All-New United Ireland Thread

flutered

jm08 wrote: »

Would the existing policing not continue with the existing PSNI? I don't think you will see Irish Defence forces patrolling loyalist areas of Belfast. That would be incredible stupid. If there is need for Peacekeeping, get the UN to supply troops.

eu task force would be my preference

Avatar MIA

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Seemingly some see the trend
https://www.channel4.com/news/by/gary-gibbon/blogs/forty-shades-of-green-fifty-shades-of-orange

You can just see the professional/landed class from a traditional unionist background despairing at the growing disparity between NI/Belfast and the prosperous parts of the UK and large parts of the Republic. And it's only going to become more isolated post Brexit - if the UK economy dips it will entrench on the mainland. These people must be sick of seeing their kids emigrate - what's known as a brain drain.

The poorer/less educated classes do like the reflected glory of empire and royalty.

blanch152

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

One would assume any hard-core unionist who wouldn't wish to be governed by anyone other than those within the union would most likely up stick and head across the water,

This makes no sense at all. If it were true, we would have seen mass migration from North to South over the years since 1922. It simply hasn't happened.

Think of the Rhodesian farmers and South African farmers, who despite their friends and families being murdered around them, stayed with their farms. Why would unionists be any different?

snowstorm445

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Between Brexit and the current Stormont stand-off, discussion concerning a united Ireland has grown in recent years, and the oncreased likelihood of the election of an SF First Minister in future Stormont elections will only intensify such a debate. So what issues need to be considered?

1. What would the cost of unification be and would the EU subside the adjustment?
2. Would a new Ireland require changes to the national flag and anthem?
3. Should parties in the Republic publish policy papers to prepare for a future referendum?
4. Would unionists be entitled to dual citizenship, and would the question of the Commonwealth re-emerge in that context?
5. Would the national government remain a unitary state, or would a federal government with regional assemblies emerge?
6. Would Southern politicians campaign in an NI referendum, and how can Alliance voters and liberal Protestants be persuaded to vote for unity?

1. The EU would almost certainly attempt to subsidise and pour regional funding into Northern Ireland post-unity, if only to prove a point to observers in Britain and to wavering nationalists in Scotland (and possibly Wales). It's cynical, but almost a given IMO.
2. I feel it would, although it would meet stiff resistance down here for sure. Flegs are very important to Unionists after all, and the tricolour would have to go in a new setup IMO.
3. Yes, although I doubt many would do until it becomes absolutely unavoidable. Outside of SF there is extreme apathy down here regarding a United Ireland and what form it would take.
4. Probably, not sure. As for the Commonwealth, it means very little nowadays (compared with when we left in the late 40s), and while the idea is well-intended I doubt it would mean anything to the Unionists.
5. There will almost certainly need to be a devolved arrangement for Northern Ireland post-unity, if only to ensure continuity with the Good Friday Agreement. I doubt any sort of overall federal system would be necessary or desirable though.
6. Unionists need to know who they will be dealing with in a United Ireland, so I feel that first is a must (although bear in mind there will almost certainly have to be a referendum down here at the same time so debate on the issue down here and the figures associated with it will no doubt filter up north to voters there). I think the self-evident disaster that a Hard Brexit might become has enough potential to swing moderate Protestants than anything else, although I must say having observed politics there over the years Unionists are far more solidly behind the union through thick and thin than Nationalists often are regarding a United Ireland. There is a large contingent that would never be convinced in the run up to a referendum, and their transition into a new state post-vote would be extremely gradual (obviously some would never accept it and probably leave).

One thing that I think must be considered in the future is that some "ex"-Unionists in a United Ireland, while acknowledging that rejoining the United Kingdom is a lost cause (if it even continues to exist in the decades to come, which is not a certainty by any means), will always retain a degree of aversion to Dublin rule. As a result, we may see a form of independence movement develop among Ulster Protestants in the decades following unity. Pure speculation obviously, but going by how utterly abhorrent many of them are of any sort of prospect of a United Ireland right now, I doubt if this current of thought would be quick to evaporate, as some seem to think, in the wake of a United Ireland.

Infini

jm08 wrote: »

Would the existing policing not continue with the existing PSNI? I don't think you will see Irish Defence forces patrolling loyalist areas of Belfast. That would be incredible stupid. If there is need for Peacekeeping, get the UN to supply troops.

I'd imagine that the PSNI would be just subsumed into the Gardai. New name, same people though. As for troops there'd be no need for them there bar being in the barracks and even then it would probably be mostly the same people in them now unless they're from the mainland UK.

McMurphy

blanch152 wrote: »

This makes no sense at all. If it were true, we would have seen mass migration from North to South over the years since 1922. It simply hasn't happened.

Why would hard-core unionists who wished to be governed by no one else except a government from the union emigrate from the north to the south?

Please clarify.

The rest of your post about South African farmers clearly belongs elsewhere as it's in no way shape or form a comparable scenario.

Unless of course people want to go down the road of comparing Adams to Mandela, and a few decades of life in the north with Apartheid life in S.A, but I don't think that will suit some people's narrative, so best not to go down that rabbit hole.

judeboy101

I personally see the tricolour as a reminder of partition, the golden harp on a field of green is way more classy.

jm08

blanch152 wrote: »

This makes no sense at all. If it were true, we would have seen mass migration from North to South over the years since 1922. It simply hasn't happened.

Think of the Rhodesian farmers and South African farmers, who despite their friends and families being murdered around them, stayed with their farms. Why would unionists be any different?

Farmers don't have any options. If they left their land, what would they do? Their skills are not transferable to another country unless they can afford to buy land (which is unlikely). That would not be the case for most people in NI. They have British qualifications and training. A large number of them go to University in Scotland and England as well (and I believe this is already an issue with young protestants - they don't come back to Northern Ireland when finished university in Scotland or England).

James Brown

They'll likely become like the US south. Part of the country proper, but you'll get the odd union flag waver. I don't see life changing for them much. A kick in the balls pride wise may be, but they'll have the same freedoms they enjoy now, (but they'll need respect sames sex couples and science). All our signage is already in English and Irish, so that's that sorted.

maccored

i dont think it would work unless the whole government system, north and south, was stripped down and rebuilt as one entity

VinLieger

maccored wrote: »

i dont think it would work unless the whole government system, north and south, was stripped down and rebuilt as one entity

Does anybody really think that is possible to do without mass disruption to peoples way of life north and south?

The main issue with the public service and a united ireland is how many are employed by the state in the north is objectively unsustainable after reunification

James Brown

VinLieger wrote: »

Does anybody really think that is possible to do without mass disruption to peoples way of life north and south?

The main issue with the public service and a united ireland is how many are employed by the state in the north is objectively unsustainable after reunification

But we have the same issue with the current HSE. There will be a lot of work for state employees for many years. They need look at the contracts of new hires as they come in.

The constitution would need be scrapped and re-written to include the rights and wishes of a modern all peoples country.

Sunny Disposition

It'd be fantastic if it happened, make no mistake partition is a huge historic injustice.

It makes sense too, the south is a far better place to live than the north, it's not divided, is more prosperous and isn't as reliant on massive wealth transfers.

The problem is unionism is in a very dour mood after generations of conflict. They will have to be made feel comfortable. All new emblems will be needed, some way of propping Belfast up as a centre for the public sector, extra supports in getting FDI for the north east.

I think there will be a lot of international support, from the US, Europe and from Britain for a period of time.

I'm actually surprised some unionists are discussing it now, seems like they are starting to see is as inevitable rather than possible. I suppose it is inevitable in the next 100 years or so, wind is bound to blow that way sooner or later, but they see to think it will be sooner.

An Ciarraioch

Matt Barrett wrote: »

VinLieger wrote: »

Does anybody really think that is possible to do without mass disruption to peoples way of life north and south?

The main issue with the public service and a united ireland is how many are employed by the state in the north is objectively unsustainable after reunification

But we have the same issue with the current HSE. There will be a lot of work for state employees for many years. They need look at the contracts of new hires as they come in.

The constitution would need be scrapped and re-written to include the rights and wishes of a modern all peoples country.

Speaking of the HSE, one of the topics regularly raised on panel shows in relation to a UI is access to the NHS, and what are regarded as significantly higher GP costs South of the Border. In theory, Sláintecare would best address those concerns, but that seems destined to fill the back of a filing cabinet.

murphaph

Do we really want to live in the same country as Ian Paisley Jr., Nigel Dodds and William McCrea?

James Brown

murphaph wrote: »

Do we really want to live in the same country as Ian Paisley Jr., Nigel Dodds and William McCrea?

Bertie Ahern, need I go on

blanch152

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Why would hard-core unionists who wished to be governed by no one else except a government from the union emigrate from the north to the south?

Please clarify.

Because I wasn't talking about unionists.

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

The rest of your post about South African farmers clearly belongs elsewhere as it's in no way shape or form a comparable scenario.

Unless of course people want to go down the road of comparing Adams to Mandela, and a few decades of life in the north with Apartheid life in S.A, but I don't think that will suit some people's narrative, so best not to go down that rabbit hole.

It seems to me that there is a naive expectation out there that unlike Northern nationalists in 1922, Rhodesian farmers in 1979, and Afrikaaners post-Apartheird, that the vast majority of Ulster unionists will be happy to up and leave the State after unification.

Fr Tod Umptious

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

It'd be fantastic if it happened, make no mistake partition is a huge historic injustice.

It makes sense too, the south is a far better place to live than the north, it's not divided, is more prosperous and isn't as reliant on massive wealth transfers.

The problem is unionism is in a very dour mood after generations of conflict. They will have to be made feel comfortable. All new emblems will be needed, some way of propping Belfast up as a centre for the public sector, extra supports in getting FDI for the north east.

I think there will be a lot of international support, from the US, Europe and from Britain for a period of time.

I'm actually surprised some unionists are discussing it now, seems like they are starting to see is as inevitable rather than possible. I suppose it is inevitable in the next 100 years or so, wind is bound to blow that way sooner or later, but they see to think it will be sooner.

I'm sorry but I just don't get what would be fantastic about it.

We have developed fine as a 26 county entity for almost a century, what exactly is "fantastic" about the rest of the island coming under the same juristiction ?

James Brown

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

I'm sorry but I just don't get what would be fantastic about it.

We have developed fine as a 26 county entity for almost a century, what exactly is "fantastic" about the rest of the island coming under the same juristiction ?

Answered your own question. Some people would like all of Ireland under the one roof as it were.

Fr Tod Umptious

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Answered your own question. Some people would like all of Ireland under the one roof as it were.

But why ?

What's the value to them or to us ?

Some romantic BS ?

If they want to live in the 26 juristiction they can.

Avatar MIA

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

What's the value to them or to us ?

Economies of scale 101

Fr Tod Umptious

Avatar MIA wrote: »

Economies of scale 101

Show me some evidence that it would be economically beneficial.

If it's so damn simple show me the numbers.

Avatar MIA

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Show me some evidence that it would be economically beneficial.

If it's so damn simple show me the numbers.

Infrastructure items make more sense - Nuclear power plant for 4.5m becomes more feasible with 6.5 people as an example. Healthcare facilities are another that make more sense the greater the population.

The Dutch are a good example of a small country with a high relative population reaping the benefits.

McMurphy

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Show me some evidence that it would be economically beneficial.

If it's so damn simple show me the numbers.

How can any one show you evidence of something that has yet to happen?

Some have estimated.

United Irish economy could deliver boost of €36bn

But, another country that has been reunited in western Europe in relatively recent times was Germany.


Is there an argument/evidence that reunification has been economically detrimental to the Germans?

McMurphy

blanch152 wrote: »

It seems to me that there is a naive expectation out there that unlike Northern nationalists in 1922, Rhodesian farmers in 1979, and Afrikaaners post-Apartheird, that the vast majority of Ulster unionists will be happy to up and leave the State after unification.

The only naivety I see here is your own, because you introduced something to the thread No one else ever mentioned.

No one said the "vast majority of unionists" would be happy to up and leave, I said a few hard-core might opt to do so.

Fr Tod Umptious

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

How can any one show you evidence of something that has yet to happen?

Some have estimated.

United Irish economy could deliver boost of €36bn

But, another country that has been reunited in western Europe in relatively recent times was Germany.


Is there an argument/evidence that reunification has been economically detrimental to the Germans?

Lots, below is just one

It was actually German reunification tha fueled the Celtic Tiger

The German economy was sluggish thus interest rates were low, these low rates in the new Euro zone allowed Irish banks easy access to credit which was passed on to any Tom, dick or Harry who had a pulse.

http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/hili67a.pdf

After German unification in October 1990, the economic performance of western Germany
was initially strong. However, it deteriorated by 1992 and remained dismal for the
remainder of the 1990s. During this time, the unemployment rate nearly doubled, as GDP
growth averaged a meager 1.5 percent per year. The government's fiscal strategy after
1992 was to raise taxes, increase social security contribution rates (payments by
workers/employers into the social security program), and cut spending, all of which was
meant to reduce its borrowing requirements. Public finances deteriorated and resulted in
protracted budget deficits and soaring public indebtedness.

Mr.Nice Guy

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

I'm sorry but I just don't get what would be fantastic about it.

We have developed fine as a 26 county entity for almost a century, what exactly is "fantastic" about the rest of the island coming under the same juristiction ?

Ugh, I just despair at this sort of lift-up-the-drawbridge, partitionist mindset from southerners. As a Dubliner, if someone told me I could have more material wealth by saying cheerio to Cork or Galway I would say 'no thanks' because these people are my compatriots. I want to be in a state with them.

I feel the same way about those from Down, Armagh, Derry, Antrim, Fermanagh and Tyrone: I would rather be together with my countrymen and women than to say 'nah, stuff you, I'm alright Jack'.

It's such a staggering level of selfishness imo.

Of course the default position of the southern partitionist is often to try and dismiss and deny the Irishness of those north of the border, this despite the southern constitution bestowing an automatic right of citizeship upon those in the north, and openly admitting an aspiration for unity.

Many of the people north of the border identify as Irish, many hold Irish citizenship, many have contributed to the culture, sport, politics and social history of this entire island. And further, I don't accept - and don't see why anyone else would - that hundreds of years of common nationhood can be undone by a dozen people in a smoky room in London writing a bunch of arbitrary lines on a map. My sense of nationhood is stronger than that. Mine doesn't stop at a border; hard, soft, invisible or otherwise.

You would think Brexit and the power and influence that the Boris Johnsons and Jacob Rees-Moggs still wield over here - power to influence ALL of this island - ought to concentrate minds on the need for us to get entirely away from this influence and to shape our own destinies and future.

An Ciarraioch

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

It'd be fantastic if it happened, make no mistake partition is a huge historic injustice.

It makes sense too, the south is a far better place to live than the north, it's not divided, is more prosperous and isn't as reliant on massive wealth transfers.

The problem is unionism is in a very dour mood after generations of conflict. They will have to be made feel comfortable. All new emblems will be needed, some way of propping Belfast up as a centre for the public sector, extra supports in getting FDI for the north east.

I think there will be a lot of international support, from the US, Europe and from Britain for a period of time.

I'm actually surprised some unionists are discussing it now, seems like they are starting to see is as inevitable rather than possible. I suppose it is inevitable in the next 100 years or so, wind is bound to blow that way sooner or later, but they see to think it will be sooner.

I'm sorry but I just don't get what would be fantastic about it.

We have developed fine as a 26 county entity for almost a century, what exactly is "fantastic" about the rest of the island coming under the same juristiction ?

For one thing, it's doubtless doing NI Protestants a disservice to assume they're all crawthumpers like Foster - in a new dispensation, faced with more moderate variations of nationalism, the rhetoric would surely be toned down, and the non-politicians would just want to secure their economic future. Also, geographically and economically, various counter-balancing hubs to Dublin would be natural fits, such as Sligo-Donegal-Derry, Cavan-Fermanagh-Leitrim, and Armagh-Monaghan-Down-Louth.

Kermit.de.frog

What I don't get is the arguments unionist politicians openly make in the UK for the union.


They say that

a: NI trade is so hopelessly dependent on GB that there can be no sea border

and

b: Ireland could never match this enormous subvention they get


Whenever I hear this I just can't get over how debasing and frankly embarrassing the arguments are. It's basically making a virtue of total economic delinquency. It must also be infuriating for "mainland" taxpayers as it's their money!

It's bizarre.

Junkyard Tom

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

It's basically making a virtue of total economic delinquency.

Indeed. From ship-building linen-exporting industrialists to 'Professor' Peter Robinson and 'Lord' Willie McCrea in less than a century.

It must also be infuriating for "mainland" taxpayers as it's their money!

DUP strategists must be the absolute dumbest ever. I heard a unionist man on BBC Radio 'Ulster' speaking to the DUP's more recent own-goals saying: 'have these people ever played chess'?

I'd recommend they start with Connect Four.