Should Ireland join the Commonwealth

alastair · 23-04-2014 12:52pm

sparky42 wrote: »

Not that I know of and with Russia on the Security council it wouldn't happen anyway.

But since the commonwealth refused to take up the recommendations of the 2011 review that included repealing the anti Homosexuality laws, and banning Forced Marriages and the creation of a Commissioner for Human Rights I'd say there is at least as active a resistance as elements of the UN towards Human Rights.

So - it's not that there's no debate, it's that members refuse to play ball? Again - this isn't radically different to the frustrations and limits of any groups of nations coming together. I'm not particularly impressed with the Commonwealth's record on a number of issues, and will grant that it's intrinsically got less leverage than the UN has, but none of those are reasons to stay out. I come back to the question of whether - even if it's only a talking shop, is it better to add your voice to debate within, or stay outside harping that it gets nothing done?

For me, the cons outweigh the pros for Irish membership currently, but I don't think the grouping is without some merit.

sparky42 · 23-04-2014 1:03pm

alastair wrote: »

So - it's not that there's no debate, it's that members refuse to play ball? Again - this isn't radically different to the frustrations and limits of any groups of nations coming together. I'm not particularly impressed with the Commonwealth's record on a number of issues, and will grant that it's intrinsically got less leverage than the UN has, but none of those are reasons to stay out. I come back to the question of whether - even if it's only a talking shop, is it better to add your voice to debate within, or stay outside harping that it gets nothing done?

For me, the cons outweigh the pros for Irish membership currently, but I don't think the grouping is without some merit.

Well I'd disagree with what actual level of debate is happening and how much is one liner PR statements (remember with the new conservative OZ PM even Australia isn't supportive of equality at the moment). We already have a voice in the UN and a fairly active one at that (no matter what the end result of it is), I don't see why we need to have a voice in the Commonwealth or what possible value it would have (it's not like our voice would make the difference to any of it's issues).

Frankly I just don't see the value of it, nor am I convinced about it's long term viability, once the Queen is gone who knows how it develops (we don't even know how the Republican feeling in Australia will develop post Queen and with the increasing relationship/reliance with the US), China is gaining massive influence in Africa due to investment and is shaping Government policies there, the social views are unlikely to realign (not with the US Christian Right pumping money into conservative Africa), democracy hasn't exactly flourished under the Commonwealth in many nations, and the Muslim member nations aren't exactly happy with the international policies of the UK/Dominions.

Khomeini · 23-04-2014 3:03pm

To those who say it has no benefits... would you be happy to join if there were monetary benefits?

sparky42 · 23-04-2014 3:06pm

Khomeini wrote: »

To those who say it has no benefits... would you be happy to join if there were monetary benefits?

Not really no, I don't see it as an institution of value or of long term development.

Khomeini · 23-04-2014 3:13pm

sparky42 wrote: »

Not really no, I don't see it as an institution of value or of long term development.

Hypothetically, if it presented long term prosperity would you be for Ireland joining the Commonwealth?

sparky42 · 23-04-2014 3:24pm

Khomeini wrote: »

Hypothetically, if it presented long term prosperity would you be for Ireland joining the Commonwealth?

As it's currently structured no, there are too many undemocratic forces (and anti human rights forces) that go unchecked and have blocked attempts to strengthen it's commitments outside of words in human rights or democracy. A reformed commonwealth which did actually take action on HR violations, or Corruption, Vote buying, perhaps yes.

But considering the likelihood of political instability/cost that joining would bring to the Irish political system (even to a reformed Commonwealth), perhaps not.

Either way it's not likely to be anything anyone old enough to post here has to deal with, right now the only suggestion of movement would be in the situation of NI unification, which is even less likely to happen in my view.

walrusgumble · 23-04-2014 4:19pm

Godge wrote: »

It is an interesting idea but not a new one.

Those genuinely interested in a united Ireland have previously floated the idea as a compromise i.e Ireland is united but rejoins the Commonwealth.

Independent United Ireland or nothing. The north is not worth joining the Commonwealth

walrusgumble · 23-04-2014 4:22pm

Khomeini wrote: »

Hypothetically, if it presented long term prosperity would you be for Ireland joining the Commonwealth?

Factually and realistically , it won't. To suggest otherwise is naive and down right dishonest. It is no different to the crap that came from Enda Kenny about voting for Lisbon = Jobs. Commonwealth does little for the man in Camden Street London. No matter how many times the David Norris' of this world click their red shoes and shout, Commonwealth = long term prosperity, it does not mean that it will. Hell, even the British, secretly, accept that their place is in Europe

There is little to prevent our current legislators and NGO's from going out to India, Australia , Canada, Pakistan to campagin and push for more business. We can set up our own prices and deals and set up our own immigration policies .

We don't need a big swanky dinner gala for Commonwealth chums to achieve these things.

There is enough resentment towards the EU , why the hell would we want to get involved in an irrelevant, cermonial and historical clap trap that is the Commonwealth ?

sparky42 · 23-04-2014 4:22pm

walrusgumble wrote: »

Independent United Ireland or nothing. The north is not worth joining the Commonwealth

Short of ethnic cleansing (which Ireland itself would stop) there are going to be Unionists in Northern Ireland that are going to have to be accommodated if anything changed.

Now the reality is it's not going to change so it's not a concern.

walrusgumble · 23-04-2014 4:31pm

alastair wrote: »

You could make equally valid criticisms of the UN. Surely better to have a forum that provides debate on the issues than to stand outside harping?

UN actually do intervene in conflicts. Our boys have been risking their lives in the Leb for some time. They send aid, and do up reports.

Lack of action is due to the democractic system and ability to block action

So, no, the UN is not comparable to the Commonwealth, ask any Refugee in a camp in eg DRC, Cameroon, Rwanda.........

walrusgumble · 23-04-2014 4:36pm

sparky42 wrote: »

Short of ethnic cleansing (which Ireland itself would stop) there are going to be Unionists in Northern Ireland that are going to have to be accommodated if anything changed.

Now the reality is it's not going to change so it's not a concern.

That is an issue irrespective of associating the Commonwealth. You do not need to be in the Commonwealth to achieve that!

The Unionists will be a minority. They are a minority and their days are numbered (not for one minute suggesting that all Catholics are Nationalist or that even all Nationalists in the North would genuinely support a UI at this time)

Outside of the important social and civil liberties and rights that they have and entitled to have, why should we pander to them, when some of them, will be required to vote YES to a United Ireland. The way the South is now, we ain't the big Catholic country that it use to be - then again, that doesn't bother Unionists, as they will find something to get paranoid over

No pandering! Too much, not worth Uniting.

What accommdating are you referring to ? We have Unionists in the South too , so sod them!

Ethinic Cleansing? No need, the Nationalists are doing well at Queen's Belfast , the PSNI, Government Buildings

alastair · 23-04-2014 5:13pm

walrusgumble wrote: »

UN actually do intervene in conflicts. Our boys have been risking their lives in the Leb for some time. They send aid, and do up reports.

Lack of action is due to the democractic system and ability to block action

So, no, the UN is not comparable to the Commonwealth, ask any Refugee in a camp in eg DRC, Cameroon, Rwanda.........

The criticisms referenced are equally applicable to the UN. No-one suggested the UN and the Commonwealth were comparable as organisations.

alastair · 23-04-2014 5:15pm

walrusgumble wrote: »

The Unionists will be a minority. They are a minority and their days are numbered (not for one minute suggesting that all Catholics are Nationalist or that even all Nationalists in the North would genuinely support a UI at this time)

On what basis are 'their days numbered'? Because it doesn't look that way by any reasonable measure.

ZeitgeistGlee · 23-04-2014 6:24pm

sparky42 wrote: »

Can you find any popular support for discussion on such an issue? Thats ike suggesting that the US doesn't rejoin the Commonwealth because "populist sentiment renders the discussion moot".

I was referring to Ireland rejoining the UK.

sparky42 · 23-04-2014 6:29pm

ZeitgeistGlee wrote: »

I was referring to Ireland rejoining the UK.

Rejoining the UK?:eek: That's not populist sentiment against it, that's national identity. It's also stupid to suggest otherwise, or do you want to start redrawing borders?:rolleyes:

ZeitgeistGlee · 23-04-2014 6:45pm

sparky42 wrote: »

Rejoining the UK?:eek: That's not populist sentiment against it, that's national identity. It's also stupid to suggest otherwise, or do you want to start redrawing borders?:rolleyes:

Are the Scottish, English and Welsh any less nationally identifiable for being part of the UK? The Welsh who've been part of the UK far longer than either ourselves or Scotland have managed to retain a hugely obvious sense of independent identity.

Your response basically makes my point for me though seeing as you jumped straight to "redraw national borders and lose all sense of identity" rather than actually reasonably discussing the idea. Magnify by that "800 years! Rabble rabble!" and yes, any chance for a dispassionate debate centred around genuine pros and cons is lost to "populist sentiment". No politician in this country wants to be known as the one who suggested rejoining the UK.

sparky42 · 23-04-2014 6:54pm

ZeitgeistGlee wrote: »

Are the Scottish, English and Welsh any less nationally identifiable for being part of the UK? The Welsh who've been part of the UK far longer than either ourselves or Scotland have managed to retain a hugely obvious sense of independent identity.

Your response basically makes my point for me though seeing as you jumped straight to "redraw national borders and lose all sense of identity" rather than actually reasonably discussing the idea. Magnify by that "800 years! Rabble rabble!" and yes, any chance for a dispassionate debate centred around genuine pros and cons is lost to "populist sentiment". No politician in this country wants to be known as the one who suggested rejoining the UK.

And at least a portion of the Scots want out from the UK, both the Welsh and Scots would argue about London centric polices that ignore them at best, disadvantage them at worse.

No politician here wants to suggest it, as there is zero pubic interest in doing so, seriously can you suggest a single study at any point from any academic or policy group that has given any percentage of support for such a suggestion. Suggesting otherwise is divorced from reality, suggesting Ireland be part of the UK is both a) Trolling and b) at least 150 years to late. It has nothing to do with "rabble", I'm quite happy with the improvements and normalisation of the relationship, but what you are suggesting is nonsense.

I can argue economic reasons why we shouldn't, I could argue the political reasons why we wouldn't have been a happy fit post 1916. If you want something else go to an AH forum and suggest it.

By the way there's nothing stopping you from living and working a long and healthy life in the UK if you feel so strongly about being part of the UK again.

riffmongous · 23-04-2014 6:54pm

ZeitgeistGlee wrote: »

Are the Scottish, English and Welsh any less nationally identifiable for being part of the UK? The Welsh who've been part of the UK far longer than either ourselves or Scotland have managed to retain a hugely obvious sense of independent identity.

Your response basically makes my point for me though seeing as you jumped straight to "redraw national borders and lose all sense of identity" rather than actually reasonably discussing the idea. Magnify by that "800 years! Rabble rabble!" and yes, any chance for a dispassionate debate centred around genuine pros and cons is lost to "populist sentiment". No politician in this country wants to be known as the one who suggested rejoining the UK.

Well why don't you put forward a few pros then so and just ignore the people who argue on 'popular sentiment'? But so far no one has put forward any reason why we should have a debate on it in the first place

sparky42 · 23-04-2014 7:00pm

riffmongous wrote: »

Well why don't you put forward a few pros then so and just ignore the people who argue on 'popular sentiment'? But so far no one has put forward any reason why we should have a debate on it in the first place

Exactly, would he support for example the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and demand that the Irish army have deployed in them if we were part of the UK then, when the UK gets into it's next war would he support/volunteer for deployment?

What about the UK's Nuclear weapons, what about the defence relationships with less than good people?

silverbolt · 23-04-2014 7:05pm

erm no we shouldnt

we dont need them and things are fine the way they are between us

restarting all that again will have the IRA bombing schools again

recipio · 23-04-2014 7:17pm

If you leave emotion out of it then re-joining the UK has a lot going for it.
A better standard of living, a free health service and an end to partition once and for all.
This state was founded on a wave of nationalist emotion and if we could supress that and think more logically it is feasible.
We are all moving to a global economy anyway - I'm going to guess there will be a bridge/chunnel to the UK by 2050. Who is happy with the two dysfunctional states we now have, north and south. ? I'm not.

sparky42 · 23-04-2014 7:24pm

recipio wrote: »

If you leave emotion out of it then re-joining the UK has a lot going for it.
A better standard of living, a free health service and an end to partition once and for all.
This state was founded on a wave of nationalist emotion and if we could supress that and think more logically it is feasible.
We are all moving to a global economy anyway - I'm going to guess there will be a bridge/chunnel to the UK by 2050. Who is happy with the two dysfunctional states we now have, north and south. ? I'm not.

Same could be said about the Eastern European and 'Stan nations asking to rejoin Russia, not sure they'd jump at it.

ZeitgeistGlee · 23-04-2014 7:35pm

sparky42 wrote: »

And at least a portion of the Scots want out from the UK, both the Welsh and Scots would argue about London centric polices that ignore them at best, disadvantage them at worse.

Your point was they we'd have no identity in the UK, please don't try to move goalposts.

Whether or not the Scots want out has more to do with (according to what I've seen from the pro-movement) what they perceive as being the cost/benefit ratio of being a member vs being outside the UK. Their identity being strengthened seems to be tacted on as a bit of an afterthought to "we contribute more financially to the UK than we receive".

sparky42 wrote: »

No politician here wants to suggest it, as there is zero pubic interest in doing so, seriously can you suggest a single study at any point from any academic or policy group that has given any percentage of support for such a suggestion. Suggesting otherwise is divorced from reality, suggesting Ireland be part of the UK is both a) Trolling and b) at least 150 years to late. It has nothing to do with "rabble", I'm quite happy with the improvements and normalisation of the relationship, but what you are suggesting is nonsense.

No, no politician wants to suggest it because of the instantaneous knee-jerk negativity which it would come with, it would be political suicide or at least yield deep marginalisation.

I could go looking for academic support on the suggestion being seeing as my original point was exactly the kind of response I've been getting renders it moot it seems a bit well, moot.

Funnily enough I find when I raise the notion of joining a federalised Europe (which I am actually a supporter of), there's never quite this level of vehemence in response. Realistically there's not a lot of appreciable difference between the two.

sparky42 wrote: »

I can argue economic reasons why we shouldn't, I could argue the political reasons why we wouldn't have been a happy fit post 1916. If you want something else go to an AH forum and suggest it.

Don't be facetious, we both know the response the AH would garner. :rolleyes:

sparky42 wrote: »

By the way there's nothing stopping you from living and working a long and healthy life in the UK if you feel so strongly about being part of the UK again.

Honestly that's just a nonsensical strawman. I can't discuss the pros and cons of rejoining the UK without being a diehard Unionist? Pull the other one like a good man. :rolleyes:

sparky42 wrote: »

Exactly, would he support for example the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and demand that the Irish army have deployed in them if we were part of the UK then, when the UK gets into it's next war would he support/volunteer for deployment?

What about the UK's Nuclear weapons, what about the defence relationships with less than good people?

Kindly address your questions for me to me Sparky. :rolleyes:

As to said questions:

1) I didn't support Iraq or Afghanistan the first time they happened. Whether or not I'd support any new wars we found ourselves involved in would depend entirely on who we were fighting.

2) Nuclear weapons disarmament is a sensible, laudable and desirable goal and should be a global aim rather than that of individual nations.

3) As for defence relationships with "less than good people", I think everyone knows they're not worth the paper their printed on vs political expediency. However, such relationships where they exist are undesirable and should be revoked at the earliest instance.

And really I have several friends in the UK with extremely similar outlooks to myself, should they all decamp over here seeing as they don't meet your view as to what a UK citizen should believe in?

ZeitgeistGlee · 23-04-2014 7:36pm

sparky42 wrote: »

Same could be said about the Eastern European and 'Stan nations asking to rejoin Russia, not sure they'd jump at it.

I didn't realise the UK and Russia had so much similarity in their recent geopolitical actions. Did we lose a county and nobody mentioned it?

riffmongous · 23-04-2014 7:51pm

recipio wrote: »

A better standard of living

In which ways? Northern Ireland remained part of the Union and I don't think their standard of living is so much better than in Ireland

a free health service

That's one area the UK is better than Ireland alright, but the problems with the HSE could certainly be fixed independently.

and an end to partition once and for all.

I don't think it works like that.

sparky42 · 23-04-2014 7:56pm

ZeitgeistGlee wrote: »

I didn't realise the UK and Russia had so much similarity in their recent geopolitical actions. Did we lose a county and nobody mentioned it?

I'm sure that plenty of Iraqis and Afghans might think they are the same. Hell you have Blair touting that the UK should support Russia and invade Syria today.

The point about you supporting the war or not is moot as it won't matter, if the English population decide to go to war the UK goes to war combined the rest don't have the votes/population to do otherwise.

sparky42 · 23-04-2014 7:58pm

riffmongous wrote: »

In which ways? Northern Ireland remained part of the Union and I don't think their standard of living is so much better than in Ireland

More over that exists because the rest of the UK pays for it to exist due to historic policies, there is no guarantee that they would be willing to carry out such equal transfers to the whole of Ireland.

sparky42 · 23-04-2014 8:00pm

ZeitgeistGlee wrote: »

No, no politician wants to suggest it because of the instantaneous knee-jerk negativity which it would come with, it would be political suicide or at least yield deep marginalisation.

I could go looking for academic support on the suggestion being seeing as my original point was exactly the kind of response I've been getting renders it moot it seems a bit well, moot.

Funnily enough I find when I raise the notion of joining a federalised Europe (which I am actually a supporter of), there's never quite this level of vehemence in response. Realistically there's not a lot of appreciable difference between the two.

So you think basically that if only we could get our heads out of our asses that should realise that this whole independence thing is over rated. If you are so convinced of your argument then you should get data and support it otherwise its just nonsense on the net.

ZeitgeistGlee · 23-04-2014 8:08pm

sparky42 wrote: »

The point about you supporting the war or not is moot as it won't matter, if the English population decide to go to war the UK goes to war combined the rest don't have the votes/population to do otherwise.

True, unfortunately that's just part of being in the minority. I'm sure there are plenty here in Tipperary who lament measures put forth for the benefit of Dublin but we aren't trying to secede from the Republic (we leave that to Cork).

sparky42 wrote: »

So you think basically that if only we could get our heads out of our asses that should realise that this whole independence thing is over rated. If you are so convinced of your argument then you should get data and support it otherwise its just nonsense on the net.

No, I believe if we could put aside that initial discomfort at the idea that we'd actually find there are pros instead of just cons. They're our biggest trading partner and we share numerous cultural similarities, I don't see why extending further bridges to our mutual benefit is such a terrible idea.

And just to clarify, rejoining the UK is of absolutely zero interest or disinterest to me outside of purely academic speculation. Likewise with Reunification with the North, if it happens as part of the will of the people then "yay", if it doesn't, it doesn't. The most important part of if it does is that we ensure we're getting the most pros for the least cons. Same as our position in the EU.

sparky42 · 23-04-2014 8:15pm

ZeitgeistGlee wrote: »

True, unfortunately that's just part of being in the minority. I'm sure there are plenty here in Tipperary who lament measures put forth for the benefit of Dublin but we aren't trying to secede from the Republic (we leave that to Cork).

I think there might be a minor difference about arguing about x amount of money being spent in another county, and going to war where thousands of our people are killed or wounded, tens of thousands if not more on the other side are killed or wounded, and tens of billions are wasted in said war.

No, I believe if we could put aside that initial discomfort at the idea that we'd actually find there are pros instead of just cons. They're our biggest trading partner and we share numerous cultural similarities, I don't see why extending further bridges to our mutual benefit is such a terrible idea.

And just to clarify, rejoining the UK is of absolutely zero interest or disinterest to me outside of purely academic speculation. Likewise with Reunification with the North, if it happens as part of the will of the people then "yay", if it doesn't, it doesn't. The most important part of if it does is that we ensure we're getting the most pros for the least cons. Same as our position in the EU.

Plenty of our economic performance is because we are separate from the UK, why do you think NI and Scotland are demanding Corporate Tax rate rights from London to compete with us.

Should Ireland join the Commonwealth

Comments