Re: More racism coming out of Australia

by Merlin Mon 12 Oct 2009, 11:34

skully wrote:What is going on?

That's another thread altogether.
Get with it FFS skulls ... Wink

by Hass Mon 12 Oct 2009, 11:39

Sorry for the essay guys, but those arguing the English point of view were inferring that the Irish point of view was borne of ignorance.

I hadn't been in this thread for nine pages and was more or less accused of running away from my opening salvo. The thread was already a giant clusterf&%@ several pages ago - I figured I might as well make my point.

by tac Mon 12 Oct 2009, 11:41

And a decent summary it was, Hass, but shoeshine will no doubt counter that it is unfair to blame the english as the landlords were actually normans . . .

by JKLever Mon 12 Oct 2009, 15:37

Hass wrote:
I only used the Irish example to make a larger point, not to get a rise out of the English. Saying the English "starved them to death" might have been a bit inflammatory

It wasn't inflammatory, it was complete rubbish. It suggested it was government policy to do that. And the 'denied them the freedom of religion' line is complete arse. You might just have well written out of existence the fact catholics & protestants were busy burning each other to death for not toeing the line throughout Europe at that time.

I agree with the rest of your statement, no problem (hell there were even 'no black or irish' signs on some shop windows as recent as the 1960's!) - but how is it 'the english point of view' ? Surely its the POV of two individuals. The sort of willingness to box me and shoeshine as 'the english' is what caused me to get snarky in the first place at your one liner.

British policy in Ireland is nothing to proud of (as a country that is, personally I CGAF, nothing to do with me) so why the need to make sh!t up?

Tis all.

You're easily one of the more knowledgeable forummers here and I read all your contributions so I nearly choked on my dinner when I read what you wrote.

by Merlin Mon 12 Oct 2009, 15:47

You tell 'em Lever ... you tell 'em!
Cheeky feckin' Strines adopting airs, graces and the quicksanded moral high ground!

PS - Is all this strife really worth it over a dozzy coupla Oirish tatties ?

by Eric Air Emu Mon 12 Oct 2009, 19:07

Has anyone come up with the you will pay the price for being a fussy eater line yet?

by eowyn Mon 12 Oct 2009, 19:23

It wasn't inflammatory, it was complete rubbish. It suggested it was government policy to do that. And the 'denied them the freedom of religion' line is complete arse. You might just have well written out of existence the fact catholics & protestants were busy burning each other to death for not toeing the line throughout Europe at that time.

Mr Lever, Catholics and Protestants weren't burning each other at the stake at the time of the Potato Famine.

Why is it we need to simplify and 'explain away' things that were incredibly complex and of their time? Except that horrendous things happened in the past, that many were culpable then make damn sure they don't happen again.

by JKLever Mon 12 Oct 2009, 19:27

eowyn wrote:
It wasn't inflammatory, it was complete rubbish. It suggested it was government policy to do that. And the 'denied them the freedom of religion' line is complete arse. You might just have well written out of existence the fact catholics & protestants were busy burning each other to death for not toeing the line throughout Europe at that time.

Mr Lever, Catholics and Protestants weren't burning each other at the stake at the time of the Potato Famine.

Didn't say they were shrug

by ever hopeful Mon 12 Oct 2009, 19:42

tac wrote:most Australians agree that we have nowt to be proud of

I don't know, I reckon there are a few things.

As far as the Irish famine goes though, I don't think any of the serious posts on here are trying to defend the English position, only to explain exactly which English people were responsible and to what extent. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you're arguing that ALL English people at the time were guilty, then aren't you automatically also condemning a lot of Australians' ancestors who were presumeably still here?

(and if I'm not wrong then correct me anyway; I know you enjoy it)

by furriner Mon 12 Oct 2009, 20:54

So, now I'm confused, why exactly did the English murder the Irish?

You say Potato...

by furriner Mon 12 Oct 2009, 21:09

If a gentleman happens to be born in a stable, it does not follow that he should be called a horse.

I'm done, thanks for asking.

by JKLever Mon 12 Oct 2009, 22:09

furriner wrote:So, now I'm confused, why exactly did the English murder the Irish?

Because they spoke funny.

by ever hopeful Mon 12 Oct 2009, 23:44

tac wrote:most Australians agree that we have nowt to be proud of

BTW tac, I meant to ask...

by ever hopeful Mon 12 Oct 2009, 23:45

tac wrote:most Australians agree that we have nowt to be proud of

...does it annoy you when people latch onto one little thing you said...

by ever hopeful Mon 12 Oct 2009, 23:46

tac wrote:most Australians agree that we have nowt to be proud of

..and then keeping on quoting it out of context...

by ever hopeful Mon 12 Oct 2009, 23:47

tac wrote:most Australians agree that we have nowt to be proud of

...just to make some poorly argued point and to try and wind people up?

by G.Wood Mon 12 Oct 2009, 23:47

tac wrote:most Australians agree that we have nowt to be proud of

I am proud of tac's work on this thread

by ever hopeful Mon 12 Oct 2009, 23:48

tac wrote:most Australians agree that we have nowt to be proud of

Or doesn't it really bother you one way or the other?

by ever hopeful Mon 12 Oct 2009, 23:59

G.Wood wrote:Sad but true tac.

As much fun as hunting the natives for sport must have been for the English anything Australians did them later had to be an improvement (as abhorrent as some of it was and still is)

Well, it's a point of view, but would I rather be hunted down like an animal or have my entire way of life and culture systematically destroyed and all my people treated like halfwitted criminals for generations? It's not such a clear cut choice for me...

by ever hopeful Tue 13 Oct 2009, 00:10

Going back to the Irish again (have we mentioned them yet?), if anyone wants an unbiased way of getting a feel for what really happened (but doesn't want to wade through some dusty old history tome) then I can recommend Joseph O'Connor's book, Star of the Sea. It's a novel of course, so the plot is ultimately fictional, but it's very much based on the facts surrounding the famine years and whilst being an entertaining (and often harrowing) read manages to put across many viewpoints, from many quarters, along the way.

by tac Tue 13 Oct 2009, 01:45

ever hopeful wrote:
tac wrote:most Australians agree that we have nowt to be proud of
Or doesn't it really bother you one way or the other?

Not in the slightest, eh. But then I would never be so foolish as to blame the Irish potato famine on the normans . . . aye-aye

by furriner Tue 13 Oct 2009, 01:59

JKLever wrote:
furriner wrote:So, now I'm confused, why exactly did the English murder the Irish?

Because they spoke funny.

Ah.

On a related note, I am quite pissed off that some English forummers don't know more about the Indian/ English history, after all that your lot made fortunes out of us. Wink

Hell, my great grandfather's inheritance has probably paid for JKL's education, or Merlin's 1970s bellbottoms and toupee. Laughing

by tac Tue 13 Oct 2009, 02:00

furriner wrote:
JKLever wrote:
furriner wrote:So, now I'm confused, why exactly did the English murder the Irish?

Because they spoke funny.

Ah.

On a related note, I am quite pissed off that some English forummers don't know more about the Indian/ English history, after all that your lot made fortunes out of us.

Hell, my great grandfather's inheritance has probably paid for JKL's education, or Merlin's 1970s bellbottoms and toupee.

Well that's not much to brag about . . .

by furriner Tue 13 Oct 2009, 02:10

Merlo's totally 'down wit it' bellbottoms on the other hand...

by tac Tue 13 Oct 2009, 02:13

and the toupee . . .

by Sponsored content