Talk:Blueshirts

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

Ok. We have two articles on the Blueshirts. Blueshirts and National Guard. I don't know what to do with them.

I think it's fixed now; please check for mistakes. - Hephaestos`

National Corporate Party[edit]

Someone associated with this article might know more of O'Duffys National Corporate Party which I have created a stub on, and could help expand. Nagelfar 18:27, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Blatant Popular Front Politics[edit]

This article seems to deviate from NPOV, especially considering the seemingly amused exclamation regarding Franco's troops firing on O'Duffy's position and the references to the holocaust, especially in light of the IRA's Plan Kathleen and the uncited references to 'conservative elements.'

Worst article that I've encountered on Wikipedia. Was obviously written by people hostile to Fine Gael. The Blueshirt movement was not Fascist. It's leaders may have been but were kept i9n check by the leaders of the constitutional Fine Gael party. In the end, FG alienated extremists in the Blueshirts and successfully broke away from that body leaving only a handful of supporters with extrmists like O'Duffy. Get your facts straight!

Biased article[edit]

This is the most biased article I have ever read. It should be deleted or re-written


Serious POV issue with THIS line: "O'Duffy's adventure by raising a volunteer group to aid the Nationalist movement of Franco in Spain against the Socialist government which was brutally persecuting the Church,"

EXCUSE ME...

when did it become an unchallengeable assertion that the democratically elected Popular Front government WAS in fact persecuting the Church? If you were to say "the Socialist government whose opponents CLAIMED was 'brutally yada yada yada' it would be barely tolerable. Definite rewrite or deletion needed there. -Ken Burch


The introduction is very defensive - not describing the organisation at all, but saying that it wasn't fascist! A quite unique approach for a Wikipedia article. 124.197.15.138 (talk) 05:39, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fine gael and the blueshirts are intrinsically linked, they were a fascist org, maybe u should interview the older generations whom knew what they did after the civil war with land commission, they actively singled out those who did not fight in civil war and those on the other side. Democratic? I think not.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.47.20.24 (talk) 15:26, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fascism[edit]

There is still considerable debate in Ireland about whether apart from General O' Duffy, other members of the Army Comrades Association and members were undoubtedly fascist, but there was little in open docterine that can associate the group with anything other than militarism and corportivism. They always maintained that they were a democratic party. I intend to change this article in this way, to even up the debate and reflect some of the acedemic opinions in Ireland at the minute. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.41.69.239 (talk) 13:01, 25 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I don't know much about the factual content of this article. However the second paragraph begins..."Regarded by imbeciles...." This is purely subjective and a matter of opinion. That part should be deleted or at the very least amended.

Article fails to give proper evidence or reasoning to label the Blueshirts as Fascists. Being anti-communist and having christian values does not mean it is the opposite extreme of fascism. The opening section labels the Blueshirts as Fascist but then further into the article this is questioned by giving historians different points of view with no clear consensus to make this claim. I therefore think it is sensible to delete this designation as fascist in the introduction. Teddy455 (talk) 22:39, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The IRA anti-fascist!![edit]

Whether the Blueshirts were fascists or not will always depend on what definition of fascism is in vogue, therefore it is unlikely that a conclusion will ever be reached. However, one thing is beyond doubt- the IRA cannot be seen as an anti-fascist movement. Firstly The IRA opposed the Blueshirts in the same way they opposed any political party at the time, (i.e. The Communist Party of Ireland) with violence and intimidation. It was about political space that's why the blueshirts were opposed by the IRA in the 1930s. It would be too simplistic to assess the IRA's anti-fascist credentials on this point alone. The IRA's response to the Spanish Civil War is telling, as its leadership banned its members from participating [citation needed] in the 'International fight against fascism', still an anti-fascist organisation? Finally the IRA's collaboration with the Nazi's discredits any notion of the IRA as an anti-fascist organisation. True it opposed 'fascism' in Ireland but once Ireland was rid of fascism the IRA's focus on more imediate issues. The IRA's opposition to fascism died with the blueshirts. Palingenetic 20:27, 24 March 2007 (UTC)Palengenetic[reply]

Protestants[edit]

"Christian faith" would include Protestants. Did they have many Protestant members? --84.20.17.84 15:22, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a quotation, so it doesn't matter. They said it; we repeated it. - Revolving Bugbear 18:35, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am not questioning the accuracy of the quotation. I'd like to ascertain whether there were Protestants or non-Irish Christian people. --84.20.17.84 15:01, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Categories[edit]

are the Categories correct - were the Blueshirts a "political party"? ClemMcGann (talk) 13:57, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Image Request[edit]

I have a family photo showing a group of Blueshirts outside Healys Pub in Foxford, Mayo. I'd be willing to let it be used for this article but was wondering what license it should be under as I don't know what the story is regarding copyright. Scan of photo here... http://flickr.com/photos/jaqian/2162010688/sizes/o/ Jaqian (talk) 12:16, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Er......[edit]

So who exactly were the Blueshirts? This article simply fails to give a very neat definition of what they stood for or what they wanted. Jamrifis (talk) 19:20, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Poor article...[edit]

Full of POV and irrelavant facts —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.24.91 (talk) 03:34, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

March on Dublin[edit]

The protectors of Cumann na nGaedhael and the National Centre Party were also declared illegal, while the Irish Republican Army, who were mobilising against the fascist threat by breaking up their meetings and organising mass resistance, were allowed to remain legal and armed.

This paragraph doesn't read well. It already stated that the Blueshirts were banned, who then are the so called protectors of Cumann na nGaedhael and the National Centre Party? Can this paragraph be deleted?

Also I see a lot of POV complaints, can they not just be removed to clean up the article? Jaqian (talk) 15:01, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Work needed re why "Blue weren't fascist"[edit]

At least four passages in the intro are problematic to me:

"Fascist ideology was not widespread among rank-and-file members..."

  • What is meant by "fascist ideology" here, since the Blueshirts were clearly inspired by and remained on good terms with the Italian and Spanish varieties of fascism?

"The organisation was defensive rather than offensive in outlook..."

  • The meaning of this is unclear, as is its relevance to the question of fascism(?)

"Unlike their European counterparts, members were not known to engage in political terrorism."

  • Surely many fascist parties, including some in Europe, have not been/are not strongly associated with terrorism?

"R. M. Douglas has written: "[M]ost scholars... accept that those who have sought to find in the Blueshirts an Irish manifestation of fascism have been looking in the wrong place."

  • Which implies that there is a "right place" to look, but where?

Cheers, Grant | Talk 10:32, 20 March 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Lede needs improvement[edit]

There have been a number of criticisms expressed about the content of the article, including the lede. The current layout/content of the lede is unsuitable (refer to the MoS on lede). I suggest moving most of the present lede to a new section entititled "Criticisms" or something like that, leaving a bare skeleton that can be improved in line with Wikipedia recommendations on layout and content. Hohenloh + 13:39, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Blueshirts. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:36, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dateline wrong[edit]

Members of the Blueshirts couldn't have fought in the Spanish Civil War as the Blueshirts were dissolved in 1933 and the Spanish Civil War didn't start until 1936. Article amended to say 'former members'. 213.233.155.149 (talk) 15:46, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The blushirts were a fascist organization[edit]

The blueshirt's philoposophy was fascist. Any contention to the contrary is intelectually dishonest and transparently false.

The fact that the author cited sources that claim whether or not the blueshirts are fascist, in Irish discourse much later, is irrelevant.

The sources, often elites and members of the institutions of power, are biased and have publication privileges, thereby skewing discourse and promoting self-serving, untenable conclusions. The party was an authoritarian, far right outfit that donned blue shirts akin to brown and black shirts in Germany and Italy respectively. It endoesed and encouraged street violence and property destruction to eliminate and intimate perceived opposition. It organized and placed emphasis on creating a "youth" corps. Its followers gave heil signs collectively in organized group gatherings to their leader reminiscent of Hitler, among other things.

The author(s) of the present entry are utilizing sources that engage in historical revisionism, both to distance Irish history from the atrocities perpetrated by the Nazis and Fascists, and to legitimize Finn Gael.

1) https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/books/without-the-blueshirts-there-would-have-been-no-fine-gael-1.4399082

"The uniform with blue shirt was adopted at a meeting three months after the election, in April 1933. Connections were immediately drawn with Hitler’s Brownshirts and Mussolini’s Blackshirts."

"By March 1934 an energetic O’Duffy had spoken at meetings in 23 of the 26 counties; increasingly these became Blueshirt rallies, with the right-arm salute a growing feature."

"Of his contemporaries, Mussolini and Franco offer more useful parallels in terms of personality and politics. Flawed figures, plagued by insecurity and a hunger for adulation, they wrote and rewrote their personas."

"It is hardly surprising then that Fine Gael chooses to play down this element of its history, opting instead to highlight the heroic Michael Collins, whose assassination at the age of 31 sealed his fate as a patriot and an icon. This is a problematic, selective interpretation of the party’s history."


2) https://libcom.org/article/blueshirts-irelands-fascists

"The Blueshirts, Ireland's home grown variant of Fascism developed in Ireland during the 1920's and 30's."

"The Blueshirts had been set up in the spring of 1931 under the name of the Army Comrades Association comprising ex members of the Free State army. Their first leader was Dr. T F O'Higgins. In late 1931 the ACA claimed a membership of 100,000, adopted the uniform of a blue shirt and changed its name to the National Guard.

A new leader, Eoin O'Duffy, was appointed in 1933 after he had been sacked from his post as Police Commissioner. O'Duffy had been prominent in the Free State army during the Civil War and had been responsible for the murder of eight Republicans by tying them together over a landmine in Kerry. The Blueshirts used the handy label of "anti-communism" as a cloak for their fascist activities.

"The run up to the 1932 election was marked by increasing repression of Republican and Socialist groups with the indiscriminate banning of progressive political organisations and the regular imprisonment of their leaders."

"The Blueshirt newspaper commenced publication from August 1933. Blueshirt propaganda was racist - and anti-semitic, as in this extract from their journal:

"The founders of Communism were practically all Jews. This can scarcely be a mere coincidence. It may appear singular that Marx, Engels, Lasalle and Ricardo were all Jews".

"Blueshirt publications also proposed that the leader should be greeted in the Nazi style, suggesting the ludicrous "Hail O'Duffy". In February 1934 John A Costello, a leading Cumann Na nGael member declared in the Dail:

“The Blackshirts have been victorious in Italy and Hitler's Brownshirts have been victorious in Germany, as assuredly the Blueshirts will be victorious in Ireland".

O'Duffy had contacts with European fascist groups. In December 1934 he attended an International Fascist Conference in Switzerland which included representatives of far-right groups in 13 European states."

3) Here is a 1930's blue shirt emblem with Finn Gael imprinted. Earlier versions, before the group merged with Finn Gael, omitted reference to the party and the pertinent space was left blank

https://www.whytes.ie/art/1930s-fine-gael-badges-two-different-types/130319/?SearchString=&LotNumSearch=&GuidePrice=&ArtistID=&ArrangeBy=list&NumPerPage=15&offset=442

4) Continuing with this theme, W.T. Cosgrove, who served as leader of Finn Gael from 1934-1944, wrote that, "[P]eople reared in workhouses, as you are aware, are no great acquisition to the community and they have no ideas whatsoever of civic responsibilities. As a rule their highest aim is to live at the expense of the ratepayers. Consequently, it would be a decided gain if they all took it into their heads to emigrate."

Biolitblue (talk) 07:16, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Biolitblue, Welcome to Wikipedia
Per WP:RELIABILITY, sourcing on Wikipedia must always primarily be from reliable, secondary sources. You've linked to Whytes.ie and an unsourced quote from WT Cosgrove. These would at best be primary sources and per WP:RSPRIMARY, these are highly discouraged from use on Wikipedia.
You've stated you feel several of the cited authors/historians are inappropriate for use in the article or are bias, however you've also cited Libcom.org, which gives perspectives from a decidedly Marxist political viewpoint rather than a neutral historical one. Per WP:RS/AC, Wikipedia places great value on Academic consensus, and thus the viewpoint of the cited historians cannot merely be hand-waved away by speculating that they are "elites".
If you would like to contribute to this or any other article here on Wikipedia, you may want to consult Help:Referencing for beginners first. For historical topics and article, I'd suggest using Journal sources such as JSTOR for your research. CeltBrowne (talk) 09:10, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The salient point is whether the information is correct. If the source reflects bias because of the source, you have a point. Can you show me where in the actual content of libcom.org where there is actual bias, instead of merely assuming bias based on the source?
Additionally, libcom.org, whatever the political slant, might be in a more advantageous position of discerning the truth because they focus on matters such as this one more than MSM. Do they have the facts wrong?
Are you insinuating that all published sources from writers who may support some form of socialism are not citable on Wikipedia? Are Marx's own published views not citable own Wikipedia?
Your comment that I'm "waving away" other sources is presumptuous and untrue. I'm trying to discern the truth whatever the source, whether it be Libcom.org, or The Economist, or Fox News.
The cite to the quote in https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/books/without-the-blueshirts-there-would-have-been-no-fine-gael-1.4399082 is also cited in the original article, but conveniently you have raised no objection to that fact.
The quote from WT Cosgrove was taken from https://www.irishtimes.com/news/other-lives-glimpsed-1.41048 It is also attributed to him in other sources. Biolitblue (talk) 01:44, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It appears that you believe I'm driving an agenda by using the term "elites," which you took special care to quote in your response. The term is part of the accepted lexicon within sociology.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/elite-sociology Biolitblue (talk) 02:30, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The issue with Libcom is not that they're socialists, the issue with your Libcom source is that we have no idea who the author of it is (it's attributed only to the username "Fozzie") or if they're reliable source/expert in their field. Per WP:RELIABILITY, Wikipedia articles need to be sourced to reliable, secondary sources. Named historians whose credentials we can verify are suitable sources. Anonymous unverifiable sources are not. As I've already pointed out, your other sources are primary ones. You need to find secondary ones.
You added a Political POV maintaince tag and attacked the reliability of the Historians cited in the article, but you don't seem to be familiar with how material is sourced on Wikipedia. I'd suggest reading Help:Referencing for beginners#Reliable sources and taking the quiz before even making edits on Wikipedia, much less trying to radically alter this article. CeltBrowne (talk) 10:24, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Blueshirts&oldid=1200209657"