An Irish woman's social, political and domestic commentary
Saturday, October 22, 2005  


Cannot believe that after my so recent mention of Garret FitzGerald's revolutionary roots that bloody FF manage to hijack 1916 for themselves. How do FF supporters so conveniently ignore the fact that the biological and political descendants of the 1916ers mainly ended up in Fine Gael? Christ, even my favourite creep Michael McDowell has a right to commemorate it without having to get the permission of Fianna Fail. Deep sigh.

posted by Sarah | 11:59 10 comments
Whaddaya talkin' about, woman?
On a slightly related note, I was wondering about this line from Bertie's Bodenstown address last week:

De Valera spoke at a time [1925] when Irish Republicanism was at a particularly low ebb. He, and his followers, had recently experienced the disillusionment of a bitter and bloody civil war and due to the provisions of the Treaty which imposed an Oath of Allegiance, the broad body of Republican opinion remained outside the national parliament.

So in that scheme of things, what was the Civil War about, then?
I will assume that EWI is enquiring about the facts of my post, which I assumed might be known to my readers. From today's IT "Taoiseach Bertie Ahern has announced the reinstatement of the traditional 1916 Easter Parade involving the Army marching past Dublin's GPO, in an attempt to reclaim traditional republicanism from Sinn Féin.....Since its foundation, Fianna Fáil has rightly commemorated the heroic struggle of the men and women of 1916. But it is now time that we suitably recognise the self-sacrifice of our forebears. Many of those who fought in 1916 became the founding members of our party. We all know the names of de Valera and Markievicz. We are also the party of Pádraig Pearse's mother and sister." Signalling that this initiative was designed to challenge Sinn Féin's claim to a monopoly on traditional republicanism, the Taoiseach said the spirit of 1916 was "not the property of those who have abused and debased the title of republicanism".

It is, I suppose, appropriate that the 1916ers should be commemorated. The annual parade was abandon since 1970 because of the "Troubles". By announcing this at the Fianna Fail Ard Fheis, he's made it clear that Fianna Fail, and not the country, are to have ownership of this event. Don't you just love his reminder about Padraig Pearse's mother and sister and De Valera? Fianna Fail was the result of a split in the splitters. Meanwhile, Garett's dead and the rest of them got on with founding the State. I think they were entitled to a cross-party initiative on this one.
With reference to, and pertaining to "Garret's dead")

I am, in fact, very much alive, if indeed, in fact on a point of imformation, and if I may say so rather, though I would not indeed blame you for thinking from my multifarious writings that I am in fact, and have long been, dead, but I am actually rather more alive.

Of course, I may be right in thinking that you have made what the psyscho-analysts, those of a certain Vienese persuasion in particular, will describe as "a Freudian slip", since it seems probable that you may have meant to employ the phrase "Garrets's dad"), that being a shortened, and rather familiar way in which to describe my father who is no doubt revolving(note the apposite pun on the word revolutionary)in his grave to see the memory of the men of 1916 so awfully besmirched.

Yours sincerely, on behalf of
:-) that was indeed a grevious slip....I hope not some psychic omen of Garret's doom. May he live long and happy.
Firstly, amusing bit of burlesque from GS (AF). I'm a great admirer of Garret, but nothing wrong with some witty humour!

On 1916, yes Bertie exploited it cleverly for the Ard Fheis. I agree FG may argueably have better quality republican roots - but once again FG's qualities rarely turn into good PR - they could easily have suggested the same idea on 1916. I don't think FG want to use that era in today's world, which is fair enough in some aspects.
I will assume that EWI is enquiring about the facts of my post, which I assumed might be known to my readers.

I was out during most of the day, so no, I didn't know it. I left my days as a Fianna Fáil yoof officer (oh, yes) behind some time ago. And political conferences these days are just extended PR affairs, not worth listening to live.

The sudden fashion for rushing to claim legacies from the struggle for independence is worthy of comment - FG were trying to do it just the other week, as I presume you know.
So in that scheme of things, what was the Civil War about, then?

I wouldn't think even El Berto knows. After all, it's hardly likely to be something he wrote, is it? Perhaps someone can ask Mansergh... ;-)
The general interest in Bertie's remarks prompted me to think a bit deeper. Kinda long thoughts to paste here...Sarah I hope you don't mind me pointing you and your readers to "National pride" at
i have a theory about the rising. Basically it was an accident started by connolly a scot who couldnt believe that the off licences and bars were closed and he kicked up a stink, broke into the offy by the flowing tide and things kicked off, also when he was shot he wasnt wounded in the leg and had to sit in a chair, he was so pissed he couldnt stand. god bless the jocks, who says they're lesser celts??
Post a Comment
Previous Popular Posts
Other Blogs