Is the end of the Union in sight? (It may well be but then again…)

[mayogodhelpus@gmail.com]

No it does not, both regions of Ireland left the Union, even the North for a very short period.

Well that just have been a shock to my parents, both of whom were born before 1921 (just), but never noticed any difference.
In any case, they managed to survive somehow, before going on to consumate their greatest achievement...

Well the 6 counties did leave the Union for a few days. So it is the 1922 Union. No older than the 26 county state. The U.K. is among the 20'th century formed nations in Europe.

I'd rather have a German passport than one of these

German Passport, Irish Passport, what's the difference? Each is liable to see you whipped by the Brits when the time comes 

Remember Fontenoy 

The U.K. = The U.S.A. lapdog. The British Armed forces are little more than a Mercenary servant of the United States of America's Empire.

Oi! Less of the Cheek - or we'll demand our £7 billion back:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/nov/22/ireland-bailout-uk-lends-seven-billion

Btw, Osborne is part of the old Anglo-Irish aristocracy, known in Ireland as the Ascendancy. He is the heir to the Osborne baronetcy (of Ballentaylor, in County Tipperary, and Ballylemon, in County Waterford). And you thought you had got rid of the Landlords in 1921... 

You know how the 1801 Union was secured (after the small matters of rape, murder, colonisation, torture, genocide, apartheid, and land grab) by filthy bribery. The only Germans that may have been involved were the ones on Perfidious Albion's throne.

Give me Berlin over Boston or Munich over Manhatten anyday. We serve neither King nor Kaiser, but sure the Kaiser is long dead.

Where's your Irish Spirit, eh?
"Geographically we are closer to Berlin than Boston. Spiritually we are probably a lot closer to Boston than Berlin.
http://www.deti.ie/press/2000/210700.htm


I'm not a Europhobe, I'll leave that to the Brits who build Unions at the barrell of a gun & the sharp end of a blade.

Fat Harney, as credible as Tony Blair talking about Iraq.

Anyhow, the Kaiser's Dead, as you say, whilst the Queen Lives On - as you'll get to see for yourself, soon enough:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13003898

If the Indifference I witnessed in England is anything to go by, she may be the last  The people of Liverpool give me impression that the people of the European offshore island of Britian may soon ready to join the 21'st century and abandon their Feudal Kingdom.

Btw, I have some of this left over from the Royal Wedding that I can let you have...
http://www.partydelights.co.uk/confirmitem.asp?ProductID=ENGLUJBAN

1922 Union, FACT. After huge territorial losses to my country. In fact ye probably lost as much territory as the Germans after WW1, OUCH.

You're in no position to be laughing about "loss of territory". Or have you forgotten about this?
'the national territory consists of the whole island of Ireland' - The late, but unlamented, Article 2...

Hey I don't think Irish troops ever had to get on boats out of UK territory with their tails between their legs on other hand the Brits have been doing it for nearly 100 years now.

[lynchbhoy]

you can quote cameron all youlike on his PR stunt.

I can quote Political Leaders. I can cite the Election Results, I can quote the Law, I can cite Historical Precedent and Economic Fact.
Meanwhile you can quote/cite precisely Nothing (bar the deluded ramblings of your own fevered imagination).
Are you really so thick-skinned that you don't realise when your arse is being kicked? 

Its well known that the suits in Gov and civil service want to jettison the money pit of the north as soon as possible.

Those would be the self-same "suits" whose last major action over NI was to draft, enact and sign into Law the GFA, which took NI's right to self-determination out of their ("suits") hands and placed it firmly in the hands of the NI electorate?
Waken up, man - you've had 13 years to get used to it!

Our Irish gov still run the show. the banks are the only thing holding us back down presently - exports and internal indsutry ar eup !

Nurse! Nurse! He's got out again...

your little jibes may amuse you, but hardly of any use in your mission to show why there wont be a reunification - or are you going to flip-flop again !!

No flip-flop from me. I have never denied the possibility of a UI at some stage in future, since I lack the Power of Prophecy.
All I have said is that in my considered opinion, there is no sign whatever of any such thing, either imminently, or in the foreseeable future. And I have quoted the electoral results to back up my thesis, electoral results which you have notably failed even to ackowledge, never mind address.
Which is quite enough for me.

when countries leave an occupied jurastiction- eg germany, japan, hong kng etc - they have to pay for the upkeep for a number or years.
Thie payment will be less than their usual annual spend, but it is the sweetner that enables these 'transactions' to happen.
If you didnt know that, then you really dont know what happens in reality in this world - what we mostly knew for a good while now !!

More drivel. To take your three examples, it was the Americans,  not the British, who pumped money into (West) Germany and Japan after WWII. And they only did so in order to prevent them going Communist - hardly a fate likely to befall any part of ireland anytime soon!
As for Hong Kong, the British didn't pay a single penny to the Chinese after they left; rather we repatriated everything of worth well in advance of the 1997 handover, most notably:
"HSBC Holdings plc established in 1990 became the parent company to The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation in preparation for its purchase of Midland Bank in the United Kingdom and restructuring of ownership domicile for the impending transfer of sovereignty of Hong Kong to China. HSBC Holdings acquisition of Midland Bank gave HSBC Group a substantial market presence in the United Kingdom which was completed in 1992. As part of the takeover conditions for the purchase of Midland Bank, HSBC Holdings plc was required to relocate its world headquarters from Hong Kong to London in 1993"

And as with HK, so it was with virtually all of our former colonies. For providing a "dowry" would have cost money which we preferred to spend within the UK, including NI.

But hey, none of that really counts (or even happened?), since you're Lynchbhoy and all it takes for something you want to happen, is for you to say it will...

ok I am incorrect about hong kong then.
However the resourses left behind more than made up for this !!

as for your other stuff- yes you are flip flopping
read back on yer own posts !

the notion of reunification obv drives you so mad you stick yer head back into the sand all over again !

I'm interested in why you ar calling for a nurse - incontinence time again perhaps?

sad to see someone like yourself so blinkered by hatred !

[Eamonnca1]

Why do unionists want to be part of the UK??  I never understand it.

It appears to me they have no real culture--other than wading in from another land--being given land and then pretending the world ends at an invisible border. Therefore this part of the island is rendered almost identity-less--it must leave unionists feeling weird, like they are just camping out in a place that isnt really theirs. I mean all the towns names --like Belfast--an anglasised version of "mouth of the river Farset" --Derry --Doire --meaning "oak grove." It must leave you feeling like your 'holding what you have' for dear life --wee corners of Belfast and other towns--simply custodians for now, not forever.

Sure nearly all middle class protestants go to university in England and Scotland--many never return--they feel more at home over there--surely this trend will affect voting patterns negatively for unionists. Sure they'll still have the "yeeeeeeooooooooo" brigade who'll always vote for anyone holding a union jack but it's bound to affect things.

I mind years ago i went to USA for a soccer trip and me and this fella from east belfast were staying in a family home of the host team--they had loads of people over at the house to meet the "irish guys" during the 2 weeks and the clown i was with tired himself out telling everyone "no we're not the irish guys, we're not irish, we're nothern irish" everyone was like "yeah, ok" We even played a game and this fella kicked someone and the USA kid was sayin "you irish b**tard" and the boy said "i'm not irish i'm northern irish"!!!! He'd a permanant confused frown on his face, it was a laugh. They also welcomed us with a tricolour on the wall in our bedroom--the wee man near had a breakdown! HE'd never been outta east belfast and probably didnt even know that if you keep driving you'll get to dublin (to be fair he probably had never heard of lisburn, never mind longford etc)

If ever I run out of reasons for wanting NI to remain in the UK, I can always refer back to this ignorant, insulting and frankly bigoted rant.

Thank You. 

The truth hurts, doesn't it?

[Eamonnca1]

Oi! Less of the Cheek - or we'll demand our £7 billion back:

[Eamonnca1]

From what I've seen of the stats, the catholic population has been breeding like rabbits but that growth is levelling off.  Since the unionist discrimination machine was dismantled, catholics have become better off and as people become more affluent they have fewer children.  So if we just assume that all taigs will vote nationalist and all prods will vote unionists, we're looking at a continuation of the status quo for some time to come.

Evil Genius has plenty to say on this subject (more so than on GAA matters, which makes me wonder what exactly he's doing here) and he makes some points above which I agree with and some that I disagree with.

Some of his points that I disagree with:

1 - English nationalism is weak as evidenced by rejection of regional assemblies.  Bunkum.  Regional assemblies have nothing to do with English nationalism, they were an internal matter for England.  The English (it's OK to use that label without the sneering quotation marks and without the 'sic,' because a man from England is English) rejected them as an unnecessary additional layer of bureaucracy.  However, there is plenty of resentment in England about the fact that Scottish MPs get to vote on matters that affect England and Wales only but English MPs cannot vote on matters that affect Scotland only since most of that power was devolved.  Support for an independent English parliament has been quoted as being as high as 60%.  And if you're the kind of person who is obsessed with flags, you might be interested to note the soccer-inspired popularity of the flag of St George which has surged in the last 20 odd years.

2 - Alliance is a unionist party because it "accepts the status quote."  Well SF and the SDLP have also accepted the status quo.  Anyone who signed up to the Good Friday Agreement (or the "Belfast Agreement" as the [Edited Mod3] prefer to describe it) accepts the status quo. Accepting the status quo is the basis for working the institutions of government that were agreed, but it does not a unionist make.

3 - SF had a "paltry showing" at the last southern general election. If trebling your number of seats is a "paltry showing" then I'd hate to see your idea of a success.

4 - Nationalism in Britain is weak. Since 1935, the SNP has gone from zero to a third of the vote in Scotland. Since 1929 Plaid Cymru has grown from zero to a fifth of the vote in Wales. Nationalism is a long term project and its strength or weakness cannot be measured by one set of election results alone.  You have to plot the strength of the vote over time and see if it's going up or down in the long term. It's going up.

Other people have suggested repartition.  Ain't gonna happen, nor should it.  It's not written anywhere in the Good Friday Agreement that the place can be carved up a second time just because one tribe with delusions of grandeur can't take a beating in a free and fair vote.  As soon as 50%+1 vote for a UI in the north and the same happens in the south, then a united Ireland it will be. End of.

Here's the problem though, and on this I agree with Evil Genius.  Nationalism is its own worst enemy.

You see, with a very small number of exceptions, someone who makes it as far as his 20s with unionist beliefs is not going to change them.  Same for a nationalist.  However it is possible for deeply held beliefs to change from one generation to the next.  Witness the collapse of the power of the catholic church.  Children of devout catholics are at least abandoning collective worship via the middle man, and at most others are abandoning religious faith altogether.  I remember when the word 'atheist' was almost a term of abuse, but it's not anymore. 

So the best hope that nationalism has of winning over people from the other side is to convince the children of today's unionists that unionism is politically incorrect as a cultural idea.  But that is never going to happen as long as the current education system remains, dare I say it, partitioned.  As long as the state carries on funding the catholic system, the state system is going to be dominated by protestants and it's going to remain a system in which unionist ideas are not challenged and hence survive into adulthood by which time they are set in stone. Now special interests, usually religious ones, like to deny this and claim that the segregated education system is not the "only" cause of division, but it's a disingenuous denial since it is a very significant contributor to division.

So it's in nationalism's own interest to de-segregate the education system, and yet the two nationalist parties are not interested in doing so.  They claim to support the integrated sector and claim their non-sectarian brownie points that way, but only a severe overhaul of the state and catholic sectors is going to move the needle on the gauge of sectarian division.  Peter Robinson, a man with whom I've often disagreed, raised the matter last year by suggesting that the catholic sector should not get such generous support from the state.  The two nationalist parties closed ranks and called him a bigot for daring to challenge the segregated system. So nationalism is keen to keep closed the one channel that it needs to open in order to let its ideas flow into the minds of the next generation of voters.

As for the message that nationalism needs to be getting out there, what is it? I think it needs to be a vision of a united Ireland that we can sell to northern protestants in terms that will benefit them and which they would be comfortable with.  What kind of structures of government can we expect?  What constitutional protections can we put in place? 

Could we live with Stormont in its present form, with all its checks and balances to prevent one-sided domination, as a regional assembly within a united Ireland? I wouldn't have a problem with it. 

For national parliament elections do we use the STV voting system currently in use in the 26 counties? It would put northern protestants in a strong position, they'd have a lot more representation in an actual national parliament than they've ever had at Westminster. 

How about moving the capital from Dublin to Belfast?  Or at least there should be a decent looking parliament building. Leinster House looks fine as a mansion, but its bland look and ugly car park and security ramps in front are very unbecoming for a national parliament. The Custom House is a far more impressive building. Even Stormont looks more imposing.

How about commonwealth membership for our new 32-county republic?  If it makes northern protestants feel better and maintains some connection to their motherland then why not? It doesn't dilute the country's independence, there are plenty of republics in the commonwealth who maintain their own elected head of state. 

What about more practical matters, like the appearance on the street?  Do we paint all the post boxes green or do we let certain areas leave them in red?  Who gives a toss?  If some people want the post box on their street to stay red then leave it red. 

What about parades?  Can we get nationalist residents' groups to draw up a list of reasonable conditions under which they would accept orange parades in their areas? Could they come up with a list of what they actually find objectionable about such parades and offer to allow them to pass if the objectionable aspects were removed from orange culture?

Above all, Irish unity could be a chance for Ulster protestants to get back in touch with the so-called protestant work ethic about which we've heard so much and seen so little in the last few decades.  Right now there's an inherent culture of entitlement concerning handouts and subsidies from the English taxpayer.  Paper-pushing bureaucrats doing communist style non-jobs have come in, actual productive industries that add value and produce something have gone out. Cutting the ties to the British apron strings would force them to rediscover that old self-sufficient pioneering spirit and start earning their keep again.

This is a long term project, folks. Anyone who thinks there's any point in having a border poll in the next ten years is kidding themselves.

[Gold]

the brits are and will be the main agitator for this.

"So let me repeat the pledge I made to you in Belfast a year and a half ago. I will never be neutral on our Union. We passionately believe that England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales are stronger together, weaker apart"  - David Cameron* speaking in Northern Ireland, May 4th, 2010.

* - He's the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, in case it had slipped by you...

the republicans/nationalists/Irish will get this when the majority swings

"... when the majority swings" Why not go down to your local kiddies' play park? You'll find plenty of swings there. And if you engage them in conversation, you should learn something, too...

... and the southern gov kicks in with budgetary changes

Er, don't you mean the German  Government? 

... on the back of a huge pile of cash from british gov for jettisoning the north (payable over a number of years).

"A huge pile of cash"?
Let me get this straight. The (perfidious) Brits resent paying for NI when it is part of the UK, but will happily pay out bundles when it isn't.
Aye, that figures. 

you can try to stick your head in the sand all you like, you know what I have written is no lie.

I wouldn't say it's a "lie", because you have repeated it so often that I accept that you genuinely believe it.
Therefore it is a delusion.
You really shouldn't have stopped taking your medication.

its your own problem that you just want to deny that there will be reunification.

I do not claim that there will never  be "reunification" [sic].
Rather, I believe that there is no realistic prospect of a single Irish state in the foreseeable future.
Beyond that, I cannot tell, because it is, er, unforeseeable...

same type of unionist mentality that wanted to deny nationalists votes,civil rights etc

I have never denied any Nationalist anything. How old do you think I am?

the never never never mentality never changes.

With your deluded fantasies about Brits waving wads of cash for Irish Republicans etc, you are the one who is living in "Neverland":
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-530257/Tumbledown-abandoned-The-ruins-Michael-Jacksons-Neverland.html

However your old muckers the brits will switch sides and sell you down the river in the not too distant future ! 

I'll take my chances with this, thank you very much:
1. The participants endorse the commitment made by the British and Irish Governments that, in a new British-Irish Agreement replacing the Anglo-Irish Agreement, they will:
(i) 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 Ireland; - Good Friday Agreement ( http://www.nio.gov.uk/agreement.pdf )

Enjoy your stay on the island!!

[mayogodhelpus@gmail.com]

Oi! Less of the Cheek - or we'll demand our £7 billion back:

To prop up British Banks. Here maybe ye should keep the money and take the hits and bail out your own banks, without the interest repayments of course.

[Eamonnca1]

Oi! Less of the Cheek - or we'll demand our £7 billion back:

To prop up British Banks. Here maybe ye should keep the money and take the hits and bail out your own banks, without the interest repayments of course.

Not sure who you're talking to or what you're trying to say but I just love the way [Edited Mod3] refer to British exchequer funds as "our money" when in fact they are net beneficiaries from HMG and don't contribute anywhere near enough tax revenue to cover the services they use.

[Maguire01]

What about more practical matters, like the appearance on the street?  Do we paint all the post boxes green or do we let certain areas leave them in red?  Who gives a toss? 

You'd be surprised.
http://ograshinnfein.blogspot.com/2008/10/green-post-boxes-continues-to-spread.html
Actually, you wouldn't.

[Eamonnca1]

What about more practical matters, like the appearance on the street?  Do we paint all the post boxes green or do we let certain areas leave them in red?  Who gives a toss? 

You'd be surprised.
http://ograshinnfein.blogspot.com/2008/10/green-post-boxes-continues-to-spread.html
Actually, you wouldn't.

I certainly wouldn't.  It's a shame they have so much time on their hands, but on the other hand I suppose it's better to give them something to do other than rioting.

[mayogodhelpus@gmail.com]

What about more practical matters, like the appearance on the street?  Do we paint all the post boxes green or do we let certain areas leave them in red?  Who gives a toss? 

You'd be surprised.
http://ograshinnfein.blogspot.com/2008/10/green-post-boxes-continues-to-spread.html
Actually, you wouldn't.

This is Criminal Activity. Is this being carried out by the Youth Wing of Sinn Féin. Still strugging with the rule of law I see.

[Lar Naparka]

It will be interesting to see what is going to result from the Assembly elections.

[AQMP]

It will be interesting to see what is going to result from the Assembly elections.

I think we might see a low turn out.  It's been a very low profile campaign on the whole and it seems NI's first ever election on "bread and butter" issue (to paraphrase Robinson) has not caught the public imagination at least where I live.  Even Mrs AQMP who insists on exercising her franchise at every opportunity has said she's not going to bother this time.

[Maguire01]

It will be interesting to see what is going to result from the Assembly elections.

I think we might see a low turn out.   It's been a very low profile campaign on the whole and it seems NI's first ever election on "bread and butter" issue (to paraphrase Robinson) has not caught the public imagination at least where I live.  Even Mrs AQMP who insists on exercising her franchise at every opportunity has said she's not going to bother this time.

Turnout reported as 'steady' so far.

[Evil Genius]

From what I've seen of the stats, the catholic population has been breeding like rabbits but that growth is levelling off.  Since the unionist discrimination machine was dismantled, catholics have become better off and as people become more affluent they have fewer children.  So if we just assume that all taigs will vote nationalist and all prods will vote unionists, we're looking at a continuation of the status quo for some time to come.

Evil Genius has plenty to say on this subject (more so than on GAA matters, which makes me wonder what exactly he's doing here) and he makes some points above which I agree with and some that I disagree with.

Some of his points that I disagree with:

1 - English nationalism is weak as evidenced by rejection of regional assemblies.  Bunkum.  Regional assemblies have nothing to do with English nationalism, they were an internal matter for England.  The English (it's OK to use that label without the sneering quotation marks and without the 'sic,' because a man from England is English) rejected them as an unnecessary additional layer of bureaucracy.  However, there is plenty of resentment in England about the fact that Scottish MPs get to vote on matters that affect England and Wales only but English MPs cannot vote on matters that affect Scotland only since most of that power was devolved.  Support for an independent English parliament has been quoted as being as high as 60%.  And if you're the kind of person who is obsessed with flags, you might be interested to note the soccer-inspired popularity of the flag of St George which has surged in the last 20 odd years.

2 - Alliance is a unionist party because it "accepts the status quote."  Well SF and the SDLP have also accepted the status quo.  Anyone who signed up to the Good Friday Agreement (or the "Belfast Agreement" as the [Edited Mod3] prefer to describe it) accepts the status quo. Accepting the status quo is the basis for working the institutions of government that were agreed, but it does not a unionist make.

3 - SF had a "paltry showing" at the last southern general election. If trebling your number of seats is a "paltry showing" then I'd hate to see your idea of a success.

4 - Nationalism in Britain is weak. Since 1935, the SNP has gone from zero to a third of the vote in Scotland. Since 1929 Plaid Cymru has grown from zero to a fifth of the vote in Wales. Nationalism is a long term project and its strength or weakness cannot be measured by one set of election results alone.  You have to plot the strength of the vote over time and see if it's going up or down in the long term. It's going up.

Other people have suggested repartition.  Ain't gonna happen, nor should it.  It's not written anywhere in the Good Friday Agreement that the place can be carved up a second time just because one tribe with delusions of grandeur can't take a beating in a free and fair vote.  As soon as 50%+1 vote for a UI in the north and the same happens in the south, then a united Ireland it will be. End of.

Here's the problem though, and on this I agree with Evil Genius.  Nationalism is its own worst enemy.

You see, with a very small number of exceptions, someone who makes it as far as his 20s with unionist beliefs is not going to change them.  Same for a nationalist.  However it is possible for deeply held beliefs to change from one generation to the next.  Witness the collapse of the power of the catholic church.  Children of devout catholics are at least abandoning collective worship via the middle man, and at most others are abandoning religious faith altogether.  I remember when the word 'atheist' was almost a term of abuse, but it's not anymore. 

So the best hope that nationalism has of winning over people from the other side is to convince the children of today's unionists that unionism is politically incorrect as a cultural idea
etc
etc
etc
etc

On the subject of a UI, I have argued on this thread and others my belief that the Union is basically safe, since a small, but clear and consistent majority of voters in NI wants NI to remain in the UK. I have further argued that there is nothing on the horizon which is likely to change that in the foreseeable future (quite the opposite, imo).

Therefore on the basis that Unionism doesn't actually need  to do anything (i.e. it is for Nationalism to produce a "game-changer"), I could have left it there. Instead, however, out of respect for posters like Lar Naparka and MGHU etc, I continued to participate in what has been an interesting debate.

In which spirit, as I started reading the above post, I noted a lot of interesting stuff which merited a response. And then I got to the part which stated that Unionism is "politically incorrect as a cultural idea". Note the term "politically incorrect":  not that Unionism is eg doomed to failure, or badly presented, or unacceptable to many etc.
No, according to Nationalists like you, Unionism is an ideology which no right-thinking person could properly endorse.

And at that point, I stopped mentally composing my reply to your lengthy post. For that, in essence, is the real problem which Nationalism faces - namely too many adherents simply do not accord even the most basic respect to the views and wishes of a million of their fellow Irishmen and women.

At which point, I can only conclude that not only do we (Unionists) not actually need  to do anything to change our position, but this one, at least, no longer wants  to do anything. For if the whole point of engaging with your political opposites is to try to find some sort of common ground and understanding etc, how is that possible if your opponents do not accord you even the most basic respect necessary for such engagement, from the very outset?

For if Unionism is genuinely "politically incorrect", then the only logical outcome of any dialogue would be one whereby Unionism would no longer exist. And whatever else you and your fellow Nationalists should know, it is that after 400 years, Unionists are here and they're here to stay.

Beyond that, if as Nationalists you're hoping to get anywhere with us, as a first step, you would be advised to drop the casual, even instinctive bigotry as posted eg by "Gold" in post#19 (and, I note, endorsed by you in post #62).

Then and only then, will Unionists feel it worth our while to "engage with" or "reach out to" Nationalism (or whatever the latest trendy phrase for "talking to" might be)...