Prods v Caths and Republicanism/Unionism

[Magic]

I've always been under the impression that the latter was all about the former, with a bit of help from the British. How surprised I was then to find out that two of the main protagonists in the Easter Rising (Wolfe Tone and Russel) were in fact, Protestants. This kind of shat on everything I ever really roughly knew about Ireland. Whilst there have been LOADS of references on the board and shit I don't think we've actually had a topic on the troubles, 1916, the Empire's rule and before the British invasion.

It's pretty interesting and very close to home (if not home) for most on here so yeah, I'm interested.

[GS]

Given Wolfe Tone died in 1798, it would be very difficult for him to have participated in the Easter Rising.

[Magic]

They were cited as the main inspirations. Posthumous protagonists.

[Henry]

Wolfe Tone was the leader of the 1798 rebellion, not the Easter Rising, which was in 1916.

It was originally Anglicans against everyone else. The identification of (other) Protestants with unionism and Catholics with nationalism is something that only developed in the 19th century, and reached roughly it's current form only after Irish independence and the exalted role of the Catholic church within the free state. There were still lots of Protestants involved in Irish nationalism before that.

[GS]

Daniel O'Connell is largely responsible for tying Catholicism to the nationalist cause. He held rallies which amalgamated the call for Catholic emancipation with calls for some sort of 'home rule'. The Protestants thus became uncomfortable, as there was still a fear of "Popish influence", and became reluctant to associate with it.

[Giggles]

This will get very very like all the politics threads.

[GS]

This will get very very like all the politics threads.

Not really. It's indisputable historical fact that the IRA lost and the union appears to be safe, so everything else is incidental.

[Magic]

This isn't a political thread, it's a historical thread.

[Giggles]

Not really. It's indisputable historical fact that the IRA lost and the union appears to be safe, so everything else is incidental.

You're the main reason it'll get like all the political threads.

Though it's given you a chance to type that again. I'd love a quid for every time.

[Magic]

Any good books on high level history from the early 1000s to now?

[Henry]

Any good books on high level history from the early 1000s to now?

Irish history or general history?

[Lewis]

'Could you go a chicken supper...'

[Magic]

Irish history or general history?

Well this is the Ireland thread, m8.

[Pepe]

[Giggles]

Well this is the Ireland thread, m8.

1949 to now. It's been pretty uneventful really.

[Henry]

Well this is the Ireland thread, m8.

Try this if you want detail.

Or this for something a bit lighter.

[John]

You're the main reason it'll get like all the political threads.

Though it's given you a chance to type that again. I'd love a quid for every time.

Now you've got that out of your system, I expect you won't post in the thread again unless it's to contribute properly. You've done fuck all but whinge lately and it's getting a bit tiresome. Contribute or fuck off.

[Giggles]

Now you've got that out of your system, I expect you won't post in the thread again unless it's to contribute properly. You've done fuck all but whinge lately and it's getting a bit tiresome. Contribute or fuck off.

There's no contributing to it, so would you ever go and lay in your own piss you rotten little weasel. You're like a fucking bad smell.

[GS]

Ignore Giggles, Magic.

You'd be surprised how little most people know about this. A lot of people still think it's a warzone, which can be quite interesting.

[Magic]

Try this if you want detail.

Or this for something a bit lighter.

Picked it up for 78p (plus deliv).

[Giggles]

Ignore Giggles, Magic.

You'd be surprised how little most people know about this. A lot of people still think it's a warzone, which can be quite interesting.

DId he say he wanted to know about Ireland or Northern Ireland? Feel free to fill him in on your cretinous little corner. If he wants to know about Ireland he'd be better getting something more neutral like an American history book on the subject so he's not just getting the one sided twisted version you lot are fed in schools.

[Magic]

Ignore Giggles, Magic.

You'd be surprised how little most people know about this. A lot of people still think it's a warzone, which can be quite interesting.

I'm quite happy to admit I know fuck all on the subject (surprisingly for me). It's something our Catholic school shied away from. The acronyms alone made it unappealing on a personal level.

[Magic]

The best thing about this thread is Giggles' meltdown, by the way.

[Giggles]

The best thing about this thread is Giggles' meltdown, by the way.

Absolute and total meltdown.

To be honest I'm still having trouble believing you actually have a serious interest in anything.

[GS]

I'm quite happy to admit I know fuck all on the subject (surprisingly for me). It's something our Catholic school shied away from. The acronyms alone made it unappealing on a personal level.

I had similar when reading Orwell's Homage to Catalonia. It was difficult to keep track of the different acronyms and which side they were actually on.

[Pepe]

Giggles, mate.

[Giggles]

Giggles, mate.

What? I got to insult both the hun twins in one thread, can't pass that one up.

Toggle Spoiler

[John]

Nothing to contribute, says the joint top poster in the thread.

[Boydy]

Magic went to a Catholic school?

[Boydy]

In terms of people fighting for the 'other side', Ronnie Bunting is an interesting modern era one. His dad, Major Ronald Bunting was big mates with Paisley when he was out in the streets in the sixties staging counter-demonstrations to the Civil Rights marches. Junior, meanwhile, joined the Official IRA and later helped found the INLA.

[igor_balis]

Lads, I actually have a youtube video that is relevant and informative for this one!

Toggle Spoiler

Toggle Spoiler

Go fuck yourselves.

[ItalAussie]

I always find the conflation of Protestantism/Catholicism and governmental basis to be distasteful. Especially since the original source material has absolutely nothing to say about the conflict.

[Henry]

I always find the conflation of Protestantism/Catholicism and governmental basis to be distasteful. Especially since the original source material has absolutely nothing to say about the conflict.

What are you referring to? The Bible?

I've read a little about this in the context of the reformation, English civil war etc. Up until the enlightenment, the concept of separation of church and state didn't really exist. When the ruler was a Catholic, the state religion needed to be Catholicism, and when he was Anglican, it needed to be that.

[Boydy]

Lads, I actually have a youtube video that is relevant and informative for this one!

Toggle Spoiler

Toggle Spoiler

Go fuck yourselves.

I love that episode.

[ItalAussie]

What are you referring to? The Bible?

I've read a little about this in the context of the reformation, English civil war etc. Up until the enlightenment, the concept of separation of church and state didn't really exist. When the ruler was a Catholic, the state religion needed to be Catholicism, and when he was Anglican, it needed to be that.

Yep. The Bible itself basically says nothing about governance after the first few books, which we can all agree would be a terrible way to run a country.

The closest anyone gets in the NT is Jesus with his "render unto Caesar" bit. As far as governance goes, it's a very non-interventionist book.

[Henry]

Yep. The Bible itself basically says nothing about governance after the first few books, which we can all agree would be a terrible way to run a country.

The closest anyone gets in the NT is Jesus with his "render unto Caesar" bit. As far as governance goes, it's a very non-interventionist book.

Well, the OT is about as interventionist as can be. And while it has nothing to say about sectarian disputes happening two millenia later, the NT isn't quite as you say either.

The whole "render unto Caesar" story has been interpreted to mean paying your taxes without any fuss. However in its original context where Jesus was asked a question about the land of Israel, the meaning of the additional "render unto God" part probably referred to kicking the Romans out and having Jews run the place. Then there's the gospel of Matthew, which contrary to some of the others states that OT law is to be maintained.

[ItalAussie]

Well, the OT is about as interventionist as can be. And while it has nothing to say about sectarian disputes happening two millenia later, the NT isn't quite as you say either.

The whole "render unto Caesar" story has been interpreted to mean paying your taxes without any fuss. However in its original context where Jesus was asked a question about the land of Israel, the meaning of the additional "render unto God" part probably referred to kicking the Romans out and having Jews run the place. Then there's the gospel of Matthew, which contrary to some of the others states that OT law is to be maintained.

Maintained as a moral institution, not a government institution. Jesus' comment about not coming to replace the law but to perfect it is largely interpreted as him not removing the moral authority that the books of the law possess. Which is necessary to the idea of sinful humanity, etc., because the back end of the gospels can't happen if there's no moral slate for humanity to consistently fail to attain. But there's no sensible way of taking that line as a call to governance.

Paul (or whoever actually wrote the epistles in which it is discussed) draws a very solid distinction between the two ideas.

[Shindig]

Lads, I actually have a youtube video that is relevant and informative for this one!

Toggle Spoiler

Toggle Spoiler

Go fuck yourselves.

See, Henry? American intervention works.

[Magic]

Lads, I actually have a youtube video that is relevant and informative for this one!

Toggle Spoiler

Toggle Spoiler

Go fuck yourselves.

What the fuck!

[Henry]

Maintained as a moral institution, not a government institution. Jesus' comment about not coming to replace the law but to perfect it is largely interpreted as him not removing the moral authority that the books of the law possess.

Which is necessary to the idea of sinful humanity, etc., because the back end of the gospels can't happen if there's no moral slate for humanity to consistently fail to attain. But there's no sensible way of taking that line as a call to governance.

Yes there is - the sensible way is to take it the way it's written, and not to try to come up with a contrived interpretation to make it consistent with the "back end of the gospels", Pauls epistles (Paul was obviously in conflict with the kind of Jewish Christianity that Matthew represents) or anything else.