Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Loud Whispers]

While I’m loathe to use irony to address a point, it couldn’t possibly be that it’s a symbol celebrating the British military, and they don’t particularly like the British military as a result of things like the Military Reaction Force or the Falls Curfew.

Nah, nothing as simple as thinking that people that were supposed to protect you treat you like shit and loot your house or anything like that.

It's not a symbol celebrating the British military, it is a symbol of remembrance, a reminder of all the fallen servicemen and women from the Great War onwards. It is probably a distinction irrelevant in the eyes of those who build pyres out of their neighbour's symbols. Curious that they added a Trump flag and an Israel flag to the pyre as well. Adding the specific names of murdered Irishmen? It's a deliberate terror tactic desiring a continuation of war, when the threat of peace seems ever closer.

[TD1]

My granny laid poppies on her brother's grave not two years ago.

It is more than a "military" symbol, I assure you. Apologetics only stretches so far.

[Kagus]

I always just associate poppies with opium. I'm a bit fucked up in the head, yes.

I don't think a couple wreaths are enough to get high off of, though.

[hector13]

While I’m loathe to use irony to address a point, it couldn’t possibly be that it’s a symbol celebrating the British military, and they don’t particularly like the British military as a result of things like the Military Reaction Force or the Falls Curfew.

Nah, nothing as simple as thinking that people that were supposed to protect you treat you like shit and loot your house or anything like that.

It's not a symbol celebrating the British military, it is a symbol of remembrance, a reminder of all the fallen servicemen and women from the Great War onwards. It is probably a distinction irrelevant in the eyes of those who build pyres out of their neighbour's symbols.

It has recently been taken up as a symbol of British nationalism too. Last year (maybe the year before) the home nations’ Football Associations got in a bit of a tizzy over FIFA not allowing them to wear the poppy on their shirts, ‘cause Scotland were playing England in a World Cup qualifier. Cue politicians getting upset over this decision, saying they would support the players in whatever punishment they received from the governing body. Notably (at least according to Beeb) no other country got upset about that, even those from which most of the fighting took place.

There’s also the occasional “this person isn’t wearing a poppy this hates Britain/should be killed, like Moeen Ali, whose poppy fell of but he was called a rancid cunt and worse by various people, or James McClean who received death threats for not wearing a poppy on political grounds - he was raised in an Irish nationalist household and is uncomfortable wearing something that reminds him of the armed forces.

The red poppy does remain the international symbol of remembrance though, I’ll give you that.

Curious that they added a Trump flag and an Israel flag to the pyre as well. Adding the specific names of murdered Irishmen? It's a deliberate terror tactic desiring a continuation of war, when the threat of peace seems ever closer.

Let’s not pretend this is just a Republican thing, aye? Loyalists do the same shit, as well as burning Irish national flags, Palestinian flags, and images of Che Guevara.

To paraphrase the big man himself, there are cunts on both sides.

[smjjames]

This line of discusion is going to get ugly fast. Just saying.

Only if we let it get ugly.

Anyways, a quick scan of the article looks to me like it's just an extension of the Catholic-Protestant (or Protestant-Catholic, if you prefer) conflict that's been going on in Northern Ireland for ages.

[hector13]

Basically that’s it. It only “ended” (Good Friday Agreement) just under two decades ago, and the political wings of the various paramilitaries still utterly loathe each other, so it’s all fresh in the mind and there are people more than willing to remind folk in case they might forget.

[Kagus]

I'm still convinced that Ireland is just the westernmost country in the middle east...

[Rowanas]

I'm still convinced that Ireland is just the westernmost country in the middle east...

Terrorists? Check.
Religious Division? Check.
Funny Accents? Check.

[TD1]

Ireland is not a country any more than Europe is (though there are definite elements in both aiming in that direction). It is an island with two countries represented; the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom. The problem with the United Kingdom portion is that there is a cultural, political and religious split between those claiming allegiance to each nation.

To paraphrase the big man himself, there are cunts on both sides.

Indeed there are, and let none of us dispute it. Indeed, I don't know that anyone did dispute it. This seems to be an element of your posting concerning Northern Ireland, though. If there is something negative about Unionism - say violence during marches - you bring out the scorn:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

12th of July is the date that Billy of Orange beat the Catholics up centuries ago, some members of the Orange Order - a Protestant organisation that doesn’t like Catholics - like to celebrate that by marching through Catholic neighboirhoods singing anti-Catholic songs, some Republicans don’t appreciate that. Violence ensues.

When something negative about Republicanism is posted, this being a case in point, it is "but the other side is just as bad, stop picking on the Republicans!"

I fully agree with there being horrible people on both sides. I am a Unionist by dint of my cultural and ancestral association with Britain, as well as the obvious political and economic reasons (though these last two are only benefits, I admit, and I would be a Unionist regardless).

Despite this, I know that the history of the Troubles in Northern Ireland is one of brutality. Horrible, senseless murder on both sides, for little reason other than politics or religion. And that on both sides these issues continue.

I accept this, but given your pattern of "attack Unionism, defend Republicanism", I don't know that you do. I posted an article about the burning of highly potent emotional symbols (and do not try to insinuate that this attack was not intended to be a spiteful emotional assault; with the inclusion of murdered people's names, it blatantly is) and your response is not to criticise, but to defend.

The above article was not posted to prove Unionism to be superior morally; try not to argue as though it were.

[Loud Whispers]

I'm still convinced that Ireland is just the westernmost country in the middle east...

Needs more caves, opium & hot weather

It has recently been taken up as a symbol of British nationalism too. Last year (maybe the year before) the home nations’ Football Associations got in a bit of a tizzy over FIFA not allowing them to wear the poppy on their shirts, ‘cause Scotland were playing England in a World Cup qualifier. Cue politicians getting upset over this decision, saying they would support the players in whatever punishment they received from the governing body. Notably (at least according to Beeb) no other country got upset about that, even those from which most of the fighting took place.

???
The Red Poppy hasn't been taken up as a symbol of British nationalism though. Football is not synonymous with nation and the Federation International of Football Associations has no authority to retroactively define a symbol which has commiserated the fallen for a century. I don't think it's fair to say anyone got upset, when the UK FA & Westminster wrote letters to the FIFA informing them of the history of the poppy & asking them to reconsider with the support of our European counterparts. It was a matter which was resolved calmly in civility in football. Nowhere in the entirety of the United Kingdom have I ever seen, at any time in my life, the poppy treated as a symbol of British nationalism.

Ireland is not a country any more than Europe is (though there are definite elements in both aiming in that direction). It is an island with two countries represented; the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom. The problem with the United Kingdom portion is that there is a cultural, political and religious split between those claiming allegiance to each nation.

That's not entirely true. All of Ireland is united in their view of Westminster's competency ;]

There’s also the occasional “this person isn’t wearing a poppy this hates Britain/should be killed, like Moeen Ali, whose poppy fell of but he was called a rancid cunt and worse by various people, or James McClean who received death threats for not wearing a poppy on political grounds - he was raised in an Irish nationalist household and is uncomfortable wearing something that reminds him of the armed forces.

Perhaps it's my fault for not posting a wall of text recently regarding virtue signalling, but I shall be clear that I find virtue signalers to be an old lot.

I don't follow sports for this reason, amongst others. Whether it is cricket or football, a tremendous deal of it has devolved into empty tribalism, diverging people's energies into unproductive ends, making madmen cheer the name of athletes who have nothing to do with the local area they're supposedly representing. Taking these communities and then making them into enemies of their neighbours! It's crazy to think how many more have died by pointless rioting over sports in the UK, while actual travesties are met with silence. You can advocate for the abolishment of Britain but don't you dare say football's not coming home.

'Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are. For they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
Moreover when ye fast, be not, as the hypocrites, of a sad countenance: for they disfigure their faces, that they may appear unto men to fast. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.'

My thoughts on virtue signalers is the same as Christ's on hypocrites. Those for whom remembrance is about loudly proclaiming how their reverence for other's self-sacrifices serves as a suitable moral highground to launch artillery from, are those that have their reward. I have only found sincerity at every remembrance service I have been to, even a humility expressed by those who felt that they deserved no place in public remembrance. To have that humility expressed by young and old alike fills me with considerable hope. Please do take this into account when judging the tens of millions of the United Kingdom based upon the tweets of a dozen. Rancid cunts stink more than clean eggs, and the last thing virtue signalers need is more attention.

The red poppy does remain the international symbol of remembrance though, I’ll give you that.

Though it's worrying that it 'remains' for now, and is not a given that it shall remain for future immemorial. Seems the legitimacy of any symbol is a fragile thing in today's world.

Curious that they added a Trump flag and an Israel flag to the pyre as well. Adding the specific names of murdered Irishmen? It's a deliberate terror tactic desiring a continuation of war, when the threat of peace seems ever closer.

Let’s not pretend this is just a Republican thing, aye? Loyalists do the same shit, as well as burning Irish national flags, Palestinian flags, and images of Che Guevara.

To paraphrase the big man himself, there are cunts on both sides.

For clarification, in order of importance:
1. I never made the pretence that this was a Republican thing, one bonfire made by edgelords does not represent the entirety of Ireland. Going "no u" and fueling an escalation of hatred when that is entirely the objective sought by these groups is entirely playing into their narratives. You are under attack, you must attack in kind, whilst the other side says: You are under attack, you must attack in kind.
2. What is the connection being insinuated between the British army, Trump and Israel?
3. That's a flag of ISIS, not Palestine. Which once more raises the question of what connections are being insinuated.

We can't choose what those from our tribes do, anymore than I can stop virtue signalers or British tourists in Spain from representing the UK. But we can choose what we choose to support, tacitly or otherwise. I don't approve of it when "loyalists" do it or when "republicans" do it, blood begets blood, and that's about it really. The discourse of our peoples does not need to be reduced to Trumpist Army Jews vs Communist Republican ISIS. It's thoroughly silly behaviour

[Reelya]

I'm still convinced that Ireland is just the westernmost country in the middle east...

Terrorists? Check.
Religious Division? Check.
Funny Accents? Check.

The funny accents is all of Ireland, but the other two are only Northern Ireland and purely exist because they're an occupied territory. Occupations tend to cause this sort of thing. For example, Vietnamese are some of the most chill people you'll ever meet. The Vietcong wouldn't have existed without the French and later Americans screwing around with the place.

Naturally, if the USA had never left Vietnam, we'd be going on about how the Vietnamese are "naturally" belligerent, to explain why Vietnam keeps flaring up in rebellion and terrorist attacks, and not blame the actual occupiers for creating the situation. The occupiers labeling the occupied as "beligerent types" is actually kinda toxic widespread behavior: think how American indians were portrayed as warlike attackers of the "peaceful" settlers, how some white Australians / South Africans bemoan the restless blacks, how we portray the Irish, the Palestinians, or the Vietnamese during the Vietnam war, and on and on.

[hector13]

Ireland is not a country any more than Europe is (though there are definite elements in both aiming in that direction). It is an island with two countries represented; the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom. The problem with the United Kingdom portion is that there is a cultural, political and religious split between those claiming allegiance to each nation.

To paraphrase the big man himself, there are cunts on both sides.

Indeed there are, and let none of us dispute it. Indeed, I don't know that anyone did dispute it. This seems to be an element of your posting concerning Northern Ireland, though. If there is something negative about Unionism - say violence during marches - you bring out the scorn:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

12th of July is the date that Billy of Orange beat the Catholics up centuries ago, some members of the Orange Order - a Protestant organisation that doesn’t like Catholics - like to celebrate that by marching through Catholic neighboirhoods singing anti-Catholic songs, some Republicans don’t appreciate that. Violence ensues.

When something negative about Republicanism is posted, this being a case in point, it is "but the other side is just as bad, stop picking on the Republicans!"

I fully agree with there being horrible people on both sides. I am a Unionist by dint of my cultural and ancestral association with Britain, as well as the obvious political and economic reasons (though these last two are only benefits, I admit, and I would be a Unionist regardless).

Despite this, I know that the history of the Troubles in Northern Ireland is one of brutality. Horrible, senseless murder on both sides, for little reason other than politics or religion. And that on both sides these issues continue.

I accept this, but given your pattern of "attack Unionism, defend Republicanism", I don't know that you do. I posted an article about the burning of highly potent emotional symbols (and do not try to insinuate that this attack was not intended to be a spiteful emotional assault; with the inclusion of murdered people's names, it blatantly is) and your response is not to criticise, but to defend.

The above article was not posted to prove Unionism to be superior morally; try not to argue as though it were.

Indeed.

I responded to you initially because you said you didn’t understand why a group of people who were horribly mistreated by the British army over a period of decades may have an issue with a symbol associated with the British army, this in spite of you knowing what happened during the Troubles.

In much the same way LW is right to point out my erroneous interpretation of his post, at what point did I say the Republicans were right to do the things they did in the article?

You will note that the quote you mentioned in your post was about the annual Orange Order marches, a religious thing involving some people who choose to use it as a vehicle to indulge their religious hatred, every year. I personally don’t like religion, moreso when it is used to make other groups fearful, even if those happen to be other religious groups. Given the general alignment between politics and religion around the topic of Republicans and Loyalists, what I said was intended as a very generalized comment on what happens every year around the middle of July. Catholics/Republicans know the Protestants/Loyalists are going to march and cheer about a Protestant beating a Catholic hundreds of years ago, and thus both sides feel they have an excuse to go on a bit of a rampage.

I also note you took that quote out of context: smjjames asked what was causing the violence in Derry over a period of days, to which I responded with that over-generalized summary of what happens every year around the time of the Twelfth marches. At the time, this caused you to confuse my scorn with religious folk as support for the Republicans, a notion which I disabused you of shortly thereafter, which appeared to end the discussion.

Consequently I’m confused as to why it’s being brought up seven weeks hence, unbidden, out of ckntext, and previously clarified.

[Loud Whispers]

The funny accents is all of Ireland, but the other two are only Northern Ireland and purely exist because they're an occupied territory. Occupations tend to cause this sort of thing. For example, Vietnamese are some of the most chill people you'll ever meet. The Vietcong wouldn't have existed without the French and later Americans screwing around with the place.
Naturally, if the USA had never left Vietnam, we'd be going on about how the Vietnamese are "naturally" belligerent, to explain why Vietnam keeps flaring up in rebellion and terrorist attacks, and not blame the actual occupiers for creating the situation. The occupiers labeling the occupied as "beligerent types" is actually kinda toxic widespread behavior: think how American indians were portrayed as warlike attackers of the "peaceful" settlers, how some white Australians / South Africans bemoan the restless blacks, how we portray the Irish, the Palestinians, or the Vietnamese during the Vietnam war, and on and on.

I believe comparison with American experiences with occupation are unhelpful, since American experiences with occupation tend to be filtered through Hollywood and not History . Subsequently a great deal of the complexities required to fully grasp why all four factions behave the way they do gets lost. One of the immediate differences is that the American military occupied Vietnam despite the American state or American people having zero ties with Vietnam, while the contemporary states of ROI, NI & UK trace a common descent from Norman invaders 1000 years ago, with said Norman invaders becoming Anglo-Normans and Irish-Normans, becoming eventually English and Irish respectively.
Then you have Irish fighting off some Norman barons while Irish-Norman barons alternated between supporting or fighting off Anglo-Norman attempts to reassert central authority and you see the immediate foundations of a millennia-long trend over conflicting, overlapping loyalties and identities, as divisions between Gaelic Irish, Anglo Irish, Scots Irish and other significant divisions of Irish dealt with their divisions within and between, especially with regard to the differences in region. The British Isles are a small place, with a great deal many people of disparate histories and connections; when it comes to Ireland I am especially loathe to speak of it because the more I learn of it the more I know of my own ignorance regarding which provinces were exceptionally tied to Scotland, or Wales, or England, or France, or were exceptions to the own exceptions they carried, without factoring religious or political affiliations or diaspora international or within the isles.
The other significant difference is that the USA was intervening in a foreign country, whereas the situation in Ireland was twice a civil war, between the unified Irish-British state and the Irish state, and between the Irish factions and their opposing Irish counterparts. Vietnam did not give America its leaders or its officers, its writers or scientists the same way Ireland did to the UK, and at no point in its history were Vietnam and the USA governed under one state even in the broadest sense. Throughout the massive phase of Imperial expansion from 1800-1900, Irish officers, statesmen, literati, judges, soldiers, marines, sailors and so forth were critical supporters of British Imperial expansion, as I stressed before, the situation is not nearly as neat or simple as one would hope it could be, right down to militant nationalists & loyalists attacking their own political representatives for working with their opponents peacefully. Unfortunately the situation is rather more akin to Roman occupation of England than American occupation of Vietnam

[Loud Whispers]

Spoiler: tfw you date Henry IX of Gloucester (click to show/hide)

>my feet hurt
>the hoi polloi probably support these Hanoverian usurpers
>I wish I was at home studying constitutional precedent
>I bet they don't even care about legitimate Stuart succession
>Navy Royal not Royal Navy ok
>Fucking roundheads

[hector13]

Oh hey Scottish royals.

That seems a bit unbelievable, though, that there are folks who still believe in the whole divine right thing.