Philosophy Now Forum

Posted: **Fri Mar 22, 2019 4:50 pm**

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2019 1:12 am vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑
Sun Feb 10, 2019 4:02 am
... A piece of land is not a country until it has a uniting Government and national identity.

The Irish at the time had none of the above, they were, like your Maoris, a bunch of tribes or clans as they prefer with multiple 'kings'. So like your descendants we were bringing the angelic benefit of civilization to them.

The Irish had been a lot more civilised than the English for a lot longer.

Posted: **Fri Mar 22, 2019 7:08 pm**

But just hadn't bothered to have a country eh!

Posted: **Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:56 pm**

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2019 7:08 pm But just hadn't bothered to have a country eh!

And the English even gave it its name

Posted: **Fri Mar 22, 2019 10:18 pm**

Plantations of Ireland.

Plantations in 16th- and 17th-century Ireland involved the confiscation of land by the English crown and the colonisation of this land with settlers from the island of Great Britain. There had already been smaller-scale immigration to Ireland as far back as the 12th century, which had resulted in a distinct ethnicity in Ireland known as the Old English, or Hiberno-Normans. Unofficial plantations carried out privately by landlords also took place, such as those in County Antrim and County Down.

The 16th-century plantations were established through large areas of the country by the confiscation of lands occupied by Gaelic clans and Hiberno-Norman dynasties, but principally in the provinces of Munster and Leinster. The Crown granted these lands to colonists ("planters") from England. This process began during the reign of Henry VIII and continued under Mary I and Elizabeth I. It was accelerated under James I, when the Plantation of Ulster took place on land escheated from those Gaelic chiefs who broke the terms of surrender and regrant, Charles I, and Oliver Cromwell; in their time, land was also granted to Scottish planters.

The early plantations in the 16th century tended to be based on small "exemplary" colonies. The later plantations were based on mass confiscations of land from Irish landowners and the subsequent importation of numerous settlers and labourers from England and Wales, and later from Scotland.

The final government-planned plantations were established under the English Commonwealth and Cromwell's Protectorate during the 1650s, when thousands of Parliamentarian soldiers were settled in Ireland. Apart from the plantations, significant immigration into Ireland continued well into the 18th century, from both Great Britain and continental Europe.

The plantations changed the demography of Ireland by creating large communities with a British and Protestant identity. The ruling classes of these communities replaced the older Catholic ruling class, which had shared with the general population a common Irish identity and set of political attitudes.[1] The new ruling class represented both English and Scottish interests in Ireland. The physical and economic nature of Irish society was also changed, as new concepts of ownership, trade, and credit were introduced. These changes led to the creation of a Protestant Ascendancy, which during the 17th century secured the authority of Crown government in Ireland from Dublin.

It would be best if Ulster men and women thought of themselves as Irish( as did my own mother) It would be a peaceful solution if the DUP and sympathisers wished for a united Ireland within Europe.

Posted: **Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:23 am**

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: And the English even gave it its name

When are you going to address this?
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑
Sun Feb 10, 2019 4:02 am
... A piece of land is not a country until it has a uniting Government and national identity.

Ireland at the time did not have a uniting government nor a national identity so your argument that the colonists of America, NZ, et al, holds for Ireland. So where do you go from there?

Posted: **Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:28 am**

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:23 am
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: And the English even gave it its name
When are you going to address this?
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑
Sun Feb 10, 2019 4:02 am
... A piece of land is not a country until it has a uniting Government and national identity.

Ireland at the time did not have a uniting government nor a national identity so your argument that the colonists of America, NZ, et al, holds for Ireland. So where do you go from there?

Umm, yes it did. Give it up, stupid Englishman.

Posted: **Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:29 am**

Belinda wrote:... It would be best if Ulster men and women thought of themselves as Irish( as did my own mother) It would be a peaceful solution if the DUP and sympathisers wished for a united Ireland within Europe.

Ah! And now we get to the root cause of your PC 'outrage'.

Brexit well may raise this issue as they largely voted to stay in the EU but you're on a hiding to nothing if you think the DUP will give up being British as they seem to have a problem with a powerful political priesthood who takes it's orders from Rome.

Posted: **Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:35 am**

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:Umm, yes it did. Give it up, stupid Englishman.

No it really didn't dingbat. The title 'High King' just meant the strongest king amongst kings, basically the toughest of the petty 'kings' of tribes. There was no united government, unlike England who'd had Kings and a Queen for yonks by then.

Posted: **Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:41 am**

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:35 am
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:Umm, yes it did. Give it up, stupid Englishman.
No it really didn't dingbat. The title 'High King' just meant the strongest king amongst kings, basically the toughest of the petty 'kings' of tribes. There was no united government, unlike England who'd had Kings and a Queen for yonks by then.

I'll leave you to work it out 'Pommy dingbat'. 'Justify' it all you want. The English were criminal tossbuckets and theives when it came to Ireland and you know it.

Posted: **Sat Mar 23, 2019 1:19 am**

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: I'll leave you to work it out 'Pommy dingbat'. 'Justify' it all you want. The English were criminal tossbuckets and theives when it came to Ireland and you know it.

Aaaannnnd! There we have it. The PC selective history writ large. The only difference between you and those you oft disparage are which causes you choose otherwise you are of the same cloth.

Posted: **Sat Mar 23, 2019 1:37 am**

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Sat Mar 23, 2019 1:19 am
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: I'll leave you to work it out 'Pommy dingbat'. 'Justify' it all you want. The English were criminal tossbuckets and theives when it came to Ireland and you know it.
Aaaannnnd! There we have it. The PC selective history writ large. The only difference between you and those you oft disparage are which causes you choose otherwise you are of the same cloth.

Blah blah...Fascist PC twit.

Posted: **Sat Mar 23, 2019 2:21 am**

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:45 am
gaffo wrote: per historical fact, other way around, Scotts irish prot Northern part of Ireland,

not vice verse as your assursion,
Not really as I was talking about the reverse mass immigration from Ireland to Scotland during the Irish Famine.

ok, not informed of this migration, i bow to you knowing this history i did not. from your earlier posts know you are a bullshitter.

and so, i thank you for informing of this pop migration i know nothing about.

thanks for expanding my historical knowledge Sir. hope you and Australia are well. peace to you Sir and thanks for reply

.

Posted: **Sat Mar 23, 2019 3:01 am**

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Blah blah...Fascist PC twit.

"Fascist", the PC pit just keeps getting deeper.

Posted: **Sat Mar 23, 2019 3:03 am**

gaffo wrote:ok, not informed of this migration, i bow to you knowing this history i did not.

?

from your earlier posts know you are a bullshitter. ...

Do you? Point out where.

and so, i thank you for informing of this pop migration i know nothing about.

thanks for expanding my historical knowledge Sir. hope you and Australia are well. peace to you Sir and thanks for reply .

Who's an Ozzie?

Posted: **Sat Mar 23, 2019 3:25 am**

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2019 4:50 pm Well not necessarily on the UK

yes i know - i'm american, but informed and interested in other nations (and geo-polictics, blowback/etc for the rest of us) - world is small now, so to be an informed citizen (of whatever nation, and with the net - there is no excuse to not be informed anymore).

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2019 4:50 pm part but the EU will want to impose a border there

yes of course! the ball was in there court these past 3 years.

did my post you replied to imply that the Brits had the mandate to fix the or not fix a hard boarder in Ireland? I hope my post did not say that, that was not my intent. Reality is border issue is left up to ROI (primarily) and the EU (Secondarily), not the UK.

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2019 4:50 pm and I agree that logically there will have to be one as there is no way the Northern Irish will have one in the Irish Sea.
of course, but May - being a traitor to her Nation (choosing personal survival/her party over her Nation) - will side with the DUP thugs with dreams of a united Ireland as Protestant and English - both characteristics of which are delusional and counter to the arc of history (and so folly).

but so be it, the DUP, May and the 19 million (52 percent in 2016) - were/are fools shouting at the wind.

good riddence to may/Dup, an England. may the wise Scots vote to leave the UK, and make the UK England.

Wales i welcome doing the same, and NI dissapearing into the ROI after the reforendum which will happen in a couple of years.

- i value the Rule of LAw and is the NI per the reforendum vote to remain with the fools in England, fine, its would be a legal yet foolish result (but i don't think they will vote that way - esp after 1/2 of the brokerages moved from London to Dublin prior).

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2019 4:50 pm Well given NI did largely vote remain

Philosophy Now Forum

Irish 'multiculturalism'

Re: Irish 'multiculturalism'

Re: Irish 'multiculturalism'

Re: Irish 'multiculturalism'

Re: Irish 'multiculturalism'

Re: Irish 'multiculturalism'

Re: Irish 'multiculturalism'

Re: Irish 'multiculturalism'

Re: Irish 'multiculturalism'

Re: Irish 'multiculturalism'

Re: Irish 'multiculturalism'

Re: Irish 'multiculturalism'

Re: Irish 'multiculturalism'

Re: Irish 'multiculturalism'

Re: Irish 'multiculturalism'

Re: Irish 'multiculturalism'