Capitol Hill Blue Forums Misc. Topics General Stuff December 16, 1773

The Irish war of independence was fought to make Ireland worse off.

Sinn fein and the IRA fought a war break the union between herself and England. taking Ireland out of the wider economy and larger market.

Withdrawing Irish claims on English financial assistance, which from the 1880s on was quite substantial - despite the previous treatment of Ireland.

The Irish fought to have less tax monies to administer by their government than would be available under the British.

indeed for centuries many Irish had made their fortune through the wider British empire, according to Prof Niall Ferguson, the irish and the scots played a disproportionately large part in building the empire.

And the Irish fought to rid themselves of these financial advantages.

It was nationalist, parochial bullshite, but that war of idependence wasnt fought for profit. There was no profit to be had, no huge natural resources to squabble over. no diamond mines, no gold, no oil, few large companies or industrial concerns.

Altough lip service was paid to socialist ideals and motives, they didnt last even until the ceasefire with England.

Perhaps you should widen your reading choices.

Pecunia in toilet

Schlack...
that was pretty funny

You've misunderstood my statement. Nearly all those actually fighting fought for idealistic goals...this is true in most civl conflicts.

However, a large part of the funding derived from those looking to profit from an independent Ireland. Much of the money came direct from America -- smaller donations made by nationalistic Irish-Americans, the larger ones from businessmen looking to curry favor with the new government. Even foreign countries who felt the loss of Ireland would weaken Britain, and thereby strengthen their own position...one loan was negotiated with Russia, and (Italy offered another, though this one fell through when Britain learned of it)

No one fought to make Ireland "worse off", though you may, if you wish, argue that was the end result. That's a different question entirely, however.

Perhaps you should refrain from flaming other posters.

it's absurd to argue that wars do not have some underlying profit motivating them. certainly the best interest of a people, a nation an economic system includes protecting the ability to do business and profit without direct or even indirect manipulation of outside authorities. i think howard zinn aptly pointed out the motivation of profit during the revolutionary war in his book "a history of the people of the united states ..." however, even his assertions that the people primarily responsible for the war were wealthy land owners does not change the fact that a desire to direct ones own destiny was largely behind the motivation as well.

That is exactly my point.

Funny as I didn’t make that argument.


I’ve put a case that the Irish fought to make themselves worse off by severing the link with England. This was the express intention of the war. this was the entire reason for it. it had inevitable economic consequences, which were accepted. I don’t see how one can argue that people who fought for independence didn’t fight for its inevitable consequences. people were willing to take that hit in order to have independence.

Saying that no they didn’t isn’t much of an argument - as you yourself have pointed out.

Most large landowners and big businessmen, because of their close ties to England were dead against the insurrection and didn’t support it financially. in fact finances in Ireland were very had to come by, which is why the reliance of the US. I just don’t see how this fits into a profit motive analysis. it only does if you chop parts off.

the National Loan organized by Michael Collins was made up of small donations by small people. hardly currying favour



wiki

Of this 5 million given by people in the US, can you please identify who the big us business beneficiaries were? If money/profit was indeed the motive. Who exactly was currying favor? Are we dealing with speculation and inyourendo? Do you have any citations?

I would like to see who thought they would profit from it, as trade between the US and Ireland was miniscule at best. And why would anyone curry favour with the proto Irish government? when there was so much more profit to be made currying favour with the British empire. profit as a motive, in the main doesn’t cut it.
The vast majority of the monies in the US were collected in small amounts from a lot of people during the fundraising tours of Eamonn De Velera. and in the plethora of Irish clubs. it may have been nostalgia, idealism or social pressure, but the profit motive, just isn’t there. in fact that system of collecting money "for the boys" continued until fairly recently. one cannot argue that that was currying favour with anyone but the paramilitaries who were never and would never be in a position respond.

Ill see tonight if I can dig out some analysis of US monies to Ireland during the war of independence.

I’m also intrigued by the Russian loan. If it happened, it’s not something I'm aware of, or hasn’t stuck in the memory. I do know that smears of soviet influence were made by the British throughout the 20 century on Irish Republicans, which turned out to be complete crap. I suspect the Russian loan falls into this category. Oh and by 1917, wasn’t Italy now on the side of the Allies? whereas the war of independence didn’t kick off until 1918/1919.


link
and appears to be exactly the opposite of what you stated. it was Ireland who gave money to Russia

An in any case, don’t (proto) national governments arrange loans from other National governments. I’m not sure what the point this particular point was. It looks like loans with other governments were raised after the war of independence, not before. so the profit motive doesn’t fit there either.

I could be wrong on this Ill look into it tonight when I have access to my books.

Books? You still have books over there???

considering the way the economy is going, our book supply will run out about December. i dont know what we will havbe to eat after that

how 'bout some nice little tea cakes?

well, you may say that but reading your earlier post says different. you are saying that wars are motivated by profit. i am saying while that is true, there are other elements involved beyond monetary gain.