|
|
Post by earl on May 16, 2008 16:42:02 GMT
How does a thread titled 'Rangers in the UEFA final' end up on the Irish education system is mind boggling. But it seems that the myths are flying about today. As Leeside said Cromwell and the period known as 'An Gorta Mór' (the Great Hunger) or the Irish Famine were hundreds of years apart. And what is this 'Irish' version of that famine period?? Is this the same period that the British government in Tony Blair publically appoligised to the Irish people for the role the British government played in this period? Starvation and hunger was not sectarian, poor people from every religion starved. Exactly Tony Blair had to apologise for the famine to Nationalists as part of the peace process. The Irish verion of that famine as you put it mate is that it ignored protestants, and those who wished to remain British, And attacked only the farms of nationalist Irish. It is your famine it's not mine, my ancestors never suffered from it. It has been part and parcel of the republican movement ever since it happened, like it was the fault of the Brits. So convinced are the Brits by this rhetoric they feel they have to apologise for it in the 21st century ffs. Tony didn't apologise to the rest of the UK for the treatment they received in the same period, only the Irish. It was a famine it happened, it had absolutely nothing to do with politics, but it is touted by republicans wherever they go as an example of how the Brits treated the Irish. And whether you like it or not they start being taught that verion in school. Bilk, you've openly admitted that you know nothing on history and are not interested in it. You don't have to continue demonstrating this fact. We believe you. |
|
|
|
Post by Bilk on May 16, 2008 16:46:16 GMT
Exactly Tony Blair had to apologise for the famine to Nationalists as part of the peace process. The Irish verion of that famine as you put it mate is that it ignored protestants, and those who wished to remain British, And attacked only the farms of nationalist Irish. It is your famine it's not mine, my ancestors never suffered from it. It has been part and parcel of the republican movement ever since it happened, like it was the fault of the Brits. So convinced are the Brits by this rhetoric they feel they have to apologise for it in the 21st century ffs. Tony didn't apologise to the rest of the UK for the treatment they received in the same period, only the Irish. It was a famine it happened, it had absolutely nothing to do with politics, but it is touted by republicans wherever they go as an example of how the Brits treated the Irish. And whether you like it or not they start being taught that verion in school. Bilk, you've openly admitted that you know nothing on history and are not interested in it. You don't have to continue demonstrating this fact. We believe you. Yeah an overindulgence in history is what has this island where it is today. Each side believes it's own myths. And you wonder why I'm not interested |
|
|
|
Post by earl on May 16, 2008 16:51:23 GMT
I wouldn't say I overindulge. I know what happened. I know how my country got to where it is today and I know how our relationship with our nearest neighbour has developed. And what I know is the accepted official history, taught all around the world in Irish history courses. If our history is a myth, then so is everyone elses.
|
|
|
|
Post by Blue Angel on May 16, 2008 16:52:11 GMT
An Gorta Mor (I refuse for a variety of historical reasons to call it a famine) certainly DID affect unionists and problems from potato blight were also felt in areas of Belgium where in the latter in some areas peasants also relied largely on the potato crop. But it is instructive to compare the reaction of the Belgian govt. of that era to the British govts. response. An Gorta Mor did leave a huge smouldering anger in it's wake. At the same time it's important to recognise that while the Irish were dying the english peasants and working class were not having an day at the seaside either and many of them were slowly dying in other equally unpleasant ways through living in horrific newly emerging slums in many cities and working in foul conditions. BOTH were examples of irresponsible and callous govt.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bilk on May 17, 2008 20:41:02 GMT
I wouldn't say I overindulge. I know what happened. I know how my country got to where it is today and I know how our relationship with our nearest neighbour has developed. And what I know is the accepted official history, taught all around the world in Irish history courses. If our history is a myth, then so is everyone elses. I think I explained above my position on history, I don't always argue the facts of history. My beef is what is left out of history, you say you know the facts of irish history, but if someone posts on here what they believe to be the facts (usually taken from some other source from the one you read or were taught) then it must be a lie. You see you talk about Irish history being taught around the world and that in itself bothers me. Most countries teach their own history, but when the Irish arrive in a country in enough numbers they make sure that country is taught their history, or what they believe to be their history. No other nationality I know does that. The protestant unionist/ ulster scots for an instance went to America at exactly the same time as the Irish emigrated there. The history of the protestant unionists/ulster scotts is virtually unknown in America. But the republican version of Irish history is known chapter and verse by every American who ever had a glass of guiness and is therefore Irish. You see I know no other history, other than Irish history, that is taught around the world. But the Irish make sure their version of their history is known around the world. The ulster scots melted into the American society and became Americans, there is no such thing as an ulster scot American, and yet they produced something like seven or eight presidents of America. In fact about 50%, I have read but don't take as gospel, of those who believe the Irish version of history in America and therefore see themselves as Irish are actually of Ulster Scott desent. Anyway my point is you can teach the truth, but is it the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth, I very much doubt that. What a historian or someone teaching history does is tell you the bits he wants you to hear, the rest he/she leaves out. That can be every bit as bad as lying, because the bits left out turn that history into a totally different history, if they are left in. |
|
|
|
Post by Wasp on May 18, 2008 0:04:59 GMT
Exactly Tony Blair had to apologise for the famine to Nationalists as part of the peace process. The Irish verion of that famine as you put it mate is that it ignored protestants, and those who wished to remain British, And attacked only the farms of nationalist Irish. It is your famine it's not mine, my ancestors never suffered from it. It has been part and parcel of the republican movement ever since it happened, like it was the fault of the Brits. So convinced are the Brits by this rhetoric they feel they have to apologise for it in the 21st century ffs. Tony didn't apologise to the rest of the UK for the treatment they received in the same period, only the Irish. It was a famine it happened, it had absolutely nothing to do with politics, but it is touted by republicans wherever they go as an example of how the Brits treated the Irish. And whether you like it or not they start being taught that verion in school. Bilk, you've openly admitted that you know nothing on history and are not interested in it. You don't have to continue demonstrating this fact. We believe you. Ear; I fully understand we can say things in the heat of debate etc, but why are you trying to belittle bilk this way, Bilk has posted and posted on here, yet you seem to have to get your smart arsed point across by trying to belittle bilk and make himn out to being under the likes of you as far as intelligence is concerned. Any wonder Unionists have left this site and other Uniopnists have refused to debate here. I thought at the very least you could have shown bilk some respect for being open and honest in his posts, but oh no he just gets the usual smart arsed, sarcastic belittling comments we Unionists are used to. |
|
|
|
Post by An Fear Dubh on May 18, 2008 16:04:00 GMT
Reply 69 - I know we are way off topic heading subject matter but I find Bilk's point far more interesting and intellectually challenging and want to develop it further. And a new heading might loose the thrust here.
I do not want to say if Bilk is right or wrong but I do want with his input to explore some of the very interesting points he made.
History - History is usually written by the victors. And in the main that is true. But in Ireland we have a tradition of oral telling, be it stories, poems or history. The weakness of oral history is that each teller can add bits and embellish it for various reason.
Bilk said, "Most countries teach their own history, but when the Irish arrive in a country in enough numbers they make sure that country is taught their history, or what they believe to be their history. No other nationality I know does that."
I can see why you might make this statement. But I believe other nationalities do impose their view of history on others. This can be seen through colonialism, taking India as an example. Where learning about Kings and Queens of England are part of the 'education'. Maybe you want to say that the way the history is imposed/taught is different in the Irish context than others. Then because we were not militarily invading and colonizing this is true, but the results are similar.
But let us deal exclusively with North America and leave their other countries aside. Colonial history was in America, and it was the British version of history in Ireland that was pushed by the administration well after US Independence. An Gorta Mór (The Great Hunger) or as some refer to it The Irish Famine (1845-1848), had a huge impact on Ireland. The population of Ireland went from over 8 million before 1845 to under 3 million after 1848. How many died and how many left Ireland has been strongly debated. But the indisputable fact is the population of Ireland decreased by 5 million in 3 years. That is like everyone in Ireland today leaving over the next 3 years! No one is suggesting they all died, many emigrated and most went to America.
When they arrived in America they en-counted hostility born out of fear, at such great hordes arriving daily. For security they banded together and formed alliances, etc. The establishment was American but British in design and attitude. And old hostilities from Ireland were transfered to America. Some by the experiences suffered, some by design, and some to exploit the advantages of the new situation. As the Irish came into contact with other communities (Russian/Poles/Jews/Germans) in similar situations questions were asked and attitudes were questioned by those new to the Irish experience. Thus the Irish tradition of oral history transfered to America to compete and vie with the establishment history which was mostly British in version. I believe it is through conflict (be that with each other or the environment/climate) that we become most creative and resourceful. But for the protestant ulster-scots there was little conflict with the history of the American establishment. And therefore no desire to ensure their version/story of history be told because in the main their version was the establishment version.
The point about what is the truth of history is a valid one. Some facts are indisputable, but it is how you interpret these facts into the social network that makes them open to various interpretations.
Fact - The population of Ireland decreased by 5 million in less than 3 years.
Fact - There was no Famine in Ireland (1845-1848), enough food was exported from Ireland during this period to feed a far greater population. A famine is where no food exists, in Ireland there was a blight that killed the potato crop a number of years running. The stable diet of the poor was the potato crop.
Insufficient facts (or disputed facts) exist to know without dispute;
What was the religious make up of all those that died. But it is assumed that the vast majority were Catholic. It must also be assumed that some protestant most likely Presbyterian also died as a result of this blight. It is unlikely that any Anglican died as a direct result of potato blight.
In this new America where desperate people where escaping from the turmoil back in Ireland. They arrived to quickly find themselves in a place that was not all milk and honey. Bonding together they developed a strong community. And as others later arrived they tried to ingrate themselves in with this strong community as it afforded some protection. And as American society developed and representatives were needed and elected it was recognized that one bloc that held a huge vote winning potential was the 'Irish' vote. Only later did other ethnic groupings mimic the actions of the Irish and build a identifiable group. Thus any aspiring go getting politician wanted to ensure that he/she had that vote. And no ulster-scot was going to highlight his decent if it meant that such an exposure might turn the vote in favour of his opponent. Once successfully elected such information seepage might not effect his standing, but not prior or it was played down and the Irish element played up. Are such politicians deceitful to deny their ulster-scots heritage, or are they just aspiring politicians?
|
|
|
|
Post by Bilk on May 18, 2008 17:20:08 GMT
They are both one goes with the other, they are joined at the hip, an aspiring politition and a liar are one and the same.
"Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive" In the case of the Ulster Scots, (that is if your analogy is correct) their lying lead to money being put in the coffers of SF/IRA by those who thought themselves Irish Americans, when actually they were Ulster Scots. In other words they were funding the murder of their relatives, people who stayed at home but had the same bloodline as them. I had a distant cousin who came here to visit from America, some of the pictures he showed me of his relatives were also my relatives. Many of those pictures I had at home. His great grandfather for instance was my great grandfather, and this idiot thought he was a republican. My grandfather (The son of his great grandfather who returned to Ulster from America) I had to inform him, was a member of the UVF and died at the Battle of the Somme. His son was murdered by the IRA, my dads brother. So am I wrong about the lies in history that can lead to him and his ilk feeding the coffers of the people who are murdering members of his family? Do you honestly believe had he known the truth would he have been putting money into the coffers of SF. He was taught a flase history.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jim on May 18, 2008 17:39:15 GMT
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
So, rangers. Lost yesterday aye?
Celtic are gonna win the league if we dont fuck it up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bilk on May 18, 2008 18:15:01 GMT
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ So, rangers. Lost yesterday aye? Celtic are gonna win the league if we dont fuck it up. Nope they drew with Motherwell  |
|
|
|
Post by Blue Angel on May 18, 2008 18:29:11 GMT
The population of Ireland was devastated by An Gorta Mor but nowhere else have I ever heard it claimed the population dropped by 5 million in 3 years - normallly the figures claimed range from between 1 million to 1.5 million - I'm just curious as to where the 5 million in 3 years figure is coming from there...
|
|
|
|
Post by Jim on May 18, 2008 20:33:14 GMT
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ So, rangers. Lost yesterday aye? Celtic are gonna win the league if we dont fuck it up. Nope they drew with Motherwell Will still be a devastating blow to them. Only way they can win it is if they dont fuck up and if celtic do fuck up! |
|
|
|
Post by earl on May 19, 2008 10:24:38 GMT
I think I explained above my position on history, I don't always argue the facts of history. My beef is what is left out of history, you say you know the facts of irish history, but if someone posts on here what they believe to be the facts (usually taken from some other source from the one you read or were taught) then it must be a lie. There's the accepted view of history, backed up and researched, where it is taught in schools and constantly examined, and then there's everything else. Everything else needs to stand up to intense scrutiny and the majority of the time on here, these sources and theories simply don't make the grade. If everything was to be considered with equal importance as possibly true, without any examination of the sources, then there's be no official history as there'd be contradicting theories all over the place. How come one of the oldest Irish language courses outside of Ireland is one in Krakow in Poland, where there isn't many Irish at all? Some countries take a genuine interest in our culture and it's got nothing to do with an invasion of 'ignorant Irish', unwilling to accept the local ways. And why does this bother you? There are places and facilities in the U.S. which examine the Ulster Scots heritage, but they don't bother me. And honestly Bilk, how many other nationalities (especially non-english speaking nationalities) do you know in detail? Ever hear of Columbus day in the U.S.? Look it up. How about Kwanzaa? Look it up. How about Cinco de Mayo? Look it up. And doesn't Chinese new year get celebrated anywhere there is Chinese? I know of a few Aussies that celebrate Anzac day and Australia day too. People always bring traditions and history from their home country to the new. If anything, the Ulster Scots community are the exception rather than the rule, as ye lot, as a whole, would rather forget where ye came from once you leave Ulster. And don't give me any BS about assimilation or integration, because there's enough evidence around the world of peoples of Irish decent improving their new home countries, from navies, to stock exchanges, to civil departments, to the creation of new states. This isn't totally true. The Ulster Scots mostly arrived not long after the penal laws were in full effect in Ireland (Ironically, many Presbyterians still celebrate the 12th as if they received religious liberty on that day, but in reality, they had to travel to the U.S. and fight the British there for their liberty). That was over 100 years before the mass immigration of famine refugees started to flow into the U.S. The term 'Scots-Irish' was invented by the Ulster Scots to separate them from the influx of poor Irish Catholics. The Ulster Scots helped define the original meaning of what an American was, by their values in which they brought with them. They certainly didn't take it from the native Americans! Irish history is taught as part of the history curriculum in certain states, so it's not just would be Irish-Americans that are aware of it. For example, the Irish famine is taught in history classes in California, thanks to former senator Tom Hayden. And it's not just Irish Americans that do third level Irish courses in the U.S. And who better to spread the history of Ireland than the Irish. Maybe you'd prefer the Dutch or Danish to do it, but you'll find most other countries tend to promote their own history. Incorrect, Ulster Scots were one of the main groups to create the original definition of what an American was. They didn't just 'melt' in. They simply renamed their own values to be 'American values'. They were indistinguishable from their old country values. 36 million Americans claim Irish ancestry. Considering the millions that spilled in during the 1800's, I'd find it hard to believe that that number is split evenly with Scots Irish. I'd guess (and it's as good as yours) that maybe around 30% of that figure would be Scots Irish. This is ironic because, as previously stated, the term Scots Irish was invented by their ancestors to separate them from the Irish Catholics. I'd say many of their ancestors would be shocked to hear these things! I'd agree with you here Bilk, but it's the same for every country. How much of British history, for example, is taught in British schools? Do they teach about the Mau Mau in Kenya, or the gassing of Kurds in Iraq for example? Sure they barely teach about the history between Britain and Ireland, even though technically, we were meant to be the same country at one point! |
|
|
|
Post by earl on May 19, 2008 10:29:09 GMT
Bilk, you've openly admitted that you know nothing on history and are not interested in it. You don't have to continue demonstrating this fact. We believe you. Ear; I fully understand we can say things in the heat of debate etc, but why are you trying to belittle bilk this way, Bilk has posted and posted on here, yet you seem to have to get your smart arsed point across by trying to belittle bilk and make himn out to being under the likes of you as far as intelligence is concerned. Any wonder Unionists have left this site and other Uniopnists have refused to debate here. I thought at the very least you could have shown bilk some respect for being open and honest in his posts, but oh no he just gets the usual smart arsed, sarcastic belittling comments we Unionists are used to. Point taken. I apologise Bilk. |
|
|
|
Post by An Fear Dubh on May 19, 2008 13:27:16 GMT
Correction - Thanks to Blue Angel, I see I got my 'facts' twisted up.
I said -"The population of Ireland decreased by 5 million in less than 3 years"
It should have read "The population of Ireland decreased by 3 million in 3 years."
The 1841 census put the population at 8.2 million, but due to the fire in the Four Courts in 1922 all census' were destroyed. So we are reliant on reports, and people who used the figures in other documentation to piece together the exact figures. But it seems that total was used elsewhere and is largely unchallenged. Although such census of the era are questioned because of methods used to collect data, the education of those giving and gathering the data and other things. Other census firures later are not so solid and are constested and reports vary from 6.5 million - 4.5 million. So most people accept a figure in between.
Sorry for that, most embarressing, I put it down to night-shift fatigue, and old age.
Just a side note to Blue Angel - My muddled recollection is 1-1.5 million died as a direct result and a similiar number emmigrated. Is that your understanding?
|
|
