Margaret Thatcher....

[LCohen]

LC, you have "no issue with a United Ireland that is democratically approved," except, of course,  that one that was democratically approved just before the creation of that other carved-out chunk of land whose majority opinion you seem to esteem so highly.  You're good at the game "Twister," I bet.

Never played twister.

A majority on all parts of the island has my approval. Enforcing a united Ireland on a sizeable area with a sizeable majority did not & would not carry my support.

[LCohen]

The Brits seemed to think of Ireland as a single country with a distinctive identity, every bit as distinctive as Scotland or England. They governed it as a single entity right up until the Act of Union.  Even your crowd thought of it as a single entity. The Church of Ireland, the Grand Orange Lodge of Ireland, all are all-Ireland institutions. When Queen Victoria visited Belfast you had the place bedecked in banners welcoming HM to "Ireland" (Northern Ireland hadn't been invented yet, there was no word of a "national" identity for Ulster, it was always a regional identity), and you had banners saying "Erin go Bragh" and what not.  Just about every sport other than soccer is governed on an all-Ireland basis.

The use of "you" and "your" is interesting.

The sporting reference is intriguing. I think you are quite right in organising international boundaries based on the views of sporting orgaisations.

Is it correct that "just about every sport other than soccer is governed on an all-Ireland basis"? So many of those that still have players playing for NI and or UK in international games.

Whoever said that there was a national identity in Ulster (at a 9 or the eroneous 6 county level) or Northern Ireland? Neither are countries.

I don't deny that Britain ruled Ireland on an all-island basis. I do deny that the Irish ever did?

I'll take that as a retraction of your previous contention that Ireland has never been ruled as a single entity.

You seem to be a little hung up on whether it was ruled from within or without as a single entity, but that's neither here nor there. Even if what you say is true and that Ireland was only united under British rule (which is debatable at best) it doesn't change the fact that it was governed as a single entity with its own identity.

Gerrymandering a new territory with no prior tradition of nationhood in the interests of promoting a self-entitled minority to the status of a "majority" is not democracy. It's caving in to the unreasonable demands of a people with some ideas above their station.

I have pointed out before that I asumed that the nationalist argument was founded on the basis that Ireland had been united by someone other than England/Britain.

The fact that it was not united beforehand removes the absolute imperiative that Britain had to view it entirely as one entity when considering (partial) withdrawal especially when they considered the demographics in the north. Again I ask you to what where Britain to do? How would their ignoring of a vocal majority in the north have been received internationally?

Those who believ that Britain could have fully withdrawn from the island of Ireland then (or in the absence of a majority now or in the future) are deluding themselves.

entirely incorrect I'm afraid.

even then, it is no reason to ignore the wishes of the majority.

any other excuse is just justifying your delusion to yourself.

will we have local councils or Tyrone, Derry and Fermanagh voting whether we have reunification?
As the current six counties is not fully goverened by the six counties and the people in it are not all pleased with the undemocratic methods of the past !
ya cant have it both ways !

I'm happy for border to be redrawn. SF are not.

[Oraisteach]

Amuse me, LC.  What would your new ideal border look like?

[deiseach]

The majority positions were clear in the absence of a vote. Having a vote would not have changed this but having a vote was impossible given the nature of democracy at the time.

And when a vote was possible, such as when Fermanagh and Tyrone councils expressed their loyalty to the government in Dublin, you ignore it, abolish the body that erred, and gerrymander the entities that replace them. So much for the freedom of small nations.

[Nally Stand]

This is comical!!

Time for a other quick step guide from LCohen. This time, democracy:

1. Majority rules
2. If majority rules makes for an undesirable result, ignore majority and create state where minority can become a majority.
3. Claim minority is now democratic majority.
4. Lecture others about democracy

[Maguire01]

Nally Stand's claims on population movement seem crazed and demented.

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=qNDx0wXsLC8C&pg=PR41&lpg=PR41&dq=belfast+catholics+biggest+population+since+second+world+war&source=bl&ots=ewh8nVVZZC&sig=tMyr9bPwU1-Bli4QO6IG9h66Clo&hl=en&sa=X&ei=xE52UbjNLaGT0AW464D4Dg&ved=0CFsQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=belfast%20catholics%20biggest%20population%20since%20second%20world%20war&f=false
"Hundreds of homes belonging to Catholics were set alight and within days, Belfast witnessed the largest population displacement since the Second World War." The Dirty War, Martin Dillon


http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/topics/troubles_everyday_life
"Northern Ireland saw the biggest population movement in Europe since the Second World War" Denis Murray, BBC Ireland Correspondent


http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/2/1/1/2/6/pages211262/p211262-14.php
"Loyalist rioting and violence in response to a peaceful civil rights campaign caused genuine threats to civic order and the most massive population shift in Europe since the end of the Second World War." Timothy D. Hoyt US Naval War College


http://www.socialistworld.net/pubs/tt/ch11.html
"After internment in 1971, the widespread intimidation resulted in the greatest population shift then seen in Europe since the second world war."


http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/frankiequinn/quinn94/
"By February 1973, 60,000 people – ten percent of the city's population – had moved out of their homes in what was, at the time, the biggest population displacement in Europe since World War Two."


http://www.theworkersrepublic.com/brendan-hughes-memoirs---review.html
Loyalist ethnic cleansing of Catholic/Nationalist areas in Belfast, had caused the largest population displacement in Western Europe, since World War 2

A small point, but you did claim the movement was "Catholics fleeing across the border" - these links don't imply crossing the border. And in fact a number of those articles refer to movement in both communities as the place became polarised.

[mayogodhelpus@gmail.com]

The Brits seemed to think of Ireland as a single country with a distinctive identity, every bit as distinctive as Scotland or England. They governed it as a single entity right up until the Act of Union.  Even your crowd thought of it as a single entity. The Church of Ireland, the Grand Orange Lodge of Ireland, all are all-Ireland institutions. When Queen Victoria visited Belfast you had the place bedecked in banners welcoming HM to "Ireland" (Northern Ireland hadn't been invented yet, there was no word of a "national" identity for Ulster, it was always a regional identity), and you had banners saying "Erin go Bragh" and what not.  Just about every sport other than soccer is governed on an all-Ireland basis.

The use of "you" and "your" is interesting.

The sporting reference is intriguing. I think you are quite right in organising international boundaries based on the views of sporting orgaisations.

Is it correct that "just about every sport other than soccer is governed on an all-Ireland basis"? So many of those that still have players playing for NI and or UK in international games.

Whoever said that there was a national identity in Ulster (at a 9 or the eroneous 6 county level) or Northern Ireland? Neither are countries.

I don't deny that Britain ruled Ireland on an all-island basis. I do deny that the Irish ever did?

I'll take that as a retraction of your previous contention that Ireland has never been ruled as a single entity.

You seem to be a little hung up on whether it was ruled from within or without as a single entity, but that's neither here nor there. Even if what you say is true and that Ireland was only united under British rule (which is debatable at best) it doesn't change the fact that it was governed as a single entity with its own identity.

Gerrymandering a new territory with no prior tradition of nationhood in the interests of promoting a self-entitled minority to the status of a "majority" is not democracy. It's caving in to the unreasonable demands of a people with some ideas above their station.

I have pointed out before that I asumed that the nationalist argument was founded on the basis that Ireland had been united by someone other than England/Britain.

The fact that it was not united beforehand removes the absolute imperiative that Britain had to view it entirely as one entity when considering (partial) withdrawal especially when they considered the demographics in the north. Again I ask you to what where Britain to do? How would their ignoring of a vocal majority in the north have been received internationally?

Those who believ that Britain could have fully withdrawn from the island of Ireland then (or in the absence of a majority now or in the future) are deluding themselves.

entirely incorrect I'm afraid.

even then, it is no reason to ignore the wishes of the majority.

any other excuse is just justifying your delusion to yourself.

will we have local councils or Tyrone, Derry and Fermanagh voting whether we have reunification?
As the current six counties is not fully goverened by the six counties and the people in it are not all pleased with the undemocratic methods of the past !
ya cant have it both ways !

I'm happy for border to be redrawn. SF are not.

Neither am I, if a united Ireland is accepted by the majority of the Northern population and a majority of the population of the Republic, Sin é.

[mayogodhelpus@gmail.com]

LC, you have "no issue with a United Ireland that is democratically approved," except, of course,  that one that was democratically approved just before the creation of that other carved-out chunk of land whose majority opinion you seem to esteem so highly.  You're good at the game "Twister," I bet.

Never played twister.

A majority on all parts of the island has my approval. Enforcing a united Ireland on a sizeable area with a sizeable majority did not & would not carry my support.

Pity you weren't about when they were forcing the overwhelming majority of Ireland into a United Kingdom they did not want.

[Eamonnca1]

This is comical!!

Time for a other quick step guide from LCohen. This time, democracy:

1. Majority rules
2. If majority rules makes for an undesirable result, ignore majority and create state where minority can become a majority.
3. Claim minority is now democratic majority.
4. Lecture others about democracy

Pretty much sums it up. If you want to convince a unionist to support democracy, get the majority to vote unionist. If the majority vote otherwise, keep rigging the border until unionists are in the majority and they'll support it again. Same as the flag protesting knuckledraggers who can't get it into their thick skulls that a democratically elected council took a democratic vote and won it fair and square. Democrats when it suits them. The only time democracy counts is when they're in the majority. 

You can only go on placating this sense of entitlement for so long, they're going to have to lose their privileged position some time and join the rest of the human race. South African whites and slave keepers in the American south weren't ready for justice, but it had to be imposed ready or not because it was the right thing to do.  God help us if we slow progress down to the speed of the slowest bigot.

[LCohen]

Amuse me, LC.  What would your new ideal border look like?

Whatever people voted for. I would only have 1 vote.

I would not necessarily believe that voters in say Fermanagh, S Arrmagh would would want their returned votes to result in a shifting of the border.

[LCohen]

The majority positions were clear in the absence of a vote. Having a vote would not have changed this but having a vote was impossible given the nature of democracy at the time.

And when a vote was possible, such as when Fermanagh and Tyrone councils expressed their loyalty to the government in Dublin, you ignore it, abolish the body that erred, and gerrymander the entities that replace them. So much for the freedom of small nations.

I would have np problem with the border being redrawn on that basis. As pointed above SF would have real difficulty so direct your query to them

[LCohen]

This is comical!!

Time for a other quick step guide from LCohen. This time, democracy:

1. Majority rules
2. If majority rules makes for an undesirable result, ignore majority and create state where minority can become a majority.
3. Claim minority is now democratic majority.
4. Lecture others about democracy

So if a majority of Catalans voted for indepence but a majority in Spain and France you would presumably dent the rights of the majority view in Catalonia?

[LCohen]

The Brits seemed to think of Ireland as a single country with a distinctive identity, every bit as distinctive as Scotland or England. They governed it as a single entity right up until the Act of Union.  Even your crowd thought of it as a single entity. The Church of Ireland, the Grand Orange Lodge of Ireland, all are all-Ireland institutions. When Queen Victoria visited Belfast you had the place bedecked in banners welcoming HM to "Ireland" (Northern Ireland hadn't been invented yet, there was no word of a "national" identity for Ulster, it was always a regional identity), and you had banners saying "Erin go Bragh" and what not.  Just about every sport other than soccer is governed on an all-Ireland basis.

The use of "you" and "your" is interesting.

The sporting reference is intriguing. I think you are quite right in organising international boundaries based on the views of sporting orgaisations.

Is it correct that "just about every sport other than soccer is governed on an all-Ireland basis"? So many of those that still have players playing for NI and or UK in international games.

Whoever said that there was a national identity in Ulster (at a 9 or the eroneous 6 county level) or Northern Ireland? Neither are countries.

I don't deny that Britain ruled Ireland on an all-island basis. I do deny that the Irish ever did?

I'll take that as a retraction of your previous contention that Ireland has never been ruled as a single entity.

You seem to be a little hung up on whether it was ruled from within or without as a single entity, but that's neither here nor there. Even if what you say is true and that Ireland was only united under British rule (which is debatable at best) it doesn't change the fact that it was governed as a single entity with its own identity.

Gerrymandering a new territory with no prior tradition of nationhood in the interests of promoting a self-entitled minority to the status of a "majority" is not democracy. It's caving in to the unreasonable demands of a people with some ideas above their station.

I have pointed out before that I asumed that the nationalist argument was founded on the basis that Ireland had been united by someone other than England/Britain.

The fact that it was not united beforehand removes the absolute imperiative that Britain had to view it entirely as one entity when considering (partial) withdrawal especially when they considered the demographics in the north. Again I ask you to what where Britain to do? How would their ignoring of a vocal majority in the north have been received internationally?

Those who believ that Britain could have fully withdrawn from the island of Ireland then (or in the absence of a majority now or in the future) are deluding themselves.

entirely incorrect I'm afraid.

even then, it is no reason to ignore the wishes of the majority.

any other excuse is just justifying your delusion to yourself.

will we have local councils or Tyrone, Derry and Fermanagh voting whether we have reunification?
As the current six counties is not fully goverened by the six counties and the people in it are not all pleased with the undemocratic methods of the past !
ya cant have it both ways !

I'm happy for border to be redrawn. SF are not.

Neither am I, if a united Ireland is accepted by the majority of the Northern population and a majority of the population of the Republic, Sin é.

Some on here diagree with you. Thats all I can say. I'm not calling for a re-drawing of the border but am happfy for it to be permitted should it be called for.

[LCohen]

LC, you have "no issue with a United Ireland that is democratically approved," except, of course,  that one that was democratically approved just before the creation of that other carved-out chunk of land whose majority opinion you seem to esteem so highly.  You're good at the game "Twister," I bet.

Never played twister.

A majority on all parts of the island has my approval. Enforcing a united Ireland on a sizeable area with a sizeable majority did not & would not carry my support.

Pity you weren't about when they were forcing the overwhelming majority of Ireland into a United Kingdom they did not want.

Have never defended colonisation or plantations. Colonisations in the absence of plantations are relative easy to over turn. Successful plantations are different. I'm not justifying them but they are real and can't be wished away.

[LCohen]

This is comical!!

Time for a other quick step guide from LCohen. This time, democracy:

1. Majority rules
2. If majority rules makes for an undesirable result, ignore majority and create state where minority can become a majority.
3. Claim minority is now democratic majority.
4. Lecture others about democracy

Pretty much sums it up. If you want to convince a unionist to support democracy, get the majority to vote unionist. If the majority vote otherwise, keep rigging the border until unionists are in the majority and they'll support it again. Same as the flag protesting knuckledraggers who can't get it into their thick skulls that a democratically elected council took a democratic vote and won it fair and square. Democrats when it suits them. The only time democracy counts is when they're in the majority. 

You can only go on placating this sense of entitlement for so long, they're going to have to lose their privileged position some time and join the rest of the human race. South African whites and slave keepers in the American south weren't ready for justice, but it had to be imposed ready or not because it was the right thing to do.  God help us if we slow progress down to the speed of the slowest bigot.

Agree with a lot of that. Unionism will have to wake up to the fact that the Union is not under imminent threat but an element within Unionism have still to get to grips with the fact that mis-rule and some of the perceived entitlements are gone and will not be allowed to re-occur.