So, is this a sign that ' Ulster ' is truly doomed ?
The Stormont Executive's First Minister has said Northern Ireland's future in the United Kingdom could depend on Catholics, wary of Ireland's economic woes, voting across the traditional divide.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/1119/robinsonp.html
Not necessarily, at least in the short to medium term. SF and the SDLP could get 60% of the vote, but it's only the vote on a referendum that matters. I don't think it would make any sense to push for a referendum until the nationalist vote is at least 55%.
As for the DUP attracting Catholics... I can't see it happening in any significant numbers. Robinson's reaction to the Prison Service emblems issue is a reminder of just how moderate the DUP is. Not very.
Figures out last month found that 49% of Northern Irish students at the province's universities were Catholics, while 35% were Protestants
the Protestant working class are in big trouble with stats like that.
Quote from: Maguire01 on November 19, 2011, 02:11:20 PM
Not necessarily, at least in the short to medium term. SF and the SDLP could get 60% of the vote, but it's only the vote on a referendum that matters. I don't think it would make any sense to push for a referendum until the nationalist vote is at least 55%.
As for the DUP attracting Catholics... I can't see it happening in any significant numbers. Robinson's reaction to the Prison Service emblems issue is a reminder of just how moderate the DUP is. Not very.
Catholics won't vote for the DUP any time soon. However a percentage could well vote to remain in the UK in a referendum mainly for "fear of change" reasons rather than "Castle Catholic/West Brit" reasons.
i wouldnt like to be depending on a catholic for anything :)
I'm 34 years old. If, in the immediate future, Ireland was reunited, I think i'd emigrate.
Life's too short to spend most of it living on the breadline in pursuit of an ideology. I've no love of Britain or Britishness, but I'd hate to see how long it would take the wee six to cope without British money.
I'd also argue that if another life is lost over division/unification, then it's one too many.
QuoteI'd also argue that if another life is lost over division/unification, then it's one too many.
I agree that far too many lives have been lost because this island is divided. Not one more life should be lost to keep it divided.
Quote from: thewobbler on November 19, 2011, 07:50:31 PM
I'm 34 years old. If, in the immediate future, Ireland was reunited, I think i'd emigrate.
Life's too short to spend most of it living on the breadline in pursuit of an ideology. I've no love of Britain or Britishness, but I'd hate to see how long it would take the wee six to cope without British money.
I'd also argue that if another life is lost over division/unification, then it's one too many.
Let me get this straight. If Ireland was reunited you would be forced to live on the breadline and therefore you would have to emigrate? You haven't much faith on your own people to you? Instead you would prefer to live in a state that is propped up by British money instead of building a new country for your people and family. I think if Ireland was reunited i would be happy enough to see you go.
I'd be happy to go too Myles. Romanticism doesn't pay the bills.
Quote from: Windmill abu on November 19, 2011, 08:13:31 PM
I agree that far too many lives have been lost because this island is divided. Not one more life should be lost to keep it divided.
And what would be an acceptable number of deaths to reunite it?
This is the latest step in Unionism's constant redefining of what The Irish Question is. Whether it be carving out their own
herrenvolk democracy, depriving their own proles of votes so the Papists couldn't have them, rejecting the sovereignty of Parliament in making international treaties, or constantly threatening violence should they not get their way, we now have the hysterically desperate idea that you can buy a person's sense of national identity. Coming next: a requirement a la Montengro that any change in the status quo requires the approval of 55% of the voters. Then 55% of the electorate. Then 55% of Protestants . . .
I don't recite poetry to everyone wobbler but this one is for you...
What need you, being come to sense, But fumble in a greasy till And add the halfpence to the pence And prayer to shivering prayer, until You have dried the marrow from the bone; For men were born to pray and save; Romantic Ireland's dead and gone, It's with O'Leary in the grave.
Yet they were of a different kind, The names that stilled your childish play, They have gone about the world like wind, But little time had they to pray For whom the hangman's rope was spun, And what, God help us, could they save? Romantic Ireland's dead and gone, It's with O'Leary in the grave.
Was it for this the wild geese spread The grey wing upon every tide; For this that all that blood was shed, For this Edward Fitzgerald died, And Robert Emmet and Wolfe Tone, All that delirium of the brave? Romantic Ireland's dead and gone, It's with O'Leary in the grave.
Yet could we turn the years again, And call those exiles as they were In all their loneliness and pain, You'd cry `Some woman's yellow hair Has maddened every mother's son': They weighed so lightly what they gave. But let them be, they're dead and gone, They're with O'Leary in the grave.
Surely there is a better argument than listening to dead men?
I'm very much alive.
Look on the bright side at least - its gonna be fun watching the unionists bend over backwards to keep the Fenians happy lest we decide to say "da f**k with this shit".
Quote from: Ulick on November 19, 2011, 09:56:58 PM
Look on the bright side at least - its gonna be fun watching the unionists bend over backwards to keep the Fenians happy lest we decide to say "da f**k with this shit".
There is as much chance of it happening as SF sitting in the Dail or Stormont.
"No Irish nationalist could support any treaty which institutionalizes British government claims to a part of Irish national territory. Indeed, the term - 'constitutional nationalism'- used by Mr.Mallon (SDLP) and his colleagues to describe their political philosophy is a contradiction in terms. The only constitutional nationalist in Ireland today is Sean McBride. He puts his nationalism within a framework of Irish constitutionality. Mr. Mallon, however, puts his within the framework of British constitutionality. Irish nationalism within British constitutionality is a contradiction in terms."
- Gerry Adams, 1986
("The Politics of Irish Freedom", Gerry Adams, Brandon Book Publishers, Ltd., Dingle, County Kerry, Ireland 1986, page 112, lines 26-35. NOTE: REMOVED FROM 1995 and1996 EDITIONS).
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
I know Gerry let you down but don't worry it'll all come good in the end and you can be part of a unified 32 counties.
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 19, 2011, 11:17:48 PM
I know Gerry let you down but don't worry it'll all come good in the end and you can be part of a unified 32 counties.
No interest in free state vermin.
I think Trout has been at the drinks cabinet again.
Quote from: Tony Baloney on November 19, 2011, 11:34:08 PM
I think Trout has been at the drinks cabinet again.
What the f**k would someone like you know?
Quote from: Trout on November 19, 2011, 11:26:46 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 19, 2011, 11:17:48 PM
I know Gerry let you down but don't worry it'll all come good in the end and you can be part of a unified 32 counties.
No interest in free state vermin.
That's Nazi talk, I think I'm getting a clearer picture of this particular fish. Still, we would welcome you and yours into the republic. Being a republic we would cherish all our children, even you trout with all your bitterness. I look forward to the day.
Quote from: Trout on November 19, 2011, 11:41:18 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on November 19, 2011, 11:34:08 PM
I think Trout has been at the drinks cabinet again.
What the f**k would someone like you know?
Temper temper. :D
Quote from: Windmill abu on November 19, 2011, 08:13:31 PM
QuoteI'd also argue that if another life is lost over division/unification, then it's one too many.
I agree that far too many lives have been lost because this island is divided. Not one more life should be lost to keep it divided.
how would a referendum on Irish unity result in a loss of life?
Quote from: year til sunday on November 20, 2011, 12:07:55 AM
Quote from: Windmill abu on November 19, 2011, 08:13:31 PM
QuoteI'd also argue that if another life is lost over division/unification, then it's one too many.
I agree that far too many lives have been lost because this island is divided. Not one more life should be lost to keep it divided.
how would a referendum on Irish unity result in a loss of life?
Are you brain dead? Do you not think Martin McGuinesses best mates in the DUP would mobilise the UDA/UVF?
Quote from: Maguire01 on November 19, 2011, 02:11:20 PM
Not necessarily, at least in the short to medium term. SF and the SDLP could get 60% of the vote, but it's only the vote on a referendum that matters. I don't think it would make any sense to push for a referendum until the nationalist vote is at least 55%.
As for the DUP attracting Catholics... I can't see it happening in any significant numbers. Robinson's reaction to the Prison Service emblems issue is a reminder of just how moderate the DUP is. Not very.
Even if the nationalist vote hit 55%, it is the increasing number of people not voting (mainly young people) who would be the determining factor. The type of people who voted on the GFA but might not have voted since.
Spot on, Deiseach.
Quote from: muppet on November 19, 2011, 09:43:59 PM
Surely there is a better argument than listening to dead men?
That should be framed and hung on every Irish livingroom wall where Devalera and the pope used to be.
All this mediaeval talk of Protestant and Catholic in a political debate is depressing. Should it be Nationalist and Unionist or is Northern Ireland really the last society in the post-Christian world (for want of a better term) that votes on sectarian lines?
Quote from: Trout on November 20, 2011, 12:13:22 AM
Quote from: year til sunday on November 20, 2011, 12:07:55 AM
Quote from: Windmill abu on November 19, 2011, 08:13:31 PM
QuoteI'd also argue that if another life is lost over division/unification, then it's one too many.
I agree that far too many lives have been lost because this island is divided. Not one more life should be lost to keep it divided.
how would a referendum on Irish unity result in a loss of life?
Are you brain dead? Do you not think Martin McGuinesses best mates in the DUP would mobilise the UDA/UVF?
i don't know, would they, and under what circumstances and for what end?
Talking about it on Nolan show now.
"Lots of Catholics phoning" (well about 5) in to say they support the "union" and would be unionists with a small u?
Wonder will they let any Catholics who disagree on!
Think we should add a poll and see if there are any on here who would support the "union"?
Quote from: Trout on November 19, 2011, 11:26:46 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 19, 2011, 11:17:48 PM
I know Gerry let you down but don't worry it'll all come good in the end and you can be part of a unified 32 counties.
No interest in free state vermin.
Bitter, moi! :D
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 21, 2011, 09:50:53 AM
Talking about it on Nolan show now.
"Lots of Catholics phoning" (well about 5) in to say they support the "union" and would be unionists with a small u?
Wonder will they let any Catholics who disagree on!
Think we should add a poll and see if there are any on here who would support the "union"?
If there was a bit less apathy in the south for their northern brothers, there may be a few less castle catholics.
A nationalist majority in the North will not mean an automatic 32 County Republic, even if a majority were to vote for it. The status quo would continue at Stormont and in all likelyhood an accommodation reached with Britain regarding a transfer of jurisdiction and funding. Unionist rights will be guaranteed much as Nationalists rights are now. A lot of Northern Nationalists actually like the way Stormont works even if the don't like the British trappings. If Unionists were being smart they would agree to parity of esteem for Nationalist flags, anthems and emblems, the down playing of the significance of the crown in the judicial system etc. They might also agree to a joint Head of State with the Queen and the President. Just a thought wouldn't it be a little bit ironic if the next King Billy were to over see the departure of the North from the UK?
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 10:08:18 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 21, 2011, 09:50:53 AM
Talking about it on Nolan show now.
"Lots of Catholics phoning" (well about 5) in to say they support the "union" and would be unionists with a small u?
Wonder will they let any Catholics who disagree on!
Think we should add a poll and see if there are any on here who would support the "union"?
If there was a bit less apathy in the south for their northern brothers, there may be a few less castle catholics.
f**k me - it's our fault again!
Sorry about the weather we're causing.
Quote from: Hardy on November 21, 2011, 10:31:42 AM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 10:08:18 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 21, 2011, 09:50:53 AM
Talking about it on Nolan show now.
"Lots of Catholics phoning" (well about 5) in to say they support the "union" and would be unionists with a small u?
Wonder will they let any Catholics who disagree on!
Think we should add a poll and see if there are any on here who would support the "union"?
If there was a bit less apathy in the south for their northern brothers, there may be a few less castle catholics.
f**k me - it's our faut again!
Sorry about the weather we're causing.
Not "again", just was your fault in the first place and that stain remains. Its a fact of life that some of the most committed unionist reside in the Dail and represent plenty of the same. I suppose its good that they represent their voters in some small way.
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 10:08:18 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 21, 2011, 09:50:53 AM
Talking about it on Nolan show now.
"Lots of Catholics phoning" (well about 5) in to say they support the "union" and would be unionists with a small u?
Wonder will they let any Catholics who disagree on!
Think we should add a poll and see if there are any on here who would support the "union"?
If there was a bit less apathy in the south for their northern brothers, there may be a few less castle catholics.
Plenty of apathy in the North as well!!
Quote from: Applesisapples on November 21, 2011, 10:58:29 AM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 10:08:18 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 21, 2011, 09:50:53 AM
Talking about it on Nolan show now.
"Lots of Catholics phoning" (well about 5) in to say they support the "union" and would be unionists with a small u?
Wonder will they let any Catholics who disagree on!
Think we should add a poll and see if there are any on here who would support the "union"?
If there was a bit less apathy in the south for their northern brothers, there may be a few less castle catholics.
Plenty of apathy in the North as well!!
Born from the apathy in the south to an extent.
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 10:39:24 AM
Quote from: Hardy on November 21, 2011, 10:31:42 AM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 10:08:18 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 21, 2011, 09:50:53 AM
Talking about it on Nolan show now.
"Lots of Catholics phoning" (well about 5) in to say they support the "union" and would be unionists with a small u?
Wonder will they let any Catholics who disagree on!
Think we should add a poll and see if there are any on here who would support the "union"?
If there was a bit less apathy in the south for their northern brothers, there may be a few less castle catholics.
f**k me - it's our faut again!
Sorry about the weather we're causing.
Not "again", just was your fault in the first place and that stain remains. Its a fact of life that some of the most committed unionist reside in the Dail and represent plenty of the same. I suppose its good that they represent their voters in some small way.
Perhaps you could explain what I did and how I can purge this "stain". I'm always willing to help.
Quote from: Hardy on November 21, 2011, 11:04:44 AM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 10:39:24 AM
Quote from: Hardy on November 21, 2011, 10:31:42 AM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 10:08:18 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 21, 2011, 09:50:53 AM
Talking about it on Nolan show now.
"Lots of Catholics phoning" (well about 5) in to say they support the "union" and would be unionists with a small u?
Wonder will they let any Catholics who disagree on!
Think we should add a poll and see if there are any on here who would support the "union"?
If there was a bit less apathy in the south for their northern brothers, there may be a few less castle catholics.
f**k me - it's our faut again!
Sorry about the weather we're causing.
Not "again", just was your fault in the first place and that stain remains. Its a fact of life that some of the most committed unionist reside in the Dail and represent plenty of the same. I suppose its good that they represent their voters in some small way.
Perhaps you could explain what I did and how I can purge this "stain". I'm always willing to help.
The stain is obviously grease from all those chips on shoulders. ;)
Quote from: Rossfan on November 21, 2011, 11:19:20 AM
Quote from: Hardy on November 21, 2011, 11:04:44 AM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 10:39:24 AM
Quote from: Hardy on November 21, 2011, 10:31:42 AM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 10:08:18 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 21, 2011, 09:50:53 AM
Talking about it on Nolan show now.
"Lots of Catholics phoning" (well about 5) in to say they support the "union" and would be unionists with a small u?
Wonder will they let any Catholics who disagree on!
Think we should add a poll and see if there are any on here who would support the "union"?
If there was a bit less apathy in the south for their northern brothers, there may be a few less castle catholics.
f**k me - it's our faut again!
Sorry about the weather we're causing.
Not "again", just was your fault in the first place and that stain remains. Its a fact of life that some of the most committed unionist reside in the Dail and represent plenty of the same. I suppose its good that they represent their voters in some small way.
Perhaps you could explain what I did and how I can purge this "stain". I'm always willing to help.
The stain is obviously grease from all those chips on shoulders. ;)
There would be no call to grease them in the sloping shouldered south.
Thanks lads. I often wonder why the desire to reunify this country when so many of ye seem to hate the south, and those of us who make up the Republic, so much. I wouldn't mind but every time I go north, or meet a lad from over the border, they seem to be mad keen to get on with us.
I dont hate the south, its just the apathetic attitude that some have towards the north. In fact some really detest the north and my own personal observation is that it gets worse the further south you go. Could be wrong but just an observation. Down round langer and yerra land they would make you think you really are from another country.
Quote from: Hardy on November 21, 2011, 11:04:44 AM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 10:39:24 AM
Quote from: Hardy on November 21, 2011, 10:31:42 AM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 10:08:18 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 21, 2011, 09:50:53 AM
Talking about it on Nolan show now.
"Lots of Catholics phoning" (well about 5) in to say they support the "union" and would be unionists with a small u?
Wonder will they let any Catholics who disagree on!
Think we should add a poll and see if there are any on here who would support the "union"?
If there was a bit less apathy in the south for their northern brothers, there may be a few less castle catholics.
f**k me - it's our faut again!
Sorry about the weather we're causing.
Not "again", just was your fault in the first place and that stain remains. Its a fact of life that some of the most committed unionist reside in the Dail and represent plenty of the same. I suppose its good that they represent their voters in some small way.
Perhaps you could explain what I did and how I can purge this "stain". I'm always willing to help.
hardy - you know your history as well as anyone im sure. You know what i refer to and you know that sucessive irish governments did precious little to put pressure on the British government during the troubles. If it makes us northerners a little pissed off well please forgive us that and forgive us for being well entitled to being pissed off. Do you not think we have a reason to be ?
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 11:58:09 AM
Quote from: Hardy on November 21, 2011, 11:04:44 AM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 10:39:24 AM
Quote from: Hardy on November 21, 2011, 10:31:42 AM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 10:08:18 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 21, 2011, 09:50:53 AM
Talking about it on Nolan show now.
"Lots of Catholics phoning" (well about 5) in to say they support the "union" and would be unionists with a small u?
Wonder will they let any Catholics who disagree on!
Think we should add a poll and see if there are any on here who would support the "union"?
If there was a bit less apathy in the south for their northern brothers, there may be a few less castle catholics.
f**k me - it's our faut again!
Sorry about the weather we're causing.
Not "again", just was your fault in the first place and that stain remains. Its a fact of life that some of the most committed unionist reside in the Dail and represent plenty of the same. I suppose its good that they represent their voters in some small way.
Perhaps you could explain what I did and how I can purge this "stain". I'm always willing to help.
hardy - you know your history as well as anyone im sure. You know what i refer to and you know that sucessive irish governments did precious little to put pressure on the British government during the troubles. If it makes us northerners a little pissed off well please forgive us that and forgive us for being well entitled to being pissed off. Do you not think we have a reason to be ?
I have more to concern me than worrying about how pissed off you are.
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 11:47:20 AM
I dont hate the south, its just the apathetic attitude that some have towards the north. In fact some really detest the north and my own personal observation is that it gets worse the further south you go. Could be wrong but just an observation. Down round langer and yerra land they would make you think you really are from another country.
That statement certainly does not ring true. Cork and Kerry were the most anti-treaty counties during the Civil War. Areas of west-Cork and particularly mid and north-Kerry would still be deeply republican - witness the support for Sinn Féin north of Tralee.
For all that there are many in the twenty-six counties who are wholly ignorant of the six counties, there are at least as many in the six counties who are equally as ignorant in their attitude towards 'southerners.'
Quote from: Hardy on November 21, 2011, 12:19:31 PM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 11:58:09 AM
Quote from: Hardy on November 21, 2011, 11:04:44 AM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 10:39:24 AM
Quote from: Hardy on November 21, 2011, 10:31:42 AM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 10:08:18 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 21, 2011, 09:50:53 AM
Talking about it on Nolan show now.
"Lots of Catholics phoning" (well about 5) in to say they support the "union" and would be unionists with a small u?
Wonder will they let any Catholics who disagree on!
Think we should add a poll and see if there are any on here who would support the "union"?
If there was a bit less apathy in the south for their northern brothers, there may be a few less castle catholics.
f**k me - it's our faut again!
Sorry about the weather we're causing.
Not "again", just was your fault in the first place and that stain remains. Its a fact of life that some of the most committed unionist reside in the Dail and represent plenty of the same. I suppose its good that they represent their voters in some small way.
Perhaps you could explain what I did and how I can purge this "stain". I'm always willing to help.
hardy - you know your history as well as anyone im sure. You know what i refer to and you know that sucessive irish governments did precious little to put pressure on the British government during the troubles. If it makes us northerners a little pissed off well please forgive us that and forgive us for being well entitled to being pissed off. Do you not think we have a reason to be ?
I have more to concern me than worrying about how pissed off you are.
Fair enough. Nicely side stepped.
Quote from: Donnellys Hollow on November 21, 2011, 12:24:40 PM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 11:47:20 AM
I dont hate the south, its just the apathetic attitude that some have towards the north. In fact some really detest the north and my own personal observation is that it gets worse the further south you go. Could be wrong but just an observation. Down round langer and yerra land they would make you think you really are from another country.
That statement certainly does not ring true. Cork and Kerry were the most anti-treaty counties during the Civil War. Areas of west-Cork and particularly mid and north-Kerry would still be deeply republican - witness the support for Sinn Féin north of Tralee.
For all that there are many in the twenty-six counties who are wholly ignorant of the six counties, there are at least as many in the six counties who are equally as ignorant in their attitude towards 'southerners.'
I agree DH. And areas like West Limerick and Clare would also be very much 32 county republican (small r). I think in general most of the country would be in fairness. I think the media and particularly the broadcast media might give a false impression to be honest. I know young people generally don't give a shite, but they don't give a shite about a lot of things except being young. I think the underlying sentiment would still be in favour of a united Ireland, but not against anyone's will.
Quote from: AZOffaly on November 21, 2011, 01:01:05 PM
Quote from: Donnellys Hollow on November 21, 2011, 12:24:40 PM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 11:47:20 AM
I dont hate the south, its just the apathetic attitude that some have towards the north. In fact some really detest the north and my own personal observation is that it gets worse the further south you go. Could be wrong but just an observation. Down round langer and yerra land they would make you think you really are from another country.
That statement certainly does not ring true. Cork and Kerry were the most anti-treaty counties during the Civil War. Areas of west-Cork and particularly mid and north-Kerry would still be deeply republican - witness the support for Sinn Féin north of Tralee.
For all that there are many in the twenty-six counties who are wholly ignorant of the six counties, there are at least as many in the six counties who are equally as ignorant in their attitude towards 'southerners.'
but not against anyone's will.
thats that fooked then
Quote from: AZOffaly on November 21, 2011, 01:01:05 PM
Quote from: Donnellys Hollow on November 21, 2011, 12:24:40 PM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 11:47:20 AM
I dont hate the south, its just the apathetic attitude that some have towards the north. In fact some really detest the north and my own personal observation is that it gets worse the further south you go. Could be wrong but just an observation. Down round langer and yerra land they would make you think you really are from another country.
That statement certainly does not ring true. Cork and Kerry were the most anti-treaty counties during the Civil War. Areas of west-Cork and particularly mid and north-Kerry would still be deeply republican - witness the support for Sinn Féin north of Tralee.
For all that there are many in the twenty-six counties who are wholly ignorant of the six counties, there are at least as many in the six counties who are equally as ignorant in their attitude towards 'southerners.'
I agree DH. And areas like West Limerick and Clare would also be very much 32 county republican (small r). I think in general most of the country would be in fairness. I think the media and particularly the broadcast media might give a false impression to be honest. I know young people generally don't give a shite, but they don't give a shite about a lot of things except being young. I think the underlying sentiment would still be in favour of a united Ireland, but not against anyone's will.
The problem there is that it has to be against someones will. Maybe a minirity but it will always be a sizeable minority. The question then is will that sizeable minority accept a democratic majority ???? ::) ::) ::)
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 01:04:00 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on November 21, 2011, 01:01:05 PM
Quote from: Donnellys Hollow on November 21, 2011, 12:24:40 PM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 11:47:20 AM
I dont hate the south, its just the apathetic attitude that some have towards the north. In fact some really detest the north and my own personal observation is that it gets worse the further south you go. Could be wrong but just an observation. Down round langer and yerra land they would make you think you really are from another country.
That statement certainly does not ring true. Cork and Kerry were the most anti-treaty counties during the Civil War. Areas of west-Cork and particularly mid and north-Kerry would still be deeply republican - witness the support for Sinn Féin north of Tralee.
For all that there are many in the twenty-six counties who are wholly ignorant of the six counties, there are at least as many in the six counties who are equally as ignorant in their attitude towards 'southerners.'
but not against anyone's will.
thats that fooked then
Maybe, but doesn't mean you can't keep trying to make a united Ireland attractive to both communities.
Quote from: fearglasmor on November 21, 2011, 01:07:49 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on November 21, 2011, 01:01:05 PM
Quote from: Donnellys Hollow on November 21, 2011, 12:24:40 PM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 11:47:20 AM
I dont hate the south, its just the apathetic attitude that some have towards the north. In fact some really detest the north and my own personal observation is that it gets worse the further south you go. Could be wrong but just an observation. Down round langer and yerra land they would make you think you really are from another country.
That statement certainly does not ring true. Cork and Kerry were the most anti-treaty counties during the Civil War. Areas of west-Cork and particularly mid and north-Kerry would still be deeply republican - witness the support for Sinn Féin north of Tralee.
For all that there are many in the twenty-six counties who are wholly ignorant of the six counties, there are at least as many in the six counties who are equally as ignorant in their attitude towards 'southerners.'
I agree DH. And areas like West Limerick and Clare would also be very much 32 county republican (small r). I think in general most of the country would be in fairness. I think the media and particularly the broadcast media might give a false impression to be honest. I know young people generally don't give a shite, but they don't give a shite about a lot of things except being young. I think the underlying sentiment would still be in favour of a united Ireland, but not against anyone's will.
The problem there is that it has to be against someones will. Maybe a minirity but it will always be a sizeable minority. The question then is will that sizeable minority accept a democratic majority ???? ::) ::) ::)
Yes fear. Obviously someone will be unhappy, but what I mean is that we need to try and make sure there's no triumphalism or regalia that will make it seem like a defeat for anybody. Otherwise you'll just spawn another round of trouble in the country.
I think that in time the majority of people in the north can be persuaded that a united Ireland would be a good place to live. If we can't at least aim for that, what point is there?
Quote from: Donnellys Hollow on November 21, 2011, 12:24:40 PM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 11:47:20 AM
I dont hate the south, its just the apathetic attitude that some have towards the north. In fact some really detest the north and my own personal observation is that it gets worse the further south you go. Could be wrong but just an observation. Down round langer and yerra land they would make you think you really are from another country.
That statement certainly does not ring true. Cork and Kerry were the most anti-treaty counties during the Civil War. Areas of west-Cork and particularly mid and north-Kerry would still be deeply republican - witness the support for Sinn Féin north of Tralee.
For all that there are many in the twenty-six counties who are wholly ignorant of the six counties, there are at least as many in the six counties who are equally as ignorant in their attitude towards 'southerners.'
That's certainly true.
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 12:52:35 PM
Quote from: Hardy on November 21, 2011, 12:19:31 PM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 11:58:09 AM
Quote from: Hardy on November 21, 2011, 11:04:44 AM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 10:39:24 AM
Quote from: Hardy on November 21, 2011, 10:31:42 AM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 10:08:18 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 21, 2011, 09:50:53 AM
Talking about it on Nolan show now.
"Lots of Catholics phoning" (well about 5) in to say they support the "union" and would be unionists with a small u?
Wonder will they let any Catholics who disagree on!
Think we should add a poll and see if there are any on here who would support the "union"?
If there was a bit less apathy in the south for their northern brothers, there may be a few less castle catholics.
f**k me - it's our faut again!
Sorry about the weather we're causing.
Not "again", just was your fault in the first place and that stain remains. Its a fact of life that some of the most committed unionist reside in the Dail and represent plenty of the same. I suppose its good that they represent their voters in some small way.
Perhaps you could explain what I did and how I can purge this "stain". I'm always willing to help.
hardy - you know your history as well as anyone im sure. You know what i refer to and you know that sucessive irish governments did precious little to put pressure on the British government during the troubles. If it makes us northerners a little pissed off well please forgive us that and forgive us for being well entitled to being pissed off. Do you not think we have a reason to be ?
I have more to concern me than worrying about how pissed off you are.
Fair enough. Nicely side stepped.
Only a side-step in the sense that one would side-step a pile of elephant dung.
Quote from: Hardy on November 21, 2011, 01:36:33 PM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 12:52:35 PM
Quote from: Hardy on November 21, 2011, 12:19:31 PM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 11:58:09 AM
Quote from: Hardy on November 21, 2011, 11:04:44 AM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 10:39:24 AM
Quote from: Hardy on November 21, 2011, 10:31:42 AM
Quote from: haveaharp on November 21, 2011, 10:08:18 AM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 21, 2011, 09:50:53 AM
Talking about it on Nolan show now.
"Lots of Catholics phoning" (well about 5) in to say they support the "union" and would be unionists with a small u?
Wonder will they let any Catholics who disagree on!
Think we should add a poll and see if there are any on here who would support the "union"?
If there was a bit less apathy in the south for their northern brothers, there may be a few less castle catholics.
f**k me - it's our faut again!
Sorry about the weather we're causing.
Not "again", just was your fault in the first place and that stain remains. Its a fact of life that some of the most committed unionist reside in the Dail and represent plenty of the same. I suppose its good that they represent their voters in some small way.
Perhaps you could explain what I did and how I can purge this "stain". I'm always willing to help.
hardy - you know your history as well as anyone im sure. You know what i refer to and you know that sucessive irish governments did precious little to put pressure on the British government during the troubles. If it makes us northerners a little pissed off well please forgive us that and forgive us for being well entitled to being pissed off. Do you not think we have a reason to be ?
I have more to concern me than worrying about how pissed off you are.
Fair enough. Nicely side stepped.
Only a side-step in the sense that one would side-step a pile of elephant dung.
Which bit is dung ? The bit about successive Irish governments doing nothing ? Tell me otherwise.
The title of this thread contains the word "future".
However a couple of bucks seem to want to dig into the past as usual so they can be upset about things .
Ther's not a single thing you can do about the bloody past - whether it's your take on it or mine.
Now this oul future thingy ... we can all do something to try and shape that ...... or does that call for constructiveness and no giving out about future partners etc.
Sure some people couldnt be having that sort of carry on :P
Quote from: Rossfan on November 21, 2011, 02:33:54 PM
The title of this thread contains the word "future".
However a couple of bucks seem to want to dig into the past as usual so they can be upset about things .
Ther's not a single thing you can do about the bloody past - whether it's your take on it or mine.
Now this oul future thingy ... we can all do something to try and shape that ...... or does that call for constructiveness and no giving out about future partners etc.
Sure some people couldnt be having that sort of carry on :P
Not repeating mistakes of the past will help in building this future you speak of.
Quote from: Rossfan on November 21, 2011, 02:33:54 PM
The title of this thread contains the word "future".
However a couple of bucks seem to want to dig into the past as usual so they can be upset about things .
Reminds me of a certain election recently.
Northern Ireland is always going to be a bit of both British and Irish, isn't it? If the GFA gives some sort of parity of esteem to Nationalists as a minority then when the table are turned the Protestants will have to get the same treatment. The Brits are very kind to fund the whole charade. They broke it so they should fix it.
I though David Adams' piece on Michael D was very good
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2011/1117/1224307704567.html
Can only speak from my own personal experience. A lot of Northern nationalists confuse the views of e.g. the Eoghan Harrises and the Sindo of this country with the wider view of the North held by Southerners. I spend a fair bit of time in the South (mostly in the border counties I admit) but also in Dublin. I've only experienced "anti-northern" sentiments directly once. Yes some people are a bit ignorant of what the North is like but I generally find that this is not reflected in "anti-northerness". Maybe people in the South don't think about a United Ireland every day but who does?
A dead pot said this:
Its the kettles, stupid!
Jesus Christ, it's the same fcking thread over and over again.
The Presidential election thread was taken over with the same old blame game, now this thread is gone the same way.
It would sicken your hole.
Something I remember clearly from stupid arguments I was involved in on OWC many moons ago, was that when we reached a time when a UI seemed a genuine possibility (and would be voted for) a lot of the contingent on OWC thought it very fair that at that point the boundaries of NI should be redrawn again to rather than (once again) accepting the will of the majority. :o
In a hypothetical UI Dublin would still get everything and Down would be relegated to the status of Cavan or Longford or Mayo or Wexford .
Quote from: bennydorano on November 21, 2011, 06:57:09 PM
Something I remember clearly from stupid arguments I was involved in on OWC many moons ago, was that when we reached a time when a UI seemed a genuine possibility (and would be voted for) a lot of the contingent on OWC thought it very fair that at that point the boundaries of NI should be redrawn again to rather than (once again) accepting the will of the majority. :o
Seems about right. They insist they're entitled to a homeland, something that respectable opinion in Albion scoffs at when articulated by Turkish Cypriots or white South Africans.
Quote from: deiseach on November 21, 2011, 09:03:03 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 21, 2011, 06:57:09 PM
Something I remember clearly from stupid arguments I was involved in on OWC many moons ago, was that when we reached a time when a UI seemed a genuine possibility (and would be voted for) a lot of the contingent on OWC thought it very fair that at that point the boundaries of NI should be redrawn again to rather than (once again) accepting the will of the majority. :o
Seems about right. They insist they're entitled to a homeland, something that respectable opinion in Albion scoffs at when articulated by Turkish Cypriots or white South Africans.
Who are you? - Mary McAleese?
Lazy, bigoted comment
Quote from: deiseach on November 21, 2011, 09:03:03 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 21, 2011, 06:57:09 PM
Something I remember clearly from stupid arguments I was involved in on OWC many moons ago, was that when we reached a time when a UI seemed a genuine possibility (and would be voted for) a lot of the contingent on OWC thought it very fair that at that point the boundaries of NI should be redrawn again to rather than (once again) accepting the will of the majority. :o
Seems about right. They insist they're entitled to a homeland, something that respectable opinion in Albion scoffs at when articulated by Turkish Cypriots or white South Africans.
Sure we'll build them a reservation up around Portbalintrae.
Quote from: michaelg on November 21, 2011, 10:55:23 PM
Quote from: deiseach on November 21, 2011, 09:03:03 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 21, 2011, 06:57:09 PM
Something I remember clearly from stupid arguments I was involved in on OWC many moons ago, was that when we reached a time when a UI seemed a genuine possibility (and would be voted for) a lot of the contingent on OWC thought it very fair that at that point the boundaries of NI should be redrawn again to rather than (once again) accepting the will of the majority. :o
Seems about right. They insist they're entitled to a homeland, something that respectable opinion in Albion scoffs at when articulated by Turkish Cypriots or white South Africans.
Who are you? - Mary McAleese?
Lazy, bigoted comment
Think you may have misunderstood the sentiment michaelg (where did all the proper nouns go?)
QuoteSure we'll build them a reservation up around Portbalintrae.
From Newtownabbey to Larne would be ideal, leave them a boat route to go the Glasgow Rangers games.
Quote from: michaelg on November 21, 2011, 10:55:23 PM
Quote from: deiseach on November 21, 2011, 09:03:03 PM
Seems about right. They insist they're entitled to a homeland, something that respectable opinion in Albion scoffs at when articulated by Turkish Cypriots or white South Africans.
Who are you? - Mary McAleese?
Lazy, bigoted comment
Okay michaelg, you explain to me why Ulster Unionists (for want of a better term) were entitled to a homeland while Turkish Cypriots and white South Africans are not
Quote from: deiseach on November 22, 2011, 02:55:51 PM
Quote from: michaelg on November 21, 2011, 10:55:23 PM
Quote from: deiseach on November 21, 2011, 09:03:03 PM
Seems about right. They insist they're entitled to a homeland, something that respectable opinion in Albion scoffs at when articulated by Turkish Cypriots or white South Africans.
Who are you? - Mary McAleese?
Lazy, bigoted comment
Okay michaelg, you explain to me why Ulster Unionists (for want of a better term) were entitled to a homeland while Turkish Cypriots and white South Africans are not
Wasn't it Paisley that said "id rather be British than fair"
Quote from: michaelg on November 21, 2011, 10:55:23 PM
Quote from: deiseach on November 21, 2011, 09:03:03 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 21, 2011, 06:57:09 PM
Something I remember clearly from stupid arguments I was involved in on OWC many moons ago, was that when we reached a time when a UI seemed a genuine possibility (and would be voted for) a lot of the contingent on OWC thought it very fair that at that point the boundaries of NI should be redrawn again to rather than (once again) accepting the will of the majority. :o
Seems about right. They insist they're entitled to a homeland, something that respectable opinion in Albion scoffs at when articulated by Turkish Cypriots or white South Africans.
Who are you? - Mary McAleese?
Lazy, bigoted comment
Why bigoted?
Surely too it would be lazy not to at least ask such a question? When previously faced with such an issue, unionists took that position, why not again?
/Jiim
Quote from: SuperMac on November 19, 2011, 12:48:29 PMSo, is this a sign that ' Ulster ' is truly doomed ?
The Stormont Executive's First Minister has said Northern Ireland's future in the United Kingdom could depend on Catholics, wary of Ireland's economic woes, voting across the traditional divide.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/1119/robinsonp.html
Absolutely not!
Tbh, this reminds me of Robinson's claim before the last Assembly election that if Unionists didn't vote DUP, we could see a SF 1st Minister. That was never going to happen, but it did no harm in scaring Unionists into staying "staunch". This interview will do the same, whilst also subtly reminding Catholics/Nationalists that he is aware of their concerns etc. (Of course, I don't for one moment imagine RC's/Nats will now vote DUP - nor does Robinson. But if this induces complacency in them etc, then a failure by some of them to vote at all is enough to maintain the Unionist majority)
And, of course, it will be no coincidence that this piece appeared on the day of the TUV Annual Conference in Cookstown - thereby neatly drawing attention away from them.
I don't like the greedy hoor myself, but he's undeniably a clever political operator, is Robinson. ::)
Quote from: seafoid on November 19, 2011, 05:05:40 PM
Figures out last month found that 49% of Northern Irish students at the province's universities were Catholics, while 35% were Protestants
the Protestant working class are in big trouble with stats like that.
There is no doubt that the lack of educational attainment among the Prod working class is a real problem economically and socially etc, but I don't see how it affects their political affiliations. In fact if anything, it makes tham
more likely to adhere to traditional working class Loyalism etc, rather than be attracted by the prospect of some sort of liberal democratic and secular United Ireland.
And anyhow, that figure is somewhat misleading, unless it is set against the number of Prods who cross the water to study in GB (many more than RC's, I suspect), at least some of whem will return to NI after graduating.
Quote from: dec on November 19, 2011, 07:05:40 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on November 19, 2011, 02:11:20 PM
Not necessarily, at least in the short to medium term. SF and the SDLP could get 60% of the vote, but it's only the vote on a referendum that matters. I don't think it would make any sense to push for a referendum until the nationalist vote is at least 55%.
As for the DUP attracting Catholics... I can't see it happening in any significant numbers. Robinson's reaction to the Prison Service emblems issue is a reminder of just how moderate the DUP is. Not very.
Catholics won't vote for the DUP any time soon. However a percentage could well vote to remain in the UK in a referendum mainly for "fear of change" reasons rather than "Castle Catholic/West Brit" reasons.
Spot on, on both counts.
Quote from: Windmill abu on November 19, 2011, 08:13:31 PM
QuoteI'd also argue that if another life is lost over division/unification, then it's one too many.
I agree that far too many lives have been lost because this island is divided. Not one more life should be lost to keep it divided.
Except that those people who are pro-partition are not the ones who are taking lives.
Rather it is those who are most viscerally anti-partition - as I think you well know... ::)
Quote from: deiseach on November 19, 2011, 08:43:37 PM
Quote from: Windmill abu on November 19, 2011, 08:13:31 PM
I agree that far too many lives have been lost because this island is divided. Not one more life should be lost to keep it divided.
And what would be an acceptable number of deaths to reunite it?
This is the latest step in Unionism's constant redefining of what The Irish Question is. Whether it be carving out their own herrenvolk democracy, depriving their own proles of votes so the Papists couldn't have them, rejecting the sovereignty of Parliament in making international treaties, or constantly threatening violence should they not get their way,
Er, this is 2011. You know, mandatory power sharing, SF in Government, equal rights for all etc...
Quote from: deiseach on November 19, 2011, 08:43:37 PMwe now have the hysterically desperate idea that you can buy a person's sense of national identity.
Or, we now have the entirely rational idea that the constitutional question having been at least "parked" for now, maybe people can begin to cast their votes not on archaic, tribal lines, but on the same broadly socio-economic basis which governs elections in the rest of the free, democratic world...
Quote from: deiseach on November 19, 2011, 08:43:37 PMComing next: a requirement a la Montengro that any change in the status quo requires the approval of 55% of the voters. Then 55% of the electorate. Then 55% of Protestants . . .
Meanwhile, back in the real world:
http://www.nio.gov.uk/agreement.pdf
Quote from: Fionntamhnach on November 19, 2011, 09:18:19 PMIn any case the subsidy per-head of a resident of NI in terms of public service provision has been slowly decreasing in real terms since the late 90's and there's no sign of that stopping any time soon - it might accelerate if nothing else. In terms of UK regions, NI is in no worse position than Wales or NE England and its possible that say in two decades time if the UK still exists in its current form that NI may be more economically prosperous than right now. Too much of Britain itself depends on the economy of SE England.
Some excellent points, there (imo).
To which I would add that for the first half century after Partition, the NI economy was
inherently far more propserous than the Republic's. Of course, much of that was dependant on traditional manufacting industry of the type which hardly exists any more in Western Europe any more.
But as against that, the ROI did not see its economy ravaged by anything like the 30 years of Troubles which NI had to endure. Therefore assuming those days are past, NI can hope to revert to a situatiuon whereby its economic prospects will depend on the efforts and assets of its own people etc.
In which case, I see no reason why NI cannot be every bit as prosperous long-term as the ROI - especially when it has the support of the British Treasury to underpin it, rather than the shackles of the Bundesbank to restrain it!
Quote from: Ulick on November 19, 2011, 09:56:58 PM
Look on the bright side at least - its gonna be fun watching the unionists bend over backwards to keep the Fenians happy lest we decide to say "da f**k with this shit".
"
Lest we decide"?
Does that imply a degree of doubt,
Donagh Ulick?
Surely every "Fenian" [
sic] is as pure and uncompromising as ever in resisting the Crown
and the Half Crown... ;)
Quote from: Trout on November 19, 2011, 11:05:12 PM
"No Irish nationalist could support any treaty which institutionalizes British government claims to a part of Irish national territory. Indeed, the term - 'constitutional nationalism'- used by Mr.Mallon (SDLP) and his colleagues to describe their political philosophy is a contradiction in terms. The only constitutional nationalist in Ireland today is Sean McBride. He puts his nationalism within a framework of Irish constitutionality. Mr. Mallon, however, puts his within the framework of British constitutionality. Irish nationalism within British constitutionality is a contradiction in terms."
- Gerry Adams, 1986
("The Politics of Irish Freedom", Gerry Adams, Brandon Book Publishers, Ltd., Dingle, County Kerry, Ireland 1986, page 112, lines 26-35. NOTE: REMOVED FROM 1995 and1996 EDITIONS).
Very interesting deletion, there, Trout - especially when as late as 1994, Adams was still declaring to the SF Ard Fheis that:
"Unionists are an Irish national minority, a religio/political minority, with minority rights not majority ones. Unionists can have no veto of British government policy or Irish government policy either for that matter."http://www.sinnfein.ie/contents/15170
I wonder how he reconciles those sentiments with the following extract from the GFA which he negotiated soon after:
[Participants] recognise the legitimacy of whatever choice is freely exercised by a majority of the people of Northern Ireland with regard to its status, whether they prefer to continue to support the Union with Great Britain or a sovereign united Irelandhttp://www.nio.gov.uk/agreement.pdf
Or might it simply be that he is a lying bastard, who will say anything to anyone, if he thinks that it will gain him some sort of material advantage?
Quote from: Hardy on November 20, 2011, 01:12:35 PMAll this mediaeval talk of Protestant and Catholic in a political debate is depressing. Should it be Nationalist and Unionist or is Northern Ireland really the last society in the post-Christian world (for want of a better term) that votes on sectarian lines?
Agree, but I do take some reassurance from the fact that a significant (and increasing?) section of the Prod/Unionist population is prepared to diverge from voting on traditional tribal lines, and give support to non-sectarian parties such as Alliance, Green, Independent and Conservative etc. Naomi Long unseating Peter Robinson in the Loyalist heartland of East Belfast was especially encouraging, maintaining as it did, a tradition dating back to Oliver Napier and beyond.
Perhaps given time, their RC/Nationalist counterparts will follow their example?
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 21, 2011, 09:50:53 AMThink we should add a poll and see if there are any on here who would support the "union"?
Aye, right.
For with a Board that is 50%+ for "Marty for Prez", that would be bound to be representative of popular opinion... :D
Quote from: Applesisapples on November 21, 2011, 10:20:17 AMA nationalist majority in the North will not mean an automatic 32 County Republic, even if a majority were to vote for it. The status quo would continue at Stormont and in all likelyhood an accommodation reached with Britain regarding a transfer of jurisdiction and funding. Unionist rights will be guaranteed much as Nationalists rights are now. A lot of Northern Nationalists actually like the way Stormont works even if the don't like the British trappings. If Unionists were being smart they would agree to parity of esteem for Nationalist flags, anthems and emblems, the down playing of the significance of the crown in the judicial system etc. They might also agree to a joint Head of State with the Queen and the President. Just a thought wouldn't it be a little bit ironic if the next King Billy were to over see the departure of the North from the UK?
Unionists don't need to do anything that would "dilute" the position of NI within the UK.
All the evidence indicates that he constititional issue is settled for now, and the foreseeable future.
Meanwhile back at the (Stormont) ranch, there is an economy to sort out...
Quote from: Evil Genius on November 23, 2011, 02:55:50 PM
Quote from: Gaoth Dobhair Abu on November 21, 2011, 09:50:53 AMThink we should add a poll and see if there are any on here who would support the "union"?
Aye, right.
For with a Board that is 50%+ for "Marty for Prez", that would be bound to be representative of popular opinion... :D
I voted, not for that hoor.
Quote from: AZOffaly on November 21, 2011, 01:11:12 PMI think that in time the majority of people in the north can be persuaded that a united Ireland would be a good place to live. If we can't at least aim for that, what point is there?
With the way things are (end of The Troubles, GFA, death of Celtic Tiger, Euro-crisis etc), I honestly believe that the task of persuading the minority of people in the north [
sic] that "NI is a good place to live" is proving somewhat easier than that which you are pursuing.
Quote from: seafoid on November 21, 2011, 04:56:04 PM
Northern Ireland is always going to be a bit of both British and Irish, isn't it? If the GFA gives some sort of parity of esteem to Nationalists as a minority then when the table are turned the Protestants will have to get the same treatment. The Brits are very kind to fund the whole charade. They broke it so they should fix it.
I though David Adams' piece on Michael D was very good
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2011/1117/1224307704567.html
The position of (so-called) "Loyalists" like Davy Adams in the post-Troubles world is a curious one. For having been resoundingly and consistently rejected by their "own" community at the Polls, they are reduced to scrounging around for a wee bit of consideration whereever they can get it.
And seeing as no-one anywhere in the UK gives a flying fcuk about any of them, that seems to mean Da Republik - as eg Jackie McDonald and his "New Best Friend" Mary McAleese demonstrated:
(http://ansionnachfionn.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/mary-mcaleese-with-uda-teror-leader-jackie-mcdonald.jpg?w=235&h=186)
What with Gerry Adams fleeing to Louth, it's suggests parallels with Mauretania welcoming the dregs of the Gadaffi regime, or Idi Amin retiring to Saudi Arabia.
In fact, I'm tempted to say you're welcome to this motley assortment of thugs, gangsters and murderers etc, except that I wouldn't wish them upon my worst enemy, never mind the (overwhelmingly) good people of the ROI.
Quote from: bennydorano on November 21, 2011, 06:57:09 PMSomething I remember clearly from stupid arguments I was involved in on OWC many moons ago, was that when we reached a time when a UI seemed a genuine possibility (and would be voted for) a lot of the contingent on OWC thought it very fair that at that point the boundaries of NI should be redrawn again to rather than (once again) accepting the will of the majority. :o
As a discussion site for NI football fans, OWC is no more representative of Unionist thinking than, say, a discussion site for GAA fans is of Nationalist thinking.
Or did you not happen to notice eg the majority support Marty McGuinness got on here for his presidential bid, as against the 13% of the vote that he
actually got? ::)
Quote from: deiseach on November 21, 2011, 09:03:03 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 21, 2011, 06:57:09 PM
Something I remember clearly from stupid arguments I was involved in on OWC many moons ago, was that when we reached a time when a UI seemed a genuine possibility (and would be voted for) a lot of the contingent on OWC thought it very fair that at that point the boundaries of NI should be redrawn again to rather than (once again) accepting the will of the majority. :o
Seems about right. They insist they're entitled to a homeland, something that respectable opinion in Albion scoffs at when articulated by Turkish Cypriots or white South Africans.
So have I got this straight?
When a majority (Unionists) in one part of an island (Ireland) demand the right to self-determination for themselves etc, that is seeking "homeland" status.
But when the majority (Nationalists) in another part of the same island simultaneously demand the right to self-determination for themselves, that is somehow different?
You know, you really should stop listening to the voices in your head, and start studying the reality of what is happening all around you.
This would be a good place to start:
http://www.nio.gov.uk/agreement.pdf
He's on a roll!
Quote from: AQMP on November 23, 2011, 03:55:16 PM
He's on a roll!
Only for yourself and Stew he'd have the page to himself...someone must have hit a nerve!
/Jim
Quote from: Evil Genius on November 23, 2011, 03:30:45 PM
When a majority (Unionists) in one part of an island (Ireland) demand the right to self-determination for themselves etc, that is seeking "homeland" status.
Ah see, look what the Dubs started with their "Blue Wave".
QuoteEvil Genius
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3517
View Profile Personal Message (Offline)
Re: NI's future in the United Kingdom could depend on Catholics - Robinson
« Reply #86 on: Today at 03:19:42 PM »
Reply with quote
Quote from: seafoid on November 21, 2011, 04:56:04 PM
Northern Ireland is always going to be a bit of both British and Irish, isn't it? If the GFA gives some sort of parity of esteem to Nationalists as a minority then when the table are turned the Protestants will have to get the same treatment. The Brits are very kind to fund the whole charade. They broke it so they should fix it.
I though David Adams' piece on Michael D was very good
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2011/1117/1224307704567.html
The position of (so-called) "Loyalists" like Davy Adams in the post-Troubles world is a curious one. For having been resoundingly and consistently rejected by their "own" community at the Polls, they are reduced to scrounging around for a wee bit of consideration whereever they can get it.
And seeing as no-one anywhere in the UK gives a flying fcuk about any of them, that seems to mean Da Republik - as eg Jackie McDonald and his "New Best Friend" Mary McAleese demonstrated:
What with Gerry Adams fleeing to Louth, it's suggests parallels with Mauretania welcoming the dregs of the Gadaffi regime, or Idi Amin retiring to Saudi Arabia.
In fact, I'm tempted to say you're welcome to this motley assortment of thugs, gangsters and murderers etc, except that I wouldn't wish them upon my worst enemy, never mind the (overwhelmingly) good people of the ROI.
while the people of the ''ROI'' are undoubtedly good to consider them overwhelmingly good is i believe a step too far. they're grand that's about it, myself included.
Quote from: Evil Genius on November 23, 2011, 03:30:45 PM
So have I got this straight?
When a majority minority (Unionists) in one part of a country (Ireland) demand the right to self-determination through force of arms for themselves etc, that is seeking "homeland" status.
But when the majority (Nationalists) in the same country simultaneously demand the right to self-determination for themselves (and everyone else in the country), that is somehow different invalid.
Straight now, that's how it was for your lot.
He never gives up. And him that got on to the first boat back to the mainland.
Last nights spotlight basically stated that the ROI owns the North!! Sammy wants a seat on the board of an Irish Government body...NAMA...British my arse!! :D
Quote from: Evil Genius on November 23, 2011, 02:30:05 PM
Surely every "Fenian" [sic] is as pure and uncompromising as ever in resisting the Crown and the Half Crown... ;)
That old chestnut again? Fenians should refuse to accept the money they have earned because it happens to have a picture of the Queen on it? If they were truly patriotic they'd somehow do all of their business in Euros?
*snore*
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on November 23, 2011, 04:02:15 PM
Quote from: AQMP on November 23, 2011, 03:55:16 PM
He's on a roll!
Only for yourself and Stew he'd have the page to himself...someone must have hit a nerve!
/Jim
He's back on the oul steroids again :D
Jasus but that was some output today.
Quote from: Evil Genius on November 23, 2011, 03:24:15 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 21, 2011, 06:57:09 PMSomething I remember clearly from stupid arguments I was involved in on OWC many moons ago, was that when we reached a time when a UI seemed a genuine possibility (and would be voted for) a lot of the contingent on OWC thought it very fair that at that point the boundaries of NI should be redrawn again to rather than (once again) accepting the will of the majority. :o
As a discussion site for NI football fans, OWC is no more representative of Unionist thinking than, say, a discussion site for GAA fans is of Nationalist thinking.
Or did you not happen to notice eg the majority support Marty McGuinness got on here for his presidential bid, as against the 13% of the vote that he actually got? ::)
Just relaying some anecdotal evidence of unionist 'thinking'. I mentioned it as it has always stuck in my mind that some people will preach 'till they are blue in the face that they are democrats but then, when it doesn't suit them, they'll think nothing of moving the goalposts and might quite possibly arm themselves (again) to subvert the democratic will of the majority (again). All hypothetical off course but still representative of a section of unionist thinking - and to be honest I'd say a right percentage of DUP, TUV, PUP and a sneaky percentage of UUP would think it's quite legitimate and why wouldn't they? It worked the first time or have you forgotten about Donegal, Cavan and Monaghan?
Quote from: Evil Genius on November 23, 2011, 03:30:45 PM
You know, you really should stop listening to the voices in your head, and start studying the reality of what is happening all around you.
EG, I gave you a pass the last time you played the man and not the ball with respect to me. Twice is careless.
I've explained the 'reality' of history and the present day, i.e. that Unionism reserves the right at all times to resist being forced into a united Ireland. All the talk of majorities/greater numbers/consent are a smoke screen for that reality. You're free to disagree, although that means you believe that once 50% +1 of the population of Northern Ireland support an end to the Union the now-minority community will meekly accept the democratic will. Forgive me for being so . . . sceptical
As it happens, I think Ulster Unionist had a point back in the day. If the United Kingdom could be broken up, why not Ireland? The answer is that it can be, and it was. However, perhaps you would care to explain why Cyprus and South Africa must be kept whole. Or Northern Ireland, for that matter
Quote from: Rossfan on November 23, 2011, 07:25:59 PM
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on November 23, 2011, 04:02:15 PM
Quote from: AQMP on November 23, 2011, 03:55:16 PM
He's on a roll!
Only for yourself and Stew he'd have the page to himself...someone must have hit a nerve!
/Jim
He's back on the oul steroids again :D
Jasus but that was some output today.
It's not steroids, it's the chronic insecurity and the fear - the adrenal glands get overstimulated.
Quote from: Evil Genius on November 23, 2011, 03:30:45 PM
Quote from: deiseach on November 21, 2011, 09:03:03 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 21, 2011, 06:57:09 PM
Something I remember clearly from stupid arguments I was involved in on OWC many moons ago, was that when we reached a time when a UI seemed a genuine possibility (and would be voted for) a lot of the contingent on OWC thought it very fair that at that point the boundaries of NI should be redrawn again to rather than (once again) accepting the will of the majority. :o
Seems about right. They insist they're entitled to a homeland, something that respectable opinion in Albion scoffs at when articulated by Turkish Cypriots or white South Africans.
So have I got this straight?
When a majority (Unionists) in one part of an island (Ireland) demand the right to self-determination for themselves etc, that is seeking "homeland" status.
But when the majority (Nationalists) in another part of the same island simultaneously demand the right to self-determination for themselves, that is somehow different?
You know, you really should stop listening to the voices in your head, and start studying the reality of what is happening all around you.
This would be a good place to start:
http://www.nio.gov.uk/agreement.pdf
If a majority of the people in the north east of England decided they wanted to establish their own Geordie homeland (and in population terms, their 'country' would be larger than NI), do you think they would be permitted to do so? Do you think they
should be allowed to do so? What about the South West of England, which would be about the same size as NI and which boasts its own language and has always felt 'different' from the rest of England? Serious questions.
Quote from: Myles Na G. on November 23, 2011, 09:49:15 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on November 23, 2011, 03:30:45 PM
Quote from: deiseach on November 21, 2011, 09:03:03 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 21, 2011, 06:57:09 PM
Something I remember clearly from stupid arguments I was involved in on OWC many moons ago, was that when we reached a time when a UI seemed a genuine possibility (and would be voted for) a lot of the contingent on OWC thought it very fair that at that point the boundaries of NI should be redrawn again to rather than (once again) accepting the will of the majority. :o
Seems about right. They insist they're entitled to a homeland, something that respectable opinion in Albion scoffs at when articulated by Turkish Cypriots or white South Africans.
So have I got this straight?
When a majority (Unionists) in one part of an island (Ireland) demand the right to self-determination for themselves etc, that is seeking "homeland" status.
But when the majority (Nationalists) in another part of the same island simultaneously demand the right to self-determination for themselves, that is somehow different?
You know, you really should stop listening to the voices in your head, and start studying the reality of what is happening all around you.
This would be a good place to start:
http://www.nio.gov.uk/agreement.pdf
If a majority of the people in the north east of England decided they wanted to establish their own Geordie homeland (and in population terms, their 'country' would be larger than NI), do you think they would be permitted to do so? Do you think they should be allowed to do so? What about the South West of England, which would be about the same size as NI and which boasts its own language and has always felt 'different' from the rest of England? Serious questions.
Well the Unionist majority in the North-Eastern part of Ireland were able to break away from the rest of the island, so I don't see the difference.
If the Geordies armed themselves to the teeth demanding their independence, would you send your children to kill and be killed to prevent it?
Talk of the United Kingdom breaking up and comparing it with Ireland is not comparing like with like. Ireland was colonised and coerced into the UK, this coercion has to end, comparisons with other places are neither here not there.
Quote from: Applesisapples on November 23, 2011, 05:10:17 PM
He never gives up. And him that got on to the first boat back to the mainland.
"First boat back"?
I was born in the UK, brought up in the UK, live in the UK and expect to die in the UK.
Just like eg Gerry Adams Sr., Joe Cahill, Brian Keenan, Martin Meehan and the rest... :D
Quote from: Applesisapples on November 23, 2011, 05:12:42 PM
Last nights spotlight basically stated that the ROI owns the North!! Sammy wants a seat on the board of an Irish Government body...NAMA...British my arse!! :D
And who owns the ROI, mein Herr? ;)
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on November 23, 2011, 05:35:54 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on November 23, 2011, 02:30:05 PM
Surely every "Fenian" [sic] is as pure and uncompromising as ever in resisting the Crown and the Half Crown... ;)
That old chestnut again? Fenians should refuse to accept the money they have earned because it happens to have a picture of the Queen on it? If they were truly patriotic they'd somehow do all of their business in Euros?
*snore*
It was nothing to do with a technicality like whose picture is on the currency.
Rather I was alluding to the fact that
Donagh Ulick was accepting that Irish Nationalists in NI cannot all be taken for granted as voting for a UI etc, if that would hurt them economically.
Which coming from those two posters ;), is quite an admission.
Quote from: bennydorano on November 23, 2011, 07:44:49 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on November 23, 2011, 03:24:15 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 21, 2011, 06:57:09 PMSomething I remember clearly from stupid arguments I was involved in on OWC many moons ago, was that when we reached a time when a UI seemed a genuine possibility (and would be voted for) a lot of the contingent on OWC thought it very fair that at that point the boundaries of NI should be redrawn again to rather than (once again) accepting the will of the majority. :o
As a discussion site for NI football fans, OWC is no more representative of Unionist thinking than, say, a discussion site for GAA fans is of Nationalist thinking.
Or did you not happen to notice eg the majority support Marty McGuinness got on here for his presidential bid, as against the 13% of the vote that he actually got? ::)
Just relaying some anecdotal evidence of unionist 'thinking'. I mentioned it as it has always stuck in my mind that some people will preach 'till they are blue in the face that they are democrats but then, when it doesn't suit them, they'll think nothing of moving the goalposts and might quite possibly arm themselves (again) to subvert the democratic will of the majority (again). All hypothetical off course but still representative of a section of unionist thinking - and to be honest I'd say a right percentage of DUP, TUV, PUP and a sneaky percentage of UUP would think it's quite legitimate and why wouldn't they? It worked the first time or have you forgotten about Donegal, Cavan and Monaghan?
If your initial "evidence" [
sic] is garbage, then your consequential conclusion will also be garbage.
Or do you consider that eg a majority of Irish Nationalists wanted Martin McGuinness to be their President last month, just because he topped the poll on this forum? ::)
Quote from: Evil Genius on November 24, 2011, 12:33:51 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on November 23, 2011, 05:12:42 PM
Last nights spotlight basically stated that the ROI owns the North!! Sammy wants a seat on the board of an Irish Government body...NAMA...British my arse!! :D
And who owns the ROI, mein Herr? ;)
And by extension the North! :D
Quote from: Evil Genius on November 24, 2011, 12:32:56 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on November 23, 2011, 05:10:17 PM
He never gives up. And him that got on to the first boat back to the mainland.
"First boat back"?
I was born in the UK, brought up in the UK, live in the UK and expect to die in the UK.
Just like eg Gerry Adams Sr., Joe Cahill, Brian Keenan, Martin Meehan and the rest... :D
Occupied six counties I think you'll find.
Quote from: deiseach on November 23, 2011, 08:04:22 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on November 23, 2011, 03:30:45 PM
You know, you really should stop listening to the voices in your head, and start studying the reality of what is happening all around you.
EG, I gave you a pass the last time you played the man and not the ball with respect to me. Twice is careless.
I've explained the 'reality' of history and the present day, i.e. that Unionism reserves the right at all times to resist being forced into a united Ireland. All the talk of majorities/greater numbers/consent are a smoke screen for that reality. You're free to disagree, although that means you believe that once 50% +1 of the population of Northern Ireland support an end to the Union the now-minority community will meekly accept the democratic will. Forgive me for being so . . . sceptical
The difference between History and the present is that formerly, NI's place within the UK was under threat by armed, unconstitutional methods, with the insurgents having a degree of sympathy from outside NI (ROI, GB, USA etc).
This was (primarily) why some Unionists resorted to armed, sometimes unconstitutional methods of their own.
Whereas since the GFA, the only threat to NI's position is an electoral one. Consequently, there is no longer any armed recourse by Unionists.
That being the case, you seem to fear that Unionism's response to the "electoral threat"is/wll be one of re-partition. Yet you produce no evidence for this whatever, such as eg political party policy, opinion polls, position papers, lobby groups or even individuals advocating it.
Now if "push came to shove" in a border poll etc, I'm not saying that no Unionist would ever advocate re-partition. But it is my firm belief that so long as any end to Partition came about exclusively by democratic means, then it would be accepted by the vast majority of Unionists, especially since our future rights to Britishness etc are guaranteed post-unity by the GFA.
If you believe differently, then you should put put up your evidence, otherwise I will continue to conclude that your views on what Unionists are really thinking come chiefly from your own imagination, possibly in order to suit your own prejudices.
Quote from: deiseach on November 23, 2011, 08:04:22 PMAs it happens, I think Ulster Unionist had a point back in the day. If the United Kingdom could be broken up, why not Ireland? The answer is that it can be, and it was. However, perhaps you would care to explain why Cyprus and South Africa must be kept whole. Or Northern Ireland, for that matter
I am tempted to ask why you think the Cypriot or SA situations are relevant to NI's ::), but for the sake of argument, I will indulge you.
Basically, the vast majority of South Africans, including a majority within every community, beleive that the State should not be broken up. I am not so cognisant with Cyprus, but from what I understand, a majority from within both the Greek
and Turkish communities agree that Cyprus should be a single unitary state i.e. what they disagree on is what form that state should take. Therefore if my understanding is correct, then Cyprus should not be partitioned.
Similarly, if a majority in NI were to vote for it to join with the ROI (also a majority within ROI itself), then I would accept that, with the only queestion being what form the new entity should take. And with the ROI being a modern, democratic and secular state within the greater EU, along with post-Unity guarantees from GB, I feel sure that the large majority of my fellow NI Unionists would accept* this.
* - The key is that should not be being
coerced, as militant Republicanism etc has sought to do ever since NI was founded.
Quote from: Evil Genius on November 24, 2011, 01:11:50 PM
* - The key is that should not be being [/i]coerced[/i], as militant Republicanism etc has sought to do ever since NI was founded.
Fair enough but if one is to take a point from history, was the initial resistance of Ulster to an All-Ireland state manifested itself as opposition to Home Rule consitutionalism? (Even if the actual demarcation line were drawn post 1916/War of Independence)
Also while no party is currently advocating a re-partition, is that because Unionist parties are maintaining that a UI is not on the cards? Surely if that was to change then it could become an issue?
/Jim.
Quote from: Myles Na G. on November 23, 2011, 09:49:15 PMIf a majority of the people in the north east of England decided they wanted to establish their own Geordie homeland (and in population terms, their 'country' would be larger than NI), do you think they would be permitted to do so?
In principle, yes.
Quote from: Myles Na G. on November 23, 2011, 09:49:15 PMDo you think they should be allowed to do so?
Ditto.
Quote from: Myles Na G. on November 23, 2011, 09:49:15 PMWhat about the South West of England, which would be about the same size as NI and which boasts its own language and has always felt 'different' from the rest of England?
Ditto.
Quote from: Myles Na G. on November 23, 2011, 09:49:15 PMSerious questions.
Serious answers (I hope).
Now here is a serious question for you. Why did you choose such unlikely examples as Geordieland or Cornwall? Why didn't you pose the far more pertinent examples of Scotland or Wales?
Might it be that their desire for self-determination rather tears the arse out of the ("saltwater") argument of their Celtic cousins in Ireland for a single, undivided nation in their own island? ;)
Quote from: armaghniac on November 23, 2011, 11:11:04 PM
Talk of the United Kingdom breaking up and comparing it with Ireland is not comparing like with like. Ireland was colonised and coerced into the UK, this coercion has to end, comparisons with other places are neither here not there.
What, and Scotland and Wales weren't?
In an earlier post, Myles posed the possibility of eg the North east of England wanting to break away from the UK. Who do you think was responsible for that region being part first of England, subsequently of the UK?
Answer: The Normans - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrying_of_the_North
You know, basically the same people as colonised parts of ireland a hundred years later. Of course in doing so, they suppressed the existing (Celtic) population, just as they had done the native (Viking?) Northumbrian population in NE England.
Then again, those original Irish Celts and Geordie Vikings had themselves supplanted the people in their newly conquered lands before them...
It's fun, this game of "Historical Cluedo", isn't it?
Fun, but utterly pointless - unless you're a bitter revisionist, who refuses to face up to the reality of 2011, because it doesn't suit... ::)
Evil Genius, good of you acknowledge the key point, 'a single, undivided nation in their own island' Your mixing too much with us GAA boys, your starting to come round to our way of thinking!
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on November 24, 2011, 01:20:36 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on November 24, 2011, 01:11:50 PM
* - The key is that should not be being [/i]coerced[/i], as militant Republicanism etc has sought to do ever since NI was founded.
Fair enough but if one is to take a point from history, was the initial resistance of Ulster to an All-Ireland state manifested itself as opposition to Home Rule consitutionalism? (Even if the actual demarcation line were drawn post 1916/War of Independence)
Post 1916, I would certainly contend that Unionist opposition to Home Rule
was constitutional.
Of course, it is arguable that it may not always have been so previously, but we (and Constitutional Democracy) have all come a long way since the 18th and 19th Centuries etc.
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on November 24, 2011, 01:20:36 PMAlso while no party is currently advocating a re-partition, is that because Unionist parties are maintaining that a UI is not on the cards? Surely if that was to change then it could become an issue?
Possible, I suppose, but I genuinely don't think so.
For if the last decade has taught us anything, it is that Unionists in NI are at least as committed to the GFA, both in letter and in spirit, as Nationalists:
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_2QJSeWQoKyA/R3lUAmDhcOI/AAAAAAAAC_U/-pRh2sx2U2s/s400/GD3290519%40NOTE-ALTERNATE-CROP-4725.jpg)
What the Normans or the Vikings did 1000 years ago is neither here nor there. It literally is history, they are no longer trying to do this. Things the British have done in more recent times is relevant, because they are still trying to do it.
Quote from: Sandino on November 24, 2011, 01:33:28 PM
Evil Genius, good of you acknowledge the key point, 'a single, undivided nation in their own island'. Your mixing too much with us GAA boys, your starting to come round to our way of thinking!
Sorry to disappoint you, but your "loophole" is itself full of holes.
P.S. If that's too oblique for you, I would point out that there are currently
two nations in Ireland. That's how it's been since before we both were born and (I suspect) how it's going to be after we are both dead. One of us still needs to get used to it. ;)
Quote from: armaghniac on November 24, 2011, 01:47:14 PMWhat the Normans or the Vikings did 1000 years ago is neither here nor there. It literally is history, they are no longer trying to do this. Things the British have done in more recent times is relevant, because they are still trying to do it.
Well, if you can't oppress a Mope, who can you oppress? :D
It's always interesting seeing your mindset, EG. You are absolutely not a bigot or any of the other ludicrous variants routinely thrown at you by people on here. However, you have an almost touching faith in the status quo, a situation which was invariably arrived at by overwhelming violence followed by the threat of violence which then calcified into 'peace' and any threat to that 'peace' then gets labelled as "unconstitutional methods". Even your definition of a community follows what suits the status quo. So there is no racist white community in South Africa, just whites. And no Turkish Cypriot community who want an independent republic rather than be part of a unitary Cyprus, just their leader who crave international recognition above all things. It must be marvellous to always be on the right side of such a Westphalian outlook.
You ask me to provide evidence that Unionism will display bad faith regarding the consitutional situation post the GFA. I have none, except the overwhelming weight of history which demonstrates Unionism's repeated bad faith which I outlined in my earlier post on the subject. Perhaps we are living in a new paradigm. But I no more believe that than I believe the Shinners will ever become a party concerned primarily with bread & butter questions. The IRA have gone away - but that doesn't preclude the possibility of them ever starting up again
Quote from: Jim_Murphy_74 on November 24, 2011, 01:20:36 PM
Also while no party is currently advocating a re-partition, is that because Unionist parties are maintaining that a UI is not on the cards? Surely if that was to change then it could become an issue?
Exactly. The status quo is that a UI is not on the cards. Any suggestion to the contrary is met with "look, it just isn't, okay?!" :D
Quote from: deiseach on November 23, 2011, 10:57:52 PM
If the Geordies armed themselves to the teeth demanding their independence, would you send your children to kill and be killed to prevent it?
I would send Gazza with a fishing rod!
QuoteWell, if you can't oppress a Mope, who can you oppress?
Perhaps you'd like to article why anyone should be oppressed, even Mopes?
Quote from: deiseach on November 24, 2011, 01:56:34 PMIt's always interesting seeing your mindset, EG. You are absolutely not a bigot or any of the other ludicrous variants routinely thrown at you by people on here.
Thank You.
Quote from: deiseach on November 24, 2011, 01:56:34 PMHowever, you have an almost touching faith in the status quo
"Touching" impies naivety. I would hope that my faith in the status quo (effectively the GFA) is actually entirely reasoned and realistic. That is, it is the product of 10 years of observation and practice, whereby that status quo seems more secure than it has ever been.
Quote from: deiseach on November 24, 2011, 01:56:34 PM... a [status quo] which was invariably arrived at by overwhelming violence followed by the threat of violence which then calcified into 'peace' and any threat to that 'peace' then gets labelled as "unconstitutional methods".
This is where I disagree with your analysis. For imo the Troubles etc did not somehow "calcify into" (produce) the GFA etc, nor was it (GFA) somehow the "invariable" (I assume you meant "inevitable") consequence of same.
Rather as I see it, 30-odd years of violence produced absolutely nothing (except bitterness and grief), so that eventually, after all the participants finally accepted that it wouldn't, they sat down and tried a different tack.
The subsequent negotiations became known as the "Peace Process", though I always thought that a misnomer, since it implied that that the process was a child of the "War Process", when it was,
ab initio a "
Political Process".
Which is why I consider any threat by force of arms to the product of that free and democratic process to be unconstitutional/illegal/illegitimate etc (take your pick)
Quote from: deiseach on November 24, 2011, 01:56:34 PMEven your definition of a community follows what suits the status quo.
We may disagree on how we define and accommodate them, but surely you aren't trying to deny that there are
two communities* in Ireland? :o
* - I prefer the term "political traditions" myself, btw.
Quote from: deiseach on November 24, 2011, 01:56:34 PMSo there is no racist white community in South Africa, just whites.
I never said that, nor anything like it.
There is a white community in SA. Some (many?) of these may be racist. Some of those racists may want a separate, whites-only "homeland". However, the clear majority of all whites accept that SA should be a single, multi-racial nation state, therefore the white racists have no constitutional case (or a moral one, for that matter).
Quote from: deiseach on November 24, 2011, 01:56:34 PMAnd no Turkish Cypriot community who want an independent republic rather than be part of a unitary Cyprus, just their leader who crave international recognition above all things.
Really?
"In April 2004, a referendum of the Annan Plan to reunite the island was strongly approved by Turkish Cypriots (64.9% voting 'yes') whilst it was strongly rejected by the Greek Cypriots (75.8% voting 'no')."http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/2004/annan-cyprus-problem_maps_26feb03.pdf
Quote from: deiseach on November 24, 2011, 01:56:34 PMIt must be marvellous to always be on the right side of such a Westphalian outlook.
I don't claim always to be "right", but I'd like to think I am consistent.
Quote from: deiseach on November 24, 2011, 01:56:34 PMYou ask me to provide evidence that Unionism will display bad faith regarding the consitutional situation post the GFA. I have none
You might have stopped there...
Quote from: deiseach on November 24, 2011, 01:56:34 PM... except the overwhelming weight of history which demonstrates Unionism's repeated bad faith which I outlined in my earlier post on the subject.
The overwhelming weight of history suggests that when faced by attempts to
coerce them into a settlement with which they didn't agree and felt they ought not to accept, Unionism responded by whatever means they thought necessary.
But the whole point about the present dispensation is that there is no coercion involved, only constitutional politics, freely entered into and universally recognised. Which is why I believe that Unionists would accept, without significant violence, if they were ever voted out of the UK.
It's rather like when the Nationalist asked the Unionist years ago: "When are you going to drop your Siege Mentality?", and the latter replied: "Just as soon as you raise the Siege!" ;)
Quote from: deiseach on November 24, 2011, 01:56:34 PMPerhaps we are living in a new paradigm. But I no more believe that than I believe the Shinners will ever become a party concerned primarily with bread & butter questions. The IRA have gone away - but that doesn't preclude the possibility of them ever starting up again
I believe that Unionists in general accept the new paradigm.
I cannot predict whether SF/IRA will continue to do so (though I suspect they will); in any case, that is for them and their supporters to determine.
Quote from: armaghniac on November 24, 2011, 03:06:03 PM
QuoteWell, if you can't oppress a Mope, who can you oppress?
Perhaps you'd like to article why anyone should be oppressed, even Mopes?
No, I wouldn't - at least not until you reinstate the "smilie" which you consciously omitted.
P.S. In the meantime, I intend to carry on oppressing Mopes
and Po-faced Tw ats... ;)
QuoteP.S. In the meantime, I intend to carry on oppressing Mopes and Po-faced Tw ats...
Well, at least you are frank. Not all wrongdoers own up to their crimes.
Quote from: armaghniac on November 24, 2011, 03:32:52 PM
QuoteP.S. In the meantime, I intend to carry on oppressing Mopes and Po-faced Tw ats...
Well, at least you are frank. Not all wrongdoers own up to their crimes.
Well that's me told, and no mistake!
P.S. I note you omitted my "smilie" again. You do know that ;) and :D are meant to denote humour and light-heartedness, don't you? Or do I have to add Simpletons to my Oppressed List as well? ;D
Quote from: Evil Genius on November 24, 2011, 03:20:51 PM
Quote from: deiseach on November 24, 2011, 01:56:34 PM... except the overwhelming weight of history which demonstrates Unionism's repeated bad faith which I outlined in my earlier post on the subject.
The overwhelming weight of history suggests that when faced by attempts to coerce them into a settlement with which they didn't agree and felt they ought not to accept, Unionism responded by whatever means they thought necessary.
But the whole point about the present dispensation is that there is no coercion involved, only constitutional politics, freely entered into and universally recognised. Which is why I believe that Unionists would accept, without significant violence, if they were ever voted out of the UK.
Pur-leeze. So there is no coercion in the maintenance of the Union. The people of (say) Crossmaglen are free to leave whenever they like. It wouldn't involve that much disruption, would it? A few road signs is all. But that's not the case. Until you accept that there are hundreds of thousands of people in Northern Ireland who are being coerced into being part of a country with which they have no affinity then you will always lack a proper understanding of what has happened over the last 40 years
Quote from: Evil Genius on November 24, 2011, 03:20:51 PM
Quote from: deiseach on November 24, 2011, 01:56:34 PMAnd no Turkish Cypriot community who want an independent republic rather than be part of a unitary Cyprus, just their leader who crave international recognition above all things.
Really?
"In April 2004, a referendum of the Annan Plan to reunite the island was strongly approved by Turkish Cypriots (64.9% voting 'yes') whilst it was strongly rejected by the Greek Cypriots (75.8% voting 'no')."
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/2004/annan-cyprus-problem_maps_26feb03.pdf
And what does that tell us? That any settlement that the Turks like, the Greeks dislike. Yet they keep on trying to reunify the island. Imagine if that was the starting point for the politicial discussion about Ireland, i.e. the only settlement acceptable to the international community is one where the island was reunified. Three words: Security Council veto ::)
Look a majority is only a majority when its a unionist majority, otherwise it is undemocratic.
Quote from: Evil Genius on November 24, 2011, 01:21:00 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on November 23, 2011, 09:49:15 PMIf a majority of the people in the north east of England decided they wanted to establish their own Geordie homeland (and in population terms, their 'country' would be larger than NI), do you think they would be permitted to do so?
In principle, yes.
Quote from: Myles Na G. on November 23, 2011, 09:49:15 PMDo you think they should be allowed to do so?
Ditto.
Quote from: Myles Na G. on November 23, 2011, 09:49:15 PMWhat about the South West of England, which would be about the same size as NI and which boasts its own language and has always felt 'different' from the rest of England?
Ditto.
Quote from: Myles Na G. on November 23, 2011, 09:49:15 PMSerious questions.
Serious answers (I hope).
Now here is a serious question for you. Why did you choose such unlikely examples as Geordieland or Cornwall? Why didn't you pose the far more pertinent examples of Scotland or Wales?
Might it be that their desire for self-determination rather tears the arse out of the ("saltwater") argument of their Celtic cousins in Ireland for a single, undivided nation in their own island? ;)
I chose those examples because they are, in my view, analogous to the Irish situation: ie they are territories within a block of land which has for many centuries has been identified as a single country, namely England. The territory which became NI was within a block of land which had, since records began basically, been identified as a single country, namely Ireland. Scotland and Wales are countries in their own right which have chosen to throw their lot in with England and form a political alliance called the UK: their choice. And I trust that if it ever stops being their choice, they are allowed to leave the alliance on good terms. Ireland never agreed to be part of this alliance. On the contrary, the people of this island voted first for Home Rule and then for independence. Both votes were ignored.
You mention the 'saltwater' argument - i.e that Ireland has no right to be an independent country simply on the basis that it is an island. I agree. Ireland has a right to be an independent country on the basis that the majority of people who live there want it to be so. End of. Or maybe you think the right of GB to be a country independent of Europe is merely based on 'saltwater-ism' too and that the British should be governed from Brussels?
Quote from: Evil Genius on November 24, 2011, 12:42:29 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 23, 2011, 07:44:49 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on November 23, 2011, 03:24:15 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 21, 2011, 06:57:09 PMSomething I remember clearly from stupid arguments I was involved in on OWC many moons ago, was that when we reached a time when a UI seemed a genuine possibility (and would be voted for) a lot of the contingent on OWC thought it very fair that at that point the boundaries of NI should be redrawn again to rather than (once again) accepting the will of the majority. :o
As a discussion site for NI football fans, OWC is no more representative of Unionist thinking than, say, a discussion site for GAA fans is of Nationalist thinking.
Or did you not happen to notice eg the majority support Marty McGuinness got on here for his presidential bid, as against the 13% of the vote that he actually got? ::)
Just relaying some anecdotal evidence of unionist 'thinking'. I mentioned it as it has always stuck in my mind that some people will preach 'till they are blue in the face that they are democrats but then, when it doesn't suit them, they'll think nothing of moving the goalposts and might quite possibly arm themselves (again) to subvert the democratic will of the majority (again). All hypothetical off course but still representative of a section of unionist thinking - and to be honest I'd say a right percentage of DUP, TUV, PUP and a sneaky percentage of UUP would think it's quite legitimate and why wouldn't they? It worked the first time or have you forgotten about Donegal, Cavan and Monaghan?
If your initial "evidence" [sic] is garbage, then your consequential conclusion will also be garbage.
Or do you consider that eg a majority of Irish Nationalists wanted Martin McGuinness to be their President last month, just because he topped the poll on this forum? ::)
Try focusing on the real issue, which is the content of the message, not the forum where it was delivered. Sidesteppery :-) Garbage indeed.