GoIreland rewrite history to make it "Irish"

Sound of Silence

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

The OP is a bit odd to care about this fluff piece but right about Boyle.

It's the allusion to Propaganda that's most odd.

The amount of misinformation that surrounds Inventors and Inventions isn't something which is confined to the Irish, so to read too much into what is admittedly a fluff piece just seems bizarre.

MadsL

Dravokivich wrote: »

If you want to be such a smart arse about it,

Insertion of new Article 9.2.2:
This section shall not apply to persons born before the date of the enactment of this section.

I'm pretty sure that covers it.

No. You are in, you can call yourself Irish and claim Irish citizenship. You can also claim Scottish heritage and probably UK citizenship. The point that I am making in the case of Boyle is that if you are born in a colony, and actively assist in the supression of the natives, you have no right to retrospectively be called a native of that land when it reaches independence.

Following that amendment you will find that the majority of Irish felt that being born somewhere was not the same as being "of" there. Hence the parental nationality rule.

Sound of Silence wrote: »

They would have been considered Colonial Commoners, of course. The equivalent in Ireland being the Anglo-Irish class or the Protestant Ascendancy.

Commoners of which Sovereignty? I think you left something out.

Sound of Silence wrote: »

Then I assume the BBC have been polluted with that same terrible disease.

The teachers notes for that page cover other inventors scrabbling to patent the telephone. http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/schoolradio/pdfs/history/inventions.pdf

Often they're on a bit of a roll.

You know that's a wiki written by a volunteer right?

What exactly are you trying to prove with this, that the BBC publish errors?? Of course they do, I'm not sure what you are trying to argue by linking to this? Care to expound?

I don't particularly wish to lay claim to these malcontents, but the natural fact is that they were born in Ireland and therefore could reasonably be introduced into the GoIreland article as being, well, Irish or at least Anglo-Irish.

And the point is that I was making was that more than half of these so called 'weird' Irish inventions are weird because they worn't invented in the first place. In the case of Boyle, all I am doing is pointing out that calling the son of an invading Earl and the brother of Cromwell's go to armaments guy "Irish" is bending the needle of my ironymatixs patented Irony right up against the "Delicious" setting.

If you simply don't want to entertain any more speculation, then we can dig the man up himself and ask him in person - all in the name of a Cartoon article which transcends simple misappropriation and enters the realm of State Propaganda.

As I said earlier calling this man Irish to his face would have probably got you horsewhipped. Speculate all you want, but I doubt very much if on digging him up he'd have much time for you asking him to put on the Green Jersey.

W.B. Yeats spoke of the Anglo-Irish class when he said: "We are one of the great stocks of Europe. We are the people of Burke; we are the people of Grattan; we are the people of Swift, the people of Emmet, the people of Parnell. We have created the most of the modern literature of this country. We have created the best of its political intelligence". I assume your response would be that, unfortunately, these men's accomplishments simply do not fit into the fabric of Irish heritage until about, well, the early to mid 18th Century, if even that.

If you think that a contemporary of Cromwell, from a family that took an active part in the mass slaughter and destruction of Ireland, who left at the age of eight, who bled his Irish estates for an income of 3000 a year, and who loathed the place is someone you want to put up on pedestal as one of the Great Men of Ireland, then you would appear to be struggling to find such men.

I'm not disrespecting the Anglo-Irish contribution to Ireland, on the contrary, it suprises me how often the Anglo portion is dropped when it suits, but even you have to admit that including Boyle requires ignoring some rather bloody aspects of his relations and history.

Those must have been a tumultuous and revelatory twenty years. Also, Swift had very little love for the native Irish. As I mentioned earlier, when he spoke of the "Irish people", he was speaking of the Anglo-Irish class

You keep trying to drag Swift into this for some reason. We are discussing Boyle.

I find it ironic that a man who clearly expressed his distaste for the whole "800 Years" argument seems to be doing everything in his power to perpetuate the notion of the foreign Colonial aggressor exploiting and pacifying the Native population.

That's because you can't have it both ways. The father and brother the "foreign Colonial aggressor" and the other son the beloved Irishman. Come on, that's quite a doublethink right there wouldn't you say?

Nothing wrong with that, but it has little to do with the GoIreland article simply stating that Robert Boyle was born in Ireland.

No, re-read it. It states he was an Irishman.

When has a parent's Nationality been tied to someone's ethnicity?

Ever hear of an anchor baby?
Given that "One in five people deported from Ireland since the start of 2010 were children. Deporting children, who may have been born in Ireland and never been to the countries they are being returned to, is a hardly justifiable practice."
[source]
Ireland in its sovereign form no longer sees place of birth as having the same importance as you wish to place on it. Out of interest, how did you vote in that Referendum?

It doesn't negate him from being placed in the Article. I'm not sure what else was claimed about Boyle in the article, other than that he happened to have been born in Ireland, which certainly isn't a false claim.

As I have said above, he is described as an Irishman.

I'm not sure how much room was left in the article for the author to actually explore in detail the intricacies of the Irish identity and how it applies to each individual inventor. A thoroughly engrossing read, indeed.

I'm sure you can grasp the subtle difference between he was born in Ireland and he's an Irishman.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

MadsL wrote: »

I'm sure you can grasp the subtle difference between he was born in Ireland and he's an Irishman.

You mean that David Norris isn't Congolese?

MadsL

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

You mean that David Norris isn't Congolese?

Is he Belgian?

I think you'll find my point as explained above is that your parents' ethnicity and nationality play a very great role in determining a person's view of their nationality.

I'd be certain that Boyle would have choked on his coffee had you described him as an Irishman.

Sound of Silence

What exactly are you trying to prove with this, that the BBC publish errors?? Of course they do, I'm not sure what you are trying to argue by linking to this? Care to expound?

What's the difference between an error and propaganda? The Irish commit one and the British the other.

If you think that a contemporary of Cromwell, from a family that took an active part in the mass slaughter and destruction of Ireland, who left at the age of eight, who bled his Irish estates for an income of 3000 a year, and who loathed the place is someone you want to put up on pedestal as one of the Great Men of Ireland, then you would appear to be struggling to find such men.

Again I'll explain that I have no interest in claiming Robert Boyle as an Irishman. My interest in this topic lies solely with your claims regarding supposed State propaganda, which I'll admit is a claim I find to be frankly ridiculous.

Do you really consider the author of the piece to have been particularly interested in exploring or speculating on Boyle's ethnic identity before he included him in the trawl? Or would you suspect that he included him simply based on the fact that he was born on this Island; a fact which can hardly be denied. The author of the article wasn't even the first person to claim Robert Boyle; Science.ie also got in on it.

I guess the State Propaganda has permeated so deeply into the Irish media that it's infiltrated two year old articles!

I'm not disrespecting the Anglo-Irish contribution to Ireland, on the contrary, it suprises me how often the Anglo portion is dropped when it suits, but even you have to admit that including Boyle requires ignoring some rather bloody aspects of his relations and history.

You're shocked by how often the "Anglo portion" is dropped? It would seem that in Boyle's case both the Anglo and the Irish are dropped when one sees fit.

You keep trying to drag Swift into this for some reason. We are discussing Boyle.

I'm simply using Swift as a contrast to your view that Boyle's Generation had a single solitary view of ethnicity and identity. Swift, having been born to English parents in Ireland (his Father a staunch Royalist and Planter, like Boyle's), would certainly have been influenced by the supposed attitudes of the time. Despite this, it would seem that he had little problem identifying himself as Anglo-Irish, or even Irish for that matter. Hell, he never needed even to bring out the horsewhip.

You even said it yourself when you argued "that your parents' ethnicity and nationality play a very great role in determining a person's view of their nationality". What affect this supposed indoctrination had on Swift, I'm not entirely sure. In Boyle's case, the topic is entirely in the realm of speculation.

That's because you can't have it both ways. The father and brother the "foreign Colonial aggressor" and the other son the beloved Irishman. Come on, that's quite a doublethink right there wouldn't you say?

Again, do you honestly believe that I'm attempting to portray Boyle as a Son of Eire or a proud Irishman? Far from it.

No, re-read it. It states he was an Irishman.

By birth perhaps, but not by conviction clearly. Like countless others, I assume.

Ever hear of an anchor baby?
Given that "One in five people deported from Ireland since the start of 2010 were children. Deporting children, who may have been born in Ireland and never been to the countries they are being returned to, is a hardly justifiable practice."
[source]
Ireland in its sovereign form no longer sees place of birth as having the same importance as you wish to place on it. Out of interest, how did you vote in that Referendum?

Odd that you would bring that up, as the logical conclusion to your argument would be that these people could not in fact be considered Irish, as the ethnicity and Nationality of their parents would seemingly prevent it.

Seeing that I don't live in the Republic, I can't vote on the referendum.

steddyeddy

We proposed the concept of the electron.

MadsL

Sound of Silence wrote: »

What's the difference between an error and propaganda? The Irish commit one and the British the other.

Fine. The BBC piece is British Propaganda. Is your what-about-ary itch satisfied?
Have you proved anything?

Again I'll explain that I have no interest in claiming Robert Boyle as an Irishman. My interest in this topic lies solely with your claims regarding supposed State propaganda, which I'll admit is a claim I find to be frankly ridiculous.

You'll see I retracted that this was State-sponsored quite some time ago. In the meantime you have been obessing about Boyle.

Do you really consider the author of the piece to have been particularly interested in exploring or speculating on Boyle's ethnic identity before he included him in the trawl? Or would you suspect that he included him simply based on the fact that he was born on this Island; a fact which can hardly be denied.

I pointed out that over 60-80% of this piece is complete bollox, they hardly explored anything. You seem fixated on Boyle, to the exclusion of all of the other makey up stuff in the infographic. I'm suggesting that it was very sloppy research to claim half of this stuff.

I never denied Boyle was born in Lismore, I'm just pointing out the fact that thye concept of him as "Irishman" would have been baffling. He probably would have pointed out that he was born in a part of the world ruled by his King, to whom he had, as a Cavalier, sworn an oath of allegiance, and that made him a true Briton.

The author of the article wasn't even the first person to claim Robert Boyle; Science.ie also got in on it.

I never claimed they were the first person, I just pointed out his true biography and actions.

I guess the State Propaganda has permeated so deeply into the Irish media that it's infiltrated two year old articles!

Again, you are fixing on a fact from one of the ten points made in the infographic. Why so fixated.

You're shocked by how often the "Anglo portion" is dropped? It would seem that in Boyle's case both the Anglo and the Irish are dropped when one sees fit.

Would "Irish-born" Englishman suit you beter?

I'm simply using Swift as a contrast to your view that Boyle's Generation had a single solitary view of ethnicity and identity. Swift, having been born to English parents in Ireland (his Father a staunch Royalist and Planter, like Boyle's), would certainly have been influenced by the supposed attitudes of the time. Despite this, it would seem that he had little problem identifying himself as Anglo-Irish, or even Irish for that matter. Hell, he never needed even to bring out the horsewhip.

Boyle's generation? Boyle was 40 before Swift was even born. You are stretching now.

You even said it yourself when you argued "that your parents' ethnicity and nationality play a very great role in determining a person's view of their nationality". What affect this supposed indoctrination had on Swift, I'm not entirely sure. In Boyle's case, the topic is entirely in the realm of speculation.

Then by your measure, as has been pointed out David Norris is Congolese.
By extreme argument, he could be seen as Belgian, I would only argue that if he was of Belgian descent, and aiding conquest then that would be correct.
By any normal measure, the nationality of your parents has a huge factor to play, as now demonstrated by the Irish Constitution.

Again, do you honestly believe that I'm attempting to portray Boyle as a Son of Eire or a proud Irishman? Far from it.

By birth perhaps, but not by conviction clearly. Like countless others, I assume.

By birth he was an Hon. as the son of an Earl, or does that not mean as much as spending eight years and practically none of his adult life in Ireland in determining his nationality.

Odd that you would bring that up, as the logical conclusion to your argument would be that these people could not in fact be considered Irish, as the ethnicity and Nationality of their parents would seemingly prevent it.

I don't have a say in it. I'm just pointing out how the State behaves in relation to those people. It is not enough to be born in Ireland to be Irish for the State. You are arguing that it is.

Seeing that I don't live in the Republic, I can't vote on the referendum.

Very well, how would you have voted?

steddyeddy wrote: »

We proposed the concept of the electron.

Was there a vote?

John Doe1

Well at least an irishman James Ussher discovered the date the world started, 4004 BC

9959

John Doe1 wrote: »

Well at least an irishman James Ussher discovered the date the world started, 4004 BC

The world started what exactly, cross-dressing?

Sound of Silence

MadsL wrote: »

I pointed out that over 60-80% of this piece is complete bollox, they hardly explored anything. You seem fixated on Boyle, to the exclusion of all of the other makey up stuff in the infographic. I'm suggesting that it was very sloppy research to claim half of this stuff.

My summary of the other 60-80% of the article was pretty much summed up as a misappropriation of credit - something which is hardly the sole preserve of the Irish when it comes to inventors or inventions, and hardly something to be particularly riled about. I even touched on this point when I made a deliberately sarcastic post about Edison and Tesla.

Hell, it's a topic which is often entertained by cracked articles and trivia books, so to call out one particular Organisation over the debacle as being slightly more guilty than the others just seems a bit far-fetched.

Very well, how would you have voted?

I would be a liar to claim that I knew the exact content of the Referendum you happened to mention, but generally I'm in favour of anything which supports the right to amnesty for asylum-seekers.

MadsL

Sound of Silence wrote: »

My summary of the other 60-80% of the article was pretty much summed up as a misappropriation of credit - something which is hardly the sole preserve of the Irish when it comes to inventors or inventions,

At no point did I say it was.

and hardly something to be particularly riled about.

And yet here you are. I like how you are also now trying to direct the level of my emotions. Wonder how that will work out.

I even touched on this point when I made a deliberately sarcastic post about Edison and Tesla.

Which I thanked.

Hell, it's a topic which is often entertained by cracked articles and trivia books, so to call out one particular Organisation over the debacle as being slightly more guilty than the others just seems a bit far-fetched.

I started a thread on one example, not the whole topic of trivia.

I would be a liar to claim that I knew the exact content of the Referendum you happened to mention, but generally I'm in favour of anything which supports the right to amnesty for asylum-seekers.

Not hard to research now is it???

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-seventh_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland

Sound of Silence

MadsL wrote: »

At no point did I say it was.

Then rather than ignoring it as simply an exaggerated (more than often false) example of Ireland's contribution to the Scientific world, you claimed it as State [Word revoked by MadsL].

The article was a fluff piece, as another Poster pointed out. It's hardly an attempt by a State Agency to rewrite History, as the thread title puts it.

And yet here you are. I like how you are also now trying to direct the level of my emotions. Wonder how that will work out.

What can I say, I'm a self confessed Political masochist, and love to torment myself with endless arguments and irreconcilable disputes.

I wouldn't be on a forum if I wasn't.

Not hard to research now is it???

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-seventh_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland

Again, I don't live in the Republic.

As such, my contribution to the topic equates to nowt. But I'll give the Wiki article a quick glance over for the sake of it.

MadsL

Sound of Silence wrote: »

Then rather than ignoring it as simply an exaggerated (more than often false) example of Ireland's contribution to the Scientific world, you claimed it as State [Word revoked by MadsL].

The article was a fluff piece, as another Poster pointed out. It's hardly an attempt by a State Agency to rewrite History, as the thread title puts it.

Are you deliberately missing the fact I said this several pages ago.

MadsL wrote: »

Apologies for giving the impression GoIreland was state funded, it was indirectly until 2004. Sorry for any confusion caused. FEXCO bought it out and it is now a private system.

What can I say, I'm a self confessed Political masochist, and love to torment myself with endless arguments and irreconcilable disputes.

I wouldn't be on a forum if I wasn't.

I think you'll find a world of pain trying to control people's level of Rilement (is that a word, I feel it should be)

Again, I don't live in the Republic.

Wasn't a qualification to answer my question.

As such, my contribution to the topic equates to nowt. But I'll give the Wiki article a quick glance over for the sake of it.

For someone so vested in what constitutes Irish nationality, I'm surprised you are not more familiar with it.

stoneill

Gay Byrne invented sex apparently.
Or is gay burn something you get?

MadsL

stoneill wrote: »

Gay Byrne invented sex apparently.
Or is gay burn something you get?

Marty Whelan invented the moustache.




Wait. Sorry, Marty Whelan has a moustache.

steddyeddy

MadsL wrote: »

Is he Belgian?

I think you'll find my point as explained above is that your parents' ethnicity and nationality play a very great role in determining a person's view of their nationality.

I'd be certain that Boyle would have choked on his coffee had you described him as an Irishman.[/QUOTE]

No you're not. The man is dead a few century you have no idea whether he would like to be called an Irish man or not. It's simply your opinion and not even worth debating to be honest.

syklops

MadsL wrote: »

So if you were born in Spain on holiday, would you describe yourself as Spanish?
To help you, you might want to read the text of the 27th Amendment of the Constitution of Ireland.



Clearly the majority of the Irish population consider parents' nationality to be very much to do with a child's nationality?

You specifically said father, not parent. My mother is Irish.

MadsL

steddyeddy wrote: »

No you're not. The man is dead a few century you have no idea whether he would like to be called an Irish man or not. It's simply your opinion and not even worth debating to be honest.

I'm not certain? I certainly am.

Ah I see. Your entire argument against that is "that's your opinion". Awesome.

Well done. You see the way I provide reasons earlier, that's called debating points, you might want to try it sometime.

MadsL

syklops wrote: »

You specifically said father, not parent. My mother is Irish.

So to ask my question again, if you were born on holidays in Spain to a Scottish father and an Irish mother, would that make you Spanish?

steddyeddy

MadsL wrote: »

I'm not certain? I certainly am.

Ah I see. Your entire argument against that is "that's your opinion". Awesome.

Well done. You see the way I provide reasons earlier, that's called debating points, you might want to try it sometime.

You stated to be certain about a man's reaction if he was called an Irish man. The man in question has been dead centuries so as I said you're not certain.

MadsL

steddyeddy wrote: »

You stated to be certain about a man's reaction if he was called an Irish man. The man in question has been dead centuries so as I said you're not certain.

No I am. I'm quite certain about my opinion.

Will we continue this "Yes, it is. No, it isn't." stuff. or would you like to put up a reason why Boyle would have consider himself Irish given that.

1. The 17th century Planters were English
2. His was the son of an Earl
3. His brothers were involved in massacring the Irish
4. He clearly only wanted irish estates for the money
5. He got the f out of Ireland and stayed out for his entire life except for brief visits to sort out the estates
6. He was a loyal Cavalier of the King
7. He called the Irish "illiterate"

There's seven.

Have you even one reason to believe he considered himself Irish except that he was squeezed out in Lismore??

Cienciano

conorhal wrote: »

But with his contemptable self loathing and mealy mouthed begrudgery towards the country, what else could he be but Irish?

This "self loathing" crap is bandied about on AH a lot. It's not "self loathing" to point out that someone isn't irish. Even if he did consider himself Irish but we don't know, it's not self loathing to question his nationality if it is indeed in question.
To make any point about Ireland that's not 100% positive isn't self loathing. It's almost as misused as that other word you used, "begrudgery".

steddyeddy

MadsL wrote: »

No I am. I'm quite certain about my opinion.

Will we continue this "Yes, it is. No, it isn't." stuff. or would you like to put up a reason why Boyle would have consider himself Irish given that.

1. The 17th century Planters were English
2. His was the son of an Earl
3. His brothers were involved in massacring the Irish
4. He clearly only wanted irish estates for the money
5. He got the f out of Ireland and stayed out for his entire life except for brief visits to sort out the estates
6. He was a loyal Cavalier of the King
7. He called the Irish "illiterate"

There's seven.

Have you even one reason to believe he considered himself Irish except that he was squeezed out in Lismore??

No not particularly but then I dont claim to know the man's thoughts. Neither of us can know.

Duggys Housemate

Cienciano wrote: »

This "self loathing" crap is bandied about on AH a lot. It's not "self loathing" to point out that someone isn't irish. Even if he did consider himself Irish but we don't know, it's not self loathing to question his nationality if it is indeed in question.
To make any point about Ireland that's not 100% positive isn't self loathing. It's almost as misused as that other word you used, "begrudgery".

Starting a thread on this fluff piece is the self-loathing bit. Not Boyle. He was definitely not Irish. That's a bit of a run around.

Sound of Silence

MadsL wrote: »

Are you deliberately missing the fact I said this several pages ago.

I'm guessing you missed the "revoked by MadsL" point that I made, but I was referring to the sentiment of your earlier posts which were hardly an example of a forgiving approach to the topic.

I think you'll find a world of pain trying to control people's level of Rilement (is that a word, I feel it should be)

It is now.

Wasn't a qualification to answer my question.

For someone so vested in what constitutes Irish nationality, I'm surprised you are not more familiar with it.

Seeing that I was, let's see, the grand age of Twelve or Thirteen when the Amendment was made - an Amendment which admittedly by European standards was hardly earth shattering and simply moved Ireland into line with the rest of the Union - I'm not particularly surprised that I wasn't made aware of it at the time.

Regardless, if there ever was an effort made to repeal the Amendment, and provided I was capable of voting on it (which I'm not), then I would be in favour of the repeal - provided that efforts were made to limit instances of "Birth tourism" (i.e. strict regulations on the issuing of Visas).

You're not for the whole born in the stable approach, are you?

Duggys Housemate

Interestingly enough my ancestors - I mean 19th century, I did a family tree - were servants of the Devonshires who now own Lismore - an impressive Castle/Country house even by English standards, although not by the standards of the Devonshires.

But this thread has run its course for me, I am glad that some Irish man at some time or other invented the unsubscribe button.

MadsL

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Starting a thread on this fluff piece is the self-loathing bit.

Describe the nature of the self-loathing I exhibited in my OP please.

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

But this thread has run its course for me, I am glad that some Irish man at some time or other invented the unsubscribe button.

You think vBulletin is Irish software, oh dear, I have some bad news for you.

Sound of Silence wrote: »

I'm guessing you missed the "revoked by MadsL" point that I made, but I was referring to the sentiment of your earlier posts which were hardly an example of a forgiving approach to the topic.

I though you meant the work propaganda, rather than State.

It is now.

Good.

Seeing that I was, let's see, the grand age of Twelve or Thirteen when the Amendment was made - an Amendment which admittedly by European standards was hardly earth shattering and simply moved Ireland into line with the rest of the Union - I'm not particularly surprised that I wasn't made aware of it at the time.

History lesson for you so.

Regardless, if there ever was an effort made to repeal the Amendment, and provided I was capable of voting on it (which I'm not), then I would be in favour of the repeal - provided that efforts were made to limit instances of "Birth tourism" (i.e. strict regulations on the issuing of Visas).

OK

You're not for the whole born in the stable approach, are you?

It is not very consistently applied now is it?

im invisible

MadsL wrote: »

Wavin. Right. Not Dutch then?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wavin

(heres the original)

Cienciano

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Starting a thread on this fluff piece is the self-loathing bit. Not Boyle. He was definitely not Irish. That's a bit of a run around.

How? He's pointing out that it's bollocks and it is. Nothing self loathing about it. Just someone pointing out a number of inaccuracies in an ad. Just because the ad happens to be some tourist crap ad for ireland doesn't make it self loathing.

Duggys Housemate

I decided to pop back in to point out to serious minds that I don't really believe that an Irishman invented the unsubscribe button.

Now continue to get over-excited by a "State Sponsered" fluff piece in a privately funded tourist website which , tongue in cheek, over credits some Irish people with certain inventions.

I mean, God knows, that's the most important thing that ever happened. Someone is wrong on the Internet.