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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Why is it that Irish Republicans identify with the Catholic side of Irish history?

2»

Comments

  • #32
    OCorcrainn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 428 ✭✭OCorcrainn


    jonniebgood1 wrote: »
    First :

    and then :

    You clearly contradict yourself. You appear to be talking nonsense but I will ask you none the less to explain the apparent contradiction.

    And this certainly doesn't explain it although your final sentence summarises what you are doing quite well:

    I can understand your argument but I don't think that snide belittling attitude is appropriate from a mod of this forum.


  • #33
    pedroeibar1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,108 ✭✭✭pedroeibar1


    Coles wrote: »
    Dude. You need to read my words again. Slowly. One. at. a. time.

    Republicanism is non-sectarian by definition. Sectarianism is central to Loyalism. That goes a very long way towards explaining why during a horrific civil conflict 7% of 'Republican' killings were sectarian compared to more than 80% of Loyalist killings.

    The Mod can reply in his own way.
    For my part, go tell that to the people of Omagh, Birmingham, various parts of London and lots of other places in between.

    It is because of those events and the s#ite that so-called republicans (lower case ‘r’ deliberately) like you post that both my grandfather and granduncle specifically requested that ‘republicans’ be prevented from attending their burials. Their wishes were honoured.


  • #34
    Coles
    Registered Users Posts: 1,020 ✭✭✭Coles


    Take it elsewhere. We are discussing historic facts and if you can't engage without abuse then please don't bother.


  • #35
    jonniebgood1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,577 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    OCorcrainn wrote: »
    I can understand your argument but I don't think that snide belittling attitude is appropriate from a mod of this forum.

    Sometimes comments need to be identified clearly for what they are. If that is seen as snide and belittling by you I cannot help this. I usually try to be fair on the forum but participation in a debate sometimes requires being succinct or 'to the point'. I commented
    You appear to be talking nonsense but I will ask you none the less to explain the apparent contradiction.

    I gave the poster a second opportunity to explain, they were unable and resorted to playground response:
    Dude. You need to read my words again. Slowly. One. at. a. time.
    followed by a slightly altered explanation of what I see as a flawed argument.

    I am not here to hold someones hand when they are unable to stand over comments as is the case here. Historical debate requires a knowledge of history which I suspect Coles has to some level. However it also requires some semblance of balance otherwise ones opinions are open to ridicule. In this discussion the line of argument that Coles has attempted is lacking in balance. It follows then that it is open to ridicule, thus ridiculous. Identifying this is fair in my opinion.

    This is of course open to challenge either on the feedback board or by PM to a c-mod.


  • #36
    Coles
    Registered Users Posts: 1,020 ✭✭✭Coles


    jonniebgood1 wrote: »
    ...followed by a slightly altered explanation of what I see as a flawed argument.
    So then explain why it's a flawed argument.

    I'd suggest you carefully read my words first just so that you understand the point I made. Perhaps you should compare what I actually wrote with your initial knee jerk reaction to it.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Coles
    Registered Users Posts: 1,020 ✭✭✭Coles


    Two days later and still no response. That's disappointing.


  • #38
    Coles
    Registered Users Posts: 1,020 ✭✭✭Coles


    And another day has passed and still nothing.

    Ok.

    Let's develop this discussion a bit. This is a discussion on historic fact, so I'll be happy to be corrected when I'm wrong. I don't care for political whataboutery and the discussion won't benefit from it.



    The 'Republic' that was proclaimed in 1916 was very much on the French revolutionary model. Equality, Liberty and Fraternity. It proclaimed that ALL the children of the State would be equal, but it also made a specific reference to the sectarian divisions that were part of British rule in Ireland. It wasn't proclamed by Catholics. It wasn't proclaimed by Protestants. It was proclaimed by men and women who did not want their society divided in that arbitrary way.

    "The Republic guarantees religious and civil liberty, equal rights and equal opportunities to all its citizens, and declares its resolve to pursue the happiness and prosperity of the whole nation and of all its parts, cherishing all the children of the nation equally, and oblivious of the differences carefully fostered by an alien government, which have divided a minority from the majority in the past."

    This non-sectarianism was at the core of the Proclamation of the Irish Republic, and I would imagine such ideals are very much a cornerstone of proper Republicanism today. After all, you can not have a sectarian Republic. You can not be a sectarian Republican. This was the core point that was clearly misunderstood at the start of this thread.

    Of course the Irish Republic we ended up with has been down a long and twisted road. The political strand that would go on to form FG were content to agree to a sectarian division between the Catholic and Protestant populations of Ireland, and in effect the majority of the country became a sectarian 'Catholic' State with social policy controlled by the RCC, while the Northern counties became another deeply sectarian State governed by and for Protestants.

    In the southern counties we are finally starting to secularise our society (schools, hospitals etc) and it seems that religious freedom is also being safeguarded as was the intention in the Proclamation. In the northern counties it took a long, bloody and bitter struggle to achieve civil rights and equality, and to ensure that power would be shared in a non sectarian way as it mostly is today. Obviously there are still deep cultural scars after hundreds of years of sectarian division.

    If the aim of the struggle was to achieve a 'United Irish Republic', clearly it hasn't succeeded, but when you look back at how both sectarian states utterly failed their people you realise just how far we've come to establishing governance both side of the Irish border that is closer to those Republican ideals than ever before. It might never be a called an Irish Republic, but what of it.


Advertisement