Stormont power sharing talks

Irishweather

I am a Unionist and I don't think Ulster Scots should be bolstered up with any legislation. It is not a language.

tomwaterford

Irishweather wrote: »

Religion, way of Life, attitudes, historical perspective.

Religion isn't a culture (and there fcuk all difference only singing at the masses tbh) and irrelevant among anyone under 30

Way of life .....some expansion again is required here as to what differences do you see culturally here???


Historical perspective isn't a culture either,history is simple facts are X

,I fail to see how there can be perspective/different views anywhere in the world on history only shysters making money by twisting facts







Are you sure your not grasping at straws

Irishweather

If there is no cultural differences at all, then explain why Northern Ireland exists as a jurisdiction?

tomwaterford

Irishweather wrote: »

If there is no cultural differences at all, then explain why Northern Ireland exists as a jurisdiction?

Because at time of Irish independence northern Ireland accounted for circa 45% of irish economic output and it's was worth Britain's while to hold onto it



Pure and utterly it's simply that....money talks.....don't ever fool yourself into thinking English care about music/culture (anything) above money

tomwaterford

Btw I'm awaiting further explanation of the gem that was difference s in way of life

Irishweather

tomwaterford wrote: »

Because at time of Irish independence northern Ireland accounted for circa 45% of irish economic output and it's was worth Britain's while to hold onto it



Pure and utterly it's simply that....money talks.....don't ever fool yourself into thinking English care about music/culture (anything) above money

I go to university in England, i'm no fool.

FrancieBrady

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Why can't Irish be recognised alongside Ulster Scots, even if you refuse to accept Ulster Scots as a language?

Do a Dev, cross your fingers about the bits you don't like and be pragmatic

Because it has been invented/thrown in there to demean, once again, the Irish language. Look at what Paisley's objections were in 2007, not a mention of U-S.

The Irish people have had enough of that. The time has come, are unionists going meet their obligations and allow full equality and normalisation or not.

Junkyard Tom

blanch152 wrote: »

A summary of public opinion constitutes evidence that the British cabinet didn't even consider unionists British? Are you seriously putting that out of context extract forward as evidence?

Yes.

We are back to the fantasy world of one retired British general in one highly edited television interview being taken as conclusive evidence that the IRA weren't militarily defeated.

Oh for goodness sake not this again. I don't remember seeing any white flags being waved, mass arrests and so on, quite the opposite. Also, the fact that a former PIRA commander was deputy first Minister for most of the last couple of decades might have passed you by.

LeinsterDub

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Because it has been invented/thrown in there to demean, once again, the Irish language. Look at what Paisley's objections were in 2007, not a mention of U-S.

The Irish people have had enough of that. The time has come, are unionists going meet their obligations and allow full equality and normalisation or not.

I don't understand how accepting something is or is not a language impacts the status of Irish.

FrancieBrady

LeinsterDub wrote: »

I don't understand how accepting something is or is not a language impacts the status of Irish.

What you are asking Irish people to do is once again accept a dilution of their request.

It is a principle, 'that unionists dictate what they get' is what is at stake.

Unionism has invented the significance of Ulster Scots to give respectability to the cultural bigotry expressed by Ian Paisley in 2007.
Because they know that that position is untenable so have invented the notion that Ulster Scots is on a par.
It is no suprise that some here have swallowed that position as being credible.

You only need to open your eyes and see how Irish is disparaged at executive level and below to see the real Unionist attitude to it.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Of course you don't believe in a vibrant Irish language culture (which this act will promote) but it isn't about 'you'.
It is about the people who identify as Irish and who are electing again and again, in increasing numbers, a party that is seeking an act on their behalf.
A party that has already agreed this with the British government who have now suspended governing with another party who have sought to cherrypick only what is acceptable to their religiously fundamentalist and culturally bigoted code.

Some of the very behaviour that led to the conflict in the first place.

Correction, I don't believe in paying for a vibrant Irish language culture.

tomwaterford wrote: »

Sure we know you dislike Irish culture

Not at all, I love Irish culture - U2, Thin Lizzy, Christy Moore, Makem and Clancy, Stockton's Wing, Bagatelle, Hot House Flowers, Corrs, have seen most of them in concert. Big GAA fan, follow the Irish soccer, cricket and rugby teams, read Roddy Doyle and John Connolly among others.

You don't have to be a dyed in the wool RA supporter to love Irish culture. In fact, given the corrosive influence of the IRA on Irish culture, loving Irish culture is probably incompatible with having supported the IRA.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What you are asking Irish people to do is once again accept a dilution of their request.

It is a principle, 'that unionists dictate what they get' is what is at stake.

Everyone has to accept dilution of their requests - it is what compromise is all about.

The unionists request a wholly British state, that request is being diluted. The nationalists want a united Ireland, that request is being diluted. What is wrong with the dilution of requests?

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Because it has been invented/.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulster_Irish

How many times to I have to point out that the Ulster Irish dialect died out in the 1970s and the Irish language being spoken in the North today is a purely invented importation of Irish from other parts of the island? Somehow this is not a problem for an Irish Language Act but it is for recognition of Ulster Scots.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Not at all, I love Irish culture .

But you don't want to pay for the most significant parts of it. You don't 'love' Irish culture, you 'love consuming it' is what you should be saying.
There are many like you.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Everyone has to accept dilution of their requests - it is what compromise is all about.

The unionists request a wholly British state, that request is being diluted. The nationalists want a united Ireland, that request is being diluted. What is wrong with the dilution of requests?

Because there comes a point where if you dilute to much you end up with nothing.

Unionists never had a right to request a 'wholly' British state. It was an 'artificial' partitioning and their failed attempt to make it 'wholly' British that caused the conflict.
Nationalists have compromised on a UI.

LeinsterDub

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What you are asking Irish people to do is once again accept a dilution of their request.

It is a principle, 'that unionists dictate what they get' is what is at stake.

Unionism has invented the significance of Ulster Scots to give respectability to the cultural bigotry expressed by Ian Paisley in 2007.
Because they know that that position is untenable so have invented the notion that Ulster Scots is on a par.
It is no suprise that some here have swallowed that position as being credible.

You only need to open your eyes and see how Irish is disparaged at executive level and below to see the real Unionist attitude to it.

Dilutions of your request is basically how democracy works. When a party is in coalition they'll need to dilute their policies. Even when in over all control factions and stakeholders within and outside of the party will lead to dilution.

I'm aware of some unionist attitude to Irish or even anything Irish but surely a language act can protect Irish? I don't see how accepting U.S as on a par affects Irish. Let the baby have it's bottle. The smart play, the play to win over unionist to a UI is to be seen to be flexible and accepting. Not petty and sectarian.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

But you don't want to pay for the most significant parts of it. You don't 'love' Irish culture, you 'love consuming it' is what you should be saying.
There are many like you.

Hold on, who has said that the most significant part of Irish culture is the language? I would strongly disagree.

Sport and music are much more significant parts of Irish culture than the language, not just for their strength but also their distinctiveness. I would also think that the Irish generousity of spirit and the sense of humour are much more significant aspects of the Irish culture than the language.

Culture is a living organic thing, changing all the time.

Heritage is dead culture, the culture of the past. The language is a significant part of our heritage, but not of our culture.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulster_Irish

How many times to I have to point out that the Ulster Irish dialect died out in the 1970s and the Irish language being spoken in the North today is a purely invented importation of Irish from other parts of the island? Somehow this is not a problem for an Irish Language Act but it is for recognition of Ulster Scots.

NOBODY is not recognising Ulster Scots. How many times does it have to be said.

Ulster Scots is not the issue.

An agreement has been made and it is being blocked (as well as other significant rights) by the DUP who have invented the notion that Ulster Scots is important to them.

So important that their leader forgot to mention it in his objections in 2007, preferring instead to engage in triumphalism and cultural bigotry.

Junkyard Tom

blanch152 wrote: »

The unionists request a wholly British state

Britain lies to the east of Ireland. Unionists don't want a wholly British state, in fact they're doing thier best to run the northeast as some sort of fiefdom where they get to block equal marriage and language rights like people enjoy in Britain and Ireland.

Stormont is failing because the DUP are making the north ungovernable internally. It's gotten so bad now that people like me would rather have direct rule from Westminster than have to listen to utter bigots like Gregory Campbell use Stormont to mock people's culture and listen to Arlene Foster describe us as crocodiles.

Let SF, the SDLP, and Alliance go back to their local councils and work on ground while the British get thier **** together. We can wait.

blanch152

end of the road wrote: »

everything is wrong with it. it will never be truely like Finchley, the people there are not and never will be british. northern ireland is part of ireland, ruled by britain, but the people are irish. the british people don't recognise them as being british either.

It will never truly be like Dublin either, because it is different. Northern Ireland will only be whole when it incorporates aspects of both traditions, clearly there are many on both sides who are incapable of that.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

NOBODY is not recognising Ulster Scots. How many times does it have to be said.

Ulster Scots is not the issue.

An agreement has been made and it is being blocked (as well as other significant rights) by the DUP who have invented the notion that Ulster Scots is important to them.

So important that their leader forgot to mention it in his objections in 2007, preferring instead to engage in triumphalism and cultural bigotry.

What is wrong with parity of esteem between them? It is the ultimate in triumphalism and cultural bigotry to assert that our resurrected few words are a language while their resurrected few words are a dialect.

tomwaterford

blanch152 wrote: »

Correction, I don't believe in paying for a vibrant Irish language culture.




Not at all, I love Irish culture - U2, Thin Lizzy, Christy Moore, Makem and Clancy, Stockton's Wing, Bagatelle, Hot House Flowers, Corrs, have seen most of them in concert. Big GAA fan, follow the Irish soccer, cricket and rugby teams, read Roddy Doyle and John Connolly among others.

You don't have to be a dyed in the wool RA supporter to love Irish culture. In fact, given the corrosive influence of the IRA on Irish culture, loving Irish culture is probably incompatible with having supported the IRA.

And yet you dislike/ignorant of the irish language (don't see ñeed for a act to protect it FFS,)one of the most fundamental parts of a culture anywhere


Reminds me of a sunday world,me fein mindset tbh

blanch152

tomwaterford wrote: »

And yet you dislike/ignorant of the irish language (don't see for a act to protect it FFS,)one of the most fundamental parts of a culture anywhere


Reminds me of a sunday world,me fein mindset tbh

I speak better Irish than most, doesn't stop from thinking that it is a dead language and not a fundamental part of the modern Irish culture. As I have already said, the language is a significant part of our history and our heritage, but it has no significant role today, either North or South.


P.S. Adding a smilie to a glib insult doesn't make it any less of a glib insult.

tomwaterford

blanch152 wrote: »

What is wrong with parity of esteem between them? It is the ultimate in triumphalism and cultural bigotry to assert that our resurrected few words are a language while their resurrected few words are a dialect.

Why prior to the peace process has Ulster Scots not appeared as a.language option on a census


Its the ultimate in unethical dishonesty to eqate the two,
It's only pushed as a means to devalue and take the piss outta the Irish language,by those opposed to Irish culture

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Hold on, who has said that the most significant part of Irish culture is the language? I would strongly disagree.

Sport and music are much more significant parts of Irish culture than the language, not just for their strength but also their distinctiveness. I would also think that the Irish generousity of spirit and the sense of humour are much more significant aspects of the Irish culture than the language.

Culture is a living organic thing, changing all the time.

Heritage is dead culture, the culture of the past. The language is a significant part of our heritage, but not of our culture.

It is not about what YOU want, or how you feel about Irish.

And you must be totally unaware of the surge in interest in the Irish language.
I don't think all those kids attending Gael Scoilenna would take kindly to being described as part of our heritage and not a living breathing part of our culture.

FrancieBrady

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Dilutions of your request is basically how democracy works. When a party is in coalition they'll need to dilute their policies. Even when in over all control factions and stakeholders within and outside of the party will lead to dilution.

I'm aware of some unionist attitude to Irish or even anything Irish but surely a language act can protect Irish? I don't see how accepting U.S as on a par affects Irish. Let the baby have it's bottle. The smart play, the play to win over unionist to a UI is to be seen to be flexible and accepting. Not petty and sectarian.

This has been agreed already.
It is about the continued blocking of rights by the DUP.

tomwaterford

blanch152 wrote: »

I speak better Irish than most, doesn't stop from thinking that it is a dead language and not a fundamental part of the modern Irish culture. As I have already said, the language is a significant part of our history and our heritage, but it has no significant role today, either North or South.


P.S. Adding a smilie to a glib insult doesn't make it any less of a glib insult.

If the caps fits it's hardly a glib.insult

Hardly a dead language,when those claiming fluency increased,Iñ.the last ceñsus in the free state
When gaelscoils are booked out years in advance??,



It's a, stunning language,and no reason fluency of it shouldn't be encouraged,had great fun backpacking with other Irish and learning Spanish complemented via it



The view that it has no place is actually outdated nowadays,

blanch152

tomwaterford wrote: »

Why prior to the peace process has Ulster Scots not appeared as a.language option on a census


Its the ultimate in unethical dishonesty to eqate the two,
It's only pushed as a means to devalue and take the piss outta the Irish language,by those opposed to Irish culture

Because the revival of Ulster Scots is some twenty years behind the revival of Irish. The only difference between them is that one revival of a dead language began before the other.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It is not about what YOU want, or how you feel about Irish.

And you must be totally unaware of the surge in interest in the Irish language.
I don't think all those kids attending Gael Scoilenna would take kindly to being described as part of our heritage and not a living breathing part of our culture.

Of course they are part of our culture, just as other minority pursuits are part of our culture. What we are discussing is the significance of that part. I can assert fairly confidently that the Irish language forms a minor part of modern-day Irish culture, but occupies a significant part of Irish heritage. Pretty accurate representation of the facts.

blanch152

tomwaterford wrote: »

If the caps fits it's hardly a glib.insult

Hardly a dead language,when those claiming fluency increased,Iñ.the last ceñsus in the free state
When gaelscoils are booked out years in advance??,



It's a, stunning language,and no reason fluency of it shouldn't be encouraged,had great fun backpacking with other Irish and learning Spanish complemented via it



The view that it has no place is actually outdated nowadays,

You keep missing the point of the word "significant". I didn't say the Irish language had no place, I said it have no significant place.