Saturday, June 30, 2007
‘You’re not real unionists, you’re Ulster nationalists’, UUP tells DUP…
IN its continuing efforts to differentiate itself from the DUP, the UUP has accused Paisley’s party of being “Ulster nationalist” rather than “British unionist” - something we’ve explored on Slugger recently. Ulster Unionist Rodney McCune said: “ I see Ulster Unionists as the only Northern Ireland party continuing to use the language of British Unionism. That is set against the Irish nationalism and republicanism of the SDLP and Sinn Fein and what I see as the Ulster nationalism of the DUP. All three talk about British Labour ministers with a similar contemptuous intonation… They [the DUP], like the other nationalist and republican parties in Northern Ireland, attribute all problems to direct rule or attribute problems to British ministers. Yet as a party the DUP don’t contribute to important national debates such as the future of nuclear power or our national approach to rising crime and prison overcrowding. In my view they are not authentic unionists.” Or perhaps the DUP now recognises the reality that Northern Ireland, while still part of the UK, has its own particular needs and must find its own unique answers to deal with its situation?
Belfast Gonzo @ 07:00 PM
Would my reading be correct?
No Rory, Torgon is correct, Steven King was very OPEN about his homosexuality the whole time he was David Trimble’s advisor.
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 06:44 AMIt was the former UDA Leader John McMichael who was most open about the potential future in what he saw as an Independant Ulster. Even at that stage, one sensed that there was a potential fault-line within Unionism. The violent situation however, has kept these differences under wraps for many years - until now.
I have always sensed that there was a body of ‘Unionist’ opinion which did not necessarily regard full integration with Britain as a finite link. Perhaps within the core body of liberal Protestant opinion, lies some glimmer of hope for those Nationalists who are seeking to ‘persuade’ for some form of Irish Unity in the years ahead.
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 07:33 AMUlster nationalism is hardly a new notion. What makes it sensible as an underlying belief is that the UK is becoming a something of a mutually beneficial association under devolution rather than a singular state. The UU position on this is, as usual, written for a past political situation that has already gone.
The old Molyneaux analysis that direct rule from London was the best safeguard for the Union had an element of truth, however it also left our infrastructure subject to chronic underinvestment and a leaderless, rudderless civil service to struggling try to make the best of a bad job of running this place.
btw I can’t see how Stephen King’s sexuality has anything to do with this post
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 07:36 AM“I have always sensed that there was a body of ‘Unionist’ opinion which did not necessarily regard full integration with Britain as a finite link. Perhaps within the core body of liberal Protestant opinion, lies some glimmer of hope for those Nationalists who are seeking to ‘persuade’ for some form of Irish Unity in the years ahead.”
I think you’ll find that it is liberal Protestant opinion that is most in favour of intergration. Many of those who believe in devolution don’t trust Westminster and see it as giving them more control over their destiny. As for Ulster independance most Unionists see it as an option only in a doomsday situation when the alternative is a united Ireland.
BTW how are you going to convince Unionists like me? By sending Martina Anderson to wax lyrical about how she admires those who spent 35 years slaughtering members of my community? You may find that one of the reasons people are Unionists is to stick up two fingers to the scum who tried to deny us the right to chose which state we lived in.
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 07:52 AMThe UUP seem determined to learn absolutely nothing. One faction continues to hit the DUP for “selling out” by doing a deal with Sinn Fein: another section now claims that the DUP isn’t unionist enough anyway: and the Union Group argues in favour of engaging with Sinn Fein to reach some sort of consensus on an all-Ireland unionism.
They have collectively lost the plot.
Porlock
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 08:32 AMPerhaps within the core body of liberal Protestant opinion, lies some glimmer of hope for those Nationalists who are seeking to ‘persuade’ for some form of Irish Unity in the years ahead.
Liberal of all denominations and none would see Westminster (rather than Paisley and the rest of the Prodiban) as the main guarantee of the social and cultural freedoms that they are entitled to expect in a modern western democracy.
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 08:39 AM“Ulster nationalism is hardly a new notion. What makes it sensible as an underlying belief is that the UK is becoming a something of a mutually beneficial association under devolution rather than a singular state. The UU position on this is, as usual, written for a past political situation that has already gone.”
This is the Blair/Brown political masterstroke. The Tories will never again dominate the United Kingdom as they did under Thatcher. The Tories may eventually simply become the English National party.
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 08:52 AMRory,
No my post was pointing out that Stephen King appeared in Northern Ireland despite having no obvious reason to come here and several good reasons to feel happier staying in England at a university of higher status (for him) and one where homophobia is likely to be less common. The only thing I have against him is that he helped wreck the UUP which I was a member of.
On the substatnive point could I suggest complaining about direct rule ministers is extremely common by everyone. Is it not in part the less politically and geographically remote areas complaining about “them lot in the centre”. You see this here. People outside Belfast often complain that those in Belfast have better roads, hospitals etc. Those in the Presbyterian Church in the country complain that it is too Belfast- centric. People in the north of England complain that London gets more. Dewi can correct me but I believe that people in North and West Wales complain about Cardiff. I suspect this sort of thing is extremely common and not that indicative of some split within unionism.
Even if it is I adhere strongly to the view that none of the groups mentioned have any interest in a United Ireland, and those in favour of an Independent Ulster are really talking about a Doomsday secenario so I do not think the nationalists should dtart celebrating our imminent conversion to their views.
By the way I am still waiting for someone to tell me what happened to King. I hope he got a good job because although I think he helped wreck the UUP I would not want to think he is unemployed, I am sure he had talent; just not as a unionist strategist.
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 09:09 AMTurgon, from what I understand Stephen King got a job as a researcher for the Conservative party.
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 09:18 AMPaisley displaced the anglophile ‘toffs’ of the old UUP, making it less likely that the English would identify with unionism enough to see off the IRA.
The setting up of the Scottish and Welsh administrations meant that Paisley Powell Molyneaux could no longer pretend that integration was on the cards, and also showed the IRA that the brits were disinterested oppressors.
Call it Ulster nationalism, call it the end of political hyperinflation. 3000 dead is a big price to pay for anyone’s impossible dream.
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 09:22 AMRichard,
When referring to “liberal Protestant opinion”, I was particularly referencing those sections of that community best represented within areas like North Down. ie financially secure middle-classes whose voting record is virtually non-existent. I believe that these sections are much-more prone to be swayed by economic arguments for any future All-Ireland scenario. ie many of them have no political affinity whatsoever with either of the main Unionist Parties, nor indeed the Alliance Party for that matter.
As for your current political idealogy revolving around “sticking two fingers up to the scum”, I actually feel really sorry for you. It must be a sad life to have such a degree of hatred flowing through you…
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 09:33 AM“Paisley displaced the anglophile ‘toffs’ of the old UUP, making it less likely that the English would identify with unionism enough to see off the IRA.”
I think you’ll find the big house Unionists were seen off in the early 1970s.
“The setting up of the Scottish and Welsh administrations meant that Paisley Powell Molyneaux could no longer pretend that integration was on the cards, and also showed the IRA that the brits were disinterested oppressors.”
Paisley isn’t an intergrationist, Powell was dead by the time the Welsh and Scottish devolved governments were set up and Molyneaux had stopped having an active role in politics.
“Call it Ulster nationalism, call it the end of political hyperinflation. 3000 dead is a big price to pay for anyone’s impossible dream.”
Hear, hear, one of the most damning inditements of Irish Republicanism I have come across.
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 09:34 AM“When referring to “liberal Protestant opinion”, I was particularly referencing those sections of that community best represented within areas like North Down. ie financially secure middle-classes whose voting record is virtually non-existent. I believe that these sections are much-more prone to be swayed by economic arguments for any future All-Ireland scenario. ie many of them have no political affinity whatsoever with either of the main Unionist Parties, nor indeed the Alliance Party for that matter.”
Plenty of middle class Protestants in North Down vote Unionist. They voted for Bob McCartney’s vision of full intergration and when he was seen as a man of the right elected Sylvia Hermon. And if you are looking for a place that most resembles Finchley, look no further than Bangor.
Many of them served in the RUC or had relatives that did so. They may not like that awfully vulgar Ian Paisley but don’t imagine for a second they have anytime for apologists for the IRAs squalid murder campaign.
Although I find it a tad ironic that our revolutionary champions of the working class are going to go grovelling to the petite bourgeoisise.
“As for your current political idealogy revolving around “sticking two fingers up to the scum”, I actually feel really sorry for you. It must be a sad life to have such a degree of hatred flowing through you…”
Oh my political ideology doesn’t revolve around Republicans, don’t imagine I think so highly of them. The deaths of the hunger strikers, all those years wasted in prison by IRA members having been in vain is just a bonus.
And I can assure you my life is quite a happy one, I get this nice warm feeling whenever I hear a Shinner whinge about occupation, the killing of IRA terrorists etc :o)
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 09:48 AMRichard,
Unfortunately your response has only served to verify my initial point.
As for your pathological hatred of Sinn Fein, how you must have squirmed when thay polled over 26% of the vote in the recent Assembly Elections. (Their biggest vote here since the partition of Ireland in 1921).
How you must have squirmed still further when Dr Paisley (the erstwhile Dr. No) entered into a fully co-operational and cordial Government with Sinn Fein. Not too mention his new ‘sugar-sweet’ relationship with The Taoiseach and Dail Eireann.
It would be interesting to know who would now be your ‘champions’ within political Unionism Richard, because you seem to be even further right-wing than the Jim Allister’s of this world.
Unfortunately Richard, your views are effectively old-school sectarian Unionism and they are no longer represented by either of the main Unionist parties. The ongoing pace of unprecedented change on this island is leaving you far behind…
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 10:11 AM“As for your pathological hatred of Sinn Fein, how you must have squirmed when thay polled over 26% of the vote in the recent Assembly Elections. (Their biggest vote here since the partition of Ireland in 1921).”
Nope, I was heartened once again the electorate prefered Unionist parties to Nationalist ones.
“How you must have squirmed still further when Dr Paisley (the erstwhile Dr. No) entered into a fully co-operational and cordial Government with Sinn Fein. Not too mention his new ‘sugar-sweet’ relationship with The Taoiseach and Dail Eireann.”
Quite the opposite. I was rather amused to see Sinn Fein begging to get back into Stormont after all those promises of not returning there. Only highlights the surrender of the Republican movement. And let us by under no illusions that the IRA was crushed, most defeaten “armies” get to keep their weapons. Only in the face of a total defeat can the victor impose the humilation of forcing the enemy to give up their arms. But hey, I’m sure those “undefeaten army” t-shirts Sinn Fein sells is a conciliation for that :o)
As for the hammering Mr Ahern’s party gave Sinn Fein I’m sure Ian Paisley would be very pleased with him. Sinn Fein can’t really claim to speak for Irish Republicans, let alone the Irish people, after that can it?
BTW I suspect you’ll find garden centre Prods will be as impressed with Sinn Fein’s economic arguments as the people in the RoI were :o)
“Unfortunately Richard, your views are effectively old-school sectarian Unionism and they are no longer represented by either of the main Unionist parties.”
What sectarian comments have I made? And if you can’t cite any we’ll take it you resorted to that slur as you can’t come up with a better argument than mine. Calling someone a bigot seems to be the Nationalist equivalent of waving a white flag in the face of superior opposition.
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 10:24 AMRichard,
1. It was 13 years after the IRA Ceasefire before they VOLUNTARILY fully decommissioned their weapons.
2. Two of the most Senior British Army personnel who served here during the troubles have made public statements in the past number of years stating quite categorically that the IRA had been undefeated by British Forces. They conceded that the IRA could have perpetrated a campaign for decades to come (had it been their choosing).
Sorry to let those facts from your own military personnel get in the way of your little rant, Richard… :)
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 10:31 AM“It was 13 years after the IRA Ceasefire before they VOLUNTARILY fully decommissioned their weapons.”
The IRA frequently stated it would not decommission because this would be a humiliation and mark its defeat. So the IRA was defeaten by the very definition given by P O’Neill.
And it didn’t voluntarily decommission. It did so because the British government and the DUP insisted it do so.
How does it feel knowing that the IRA obeyed Ian Paisley like a lap dog :o)
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 10:38 AMHey Richard,
You are clearly confused here...!
You are now championing Dr Paisley, the guy who you earlier lambasted as being both “vulgar” and a a “non-integrationist”.
The same guy who effectively sold you out by breaking every promise he ever made about not going into government with the people he called “Sinn Fein/IRA”.
Have you written to him Richard to express your outrage...? Or have you just accepted that the last great bastion of Protestant Unionism has just sold you out in the same way as Trimble did…
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 10:46 AMAs far as I know Steven King now works as a spokesperson for a right wing think tank, Policy Exchange. It’s the London equivalent of the US Project for a New American Century crowd as far as I can make out.
The UUP is firmly in third place behind SF and the DUP in the north - and its future doesn’t look bright. It’s Simply British campaign was disastrous - as bad an advertisement for supposedly multi cultural Britain as it was for the UUP itself as the message it sent didn’t resonate at all with voters. It bombed as badly as the Decent People Vote UUP message.
It really doesn’t matter much to me who unionists elect as their political representatives. The common agenda of Unionist parties is to continue to marginalise nationalists and to refuse to recognise the legitimacy of their political aspirations. It’s far from representing the “United Kingdom’ to being a good option for nationalists.
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 10:53 AM“You are now championing Dr Paisley, the guy who you earlier lambasted as being both “vulgar” and a a “non-integrationist”.”
He isn’t an intergrationist and would tell you that himself. Nor did I call him vulgar, I simply remarked that the so-called garden centre Prod would have that opinion.
As for Dr Paisley I haven’t got around to writing to him yet, although when I do I was congratulate him for standing his ground until the ultimate humilation was heaped on the IRA.
BTW you didn’t get back to me regarding the IRA’s surrender. Presumably that is because you now accept it was defeaten by its own definition?
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 10:54 AMRichard,
Actually re your definition of “surrender”, I quoted two British Army Generals who served here and effectively declared the IRA to be an undefeated army.
God, but you are sensitive Richard. You are just going to have to accept that life for you and your brand of Unionism will never, ever be the same again.
By the way I’m delighed you still support Paisley and his policies, because it means that you now fully support Martin McGuinness as your Deputy First Minister (as Paisley does).
Also Richard you now fully accept the new Assembly with 4 Sinn Fein Ministers looking after many aspects of your daily life (as Paisley does.)
Perhaps you are more confused than you previosuly imagined Richard…
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 11:04 AM“Actually re your definition of “surrender”, I quoted two British Army Generals who served here and effectively declared the IRA to be an undefeated army.”
Saying the IRA could limp on isn’t the same as claiming it was undefeaten. And surely the IRA is better placed to define what its defeat would be?
It failed to achieve its objective of a united Ireland and surrendered its weapons due to a demand from its enemy. By any definition that is total defeat. You remind me of those Germans who didn’t believe their country had lost the First World War in spite of the humilation of Versailles.
As for my life I haven’t really noticed any changes in it since the resoration of the Assembly. NI is still part of the UK. So I’m afraid you are teh deluded one :o)
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 11:25 AMRichard,
Off to watch the Gaelic now, so I’ll leave you to dwell over the “victory” that never actually took place...!
You seem to live in some sort of alternative universe to the rest of us, but hey, as long as you are happy…
Who do you reckon will win today then? Cork or Kerry...?
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 11:38 AMGoing back to the topic: the issue Gonzo raises is very interesting.
I have long believed that, essentially, the DUP was for people who saw their identity primarily in “Ulster” terms, whereas Ulster Unionists saw it primarily in “British” terms. Of course there is some overlap, hence the shift in votes from one to the other. Additionally, the devolved settlement almost requires a national identity ("Scottish", “Welsh”, “Ulster") in addition to “British” - in some ways, therefore, Ulster Unionists are living in a world that no longer exists.
From an analytical perspective, however, I think there is something in this for the Ulster Unionists. But there are three problems:
1. as identified, they have to sell this “British” angle in a devolved settlement (not easy);
2. if they are so “British”, why do they insist on standing outside the British political system (i.e. why are they not just the NI branch of the Tories)
3. actually, are there really very many people in NI who do see the White Cliffs and think they’re home?If I may be so bold, it would be helpful to leave out of this debate the Ulster Unionists’ capacity or otherwise to sell a coherent message - that’s another subject. The question is: is there a division “Ulster” vs “British” from which the UUP can regain votes from the DUP?
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 11:43 AMIJP,
I understand your argument but I am just not convienced that many people make this distinction on a continual basis. I suspect they shift depending on a given issue.
I know analogies are always flawed but how about someone who works for say Tesco in a local store. They may be loyal to their local store and loyal to Tesco and the differentation is different in different contexts. Or say a health worker who is very proud of say the Royal and also proud of being an NHS nurse or whatever. We all identify at multiple levels. I fear that trying to split an Ulster Nationalist from an Ulster British position is extremely abstract and does not chime with the way the vast majority of people think.
Could it in part be that the UUP are so incoherent in this precisely because it is an incoherent position.
Also it is like I said earlier about people always moaning about places seen as more central.
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 11:58 AM
