A Little Pony wrote: » The last number of pages reading back on them is really funny and full of so much fear for 'The Prod'. From where I live I don't recognize these stereotypes of Ulster Unionists. It really is bizarre. Anyone actually from NI on here?
Professor Moriarty wrote: » A Little Pony wrote: » So much paranoia in this post, as if the world gives a sh*t about this part of the world or Unionism or takes any notice of the politics of NI at all. Don't be so naive or disingenuous to think otherwise. Exactly my point. Once the Tories ditch Unionism, as they will, Unionists will find themselves friendless. The rest of the world doesn't understand Unionism and doesn't care.
A Little Pony wrote: » So much paranoia in this post, as if the world gives a sh*t about this part of the world or Unionism or takes any notice of the politics of NI at all. Don't be so naive or disingenuous to think otherwise.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » steddyeddy wrote: » You see Irish isn't sectarian. It was spoken by both sides a century ago. It would be a great way to build bridges across communities. In fact, many of the stalwarts of the Gaelic Revival and other Irish cultural revivals were wealthy Protestants. But you can't compare maintaining and promoting one of Europe's most ancient languages with aggressive bigotry and sectarianism. Or a dialect. To do so insults your neighbour and simply exposes frightened and biased thinking. The rest of the world is casting Unionism adrift. The Tory/DUP temporary little arrangement will be dropped soon As the UK sunders further, English/Scottish/Welsh politicians will do what is best for their electorate. Unionists who think that England will care about them are deluded. For its own sake, Unionism should think about who will be its friend in the future. Protestant ascendancy is over. Paranoid sulking and sectarianism won't bring it back. It's time to grow up.
steddyeddy wrote: » You see Irish isn't sectarian. It was spoken by both sides a century ago. It would be a great way to build bridges across communities.
Red_Wake wrote: » But not Irish I assume, seeing as you're not using it in your example?
Professor Moriarty wrote: » Red_Wake wrote: » Even if those acts involve Ulster Scots? Yes. Ulster Scots should be afforded the same esteem as Shelta. Even if Shelta is more distinct and more widely spoken than Ulster Scots.
Red_Wake wrote: » Even if those acts involve Ulster Scots?
FrancieBrady wrote: » blanch152 wrote: » In a united Ireland, compulsory Irish for the Leaving Certificate would have to go, entry requirements for a second language in college would also have to go, preferential treatment for Irish in the civil service would also have to go. These are the types of things that would inevitably be required in order to reassure Unionists about their future. It is ironic that uniting the island would inevitably lead to further Anglisation. Yes, there would have to be legislation and acts that ensure parity of esteem and that respect identity. No big deal.
blanch152 wrote: » In a united Ireland, compulsory Irish for the Leaving Certificate would have to go, entry requirements for a second language in college would also have to go, preferential treatment for Irish in the civil service would also have to go. These are the types of things that would inevitably be required in order to reassure Unionists about their future. It is ironic that uniting the island would inevitably lead to further Anglisation.
Thomas__ wrote: » That´s already the case, when you apply for a job in the civil service, you have to know Irish. But for TDs, it won´t work unless the majority of the TDs would start to debate in Irish only. I can´t imagine this would ever happen.
tomwaterford wrote: » Tbf I think you're getting paid by the state, it's not unreasonable to expect you to learn irish
Thomas__ wrote: » Sums it up very well, the way the DUP is delivering her part in the power sharing of the NI govt. In many ways, I see the DUP as being "the" blocking part(y) in many aspects which concerns political and societal progress in NI. Needless to mention the topic of a UI, which is "by nature" a non-starter to them (to put it mildly). By the way, when one thinks about this imaginary UI, Irish would be on the Curriculum on the whole Island, and therefore in NI as well, whether the DUP would like it or not. I think that they know that perfectly well which might be one of the many reasons why they are against a UI (with remaining British is of course at the top of all).
Thomas__ wrote: » I didn´t know that. In regards of the Irish Constitution, it´d be natural to require knowledge in Irish language from applicants for becoming a civil servant.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Red_Wake wrote: » My point is, claiming the irish language is a barrier to forming a government rings hollow when the individual in question won't even learn it themselves. Why? Women's rights could be a barrier, would the person have to be a woman to object? The issue here is not the merits or demerits of Irish, but the continued blocking of agreed clauses in an agreement the DUP were party to. That they have chosen to cherrypick the bits they don't like since the GFA has now come to a head after years of frustration. Are they correct to do this ( continually row back on agreed provisions and the availability of other rights that everyone 'normally' has on these islands)in your opinion? *I am not interested in your opinion of Irish btw.
Red_Wake wrote: » My point is, claiming the irish language is a barrier to forming a government rings hollow when the individual in question won't even learn it themselves.
Jep Gambardella wrote: » Thomas__ wrote: » That´s already the case, when you apply for a job in the civil service, you have to know Irish. That's no longer the case. If I recall correctly, it was abolished in 1975 with the exception of jobs that needed Irish speakers. I think they still give bonus points for knowledge of Irish though.
Thomas__ wrote: » That´s already the case, when you apply for a job in the civil service, you have to know Irish.
tomwaterford wrote: » Thomas__ wrote: » That´s already the case, when you apply for a job in the civil service, you have to know Irish. But for TDs, it won´t work unless the majority of the TDs would start to debate in Irish only. I can´t imagine this would ever happen. Tbf I think you're getting paid by the state, it's not unreasonable to expect you to learn irish
tomwaterford wrote: » Red_Wake wrote: » Irish, as a taught subject in secondary school, is atrocious. I honestly feel if it was taught as a foreign language[similiar to how french is taught], it would be both more enjoyable, and the students would come out with a better standard of Irish. The Irish education won't make you a gaeilgeoir, so should not be counted as an advantage for explaining how two adults have such different standards of Irish. When it comes down to it, Leo made the effort to learn the language[admittedly there was a practical element of it for him with the irish language debates], and the two lads didn't. Your argument amounts to,there shouldn't be an Irish language act because two people,one of whom is dead don't speak it to an acceptable level for you??Or what exactly is the exact point your attempting to put across (If twas me,I'd gladly make all tds and civil servants compulsory learn Irish,)
Red_Wake wrote: » Irish, as a taught subject in secondary school, is atrocious. I honestly feel if it was taught as a foreign language[similiar to how french is taught], it would be both more enjoyable, and the students would come out with a better standard of Irish. The Irish education won't make you a gaeilgeoir, so should not be counted as an advantage for explaining how two adults have such different standards of Irish. When it comes down to it, Leo made the effort to learn the language[admittedly there was a practical element of it for him with the irish language debates], and the two lads didn't.
tomwaterford wrote: » Red_Wake wrote: » Irish, as a taught subject in secondary school, is atrocious. I honestly feel if it was taught as a foreign language[similiar to how french is taught], it would be both more enjoyable, and the students would come out with a better standard of Irish. The Irish education won't make you a gaeilgeoir, so should not be counted as an advantage for explaining how two adults have such different standards of Irish. When it comes down to it, Leo made the effort to learn the language[admittedly there was a practical element of it for him with the irish language debates], and the two lads didn't. Your argument amounts to,there shouldn't be an Irish language act because two people,one of whom is dead don't speak it to an acceptable level for you?? Or what exactly is the exact point your attempting to put across (If twas me,I'd gladly make all tds and civil servants compulsory learn Irish,)
Red_Wake wrote: » Professor Moriarty wrote: » Red_Wake wrote: » My father learned Irish at night classes in his 50s[from nothing I believe], Leo Varadkar has been learning Irish relatively recently so he can handle any questions in irish, and participate in irish language debates, which Gerry Adams has had to pull out of due to his poor quality of irish. Both adult learners, who didn't let any lack of support for the irish language stop them. Why couldn't Gerry and Martin take it upon themselves to become as fluent as Leo[who's often insinuated to be a "West Brit" or "Tory boy"]. To me, it beggars belief that anyone could claim that disrespecting the irish language is offensive to them, when they don't even care enough about it to learn it themselves. Varadkar was educated in Ireland and would have learned Irish as a core subject. He would be brushing up on an existing grasp of the language. Irish, as a taught subject in secondary school, is atrocious. I honestly feel if it was taught as a foreign language[similiar to how french is taught], it would be both more enjoyable, and the students would come out with a better standard of Irish. The Irish education won't make you a gaeilgeoir, so should not be counted as an advantage for explaining how two adults have such different standards of Irish. When it comes down to it, Leo made the effort to learn the language[admittedly there was a practical element of it for him with the irish language debates], and the two lads didn't.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » Red_Wake wrote: » My father learned Irish at night classes in his 50s[from nothing I believe], Leo Varadkar has been learning Irish relatively recently so he can handle any questions in irish, and participate in irish language debates, which Gerry Adams has had to pull out of due to his poor quality of irish. Both adult learners, who didn't let any lack of support for the irish language stop them. Why couldn't Gerry and Martin take it upon themselves to become as fluent as Leo[who's often insinuated to be a "West Brit" or "Tory boy"]. To me, it beggars belief that anyone could claim that disrespecting the irish language is offensive to them, when they don't even care enough about it to learn it themselves. Varadkar was educated in Ireland and would have learned Irish as a core subject. He would be brushing up on an existing grasp of the language.
Red_Wake wrote: » My father learned Irish at night classes in his 50s[from nothing I believe], Leo Varadkar has been learning Irish relatively recently so he can handle any questions in irish, and participate in irish language debates, which Gerry Adams has had to pull out of due to his poor quality of irish. Both adult learners, who didn't let any lack of support for the irish language stop them. Why couldn't Gerry and Martin take it upon themselves to become as fluent as Leo[who's often insinuated to be a "West Brit" or "Tory boy"]. To me, it beggars belief that anyone could claim that disrespecting the irish language is offensive to them, when they don't even care enough about it to learn it themselves.
Red_Wake wrote: » Thomas__ wrote: » Red_Wake wrote: » Lads, if Irish is so important to republicanism, why could neither Gerry Adams nor Martin McGuinness speak it? I´d like to answer your question with a counter question which is, "why couldn´t both of them not learn it during their schooldays in school?" As I take it that you know the answer to that question already, it will answer your own one as well. There are different ways to learn a language but there is one thing which is very important which is, one has to use it in writing and talking. My father learned Irish at night classes in his 50s[from nothing I believe], Leo Varadkar has been learning Irish relatively recently so he can handle any questions in irish, and participate in irish language debates, which Gerry Adams has had to pull out of due to his poor quality of irish. Both adult learners, who didn't let any lack of support for the irish language stop them. Why couldn't Gerry and Martin take it upon themselves to become as fluent as Leo[who's often insinuated to be a "West Brit" or "Tory boy"]. To me, it beggars belief that anyone could claim that disrespecting the irish language is offensive to them, when they don't even care enough about it to learn it themselves.
Thomas__ wrote: » Red_Wake wrote: » Lads, if Irish is so important to republicanism, why could neither Gerry Adams nor Martin McGuinness speak it? I´d like to answer your question with a counter question which is, "why couldn´t both of them not learn it during their schooldays in school?" As I take it that you know the answer to that question already, it will answer your own one as well. There are different ways to learn a language but there is one thing which is very important which is, one has to use it in writing and talking.
Red_Wake wrote: » Lads, if Irish is so important to republicanism, why could neither Gerry Adams nor Martin McGuinness speak it?
