The Southern "Irish"

[Roger]

I see myself as Irish not any particular type of Irish.

One size fits it all, and it's our size?

[muppet]

By the way what is the "Southern Irish"?

Surely you mean the "Irish"?

Is that question to me?

I never refer to "Irish" unless I mean all the people of Ireland. Southern Irish seems to be the term on here for those that are from the Republic.  I don't think it is the best term but I don't really care as I know what it refers to whether it's right or wrong.  I would usually say 'the Irish Republic' or 'those in the Republic'. 

Why not free state or freestaters?

Because the rest of the big bad world won't have a clue what you are on about. Irish it is so.

[RedandGreenSniper]

Ahern leaving his mothers funeral? Was that the same mother who's passing he used to explain dodgy cash dealing in the tribunal???

Classy comment Zapatista, real classy

His career has only ended as a success by playing the emotion card. He has regularly used the emotion card to get out of hot spots and I don't accept it from him anymore. He is the boy who cried wolf.

I'm not a Ahern apologist but I don't see the relevance in regard to leaving his mother's funeral. Credit where its due and then the argument can be rational and reasoned

[Roger]

Why not free state or freestaters?

I noticed that earlier discussion and thought it much ado about nothing.  I have no particular love for the Republic but whether someone calls it the Freestate or freestaters doesn't seem particularly offensive to me. I personally don't use it for no other reason than it has been the Republic of Ireland since I was born.  If it or southern Irish became the common parlance then I'd probably use it. It is simply a term that refers to Irish people from a different state.  Similarly if people refer to Nordies or Northerners I'm happy enough with that too as I don't consider there any agenda behind it and I know what they are referring to.

[Zapatista]

Ahern leaving his mothers funeral? Was that the same mother who's passing he used to explain dodgy cash dealing in the tribunal???

Classy comment Zapatista, real classy

His career has only ended as a success by playing the emotion card. He has regularly used the emotion card to get out of hot spots and I don't accept it from him anymore. He is the boy who cried wolf.

I'm not a Ahern apologist but I don't see the relevance in regard to leaving his mother's funeral. Credit where its due and then the argument can be rational and reasoned

Leaving his mothers funeral has no relevance. While I can sympathise with the human loss I can't accept it as an indication of his commitment or sacrifice to the GFA.

[BallyhaiseMan]

When are we starting this Northern Ireland GAA Championship then,
at least Pints wont have to put up with us "freestaters" while watching Armagh 

[RedandGreenSniper]

Ahern leaving his mothers funeral? Was that the same mother who's passing he used to explain dodgy cash dealing in the tribunal???

Classy comment Zapatista, real classy

His career has only ended as a success by playing the emotion card. He has regularly used the emotion card to get out of hot spots and I don't accept it from him anymore. He is the boy who cried wolf.

I'm not a Ahern apologist but I don't see the relevance in regard to leaving his mother's funeral. Credit where its due and then the argument can be rational and reasoned

Leaving his mothers funeral has no relevance. While I can sympathise with the human loss I can't accept it as an indication of his commitment or sacrifice to the GFA.

I think it does. Doing any sort of work on a day like that is unusual. Heading up to try to further the GFA, something that wouldn't be easy to do at any stage, hours after burying your mother is a real sign of commitment and a willingness to get something sorted imho

[Evil Genius]

Reading this thread, I am reminded of Brendan Behan's comment that whenever a group of Irish people have a meeting, the first Item on the Agenda will be The Split!   

Still, it's nice to see that true Irish Unity is as close as it ever was...

[Lar Naparka]

That's quite a bit of revisionism there Lar. Fair play to ye.

A much lower standard of living?

Ahern, Clinton and Blair?

Ahern leaving his mothers funeral? Was that the same mother who's passing he used to explain dodgy cash dealing in the tribunal???

Janey, Zap, you're in horrid bad form today!
Right now, you would be taken for a well-balanced individual; one with a chip on both shoulders.
Revisionism is a funny thing; it's very subjective and what's bending facts for one person is putting the record straight for another.
Unless someone can prove me wrong, I'm very much putting facts on the line here.
If you want to be sarcastic about any man who puts a solution to the Northern problem in front of attending his mother's funeral, you may snigger away but I won't be joining you.
Blair and Clinton too had a lot of serious issues to tackle.  The time and trouble involved for both to take up an apparently hopeless cause needs to be acknowledged.
Now, you may fail to appreciate the efforts of all three but there are others in the North would readily acknowledge the effort put in and the political risks all of them took on.
All three may have dirtied their bibs elsewhere but getting Papa Doc and Gerry Adams to sit down and talk was a feat that has to be acknowledged.
Ronald Reagan or either of the Bush brigade would not worked as hard as Clinton did to solve a problem that did not directly involve the US. Blair was up to his oxters in all sorts of crises, involvement in Iraq being just one, yet he cannot be faulted for shirking his part in advancing the peace process.
Big Ian on the Late Late last weekend mentioned that Blair had rang him 7 times in one day. Do you think Maggie Thatcher or Gordon Brown would bother ringing a second time? If either rang even once, it would be to issue an order and not to ask a request.
How Bertie stuck at his job while the revelations about his finances were coming out thick and fast, I'll never know but he did keep the cool. Like them or not, all three earned the thanks of all on the island for bringing some sort of peace and stability to a hitherto intractable problem.
Personally, I don't like any of them but I do give credit where it's due – that's not hard to do, is it?
Tell me Zap, why do you have problems with accepting that we had a lower standard of living down here than Nationalists had in Northern Ireland?
Common sense alone would tell you that.
After Partition the South was cut adrift, cut off from financial aid from the British Treasury and with sweet damn all natural resources.  Furthermore, the people in government as well as those in opposition were eminently unsuited for the job of running a country.
They could blow the b*ll*x off each other okay or use a pistol as good as John Wayne any day but statesmen they were not. Dev, when he came to power, started the Economic War against Britain and it buckled the economy big time. We lost that row and most Irish people saw more dinnertimes than dinners while it lasted and it went on for years.
WW2 came along and our economy practically ground to a halt as exports and imports went by the board. If it wasn't for emigration and the money that emigrant workers sent back home to their people, our grandparents could have starved. I suppose quite a few of the poor devils did.
No; I am not playing the violin for sympathy here; one would not need to be a genius (either of the benign or evil types) to figure out why the Republic was impoverished from Partition to the end of the last century. By contrast, inhabitants of the statelet north of the border were getting financial aid from Her Majesty's Government that their cousins down here did not.
I have been following the progress of the troubles since the Civil Rights parade was attacked by the B Specials at Burntollet in 1969 and, as the fella says, that's not today nor yesterday!
It was very noticeable that the 'Castle Catholics' were never inclined to support the local Shinners or even the SDLP candidates in their area. They have always been quite happy to keep the Union in place. They know which side their bread is buttered.
The Malone Road was never a hot bed of Nationalism and that's for sure!
In other words, not every Catholic looked across  the border for help and support and I'd say one hell of a lot of them still don't.

[Myles Na G.]

Reading this thread, I am reminded of Brendan Behan's comment that whenever a group of Irish people have a meeting, the first Item on the Agenda will be The Split!   

Still, it's nice to see that true Irish Unity is as close as it ever was...

I appreciate that I'm inviting ridicule by replying to one of your posts, EG, but what the hell...

Irish unity requires a change in mindset from both unionists and nationalists, but mainly nationalists since we're (cue kneejerk reply from Carribbore) the ones proposing constitutional change. Until nationalists are prepared to accept that people from the protestant / British community are every bit as Irish as anyone else on the island, unity will remain a dream.

[pintsofguinness]

Should have demanded answers muppet, even if they werent going to get them it would have meant something to the nationalist community in the north.


What are you on about Wsteve?

Get of the cross POG, you boys talk some shite, why dont all you boys working in Britain walk out of your jobs in protest! What side of the strike would you be on in this 'British jobs for British workers' shite they are going on with?

when the union lads come over and ask you nationality i expect you would whip out the Irish passport and leave the office 

Without a moment's hesitation. 

I'm not sure why I should be walking out of my job in protest though?

Well they want 'British jobs for British workers' so you wouldnt be leaving but more so getting kicked out!

See what I've highlighted? That's what prompted my question, why would I be walking out?
If they wanted to kick me out for being Irish then that's fine, I wouldnt deny my nationality if they held a gun to my head.  

I think though it's not a thing about foreign workers as such, it's employers telling people to f**k off while they bring in foreigners to do the job for half, maybe quarter, the money.  I'd say you'd have an issue with that if your employer done the same.  I would have an issue with it with regards to both the foreign boys being exploited and the english ones.


La Narka
I've said on this thread what I expected the Irish government to do.  It would have helped if they acted like they were fighting our corner, even if no one was listening.  


Myles

Until nationalists are prepared to accept that people from the protestant / British community are every bit as Irish as anyone else on the island, unity will remain a dream.

I've no issue with Unionsits being Irish, if they consider themselves Irish then that's fine it's when the jump to one nationality from another every five minutes and dont quite seem able to make up their mind it gets silly.

[RedandGreenSniper]

That's quite a bit of revisionism there Lar. Fair play to ye.

A much lower standard of living?

Ahern, Clinton and Blair?

Ahern leaving his mothers funeral? Was that the same mother who's passing he used to explain dodgy cash dealing in the tribunal???

Janey, Zap, you're in horrid bad form today!
Right now, you would be taken for a well-balanced individual; one with a chip on both shoulders.
Revisionism is a funny thing; it's very subjective and what's bending facts for one person is putting the record straight for another.
Unless someone can prove me wrong, I'm very much putting facts on the line here.
If you want to be sarcastic about any man who puts a solution to the Northern problem in front of attending his mother's funeral, you may snigger away but I won't be joining you.
Blair and Clinton too had a lot of serious issues to tackle.  The time and trouble involved for both to take up an apparently hopeless cause needs to be acknowledged.
Now, you may fail to appreciate the efforts of all three but there are others in the North would readily acknowledge the effort put in and the political risks all of them took on.
All three may have dirtied their bibs elsewhere but getting Papa Doc and Gerry Adams to sit down and talk was a feat that has to be acknowledged.
Ronald Reagan or either of the Bush brigade would not worked as hard as Clinton did to solve a problem that did not directly involve the US. Blair was up to his oxters in all sorts of crises, involvement in Iraq being just one, yet he cannot be faulted for shirking his part in advancing the peace process.
Big Ian on the Late Late last weekend mentioned that Blair had rang him 7 times in one day. Do you think Maggie Thatcher or Gordon Brown would bother ringing a second time? If either rang even once, it would be to issue an order and not to ask a request.
How Bertie stuck at his job while the revelations about his finances were coming out thick and fast, I'll never know but he did keep the cool. Like them or not, all three earned the thanks of all on the island for bringing some sort of peace and stability to a hitherto intractable problem.
Personally, I don't like any of them but I do give credit where it's due – that's not hard to do, is it?
Tell me Zap, why do you have problems with accepting that we had a lower standard of living down here than Nationalists had in Northern Ireland?
Common sense alone would tell you that.
After Partition the South was cut adrift, cut off from financial aid from the British Treasury and with sweet damn all natural resources.  Furthermore, the people in government as well as those in opposition were eminently unsuited for the job of running a country.
They could blow the b*ll*x off each other okay or use a pistol as good as John Wayne any day but statesmen they were not. Dev, when he came to power, started the Economic War against Britain and it buckled the economy big time. We lost that row and most Irish people saw more dinnertimes than dinners while it lasted and it went on for years.
WW2 came along and our economy practically ground to a halt as exports and imports went by the board. If it wasn't for emigration and the money that emigrant workers sent back home to their people, our grandparents could have starved. I suppose quite a few of the poor devils did.
No; I am not playing the violin for sympathy here; one would not need to be a genius (either of the benign or evil types) to figure out why the Republic was impoverished from Partition to the end of the last century. By contrast, inhabitants of the statelet north of the border were getting financial aid from Her Majesty's Government that their cousins down here did not.
I have been following the progress of the troubles since the Civil Rights parade was attacked by the B Specials at Burntollet in 1969 and, as the fella says, that's not today nor yesterday!
It was very noticeable that the 'Castle Catholics' were never inclined to support the local Shinners or even the SDLP candidates in their area. They have always been quite happy to keep the Union in place. They know which side their bread is buttered.
The Malone Road was never a hot bed of Nationalism and that's for sure!
In other words, not every Catholic looked across  the border for help and support and I'd say one hell of a lot of them still don't.

Great post there Lar. Sums up most of my thoughts on the issue.

I'll add that a possible united Ireland could criple the economy of the new 32 county state. As things stand, the nationalists of the six counties are doing quite well from the UK. Better than most people in the 26 counties are doing with government from Dublin. Deeply ironic

[Gnevin]

Why not free state or freestaters?

I noticed that earlier discussion and thought it much ado about nothing.  I have no particular love for the Republic but whether someone calls it the Freestate or freestaters doesn't seem particularly offensive to me. I personally don't use it for no other reason than it has been the Republic of Ireland since I was born.  If it or southern Irish became the common parlance then I'd probably use it. It is simply a term that refers to Irish people from a different state.  Similarly if people refer to Nordies or Northerners I'm happy enough with that too as I don't consider there any agenda behind it and I know what they are referring to.

It has never been the Republic of Ireland. Republic of Ireland is just the description of the state .

[Zapatista]

That's quite a bit of revisionism there Lar. Fair play to ye.

A much lower standard of living?

Ahern, Clinton and Blair?

Ahern leaving his mothers funeral? Was that the same mother who's passing he used to explain dodgy cash dealing in the tribunal???

Janey, Zap, you're in horrid bad form today!
Right now, you would be taken for a well-balanced individual; one with a chip on both shoulders.
Revisionism is a funny thing; it's very subjective and what's bending facts for one person is putting the record straight for another.
Unless someone can prove me wrong, I'm very much putting facts on the line here.
If you want to be sarcastic about any man who puts a solution to the Northern problem in front of attending his mother's funeral, you may snigger away but I won't be joining you.
Blair and Clinton too had a lot of serious issues to tackle.  The time and trouble involved for both to take up an apparently hopeless cause needs to be acknowledged.
Now, you may fail to appreciate the efforts of all three but there are others in the North would readily acknowledge the effort put in and the political risks all of them took on.
All three may have dirtied their bibs elsewhere but getting Papa Doc and Gerry Adams to sit down and talk was a feat that has to be acknowledged.
Ronald Reagan or either of the Bush brigade would not worked as hard as Clinton did to solve a problem that did not directly involve the US. Blair was up to his oxters in all sorts of crises, involvement in Iraq being just one, yet he cannot be faulted for shirking his part in advancing the peace process.
Big Ian on the Late Late last weekend mentioned that Blair had rang him 7 times in one day. Do you think Maggie Thatcher or Gordon Brown would bother ringing a second time? If either rang even once, it would be to issue an order and not to ask a request.
How Bertie stuck at his job while the revelations about his finances were coming out thick and fast, I'll never know but he did keep the cool. Like them or not, all three earned the thanks of all on the island for bringing some sort of peace and stability to a hitherto intractable problem.
Personally, I don't like any of them but I do give credit where it's due – that's not hard to do, is it?
Tell me Zap, why do you have problems with accepting that we had a lower standard of living down here than Nationalists had in Northern Ireland?
Common sense alone would tell you that.
After Partition the South was cut adrift, cut off from financial aid from the British Treasury and with sweet damn all natural resources.  Furthermore, the people in government as well as those in opposition were eminently unsuited for the job of running a country.
They could blow the b*ll*x off each other okay or use a pistol as good as John Wayne any day but statesmen they were not. Dev, when he came to power, started the Economic War against Britain and it buckled the economy big time. We lost that row and most Irish people saw more dinnertimes than dinners while it lasted and it went on for years.
WW2 came along and our economy practically ground to a halt as exports and imports went by the board. If it wasn't for emigration and the money that emigrant workers sent back home to their people, our grandparents could have starved. I suppose quite a few of the poor devils did.
No; I am not playing the violin for sympathy here; one would not need to be a genius (either of the benign or evil types) to figure out why the Republic was impoverished from Partition to the end of the last century. By contrast, inhabitants of the statelet north of the border were getting financial aid from Her Majesty's Government that their cousins down here did not.
I have been following the progress of the troubles since the Civil Rights parade was attacked by the B Specials at Burntollet in 1969 and, as the fella says, that's not today nor yesterday!
It was very noticeable that the 'Castle Catholics' were never inclined to support the local Shinners or even the SDLP candidates in their area. They have always been quite happy to keep the Union in place. They know which side their bread is buttered.
The Malone Road was never a hot bed of Nationalism and that's for sure!
In other words, not every Catholic looked across  the border for help and support and I'd say one hell of a lot of them still don't.

Lar i'm am generally a big fan of your posts and usually see your reason but this time I can't agree. Perhaps I reacted to that moreso than anything.

First of all the peace process started long before the 3 you mentioned came along. It started under Thatcher without her knowledge. To compare Thatcher and Regan with any moderate politician is not fair either. Maybe I should compare Blair with Mandela and Clinton with Putin?

Tony Blair and Bertie Ahern are not and were not peace keepers. Tony Blair represented the occupying British force in Ireland. He was head of a force that took part in much of the bloodshed and the continued denial of that.. He was not an observer who decided to help he was a player as was Adams and Paisley. Ahern was a token Representative. he was brought along for the ride in order to make it all seem somehow legitimate. due to the years of turning a blind eye to the northAhern was left in a position were he had nothing to offer to the peace process. He was told were his position should be by the players - the Brits the Nationalists/republicans and the Unionists. Ahern was told that if he did what was asked of him it might succeed. The Dublin Government had absolutely no negotiating power during the talks as they had nothing to offer. Bill Clinton was also a token National dimension. It is the role of the international community to be involved in peace agreements and Clinton sent Representatives along to facilitate that. If the GFA had have failed Clinton we would have heard the last of Clinton in Ireland.It was a big thing for him only because of timing.

The people responsible for the GFA are the Brits the Nationalists/Republicans and the Unionists. Everyone else played a minor role as everyone else had nothing to gain or loose.

There were very few political risks taken by those 3. Clinton, Blair and Ahern were not politically accountable to those directly affected by the GFA. In fact it was the UUP and SF who took most of the political risks. If the GFA had have failed Ahern, Blair and Clinton would still have stayed in their positions for long to follow. Espeacially since, as you say it was an apparently hopeless job.

It was not Blair, Ahern and Clinton who got Paisley and Adams around a table it was the people of the 6 counties who voted in big numbers for the GFA.Paisley and Adams were forced around that table by Unionist and Nationalists of the north.

I know it was extremely difficult living in the south during those times but it was not a much lower standard of living than that of northern catholics. It was at the very least a similar standard. I know to well about the castle catholics. I have a relation who stood against a hungerstriker in an election. I am a firm believer that the majority of the Irish people are 'would be' castle catholics as it is certain from our history.    

[Myles Na G.]

Should have demanded answers muppet, even if they werent going to get them it would have meant something to the nationalist community in the north.


What are you on about Wsteve?

Get of the cross POG, you boys talk some shite, why dont all you boys working in Britain walk out of your jobs in protest! What side of the strike would you be on in this 'British jobs for British workers' shite they are going on with?

when the union lads come over and ask you nationality i expect you would whip out the Irish passport and leave the office 

Without a moment's hesitation. 

I'm not sure why I should be walking out of my job in protest though?

Well they want 'British jobs for British workers' so you wouldnt be leaving but more so getting kicked out!

See what I've highlighted? That's what prompted my question, why would I be walking out?
If they wanted to kick me out for being Irish then that's fine, I wouldnt deny my nationality if they held a gun to my head.  

I think though it's not a thing about foreign workers as such, it's employers telling people to f**k off while they bring in foreigners to do the job for half, maybe quarter, the money.  I'd say you'd have an issue with that if your employer done the same.  I would have an issue with it with regards to both the foreign boys being exploited and the english ones.


La Narka
I've said on this thread what I expected the Irish government to do.  It would have helped if they acted like they were fighting our corner, even if no one was listening.  


Myles

Until nationalists are prepared to accept that people from the protestant / British community are every bit as Irish as anyone else on the island, unity will remain a dream.

I've no issue with Unionsits being Irish, if they consider themselves Irish then that's fine it's when the jump to one nationality from another every five minutes and dont quite seem able to make up their mind it gets silly.

I don't think they do jump from one nationality to another. I think what you're identifying is that individual unionists identify themselves on a spectrum which ranges from Irish to British. Nationalists should ask themselves why it is that many unionists find it difficult to class themselves simply as Irish. My view is that the traditional, dominant definition of Irishness - Gaelic, Catholic, nationalist - excludes those from a Protestant / unionist background. Put that with the underlying philosophy behind armed force republicanism - Brits Out, Ourselves Alone - and you're left with a community with an uncertain sense of its own Irishness, an uncertain sense of its own place on this island.