Long march to United Ireland begins at home…

Jude Collins makes a welcome return, with a piece on the real political task facing Sinn Fein: winning over 10-20% of Unionist voters to the cause of a united Ireland.

  • Turgon

    Thanks delta omega, that’s two of us. I guess we can count on Darth. How many apprentice boys were needed to shut the gates?

  • Turgon

    By the way delta omega. I remember a good few years ago telling ny late father in law that Paisley was a lundy. He got a bit annoyed and asked for the evidence. I guess if he were alive today he would not be asking anymore.

  • Gréagóir O’ Fráinclín

    ”I think you are unhappy because although these suggestions help account for their occurance they do not justify the campagin of murder foisted upon us by terrorists of all sides.”

    Turgon, I look back at ‘The Troubles’ and on reflection and in hindsight it is quite difficult at times to understand why people committed such atrocious murders, now that there is a much welcomed peace in Northern Ireland. But conditions must have been really bad for such appalling events to happen back then and as to why ordinary people were driven to do such horrible things. What was it that impelled innocent young men to join the IRA and carry out such acts? Would you maybe know why?

    But today Unionists shouldn’t be as fearful and nervous of the dreaded United Ireland as they see it, as agreement and compromise is the future. Ulster Unionists are very much entitled to their beliefs and their very ‘British’ way of life, but it can be ever so difficult at times to understand why Unionists seem so spitefully dismissive of all things Irish; the people, the culture, the language, the sport, the achievements etc… It’s as if this is the only purpose for the Unionists existance.

  • Turgon

    On a slightly more considered note I have not lost all hope at all. Remember after the “Good Friday Agreement” Paisley was laughed at and jeered by many including unionists and the media. The GFA seemed the only way possible. As time went on the correctness of his position was recognised by most unionists.

    Paisley gave us back our confidence, not immediately but gradually. Then he did a deal which helped him. He may really have believed it was as good a deal as he could get (Trimble may have felt the same way). Now again our confidence is shaken. I am quite sure, however, as this latest deal plays out people will see it for the error that it is.

    Then when Paisley has gone the time will come when either a new party can emerge or the DUP will split. Without Paisley and with a bit of time I am confident that there are people who are more committd to the unionist cause than ministeral cars and the trappings of power even if shared with terrorists

  • kensei

    “What I find most instructive in this thread is that when a number of “reasonable” unionists proposed possible requests and things which if implemented might make them accept a united Ireland they were attacked shot down etc. and told basically when we win you can just lump it.”

    Actually one person did that. I, and I’m sure many others, would be happy to talk about it. I wouldn’t say, yes – can do all that, but it’s a perfectly reasonable basis for discussion, and if, say, the UUP or Alliance came out with it I’ve no doubt both Nationalist parties would be falling over themselves to talk about it.

    “When I (I accept I am not a “reasonable” unionist as defined by nationalists) suggested that Protestant Catholic and dissenter bit might be annoying people repeated it and made it a kind of religious mantra.”

    As I tried to explain, it may annoy you but it isn’t a demand. It’s a goal, and I fail to see how it isn’t a worthy one. The principles that flow from it – equality, respect, tolerance – are equally worthy and equally valid. It is not a reasonable demand for me to drop that view, irrespective of your reasonableness or otherwise.

    “When cruimh attempted to suggest that discrimination against northern nationalists was anything less than the most awful discrimination in world history he got attacked.”

    No, his points were cut to shreds by Sammy, who did a far better job on it than I imagine just about anyone else here could have managed.

  • delta omega

    Turgon – there are many more than two of us – and you are correct that out of the ashes of the DUP will rise a pheonix. I just hope that day is not too far off and arrives before our entire identity is sold for a bowl of pottage.

  • Turgon

    Greagoir,

    I do not know why people committed evil acts of IRA or loyalist murder, it is not for me to judge other people. What they did is between them and society. Why they did it is between them and God. If you want me to speculate I guess it was a combination of greivance, poor life chances, immaturity, peer pressure and hatred of others in differing ammounts depending on the different person committing the acts.

    That can be an explanation but NEVER an excuse or justification. There is an explanation for what Ian Huntley did to those little girls but not a justification.

    The IRA and all the others were ordinary people. The most evil acts can be performed by the most ordinary and banal of people.

    In terms of dismissing anything Irish. I do not think I have attacked anything Irish in any posts on this thread. I think your problem with me is that you find it impossible to understand that whilst I live on this land mass I do not regard my self as Irish in any shape manner or form. I am sure you do not care but if you ever get your united Ireland and I am still here I will not be united to your state. No I won’t kill anyone but I won’t feel Irish. What form of cultural imperialism is it that forces you to demand that I feel irish

  • PaddyReilly

    Well DFK,

    It is amusing is the way words and concepts are distorted in Ireland. Republicanism is associated with Catholicism, whereas elsewhere it is considered to be the antithesis of Catholicism, a movement of Freemasons, Deists and Unitarians. So you have the edge on me with regard to Republicanism, as you want to impose the hyper-Jacobin educational system of France and the US, which withholds all state support from religious schools.

    I would not regard myself as sold on republicanism: if a majority of Ireland’s people wanted a monarch, I would go along with them. Indeed if the call was for the total abolition of religious schools, I would want that. But it seems to me that this is not much of a vote-winner. If there was no call for these schools they would not exist.

    At the same time, I cannot help thinking of those of my friends who were thrown out of their (Jesuit, etc) colleges for militant Atheism. Between ages 11 and 18 I myself went through a number of mutually contradictory religious, political and philosophical standpoints. Thesis, antithesis and synthesis. Secular schools also have a role, for educating those of us with doubts, though some start with Atheism and end up doubting that as well.

    With regard to British identity, I can only observe that my uncle, a person of Catholic faith and once prominent in ROI life (his mother had a pension for her part in the Easter Rising) has been attending functions in the British Embassy recently to celebrate his regimental service during World War Two. (Another relation, a great-uncle of CoI faith, had a medal for his service in the regiment which put down the Easter Rising, btw). So even in a fully separated Republic, the opportunity for indulging your British connections exists. Just register with the embassy if you want to. You don’t have to subvert the constitution to solve your personal identity crisis. There are plenty of Lithuanians and Chinese growing up in Ireland but that doesn’t mean Ireland has to join the Eastern Block. You might bring home a Libyan wife (mashaAllah) but we are not going to join the Arab League.

    The moment Ireland is sovereign and united, all grievances against the British State will be annulled. Who knows what the popular mood will be then: perhaps joining the Commonwealth would be a popular move. But on the whole, I think the Commonwealth seems to be a kind of Rotary Club which exists for the benefit of Third World states. Ireland could benefit from a closer relationship with Canada, for example, without necessarily wanting to import any more Nigerians.

    Gréagóir’s satire on the necessary measures to be taken to persuade Unionists to join a UI just about says it all. Put it this way: did the SDLP and SF when negotiating the GFA demand that the UK abolish its monarchy, change its flag and constitution and leave the Commonwealth? Is that not the tail wagging the dog? If they had made such outrageous demands, would we not conclude that they were not serious about negotiating a peaceful settlement? Why should I not believe the same of you? I think you would be better off concentrating on compromises which are confined to your own neck of the woods, and not start formulating changes to the lifestyle of people in Kerry.

    Yehia al-jamaharia.

  • the UUP or Alliance came out with it

    Alliance is not a unionist party – respect our mandate, man! 😉

    And also, it’s the DUP you have to deal with; they’re the dominant party in unionism, they’re likely to remain so for the foreseeable future, any road you wish to pursue towards a United Ireland has to secure at least the acquiescence of them and most of their supporters.

    Paisley and Robinson cottoned on fairly quickly that post-2003, they couldn’t maintain the Union without at least meeting Sinn Féin part way. Have Republicans realised the same applies, in reverse, with the DUP? If not, there ain’t going to be no United Ireland.

    Turgon – there are many more than two of us – and you are correct that out of the ashes of the DUP will rise a pheonix.

    Keep going lads – at this rate, we’ll know who every single Bob McCartney voter is by Wednesday teatime!

  • Turgon

    Paddy Reilly,

    “Ireland could benefit from a closer relationship with Canada, for example, without necessarily wanting to import any more Nigerians.”

    You did not just type that did you?

  • You did not just type that did you?

    Yup. He thinks married, heterosexual, men should be guaranteed more money and better jobs than everyone else as well.

    And, no, I’m not making that up.

  • Turgon

    Sammy Morse.

    Sorry I have never voted for McCartney. The fact that there are to say the least problems with Mr. McCartney does not mean that the deal is a great idea. McCartney’s analysis that the deal is bad is in my view correct. It is just his personality, leadership qualities and general wierdness that handicap him.

    As I said earlier there was a lot of scoffing at Paisley after the GFA and everyone said he was finished because he did not support it. He seems to have done rather well but has now sold out. Well we have been sold out before and traditional unionism has had the last laugh. Just a few names to remember O’Neill, Faulkner, Trimble and now Paisley.

  • dub

    turgon,

    you are entitled to feel whatever you want… it is odd though to be living somewhere and not to feel of it… many unionists feel irish and yet feel their best interests and best interests of northern ireland are served by continuing union with great britain…that to me is entirely rational… i am not saying you are irrational merely that your attitude to northern ireland ireland ulster whatver you want to call it is odd because from its place names to its poltical and religious culture to the accents of its people and the way they speak english there is an awful lot which is distintly irish about northern ireland and all the people who live there, not the least the name of the place.. i think that maybe you conflate the words irish and irish nationalist… even in the republic this is not how people see the word irish and i suspect that neither do the chuch of ireland the irish football association the grand orange lodge of ireland the newspaper ireland’s saturday night the presbyterian church in ireland the irish cricket union the irish rugby football union…perhaps you never say “i’m only after” or “so i am” or prnounce film as “fillum” but many many northern protestants do.. these are all distinctive irish speech patterns…perhaps where you live the name of all the townlands parishes and baronies towns and villages are exclusively derived from the english language but i doubt it… perhaps where you live was not part of the kingdom of ireland for centuries and governed from dubiln for centuries as part of a territory called ireland…perhaps where you live the local orange bands do not play traditional irish hornpipes and reels and do not play the lambeg (lamh beag) drum, perhaps all these things are nevertheless true but you feel yourself to be above all this localism and reality…”i am an ulster orange man and from erin’s isle i come”

  • PaddyReilly

    He thinks married, heterosexual, men should be guaranteed more money and better jobs than everyone else as well.

    Well yes that’s almost right. I do think that choosing married men with families in preference to other candidates promotes social cohesion. And I don’t think that Ireland should be advertising in Nigerian newspapers for immigrants. It’s amazing how quickly one paradigm yields to another

  • Cruimh

    “No, I disagreed with his points;”

    I certainly did’t take it as an attack.

    “I’m hardly pursuing some Republican agenda.”

    Aliance party AND C of I – that’s even worse Sammy 😉

  • AND C of I – that’s even worse Sammy

    I’ll scare you even more – I’m an Anglo-Catholic!

  • DJK

    Paddy,

    I’ll decide what compromises I want to make and put them on the table. If the Kerry people and the majority in the 26 counties don’t come to an agreement with me and the majority in the 6 counties, then fine. Default to the status quo and Maasalamah.

    To save you the trouble, I do of course make the assumption that my compromises would be the minimum that a majority in the 6 counties, (NI), would accept. A fair assumption in my view.

  • Cruimh

    kensei – hate to disappoint you, Sammy did not cut my points to shreds.

  • Cruimh

    Gréagóir – the argument that things must have been really dreadful to make young catholics do such dreadful things to my community is very weak as well as being insulting to the victims. If we use that line of thinking the Tutsis must have been real monsters to have drive the Hutus to their crimes, the Jews must have deserved the ghastly crimes done to them by various groups over the centuries etc etc Closer to home – were the cathlics of NI and the ROI such monsters as to have driven young men like Gusty Spense or the men who planted the Dublin and Monaghan bombs ?

    “But today Unionists shouldn’t be as fearful and nervous of the dreaded United Ireland as they see it, as agreement and compromise is the future.”

    Couple of things

    Even if we were to no longer feel threatened by a United Ireland that does not mean that we would necessarily wish to help create one.
    Attitudes towards the nationalist South and nationalism are easing. The big changes down there mean we do not view it with the same alarm. But you must realise we still have major problems with republicanism. Republicanism to us is what we see here – unrepentent physicial force – not the gentler form as understood in the ROI. The Tricolour and Irish language is Gerry Adams – aggressive. It certainly helped that the ROI gave them a bloody nose last month. But on the negative side for many of us when the ROI praises 1916 it is validating Adams and McGuinness and suggesting that deep down you are not our friends.

  • Prince Eoghan

    >>kensei – hate to disappoint you, Sammy did not cut my points to shreds.
    Posted by Cruimh on Jun 11, 2007 @ 06:24 PM<<*Ahem* Sorry Cruimh but Sammy done quite a job at exposing your attempt to whitewash a rather important part of history. All the 'aye sure it happened, but it wasn't so bad' and the 'they boycotted the state' nonsense just doesn't wash anywhere.There is only one poster on the blogosphere who comes out with the stuff you do, he used to post here but is now usually to be found on ATW hence why I thought you were he. Indeed if you believe the poster I am talking about re-state discrimination, it only happened in the ROI, and evidence of how happy Catholics were in the north is in the birth rate. He argues that the population would not have increased if the Catholics were so hard done by, disregarding that poverty especially in those days was often accompanied by large families. The Taigs were very happy chappies indeed, no work so plenty of time to screw!He also has some good points (like yourself) but usually uses them to paint a picture that only a true revisionist would attempt. ie. he has his conclusion and uses selective evidence (often erroneously) to back up what he is saying. If you are not him then you have very similar M.O.'s

  • PaddyReilly

    Well, DJK, I don’t think the Unionists or even the NI Protestant people are ready quite yet for a United Ireland. All this business about Paisley in government with Martin McG has been a shock to the system. It would require one or two more Nationalist Westminster MPs and half a dozen less Unionist MLAs before one could really imagine that it’s a working possibility.

    A friend of mine from Ballymena was at home with his father and elder brother one Christmas, when his brother, who has a high paying job in Dublin, suggested that perhaps a United Ireland would not be such a bad thing after all. (The family are Protestant, of course.) The resulting explosion from the old man lasted about six hours and was audible in Broughshane and Cullybackey.

    There was a man in Glenarm, another Protestant, who thought a UI was inevitable and said so, publicly. This was about 30 years ago. He was shot of course by his coreligionists. Pour encourager les autres, I suppose. Lundies beware. Never be the first to jump is sound advice. I don’t actually detect any great enthusiasm for a United Ireland among the NI Protestant population, but I do think there’s a sort of grudging acceptance of its inevitability, though not in all quarters as this thread shows. They won’t vote for it, I’d say, but when it comes to the day there’s many that won’t have the heart to vote against it.

    Quite what your motivation is in proposing this negotiation I don’t know. Suicide by Orangeman? Trolling? Defeating the proposition by convincing the 26 county men the price is too high? My experience with talking to Unionists about a UI is like the song “Soldier, Soldier, won’t you marry me?” Basically, the soldier keeps coming up with objections which the woman fills with goods from her grandfather’s chest until the soldier eventually admits he is already married.

  • Cruimh

    I don’t see any answer to :

    the nationalist narrative of a people oppressed like the Israelites in Egypt is bunkum.

    Posted by Cruimh on Jun 11, 2007 @ 12:14 PM

    or :

    “I wasn’t aware of that, and there’s nothing up the thread that indicates that.”

    This post (kensei on Jun 11, 2007 @ 10:08 AM ) which started the exchange clearly refers to the early days Sammy. Hence my discussion of the leech commission etc .

    “The Unionist government could have tried to tie that 33%, as it was at the time, into the system.”

    Regarding the discrimination extent – the nationalist narrative dominates – unionism’s biggest failing has been it’s complacency and it’s unwillingness to counter outlandish claims.
    However work by people like Gudgin has started to
    restore some semblance of balance to our understanding of what actually went on.

    After all – for all the claims about the severity and ubiquity of discrimination even in the police we found that statistically RCs were over-represented in the senior ranks.

    Posted by Cruimh on Jun 11, 2007 @ 02:00 PM

  • Cruimh

    p.s – revisionist is an amusing term – used by people scared of the truth coming out.

  • Prince Eoghan

    >>After all – for all the claims about the severity and ubiquity of discrimination even in the police we found that statistically RCs were over-represented in the senior ranks.<

  • Turgon

    Paddy Reilly,

    DJK made what is in my view an honest mistake. He suggested that some in the broader unionist community might accept a united Ireland (even welcome it) if they were happy about the nature of that state. The answer was faily deafening. I could have told him that.

    I must admit your excellent views on other things should be made known more widely. Can you please run for high office in RoI so that unionists run away from a united Ireland more quickly.

    Greagoir,

    Both Cruimh and me have answered your question about why we think “innocent young men were impelled to join the IRA”. So what about your view?

  • DJK

    My motivation? I actually believe that it could be a good thing for future generations. This constitutional question is an unneccesary distraction to the important things in life. It consumes too much energy from people and acts as a barrier between neighbours. I also happen to think that the NI issue is unfair to the Scottish, English and Welsh people. I would like them to be free of it for their sake and for our own.

    The things I put on the table are my expectation of what those hoping to have a realistic engagement, should expect. From a personal point of view, they are of little or no consequence to me. Really the only thing that I would hang out against is any glorification of violence as a means to arriving at an agreement. I think that sets a bad precedent that can damage the future. I also believe the violence has been counter productive.

    Some of the respect of British/unionist culture that I would seek is really in recognition of its importance to a huge number of the current generation. I would expect future generations of former unionist families to gradually loosen their attachment to those bonds. Respect in itself isn’t a bad thing anyway. It may help Irish republicans to try to look for some good in the British way of life. I know you like to dress it up as the evil empire. I don’t think that is valid or helpful.

    You have talked to sme unionists obviously. You haven’t talked to them all. With a few exceptions, there is a bit of Irish in us all. it needs to be nurtured.

  • kensei

    “kensei – hate to disappoint you, Sammy did not cut my points to shreds.”

    Nah, he did. Don’t beat yourself up about it.

  • Cruimh

    kensei – he quit after my 2 pm embarrassed him – it’s always dagerous to jump into a discussion without reading the beginning. but that’s APNI for you 😉

  • Southern Observer

    Am coming in after reading the earlier stages of this thread.I always groan when the UI subject comes up as it invariably leads to a ‘yes it will’/’no it won’t’ pantomimic perseveration.Personally I am an agnostic on the issue.
    I played my own modest part in SF’s electoral debacle , but to add another ‘voice from the south’, vituperative attacks on Northern SF supporters are not the way to go -‘never condemn a man until you walk for a mile in his shoes’ etc.
    However a number of points must be made to Northern proponents of a UI.Firstly if you want it to happen paradoxically the best thing to do is stop raising the issue – threads like this for example generate more heat than light.Secondly of the two NI nationalist parties which is best placed to connect with the middle ground and least likely to scare off the ROI?.This one is a no-brainer.If you feel the stoops have deficiencies then join up and force change through weight of numbers.

  • he quit after my 2 pm embarrassed him

    No, I didn’t quit – you stopped making any relevant points. And how can you when Craig and Brookeborough openly boasted of anti-Catholic discrimination? No, it wasn’t Sharpeville, but then I’ve never made such ludicrous comparisons to begin with.

  • Cruimh

    Naughty Sammy

    I proved that the discussion was about the early days.

    I made the point that work by people like Gudgin has shown that while discrimination did exist it was by no means as pervasive and severe as the nationalist narrative would have it

    I gave an example that showed that discrimination was not ubiquitous.

    APNI sanctimony always ends in bluster when challenged. You could at least have the decency to admit that kensei and I were talking about the 1920s.

  • kensei

    “I proved that the discussion was about the early days.”

    No, you didn’t, and no we weren’t. We were having a discussion that included the 1920’s, rather than one focussed on it. Both Sammy and myself are happy to concede that there were some efforts made. The problem was they were inadequate, not implemented and gone by the 1930’s.

    What you are actually doing is displaying Unionist revision #1. That one says that this place wasn’t really that bad and it was all the nasty republicans fault and Unionism has no responsibility for anything. #2, for interest, is the “well, it was just as bad for everyone” line.

  • Gréagóir O’ Fráinclín

    In hindsight, what could be regarded as kinda odd is that at the time of the civil rights marches the Protestant working class community stayed well away, yet members of that community now profess to being victims of discrimination and hardship as their Catholic neighbours. Does this mean then that they were quite happy with the status quo at the time and were rather unwiling to change it to better their own circumstances. I know the civil rights movement was mainly composed of disenfranchised Catholics as such but there was the fair minded humanitarian Ivan Cooper at the helm.
    The Protestant working class could have jumped on board, and form a united front(rather than joining the UVF, in nervous terror of as what they thought this threat to their ‘British’ way of life). Maybe there would have been a different outcome and ‘The Troubles’ therefore avoided.

  • barnshee

    “Disenfranchised Catholics as such but there was the fair minded humanitarian Ivan Cooper at the helm. ”

    More claptrap –PEOPLE were disenfranchised in LOCAL elections because of the property qualification. This applied to ALL- no disenfranchised catholics just disenfranchised people including a LOT of prods.

    The inclusion of the lefty/republican brigade particularly a lot of dribbling undergrads from QUB ensured that the( I Know cause in the words of Max Boyce ” I was there”)

  • Cruimh

    I did Kensei – the 33% nailed it.

    the claim was made that the Unionists NEVER made any attempt to bring RCs onboard – even sammy ended up admitting they did.

    And correct kensei – this place wasn’t as bad as those who claim it was such a hellhole that it justified la mon and Enniskillen would have it.

    Gréagóir – could you address the reply to your post saying that because young RCs did beastly things it must mean they were justified ?

  • Cruimh

    Interesting thing barnshee is that for all he pious crap about OMOV and denial of rights – when OMOV was granted there was very little change – and the terrorists continued slaughtering. There were decent people involved in NICRA – but that wasn’t what the violence was about – it was the usual small minority of republicans trying to impose their wishes upon the people of NI.

  • iain

    Anyway, dragging everything back on topic. Does anyone think that part of the SF unionist outreach project might include a watering down of the demand for an immediate United Ireland. If the recent election in the republic is anything to go by, Sinn Fein might be better off with NI continuing. They are guaranteed a place in government in NI, but none of the Southern parties seem interested in dealing with them. If i were Gerry and Martin i’d be thinking of sacrificing the united ireland project for enough extra votes to get to be First minister instead of Deputy. Maybe push for a marxist republic in Ulster and abandon those nasty free-staters to their decadent market economy ;o)

  • The Devil

    “in the police we found that statistically RCs were over-represented in the senior ranks”

    Well if RC’s is an abbreviation of Right Cunts i’ve news for you mate…

    THEY STILL ARE

  • ingram

    “in the police we found that statistically RCs were over-represented in the senior ranks”

    Well if RC’s is an abbreviation of Right Cunts i’ve news for you mate…

    THEY STILL ARE

    LOL

  • kensei

    “I did Kensei – the 33% nailed it.”

    No, that is a specific part of a general argument.

    “the claim was made that the Unionists NEVER made any attempt to bring RCs onboard – even sammy ended up admitting they did.”

    Now, pay attention, because I’m getting bored of this and won’t repeat myself again. No one is denying that absolutely nothing was done. Merely that they were inadequate, not implemented and gone by the 1930’s to be replaced with open boasts of discrimination.

  • Gréagóir O’ Fráinclín

    ”Gréagóir – could you address the reply to your post saying that because young RCs did beastly things it must mean they were justified ?”

    I never said that the IRA were justified in what they done. I’m not a bible basher or religious in any way but I do agree that murder is wrong, whether performed by individuals, organizations or states! The indescriminate bombing of civilians in shopping malls or the indescriminate bombing of civilians from the skies; It’s all wrong, and I’m sure you agree too!
    I posed the question why did this all come about. Why did ‘The Troubles’ ever kick start and reach such a hellish level. ‘There were decent people involved in NICRA’ as you said but why didn’t the good Protestant folk in power give a fair minded ear to their grievances? Eventually they did?
    The Civil Rights Movement was subsequently hijacked by the IRA, but could this have been prevented? As you said …’it was the usual small minority of republicans trying to impose their wishes upon the people of NI’. How could this ‘usual small minority’ and their subsequent actions not have been initially contained and addressed in some way? Why did it snowball out of control then if things weren’t as bad then as you portray now? ‘….’while discrimination did exist it was by no means as pervasive and severe as the nationalist narrative would have it.’
    Was it the heavy handedness toward all Catholics by the NI authorities? ..or will you dispute this as to be another myth conjured up by Irish Nationalists?

  • Cruimh

    “No one is denying that absolutely nothing was done.”

    That has been my point – they did try – and your lot sulked. As usual.

    “Merely that they were inadequate, not implemented and gone by the 1930’s”

    How could they have been implimented when nationalists refused to co-operate ?

  • PaddyReilly

    If i were Gerry and Martin i’d be thinking of sacrificing the united ireland project for enough extra votes to get to be First minister instead of Deputy.

    Well you’re not Gerry or Martin. If they sacrificed the UI project I don’t suppose they’d win a single Unionist vote for doing so, and would probably lose a substantial portion of the Nationalist vote.

    Unionists aren’t ever going to vote for Sinn Féin. The most SF can hope for is that, given sufficient outreach and assurances, they won’t bother to vote at all.

  • Cruimh

    “I never said that the IRA were justified in what they done.”

    I didn’t say that you said they were justified.
    I’d like you to answer the post.

    Gréagóir – the argument that things must have been really dreadful to make young catholics do such dreadful things to my community is very weak as well as being insulting to the victims. If we use that line of thinking the Tutsis must have been real monsters to have drive the Hutus to their crimes, the Jews must have deserved the ghastly crimes done to them by various groups over the centuries etc etc Closer to home – were the cathlics of NI and the ROI such monsters as to have driven young men like Gusty Spense or the men who planted the Dublin and Monaghan bombs ?

    “But today Unionists shouldn’t be as fearful and nervous of the dreaded United Ireland as they see it, as agreement and compromise is the future.”

    Couple of things

    Even if we were to no longer feel threatened by a United Ireland that does not mean that we would necessarily wish to help create one.
    Attitudes towards the nationalist South and nationalism are easing. The big changes down there mean we do not view it with the same alarm. But you must realise we still have major problems with republicanism. Republicanism to us is what we see here – unrepentent physicial force – not the gentler form as understood in the ROI. The Tricolour and Irish language is Gerry Adams – aggressive. It certainly helped that the ROI gave them a bloody nose last month. But on the negative side for many of us when the ROI praises 1916 it is validating Adams and McGuinness and suggesting that deep down you are not our friends.

  • kensei

    “That has been my point – they did try – and your lot sulked. As usual.”

    It was our fault – gotcha. I said this two pages back, why has it taken to here to get to the same point?

    “How could they have been implimented when nationalists refused to co-operate ?”

    I see. If we have a look at England for the moment, the UK Government is obsessed, some would argue totally and beyond sense, with integration of immigrants at the moment, and in particular Muslim communities. In fact, it’s been and continual obsession for awhile, and is likely to be for the foreseeable future, especially if they are unsuccessful.

    I doubt, somehow, that they will respond by gerrymandering Birmingham and boasting they’ve kept their hands of the jobs and houses.

  • PaddyReilly

    Firstly if you want it to happen paradoxically the best thing to do is stop raising the issue – threads like this for example generate more heat than light

    Unfortunately the nature of this forum is that it will be raised every couple of weeks.

    If you have a family firm and an important family member who runs it all, it is a source of very great concern as to what will happen when he dies. However, the old man may not take kindly to having his impending demise brought up. Politeness dictates that we refrain from mentioning it: even self-interest, he might change his will. As a result, the death, when it finally happens, plunges the firm into chaos.

    Ordinarily, off-line, I would not make myself unpopular by suggesting to Unionist acquaintances that their polity is not immortal. Nevertheless, I think it’s something that needs to be discussed. Everyone, particularly the Dublin government, needs to have contingency plans for dealing with the day when a vote for unity propels us into a new dimension. Equally, we need to know what a Nationalist majority government would be doing in the absence of a vote for unity.

    Perhaps it will never happen, I say, with the insincerity of someone comforting a friend with advanced cancer and forty metastases, but we need to have a plan in case it does.

  • Cruimh

    kensei – it was both side’s fault although It’s good to see a nationalist admit that they were at fault. Progress.

    re “England” – England does not have a 90% Muslim country sharing it’s border that claims sovereignty over it’s territory.

  • PaddyReilly

    re “England” – England does not have a 90% Muslim country sharing it’s border that claims sovereignty over it’s territory.

    This is true. But England did not unilaterally invent itself in the 20th Century by carving up an area where English were slightly over a majority with substantial districts where Muslims predominated.

  • the Emerald Pimpernel

    Nice one Paddy

    Always more effective to use their own logic against them

  • Gréagóir O’ Fráinclín

    Cruimh, I reply……
    ‘the argument that things must have been really dreadful to make young catholics do such dreadful things to my community is very weak as well as being insulting to the victims. If we use that line of thinking the Tutsis must have been real monsters to have drive the Hutus to their crimes, the Jews must have deserved the ghastly crimes done to them by various groups over the centuries etc etc Closer to home – were the cathlics of NI and the ROI such monsters as to have driven young men like Gusty Spense or the men who planted the Dublin and Monaghan bombs ?

    – All the above examples have different contexts. However, insecurity, prejudice and vengence are what motivates people to do such things. Base human instincts, loss of reason, the Id in overdrive.

    ‘Couple of things

    ‘Even if we were to no longer feel threatened by a United Ireland that does not mean that we would necessarily wish to help create one.
    Attitudes towards the nationalist South and nationalism are easing. The big changes down there mean we do not view it with the same alarm.’

    – You should feel at ease for there is no longer a threat. People in the south would wish people in the north to just get on with their lives. Start making money and enjoy all the comforts of life for the island has been poor for too long. Unionists appear more agreeable now that a settlement has been brokered and Nationalists throughout the island welcome this. The recent rugby game between Ireland and England was a reflection of the new mood. It was good to see Ulster Unionist folk supporting Ireland, but kinda disappointing to some Irish folk to see them support England,’the Old Enemy.’ But thats understandable because Unionists feel more affiliated to Britain.
    Nationalists however, may feel that the ‘loyalty ‘to Britain rather than Ireland evokes the Planter mentality, of ‘us better than you’, or ‘croppie lie down’ and that Unionists ancestors were strategically placed here in Ireland as pawns in the England’s empire game to put Irish people down.

    ‘But you must realise we still have major problems with republicanism. Republicanism to us is what we see here – unrepentent physicial force – not the gentler form as understood in the ROI.

    – Thats understandable – the party political broadcast for SF in the recent NI elections was appalling.

    ‘The Tricolour and Irish language is Gerry Adams – aggressive. It certainly helped that the ROI gave them a bloody nose last month. But on the negative side for many of us when the ROI praises 1916 it is validating Adams and McGuinness and suggesting that deep down you are not our friends.’

    – The case of commmerating 1916 recently caused some concern in the Irish Republic. Not everyone agreed with it. The FF government felt that SF were encroaching in political circles and felt the need to rekindle the source of modern Irish politics before SF ‘hijacked’ it. As ye know, all Irish political parties trace their origins to 1916, and the Civil War that ensued over the partition of the country. (Irish people were so emotive about partition). The Tri-Colour preceded Gerry Adams, and it was to signify the union of all the people on the island as the 3 equal portions of colours implies, but it could be said that it was ‘hijacked’ by SF as well as the Irish language for exclusive use. The language is for eveyone on the island as it predates the confict by millenia.

  • Cruimh

    Thanks Gréagóir – I don’t think there is a lot between us.

    But as an aside – I don’t think the civil war was primarily about partition, or was it ?