The SDLP

[6th sam]

Serious question...
What percentage of the Unionist/Protestant population are "angry" over the Protocol?
What percentage are out rioting, attacking Police, trying to attack Nationalists etc?

Very very low percentage Ross, most unionists are reasonable . The problem for us is that they value the union and therefore many ( understandably ) back the main unionist party as the best way of maintaining the union. The real hardliners tend to be older fundamentalist types , and an easily led section of the "Protestant" working class. Most unionists favour the union for socio-economic reasons, and if there are sound socioeconomic reasons for a UI they could be persuaded. It would suit the British and Irish governments to create favourable socioeconomic for a UI. Let's be honest no Englishman with a brain wouldn't be delighted to offload Ni, to the extent that they'd be happy for GB to part finance it. A trouble free north with an economic link to England would make sense even to partitionists in ROI. For me the biggest step along the path is to sideline the DUP by giving unionists a middle ground alternative in the Alliance ( some unionists already copping on to this) . SF need to realise ( and I think they are already starting this) that if they genuinely want to become the largest party in the North they are going to have to soften further, show more remorse . Finucane epitomised this best in North belfast

A very reasonable post.  Whilst socio-economic reasons are undoutedly a major reason why unionists favour the union, it's not the be all and end all.  A sense of comfort with the status quo and fear of the unkown are the main reasons why unionsists would be reluctant to ever vote for a UI.  Coupled with the oft mentioned 'siege mentality' and a sense of giving in to SF/IRA after their 30 year terrorist campaign, it's unlikely that small 'u' unionists who vote Alliance will ever vote for a UI, as many on this board seem to think that they will.

Agree that the " comfort of the status quo " is a factor, unbelievably, as the status quo has been a disaster by most parameters: large percentage of the population having no affinity to the state, economic regression, large public sector, segregation , sectarianism, racism . The status quo is not a viable option and those unionists who are hanging onto the status quo are doing themselves no favours. If NI didn't work with a large unionist majority , it ain't go to work with a unionist minority. An all island solution with Britishness enshrined in the constitution is the most likely scenario. NI possibly might have worked if respect was shown to the minority but unfortunately for unionists that opportunity has been lost .

Again, you don't seem to get the fundamental point / essence of unionism.  The main parameter by which it has been a success, is that NI has remained as part of the United Kingdom, with the benefits that that brings.  As for your final sentence, as things stand there is likely still a significant number from the nationalist community who would vote to remain in the UK, so there is no guarantee of a UI happening in the immediate future.

Michaelg , you're an intelligent man and I always try to understand and respect your viewpoint, but how can you possibly say unionism has been a success🤦🏻‍♂️. When NI was founded 100 years ago the uk held onto, I think over 90% of the GDP of the island.
To make a simple analogy, Unionism has behaved liked a spoilt privileged child and let those UK  advantages slip away. The unionist leadership again like a spoilt child basically have tried to bully  their Irish neighbours  in the north, and have been antagonistic and demeaning  to their neighbours in the South, whilst demanding more from mummy and daddy. NI remains in the UK family but like most spoilt bullies, your current leadership still appears immature , contributing little to their family and has few friends, but unfortunately  remains deluded . Surely it's Time to grow up and get real?
Much of unionism however remains the  deluded bully  , even as their best argument for the union , " at least we are better off than that backwater down south " has now also gone. All sides need to start looking to the future and stop hanging on to a woeful status quo for fear of something worse. Don't forget that any new arrangements on the island will continue to be heftily financed by the UK who will be keen to offload NI and would welcome even closer links with ROI, especially post Brexit. Unionism is in real trouble if their best hope is to persuade those  they have bullied for years to join them in hanging on by their fingernails to a UK that they've sponged off for years, giving little back . How could intelligent people in the UK possibly want them, I mean even their best allies the Tories have shafted them . I've never shied away from admitting Irish nationalists contribution to this mess, but unionism needs to quickly develop the insight that the status quo sells their community woefully short. If intelligent unionists like yourself don't get this, and move the dinosaurs that are destroying your community,  off the stage, then you'll lose the opportunity to optimise your influence in new arrangements.

[michaelg]

Serious question...
What percentage of the Unionist/Protestant population are "angry" over the Protocol?
What percentage are out rioting, attacking Police, trying to attack Nationalists etc?

Very very low percentage Ross, most unionists are reasonable . The problem for us is that they value the union and therefore many ( understandably ) back the main unionist party as the best way of maintaining the union. The real hardliners tend to be older fundamentalist types , and an easily led section of the "Protestant" working class. Most unionists favour the union for socio-economic reasons, and if there are sound socioeconomic reasons for a UI they could be persuaded. It would suit the British and Irish governments to create favourable socioeconomic for a UI. Let's be honest no Englishman with a brain wouldn't be delighted to offload Ni, to the extent that they'd be happy for GB to part finance it. A trouble free north with an economic link to England would make sense even to partitionists in ROI. For me the biggest step along the path is to sideline the DUP by giving unionists a middle ground alternative in the Alliance ( some unionists already copping on to this) . SF need to realise ( and I think they are already starting this) that if they genuinely want to become the largest party in the North they are going to have to soften further, show more remorse . Finucane epitomised this best in North belfast

A very reasonable post.  Whilst socio-economic reasons are undoutedly a major reason why unionists favour the union, it's not the be all and end all.  A sense of comfort with the status quo and fear of the unkown are the main reasons why unionsists would be reluctant to ever vote for a UI.  Coupled with the oft mentioned 'siege mentality' and a sense of giving in to SF/IRA after their 30 year terrorist campaign, it's unlikely that small 'u' unionists who vote Alliance will ever vote for a UI, as many on this board seem to think that they will.

Agree that the " comfort of the status quo " is a factor, unbelievably, as the status quo has been a disaster by most parameters: large percentage of the population having no affinity to the state, economic regression, large public sector, segregation , sectarianism, racism . The status quo is not a viable option and those unionists who are hanging onto the status quo are doing themselves no favours. If NI didn't work with a large unionist majority , it ain't go to work with a unionist minority. An all island solution with Britishness enshrined in the constitution is the most likely scenario. NI possibly might have worked if respect was shown to the minority but unfortunately for unionists that opportunity has been lost .

Again, you don't seem to get the fundamental point / essence of unionism.  The main parameter by which it has been a success, is that NI has remained as part of the United Kingdom, with the benefits that that brings.  As for your final sentence, as things stand there is likely still a significant number from the nationalist community who would vote to remain in the UK, so there is no guarantee of a UI happening in the immediate future.

Michaelg , you're an intelligent man and I always try to understand and respect your viewpoint, but how can you possibly say unionism has been a success🤦🏻‍♂️. When NI was founded 100 years ago the uk held onto, I think over 90% of the GDP of the island.
To make a simple analogy, Unionism has behaved liked a spoilt privileged child and let those UK  advantages slip away. The unionist leadership again like a spoilt child basically have tried to bully  their Irish neighbours  in the north, and have been antagonistic and demeaning  to their neighbours in the South, whilst demanding more from mummy and daddy. NI remains in the UK family but like most spoilt bullies, your current leadership still appears immature , contributing little to their family and has few friends, but unfortunately  remains deluded . Surely it's Time to grow up and get real?
Much of unionism however remains the  deluded bully  , even as their best argument for the union , " at least we are better off than that backwater down south " has now also gone. All sides need to start looking to the future and stop hanging on to a woeful status quo for fear of something worse. Don't forget that any new arrangements on the island will continue to be heftily financed by the UK who will be keen to offload NI and would welcome even closer links with ROI, especially post Brexit. Unionism is in real trouble if their best hope is to persuade those  they have bullied for years to join them in hanging on by their fingernails to a UK that they've sponged off for years, giving little back . How could intelligent people in the UK possibly want them, I mean even their best allies the Tories have shafted them . I've never shied away from admitting Irish nationalists contribution to this mess, but unionism needs to quickly develop the insight that the status quo sells their community woefully short. If intelligent unionists like yourself don't get this, and move the dinosaurs that are destroying your community,  off the stage, then you'll lose the opportunity to optimise your influence in new arrangements.

Given the general tone of your post above, coupled with other posters advice for unionists to 'move back to Britain' or to bring out the machine guns as another poster suggested, I fear you will be a long time persuading more moderate unionists to throw their hat in the riing for a UI.

[6th sam]

Serious question...
What percentage of the Unionist/Protestant population are "angry" over the Protocol?
What percentage are out rioting, attacking Police, trying to attack Nationalists etc?

Very very low percentage Ross, most unionists are reasonable . The problem for us is that they value the union and therefore many ( understandably ) back the main unionist party as the best way of maintaining the union. The real hardliners tend to be older fundamentalist types , and an easily led section of the "Protestant" working class. Most unionists favour the union for socio-economic reasons, and if there are sound socioeconomic reasons for a UI they could be persuaded. It would suit the British and Irish governments to create favourable socioeconomic for a UI. Let's be honest no Englishman with a brain wouldn't be delighted to offload Ni, to the extent that they'd be happy for GB to part finance it. A trouble free north with an economic link to England would make sense even to partitionists in ROI. For me the biggest step along the path is to sideline the DUP by giving unionists a middle ground alternative in the Alliance ( some unionists already copping on to this) . SF need to realise ( and I think they are already starting this) that if they genuinely want to become the largest party in the North they are going to have to soften further, show more remorse . Finucane epitomised this best in North belfast

A very reasonable post.  Whilst socio-economic reasons are undoutedly a major reason why unionists favour the union, it's not the be all and end all.  A sense of comfort with the status quo and fear of the unkown are the main reasons why unionsists would be reluctant to ever vote for a UI.  Coupled with the oft mentioned 'siege mentality' and a sense of giving in to SF/IRA after their 30 year terrorist campaign, it's unlikely that small 'u' unionists who vote Alliance will ever vote for a UI, as many on this board seem to think that they will.

Agree that the " comfort of the status quo " is a factor, unbelievably, as the status quo has been a disaster by most parameters: large percentage of the population having no affinity to the state, economic regression, large public sector, segregation , sectarianism, racism . The status quo is not a viable option and those unionists who are hanging onto the status quo are doing themselves no favours. If NI didn't work with a large unionist majority , it ain't go to work with a unionist minority. An all island solution with Britishness enshrined in the constitution is the most likely scenario. NI possibly might have worked if respect was shown to the minority but unfortunately for unionists that opportunity has been lost .

Again, you don't seem to get the fundamental point / essence of unionism.  The main parameter by which it has been a success, is that NI has remained as part of the United Kingdom, with the benefits that that brings.  As for your final sentence, as things stand there is likely still a significant number from the nationalist community who would vote to remain in the UK, so there is no guarantee of a UI happening in the immediate future.

Michaelg , you're an intelligent man and I always try to understand and respect your viewpoint, but how can you possibly say unionism has been a success🤦🏻‍♂️. When NI was founded 100 years ago the uk held onto, I think over 90% of the GDP of the island.
To make a simple analogy, Unionism has behaved liked a spoilt privileged child and let those UK  advantages slip away. The unionist leadership again like a spoilt child basically have tried to bully  their Irish neighbours  in the north, and have been antagonistic and demeaning  to their neighbours in the South, whilst demanding more from mummy and daddy. NI remains in the UK family but like most spoilt bullies, your current leadership still appears immature , contributing little to their family and has few friends, but unfortunately  remains deluded . Surely it's Time to grow up and get real?
Much of unionism however remains the  deluded bully  , even as their best argument for the union , " at least we are better off than that backwater down south " has now also gone. All sides need to start looking to the future and stop hanging on to a woeful status quo for fear of something worse. Don't forget that any new arrangements on the island will continue to be heftily financed by the UK who will be keen to offload NI and would welcome even closer links with ROI, especially post Brexit. Unionism is in real trouble if their best hope is to persuade those  they have bullied for years to join them in hanging on by their fingernails to a UK that they've sponged off for years, giving little back . How could intelligent people in the UK possibly want them, I mean even their best allies the Tories have shafted them . I've never shied away from admitting Irish nationalists contribution to this mess, but unionism needs to quickly develop the insight that the status quo sells their community woefully short. If intelligent unionists like yourself don't get this, and move the dinosaurs that are destroying your community,  off the stage, then you'll lose the opportunity to optimise your influence in new arrangements.

Given the general tone of your post above, coupled with other posters advice for unionists to 'move back to Britain' or to bring out the machine guns as another poster suggested, I fear you will be a long time persuading more moderate unionists to throw their hat in the riing for a UI.

Criticising the perceived  "tone" of my comment rather than the content, and coupling it with a comment  to which I am clearly diametrically opposed , is selling yourself short Michaelg, and unfortunately that's a recurrent trait amongst many unionists. If you are not prepared to engage with people like me who clearly likes unionists and wants to improve a woeful status quo , then maybe you're closer to the dinosaurs that are holding your community back , than you would admit .?

[michaelg]

Serious question...
What percentage of the Unionist/Protestant population are "angry" over the Protocol?
What percentage are out rioting, attacking Police, trying to attack Nationalists etc?

Very very low percentage Ross, most unionists are reasonable . The problem for us is that they value the union and therefore many ( understandably ) back the main unionist party as the best way of maintaining the union. The real hardliners tend to be older fundamentalist types , and an easily led section of the "Protestant" working class. Most unionists favour the union for socio-economic reasons, and if there are sound socioeconomic reasons for a UI they could be persuaded. It would suit the British and Irish governments to create favourable socioeconomic for a UI. Let's be honest no Englishman with a brain wouldn't be delighted to offload Ni, to the extent that they'd be happy for GB to part finance it. A trouble free north with an economic link to England would make sense even to partitionists in ROI. For me the biggest step along the path is to sideline the DUP by giving unionists a middle ground alternative in the Alliance ( some unionists already copping on to this) . SF need to realise ( and I think they are already starting this) that if they genuinely want to become the largest party in the North they are going to have to soften further, show more remorse . Finucane epitomised this best in North belfast

A very reasonable post.  Whilst socio-economic reasons are undoutedly a major reason why unionists favour the union, it's not the be all and end all.  A sense of comfort with the status quo and fear of the unkown are the main reasons why unionsists would be reluctant to ever vote for a UI.  Coupled with the oft mentioned 'siege mentality' and a sense of giving in to SF/IRA after their 30 year terrorist campaign, it's unlikely that small 'u' unionists who vote Alliance will ever vote for a UI, as many on this board seem to think that they will.

Agree that the " comfort of the status quo " is a factor, unbelievably, as the status quo has been a disaster by most parameters: large percentage of the population having no affinity to the state, economic regression, large public sector, segregation , sectarianism, racism . The status quo is not a viable option and those unionists who are hanging onto the status quo are doing themselves no favours. If NI didn't work with a large unionist majority , it ain't go to work with a unionist minority. An all island solution with Britishness enshrined in the constitution is the most likely scenario. NI possibly might have worked if respect was shown to the minority but unfortunately for unionists that opportunity has been lost .

Again, you don't seem to get the fundamental point / essence of unionism.  The main parameter by which it has been a success, is that NI has remained as part of the United Kingdom, with the benefits that that brings.  As for your final sentence, as things stand there is likely still a significant number from the nationalist community who would vote to remain in the UK, so there is no guarantee of a UI happening in the immediate future.

Michaelg , you're an intelligent man and I always try to understand and respect your viewpoint, but how can you possibly say unionism has been a success🤦🏻‍♂️. When NI was founded 100 years ago the uk held onto, I think over 90% of the GDP of the island.
To make a simple analogy, Unionism has behaved liked a spoilt privileged child and let those UK  advantages slip away. The unionist leadership again like a spoilt child basically have tried to bully  their Irish neighbours  in the north, and have been antagonistic and demeaning  to their neighbours in the South, whilst demanding more from mummy and daddy. NI remains in the UK family but like most spoilt bullies, your current leadership still appears immature , contributing little to their family and has few friends, but unfortunately  remains deluded . Surely it's Time to grow up and get real?
Much of unionism however remains the  deluded bully  , even as their best argument for the union , " at least we are better off than that backwater down south " has now also gone. All sides need to start looking to the future and stop hanging on to a woeful status quo for fear of something worse. Don't forget that any new arrangements on the island will continue to be heftily financed by the UK who will be keen to offload NI and would welcome even closer links with ROI, especially post Brexit. Unionism is in real trouble if their best hope is to persuade those  they have bullied for years to join them in hanging on by their fingernails to a UK that they've sponged off for years, giving little back . How could intelligent people in the UK possibly want them, I mean even their best allies the Tories have shafted them . I've never shied away from admitting Irish nationalists contribution to this mess, but unionism needs to quickly develop the insight that the status quo sells their community woefully short. If intelligent unionists like yourself don't get this, and move the dinosaurs that are destroying your community,  off the stage, then you'll lose the opportunity to optimise your influence in new arrangements.

Given the general tone of your post above, coupled with other posters advice for unionists to 'move back to Britain' or to bring out the machine guns as another poster suggested, I fear you will be a long time persuading more moderate unionists to throw their hat in the riing for a UI.

Criticising the perceived  "tone" of my comment rather than the content, and coupling it with a comment  to which I am clearly diametrically opposed , is selling yourself short Michaelg, and unfortunately that's a recurrent trait amongst many unionists. If you are not prepared to engage with people like me who clearly likes unionists and wants to improve a woeful status quo , then maybe you're closer to the dinosaurs that are holding your community back , than you would admit .?

Just because my desire would be for NI to stay within the UK, that does not make me 'closer to the dinosaurs'.  You mentioned GDP etc, but these things can change over time.  Although bouyant at the moment, the economy in the ROI was in poor health for much of the last 100 years, and indeed, had to be bailed out in recent times.  You are going to have a different view, but my preference is to continue as part of the UK going forward.  As I also mentioned, it is not soley a question about economic arguments.  Other than the odd trip to watch the rugby in Dublin, or a holiday in Donegal, many unionists have little or no affinity with the ROI, be that watching gaelic games, watching RTE etc.  That might not sound like much of a big deal to someone like you who embraces those aspects of Irish cultural life, but it may be part of the wider reasons why a lot of unionists aren't so keen on a UI.

[general_lee]

Serious question...
What percentage of the Unionist/Protestant population are "angry" over the Protocol?
What percentage are out rioting, attacking Police, trying to attack Nationalists etc?

Very very low percentage Ross, most unionists are reasonable . The problem for us is that they value the union and therefore many ( understandably ) back the main unionist party as the best way of maintaining the union. The real hardliners tend to be older fundamentalist types , and an easily led section of the "Protestant" working class. Most unionists favour the union for socio-economic reasons, and if there are sound socioeconomic reasons for a UI they could be persuaded. It would suit the British and Irish governments to create favourable socioeconomic for a UI. Let's be honest no Englishman with a brain wouldn't be delighted to offload Ni, to the extent that they'd be happy for GB to part finance it. A trouble free north with an economic link to England would make sense even to partitionists in ROI. For me the biggest step along the path is to sideline the DUP by giving unionists a middle ground alternative in the Alliance ( some unionists already copping on to this) . SF need to realise ( and I think they are already starting this) that if they genuinely want to become the largest party in the North they are going to have to soften further, show more remorse . Finucane epitomised this best in North belfast

I wish the highlighted part was true. Most Unionists favour the Union on cultural and identity grounds. You could make them all £10k richer in a UI and they still wouldn't vote for it. Being part of a right-wing country with 4.5 million (including themselves, ironically) living in abject poverty doesn't even come in to the equation.

The pragmatic "small u" Unionists, many of which are from Catholic/Nationalist backgrounds are the demographic that needs convinced first. In reality it's just going to be a crude numbers game

[Milltown Row2]

If you are historically against it culturally against it then why would any Protestant vote to be in a UI?

Money is not a driver here, being shafted by the tories is easier than being shafted by SF, SF are (to all unionists) IRA murders in government, because they are voted in means nothing in fact it's worse that 'ordinary' people voted in murderers.

Regardless of whether anyone on here believes that, that is the mindset of a unionist, take SF out of the picture when talking about a UI then you might have a chance.

It's like turkeys voting for Xmas, or Jews leaving Israel

People can throw up all the excuses or benefits, it's morally wrong for any one from a unionist background to vote for a UI, the UI crowd will have to concentrate on getting every vote from the nationalists, that will be the biggest test!

[6th sam]

Serious question...
What percentage of the Unionist/Protestant population are "angry" over the Protocol?
What percentage are out rioting, attacking Police, trying to attack Nationalists etc?

Very very low percentage Ross, most unionists are reasonable . The problem for us is that they value the union and therefore many ( understandably ) back the main unionist party as the best way of maintaining the union. The real hardliners tend to be older fundamentalist types , and an easily led section of the "Protestant" working class. Most unionists favour the union for socio-economic reasons, and if there are sound socioeconomic reasons for a UI they could be persuaded. It would suit the British and Irish governments to create favourable socioeconomic for a UI. Let's be honest no Englishman with a brain wouldn't be delighted to offload Ni, to the extent that they'd be happy for GB to part finance it. A trouble free north with an economic link to England would make sense even to partitionists in ROI. For me the biggest step along the path is to sideline the DUP by giving unionists a middle ground alternative in the Alliance ( some unionists already copping on to this) . SF need to realise ( and I think they are already starting this) that if they genuinely want to become the largest party in the North they are going to have to soften further, show more remorse . Finucane epitomised this best in North belfast

A very reasonable post.  Whilst socio-economic reasons are undoutedly a major reason why unionists favour the union, it's not the be all and end all.  A sense of comfort with the status quo and fear of the unkown are the main reasons why unionsists would be reluctant to ever vote for a UI.  Coupled with the oft mentioned 'siege mentality' and a sense of giving in to SF/IRA after their 30 year terrorist campaign, it's unlikely that small 'u' unionists who vote Alliance will ever vote for a UI, as many on this board seem to think that they will.

Agree that the " comfort of the status quo " is a factor, unbelievably, as the status quo has been a disaster by most parameters: large percentage of the population having no affinity to the state, economic regression, large public sector, segregation , sectarianism, racism . The status quo is not a viable option and those unionists who are hanging onto the status quo are doing themselves no favours. If NI didn't work with a large unionist majority , it ain't go to work with a unionist minority. An all island solution with Britishness enshrined in the constitution is the most likely scenario. NI possibly might have worked if respect was shown to the minority but unfortunately for unionists that opportunity has been lost .

Again, you don't seem to get the fundamental point / essence of unionism.  The main parameter by which it has been a success, is that NI has remained as part of the United Kingdom, with the benefits that that brings.  As for your final sentence, as things stand there is likely still a significant number from the nationalist community who would vote to remain in the UK, so there is no guarantee of a UI happening in the immediate future.

Michaelg , you're an intelligent man and I always try to understand and respect your viewpoint, but how can you possibly say unionism has been a success🤦🏻‍♂️. When NI was founded 100 years ago the uk held onto, I think over 90% of the GDP of the island.
To make a simple analogy, Unionism has behaved liked a spoilt privileged child and let those UK  advantages slip away. The unionist leadership again like a spoilt child basically have tried to bully  their Irish neighbours  in the north, and have been antagonistic and demeaning  to their neighbours in the South, whilst demanding more from mummy and daddy. NI remains in the UK family but like most spoilt bullies, your current leadership still appears immature , contributing little to their family and has few friends, but unfortunately  remains deluded . Surely it's Time to grow up and get real?
Much of unionism however remains the  deluded bully  , even as their best argument for the union , " at least we are better off than that backwater down south " has now also gone. All sides need to start looking to the future and stop hanging on to a woeful status quo for fear of something worse. Don't forget that any new arrangements on the island will continue to be heftily financed by the UK who will be keen to offload NI and would welcome even closer links with ROI, especially post Brexit. Unionism is in real trouble if their best hope is to persuade those  they have bullied for years to join them in hanging on by their fingernails to a UK that they've sponged off for years, giving little back . How could intelligent people in the UK possibly want them, I mean even their best allies the Tories have shafted them . I've never shied away from admitting Irish nationalists contribution to this mess, but unionism needs to quickly develop the insight that the status quo sells their community woefully short. If intelligent unionists like yourself don't get this, and move the dinosaurs that are destroying your community,  off the stage, then you'll lose the opportunity to optimise your influence in new arrangements.

Given the general tone of your post above, coupled with other posters advice for unionists to 'move back to Britain' or to bring out the machine guns as another poster suggested, I fear you will be a long time persuading more moderate unionists to throw their hat in the riing for a UI.

Criticising the perceived  "tone" of my comment rather than the content, and coupling it with a comment  to which I am clearly diametrically opposed , is selling yourself short Michaelg, and unfortunately that's a recurrent trait amongst many unionists. If you are not prepared to engage with people like me who clearly likes unionists and wants to improve a woeful status quo , then maybe you're closer to the dinosaurs that are holding your community back , than you would admit .?

Just because my desire would be for NI to stay within the UK, that does not make me 'closer to the dinosaurs'.  You mentioned GDP etc, but these things can change over time.  Although bouyant at the moment, the economy in the ROI was in poor health for much of the last 100 years, and indeed, had to be bailed out in recent times.  You are going to have a different view, but my preference is to continue as part of the UK going forward.  As I also mentioned, it is not soley a question about economic arguments.  Other than the odd trip to watch the rugby in Dublin, or a holiday in Donegal, many unionists have little or no affinity with the ROI, be that watching gaelic games, watching RTE etc.  That might not sound like much of a big deal to someone like you who embraces those aspects of Irish cultural life, but it may be part of the wider reasons why a lot of unionists aren't so keen on a UI.

Great to get that perspective and honesty. So many unionists are not keen to expose themselves to Irishness to which they have no affinity,  but you want the Irish in the North who have been bullied by unionism for years to join with unionists in embracing  Britishness? 🤦🏻‍♂️Are you serious .
The way to defeat bullying is to call it out , and show a better way. This will involve creativity in finding the best way of doing things . The key has to be moving away from an exclusive nationalistic view of things from both sides and being led by the true majority who realise that equality, respect, opportunity , health , education , quality of life are far more important than national affiliation. Unionists have had the chance to provide that in the North and have failed, so the status quo won't work. Perhaps MR's assessment is correct , SF ironically are now a massive barrier to a UI , as victory for republicans is too difficult for unionists to countenance . Could SF do a John Hume and put the country first (as in the whole island ) . The historical desire of republicans for a 32 county socialist republic is as far away as ever. An All-Island solution however is achievable . Do SF hold out for the former, or pragmatically help to achieve the latter ?

[imtommygunn]

I honestly believe mr's assessment is right here. I'm not anti sf but there is a set of voters, nationalist and obviously unionist, they will never be able to tap into because of their past. Maybe time will change that but if it is time they need it is probably decades.

[michaelg]

Serious question...
What percentage of the Unionist/Protestant population are "angry" over the Protocol?
What percentage are out rioting, attacking Police, trying to attack Nationalists etc?

Very very low percentage Ross, most unionists are reasonable . The problem for us is that they value the union and therefore many ( understandably ) back the main unionist party as the best way of maintaining the union. The real hardliners tend to be older fundamentalist types , and an easily led section of the "Protestant" working class. Most unionists favour the union for socio-economic reasons, and if there are sound socioeconomic reasons for a UI they could be persuaded. It would suit the British and Irish governments to create favourable socioeconomic for a UI. Let's be honest no Englishman with a brain wouldn't be delighted to offload Ni, to the extent that they'd be happy for GB to part finance it. A trouble free north with an economic link to England would make sense even to partitionists in ROI. For me the biggest step along the path is to sideline the DUP by giving unionists a middle ground alternative in the Alliance ( some unionists already copping on to this) . SF need to realise ( and I think they are already starting this) that if they genuinely want to become the largest party in the North they are going to have to soften further, show more remorse . Finucane epitomised this best in North belfast

A very reasonable post.  Whilst socio-economic reasons are undoutedly a major reason why unionists favour the union, it's not the be all and end all.  A sense of comfort with the status quo and fear of the unkown are the main reasons why unionsists would be reluctant to ever vote for a UI.  Coupled with the oft mentioned 'siege mentality' and a sense of giving in to SF/IRA after their 30 year terrorist campaign, it's unlikely that small 'u' unionists who vote Alliance will ever vote for a UI, as many on this board seem to think that they will.

Agree that the " comfort of the status quo " is a factor, unbelievably, as the status quo has been a disaster by most parameters: large percentage of the population having no affinity to the state, economic regression, large public sector, segregation , sectarianism, racism . The status quo is not a viable option and those unionists who are hanging onto the status quo are doing themselves no favours. If NI didn't work with a large unionist majority , it ain't go to work with a unionist minority. An all island solution with Britishness enshrined in the constitution is the most likely scenario. NI possibly might have worked if respect was shown to the minority but unfortunately for unionists that opportunity has been lost .

Again, you don't seem to get the fundamental point / essence of unionism.  The main parameter by which it has been a success, is that NI has remained as part of the United Kingdom, with the benefits that that brings.  As for your final sentence, as things stand there is likely still a significant number from the nationalist community who would vote to remain in the UK, so there is no guarantee of a UI happening in the immediate future.

Michaelg , you're an intelligent man and I always try to understand and respect your viewpoint, but how can you possibly say unionism has been a success🤦🏻‍♂️. When NI was founded 100 years ago the uk held onto, I think over 90% of the GDP of the island.
To make a simple analogy, Unionism has behaved liked a spoilt privileged child and let those UK  advantages slip away. The unionist leadership again like a spoilt child basically have tried to bully  their Irish neighbours  in the north, and have been antagonistic and demeaning  to their neighbours in the South, whilst demanding more from mummy and daddy. NI remains in the UK family but like most spoilt bullies, your current leadership still appears immature , contributing little to their family and has few friends, but unfortunately  remains deluded . Surely it's Time to grow up and get real?
Much of unionism however remains the  deluded bully  , even as their best argument for the union , " at least we are better off than that backwater down south " has now also gone. All sides need to start looking to the future and stop hanging on to a woeful status quo for fear of something worse. Don't forget that any new arrangements on the island will continue to be heftily financed by the UK who will be keen to offload NI and would welcome even closer links with ROI, especially post Brexit. Unionism is in real trouble if their best hope is to persuade those  they have bullied for years to join them in hanging on by their fingernails to a UK that they've sponged off for years, giving little back . How could intelligent people in the UK possibly want them, I mean even their best allies the Tories have shafted them . I've never shied away from admitting Irish nationalists contribution to this mess, but unionism needs to quickly develop the insight that the status quo sells their community woefully short. If intelligent unionists like yourself don't get this, and move the dinosaurs that are destroying your community,  off the stage, then you'll lose the opportunity to optimise your influence in new arrangements.

Given the general tone of your post above, coupled with other posters advice for unionists to 'move back to Britain' or to bring out the machine guns as another poster suggested, I fear you will be a long time persuading more moderate unionists to throw their hat in the riing for a UI.

Criticising the perceived  "tone" of my comment rather than the content, and coupling it with a comment  to which I am clearly diametrically opposed , is selling yourself short Michaelg, and unfortunately that's a recurrent trait amongst many unionists. If you are not prepared to engage with people like me who clearly likes unionists and wants to improve a woeful status quo , then maybe you're closer to the dinosaurs that are holding your community back , than you would admit .?

Just because my desire would be for NI to stay within the UK, that does not make me 'closer to the dinosaurs'.  You mentioned GDP etc, but these things can change over time.  Although bouyant at the moment, the economy in the ROI was in poor health for much of the last 100 years, and indeed, had to be bailed out in recent times.  You are going to have a different view, but my preference is to continue as part of the UK going forward.  As I also mentioned, it is not soley a question about economic arguments.  Other than the odd trip to watch the rugby in Dublin, or a holiday in Donegal, many unionists have little or no affinity with the ROI, be that watching gaelic games, watching RTE etc.  That might not sound like much of a big deal to someone like you who embraces those aspects of Irish cultural life, but it may be part of the wider reasons why a lot of unionists aren't so keen on a UI.

Great to get that perspective and honesty. So many unionists are not keen to expose themselves to Irishness to which they have no affinity,  but you want the Irish in the North who have been bullied by unionism for years to join with unionists in embracing  Britishness? 🤦🏻‍♂️Are you serious .
The way to defeat bullying is to call it out , and show a better way. This will involve creativity in finding the best way of doing things . The key has to be moving away from an exclusive nationalistic view of things from both sides and being led by the true majority who realise that equality, respect, opportunity , health , education , quality of life are far more important than national affiliation. Unionists have had the chance to provide that in the North and have failed, so the status quo won't work. Perhaps MR's assessment is correct , SF ironically are now a massive barrier to a UI , as victory for republicans is too difficult for unionists to countenance . Could SF do a John Hume and put the country first (as in the whole island ) . The historical desire of republicans for a 32 county socialist republic is as far away as ever. An All-Island solution however is achievable . Do SF hold out for the former, or pragmatically help to achieve the latter ?

Not sure where I said that.

[Sportacus]

I honestly believe mr's assessment is right here. I'm not anti sf but there is a set of voters, nationalist and obviously unionist, they will never be able to tap into because of their past. Maybe time will change that but if it is time they need it is probably decades.

100% right.  Unionists are Unionists so there won't be a single one of them will switch and vote for a UI. Nevertheless they are running out of road bit by bit.  Sometimes it's just a slow burn and sometimes there's another brick knocked out of their wall, the latest being Brexit. The best Unionist leaders can achieve is buying time.  SF are despised by them, SDLP less so but at the end of the day SDLP won't win a single vote off them either in a border poll.  The real challenge is to move towards a UI on a path which is as peaceful as possible, and that's where wise words and fair analysis of the benefits of a UI in terms of the economy and political representation will help enormously.  SF haven't been capable of that, A. because their economics is for the birds, and B. because they have to celebrate their Republican past and every time they do, Unionists could boke.

[6th sam]

Serious question...
What percentage of the Unionist/Protestant population are "angry" over the Protocol?
What percentage are out rioting, attacking Police, trying to attack Nationalists etc?

Very very low percentage Ross, most unionists are reasonable . The problem for us is that they value the union and therefore many ( understandably ) back the main unionist party as the best way of maintaining the union. The real hardliners tend to be older fundamentalist types , and an easily led section of the "Protestant" working class. Most unionists favour the union for socio-economic reasons, and if there are sound socioeconomic reasons for a UI they could be persuaded. It would suit the British and Irish governments to create favourable socioeconomic for a UI. Let's be honest no Englishman with a brain wouldn't be delighted to offload Ni, to the extent that they'd be happy for GB to part finance it. A trouble free north with an economic link to England would make sense even to partitionists in ROI. For me the biggest step along the path is to sideline the DUP by giving unionists a middle ground alternative in the Alliance ( some unionists already copping on to this) . SF need to realise ( and I think they are already starting this) that if they genuinely want to become the largest party in the North they are going to have to soften further, show more remorse . Finucane epitomised this best in North belfast

A very reasonable post.  Whilst socio-economic reasons are undoutedly a major reason why unionists favour the union, it's not the be all and end all.  A sense of comfort with the status quo and fear of the unkown are the main reasons why unionsists would be reluctant to ever vote for a UI.  Coupled with the oft mentioned 'siege mentality' and a sense of giving in to SF/IRA after their 30 year terrorist campaign, it's unlikely that small 'u' unionists who vote Alliance will ever vote for a UI, as many on this board seem to think that they will.

Agree that the " comfort of the status quo " is a factor, unbelievably, as the status quo has been a disaster by most parameters: large percentage of the population having no affinity to the state, economic regression, large public sector, segregation , sectarianism, racism . The status quo is not a viable option and those unionists who are hanging onto the status quo are doing themselves no favours. If NI didn't work with a large unionist majority , it ain't go to work with a unionist minority. An all island solution with Britishness enshrined in the constitution is the most likely scenario. NI possibly might have worked if respect was shown to the minority but unfortunately for unionists that opportunity has been lost .

Again, you don't seem to get the fundamental point / essence of unionism.  The main parameter by which it has been a success, is that NI has remained as part of the United Kingdom, with the benefits that that brings.  As for your final sentence, as things stand there is likely still a significant number from the nationalist community who would vote to remain in the UK, so there is no guarantee of a UI happening in the immediate future.

Michaelg , you're an intelligent man and I always try to understand and respect your viewpoint, but how can you possibly say unionism has been a success🤦🏻‍♂️. When NI was founded 100 years ago the uk held onto, I think over 90% of the GDP of the island.
To make a simple analogy, Unionism has behaved liked a spoilt privileged child and let those UK  advantages slip away. The unionist leadership again like a spoilt child basically have tried to bully  their Irish neighbours  in the north, and have been antagonistic and demeaning  to their neighbours in the South, whilst demanding more from mummy and daddy. NI remains in the UK family but like most spoilt bullies, your current leadership still appears immature , contributing little to their family and has few friends, but unfortunately  remains deluded . Surely it's Time to grow up and get real?
Much of unionism however remains the  deluded bully  , even as their best argument for the union , " at least we are better off than that backwater down south " has now also gone. All sides need to start looking to the future and stop hanging on to a woeful status quo for fear of something worse. Don't forget that any new arrangements on the island will continue to be heftily financed by the UK who will be keen to offload NI and would welcome even closer links with ROI, especially post Brexit. Unionism is in real trouble if their best hope is to persuade those  they have bullied for years to join them in hanging on by their fingernails to a UK that they've sponged off for years, giving little back . How could intelligent people in the UK possibly want them, I mean even their best allies the Tories have shafted them . I've never shied away from admitting Irish nationalists contribution to this mess, but unionism needs to quickly develop the insight that the status quo sells their community woefully short. If intelligent unionists like yourself don't get this, and move the dinosaurs that are destroying your community,  off the stage, then you'll lose the opportunity to optimise your influence in new arrangements.

Given the general tone of your post above, coupled with other posters advice for unionists to 'move back to Britain' or to bring out the machine guns as another poster suggested, I fear you will be a long time persuading more moderate unionists to throw their hat in the riing for a UI.

Criticising the perceived  "tone" of my comment rather than the content, and coupling it with a comment  to which I am clearly diametrically opposed , is selling yourself short Michaelg, and unfortunately that's a recurrent trait amongst many unionists. If you are not prepared to engage with people like me who clearly likes unionists and wants to improve a woeful status quo , then maybe you're closer to the dinosaurs that are holding your community back , than you would admit .?

Just because my desire would be for NI to stay within the UK, that does not make me 'closer to the dinosaurs'.  You mentioned GDP etc, but these things can change over time.  Although bouyant at the moment, the economy in the ROI was in poor health for much of the last 100 years, and indeed, had to be bailed out in recent times.  You are going to have a different view, but my preference is to continue as part of the UK going forward.  As I also mentioned, it is not soley a question about economic arguments.  Other than the odd trip to watch the rugby in Dublin, or a holiday in Donegal, many unionists have little or no affinity with the ROI, be that watching gaelic games, watching RTE etc.  That might not sound like much of a big deal to someone like you who embraces those aspects of Irish cultural life, but it may be part of the wider reasons why a lot of unionists aren't so keen on a UI.

Great to get that perspective and honesty. So many unionists are not keen to expose themselves to Irishness to which they have no affinity,  but you want the Irish in the North who have been bullied by unionism for years to join with unionists in embracing  Britishness? 🤦🏻‍♂️Are you serious .
The way to defeat bullying is to call it out , and show a better way. This will involve creativity in finding the best way of doing things . The key has to be moving away from an exclusive nationalistic view of things from both sides and being led by the true majority who realise that equality, respect, opportunity , health , education , quality of life are far more important than national affiliation. Unionists have had the chance to provide that in the North and have failed, so the status quo won't work. Perhaps MR's assessment is correct , SF ironically are now a massive barrier to a UI , as victory for republicans is too difficult for unionists to countenance . Could SF do a John Hume and put the country first (as in the whole island ) . The historical desire of republicans for a 32 county socialist republic is as far away as ever. An All-Island solution however is achievable . Do SF hold out for the former, or pragmatically help to achieve the latter ?

Not sure where I said that.

Presumably By wanting us remain part of the UK as it stands , that involves embracing Britishness . Can you understand how one of the reasons NI has failed is because it has given preference to Britishness . Even after the GFA which promoted equal status of identities , the DUP have had to be dragged kicking and screaming into what they ridiculously term "concessions ".

[Rossfan]

For the "new" post GFA Northern IRELAND to have worked and be a success the Irishness of a large proportion of the population had to be officially recognised and respected.
It certainly isn't the latter especially by the largest Unionist Party, nor the other 2 either.
They want to be the same as Great Britain but yet want different laws for abortion/same sex marriage e.g.
And of course the sky will fall if there were bi lingual road signs like there are in Scotland and Wales.
Peter Robinson tried to make his party realise that they needed to get the Catholic/Nationalist people onside to make "NI as part of the UK" to work.
Instead we got poison Arlene and "curry my yoghurt" from that ignorant bigoted fkr Campbell.

[michaelg]

Serious question...
What percentage of the Unionist/Protestant population are "angry" over the Protocol?
What percentage are out rioting, attacking Police, trying to attack Nationalists etc?

Very very low percentage Ross, most unionists are reasonable . The problem for us is that they value the union and therefore many ( understandably ) back the main unionist party as the best way of maintaining the union. The real hardliners tend to be older fundamentalist types , and an easily led section of the "Protestant" working class. Most unionists favour the union for socio-economic reasons, and if there are sound socioeconomic reasons for a UI they could be persuaded. It would suit the British and Irish governments to create favourable socioeconomic for a UI. Let's be honest no Englishman with a brain wouldn't be delighted to offload Ni, to the extent that they'd be happy for GB to part finance it. A trouble free north with an economic link to England would make sense even to partitionists in ROI. For me the biggest step along the path is to sideline the DUP by giving unionists a middle ground alternative in the Alliance ( some unionists already copping on to this) . SF need to realise ( and I think they are already starting this) that if they genuinely want to become the largest party in the North they are going to have to soften further, show more remorse . Finucane epitomised this best in North belfast

A very reasonable post.  Whilst socio-economic reasons are undoutedly a major reason why unionists favour the union, it's not the be all and end all.  A sense of comfort with the status quo and fear of the unkown are the main reasons why unionsists would be reluctant to ever vote for a UI.  Coupled with the oft mentioned 'siege mentality' and a sense of giving in to SF/IRA after their 30 year terrorist campaign, it's unlikely that small 'u' unionists who vote Alliance will ever vote for a UI, as many on this board seem to think that they will.

Agree that the " comfort of the status quo " is a factor, unbelievably, as the status quo has been a disaster by most parameters: large percentage of the population having no affinity to the state, economic regression, large public sector, segregation , sectarianism, racism . The status quo is not a viable option and those unionists who are hanging onto the status quo are doing themselves no favours. If NI didn't work with a large unionist majority , it ain't go to work with a unionist minority. An all island solution with Britishness enshrined in the constitution is the most likely scenario. NI possibly might have worked if respect was shown to the minority but unfortunately for unionists that opportunity has been lost .

Again, you don't seem to get the fundamental point / essence of unionism.  The main parameter by which it has been a success, is that NI has remained as part of the United Kingdom, with the benefits that that brings.  As for your final sentence, as things stand there is likely still a significant number from the nationalist community who would vote to remain in the UK, so there is no guarantee of a UI happening in the immediate future.

Michaelg , you're an intelligent man and I always try to understand and respect your viewpoint, but how can you possibly say unionism has been a success🤦🏻‍♂️. When NI was founded 100 years ago the uk held onto, I think over 90% of the GDP of the island.
To make a simple analogy, Unionism has behaved liked a spoilt privileged child and let those UK  advantages slip away. The unionist leadership again like a spoilt child basically have tried to bully  their Irish neighbours  in the north, and have been antagonistic and demeaning  to their neighbours in the South, whilst demanding more from mummy and daddy. NI remains in the UK family but like most spoilt bullies, your current leadership still appears immature , contributing little to their family and has few friends, but unfortunately  remains deluded . Surely it's Time to grow up and get real?
Much of unionism however remains the  deluded bully  , even as their best argument for the union , " at least we are better off than that backwater down south " has now also gone. All sides need to start looking to the future and stop hanging on to a woeful status quo for fear of something worse. Don't forget that any new arrangements on the island will continue to be heftily financed by the UK who will be keen to offload NI and would welcome even closer links with ROI, especially post Brexit. Unionism is in real trouble if their best hope is to persuade those  they have bullied for years to join them in hanging on by their fingernails to a UK that they've sponged off for years, giving little back . How could intelligent people in the UK possibly want them, I mean even their best allies the Tories have shafted them . I've never shied away from admitting Irish nationalists contribution to this mess, but unionism needs to quickly develop the insight that the status quo sells their community woefully short. If intelligent unionists like yourself don't get this, and move the dinosaurs that are destroying your community,  off the stage, then you'll lose the opportunity to optimise your influence in new arrangements.

Given the general tone of your post above, coupled with other posters advice for unionists to 'move back to Britain' or to bring out the machine guns as another poster suggested, I fear you will be a long time persuading more moderate unionists to throw their hat in the riing for a UI.

Criticising the perceived  "tone" of my comment rather than the content, and coupling it with a comment  to which I am clearly diametrically opposed , is selling yourself short Michaelg, and unfortunately that's a recurrent trait amongst many unionists. If you are not prepared to engage with people like me who clearly likes unionists and wants to improve a woeful status quo , then maybe you're closer to the dinosaurs that are holding your community back , than you would admit .?

Just because my desire would be for NI to stay within the UK, that does not make me 'closer to the dinosaurs'.  You mentioned GDP etc, but these things can change over time.  Although bouyant at the moment, the economy in the ROI was in poor health for much of the last 100 years, and indeed, had to be bailed out in recent times.  You are going to have a different view, but my preference is to continue as part of the UK going forward.  As I also mentioned, it is not soley a question about economic arguments.  Other than the odd trip to watch the rugby in Dublin, or a holiday in Donegal, many unionists have little or no affinity with the ROI, be that watching gaelic games, watching RTE etc.  That might not sound like much of a big deal to someone like you who embraces those aspects of Irish cultural life, but it may be part of the wider reasons why a lot of unionists aren't so keen on a UI.

Great to get that perspective and honesty. So many unionists are not keen to expose themselves to Irishness to which they have no affinity,  but you want the Irish in the North who have been bullied by unionism for years to join with unionists in embracing  Britishness? 🤦🏻‍♂️Are you serious .
The way to defeat bullying is to call it out , and show a better way. This will involve creativity in finding the best way of doing things . The key has to be moving away from an exclusive nationalistic view of things from both sides and being led by the true majority who realise that equality, respect, opportunity , health , education , quality of life are far more important than national affiliation. Unionists have had the chance to provide that in the North and have failed, so the status quo won't work. Perhaps MR's assessment is correct , SF ironically are now a massive barrier to a UI , as victory for republicans is too difficult for unionists to countenance . Could SF do a John Hume and put the country first (as in the whole island ) . The historical desire of republicans for a 32 county socialist republic is as far away as ever. An All-Island solution however is achievable . Do SF hold out for the former, or pragmatically help to achieve the latter ?

Not sure where I said that.

Presumably By wanting us remain part of the UK as it stands , that involves embracing Britishness . Can you understand how one of the reasons NI has failed is because it has given preference to Britishness . Even after the GFA which promoted equal status of identities , the DUP have had to be dragged kicking and screaming into what they ridiculously term "concessions ".

Why would you say that if you have not had to do that to date? 

[smelmoth]

What is the appetite for a UI in the south at the moment?

Not sure if it has been tested in any way. Would be interesting to see the level of support and the issues that are seen as important.

It seems obvious that a UI in the near future would require significant financial, security and sovereignty compromises for RoI. Maybe some of those will lessen in the future but some sort of pulse check on the current appetite would be interesting.

I get the impression that the average citizen in the south gives little or no thought to a UI

[Rossfan]

I think its fair to say it wouldn't be first thing on many people's minds when they wake in the morning.
It's kind of a case of "that will be nice when it comes" but meanwhile let's get on with the normal things in life.
Two things the NO folk would express concern about are cost and violence.