Ireland's greatest person

IMO the historic past poses a problem for many in the Irish media and political world. The blackening of De Valera - necessary to shed the now apparently unacceptable birth and early development of the nation - has to be accompanied with an equal separating out of Collins from the 'revolutionary' track. Collins died so it's possible to indulge in a 'things would/should have been much different' saga. That how it appear to me - so we get stuff like the nonsense you describe.

In fact, De Valera, Collins, Connolly were all more in sync with each other and their aspirations for a free Ireland than many now want to acknowledge. As I said, that's how it comes across to me anyway.

brianthebard wrote: »

I'd be the first to say I don't believe Collins was a Marxist, or at the very least never gave any real signs that he was, although he didn't have mcuh of chance.

I saw that programme and found it quite good. No major glaring inaccuracies that I noticed. I think if anyone has an agenda on this issue then it is those who seek to claim that Collins as some kind of marxist when there is absolutely no credible, actual evidence to back that up whatsoever.

Michael Collins followed by Bono... Bono!!! :rolleyes:

brianthebard wrote: »

Whoever presents the programme on Connolly will have far less leeway in this regard for instance (glad to see Connolly made the top five at least).

You will be pleased to learn that is going to be Joe Duffy (my money is on Collins to win personally). I am not sure what people were expecting out of this. After the Late Late the other night when each of the 5 panel were giving an overview of their selection and the criteria it very quickly became clear that this was a very personal choice for them and to expect each of them to turn out an indepth historical biography or anything of the sort was a bit much.

Of course it is going to be their personal interpretation of that figure, of course it is going to be 'osprey history' or very summarised and bite sized history in broad strokes. A million and one editorial variation exsist for ways in which that period Could have been covered differently with a focus placed more in one direction than another.

Beyond incorrectly set expectations of the programme format itself the programme delivered in my view.

McDowell is entitled to give his opinion - he was after all asked to present the programme, personally I do not think he overstepped the mark too much. On a side note if you compare that programme to say . . . . the 1916 walking tour of Dublin where according to the socialist tour guide every single aspect of 1916 was blood red socialist - compared to that I do not think Mc Dowell was bad in comparison.

Doesn't it say it all when a tax dodger like Bono is nominated as Ireland's greatest person. And as for Robbo ( Mary Robinson ). Other women such as Anne Devlin or Countess Markievicz would have been far more worthy, but I suppose they had to throw her in for the trendy middle classes :rolleyes: I rememeber when the Berlin Wall was coming down and a silly fecker on the Late Late show saying Robbo getting elected was Ireland's equivalent of the Berlin Wall falling .........ah yes, the Gombeen state.

doolox wrote: »

I'd have to put Bono 5th. He is an entertainer, a singer of songs but has used the ridiculous level of credibility given to celebrity in this age to promote some good causes. Perhaps he is on par with Woody Guthrie or Christy Moore who also have written some intelligent songs about social issues. Also John Lennon comes to mind. Bono, however has been well rewarded for his work, he has suffered little or no persecution etc for his beliefs. True greatness shines through when people stick to their beliefs in the face of danger, ridicule, death or prison as in the case of some of the other people shortlisted.

It is refreshing to hear someone compliment Bono on the work he does, although if he is Ireland's greatest person, i think his wife Ali should get a mention as i believe she orchestrates a lot of his work.

brianthebard wrote: »

Tbh I asked for a link, not some points cherry picked. Regardless most of those points are more Connolly than Keynes. You can see most of those are taken directly from Connolly's manifesto's for the IRSP and the Labour party.

Socialism has changed enormoulsy over the past century. A lot of the aspirations of the early socialists, such as those listed above, are now considered to be norms.

I don't think that anyone suggested here that Collins was Marxist - in fact the contrary. But in A Path to Freedom he shows how fluid his economic polices were and suggests that "The profits from the mineral resources - the working of mines, the development of water power etc. - will belong to the nation for the advantage of the whole nation". In another place he writes "We will hope to see in Ireland industrial conciliation and arbitration taking the place of strikes and the workers sharing in the ownership and management of business".

A read of his essays does also certainly reveal him to be as nationalist and as passionately anti-English as anyone else who fought in 1916. So to suggest that Collins somehow was a shade apart is a false notion. Collins wanted rid of the English and freedom for Ireland - getting rid of the odious connection with England being a top priority that he comes back to again and again in these writings.

"The Irish struggle has always been for freedom- freedom from English occupation, from English interference and from English domination - not for freedom with any particular label attached to it. What we fought for at any particular time was the greatest measure of freedom obtainable at that time and it depended upon our strength whether the claim was greater than at another time or lesser than at another time."

Collins also lays the blame for the violence of 1916 at the door of the British forces. He writes "In the first two years all violence was the work of the British armed forces who in their efforts of suppression murdered fifteen Irishmen and wounded nearly 400 men, women and children. Meetings were broken up everywhere, National newspapers were suppressed. Over 1,000 men and women were arrested for political offenses, usually of the most trivial nature...These forces were kept here or sent here by the British government to harass the development of Irish self-government".

Collins goes on to describe the British presence in Ireland from 1916 to the time of the early 1920s as a 'Reign of Terror' - his words. He castigates the British presence in Ireland - emphasises the British policy of violence to suppress nationalism - and waves aside any suggestion that there was any change of heart on the side of the British to pulling back on the violence. The British "did not repent in the middle of their Black and Tan terror". Those in Britain who opposed this terror "were pacifists with very little power" - the same people who had opposed WWI without any results.

Collins describes as a false notion the idea that the British wanted peace in Ireland - in fact he says what they really wanted was "destruction of the national movement". He writes "In Aug 1920 a law was passed 'to restore law and order in Ireland', this law in reality abolished all law in Ireland and left the lives and property of the people defenceless before the British forces".

MarchDub wrote: »

I don't think that anyone suggested here that Collins was Marxist - in fact the contrary. But in A Path to Freedom he shows how fluid his economic polices were and suggests that "The profits from the mineral resources - the working of mines, the development of water power etc. - will belong to the nation for the advantage of the whole nation". In another place he writes "We will hope to see in Ireland industrial conciliation and arbitration taking the place of strikes and the workers sharing in the ownership and management of business".

A read of his essays does also certainly reveal him to be as nationalist and as passionately anti-English as anyone else who fought in 1916. So to suggest that Collins somehow was a shade apart is a false notion. Collins wanted rid of the English and freedom for Ireland - getting rid of the odious connection with England being a top priority that he comes back to again and again in these writings.

"The Irish struggle has always been for freedom- freedom from English occupation, from English interference and from English domination - not for freedom with any particular label attached to it. What we fought for at any particular time was the greatest measure of freedom obtainable at that time and it depended upon our strength whether the claim was greater than at another time or lesser than at another time."

Collins also lays the blame for the violence of 1916 at the door of the British forces. He writes "In the first two years all violence was the work of the British armed forces who in their efforts of suppression murdered fifteen Irishmen and wounded nearly 400 men, women and children. Meetings were broken up everywhere, National newspapers were suppressed. Over 1,000 men and women were arrested for political offenses, usually of the most trivial nature...These forces were kept here or sent here by the British government to harass the development of Irish self-government".

Collins goes on to describe the British presence in Ireland from 1916 to the time of the early 1920s as a 'Reign of Terror' - his words. He castigates the British presence in Ireland - emphasises the British policy of violence to suppress nationalism - and waves aside any suggestion that there was any change of heart on the side of the British to pulling back on the violence. The British "did not repent in the middle of their Black and Tan terror". Those in Britain who opposed this terror "were pacifists with very little power" - the same people who had opposed WWI without any results.

Collins describes as a false notion the idea that the British wanted peace in Ireland - in fact he says what they really wanted was "destruction of the national movement". He writes "In Aug 1920 a law was passed 'to restore law and order in Ireland', this law in reality abolished all law in Ireland and left the lives and property of the people defenceless before the British forces".

No doubting you, where are the above quotes from, The Path to Freedom ?

MarchDub wrote: »

Yes, the selection of various essays and notes written by Collins himself. All the quotes in my post are Collins' own words.

At Bachelors Walk in 1913 the British army killed 4 and wounded 30 or more. Collins writes "In the first two years all violence was the work of the British armed forces who in their efforts of suppression murdered fifteen Irishmen and wounded nearly 400 men, women and children."

Where the other deaths caused by attacks of meetings, cell beatings etc ? A bit off topic, but any idea anyone ?

Dionysus wrote: »

An t-Éireannach is fearr? Aodh Mór Ó Néill, gan amhras ar bith.

An extraordinary person at an extraordinary time in Ireland's history. It's embarrassing that any list of supposedly great Irish people could overlook him.

Great choice!

PatsytheNazi wrote: »

Agus Aodh Ruadh Ó Domhnaill.

Yes. Him too. You know some years ago I was reading some of the source material from the Battle of Kinsale and something that always stayed with me was the description of O'Donnell - in the jaws of defeat - running around the rear of the Irish army lines - when they were in retreat- desperately trying to convince them to stay their positions. A man of great passion and conviction.

Gateley was included and scored high due an internet campaign among the gays to give him a high score :rolleyes: Whatever about Bono, at least he has done a bit more for the less fortunate in the world than that airhead Gateley.