An Treaty 1921

[Orangemac]

Only caught the last half hour of this but looked good,particularly the recordings of the central charcters own versions of events.

With Dev everythng seems to have been about him, was traipsing round America during the war of Independence, refused to get involved with treaty negotiations, used the money raised to form the Irish Press for his own family's benefits.

He certianly didn't care much about the 6 counties. As Aidan Quinn said in Michael Collins "Aw Mick, you gave away the North".

Probably the best thing he did was keep Ireland out of the 2nd world war.

[muppet]

Engaging them in war is, and always was, idiotic and only brought more misery on the ordinary Irish.

Are you relating that to every insurgency including the War of Independence?
Can you offer some realistic method by which a people could rebel against imperialism?
Perhaps you have gained some opinions gained from Mohandas Gandhi school of propaganda, which fail to describe accurately just how much of a hypocrite that man was, both in his personal and social life. And not a mention of just how much the military insurgency in India led by Subash Chandra Bose made life impossible for the British Army occupation in India.

How do you imagine that we could have used the famine as weapon against occupation, like permanent victims?
In all imperialist occupation, the main tool used was to strip the natives of dignity, impose inferiority complex and a big player in that were the religious institutions.
The famine was a weapon that was used against the Irish. Not just the famine itself but the aftermath. In a single stroke, religious fundamentalism tightened its grip onto the Irish by imposition of an inferiority complex, that it was our fault because we were so thick. And in a stroke the Irish language was crushed because it was associated with that ignorance. And that association of gaelic language with ignorance  was so rooted into the psyche of irish people that it still persists in so called modern Ireland.
The roots of chronic inferiority were well settled by the Famine.
You had a situation in the mid 19c where the national school system was established and children were not allowed to speak gaelic.
The parents cooperated with this post famine, because education was seen as a way out of ignorance. They allowed their children to be beaten because being Irish was being thick and being thick was a problem.

I have to assume you are disagreeing with me because I suggested that shooting Brits was not the way to go.

You have inadvertently hit the nail on the head.

Thomas Kineally called it The Great Shame. It was a great shame, but the shame wasn't ours. It was Britain's. You are correct when you say we were thick. We somehow became ashamed at ourselves for a massive tragedy that was imposed on us and thus we let them off the hook for the famine.

Back to the war. Every bullet that was fired allowed their well-honed war machine to kick into action. It they shot someone in my family I would be inclined to shoot back. But it would be the most basic an eye for an eye logic. I would be playing into their hands and I would be wrong.

BTW I never mentioned Ghandi did I? You suggest I gained an opinion somewhere and then argue against it even though I never even mentioned him. Strawhataboutery?

I have argued here before that the 800 casualties the British took in War of Independence was not the reason the Brits left the 26. It is absurd to suggest that a war-loving (to this day) nation would be defeated simply because of 800 casualties. They have taken more than that in The Troubles and there is little sign of them leaving.

[deiseach]

I have argued here before that the 800 casualties the British took in War of Independence was not the reason the Brits left the 26. It is absurd to suggest that a war-loving (to this day) nation would be defeated simply because of 800 casualties. They have taken more than that in The Troubles and there is little sign of them leaving.

What do you think caused them to leave? That's not a trick question, I'm intrigued by your line of thought

[muppet]

I have argued here before that the 800 casualties the British took in War of Independence was not the reason the Brits left the 26. It is absurd to suggest that a war-loving (to this day) nation would be defeated simply because of 800 casualties. They have taken more than that in The Troubles and there is little sign of them leaving.

What do you think caused them to leave? That's not a trick question, I'm intrigued by your line of thought

A combination of the campaign of no co-operation with the British, the creation of our own Government and the inevitability of Independence following Emancipation, ownership of our land, the fact that they had promised independence (I know they had broken the same promises before) in return for the WW1 effort etc, etc. We like to think we beat them out in the War of Independence, but if you leave out the romantic you are left with the simple fact that from a British point of view, we had become ungovernable.

[Main Street]

the campaign of no co-operation with the British, the creation of our own Government and the inevitability of Independence following Emancipation, ownership of our land, the fact that they had promised independence (I know they had broken the same promises before) in return for the WW1 effort etc, etc. We like to think we beat them out in the War of Independence, but if you leave out the romantic you are left with the simple fact that from a British point of view, we had become ungovernable.

I doubt there is a rational historical analysis that claims we beat the British in the WOI. Is there any analysis at all, that makes that claim?
Ironic that the non-republican parliamentarians and the non-violent status quo were the ones to propagate participation in WW1 on the base of a promise and ultimately contributed to a futile loss in life, exceeding (many fold) anything endured in the WOI

No Muppet, you never mentioned Gandhi but I see you espouse similar mythical Gandhi -esque tactics against Imperial occupation.  Nice theory though, but utterly hopeless and naive.

[muppet]

the campaign of no co-operation with the British, the creation of our own Government and the inevitability of Independence following Emancipation, ownership of our land, the fact that they had promised independence (I know they had broken the same promises before) in return for the WW1 effort etc, etc. We like to think we beat them out in the War of Independence, but if you leave out the romantic you are left with the simple fact that from a British point of view, we had become ungovernable.

I doubt there is a rational historical analysis that claims we beat the British in the WOI. Is there any analysis at all, that makes that claim?

Are you serious? Then you agree with me.

Ironic that the non-republican parliamentarians and the non-violent status quo were the ones to propagate participation in WW1 on the base of a promise and ultimately contributed to a futile loss in life, exceeding (many fold) anything endured in the WOI

No Muppet, you never mentioned Gandhi but I see you espouse similar mythical Gandhi -esque tactics against Imperial occupation.  Nice theory though, but utterly hopeless and naive.

Gandhi was influenced by Michael Davitt (after he moved away from the Fenians). There was also Daniel O'Connell  to point to as an example of making progress. Why would I quote Gandhi?

[Hardy]

Michael Moore, while I find him an annoyance in that I can predict his opinion on most issues, has something interesting to say on the tactics of peaceful resistance. He presents a persuasive case as to how it is almost certainly more effective than futile physical force against an infinitely more powerful oppressor.

He suggests how the Palestinians could bring the Israeli state to a standstill with peaceful tactics. There would be casualties, but surely no more than the militant Palestinians continually sustain in their futile military campaign. The following is a quote from "Stupid White Men".

Here's how it works:

1. Just sit your ass down. That's it. It's simple. You just lay your bodies down — often just a few thousand in the middle of the road will do — and don't move and don't fight back when they try to drag you away. Instead of Israel always shutting down the borders to Gaza and the West Bank, you shut them down. Just march peacefully up to the checkpoint and then sit down. No Israelis will be able to get to their settlements. No Israelis will be able to transport goods and natural resources from your land into Israel. There is no Israeli vehicle I know of that can drive over mounds of thousands of people (not even a pair of snow tires will do the job!). Of course, they may try, and a number of your people may be injured or killed. Still, don't move. Just sit. The world will be watching - especially if you embrace the wonderful world of public relations, and alert the media to your plans. (Trust me, CNN will take your call.) And you'll end up with far fewer dead Palestinians than you yield under your current plan.

2. Call a general strike. Refuse to work for the Israelis. Their economy is based on the near-slave labor you provide them. Don't do it anymore. Who will do all their shitwork for them if Palestinians won't? Other Israelis? I don't think so! They need you and your willingness to break your backs for them for substandard wages. Watch how quickly a deal is struck once every single Arab refuses to go to work. Of course, they'll try to break you. They will cut off your water, your roads, your food - but you must stand firm. Stockpile, then strike nonviolently, and never give in. They will. 

A few years back, over a million Israelis attended a Peace Now  rally in Tel Aviv. That was an amazing sight. It also means that you, the Palestinians, have a million Jewish allies – a third of the country - in the nation you know as your enemy. A million of your "enemies" will come to your aid if you protest in a nonviolent way. Try it! Between your people and theirs, you will outnumber those in Israel who want to drive you into the sea. 

Unfortunately, I know your inclination is to keep drawing blood. You think this will bring you liberation. It won't. It will turn you into those who are now killing you. And if you haven't figured out one thing about the Israelis by now, you'd better get a clue—they ain't goin' anywhere. For God's sake, man—they had six million of their people massacred by the most advanced civilization on earth. Do you think they're going to let a few stones and car bombs get in the way of their own survival? They live in a world where they're isolated and all alone. They won't quit until you or the rest of the earth annihilates every last one of them. Is that what you want? Every last Jew wiped from the planet? If it is, then you need serious help - and you're gonna have to get past me before you touch another one of their children.

But if, as I suspect, you would prefer peace and quiet to constant war and displacement, then you must lay down all arms, lay down your bodies in the middle of the road and then just wait. Yes, the Israelis will beat many of your people. They will drag your women by the hair, they will set dogs on you, they may even get out the firehoses (and other tricks they've learned from us Americans). YOU MUST NOT FIGHT  BACK! Trust me, when the pictures of your suffering at the hands of these brutes go out across the world, there will be such an outcry that the Israeli government will be unable to continue its oppression.

Well, there you go. If you want, I will come and join you in your nonviolent protest. It's the least I can do after helping finance the bullets and bombs that have killed your people.

Yours,
Michael Moore

[haveaharp]

"Trust me, when the pictures of your suffering at the hands of these brutes go out across the world, there will be such an outcry that the Israeli government will be unable to continue its oppression."

Somehow i wouldnt want to be testing that theory. The world pays lip service to the plight of Palestinians. 

[thejuice]

I forwarded that to a friend who has given up much of his free time to go to Palestine. He laughed at it. Especially the talk of "inclinations to draw blood" and much of his other tough talking. Civil disobedience and plenty of other peaceful protests have been tried over the years. I suspect Michael Moore hasn't spent much time in Palestine though I might be wrong.

[Hardy]

I forwarded that to a friend who has given up much of his free time to go to Palestine. He laughed at it.

He's impressed with the Palestinian strategies and tactics that have been working so well then?

I don't know whether Moore has ever been to Palestine but I'm pretty sure what he proposes has never been tried.