@Tim_Riggins coming across as a try hard spastic here. 
Not to the degree we saw in Ireland and like the UK, they went through a brutal war, unlike ourselves.
The Swedes will be surprised to find that out.
Accepted. We are talking about the region of Scandinavia though. That region went through a brutal war and occupation (s).
The Norwegians have Oil coming out their ears.
Something tells me that in a minute we will only be talking about Denmark and Finland.
2 Likes
And?
Who are you saying did better economically post Irish Independence, the new Irish State or the UK?
You are also missing the point that the Romantic ideals of 1916 was that the nation could claim it’s wealth and it’s future. You cannot dispute that Ireland was a complete shit show for decades following independence. That despite Ireland not going to war that Ireland went further behind in the 1950s.
And who are you saying did better economically pre Irish Independence, the new Irish State or the UK?
We were the UK. Our economy declined further vs the British one for 70 years post independence.
Irish workers were catching up to British workers until independence.
Even the bollox article cherry picking stats above doesn’t agree with that.
*During the Famine they earned about 90pc of what their English counterparts did. This ratio remained more or less unchanged
Um you’re talking about cherry picking when;
In 1845, Irish unskilled workers earned half of what their counterparts were earning in Britain - by 1913 they were earning three quarters.
Some amount of shite posted here today, what’s the main points being argued? (bullet points please)
@Tim_Riggins … I may know fuck all about economics, but the part of Ireland that kept the Union are hardly booming, are they? They live on a large handout, do they not?
Our problems were nothing to do with leaving the Union but with the with the cretins that filled the vacum, that’s not one and the same.
When it was the “heroes” of 1916 that governed largely from independence onwards, they very much are.
Which is his point.
I never said I think NI were right to stay in the Union when we didn’t. A small region like that sharing a land border with another small region is always going to struggle - but given they had 30 years of bombing it’s not a very fair comparison is it.
Ireland had a great shot post independence but collectively blew it. 1916 was just another romantic folly by a few lads. It gained some traction in the post war years as people wanted some reward for their efforts.
The Irish Parliamentary Party achieved a great deal in the late 19th Century and early 20th Century. John Bruton wanted a bit of recognition of that but the winners of history were the 1916 lot who managed to distort our history books.
The economic claims being made in that piece are complete bollocks. The cherry-picking of comparisons is bad enough, but the attribution of whatever positive stats he could find to the Empire ‘Project’ is even worse. Also, referring to the violent takeover of foreign peoples and resources as a ‘project’ is cuntishness on a remarkable scale.
Which comparisons are? All I’ve heard is you and others calling it “bollocks” with no back up to that claim. What would you attribute the stats to then?
To what do you attribute Ireland’s dreadful economic performance, led by the “heroes” of 1916, from Independence onwards?
The whinging over the “Empire project” is just emotive nonsense.
Yes. I’d agree with much of that. However, youre wrong to state that the heroes of '16 were the ones to recieve the keys to the city. What the IRB achieved and fought for was distinctly different from what the IRA and those that drove the period of 1918-23 stood for. Most of the men of '16 were idealists, members of the intelligentsia and socialists… The leadership that emerged after them were largely power hungry insular politicans. It has already been touched on here that the period after '16 paved the way for the large farmer and mercahnt class to grab power at a local level and both urban and even international policy were blatantly ignored for a long period after.
Yes, the IPP did great work, and it has also been agreed on this very thread that due to their efforts Ireland had already mentally left the Union, all that was needed was the pysical separation. But when the Brits kept moving the goal posts and denied home rule they paved the way for what later happened… The fact that they continued to get it wrong and filled the IRA ranks in the north in the 70s and 80s just shows how lessons are never learned, just repeated.
Hmmmm who’s side to take here:
The Doctor of History or the Soggy Biscuit Champion of Clongowes
1 Like
Tim Riggins has a PhD in forelock tugging, mate.
Monkstown, I believe. It’s a fee paying school there in Kingstown.
1 Like
Tim has a good grasp of the period, more than me it must be said, but his use of sources to suit his argument are questionable. He is also emotionally invested here which is hindering his ability to remain objective. He currently sits with a middle to low B grade. Tim needs to embrace the wider historiography and literature on the topic at hand and take his thumb out of his ass if he is to improve his grade.