Truth At Last

[Evil Genius]

deiseach "  Unionism has always reserved the right to take up arms to prevent such a corrupt parliamentary bargain. They would, in my opinion, be justified in taking such an action " - Are you serious ?

Yes. If Irish Nationalists are entitled to take up arms to further their political aims, then surely Ulster Unionists are entitled to the same, shall we say, courtesy?

It should be open to any group to take up arms to resist any threat to their right of democratic self-determination.

But in the present dispensation, imperfect though it may be, I don't consider Unionists would have the right to take up arms in the event of a majority of People in NI voting freely to end partition. Nor do I consider that Nationalists would have the right to take up arms in the event of the majority of the people of NI freely declining to end partition.

It's called democracy.

[deiseach]

It should be open to any group to take up arms to resist any threat to their right of democratic self-determination.

There's the rub. Who do you canvass? The people of Fermanagh and Tyrone, for example, were not asked their opinion in 1921, have not been offered a chance to express their opinion since and (in your dispensation) can never be asked without having their opinion placed alongside those with whom they do not agree. That's not democracy - that's majoritarianism.

[Evil Genius]

And as for your blithe acceptance of the term "blow-in", so long as a million Irish people, many of whose ancestors have lived in Ireland for centuries, are treated like that,

However when any of us suggest that this group of people are not blow-ins but just plain ordinary Irish people like the rest of us, entitled to the same rights and subject to the same obligations are everyone else, we get landed upon. You can't have it both ways.

I don't want it both ways. I am an Irishman. As such, I have as much right to pledge my allegiance to a United Kingdom as you, another Irishman, have to pledge allegiance to a United Ireland.

The only question remaining is how you accommodate our two contradictory aspirations.

From your posts, you continually refer to historical precendents/events, of your own interpretation, to justify your case.

For myself, I see absolutely no point in claiming credit, justification or authority on the basis of "good" deeds committed by ancestors who are long dead (nor should anyone feel ashamed on account of any misdeeds which may have been committed by them).

Instead, I believe that we must all account for our own words and actions.

Consequently, it is the people who live in Ireland today who must decide how we are to organise our lives.

Fortunately they have. It's called the GFA. Live with it.

[Evil Genius]

It should be open to any group to take up arms to resist any threat to their right of democratic self-determination.

There's the rub. Who do you canvass? The people of Fermanagh and Tyrone, for example, were not asked their opinion in 1921, have not been offered a chance to express their opinion since and (in your dispensation) can never be asked without having their opinion placed alongside those with whom they do not agree. That's not democracy - that's majoritarianism.

The people of East Donegal, for example, were not asked, either. There were many communities there which would have produced a majority for maintaining the Union if they had.

But as I said above, you simply cannot continue to bind yourself according to the constraints imposed by people long since dead. We are where we are and need to live with that.

Fortunately after decades of strife, a clear majority, from within all communities, in all parts of Ireland, have now recognised this.

And that's democracy for you.

[deiseach]

But as I said above, you simply cannot continue to bind yourself according to the constraints imposed by people long since dead. We are where we are and need to live with that.

Fortunately after decades of strife, a clear majority, from within all communities, in all parts of Ireland, have now recognised this.

And that's democracy for you.

It's only democracy if you continue to allow ourselves to be bound by the constraints imposed by people long dead. Looking at the opinions of the people of Donegal North East all of twelve days ago, there doesn't seem to be a hell of a lot of demand for the Union. Compare this with West Tyrone in 2005, where those running on a Nationalist platform outvoted those running on a Unionist ticket by a factor of almost three to one. And yet, those people must see their wishes ignored because of the aformentioned constraints imposed by the long dead. Shame.

[armaghniac]

From your posts, you continually refer to historical precendents/events, of your own interpretation, to justify your case.

hardly an unreasonable debating strategy, especially given some of the posts on this board!

For myself, I see absolutely no point in claiming credit, justification or authority on the basis of "good" deeds committed by ancestors who are long dead (nor should anyone feel ashamed on account of any misdeeds which may have been committed by them).

I firmly believe that you have to start from where you are, but with an understanding of how and why this situation occurred. NI came into existence and developed in a certain way, it is not a normal place. Things like fair employment laws, 50% quotas for the PSNI etc reflect this. Unionists need to take comfort from the fact that while NIs place in the union is open to change, such change will proceed with agreement, they have been given a voice. The flip side of this coin is to stop screaming when the people of Derry want to name their city officially with the name everyone uses anyway, when Irish language signs are proposed for places whose name is simply a bastardisation of an Irish name, when people oppose parades that they always opposed, but that opposition was ignored, to stop referring to the place as British, the British don't own it, the new arrangements mean that the people of NI control its destiny.

Consequently, it is the people who live in Ireland today who must decide how we are to organise our lives.
Fortunately they have. It's called the GFA. Live with it.

Gladly.

[magickingdom]

Quite simply, in 1921 a clear majority in one part of the island voted to break with the Union and a clear majority in the other part voted to retain it. In such circumstances, so long as their rights are freely and democratically respected, it is incumbent upon minorities "trapped" on both sides of the border to accept it.

what are you on about? incorrect... why cant you just say the thing was gerrymandered as you and sammy well know and get on with it. there was no such vote..

[Evil Genius]

Quite simply, in 1921 a clear majority in one part of the island voted to break with the Union and a clear majority in the other part voted to retain it. In such circumstances, so long as their rights are freely and democratically respected, it is incumbent upon minorities "trapped" on both sides of the border to accept it.

what are you on about? incorrect... why cant you just say the thing was gerrymandered as you and sammy well know and get on with it. there was no such vote..

The first Election to Stormont in 1921 was conducted on a First Past The Post basis from an electorate comprising universal suffrage for over-21's (i.e all Catholics/Nationalists had exactly the same voting rights as everyone else). In that election, Unionist parties gained 66.9% of the vote and Sinn Fein and the Nationalists 32.9% between them.

Of course, if you don't recognise the validity of that vote, then I could refer you to the 1918 General Election - the last time an all-Ireland election was ever held. In that one, Unionists parties gained 29.3% of the vote*.

Interestingly, this did not just give them an overall majority in the six counties which were subsequently to comprise Northern Ireland; they also gained an overall majority in the nine counties of Ulster .

Therefore, when Irish Nationalists complain about the "gerrymandered" nature of "the occupied six county statelet" etc, those who live in Cavan, Monaghan and Donegal might just have cause to give silent thanks to the Boundary Commission! 


* - Despite getting 29.3% of the vote, Unionists only secured 24.7% of the seats (26/105). By contrast, Sinn Fein gained 46.9% of the vote, but 69.5% of the seats (73/105). Another example of gerrymandering by "perfidious Albion" perhaps? 

[BallyhaiseMan]

Quite simply, in 1921 a clear majority in one part of the island voted to break with the Union and a clear majority in the other part voted to retain it. In such circumstances, so long as their rights are freely and democratically respected, it is incumbent upon minorities "trapped" on both sides of the border to accept it.

what are you on about? incorrect... why cant you just say the thing was gerrymandered as you and sammy well know and get on with it. there was no such vote..

The first Election to Stormont in 1921 was conducted on a First Past The Post basis from an electorate comprising universal suffrage for over-21's (i.e all Catholics/Nationalists had exactly the same voting rights as everyone else). In that election, Unionist parties gained 66.9% of the vote and Sinn Fein and the Nationalists 32.9% between them.

Of course, if you don't recognise the validity of that vote, then I could refer you to the 1918 General Election - the last time an all-Ireland election was ever held. In that one, Unionists parties gained 29.3% of the vote*.

Interestingly, this did not just give them an overall majority in the six counties which were subsequently to comprise Northern Ireland; they also gained an overall majority in the nine counties of Ulster .

Therefore, when Irish Nationalists complain about the "gerrymandered" nature of "the occupied six county statelet" etc, those who live in Cavan, Monaghan and Donegal might just have cause to give silent thanks to the Boundary Commission! 


* - Despite getting 29.3% of the vote, Unionists only secured 24.7% of the seats (26/105). By contrast, Sinn Fein gained 46.9% of the vote, but 69.5% of the seats (73/105). Another example of gerrymandering by "perfidious Albion" perhaps? 

are you implying Cavan is one of the "occupied three counties" Evil Genius? 

[Evil Genius]

But as I said above, you simply cannot continue to bind yourself according to the constraints imposed by people long since dead. We are where we are and need to live with that.

Fortunately after decades of strife, a clear majority, from within all communities, in all parts of Ireland, have now recognised this.

And that's democracy for you.

It's only democracy if you continue to allow ourselves to be bound by the constraints imposed by people long dead. Looking at the opinions of the people of Donegal North East all of twelve days ago, there doesn't seem to be a hell of a lot of demand for the Union. Compare this with West Tyrone in 2005, where those running on a Nationalist platform outvoted those running on a Unionist ticket by a factor of almost three to one. And yet, those people must see their wishes ignored because of the aformentioned constraints imposed by the long dead. Shame.

Disingenuous, since you're not comparing like with like. Originally you pointed to the fact of "the people of Fermanagh and Tyrone [were] not asked their opinion in 1921". Now you're referring to elections in those counties in 2007.

As it happens, in the 1918 General Election, the three Tyrone Constituences saw SF/Nationalists gain 50.11% of the vote (30,052) and Unionists 49.88% (29,917). And Fermanagh saw SF/Nats gain 53.59% of the vote (13,041) and Unionists 46.41% (11,292).

Of course, you might argue from that that those two counties should have been included in the Free State three years later (though that would have left Nationalists in the remaining four counties of NI in an even smaller minority and further "cut off")

Alternatively, I could argue that whilst the three southernmost Provinces should have been allowed to breakway from the Union, since a majority of the voters there so willed it, an unpartitioned Ulster should have remained within the UK, since that reflected the majority vote there.

All of which brings us back to my original point, which was whatever the slights, injustices and grievances we can all point to from the past, we are where we are and the challenge is to deal with that.

[Evil Genius]

are you implying Cavan is one of the "occupied three counties" Evil Genius? 

Nah, we just didn't want it...

[BallyhaiseMan]

are you implying Cavan is one of the "occupied three counties" Evil Genius? 

Nah, we just didn't want it...

aha ya c**nt ya 

[Gaoth Dobhair Abu]

But as I said above, you simply cannot continue to bind yourself according to the constraints imposed by people long since dead. We are where we are and need to live with that.

Fortunately after decades of strife, a clear majority, from within all communities, in all parts of Ireland, have now recognised this.

And that's democracy for you.

It's only democracy if you continue to allow ourselves to be bound by the constraints imposed by people long dead. Looking at the opinions of the people of Donegal North East all of twelve days ago, there doesn't seem to be a hell of a lot of demand for the Union. Compare this with West Tyrone in 2005, where those running on a Nationalist platform outvoted those running on a Unionist ticket by a factor of almost three to one. And yet, those people must see their wishes ignored because of the aformentioned constraints imposed by the long dead. Shame.

Disingenuous, since you're not comparing like with like. Originally you pointed to the fact of "the people of Fermanagh and Tyrone [were] not asked their opinion in 1921". Now you're referring to elections in those counties in 2007.

As it happens, in the 1918 General Election, the three Tyrone Constituences saw SF/Nationalists gain 50.11% of the vote (30,052) and Unionists 49.88% (29,917). And Fermanagh saw SF/Nats gain 53.59% of the vote (13,041) and Unionists 46.41% (11,292).

Of course, you might argue from that that those two counties should have been included in the Free State three years later (though that would have left Nationalists in the remaining four counties of NI in an even smaller minority and further "cut off")

Alternatively, I could argue that the three southernmost Provinces should have been allowed to breakway from the Union, since a majority of the voters there so willed it, but Ulster should have remained within the UK, since that reflected the majority vote there.

Which gets back to my original point, which was whatever the slights, injustices and grievances we can all point to from the past, we are where we are and the challenge is to deal with that.

And EG just whose idea was it to exclude Donegal, Monaghan and Cavan???
Whose purpose did it suit more???

[Evil Genius]

And EG just whose idea was it to exclude Donegal, Monaghan and Cavan???
Whose purpose did it suit more???

The short answer is that I don't actually know, since I wasn't around at the time! 

The question really is where you draw the line (literally). The "default position" amongst Nationalists is that Ireland is a single entity, so should not be partitioned. Which is fair enough on its own terms.

However, Unionists could argue that in reality, the only time when Ireland was ever truly "united" (i.e. in political terms) was as part of the United Kingdom and that a majority of voters in the UK, including Ireland, will have been opposed to a break from the Union by any part of Ireland, never mind all of it.

I don't hold to that myself. Personally, I simply consider that since a majority of one part of the island was (violently) opposed to the Union they should have been allowed to secede, and since the majority in the other part of the island was (equally violently) determined to maintain the Union, that had to be accommodated as well. Otherwise, the only possible outcome would have been Civil War, on a scale never seen on the island, before or since.

Which brings us back to Cavan, Monaghan and Donegal.  Since Ulster has historically always had a degree of "separateness" from the rest of Ireland, and Unionism had an overall majority in the whole Province, there is a reasonable (if not overwhelming) case for saying that all nine counties could/should have remained within the UK.

My guess, however, is that the Boundary Commission made a pragmatic decision to include them in the Free State, since that suited both the population of those three counties (i.e. majority Nationalist) and it suited the six counties of NI (i.e. maintained a working Unionist majority in NI).

Anyhow, interesting as this speculation is and useful as it may be for illustrative purposes, we can't change anything which happened then, only what's happening now. And as I see it, the most important political development to occur in Ireland within living memory was the GFA which, as an Irish Unionist, I welcome since it secures the position of NI within the UK more firmly than ever (imo).

[armaghniac]

My guess, however, is that the Boundary Commission made a pragmatic decision to include them in the Free State, since that suited both the population of those three counties (i.e. majority Nationalist) and it suited the six counties of NI (i.e. maintained a working Unionist majority in NI).

Your guess is wrong, the Unionists decided that keeping those 3 counties would leave them with a slender majority, so they dumped any unionists that might be living there and went for six as an area they could dominate. All of this was long before the boundary commission.
Of course demography is catching up on the 6 counties too.

Since Ulster has historically always had a degree of "separateness" from the rest of Ireland,

Why then should all of Ulster not be used as a regional unit then?