If Ireland was never colonised?

tac foley · 22-03-2013 11:25pm

I'll come back in this 'conversation' the day that the RoI builds a $250,000,000 cruise liner.

Hey, I'll be generous - let's make just a lil' bitty $100,000,000 cruise liner and say we're quits, eh?

tac

robp · 22-03-2013 11:51pm

tac foley wrote: »

However, let's just look at a few things that the Finns do that Ireland does not -

1. They build ships - HUGE ships - cruise ships bigger than almost anybody else. Container ships, too, LOTS of container ships. RO-RO ferries, icebreakers, boaty stuff.

2. They have a thriving armament manufacturing base - VALMET Oy, and also TAMPELLA Oy. Their admittedly small armed forces uses Finnish-built motor transport to the exclusion of just about everything else - SISU Trucks.

3. Their electronics companies are not owned out of country - NOKIA is Finnish.

4. They have a thriving small-arms manufacturing base - SAKO and Tikka.

5. They have little agriculture, but gazillions of trees to export.

That apart, they are actually more or less in the same boat as the RoI -

Finland agriculture - 2.6%

RoI agriculture - 2%

Finland services - 68.2%

RoI services - 69%

Finland Industries - 29.1%

RoI industries - 29%

However, let's be bold about it - you need to sell a LOT of Guinness to offset a single $250,000,000 cruise liner...as you can see from the eye-watering difference in the Finnish and Irish GDP.

Finland GDP - $266 Billion [2011]

RoI GDP - eu 159 Bn [2011]

tac

Of course. Finland has industry but Ireland could have ended up comparably if history was different. Like Ireland Finland industrialised late in the 20th century after a disastrous famine in the 19th century. Like Ireland it has limited natural resources. I just don't believe that Ireland without the English language would be improvised. Of course I would say that with my Irish avatar though! Also Iceland is not comparable at all to Ireland.

Capt'n Midnight · 23-03-2013 6:38pm

tac foley wrote: »

I'll come back in this 'conversation' the day that the RoI builds a $250,000,000 cruise liner.

Hey, I'll be generous - let's make just a lil' bitty $100,000,000 cruise liner and say we're quits, eh?

tac

What about the Titanic :pac:

jonniebgood1 · 23-03-2013 8:32pm

tac foley wrote: »

However, let's be bold about it - you need to sell a LOT of Guinness to offset a single $250,000,000 cruise liner...as you can see from the eye-watering difference in the Finnish and Irish GDP.

Finland GDP - $266 Billion [2011]

RoI GDP - eu 159 Bn [2011]

tac

I tried to stay out of this thread as I am not sure if I should be moving it from history to a different forum but I do need to point out that your figures are neither eye-watering, nor correct as far as I can see.

What are you basing the figures you give on and how are you achieving a 'like for like' comparison? I am only asking but have you taken into account population difference between Finland and Ireland or the different currencies which you seem to be showing.

The eurostat figures are here: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&plugin=1&language=en&pcode=tec00114

According to eurostat the like for like GDP per capita in Purchasing Power Standards index shows Ireland ahead of Finland.

Map here http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/mapToolClosed.do;jsessionid=9ea7d07d30db3506a0543a944077b00fb071c655224b.e34MbxeSaxaSc40LbNiMbxeNaxuSe0?tab=map&init=1&plugin=1&language=en&pcode=tec00114&toolbox=types

H3llR4iser · 29-03-2013 2:33pm

robp wrote: »

What about Finland? Mediocre location for trade, extremely cold, far less farming than Ireland and a unique language but yet they are doing fine without relying on primary industries. There are other examples too. In the modern world natural resources are not essential for an affluent services based economy.

Finland has, or at least used to have until the 1990s, one of the biggest forestry industries of the world, facilitated by the fact the territory is full of rivers and waterways to aid transportation (especially during older times). It is a quite important natural resource that was either used for energy or sold.

Also, Finland is connected to the land and not so far off mainland Europe; Ireland, provided we exclude Britain from the picture, would have been quite isolated.

Finally, while Finnish is the main language, it is far from the only one spoken: Sweden is spoken as well, and most of the industrialization happened in the 1970s, after a sizeable number of Finnish citizens started traveling abroad for their studies.

megafan · 29-03-2013 3:08pm

robp wrote: »

but there was only one attempt at a colony in a colonial sense; the Norman/British one..

Bit more than an attempt.... Norman/British invasion/colonization also sponsored by Rome & the Vatican with their hierarchy which are still here!:mad:

robp · 30-03-2013 10:21am

H3llR4iser wrote: »

Finland has, or at least used to have until the 1990s, one of the biggest forestry industries of the world, facilitated by the fact the territory is full of rivers and waterways to aid transportation (especially during older times). It is a quite important natural resource that was either used for energy or sold.

Also, Finland is connected to the land and not so far off mainland Europe; Ireland, provided we exclude Britain from the picture, would have been quite isolated.

Finally, while Finnish is the main language, it is far from the only one spoken: Sweden is spoken as well, and most of the industrialization happened in the 1970s, after a sizeable number of Finnish citizens started traveling abroad for their studies.

I am not dismissing the scale of Finish forestry but it is a primary industry just like farming. Yet, forestry only employs 3% of Finns in 2006 ,while farming employs about 4.6% of Irish as of 2010. Finland has some farming too but the numbers I presented still reveal that forestry is no more important to Finland than farming to Ireland.
Also Finland may border with Russia but its very far north and Ireland is infact slightly closer to Germany (my arbitrary core of Europe) than Finland.

megafan wrote: »

Bit more than an attempt.... Norman/British invasion/colonization also sponsored by Rome & the Vatican with their hierarchy which are still here!:mad:

Sponsored? are you kidding? By the forged papal bull Laudabiliter? Why do you single out catholic hierarchy, there is plenty of British royals in permanent residence in Ireland.

lcrcboy · 31-03-2013 1:39am

So many possibilities if the English had not entered into Ireland. Ill try list a few I think could have been possible:

1. More war on the island due to fighting over kingdoms and maybe the crown for a unified Ireland.

2. Potentially could have a monarchy today similar to the British

3. The Spanish or French could have successfully taken Ireland as strategic attacking point against Britain, meaning we could have ended up speaking French or Spanish.

4. May have fought with the allied forces during WW1 and 2 due to potentially less frosty relations with the British at that time.

5. May have ended up speaking Irish today rather than English.

the list could really go on with potential scenarios and outcomes.

Ash.J.Williams · 31-03-2013 2:08am

PhotogTom wrote: »

I'm fascinated by the idea of Brian Boru, and his son, surviving Clontarf. The idea of Ireland as a nation instead of a tribal society means that Ireland is cohesive enough to grow into a strong power on its own. Ireland colonizes England early and the Norman invasion never happens. Ireland becomes the dominant world power in the age of sail. Irish and Brehon Law dominate the world instead of English and crime and punishment.
Do I need to write the novel or does anyone know of one similar?!

if Brian boru survived we would have had a proper army which in itself would have given us stability? We were such a useless bunch when it came to organizing our defenses.

owenc · 27-05-2013 1:01pm

fryup wrote: »

Now i don't mean this to be a brit-bashing thread,

But i've often wonder what ireland would be like today and recent past if it was never colonised.

would....

* the country be economically wealthy?
* irish be the main language?
* the population be alot bigger? (no famine?)
* Dublin be the capital?
* we have such a large irish diaspora abroad? (no need to leave due to famine/eviction?)
* our relations with the UK be cosy/frosty?
* our national characteristics be different - more self confident & sophisticated? less begrudgery & underhand?

well what do you think....

I dont think Ireland would never have been colonised its too close to gb.

Lome · 27-05-2013 1:09pm

Hidalgo wrote: »

No guarantees that there would never have been a famine. Its probable that Ireland and England would have been trading partners due to the proximity. Potatoes would have been grown and therefore failed. However who knows what the response would have been if Ireland was ruled internally rather than externally;.
IMO the island would still have had violence after the time the first Normans came here due to continuous power struggles amongst Irish chieftans until at least one dominant clan held power

Impossible to say if we would be economically wealthy??

There was no famine. It was mass murder. There was more than enough food to feed tge whole country comfortably. The problem was that it was being exported out of the country by Britain.

Zebra3 · 28-05-2013 1:59am

Lome wrote: »

There was no famine. It was mass murder. There was more than enough food to feed tge whole country comfortably. The problem was that it was being exported out of the country by Britain.

Exactly, the word "famine" means shortage of food. This was not the case. Hence why the phrase "The Great Hunger" was always used.

If Ireland was never colonised?

Comments