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
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.

Nelson's Pillar

1…1011131516…38

Comments

  • #362
    LordSutch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,069 ✭✭✭✭LordSutch


    riffmongous wrote: »
    It look's awfully out of proportion for the location though no? Something that imposing needs a good bit of open space around it imo, like in a park or something, is there any reasons why that location was chosen?

    The view from the viewing gallery was really spectacular, right in the centre of the City, with a 360o view of Dublin as far as the eye could see. Great view (according to my Dad many years ago).


  • #363
    A Dub in Glasgo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,415 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo


    maryishere wrote: »
    We were part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Ireland.


    We were and we are not now, deal with it


  • #364
    maryishere
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,549 ✭✭✭maryishere


    Eugene Norman wrote: »
    We can unite again in the future under a Gaelic speaking Dublin dominated regime.
    Looking at the Dail now, and the IMF only having left a year or 2 ago, we cannot govern ourselves / keep O'Connell st as nice as it was 100 years ago...never mind govern anyone else. And think of the millions who escaped Gaelic Ireland in the past 100 years and who choose to live in an English speaking country with some allegiance left to the Queen.;)


  • #365
    A Dub in Glasgo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,415 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo


    LordSutch wrote: »
    The view from the viewing gallery was really spectacular, right in the centre of the City, with a 360o view of Dublin as far as the eye could see. Great view (according to my Dad many years ago).

    My Da says it was a shite view


  • #366
    Miniegg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,115 ✭✭✭Miniegg


    Lordsutch, again the question stands, if Ireland was truly a home nation, why were laws enacted to destoy the rights of the majority of the islands population?

    Of course there would be links between the two islands. Today, we are both independant nations, who trade with one another, move freely in one anothers countries, and generally get in pretty well, becuase we are on an equal footing. This wasnt the case for the majority of Irish when Ireland was in the empire (oops i said the e word again).


  • Advertisement
  • #367
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,094 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    storker wrote: »
    It's a handy term, though, and saves time. Because once someone uses it, you know you're dealing with a fool.


    It is, without fail, invariably the West Brits who try to contend it's not a legitimate term. In reality, West Brit is a perfect description of an entire ethno-cultural-political-colonial class who are defined by their anglocentricity, belief in the cultural inferiority/backwardness of the Irish, belief in the illegitimacy of Irish demands for complete independence from British rule, and enthusiasm to make apologies for British imperial violence and make condemnations of Irish republican violence. John Bruton is a textbook West Brit.

    So, too, is anybody in this thread who tries to contend that British imperial violence = worthy of glorifying; Irish freedom fighter violence = terrorism. I've counted precisely four of you in the past few pages.


  • #368
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    maryishere wrote: »
    Looking at the Dail now, and the IMF only having left a year or 2 ago, we cannot govern ourselves / keep O'Connell st as nice as it was 100 years ago...never mind govern anyone else. And think of the millions who escaped Gaelic Ireland in the past 100 years and who choose to live in an English speaking country with some allegiance left to the Queen.;)

    You just keep repeating the same nonsense. Slums Mary. Real slums. Just of O'Connell street during the glorious reign of Victoria and her successors, ten families in broken down Georgian accomodation. and massive emigration too. It's didn't start after Irish independence.

    I like England. I've lived there. I may again. This Irish fetishing of past, of British rule, from the backwaters of Ireland (you're from the West) is plain odd. Particular since you can live in Britain and Ireland simultaneously by driving a few miles north east.


  • #369
    maryishere
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,549 ✭✭✭maryishere


    A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »
    My Da says it was a shite view
    He must have been facing the centre of the column. Not much of a head for heights, had me?


  • #370
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,565 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    maryishere wrote: »
    Looking at the Dail now, and the IMF only having left a year or 2 ago, we cannot govern ourselves / keep O'Connell st as nice as it was 100 years ago...never mind govern anyone else. And think of the millions who escaped Gaelic Ireland in the past 100 years and who choose to live in an English speaking country with some allegiance left to the Queen.;)

    I would find it exceptionally difficult to believe you are living life to the max with an outlook like that. I live in England I don't spend my time here lamenting the fact it's not more like Ireland.


  • #371
    storker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,750 ✭✭✭storker


    Deleted User wrote: »
    It is, without fail, invariably the West Brits who try to contend it's not a legitimate term.

    Not very good at logic, are you? The definition of a West Brit is someone who disagrees with the term when it's applied? Riiiight.
    In reality, West Brit is a perfect description of an entire ethno-cultural-political-colonial class who are defined by their anglocentricity, belief in the cultural inferiority/backwardness of the Irish, belief in the illegitimacy of Irish demands for complete independence from British rule, and enthusiasm to make apologies for British imperial violence and make condemnations of Irish republican violence. John Bruton is a textbook West Brit.

    Yes, that might be a good use of the term alright. If its use was restricted to that definition. See my earlier post on the subject.
    So, too, is anybody in this thread who tries to contend that British imperial violence = worthy of glorifying; Irish freedom fighter violence = terrorism. I've counted precisely four of you in the past few pages.

    "Of you"? I see, so you're including me in this definition? OK I'll bite. Let's see you back that up with direct quotation from something I've posted. The last fool I challenged on this quickly vanished. Let's see if you can do better...


  • Advertisement
  • #372
    Junkyard Tom
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,115 ✭✭✭✭Junkyard Tom


    maryishere wrote: »
    And think of the millions who escaped Gaelic Ireland in the past 100 years and who choose to live in an English speaking country with some allegiance left to the Queen.;)

    Forced to leave due to poverty and starvation while Britain itself had an industrial revolution. You're getting a kick out of this aren't you?
    'The real evil with which we have to contend is not the physical evil of the Famine, but the moral evil of the selfish, perverse and turbulent character of the people’.

    Charles Trevelyan


  • #373
    maryishere
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,549 ✭✭✭maryishere


    I live in Dublin and very much live life to the max. I have a balanced view of history and can see two sides of what happened. Some people here in Ireland however were brought up to hate the British.


  • #374
    maryishere
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,549 ✭✭✭maryishere


    Quote" And think of the millions who escaped Gaelic Ireland in the past 100 years and who choose to live in an English speaking country with some allegiance left to the Queen."
    Junkyard Tom wrote: »
    Forced to leave due to poverty and starvation while Britain itself had an industrial revolution. You're getting a kick out of this aren't you?

    Not very good at history are you? For your information, the Industrial Revolution was the transition to new manufacturing processes in the period from about 1760 to sometime between 1820 and 1840.

    I wrote " think of the millions who escaped Gaelic Ireland in the past 100 years and who choose to live in an English speaking country with some allegiance left to the Queen." The Industrial Revolution was not in the past 100 years.:rolleyes::rolleyes:

    And think of the millions who chose to emigrate from Ireland in the 100 years since independence to Australia, New Zealand, Canada ... You cannot blame the British for forcing these Irish emigrants to leave in the past 100 years and go to countries which retain a link to the Queen.

    One thing I notice is many Irish Republicans poor grasp of history, and an attitude to blame the British for everything.


  • #375
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    maryishere wrote: »
    I live in Dublin and very much live life to the max. I have a balanced view of history and can see two sides of what happened. Some people here in Ireland however were brought up to hate the British.

    Your posting history indicates you lived in the west.


    In any case your arguments are effectively trolling. Historically Illiterate, a sheer contempt for the country you live in. Sneering nonsense. When challenged (on the removal of statues, on
    what O'Connell st was like 100 years ago, you move on to the next inaccuracy).

    Here's the thing. We have a control for what Ireland under Britain would look like. It wouldn't be the Cotswolds.

    It's called Northern Ireland. Belfast is an hour away. If British Ireland is so good how come so few people who would prefer the whole island was British choose to live there?

    Seems hypocritical to me, like old school communists in the west who wanted communism where they were but never fled to it where it was.


  • #376
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    maryishere wrote: »
    Quote" And think of the millions who escaped Gaelic Ireland in the past 100 years and who choose to live in an English speaking country with some allegiance left to the Queen."


    Not very good at history are you? For your information, the Industrial Revolution was the transition to new manufacturing processes in the period from about 1760 to sometime between 1820 and 1840.

    I wrote " think of the millions who escaped Gaelic Ireland in the past 100 years and who choose to live in an English speaking country with some allegiance left to the Queen." The Industrial Revolution was not in the past 100 years.:rolleyes::rolleyes:

    And think of the millions who chose to emigrate from Ireland in the 100 years since independence to Australia, New Zealand, Canada ... You cannot blame the British for forcing these Irish emigrants to leave in the past 100 years and go to countries which retain a link to the Queen.

    Since we are comparing Ireland under independence to pre independence you would have to prove the counter factual - that fewer people would have left British run Ireland.


  • #377
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    maryishere wrote: »
    Quote" And think of the millions who escaped Gaelic Ireland in the past 100 years and who choose to live in an English speaking country with some allegiance left to the Queen."


    Not very good at history are you? For your information, the Industrial Revolution was the transition to new manufacturing processes in the period from about 1760 to sometime between 1820 and 1840.

    I wrote " think of the millions who escaped Gaelic Ireland in the past 100 years and who choose to live in an English speaking country with some allegiance left to the Queen." The Industrial Revolution was not in the past 100 years.:rolleyes::rolleyes:

    And think of the millions who chose to emigrate from Ireland in the 100 years since independence to Australia, New Zealand, Canada ... You cannot blame the British for forcing these Irish emigrants to leave in the past 100 years and go to countries which retain a link to the Queen.

    One thing I notice is many Irish Republicans poor grasp of history, and an attitude to blame the British for everything.
    You don't need to know history when you know to blame the British for everything.


  • #378
    Miniegg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,115 ✭✭✭Miniegg


    Mary, the British make up the largest group of non nationals living in Ireland, so what does that tell you?

    Since the formation of the republic, we have made mistakes and do have serious problems to contend with, which you like to point out. But we are a young nation, less than 100 years old so surely this is to be expected. Britain still makes mistakes and has similar problems after hundreds of years of self governance!

    I believe we have a lot going for us. All in we have friendly resourceful people with a good work ethic, an inclusive society, a good standard of life, and thankfully, a growing economy.


  • #379
    maryishere
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,549 ✭✭✭maryishere


    Eugene Norman wrote: »
    Since we are comparing Ireland under independence to pre independence you would have to prove the counter factual - that fewer people would have left British run Ireland.
    Thats hypothetical, but one thing for certain.....most English speaking countries have increased their populations by a higher percentage than Ireland has in the past 100 years. Most countries eg UK, Australia, Canada, USA, have swelled at least partially due to emigration. Our population was approx 3 million in 1923, now its only 4.6 million, despite all the eastern Europeans etc who have come here in the past 10/15 years. Canada meanwhile in the past 50 years alone has nearly doubled to approx 36 million, and Oz in the past 50 years alone has more than doubled from 10 million to over 23 million. You cannot blame the Brits for what happened in the past 100 years in Ireland. In fact they gave us billions, through the EEC / EC....and gladly absorbed many of our emigrants. I have relations down the country, but I also have relations who emigrated.
    I think it would be a sign of our maturity as a nation not to blame the British for everything.


  • #380
    Disgruntled Badger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 182 ✭✭Disgruntled Badger


    The guy who did it is still alive and living in south Dublin I understand. Never been charged with anything despite a number of people being hurt and quite a lot of damage to oconnell St. It was just a crass act of vandalism by a bunch of thugs.

    It was the merchants of Dublin who paid for it to be built. The British had nothing to do with it being built.

    It was deemed too expensive to rebuild every time it was discussed which was a shame. Would have been two fingers to the provos.

    Nelson's head is still around, in Collin's barracks I think.


  • #381
    maryishere
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,549 ✭✭✭maryishere


    Miniegg wrote: »
    Mary, the British make up the largest group of non nationals living in Ireland, so what does that tell you?
    I'm not sure on the latest statistics, but "Polish nationals increased by 93.7pc since 2006 from 63,276 to 122,585 in 2011 making them the largest group ahead of UK nationals with 112,259.
    Meanwhile most of the “new Irish” born in this country are from Poland, followed by people from Lithuania, the UK and Latvia."

    However there are a lot of people from the UK living in Ireland. I work with some here in Dublin. Others I know have retired here. We have low population density and a great quality of life. Beautiful scenery in much of the country too. You can get to the west for weekends away easily. Lovely beaches, walks, mountains, pubs. A lot going for it.

    Miniegg wrote: »
    Since the formation of the republic, we have made mistakes and do have serious problems to contend with, which you like to point out. But we are a young nation, less than 100 years old so surely this is to be expected. Britain still makes mistakes and has similar problems after hundreds of years of self governance!

    I believe we have a lot going for us. All in we have friendly resourceful people with a good work ethic, an inclusive society, a good standard of life, and thankfully, a growing economy.
    Agreed.


  • Advertisement
  • #382
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    Miniegg wrote: »
    Lordsutch, again the question stands, if Ireland was truly a home nation, why were laws enacted to destoy the rights of the majority of the islands population? .

    What laws?


  • #383
    FTA69
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,252 ✭✭✭FTA69


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    What laws?

    I imagine he's referring to the Penal Laws which were instituted with a view to subjugating the Irish people and placing them in a position of penury in contrast to the settlers and those perceived "loyal". The last of these were only repealed roughly around the early 1800s by the way.

    A second point (and not addressed at you here Fred), it never ceases to amaze me the servile and cloying approach some Irish people seem to have regarding their own country and their own history. The relationship between Ireland and Britain was very much a colonial one - how anyone seeks to portray it as some sort of 'partnership of equals' sort of jolly is beyond me and some of those lecturing Republicans about history books could probably do with reading one.

    Ireland was always a distinct country with a distinct people and without being too crude about it, the reason that ceased to be is because it was invaded, colonised, planted and subjugated the same way other colonies were later to be treated the same. Even fifty years into the Act of Union, we ended up with over a million people starving to death while produce was shipped out of the country to be sold for the benefit of absentee landlords based in London.

    Yeah, great example of us being a "home country" there. Later when Irish people democratically decided to cede from this Union, the British government instigated a war and program of coercion.

    My only solace at reading some of the utter dogsh*t I've seen on this thread is that Ireland always had these pseudo-intellectual numpties extolling the virtues of being dominated by Britain; they were a bleating shower of fools back then and they are the same now.


  • #384
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,094 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    storker wrote: »
    Not very good at logic, are you? The definition of a West Brit is someone who disagrees with the term when it's applied? Riiiight.

    You appear to have a unique understanding of the English language.


    storker wrote: »
    "Of you"? I see, so you're including me in this definition? OK I'll bite. Let's see you back that up with direct quotation from something I've posted.

    How about, for starters, your thanks for this classic "British Empire violence = good; Irish violence = bad" post.


  • #385
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    FTA69 wrote: »
    I imagine he's referring to the Penal Laws which were instituted with a view to subjugating the Irish people and placing them in a position of penury in contrast to the settlers and those perceived "loyal". The last of these were only repealed roughly around the early 1800s by the way.

    Odd then, that many of those settlers were Scottish Presbyterians who were also subject to penal laws and perversely, the Irish Confederates that came about as a result of the penal laws, were themselves "loyal" to the crown.

    Also, oddly, the penal laws in England and Scotand were not only harsher, but also enforced more vehemently.


  • #386
    FTA69
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,252 ✭✭✭FTA69


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    Odd then, that many of those settlers were Scottish Presbyterians who were also subject to penal laws and perversely, the Irish Confederates that came about as a result of the penal laws, were themselves "loyal" to the crown.

    Also, oddly, the penal laws in England and Scotand were not only harsher, but also enforced more vehemently.

    What's odd about it? The Presbyterians you refer to were Irish Presbyterians who had been largely born and raised in the country. I never made this out to be a sectarian thing Fred, I said the bulk of the Irish population were subjugated by a legal code brought in to promote an ascendancy aimed at maintaining English rule across the country.

    The Penal Laws also included a Popery Act whereby subdivision of land was enforced thus leading to a prevalence of uneconomical small holdings that could only support one crop.

    Your above comment is a typical one to be honest, the usual dishonest contention that 'sure weren't things bad for everyone back then' in an effort to try and play down the colonisation of Ireland.


  • #387
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    FTA69 wrote: »
    What's odd about it? The Presbyterians you refer to were Irish Presbyterians who had been largely born and raised in the country. I never made this out to be a sectarian thing Fred, I said the bulk of the Irish population were subjugated by a legal code brought in to promote an ascendancy aimed at maintaining English rule across the country.

    The Penal Laws also included a Popery Act whereby subdivision of land was enforced thus leading to a prevalence of uneconomical small holdings that could only support one crop.

    Your above comment is a typical one to be honest, the usual dishonest contention that 'sure weren't things bad for everyone back then' in an effort to try and play down the colonisation of Ireland.

    I'm not disputing that things weren't bad.

    The penal laws were designed to establish Anglican control and remove the threat of subversion by Rome. Considering other events in Europe at the time, this was understandable.

    In no way were the Irish the specific target of these laws, as they applied to Catholics and dissenters in all areas of the British isles.

    The post I was replying to used the penal laws as an example of how Ireland was treated differently, but in fact, it wasn't.


  • #388
    Miniegg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,115 ✭✭✭Miniegg


    Hi Fred, first of all I see many different groupings as Irish (be they Catholic, Protestant, Unionist, Republican). That we all have differing views does not diminish the fact that we are all Irish, and share this island together.

    During Irelands involvement in the British empire, the majority of Ireland's population were Catholic, a religion which was incompatible with the empire. Thus, the majority of Irish people felt the brunt of the Penal laws more than Scotland, for example, who had a Protestant majority.

    My point is, if laws were enacted to decimate the rights of the vast majority of people living in Ireland, then Ireland was never truly integrated into the empire.


  • #389
    FTA69
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,252 ✭✭✭FTA69


    The Penal Laws in Ireland had the effect of disenfranchising the vast majority of the populace in order to empower a church that represented around 10% of the population. As I said above, it was a key colonial tactic aimed at bringing the country further under the control of the British establishment.

    Secondly, they were instituted on the back of the Cromwellian campaign in Ireland in which the man himself burned and massacred his way across Ireland killing around a quarter of the population in the process before mass confiscating land from the natives and selling a healthy amount of them into slavery.

    Home country my bollocks.

    And by the way, I'm not portraying some colouring book version of history whereupon everyone in Britain had in great and everyone in Ireland had it sh*te, my point is that Ireland itself was viewed as a possession of the crown as opposed to some country in equal partnership and while the lot of British peasants and workers was poor - they weren't subjected to systematic colonisation the same way Ireland and other countries were.


  • #390
    storker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,750 ✭✭✭storker


    Deleted User wrote: »
    You appear to have a unique understanding of the English language.
    How about, for starters, your thanks for this classic "British Empire violence = good; Irish violence = bad" post.

    So, no supporting quotes from anything I wrote then. Digging up a thank is the best you can do? My thanks referred to the second paragraph.

    Got anything else?


  • Advertisement
  • #391
    The flying mouse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,915 ✭✭✭The flying mouse


    on rte1 radio now


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement