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

Great Irish Political Leaders

Options
  • 30-07-2013 6:17pm
    #1
    Kettleson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,047 ✭✭✭


    OK so I'm writing from a relatively un-read/non-academic status.

    However, we've all heard about "great Irish Political leaders" and judging by today's collection, there wont be many joining that particular hall of fame.

    So just how great were these leaders of yore? Or is it mostly all politically motivated, romantic nonsense?

    Were there any at all? If you could name just one, who would it be and why?

    PS: I made an easy, conscious decision not to post in AH. So I'm looking for relatively well reasoned opinion. Thanks...


«13

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    who the fug
    Registered Users Posts: 4,041 ✭✭✭who the fug


    Dev

    took over in 33 . jumped on what Collins Higans & Cosgrove gave him, kept a lid on things and kept us out of WW2, his problem was he grew old and stayed to long


  • Options
    #3
    The_Valeyard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,452 ✭✭✭✭The_Valeyard


    Sean Lemass, great leader for this country.

    Him and T.K Whitaker did help to modernise the nation.


  • Options
    #4
    Rightwing
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,101 ✭✭✭Rightwing


    None :mad:


  • Options
    #5
    Zebra3
    Registered Users Posts: 13,858 ✭✭✭✭Zebra3


    who the fug wrote: »
    Dev

    took over in 33 . jumped on what Collins Higans & Cosgrove gave him, kept a lid on things and kept us out of WW2, his problem was he grew old and stayed to long

    Catholic extremist who gave too much power to the paedos in the Roman church. Very backward looking.

    At least Lemass tried to take the country into the 20th C in some shape of form.


  • Options
    #6
    who the fug
    Registered Users Posts: 4,041 ✭✭✭who the fug


    Zebra3 wrote: »
    Catholic extremist who gave too much power to the paedos in the Roman church. Very backward looking.

    At least Lemass tried to take the country into the 20th C in some shape of form.

    he was of his time, if he walked in 48, he would be not have been remembered for the fifties

    Old men have never know when to walk;)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Kettleson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,047 ✭✭✭Kettleson


    I am very much aware that I am relatively unread, On Dev however.

    Why was staying out of the War such a good (moral) thing? Seems a bit sit-on-the-fence to me. Was the national card that important not to help out the neighbours? Was the "occupation" of 6 counties still such an issue in times of war. And Britain, had they had lost, we would all have been speaking German anyways.

    It seems to me that Dev was happy enough to let Britain go to War and was looking forward to benefiting from their success, should they win.

    It would have seemed more strategic and morally upstanding to row in with Britain. Feel free to correct me on this one.


  • Options
    #8
    robp
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,934 ✭✭✭robp


    Zebra3 wrote: »
    Catholic extremist who gave too much power to the paedos in the Roman church. Very backward looking.

    At least Lemass tried to take the country into the 20th C in some shape of form.

    Dev was an intellectual, quite contrary to 'one of lads' politicians common today (Enda , Bertie). With his experience as president of the League of Nations he was far more outward looking than people give him credit for. He resisted placing Catholicism as a state religion and put in place a progressive constitution, which to this day has a firmer democratic design then is average in Europe. He had little charisma but huge foresight. His greatest failing was his disinterest in Ireland’s financial growth (and staying too long) but he was a idealist, who only saw wealth as a means to an end.


  • Options
    #9
    robp
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,934 ✭✭✭robp


    Kettleson wrote: »
    I am very much aware that I am relatively unread, On Dev however.

    Why was staying out of the War such a good (moral) thing? Seems a bit sit-on-the-fence to me. Was the national card that important not to help out the neighbours? Was the "occupation" of 6 counties still such an issue in times of war. And Britain, had they had lost, we would all have been speaking German anyways.

    It seems to me that Dev was happy enough to let Britain go to War and was looking forward to benefiting from their success, should they win.

    It would have seemed more strategic and morally upstanding to row in with Britain. Feel free to correct me on this one.

    In hindsight it is very easy to say Ireland should have gone to war but you have to put yourself back in the context of 1939. The republic was just 2 years old. There was war only 17 years before with the UK. The fragile new republic still had territorial claims on UK territory. Ireland was woefully unprepared for war. Antiquated weapons or none at all. Germany was respected in Ireland, even up to 1945. People would have seen the war as a spat between old imperial powers. The rhetoric coming from the UK and Churchill during the war years mocking Ireland wouldn’t particularly have helped either. Maybe Ireland should have joined in at 1943 or 1944 but in 1939 it is easy to see why declaring war was avoided.


  • Options
    #10
    Kettleson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,047 ✭✭✭Kettleson


    robp wrote: »
    In hindsight it is very easy to say Ireland should have gone to war but you have to put yourself back in the context of 1939. The republic was just 2 years old. There was war only 17 years before with the UK. The fragile new republic still had territorial claims on UK territory. Ireland was woefully unprepared for war. Antiquated weapons or none at all. Germany was respected in Ireland, even up to 1945. People would have seen the war as a spat between old imperial powers. The rhetoric coming from the UK and Churchill during the war years mocking Ireland wouldn’t particularly have helped either. Maybe Ireland should have joined in at 1943 or 1944 but in 1939 it is easy to see why declaring war was avoided.


    Nice one Robp. I've since been googling and wiki'ing to get some commentary on it, and your summary is as good as it gets. Thanks for that.

    We'll never know, but theoretically, could you suggest what might have happened had Ireland sided with Britain? Thanks


  • Options
    #11
    robp
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,934 ✭✭✭robp


    Kettleson wrote: »
    Nice one Robp. I've since been googling and wiki'ing to get some commentary on it, and your summary is as good as it gets. Thanks for that.

    We'll never know, but theoretically, could you suggest what might have happened had Ireland sided with Britain? Thanks
    Cheers but I am only repeating the real experts. Checkout http://www.rte.ie/radio/judgingdev/listen.html if you have not already heard it. Its much better then Wiki.
    On a different course of history, I would not be so well versed up. It is hard to say.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Zebra3
    Registered Users Posts: 13,858 ✭✭✭✭Zebra3


    robp wrote: »
    Dev was an intellectual, quite contrary to 'one of lads' politicians common today (Enda , Bertie). With his experience as president of the League of Nations he was far more outward looking than people give him credit for. He resisted placing Catholicism as a state religion and put in place a progressive constitution, which to this day has a firmer democratic design then is average in Europe. He had little charisma but huge foresight. His greatest failing was his disinterest in Ireland’s financial growth (and staying too long) but he was a idealist, who only saw wealth as a means to an end.

    He was crook in true FF style, setting the standards for Haughey and Ahern.

    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/dev-tricked-public-into-investing-in-irish-press-file-reveals-26226075.html


  • Options
    #13
    McKrab
    Registered Users Posts: 48 ✭McKrab


    robp wrote: »
    Dev was an intellectual, quite contrary to 'one of lads' politicians common today (Enda , Bertie). With his experience as president of the League of Nations he was far more outward looking than people give him credit for. He resisted placing Catholicism as a state religion and put in place a progressive constitution, which to this day has a firmer democratic design then is average in Europe. He had little charisma but huge foresight. His greatest failing was his disinterest in Ireland’s financial growth (and staying too long) but he was a idealist, who only saw wealth as a means to an end.

    Resisted placing Catholicism as a State religion? Put in place a progressive constitution? That's utterly misleading.
    This is the man whose vision of Ireland was of comely maidens dancing at crossroads.
    He wanted to keep Ireland tethered to the backward Catholic dogma that prevailed at the inception of the State. He was always careful not to risk the wrath of Archbishop McQuaid, the President of his alma mater Blackrock, or to offend him in any way.
    Not to mention the "special place of the Catholic Church" acknowledged by the State in his constitution, which also mentioned the desire for women to stay in the home.

    Disinterest in financial growth is an understatement. He plunged the country into an economic crisis in the 1930's solely for the sake of breaking Ireland's perceived economic dependence on Britain.

    Another part of De Valera's rather mixed career as a politician which rarely seems to be mentioned is his outrageous role in the Civil War. The rivalries that developed in the Civil War have plagued Irish Politics ever since, and were all due to the fact that he couldn't bite the bullet and say the Oath (something which he managed to do well enough less than 10 years later anyway, once faced with political dereliction).

    De Valera was quite frankly a blight upon Irish Politics, and upon the Irish people.


  • Options
    #14
    Riddle101
    Registered Users Posts: 8,385 ✭✭✭Riddle101


    I think Sean Lemass is the most popular and best choice to go with. The guy did great things for Ireland, arguably more then any other Taoiseach we've had.


  • Options
    #15
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    I'd take Lemass and Whittaker over Dev and McQuaid any day!!

    For your consideration I'd also offer Garret Fitzgerald.

    I also think Haughey merits consideration - for all his many flaws he did have a dark charisma and certain style .......and aside from that he actually brought in some decent policies and wasn't afraid to govern.


  • Options
    #16
    robp
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,934 ✭✭✭robp


    Zebra3 wrote: »
    He was crook in true FF style, setting the standards for Haughey and Ahern.

    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/dev-tricked-public-into-investing-in-irish-press-file-reveals-26226075.html
    In my opinion it was wrong as head of gv that he held those shares but there is a consensus that he made little money from it. Unlike Haughey and Ahern he ended his career without great wealth. Indeed as late as the 1960s when Ireland started to grow economically he refused salary rises to his position.
    McKrab wrote: »
    Resisted placing Catholicism as a State religion? Put in place a progressive constitution? That's utterly misleading.
    This is the man whose vision of Ireland was of comely maidens dancing at crossroads.
    He wanted to keep Ireland tethered to the backward Catholic dogma that prevailed at the inception of the State. He was always careful not to risk the wrath of Archbishop McQuaid, the President of his alma mater Blackrock, or to offend him in any way.
    Not to mention the "special place of the Catholic Church" acknowledged by the State in his constitution, which also mentioned the desire for women to stay in the home.

    Disinterest in financial growth is an understatement. He plunged the country into an economic crisis in the 1930's solely for the sake of breaking Ireland's perceived economic dependence on Britain.

    Another part of De Valera's rather mixed career as a politician which rarely seems to be mentioned is his outrageous role in the Civil War. The rivalries that developed in the Civil War have plagued Irish Politics ever since, and were all due to the fact that he couldn't bite the bullet and say the Oath (something which he managed to do well enough less than 10 years later anyway, once faced with political dereliction).

    De Valera was quite frankly a blight upon Irish Politics, and upon the Irish people.

    People always quote the sentence about comely maidens but always omit speeches about Ireland becoming being industrious. Infact cross roads aren't even mentioned in the speech. Comely maidens has nothing remotely to do with religion. It related to the pastoral idealism that Dev like Michael Collins possessed. Dev wasn't an enemy of McQuaid but Dev made plenty of enemies to various political priests who favoured Cumann na nGaedheal. Infact some were known to denounced him from the pupil. Giving women a constitutional right to stay at home was a privilege, if discrimination only to men. Yes he guided the country in-line with Catholic social theory but that had deep popular support.

    Lastly your misinformed about the Civil war. His role was much more minor then you suggest. Even though he was a figure head he wasn't in a major controlling position of rebel republicans. Militarily he controlled little. Historians have recognised there was a group of die hard republicans who were set on war and were not open to negotiations on the treaty. To attribute the entire Civil war to him is to grossly exaggerate his influence.


  • Options
    #17
    pedroeibar1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,108 ✭✭✭pedroeibar1


    Fitzgerald had no desire to be other than an academic and was delighted to be viewed as one.

    Haughey wanted to be a statesman and achieved it, although his legacy is marred by corruption.

    Reynolds wanted to be a statesman but with his demeanour never could rise above being ‘one of the lads.’

    Bruton was a ‘gentleman farmer’ and when in office never could make up his mind if he wanted that or to be known as a statesman. (Which is why he is a good diplomat.)

    Ahern did not care as long as he was liked and re-elected. He now has to worry about his legacy/standing, hence the ‘Iar-taoiseach’ sobriquet.

    Cowan could never be a statesman as he had an ego that over-rode common decency and politeness.

    Kenny desperately wants to be a statesman but has neither the ability, talent nor capacity to be one.


  • Options
    #18
    OCorcrainn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 428 ✭✭OCorcrainn


    Kettleson wrote: »
    OK so I'm writing from a relatively un-read/non-academic status.

    However, we've all heard about "great Irish Political leaders" and judging by today's collection, there wont be many joining that particular hall of fame.

    So just how great were these leaders of yore? Or is it mostly all politically motivated, romantic nonsense?

    Were there any at all? If you could name just one, who would it be and why?

    PS: I made an easy, conscious decision not to post in AH. So I'm looking for relatively well reasoned opinion. Thanks...

    David Ervine
    Robert Emmett
    Sean Lemass
    Gerry Adams
    Seán MacBride
    Micheal Collins
    John Hume
    Charles Stuart Parnell
    Theobald Wolfe Tone
    Henry Grattan
    Douglas Hyde
    Arthur Griffith
    Garrett Gitzgerald
    Jack Lynch
    Terence O'Neill
    David Trimble
    Martin McGuinness
    Albert Reynolds
    Cathal Brugha
    WT Cosgrave
    Frank Aiken
    Dick Spring
    Eoin MacNeill
    Napper Tandy
    Arthur Wellesley

    De Valera destroyed this country and set it backwards for decades.
    Daniel O Connell influenced many people to abandon the Irish language and to speak English instead, and is considered by many to be responsible for the near demise of the Irish language.


  • Options
    #19
    tdv123
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,292 ✭✭✭tdv123


    pedroeibar1 wrote: »
    Fitzgerald had no desire to be other than an academic and was delighted to be viewed as one.

    Bruton was a ‘gentleman farmer’ and when in office never could make up his mind if he wanted that or to be known as a statesman. (Which is why he is a good diplomat.)


    Kenny desperately wants to be a statesman but has neither the ability, talent nor capacity to be one.

    The same Bruton who had ago at Vol. Martin "Doco" Doherty, after Doco risked his own life who without doubt saved I'd say potentially the biggest massacre of the troubles? That Bruton? And be begrudge him a military funeral for his heroic actions.


  • Options
    #20
    Kettleson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,047 ✭✭✭Kettleson


    In my lifetime, and from your list John Hume.

    I am old enough to remember Mr De Valeras funeral and am young enough to have shared the experience of the hostilities and challenges that John Hume met head on, on a daily basis.

    For me, John Hume is the most honourable statesman and humanitarian that Ireland was lucky enough to have born to its soil.

    IMO, no one else comes close. He was doing his thing in the 6 counties, a violent cauldron where he had much bigger fish to fry, needed a bigger pair of balls, and was under daily threat of assissanation to both himself and his family and paid no undue reverence to any church.

    I have reached my Journeys end. John Hume.
    OCorcrainn wrote: »
    David Ervine
    Robert Emmett
    Sean Lemass
    Gerry Adams
    Seán MacBride
    Micheal Collins
    John Hume
    Charles Stuart Parnell
    Theobald Wolfe Tone
    Henry Grattan
    Douglas Hyde
    Arthur Griffith
    Garrett Gitzgerald
    Jack Lynch
    Terence O'Neill
    David Trimble
    Martin McGuinness
    Albert Reynolds
    Cathal Brugha
    WT Cosgrave
    Frank Aiken
    Dick Spring
    Eoin MacNeill
    Napper Tandy
    Arthur Wellesley

    De Valera destroyed this country and set it backwards for decades.
    Daniel O Connell influenced many people to abandon the Irish language and to speak English instead, and is considered by many to be responsible for the near demise of the Irish language.


  • Options
    #21
    pedroeibar1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,108 ✭✭✭pedroeibar1


    tdv123 wrote: »
    The same Bruton who had ago at Vol. Martin "Doco" Doherty, after Doco risked his own life who without doubt saved I'd say potentially the biggest massacre of the troubles? That Bruton? And be begrudge him a military funeral for his heroic actions.

    Nonsense. Doherty was a convicted terrorist, by his own boast he spent time 'on active service' in the IRA's bombing campaign in England. There is no doubt he saved lives in the attempted Dublin pub bombing, but he died as he lived. He was not a soldier and had no right to a military funeral. He was buried in an IRA managed PR funeral. This discussion is about statesmen, you have added nothing to it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    OCorcrainn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 428 ✭✭OCorcrainn


    Kettleson wrote: »
    In my lifetime, and from your list John Hume. John Hume without a doubt.

    I am old enough to remember Mr De Veleras funeral and am young enough to have shared the experience of the hostilities and challenges that John Hume met head on, on a daily basis.

    For me, John Hume is the most honourable statesman and humanitarian that Ireland was lucky enough to have born to its soil.

    In my experience, no on else comes close. He was doing his thing in the 6 counties, a violent cauldron where he had much bigger fish to fry, needed a bigger pair of balls, and was under daily threat of assissanation to both himself and his family and paid no undue reverence to any church.

    I have reached my Journeys end. John Hume.

    A good choice, I am a Sinn Féin supporter myself but if I was living up north the SDLP would get my vote too. I have a lot respect for the effort that party did during the Troubles, more so for the work John Hume did, no one can deny his contribution. Nationalists needed men like him just as much as Gerry Adams or Martin McGuinness.


  • Options
    #23
    Che16
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16 ✭Che16


    pedroeibar1 wrote: »
    Nonsense. Doherty was a convicted terrorist, by his own boast he spent time 'on active service' in the IRA's bombing campaign in England. There is no doubt he saved lives in the attempted Dublin pub bombing, but he died as he lived. He was not a soldier and had no right to a military funeral. He was buried in an IRA managed PR funeral. This discussion is about statesmen, you have added nothing to it.

    Clearly you are very susceptible to propaganda,read a book,honestly.Fair play to volunteer Doherty for resisting British rule in Ireland.He was a soldier of the Irish Republic and should have received a soldier's funeral.


  • Options
    #24
    burgermasters
    Registered Users Posts: 224 ✭✭burgermasters


    Kettleson wrote: »
    I am very much aware that I am relatively unread, On Dev however.

    Why was staying out of the War such a good (moral) thing? Seems a bit sit-on-the-fence to me. Was the national card that important not to help out the neighbours? Was the "occupation" of 6 counties still such an issue in times of war. And Britain, had they had lost, we would all have been speaking German anyways.

    It seems to me that Dev was happy enough to let Britain go to War and was looking forward to benefiting from their success, should they win.

    It would have seemed more strategic and morally upstanding to row in with Britain. Feel free to correct me on this one.


    I know it two days after your post but feel I should say anyway?
    Churchhill offered dev the 6 counties if Ireland declared its would fight as allied to British but the coward claimed he didn't trust the British, fact was that we couldn't have afforded to go to war any way and if so it meant the British footing the bills for us and dev didn't want that? That info comes from my grandfather whom was a volunteer back in the day, also have to say Collins was the best irish leader ever, rip


  • Options
    #25
    Che16
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16 ✭Che16


    burgermasters wrote: »
    I know it two days after your post but feel I should say anyway?
    Churchhill offered dev the 6 counties if Ireland declared its would fight as allied to British but the coward claimed he didn't trust the British, fact was that we couldn't have afforded to go to war any way and if so it meant the British footing the bills for us and dev didn't want that? That info comes from my grandfather whom was a volunteer back in the day, also have to say Collins was the best irish leader ever, rip

    In what way was Michael Collins the greatest Irish leader ever?He accepted the Treaty which was a blatant sell-out and gave us nothing,a war where we lost so much young men and civillians and not to mention the regular,working class English soldiers whoalso died for nothing.He then turned on his former comrades and accepted partition of our country.Had he lived circumstances might have changed,he might have redeemed himself but we do not know.One things for sure,he was neither a Republican,a man of principle or a great leader.


  • Options
    #26
    burgermasters
    Registered Users Posts: 224 ✭✭burgermasters


    Che16 wrote: »
    In what way was Michael Collins the greatest Irish leader ever?He accepted the Treaty which was a blatant sell-out and gave us nothing,a war where we lost so much young men and civillians and not to mention the regular,working class English soldiers whoalso died for nothingness then turned on his former comrades and accepted partition of our country.Had he lived circumstances might have changed,he might have redeemed himself but we do not know.One things for sure,he was neither a Republican,a man of principle or a great leader.

    Micheal Collins was nothing but a Republican hero who lived fought and died for his fellow irish men and women,granted he couldn't bring back the whole country but nobody could have? Yes men and women died on both sides but that is war? He gave his life for what we have now been traitor he wasn't there is clear documentation on him and you can clearly see that he was by no means a traitor to this country.


  • Options
    #27
    markomuscle
    Closed Accounts Posts: 560 ✭✭✭markomuscle


    I always find it strange seeing northern republicans idolising Collins, he played a part in partition even if it was for reasons he thought were right.


  • Options
    #28
    OCorcrainn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 428 ✭✭OCorcrainn


    markomuscle wrote: »
    I always find it strange seeing northern republicans idolising Collins, he played a part in partition even if it was for reasons he thought were right.

    I am a southern republican and Shinner and obviously would have been anti-Treaty but I still have a be-grudging respect and admiration for Collins. I have no trace of either for De Valera.


  • Options
    #29
    pedroeibar1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,108 ✭✭✭pedroeibar1


    xx


  • Options
    #30
    pedroeibar1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,108 ✭✭✭pedroeibar1


    Che16 wrote: »
    Clearly you are very susceptible to propaganda,read a book,honestly.Fair play to volunteer Doherty for resisting British rule in Ireland.He was a soldier of the Irish Republic and should have received a soldier's funeral.

    Personal insults and what you have written to date in your 3 history posts - res ipsa loquitur. O’Doherty was not a soldier and never had a mandate from a democratically elected government. He was a convicted terrorist, a person who was proud to boast about bombing (innocent people) and who was hired as a doorman because of his ‘connections’. He questioned a couple of suspicious thugs who then shot him. He most certainly was not a Great Irish Political Leader, which is what this thread is about. :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    Che16 wrote: »
    In what way was Michael Collins the greatest Irish leader ever?He accepted the Treaty which was a blatant sell-out and gave us nothing,a war where we lost so much young men and civillians and not to mention the regular,working class English soldiers whoalso died for nothing.He then turned on his former comrades and accepted partition of our country.Had he lived circumstances might have changed,he might have redeemed himself but we do not know.One things for sure,he was neither a Republican,a man of principle or a great leader.

    Well, let's start with the fact that regardless of his military credentials, he was an outstanding organiser - his role as Minister of Finance is hugely overlooked along with his role in organising the logistics of the War of Independence. All while on the run and managing a first class intelligence gathering operation.

    He was also astute enough to realise that while the British were war weary, the Republican forces were spent - they were effectively out of ammunition and a lot of units were, in modern parlance, 'combat ineffective' for the want of replacements. In the circumstances he did as well as anyone could have.


Advertisement