Do you consider nationalists from Northern Ireland to be Irish?

joeguevara

Anyone from any part of the world has the right to call themselves Irish if they want to. If they have a direct link then yes, I believe they are. I have cousins in England whose grandparents were Irish and I consider them to be Irish.

Americans who have a tacit link are a different story but I have lived in Irish communities in the Bronx and God help anyone who questions if they are Irish.

But the OP is easily answered. Anyone born in the island of Ireland are Irish. Full stop. I wonder why the OP felt the had to add the word nationist as a describer. Why would that make a difference?

SharpshooterTom

joeguevara wrote: »

I wonder why the OP felt the had to add the word nationist as a describer. Why would that make a difference?

Because its my belief that people from protestant and unionist backgrounds in NI who identify solely as British are not Irish. Others disagree and that's fine. But the PUL community in the North do not partake in any Irish culture, have little or no Irish heritage and declare their loyalty to the UK.

Sleeper12

careless sherpa wrote:

It's the mainland now? An Irish nationalist alright. Your use of vocabulary says otherwise

Some of us aren't afraid of names, flags and titles. I live in a country where the Queen doesn't rule. When she visited & I'm delighted she visited, I saw a visiting dignitarie. An invited guest. I didn't feel anger or a threat. I saw a little old lady dressed in green doing & saying as much as protocol allowed her to do to try mend fences.

My grandfather fought in Michael Collins IRA for our independence. As an autistic child the guns scared the living siht out of me at his full military funeral. My family have stories about what the Black & Tans did to my great grand parents because their son was IRA.

That was 100 years ago.. Terms like British Isles don't frighten me or anger me or threaten me. They are names and nothing more. Where does it end. Oh some of my family died in the potato famine so I don't want to be offended. From now on potatoes should be called earth balls.

Vikings came to Ireland, slaughtered and raped men women & children. They took us a slaves. Time heals all. We now embrace our history with the Norsemen.

Donnielighto

careless sherpa wrote: »

It's the mainland now? An Irish nationalist alright. Your use of vocabulary says otherwise

Great Britain is the UK mainland though in comparison. To the north. Also said one comfortable in their own skin. Being a nationalist (I don't think there is any real benefit from nationalism bar sport) doesn't mean hating another country area or people it means believing or acting for some form of autonomy.


Do nationalists have to hate the UK and everything about it indefinitely now? Having an issue with calling great Britain the UK mainland is more nonsensical (harsh but can't think of a softer word atm) than a brexiteer getting up in arms over someone calling France the European mainland, as the uk is a single entity.

Sleeper12

Donnielighto wrote:

Great Britain is the UK mainland though in comparison. To the north. Also said one comfortable in their own skin. Being a nationalist (I don't think there is any real benefit from nationalism bar sport) doesn't mean hating another country area or people it means believing or acting for some form of autonomy.

He's lost the British Isles argument and is looking to pick a fight on anything now.

I was replying to you when I said mainland. I deliberately used this term when speaking to you. It's about building Bridges and not burning them. You said yesterday that you were a unionist so I deliberately used a term that you might use.

I'll tell you what. We've a long way to go with this peace thing when you see reactions to names like British Isles and mainland.

Here's one for you. We don't even seem to have an Irish language name that describes the 500 Islands in the British Isles. Everyone getting hot under the collar about the name and we don't have a replacement name. It's not good enough for the government to make claims that British Isles is not a recognised term or of term without actually giving us an official term. It is stupid backwards Irish politics. Say one thing publicly and teach our children the complete opposite in national school

Feisar

Question, can people in NI call themselves British as it's Great Britain and NI?

Sleeper12

Feisar wrote:

Question, can people in NI call themselves British as it's Great Britain and NI?

They can call themselves British or Irish. They can call themselves British and Irish if they choose.

Ironicname

joeguevara wrote:

Anyone from any part of the world has the right to call themselves Irish if they want to.

So essentially, being Irish means nothing if it's a claim anyone can make because they want to?

alastair

Sleeper12 wrote: »

And we dance round & round

The department of education make the curriculum for geography like all subjects. The department of education has inspectors visiting primary schools to ensure that the curriculum is being taught correctly and to assess the teachers themselves.

Are you honestly stating that the department of education does not know what each book contains? You honestly believe that a teacher can teach flat earth & introduce books on the subject & the department of education will have nothing to say about it? The department of education didn't find out in 100 years that British Isles was being taught in school? That it was being taught in the teachers colleges? In 100 years the department of education didn't know that the books contained British Isles? Then you claim that the department of education can't ban a book or order rewordings in reprints?

Come on now. Think your arguments through

They don’t have any involvement with vetting or authorising any geography textbooks. That’s the reality. They stipulate the curriculum and, to a degree, the syllabus. They don’t have any input into textbooks, beyond specified literary works for language assessment.

careless sherpa

Donnielighto wrote: »

Great Britain is the UK mainland though in comparison. To the north. Also said one comfortable in their own skin. Being a nationalist (I don't think there is any real benefit from nationalism bar sport) doesn't mean hating another country area or people it means believing or acting for some form of autonomy.


Do nationalists have to hate the UK and everything about it indefinitely now? Having an issue with calling great Britain the UK mainland is more nonsensical (harsh but can't think of a softer word atm) than a brexiteer getting up in arms over someone calling France the European mainland, as the uk is a single entity.

Great britain is not the mainland to Ireland. It is an island to our east. The use of language is important and to try to downplay it's use in a colonial context portrays an ignorance as to have it was used in the past to denote ownership and superiority. Those ideas belong in the past and the peole clinging to them need to let them go. That era is long over, Ireland's future is with European partners in an equal footing

alastair

ThomasFlynn wrote: »

Because its my belief that people from protestant and unionist backgrounds in NI who identify solely as British are not Irish. Others disagree and that's fine. But the PUL community in the North do not partake in any Irish culture, have little or no Irish heritage and declare their loyalty to the UK.

Orangeism is also Irish culture and heritage. Plenty of NI unionist and loyalist culture is specific to Ireland, albeit a different culture to Nationalists.

Sleeper12

alastair wrote:

They don’t have any involvement with vetting or authorising any geography textbooks. That’s the reality. They stipulate the curriculum and, to a degree, the syllabus. They don’t have any input into textbooks, beyond specified literary works for language assessment.

Ah go away with your nonsense.


Government says that British Isles has no meaning & isn't official or used.

The very same ministers making these claims were taught about the British Isles in Irish schools. As they spoke their children were being taught the exact same thing.

It is totally ridiculous to claim that the department of education does not know what has been taught in Irish schools for the last 100 years.

The government says that the term used worldwide "British Isles" is not recognized yet they give us no indication on what name to use. They don't give us an official name at all. We don't seem to have an Irish name for the 500 Islands.

Your repeated defence is that the Irish government hasn't known that Irish children were taught about the British Isles for 100 years. Have you any idea how this defense sounds? The big secret. Every man woman & child knows what was being taught in school but you claim that the department of education & the government didn't know? You do make me laugh.

British Isles was in fact taught in Irish schools. The department of education & the government were aware of this & this give credence to the use of the name. State schools taught us that it was the British Isles.

Jasus man you are flogging a dead horse here. Do you ever admit when you make a mistake?

alastair

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Ah go away with your nonsense.


Government says that British Isles has no meaning & isn't official or used.

The very same ministers making these claims were taught about the British Isles in Irish schools. As they spoke their children were being taught the exact same thing.

It is totally ridiculous to claim that the department of education does not know what has been taught in Irish schools for the last 100 years.

The government says that the term used worldwide "British Isles" is not recognized yet they give us no indication on what name to use. They don't give us an official name at all. We don't seem to have an Irish name for the 500 Islands.

Your repeated defence is that the Irish government hasn't known that Irish children were taught about the British Isles for 100 years. Have you any idea how this defense sounds? The big secret. Every man woman & child knows what was being taught in school but you claim that the department of education & the government didn't know? You do make me laugh.

British Isles was in fact taught in Irish schools. The department of education & the government were aware of this & this give credence to the use of the name. State schools taught us that it was the British Isles.

Jasus man you are flogging a dead horse here. Do you ever admit when you make a mistake?

Don’t know how to make it simpler for you. You’re wrong. The Dept of Education do not authorise, specify, or oversee any textbooks beyond stipulating literary text options for language studies. Again - you’re wrong in claiming otherwise. The State position on the term is crystal-clear - they don’t use it, and it’s not got any official status.

Sleeper12

alastair wrote:

Don’t know how to make it simpler for you. You’re wrong. The Dept of Education do not authorise, specify, or oversee any textbooks beyond stipulating literary text options for language studies. Again - you’re wrong in claiming otherwise. The State position on the term is crystal-clear - they don’t use it, and it’s not got any official status.

You repeat the same thing over & over yet ignore or refuse to respond to the fact that this has not taught in Irish state schools with the full knowledge of the department of education & the government for 100 years. Every member of the government & department of education has been taught this in school.

The government say its not a recognised term yet they don't supply us with an official term. Until they do actually invent an official term all we can do is call it by the term used worldwide, the British Isles.

blanch152

Ironicname wrote: »

So essentially, being Irish means nothing if it's a claim anyone can make because they want to?

Irishness means different things depending on whether you are talking about residency, citizenship, nationality, domicile, cultural affinity or anything else.

For example a Muslim person born on this island may have Irish residency, citizenship, nationality and domicile, but may have close to zero cultural affinity with Ireland. Someone else may have none of those legal attachments but may have huge cultural affinity with Ireland and may even feel Irish or believe that they are Irish.

How Irish someone is depends on what you are talking about.

alastair

Sleeper12 wrote: »

You repeat the same thing over & over yet ignore or refuse to respond to the fact that this has not taught in Irish state schools with the full knowledge of the department of education & the government for 100 years. Every member of the government & department of education has been taught this in school.

The government say its not a recognised term yet they don't supply us with an official term. Until they do actually invent an official term all we can do is call it by the term used worldwide, the British Isles.

Britain and Ireland is perfectly acceptable and already used. I’ve repeatedly pointed out that the State, in the firm if the Dept of Education, has no role in vetting geography textbooks, so I’m not ignoring anything. You’re simply wrong.

alastair

blanch152 wrote: »

Irishness means different things depending on whether you are talking about residency, citizenship, nationality, domicile, cultural affinity or anything else.

For example a Muslim person born on this island may have Irish residency, citizenship, nationality and domicile, but may have close to zero cultural affinity with Ireland. Someone else may have none of those legal attachments but may have huge cultural affinity with Ireland and may even feel Irish or believe that they are Irish.

How Irish someone is depends on what you are talking about.

This notional Muslim must be pretty determined to never set foot outside their room then, to live here and have ‘zero’ affinity with the world around them. You sure you aren’t just projecting your own prejudices there?

blanch152

alastair wrote: »

This notional Muslim must be pretty determined to never set foot outside their room then, to live here and have ‘zero’ affinity with the world around them. You sure you aren’t just projecting your own prejudices there?

Not at all.

You can take the example elsewhere. A member of the travelling community might feel the same about Ireland. Abroad, a member of the Amish community in the US may be legally American for citizenship, domicile, residency and nationality, but have close to zero affinity with mainstream American cultural values.

What I am saying is that it is possible to be legally Irish in every sense and to self-identify as something other than Irish. Can't understand why people have a problem with that.

alastair

blanch152 wrote: »

Not at all.

You can take the example elsewhere. A member of the travelling community might feel the same about Ireland. Abroad, a member of the Amish community in the US may be legally American for citizenship, domicile, residency and nationality, but have close to zero affinity with mainstream American cultural values.

What I am saying is that it is possible to be legally Irish in every sense and to self-identify as something other than Irish. Can't understand why people have a problem with that.

Except that Travellers and Amish are Irish and American respectively. Just a different strand of Irish and American. If you limit your concept of nationality to only a notional mainstream, you’re not really allowing for healthy change.

blanch152

alastair wrote: »

Except that Travellers and Amish are Irish and American respectively. Just a different strand of Irish and American. If you limit your concept of nationality to only a notional mainstream, you’re not really allowing for healthy change.

The Travellers and the Amish may well legally be Irish and American respectively, but they don't have to be considered as Irish and American if they don't want to be. I am not limiting my concept of nationality, quite the opposite.

It is like the debate of sex versus gender. Someone may be legally and biologically male but may identify as female.

Someone born on this island is Irish by citizenship. If they live in the South, they are Irish by residency. They may well consider themselves French if they have French ancestry and have lived part of their life in France.

I am not bothered whether they call themselves French or Irish, that is their choice. In answering the OP's question as to whether I consider nationalists from Northern Ireland to be Irish, the answer is that I consider them whatever they want to be considered.

This fluid definition of nationality causes a problem for the republican movement because the notion of nationality becomes detached from territory. So the Muslim example I gave is pretty much the truth, if that Muslim or traveller or Amish person doesn't want to be known or considered as Irish, even though legally they are Irish, then so what, let them be Muslim or traveller or Amish or British?

Ironicname

blanch152 wrote:

How Irish someone is depends on what you are talking about.

I agree.

The title of the topic is whether I consider people from the north are Irish. I don't. I consider them Northern Irish.

British Isles has officially been dropped by Irish Government policy since approx 2007. What happened a 100 years before that or what was previously taught in some in some schools in the past is irrelevant unless, you're Irish, and wish to be argumentative.

If you're not Irish, and say, British I've no problem with you calling it the British Isles, you can call it whatever you like, it's just not recognised by the (most) Irish People or their government.

Well, this is timed well for this thread.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2019/1014/1083271-desouza-citizenship/

The UK Home Office/immigration tribunal considers people born in NI to be automatically British citizens.

Donnielighto

Sleeper12 wrote: »

He's lost the British Isles argument and is looking to pick a fight on anything now.

I was replying to you when I said mainland. I deliberately used this term when speaking to you. It's about building Bridges and not burning them. You said yesterday that you were a unionist so I deliberately used a term that you might use.

I'll tell you what. We've a long way to go with this peace thing when you see reactions to names like British Isles and mainland.

Here's one for you. We don't even seem to have an Irish language name that describes the 500 Islands in the British Isles. Everyone getting hot under the collar about the name and we don't have a replacement name. It's not good enough for the government to make claims that British Isles is not a recognised term or of term without actually giving us an official term. It is stupid backwards Irish politics. Say one thing publicly and teach our children the complete opposite in national school

I'm from the republic btw, just think the north would need to get in line before the rep could take it reasonably. Also I'd like supermajority both sides before merging.

Sleeper12

alastair wrote:

Britain and Ireland is perfectly acceptable and already used. I’ve repeatedly pointed out that the State, in the firm if the Dept of Education, has no role in vetting geography textbooks, so I’m not ignoring anything. You’re simply wrong.

Call what Britain & Ireland? You must have realised by now that we are talking about a grouping of 500 islands. Calling them Britain and Ireland is hardly suitable. Or are you referring to just the two main islands Ireland and Britain?

Donnielighto

[Deleted User] wrote: »

British Isles has officially been dropped by Irish Government policy since approx 2007. What happened a 100 years before that or what was previously thought in some in some schools in the past is irrelevant unless, you're Irish, and wish to be argumentative.

If you're not Irish, and say, British I've no problem with you calling it the British Isles, you can call it whatever you like, it's just not recognised by the (most) Irish People of their government.

Firstly everyone knows what you'd be talking about and it's not local vernacular but general use for these islands.

What would you suggest using in lieu of British isles to describe them since you don't want that term used?

Donnielighto

Donnielighto wrote: »

What would you suggest using in lieu of British isles to describe them since you don't want that term used?

The British & Irish Isles? Is that so mad?

A certain cohort thought the end of the world had arrived when a certain rugby team was changed to The British and Irish Lions. But hardly anyone bats an eyelid now.

facehugger99

Deleted User wrote: »

Well, this is timed well for this thread.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2019/1014/1083271-desouza-citizenship/

The UK Home Office/immigration tribunal considers people born in NI to be automatically British citizens.

I think that's fair enough really - NI is part of the UK after all.

SharpshooterTom

Deleted User wrote: »

Well, this is timed well for this thread.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2019/1014/1083271-desouza-citizenship/

The UK Home Office/immigration tribunal considers people born in NI to be automatically British citizens.

Why is it so difficult for her to just renounce her UK citizenship and then reapply?

riffmongous

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Call what Britain & Ireland? You must have realised by now that we are talking about a grouping of 500 islands. Calling them Britain and Ireland is hardly suitable. Or are you referring to just the two main islands Ireland and Britain?

Why not? We don't say Irish Isles when we mean Ireland and it's islands, we just say Ireland.