Stormont power sharing talks

tomwaterford wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

Stormont is not coming back unless Ulster Scots and Irish language are put together in a language package, but really the system is flawed and has been doomed to fail from the start.

Ya....of course power sharing with nationalistsruns completely against unionist principles



Interesting you not language package.....and have accepted that Irish will be getting it's own act??


But your buring your head in the sand in relation to no longer holding a majority in stormont??

Looks increasing likely unionists dont want to share power...in the new reality

In fact, they never wanted it at all.

The Golden Miller wrote: »

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You have been asked to list out actions by the current SF party that is anywhere near as bad as the DUP. Or any other party that are trying to normalise society in northern Ireland.
A list like the one I presented that shows a party blocking ordinary rights on religious grounds or blocking previously agreed cultural measures that are designed to give parity of esteem. A core tenet of the GFA.

Otherwise you are just talking from a deeply prejudiced bolthole.

Indeed, you push him into a corner and the true mask slips. Not for the first time with this poster. Point blank refusing to address the points and runs back to talking about events 20 years ago or more, completely irrelevant to current topics. Constitutional nationalist just means a partitionist/southern unionist in most cases i.e they think labeling themselves a "nationalist" lends more credibility to their argument while always finding a reason to oppose a united Ireland. They constantly attack and focus all blame on SF while shouting the loudest about progress and peace, yet when the mask slips want nothing more than to drag up the past at every turn to push their anti-SF agenda, with no intention of moving forward. But why would they want to move forward, when they can revel in the bitterness and divide of the north from a completely insulated position, and use it to push this agenda? Who cares about real lives in the effected area when they can play these little games?

I at least have a level of respect for unionists in the north, they nail their colours to the mast, this other lot just try and spread their hate-filled anti-nationalist, anti-SF bile from behind the pretense of being a "constitutional nationalist" likes cowards. Can't even man up and acknowledge what they are. Can't even criticise the DUP unless called out on it

Re "constitutional nationalists", that´s well put. I see myself - in contrast to any lable of nationalism - as "constitutional republican". That means that I support the existing Republic of Ireland as the legitimate Irish State which on day, will incorporate NI in a UI. One shouldn´t forget the fact that there are plenty of SF members and supporters who stick strongly to the Easter Proclamation which is of course the traditional core of the Irish Republic, but some of them are against this existing Irish State and seek to replace it by a Socialist Republic and the latter has a bad taste to me.  

The history and therefore the tradition of a party which reflects where its roots are, where the party comes from and where she is heading is always to remain with her. So it is with SF and so it is with all the others. SF has a Long historical record from the very founding of the Party, to the participation of her members in the Easter Rising, leading to the 1918 GE, 1st Daíl, war of Independence and not to Forget the split of her that led to the Irish Civil war with the anti-treaty faction coming from the diehard Republicans of SF. After the Irish Free State consolidated after the civil war, SF nearly vanished from the party-political spectrum in Ireland. She re-emerged in the wake and during the troubles, being the political arm of the PIRA and in due course became the leading party of the CNRs in NI. Since the GFA and the power sharing agreement on which ground SF took on a leading role in NI´s govt, she developed herself into a more left-wing similar social-democratic party but still with a strong left-wing leaning, to the disadvantage of the SDLP.

Both SF leaders in NI never really came clean with their past in the IRA, the former DFM Martin McGuinness admitting his membership in the PIRA in the early 1970s but insisting on his departure from Membership in 1974 in order to make believe that he neither had knowledge nor any involvement for what was committed by the PIRA afterwards. This is a point which is hard to believe because after he "quitted" his PIRA Membership, he was deeply involved in politics as SF member and I can´t believe that he never had any knowledge about any Terror acts before they were carried out. This was the main reason for why he lost in the last presidential election in the Republic of Ireland where he was the candidate of SF and as such was very often confronted with questions to his past by people in the Republic. Gerry Adams still claims that he was never a member of the IRA. So, how did this man gain the trust and confidence of the PIRA leaders if they were not to rely on him in a way that Adams himself was and still is as much oath bound like any PIRA member?  

SF has this IRA past sticking on her record and by all the efforts to develop and present herself as a modern left-wing / centre-left Party, this above mentioned aspects are still blocking further wider acceptance among the electorate on both sides of the border. The party itself appears janus-headed. In NI she presents herself as the left-wing nationalist party, serving the interests of the CNRs but also attempting to be more inclusive and reach out to moderate unionists (which has been in vain of course, due to the IRA connection). In the Republic she presents herself as the left-wing alternative party to the establishment which is mainly conservative (FF and FG put together). In both parts of the Island of Ireland, she took over policies from the traditional labour parties to make her appear more centre-left in order to gain votes from that political spectrum and she was successful with it on the account of the traditional centre-left becoming more weaker in the past decades. Worst it is with the Irish Labour Party who lost dramatically in the past GE in the Republic. In NI, the SDLP is too much perceived as a party that stands in favour of the status quo which makes her appear to be as much partitionist like all the other parties in NI and her committment to a UI is perceived as nothing but just lip-service to the cause. The Republicans and Nationalists in NI don´t give much of a damn about the IRA past of SF, they set more weight on the ability of SF to bring about a UI cos they also see that in the Republic, the committment of the establishment parties towards a UI is just lip-service as well.

As for having a level of respect for the Unionists in NI, I don´t have any level of respect for them anymore. I´ve been in engaged in debates with them over several years and frankly, those who you respect for "nailing their flag on the mast" are the very ones who represent the blocking faction towards a UI in NI and who are also diehard Brexiteers, trouble makers "in defense of British culture", the people with the most bigotted political mindset and who indeed maintain the sectarianism in NI which has to be overcome in order to achieve a better future for all people who live in NI. Someone who is of that mindset doesn´t earns my respect but just my utter contempt and "nailing the flag to mast" is nothing but a sign for the very bigotry I was mentioning here.

I am no friend of SF either, but at least they can provide a change in NI society and path the way towards a UI by cross-community consent. The chances for that might increase once Gerry Adams has handed down the leadership of SF to a younger generation who has no involvement with the troubles and which is clear from any accusations in regards to a former IRA Membership and that is imo a very important point to win over some other voters who reject SF because of the present leader.  

Unionists and Loyalists really love to point out the maintenance of Republican traditions in SF re the IRA in order to say that they are no much different from the Unionists and Loyalists and their traditions to the UVF. What is history and the handling of it is one Thing and certainly it has to be accommodated in some ways. But what should count more than this is the way the party is set out to go and the progress she aims at with a genuine inclusiveness.

I just like to give some Food for thoughts which is to consider who many of the DUP fellas were supporters of UKIP as well. I met two of them and they had no Problem with voting for UKIP but still stick to the DUP in NI political matters. I am convinced that not less of them voted along the UKIP stance in favour of Brexit such as the DUP officially supported and stood for Brexit in order to avoid any alienation of her own voters and party members. The fact that the majority of the electorate in NI voted in favour of remain is only due to the moderate Unionists on their parts but more so to the fact that SF was supporting and stood for remain. Now, the DUP presents herself as the party of "a soft Brexit". But this isn´t working at all, cos they have been purchased by the present UK govt who exploited their vanity and desire to be part of "a British government". The DUP won´t prevail with her "soft-Brexit-mask" and the diehard Brexiteers within the Tory Party will drag them along the way to a hard Brexit.

Since the BrexitRef, Britishness had become a negative term once again, at least in my perception and considerations because it had let the racistic nationalism and chauvinism reare its head again. That´s the mindset of many DUPers as well. Plenty of examples form domestic NI politics from the past couple of years in which the DUP proved her reluctance or even non-interest to change in such matters. Very similar to the attitude and political mindset of what is called "Little Englander". The very term is not just some form of abuse, it really has a political meaning carried with them and exposed by its very followers. In other words, a political reality proved by facts, unfortunately so and stands for the synomyms of backwards, narrow-minded and racistical nationalism.