Follow @PoliticsIE
 
 
 
Page 1 of 18 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 173

Thread: 1916 Centenary Committee

  1. #1
    Politics.ie Newbie
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    80
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default 1916 Centenary Committee

    Bertie speaking tonight in Killarney. (will this event attract more people to Sinn Fein or Fianna Fail?)

    As Taoiseach, on behalf of the Government, I want to inform you tonight of what we are planning. Next Easter Sunday, we are reintroducing a parade to commemorate 1916. Our Defence Forces – the only legitimate army of the Irish people – will parade to commemorate this historic event and their proud contribution in the service of the State. We in this State will proclaim our republicanism. We will recognise and praise the vision of the Volunteers of 1916 and indeed the War of Independence. We will show that our Defence Forces are the true successors of the volunteers. The Irish people need to reclaim the spirit of 1916, which is not the property of those who have abused and debased the title of republicanism. But a one-day commemoration is not enough. We need to reflect our esteem for the men and women of 1916 in a more permanent way. Therefore, the Government is establishing a 1916 Centenary Committee. Its brief is to begin to plan now for a major centenary celebration of the 1916 Rising. I want next Easter to be an expression of our pride as a nation. We want to commemorate the greatest generation we have ever produced. We want to celebrate the freedom we achieved. And we want more publicly to recognise those who gave us the opportunity to acquire and develop that freedom. This is our State’s inheritance. We must protect it from those who will abuse it and from the revisionists who would seek to denigrate it.

  2. #2
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    643
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    As a republican, I welcome any step to commemorate the men and women of 1916. This decision is long overdue. However, there is an air of gimmickry about it. All this guff about the spirit of 1916 not being the property of those who have abused and debased republicanism is predictable and pathetic.
    Let's ask ourselves why Bertie did this now, at this time? There was nothing stopping him doing this 10 years ago or 15 years ago. The reality is, he is doing this now because SF now have a popular mandate that FF can't deny and the emperor wants to try to reclaim FF's republican clothes. That is the mother of all ironies, he goes on about how republicanism is not the property of SF, yet it is SF that are dictating how republican FF sell themselves. Well Bertie, we're ready for you, you can demonise us all you want, but few people could question our dedication to the republican cause.
    "John Bull has got his hand down your pants and his fist around your bollox and you can't see it."

  3. #3
    Politics.ie Member FutureTaoiseach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Dept. of FutureTaoiseach
    Posts
    7,992
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    The re-introduction of the annual 1916 parade abandoned in 1970 is a very welcome move. Never again should revisionism be allowed to denigrate the 1916 freedom-fighters without whom we would still be a British colony.

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FutureTaoiseach
    Never again should revisionism be allowed to denigrate the 1916 freedom-fighters without whom we would still be a British colony.
    Leaving aside your rather asinine understanding of 'revisionism', why shouldn't people be allowed to denigrate who they want? Would you support the introduction of some law which would restrict freedom of speech around the subject of the 1916 Rising?
    Failed liberal traitors: http://cedarlounge.wordpress.com

  5. #5
    Politics.ie Member FutureTaoiseach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Dept. of FutureTaoiseach
    Posts
    7,992
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smiffy
    Quote Originally Posted by FutureTaoiseach
    Never again should revisionism be allowed to denigrate the 1916 freedom-fighters without whom we would still be a British colony.
    Leaving aside your rather asinine understanding of 'revisionism', why shouldn't people be allowed to denigrate who they want? Would you support the introduction of some law which would restrict freedom of speech around the subject of the 1916 Rising?
    I am not saying that there should not be freedom of speech on this issue. However, I consider the original decision to scrap the parade as an act of denigration to the 1916 freedom-fighters and consider the restoration of the parade to be an undoing of this. I was trying to make the point that the State should celebrate the 1916 rebellion - especially since not to do so is to feed the propaganda of revisionists who denigrate this State's republican roots.

    There is nothing asinine about rejecting revisionism of the kind that denigrates the 1916 freedom fighters. Denigration of them is asinine, however.

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FutureTaoiseach
    I am not saying that there should be freedom of speech on this issue. However, I consider the original decision to scrap the parade as an act of denigration to the 1916 freedom-fighters and consider the restoration of the parade to be an undoing of this. I was trying to make the point that the State should celebrate the 1916 rebellion - especially since not to do so is to feed the propaganda of revisionists who denigrate this State's republican roots.
    What do you understand 'revisionism' to actually consist of?

    Some specific examples would be useful in this context.

    Oh, I see you've added something:

    There is nothing asinine about rejecting revisionism of the kind that denigrates the 1916 freedom fighters. Denigration them is asinine, however.
    If you read my post, you'll see that I was suggesting that your understanding of revisionism (I'm assuming you're referring to a broad movement in Irish historical studies that emerged in the 1960s that is generally lumped into the category of 'revisionism'), was asinine. Let's see if that's true.
    Failed liberal traitors: http://cedarlounge.wordpress.com

  7. #7
    Politics.ie Newbie
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    29
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    I welcome this. I think its an acknoweldgement (even though they wont admit it) by the Government that sometimes people have to fight for their rights and freedoms (including taking up arms and killing people). The men and women that fought and died in 1916 should be commemorated properly and always should have been.

    Successive Governments should not have tried to ignore them just because it showed up their hypocrisy against those fighting against British occupation of our country over the past thirty years or so. So while it is belated, I welcome it very much indeed.

  8. #8
    Politics.ie Member FutureTaoiseach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Dept. of FutureTaoiseach
    Posts
    7,992
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smiffy
    Quote Originally Posted by FutureTaoiseach
    I am not saying that there should be freedom of speech on this issue. However, I consider the original decision to scrap the parade as an act of denigration to the 1916 freedom-fighters and consider the restoration of the parade to be an undoing of this. I was trying to make the point that the State should celebrate the 1916 rebellion - especially since not to do so is to feed the propaganda of revisionists who denigrate this State's republican roots.
    What do you understand 'revisionism' to actually consist of?

    Some specific examples would be useful in this context.
    I meant I was not saying there should not be freedom of speech on this issue. Corrected now.

    An example of revisionism would be:

    These remarks by John Bruton that somehow, having Southern Irish MPs at Westminster would have tempered British policy on Ireland, and his remarks that the IRA shot 10 Protestants on a single night in April 1922 in Cork. Putting it that way is misleading since Catholic informers and collaborators were also shot. These specific Protestants were shot because they were members of a Loyalist group called the Loyalist Action Group in the Bandon area, which research reveals were involved in passing on information about the Old IRA to the British, as well as helping the RIC torture, shoot and identify alleged Republicans and burn houses. Such actions were treason against the Republic and deserved the ultimate price.They were not killed because they were Protestants, but because they were collaborating with an occupying power. Bruton also said that the IRA shot already surrendered soldiers, which is also disputed. Bruton seems to prefer to most negative portrayal of those who fought for Irish freedom in 1916-22.

    http://www.indymedia.ie/newswire.php?story_id=66994

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FutureTaoiseach
    What do you understand 'revisionism' to actually consist of?

    Some specific examples would be useful in this context.
    I meant I was not saying there should not be freedom of speech on this issue. Corrected now.


    An example of revisionism would be:

    These remarks by John Bruton that somehow, having Southern Irish MPs at Westminster would have tempered British policy on Ireland, and his remarks that the IRA shot 10 Protestants on a single night in April 1922 in Cork. Putting it that way is misleading since Catholic informers and collaborators were also shot. These specific Protestants were shot because they were members of a Loyalist group called the Loyalist Action Group in the Bandon area, which research reveals were involved in passing on information about the Old IRA to the British, as well as helping the RIC torture, shoot and identify alleged Republicans and burn houses. Such actions were treason against the Republic and deserved the ultimate price.They were not killed because they were Protestants, but because they were collaborating with an occupying power. Bruton also said that the IRA shot already surrendered soldiers, which is also disputed. Bruton seems to prefer to most negative portrayal of those who fought for Irish freedom in 1916-22.

    http://www.indymedia.ie/newswire.php?story_id=66994
    Yes, that's the kind of thing I was getting at when I referred to an asinine understanding of what 'revisionism' actually consists of.
    Failed liberal traitors: http://cedarlounge.wordpress.com

  10. #10
    Politics.ie Newbie
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    I too think this is a great idea.I've never had the opportunity to see a proper military parade performed by the Irish Defence Forces. I think it will be a great occasion.

    That said, hopefully the whole Rising will be viewed with a new perspective of what really went on and the context in which it was set. Ireland was in a 'boom' period during the war, farmers for example never had it so good. To see how (most) Irish people went from wanting home rule to full independence in a short matter of years is of great importance. It has to be said that a small group of people (the IRB) effectively launched an attack with no mandate whatsoever from the Irish people to do so, albeit their actions were approved retrospectively in such a huge change of opinion.

    I hope that this viewpoint is recognised, and that the attitude many an elder person has told me about such parades commemorating the occasion reflect the fact that what the Volunteers and the ICA did was akin to an act of terrorism yet later legitimised, rather than the view that 1916 was simply the will of the Irish People being implemented by the Volunteers to achieve independence and freedom, which I'm told is what the previous parades seemed to suggest.
    Greatest forest in the history of trees.

Page 1 of 18 1234511 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •