United Ireland....... Persuade the unionists.....

Capt'n Midnight

El Tarangu wrote: »

On this, and on any number of any other issues (tax law, social welfare, etc) what's going to happen when the two states amalgamate - is the north going to have to accept all of the laws of the south by default, or is there going to be some give-and-take?

VAT and excise and tax rules frequently change at budget time. It's just a question of how many budgets it would take to harmonise them even so I'd expect NI to get concessions to help attract foreign investment.

Laws are generally similar, age of consent would be a major difference.

The parades commission might be unconstitutional under Article 40.6.1.ii

Will it be politically acceptable on this side of the island of the island for the north not to implement abortion legislation in exchange for concessions on marches or some such?

The DUP held the balance of power recently during a bigger change than joining the EU and what concessions did they get ? For a once off loosening of the purse strings by just 10% they threw their futures under a Big Red Bus, and there was a some collateral damage.


Westminster already on the way to overrule them. So no concessions were ever going to be offered.

By fighting a battle they had already lost the DUP have just rubber stamped Westminster's authority over them.

Nqp15hhu

[Deleted User] wrote: »

How common is Catholic unionism up there would you say?

There is certainly a lot of people who would vote to stay in the U.K. but whom wouldn’t be classified Unionist.

I don’t think it’s reasonable to assign a grow in Catholicism as an automatic increase in nationalism.

Imreoir2

VinLieger wrote: »

Those polls should be taken with a grain of salt, they are done without any details being put to them like the massive economic and security implications not to mention the very real question and possibility of needing to change our flag and national anthem and possibly a lot more to appease the unionists.

Your attitude by the way is exactly the same as the bexiteers, any poll on such a divisive and massive change in the status quo should never require a simple majority of 50.1%.

Simply ignoring the wishes and concerns of a large proportion of people North and South of the border so you can masturbate over your united Ireland fantasy becoming a reality will not lead to a successful reunification.

"masturbate over your united Ireland fantasy" :rolleyes:
You mammy will give you a clip round the ears if she catches you talking like that.

The idea that there is some doubt that the south will support unification is often trotted out, but never with the slighest shred of supporting evidence. Your argument relys on the rather absurd assumption that the electorate are entirely unaware of the potential economic implications of unification. Go ahead, produce the evidence that this is the case, i'll wait.

Your attempt to shoehorn a comparrision to Brexiteers into your argument is also rather limp. Brexiteers did many things, but assume that remainers were a small minority that could safely be ignored before the referendum was hardily one of them. There is no large proportion South of the border that are opposed to unification, there is only a small insignificant proportion of people. Unification will pass down here in a landslide, which is exactly why southern opponents of unification can safely be ignored.

Charles Babbage

Stovepipe wrote: »

The cargo cult that is NI is largely borne by the UK taxpayer,in the form of pensions. If there was reunification, the pensions would still continue to come from the UK taxpayer until the last pensioner and his/her dependents died.

The norm when a state splits, is that each bit takes on its own pensions etc. That is certainly the proposal for Scottish independence.

Now I can make arguments for this and that in relation why this should be different, but how is this desirable situation to be brought about? What is the model?

Get Joe Brolly to drone on long enough, and most of them would emigrate. What a boring 'character' he is. What makes him even worse is he considers himself some sort of poet philosopher.

Nqp15hhu

Nqp15hhu wrote: »

Yes, it’s all rather daft to go out of your way to tell someone what their identity and nationality is.

I am a Northern Irish British citizen. Nobody is going to tell me otherwise, or force an alien identity upon me.

You wouldn’t see people telling Pennsylvania Dutch what their identity is.

This all stems from a hated and anti British attitude, with a desire to remove all British influence from this island. Well I’m afraid that may be your wish but there’ll always be Ulster Scots people here in NI.

Just shows you up to be ignorant.

Are you ulster scots?

Junkyard Tom

Nqp15hhu wrote: »

Which brings me to the point of violence, you referenced Nationalist violence and their unwillingness to accept NI's existence, well what about Unionists? Do you think that Unionists don't matter and only Nationalist violence matters?

Lets say there's a pro-UI vote. What would unionist violence be about? Remember now you'd be living in a region where a majority want to unite with the rest of of their country. You'd have no majority in Derry, Belfast or 4 of the six counties.

Re-partition is not going to happen. So what would the violence be for?

VinLieger

Imreoir2 wrote: »

"masturbate over your united Ireland fantasy" :rolleyes:
You mammy will give you a clip round the ears if she catches you talking like that.

LOL, attack the post not the poster but ill let it go for now.

Imreoir2 wrote: »

The idea that there is some doubt that the south will support unification is often trotted out, but never with the slighest shred of supporting evidence. Your argument relys on the rather absurd assumption that the electorate are entirely unaware of the potential economic implications of unification. Go ahead, produce the evidence that this is the case, i'll wait.

You want me to prove a negative? Well obviously i can't because its an idiotic request but it is my belief that the vast majority who answer polls in the moment are not considering economics, security, changing flags, anthems and possibly even constitutions to name again some of the many many things that will very possibly need to be changed.

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Your attempt to shoehorn a comparrision to Brexiteers into your argument is also rather limp. Brexiteers did many things, but assume that remainers were a small minority that could safely be ignored before the referendum was hardily one of them. There is no large proportion South of the border that are opposed to unification, there is only a small insignificant proportion of people. Unification will pass down here in a landslide, which is exactly why southern opponents of unification can safely be ignored.

I didn't shoehorn anything you literally said this

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Why? You don't have to get everyone to agree to it, just the majority.

Also for any border poll to happen we need to learn from the mistakes of brexit and a proper debate needs to happen beforehand laying down EXACTLY what a UI will look like so people know what they are voting for. That includes economics and finances, transfer of public services and employments, because close to 30% of NIs jobs are in the public sector which is not sustainable, what the actual subvention cost currently is, what other aspects of the new Ireland need to change, the rather large question of future security, to name some of the long list of issues that will arise in the case of a positive vote and will need to be decided on in UI.

So yes i think you are exactly like a brexiteer as you are in all but the literal words simply shouting project fear at this stage. Or would you rather we simply vote yes or no with no proper debate of all the issues and spend the next god knows how many years looking possibly even stupider than the UK did after their brexit vote.

FYI German reunification still hasn't been paid off and at the moment cost more than 2 trillion and Berlin along with the rest of the country still can be divided very easily by demographics, economics and any number of other metrics along the old borders and its 30 years since that started. I'm not saying ours will cost that much but you are avoiding the real issues and questions that need to be answered and seem to think its simply a case of flicking a switch and everyone will all be dancing a jig at the crossroads.

martinedwards

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

So what would the violence be for?

a cover for mafia like drugs and protection rackets.

like it has been for the last 50 years.

The paramilitary groups are still strong on both sides and recruiting like crazy.

the kids are getting in because they can be seen as hard men.

their parents are misty eyed because their kids are supporting the cause(s).

VinLieger

martinedwards wrote: »

a cover for mafia like drugs and protection rackets.

like it has been for the last 50 years.

The paramilitary groups are still strong on both sides and recruiting like crazy.

the kids are getting in because they can be seen as hard men.

their parents are misty eyed because their kids are supporting the cause(s).

Exactly they likely have all been recruiting hard in the last year with the lack of school and jobs

martinedwards

Had a chat about this with a colleague in work.

I'm a prod, parents from Donegal, and I have both passports because of Brit consular support and freedom to travel in EU. I vote Alliance.

My Catholic colleague support the ROI football team, and would vote for a nationalist party.

HE said that it'll never happen because of the finances.

Mainly the NHS. Which someone else has already pointed out is FREE. totally.

The fact that we both work for a British bank call centre sort of helps too, as they'd definitely pull out.

Oh yeah, Ulster Scots. forget it. it's not a language. its a deep country accent. I managed to score 28/30 on an online test and got a certificate from the Ulster Scots Agency. totally and utterly a "them 'uns get a grant for a language that is used by a tiny minority, how can we get funding?" exercise. My Mrs is a teacher and one of her colleagues had a 2 year secondment (full pay, of course!) to the exam authorities to write a syllabus for GCSE Ulster scots. which was never used. because it's garbage.

Nqp15hhu

Ulster Scots is a dialect along the north coast with heavy Scottish influence. It does exist and is not “garbage”.

Nqp15hhu

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Lets say there's a pro-UI vote. What would unionist violence be about? Remember now you'd be living in a region where a majority want to unite with the rest of of their country. You'd have no majority in Derry, Belfast or 4 of the six counties.

Re-partition is not going to happen. So what would the violence be for?

You forgetting the IRA? Same thing my dear. Same as Leo V and Simon C going on incessantly about violence on the border.

Oh wait, is it the case that only Nationalist violence matters and has a voice?

Del2005

Imreoir2 wrote: »

There is no large proportion South of the border that are opposed to unification, there is only a small insignificant proportion of people. Unification will pass down here in a landslide, which is exactly why southern opponents of unification can safely be ignored.

Where are you getting this information? Is it from opinion polls based on question 1 or 2 below?


Question 1,

Do you want a united Ireland? Yes or No? Yes wins by a landslide in the Republic and a large margin in the North.

Question 2,

Do you want a federal Ireland with a different national flag, different national anthem and the Queen as Head of State*? Yes or No?
I don't see that getting much support in either Country.


*if we rejoin the commonwealth as some have suggested the the King or Queen of Great Britain and Ireland would be our head of state.

martinedwards

Nqp15hhu wrote: »

Ulster Scots is a dialect along the north coast with heavy Scottish influence. It does exist and is not “garbage”.

Is there a dictionary? Other than in the comedy section with the John Pepper books?

Its a dialect, absolutely not a language.

I don't speak French or German, and if I lift a discarded newspaper in an airport, I can't read it. Because French and German are real languages.

When I lift an Ulster Scots novel (as I have done) and read the first page out loud in a comedy Ballymoney farmer accent...... suddenly I can read the rest.

Is it because I have suddenly received a supernatural gift of understanding all languages?

Or is it because I enjoy Billy Connolly and so have a smattering of Glasgow slang?

I stand by my claim that before there was funding for Gaelic, Ulster Scots was a historical ethnicity, and not a "language".

In these times of financial strain, funding should go to the NHS, and not printing translations of official documents into pseudo-language that no-one speaks as a first language.

To be honest, in my humble opinion, the same applies to Gaelic as no-one in NI speaks Gaelic and not English.

All political one-upmanship

randd1

Nqp15hhu wrote: »

Ulster Scots is a dialect along the north coast with heavy Scottish influence. It does exist and is not “garbage”.

It is utter garbage, it's just an attempt at a thick scottish accent with some english words mangled to make it sound like a different language.

If they wanted an identity as real Ulster Scots, they'd be speaking scots gaelic and playing shinty.

Nqp15hhu

martinedwards wrote: »

Is there a dictionary? Other than in the comedy section with the John Pepper books?

Its a dialect, absolutely not a language.

I don't speak French or German, and if I lift a discarded newspaper in an airport, I can't read it. Because French and German are real languages.

When I lift an Ulster Scots novel (as I have done) and read the first page out loud in a comedy Ballymoney farmer accent...... suddenly I can read the rest.

Is it because I have suddenly received a supernatural gift of understanding all languages?

Or is it because I enjoy Billy Connolly and so have a smattering of Glasgow slang?

I stand by my claim that before there was funding for Gaelic, Ulster Scots was a historical ethnicity, and not a "language".

In these times of financial strain, funding should go to the NHS, and not printing translations of official documents into pseudo-language that no-one speaks as a first language.

To be honest, in my humble opinion, the same applies to Gaelic as no-one in NI speaks Gaelic and not English.

All political one-upmanship

Yes... it is a dialect that is spoken by natives in the north coast of NI. It is used for one up man ship.

However, I don’t appreciate people mocking the dialect or calling it “garbage”.

Nqp15hhu

randd1 wrote: »

It is utter garbage, it's just an attempt at a thick scottish accent with some english words mangled to make it sound like a different language.

If they wanted an identity as real Ulster Scots, they'd be speaking scots gaelic and playing shinty.

No, it’s not an attempt at a thick Scottish accent. It IS the local dialect.

MaccaTacca

Can someone explain to me what happens to Ulster Unionists if Scotland votes for independence from the UK?

The vast majority of Unionists up north are of Scottish heritage, not English. They are 'Ulster Scots'.

If Scotland leaves the UK, then a lot of Nordies will find their ties to crown no longer come under it's power.

Why is this aspect never discussed?

The future of Northern Ireland and a United Ireland has a lot more to do with the future of Scotland, than it does with England.

Dyr

MaccaTacca wrote: »

Can someone explain to me what happens to Ulster Unionists if Scotland votes for independence from the UK?

The vast majority of Unionists up north are of Scottish heritage, not English. They are 'Ulster Scots'.

If Scotland leaves the UK, then a lot of Nordies will find their ties to crown no longer come under it's power.

Why is this aspect never discussed?

The future of Northern Ireland and a United Ireland has a lot more to do with the future of Scotland, than it does with England.

The Scots aren't going it alone

randd1

Nqp15hhu wrote: »

You forgetting the IRA? Same thing my dear. Same as Leo V and Simon C going on incessantly about violence on the border.

Oh wait, is it the case that only Nationalist violence matters and has a voice?

The IRA's campaign came about due to the politics of Orangemen denying Catholics basic civil rights, keeping them as second class citizens in poverty and happily using violence to do so, all based on hyper-religious extremism. The IRA was murderous bastards, but it was the Orangemen and Orangemen alone that brought them about.

Their biggest fear is that they'll get off the Irish what they started. Only they won't, that simply won't happen. Orangemen today would face the complete opposite in joining with the Republic to what they put the Irish through in the 50's and 60's. They'd straight off have every equal right, every civil right and equality of opportunity, healthcare, education et al like the rest of us, so there would be no need for violence.

And quite obviously loyalist violence has a voice. They've the Unionist parties be their mouthpiece for more than a 100 years now.

Dyr

Before I post something about a UI, can I just check, is this a light hearted thread? I don't want to be posting serious comments in AH, its against the rules I've heard.

Mules

Bambi wrote: »

Before I post something about a UI, can I just check, is this a light hearted thread? I don't want to be posting serious comments in AH, its against the rules I've heard.

I dont know about the rules, but you'll have to post after that intro

martinedwards

Del2005 wrote: »

*if we rejoin the commonwealth as some have suggested the the King or Queen of Great Britain and Ireland would be our head of state.

Not true.

The Queen is head of state of 16 member States. 33 are Republics and the remaining 5 have other monarchs

Mules

Del2005 wrote: »

Where are you getting this information? Is it from opinion polls based on question 1 or 2 below?


Question 1,

Do you want a united Ireland? Yes or No? Yes wins by a landslide in the Republic and a large margin in the North.

Question 2,

Do you want a federal Ireland with a different national flag, different national anthem and the Queen as Head of State*? Yes or No?
I don't see that getting much support in either Country.


*if we rejoin the commonwealth as some have suggested the the King or Queen of Great Britain and Ireland would be our head of state.

Interesting about having the Queen as head of state. That would take a bit of persuading for many in the republic. I suppose that would be the thing though. Both people's would have to make compromises. The thread title is about persuading unionists but if unification were to be done right, people in the republic would need to be persuaded to do stuff they weren't keen on either.

* I'd take the Queen over some of the smug feckers we've had as presidents

Bambi

Bambi wrote: »

Before I post something about a UI, can I just check, is this a light hearted thread? I don't want to be posting serious comments in AH, its against the rules I've heard.

Not really, boss. How could it be.

Imreoir2

VinLieger wrote: »

LOL, attack the post not the poster but ill let it go for now.

Accusing me of masturbating over a united Ireland fantisy was an attack on the post, and not the poster, was it? :rolleyes:

You want me to prove a negative? Well obviously i can't because its an idiotic request but it is my belief that the vast majority who answer polls in the moment are not considering economics, security, changing flags, anthems and possibly even constitutions to name again some of the many many things that will very possibly need to be changed.

You could believe that the sky is made of cheese too, if you have no evidence to support that opinion, why should anyone care? Let's stick to facts.

I didn't shoehorn anything you literally said this

Yes, but my point was to point out that you don't need to convince 100% of the electorate and as such the opinions of a small minority of that electorate are irellevant. It was suggested that the opinions of Southern partitionists would need to be reckoned with. In reality that is far from the case as they are too small a minority to be worth pandering to. Unionists in the north will need to be engaged with, certainly, but southern partitionists can safely be ignored.

Also for any border poll to happen we need to learn from the mistakes of brexit and a proper debate needs to happen beforehand laying down EXACTLY what a UI will look like so people know what they are voting for. That includes economics and finances, transfer of public services and employments, because close to 30% of NIs jobs are in the public sector which is not sustainable, what the actual subvention cost currently is, what other aspects of the new Ireland need to change, the rather large question of future security, to name some of the long list of issues that will arise in the case of a positive vote and will need to be decided on in UI.

No argument here, that will certainly need to happen. But that is a debate for the people of NI to have. While such a conversation will be had down here to inform the electorate, it will not have a major impact on the result. Unification will pass with a large majority down here if it passes in NI. Significant opposition to unification in the south is simply not there, the no vote might get 30%, on a very good day. Thats why southern opponants to unification are not an important consideration in the overall debate. They don't need to be won over, they can be ignored.

So yes i think you are exactly like a brexiteer as you are in all but the literal words simply shouting project fear at this stage. Or would you rather we simply vote yes or no with no proper debate of all the issues and spend the next god knows how many years looking possibly even stupider than the UK did after their brexit vote.

Go ahead and show me where I have made any argument that could be construed as akin to dismissing the challenges of unification as 'project fear'. You seem to be arguing against what you want me to be saying rather than anything I have actually said.

FYI German reunification still hasn't been paid off and at the moment cost more than 2 trillion and Berlin along with the rest of the country still can be divided very easily by demographics, economics and any number of other metrics along the old borders and its 30 years since that started. I'm not saying ours will cost that much but you are avoiding the real issues and questions that need to be answered and seem to think its simply a case of flicking a switch and everyone will all be dancing a jig at the crossroads.

Again, never actually said any of this, drop the strawman kid.

Dyr

Deleted User wrote: »

Not really, boss. How could it be.

It confused me too, but apparently there's some rule about lighthearted posts only in AH now. Or just some mod making stuff up as they go along


Anywhoo, UI very unlikely if the Brits make a go of it post Brexit. Northern Nationalists tend to pay close attention to what side their bread is buttered on and Ireland doesnt look like an attractive option with our crappy vaccine rollout and health "service".

So that's probably that for the forseeable.

martinedwards

MaccaTacca wrote: »

Can someone explain to me what happens to Ulster Unionists if Scotland votes for independence from the UK?

The vast majority of Unionists up north are of Scottish heritage, not English. They are 'Ulster Scots'.

If Scotland leaves the UK, then a lot of Nordies will find their ties to crown no longer come under it's power.

Why is this aspect never discussed?

The future of Northern Ireland and a United Ireland has a lot more to do with the future of Scotland, than it does with England.

The idea of a Scottish connection only really stretches to Celtic and Rangers

Here’s a wiki page on the subject complete with opinion polls for Northern Ireland.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Ireland

The results are confused to say the least (must depend on the questions being asked) but it’s mostly anti unification. There’s a trend away from being pro union though.

Also at the bottom of that page there’s a opinion poll for people in the Republic. The support for unification vanishes if people are told they might have to pay more tax. It drops from 61% to 31%. Now imagine the even greater falls if there are other required changes - to the flag, commonwealth etc.

And all polls as far as I can see that have the phrase “in my lifetime” get higher support than specific dates. To a 20 year old this is something that should happen in 60 years which seems an infinite time away.