Loyalism in a United ireland

Neo Unionist

One of the main reasons why Ireland was partitioned into North and South was because Irish and Ulster Unionists took it upon themselvesto fight against Home Rule. On the opposite side of things you had Irish Nationalists who were going to fight for its implementation. Yet the country was divided to cater for the Unionist minority group, a group who didn’t even have exclusive representation in their own newly created state.

So why is it that Loyalists are considered a potential threat in a United Ireland when the police are capable of dealing with the current republican threat in a divided Ireland considering that Republicans outnumber Unionists on the island?

Was it, and is it the case that Loyalism and the threat it brings is overhyped in order to justify partition?

Iwasfrozen

Have you ever thought you might get on better with your neighbours if you stopped trying to force your political views on them? No? Just asking.

Mr Cumulonimbus

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Have you ever thought you might get on better with your neighbours if you stopped trying to force your political views on them? No? Just asking.

Were you solely thinking of Irish Nationalists/Republicans when you were typing this? No? Just asking.

Iwasfrozen

Mr Cumulonimbus wrote: »

Were you solely thinking of Irish Nationalists/Republicans when you were typing this? No? Just asking.

I was thinking of hypocritical republicans who fought for the right to self determination from Britain then fought to deny that right to the unionist community.

Why? Because they had the jingoistic compulsion to extend their dominion over all of Ireland regardless of how the locals felt about this.

Mr Cumulonimbus

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I was thinking of hypocritical republicans who fought for the right to self determination from Britain then fought to deny that right to the unionist community.

I was unaware the partition process unfolded like this.

how the locals felt about this.

November 1918 election results?

enricoh

the orange order covered themselves in glory again last night, no-one does bitterness better! good luck to the tourism board up there, methinks they,re pi.ssing against the wind!

Neo Unionist

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Have you ever thought you might get on better with your neighbours if you stopped trying to force your political views on them? No? Just asking.

That is assuming that all people from Northern Ireland are Unionist which they clearly are not.

Riddle101

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I was thinking of hypocritical republicans who fought for the right to self determination from Britain then fought to deny that right to the unionist community.

If it came to a choice between Irish independence, and catering to the unionist community(which were a minority) which choice would you make if you were a republican trying to get independence? Keeping in mind, Unionist were obstructive to their aims.

Why? Because they had the jingoistic compulsion to extend their dominion over all of Ireland regardless of how the locals felt about this.

England extended their dominion all over the world regardless of how people felt about it from those countries. America got their independence, India fought for independence too. So you could say, Unionists didn't exactly have a problem with British dominion over the locals either. They were happy to see Ireland stay British, regardless of locals who wanted independence.

everdead.ie

I don't see why Loyalism would be an issue in a United Ireland.
Loyalists would still be gauranteed all their rights and marches the only issue I could forsee is that a lot of the bonfires would be made to downsize so they don't damage the surrounding buildings.

Can't think of any other issues except for protests etc.

Richard Hillman

enricoh wrote: »

the orange order covered themselves in glory again last night, no-one does bitterness better! good luck to the tourism board up there, methinks they,re pi.ssing against the wind!

Bitterness? They are celebrating battles that they won.

Riddle101

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Bitterness? They are celebrating battles that they won.

This doesn't look like celebrating to me
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/belfast-riots-400-extra-police-drafted-in-following-violence-as-mp-nigel-dodds-is-hit-by-brick-8706685.html

But sure even last year, when they stopped out outside St Patrick's church and played sectarian songs. Or the bonfires with tri color flags being burned. Yeah that doesn't show bitterness at all.

Swan Curry

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Bitterness? They are celebrating battles that they won.

What's this "they" business?The only "battles" today's Orangemen have experience of is when they attack the police.

Banjo String

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Bitterness? They are celebrating battles that they won.

that's commonly referred to as triumphalism.

Parading in areas they're obviously not wanted, nor welcomed in, if that's not bitterness what is?

The twelfth should be organised in future as something akin to Glastonbury. A huge field in the middle of nowhere with thousands of other like minded people get together to celebrate their 'culture'. No one should be offended, no one would feel intimidated.

WakeUp

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Bitterness? They are celebrating battles that they won.

In fairness, the Loyalists involved in the sectarian triumphalism weve witnessed over the past couple of days were celebrating their depressing & bigoted inability to move on from the 17th century and nothing more.

Richard Hillman

I am just pointing out the misuse of the word bitter. They protestants won their battle and it is the other side that are bitter about losing, otherwise there would be no objections to the march.

OCorcrainn

So you think it is perfectly ok for Orange parades to march down nationalist and catholic areas with banners of loyalists like Lenny Murphy, Michael Stone, Billy Wright or banners of the Red Hand Commandos, UFF, UVF, UDA and the LVF? Not to mention loyalists after having been given permission to march on their contested traditional routes calling nationalists and Catholics "second class citizens"?

You ignorance on these facts as to why they are so opposed is astounding.

Iwasfrozen

Mr Cumulonimbus wrote: »

November 1918 election results?

What about them?

Iwasfrozen

Neo Unionist wrote: »

That is assuming that all people from Northern Ireland are Unionist which they clearly are not.

No it isn't. When I said neighbours I was talking, albeit not exclusively, about unionists.

Buzz84

SamHall wrote: »

that's commonly referred to as triumphalism.

Parading in areas they're obviously not wanted, nor welcomed in, if that's not bitterness what is?

The twelfth should be organised in future as something akin to Glastonbury. A huge field in the middle of nowhere with thousands of other like minded people get together to celebrate their 'culture'. No one should be offended, no one would feel intimidated.

But if they thought they couldnt offend anyone what would be the point for them?

Iwasfrozen

Riddle101 wrote: »

If it came to a choice between Irish independence, and catering to the unionist community(which were a minority) which choice would you make if you were a republican trying to get independence? Keeping in mind, Unionist were obstructive to their aims.

Exactly. Which highlights the hypocrisy inherit in Irish nationalism.

England extended their dominion all over the world regardless of how people felt about it from those countries. America got their independence, India fought for independence too. So you could say, Unionists didn't exactly have a problem with British dominion over the locals either. They were happy to see Ireland stay British, regardless of locals who wanted independence.

Another example to highlight the hypocrisy of a movement fighting against foreign domination trying to dominate another people.

Hypocrisy and doublethink are inherit in Irish nationalism.

Riddle101

Richard Hillman wrote: »

I am just pointing out the misuse of the word bitter. They protestants won their battle and it is the other side that are bitter about losing, otherwise there would be no objections to the march.

The objection comes from the antagonistic nature of the marches. When you've got an openly sectarian organisation matching through a nationalist area singing sectarian songs etc. Well one does not need to guess why there is so much objection.

Exactly. Which highlights the hypocrisy inherit in Irish nationalism.

You're over exaggerating at best. You think people who fight for independence are going to have full support of what they are doing? You don't think that America or India didn't have people who opposed independence either. The people who oppose can't be helped, and there will always be people opposed to it, that is a fact. So yeah, unionist weren't exactly apart of the overall plan for Irish Independence. But you make it seem like they were oppressed, which was the other way around. Unionist were apart of the problem as well, and there was no other way to deal with it.

Another example to highlight the hypocrisy of a movement fighting against foreign domination trying to dominate another people.

I don't see an example. I just see you trying to undermine my points, with the assessment that fighting for independence is the same thing as a country/empire trying to exert it's control over the world forcibly. When the French Resistance was active during the second world war, do you think they should have taken into account the Vichy Government? Or The Partisans in Yugoslavia who were fighting Nazi control in that country. Should they have taken into account the people who co-operated with the Nazis? Like Ante Pavelic and the Ustaše regime.

The real hypocrites are the Unionists/Loyalists.

Hannibal

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

What about them?

"regardless of how the locals felt about this" is indicated by the result of the 1918 Irish general election and it's pretty clear exactly how the locals felt:

Sinn Féin led by Eamon de Valera won 73 seats and 46.9% of the vote.

Irish Unionist Alliance led by Edward Carson won 22 seats and 25.3% of the vote

Irish Parliamentary Party led by John Dillon won 6 seats and 21.7% of the vote.

clairefontaine

Dotsey wrote: »

"regardless of how the locals felt about this" is indicated by the result of the 1918 Irish general election and it's pretty clear exactly how the locals felt:

Sinn Féin led by Eamon de Valera won 73 seats and 46.9% of the vote.

Irish Unionist Alliance led by Edward Carson won 22 seats and 25.3% of the vote

Irish Parliamentary Party led by John Dillon won 6 seats and 21.7% of the vote.

Was this before women were allowed to vote in Ireland? Did they vote in that election? Just curious.

Mr Cumulonimbus

clairefontaine wrote: »

Was this before women were allowed to vote in Ireland? Did they vote in that election? Just curious.

Men over 21 and women over 30, but not all women over 30. There were still some restrictions based around property ownership I think.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Hypocrisy and doublethink are inherit in Irish nationalism.

?

Strange that. Unionism was in a minority in the one time that there was an all island election based on a model of decent enough universal suffrage. They refused to accept the wishes of the majority on the island who voted for varying forms of independence, but once partition was up and running they lost no time in telling nationalists in the new NI state that they had to abide by the democratic wishes of "the majority". Hypocrisy and doublethink as well?

Happyman42

Richard Hillman wrote: »

I am just pointing out the misuse of the word bitter. They protestants won their battle and it is the other side that are bitter about losing, otherwise there would be no objections to the march.

They may have won the battle but they have lost the war, that is what they show in a display of ranting stubborness to face reality every July.

Jelle1880

Riddle101 wrote: »

The objection comes from the antagonistic nature of the marches. When you've got an openly sectarian organisation matching through a nationalist area singing sectarian songs etc. Well one does not need to guess why there is so much objection.

Who was walking through nationalist areas ?

SoulandForm

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Who was walking through nationalist areas ?

The Orange Order.

Personally Im in favour of just a straight out ban on them.

Jelle1880

SoulandForm wrote: »

The Orange Order.

Personally Im in favour of just a straight out ban on them.

Shocking

They weren't walking through any nationalist area, unless you constitute passing the Ardoyne shops as 'walking through'.

SoulandForm

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Shocking

They weren't walking through any nationalist area, unless you constitute passing the Ardoyne shops as 'walking through'.

I dont like this idea of Catholic streets and Protestant streets yet given the Orange Order's history its hardly surprising that Catholics or generally Republican/nationalist/Socialist people dont want them around. Ardoyne shops are part of the neighbourhood and more than that the whole area got sealed off to accommodate these bigots.

Its either ban them completely eventually OR they say sorry for all the damage that they have done where ever in the globe they have been.

Jelle1880

In which case you'd have to ban all Republican/National flute bands and/or organisations who march through Belfast as well...

I agree that this whole idea of Republican/Nationalist and Loyalist/Unionist neighbourhoods is outdated, but if you see the yearly outbursts of violence from both sides then it's crystal clear that there are still elements who refuse to, or are simply unable to co-exist with one another.

i think it's also important to stress that the only flashpoint of violence and trouble was near the Ardoyne, more than 500 other parades all over Northern Ireland and in the Republic passed without any incident or tension.

Buzz84

Jelle1880 wrote: »

In which case you'd have to ban all Republican/National flute bands and/or organisations who march through Belfast as well...

I agree that this whole idea of Republican/Nationalist and Loyalist/Unionist neighbourhoods is outdated, but if you see the yearly outbursts of violence from both sides then it's crystal clear that there are still elements who refuse to, or are simply unable to co-exist with one another.

i think it's also important to stress that the only flashpoint of violence and trouble was near the Ardoyne, more than 500 other parades all over Northern Ireland and in the Republic passed without any incident or tension.

What do you mean out dated? People don't have much choice. Would you feel comfortable living on the Shankill Road or vice versa