Going back to Carian's comment, a decent argument could be put up that armed republicanism achieved the square root of jack ****, on the basis that : - the free state 'achieved' by michael collins, was pretty much exactly what the brits had offered before WW1 (to come into force at the end of WW1) anyway, except under the collins deal we kept 'the north', which you would have got if nothing had happened. - the republic was formed by a vote, not by armed struggle - you still haven't got the north now, after all those bombs Being honest about it though, the reality probably is, that without the 'armed struggle' or whatever you want to call it, even less people would have voted for a republic than they actually did (which wasnt many anyway), and even with the results of the referendum as they were, it probably wouldn't have been accepted as amounting to a vote for independence if everyone wasn't already so ****ed off with fighting about it already. So looking at it objectively, it probably got you a republic (that not many irish, even by 49, wanted anyway). As Pud points out though, the reality is, that that makes fairly little difference to the country anyway. If you ask a republican whether the struggle was worth it, he'll say something like, "damn right it was worth it. The air smells better today, and the fields look greener. Irish green." In reality though, the fields dont look greener, and the air doesnt smell sweeter. It was exactly the same. Were thousands and thousands of horrific deaths, and decades of hatred and everything else 'worth it', for some prick to delude himself that the air smells sweeter ? Was it ****. Irish republicanism was a pointless 'war' that did far far more harm than it did good (arguably pretty much sod all). But those involved were going to do it anyway. It was something to do.
My figures are actually slighty wrong. 38% voted in favour of independence, which amounted to 56% of those who voted. Northern ireland was excluded from the vote, otherwise the figures would have been something like 25% and 35%, assuming population ratios were similar, and future northern ireland voting trends were reciprocated. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_constitutional_referendum,_1937 It was 1937 by the way.
Indeed. He has no chance arguing with the Irish, who never forget a ****ing grievance even if it means going back 8 centuries.
Listen tw@. All you've got to add to proceedings is a stupid ****ing username. Why don't you just go back to your council estate ?
Not really revising anything though. As I'm sure even rebelboy knows, the irish have been claiming the whole island should be one country for decades. If they had voted for independence as a whole island, those wishing to leave the UK would have been in a minority. And that's in an election when the seperatists had campaigned very very hard, including De Valera making an impasioned speech on the morning of the referendum, because he knew it was going to be close. And in an election when there was barerly any campaigning whatsoever on behalf on anti-seperatists. And that's with the UK on the bring of another world war. And that's after all the **** stirring Jerry Collins and his pals did trying to turn sentiment against the British. Ask an irishman today how many people voted for independence, and no doubt he'd say, "right so, i didnt now we had a vote about it to be honest with ya. But oid have thought almost everybody" But it's not the case. With everything going for them. With the north excluded from the vote. With he world on the brink of war again. With the anti seperstists not even campaigning. DeValera's lot JUST snuck over the line. Go back to 1916, and there was barerly a soul in Ireland who wanted to cease being a part of the UK. The seperatist movement of the 20th century was borne out of a bunch of freaks who had nothing better to do. Simple as that.
Worked out well though. Haven't had a war or a famine to deal with while we are all running scared of terrorism. Maybe Ireland should have ruled us
Because I don't come from a council estate. I've got plenty to add to proceedings. It's not a topic I'm a stranger to on here. Or anywhere else for that matter. I won't apologise for being condescending here because condescension is what I'm aiming for... But his happens to be amongst the few topics In which I'm fairly well versed. It is clear to me that you are not someone with a particularly developed understanding of this subject. it is also clear to me that you think you do. I find that amusing.
RobSpur apart from getting GC to bite, how come you have such an in depth interest with Ireland (not that I would know if your knowledge is correct), I can't think of many people I know that would care one bit about Irish history, just curious to know why you have such a take on it?
