A United Ireland. Opening up the discussion.

[imtommygunn]

For as well as manadating a place for Nationalism in any devolved government in NI, the GFA also mandated a place for Unionism. And since one cannot proceed without the other, then nothing is changed whether the FM be SF and the DFM is DUP, or vice versa.

A place for nationalism but as long as it's not first minister eh?

[Franko]

It's a mad world we live in these days when Unionists berate SF for not being Republican enough. 🤷‍♂️

A sure sign that Sinn Fein are finally on the right track.

Except that I wasnt berating them, I was analysing their current political stance, from a Unionist perspective.

My point being that of course I prefer that they are now playing politics rather than paramilitarism etc, but either way, I genuinely don't see how their current strategy is any more likely to bring about a UI than their previous one.

SF doing the decent thing is shocking and scary. You'll never change the hardliners on both sides from being upset at them doing that, but everyone else thinks they've played a blinder. Keep this up and the moderate unionists won't be so frightened of what a UI might look like.

This (moderate) Unionist is neither "shocked" nor "scared".

While not being frightened of something is not the same as being positively enthusiastic for it.

And if Irish Nationalism is to have any hope of achieving a majority for a UI in a referendum, they need to persuade a sizeable proportion of  the Unionist population to become enthusiastic Nationalists.

And whatever the events of the last 11 days have told us about SF etc, it has also told us that the Unionist/British identity in NI is as strong as ever.

'Moderate' is a simple word, but one that you clearly do not understand

By your own admission, there is nothing which would divert you from being unionist in your political views

That sort of attitude is anything but moderate

Thus (and as stated before), people with your viewpoint are not the demographic that Nationalism needs to appeal to

Not only do you erroneously appear to think yourself a member of this group, but you've also seemingly appointed yourself as their spokesperson 

[dec]

By your own admission, there is nothing which would divert you from being unionist in your political views

That sort of attitude is anything but moderate

Does that mean that any nationalist who is not open to becoming a Unionist is not a moderate?

[Evil Genius]

That entire post reminds me of James Molyneaux proclaiming that "a prolonged IRA ceasefire could be the most destabilising thing to happen to unionism since partition".

Would that be the same James Molyneux who ceased to be politicalyl relevant sometime before the end of the last century?

Your post absolutely screams of your discomfort at the positive reaction SF have been getting from the 'middle of the roaders' over the last week. SF won't have lost any support from it's base over the course of the last few days - they've been greeting royal visitors here for a decade after all (and I remember the jibes from opponents predicting that it meant SF were about to take their seats in Westminster back then too ).

What you infer and what I imply, never mind state, are two very different things.

For I am not at all "discomforted" by the sight of SF having to move away from everything that they used to hold dear, if anything I am somewhat amused by it. (Nor btw did I predict eg that they will take their seats at Westminster, rather I suggested that they might as well.)

So while they won't have lot support, they will however have gained a degree of support from the middle of the road. The same people you no doubt know are key to a border poll.

And then to cap the post off with the claim that Irish Republicanism is dying, at a time when SF's is now the largest party north and south, and still growing?? You're some ostrich.

They won't have lost support. Indeed they most likely have gained support.

But the point is that such shifts are entirely within the Nationalist spectrum, meaning that if eg I were an SDLP supporter, I could well be discomforted etc, but as a Unionist, I am not moved, either literally or figuratively..

Ditto the emergence of SF as a force in ROI. For if anything, that trend only makes a UI vote in a referendum LESS likely not more, on the basis that while  some moderate Unionists might be persuadable that in principle at least, a UI could be good for them, Hell will freezr over before we will trust our fate to a UI where SF has the whip hand.

As for you "midlle of the road" manoeuvering, where you're going wrong is in imagining that there is only one road in NI, with one middle. Whereas the reality is that there are two roads, a Nationalist one and a Unionist one. And while SF may have made gains in the middle lane of theirs, unless or until Nationalism can persuade a sizeable proportion of Unionists that we should all be "On the One Road", then they have no hope of gaining a majority in any referendum.

Which is why I am not at all disacomforted by the events of the last few days, since as well as movement by and within Nationalism etc, this Ostrich has also observed the other lesson to be drawn, namely that support for the Union within Unionism, whether party political or cultural, is as strong as ever.

And unless or until that latter changes, there simply won't be a UI.

Which I am entirely comfortable with.

[Dougal Maguire]

I hear that 250,000 people visited the Queen's lying in state. Clearly she's not as big a draw as Garth Brooks

[Franko]

By your own admission, there is nothing which would divert you from being unionist in your political views

That sort of attitude is anything but moderate

Does that mean that any nationalist who is not open to becoming a Unionist is not a moderate?

There is a spectrum - just because they are not nationalist, doesn't automatically make someone unionist (or vice versa)

Those of a unionist persuasion like to describe such people (on the nationalist side) as 'nationalists, who are happy with the status quo'

But anyone who states that no amount of inducement would change their political stance, is not moderate in their views

[johnnycool]

Unionism is really struggling to process the normalisation of SF by everyone other than them and the straw clutching will go on.

Correction: party political Unionism may be struggling etc, but so what?

For as well as manadating a place for Nationalism in any devolved government in NI, the GFA also mandated a place for Unionism. And since one cannot proceed without the other, then nothing is changed whether the FM be SF and the DFM is DUP, or vice versa.

In the meantime the battle for the middle ground in NI goes on as it is they who will decide the constitutional question when it comes and it's coming.

Which one are you?

Political unionism (I stand corrected) has veered deep into it's hardline (but diminishing) base to maintain it's vote but has it left a lot of unionist voters behind for the Alliance and apathy? And how will the small u respond when the UK's economy nose dives even further with Truss and the right wing think tanks at the helm?

Not sure what you are getting at with that, but in terms of the constitutional question I'm all on for a UI for several reasons, mostly economic as the industry I work in is much better paid in the South (not just the greater Dublin area), the NHS is no longer recognisable to the one of my youth and most of my adult life and educationally my kids would be no worse off and probably better.

BUT,
    There will need to be a place for Stormont as well as whatever form a national Gov that evolves to give some feel of normality to the wee six for quite a while, decades, IMO.

[Evil Genius]

EG's theory in a nutshell:

A person can only ever become more resolved towards Unionism, never less.  Once a unionist, always a unionist, regardless of circumstance.

No, I'm not saying that.

What I am saying is that Sinn Fein will not persuade Unionists to become Nationalists, whether by bullet or ballot. On the contrary, the more successful SF become in persuading people within their own community, the less likely Unionists are to be persuaded by them, not more.

Nationalists, however, are capable of become non-nationalists (or at the very least agnostic about the subject) at the drop of a crown hat.

Which is utter nonsense.

It is not "noinsense", rather as very opinion poll this century has shown, it is demonstrable fact.

For it didn't take the "droip of a hat", regal or otherwise, rather it took the end of The Troubles, the implementation of the GFA and the relative peace of the last 30-odd years to elicit change in some Nationalist thinking in NI.

Which is not to say that they are any "less Nationalist" in terms of identity and aspiration etc, nor in their voting habits in ordinary elections.

But now that the GFA has guaranteed their right to express ad uphold their Irish identity in all the different ways which that entails (culture, language, sport, arts etc), there has undeniably emerged a small but significant strand within Nationalism in NI which is no longer desperate to achieve a UI.

Meaning that if it ever came to a referendum, some Nationalists aren't likely to vote at all, while some might even vote to remain. And even if were only talking about a few, for any vote for a UI to succeed, then it would take 100% of Nationalists to turn out and vote for it.

And then for a proportion of Unionists to vote for it as well.

And even if the former could be achieved (highly unlikely, imo), then thisUnionist considers that the latter is further away than ever.

All of which explains why, with every electoral success, SF are still not demanding a referendum. Which in turn reflects that their political leaders understand how these things work rather better thsn their supporters.

Unsurprising though, as the political leaders of Unionism display a similar head in the sand attitude to the changes occurring in front of their eyes.

This Unionist, at least, is under no illusions as to the mess that the DUP, and TUV etc, have got themselves into.

Nor am I under any illusions as to the harm that that is causing for the lives of people in NI etc.

But as I keep repeating, whatever happens in local elections etc has no little or bearing on how people would vote in a referendum. And to take this right back on topic, whatever the recent manoeuverings of SF etc, I saw nothing in the events of the last couple of weeks to persuade me that Unionists are any less committed to the Union than before.

If anything, those scenes from Westminster and the reaction to them in NI suggest to me that the bond is as strong as ever.

[trailer]

That entire post reminds me of James Molyneaux proclaiming that "a prolonged IRA ceasefire could be the most destabilising thing to happen to unionism since partition".

Would that be the same James Molyneux who ceased to be politicalyl relevant sometime before the end of the last century?

Your post absolutely screams of your discomfort at the positive reaction SF have been getting from the 'middle of the roaders' over the last week. SF won't have lost any support from it's base over the course of the last few days - they've been greeting royal visitors here for a decade after all (and I remember the jibes from opponents predicting that it meant SF were about to take their seats in Westminster back then too ).

What you infer and what I imply, never mind state, are two very different things.

For I am not at all "discomforted" by the sight of SF having to move away from everything that they used to hold dear, if anything I am somewhat amused by it. (Nor btw did I predict eg that they will take their seats at Westminster, rather I suggested that they might as well.)

So while they won't have lot support, they will however have gained a degree of support from the middle of the road. The same people you no doubt know are key to a border poll.

And then to cap the post off with the claim that Irish Republicanism is dying, at a time when SF's is now the largest party north and south, and still growing?? You're some ostrich.

They won't have lost support. Indeed they most likely have gained support.

But the point is that such shifts are entirely within the Nationalist spectrum, meaning that if eg I were an SDLP supporter, I could well be discomforted etc, but as a Unionist, I am not moved, either literally or figuratively..

Ditto the emergence of SF as a force in ROI. For if anything, that trend only makes a UI vote in a referendum LESS likely not more, on the basis that while  some moderate Unionists might be persuadable that in principle at least, a UI could be good for them, Hell will freezr over before we will trust our fate to a UI where SF has the whip hand.

As for you "midlle of the road" manoeuvering, where you're going wrong is in imagining that there is only one road in NI, with one middle. Whereas the reality is that there are two roads, a Nationalist one and a Unionist one. And while SF may have made gains in the middle lane of theirs, unless or until Nationalism can persuade a sizeable proportion of Unionists that we should all be "On the One Road", then they have no hope of gaining a majority in any referendum.

Which is why I am not at all disacomforted by the events of the last few days, since as well as movement by and within Nationalism etc, this Ostrich has also observed the other lesson to be drawn, namely that support for the Union within Unionism, whether party political or cultural, is as strong as ever.

And unless or until that latter changes, there simply won't be a UI.

Which I am entirely comfortable with.

NI and the Union is crumbling before your very eyes and you can't see it.

Huge energy bills are coming this winter. Lengthy health waiting lists, along with an inaccessible GP service will see off lots of elderly. Schools, Roads all crumbling. Cost of food is sky rocketing. This winter will see a huge spike in deaths. Meanwhile Unionists are shouting about a protocol they have no control over changing. Lots of older generation Unionists will literally die this winter and those deaths are on the DUP and it's voters. 10 days of British ceremonial pomp won't save those people unfortunately.

[general_lee]

Meaning that if it ever came to a referendum, some Nationalists aren't likely to vote at all, while some might even vote to remain.

That would make them Irish Unionists rather than Irish Nationalists.

[screenexile]

EG's post is a bit deep for what I see going on.

Sinn Fein are recognising that those who were around for the armed struggle are on the way out and that votes are going to be won in the future are from young progressives and that getting that vote over the next 10 years and convincing them a UI is in their best interests is how to get it done. New votes are going to go to Greens/Alliance so that's where SF's focus has to lie.

The DUP have gone the opposite way which is the road to no town they are on the slide bigtime!

[Snapchap]

That entire post reminds me of James Molyneaux proclaiming that "a prolonged IRA ceasefire could be the most destabilising thing to happen to unionism since partition".

Would that be the same James Molyneux who ceased to be politicalyl relevant sometime before the end of the last century?

Your post absolutely screams of your discomfort at the positive reaction SF have been getting from the 'middle of the roaders' over the last week. SF won't have lost any support from it's base over the course of the last few days - they've been greeting royal visitors here for a decade after all (and I remember the jibes from opponents predicting that it meant SF were about to take their seats in Westminster back then too ).

What you infer and what I imply, never mind state, are two very different things.

For I am not at all "discomforted" by the sight of SF having to move away from everything that they used to hold dear, if anything I am somewhat amused by it. (Nor btw did I predict eg that they will take their seats at Westminster, rather I suggested that they might as well.)

So while they won't have lot support, they will however have gained a degree of support from the middle of the road. The same people you no doubt know are key to a border poll.

And then to cap the post off with the claim that Irish Republicanism is dying, at a time when SF's is now the largest party north and south, and still growing?? You're some ostrich.

They won't have lost support. Indeed they most likely have gained support.

But the point is that such shifts are entirely within the Nationalist spectrum, meaning that if eg I were an SDLP supporter, I could well be discomforted etc, but as a Unionist, I am not moved, either literally or figuratively..

Ditto the emergence of SF as a force in ROI. For if anything, that trend only makes a UI vote in a referendum LESS likely not more, on the basis that while  some moderate Unionists might be persuadable that in principle at least, a UI could be good for them, Hell will freezr over before we will trust our fate to a UI where SF has the whip hand.

As for you "midlle of the road" manoeuvering, where you're going wrong is in imagining that there is only one road in NI, with one middle. Whereas the reality is that there are two roads, a Nationalist one and a Unionist one. And while SF may have made gains in the middle lane of theirs, unless or until Nationalism can persuade a sizeable proportion of Unionists that we should all be "On the One Road", then they have no hope of gaining a majority in any referendum.

Which is why I am not at all disacomforted by the events of the last few days, since as well as movement by and within Nationalism etc, this Ostrich has also observed the other lesson to be drawn, namely that support for the Union within Unionism, whether party political or cultural, is as strong as ever.

And unless or until that latter changes, there simply won't be a UI.

Which I am entirely comfortable with.

I just haven't the time right now to reply to each point, but one bit of ostrich behaviour really jumped out there - your claim that support for the union is as strong as ever. That's some claim. The most recent poll (Lucid Talk) gives the pro-union vote a 7% lead over the UI side. Are you seriously saying that a 7% majority is "as strong" a pro-union majority as there's been since the formation of the state? Interestingly, the same poll states that a large majority of young voters (aged 18-25) by a margin of 57% to 35% would vote for a United Ireland today, while a majority of all voters would like to see a united Ireland within the next 20 years (by a margin of 51% to 44%). Again, are you saying that's the strongest support for the union there's ever been?

Ostrich.

[Franko]

EG's theory in a nutshell:

A person can only ever become more resolved towards Unionism, never less.  Once a unionist, always a unionist, regardless of circumstance.

No, I'm not saying that.

What I am saying is that Sinn Fein will not persuade Unionists to become Nationalists, whether by bullet or ballot. On the contrary, the more successful SF become in persuading people within their own community, the less likely Unionists are to be persuaded by them, not more.

Nationalists, however, are capable of become non-nationalists (or at the very least agnostic about the subject) at the drop of a crown hat.

Which is utter nonsense.

It is not "noinsense", rather as very opinion poll this century has shown, it is demonstrable fact.

For it didn't take the "droip of a hat", regal or otherwise, rather it took the end of The Troubles, the implementation of the GFA and the relative peace of the last 30-odd years to elicit change in some Nationalist thinking in NI.

Which is not to say that they are any "less Nationalist" in terms of identity and aspiration etc, nor in their voting habits in ordinary elections.

But now that the GFA has guaranteed their right to express ad uphold their Irish identity in all the different ways which that entails (culture, language, sport, arts etc), there has undeniably emerged a small but significant strand within Nationalism in NI which is no longer desperate to achieve a UI.

Meaning that if it ever came to a referendum, some Nationalists aren't likely to vote at all, while some might even vote to remain. And even if were only talking about a few, for any vote for a UI to succeed, then it would take 100% of Nationalists to turn out and vote for it.

And then for a proportion of Unionists to vote for it as well.

And even if the former could be achieved (highly unlikely, imo), then thisUnionist considers that the latter is further away than ever.

All of which explains why, with every electoral success, SF are still not demanding a referendum. Which in turn reflects that their political leaders understand how these things work rather better thsn their supporters.

Unsurprising though, as the political leaders of Unionism display a similar head in the sand attitude to the changes occurring in front of their eyes.

This Unionist, at least, is under no illusions as to the mess that the DUP, and TUV etc, have got themselves into.

Nor am I under any illusions as to the harm that that is causing for the lives of people in NI etc.

But as I keep repeating, whatever happens in local elections etc has no little or bearing on how people would vote in a referendum. And to take this right back on topic, whatever the recent manoeuverings of SF etc, I saw nothing in the events of the last couple of weeks to persuade me that Unionists are any less committed to the Union than before.

If anything, those scenes from Westminster and the reaction to them in NI suggest to me that the bond is as strong as ever.

1.

Unfortunately for you, it's not only SF who are doing the persuading these days.  Large strands of civic nationalism have started to beat the drum, with ever greater fervour


2.
This (ex-Unionist) disagrees with you

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/james-nesbitt-wants-new-union-of-ireland-as-he-reveals-project-to-give-voice-to-silent-majority-38287899.html

"People from the North, of my tradition, would feel that they have their identity, that it is in no way threatened, that they have an equal voice, that they are part of a society that is progressive, inclusive, diverse," Nesbitt said.

"That they have prosperity, that they're not marginalised, and that they can be proud to be from the north of Ireland in a new union of Ireland."

"Among my friends, who are all boys who are Protestants, well, men, we're all 54, they would really consider now what the notion of a new union of Ireland might look like, and I think there's a lot of people that think that."


2a.
Time to invest in a bigger screen

[grounded]

It sounds as if EG is trying to persuade himself that the Union is safe rather than other board members on here.
       Its amazing the way Unionist language has changed regarding a UI.
          First it was ' there will never be a Nationalist majority ' then as the demographic change was demonstrated it moved to
         ' Nationalists are too well off in the UK and would suffer in terms of finance, education, welfare and healthcare' they would never vote for a UI '
         Its now evolving into a 50+1 majority is no longer acceptable. So called parrallel consent.
         All to avoid the glaring reality that there will be a UI referendum at some stage.
           

[Eamonnca1]

It sounds as if EG is trying to persuade himself that the Union is safe rather than other board members on here.
       Its amazing the way Unionist language has changed regarding a UI.
          First it was ' there will never be a Nationalist majority ' then as the demographic change was demonstrated it moved to
         ' Nationalists are too well off in the UK and would suffer in terms of finance, education, welfare and healthcare' they would never vote for a UI '
         Its now evolving into a 50+1 majority is no longer acceptable. So called parrallel consent.
         All to avoid the glaring reality that there will be a UI referendum at some stage.
         

This is a unionist obsession. Almost every single day there's at least one line of text in the Newsletter saying "Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom." It's like a mantra they have to keep repeating to themselves for their own mental health. I can't remember the last time I heard someone say "California is part of the United States," but then people here seem to be a bit more secure in their identity.