blanch152 wrote: » You really don't see the massive hole in the SF argument - they want separate rights for one language, not inclusive rights for all languages respecting both traditions. On the topic of Brokenshire - well done to him for ensuring transparency of funding for political parties. No more will the likes of the DUP be able to get anonymous donations for a Brexit referendum, I take it you welcome that.
The Golden Miller wrote: » I don't think you really see the massive hole in your own argument. You keep trying to equate two things that are not a like for like i.e a dialect and a language. They claim to be British, the language of "their side" is the language of Britain/UK. Respecting both traditions is giving Irish the same footing as English. Recognising "Ulster-scots" is the equivalent of bringing in an act to recognize the Dublin or Cork accent as being more than a dialect i.e nonsense. Whether unionists "think" it's a language or not should be neither here or there, it simply isn't. Unless you agree that childish nonsense should be pandered to at the highest levels in politics and society? And even with that, no one is even against them bringing in an Ulster-scots act. But the focus for some must be to always find a way to blame SF/nationalist side
blanch152 wrote: » What is clear from your post (and many others around here) is the lack of respect for the opposing tradition. Equating Ulster-Scots to a Cork accent, references to childish nonsense and similar remarks from others are a clear sign that there is a very long way to go in terms of unifying the North. Imposing an Irish Language Act on the other side is not the way to win hearts and minds. British means more than English, it means Scottish, Welsh and yes, Irish as well. 800 years of belonging to the British tradition does leave a mark and we should be brave enough to openly acknowledge and praise the British heritage across this island.
blanch152 wrote: » What is clear from your post (and many others around here) is the lack of respect for the opposing tradition.
blanch152 wrote: » Equating Ulster-Scots to a Cork accent, references to childish nonsense and similar remarks from others are a clear sign that there is a very long way to go in terms of unifying the North. Imposing an Irish Language Act on the other side is not the way to win hearts and minds.
blanch152 wrote: » British means more than English, it means Scottish, Welsh and yes, Irish as well. 800 years of belonging to the British tradition does leave a mark and we should be brave enough to openly acknowledge and praise the British heritage across this island.
The Golden Miller wrote: » Pandering to and allowing fundamental extremists to condition every new generation with a "No Surrender" siege mentality is probably closer to the mark, and it is something which you seem to defend and deflect from at all costs by attempting to move all focus to SF on every matter related to the north
FrancieBrady wrote: » The party you are defending have used the executive to denigrate and deride a language knowing how divisive that would be. Whatever you say the standing of Ulster-Scots is hotly contested and you can find many aspersions cast by experts on it's claims to be a language. And again,nobody has a problem giving it its own official place. Have the DUP officially applied for it to be recognised with an act? And if so, when did they do this?
blanch152 wrote: » I am not defending any party, I have criticised both the DUP and SF and have no time for either. The standing of Ulster-Scots is hotly contested by nationalists, the standing of Irish is hotly contested by unionists. The compromise is a Minority Languages Act. I am nor surprised that neither party has considered this as both are stuck in their bunker mentality.
“Ther er mony guid things that a cud sae aboot tha fowk o’ mi’ Baille-Wick but yince an fairmist Aa’ coont it a grate muckle oaner tae spake oot oan ther behaulf in tha Hoos O’ Commons. Tha Strengfird fowk er tha satt o’ tha grun, an in thenkin theim fer ther support Aa’ wud asshair theim that A’ll wroucht an dae fer theim tha best Aa caun.
“There are many good things that I could say about the people of my constituency, but first of all I count it a great honour to speak on their behalf in the House of Commons. The Strangford people are the salt of the earth and in thanking them for their support I would also assure them that I shall work and do for them the best I can.”
FrancieBrady wrote: » It is not only contested by Nationalists. I'll leave this here, to explain in some way why I think it is not a language. This is an extract from a maiden speech by Jim Shannon in the HOC. Judge for yourself whether this is a dialect or a proper language. And in the unlikely event you would require a translation, here it is: Again, nobody has a problem preserving this language/dialect.
blanch152 wrote: » It is not about judging for myself, it is about respecting each community. You think that it is not a language and produce a speech as evidence, some of the Unionists think the same about Irish. Mutual respect, at one level SF are right to demand respect for Irish, but they are so so wrong in demanding only one-way respect and not offering any of their own. As I said already, two parties stuck in trenches and bunkers.
blanch152 wrote: » The standing of Ulster-Scots is hotly contested by nationalists,
blanch152 wrote: » the standing of Irish is hotly contested by unionists.
blanch152 wrote: » The compromise is a Minority Languages Act.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Unionists have said that an Irish Act will be a 'vehicle to hollow out our Britishness'. If you ever wanted a better phrase to underline the 'siege mentality' then that is it. Not to mention that it totally undermines the GFA, which agreed to recognise fully the aspiration to identify as British and Irish. And the St. Andrew's Agreement where the British committed to legislation on this issue. Personally, I think the executive should stay down until this is resolved, once and for all. We have seen that nobody has anything to fear from the progress to normality, even if the path (Flags and marches etc) to that normality might be initially difficult and fraught.
The Golden Miller wrote: » I agree. Everytime SF have tried to reach out to the other side it's been thrown back in their face. If the DUP are going to use the institutions in the north to obstruct any progress being made on the parity of Irish heritage and equality in general, then they should refuse to engage until the British government does something about it (which won't happen as they are no longer neutral). The DUP have not accepted the GFA in the same spirit as the other parties, even the UUP.
FrancieBrady wrote: » What I think should happen now is pressure on the British Government to act on their commitments under the GFA and St Andrew's agreement should be mounted. And staying out of an executive should be part of that. Not an ideal situation but this has been coming for a long time and it is clear that is what the people SF represent want. It should be now or never because it has to be sorted just like you would try to sort any cancerous attack.
The Golden Miller wrote: » Yes it does have to be now and SF finally see that themselves. It was coming to a head for a long time before SF pulled out when the RHI scandal was the straw that broke the camels back. For too long SF were subservient to the DUP just to keep the institutions afloat (while the DUP obstructed any progress they tried to make) as they seen the bigger picture. But that toxic environment could only last for so long. So SF have to stick it out because if they don't they are letting the GFA down themselves by being subservient to the DUP which corrupts the spirit in which the institutions were founded upon
astrofool wrote: » They're both as bad as each other. Whatever about other injustices, and to bleat on about the RHI wasting money, the Irish Language Act is, in itself, a big money black hole, and has yielded almost 0 uptake of Irish in the south (where if the same money was spent on teaching and promoting Irish, it may be growing instead of declining). For it to be the issue in the North that prevents a government forming is beyond ridiculous.
FrancieBrady wrote: » *And that is allowing for the fact that parity of cultural identity may not be important to everybody but it is clearly important to many.
blanch152 wrote: » Yes, but who defines parity of cultural identity? The problem here is that both parties - SF and DUP but particularly SF - dress up their views as being about parity of cultural identity as defined by themselves.
blanch152 wrote: » You are hitting the nail on the head. The only thing that could work is a watered down version of our Act that also catered for other minority languages. However, expect to be told you are disrespecting the nationalist culture by questioning the value of an Irish Language Act.
For Reals wrote: » Isn't the impasse also related to Unionists seeking similar recognition for Ulster Scots? Ulster Scots is akin to the Ebonics in the U.S., IMO, to use it in comparison to a native language is a bit of a stretch.
FrancieBrady wrote: » 'Parity', concentrate on what that word means and you won't need anyone else to define it. For instance, (and here is more of the DUP delusion that you and others buy into) Arlene says that seeking parity of esteem is one side 'seeking cultural supremacy over another' in the week before the 12th celebrations begin. Could she be anymore bogus or ironic do you think?
blanch152 wrote: » It is ironic coming from Arlene's mouth but it is also ironic coming from SF. I half agree with her but both sides are now seeking cultural supremacy over the other. Those entrenched on either side fail to see this. When some of us down here point it out, we are derided as partitionists by one side or ignored as irrelevant Irish by the other.
For Reals wrote: » There's also the DUP's opposition to lifting the region's ban on same-sex marriage. Hardly a Catholic Ireland cultural hang up.
blanch152 wrote: » there is a very long way to go in terms of unifying the North
Junkyard Tom wrote: » blanch152 wrote: » there is a very long way to go in terms of unifying the North Unifying the north? As what? some sort of hybrid between Irish people and people whose culture is largely based on unbridled hibernophobia? The DUP have no intention of trying to 'unify the north', they're too busy trying to retain remnants of the orange state while suppressing cultural, civic and political equality.
