In the event of united Ireland could DUP attract a significant vote in the Republic / 26 Counties ?

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123403983#Comment_123403983

Is your theory that the First Minister up there is keeping it as an economic wasteland, even though London has given her tens of billions? Or are SF just running the place badly up there?

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123404058#Comment_123404058

At least the British were / are generous to minorities: the Catholic % of the population in N.I. greatly increased in the past 100 years. We can get a glimpse from Kneecap with their heady mix of Republicanism, Racism, Irish language, enticement of followers to kill Tory MPs etc how welcome DUP people would be in a hypothetical U.I. Unfortunately, they ( people from the PUL community ) would be out of course: "planters" have no place in Ireland, or Tories either, as Kneecap would say.

BENDYBINN

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123404340#Comment_123404340

you tell me..

Think it needs major investment from outside but sadly the troubles are still fresh on peoples minds. To a lot of outsiders not much has changed.

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123404399#Comment_123404399

At least the British were / are generous to minorities: the Catholic % of the population in N.I. greatly increased in the past 100 years.

How is this down to the "generosity" of the British?

We can get a glimpse from Kneecap with their heady mix of Republicanism, Racism, Ie from the PUL community ) would be out of corish language, enticement of followers to kill Tory MPs etc how welcome DUP people would be in a hypothetical U.I. Unfortunately, they ( peoplurse: "planters" have no place in Ireland, or Tories either, as Kneecap would say.

So one, self proclaimed, provocative band speaks for every Irish person all of a sudden?

Or did you just need some sensationalism to cling to as usual…..

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123404399#Comment_123404399

NI was allowed stagnate and was paid to be unproductive for decades.

That has become a crutch for those advocating for continuing the union with Britain.

The 'we can't afford it' crowd here and the 'we can't survive without the subvention' voices in NI itself.

Might not be evident to you, but lots has changed, NI now does better than parts of the UK simply by staying connected to Ireland and the EU, something the majority in NI voted for. Even the DUP accept this, if not vocally then by action, they have tacitly accepted the necessity for a sea border with GB.

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123404340#Comment_123404340

That's a very telling line of thought, but who's surprised.

It's nothing to do with the previous First Ministers and/or the successive Unionist regimes that failed poorly economically and socially for a large portion of it's existence….it's simply down to Michelle O'Neill and what she has done in the lest 12 months.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123404530#Comment_123404530

The tragedy of partition was many faceted but economically it saw the most prosperous industrial part of Ireland remain in the UK to stagnate by the 50's (massive unemployment and it's main industries gone or in terminal decline) I think many now realise that lack of autonomy was the root cause of this.
In a UI their voices (Unionist or Nationalist)would be heard and they could have real impact on their fate. How many times have they been sold down the river by a Britain interested only in what's best for itself (or actually southern England)
Nationalists could always see that to be frank, and those unionists who now believe the above are voting for the Alliance or even the SDLP and Greens or worse, not voting at all, the unionist vote continues to decline.

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123404647#Comment_123404647

Nationalists could always see that to be frank

I don't think Nationalists could see it; I think their experiences were just more accustomed to governing bodies not being representative of them or a champion for their collective success.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123404647#Comment_123404647Civil

I don't think Nationalists could see it; I think their experiences were just more accustomed to governing bodies not being representative of them or a champion for their collective success.

Rights movement was born out of asserting autonomy. Unless they did it for themselves the British were never going to. Recognising that is what all mass civil rights movements are motivated by.

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123404762#Comment_123404762

Civil rights came to all parts of the UK, Scotland, Wales, England, N. Ireland. Even long long before that, Britain was ahead of the many other European countries by abolishing slavery before they did. Even things like protection of minorities, Jews and homosexuals and minorities of all types were more welcome in Britain in most of the 20th century than in Ireland. In the 20th century Catholics as a % of the population increased in N.I. but Protestants as a % of the population decreased in the Republic. And UK society had better rights in many ways in the 20th century than the Republic: I remember here even married couples had not the right to buy contraception, they had to go to N.I. to buy it.

Anyway, back to the thread title, DUP supporters would be as welcome, or as comfortable, in a hypothetical United Ireland as a Tory at a Kneecap concert.

L1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123404968#Comment_123404968

You've listed rights there that GB often legislated for in GB and left NI hanging.

Gay decriminalisation was decades later, abortion decades later, same sex marriage late, one man one vote late etc etc

If you're old enough to remember before the 1973 McGee decision (married couples access to contraception by mail), or even 1979 (legalised on prescription) but somehow haven't remembered any of the many, many times that GB left NI with a massive gap in rights - I'd suggest that you are either being incredibly selective in what you remember, or need to ask a gerontologist to check your memory!

Seth Brundle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123403907#Comment_123403907

Firstly, you easily could have made your point without the usual attempt at trolling about the IRA.

Secondly, would unionists even exist in a UI because they would then be part of a political union: the EU?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123404340#Comment_123404340

London decide the budget allocated to NI. If, as the question asked, London withheld funds, there is not a huge amount a SF or DUP FM could do!

But again, there is the usual need to get a dig in about SF! (Gentle mod jote: the next time I see a dig like these will be the last!)

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123404968#Comment_123404968

I'd seriously question your knowledge of civil rights in NI because it clearly is vacant of any facts!

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123405493#Comment_123405493

I remember in  1971 a group of women challenged the ban on contraception in Ireland. They took a train across the border to Northern Ireland and came back to Connolly Station (some people still called it Amiens Street station back then) laden with pills and condoms. A lot of controversy about it at the time.

Contraception was illegal in Ireland, south of the border, from 1935 until 1979, with restrictions on its sale and availability until 1985. It was only in 1987 that Gay Byrne showed people what condoms actually looked like on the Late Late show, and there was huge controversy about that at the time. I even remember a few pubs here ( south of the border ) getting condom machines in the late eighties / early nineties and there was still controversy about it. Before that, I remember people sometimes asked friends going to N.Ireland to get them. Easily available there.

Homosexuality was only decriminalized in Ireland in 1993: before that a lot of homosexuals in Ireland went to Britain or other countries for obvious reasons.

.

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123408048#Comment_123408048

They weren't keen on Civil Rights but as long as you could get condoms and pills, NI was alright with you…..

L1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123408048#Comment_123408048

You've completely ignored all the substance of my post, and confirmed that you have either a very selective or seriously failing memory in doing so

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123408131#Comment_123408131

You commented about contraception and gay rights, the exact same topics as I commented on.

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123408811#Comment_123408811

Even just on the rights of homosexuals you, intentionally, omitted a key salient point that wouldn't look as good for your venerable Unionist (when it suits them) brethren.

L1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123408811#Comment_123408811

The substance of my post was that NI often lagged significantly behind GB in getting rights; and also that your memory is mightily selective

You aren't addressing those

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123408922#Comment_123408922

Yes I clearly did. You were talking about 2 issues, contraception and gay rights. In 1982 N. Ireland changed its criminal laws to legalise homosexual acts between consenting male adults. Homosexuality was not decriminalised south of the border until June 24, 1993. So N. Ireland was 9 years ahead of the Republic there.

As regards contraception, I wrote "

I remember in  1971 a group of women challenged the ban on contraception in Ireland. They took a train across the border to Northern Ireland and came back to Connolly Station (some people still called it Amiens Street station back then) laden with pills and condoms. A lot of controversy about it at the time.

Contraception was illegal in Ireland, south of the border, from 1935 until 1979, with restrictions on its sale and availability until 1985. It was only in 1987 that Gay Byrne showed people what condoms actually looked like on the Late Late show, and there was huge controversy about that at the time. I even remember a few pubs here ( south of the border ) getting condom machines in the late eighties / early nineties and there was still controversy about it. Before that, I remember people sometimes asked friends going to N.Ireland to get them. Easily available there."

Get your facts right before accusing others.

L1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123411011#Comment_123411011

I was comparing NI's introduction of rights to GBs, not to ROI, and you know that.

That wall of blather continues to evade the point, just as you continue to have a selective memory

You are not a honest debater and never have been.

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123411011#Comment_123411011

In 1982 N. Ireland changed its criminal laws to legalise homosexual acts between consenting male adults. Homosexuality was not decriminalised south of the border until June 24, 1993. So N. Ireland was 9 years ahead of the Republic there.

This bit is, again, intentionally disingenuous. You continue to intentionally omit a key salient point and muddy the waters in relation what led to the decriminalisation; why because it would contradictory of Unionism and support the original point @L1011 is making.

You continuously need play this childish game.

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123411039#Comment_123411039

You mentioned contraception and homosexuality laws. I was comparing rights in N,.Ireland to its nearest neighbour, and vice versa. Rights here compared to our nearest neighbour.

N.I. was far ahead of us in relation to contraception and homosexuality law. I do not know when freely available contraception was introduced in Britain, or homosexuality law changed, but I guess they were far ahead of us too, just as N.I was ahead of us. Thems the facts, as they say. And I do not make personal attacks.

L1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123411173#Comment_123411173

I was comparing NI rights to GB.

YOU went off on the tangent you wanted to reply on, because acknowledging that NI was left as a backward backwater by GB does not work in your single transferrable argument.

Telling you that you are not an honest debater is not a personal attack. Indeed, pretending that it is a personal attack is yet another sign that you are not an honest debater!

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123411336#Comment_123411336

You referenced contraception and homosexuality law. If you are saying N.I. was a "backward backwater" compared to the rest of the UK, perhaps it was, but if that was the case in relation to the matters you were talking about ( contraception and homosexuality) we were an awful lot more backward here in the Republic. So I was looking at it in context.

L1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123411399#Comment_123411399

What you consider context is an irrelevance you decided on because it would let you use your single argument.

I also referenced abortion, same sex marriage and one man one vote, by the way. You seem to have ignored those as you cannot try use that argument.

The point that NI was - and is - a backward backwater of the UK compared to GB laws still stands, unchallenged, after all your distraction attempts.

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123411461#Comment_123411461

You referenced only Contraception and Homosexual rights in N.I. your post no. 672. I made the point N.I. was way ahead in both of these compared to the Republic, which was even more backward than N.I. if you call N.I. backward.

 In 1982 N. Ireland changed its criminal laws to legalise homosexual acts between consenting male adults. Homosexuality was not decriminalised south of the border until June 24, 1993. And N.I. was decades ahead of the Republic when it came to contraception.

The Republic has changed a lot in recent decades since the 80s and 1990s, as we all know. All countries in the western world have evolved and progressed over time in so many ways.

Seth Brundle

Mod: lets stop that particular line of discussion now!

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123404647#Comment_123404647

More revisionist history.

The decline in economic activity in Northern Ireland coincided with the onset of the Troubles. Until then, Northern Ireland had done really well, while Ireland lagged under the economic policies of the De Valera governments.

A question that has never been answered is whether the Troubles caused the economic decline, or whether the economic decline led to the civic unrest. One for the historians to answer in the future but not through the lens of Nationalist victim mentality.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123466928#Comment_123466928

Oh gosh, no. NI never did "really well", and was in serious economic decline long before the onset of the Troubles.

Part of this was part of a wider phenomenon, not particular to NI or its circumstances. The decline of shipbuilding and associated industries didn't just affect Belfast, but the UK as a whole. The collapse of Derry's once-thriving textile industry mirrored the collapse of the textile industry in Great Britain.

But I think the economic decline of NI was exacerbated by factors that were particular to NI.

The first and most obvious of these was partition itself. Borders are inherently enconomically depressing — they just are. This is a well-recognised and much studied phenomenon. They create barriers to trade, add foreign exchange costs, distort markets, involve customs charges, etc, etc. Places on both sides of a border suffer from this, so it was a problem for both NI and RoI. But it was a much bigger problem for NI, simply because a much larger proportion of NI's territory and population is close to the border, and so suffered the economically depressing effects of being a border region.

The second problem was that NI was extraordinarily badly governed. They didn't have a change of government for 50 years which, regardless of the ideological leanings of your government, is not healthy. Regular changes of government bring in new personnel, new ideas, fresh energy. NI was denied all this. And this was compounded by the fact that the government, and politics generally, was dominated by the national question, by questions of identity, by prioritising dominance of one community over the other — economic issues didn't acheive the kind of political traction that they would in most democracies. And its undeniably the case that the Unionist party, which was in government the whole time, was fairly amateurish and not very competent.

None of this is to say that RoI did not also have similar problems - partition, sclerotic government, a politics dominated by the national question and paying insufficient attention to economic matters. But RoI corrected its course much earlier than NI; from the mid-1950s onwards RoI was on a growth trajectory, with the economy growing faster than GB and much faster than NI.

To a large extent NI's economic malaise was masked by ever-larger transfer payments from GB. Perhaps if it hadn't been NI would have approached a crisis much earlier on and would have done something about it, which is basically what happened in RoI in the 1950s. NI never came to that point. And then the Troubles began, which of course brought fresh economic woes to add to the existing ones.

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123466928#Comment_123466928

It's been documented by economists. There were multiple reasons for NI's economic decline; the Troubles being noted as one reason notably in the mid 70's to late 80's. From memory, a cost of 30,000 jobs roughly was reported with a mix of reasons linked to The Troubles - Investment / government policy / tourism & labour mobility. The fact that they had done "really well" (which is very subjective) wasn't simplistically because they had better policy's/ideas/process/environment's in place.

The Oil crisis was a massive hit that was a hefty blow at the time that was the death knell for a lot of their historic powerhouse industries.

The Troubles aren't the singular cause and the 'question' has been looked in to; they were both a cause and affect of the time.

Edit: And also, while it's recognised now that the new Irish State's policies were never the greatest to say the least, they also had an exceptionally poorer start point when it came to industrialised centres; The governors of the Ireland in the pre-partition era had ensured Belfast was the Industrial hub of the Island - Textiles & ship building being the main. Dublin had no comparable industry; food processing being the major one.