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
I agree wholeheartedly with Rodney in this instance. Although I’m aware that opinion within the party on his comments isn’t exactly undivided,
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 12:03 PMTurgon
All you say is true (and good news for me, by the way, as one who competes with the UUP for votes!), but it doesn’t quite answer my point.
I do believe there is a distinction - albeit a blurred one - between the Northern Irelander who sees the White Cliffs of Dover and thinks “I’m home”, and those who don’t; between those who (primarily) listen to Radio 4 and who talk about “the Telegraph” to mean the Daily Telegraph and those who listen to Radio Ulster and mean the Belfast Telegraph; between those who complain about the number of “local” programmes on the BBC and those who complain about the nature of them. There is a clear difference in emphasis, albeit along a spectrum. Into the former camp, generally, fall the “decent people”; into the latter camp, generally, fall the “people of Ulster”.
Thus it could be argued that, as the UK has become more devolved and the EU more powerful, so it has become more beneficial to emphasize the “regional” over the “national”, to the detriment of the former (and therefore of the UUP politically).
I am certain the division exists, albeit along a spectrum. My follow-up thesis, of which I’m not so certain, is that the UUP has identified the division correctly - but they’re on the wrong side of that division. But perhaps I’m mistaken?
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 12:31 PMTo begin with I don’t believe Unionists can be neatly seperated into Jennifer Todd’s two categories. For the vast majority the two identities co-exist, the difference would be one of emphasis put on each.
Secondly I think the British identity is stronger. Most Unionists who wouldn’t describe themselves as Irish would say they are British rather than an Ulsterman.
Regarding the white cliffs I don’t think Unionists feel other parts of the UK are drastically different from their own. Most would have family connections with other parts of the UK and many have lived and/or studied in other parts of it. The Unionist community doesn’t have the same ties with the RoI.
These are nothing more than my own experiences, I can’t provide empirical data to back them up.
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 12:32 PM“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)”
Very well put IJP, when I speak to people from within the Unionist circumference they often raise the point about why doesn’t the UUP just merge with the Tories if that is what they seem to be advocating. It seems to be one of Integration vs Devolution and the problems that come from that in terms of voter recognition with the newly devolved mini regional-state and its powers.
I think in respect of Ulster Nationalism, is it not the case that it comprises some of the worst segments of Northern Ireland life namely inflated loyalism, driven by the delusion that Northern Ireland is Ulster and at that is without a large Irish Nationalist citizenship.
Paisley, when he talks about Ulster in a geopolitical sense, always gives me a good hearty chuckle, as if he wants to have a say over matters regarding Donegal etc, then perhaps its a federal Ireland that he wants? It is about one of the only things I agree with Sinn Fein with when they mention Ulster in Paisley’s view is non-existent.
But Gonzo raises a good point about votes being on loan as I think the public have placated the political agitators to get them interwined in democracy in order to get them off the streets.
Could there be a new opening for a truly Northern Ireland party that overides the old divisions and draws in a unified centre ground. A centre ground that operates devolved institutions yet maintains ethno-cultural security by integrating policy with Ireland using the British-Irish Treaty/NSMC.
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 12:34 PMIJP,
I do indeed see your point but I still think it is more interchangable than that.
Just regarding myself, using your analogies. I listen to Radio 4 most of the time but switch to Radio Ulster (or radio 3 OK stop laughing at the back) often enough. I buy both the Daily Telegraph and Belfast Telegraph. I know which one I want on each occassion but I do not really think about it. I largely prefer the local programmes. I am sure I am odd but is this inter changablility not typical?
Maybe it does relate to where in NI you live. I have never lived in Bangor but maybe there is a more Ulster British view there than elsewhere.
In terms of splits in voting I suspect the loan to the DUP is becomming pretty permanent especially considering the UUPs lack of good people (a bit of a vicious circle). I still suspect a place will gradually open up for a party to the right of the DUP. OK start calling me Prod Taliban.
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 01:03 PMTurgon
I wonder what is the unionist view on serving in a “nationalist” led assembly. Whatever the likliehood of a UI it does look from election results and demographics that farly soon - i.e within the next 20 years nationalist parties will have more assembly sits that Unionists.
Does that worry you ?Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 01:19 PM“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.”
What? Are you high? Why do I feel like the world has gone to hell in a fucking hand basket and I’m the only one that’s noticed?
Identity Cards. 90-day detention without trial. DNA Databases - maintained if you are arrested, even if you are not convicted. Security cameras everywhere. We are currently on greeny-blue alert, or whatever they are calling it. Restrictions on trial by jury.
Seriously. What?
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 01:46 PMDewi,
Good question deserving of more time and thought than I can muster at the moment. Off hand three answers.
1). I am not sure about whether or not it will happen. I do not know the demographics that well. Also I suspect the fear of it might increase the unionist vote. Furthermore with the current arrangements nationalists may become less likely to vote. I could be wrong so on to answer 2
2). Probably would be OK. The current arrangements prevent one side gaining much power over the other lot so I do not think it would have a vast effect. I accept the symbolism would be disturbing for people like me.
3). The paranoid answer. When I was at QUB the student’s union was run by a pretty hardline nationalist clique. They did many things which greatly antagonised unionists like having honorary life members who were IRA prisoners, sending Christmas greetings to them. Having black flag demonstrations when the IRA members were shot in Gibraltar. Bilingual signs which they would not as a compromise make multilingual.
Would a nationalist run executive behave like that. Probably not they would not have enough power, the UK government would not let them, most of their voters are not that biggoted (the QUB SU was run by a tiny minority). Also of course eventually their bias got the better of them, Queen’s had to get outside consultants in and there was significant reform. Still if it all went wrong I might make it to the last boat from Larne, though we may be moving house soon further away from Larne. Then I guess we could make a stand on Devenish (not serious see Trowbridge etc).
As I say not a full or good answer, I have not even had time to check it. I need to go and amuse children.
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 02:45 PM>>I accept the symbolism would be disturbing for people like me.<<
Turgon, I honestly don’t get this at all. Not yanking your chain, but I have noticed a softening of your approach lately, and you do come across as a reasoned rational nice fella. So why would you find the symbolism disturbing? your life wouldn’t change that much. To coin a phrase from our much maligned TV talent shows, do you think that you personally and possibly Unionism in general, might be ‘on a journey’ to a place where the old attitudes don’t seem that important anymore?
>>I might make it to the last boat from Larne<<
Hopefully by that time we will have our border controls at Cairnryan ready to deal with the ‘flight of the intolerant’ ;¬)
Kensei
When people are afraid they don’t notice such things so much. I am wondering just how far these new measures can go before we start calling a spade a spade. I’ve not turned all right wing all of a sudden but the present state of affairs stinks. Some of my family were due to fly into Glasgow just a few hours after the attack, it hit’s home a wee bit.
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 03:00 PMThe problem for the UUP is that they think of Britain as ‘the mainland’ so that has been where their offspring (or a good proportion of them)have gone for their education and where they have subsequently stayed. Taken together with the fact that they have been dominated by an increasingly elderly central council they have reached the same position as the post-Thatcher Conservative Party and the post-Hume SDLP.
A party for old folk who haven’t got over the past and who don’t have the resources to begin again.
The UUP think of themselves as exiles from the mainland - they’re finished. Now even the detestable FAIR realises that the only place they can receive a hearing is the DAIL......way to go!
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 03:11 PMTurgon,
re: ‘Bilingual signs’
Ever been to Wales and the Isle of Man? You will find bilingual signs in both places. All the so-called ‘hardline’ students were asking for was ‘British’ rights for ‘British’ students.
If you remember it was the refusal of British Civil Rights which started this round of resistance off forty years ago. Nothing changes, nor could it while unionists have a veto.
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 03:20 PMSure Rodney McClune doesn’t even live in Northern Ireland. So whose he to tell us what we should think!
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 04:10 PM“The Ulster nationalism of the DUP demands a reduction of corporation tax in Northern Ireland but fails to make any argument for a UK-wide reduction.
“The DUP demand money from the treasury in language shared with the Scots and Welsh nationalists, caring not if they offend elsewhere in the UK.
“They, like the other nationalist and republican parties in Northern Ireland, attribute all problems to direct rule or attribute problems to British ministers.”
This is bull crap...the UUP have given off about direct rule ministers in the past. Look at McGimpsey and Empey.
And tell me...where does the UUP stand on the corportation tax issue?
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 04:13 PM“Paisley, when he talks about Ulster in a geopolitical sense, always gives me a good hearty chuckle, as if he wants to have a say over matters regarding Donegal etc, then perhaps its a federal Ireland that he wants?”
DC
It’s just a term that has come to be used over the years.
Bit like people calling the “republic of Ireland” by the name of “Ireland”, when we all know there are two countries on this island of Ireland.Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 06:48 PM“Liberal of all denominations and none would see Westminster (rather than Paisley and the rest of the Prodiban) etc etc
What? Are you high? etc etc
Kensei
Key phrase in my original post is that “rather than”.I’ve lived in a DUP-controlled local government fiefdom for far too long, so I know exactly their attitude towards “fun” and people “that aren’t quite like us”.
Westminster is by no means perfect, but, to my knowledge, no one there has ever told me that on a Sunday I can’t have my pint whilst having a swing and watching the Gay Pride parade go by.
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 08:12 PMLib 2016,
If the signs were so inoffensive why did the university make the union take them down. Also why did the SU executive block the idea of multi lingual signs. I remember proposing this myself as a rather niave 19 year old and being shot down. I remember it quite well as informative in making my political views.
Prince Eoghan.
I do not like debating controvertial issues with you as I find you far too charming and reasonable and do not like fighting with you. Also calling your name after your son is genuninely touching (and less sad than using a Tolkein one). I actually was quite involved in UUP politics at Queen’s but stopped soon afterwards as I did not like annoying people (and I wanted a decent degree). I even do not like annoying cyber people. I do, however, like debating with people like you especially on fairly harmless things and do really hope you will not hate me for what I said on the South Londonderry OO thread.By the way I love the flight of the intolerant. I imagine us crying on the P+O ferry and singing the sash to the tune of Roddy McCrory (which it fits perfectly and is a better tune, also fits 23rd psalm and was once sung in our church, I think I was the only one who knew).
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 09:03 PM“I’ve lived in a DUP-controlled local government fiefdom for far too long, so I know exactly their attitude towards “fun” and people “that aren’t quite like us”.
Westminster is by no means perfect, but, to my knowledge, no one there has ever told me that on a Sunday I can’t have my pint whilst having a swing and watching the Gay Pride parade go by. “
Mutual veto - you think SF would buy any of that? And the difference is we have some control of who gets in, unlike Westminster. For all that it matters about any of that stuff, though.
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 09:03 PMKensei,
Back to your comments on 90 day detention DNA database etc. I am afraid I support you on this. Please do not commit suicide because a Prodiban supports you.
I am uncomfortable about all these changes. I fly a lot with work (yes I know it is immoral and destroys the enviroment, I am sorry). I feel we all get traeted like cattle and I am not completely convinced the measures have much effect. I obviously will not comment on a number of security flaws as I see them.
I do not like DNA databases of the unconvicted and am very anti iris scans etc on passports, irises change for a whole number of reasons over time and the technology seems very poor. I know some smart alec will point out that an Irish passport will not have one. As a matter of principle I use my driving licence as ID as I object to needing a passport to travel in my own country.
There is also a significant problem that if we all are made to have ID cards how can Irish citizens in GB be made to have. They also do not need to have passports, this could be a significant block to the whole idea. I will find an amusing irony if the Irish save me from needing an ID card.
Posted by on Jul 01, 2007 @ 09:47 PMThere is also a significant problem that if we all are made to have ID cards how can Irish citizens in GB be made to have.
The current updating of passports to include iridic information and introduction of I.D. cards is due to an EU directive. Basically, you won’t be able to get out of your EU country without having a passport or I.D. bearing iridic information. So all ROI residents will need an ID or passport before they can get into the UK. What the UK is doing that is silly is requiring people who already have passports to acquire IDs as well. The EU practice is that you can travel from one EU country to another on an ID. I have met Albanians who have taken up residence in the UK using a forged Italian ID card. The EU directive is designed to make all EU countries supply cards which are much harder to forge.
Posted by on Jul 02, 2007 @ 01:40 AMPaddy
“The EU directive is designed to make all EU countries supply cards which are much harder to forge.”
I’m not entirely convinced that will work either; forgers tend to find ways around these things - wasn’t there something on the BBC about a proof of concept on tackling the ID Cards? Plus unless we start DNA tagging from birth, it doesn’t actually stop you getting into the system by nicking someone’s identity and putting your photo/DNA on it.
And a system which everyone thinks is full proof but has holes? Sounds worse to me.
Turgon
“Back to your comments on 90 day detention DNA database etc. I am afraid I support you on this. Please do not commit suicide because a Prodiban supports you.”
Why would I? Today support on civil liberties, tomorrow on destroying the Union ;)
“I do not like DNA databases of the unconvicted and am very anti iris scans etc on passports, irises change for a whole number of reasons over time and the technology seems very poor. I know some smart alec will point out that an Irish passport will not have one. As a matter of principle I use my driving licence as ID as I object to needing a passport to travel in my own country.”
If it was only passports I’d not be too worried. The real power these systems does not come from any particular form of identity. The power of the system is how easily the government keeps information on you, and how easily it can unify this information. So if it was just passport, information would be kept on entering and exiting the countries; they do that anyway.
An ID Card, on the other hand? Well, they might link your passport information on it. Criminal (and arrest, of course) records. Taxation and employment history. They might keep you medical records linked to it. How many traffic tickets you’ve got. Census Data. Hell, why not use it for the libraries too? And on and on.
Suddenly the State has a volume of information on you with an easy way of indexing it all. And they’ll say “Oh we won’t link it all up”, but the temptation to centralise it all would be much too great, and there are a pile of ways around it anyway. The application of that information can be used in all sorts of ways. And as well as the obvious sinister ones, there are all sorts of subtle ways they can used too - heck why not sell a pile of the information to marketers for a couple of billion?
Posted by on Jul 02, 2007 @ 08:43 AMTurgon.
>>hope you will not hate me for what I said on the South Londonderry OO thread.<<
Your comments were by far the most reasonable non-belligerent comments emanating from anyone associated with Unionism on the thread. Some others are so intellectually challenged they would associate going to mass with being anti-Prod. As far as you and I falling out about certain issues, I’m not so sure. There seem to be a certain strata of Unionists who post here as an extension of their intolerance/bigotry. You kind of get a feel for who these guys are, believe me you are not one of them.
I respect deeply held views sincerely held, if we disagree from time to time I pretty promise that I won’t take the huff.
All the best!
Posted by on Jul 02, 2007 @ 09:33 AMKensei,
Okay this is really really mad and whilst you lot will probably not hate me for this you will think I am mad.
Remember I am actually a pretty fundementalist Prod.
I do actually have very similar worries about the ID card with all that data. Then since people (like me) are always forgetting them some smart alec will suggest they are implanted. Why not have credit card data etc as well.
I know this is mad but I do then believe you are very, very close to the number of the beast thing in Revelation and having a mark to allow you to transact business. Then of course if you do not want one you must be a terrorist.
Okay that is beyond Trowbridge level of paranoia but you can construct such a scneraio quite easily.
If that were the case then all the stuff we were told about as kids at church events about the end of the world being nigh would be very true.
Posted by on Jul 02, 2007 @ 09:58 AMTurgon
“Prince Eoghan.
I do not like debating controvertial issues with you as I find you far too charming and reasonable and do not like fighting with you. Also calling your name after your son is genuninely touching (and less sad than using a Tolkein one)”Turgon - he’s really a sarky philistine who has no appreciation of culture at all !!!!
Posted by on Jul 02, 2007 @ 06:53 PMDewi,
That may or may not be true but it is difficult to be as unpleasent to people when you try at least at times to complement them. Call me naive or very devious. Incidentally I think you are a great singer and Elenwe fancies you.
Posted by on Jul 02, 2007 @ 09:52 PMTurgon - Elenwe knows I’m ready to follow her from Larne to Vladivostock !
Posted by on Jul 03, 2007 @ 07:14 AM
