[QUOTE=âTheUlteriorMotive, post: 941346, member: 2272â]Neither supported it. But 25 years of bombs and informers and kids being killed resulted in the same Provos administering Northern Ireland on behalf of the British. Unionists were of course no better.
The armed struggle went on too long. It could never succeed in what its stated aims were.[/QUOTE]
So it should have stopped in 1973?
[QUOTE=âflattythehurdler, post: 941237, member: 1170â]The facts that we know are that a middle aged lady was abducted in front of her children, driven across the border, tortured, adjudicated upon by a lynch mob, and had her brains blown out by her torturers before being left to rot in an unmarked grave. Her children were then further stigmatised deliberately by rumour being spread that she had run off with a British soldier.
What she may or may not have done is in dispute. It is in my opinion irrelevant. Her treatment was abhorrent. Anyone who thinks this is some sort of grey area, citing justification that she may or may not have been " an informer" ( whatever that is, or was at the time) has something wrong with them in my opinion. There is little point in my saying anything else on the matter. If you find this naive and dumb so be it. I am more than slightly taken aback to be honest.[/QUOTE]
Thatâs a terribly dumb and naive post, mate. Come on - wake up FFS sake.
Feel free to acknowledge the context of 1972, shoot to kill policy, internment, IRA fighting what they considered to be a just war.
I said itâs a grey area because I donât have a fucking clue if she was an informant or not. But informants tended to meet such a fate back then. To say that whether she was an informant or not is irrelevant is clearly absurd. She was killed on the basis of being one given the context mentioned above.
And surely anyone with a semblance of cop on can see how Republicans committed to the Good Friday Agreement are hardly going to say now, in 2014, âfuck that bitch - she deserved it.â
Or else continue to ignore all those relevant factors and focus on her being a middle aged lady and stuff.
This was a line peddled out by Gay Mitchell back at the time of the last Presidential election.
The IRA never had an option to accept Sunningdale. The Loyalists went on âstrikeâ and Faulkner withdrew it. Shocking when you think of it.
I havenât read Sunningdale in much detail but I donât think it was anywhere near the level of equality referred to in Good Friday.
Germanyâs population declined by 1.5million inhabitants in its last census. Is it a failed State too?
Rocky again shifts the goalposts of an argument to try and point score? How does one debate with someone who regularly and repeatedly uses this tactic whenever challenged. We both know what the word âinformerâ means, and all connotations thereof. Iâm packing in this thread as neither informative nor entertaining. I actually find it fairly depressing that intelligent people in a liberal democracy have no trouble with this kind of " justice".
[QUOTE=âRocko, post: 941349, member: 1â]Modern?
The numbers are slightly inflated. Youâve also opted to add two decades together to compare to one decade in the 19th century. And I donât even think you realise how that distorts everything.[/QUOTE]
The Census of 1861 gives the population as 5,764,543, being 787,842 less than that of 1851, or a decrease of 12.02 per cent, in the last ten years. During this period as many as 1,163,418 persons emigrated from Ireland.
Population in 26 counties in 1950s was 3 million. Half a million emigrated. Over 16 per cent of the population. Numbers in percentage terms are on a par with the 1850s.
Falling birth rates maybe rather than people fleeing. We had and still have high birth rates.
Next.
[QUOTE=âTheUlteriorMotive, post: 941368, member: 2272â]Falling birth rates maybe rather than people fleeing. We had and still have high birth rates.
Next.[/QUOTE]
No. Not next. You tied population decline to state failure. Youâre not skating off that easy. Plenty of States suffer population declines over a short term for differing reasons without ever being accused of being a failed state. It was a typically stupid post by you - hanging a grand theory on one largely irrelevant statistic.
Fuck off with yourself.
I find it depressing that Irish people cannot grasp the desperateness of the situation at the time in our country and judge the perpetrators from their safe boundary within the 26 counties.
And then take the moral and intellectual high ground.
Plenty of States donât suffer population decline caused by emigration of 16 per cent of their population over 10 years. They just donât unless there is a war. No other country in 1950s population fell except Ireland and East Germany.
If your population falls because of massive emigration it is state failure. We failed as a state. It was Not a short period.
Comparing modern Germany to Ireland in terms of population is a silly argument. German population after losing two world wars and a chunk of territory is 20m up in a century.
Liberal democracy? Youâre even more deluded than I thought. And no one is advocating it in an ordinary everyday peaceful, just and fair society, you know well, or else youre just choosing to ignore, the conditions that gave rise to such killings.
[QUOTE=âTheUlteriorMotive, post: 941365, member: 2272â]The Census of 1861 gives the population as 5,764,543, being 787,842 less than that of 1851, or a decrease of 12.02 per cent, in the last ten years. During this period as many as 1,163,418 persons emigrated from Ireland.
Population in 26 counties in 1950s was 3 million. Half a million emigrated. Over 16 per cent of the population. Numbers in percentage terms are on a par with the 1850s.[/QUOTE]
Youâre taking the piss now.
Firstly, 1.16m people as a percentage of 5.764m is over 20%.
Secondly, whatâs your source for half a million people in the 1950s? Iâve seen 406,000 as the generally accepted number. Either way theyâre lower numbers.
Thirdly, youâre comparing the 1950s to the 1850s and ignoring the fact that the famine was in the 1840s. The figure from 1845- 1855 was approximately 1.5m. Significantly higher than your unprecedented figures.
[QUOTE=âRocko, post: 941396, member: 1â]Youâre taking the piss now.
Firstly, 1.16m people as a percentage of 5.764m is over 20%.
Secondly, whatâs your source for half a million people in the 1950s? Iâve seen 406,000 as the generally accepted number. Either way theyâre lower numbers.
Thirdly, youâre comparing the 1950s to the 1850s and ignoring the fact that the famine was in the 1840s. The figure from 1845- 1855 was approximately 1.5m. Significantly higher than your unprecedented figures.[/QUOTE]
His source is a one page piece on a UCC website that he googled furiously about an hour ago. He is quoting verbatim from it.
[QUOTE=âRocko, post: 941396, member: 1â]Youâre taking the piss now.
Firstly, 1.16m people as a percentage of 5.764m is over 20%.
Secondly, whatâs your source for half a million people in the 1950s? Iâve seen 406,000 as the generally accepted number. Either way theyâre lower numbers.
Thirdly, youâre comparing the 1950s to the 1850s and ignoring the fact that the famine was in the 1840s. The figure from 1845- 1855 was approximately 1.5m. Significantly higher than your unprecedented figures.[/QUOTE]
Information is in this book
The Slow FailurePopulation Decline and Independent Ireland, 1920â1973
Mary E. Daly
History of Ireland and the Irish Diaspora
James S. Donnelly, Jr., and Thomas Archdeacon, Series Editors âA valuable contribution on a central topic in modern Irish history from a leading historian of Ireland. The quality of the research is second to none.ââEnda Delaney, author of Irish Emigration since 1921
Today Irelandâs population is rising, immigration outpaces emigration, most families have two or at most three children, and full-time farmers are in steady decline. But the opposite was true for more than a century, from the great famine of the 1840s until the 1960s. Between 1922 and 1966âmost of the first fifty years after independenceâthe population of Ireland was falling, in the 1950s as rapidly as in the 1880s. Mary Dalyâs The Slow Failure examines not just the reasons for the decline, but the responses to it by politicians, academics, journalists, churchmen, and others who publicly agonized over their nationâs âslow failure.â Eager to reverse population decline but fearful that economic development would undermine Irish national identity, they fashioned statistical evidence to support ultimately fruitless policies to encourage large, rural farm families. Focusing on both Irish government and society, Daly places Irelandâs population history in the mainstream history of independent Ireland.
Dalyâs research reveals how pastoral visions of an ideal Ireland made it virtually impossible to reverse the fall in population. Promoting large families, for example, contributed to late marriages, actually slowing population growth further. The crucial issue of emigration failed to attract serious government attention except during World War II; successive Irish governments refused to provide welfare services for emigrants, leaving that role to the Catholic Church. Daly takes these and other elements of an often-sad story, weaving them into essential reading for understanding modern Irish history.
Mary E. Daly is professor of history and dean of the Faculty of Arts, University College Dublin. Her many books include A Social and Economic History of Ireland since 1800; The Famine in Ireland; Industrial Development and Irish National Identity: 1922â39; and Women and Work in Ireland.
[QUOTE=âTheUlteriorMotive, post: 941403, member: 2272â]Information is in this book
The Slow FailurePopulation Decline and Independent Ireland, 1920â1973
Mary E. Daly
History of Ireland and the Irish Diaspora
James S. Donnelly, Jr., and Thomas Archdeacon, Series Editors âA valuable contribution on a central topic in modern Irish history from a leading historian of Ireland. The quality of the research is second to none.ââEnda Delaney, author of Irish Emigration since 1921
Today Irelandâs population is rising, immigration outpaces emigration, most families have two or at most three children, and full-time farmers are in steady decline. But the opposite was true for more than a century, from the great famine of the 1840s until the 1960s. Between 1922 and 1966âmost of the first fifty years after independenceâthe population of Ireland was falling, in the 1950s as rapidly as in the 1880s. Mary Dalyâs The Slow Failure examines not just the reasons for the decline, but the responses to it by politicians, academics, journalists, churchmen, and others who publicly agonized over their nationâs âslow failure.â Eager to reverse population decline but fearful that economic development would undermine Irish national identity, they fashioned statistical evidence to support ultimately fruitless policies to encourage large, rural farm families. Focusing on both Irish government and society, Daly places Irelandâs population history in the mainstream history of independent Ireland.
Dalyâs research reveals how pastoral visions of an ideal Ireland made it virtually impossible to reverse the fall in population. Promoting large families, for example, contributed to late marriages, actually slowing population growth further. The crucial issue of emigration failed to attract serious government attention except during World War II; successive Irish governments refused to provide welfare services for emigrants, leaving that role to the Catholic Church. Daly takes these and other elements of an often-sad story, weaving them into essential reading for understanding modern Irish history.
Mary E. Daly is professor of history and dean of the Faculty of Arts, University College Dublin. Her many books include A Social and Economic History of Ireland since 1800; The Famine in Ireland; Industrial Development and Irish National Identity: 1922â39; and Women and Work in Ireland.[/QUOTE]
Or you could do what the Ulterior Motive did and rely on this cut and paste job which footnotes said book at footnote 4 and looks strangely familiar if youâve read the last couple of pages. Has the benefit of making you look like some kind of intellectual without ever having to do any of the hard work. Like actually reading a book.
"Commentators have variously referred to 1950s in Ireland as the decade of âdoom and gloomâ, the âworst decade since the famineâ and the âlost decadeâ. [1][/URL] Agriculture, the traditional mainstay of the Irish economy, continued to decline throughout the 1950s. The state dedicated insufficient effort to developing new industries to fill the gap created by the demise of, in particular, of the small farm rural economy. As a consequence, little work was available for thousands of young people coming of age. Unemployment remained high throughout and it was estimated that from 1949 to 1956, real national income rose by only 8 per cent, at a time when the average increase in European equated to approximately 40 per cent.[URL=âhttp://www.ucc.ie/en/emigre/history/#_ftn2â][2][/URL] Most young people knew that the only way to secure steady employment therefore was to cross the Irish Sea.[URL=âhttp://www.ucc.ie/en/emigre/history/#_ftn3â][3]
In the 1950s, approximately half a million left the Irish Republic. Considering the countryâs population than stood at less than 3 million, to lose approximately 16% of your population â most of whom were very young and left to gain employment abroad â in one decade was astonishing. Indeed, Ireland shared the ignominy of being the only country in Europe to see its population decline in the 1950s with East Germany.[4][/URL] Roughly three out of every five children who grew up in 1950s Ireland left the country at some stage.[URL=âhttp://www.ucc.ie/en/emigre/history/#_ftn5â][5]
Why did so many people leave independent Ireland during the late 1940s and 1950s? In 1950s Ireland, agriculture still accounted for approximately two-fifths of the working population. The small farm rural economy, especially in the west of Ireland, was in an irreversible decline. Most young people knew that the only way to secure steady employment â and the lifestyle that went along with a regular weekly income â involved crossing the Irish Sea.[6][/URL] As the commission on emigration noted in 1955, emigration became âa part of the generally accepted pattern of lifeâ.[URL=âhttp://www.ucc.ie/en/emigre/history/#_ftn7â][7]
The âBreaking the Silenceâ interviews carried out by UCCâs ICMS (see emigrantsâ voices) provide a haunting description of the barren social landscape after the departure of peopleâs friends and family members. John Healyâs lyrical account of the decline of his hometown, Charlestown, Co. Mayo, is another later example of the widespread perception that rural Ireland was gradually âdyingâ as young people left in such large numbers.[8]"
I was wondering why someone would type âhalf a millionâ and then use numerals for other figures.
Has anyone else not read a single bit of this but would love to know what the last 10-15 pages are about without reading through them all?
[QUOTE=âFagan ODowd, post: 941410, member: 706â]Or you could do what the Ulterior Motive did and rely on this cut and paste job which footnotes said book at footnote 4 and looks strangely familiar if youâve read the last couple of pages. Has the benefit of making you look like some kind of intellectual without ever having to do any of the hard work. Like actually reading a book.
"Commentators have variously referred to 1950s in Ireland as the decade of âdoom and gloomâ, the âworst decade since the famineâ and the âlost decadeâ. [1][/URL] Agriculture, the traditional mainstay of the Irish economy, continued to decline throughout the 1950s. The state dedicated insufficient effort to developing new industries to fill the gap created by the demise of, in particular, of the small farm rural economy. As a consequence, little work was available for thousands of young people coming of age. Unemployment remained high throughout and it was estimated that from 1949 to 1956, real national income rose by only 8 per cent, at a time when the average increase in European equated to approximately 40 per cent.[URL=âhttp://www.ucc.ie/en/emigre/history/#_ftn2â][2][/URL] Most young people knew that the only way to secure steady employment therefore was to cross the Irish Sea.[URL=âhttp://www.ucc.ie/en/emigre/history/#_ftn3â][3]
In the 1950s, approximately half a million left the Irish Republic. Considering the countryâs population than stood at less than 3 million, to lose approximately 16% of your population â most of whom were very young and left to gain employment abroad â in one decade was astonishing. Indeed, Ireland shared the ignominy of being the only country in Europe to see its population decline in the 1950s with East Germany.[4][/URL] Roughly three out of every five children who grew up in 1950s Ireland left the country at some stage.[URL=âhttp://www.ucc.ie/en/emigre/history/#_ftn5â][5]
Why did so many people leave independent Ireland during the late 1940s and 1950s? In 1950s Ireland, agriculture still accounted for approximately two-fifths of the working population. The small farm rural economy, especially in the west of Ireland, was in an irreversible decline. Most young people knew that the only way to secure steady employment â and the lifestyle that went along with a regular weekly income â involved crossing the Irish Sea.[6][/URL] As the commission on emigration noted in 1955, emigration became âa part of the generally accepted pattern of lifeâ.[URL=âhttp://www.ucc.ie/en/emigre/history/#_ftn7â][7]
The âBreaking the Silenceâ interviews carried out by UCCâs ICMS (see emigrantsâ voices) provide a haunting description of the barren social landscape after the departure of peopleâs friends and family members. John Healyâs lyrical account of the decline of his hometown, Charlestown, Co. Mayo, is another later example of the widespread perception that rural Ireland was gradually âdyingâ as young people left in such large numbers.[8]"[/QUOTE]
You are rattled.
Do we have to footnote all sources now in debates.
I wasnât making the stuff up.
Can someone put a well clamped rating there on fagans post on my behalf as Iâm posting off the tfk app and canât do so myself.
Also, has the definition of unprecedented changed? I thought it meant never seen before? How can something never seen before actually happen before but was significantly on a bigger scale?
A pragmatic view of the circumstances of the time v the Irish need to self-loathe.
The self loathing will have reached a crescendo by Easter 2016.