|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Oct 13, 2015 20:56:19 GMT
" The 1916 Rising was a seminal event led by men and women who held aspirations of a different type of Ireland, one which would guarantee religious and civil liberty and would pursue the happiness and prosperity of the whole nation, and all of its parts. It occurred at a time of conflict on the international stage, resulting in Irishmen losing their lives on the Western Front, Gallipoli, Mesopotamia, and at sea .The Rising resulted in the loss of many lives, be they combatants or innocent civilians. We commemorate these events on this their ninetieth anniversary and mourn the loss of all those who died." "The commemoration will be measured and reflective, and will be informed by a full acknowledgement of the complexity of historical events and their legacy, of the multiple readings of history, and of the multiple identities and traditions which are part of the Irish historical experience." Come on, Young Ireland. You could hardly get more non-committal and measured than that. As far as I can tell from a cursory look, it seems historical more than celebratory. I came on those two passages within minutes, and I didn't see anything jingoistic at all. I think the sentence in bold sums up the Government's attitude. They might claim to be measured and reflective, but what I have seen in the other links in my post would seem to suggest otherwise. I certainly wouldn't take their claims at face value. Also, my argument was not that the Government's line of thinking is jingoistic (it's not) but rather they appear to hold a very patronising attitude to anyone holding a negative view of the Rising. If they were really serious about making the voice of both sides being heard, they would publish pieces critical of the Rebels on the official website. |
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Oct 13, 2015 21:16:52 GMT
Do you really think the likes of Varadkar and Kenny give two hoots about the 1916 Rising either way? I can't imagine the government has any agenda on this, other than trying to recast an essentially conservative and Catholic uprising as a liberal-left one. They can hardly ignore it.
It might be a waste of money, I won't argue that, but in terms of tone and content I think it will be about as inflammatory as a museum display of medieval agricultural implements.
|
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Oct 13, 2015 21:24:16 GMT
To be honest I don't think anyone cares about 1916 that much these days, other than Sinn Fein, and Irish history anoraks. I'm a nationalist and I don't care about it at all that much. It's not a live issue to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Oct 13, 2015 21:27:10 GMT
Do you really think the likes of Varadkar and Kenny give two hoots about the 1916 Rising either way? I can't imagine the government has any agenda on this, other than trying to recast an essentially conservative and Catholic uprising as a liberal-left one. They can hardly ignore it. OK, I can't. I agree that they can't ignore it, but they might try to be more balanced at the same time.It might be a waste of money, I won't argue that, but in terms of tone and content I think it will be about as inflammatory as a museum display of medieval agricultural implements. The commemeration itself will be, I'll admit, but what those who will use the Rising as an excuse to push their own agenda? Couldn't an overly saccharine view of the Rising give greater leverage to violent groupings seeking to influence young impressionable people, who will get the impression from this that the Rebels are role models to be emulated rather than complex and flawed historical figures? Far fetched it might be, but one person snared by this is one too many IMHO. |
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Oct 13, 2015 21:29:53 GMT
To be honest I don't think anyone cares about 1916 that much these days, other than Sinn Fein, and Irish history anoraks. I'm a nationalist and I don't care about it at all that much. It's not a live issue to me. It's not a live issue to me either, though it really does irk me when legends (with some degree of truth, I will admit) are being presented as the whole truth, and this will become live as 2016 goes on, I can guarantee that. |
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Oct 13, 2015 21:32:02 GMT
Well, maybe that's possible, but I'd imagine the young people who are inclined towards violent republicanism already see the 'Free State government' as being sell-outs anyway, and wouldn't pay much attention to what they say about the Rising. It's hard to tell. I do get your point that 2016 may be a publicity opportunity for Sinn Fein and other republican groupings, but it's hard to see how that can be avoided.
|
|
|
|
Post by pugio on Oct 14, 2015 11:47:51 GMT
Well, maybe that's possible, but I'd imagine the young people who are inclined towards violent republicanism already see the 'Free State government' as being sell-outs anyway, and wouldn't pay much attention to what they say about the Rising. It's hard to tell. I do get your point that 2016 may be a publicity opportunity for Sinn Fein and other republican groupings, but it's hard to see how that can be avoided. It might be avoided if the Irish State was willing to be less apologetic about its own existence. Sinn Féin are doubtless trying to exploit the vacuum created by officialdom's awkward shuffling. But we should acknowledge that they are also acting out of a sincere desire to actually celebrate the centenary rather than merely commemorate it. If SF were to benefit politically from this at the expense of other parties, I would hardly think it unfair.
I was disappointed, but also amused, to read that the son et lumière they had planned for the GPO and other buildings was refused permission by Dublin City Council on the grounds that it would be (clutch the pearls) 'overtly political'. Oh dearie me! We wouldn't want it to be political, now would we? Goodness gracious. Heaven forbid!
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael O'Donovan on Oct 14, 2015 23:46:01 GMT
I'm not much inclined to celebrate the centenary. I don't doubt that the 1916 leaders and most of their followers were sincere and brave. But their cause was pointless. Irish/Gaelic society and culture were more or less extinct by the mid-eighteenth century; all that remained by 1900 was some peasant music and songs (which are inherently of very little interest) and a few random scraps of the remains of the old high Gaelic culture. In the 1960s Seán Ó Riada, Seán Ó Ríordáin and a few others tried to bring the high Gaelic culture back to life, but it was too far gone.
However when I see that "the son et lumière they had planned for the GPO and other buildings was refused permission by Dublin City Council on the grounds that it would be 'overtly political'", I want to resist the authorities because I have a deep and visceral hatred of unelected desk-jockeys telling me what to do. Is there some other event I could join that would be equally upsetting for the pen-pushing drones of Dublin City Council?
|
|
|
|
Post by pugio on Oct 15, 2015 12:51:11 GMT
Well SF are also holding an exhibition in the Ambassador theatre which sounds pretty good. I will probably give it a look. However, I'm not sure whether the ticket price will merely cover costs (which I imagine are considerable) or if they are trying to use it as a fundraising exercise also.
I don't think the Rising was conceived of principally as an attempt to save Gaelic culture. That rather underestimates the popularity of the Gaelic revival in the early twentieth century. If anything the former sprang from the latter. Many insurgents were motivated by idealistic cultural revivalism, yes, but also by a vanguardist sense of national honour of a kind that is scarcely understood nowadays or, if understood, is viewed with suspicion for its indifference to liberal democratic ethics. There was also a socialist and Jacobin element too.
|
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Oct 15, 2015 13:23:58 GMT
The more I read and think about it, the more I believe that the people who turned out in Easter 1916 all had very different motivations. I'm not sure you can even say they were all fighting for the same thing, besides the immediate goal of independence.
|
|
|
|
Post by pugio on Oct 15, 2015 13:33:09 GMT
That's quite true. Of course, it could probably also be said about most of the national(ist) uprisings that took place over the course of Irish history, and indeed elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
Post by pugio on Oct 15, 2015 13:56:35 GMT
And this, I should add, is what many people are uncomfortable with nowadays: the idea that an uprising might be driven by visceral national sentiment that did not necessarily need to justify itself by reference to the fashionable political ideology of the day.
|
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Oct 15, 2015 14:01:18 GMT
And this, I should add, is what many people are uncomfortable with nowadays: the idea that an uprising might be driven by visceral national sentiment that did not necessarily need to justify itself by reference to the fashionable political ideology of the day. Surely that applies only in very extreme circumstances though? That argument could be used to claim that the Irish government is illegitimate and the Continuity IRA Army council is in fact the legitimate government of Ireland, since the generations of the dead (which can easily be manipulated) and the "mandate" from a member of the second Dail automatically override the will of the people. |
|
|
|
Post by pugio on Oct 15, 2015 14:16:31 GMT
And this, I should add, is what many people are uncomfortable with nowadays: the idea that an uprising might be driven by visceral national sentiment that did not necessarily need to justify itself by reference to the fashionable political ideology of the day. Surely that applies only in very extreme circumstances though? That argument could be used to claim that the Irish government is illegitimate and the Continuity IRA Army council is in fact the legitimate government of Ireland, since the generations of the dead (which can easily be manipulated) and the "mandate" from a member of the second Dail automatically override the will of the people. I was not making any argument other than that many people, such as yourself, are uncomfortable with visceral nationalism. I think you have given a pretty good example of why.
I would venture, however, that the dark absurdity of the R/CIRA apostolic succession thesis lies precisely in its attempt to cobble together some sort of quasi-democratic justification for a cause whose seat is in the heart and stomach rather than in the head. They would be far more intellectually respectable if they just declared themselves fascists or at least authoritarian ultra-nationalists of some kind.
|
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Oct 15, 2015 16:23:31 GMT
Surely that applies only in very extreme circumstances though? That argument could be used to claim that the Irish government is illegitimate and the Continuity IRA Army council is in fact the legitimate government of Ireland, since the generations of the dead (which can easily be manipulated) and the "mandate" from a member of the second Dail automatically override the will of the people. I was not making any argument other than that many people, such as yourself, are uncomfortable with visceral nationalism. I think you have given a pretty good example of why.
I would venture, however, that the dark absurdity of the R/CIRA apostolic succession thesis lies precisely in its attempt to cobble together some sort of quasi-democratic justification for a cause whose seat is in the heart and stomach rather than in the head. They would be far more intellectually respectable if they just declared themselves fascists or at least authoritarian ultra-nationalists of some kind.
Ok, Pugio, sorry. I thought you were making an argument there. You are quite right about the R/CIRA. I suspect though that said groups may have the same "we are the people" delusion that has plagued the Christian parties, so it mightn't always be a sign of authoritarianism, though it would be usually. |
|
