“Equality Commission strongly advise Derry City Council not to proceed”
The BBC reports the NI Equality Commission’s response to Derry City Council’s “Equality Impact Assessment of the Resolution to make application to the Privy Council to have the name of the City changed from Londonderry to Derry”. Equality Commission report [pdf file]
It is the Commission’s view that good relations in this instance have been insufficiently addressed by the Council.
From the Equality Commission report [pdf file]
5. Conclusion
5.1 The Commission appreciates that Derry City Council wishes to promote and develop the City and the region. This aim however must not be pursued at the expense of good relations and community cohesion.
The EQIA analysis and report does not convince the Commission that the policy currently proposed by the Council is the appropriate way to achieve its aim.
5.2 It is the Commission’s view that good relations in this instance have been insufficiently addressed by the Council.
In the light of the serious adverse impacts on people of different religion/political belief within the Council area, and possibly for the region as a whole, the Equality Commission strongly advise Derry City Council not to proceed with the policy as it is currently proposed since a range of possible options has not been adequately considered and a significant amount of good relations work remains to be done before any official name change is considered. The Council should demonstrate that every possible effort has been made to mitigate any adverse impacts identified by the EQIA process.
And it’s worth highlighting this section of the Equality Commission report
3.1 Aim of the policy
3.1.1 The Council states that the aim of the proposed policy is to “change the name of the City to reflect the needs of this City for a single, clear identity and to reflect the wishes of the vast majority of the citizens, while respecting the views of all sections of the community”.
3.1.2 The consultation document also identifies the Council’s stated objectives as
· reflecting the needs of this city for a single clear identity and
· reflecting the wishes of the vast majority of citizens.These objectives are the basis on which the Council rests its view of the proposed name change. ( see p 80)
3.1.3 The Commission recognises that a clear and agreed decision about the naming of the second city of Northern Ireland will be very difficult to achieve in a situation where there is no consensus, especially when the issues are sensitive and deeply divisive. However, the Commission is of the view that these difficulties are compounded by the objectives chosen by the Council.
3.1.4 There is further confusion added by the fact that the Council’s stated objectives and the aims of the policy are different in a significant way. Even within the policy aims there is a real conflict to the extent that it is virtually impossible to reconcile the differences between them. The stated objectives of the Council, which appear to be the yardstick against which the Council measures any approach to its proposal, pose an even more fundamental problem as they make no provision for taking into account the views of those who are not part of the majority. [added emphasis]
3.1.5 This inconsistency and, it might be said, mutual exclusivity involved, represent a serious weakness in the EQIA and do not provide a basis on which satisfactory conclusions can be built.
3.1.6 Moreover, we would stress that while it is often important that policies have wide public support, policy-making should not simply be about reflecting the wishes of the majority. This approach has the potential to convert the EQIA process into a quasi referendum which runs contrary to the spirit of the legislation. One of the main aims of the EQIA process, as clearly outlined in the statute, is to ensure that adequate consideration is given to mitigating the adverse impact of policies on different sections of the community, so that the needs and wishes of those likely to be adversely affected are not overlooked.
The editors at Wikipedia seem to have made their minds as well.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derry
“Derry or Londonderry (Irish: Doire or Doire Cholmchille, meaning “Oak wood of Columba”) often called the Maiden City, (a reference to its walls remaining unbreached during the Siege of Derry in 1689) is a city in Northern Ireland. The old walled city of Londonderry lies on the west bank of the River Foyle with the location of old Derry on the east bank, the present city now covers both banks (Cityside to the west and Waterside to the east) and the river is spanned by two bridges.”
The sooner this becomes standard use the better.
This has bugger all to do with actual equality. Making nice should be beyond the Commission’s mandate; incidents like this make them look like clowns.
As for the names, it’s always been Derry City to me (in County Londonderry, no less). I’ve never heard anyone that labours the “London” cry foul about saying “Ards”.
“The rest of us shouldn’t get a say.”
Sorry but thats not how the equality legislation works. Nor is it compliant with the Convention on Human Rights.
Personally I always call it Derry myself but what this shows is that SF are breaching Section 75 and ignoring their duty to promote equality and good relations. This in the week when we found that they are blocking all attempts at a CR strategy that doesn’t focus on ‘equality’ and nothing else.
So its now seesm clear that it is ‘equality’ but not for themuns. Prods not wanted . Just another from of racism.
”So its now seesm clear that it is ‘equality’ but not for themuns. Prods not wanted . Just another from of racism. ”
But does equality mean the minority wins? That seems to be the thrust of that argument because it is most definitely a small minority of Derry people who would defend the retention of Londonderry as the sole official title. If to achieve equality, the minority’s wishes must be respected can we have a United Ireland right now as well, please?
Henry94/Dec/RS/fin
This 9-county “province” of which you talk as if it is an objective fact – does it have any official, legal existence?
I’m not claiming the title “Ulster” for Northern Ireland – to me, Northern Ireland is Northern Ireland.
Just challenging the way some people love to jump in as soon as the word “province” is mentioned and go on about 9 counties, as if this is some sort of definitive fact or official legal position.
Dear Correspondent
No because that isn’t the settlement we all voted for after PIRA lost the war
Section 75 and the restrictions it brings are. So comply with it.
The current behaviour is racist
Igor, my last point was tongue-in-cheek, hence the smiley. I was trying to say that it is a small minority of people in the city who want to retain the name Londonderry, so if we keep that name because of them then it is a case of the minority dictating to the majority.
Those supporting a United Ireland will have to wait till they are the majority. ´Never going to happen´, I hear you cry.
Well, ok maybe that´s so, but it´s never going to happen that most Derry people will prefer to refer to their city as Londonderry.
And I don´t think the problem is that we have anything against the city of London, which is a very cool place, but who wants to be reminded of the old Londonderry Corporation and all that crap, for Non-exist Deity´s sake!
Have a nice day, y´all.
ItwasSammymcNally. msg 19
‘unionists mindful of their history could hardly object’
you’re forgetting about his unholiness gregory campbell, sammy. he’s got several chips on his shoulder about a pope’s name being inflicted on him already. i’ve suggested the option you have to people involved in the privy council submission. this woulds leave wee jeffrey insisting on the status quo. mind you if jeffrey is the spokkesman who’s making the case in london, i’m sure the the privy councillors will come down on the ‘Derry’. side.
Mike
The province is what it is. You can’t talk about Ulster and exclude Donegal and more than you can talk about Munster and exclude Kerry.
It is a definitive fact but it does not need a legal position. The majority of people in Ulster support the idea of an all-Ireland political and legal structure and therefore vote for nationalist rather than provincial parties.
But it is open to anybody to propose an support a provincial system. RSF do so and SF used to. If somebody proposes a province wide vote then they are talking about nine counties. If they propose a Northern Ireland wide vote they are talking about six counties.
igor
Section 75 and the restrictions it brings are. So comply with it.
The assessment is a mess. It has fuck all to do with equality. It is the tyranny of the minority, (and a small one at that) when faced with a binary choice. Perhaps the “IRA lost the war” (*yawn*) but Prods lost the demographic argument in Derry.
If anything settling the name issue once and for all will allow Derry to move forward in a way it simply can’t while this remaions contentious. But hey, BCampbell and the rest of the DUPers love it this way, gives them something to MOPE about.
In the recent past, we had a compromise : “L’derry” which everyone disagreed with. I say lets drop the “L” part and the “derry” part. We would be unique. The only town in the world without any letters at all. Lets just call ourselves ‘
Carlos,’
“If anything settling the name issue once and for all will allow Derry to move forward in a way it simply can’t while this remaions contentious”
The whole point Kensei is that the small remaining Protestant community in Londonderry constantly finds themselves very uncomfortable with the direction the city is moving in – you describe it as “forward” – but then let’s be honest you would say that…..
One poster earlier made a great point about this “need for a singular identity” rubbish when he said he looks forward to DFM Martin McGuinness (a local “wan” himself) starting to say Northern Ireland instead of the many and varied titles favoured by the minority community – sauce for the goose and all that…
The Derry/Londonderry debate has a corollary in the dispute over the name of An Daingean/Dingle/Daingean Uí Chúis in Kerry.
Shock and horror was expressed by many in the west Brit commentariat that the Irish version of the name of the town, An Daingean, should become the only official name for the town. This didn’t preclude the name ‘Dingle’ being used to promote the town in tourism literature.
They pointed, with some justification, to a plebiscite in which a resounding majority of the townspeople voted for the status quo, ie Dingle/Daingean Uí Chúis.
Now the Equality Commission – which, incidentally, holds as a policy that people shouldn’t speak Irish in public lest it offends people of ‘the other tradition’ – claims that it would be wrong to change the name of “Londonderry” to Derry as it would not be in the interest of ‘good relations’. Good relations a la the Equality Commission seems to be to make sure that nobody says or does anything that might offend the ‘other tradition’. They always seem to seek a consensus approach though they must know in their heart of hearts that a consensus on such an issue isn’t possible.
In the case of Derry, however, it seems that a significant majority of the city’s population would support the reversion to the city’s original name, Derry. Putting that to the test in a plebiscite might be the best first step. Let’s see what the people want.
Maybe it’s worth considering, however, how the current name would be accomodated within the city. How about a ‘Londonderry’ quarter?
“Good relations a la the Equality Commission seems to be to make sure that nobody says or does anything that might offend the ‘other tradition’.”
Of course that sounds perfectly reasonable does it not?
“In the case of Derry, however, it seems that a significant majority of the city’s population would support the reversion to the city’s original name, Derry.”
Do you say “Northern Ireland” yourself Concubhar?
“Maybe it’s worth considering, however, how the current name would be accomodated within the city. How about a ‘Londonderry’ quarter?”
Or instead of patronising you could just call it the Black/Orange quarter and be done with it…..
Do you say “Northern Ireland” yourself Concubhar?
Occasionally. The reality is that whatever the law says, people will say what people say. You say Londonderry, I say Doire and sometimes Derry.
One thing I will say about this measure being brought up now is that it seems to be another of these Sinn Féin stunts – not really addressing the issue but being anxious to appease their base with a symbolic and futile action.
Democratic
The whole point Kensei is that the small remaining Protestant community in Londonderry constantly finds themselves very uncomfortable with the direction the city is moving in – you describe it as “forward” – but then let’s be honest you would say that…..
Actually, that’s wasn’t what I meant. I meant that while the name issue is unresolved (and if you are a minority fighting against the wishes of maybe 75% of the population, it will always be unresolved) then it will act as a block to progress that extends beyond symbolism. There is a good compromise on the table — naming the city Derry but keeping “Londonderry” for the walled bit. That gives due repsect, but allows the wishes of the majority.
I am sure many Protestants in Derry find changes uncomfortable. That does not mean the changes are necessarily 1. wrong 2. undesirable 3. liable to be slowed or reversed. If this is about clinging on to a glorious past, then I’m sorry, but those peopel are fucked. It should be about finding a place in a changing world, and the majority being able to respect and celebrate that.
One poster earlier made a great point about this “need for a singular identity” rubbish when he said he looks forward to DFM Martin McGuinness (a local “wan” himself) starting to say Northern Ireland instead of the many and varied titles favoured by the minority community – sauce for the goose and all that…
Which is an argument with a double edge which can be easily reversed. In any case, Derry is not the North in minuature – it is overwhelmingly Nationalist. And in those types of situations – nationalist or Unionist – I am in favour of respecting the minority but the tail should not be wagging the dog. Tyranny of the minority is as bad if not worse than tyranny of the majority.
How about gifting the prefix to somewhere that might actually want it and be proud of it?
Londonlisburn, maybe, or Londonahoghill. Maybe unionists could mark out their territories even better (flags and kerbstones aren’t enough) by adding the prefix to all of ‘their’ towns.
“I am sure many Protestants in Derry find changes uncomfortable. That does not mean the changes are necessarily 1. wrong 2. undesirable 3. liable to be slowed or reversed. If this is about clinging on to a glorious past, then I’m sorry, but those peopel are fucked.”
Yeah I would suggest the residents of the constantly harrassed Fountain estate would certainly agree with the final part of your assessment alright Kensei. Also wrong and undesirable are very much subjective I feel – but I believe I touched on that with my last post.
In fairness I do think what is happening in L/Derry can very much be viewed as a microcosm for the whole state issue but however…
You did still avoid the DFM/Northern Ireland question in theory Kensei – unless of course you telling me that the size of the majority is what “makes might right”.
Democratic
Yeah I would suggest the residents of the constantly harrassed Fountain estate would certainly agree with the final part of your assessment alright Kensei. Also wrong and undesirable are very much subjective I feel – but I believe I touched on that with my last post.
1. Stop twisting what I said 2. Stop MOPING.
“Wrong and undesirable” may be relative, but you have yet to make a single argument, much less a convoncing one, as to why the tail should wag the dog here. I obviously don’t believe in attacks on people’s areas, so you can 3. quit straw men.
In fairness I do think what is happening in L/Derry can very much be viewed as a microcosm for the whole state issue but however…
If the North was 75-80% Unionist, there wouldn’t be a state issue. There also wouldn’t be an Assembly with designation. That does not mean that minority rights would have to be respected, or that there were no actions to be taken, just the chances of the present situation where Nationalism has a veto would be about nil.
You did still avoid the DFM/Northern Ireland question in theory Kensei – unless of course you telling me that the size of the majority is what “makes might right”.
Of course the size of the majority matters. When it is tight and greatly unstable then it really matters. A 99% majority is obviously differnet from a 51% one. Fundamental rights are unaffected. The naming of the city to your choice is not a fuindamental right.
Is this controversial? Really?
Call it Derry FFS, the overwhelming majority of the population do. I’ve seen no cogent or compelling arguments to the contrary.
None of that obviates the responsibility of the political leaders of the City to represent all elements of the community and to protect the freedoms and rights of the embattled Prod. minority. If that minority starts getting in trouble for using Londonderry then perhaps that would be a grounds for concern.
If the Catholics/nationalists could start to make those in the Fountain and other Londonderry Prods feel a bit more secure and valued it would bolster their ability to argue that a UI would be OK for Prods if not a land of milk and honey.
And RS – No we dont want the word Derry in the name of “the best city in the world”TM. Theres only one London.
Kensei – I’ll ignore all the irrelevant stuff I reckon – you seem to lose the rag at nothing so I’ll skip on.
“Is this controversially really?” – I really can’t be bothered getting into a day long debate with you on how daft this sentence is suffice to say that if you can’t see an issue here after all this time then speaking to me isn’t going to help you understand – nor my blood pressure.
“The naming of the city to your choice is not a fuindamental right.” – Quite….
The query on the absolute progressive need for a singular identity going forward rubbish given as a central tenet in the name change proposal for L/Derry still stands on the wider “Northern Ireland” name issue as far as our Republican international emmisaries are concerned for me though – or presumably that is different because the majority in favour is not large enough?
Posted by RG Cuan on Sep 23, 2009 @ 06:26 PM, quo he:
“Why don’t they make the official name Doire/Londonderry?
That would be a good compromise!”
In English, it’s Londonderry.
In Gaelic, it’s Doire.
So, depending on the language being used, it’s obvious what the name is.
BTW is this not the same for Dublin/Baile Áth Cliath?
submit word ==> “york”
Democratic
I’ll ignore all the irrelevant stuff I reckon – you seem to lose the rag at nothing so I’ll skip on.
I do not “lose the rag”, especially over the internet. I just don’t particularly suffer fools gladly.
“Is this controversially really?” – I really can’t be bothered getting into a day long debate with you on how daft this sentence is suffice to say that if you can’t see an issue here after all this time then speaking to me isn’t going to help you understand – nor my blood pressure.
First up, I speak for no one but myself. And as myself, I can see the difference in the size of majority (or indeed, if you want to put it another way, size of mandate) as clear as day. A question for you – is a minority of 1 enough? If one perosn objects tot he name chaneg and will be terribly, frightfully scarred by the whole process, is that enough of a minority? What about 1%?
If you don’t wnat to engage, fine. Happy for you to concede the argument.
The query on the absolute progressive need for a singular identity going forward rubbish given as a central tenet in the name change proposal for L/Derry still stands on the wider “Northern Ireland” name issue as far as our Republican international emmisaries are concerned for me though – or presumably that is different because the majority in favour is not large enough?
It isn’t the same. “Northern Ireland” is called “Northern Ireland” always and everywhere officially regardless of what the DFM does. No branding issues apply. The official name of Derry is Londonderry, but the council, the airport, the football team, the gaelic team, the Apprentice Boys etc are all called Derry. And as far as I’m aware, no one is in favour of renaming Northern Ireland. Just abolishing it. And yes, size of majority matters. Though when it come sot these sorts of binary choices, we inevitablely default to the majority on the main point as the only workable solution. Which is why the border is still in place. If this principle no longer holds, then all bets are off and I want joint authority.
This is pitiful whataboutery you are at.
LOL – If you don’t suffer fools gladly Kensei then for God’s sake refrain from asking foolish questions like “is this really controversial?”….
However – again you appear to either miss my point or are very carefully avoiding where this is going so again I will ask – if the central tenet of a push for a name change for L/Derry is on the basis of a necessary singular name and identity for “moving forward” (as you put it) then does it not follow to you that using the same logic that our ministers who at the moment are chasing international investment should be giving our home state it’s official name at all times to give out the appropriate message? If not then what has changed in your ethos?
Let’s test the nature of your logic further….
What of the the recent illegally erected hunger striker memorial unveiled in what a Sinn Fein spokeman referred to as a Nationalist housing estate despite the fact a reasonable number of Protestants live there too – would their protest have any impact on the precedent you are setting with your question of “is a minority of one enough?” for consideration. It’s all about the underlying intent you see. In fact let’s be honest on why the proposal is being put on the table at all shall we? In my view it is nothing more than Nationalist triumphalism wanting the removal of the British historical context of the city’s construction masquerading as an attempt at redressing some historical injustice….what it really is is a simply a clear political statement of intent to the both the faithful and especially to “themmuns” – and nothing else – your views?
Furthermore – just out of interest – what bearing does the proposal have on the county name as far as Nationalist interests are concerned – and how does the current arguement logistics hold up when the small Protestant population in the city is gathered up with the much larger proportion withing the county boundaries on the (slightly)wider issue?
If Unionists want to wean Nationalists and other off their veto dependency they need to avoid the use of the veto at all times themselves.
I doubt that the Privy Council would deny a petition from the First Ministers.
Would a change to Derry with a Walled City Londonderry “quarter” as Concubhar proposes achieve a simple majority in Stormont?
United Community would support something that seemed like a reasonable compromise. Dawn Purvis seems to like reasoned non-sectarian improvement.
You’d then only need 1 out of the 54 UUP and the DUP MLA’s.
Why not an Assembly motion to request that the FM & DFM make the representation on the city’s behalf?
And if 30 Unionist MLA’s lodge a petition of concern to protect themselves from a simple majority of the representatives of the people of Northern Ireland and a super majority of the people of Derry it would 1) expose their hypocrisy or 2) validate nationalist use of the veto at other times.
Give it a test.
However – again you appear to either miss my point or are very carefully avoiding where this is going so again I will ask – if the central tenet of a push for a name change for L/Derry is on the basis of a necessary singular name and identity for “moving forward” (as you put it) then does it not follow to you that using the same logic that our ministers who at the moment are chasing international investment should be giving our home state it’s official name at all times to give out the appropriate message? If not then what has changed in your ethos?
Let’s test the nature of your logic further….
I am neither missing the point or being wilfully evasivem, I just think what you are at is hopeless whataboutery that as I have already pointed out twice now, doesn’t stack up. I don’t actually believe in “necessity” the way the council is talking; or rather I don’t care. I do think it would be helpful for everyone ivolved if the issue was dealt with once and for all.
You might say it would be helpful for everyone if the status of NI was sorted out forever. But the dynamics and balance is different. It is highly unlikely we’ll ever see a Unionist majority again in Derry. The final status of this place is still very much a live question. The dynamics, relative strength of positions and consequences are radically differnet. Why then do you insist on pursuing a line that has no bearing on anything?
What of the the recent illegally erected hunger striker memorial unveiled in what a Sinn Fein spokeman referred to as a Nationalist housing estate despite the fact a reasonable number of Protestants live there too – would their protest have any impact on the precedent you are setting with your question of “is a minority of one enough?” for consideration.
The memorial is erected illegally. It should go. If they want to redo it on private grounds then if the Protestants have objections they should lodge them with the relevant planning authorities and their problems taken into account – balanced of course with everyone else. Perhaps it might modify the proposed memorial as oppose dot stop it. Theer are a range of options. Not liking something is not necessatrily grounds for getting rid of it. That applies to nationalism as much as unionism. I’m not about to judge every case I don’t know the whole facts of. I have given you a general shape. I assume you are smart enought o work at that level rather than the tedious pulling down to millions of specifics in an effort to catch me out.
It’s all about the underlying intent you see. In fact let’s be honest on why the proposal is being put on the table at all shall we? In my view it is nothing more than Nationalist triumphalism wanting the removal of the British historical context of the city’s construction masquerading as an attempt at redressing some historical injustice….what it really is is a simply a clear political statement of intent to the both the faithful and especially to “themmuns” – and nothing else – your views?
Nationalism has never liked the name for a number of historical reasons. It is assidiously avoided using it for a long period of time. People would like to see an end to the British conection, at leats in terms of politics and yes its symbollic. A number of places south changed their name after Irish independence. But it’s the democratic will and you either believe it or you don’t.
Yes, that will hurt some Unionists. But their reasons are no more noble. There is a reasonable compromise on offer meaning “Londonderry” will still exist, and will probably help the majority become more comfortable with it. I have no doyubt many Unionists would still refer to “Londonderry” after the change, but basically they have no hope fo ever changing it back. So it largely deals with the issue instead of having a running fight with it. Tthat allows peope to move on with dealing with the more pressing and practical issues. Ideally I’d like to see it dealt with as part of a package.
Furthermore – just out of interest – what bearing does the proposal have on the county name as far as Nationalist interests are concerned – and how does the current arguement logistics hold up when the small Protestant population in the city is gathered up with the much larger proportion withing the county boundaries on the (slightly)wider issue
Probaly none. But if people were having a go at it then having compromised on the city it is a strong argument for keeping it the same on a compromise basis. I doubt it’d have the same resonance.
“I have no doyubt many Unionists would still refer to “Londonderry” after the change, but basically they have no hope fo ever changing it back. So it largely deals with the issue instead of having a running fight with it. Tthat allows peope to move on with dealing with the more pressing and practical issues. Ideally I’d like to see it dealt with as part of a package.”
Like you say Kensei – the symbolism of the change is the issue for both sides – you fully understand this for Nationalism – but deny the same understanding for Unionists instead opting for a line which sounds to me of “haven’t you people got more important things to be worrying about?”
I’ll leave that thought with you.
BTW – Your last post contained a lot of straight talking and honesty and I respect that I have to say – without neccessarily agreeing with all of it of course….
PS – Your comment on part of package interests me – perhaps you could elaborate sometime at your leisure?
Henry 94
“The province is what it is. You can’t talk about Ulster and exclude Donegal and more than you can talk about Munster and exclude Kerry.”
Munster presumably has some sort of official definition through the Irish government, it whose state it completely resides.
Anyway, as I said, I wasn’t talking about “Ulster”, simply your and others (the ‘others’ including Gerry Adams) leaping in on this and plenty of other occasions when “the province” is clearly being used to refer to Northern Ireland, and going on about a 9 county “province” that has no official basis anyway. Why?
“It is a definitive fact but it does not need a legal position. The majority of people in Ulster support the idea of an all-Ireland political and legal structure and therefore vote for nationalist rather than provincial parties.”
Relevance? If we’re going to throw in random points about majorities, I would say that the majority of people in Northern Ireland have no problem with it being referred to by the colloquialism “the province”.
“But it is open to anybody to propose an support a provincial system. RSF do so and SF used to. If somebody proposes a province wide vote then they are talking about nine counties. If they propose a Northern Ireland wide vote they are talking about six counties.”
Northern Ireland is indeed strictly speaking a constituent country (of the UK) rather than a province. But if you’re going to try to be a pedant and jump on any reference to NI as “the province”, it’s a little silly to cite a “province” that has no official or legal existence or definition, and isn’t even a province OF any entity either.
kensei-leave aside the name issue-as you point out most people and organisations are content with “Derry”-this is nothing to do with the name but about the motivation for changing it.
Can I ask what exactly is it that you and your fellow travellers don’t get about “Unionist/Loyalist/British residents of Northern Ireland/Prods” etc etc fear of what is percieved as the Republican end game?
Stroke city, and these current shenanigans are that fear “personified” in a fucking nutshell.
If we can dispense with the self indulgent sixth form stylee thesaurus verbosity and grand theorising for a moment and go back to first principles.
The native British communities view is framed by their position as a minority on the island, by observing what happened/happens to their ilk in a majority republican/nationalist/catholic area-in all 32 counties (especially West Cork, South Armagh, Fermanagh, Tyrone and Derry) by observing that there must only be one brand of “Irishness” and that they are simply not included in any theoretical post reunification discussions. What happens when the wall comes down? We know exactly what will happen-please excuse us if we are not leaping about the place with unbridled joy and grasping Gerry’s “outreaching” hands. The laager mentality is alive and well-ipso facto there must be something outside the laager that is perceived as being of a threatening nature.
Comfort can be had though by also observing the total apathy and disconnection of the vast majority of the people of the Republic with your type of “Republican” mindset; precisely mirroring the British publics general attitude to Northern Ireland but at least providing a counterbalance against the prevailing Republican view.
Two rhetorical questions:
1. Why has the Republican/Nationalist Irish nation miserably failed to assimilate “themmuns” over a period of over 400 years?
2. Why have we not observed massive agitation from the people of the Republic/diaspora etc etc in helping their brothers in North escape the yoke of oppression? (If I may be so bold to offer the theory that apart from historically tipping a few quarters into the Noraid tin or buying a copy of An Phoblacht they just really don’t give enough of a fuck to be bothered outside Paddies Day.)
We know that all that matters to the northern “Republican Project” is the sectarian headcount-you are either with us or against us-all the rest is just dishonest and debating society bullshit. Most threads here eventually distill down to this very simple principle. The tyranny of the minority? Did anybody actually fucking ask them?
Message received (again….)-loud and clear.
By the way:
“I do not “lose the rag”, especially over the internet.” Fucking pants well ablaze there pal…..;-)
Kensei
“It isn’t the same. “Northern Ireland” is called “Northern Ireland” always and everywhere officially regardless of what the DFM does.
No branding issues apply.”
You think there are “no branding issues” when the deputy First Minister, the joint titular head of our Executive, goes abroad to promote Northern Ireland and won’t even use the term Northern Ireland? Or when, for example, the Agriculture Minister tries to promote produce from Northern Ireland but tells her audience about a place called “the north”?
“The official name of Derry is Londonderry, but the council, the airport, the football team, the gaelic team, the Apprentice Boys etc are all called Derry.”
Three points
1 – the name of private sports and cultural clubs is hardly relevant.
2 – The Council was called Londonderry City Council. It deliberately changed its name to Derry City Council. It also deliberately chose the name “City of Derry” rather than Londonderry for the airport – so it is they who have actually created this branding issue, wouldn’t you agree?
3 – the port, railway station and chamber of commerce are named Londonderry.
Why are the Republicans in such a hurry over this? I mean as of now they’ve shot/bombed/burnt out most of the city’s Prods so it can’t be long before they’ll be no opposition to the name change.
Democratic
Like you say Kensei – the symbolism of the change is the issue for both sides – you fully understand this for Nationalism – but deny the same understanding for Unionists instead opting for a line which sounds to me of “haven’t you people got more important things to be worrying about?”
That was not my intent. I do not dismiss the symbolism for either side. But this is basically a zero sum game – official name is either Derry or Londonderry. And if we look at the national question, there are a lot of modifiers, but it boils down to no change until the majority say so. So why should the bottom line rules be different when Nationalism is in the Ascendency?
PS – Your comment on part of package interests me – perhaps you could elaborate sometime at your leisure?
I think the symbollism needs recognised and the fact it could simply be seen as forcing Prods out of the life of the city if done wrong. And if done that way it would be a disaster. So if they are going to do it, then having the walled part of the city as “Londonderry” should mean something and carry some weight – there are cultural issues around parades obviously, and they could perhaps look into developing links with the City of London, involve the churches etc. I don’t know. I’m not the one with the issues, it’d be where you’d expect to talk tot he other party and work out compromise. Unionism understandabley will fight this tooth and nail, and probably get their way. It just probably won’t be good for anyone, is all.
kensei watch
kensei-leave aside the name issue-as you point out most people and organisations are content with “Derry”-this is nothing to do with the name but about the motivation for changing it.
I don’t particularly care for what’s hidden in the secret hearts of men.
Can I ask what exactly is it that you and your fellow travellers don’t get about “Unionist/Loyalist/British residents of Northern Ireland/Prods” etc etc fear of what is percieved as the Republican end game?
I get it. And I get the dangers. But if Unionism is always goign to say “No” regardless of what is offered, then what? I’m sorry it is not a sustainable position. The tail does not get to wag the dog, and tyranny of the minority is not a democratic or republican viewpoint.
The native British communities view is framed by their position as a minority on the island, by observing what happened/happens to their ilk in a majority republican/nationalist/catholic area-in all 32 counties (especially West Cork, South Armagh, Fermanagh, Tyrone and Derry) by observing that there must only be one brand of “Irishness” and that they are simply not included in any theoretical post reunification discussions. What happens when the wall comes down? We know exactly what will happen-please excuse us if we are not leaping about the place with unbridled joy and grasping Gerry’s “outreaching” hands. The laager mentality is alive and well-ipso facto there must be something outside the laager that is perceived as being of a threatening nature.
Which is not what I’m proposing. See above. This argument “they’ll get us back” atrgument is somewhat tired, since the list of influential Protestant Irishmen (and Republicans) greatly exceeds their number by several magnitudes but I accept it is a fear. That has to be respected, and taken into account. It doesn’t however, get to completely block change if there is support for it. I know change is scary, but sorry.
Comfort can be had though by also observing the total apathy and disconnection of the vast majority of the people of the Republic with your type of “Republican” mindset; precisely mirroring the British publics general attitude to Northern Ireland but at least providing a counterbalance against the prevailing Republican view.
I assert you are making conclusions on my “mindset” based on nothing more than prejudice. Furtehrmore, this is classic man playing. Focus on me, rather than the debate. Why should the tail wag the dog when there is an overwhelming majority for change? Given I have accepted the need to do this in a sensitive fashion, and am open to some form of compromise, why should you block all progress. You have no answer.
Normally called “Derry” in the republic, by the by.
1. Why has the Republican/Nationalist Irish nation miserably failed to assimilate “themmuns” over a period of over 400 years?
2. Why have we not observed massive agitation from the people of the Republic/diaspora etc etc in helping their brothers in North escape the yoke of oppression? (If I may be so bold to offer the theory that apart from historically tipping a few quarters into the Noraid tin or buying a copy of An Phoblacht they just really don’t give enough of a fuck to be bothered outside Paddies Day.)
So, being rhetorical, you don’t want any answer? I’ll leave it for others to pose similar leading questions for Unionism.
We know that all that matters to the northern “Republican Project” is the sectarian headcount-you are either with us or against us-all the rest is just dishonest and debating society bullshit. Most threads here eventually distill down to this very simple principle. The tyranny of the minority? Did anybody actually fucking ask them?
I believe there have been surveys, I believe they also have representatives. I do not believe everyone here is at heart a little headcounter. I have had illuminating debates, and I’ve had shit ones. If you see the world in that way, I’d guess the issue was with you.
“I do not “lose the rag”, especially over the internet.” Fucking pants well ablaze there pal…..;-)
Nope. I can give it full blast on here and turn and get on with my life. Perfectly calm. Occassionally something will actually annoy me, but very rare.
So, that all you got?
Mike
You think there are “no branding issues” when the deputy First Minister, the joint titular head of our Executive, goes abroad to promote Northern Ireland and won’t even use the term Northern Ireland? Or when, for example, the Agriculture Minister tries to promote produce from Northern Ireland but tells her audience about a place called “the north”?
Basically, largely irrelevant. Thw official bumpf will stop even dumb people getting confused, and she’ll be promoting palces in the six counties. Minimal. I don’t actually view the branding issues as particularly relevant, just pointing out they aren’t the same.
Three points
1 – the name of private sports and cultural clubs is hardly relevant.
Well, they are, being part of the city and involved in various external relations.
2 – The Council was called Londonderry City Council. It deliberately changed its name to Derry City Council. It also deliberately chose the name “City of Derry” rather than Londonderry for the airport – so it is they who have actually created this branding issue, wouldn’t you agree?
Sunk cost.
3 – the port, railway station and chamber of commerce are named Londonderry.
Great. They can change too.
No-is that all you got?? Was that supposed to be engaging the other “side” in a meaningful way?
I’m all for change by the way-just very aware that some “changes” are little more bigotry dressed up as due process. The fear is based upon the simple observation of what historically happens to the “Unionist community” (to simplify) when in the minority. This is no “argument” as you put it but based on historical fact. There’s also nothing for anyone “to get me back” for (or the vast majority of “Unionist community” victims of Republican “largesse” either-Kathryn Eakin’s cousin is a good friend of mine-maybe you could elaborate) either-your words, not mine; but nonetheless very revealing.
What is more telling is that you felt my comments worthy of your consideration. My view of your mindset has been formed by “reading” you for some time by the way-so while you’re in the mood to condescend why don’t you have a go at questions 1 and 2 for the craic?
Some interesting, forthright comments Kensei – I will digest and come back to you another time – you appear to have attracted a bit of a internet lynching at the moment so I will speak to you again sometime soon without you having to divide your attention in multiple directions hopefully!
kensei watch
I’m all for change by the way-just very aware that some “changes” are little more bigotry dressed up as due process. The fear is based upon the simple observation of what historically happens to the “Unionist community” (to simplify) when in the minority. This is no “argument” as you put it but based on historical fact. There’s also nothing for anyone “to get me back” for (or the vast majority of “Unionist community” victims of Republican “largesse” either-Kathryn Eakin’s cousin is a good friend of mine-maybe you could elaborate) either-your words, not mine; but nonetheless very revealing.
Actually, I’d gues you haven’t been on this site very long, since there have been several argum,ents over what exactly happened in West Cork, or whether or not what ahppened around the border areas constituted “Ethnic cleansing”, or the position fo Protestants in the Rpeublic, or I’d guess just about anything else you’d care top bring up. Sorry people just don’t accept your “facts” at face value.
Hmm beard scratch revealing is all very fun, but essentially meaningless man play. So given you aren’t, in fact, engaging, then is that it? is a perfectly valid response. Though having my own stalker? Cute. Honestly, I’ve no connections, no influence, and talk a lot of shite. Handsome though, but you can’t know that.
What is more telling is that you felt my comments worthy of your consideration. My view of your mindset has been formed by “reading” you for some time by the way-so while you’re in the mood to condescend why don’t you have a go at questions 1 and 2 for the craic?
Dude, I reply to just about everyone. I’d not read too much into it. And I’d guess you are seeing my “mentality” through your own prism. People see what they wnat to see. I have to work now, and train later. Perhaps tomrrow.
“Actually, I’d gues you haven’t been on this site very long..” Then you’d be well wide of the mark.
West Cork? Why not Claudy? Was the Cork issue argued to a satisfactory conclusion for you then?
My “prism” is one cut and polished by;
1. Actually living outside “here” (including Tralee and Dublin for about 5 years) for a reasonable period of time.
2. Belonging to a “mixed” extended family.
“Sorry people just don’t accept your “facts” at face value.” What people????
“Which is not what I’m proposing.” You made a proposal?
Good luck with the training-try not to pull anything.
One thing that I’ve wondered is: have any representatives of Protestant organisations in the RoI ever given reasons, either here on Slugger or elswhere, why a UI would be in NI unionists best interests?
Submit the word you see below: ==> “union”
kensei watch
How long you’ve spent in Dublin is largely irrelevant to your political views. If you want to see me a bigot or whatever, go right ahead. No desire this week to go round in ever decreasing circles. Have a nice life!
Old chum-I don’t particularily see you as anything. And we’ll have to agree to disagree about experience helping to form political opinion however!
I have posed some direct questions and posited a view and opinions shared by many of my political hue that could be seen in direct opposition to yours. I’m sorry but it is not me that is “orbiting” at the moment. I guess you’ve told me what I need to know.
Happy Arthur’s day!
kensei watchj
I have posed some direct questions and posited a view and opinions shared by many of my political hue that could be seen in direct opposition to yours. I’m sorry but it is not me that is “orbiting” at the moment. I guess you’ve told me what I need to know.
Last one as I’m terible at letting things lie.
No, you posted leading rhetorical questions designed to make cheap points. It is as easy for me to post “Why haven’t themmums properly assimilated over the past 400 years?”. Both questions are stupid. Protestantism, and especially Northern Protestantism, has made a big mark on nationalisma nd especially republicanism over the course of the past 400 years, with the exception of the last round. And that is republicanism’s deep loss. But the questions as to why things panned out as they did is something people could and have wrote thesises on. And it’s not simply a matter of it somehow being nationalism’s fault. It’s complex.
Second, you have given no reason for your “direct opposition”. You have made no attempt to answer any of my questions. So you may believe you are going in a happy straight line, but check out the scenery being the same repatedly.
And you’ve done a lot of dozy “well that tells me all I need to know” type bollocks. I have no idea who you are. I’m just running on what you say. I’m sure you are product of your experience but if you are using terms like “fellow travellers” and the like, I’m fairly sure it’s led you to get me wrong.
Anywho, laterz dude.
“And RS – No we dont want the word Derry in the name of “the best city in the world”TM. Theres only one London.”
Actually theres quite a few Brit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London,_Ohio
…and you have responded by demeaning my argument as making “cheap points” and becoming defensive.
These are genuine questions and concerns-they are not intended to lead you anywhere or be self serving in their own right. I’m interested in what you have to say and reserve the right to pose what may be construed (by you) as difficult questions and am prepared to field same. But if we are going to dance round the core of each others posts by choosing to belittle the thrust of each others argument then indeed I am wasting my time. Others observing will arrive at their own conclusions.
“Second, you have given no reason for your “direct opposition”. You have made no attempt to answer any of my questions.” I believe I have been absolutely crystal clear! What questions exactly? Am I going blind, mad or both?!
I’m off to sink a couple of jars……Óiche mhaith.
What an utter load of bollocks. Almost all of the locals, Catholic and Protestant, call it Derry. It often seems that it is those furthest away who like to exert their imagined superiority who insist it be called Londonderry.
They need to get over it. The place should be called Derry. That’s a concession to the English speaking since it could legitimately called Doire.
A legitimate and worthwhile thing to do would be to erect a plaque at each gate in the walls saying “You are now entering the historic city of Londonderry”.
abu nicola, it just shows the disconnect between the people and the state that they have constructed. You would have thought that if a majority of residents want to change the name of their city that it was an open and shut case. While before, it was the Queen’s prerogative, not it is a quango’s prerogative. Just as the Queen could veto a majority, so too can a minority veto the majority under your present construction, thereby ensuring the perpetual continuance of the status quo. Where is democracy in that? Still, this is a post-democratic age, so I guess you should just get used to existing independently of your state since it intends to exist independently of you.
I’ve been away from this infernal machine for a day or so, and I want to pick up on an earlier post about John Hume’s attitude to the name issue. I haven’t got any accurate details, and this is all from memory; but in the early 60s I think, a well known Derry film-maker (I apologise for forgetting his name, which is on the tip of my tongue) produced a movie involving Hume and the then Rector of Christchurch (the beautiful Church of Ireland church building situated very close to the magnificent Catholic St Eugene’s Cathedral, at the entrance to Brooke Park). It was seriously mould-breaking in a number of ways, but most significant of all was the appeal that they (or perhaps it was John on his own) made for people to accept the name of the city as Londonderry. Am I wrong?
kensei watch
…and you have responded by demeaning my argument as making “cheap points” and becoming defensive.
Initially, they were “rhetorical”, by the by. Which er, means, they were designed to score points, not be answered. Spare me.
These are genuine questions and concerns-they are not intended to lead you anywhere or be self serving in their own right.
Bollocks
I’m interested in what you have to say and reserve the right to pose what may be construed (by you) as difficult questions and am prepared to field same.
Well you’ve defined your username as “kensei watch”, stated things about my “mindset” and thuings as “revealing” in irritating fashion, so forgive me here if I have some big doubts over your sincerity.
But if we are going to dance round the core of each others posts by choosing to belittle the thrust of each others argument then indeed I am wasting my time. Others observing will arrive at their own conclusions.
I wasn’t aware you had an argument. Demiocratic had, and I had a nice wee discussion with him. Not sure what yours is.
“Second, you have given no reason for your “direct opposition”. You have made no attempt to answer any of my questions.” I believe I have been absolutely crystal clear! What questions exactly? Am I going blind, mad or both?!
I’ll go for both. Try rereading.