Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Irish Famine

12467…11

Comments

  • #92
    Truthrevolution
    Closed Accounts Posts: 494 ✭✭Truthrevolution


    Denerick wrote: »
    So much rubbish on this thread. It leads me to think that 90% of you are parodists. Calling the Irish famine a genocide is ridiculous and only displays your complete lack of acquaintance with that period of history.

    Oh right and you believe everything you are officially told by your government, btw are you Irish or British?


  • #93
    enno99
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,988 ✭✭✭enno99


    Denerick wrote: »
    So much rubbish on this thread. It leads me to think that 90% of you are parodists. Calling the Irish famine a genocide is ridiculous and only displays your complete lack of acquaintance with that period of history.

    As to the depth of your knowledge of this period in history maybe you could throw some more light on the subject?


    CHRISTINE KINEALY

    At the end of The Great Calamity, Christine Kinealy writes:

    "While it was evident that the government had to do something to help alleviate the suffering, the particular nature of the actual response, especially following 1846, suggests a more covert agenda and motivation. As the Famine progressed, it became apparent that the government was using its information not merely to help it formulate its relief policies, but also as an opportunity to facilitate various long-desired changes within Ireland. These included population control and the consolidation of property through various means, including emigration...

    Despite the overwhelming evidence of prolonged distress caused by successive years of potato blight, the underlying philosophy of the relief efforts was that they should be kept to a minimalist level; in fact they actually decreased as the Famine progressed." (17.)

    http://www.nde.state.ne.us/SS/Irish/Irish_pf.html


  • #94
    Denerick
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,485 ✭✭✭Denerick


    Truthrevolution wrote: »
    Oh right and you believe everything you are officially told by your government, btw are you Irish or British?

    Careful, your tinfoil hat is melting.


  • #95
    Denerick
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,485 ✭✭✭Denerick


    enno99 wrote: »
    As to the depth of your knowledge of this period in history maybe you could throw some more light on the subject?


    CHRISTINE KINEALY

    At the end of The Great Calamity, Christine Kinealy writes:

    "While it was evident that the government had to do something to help alleviate the suffering, the particular nature of the actual response, especially following 1846, suggests a more covert agenda and motivation. As the Famine progressed, it became apparent that the government was using its information not merely to help it formulate its relief policies, but also as an opportunity to facilitate various long-desired changes within Ireland. These included population control and the consolidation of property through various means, including emigration...

    Despite the overwhelming evidence of prolonged distress caused by successive years of potato blight, the underlying philosophy of the relief efforts was that they should be kept to a minimalist level; in fact they actually decreased as the Famine progressed." (17.)

    http://www.nde.state.ne.us/SS/Irish/Irish_pf.html

    Christine Kinealy is one historian among dozens. (And she doesn't say anything surprising, I don't reject that analysis) Nobody doubts that the British responses to the Irish Famine were inhumane and impotent, but suggesting they deliberately sought a policy of genocide is patently absurd. British politics was at this time blinkered by absurd ideological straitjackets and laissez faire was a system, not a mere philosophy that could easily be altered. I suggest you take even a cursory glance through some of the broader narrative histories of the period.

    EDIT: Maybe I've the wrong idea. This is the conspiracy theory forum after all. I should probably leave you fine folks to unravel all of the crazy conspiracies us mere rational mortals refuse to 'acknowledge'... (Though most of you just like taking the piss)


  • #96
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Denerick wrote: »

    EDIT: Maybe I've the wrong idea. This is the conspiracy theory forum after all.

    Yeah you'd probably feel more at home in the apologist forum.

    This is the same Britain of Concentration Camps in the Boer War, The Opium Wars, the famine in Bengal, India, and at the forefront of the human slave trade.

    Many ethnic groups was less than human to them, Irish included. Allowing 50,000 evictions of farmers and their families while people are starving to death is murder of 50,000.


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    Flamed Diving
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    louliewan wrote: »
    Population of Ireland before famine was 8 mil, after famine it was down to 4 mil, 1 mil died, 3 mil emigrated. Blight caused potato crop to fail and as cattle and grain were exported to feed the English people, Irish starved. It is said that many English people were unaware of the severity of the situation here, there was a donation of $710 (or possibly $170) sent by the Choctaw Indians .

    No. 1 million died and 1 million emigrated. Population continued to decline steadily until the 1960s, by which time it was 3 and a bit million. Read some books on the subject.


  • #98
    Flamed Diving
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    samson09 wrote: »
    This "over-reliance on the spuds" theory that is touted is nothing more than an attempt to cover up what really happened. I cant understand how anyone of sound mind can accept this theory, it just doesnt add up.

    Incredulity is not an argument.


  • #99
    Flamed Diving
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Yeah you'd probably feel more at home in the apologist forum.

    This is the same Britain of Concentration Camps in the Boer War, The Opium Wars, the famine in Bengal, India, and at the forefront of the human slave trade.

    Many ethnic groups was less than human to them, Irish included. Allowing 50,000 evictions of farmers and their families while people are starving to death is murder of 50,000.

    It wasn't genocide, BB. Gross negligence, yes, but genocide implies a direct campaign to commit mass murder against civilians. Despite the rich and varied historiography of the Irish Famine, no one, bar John Mitchel, has arrived at the conclusion that it was genocide. So either every Irish (and non-Irish) historian who has researched and written on the subject in the last century are conspirators/deluded/idiots, or your assumptions are without merit. Occams Razor.

    You are not the first BB, but you are wrong, just like the other genocidists.


  • #100
    Denerick
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,485 ✭✭✭Denerick


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Yeah you'd probably feel more at home in the apologist forum.

    There is an apologist forum? Neat.
    This is the same Britain of Concentration Camps in the Boer War, The Opium Wars, the famine in Bengal, India, and at the forefront of the human slave trade.

    This is the same Ireland of paedophile priests, magdalene laundries, Protestant Pogroms... oops! See what I did there? Your attempt to adopt the teary eyed litany of historical grievances only works if you have a point to begin with.
    Many ethnic groups was less than human to them, Irish included. Allowing 50,000 evictions of farmers and their families while people are starving to death is murder of 50,000.

    'Allowing'?? The British political system could not and would not allow for an entire population to forego paying their rents - if Britain had have actively intervened then the scope of the state would have increased dramatically, against both what was considered feasible for the state to do - and possibly against what the state could actually do. This is basic stuff. What they could have done is they could have bought cheap crops and released it for free on the open market. They tried to do this, but it brought down the government. (Look up Peel and the repeal of the Corn Laws) This is how contentious this kind of economic intervention by the state was in the mid 19th century.

    The causes of the famine are clear and distinct - we were overpopulated, the poor had too many children, were ignorant of other farming methods and fishing, and yes, a British land owning system that was unjust and immoral.

    But Ireland has had plenty of famines before this, yet they are barely touched by the history books. The reason why? The likes of O'Donovan Rossa (The conspiracy theorist of his day) was able to propagandise the Irish Famine as genocide. If this is so, then every nation on the face of the earth has had a class based genocide at some stage over the last 300 years - ie, rich v poor. To suggest the word 'genocide' is to deride the true meaning of the term - which implies centrally organised and conspired murder of entire peoples. There is little or no evidence to suggest that the British government deliberately sought the deaths of a million Irish peasants. You could say, perhaps, that it was a 'genocide of neglect', but I doubt any other nation on the face of the earth at this time would really have acted differently.

    You cannot castigate the British government for failing to act in the mid 19th century with an early 21st century political philosophy. You betray a profoundly tenuous grasp of Irish and British history if you refuse to acknowledge the political backdrop of what limited British reaction to the Irish Famine.


  • #101
    Truthrevolution
    Closed Accounts Posts: 494 ✭✭Truthrevolution


    Denerdick you still havent answered my question.......


  • Advertisement
  • #102
    Denerick
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,485 ✭✭✭Denerick


    Truthrevolution wrote: »
    Denerdick you still havent answered my question.......

    What question? If you really want to know, I hail from the planet Zigtog and was installed by the CIA to deliberately falsify Irish history on the internet.****. I gave it away again.

    *Initiating memory deletion protocol, codename 345200928...


  • #103
    Truthrevolution
    Closed Accounts Posts: 494 ✭✭Truthrevolution


    Denerick wrote: »
    What question? If you really want to know, I hail from the planet Zigtog and was installed by the CIA to deliberately falsify Irish history on the internet.****. I gave it away again.

    *Initiating memory deletion protocol, codename 345200928...

    Yet again instead of answering my question you just sit behind your keyboard typing nonsense.You have just lost all credibility in my book and i wont bother wasting any more of my time with you.


  • #104
    Denerick
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,485 ✭✭✭Denerick


    Truthrevolution wrote: »
    Yet again instead of answering my question you just sit behind your keyboard typing nonsense.You have just lost all credibility in my book and i wont bother wasting any more of my time with you.

    Oh, OK then. I'll make sure to inform my superiors in Whitehall that I've alienated yet another bog Irishman.


  • #105
    GarlicBread
    Closed Accounts Posts: 270 ✭✭GarlicBread


    Denerick wrote: »
    So much rubbish on this thread. It leads me to think that 90% of you are parodists. Calling the Irish famine a genocide is ridiculous and only displays your complete lack of acquaintance with that period of history.

    Well, from the historical record that exists, it would appear that it was genocide in the modern meaning of the word.

    Another interesting thing, john waters from the irish times was on that newstalk program and he was stating clearly that it was. I dont really like him tbh, but he wouldnt be saying it for no reason.

    I think its just gone on for so long that to try and rename it genocide is difficult as its an extremely dirty word.

    Its also important to bear in mind thats theres always gonna be some people who will complain because of the nature of their own politcal history or political alignment.

    No one wants to add or give credibility to any allready existing anti-british sentiment or groups, but that dosent mean the past should be covered and ignored.

    It will be interesting to see what happens if and when the debate goes mainstream again. I imagine a **** flinging contest on a scale never before seen. It will be entertaining to say the least.

    From 1846 - 1851 its not hard to assume that irish people knew that they were being mass murdered. If this is the case then respect and decency should be shown to their memory. The worst possible thing we could do is lable it a famine, which we have done. Maybe it needs to be looked at again with an open mind.

    People shouldnt be niave to the extent in which we fall under the sphere of british historical influence. Atrocities commited to not find themselves in the record for obivous reasons.

    Do people think if the nazis won the war they would record genocide and teach it in their schools?(just a comparison, nothing implied)

    Famine/genocide, we are all talking about the same event, not different versions.

    All in all tho, theres much worse things that have happened in more recent times to other countries, so maybe we are being selfish. Still good to have a nice winge about it though, clear out the closets of all those skeletons or we will start running out of room.


  • #106
    Denerick
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,485 ✭✭✭Denerick


    GarlicBread wrote: »
    Well, from the historical record that exists, it would appear that it was genocide in the modern meaning of the word.

    Notice my post contained a reasoned argument and outlined specific examples for why it was not a genocide. You merely make a handwave like comment -'oh well of course there was a genocide'- and expect people to take you seriously.
    Another interesting thing, john waters from the irish times was on that newstalk program and he was stating clearly that it was. I dont really like him tbh, but he wouldnt be saying it for no reason.

    John Waters??? Really? Every side in any argument always has adherents it could do without, and this unlearned sensationalist nob-end is exactly the kind of tit your argument would be better served without. He wouldn't be saying it for no reason? What kind of thing is that to say??? People like him crave notoriety.
    Its also important to bear in mind thats theres always gonna be some people who will complain because of the nature of their own politcal history or political alignment.

    No one wants to add or give credibility to any allready existing anti-british sentiment or groups, but that dosent mean the past should be covered and ignored.

    What undefensible nonsense. You haven't mentioned any history WHATSOEVER in your post. If you are going to be so blasé, you will at least have to construct an argument.
    It will be interesting to see what happens if and when the debate goes mainstream again. I imagine a **** flinging contest on a scale never before seen. It will be entertaining to say the least.

    I hope a new era of historical debate takes hold in Ireland. For too long, our history has been at the prey of deluded Republicans who refuse to view their history through an enlightened lense. A more Euro-centric and comparative analysis will be welcome and this is the way that Irish historical scholarship has been going since F.S.L. Lyons and T.W. Moody were at their peak in the 70s.

    In other words, 'Irish Exceptionalism' HAS to end.
    From 1846 - 1851 its not hard to assume that irish people knew that they were being mass murdered.

    Sensationalist drivel. They were dying, not being murdered. There is a vast, vast difference.
    If this is the case then respect and decency should be shown to their memory. The worst possible thing we could do is lable it a famine, which we have done. Maybe it needs to be looked at again with an open mind.

    I am trying to show respect for their memory, be refusing to allow ill educated Republican clowns to highjack their memory and use it as a political football. For shame.
    People shouldnt be niave to the extent in which we fall under the sphere of british historical influence. Atrocities commited to not find themselves in the record for obivous reasons.

    Do people think if the nazis won the war they would record genocide and teach it in their schools?(just a comparison, nothing implied)

    Rubbish. And thanks for introducing Godwins law into the thread!

    You said absolutely nothing with your post, but presume a lot. Please come back when you're prepared to talk about history, otherwise, butt out.


  • #107
    GarlicBread
    Closed Accounts Posts: 270 ✭✭GarlicBread


    Ah, i can almost feel the **** being flung out of my moniter lol.

    I entered into this thread on the basis of listening to a newtalk radio debate which contained about 5 different people from different backrounds with different polical views.

    Genocide was not being debated, but the historical record was. The debate was about revising the history of it to reflect the facts.

    The reason i pointed out john waters is that he's one of the most anti republican people around and for him to come out with the word genocide seems to me to be a reasonable enough accessment of the situation. He is very level headed and mainstream with regard to anglo irish relations, as far as i know anyway(i think hes a cu*t btw).

    The line between genocide and famine was drawn because history has not mentioned in any meaningful degree the british regiments that were forcing food out of the country at gun point. Take these guys out and of course, you are left with a famine. Put them back into the story and its a genocide.

    You dont have to be a historian to understand that and the reason it was being debated on radio and indeed here now on this forum is because historians played politics with it and made a bollox of the whole thing.

    Dont tell me to butt out again im more than entitled to my opinions. I think its sad that in amerca they honour our dead more than we do here.

    Dont you think that the most important event in our countries history should be taught properly in schools or should it just be pushed away for another 150 years just to make sure theres no chance of scandal?


  • #108
    GarlicBread
    Closed Accounts Posts: 270 ✭✭GarlicBread


    Also, i am not a republican clown. But by calling me one you exposed your own alignment, nuff said.


  • #109
    Flamed Diving
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    GarlicB, why does almost every historian say 'no genocide'?

    Are they idiots?

    Are they 'in on it'?

    Are they insane?

    Are they not as clever as you?


  • #110
    GarlicBread
    Closed Accounts Posts: 270 ✭✭GarlicBread


    Maybe their are afraid of being called republican clowns.

    Why was Ireland's national independant radio station in the year 2010 discussing the subject and using the term genocide? For the crack?

    I think not.


  • #111
    Flamed Diving
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    GarlicBread wrote: »
    Maybe their are afraid of being called republican clowns.

    Why was Ireland's national independant radio station in the year 2010 discussing the subject and using the term genocide? For the crack?

    I think not.

    Is it the job of this radio station to research the Irish Famine five days a week for 30+ years?

    I think not, and I am going to side with the famine experts, not the journalists.


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Flamed Diving wrote: »
    GarlicB, why does almost every historian say 'no genocide'?

    Are they idiots?

    Are they 'in on it'?

    Are they insane?

    Are they not as clever as you?

    Maybe they are anti-Irish, or 'self-hating' Irish genocide deniers. Maybe we need to set up an IDL to prevent people doubting the genocide, Perhaps we should attack Iran to make sure it is never repeated?

    You asked,

    "why does almost every historian say 'no genocide'?"

    I'd ask you,

    Why doesn't every historian say 'no genocide"?

    My answer would be because it is a matter of contention.


  • #113
    Flamed Diving
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Maybe they are anti-Irish, or 'self-hating' Irish genocide deniers. Maybe we need to set up an IDL to prevent people doubting the genocide, Perhaps we should attack Iran to make sure it is never repeated?

    You asked,

    "why does almost every historian say 'no genocide'?"

    I'd ask you,

    Why doesn't every historian say 'no genocide"?

    My answer would be because it is a matter of contention.

    Wow. Anything, but you being wrong.


  • #114
    Denerick
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,485 ✭✭✭Denerick


    Is no-one prepared to rebut the arguments provided?

    All the 'pro genocide' side have offered is that 'OF COURSE IT WAS A GENOCIDE, RACIST'. No argument, no attempt to construct an argument. No reason.


  • #115
    enno99
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,988 ✭✭✭enno99


    [QUOTE=Denerick;6534711


    The causes of the famine are clear and distinct - we were overpopulated, the poor had too many children, were ignorant of other farming methods and fishing.[/QUOTE]

    Ireland Before and After the Famine, author Cormac O’Grada documents that in 1845, a famine year in Ireland, 3,251,907 quarters (8 bushels = 1 quarter)) of corn were exported from Ireland to Britain. That same year, 257,257 sheep were exported to Britain. In 1846, another famine year, 480,827 swine, and 186,483 oxen were exported to Britain

    So who grew that Leprachauns

    The Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, the Earl of Clarendon wrote a letter to Prime Minister Russell on April 26th, 1849, expressing his feelings about lack of aid from the British House of Commons:

    "I do not think there is another legislature in Europe that would disregard such suffering as now exists in the west of Ireland, or coldly persist in a policy of extermination."

    what do that sound like to you


  • #116
    Denerick
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,485 ✭✭✭Denerick


    enno99 wrote: »
    Ireland Before and After the Famine, author Cormac O’Grada documents that in 1845, a famine year in Ireland, 3,251,907 quarters (8 bushels = 1 quarter)) of corn were exported from Ireland to Britain. That same year, 257,257 sheep were exported to Britain. In 1846, another famine year, 480,827 swine, and 186,483 oxen were exported to Britain

    We all know food was exported from Ireland during the Famine. This is not surprising and underlines the tragedy of the period. But this does not imply that the British government organised a genocide in Ireland - as this was private property which was outside of the purview of the state to intervene in. Please get to grasps with basic political science and get away from emotional sensationalism.

    The Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, the Earl of Clarendon wrote a letter to Prime Minister Russell on April 26th, 1849, expressing his feelings about lack of aid from the British House of Commons:

    "I do not think there is another legislature in Europe that would disregard such suffering as now exists in the west of Ireland, or coldly persist in a policy of extermination."

    what do that sound like to you

    You can cite any number of examples of individuals criticising the British reaction to the famine (Especially Daniel O'Connell MP, who gave a heartfelt speech in the House of Commons, pleading for the British government to take action.) Will you please please find some room in your underworked brain to understand that I'm not denying that the British were inhumane and ineffective. I am saying that it was not a genocide.

    Also, good quote mining by the way. Next time, please do try to at least pretend you're acquainted with the historical context.


  • #117
    Flamed Diving
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    enno99 wrote: »
    Ireland Before and After the Famine, author Cormac O’Grada documents that in 1845, a famine year in Ireland, 3,251,907 quarters (8 bushels = 1 quarter)) of corn were exported from Ireland to Britain. That same year, 257,257 sheep were exported to Britain. In 1846, another famine year, 480,827 swine, and 186,483 oxen were exported to Britain

    So who grew that Leprachauns

    The Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, the Earl of Clarendon wrote a letter to Prime Minister Russell on April 26th, 1849, expressing his feelings about lack of aid from the British House of Commons:

    "I do not think there is another legislature in Europe that would disregard such suffering as now exists in the west of Ireland, or coldly persist in a policy of extermination."

    what do that sound like to you

    While you are quoting Cormac O'Grada, I am sure you would be familiar with his work on the diet of the average Irish rural family, before the famine?


  • #118
    enno99
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,988 ✭✭✭enno99


    Denerick wrote: »
    Is no-one prepared to rebut the arguments provided?

    All the 'pro genocide' side have offered is that 'OF COURSE IT WAS A GENOCIDE, RACIST'. No argument, no attempt to construct an argument. No reason.

    Can you post the definition of genocide you are using

    I think this the legal terma applied correct me if im wrong

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


  • #119
    Darlughda
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,886 ✭✭✭Darlughda


    enno99 wrote: »
    Can you post the definition of genocide you are using

    I think this the legal terma applied correct me if im wrong

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

    Interesting can anybody verify if deliberate neglect is considered genocide?


  • #120
    enno99
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,988 ✭✭✭enno99


    Flamed Diving wrote: »
    While you are quoting Cormac O'Grada, I am sure you would be familiar with his work on the diet of the average Irish rural family, before the famine?

    No I am not I used the statistic as an answer to the post

    but i will look it up if you feel it will enlighten me as to why the english government let a million people starve


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    Flamed Diving
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    enno99 wrote: »
    No I am not I used the statistic as an answer to the post

    but i will look it up if you feel it will enlighten me as to why the english government let a million people starve

    As far as I can see, based on the variety of reading I have done on the subject, it was simply a combination of a half-assed attempt at handling the situation (think hurricane Katrina) and then later a case of not giving a damn, and thinking we, in some way, deserved to suffer, and that it would be beneficial to us. I think to truly understand their thinking, you must know a thing or two about 18th and 19th century economic thinking. Google 'Malthus', for a start. Then when you read it, consider that this was the prevailing socioeconomic theory of it's time. Pretend that you truly believe it. It makes the whole story a little bit more palatable.

    As for O'Grada, I am pretty sure that the data you require is in that book you have. If not, then I will have to dig around to find the paper, for I have tonnes of them. But, in rural Ireland (which was at least half the population), the average diet consisted of >60% potatoes, with the rest made up of some dairy products, like milk, cheese and rarely some bacon fat.

    That was all. Despite this, the rural Irish were the tallest people in Europe. This is because the potato is a really nutritious vegetable. You can really get by comfortably on just potatoes and dairy. The dairy makes up for the nutrition lacking in potatoes. Furthermore, the yield from potatoes is incredible, compared to any other root and grain. You can feed a family of 6+ on an acre of land growing just potatoes and keeping a dairy cow. This was the strategy followed by the rural Irish. This is why our population swelled. This is why we grew so tall. This is why so many died when the blight hit.

    One paper that kind of highlights this is:

    http://www.jstor.org/pss/2596056

    but it isn't the one I am thinking of.

    Here is another paper which discusses the introduction of the potato to countries. Ireland is mentioned, and discusses the above diet of rural Irish:

    http://www.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/nunn/files/Potatoes.pdf

    More:

    http://www.jstor.org/stable/2599996

    http://www.jstor.org/stable/649948


Advertisement