Folklore/History: Irish Famine

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: mayomick
Date: 01 Aug 13 - 08:06 AM

Keith
For somebody who likes to intervene on mudcat Irish history threads you show a remarkable ignorance of the currents within Irish historical research. That's the relevance of the last link I supplied to this debate : it indicates your ignorance and partly explains the contradictions that flow from your ignorance of these currents.   . You were castigating the Irish government over its handling of the WW2 soldiers' pardon campaign a year or so ago. And now you are paying tribute to a magazine edited by Tommy Graham of all people! Graham would be the very type of republican apologist condemned by the likes of you in 2011 for refusing to endorse the pardoning of WW2 Irish army deserters.
You are not aware of the fact that HI was founded by a republican sympathiser who has very similar views to those held by Tim Pat Coogan on issues such as the famine. Coogan would be held in high regard by the magazine's editors. As far back as 2004 letters were being sent to the magazine complaining about the "soft" HI interview that had been conducted by a republican academic with Coogan . One critic complained that "[t]he nationally minded renowned academic Professor Bradshaw afforded the green light to Mr Coogan in every sense of the word, allowing him to propagate, unchallenged, his Gaedhil distorted nationalist image of Irish history." Coogan reply is published as well here :
http://www.historyireland.com/20th-century-contemporary-history/tim-pat-coogan
Your bafflement at what you perceive to be contradictory positions taken by Dr Kineally in regards to revisionism shows that you simply don't understand how the word "revisionism" is used in Irish historical studies.

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Aug 13 - 05:58 AM

"Do you deny objecting to my putting quotes from revisionist historians Jim."
Yes I bloody well do.

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Aug 13 - 05:55 AM

I say again, I did not even know it was the dominant view until Grumpy linked to Dr. K.

This thread started on 14th.
I joined on 15th.
Grumpy linked on 17th.
I first referred to the "dominant" view AFTER THAT.

You are wrong.
I joined the thread only to give examples of the other side of the debate.

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Aug 13 - 05:15 AM

What on earth are you talking about - do I deny objecting to your putting quotes from revisionist historians - of course I ****** well do I did not object and you lied when you claimed I did; now you appear to be twisting and distorting something which is totally beyond me

"I came in to give the other view, and that is all I did."
"I just saw the thread dominated by the discredited and outmoded nationalist version of history and gave three very brief extracts that reflect the revisionist view that has been the dominant view of historians these last eighty years."

"That is the version of history that was exclusively given in this thread, apart from my 3 short extracts, even though historians have recognised for over eighty years now that it is false."

"It has been exposed as a lie for more than eighty years, but it is perpetuated and fed to each new generation to sustain the hatred that is the blight that now afflicts the land."
"It has been exposed as a lie for more than eighty years, but it is perpetuated and fed to each new generation to sustain the hatred that is the blight that now afflicts the land."

"It has been exposed as a lie for more than eighty years, but it is perpetuated and fed to each new generation to sustain the hatred that is the blight that now afflicts the land."

"His nationalist view we know, thanks to your supporters, has been rejected by actual historians for over eighty years now."

"His nationalist view we know, thanks to your supporters, has been rejected by actual historians for over eighty years now."

"You need excuses and justification for your prejudice, and if eighty years of consensus is not enough for you, you are destined to die still loathing us."

"Likewise the information that revisionism has been the dominant view of historians for over eighty years"

"And all the actual, professional historians are wrong and have been for eighty plus years."

"I just quoted that one passage that said revisionism had been dominant for eighty years."

Your penalty points for telling porkies must be a possible entry in the Guinness Book of records

"I have not read any books on the subject."
Blindingly obvoious - your entire knowledge appears to be based entirely on cut-'n-pastes which you have not evemn bothered to read properly.
Not only have you qualified you lies, but you have compounded them with even more.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Aug 13 - 04:34 AM

No - your point is, and has been from the beginning, that "the majority of historians" totally absolve the British Government from blame and those that don't are "revisionists" whose work is "80 years out of date and Republican agenda-driven"

Wrong Jim. Look back.
I came in to give the other view, and that is all I did.
I have never given my own view as I am not qualified to have one.
I did not realise that it was the "dominant" view of historians and had been since 1930 until someone else linked to Christine K who stated that fact.

My comment on education was just a reference to Doc. K who said the Irish government required schools to give a history of "heroes and villains."

I have not read any books on the subject.
I am not emotionally involved except that no-one could fail to be moved by the human tragedy of it.

"Do you deny objecting to my putting quotes from revisionist historians Jim."
Yes I bloody well do.

There you admit your will to suppress and censor.

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Aug 13 - 03:43 AM

"My only contribution was to remind that not all historians apportion blame on the government."
No - your point is, and has been from the beginning, that "the majority of historians" totally absolve the British Government from blame and those that don't are "revisionists" whose work is "80 years out of date and Republican agenda-driven" - are you totally incapable of making a straight honest statement?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 01 Aug 13 - 03:38 AM

"The quotes produced on this thread indicated that most historians believe that the government was not responsible for the deaths."

Again I see where you are coming from but also see why you're not getting anywhere. Most historians it is true would say that the idea there was a deliberate genocide where the gvt wanted people to die in their multitudes just doesn't stand up to any kind of scrutiny. Surely you see though that what they are saying is not the same as saying the gvt was not to blame for the famine being worse than it may have been. They simply did not react in the way which ensured deaths were kept at a minimum and their prejudices and pig headedness in sticking to doctrine would often hinder rather than help. To give an example there is no conflict in the two statements made by Frank Welsh in his "The Four Nations".

"As for the accusation that the famine was a wicked English plot, that of course is quite absurd; but as in many other things, the emotional myth remains much more powerful than the dull truth"

He then goes on to state that the suffering had no parallel in 19thC European history and points out

"The excess mortality in that period can, fairly and squarely, be laid at the door of the Lord John Russell's government"

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Aug 13 - 03:29 AM

"Do you deny objecting to my putting quotes from revisionist historians Jim."
Yes I bloody well do.
I argued against the points you made,and I pointed out that those points were based entirely on a tiny handful of cut-'n-pastes which you appear not even to have read properly yourself, nothing more.
If you have one single shred of evidence that I have ever attempted to censor or suppress discussion here or anywhere, please produce it or stand self-condemned as a liar
To suggest that there are two methods of historical thought - revisionist (80 years out-of-date) and modern, and to teach one of them in school is to "Poison children's minds with hatred has cost many lives and much misery and it still goes on" is not only grossly inaccurate, but it is an extreme form of censorship - "teach my line or you are advocating murder" - nothing less.
"I said that Coogan had links to IRA. How else would he get such inside knowledge?"
He got his information the same way as every other good journalist/historian gets it, by hard work and research. Are you seriously suggesting that he is the only writer to cover the IRA, or the blanket protests, or all the other aspects of the Troubles?
If not, are you accusing the rest of them of having "links with the IRA.
British MP Chris Mullins wrote a magnificently researched book on The Birmingham Six (Error of Judgement) in which he helped to prove them innocent and expose the fact that the police knew years beforehand who the real bombers were - did he have "links with the IRA?
If you have one single shred of evidence that Coogan has "links with the IRA" please produce it or stand self-condemned as a liar
"I just hate children to be fed propaganda giving them cause to hate."
If you have any evidence whatever that Irish children are being fed propaganda and taught to hate - please produce it.... well, you should know the rest by now
"Yes I could, even though I have no historical knowledge"
So you are advocating that self-confessed ignoramuses like yourself should be taken seriously even though they admit (and constantly hide behind) their/your lack of knowledge as an excuse for balls-ups.
If you could put us straight on the facts on the Irish Famine, why not start here, so far you have based your entire case on (in your own words) a couple of cut-n-pastes that contradict the opinions of "the majority of historians, including your own star witness, who has appeared to have crumbled to dust in your hands. - do you really believe that is the way to seriously discuss history - jeeeeeze!!!
"Nothing was taken out of context."
Of course it was - have you ever read books like 'The Great Hunger' or any of those she referenced - you appear never to have even heard of it until I brought it up here? The reference list given adds up to about two years reading at my reading speed.
You pompously claim to now be familiar with and understand Kinealy's writings, yet you have scooped up a couple of quotes, half digested them and got them horrendously wrong. You are now reduced to denying the veracity of what she wrote which was included in the Wiki article - "clown" seems to be a much understated description for you.
"Most historians take the revisionist view."
You don't even appear to understand the term "revisionist" and are clutching it like a comfort blanket - read the article you were given.
"It said the government could not be blamed and revisionism was the dominant view of historians."
If you read it properly, she was referring to the Peel government whose beneficial work was deliberately unravelled by the one that followed led by Russell - that is what did the damage and led to the British being accused of genocide - read the **** facts - all of them.
Are you seriously claiming that she didn't write and that somebody made up:
"Moreover, much of this death from the Famine need not have taken place. The Irish Famine was not just caused by food shortages, it was also due to political and economic choices. As a consequence, ideology triumphed over humanity.
In the face of food shortages, relief provided by the government was inadequate. Imports of food were too small to meet the scale of the problem. At the same time, large amounts of food continued to be exported from Ireland. In 1847 – 'Black '47' – 4,000 ships left Ireland, each carrying large cargoes of food to Britain."
http://www.ballinagree.freeservers.com/knealy.html
If she did, and she believes at the same time that Britain was not to blame for what happened, she is either a very poor historian making contradictory statements, or a bloody schizophrenic.
There - I've answered all your points and wasted far too much time doing so - now have the courtesy and the balls to answer the points I've made - honestly, if you are still capable of it.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Aug 13 - 02:40 AM

Very interesting, but I do not see the relevance.
Was Coogan ever published in HI or other journals?
Has he any qualifications?
Has he ever been employed as a historian?

This thread is about the famine.
My only contribution was to remind that not all historians apportion blame on the government.

What is your objection?

Have I displayed any patriotism as you accuse?
Have made any arguments at all or have I just provided quotes from historians?

Why did you say, "For Keith, exculpating the British government is objective, but blaming Britain for the famine is not objective" ?

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: mayomick
Date: 31 Jul 13 - 08:45 PM

Keith,

"She is a historian, a doctorate in History from Trinity College Dublin and author of "numerous scholarly articles" beside her 16 books on Irish history.
We have seen she is published in "History Ireland."
Cougan never has been and never will."

An endorsement coming from such a fervent anti-republican as yourself would raise many an academic eyebrow at History Ireland magazine, I'm sure
This from the Irish Soldiers Pardons Campaign (WW2) website will perhaps give you an idea of the leanings of HI's founder and editor, Tommy Graham's .
http://www.forthesakeofexample.com/


7. Tommy Graham Editor of History Ireland stated in his contribution on the BBC NI Newsline programme, 2 February 2012; "My suggestion is that they be given an amnesty. A Pardon implies that the government did something wrong". An Amnesty is a legislative or executive act by which a state restores those who may have been guilty of an offence to the position of being innocent, it includes more than Pardon, in as much as it obliterates all legal remembrance of the offence. In contrast, a Pardon is the forgiveness of a crime and can change or remove the effects of the penalty, however the scope of both Amnesty or Pardon is also dependent on the language used. Actively supported by the Irish Government through diplomatic channels the British government was able to use considered parliamentary language to alleviate the roughness of their Pardons amendment passed by the House of Commons in November 2006 for the 306 WW1 Shot at Dawn.. and the history of world war one remains intact. Even though the Irish Government Report had previously adduced evidence that WW1 court-martials were legally flawed the British pardon did not decide on the guilt or innocence of those Irish born British soldiers executed for military offences during world war one but did remove insofar as practicable the stigma of dishonour that was attached to the executions for the sake of the families and did so in a unique way which avoided the issue of fault by not apportioning blame to either side. Crucially the British Pardon did not displace the history of the Shot at Dawn but left that history intact for the historians to deliberate on ad infinitum. In the March April 2012 edition of History Ireland Mr Graham also suggests inter-alia that the court-martialling of deserters would have been more severe thereby implying that the political process route viaEmergency Powers (362) Order of 1945 was mild in comparison, he should ask the families as to whether the so called punishment was mild or not and taking into account that Mr Graham had not seen the contents of theBlacklist until 28 February 2012, perhaps he should do the research first before making further ill-informed comment. Dail Eireann/the Irish Parliament is not a military court of law and no amount of side stepping or obfuscation of the English language on the part of Mr Graham et al can change that fact. Pursuant to the separation of powers in the Irish constitution Dail Eireann as a political chamber cannot legally subvert the judicial function of the courts and if Mr Graham has evidence to the contrary he should produce that evidence forthwith. The political process inaugurated by the de Valera government to adjudicate on the desertion issue post war and which Mr Graham argued as being masterly on a television broadcast in 2011 was legally flawed from the outset and the policy of Irish Neutrality which Mr Graham has also raised has nothing whatsoever to do with the treatment of the desertion issue per se. Indeed raising the policy of Irish neutrality is a red herring and is intended to distract the debate away from the questionable political process that was used by the de Valera Government some three months after the end of the second world war to adjudicate on persons who were subject to Irish military law and accused of desertion during the Emergency. The introduction of Emergency Powers (362) Order 1945 was a cynical political exercise which ousted the jurisdiction of a military court of law and the administration of justice for the sake of political expediency and shows a total disregard by the de Valera Government for the constitutional rights of its own Irish citizens post war. Although in a previous interview with the BBC Mr Graham recommended an amnesty as a solution, he now recommends that the Attorney General should leave matters as they are and then opines sarcastically in his editorial "I understand that she has other, pressing matters on her desk in any case". Interestingly Mr Graham was an avid supporter of the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl and fully supported the Irish Government in its efforts to achieve the one size fits all blanket pardon granted by the British Government in November 2006 for the WW1 Irish Shot of Dawn on the basis of an injustice but is apparently not in favour of a one size fits all blanket pardon for Irish defence force personnel subjected to the rigours of the one size fits all Emergency Powers (362) Order of 1945. Mr Graham's obvious contempt for the objectives of the Irish Soldiers Pardons Campaign (WW2) and our families really comes into its own when he permits the unauthorised publication of a photograph and a family heirloom of a group of soldiers now deceasedin his magazine. The use of this photograph in the History Ireland article "The Disowned Army" by Donal Fallon is a breach of copyright irrespective as to whether the family member is credited or not and despite indicating to the editor that the families be left out of the issue it was included against our expressed wishes. One wonders as to what ethos and editorial guidelines History Ireland subscribes to? It seems Mr Graham and Oscar Traynor have something in common and are re-echoing Traynor's Words of Condemnation that these Irish defence force (alleged) deserters and their families are not worthy of consideration? As our campaign effort is focused primarily on seeking natural justice for surviving veterans and their families, and as Mr Graham and History Ireland are vehemently opposed to any resolution to the pardons issue on the spurious grounds that political expediency takes precedence over the democratic principles of natural justice and the right to defend oneself in the military courts, and as Mr Graham's view represents a significant departure from the rights of citizens as determined by the Constitution of Ireland, the question now arises as to which constitution does Mr Graham owe allegiance to?In common law legal systems such as in the Republic of Ireland, is not the trial/conviction/punishment of a person/alleged deserter in absentia, that is, in a trial/military court in which he/she is not present to answer the charges, held to be a violation of natural justice and an infringement of a persons right to a fair hearing?Significantly at the end of October 2011 the proposed 30th Amendment of the Irish Constitution dealing with the powers of the Oireachtas/Irish Parliament, was heavily criticised on the basis that politicians would be given powers to determine for themselves what is fair and what is not and that citizens would be deprived of their right to legal representation if passed by referendum. Senior legal figures including Professor Gerry Whyte of Trinity College also expressed disquiet that the amendment might give the Oireachtas power to conduct inquiries in which people could be deprived of their right to fair procedure. The Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL)urged Voters to reject the proposals which they claimed could turn Oireachtas Committees into "kangaroo courts". A group of eight former Irish attorneys-general came out against the referendum, stating that these proposals would seriously weaken the rights of individuals to their good name and provide insufficient protection for the independence of the judiciary. Various other eminent legal practitioners raised concerns about this provision including former Minister for Justice Mr Michael McDowell SC who urged the electorate to Vote No to inquiry powers while we can and explained his ratio publicly in the Irish Sunday Independent 23 October 2011arguing, that the proposed constitutional amendment was utterly disproportionate, unjustifiable and commented:"If no politician in the present Government and only a handful in the Dail have had the courage to speak out against it (30th Amendment of the Irish Constitution) when it was being cooked up in secret, how can we trust a Government in future not to abuse these powers"? Mr Graham should note that the referendum on Houses of the Oireachtas Inquiries was rejected by the Irish people on Thursday 27 October 2011. Irrespective as to whether defence force personnel enlisted in UK forces or went elsewhere, was not Emergency Powers (362) Order of 1945so constructed that its effect was to frustrate the right to a fair hearing for all defence force personnel named as deserters in the de Valera Government Blacklist post war? Was not Emergency Powers (No. 362) Order of 1945 a legislative exercise of a judicial power which determined the guilt and inflicted punishment on an identifiable class e.g. defence force personnel without the provision and protection of a judicial trial, e.g. a military court-martial? Surely all citizens have equal rights pursuant to the Irish constitution? In this regard it is instructive to note the submission on the 31 August 1976 by An Taoiseach (Prime Minister) Liam Cosgrave TD to Dail Eireann as he moved the resolution to introduce Emergency Powers Bill 1976 and the Criminal Law Bill 1976. Mr Cosgrave stated inter-alia "there have been comments and headlines which suggested that the Oireachtas was to be asked to suspend the Constitution. Deputies will appreciate, I am sure, that this is not so. If it were true, the Constitution would have been suspended since 1939. The reality is that it has not been so suspended by adoption of the present resolution. The protection from Constitutional challenge which would be afforded would extend solely to laws expressed to be for the purpose of securing public safety and the preservation of the state". The subsequent Irish Supreme Court decision In Re Art 26 and the Emergency Powers Bill 1976 - 1977 Irish Reports 159 is the legal authority which establishes that an Emergency Powers Bill leaves general constitutional rights intact. Consequently as the Constitution of Ireland Bunreacht na hÉireann was not suspended during the Emergency had not accused defence force personnel the inalienable right to adduce and challenge evidence in their defence according to military law as persons subject to military law and within a military court of law following the conclusion of world war two? For Mr Graham et al to argue, suggest or by implication promulgate the view that political expediency takes precedence over the democratic principles of natural justice and fair procedures in a democracy which has a written constitution is legally and morally untenable. The proposition that the military offence of desertion is unforgivable, unpardonable and that a pardon would be tantamount to condoning desertion within the Irish Defence Forces being advocated by those opposed to the pardons campaign is also CODOLOGY. The same contention was disseminated some years ago by those who were also opposed to the granting of pardons to the (Irish) Shot at Dawn on the spurious grounds that any compassionate act by the British Government to Pardon WW1 Servicemen would be prejudicial to the good order and military discipline of UK forces. For the record The Morale and Military Discipline of the British Armed Forces remains steadfast. Other governments have pardoned service personnel dismissed for desertion without undermining their status quo. The ingenuity of the New Zealand Government parliamentary draftsman in constructing a simple and straightforward text which does not rewrite the history of the New Zealand WW1 executed is exemplified unambiguously in theirPardon for Soldiers of the Great War Act 2000 and for the record The Morale and Military Discipline of the New Zealand Defence Force remains steadfast. Irrespective, we are confident in the Bona Fides of the Minister for Defence Mr Allan Shatter T.D. who has the necessary political and legal acumen to deal judiciously and compassionately with the Pardons issue in the interest's of the surviving veterans and their families and to do so without changing the history of the Emergency or tearing up the Manual of Irish Military Law... and for the record The Morale and Military Discipline of the Irish Defence Forces is steadfast...and will always remain steadfast;

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Jul 13 - 06:02 PM

Jim.
absolve yourself from lying (but only on this thread - it is now habitual with you on this forum) by either qualifying or withdrawing your accusations of my suggesting censoring or suppressing and your claim of Coogan's support for the IRA, but as you will do none of these your lying stands.

Do you deny objecting to my putting quotes from revisionist historians Jim.
It is right there in this thread.

I said that Coogan had links to IRA.
How else would he get such inside knowledge?
No outsider could have got that.

She might have added, and possibly did, considering the few lines you've quoted
The WHOLE piece was linked to.

"Poisoning children's minds with hatred has cost many lives and much misery and it still goes on" is purely your own invention and is typical of your hatred for anybody who opposes state terrorism and mass murder - be they 'Johnny Foreigner' or "loonie Leftie".

I just hate children to be fed propaganda giving them cause to hate.

Wiki invites people to add to or correct many of their articles, including this one - why not give them the benefit of your vast knowledge and experience
Yes I could, even though I have no historical knowledge.
Any biased, partisan bigot could.
Perhaps the writer was.
Who knows?

but when her statements are taken, nibble-sized and out-of-context to her other writings
The whole History Ireland piece was linked to for reference.
Nothing was taken out of context.


You have been given large chunks of what she wrote and said, alongside quotes from mainly British historians

Most historians take the revisionist view.
I was given her History Ireland piece by your bro' Grumpy.
It said the government could not be blamed and revisionism was the dominant view of historians.
You have only given the other stuff in the last few hours.

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Jul 13 - 05:38 PM

Mick.
Most professional historians from your own country ,Britain , agree with the consensus of Irish professional historians: that the United Kingdom government – the government of Ireland throughout the nineteenth century - should bear the major political responsibility for the deaths that occurred during those terrible years .The thrust of your argument goes against that.

I have not made any argument, and am in no position to.
The quotes produced on this thread indicated that most historians believe that the government was not responsible for the deaths.
How did you get the opposite impression?

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Jul 13 - 04:04 PM

"So now I am a "clown" as well as a liar, a racist and an arsehole."
All four Keith - give that man a cigar.
You have an opportunity of absolve yourself from lying (but only on this thread - it is now habitual with you on this forum) by either qualifying or withdrawing your accusations of my suggesting censoring or suppressing and your claim of Coogan's support for the IRA, but as you will do none of these your lying stands.
"My observation about education was based solely on the quote, " the Free State government instructed history teachers that pupils should be 'imbued with ...."
She might have added, and possibly did, considering the few lines you've quoted, that all states, in certain circumstances produce a formula for teaching history which suits the given circumstances.
I was brought up to believe the British Empire was wonderful and entrepreneurs like Rhodes, Livingstone and Stanley were opening up Africa to civilise the savages, when in fact they were facilitating murderous exploitation.
I was vaguely aware of events like Amrisar, but I had to go and see the film Ghandi in order to learn about the massacre.
We were taught what 'them indoors' wanted us to know.
Ireland is a relatively new state - 91 years old , and still six counties short.
When it came into existence it was necessary to imbue the people with pride and self confidence after many centuries under the rule of a foreign power.
I find it excusable that they should extol the virtues of Davis (a poet and patriot who suffered and eventually gave his life for the cause of a free Ireland) and Pearse, a teacher and intellectual who died in an attempt (five years later to prove successful) to gain independence for his country.
"Poisoning children's minds with hatred has cost many lives and much misery and it still goes on" is purely your own invention and is typical of your hatred for anybody who opposes state terrorism and mass murder - be they 'Johnny Foreigner' or "loonie Leftie".
My knowledge of Irish education, what little it might be, is based on experiences of family members, many of whom received their education in Ireland and on long term and close association with teachers, including several headmasters - oh, and of living here for 15 years.
"We need to know who wrote it."
Can we be clear on this - "WE" don't need to know anything - once again you are alone in peddling a line supporting human rights atrocities - you don't read, or totally ignore information that is put up that doesn't suit your particular line.
For the benefit of anybody else who might be interested, as I pointed out, the Wiki entry is perfectly comparable with what she said in her Thomas Davis lecture and what she has written elsewhere - and what "the majority" of historians appear to believe.
Trevelyan described the Famine as "God's Punishment", the British Chancellor imposed a property tax on Landlords, great and small, which forced them to evict tenants in order either to survive or stay wealthy and the Government facilitated the eviction of over 300,000 families and destroyed their homes so they were forced in many cases to die on the roadside of starvation or disease. To make sure these evictions were carried out efficiently they even supplied armed police and soldiers to prevent opposition. WHAT MORE IS THERE TO SAY
Do you realise that you have nor once attempted to explain, or even refer to these evictions, which, on their own, qualify as mass murder - genocide even"?
Wiki invites people to add to or correct many of their articles, including this one - why not give them the benefit of your vast knowledge and experience - I'm sure they would be eternally grateful, and as impressed with you as we are!!!
Is Christine Kinealy a clown - no, she certainly isn't, but when her statements are taken, nibble-sized and out-of-context to her other writings to prove exactly the opposite to what she is saying, she becomes yet another victim of your agenda-driven crusades.
You have been given large chunks of what she wrote and said, alongside quotes from mainly British historians - and masses of official documentation from contemporaries who on the spot at the time - you have chosen to ignore all of them - why wouldn't you; that's what you do best.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: mayomick
Date: 31 Jul 13 - 03:18 PM

I'm not attacking you , Keith . You have admitted that you are no historian and are content to base your judgement of the famine on the views of professional historians . Most professional historians from your own country ,Britain , agree with the consensus of Irish professional historians: that the United Kingdom government – the government of Ireland throughout the nineteenth century - should bear the major political responsibility for the deaths that occurred during those terrible years .The thrust of your argument goes against that.

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Jul 13 - 03:17 PM

Dr. K's quoted book was 1997 and took a nationalist view.
Her "Beyond Revisionism" piece was written before that.

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Jul 13 - 01:52 PM

So now I am a "clown" as well as a liar, a racist and an arsehole.
I think this solemn subject deserves to be discussed with more dignity Jim.

My observation about education was based solely on the quote, " the Free State government instructed history teachers that pupils should be 'imbued with ...."

We know that quote was genuine because it is on the History Ireland page.
If I am a clown, she must be too.
Is she Jim?

Do you know who wrote that Wiki page?
Should we believe a Wiki entry "The vast majority of historians place the murderous outcome of the famine firmly at the door of the Whig Government" that directly contradicts what the actual historians actually state?

Re. the Kinealy quote, unless there are two Christine Ks, I do not know how to reconcile that quote with what she unequivocally states in History Ireland.

All the links given are to genuine, original quotes.
They are all contradicted by that Wiki page.
We need to know who wrote it.

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Jul 13 - 12:37 PM

"It seems that generations of Irish schoolchildren have been brainwashed with false history presenting Britain as "villain.""
This is a grossly distorted representation of what happens in Irish schools – but then again, the clown who suggested it is "no educationalist" as I'm sure he'll scurry behind when asked to qualify his statement.
Irish children are taught to understand their history and be proud of their country's achievements – as I was of Britain's when I attended Speke Secondary Modern in Merseyside.
If teachers attempted to teach to regard Britain as "the villain" they would receive very short shrift from parents, especially those who have or whose parents have lived there and regularly state that they are "grateful for the opportunity to be able to get employment there when there was none to be had in Ireland.
In the forty years we (a Liverpudlian and an Aglo-Scot) have been visiting and finally living here we have never encountered a moment's hostility due to our origins – I can't for the life of me ever remember seeing a sign reading "No English need apply" or being referred to as a "t'ick Brit".
Any animosity is directed against politicians and the devastating effect they have had on Irish life.
The only time we thought we might have problems was when we arrive at the height of the hunger striker's dying and this town was hung with black flags – no hostility, just the usual hospitality.
I wonder if an Irish couple would have received a similar welcome then – well, I don't really!
It was around that time I was told by a family I was working for "we have Irish neighbours so we have to check under our car before we drive off in the mornings".
"....a cabal of Irish historians existed who were responsible for the creation of an anti-British famine myth"
The opposite is the case.
The vast majority of historians place the murderous outcome of the famine firmly at the door of the Whig Government and their representatives, Russell, Trevelyan and Wood in particular, including Christine Kinealy.   

"Christine Kinealy expresses the consensus of historians when she states that "the major tragedy of the Irish Famine of 1845–52 marked a watershed in modern Irish history. Its occurrence, however, was neither inevitable nor unavoidable."[136] The underlying factors which combined to cause the famine were aggravated by an inadequate government response.
As Kinealy notes,
"...[T]he government had to do something to help alleviate the suffering, the particular nature of the actual response, especially following 1846, suggests a more covert agenda and motivation. As the Famine progressed, it became apparent that the government was using its information not merely to help it formulate its relief policies, but also as an opportunity to facilitate various long-desired changes within Ireland. These included population control and the consolidation of property through various means, including emigration... Despite the overwhelming evidence of prolonged distress caused by successive years of potato blight, the underlying philosophy of the relief efforts was that they should be kept to a minimalist level; in fact they actually decreased as the Famine progressed."[137]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Famine_(Ireland)

The only way to state otherwise is to extract the useful bits and ignore the rest – "being economical with the truth" I think it's called.
The jury is still out on whether the Famine can be regarded as a "holocaust" or "ethnic cleansing" remains to be seen, but the process of smearing anybody who might make such preposterous suggestions are well underway (here at least).
Incidentally, Kinealy presented a fascinating "Thomas Davies" lecture entitled 'The Role of the Poor Law During the Famine'
An extract:

"ALTHOUGH THE TREASURY HOPED that all external financial assistance to the unions would end after the autumn of 1847 this was not possible. Pressure for relief continued to be high even after the harvest of 1848, and demand for Poor Law relief was higher in a number of unions in 1849 than it had been at any stage since 1845. In addition to current Poor Law expenditure, the Poor Rates also had to be used to repay earlier advances by the Treasury. Officials in England, however, had declared the Famine to be over since 1848, thus justifying their policy of minimum intervention.4' In the British government subscribed only £156,000, and £114,000 in 1849 (over half of which was a loan) in aid of the Poor Rates. This was far less than the £4,848,000 advanced -or the support of the public works in the months following the disastrous harvest of 1846." Furthermore, by 1848 most of the external charitable assistance to Ireland had dried up, throwing the burden almost exclusively on the local rates. Despite this, the Treasury repeatedly reprimanded the Poor Law Commissioners for providing relief 'too liberally'. Increasingly, a split was apparent between the perception of 8-he Famine by officials in Ireland and those in London. Twistleton's frustration with this policy was apparent and he rebuked the government because:
"The extent of the calamity which affects the Distressed Unions and the intensity of the distress in them, do not seem to be fully understood in England."
The Whig administration, however, was determined that the financial dependence of the Irish poor on British resources should finally be brought to an end.

Kinealy goes on to describe the introduction of a 6d-in-the-pound tax, known as 'the rate in aid' which was aimed at "all ratable property in Ireland"
"The financial responsibility for Irish distress was no longer to be an imperial charge but was transferred to the taxpayers of Ireland on the grounds that parts of Ireland had recovered from the famine and could make a greater contribution to the poorest unions."

A couple of explanations – Unions were workhouses
Edward Twistleton was Chief Poor Law Commissioner who resigned because "the destitution here is so horrible, and the indifference of the House of Commons (British Government) to it so manifest, that he is an unfit agent of a policy that must be one of extermination."
Far from absolving the British Government from blame Kinealy points the finger directly at them.
Her lecture, and fifteen other make riveting reading and are to be found in 'The Great Irish Famine' ed. Cathal Póirtéir and published by Mercier Press in conjunction with Radio Telefís Éireann in 1990
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Jul 13 - 08:53 AM

Fascinating links Triplane - many thanks.
Recruitment into the British or US army in the years following the Famine provided the inspiration for a number of songs, the most popular in Irealand being 'Patick Sheehan' which tells of an evictee whose family starved to death on the side of the road diring the Famine and who was forced to join the army, ending up as a beggar after having been blinded at the battle of Sebastopol.
It immediately became so popular that it forced the authorities to change the laws regarding servivemens' pensions.
We included a version on our collection of Clare songs, 'Around the Hills of Clare' sung by our neighbour, Vincie Boyle.
The version below, with note comes from the indespensible, 'Songs of Irish Rebellion', by Swiss folklorist Georges-Denis Zimmermann
Jim Carroll

PATRICK SHEEHAN
(1857)

TEXT: Broadside in the N.L.I. Written by Charles Joseph Kickham, under the pseudonym of «Darby Ryan, Junior». First printed in The Kilkenny Journal, 7th October, 1857; ((Patrick Sheehan, a recruiting song for English recruiting officers)!.

My name is Patrick Sheehan,
My years are thirty-four;
Tipperary is my native place —
Not far from Galtymore;
I came of honest parents —
But now they're lying low —
And many a pleasant day I spent
In the den of Aherlow.

My father -died, I closed his eyes
Outside our cabin door '—
The Landlord and the Sheriff, too,
Were there the day before —
And then my loving mother,
.And sisters three also,
Were forced to go with broken hearts
From the Glen of Aherlow.

For three long months, in search of work,
I wandered far and near;
I went unto the Poorhouse For to see my mother dear —
The news I heard nigh broke my heart;
But still in all my woe I blessed the friends who made their graves
In the Glen of Aherlow.

Bereft of home, and kith and kin —
With plenty all around —
I starved within my cabin,
And slept upon the ground!
But cruel as my lot was,
I ne'er did hardship know,
Till I joined the English army,
Far away from Aherlow.

"Rouse up there," says the Corporal,
"You lazy Irish hound,
Why, don't you hear, you sleepy dog,
The call 'to arms' sound?»
Alas! I had been dreaming Of days long, long ago —
I awoke before Sebastopol,

And not in Aherlow.
I groped to find my musket —
How dark I thought the night;
O, blessed God, it was not dark,
It was the broad day-light!
And when I found that I was blind,
My tears began to flow;
I longed for even a pauper's grave
In the Glen of Aherlow.

A poor neglected mendicant
All in the public street,
My nine months' pension now being out,
I beg from all I meet;
As I joined my country's tyrant
My face I'll never show
Along my kind old neighbours
In the Glen of Aherlow.

Oh! blessed Virgin Mary,
Mine is a mournful tale,
A poor blind prisoner here am I
In Dublin's dreary jail;
Struck blind within the trenches
Where I never feared the foe,
And now I'll never see again
My own sweet Aherlow.

Then Irish youths, dear countrymen,
Take heed of what I say,
For if you join the English ranks
You'll surely rue the day,
So whenever you are tempted
A-soldiering to go,
Remember poor blind Sheehan
Of the Glen of Aherlow.

TUNE: Kickham considered that his ballad could be sung to any "lamentation air"; in fact it is associated with the tune "Irish Molly-O", Joyce, (1909), No. 403.
There is a more popular variant of this tune, with the same text, in Father Walsh's Songs of the Gael, vol. Ill, p. 148.

NOTE: On 28th September, 1857, The Freeman's Journal published the following information: «A young man named Patrick Sheehan was brought up in custody of Police-constable Lynam, charged with causing an obstruc-tion to the thoroughfare in Grafton-street. The constable stated that the prisoner was loitering in Grafton-street for the purpose of begging, having a placard on his breast setting forth that he had served in the Crimea in the 55th regiment; that he had lost his sight in the trenches before Sebas¬topol, and that he was discharged on a pension of six pence per day for nine months; and that this period being now expired, he was now obliged to have recourse to begging to support himself. A Crimean medal was found on his person . . . The prisoner was committed for seven days for begging.
Reading this article, Kickham saw there an opportunity "to discourage enlistment in England's service by exposing the savage ingratitude she displays to those who become disabled while soldiering for her." (Quoted in James Maher's anthology The Valley near Slievenamon, p. 85.) With the song, the Kilkenny Journal printed a letter from the author explaining that he had done his best to compose his verses in the popular style: "I wrote them tough and vigorous, such as the old ballads of the people used to be, that they may seize on the popular ear and produce the intended effect on the popular heart, and mind, and spirit of the country. And for this object there is nothing like a rough, but racy street-ballad . . ".
Kickham was successful in his attempt, for the ballad was soon sung in the streets all over Ireland; it appeared on many broadsides, the only changes being in the punctuation. It is said to have shamed the government into inquiring about the ex-soldier, to whom a life pension of a shilling a day was granted

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Jul 13 - 08:30 AM

I do not understand why you attack me Mick.
I have posted nothing that could possibly be described as "patriotic."

My crime is to believe the professional historians?
If not, what are you attacking me for?

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Jul 13 - 08:25 AM

The non-historian Keith approves of such a rigorous impartial approach for Irish history departments,

That is fair and true Mick.
Do you not approve of impartial history too?

but doesn't think that he needs to keep his own patriotism in check when commenting on Irish history.

There is nothing in any of my posts to justify that slur Mick.
I do not deserve that insult and would ask you to look again and reconsider.

For Keith, exculpating the British government is objective, but blaming Britain for the famine is not objective.

I accept the objectivity of the professional historians.
Why don't you Mick?

The Irish academic establishment was challenging the simplistic heroic popular understanding of the famine , attempting to correct the traditional "blame" paradigm , as long ago as the nineteen-thirties. Its agenda was to replace the popular distorted version of Irish history by adopting a professional,scientific, methodological approach to history studies. The efforts of the academic establishment have largely failed to shift the popular understanding.

Would you say that was a fair summary , Keith?

Yes.
That is what I now believe, having read Dr. Christine K and the others.

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: mayomick
Date: 31 Jul 13 - 08:05 AM

Keith said in his previous response to me that the Kineally passage in question "does say that" a cabal of Irish historians existed who were responsible for the creation of an anti-British famine myth. Today he writes the opposite, that Irish politicians and not Irish historians were responsible for creating this famine myth - Irish historians are a scrupulously objective bunch of truth seekers!
The Irish academic establishment of the thirties thought that an objective, value-free, blame-free study of Irish history was needed and that historians should keep their patriotism in check while conducting research. The non-historian Keith approves of such a rigorous impartial approach for Irish history departments, but doesn't think that he needs to keep his own patriotism in check when commenting on Irish history. For Keith, exculpating the British government is objective, but blaming Britain for the famine is not objective.

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: GUEST,Triplane
Date: 31 Jul 13 - 06:59 AM

One result of the famine
I leave comment to those who have preformed opinions


St Patrick Battalion song

St Patricks Battallion

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: mg
Date: 31 Jul 13 - 01:03 AM

And you must hear Brendan Nolan's "Far from Home." and Johnny McEvoy wrote a great one..name escapes me...another one Deckman sent me and is on another computer now..what fascinates me the most is the people who were in the famine and wrote it during, right after or perhaps later. Johnny Seoghue?? was written by a famine sufferer. Skibereen later. There is also another version of Skibereen which is quite wonderful. Three grains of corn seems like a Victorian parlor song of the darkest gloom but was based on a true story...a coronor's report actually..from County Mayo..it made its way into a New York and I believe Ohio paper...at least one in obituary section..boy's name was Edward M'Hale. I have written about five or six songs..one about Grosse Isle...it is so sad it does not have a tune...Dan O'Hara was a true person. Nora Garvey was a true person (pride of dunquin)..we need to put names and stories to these bones that are being unearthed. And perhaps some religious ceremonies because they were so afraid of not being buried properly..which of course they were not.

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Big Mick
Date: 31 Jul 13 - 12:16 AM

A song my band did regarding the famine roads. The video was put together for the Aquinas College Irish study abroad group in Tully Cross. My daughter was there.

Along The Famine Road, written by Brian Flynn, performed by The Conklin Ceili Band

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: GUEST,Ed T
Date: 30 Jul 13 - 08:50 PM

Last post was from me, Ed T.

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: GUEST
Date: 30 Jul 13 - 08:47 PM

An interesting ddocumentary of these events from Canada, where many Irish suffering from the famine landed.



""Death or Canada: Fleeing the Irish Famine

Ballinran Entertainment produced a two-part documentary for Canadian television several years ago that appeared on Irish, English, and Canadian television. The one-hour 34-minute program describes the Irish immigration to Canada during the potato famine. The story in the film is heartbreaking and at the same time commands respect and awe for those that made the trip in "coffin ships" and survived that their children and children's children might have a better life in North America.""


Death or Canada Part 1

Death or Canada Part 2

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jul 13 - 03:44 PM

There's no mention whatsoever in that quote you gave of an anti-British famine myth nurtured for politico-economic reasons by a cabal of biased Irish historians.Quite the opposite.

Correct Mick.
The Irish historians were and are objective truth seekers.
Dr. Christine said the myth was nurtured by Irish politicians.
" the Free State government instructed history teachers that pupils should be 'imbued with the ideals and aspirations of such men as Thomas Davis and Patrick Pearse' and that they should emphasise 'the continuity of the separatist idea from Tone to Pearse' (see Francis T. Holohan, 'History teaching in the Irish Free State 1922-35' in HI Winter 1994). In Protestant schools in Northern Ireland, Irish history was rarely part of the curriculum (see Peter Collins, 'History teaching in Northern Ireland' in HI Spring 1995). Accordingly, in many Irish schools, a heroic but simplistic view of Irish history emerged, a morality story replete with heroes and villains."

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Jul 13 - 03:03 PM

"It seems that generations of Irish schoolchildren have been brainwashed with false history presenting Britain as "villain.""
Yours with deepest gratitude
Jim Carroll

Thank you, thank you, thank you]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63o8exNK4-Q

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: mayomick
Date: 30 Jul 13 - 02:58 PM

The Irish academic establishment was challenging the simplistic heroic popular understanding of the famine , attempting to correct the traditional "blame" paradigm , as long ago as the nineteen-thirties. Its agenda was to replace the popular distorted version of Irish history by adopting a professional,scientific, methodological approach to history studies. The efforts of the academic establishment have largely failed to shift the popular understanding.

Would you say that was a fair summary , Keith? There's no mention whatsoever in that quote you gave of an anti-British famine myth nurtured for politico-economic reasons by a cabal of biased Irish historians.Quite the opposite.

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jul 13 - 12:22 PM

It seems that generations of Irish schoolchildren have been brainwashed with false history presenting Britain as "villain."
Poisoning children's minds with hatred has cost many lives and much misery and it still goes on.

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jul 13 - 11:49 AM

There are no conspiracies to make up stories in order to denigrate Britain in Irish history departments , let me assure you

I believe you Mick, but the popular writers outside those departments know their market.
Denigrating Britain sells.
A balanced view awarding no blame stays on the shelves.

Christian Kineally , but what she writes doesn't support the case you make for the existence of some anti-British famine myth that has been nurtured for politico-economic reasons by a cabal of biased Irish historians .

This passage by Dr Christine actually does say that, I think.

"To a large extent, the popular understanding of the Famine in Ireland still follows a traditional, nationalist paradigm. Within this model, 'blame' is generally attributed to key groupings, either within the British government or within the landlord class. To some extent, these beliefs were fostered by the state school system south of the border, which itself arose out of particular historical circumstances. In 1922, for example, the Free State government instructed history teachers that pupils should be 'imbued with the ideals and aspirations of such men as Thomas Davis and Patrick Pearse' and that they should emphasise 'the continuity of the separatist idea from Tone to Pearse' (see Francis T. Holohan, 'History teaching in the Irish Free State 1922-35' in HI Winter 1994). In Protestant schools in Northern Ireland, Irish history was rarely part of the curriculum (see Peter Collins, 'History teaching in Northern Ireland' in HI Spring 1995). Accordingly, in many Irish schools, a heroic but simplistic view of Irish history emerged, a morality story replete with heroes and villains. This approach, however, was subsequently challenged by the Irish academic establishment. In the 1930s, a number of leading Irish academics—following the lead of British historians earlier in the century—set an agenda for the study of Irish history, which placed it on a more professional and scientific basis in terms of research methods and source materials. At the same time this approach also demanded the systematic revision and challenging of received wisdoms or unquestioned assumptions. What was specific to Ireland, however, was the declared mission to challenge received nationalist myths, and by implication, although less centrally, loyalist myths. Thus, at the launch of the influential Irish Historical Studies journal in 1938, the editors stated their commitment to replace 'interpretive distortions' with 'value-free history'. To a large extent, however, this debate took place within the rarefied atmosphere of academia and failed to percolate down into the schoolrooms either north or south of the border."

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: mayomick
Date: 30 Jul 13 - 11:08 AM

Keith, you quote from the "respected well qualified historian" Christian Kineally , but what she writes doesn't support the case you make for the existence of some anti-British famine myth that has been nurtured for politico-economic reasons by a cabal of biased Irish historians . There are no conspiracies to make up stories in order to denigrate Britain in Irish history departments , let me assure you.

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jul 13 - 06:03 AM

You have failed to justify your accusation that I have suggested suppression and censorship

You dismissed my quotes from respected and well qualified historians as "holocaust deniers."

You have not even referred to your lying about Tim Pat Coogan
I did not lie about him, and I did respond to you.


You have filled this thread and this forum with lies and distortions
No. I have merely quoted the finest historians, without comment.

Your insistence on dominating these threads with your attention-seeking habit of having the last word has dragged every thread into the sewer

No. You have posted far, far more than I have.

You lie here and you continue to lie

Easy to say when you have nothing else, but I just do not lie Jim.
If you disagree with anything, argue against it.
The fact is that you can not.

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Jul 13 - 05:47 AM

You have failed to justify your accusation that I have suggested suppression and censorship
You have not even referred to your lying about Tim Pat Coogan
You have filled this thread and this forum with lies and distortions
Your insistence on dominating these threads with your attention-seeking habit of having the last word has dragged every thread into the sewer
You lie here and you continue to lie
Please go away - you leave an extremely unpleasant taste in the mouth
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: GUEST,gutcher
Date: 30 Jul 13 - 05:45 AM

Read "The Diary Of A Highland Lady In Ireland" by a Mrs Smith nee Elizabeth Grant of Rothiemurchus for an interesting view by an outsider of the landowners side of the story which contains first hand details of the problems faced by small estate owners who, lets face it, were more concerned for their own survival and place in society.
E.G. having been brought up in a paternal highland society in Scotland at least tried to alleviate the problems of the poor within the constrictions mentioned.

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jul 13 - 04:54 AM

Coogan's reputation stands on its own merits as historically accurate, neutral and exhaustively researched.

According to who?

Apart from his popular books, has he ever been published in specialist journals to be read by real historians?

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jul 13 - 04:28 AM

Dr. Steven Davies.
"How culpable were the British ministers of the 1840s? They are charged with having given inadequate, limited relief because of their commitment to a doctrine of laissez faire. However, given the scale of the problem and the acute nature of the crisis once the harvest had failed for a second time in 1846, there was little they could do."

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jul 13 - 04:21 AM

I do not lie Jim.
Remember how you objected when I added 3 short revisionist quotes to what was an entirely one sided thread.
Why?

No historian could be completely uncritical of the government.
People starved.
Their efforts were inadequate to the scale of the catastrophe.
But she states,
"The arguments regarding the role of the British government are not sustainable"

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Jul 13 - 03:09 AM

"It would be wrong to leave anyone under the impression that "revisionism" is defined by Foster and similarly-minded people. The great Cambridge historian, Professor Brendan Bradshaw, carefully analysed what authentic revisionism was at a 1995 historical conference in New York. He accepted that all working historians are 'revisionist', in that they analyse new material that comes on stream, new sources that are opened, and private papers that are donated for research—all of which leads to new questions and obviously new conclusions. But there he departed from agreement with our revisionists."

"The historians themselves say that the revisionist view is "dominant."
Your star witness, revisionist (???) Christine Kineally's Quote:
"Moreover, much of this death from the Famine need not have taken place. The Irish Famine was not just caused by food shortages, it was also due to political and economic choices. As a consequence, ideology triumphed over humanity.
In the face of food shortages, relief provided by the government was inadequate. Imports of food were too small to meet the scale of the problem. At the same time, large amounts of food continued to be exported from Ireland. In 1847 – 'Black '47' – 4,000 ships left Ireland, each carrying large cargoes of food to Britain."
http://www.ballinagree.freeservers.com/knealy.html
"He himself must have had good links with IRA to write authoritively about them and about their prison protests"
So you say that everybody who writes a good book about the IRA, Hezbollah, Al Qaida, the Ku Klux Clan, The National Front,.... any extremist organisation, must be a supporter who "fights for them with his books"
Now there's an interesting slant on historical study - moron.
Coogan's reputation stands on its own merits as historically accurate, neutral and exhaustively researched.
You have invented your 'facts' about him - you lied and you are now defending those lies with an outrageously stupid suggestion.
Provide your proof or withdraw your accusation otherwise you will continue to lie.
"You think one should be suppressed and censored."
I really don't expect an answer to this but if you have any evidence of my having ever suggested anything be "suppressed or censored" please produce it - yet another example of your 'lying in public'.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jul 13 - 02:27 AM

Coogan and the cult fraudster are not the same person.

"Closely linked to IRA he fights for them with his books as his father fought with a gun." That is a blatant invention on your part - a lie in fact.

His father WAS a fighter.
He himself must have had good links with IRA to write authoritively about them and about their prison protests, and his books support the Republican agenda.

I leave arguing the points of history to the historians.
You must accept that there is a "nationalist" and a "revisionist" view.
I think both should be discussed.
You think one should be suppressed and censored.
Why?

The historians themselves say that the revisionist view is "dominant."
What is your denial worth compared to that Jim?

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Big Mick
Date: 29 Jul 13 - 05:31 PM

Amen, I say, amen.

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jul 13 - 04:33 PM

Whoops
You also wrote:
"Coogan and the cult fraudster are not historians."
Coogan has never been accused of "fraud" by anybody - you invented it - a lie.
You have repeatedly refused to qualify that statement - a distortion.
You spinelessly tried to pass the buck by accusing of making the statement - even if he had, it was you who persistently used it to back up your fallacious arguments - a spineless lie.
I think we are finished here - don't you?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jul 13 - 04:33 PM

Whoops
You also wrote:
"Coogan and the cult fraudster are not historians."
Coogan has never been accused of "fraud" by anybody - you invented it - a lie.
You have repeatedly refused to qualify that statement - a distortion.
You spinelessly tried to pass the buck by accusing of making the statement - even if he had, it was you who persistently used it to back up your fallacious arguments - a spineless lie.
I think we are finished here - don't you?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jul 13 - 04:23 PM

By the way
My apologies for wrongly accusing you of lying - it was not you who claimed that Mrs Smith and Tim Pat Coogan and Robert Kee were disregarded by historians, it was Ms Kinnealy - my misreading, sorry.
It's not accurate of course, beyond the fact that many professionally qualified historians disregard the opinions of those with no academic qualifications (the same is true of folklorists, as I have been made well aware over the last thirty years).
However you did write od Tim Pat Coogan:
"Closely linked to IRA he fights for them with his books as his father fought with a gun." That is a blatant invention on your part - a lie in fact.
You have persistently refused to either qualify that lie; that is agenda-driven distortion of facts - a distortion.
You will continue neither to withdraw or qualify that statement - another distortion.
You also accused Coogan

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jul 13 - 03:10 PM

Cross posted
"Why?"
Because the outcome of the famine
"all historians generally agree that British policies during the Famine (particularly those applied by the ministry of Lord John Russell) were misguided, ill-informed and counter-productive, and that had a similar crisis occurred in England instead of Ireland then the government's response would have been very different"
At best, political incompetence and neglect, at worst, a deliberate ploy to solve "the Irish Question" (doesn't that phrase have a shiveningly familiar ring?)
Whatever the truth - it was a political act that requires a political understanding.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jul 13 - 03:04 PM

"Remember I am not a historian Jim."
You really don't have to keep repeating this - it is glaringly obvious you are nowhere near one - it 's not a get-out-of-jail-free card for your displays of ignorance.
If you care to follow the link (or would that be too much like hard work) you will find that Foster is in fact a "revisionist" in the historical sense - someone prepared to revise their views in the light of new evidence. What you have been claiming throughout this is that "revisionists" are stuck somewhere in the first half of the 20th century - the opposite of the case.
I raised the point because I once heard Foster speak - he stuck me as neither an "80 years of of date" Republican, nor was he someone who was prepared to re-write history to suit an agenda - unlike your good self.
Your touching faith in Christine Kinnealy seems not to extend to her having said"

"Moreover, much of this death from the Famine need not have taken place. The Irish Famine was not just caused by food shortages, it was also due to political and economic choices. As a consequence, ideology triumphed over humanity.
In the face of food shortages, relief provided by the government was inadequate. Imports of food were too small to meet the scale of the problem. At the same time, large amounts of food continued to be exported from Ireland. In 1847 – 'Black '47' – 4,000 ships left Ireland, each carrying large cargoes of food to Britain."

Which is basically the crux of what is being suggesting here.
Her other statement in no way absolves the British from their crimes against humanity.
Peel's Government indeed did bring some relief.
In 1845 that Government fell and was replaced by Russell's Whig Government which set about dismantling all the humanitarian work Peel did and replaced it with a laissez faire policy, closed the food storehouses and replaced them with soup kitchens from which the people could not benefit if they owned more than a half acre of land - it turned famine victims into beggers.

Russell's home secretary Charles(?) Wood not only encouraged evictions, but it provided troops in order to carry those evictions out - one of the prime reasons for suggesting (in the words of Christine Kinealy" "The Irish Famine was not just caused by food shortages, it was also due to political and economic choices. As a consequence, ideology triumphed over humanity."
Nor is her reference to Irish historians relevant here - all the major critical quotes you have been given come from British historians.
Neither does your respect for her extend to your making the effort to spell her name correctly apparently.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jul 13 - 02:34 PM

- the Famine, certainly as far as the descendants of the victims is concerned, is a political issue

Why?

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jul 13 - 01:43 PM

" Roy Foster, an influential revisionist,"
Don't suppose you have any evidence of Foster's "revisionism"

No I do not.
I imagine that Christine Kineally had her reasons for saying that though.

Who said "All historians generally agree" ?

Remember I am not a historian Jim.
I do not understand your last two posts at all.
What are you asking me?
What are you saying?
What was my lie?

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jul 13 - 01:27 PM

The kind of "revisionist" Foster is considered in historical circles

"It would be wrong to leave anyone under the impression that "revisionism" is defined by Foster and similarly-minded people. The great Cambridge historian, Professor Brendan Bradshaw, carefully analysed what authentic revisionism was at a 1995 historical conference in New York. He accepted that all working historians are 'revisionist', in that they analyse new material that comes on stream, new sources that are opened, and private papers that are donated for research—all of which leads to new questions and obviously new conclusions. But there he departed from agreement with our revisionists."
http://www.atholbooks.org/extracts/foster_preface.php
Yours as ever
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Folklore/History: Irish Famine
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jul 13 - 01:07 PM

" Roy Foster, an influential revisionist,"
Don't suppose you have any evidence of Foster's "revisionism"
Won't hold my breath for a reply but in the meantime, some evidence about what he and "All historians generally agree" about the behaviour of the British Government during the famine.
Don't suppose you care to tell us where to got your information about Foster's revisionism - nope? - I thought not.
Two corrections - the Famine, certainly as far as the descendants of the victims is concerned, is a political issue
Oh - and you do lie by the way. (28 Jul 13 - 01:32 PM )
Jim Carroll   

Suggestions of genocide[edit]
A claim was made by a U.S. professor of law, Francis A. Boyle that the Famine was genocide by the British against the Irish, meaning that the famine was part of a deliberate policy of planned extermination. One U.S. historian, James Mullin, insists that what happened can be described as genocide, sometimes accusing other historians, statisticians and researchers who state otherwise of pushing a British point of view, or of revisionism, rewriting history to make excuses for British imperialism.[8] However more U.S., British and Irish historians, such as Professors F.S.L. Lyons, John A. Murphy, ROY FOSTER, and James S. Donnelly, Jr, as well as historians Cecil Woodham-Smith, Peter Gray, Ruth Dudley Edwards and Cormac Ó Gráda have denied claims of a deliberate policy of genocide. ALL HISTORIANS generally agree that British policies during the Famine (particularly those applied by the ministry of Lord John Russell) were misguided, ill-informed and counter-productive, and that had a similar crisis occurred in England instead of Ireland then the government's response would have been very different.
"Democide", a recently coined term, has been suggested to be more appropriate — referring to a deliberate policy of negligence rather of planned extermination.[9][not in citation given] The famine killed one million Irish through hunger and related diseases such as cholera. A million others emigrated during the famine, with millions more following them in the following decades. The vast majority of these people were Roman Catholic, traditionally less inclined towards loyalty to the Crown.
While it could easily be said that the famine and its after-effects ended conclusively any chance of Ireland ever being a military or economic threat to Britain again, it should be also noted that the famine's long term demographic effects were less the result of deaths from starvation (which, as with most famines, affected the old, the very young and the sick disproportionately) and more the result of emigration (which affected the young population of reproductive age). It seems almost certain that economic factors alone would have caused considerable emigration from Ireland even without mass starvation, therefore it is a matter of conjecture as to what the population of Ireland would be today had there not been a famine in the 19th century.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legacy_of_the_Great_Irish_Famine

Jim Carroll