagine Communities, I'd say that up till the 19thC there was no real concept of nationalist Irishness. More a sense of local loyality to local and neighbouring communities and a sense of Religious identity.
Like most other European counties, a sense of nationalism was instilled from a variety of sources.

KeithAFC

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

What is your definition of 'Irish people'? You should consider that alot of Unionists consider themselves as 'Irish people' when commenting as quoted.

EDIT> I have moved this series of posts to a separate thread to give it the possibility of gaining attention of other forum users.
Moderator.

Where did you hear that? Very few Unionists/Loyalists consider themselves Irish. It is mostly aimed at the Nationalist community who come from a Roman Catholic background.

jonniebgood1

KeithAFC wrote: »

Where did you hear that? Very few Unionists/Loyalists consider themselves Irish. It is mostly aimed at the Nationalist community who come from a Roman Catholic background.

You are correct in your wording "mostly", but alot of Unionists also recognise an Irishness in their making (as distinct from being British). So it is not Universal.

KeithAFC wrote: »

Where did you hear that?

Reading about the diversity of northern cultures, both nationalist and unionist, I have seen these suggestions. Manachs point is interesting in the timing of the rise in nationalism and Ireland is not the only country to undergo this.

Archbishop Robert Eames is a good example, relating strongly to Irish culture in his character he seems proud of his Irishness. Other church leaders are quite open about this also:

Ulster unionist identity is thus diverse and multi-layered, particularly perhaps for those church leaders presiding over all-Ireland institutions. This is illustrated by Dr Henry Allen:

I'm British with Protestant and the dissenter background ... I am an Ulsterman and ... I would have an affinity with being Irish because I am born in the island of Ireland, in the Ulster part of it ... I have a great love for this island of Ireland, a great love for its people and in my position, I am a member of a church which is a church, the Presbyterian Church in Ireland, not the Presbyterian Church of Ireland, the Presbyterian Church in Ireland, which means that we have outreaches and we have congregations right throughout the length and breadth of this land and I am very proud of that …

Archbishop Eames was unusual among interviewees from among the majority community, in that he went so far as to place a greater emphasis upon his Irishness than Britishness, while still describing himself as British-Irish: "I see myself as Irish, I see myself as living in that part of Ireland which for historical reasons is still part of the United Kingdom ... n purely religious terms I am Catholic and reformed. In purely political terms I live in a part of the United Kingdom but in cultural terms I see myself very much as being identified with a part of the island of Ireland." http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/dd/report7/report7c.htm

The political leaders views may be more relevant because they will not get elected if their views are not accepted.

Mr Donaldson thus sees his Irishness in a regional, rather than a national, context and he recognises that it is here the gulf with nationalists lies:

Irish nationalists argue that the Irish nation ought to be united as one political entity on the island of Ireland, and that is where I differ. I believe that it is possible to be Irish and British, or Ulster and British, and that in fact they [nationalists] were once part of the British nation they opted out of. But they cannot, on the other hand, impose the idea of the Irish nation upon those of us who see ourselves as part of the wider British nation. So, politically I think that is where the fundamental difference lies and I accept that Irish nationalists aspire towards the integrity of the Irish nation, apart from and separate from the British nation, whereas I believe that I can be part of the British nation and still have my own regional identity.

Billy Hutchinson (PUP) agrees with Mr Donaldson's contention that Irishness as defined by nationalists is the key factor making it difficult for unionists positively to express their sense of Irishness. But he nevertheless takes a somewhat more relaxed view: "I feel that we shouldn't exclude things that are Irish because they are Irish, and I think that is what we tend to do."

In a similar fashion, David Adams (UDP) argues: "I think we have to recognise that we are Irish, we are also British and at the present time the majority of the people in Northern Ireland wish to remain part of the United Kingdom, but there is a large, substantial minority who wish to have close relationships with the republic." http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/dd/report7/report7c.htm

I understand that the thread subject could descend into a row but it is a discussion that is important. My definition of Irishness would have to pay due cognisance to the above quoted points, but importantly it could not be pandering to it.

CDfm

KeithAFC wrote: »

Where did you hear that? Very few Unionists/Loyalists consider themselves Irish. It is mostly aimed at the Nationalist community who come from a Roman Catholic background.

Based on location alone , most people on mainland Britain will consider them to be Irish. I was in London for the rugby last weekend with other rugby supporters from you know where. It is not as simple as that though.


Presumably you are basing this assertion on people that you know.

But where do you get this cultural heritage from Keith. Can you define it genealogically or otherwise. What are the origan's of the Scots-Irish. When St Patrick was a boy and in 9th Century latin texts all Irish were refered to as Scottus - this guy is an example.


http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/scottus-eriugena/

So what are the origans of the Scots-Irish & what is the heritage ?

So I would like to go back a bit and learn the history of it all.

Judgement Day

jonniebgood1 - quoting Protestant clerics (apart from Paisley) is rather meaningless as by their nature/calling they tend to be more liberally minded that the average man/woman in the street. I feel as 'British as Finchley' despite having lived in the Republic for most of my life, although I would always support the Irish rugby team against England - so I guess I fail the Norman Tebbit cricket test http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cricket_test .

CDfm

Finchley JD , why Finchley ?

Your bunch go back yonks in Ireland too , don't you JD.

The regional language my ancestors spoke has been wiped off the face of the planet. I recently introduced my dad to his native yola talke.

The generic Gaelic taught in schools is not what my ancestors spoke.

I am not saying heritage is bad but there is a lot of "plastic paddyism" around the national identity.

jonniebgood1

Judgement Day wrote: »

jonniebgood1 - quoting Protestant clerics (apart from Paisley) is rather meaningless as by their nature/calling they tend to be more liberally minded that the average man/woman in the street. I feel as 'British as Finchley' despite having lived in the Republic for most of my life, although I would always support the Irish rugby team against England - so I guess I fail the Norman Tebbit cricket test http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cricket_test .

I take your point but a cleric is also a representative of a group.

I also linked to opinions of Donaldson, Billy Hutchinson (PUP), David Adams (UDP).

Your opinion on this though would be interesting- How do you define an Irishman? Even if its only supporting Rugby it means there is some link in your psyche.

CDfm

I also linked to opinions of Donaldson, Billy Hutchinson (PUP), David Adams (UDP).

You linked to arguments by politicians and thats ok but its hardly the history of how these definitions came about.

Where have the communities they represent originate from & whats their heritage & identity and how are they categorised. Look there are some categories here

John Hewitt may be reassured: there is no necessary conflict between a “planter” origin and a twentieth-century Irish or Ulster identity, or indeed between a Gaelic or Old English ethnic origin and an Ulster or Irish unionist identity.. http://fmrsi.wordpress.com/2011/05/24/event-irish-protestant-identities-ucc-26-may-2011/

Judgement Day

CDfm wrote: »

Finchley JD , why Finchley ?

Your bunch go back yonks in Ireland too , don't you JD.

The regional language my ancestors spoke has been wiped off the face of the planet. I recently introduced my dad to his native yola talke.

The generic Gaelic taught in schools is not what my ancestors spoke.

I am not saying heritage is bad but there is a lot of "plastic paddyism" around the national identity.

The British as Finchley thing comes from 1981 - it's what Maggie Thatcher told Garrett Fitzgerald - 'Northern Ireland is as British as Finchley'. Finchley being her constituency. As for going back yonks - came on holiday in 1649 and never went home.

As for the question contained in the OP, I really don't know but clearly there are many different traditions on the island and to say as Continuity Wolfe Tone does 'Irish people owe a debt of gratitude to all those countless people who laid down their lives for the cause of Irish freedom.' is simplistic and lumps everybody in together. The attitude of, dare I say it, most of my co-religionists down south would not be reflected by this statement. For the most part with some notable exceptions - (Childers, Casement etc.) - we were on the losing side. The difference between southern Unionists/former Unionists and their northern counterparts is that we moved on, kept our heads down and made the best of our lot in the new State. However, it would be hypocritical to say we will be out celebrating 1916 anymore than we 'celebrated' 1798. I have a problem too with next generation - my kids and what do I tell them - they are the product of a mixed marriage and their mother gets around it by telling them 'it's just Daddy - he's English'.

I shall post more later (if I'm sober enough) but must now concentrate on PP and the Munster vs Connacht match - great Englishman that I am!

fasttalkerchat

Everyone born here is Irish unless they consider themselves otherwise. Anyone else who wants to opt in is welcome to IMO.

Dr.Nightdub

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

Everyone born here is Irish unless they consider themselves otherwise.

That effectively writes off the whole diaspora. Let me give you the case study of my own family...

My grandfather came from Belfast and my grandmother from Clare - they moved to Australia where my father was born. My mother was born in Cork - her parents had stayed put. My father emigrated from Belfast and my mother from Cork - both moved to London, where they met, married and I and my brother were born.

Having moved back to Belfast, we left it (again - it seems we just can't help leaving the place!) and moved to Dublin. My brother emigrated from here to England where he married a woman whose family had emigrated from Pakistan and his two daughters were born.

So out of the seven of us that are still alive, only one was born in Ireland (my mother) and thus, by your definition, only one of us is Irish. By our own definitions, my parents, brother and I are all Irish, whereas my sister-in-law and nieces are unquestionably British but we love them to bits anyway.

Under the granny rule, my nieces would qualify for Australia, Pakistan, Ireland or England. Who should they play cricket for?

fasttalkerchat

Dr.Nightdub wrote: »

That effectively writes off the whole diaspora. Let me give you the case study of my own family...

My grandfather came from Belfast and my grandmother from Clare - they moved to Australia where my father was born. My mother was born in Cork - her parents had stayed put. My father emigrated from Belfast and my mother from Cork - both moved to London, where they met, married and I and my brother were born.

Having moved back to Belfast, we left it (again - it seems we just can't help leaving the place!) and moved to Dublin. My brother emigrated from here to England where he married a woman whose family had emigrated from Pakistan and his two daughters were born.

So out of the seven of us that are still alive, only one was born in Ireland (my mother) and thus, by your definition, only one of us is Irish. By our own definitions, my parents, brother and I are all Irish, whereas my sister-in-law and nieces are unquestionably British but we love them to bits anyway.

Under the granny rule, my nieces would qualify for Australia, Pakistan, Ireland or England. Who should they play cricket for?

Read the second part of the post...

Dr.Nightdub

I did. You make it sound like something you decide, as in "Oh, I think I'll be Irish." I'm saying it's something you are.

Continuity Wolfe Tone

Too big a deal is made about Southern Protestants and what they may think based on their religion; half my family (mothers side, my uncle married a protestant and raised his kids as such, so I've a lot of protestant relations) is protestant and I know quite a few others - including-ex girlfriends - and in my experience their attitudes and opinions are not defined by their religion. Only one of the southern protestants I know would be in any way unionist, and he is an elderly man. The rest would have varying political opinions like all other Irish people (i.e support various parties) but would not be unionist.

This attitude of dividing along religious lines is outdated, and not really accurate, (at least in my experience) especially in the south.

I think it is unnecessarily pedantic to pick at my statement "Irish people owe a debt of gratitude to those who fought/died for Irish freedom". Of course there might be some people who partly define themselves as Irish yet yearn for John Bulls tyranny to make a return (god only knows why) just as there may be a few Americans who wish that the US was still a colony. But in a general sense, Irish people do owe those who laid down their lives for Irish freedom and I'm sure that the vast majority would agree. (I'm talking about 1916 and the Tan War)

This is the type of carry on I was on about earlier, its daft that someone can't make a statement like I did and not get jumped on by pedants who object to it out of a sense of political correctness (not CDFM) because there may be a minority of "Irish" people who long to be British subjects (ie, British).

You could be a British person born in Ireland, an Irish person born in Britain, America etc etc but in my opinion being an Irish person, ie someone who defines themselves solely or primarily as Irish (unionists don't!) yet yearn for subjugation is an incompatible combination, it doesn't exist.

Of course you could be a unionist, but they typically don't identify themselves as solely or primarily Irish. (like you have people of Irish descent in England who wouldn't like being called english!)

jonniebgood1

Continuity Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Too big a deal is made about Southern Protestants and what they may think based on their religion; half my family (mothers side, my uncle married a protestant and raised his kids as such, so I've a lot of protestant relations) is protestant and I know quite a few others - including-ex girlfriends - and in my experience their attitudes and opinions are not defined by their religion. Only one of the southern protestants I know would be in any way unionist, and he is an elderly man. The rest would have varying political opinions like all other Irish people (i.e support various parties) but would not be unionist.

This attitude of dividing along religious lines is outdated, and not really accurate, (at least in my experience) especially in the south.

+1

Continuity Wolfe Tone wrote: »

But in a general sense, Irish people do owe those who laid down their lives for Irish freedom and I'm sure that the vast majority would agree. (I'm talking about 1916 and the Tan War)

I would include WWI, 1798, Fenians, etc in that.

As for your objections to being questioned, this is what you posted

Continuity Wolfe Tone wrote: »

How do I define an Irishman? Those who identify themselves as such is good enough for me, and Irish people owe a debt of gratitude to all those countless people who laid down their lives for the cause of Irish freedom.

I don't see it as unfair for people to offer their views on this.

Continuity Wolfe Tone

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

+1

I would include WWI, 1798, Fenians, etc in that.

As for your objections to being questioned, this is what you posted

I don't see it as unfair for people to offer their views on this.

Thats not what I originally posted, that was me responding to you asking how I define what a Irishman is.

CDfm

That's some lot of definitions in a fierce short space of time.

And , Northern Ireland manages to buck the trend on ethnic issues probably cos it was not born out of the reformation.

For those interested in a paper on Protestant Minorities in European States and Nations by Joseph Ruane and Jennifer Todd, here you go

http://www.ucd.ie/t4cms/protestant%20minorities%20in%20european%20states%20and%20nations.pdf

( They could have just talked to JD and saved themselves a lot of work)

Nice additions there with birth and diaspora cropping up.

Planters too all in the one page.

I just love this "'it's just Daddy - he's English'.It does seem that the next generation will be alrght though. My kids were both born in Britain as was their mother. So I may borrow that line.

Northern Ireland's Scots-Irish heritage goes back yonks and yonks and there were other conflict issues in Scotland too. The Protestants from where I come from were of English and Welsh origan.

So JD's heritage is just as important to him as mine is to me. We arrived 500 or so years before him and are not "native Gaels" though my mother probably is. She can recite who is related to whom with almost Bardlike quality and look at locations with Time Team persistence. I remember When I was young, I remember her telling a UCC archaelogist that he was incorrect about a holy well's location.She was right.

That's how I can imagine the Scots-Irish definition as they think just like my Mum does about her heritage.

jonniebgood1

Continuity Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Thats not what I originally posted, that was me responding to you asking how I define what a Irishman is.

And you don't like pedantry!!!:D

Regardless your post made me interested and it is important as the centenaries approach. Questions abound such as where does our nationalism come from and when did it come about. For example in 1798 was there widespread nationalism? Or did it come with better education, what would a typical cottier have known about Irish nationalism as he struggled to make a living pre-famine?

CDfm

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

For example in 1798 was there widespread nationalism?

1798 was not all about nationalism and there was a certain amount of the leadership that were looking for free trade and an end to British manipulation of the Irish economy.

Wexford was considered to be one of the least likely places to rebel but it started and spread. Part of the reason for that was post the restoration of the monarchy and the Williamite Wars had meant that the land had been carved up again and people were trying to twist a buck, practice their religion etc.

It wasn't a catholic rebellion by any stretch-except Fr Murphy was really pissed off that his church was burnt down.

It was very much a protestant rebellion too.

If you are talking the centenary of the Ulster Covenant well that is a huge issue as it defined an Ulster Scot as an ethnic identity in a way. This was new. We really did not have that before.

In one way, nationalism in Ireland is defined by that event and was predated by it. It created a community.

We still are not defining what went into it or what its identity is.

KeithAFC

You are correct in your wording "mostly", but alot of Unionists also recognise an Irishness in their making (as distinct from being British). So it is not Universal.

Very few would. Sure we have the Irish shamrock on some of our flags etc but it depends what people really mean by Irish. I always see quotes from people about Irish people who died for Irish freedom. I don't know what they mean by that if they think people of Ulster Scots heritage are Irish because the vast majority of Ulster Scots have always fought against a United Ireland.

CDfm

KeithAFC wrote: »

I don't know what they mean by that if they think people of Ulster Scots heritage are Irish because the vast majority of Ulster Scots have always fought against a United Ireland.

What is the Ulster Scots heritage ?

Rebelheart

CDfm wrote: »

The generic Gaelic [sic] taught in schools is not what my ancestors spoke.

The generic English taught in schools is not what your ancestors spoke, either.
What's your point?

So, what's you problem with calling Irish "Irish"? Given that as long ago as 1537 the English were referring to it as Irish, and that referring to it as "Gaelic" in the English language is a distinctly modern British nationalist usage, what political point are you trying to make by referring to it as "Gaelic"? Do you, when speaking English, refer to French as 'français' or, when speaking English, refer to German as 'Deutsch'? I doubt it.

Rebelheart

Judgement Day wrote: »

I feel as 'British as Finchley' despite having lived in the Republic for most of my life

Jesus. This explains a lot.

Rebelheart

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

What is your definition of 'Irish people'? You should consider that alot of Unionists consider themselves as 'Irish people' when commenting as quoted.

An Irish person is somebody who believes in defending the sovereignty of this country, in particular against it being subsumed by the only state and nationalism which has threatened it: Britain and British nationalism.

Anybody who does not defend Irishness against that threat has a concept of Irishness which is colonial and provincial in nature - Ireland, for these "Irish", is a mere region of England and its extended state of Britain. "Irishness", for them, extends to supporting Irish-born people playing an English game like rugby. For these "Irish" Ireland, and the Irish, must have a politically and culturally inferior position in Ireland to the essentially English politics and culture of Great Britain. In other words, these colonial "Irish" are the enemies of the survival of an Irishness that is not rooted in Britishness (i.e. Englishness).

The truth, as unpalatable as it is.


/end thread.

Judgement Day

Rebelheart wrote: »

Jesus. This explains a lot.

Rebelheart. Jesus. This explains a lot. :rolleyes:

Rebelheart

Judgement Day wrote: »

Rebelheart. Jesus. This explains a lot. :rolleyes:

Obviously! Duh. I'm not pretending to be something I'm not. Nobody could accuse me of that (said with more pride than Dónall Ó Néill in 1317) You, in contrast, have never made your true politics as clear as you've done on this thread.

>>>MOD SNIP- Infraction for personal insult to fellow poster- PM me if you have a problem or query with this- jonniebgood1. Comment in question removed<<<

PS: Or in my naivety am I missing the obvious here: is your earlier criticism of the "liberalism" of Protestant churchmen related to some deeper fundamentalist Christian "judgement day" belief on your part?

Judgement Day

Rebelheart wrote: »

Obviously! Duh. I'm not pretending to be something I'm not. Nobody could accuse me of that (said with more pride than Dónall Ó Néill in 1317) You, in contrast, have never made your true politics as clear as you've done on this thread. I would never have put your politics/hatred of Irish Ireland in the same league as FrattonFred and the like. You live and learn, as they say.

PS: Or in my naivety am I missing the obvious here: is your earlier criticism of the "liberalism" of Protestant churchmen related to some deeper fundamentalist Christian "judgement day" belief on your part?[/QUOTE]

Without wishing to derail the thread further I think you misunderstand where I'm coming from and as for my name, it comes from one of my favourite movies (The Terminator) and I'm about as far removed from Christian (or any other) religious fundamentalism as it is possible to be.

My politics are Unionist in belief and (Green Party in practice) and I have never displayed a hatred for the Irish or Ireland in any of my posts as far I know. There are are certain things I hate in Ireland and here are a few which you can make of what you like.

Terrorists (both persuasions equally), the GAA, Soccer, the Orange Order, bent/useless politicians, politicians who have been given a makeover in the interests of peace - Ian Paisley, Martin McGuinness, Gerry Adams, Peter Robinson, David Trimble etc., drug dealers, rapists, murderers, bankers and I'm sure there's more. A lot of hate but I don't let it eat me up and I don't feel the need to call my self "Croppy Lie Down" or "Survivor of Scullabogue" on Boards.

CDfm

Rebelheart wrote: »

PS: Or in my naivety am I missing the obvious here: is your earlier criticism of the "liberalism" of Protestant churchmen related to some deeper fundamentalist Christian "judgement day" belief on your part?

Well take this for instance

Graham Norton: My Protestant upbringing in Cork left me friendless and lonely

Read more: http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/independent-woman/celebrity-news-gossip/graham-norton-my-protestant-upbringing-in-cork-left-me-friendless-and-lonely-3060689.html#ixzz1q8erXEAe

And my ancestors in Wexford spoke a dialect called Yola

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yola_language

My point is that being Irish is not a specific generic thing no matter what people like to think.

There are a whole lot of local histories that do not fit the model.

KeithAFC

Rebelheart wrote: »

An Irish person is somebody who believes in defending the sovereignty of this country, in particular against it being subsumed by the only state and nationalism which has threatened it: Britain and British nationalism.

Anybody who does not defend Irishness against that threat has a concept of Irishness which is colonial and provincial in nature - Ireland, for these "Irish", is a mere region of England and its extended state of Britain. "Irishness", for them, extends to supporting Irish-born people playing an English game like rugby. For these "Irish" Ireland, and the Irish, must have a politically and culturally inferior position in Ireland to the essentially English politics and culture of Great Britain. In other words, these colonial "Irish" are the enemies of the survival of an Irishness that is not rooted in Britishness (i.e. Englishness).

The truth, as unpalatable as it is.


/end thread.

That rules me out then. A group of people do exist on the Island who are different people in political beliefs, religious beliefs, different ideologies and the way they see society.

It is just a reality. We keep ourselves to ourselves.

thecommietommy

CDfm wrote: »

Well take this for instance



And my ancestors in Wexford spoke a dialect called Yola

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yola_language

My point is that being Irish is not a specific generic thing no matter what people like to think.

There are a whole lot of local histories that do not fit the model.

Sounds like the DIY ' lanugage ' of Ulster Scots bulls**t to me.

KeithAFC

CDfm wrote: »

What is the Ulster Scots heritage ?

http://www.ulsterscotsagency.com/

Pretty good website on events and culture and so on.

CDfm

KeithAFC wrote: »

http://www.ulsterscotsagency.com/

Pretty good website on events and culture and so on.

Thanks . I will take a peak later.

thecommietommy wrote: »

Sounds like the DIY ' lanugage ' of Ulster Scots bulls**t to me.

See thats where you are wrong

Originally, Gaelic Ireland was a collection of "tuath" corresponding to the baronies and peopled by tribes/clans. This one was a counterbalance to the McMurroughs. So to assert that the Normans became more Irish than the Irish themselves -well here that would not have been the case.

Also, you would miss the Kavanagh/Butler connection and what happened in the restoration and Williamite Wars and what became the powderkeg which became 1798.

http://gail25.tripod.com/first.htm

http://www.heritage.nf.ca/society/united_irish_uprising.html

Have you ever met a Newfie with a Wexford accent ?

The reason for posting it is that if you are basing your national identity on historical planks then it would be a good idea that they exist.

The 1641 depositions is full of them ( people from that Wexford community).So if you are talking independence from 1798 and the war of independence you cannot really exclude this heritage because it was part and parcel of it.

These guys and the presbyterians were republicans back then.

What heritage do you think Wolfe Tone had ?

Now others are saying that they have local or regional histories too that don't fit the model.

Bannasidhe who posts in H & H also points to a whole host of other inconsistancies in the history that we learn about "Irish" history. .

Wharcha goin to cherrypick for your Irish model if you kick out a heritage of a community thats over 800 years old.

MarchDub

I simply do not see the point in this discussion at all except to argue. It's all opinion loosely supported by half facts, half truths, someone said, well what abouts...

CDfm

MarchDub wrote: »

I simply do not see the point in this discussion at all except to argue. It's all opinion loosely supported by half facts, half truths, someone said, well what abouts...

I am in two minds about it and I do suppose it depends on the attitude you enter into the thread with.

I recently contributed to a US forum on a thread about mixed race in New Orleans post the American Civil War. The usual explanation is that these were descendants of slaveowners and while that may be true you also had descendants of Irish slaves via Barbados & Virginia and the 17th Century trade in Irish slaves.

And, that's where the accurate history comes in . If history is about anything its about facts , discussing and interpreting them and maybe this thread will throw up a few.

Wild Bill

Now that we have voted to abolish birthright (which we did) , Irishness becomes a state of mind.

We speak English, are embedded in Anglo-(American) culture and are in the Anglo economic sphere.

Thus, the only defining mark of an Irishman is a commitment to political separation from Britain.

If you are not committed to that you are not Irish.

Simple as. :cool:

It's the Irish "cricket test".

Thus I know recent immigrants from Nigeria who are more legitimately Irish than poppy-wearers who've been here for generations.

ps: It seems that only thanking folk who agree with you is a suspicious activity, so I'm avoiding chance of suspicion here

MarchDub

CDfm wrote: »

If history is about anything its about facts , discussing and interpreting them and maybe this thread will throw up a few.

Its throwing up a few all right -;)

The OP reads like an invitation to just opine, which is what we are getting.

Richard

KeithAFC wrote: »

Where did you hear that? Very few Unionists/Loyalists consider themselves Irish. It is mostly aimed at the Nationalist community who come from a Roman Catholic background.

That's not true, Keith. Many, if not most NI Protestants consider themselves Irish, even though it may not be their primary identity.

Ian Paisley has always said he is Irish.

Richard

Rebelheart wrote: »

An Irish person is somebody who believes in defending the sovereignty of this country, in particular against it being subsumed by the only state and nationalism which has threatened it: Britain and British nationalism.

Anybody who does not defend Irishness against that threat has a concept of Irishness which is colonial and provincial in nature - Ireland, for these "Irish", is a mere region of England and its extended state of Britain. "Irishness", for them, extends to supporting Irish-born people playing an English game like rugby. For these "Irish" Ireland, and the Irish, must have a politically and culturally inferior position in Ireland to the essentially English politics and culture of Great Britain. In other words, these colonial "Irish" are the enemies of the survival of an Irishness that is not rooted in Britishness (i.e. Englishness).

The truth, as unpalatable as it is.

/end thread.

Except that it isn't the truth. Irishness means different things to different people, and being Irish does not necessarily make one an Irish nationalist.

Your point about Irish rugby players considering Ireland to be inferior to Great Britain doesn't have any basis in fact.

Dogma has created many problems in Ireland today and we'd be advised to stay away from it.