ULSTER independent from UK and ROI.

Erinfan

I'm not an expert on Northern Ireland issue neither Irish national nor resident may I offer a brief portrait of the situation from my point of view.

I am neither Irish nor British and never set foot in the island.
In advance I apologize if the reader discovers errors and I urge him to correct me if this portrait lacks fairness or accuracy.

There in NI,there's a slight majority of people from Protestant cultural background and almost all/mostly descendants of English and Scottish settlers settled in the 17th century during the creation of plantations of Ulster. People here consider themselves British and still want to remain British or want to maintain strong cultural and emotional links with GB. They are often referred as loyalists or unionists.

On the other side, There's a sizable minority of people from indigenous "Irish" and from Catholic cultural background and they are called nationalists or republicans who want the reunification of the island of Ireland under the administration of the Republic of Ireland.

If the majority is satisfied with the Loyalist status quo that is to say, remain under the British crown , the minority is not comfortable to live in a country Great Britain where the overwhelming majority of people 97% is Protestant culturally speaking.

If, in the contrary to this; there's annexation of Ulster to the Republic of Ireland the "Protestants" to be drowned in a country of traditions and Catholic cultures it is also a nightmare for them.

My question is:

So why not create an independent and autonomous state in Northern Ireland just as the two community groups being substantially the same demographic weights, according to my figures of 45% are “Protestants” and 40% is traditionally “Catholic”, 15% unaffiliated, will neutralize each other and thus create a mixed culture?

dlofnep

Two things.

#1 Ulster consists of 9 counties.
#2 A 6 county statelet would collapse, and would be against the wishes of both communities. It has very little support in any polls.

Cathal O

No party / group has ever gained any support for such a state. The two views are clearly either - stay within the union or become part of a new irish state

KeithAFC

Not enough support for it.

charlemont

In fairness you mean well but it wont happen.

sollar

That would be an even worse fate for the nationalist community. At least under UK administration in 2011 discrimination isn't as tolerated as it once was. An independent NI with majority protestant rule could be a different story.

Erinfan

Not convince that both communities are opposed as you suggested.I think Unionists fear most from the independent, sovereign state because they are so accustomed to live under the umbrella of UK.

RMD

I doubt it would be viable. The country has largely survived on British subsidies and the odd bit of funding from the Republic. Make it independent without funding from either and it will face many problems.

Suafd

Seems to me there is an ironic balance between the populations of the island of Ireland and the country of scotland. About 6 million here and 5 over yonder with a sizeable protestant/unionist minority here mirrored by a sizeable catholic/republican minority in scotland. In a totalitarian regime, a straight swop would be a no brainer. However, what's interesting is the increasingly nationalism of the scots.

sensibleken

If history and boards.ie have taught us anything its that too many dont have the maturity to make a state like that work

Fr Tod Umptious

dlofnep wrote: »

Two things.

#1 Ulster consists of 9 counties.
#2 A 6 county statelet would collapse, and would be against the wishes of both communities. It has very little support in any polls.

less of the nitpicking

the OP did say that they were not an expect on the subject.

dlofnep

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

less of the nitpicking

the OP did say that they were not an expect on the subject.

That is not nitpicking.

Fr Tod Umptious

dlofnep wrote: »

That is not nitpicking.

Well it is if you ask me.

Some people use the term Ulster to mean the 6 counties of NI, others use it to refer to the 9 counties of Ulster.

There is no need to up up the OP on it.

sensibleken

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Well it is if you ask me.

Some people use the term Ulster to mean the 6 counties of NI, others use it to refer to the 9 counties of Ulster.

There is no need to up up the OP on it.

The OP asked to be corrected if he got anything wrong. and politely was corrected. he wasnt giving out to the OP for it

Cathal O

In fairness i think he needed to be corrected on the difference. There is a big difference between an independent ulster and an independent NI, the OP stated that he did not know much on the topic and so he could have meant either.

On the topic itself, there is no support for any such state, there is no real NI culture i dont believe, just extreme britishness or irishness, their culture is defined as wanting to be part of separate entities.

Fr Tod Umptious

sensibleken wrote: »

The OP asked to be corrected if he got anything wrong. and politely was corrected. he wasnt giving out to the OP for it

But there is nothing wrong with referring to NI as Ulster.

You may not agree with it, but there are people in this world who refer to NI as Ulster.

And as is typical on this form when it come to Ulster or Londonderry certain posters are quick as a flash to 'correct' people for referring to NI as Ulster or Derry as Londonderry.

On the topic itself I agree that NI is not a viable entity on it's own and will only exist as part of the UK or the ROI.

enda1

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

But there is nothing wrong with referring to NI as Ulster.

You may not agree with it, but there are people in this world who refer to NI as Ulster.

And as is typical on this form when it come to Ulster or Londonderry certain posters are quick as a flash to 'correct' people for referring to NI as Ulster or Derry as Londonderry.

On the topic itself I agree that NI is not a viable entity on it's own and will only exist as part of the UK or the ROI.

What are you on about.

Its fundamentally fucking wrong. Its like calling an apple and orange.

dlofnep

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Well it is if you ask me.

Well, it's just as well that nobody asked you. The OP asked to be corrected on any errors, and I obliged him.

Fr Tod Umptious

enda1 wrote: »

What are you on about.

Its fundamentally fucking wrong. Its like calling an apple and orange.

So who do the Ulster Unionist party represent, people in Cavan, Monaghan and Donegal too ?

Fr Tod Umptious

dlofnep wrote: »

Well, it's just as well that nobody asked you. The OP asked to be corrected on any errors, and I obliged him.

But calling NI Ulster is not an error, it's a matter of preference.

awaits Mod warning about discussion on what things are called in NI

Cathal O

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

But calling NI Ulster is not an error, it's a matter of preference.

Sorry there, but as a resident of "Ulster" but not NI, if ulster would become part of an independent state, I would be directly affected, however as the three southern ulster counties are not part of NI, I would not be affected, so there is a fundamental difference here between NI and ulster.

Two separate entities.

KeithAFC

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

But there is nothing wrong with referring to NI as Ulster.

You may not agree with it, but there are people in this world who refer to NI as Ulster.

And as is typical on this form when it come to Ulster or Londonderry certain posters are quick as a flash to 'correct' people for referring to NI as Ulster or Derry as Londonderry.

On the topic itself I agree that NI is not a viable entity on it's own and will only exist as part of the UK or the ROI.

I call it Ulster. Don't see the big deal. Just another term.

Cathal O

KeithAFC wrote: »

I call it Ulster. Don't see the big deal. Just another term.

I agree, and do not understand the usual uproar regarding simple terminology. In this regard however there is a differnce. There is a big diifference between an Independant ulster and an independant NI.

An indepandant ulster would involve me, but an independant NI wouldnt

Fr Tod Umptious

Cathal O wrote: »

Sorry there, but as a resident of "Ulster" but not NI, if ulster would become part of an independent state, I would be directly affected, however as the three southern ulster counties are not part of NI, I would not be affected, so there is a fundamental difference here between NI and ulster.

Two separate entities.

Take a look where you're livin'
You got the Army on the street
And the RUC dog of repression
Is barking at your feet

So you had better talk to the SLF and ask them to renanme their classic 'Alternative Northern Ireland'

KeithAFC

Cathal O wrote: »

I agree, and do not understand the usual uproar regarding simple terminology. In this regard however there is a differnce. There is a big diifference between an Independant ulster and an independant NI.

An indepandant ulster would involve me, but an independant NI wouldnt

Aye, i agree with that.

sensibleken

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

But there is nothing wrong with referring to NI as Ulster.

You may not agree with it, but there are people in this world who refer to NI as Ulster.

And as is typical on this form when it come to Ulster or Londonderry certain posters are quick as a flash to 'correct' people for referring to NI as Ulster or Derry as Londonderry.

On the topic itself I agree that NI is not a viable entity on it's own and will only exist as part of the UK or the ROI.

I couldnt give two flying fúcks. The OP asked to be corrected if he got anything wrong. they then were politely pointed out that Ulster has 9 counties and you jumped down his throat for it, calling it nitpicking.

you can call it Jemery the magical province if you want but if someone points out its actual name then its not nitpicking

enda1

KeithAFC wrote: »

I call it Ulster. Don't see the big deal. Just another term.

Ah Irish Catholic Keith. Glad to see you join.

Fr Tod Umptious

sensibleken wrote: »

I couldnt give two flying fúcks. The OP asked to be corrected if he got anything wrong. they then were politely pointed out that Ulster has 9 counties and you jumped down his throat for it, calling it nitpicking.

you can call it Jemery the magical province if you want but if someone points out its actual name then its not nitpicking

well you must, if you are pulling me up for saying that referring to the six counties of Northern Ireland as Ulster is quiet acceptable

dlofnep

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

But calling NI Ulster is not an error, it's a matter of preference.

It is erroneous. Ulster has 9 counties. But for the sake of not dragging this thread into a meaningless ball-dragging contest, we'll agree to disagree.

RandomName2

Erinfan wrote: »

My question is:

So why not create an independent and autonomous state in Northern Ireland just as the two community groups being substantially the same demographic weights, according to my figures of 45% are “Protestants” and 40% is traditionally “Catholic”, 15% unaffiliated, will neutralize each other and thus create a mixed culture?

The Ulster Unionists have always sought some sort of independence; particularly from the notion or reality of an Irish state, but also from Westmister to a certain extent.

If the Unionists were forced into a Home Rule Ireland at the time of the Third Home Rule Bill they would have done exactly what you are suggesting and declared independence from both the UK and Ireland and would have (at least they said) be willing to resist both with arms.

As it stands, and as it has stood since Northern Ireland came into existence, the Unionists (and also the nationalists by this stage!) have been granted independence though their own Home Rule (Stormont) whilst also benefiting from being in the united kingdom (not least through very generous hand-outs).

As such it would make no sense to leave the UK - particularly if it is just to set up shop by one's self.

If they are going to remain in the EU (and they wouldn't survive without) it would be a mostly moot point anyway (unless they were specifically doing it in order to adopt the euro... and why not join Ireland if that is your main objective?)

anymore

Cathal O wrote: »

No party / group has ever gained any support for such a state. The two views are clearly either - stay within the union or become part of a new irish state

Was there not an Independence ' faction in the 80's ?

Cathal O

anymore wrote: »

Was there not an Independence ' faction in the 80's ?

And why are they not in power at the minute?

I meant no sizeable support for it

anymore

Cathal O wrote: »

And why are they not in power at the minute?

I meant no sizeable support for it

Well I suggest you state clearly what you mean. It was a point of view that was discussed for a period - I remember reading about it.

Cathal O

anymore wrote: »

Well I suggest you state clearly what you mean. It was a point of view that was discussed for a period - I remember reading about it.

Apologies...i though it was self explanatory

cardwizzard

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

But calling NI Ulster is not an error, it's a matter of preference.

awaits Mod warning about discussion on what things are called in NI

If you can't differentiate between Ulster and NI you are either living in cloud cuckoo land or on a wind up.

deise go deo

An Independant NI would not work for several Reasons.

The first and most important reason is that the support for such a state simply dose not exist, either among political circles or amongst the population in general.

Secondally an independant NI state would not be economacally viable. They are compleatly dependant on the UK to keep their economey going.

Thirdly an Independnt NI would be hopelessly divided, their would be no scope for truely democratic institutions as each side would be too fearful of what the other would do if in power which would lead to greater social tentions and most likely a return to violence.

Fuhrer

Isnt like one in every three people in NI employed by the government, which is in turn funded by Westminster?

KeithAFC

cardwizzard wrote: »

If you can't differentiate between Ulster and NI you are either living in cloud cuckoo land or on a wind up.

I don't think anyone is saying the difference in terms of politics doesn't exist. Of course it does. The 6 v 3 discussion. But i still call it Ulster. I am a proud Ulsterman. I don't see why i should not call it Ulster.

im invisible

KeithAFC wrote: »

I don't think anyone is saying the difference in terms of politics doesn't exist. Of course it does. The 6 v 3 discussion. But i still call it Ulster. I am a proud Ulsterman. I don't see why i should not call it Ulster.

but would you say you are a proud Irishman?

enda1 wrote: »

Its fundamentally fucking wrong. Its like calling an apple and orange.

reminds me of a joke i heard in primary school:

Whats the difference between an apple and an Orange??

Fuhrer

KeithAFC wrote: »

I don't see why i should not call it Ulster.

Because its not Ulster.

KeithAFC

Fuhrer wrote: »

Because its not Ulster.

It is just semantics. Like it has been said, it is just a term. I call it Ulster and always have.

KeithAFC

im invisible wrote: »

but would you say you are a proud Irishman?





reminds me of a joke i heard in primary school:

Whats the difference between an apple and an Orange??

No.

dabestman1

you do realise that ulster is in ireland don't you? Maybe a couple of geography lessons wouldn't go a miss.

Fuhrer

KeithAFC wrote: »

It is just semantics. Like it has been said, it is just a term. I call it Ulster and always have.

You asked why you shouldn't call it Ulster.


I told you by doing so you'd be wrong.


If you want to celebrate your continued ignorance don't be be shocked when people question your intelligence.

cardwizzard

KeithAFC wrote: »

I don't think anyone is saying the difference in terms of politics doesn't exist. Of course it does. The 6 v 3 discussion. But i still call it Ulster. I am a proud Ulsterman. I don't see why i should not call it Ulster.

I fully understand what you are saying Keith. And of course you are from Ulster, which is one of our four provinces, which in turn declares you are from Ireland. However if you say your from N.I you have a choice to be Irish/British.

The fact that you call the North, Ulster, is fundamentally wrong as I am sure you are well aware of the history.

Of course you can call it Ulster or 2/3 of Ulster would be more accurate. As with everything up North it's hard to give comparisons. I'm a proud Ulster man too.:p

southsiderosie

The fact that this thread has descended into a predictable squabble about the name of the entity in question is proof enough that an independent NI would never work.

That said, the nature of the squabbling on this thread is also why people in Westminster would weep for joy if NI were to declare independence tomorrow.

KeithAFC

southsiderosie wrote: »

The fact that this thread has descended into a predictable squabble about the name of the entity in question is proof enough that an independent NI would never work.

That said, the nature of the squabbling on this thread is also why people in Westminster would weep for joy if NI were to declare independence tomorrow.

Westminster have nothing to complain about. This is the legacy of the British Empire. The people in Westminster should shut up and get on with it. Pack of **** they are.

Erinfan

Hi I am OP and excuse my naiveté .


Sorry for the confusion that people who live outside the island of Ireland have on the meaning of Ulster. It's further proof that the world has only a vague idea of the conflict in Northern Ireland.
My brief summary of the situation reflects the view of a person “lambda” interviewed on the streets of Paris, Brussels ,Sydney ,Ottawa or Tel Aviv.

I have always believed that the name Ulster is Unionists favourite for Northern Ireland, and the Nationalists prefer Northern Ireland or the six counties.
When you're on a discussion forum is not just to support your point of view but also to learn.
I'm sure many people not living in the British Isles have learned the difference.
Ulster has 9 counties while NI refers to the 6 counties. Duly noted.


Assuming that every problem has a solution I will try to expose the view point of person not very familiar with the issue.

Many people are amazed by the Ireland problem which is considered from another age. At a time when Europe is built on regional lines rather than on states boundaries how can we understand that two cousins people – I have been told that both Scots and Irish are all from Celtics extractions-are torn for 80 years to learn how to live together in peace.
Boers and Bantu peoples of southern Africa have shown that physical differences racial, or cultural cohabitation does not prevent a good deal.
The Irish problem to date is “only” 800 years old while that of the Middle East has existed since at least 2000 years and is on track to find a solution.
When the Romans destroyed the temple in Jerusalem and forced the Hebrew people to disperse throughout the world it passed seven centuries before the Muslim’s conquest of Jerusalem and at the spot where once stood the temple of Jerusalem the Muslims built a mosque. The Wailing Wall is a remnant of the temple is at a stone's throw from the mosque.
The extremists on both sides vow to destroy one or the other of the two holy places for the other
What is the situation more complex?

In general the world sympathizer always with the most oppressed or supposed to be the weakest. The British which has a long history of conquest, domination and colonization has had a bad role. But with the advent of media and especially TV startled the world has witnessed the unleashing of violence and this has served the cause of more nationalist or republican violence that is attributable to both parties.

So what do I mean by that? Well the story is punctuated with injustices and humiliations but people must move on and look to the future. The Hebrew people are a perfect example to learn from.
The American white people have killed millions of indigenous and imported millions of others from Africa just to replace them . Is there more inhuman than this but this does not prevent the people of American to go forward andl elect a person of colour in the most prestigious position of their nation.

To return to the situation in Ulster- forgiveness- in Northern Ireland there are two numerically equal cousins peoples as indistinguishable from each other except their history, grapple for decades on land apparently with no natural resources apart from the strong winds, I have been told .

A friend told me that you can not distinguish a Protestant from a Catholic in a street of central Belfast.
So you say me all that there is no alternative to the situation if not the reattachment to one or other of the entities that half of your people rejects .The solution of an independent state on the disputed land is not economically viable in the best case or can receive the assent of only a fraction of belligerents people.

The Republic of Ireland you it is not in the perfusion of the IMF and EU at the moment?

cardwizzard

Erinfan, thanks for your interest in this. Always good to get an outsider view on things that go on here. I for one can bury my head in the sand and argue my point all day with out taking anything else on board, as alot of stubborn Irish men can.

It's very easy to say there is a solution to every problem. My thoughts are that time is a great healer and over the coming decades people on both sides will learn to live and co-operate better with each other. Of course it always boils down to extremists on either side and how far they are willing to budge.

However if you compare Ireland to Israel thats a hard one. You say they are on track to find a solution. Stability is the key and while Ireland isn't great, its a lot more stable than the Middle East, which always return to fighting/war.

If your looking for a protestant in Belfast, they are all the ugly ones.:D:D

Only kidding Keith.

southsiderosie

KeithAFC wrote: »

Westminster have nothing to complain about. This is the legacy of the British Empire. The people in Westminster should shut up and get on with it. Pack of **** they are.

LOL, Westminster is not still bankrolling Kenya and Jamaica.

If anyone should shut up and get on with it, it's the people in NI, but posts like yours and others on these threads make it abundantly clear why certain people make that damn near impossible for everyone else.

Bottle_of_Smoke

southsiderosie wrote: »

LOL, Westminster is not still bankrolling Kenya and Jamaica.

If anyone should shut up and get on with it, it's the people in NI, but posts like yours and others on these threads make it abundantly clear why certain people make that damn near impossible for everyone else.

There is still an element of truth in his point in that it is in Westminister's interest to ensure Northern Ireland stay's a part of the UK because in some respects it protects the union.

If its citizens voted to unify with the rest of Ireland it is likely nationalism may be boosted in Scotland and Wales. Most politicians at Westminister are unionist at least for the island of Britain.

Even Cameron was openly supportive of the union in his election campaign - in his speech at Stormont and recently about Scotland. I think most English people want to keep the union with Scotland and Wales so even if they don't care about Northern Ireland in itself - Northern Ireland's presence in the union is important for unionism overall.

The statement that Britain has no strategic interest in Northern Ireland and only remain there because the people want them to was a lie intended to soften up nationalists. The majority of Hong Kong citizens wanted them to stay too but keeping control of a nation the other side of the Peoples Republic of China would have been a a lot more complicated than the conflict in Ireland.