Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Tomorrows Financial Times article slams Ireland's failed state as warning to Scots

124»

Comments

  • #92
    j80ezgvc3p92xu
    Closed Accounts Posts: 392 ✭✭j80ezgvc3p92xu


    The fact of the matter is every nation which is still relatively healthy will strive for independence... I'm proud Ireland did after 800 years of subjugation . If Scotland votes for independence it will show that the nation is still alive and kicking and will not be duped by England into servitude.


  • #93
    dirtyden
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,744 ✭✭✭dirtyden


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    I disagree, I believe the author is simply suggesting that Salmond's claims that independence=utopia are not true and that Ireland is a good example of what could happen.

    And it isn't post colonial either, Scotland was only ever an equal partner.


    It is factual in points to an extent but without any subjectivity, and it also lacks any semblance of context and for me is a really shoddy piece of journalism. To suggest Ireland at the time was not better off leaving the UK was quite simply idiotic. We received nothing from the UK at the time apart from pillage.
    What is there to suggest that our situation would be better now as peripheral province of the UK? How well is wales or the North of England doing? To answer my own question considerably worse than us even given our current economic problems.

    How is comparing a newly independent country in the early 20th century after the great war which had been stripped and exploited for generations to modern day Scotland relevant. Its chalk and cheese.

    Take a look at the part of Ireland that you lot kept, how is that doing?


  • #94
    nyarlothothep
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,184 ✭✭✭nyarlothothep


    Ireland isn't a failed state at all, it was in the top 30 for world's best countries according to Newsweek and irc it's one of thirteen countries in the world which includes South Korea to transition from a third world economy to a first world one. A resounding success story with some major issues but a failed state? No. Ukraine/Syria etc are failed states. The Financial Times is just spinning anti Scottish independence propaganda.

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


  • #95
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,566 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    dirtyden wrote: »
    It is factual in points to an extent but without any subjectivity, and it also lacks any semblance of context and for me is a really shoddy piece of journalism. To suggest Ireland at the time was not better off leaving the UK was quite simply idiotic. We received nothing from the UK at the time apart from pillage.
    What is there to suggest that our situation would be better now as peripheral province of the UK? How well is wales or the North of England doing? To answer my own question considerably worse than us even given our current economic problems.

    How is comparing a newly independent country in the early 20th century after the great war which had been stripped and exploited for generations to modern day Scotland relevant. Its chalk and cheese.

    Take a look at the part of Ireland that you lot kept, how is that doing?

    And? I'm simply pointing out that independence does not mean an automatic utopia. That doesn't mean staying in the union is.

    And my lot? My lot are a working class family from Portsmouth. We didn't keep anything.


  • #96
    folbotcar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 472 ✭✭folbotcar


    In fact the from another point of view you could use the same argument to promote Scottish independence. There's a lot of doom mongering and downright lies on the No side. But when you look at Ireland, we despite the traumatic break from Britain, still retained strong links economically and politically to our mutual benefit.

    Remember Scotland would leave the UK peacefully without the drama that went with our departure. Arguably we got independence too soon and weren't ready, with consequences noted in the article. But that was then and this is now. The comparison is invalid.

    The article itself is a pretty shoddy piece of journalism, more resembling a post in a forum like this.

    In any case I retain the belief that the Scots lack the guts to go it alone. They'll stick with England. They sold their souls long ago.


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    wendell borton wrote: »
    While were looking back at historical events, how about the highland clearouts and thatchers dismantling of industry.
    The economy grew massively under Thatcher.


  • #98
    Knob Longman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 326 ✭✭Knob Longman


    Kenneth Salty Superhighway wrote: »
    Wow , this article reminds me of another one I read recently by Sarah Dillon about how Ireland is a leech on the EU. These people are just jealous because this is a proud Christian country which tends to put a spanner in the works of the world elite eg. breaking away from the Union , vote on Lisbon exc. (:

    The bankers, bondholders, Irish Water and the golden circle know all about us putting spanners in the works of the elite !! lol


  • #99
    Mint Aero
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,570 ✭✭✭Mint Aero


    Speaking as someone who currently resides in the UK after fleeing Ireland's jobsbridge slavery in search of real work.....can't find anything to disagree with.


  • #100
    Richard
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,441 ✭✭✭Richard


    Adyx wrote: »
    Right thing to do, certainly. But I don't think it was the right time. Obviously hindsight is great but I think we would have been better off then and now if the break with the union had came later.
    I suspect a United Ireland would also have happened if things had happened at a different time.


  • #101
    mickydoomsux
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,287 ✭✭✭mickydoomsux


    The main idea of the article is far from unreasonable.

    The first thing we did when we won independence was hand the place over the the Catholic Church who kept the populace ignorant and repressed as well as committing atrocious abuses against both children and women that we are still trying to come to terms with today.

    The once the EU came in to actually aid us in developing our nation somewhat we saw it as a gravy train and pissed millions away on parochial vanity projects and building a welfare state. Then we decided to create a clearly unsustainable boom by building more property than we could ever possibly need with money that we borrowed because it was cheap credit.

    We have a few things to be proud of but we can hardly be held up as a shining example of a post-colonial nation. We are pretty much the case study of what-not-to-do.

    Who's to say if things would have been better or worse under British rule. We may just have ended up as a glorified factory-nation for them. We sort of are anyway already when you think about it.


  • Advertisement
  • #102
    dirtyden
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,744 ✭✭✭dirtyden


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    And? I'm simply pointing out that independence does not mean an automatic utopia. That doesn't mean staying in the union is.

    And my lot? My lot are a working class family from Portsmouth. We didn't keep anything.


    Your comments lacked any context just like the article. I was simply adding some context for you.


  • #103
    Legs.Eleven
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,987 ✭✭✭Legs.Eleven


    Mint Aero wrote: »
    Speaking as someone who currently resides in the UK after fleeing Ireland's jobsbridge slavery in search of real work.....can't find anything to disagree with.

    They have a similar scheme in the UK.


  • #104
    GaelMise
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 542 ✭✭✭GaelMise


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    And? I'm simply pointing out that independence does not mean an automatic utopia.

    The question one would have to ask though is: Why are you pointing it out?
    It seems to be such a trueism, that it does not need to be stated, its like saying the sky is blue.
    No one is claiming the opposit, making the case that Scotland would be better off outside the Union than in it, is not claiming that independence means an automatic utopia.
    If your not trying to imply that this is what they are trying to say, then why bring it up at all?


  • #105
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,566 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    GaelMise wrote: »
    The question one would have to ask though is: Why are you pointing it out?
    It seems to be such a trueism, that it does not need to be stated, its like saying the sky is blue.
    No one is claiming the opposit, making the case that Scotland would be better off outside the Union than in it, is not claiming that independence means an automatic utopia.
    If your not trying to imply that this is what they are trying to say, then why bring it up at all?

    In that case, why is anyone commenting on the article? I'm simply giving my opinion on what the author is trying to say.


  • #106
    Reekwind
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,126 ✭✭✭Reekwind


    mickydoomsux wrote: »
    We have a few things to be proud of but we can hardly be held up as a shining example of a post-colonial nation. We are pretty much the case study of what-not-to-do.
    How many other post-colonial nations can you name that have one of the highest GDP per capita in the world (say, top twenty)? Ireland has its problems but, given where we've come from, a near-century of independence can only be considered a success. Whether by geographic luck or otherwise, we're certainly one of the few to have largely overcome the handicaps of colonialism.
    Who's to say if things would have been better or worse under British rule
    I struggle with this attitude. This is not much of a hypothetical situation. We don't have to ask 'what would it be like if Britain ruled Ireland' because we've got centuries of experience as to exactly what that looked like. It wasn't exactly a success.

    The only way in which continued British rule could have been better than independence is if the British policies of the previous centuries were entirely reversed and its administrators suddenly become incredibly more competent. So no, I think there's a good basis for saying that things would not have been any better.
    Fratton Fred wrote:
    In that case, why is anyone commenting on the article? I'm simply giving my opinion on what the author is trying to say.
    You're wrong. The author isn't saying that "independence does not mean an automatic utopia" (which is so obvious as to be banal) but that, based on his 'model', it is a recipe for disaster.


  • #107
    GaelMise
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 542 ✭✭✭GaelMise


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    In that case, why is anyone commenting on the article? I'm simply giving my opinion on what the author is trying to say.

    Do you think that the author is merely trying to say, 'Independance won't be the Utopia you are all claiming it will be'?

    I think its clear enough that the message of the article is that Scotland should reject independance 'because look at what happened to Ireland'.


  • #108
    Mint Aero
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,570 ✭✭✭Mint Aero


    Legs.Eleven wrote: »
    They have a similar scheme in the UK.

    Haven't heard it been mentioned once since here.


  • #109
    Reekwind
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,126 ✭✭✭Reekwind


    Mint Aero wrote: »
    Haven't heard it been mentioned once since here.
    You must have heard of it, surely? 'Workfare' was a fairly big story over here last year - most obviously when the courts questioned the legality of it. The only difference that I can see is that these policies haven't been collected under one big programme but exist as a number of separate schemes.


  • #110
    RDM_83 again
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,116 ✭✭✭RDM_83 again


    And unlike Jobsbridge, Workfare was basically mandatory, its ridiculous to compare a Jobs Bridge scheme, which while I won't defend it gives an income of 248 euro a week, this converts to 203 pounds sterling more than many workers in the UK will be receiving if they are working less than full hours (and the UK dole is much less generous in relation to claiming benefits and working part time).
    In fact a comparison between the two is a good example of why even post recession the ROI isn't that bad a place.
    (I do hate jobsbridge but for different reasons)


  • #111
    oppenheimer1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,733 ✭✭✭oppenheimer1


    pO1Neil wrote: »
    "Scots should recall poverty of Irish Free State". Should also recall the poverty of the famine in the 1840's or the slums of Dublin in 1900's when it was apart of the Union, which was a reason the 1913 lockout occurred.

    The article as written is a piece of trash. The author should also recall the poverty in the uk at the time of the Irish free state. While Ireland was poorer due to the inherited failures made by successive British governments, one has to remember conditions for English and Scot working classes at the time weren't much better.

    The author has a very poor grasp of interwar and post war Irish history, with views that are both simplistic and in my opinion wrong.

    All he's doing is skewing history to fit his own agenda


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    Courtesy Flush
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,859 ✭✭✭Courtesy Flush


    Theres obviously a big political agenda in the UK to push the Scots to a No vote on leaving the UK. Not becasue they like Scotland so much but it would have a severe economic impact on the UK as a whole, not just Scotland
    I dont believe for a moment that Scotland will vote Yes, but at least its good that they have the debate and people in Scotland give thought as to why London rule is the best thing for them


  • #113
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,566 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    Courtesy Flush wrote: »
    Theres obviously a big political agenda in the UK to push the Scots to a No vote on leaving the UK. Not becasue they like Scotland so much but it would have a severe economic impact on the UK as a whole, not just Scotland
    I dont believe for a moment that Scotland will vote Yes, but at least its good that they have the debate and people in Scotland give thought as to why London rule is the best thing for them

    The English won't get the opportunity though.


Advertisement
Advertisement