Does opposing a United Ireland automatically make you unpatriotic?

Fake News

`Bef

FrancieBrady wrote: »

blanch152 wrote: »

Nobody is defending the killing of many many children by the British Army.

However, there are quite a number of posters on here who routinely and disgustingly defend the terrorist campaign of the IRA.

I think the violence in northern Ireland was wrong and should never have happened. All of it.
But it happened.

We need to ensure it doesn't happen again. The south is safe from descending into violence because the essential problem has been fixed due to another violent campaign.
The north isn't however and I will work to my dying day to ensure that nobody has to resort to violence, either to defend a failed statelet or to try to violently remove the cause of the problem.
That is why the GFA is a process, we must constantly test what the people of NI want, be that to remain in the UK or to have a UI.

Before anyone votes on a United Ireland they should go and live in the North and see how much of hole it is and then reconsider.

Bridge93

The romantic in me would of course love a United Ireland. The island operating under one flag would be the dream of nearly all Irish people.

But the realist is in me feels it shouldn't happen until there's a clear plan as to how a number of issues will be adequately dealt with. If brexit has taught us anything, it's the perils of blindly following your heart without paying any attention to your head. Issues include:

1. The very big and obvious problem of the unionist community. It would be very naive to think repatriation would be swallowed smoothly and calmly. Civil war in the north would be a very real threat.

2. The North is an economic basket case. We've only emerged from recession and I don't fancy another one. Those calling for unification would be the first to whinge when taxes are expanded and increased to try support the North, welfare is cut, whatever method is used to find cash to prop up Northern Ireland

3. The North has a stupidly high amount of employees in the civil service and the likes. Where do these go once they pull out of the Union?

4. Currency, tax systems, school systems, welfare systems, healthcare, policing, courts, everything will need to be totally overhauled some of which are tedious but easy. Others considerably more difficult.

5. Northern Irish politics. I want nothing to do with them or have them anywhere near decision making in the Republic. That goes for both sides. The animosity is still unbearable.

In an ideal world a United Ireland would happen and I think it will happen down the line. For the time being there are too many underlying issues to sort out economically, socially and politically for me to wish for it now.

FrancieBrady

Bridge93 wrote: »

The romantic in me would of course love a United Ireland. The island operating under one flag would be the dream of nearly all Irish people.

But the realist is in me feels it shouldn't happen until there's a clear plan as to how a number of issues will be adequately dealt with. If brexit has taught us anything, it's the perils of blindly following your heart without paying any attention to your head. Issues include:

1. The very big and obvious problem of the unionist community. It would be very naive to think repatriation would be swallowed smoothly and calmly. Civil war in the north would be a very real threat.

2. The North is an economic basket case. We've only emerged from recession and I don't fancy another one. Those calling for unification would be the first to whinge when taxes are expanded and increased to try support the North, welfare is cut, whatever method is used to find cash to prop up Northern Ireland

3. The North has a stupidly high amount of employees in the civil service and the likes. Where do these go once they pull out of the Union?

4. Currency, tax systems, school systems, welfare systems, healthcare, policing, courts, everything will need to be totally overhauled some of which are tedious but easy. Others considerably more difficult.

5. Northern Irish politics. I want nothing to do with them or have them anywhere near decision making in the Republic. That goes for both sides. The animosity is still unbearable.

In an ideal world a United Ireland would happen and I think it will happen down the line. For the time being there are too many underlying issues to sort out economically, socially and politically for me to wish for it now.

That strikes me as a calm and rational list to start the debate on. And I agree this all has to be discussed transparently and planned.

Jawgap

Bridge93 wrote: »

The romantic in me would of course love a United Ireland. The island operating under one flag would be the dream of nearly all Irish people.

But the realist is in me feels it shouldn't happen until there's a clear plan as to how a number of issues will be adequately dealt with. If brexit has taught us anything, it's the perils of blindly following your heart without paying any attention to your head. Issues include:

1. The very big and obvious problem of the unionist community. It would be very naive to think repatriation would be swallowed smoothly and calmly. Civil war in the north would be a very real threat.

2. The North is an economic basket case. We've only emerged from recession and I don't fancy another one. Those calling for unification would be the first to whinge when taxes are expanded and increased to try support the North, welfare is cut, whatever method is used to find cash to prop up Northern Ireland

3. The North has a stupidly high amount of employees in the civil service and the likes. Where do these go once they pull out of the Union?

4. Currency, tax systems, school systems, welfare systems, healthcare, policing, courts, everything will need to be totally overhauled some of which are tedious but easy. Others considerably more difficult.

5. Northern Irish politics. I want nothing to do with them or have them anywhere near decision making in the Republic. That goes for both sides. The animosity is still unbearable.

In an ideal world a United Ireland would happen and I think it will happen down the line. For the time being there are too many underlying issues to sort out economically, socially and politically for me to wish for it now.

apparently, according to some nuggets, a UI will sort allllllll that out - as if by magic,

• the Unionists will become constitutional politicians in the Republic and embrace the political processes here
• unification will provide the money - apparently the border caused the basket-casedness of NI (also, the Brits, apparently, in a post UI world, will continued to pour billions into the place)
• worthy, wealth generating work will appear for the NI's bloated public service the day after a UI is declared
• overhauling systems will be easy when there is only one jurisdiction
• haven't you seen "Field of Dreams" - if you build it they will come, and they will be sensible

.....to bring any kind of rational analysis to the prospect of a UI that picks apart the dogma that it is a universal, unquestioned good amounts to partitionist thinking

FrancieBrady

Jawgap wrote: »

apparently, according to some nuggets, a UI will sort allllllll that out - as if by magic,

• the Unionists will become constitutional politicians in the Republic and embrace the political processes here
• unification will provide the money - apparently the border caused the basket-casedness of NI (also, the Brits, apparently, in a post UI world, will continued to pour billions into the place)
• worthy, wealth generating work will appear for the NI's bloated public service the day after a UI is declared
• overhauling systems will be easy when there is only one jurisdiction
• haven't you seen "Field of Dreams" - if you build it they will come, and they will be sensible

.....to bring any kind of rational analysis to the prospect of a UI that picks apart the dogma that it is a universal, unquestioned good amounts to partitionist thinking

The fear of even the debate is palpable in that post Jawgap. You remind me of the reaction of the DUP whenever someone mentions a 'United Ireland'.

Jawgap

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The fear of even the debate is palpable in that post Jawgap. You remind me of the reaction of the DUP whenever someone mentions a 'United Ireland'.

Actually, it's the fear of data that I think drives the Shinners to their "Field of Dreams" approach to a UI, and their tendency to throw personal insults around at those who disagree with them - because, let's face it, there is no rational argument that supports a UI at this time. so, if you can't support your argument with data, you can't support it rationally, what's left? Emotive sentimentality and a feral desire to personalise matters - unsurprising, really, when one sees how NI 'functions.'

I'm all for re-unification - but when the economics stack up. Presently we can't afford the €10 billion or so it takes to keep Billy and Tadgh in flegs, kerb paint, flutes, drums and pallets.

Also, I actually think that when there is greater economic convergence, there will, in consequence, be greater social and political convergence. First thing NI needs to do is stop the squabbling over whatever ridiculous thing they're arguing over this week and get Stormont up and running - then start the process of economic reform.

Quite frankly, it suits us that they don't - because the second they get control of their Corporation Tax and drop it close to our rate we, in the Republic, have an FDI problem - but it also starts the process of convergence. Thankfully, for our prosperity, the politicians they elect in NI lack the imagination to recognise their opportunities and are too wedded to their tribal tendencies.

baylah17

Since unifying the Island into a single state can only be achieved by a referendum being held on the question in this state as well as in N.I. i am pretty optimistic that a majority in favour in both jurisdictions is unlikely any time soon.
That I would oppose unification does not make me unpatriotic in the least as this States Constitution makes it clear that unification can only happen after such referenda occur.

FrancieBrady

Jawgap wrote: »

Actually, it's the fear of data that I think drives the Shinners to their "Field of Dreams" approach to a UI, and their tendency to throw personal insults around at those who disagree with them - because, let's face it, there is no rational argument that supports a UI at this time. so, if you can't support your argument with data, you can't support it rationally, what's left? Emotive sentimentality and a feral desire to personalise matters - unsurprising, really, when one sees how NI 'functions.'

I'm all for re-unification - but when the economics stack up. Presently we can't afford the €10 billion or so it takes to keep Billy and Tadgh in flegs, kerb paint, flutes, drums and pallets.

Also, I actually think that when there is greater economic convergence, there will, in consequence, be greater social and political convergence. First thing NI needs to do is stop the squabbling over whatever ridiculous thing they're arguing over this week and get Stormont up and running - then start the process of economic reform.

Quite frankly, it suits us that they don't - because the second they get control of their Corporation Tax and drop it close to our rate we, in the Republic, have an FDI problem - but it also starts the process of convergence. Thankfully, for our prosperity, the politicians they elect in NI lack the imagination to recognise their opportunities and are too wedded to their tribal tendencies.

4 out of 5 of those questions posed can be answered now, and have been.

The economic question requires the input of experts in many fields and areas before anyone (including spirited amateurs who don't have access to all the info) can start to discuss it.
That isn't impossible, it will just take time. Overcoming the economic issues should be possible given that you will have two governments, the EU and the rest of the world's expressed goodwill for any outcome of a poll.

tomwaterford

baylah17 wrote: »

That I would oppose unification does not make me unpatriotic in the least

Clearly deos like.....but you only have yourself to convince there though



: not feeling or showing love for or devotion to one's country : not patriotic

baylah17

tomwaterford wrote: »

Clearly deos like.....but you only have yourself to convince there though



: not feeling or showing love for or devotion to one's country : not patriotic

Oh but I have shown no such sentiment, indeed I rely on my countrys Constitution to back me up and that clearly states that unification cannot take place without a referendum in this State, so holding an opinion on the outcome of such a referendum in advance of it ever being held cannot be unpatriotic.
and by the way my country is Ireland, all 26 wonderful counties.

tomwaterford

baylah17 wrote: »

Oh but I have shown no such sentiment, indeed I rely on my countrys Constitution to back me up and that clearly states that unification cannot take place without a referendum in this State, so holding an opinion on the outcome of such a referendum in advance of it ever being held cannot be unpatriotic.
and by the way my country is Ireland, all 26 wonderful counties.

The constitution aspires for reunity (through peaceful means )


You self admittedly oppose this??

That I would oppose unification does not make me unpatriotic

Its ok to be unpatriotic,but it's foolish to lie to yourself....but whatever you need (irrational or not) to convince yourself otherwise,work away

FrancieBrady

baylah17 wrote: »

Oh but I have shown no such sentiment, indeed I rely on my countrys Constitution to back me up and that clearly states that unification cannot take place without a referendum in this State, so holding an opinion on the outcome of such a referendum in advance of it ever being held cannot be unpatriotic.
and by the way my country is Ireland, all 26 wonderful counties.

So if you actively oppose an expressed aim in that constitution after the north has fulfilled the constitution's requirements for a democratic choice, what would that make you?
Would that be the same as actively opposing a country's choice to engage in a war by refusing conscription, which is frequently deemed 'unpatriotic'?

*Can I stress here it is your democratic right to be 'unpatriotic' if you morally object.

baylah17

tomwaterford wrote: »

The constitution aspires for reunity (through peaceful means )


You self admittedly oppose this??





Its ok to be unpatriotic,but it's foolish to lie to yourself....but whatever you need (irrational or not) to convince yourself otherwise,work away

That I dont have the same aspiration does not make me unpatriotic, that I recognise that the two jurisdictions could potentially be united following referenda in accordance with the Constitution of this State, and that while voting against it I would accept the result does not make me unpatriotic either, quite the opposite actually.

Jawgap

FrancieBrady wrote: »

4 out of 5 of those questions posed can be answered now, and have been.

The economic question requires the input of experts in many fields and areas before anyone (including spirited amateurs who don't have access to all the info) can start to discuss it.
That isn't impossible, it will just take time. Overcoming the economic issues should be possible given that you will have two governments, the EU and the rest of the world's expressed goodwill for any outcome of a poll.

It's quite simple - NI gets a handout from Whitehall. That handout amounts to between €8 billion and €10 billion oer year or about 25 to 30% of GDP (according to Stormont's own estimates).

I suggest they get the experts in, drill down on the issue and make the necessary changes.

Once the deficit is lower - perhaps something approaching Greek levels of deficits -



.....then UI becomes a proposition worth talking about.

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So if you actively oppose an expressed aim in that constitution after the north has fulfilled the constitution's requirements for a democratic choice, what would that make you?
Would that be the same as actively opposing a country's choice to engage in a war by refusing conscription, which is frequently deemed 'unpatriotic'?

*Can I stress here it is your democratic right to be 'unpatriotic' if you morally object.

was everyone that voted in favour of same sex marriage unpatriotic?

Is everyone campaigning to repeal the eigth unpatriotic?

baylah17

Aegir wrote: »

was everyone that voted in favour of same sex marriage unpatriotic?

Is everyone campaigning to repeal the eigth unpatriotic?

Our resident SF spokesperson would have you believe so, yes.

maryishere

baylah17 wrote: »

Our resident SF spokesperson would have you believe so, yes.

In a new United Ireland, all people will be required to be patriotic, otherwise they can get out. Streets and Railway stations will be renamed after our patriot dead, and as kids leave Bobby Sands station in Belfast to learn compulsory Irish ( a requirement in state jobs) they can admire pictures of our patriots on the walls of the classrooms, on our new banknotes, postage stamps etc.

FrancieBrady

Aegir wrote: »

was everyone that voted in favour of same sex marriage unpatriotic?

Is everyone campaigning to repeal the eigth unpatriotic?

They were and are votes to change the constitution. A vote on a UI is not a vote to change the Irish constitution. Article 2 and 3 will remain even if a UI vote is defeated.

A vote on a UI here after NI has fulfilled the requirement of the Irish constitution (A democratic vote in favour of unity) will be a vote to fulfill a clause in our constitution the 'firm aim of the Irish nation'.

Again, what are you doing if you actively oppose the 'firm will' of any nation?

ohnonotgmail

I dont remember getting a vote on the original constitution so why would opposing a section of it make me unpatriotic?

Jawgap

FrancieBrady wrote: »

4 out of 5 of those questions posed can be answered now, and have been.

The economic question requires the input of experts in many fields and areas before anyone (including spirited amateurs who don't have access to all the info) can start to discuss it.
That isn't impossible, it will just take time. Overcoming the economic issues should be possible given that you will have two governments, the EU and the rest of the world's expressed goodwill for any outcome of a poll.

you're right - they can......and the answer to #2 is in the affirmative - the place is an economic basket case, and its a burden, despite our prosperity and economic growth forecasts, we are not in a position to shoulder.

Likewise the answers to #3 and #4 both can be answered in the affirmative.

baylah17

FrancieBrady wrote: »

They were and are votes to change the constitution. A vote on a UI is not a vote to change the Irish constitution. Article 2 and 3 will remain even if a UI vote is defeated.

A vote on a UI here after NI has fulfilled the requirement of the Irish constitution (A democratic vote in favour of unity) will be a vote to fulfill a clause in our constitution the 'firm aim of the Irish nation'.

Again, what are you doing if you actively oppose the 'firm will' of any nation?

The Constitution is of and for the people, so if the people of this state decide by democratic means NOT to fulfill one of its aims then they are not being unpatriotic.
In this state the people are sovereign, they are free to express their will and to change the Constitution by democratic means.
EDIT; And should the people of this state vote to unify the Island politically, saddened though I might be, I would of course accept that democratic decision.

FrancieBrady

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I dont remember getting a vote on the original constitution so why would opposing a section of it make me unpatriotic?

Well set about changing it then. Or support a party that wants to change article 2 and 3 or get rid of it.

Oh wait, there isn't a party that wants to do that.

FrancieBrady

baylah17 wrote: »

The Constitution is of and for the people, so if the people of this state decide by democratic means NOT to fulfill one of its aims then they are not being unpatriotic.
In this state the people are sovereign, they are free to express their will and to change the Constitution by democratic means.
EDIT; And should the people of this state vote to unify the Island politically, saddened though I might be, I would of course accept that democratic decision.

I have said very clearly it is your democratic right to oppose an expressed 'firm aim' of the constitution if you so decide.
Personally I would call that unpatriotic.

ohnonotgmail

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Well set about changing it then. Or support a party that wants to change article 2 and 3 or get rid of it.

Oh wait, there isn't a party that wants to do that.

i'm quite happy to leave them there as they have no consequences at the moment. but if this UI nonsense gains any traction i will definitely oppose it.

tomwaterford

baylah17 wrote: »

That I dont have the same aspiration does not make me unpatriotic, that I recognise that the two jurisdictions could potentially be united following referenda in accordance with the Constitution of this State, and that while voting against it I would accept the result does not make me unpatriotic either, quite the opposite actually.

Seems your mixing up the word democratic with patriotic tbh kid

ohnonotgmail

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I have said very clearly it is your democratic right to oppose an expressed 'firm aim' of the constitution if you so decide.
Personally I would call that unpatriotic.

what is unpatriotic about opposing something that would destroy your country. You sound like a brexiteer.

Alannah Gallagher

Would I like a United Ireland in the ideal world? Yes
Do I think it's worth a few thousand deaths in another 20 years of troubles? No

FrancieBrady

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

what is unpatriotic about opposing something that would destroy your country. You sound like a brexiteer.

And that sounds like 'your' opinion.
I have seen nothing yet that convinces me that it would 'destroy' our country. It may require some economic austerity but 'destroy' is a complete leap into scaremongering.

FrancieBrady

Jawgap wrote: »

It's quite simple - NI gets a handout from Whitehall. That handout amounts to between €8 billion and €10 billion oer year or about 25 to 30% of GDP (according to Stormont's own estimates).

I suggest they get the experts in, drill down on the issue and make the necessary changes.

Once the deficit is lower - perhaps something approaching Greek levels of deficits -



.....then UI becomes a proposition worth talking about.

I am not an economist, expert or amateur, but shouldn't the figure being bandied about(we have seen 8bn 9bn 10bn and 12 bn mentioned here. Why 11bn wasn't, I am not sure, maybe it doesn't sound scary enough) not be the figure arrived at when you subtract contributions to central UK expenditure?

What is the breakdown of that figure, what is not needed?
What can be achieved by streamlining/rationalising NI's public service.
Why is it that the subvention has risen dramatically since the GFA, almost 4bn I think since the mid 90's.

So many things that cannot be answered or supplied here. Can you explain that dramatic rise in the subvention since the mid 90's?

maryishere

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It may require some economic austerity but 'destroy' is a complete leap into scaremongering.

And that sounds like 'your' opinion.

It is never going to happen, in our lifetime at least, thank God. We have enough political and economic problems in this country without importing a politician and his followers who think its ok to childishly insult and taunt the innocent victims of the Kingsmill massacre on the anniversary.