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

murphaph

snafuk35 wrote: »

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.

You're the one who is so passionate about all this stuff. I look at it somewhat more clinically, more coldly as it doesn't stir me the way it clearly stirs you, so who's more likely to want to delude themselves.....

snafuk35

murphaph wrote: »

You're the one who is so passionate about all this stuff. I look at it somewhat more clinically, more coldly as it doesn't stir me the way it clearly stirs you, so who's more likely to want to delude themselves.....

You clearly don't know what you are talking about.
I have pointed out facts - the 1916 Rising caught the national mood and there was a seismic shift away from Home Rule toward Republicanism.
There is no controversy about this. It is what happened.
The only way you can explain the swing behind Sinn Féin, the conscription crisis, attacks on the RIC is the influence of 1916.

K-9

Could we drop the handbags please?

Nodin

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.

Well, "says" the series of events, actually.

It may not have have had an effect to the same depth or to the same numbers, but his assertion on what happened is still in fact sound and borne out by the facts. Otherwise there would have been no 1918 election win and/or subsequent war of independence.

murphaph

snafuk35 wrote: »

You clearly don't know what you are talking about.
I have pointed out facts - the 1916 Rising caught the national mood and there was a seismic shift away from Home Rule toward Republicanism.
There is no controversy about this. It is what happened.
The only way you can explain the swing behind Sinn Féin, the conscription crisis, attacks on the RIC is the influence of 1916.

The influence of the British executions of the men involved, you mean. In the immediate aftermath of the rising it was clear that it was not at all well supported.

boynesider

murphaph wrote: »

The influence of the British executions of the men involved, you mean. In the immediate aftermath of the rising it was clear that it was not at all well supported.

As someone who has studied this specific period in depth, I can assure you that this initial 'negative' reaction to the Rising and the subsequent influence of the executions on peoples perspectives of it has been much exaggerated by some modern writers and historians.

Personally, I have always tried to study the Rising as objectively as possible within the context of what was occurring across the rest of the Empire and Europe at the time. It is incredibly complex of course, but I generally have a favorable view of it.

swimming in a sea

snafuk35 wrote: »

The testimony of thousands of people who took part in the Irish revolutionary period are in the archives and historians have researched the period.

Not much archives left thanks to your heroes, the British were no longer in charge and the free state born and still a bunch of scumbags destroyed the archives in the Four Courts.

LordSutch

boynesider wrote: »

As someone who has studied this specific period in depth, I can assure you that this initial 'negative' reaction to the Rising and the subsequent influence of the executions on peoples perspectives of it has been much exaggerated by some modern writers and historians.

Personally, I have always tried to study the Rising as objectively as possible within the context of what was occurring across the rest of the Empire and Europe at the time. It is incredibly complex of course, but I generally have a favorable view of it.

Seeing as you have studied the period boynesider I have one or two questions for you: Question 1/ Was it an outragous act on the the part of the authorities of the time to execute the rebel leaders? or would this response have been expected, seeing as we were in the middle of the Great War with the rebels seen by many as traitors to the war effort? Question 2/ When the Rising is mentioned, there is always much talk of Empire "us fighting the Empire" us leaving the Empire, and of what was occuring across the rest of the Empire . . . this always perplexes me, because we were so much more than just part of the massive Empire, we were part of the United Kingdom which built the Empire! So I am always at a loss when modern day historians say "We fought the Empire" or "We put the Empire in the ha'penny place" or variation of. Yes the Rebels fought the Authorities in Dublin castle who were controlled from London, but I'm not sure that we fought and beat an Empire. I am interested to hear your thoughts on these questions boynesider.

PS I would also be interested to hear what you thought of the discussion and the points raised in the radio clip (Page#1 Post#1).

boynesider

LordSutch wrote: »

Seeing as you have studied the period boynesider I have one or two questions for you: Question 1/ Was it an outragous act on the the part of the authorities of the time to execute the rebel leaders? or would this response have been expected, seeing as we were in the middle of the Great War with the rebels seen by many as traitors to the war effort? Question 2/ When the Rising is mentioned, there is always much talk of Empire "us fighting the Empire" us leaving the Empire, and of what was occuring across the rest of the Empire . . . this always perplexes me, because we were so much more than just part of the massive Empire, we were part of the United Kingdom which built the Empire! So I am always at a loss when modern day historians say "We fought the Empire" or "We put the Empire in the ha'penny place" or variation of. Yes the Rebels fought the Authorities in Dublin castle who were controlled from London, but I'm not sure that we fought and beat an Empire. I am interested to hear your thoughts on these questions boynesider.

PS I would also be interested to hear what you thought of the discussion and the points raised in the radio clip (Page#1 Post#1).

Question 1: yes the executions were the natural and expected reaction of the authorities who as you say, would have regarded the men as traitors. This does not however make them any more lawful and acceptable, as some would claim it does.

Question 2: you have pointed out the eternal quandary of Ireland's relationship with the Empire, which is something which hasn't been given the attention I feel it deserves. We were at once a victim of it and an integral participant in the imperial process. But at the same time, since the middle of the 19th century the Irish electorate had consistently and unequivocally voted for self-governance and as much autonomy as could be practically achieved. If we were so entwined with the Empire, it was not through our own choice.

Shea O'Meara

swimming in a sea wrote: »

Not much archives left thanks to your heroes, the British were no longer in charge and the free state born and still a bunch of scumbags destroyed the archives in the Four Courts.

:rolleyes:

Generally, why would a people want to 'rejoin' a tyrannical regime? And it's even a bad use of language to say 'rejoin'. It's like saying you want to rekindle your relationship with your rapist.

If other occupied states or nations, including our generationally mentally Brit whipped loyalist chums to the north, are fine with the Queen and Co. great. Don't expect or assume everybody wants in on that charade of democracy.

The rising has become more symbolic as time passed on. We all know it wasn't supported by the majority, no myth there and any whinge about newspaper reports in the states at the time not being 100% accurate are ironic in the least when considering the British Empire and "Windsor" family, the real royals of bull**** P.R.

The Irish currently need an internal 1916 in my view.