Would a devolved government continue in the north under a united Ireland?

AngryLips

This has been vexing me lately.

comongethappy

Yes, more than likely.

maccored

how could it? a UI would mean all the country is stripped down and rebuilt as one. it wouldnt happen over night - in fact it would probably take decades.

_Kaiser_

I'd imagine initially yes while both governments got everything sorted out, but in the medium-long term the counties of the North would just be setup like the rest of em.

But I can't ever see it happening - why on earth would they want to join our parochial, corrupt, incompetent, bankrupt, little country?

comongethappy

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

But I can't ever see it happening - why on earth would they want to join our parochial, corrupt, incompetent, bankrupt, little country?

Especially when they already have one all to themselve!

AngryLips

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

But I can't ever see it happening - why on earth would they want to join our parochial, corrupt, incompetent, bankrupt, little country?

Well this wasn't the question, the assumption is they would some day.

tadcan

I would presume yes, since a yes vote would succeed by a few percent, meaning many people would be upset at the change. I also imagine that services like the NHS/police would have a partial hybrid role during a change over period. N.I will always have a distinct culture, regardless of which side of the fence you are on and the government in Dublin might not be much better in understanding the local politics then the government in London.

We could even have a new funky name to make everyone feel inclusive. Like "Ireland and the Kingdom of Northern Ireland" or IKNI.

Devine Wind 55

the federated republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland?

Karl Stein

tadcan wrote: »

N.I will always have a distinct culture, regardless of which side of the fence you are on

Above is the two-piece jigsaw concept of the island that bears no resemblance to reality.

The ethno-cultural nature of the people does not suddenly change at the imaginary line where the island was politically divided.

AngryLips

Karl Stein wrote: »

Above is the two-piece jigsaw concept of the island that bears no resemblance to reality.

The ethno-cultural nature of the people does not suddenly change at the imaginary line where the island was politically divided.

...hmm, have you ever been to NI?

Karl Stein

AngryLips wrote: »

...hmm, have you ever been to NI?

I was born and raised there and have travelled back and forth more times than I care to remember, have you?



Above would be a more accurate 'jigsaw concept' of how people identify in the north.

getzls

AngryLips wrote: »

This has been vexing me lately.

Don't worry to much about it.
If it ever happens and that is a big if, it will be long after you and every one on this Site are long dead.:D

The Corinthian

AngryLips wrote: »

This has been vexing me lately.

The Republic is a particularly centralized state, with very limited devolution. In a united Ireland it would be unlikely that the north would accept this model so some form of federalism would be more than likely.

Of course, what form this will take is what will likely be the sticking point; with Dublin likely pushing for as nominal autonomy and maximum fiscal responsibility for the federal units as possible, while Belfast would go for as much autonomy with as little fiscal responsibility, as possible.

Karl Stein wrote: »

Above is the two-piece jigsaw concept of the island that bears no resemblance to reality.

Here's a quick demonstration of how foolish your argument is. I suppose the ethno-cultural nature of the people there does not suddenly change at the imaginary line where the island was politically divided either?

Karl Stein wrote: »

I was born and raised there and have travelled back and forth more times than I care to remember, have you?

I have, on numerous occasions and there is a pretty big difference. Certainly, as you approach either side of the border, you'll see greater commonality (just like you will on most borders around the World), but in general the cultural differences are probably on a kin with a southern Irishman and a Scot.

One would have to be completely deluded to ignore almost a century of differing economics, history, politics, educational systems, not to mention the very different ethnic mixes that you'll find in NI or the Republic and pretend that we're some kind of homogeneous population.

This is not to suggest that we could not be united, or be a single country - most countries are in reality not ethnically homogeneous - but I really have to point and laugh when someone claims that this imaginary border has made no difference to the cultures north and south of the border.

Karl Stein

The Corinthian wrote: »

Here's a quick demonstration of how foolish your argument is. I suppose the ethno-cultural nature of the people there does not suddenly change at the imaginary line where the island was politically divided either?

Do you think it does? I'd be interested to know.

I have, on numerous occasions and there is a pretty big difference.

Big difference how? Be clear.

Certainly, as you approach either side of the border, you'll see greater commonality (just like you will on most borders around the World), but in general the cultural differences are probably on a kin with a southern Irishman and a Scot.

This is ridiculous. Do you honestly believe that something in the nature of the people changes exactly at the border? If you do you really haven't a clue what you're talking about and are only bringing your own ill-formed prejudices to bear.

pretend that we're some kind of homogeneous population.

Quit with the strawman argument. I'm not arguing that we're all identical, I'm making the point that the idea there are two types of people (the two-piece jigsaw concept) is ridiculous.

but I really have to point and laugh when someone claims that this imaginary border has made no difference to the cultures north and south of the border.

Strawman number two. You have form on your simplistic views on this issue which have already been shown up for what they are.

Here's the thrust of your argument ridiculous prejudices:

Seriously, most southerners have common cultural points of reference with each other when we mix - politics, education, economics, and so on - we've very few to none with nordies.

Point and laugh indeed.

guttenberg

The Corinthian wrote: »

One would have to be completely deluded to ignore almost a century of differing economics, history, politics, educational systems, not to mention the very different ethnic mixes that you'll find in NI or the Republic and pretend that we're some kind of homogeneous population.

This is not to suggest that we could not be united, or be a single country - most countries are in reality not ethnically homogeneous - but I really have to point and laugh when someone claims that this imaginary border has made no difference to the cultures north and south of the border.

May I ask where you are from(general location!!)? Speaking as a native of Donegal, I'd argue more Donegal people would have a lot more exposure/things in common with people from Derry/Tyrone than they would say Cork or Kerry. Obviously the further away from the border you go the more the differences increase but the border is definitely a lot less real now than in previous decades.

The Corinthian

Karl Stein wrote: »

This is ridiculous. Do you honestly believe that something in the nature of the people changes exactly at the border?

That's a straw man and specifically pointed out that "as you approach either side of the border, you'll see greater commonality (just like you will on most borders around the World)" as I suspected you might try that old chestnut.

The nature of people does not change "exactly at the border" anywhere in the World. However you can point to general populations and say there are significant differences and between northern and southern Ireland those differences exist to the same degree as they do between southern Ireland and, say, Scotland.

So I've never suggested that we should be identical, so you can put that to rest.

Strawman number two. You have form on your simplistic views on this issue which have already been shown up for what they are.

By shown up you mean that horseshìt response that I rebutted a few posts later?

guttenberg wrote: »

May I ask where you are from(general location!!)? Speaking as a native of Donegal, I'd argue more Donegal people would have a lot more exposure/things in common with people from Derry/Tyrone than they would say Cork or Kerry.

How about you actually read what I wrote as I covered that?

Karl Stein

The Corinthian wrote: »

That's a straw man and specifically pointed out that "as you approach either side of the border, you'll see greater commonality (just like you will on most borders around the World)" as I suspected you might try that old chestnut.

Greater commonality on what? I've asked you to be clear (twice now) yet your sentences remain obtuse bordering on gibberish.

The nature of people does not change "exactly at the border" anywhere in the World.

Well done. You're making progress and have come quite a distance from this prejudiced crap:

Seriously, most southerners have common cultural points of reference with each other when we mix - politics, education, economics, and so on - we've very few to none with nordies.

In the interest of further deconstructing the garbage you bring to the discussion what exactly constitutes a 'nordie' Is a person from Donegal a 'nordie'? Are people from Cavan and Monaghan 'nordies'

However you can point to general populations and say there are significant differences and between northern and southern Ireland

For the above view to have any gravitas you would first have to show there are two distinct populations on the island which you have failed to do and will continue to fail to do because you simply do not understand what your saying.

By shown up you mean that horseshìt response that I rebutted a few posts later?

Try not to get frustrated when your views are shown up for the prejudiced nonsense they are. It doesn't further the discussion.

AngryLips

I'm just going to stick my neck out here and point out one of the major differences between north and south of the border. People in the north have a higher expectations of what they get from Government compared to people in the south. Government provides a wider range of services up north compared to the wider prevalence of a pay-as-you-use model that exists in the republic - culturally - that translates to a greater degree of civic responsibility south of the border ...that's a hot potato point to be making, I know, but in my experience it's true.

Karl Stein

I'm guessing that The Corinthian's experiences of the north weren't travelling to GAA matches or into Nationalist areas or he wouldn't have developed such a reductive black-and-white view of the people on either side of the border.

I'd say if a person who was not familiar with the north was travelling to Rugby or Hockey matches and fraternizing with people of a primarily Unionist/British persuasion then he would see a difference in how people identify and what they identify with.

oscarBravo

Karl Stein wrote: »

For the above view to have any gravitas you would first have to show there are two distinct populations on the island which you have failed to do and will continue to fail to do because you simply do not understand what your saying.

Just so we're clear: are you arguing that (say) Scottish and English populations are not distinct, because they share an island?

Or is this the usual "Ireland is a completely unique case and not comparable to any other situation in the world" argument?

The Corinthian

Karl Stein wrote: »

Greater commonality on what? I've asked you to be clear (twice now) yet your sentences remain obtuse bordering on gibberish.

Populations when they live closer to each other, such as on borders will naturally have greater commonality. If you want to know what that is, it includes dialect and/or language, kinship, commerce and shared traditions and history, life experiences and environment and this is most often seen in border areas everywhere have.

Personally I don't think that obtuse. Maybe a little complicated for you though.

If you want to compare one population to another in terms of commonality, you need to look at the mean of both, taking into account the whole population of both territories. In this regard, once you leave the border areas, there's a fair bit of a difference between that mean or average southerner and northerner - which admittedly has formed largely in the last century given our divergent political histories.

So what you're doing is making the logical fallacy of arguing that someone just south of the border has a lot in common with a northerner, ergo all southerners have a lot in common with northerner. Using your logic, the Dutch are basically German, because many Dutch living close to Germany share a very simelar culture to them.

Indeed your arguments could be applied to the UK to argue that the English and the Scots are essentially the same people, which oscarBravo pointed out, I suspect your ideological views would be loathed to admit.

Well done. You're making progress and have come quite a distance from this prejudiced crap:

No, I'm just repeating what I've already repeatedly said. If anyone's making progress it's you for having finally acknowledged it.

In the interest of further deconstructing the garbage you bring to the discussion what exactly constitutes a 'nordie' Is a person from Donegal a 'nordie'? Are people from Cavan and Monaghan 'nordies'

It means someone from Northern Ireland. It's a southern term, so I'm not entirely surprised you weren't familiar with it. Apologies if you find it offensive, although it's not meant to be so - it's simply less of a mouthful than Northern Irish.

For the above view to have any gravitas you would first have to show there are two distinct populations on the island which you have failed to do and will continue to fail to do because you simply do not understand what your saying.

I never said there are two distinct populations. However there is a pretty large gap between most southern and northern Irish. Different politics, education, currency, even traditions.

Try not to get frustrated when your views are shown up for the prejudiced nonsense they are. It doesn't further the discussion.

Actually I tend to get more frustrated at fanatics.

Karl Stein

The Corinthian wrote: »

Populations when they live closer to each other, such as on borders will naturally have greater commonality. If you want to know what that is, it includes dialect and/or language, kinship, commerce and shared traditions and history, life experiences and environment and this is most often seen in border areas everywhere have.

Fantastic. Well done. You've come a long way from this:

The Corinthian wrote: »

TBH, the entire population in NI is substantially culturally different to the Republic's - regardless of their religion. Their attitudes are pretty alien to your average southerner as is much of what is considered normal there.

'The Corinthian' I never said there are two distinct populations.

The Corinthian wrote: »

please don't try selling me the BS that either of the two communities up there are just like us southerners

'The Corinthian' I never said there are two distinct populations.

Ironically there’s probably more in common between Nationalist and Loyalist in the North than there is between Northern Nationalist’s and Southern Freestaters.

I'm glad for you that you've learned how ridiculous the above statements are, particularly the last one which is a profoundly stupid comment, and how they're little more than two-piece jigsaw concept of a far more complex issue as regards identity and shared cultural experiences.

I'm beginning to wonder if you're worth taking seriously.

Karl Stein

The Corinthian wrote: »

It means someone from Northern Ireland.

Oh I'm familiar with the term I was just interested in what the term 'nordie' meant to you. Tbh you would not have a clue if someone living in Donegal was a 'nordie', by your criteria or, not. I might, seeing as I was born and raised in the north west, you most certainly would not.

It's a southern term, so I'm not entirely surprised you weren't familiar with it.

I've lived more of my life in the south than the north. I guess that makes me 'half-nordie' in the 'Ladybird book of Ireland' you've created in your head?

Apologies if you find it offensive, although it's not meant to be so - it's simply less of a mouthful than Northern Irish.

No need to apologise, I don't find the term offensive. I have found that those who use the term often do so out of ignorance and it's no different with you.

Richard

AngryLips wrote: »

This has been vexing me lately.

I believe it's SDLP policy. I think most parties would support it if a UI was inevitable as they wouldn't want to give up/dilute the power and influence they have.

As for all this "imaginary line" stuff, the border between NI and the republic is older than the borders of France, Germany, Poland, Austria, in fact a large number of countries. On all of these borders things often don't immediately change at the border, but they do change.

The two parts of Ireland do have a lot in common, but to ignore the differences seems short-sighted to me.

The Corinthian

Karl Stein wrote: »

I'm glad for you that you've learned how ridiculous the above statements are, particularly the last one which is a profoundly stupid comment, and how they're little more than two-piece jigsaw concept of a far more complex issue as regards identity and shared cultural experiences.

All of which has allowed you to ignore the idiotic logic of your own claim, highlighted by both me and oscarBravo. So rather than continuously slithering your way around this to avoid it, why don't you actually answer the point he made directly to you - or was it too direct for your liking, so you ignored it?

oscarBravo wrote: »

Just so we're clear: are you arguing that (say) Scottish and English populations are not distinct, because they share an island?

Or is this the usual "Ireland is a completely unique case and not comparable to any other situation in the world" argument?

It's been repeatedly highlighted that there are significant differences between the aggregate populations of northern and southern Ireland, going so far as to compare it to the differences between the aggregate populations of Scotland and southern Ireland or England. Instead, the arguments you've used could be applied to England and Scotland. Conveniently any sea boundary appears to be a valid border for you though.

You've actually not addressed this even once. So how is that different, or are you just going to continue avoiding the issue through a combination of ad hominems, straw men and good old fashioned fingers in your ears.

I'm beginning to wonder if you're worth taking seriously.

Fanatics never take seriously any view other than their own, so I wouldn't stress yourself out on that one.

Karl Stein wrote: »

Oh I'm familiar with the term I was just interested in what the term 'nordie' meant to you. Tbh you would not have a clue if someone living in Donegal was a 'nordie', by your criteria or, not. I might, seeing as I was born and raised in the north west, you most certainly would not.

Sure I would. They would be the person who can discuss the Leaving Cert like it's something they have personal experience of. Who grew up in the same system as me, same economy, same politics. Who know more about Fiannia Fail than Sinn Fein, more about the PD's than the DUP. Who know thinks like social welfare and tax rates in their country unlike Gerry Adams when he ran for office a few years ago.

Clearly, given your lack of even acknowledgement at the gap between the two populations, which is perfectly understandable given the last century, you don't have much of a clue about southerners unless they come from a border county.

I've lived more of my life in the south than the north. I guess that makes me 'half-nordie' in the 'Ladybird book of Ireland' you've created in your head?

Would you be happier if I got my information from An Phoblacht like you?

Karl Stein

The Corinthian wrote: »

All of which has allowed you to ignore the idiotic logic of your own claim, highlighted by both me and oscarBravo.

What claim? You're the one with ignorant claims such as these:

The Corinthian: TBH, the entire population in NI is substantially culturally different to the Republic's - regardless of their religion. Their attitudes are pretty alien to your average southerner as is much of what is considered normal there.
Ironically there’s probably more in common between Nationalist and Loyalist in the North than there is between Northern Nationalist’s and Southern Freestaters.

So rather than continuously slithering your way around this to avoid it, why don't you actually answer the point he made directly to you - or was it too direct for your liking, so you ignored it?

He didn't make a point he took a point I made and asked vague questions. If he wants to take a particular point and ask for clarification then I'll oblige. Have you asked him to come to your rescue is it? Has he been helping you with your homework?

It's been repeatedly highlighted that there are significant differences between the aggregate populations of northern and southern Ireland,

And this is where your whole flaccid argument fails. Congratulations though, the fact that you're saying 'significant differences' in favour of your ignorance feuled 'them and us' notions shows that you've made progress.

Conveniently any sea boundary appears to be a valid border for you though.

Mountains, seas and rivers are natural borders. Political borders are made by the decisions of men and may, or may not, incorporate natural borders. The psycho-border border you speak of exists primarily in your head and completly ignores the free flow of goods and people between the counties, the shared culture and Identity, the all ireland sporting institutions including, Golf, Rugby, Boxing, Cricket and GAA. The TV media outlets BBC NI/UTV and RTE which are broadcast across the island, etcetera etcetera.

You've actually not addressed this even once. So how is that different, or are you just going to continue avoiding the issue through a combination of ad hominems, straw men and good old fashioned fingers in your ears.

Too funny. You're the one making ridiculous claims, building strawmen and getting frustrated.

Fanatics never take seriously any view other than their own, so I wouldn't stress yourself out on that one.

Dear me. I call you out on the ridiculous, reductive image you have of the issue and I'm labelled a 'fanatic'? I'd say you don't take lightly to being disagreed with do you? You must have a lot of 'fanatics' in your life or perhaps you surround yourself with people who only agree with you?

They would be the person who can discuss the Leaving Cert like it's something they have personal experience of. Who grew up in the same system as me, same economy, same politics. Who know more about Fiannia Fail than Sinn Fein, more about the PD's than the DUP. Who know thinks like social welfare and tax rates in their country unlike Gerry Adams when he ran for office a few years ago.

See this is where your limited understanding gets shown up for what it is. The above are particular differences that are as a result of being administered by different institutions, nothing else. What you're doing above is desperately scrabbling for differences in a failed attempt to prop up your ill-informed two-piece jigsaw concept. What you're conveniently ignoring is the complexity of culture and identity that renders this two-piece jigsaw concept profoundly ignorant.

Sure I would.

Not without looking like a total weirdo by asking specific questions about what exams they took or what party they vote for. I'll reiterate, I've found that people who use the term 'nordie' usually do so out of ignorance and it is most certainly no different with you.

Clearly, given your lack of even acknowledgement at the gap between the two populations

You have failed to demonstrate that there are 'two populations' so I don't know why you persist.

you don't have much of a clue about southerners unless they come from a border county.

The above is a good example of your preconceptions, prejudices and all round ignorance. I live in Cork and have done for more than half my life. Remarkably I don't feel at all foreign here and have never felt treated as such.

Would you be happier if I got my information from An Phoblacht like you?

It's no skin off my nose if you want to proudly display your ignorance. I've never read 'An Phoblacht'. Unlike you I get my information from my experience of having lived in both jurisdictions and having a keen interest in current affairs. I suspect you've informed yourself by way of opinion pieces from Irish establishment media sources which would be to say that you're not properly informed at all.

oscarBravo

Karl Stein wrote: »

He didn't make a point he took a point I made and asked vague questions.

I'm not sure what's vague about the question. You are claiming that Ireland is culturally homogenous, and posted a satellite photograph of the island sans visible border as if it proved anything.

My question is: does this cultural homogeneity due to the lack of a visible border on a satellite photograph extend to our neighboring island?

Have you asked him to come to your rescue is it? Has he been helping you with your homework?

I just asked a question, which you completely ignored.

The Corinthian

Karl Stein wrote: »

What claim?

The one that's been asked multiple times by multiple people, most recently by oscarBravo in the last post and that you are going out of your way to avoid backing up.

Are you going to do so or just going to continue to rely on personal attacks as the sole content of your replies and continue avoiding the point?

Karl Stein

oscarBravo wrote: »

You are claiming that Ireland is culturally homogenous

I'm not claiming that Ireland is culturally homogenous like, say, a particular species of insect. I'm simply saying that the two piece jigsaw concept that The Corinthian presents is utter bollocks - and it is. There is a huge degree of cultural spill-over both north-south and east-west across the Irish sea.

Are you guys a tag team or something?

The Corinthian wrote: »

Are you going to do so or just going to continue to rely on personal attacks as the sole content of your replies and continue avoiding the point?

You set the tone. Don't cry if it's returned in kind.

oscarBravo

Karl Stein wrote: »

I'm simply saying that the two piece jigsaw concept that The Corinthian presents is utter bollocks...

The "two piece jigsaw concept" is a straw man introduced by you.

You said:

The ethno-cultural nature of the people does not suddenly change at the imaginary line where the island was politically divided.

In the same post you linked to a satellite photograph of Ireland, without explaining what relevance it has to anything.

My question then, is whether the ethno-cultural nature of people suddenly changes at the imaginary line between England and Scotland. Assuming that the answer is "no" (which it is), does that mean that Scotland does not have a distinct culture from England? - the idea that you vehemently rejected where Northern Ireland is concerned.

It's not a vague question. It's a logical corollary to your argument, and it's a question posed for the specific purpose of analysing your logic.

If your argument applies to the island of Ireland, but doesn't apply to the island of Great Britain, perhaps you could explain why Ireland operates according to different rules of logic from the rest of the world.

There is a huge degree of cultural spill-over both north-south and east-west across the Irish sea.

I don't think anyone has argued differently.

Are you guys a tag team or something?

I'm not sure why you're so defensive about the fact that more than one person is at a loss to understand your logic.

Karl Stein

oscarBravo wrote: »

The "two piece jigsaw concept" is a straw man introduced by you.

I used 'two piece jigsaw' to describe this simplistic view:

TBH, the entire population in NI is substantially culturally different to the Republic's - regardless of their religion. Their attitudes are pretty alien to your average southerner as is much of what is considered normal there.

It's not a strawman.

oscarBravo

Karl Stein wrote: »

I used 'two piece jigsaw' to describe this simplistic view:

In fact, you used the phrase in response to this:

N.I will always have a distinct culture...

You disagreed with this view, and posted a satellite photograph, apparently as a rebuttal to it, without explaining what satellite imagery has to do with culture.

You've also avoided my question yet again.

It's not a strawman.

So it's your firm contention that Northern Ireland doesn't have a distinct culture from the Republic of Ireland?

Karl Stein

oscarBravo wrote: »

In fact, you used the phrase in response to this:

Yes I did because it's wrong.

You disagreed with this view, and posted a satellite photograph, apparently as a rebuttal to it, without explaining what satellite imagery has to do with culture.

The satellite image exposes the idiocy of pretending that something significant happens to human beings at the political border. It doesn't.

So it's your firm contention that Northern Ireland doesn't have a distinct culture from the Republic of Ireland?

No it doesn't and you and your pal have failed to show that it does and will continue to fail because there isn't a distinct 'Northern Ireland' culture.

oscarBravo

Karl Stein wrote: »

The satellite image exposes the idiocy of pretending that something significant happens to human beings at the political border. It doesn't.

And there's the straw man again. Nobody has argued that a cultural distinction is something that's sharply delineated by a line on a map. That's an argument that was introduced solely by you for the sole purpose of disagreeing with it, which is the textbook definition of a straw man.

No it doesn't and you and your pal have failed to show that it does and will continue to fail because there isn't a distinct 'Northern Ireland' culture.

By which logic there isn't a distinct "Scottish" or "Welsh" culture, because they share an island with England and you can't see the borders from space. Is that your contention?

maccored

oscarBravo wrote: »

By which logic there isn't a distinct "Scottish" or "Welsh" culture, because they share an island with England and you can't see the borders from space. Is that your contention?

The attitudes of people from the north certainly aren't "pretty alien to your average southerner".

oscarBravo

maccored wrote: »

The attitudes of people from the north certainly aren't "pretty alien to your average southerner".

I'm not sure why that post quoted me, because it doesn't reference anything I said in the quote.

The Corinthian

Karl Stein wrote: »

There is a huge degree of cultural spill-over both north-south and east-west across the Irish sea.

Of course there is cultural spill-over both north-south and east-west across the Irish sea. Question that this raises are:

• Is that cultural over-spill between southern and northern Ireland any greater than between England and Scotland? Or Holland and Germany? Or between Northern Ireland and Scotland, more to the point?
• Does this cultural over-spill imply any significant level of homogeneity on average? Is the average German significantly homogeneous to the average Dutch, simply because they have an over-spill on their border areas? If not why do you feel that southern and northern Irish do? And GAA isn't a good enough reason, btw, unless you start taking into account the Premier League too.

Don't get me wrong; there's no reason why north and south should not be a single nation, simply because we may not be significantly homogeneous. Many, if not most, countries in Europe are composed of multiple cultural and ethnic groups or subgroups. But at the same time, please don't turn around and tell your average southerner how northerners are somehow the same, because we really aren't - at least no more than to a Scot or Welshman.

Even taking just the last century into account, it has left the two parts of our island to evolve culturally in very different directions and this has had a profound impact. To deny this is just invoking Fantasy Island.

You set the tone. Don't cry if it's returned in kind.

Really? When did I start the name calling first?

The Corinthian

maccored wrote: »

The attitudes of people from the north certainly aren't "pretty alien to your average southerner".

Sure they are, or are you a better expert than me, a southerner, on how southerners think, as well as being an expert on how northerners think?

It's just generally taboo to discuss it most of the time because of the reaction you get from nationalists.

RED L4 0TH

The Corinthian wrote: »

Or Holland and Germany?

If not why do you feel that southern and northern Irish do? And GAA isn't a good enough reason, btw, unless you start taking into account the Premier League too.

Don't get me wrong; there's no reason why north and south should not be a single nation

I'm unaware that a significant percentage of the Dutch & German populations has a perceived cultural commonality that may want them to wish to become a single nation.

The Corinthian

RED L4 0TH wrote: »

I'm unaware that a significant percentage of the Dutch & German populations has a perceived cultural commonality that may want them to wish to become a single nation.

Straw man. Firstly, I never said they want to become a single nation. I've actually repeatedly divorced the two issues.

Secondly, the reason I raised the point is so demonstrate that all nations 'bleed' culturally into each other at border areas, but claiming that there is some sort of aggregate cultural homogeneity on that basis is a logical fallacy.

RED L4 0TH

The Corinthian wrote: »

Straw man.

According to you.

I've actually repeatedly divorced the two issues.

And you need to do this because.....?

all nations 'bleed' culturally into each other at border areas, but claiming that there is some sort of aggregate cultural homogeneity on that basis is a logical fallacy.

All? Iceland?

SpaceTime

A federal state might make sense tbh.
You could maybe have a federal Ireland with up to 4 states inside - not quite as per the historical provinces but close enough.

You'd just have regional capitals and assemblies in Dublin, Belfast, Cork and Galway.

The big issue with integrating Northern Ireland though would be the fact that it's socially and politically drastically different to the Republic at this stage.

There's far, far more extreme right wing politics up there.

Even take something like gay marriage. That's likely to pass and has very broad support in the Republic while you've openly homophobic politicians in the North actually campaigning on those issues. It's more like the US bible belt in many ways.

You'd have loads of issues to overcome.

Ironically, the Republic and modern 21st century Britain are probably more socially and attitudinally similar than either place is with Northern Ireland.

A united Ireland would take a lot of slow integration I think. A federal setup would be essential.

oscarBravo

RED L4 0TH wrote: »

All? Iceland?

You do realise that Iceland doesn't have borders, don't you? I'm sure Karl Stein can find you a satellite photograph, if that would help.

SpaceTime wrote: »

Ironically, the Republic and modern 21st century Britain are probably more socially and attitudinally similar than either place is with Northern Ireland.

BLASPHEMER!!

RED L4 0TH

oscarBravo wrote: »

You do realise that Iceland doesn't have borders, don't you?

A country that became independent in 1918 doesn't have a border?

SpaceTime

oscarBravo wrote: »

BLASPHEMER!!

It doesn't mean I'd ever want to see a return to British rule BTW.

It is fact though that both Britain and the Republic have moved on and mended a lot of fences. Neither entity is remotely like what it was decades ago and that's largely what's made the decent relationship possible.

Northern Ireland has unfortunately become stuck somewhere and it's increasingly alienating itself from both states due to political attitudes being scarily right wing and due to the on going cycle of sectarianism that I honestly don't think many people outside NI can get their heads around.

All I see is the unionist / loyalist side moving increasingly towards a position that even frightens the Tory party.

To be fair to Sinn Fein, it's very much moving towards a normal centre left type position and I think you can see that despite the legacy issues, they're able to do business in both Dublin and London. The DUP seems to think it's in the US Tea Party movement or something.

I just think integrating NI into the Republic nearly 100 years after partition would be no easy task.

I'd like to see a united Ireland but, I think it's going to be more some kind of a situation of fuzzy joint sovereignty or something like that for a long time.

Partition shouldn't have happened in the first place but we are where we are now and I suppose all we can do is try to make it work for everyone somehow.

I guess I'm a pragmatic nationalist.

The most positive thing I could see emerging in NI would be centrist, normal politics. I'm seeing there opposite trend to that, particularly on the unionist side.

oscarBravo

RED L4 0TH wrote: »

A country that became independent in 1918 doesn't have a border?

Ah, you're being deliberately obtuse. Sorry, I thought you were interested in a discussion. Carry on.

The Corinthian

RED L4 0TH wrote: »

According to you.

Actually according to the definition of what a straw man is. Would you like to show how it does not fit this definition?

And you need to do this because.....?

Because there are always idiots who'll presume one is connected to the other, despite never saying it is. And sometimes they'll still do so no matter how many times you state it's not.

All? Iceland?

You gotta love pointless pedantry when there's nothing useful to say.

maccored

As a northerner who has a southern wife and two adult southern sons and has been living here for as long as I was living in the north, I reckon Im an expert on both. How about you? Thank god I havent met too many with an attitude like yours right enough. you really should go to the north and actually meet people. might help you.

If though the point you are making is simply that people from different parts of the country act and think differently, then yes, that's an (obvious) point. For example, Dublin people aren't really much like Mayo people in many aspects. Then again - as mentioned - thats pretty obvious. No two people think the same. Your point seems to be a very naive 'them and us' idea all the same.

The Corinthian wrote: »

Sure they are, or are you a better expert than me, a southerner, on how southerners think, as well as being an expert on how northerners think?

It's just generally taboo to discuss it most of the time because of the reaction you get from nationalists.

maccored

nevermind people in cavan, louth, monaghan etc - are you telling me their attitudes suddenly change because they arent in the north? Dont you see how silly an idea that is?

RED L4 0TH

oscarBravo wrote: »

Ah, you're being deliberately obtuse. Sorry, I thought you were interested in a discussion. Carry on.

After you sir.......

Originally posted by The Corinthian: Actually according to the definition of what a straw man is. Would you like to show how it does not fit this definition?

No need. I'm thinking it's more of an attempt on your part to claim ownership of this discussion.

Because there are always idiots who'll presume one is connected to the other, despite never saying it is. And sometimes they'll still do so no matter how many times you state it's not.

That's YOUR opinion. You're entitled to it and I respect that.

You gotta love pointless pedantry when there's nothing useful to say.

You said 'all nations'. Care to respond in a way that helps to keep the conversation alive? How does, say Japan, 'bleed culturally into others' at it's borders?

The Corinthian

maccored wrote: »

As a northerner who has two adult southern sons and has been living here for as long as I was living in the north, I reckon Im an expert on both. How about you? Thank god I havent met too many with an attitude like yours right enough. you really should go to the north and actually meet people. might help you.

I've spent more than enough time up north and spoken to plenty of people from there. I've never suggested that northerners are bad people, or inferior or anything negative. So I really don't understand why people are jumping the gun and getting so emotional, so quickly.

maccored wrote: »

nevermind people in cavan, louth, monaghan etc - are you telling me their attitudes suddenly change because they arent in the north? Dont you see how silly an idea that is?

Please don't parachute into a discussion without having the courtesy of reading what's actually been written.

It's not a case of never mind, but the combined populations of the border counties in the Republic comes to about 450k. That's under 10% of the population of the Republic. Are you seriously telling me that on the basis of that 10%, you can say that people in north and south are alike? At least any more than northerners are to the Scots?

This has already been pointed out.

RED L4 0TH wrote: »

No need. I'm thinking it's more of an attempt on your part to claim ownership of this discussion.

On behalf of the International Zionist Cabal, no doubt.

That's YOUR opinion. You're entitled to it and I respect that.

Actually, you demonstrated it.

You said 'all nations'. Care to respond in a way that helps to keep the conversation alive? How does, say Japan, 'bleed culturally into others' at it's borders?

I'm sorry, my mistake; my statement for those who revel in pedantry is all countries with (land) borders bleed culturally into others. Happy? Score any points?