Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Costs of Irish unification.

1…1920222425…42

Comments

  • #632
    GritBiscuit
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 440 ✭✭GritBiscuit


    Junkyard Tom wrote: »
    What are SF refusing to give? The DUP are blocking a list of legislative measures that are the norm in Britain and Ireland.

    Give up the past, for starters - what was I reading today about a t-shirt supporting the IRA on SF's website? If you want a united Ireland, you don't just have to convince the North to vote for it. A major vote blocker for SF is their links to paramilitaries...as well as their refusal to participate at Westminster. While such actions may be vote winners in tribal NI, they do little to convince moderate voters south of the border that that's the kind of politics, political representation and political landscape that they should adopt for their own....

    It's no coincidence that the party that claims to stand for all that represents Irish nationalism polls less than half of either of the two big parties here.
    Junkyard Tom wrote: »
    SF were voted for in their greatest ever numbers in the Westminster elections and the SDLP were wiped out. That is a clear rejection by the Nationalist community of Westminster rule.

    SF up 3 seats the DUP up 2 with votes up by more that 4x the increase of those coming out to the ballots for SF...rejecting the SDLP =/= rejecting unionism, clearly.
    What good do any gains do when the DUP are in bed with the Tories and SF are absent from all debate and challenges representing Nationalism at Westminster anyway? Do you really think absentia politicians because of a hundred yr old pledge upholding out-dated principals are the kind of "progressive" policies that are going to set them apart from the unionists and buy over the rest of the unification electorate?
    Junkyard Tom wrote: »
    They tried and got nothing but sneering and disengagement of unionists from the cross-border institutions. Trying to woo unionists is an utter waste of time.

    Of course there is no chance of getting die hard Unionists to vote differently - but they're not going to vote for unification anyway. The question is how do you convince the rest of the electorate in a unification vote? We keep seeing appeals to emotion which do little but puff out Irish braveheart chests who need no convincing but I think it's fair to say the arguments based on hard facts that are realistically going to push those off the fence are pretty thin on the ground.
    Junkyard Tom wrote: »
    And go against the wishes of their electorate who voted SDLP out of Westminster and SF in in abstencia? Why the hell would they do this? SF have been moving the political centre-of-gravity away from Westminster not toward it.

    Except they've only moved it as far as Stormont and there they've languished ever since; in second place wanted neither by the UK electorate nor the rest of Ireland. Who do you think is going to vote for the inclusion of a political landscape that either takes to absentia or celebrates the taking up of arms? Goes marching of a July lighting 3 story bonfires or wants to rewind the national psyche to some time in the 1950's? Which part of any of this do you think looks attractive to the average joe soap voter?
    Junkyard Tom wrote: »
    The current impasse is less about tribalism and more about progressive versus regressive.

    All the political parties support an ILA, marriage equality, special status for the north in the EU/UK except the DUP and UUP.

    Say what you see.

    I see a community that even without the violence, is divided and entrenched. One that with current regressive attitudes, policies and belligerence, blinkers and finger-pointing will never win a vote for reunification. Short of insisting that the die-hard unionists move to the UK so their wishes can be disregarded or that SF disband so as to distance party from paramilitary, the issues that stagnate and cripple NI will not end in my lifetime...because as long as what each side has done to the other is still within living memory - smooshed into each others faces at every opportunity would be closer to the truth - there will be resistance to cooperation and more of the "you say black, we say white - regardless of cost or consequence" mentality.

    That's how I see it. Sadly...
    And with that comes a price for unification that I'd wager the average taxpayer just won't cough up.


  • #633
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,296 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Dear me. You really don't get it, do you.

    Why would you point to the problem in order to try and show there isn't one.

    Two communities, hedged in by a failed partition. You just highlighted one side of the problem.

    OK, we'll leave it there so.

    You've obviously zero evidence that partition causes poor educational outcomes.

    There is an association which, fallaciously, you assume is causation on the basis that "partition came first, poor education outcomes developed subsequently" therefore they must have been caused by the previous event - it's equally possible that causation runs the other way (poor educational outcomes reinforce partition because people don't know any better and consequently their preference is for the status quo).

    The education system may well have induced into people a state of learned helplessness. Just as the Unionists want to keep NI tied to London, so, it seems, SF want to keep people from progressing intellectually, socially and economically.

    My evidence? The manner in which they have presided over NI's education system (if a post hoc fallacy is good enough for the goose, it should be good enough for the gander ;)) - a system, doubtless, we'd be expected to pay for in the wake of a UI being agreed.


  • #634
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,726 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Jawgap wrote: »
    OK, we'll leave it there so.

    You've obviously zero evidence that partition causes poor educational outcomes.

    There is an association which, fallaciously, you assume is causation on the basis that "partition came first, poor education outcomes developed subsequently" therefore they must have been caused by the previous event - it's equally possible that causation runs the other way (poor educational outcomes reinforce partition because people don't know any better and consequently their preference is for the status quo).

    The education system may well have induced into people a state of learned helplessness. Just as the Unionists want to keep NI tied to London, so, it seems, SF want to keep people from progressing intellectually, socially and economically.

    My evidence? The manner in which they have presided over NI's education system (if a post hoc fallacy is good enough for the goose, it should be good enough for the gander ;)) - a system, doubtless, we'd be expected to pay for in the wake of a UI being agreed.

    I would say that is fairly typical of a partitionist minset tbh. Unionists just being good unionists and SF, sinister and bad.

    NI is polarised, why, because partition forced communities into protection of themselves. That has resulted in education being equally polarised. That is WHY your relatives are exceptions to the rule rather than the norm.
    You don't need charts and graphs with circles and arrows to understand that fairly basic reality of life in NI.


  • #635
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,279 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    Charles Babbage wrote: »
    NI was occupied and ethnic cleansing was used to achieve a certain population balance by the inclusion of people who do not identify with where they live but rather with Britain. Those people then advocated a continuation of the occupation.

    The thing is bad enough without false comparisons with Yorkshire.

    The plantation of Ulster occurred in 1609. If you go back far enough, pretty much everywhere, including Yorkshire, was occupied and/or ethnically cleansed at some point in time.

    The point is that Northern Ireland isn't occupied today.


  • #636
    blanch152
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,195 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Again with the partitionist thinking.
    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    The 'effects' of partition .
    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    I would say that is fairly typical of a partitionist minset tbh.
    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    People don't naturally behave that way. Something has caused them to.
    Continue ignoring the elephant in the room.

    You can hardly call something - partition - the elephant in the room when you mention it in nearly every single post on this thread.

    It is utterly depressing that many of the nationalists on here cannot seem to realise that nothing will change in the north until the nationalist community change as much as the unionist community. There is no right side, there are two wrong sides and what either community wants is not going to be the ultimate outcome.


  • Advertisement
  • #637
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,726 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    blanch152 wrote: »
    You can hardly call something - partition - the elephant in the room when you mention it in nearly every single post on this thread.

    It is utterly depressing that many of the nationalists on here cannot seem to realise that nothing will change in the north until the nationalist community change as much as the unionist community. There is no right side, there are two wrong sides and what either community wants is not going to be the ultimate outcome.

    You have been asked who is blocking rights against the will of almost all other parties and have therefore stagnated the GFA process? The GFA being a critical agreement to progress towards normality.

    You cannot ask people to sign up to a process and then not be honest and critical as to why that process has failed.

    If 'nationalists' have brought about this stagnation, please tell us how they have done this.


    *Without the patronising and the absolutely abject advice that they should pander or appease bigotry please.


  • #638
    blanch152
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,195 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    You have been asked who is blocking rights against the will of almost all other parties and have therefore stagnated the GFA process? The GFA being a critical agreement to progress towards normality.

    You cannot ask people to sign up to a process and then not be honest and critical as to why that process has failed.

    If 'nationalists' have brought about this stagnation, please tell us how they have done this.


    *Without the patronising and the absolutely abject advice that they should pander or appease bigotry please.


    I will only be repeating myself.
    blanch152 wrote: »
    Let us be absolutely clear on this. You are criticising what you call "belligerent bigoted unionism" on two issues - same-sex marriage and the recognition of the Irish language.

    In 1969, when the IRA kicked off, what was the situation with those two issues.

    (1) Homosexuality was banned in 1969, are you trying to tell me that the whole IRA campaign was about gaining rights for the gay community? Seriously?

    (2) The Irish language had about 10 native speakers in Northern Ireland in 1969.

    So how are they now the raison d'etre of the nationalist cause?

    Go back further and tell me were either of these issues raised at the time of partition? I don't think so, but maybe you could enlighten me.

    The point I am making is that the problems and the issues that Northern Ireland is facing today have nothing to do with partition, didn't exist when partition happened, and blaming them on partition is the ultimate crutch, the ultimate "he made me do it" excuse. Until there is some maturity in Northern Ireland politics, and people stop using old tired excuses for their behaviour, then there will be no progress.

    Partition was 100 years ago. Live with it, work with it, persuade minds, the milk has been spilt. Stop blaming the long-dead people who spilled the milk.

    The problems you speak of didn't exist when partition happened, it would be like blaming the 1926 UK General Strike for Brexit. Bizarre. No causal link, no linkage of any kind!

    Too many nationalists dwell in the past. If SF put as much effort into getting on with people in the North as it does into symbolism and relics of the past, the North would be a much better place.


  • #639
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,726 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    blanch152 wrote: »
    I will only be repeating myself.



    Partition was 100 years ago. Live with it, work with it, persuade minds, the milk has been spilt. Stop blaming the long-dead people who spilled the milk.

    The problems you speak of didn't exist when partition happened, it would be like blaming the 1926 UK General Strike for Brexit. Bizarre. No causal link, no linkage of any kind!

    Too many nationalists dwell in the past. If SF put as much effort into getting on with people in the North as it does into symbolism and relics of the past, the North would be a much better place.


    It doesn't really wash that you continue to ignore the argument here.
    I am not referring to the 'event' of partition.
    I am referring to the effects of partition.

    You cannot seem to mount a counter argument without projecting something onto the opposing argument that isn't there.

    *And again with the SF 'bad' stuff. :) In a state which comes to a violent standstill every year for the celebration and triumphalism around something that happened in 1690. That has an Order (connected to the highest offices) that has taken that event to mean that they have a god given right to supreme power for protestants.


  • #640
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,296 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    I would say that is fairly typical of a partitionist minset tbh. Unionists just being good unionists and SF, sinister and bad.

    NI is polarised, why, because partition forced communities into protection of themselves. That has resulted in education being equally polarised. That is WHY your relatives are exceptions to the rule rather than the norm.
    You don't need charts and graphs with circles and arrows to understand that fairly basic reality of life in NI.

    Yes, as was previously noted, mindsets that need decommissioning.

    You know it's perfectly possible for someone to hold an opinion without them being labeled pejoratively. It seems to be very much a SF (and to a lesser extent an NI Nationalist) thing to label anyone who dares question the dogma of the movement as 'heretical.' The attitude of "if you're not for us you must be against us" really does provide a revealing insight into the psyche and intellect of the place and the tendency to see everything as binary.

    To be honest, I was going to note that most everyone I know from NI (whose educational background I know of) went to a non-denominational school, but then I realised that most of those people I've met or socialised with them outside NI so it may be that those who do eschew the tribal nature of the denominational education systems have their horizons lifted and get out.


  • #641
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,726 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Jawgap wrote: »
    Yes, as was previously noted, mindsets that need decommissioning.

    You know it's perfectly possible for someone to hold an opinion without them being labeled pejoratively. It seems to be very much a SF (and to a lesser extent an NI Nationalist) thing to label anyone who dares question the dogma of the movement as 'heretical.' The attitude of "if you're not for us you must be against us" really does provide a revealing insight into the psyche and intellect of the place and the tendency to see everything as binary.

    To be honest, I was going to note that most everyone I know from NI (whose educational background I know of) went to a non-denominational school, but then I realised that most of those people I've met or socialised with them outside NI so it may be that those who do eschew the tribal nature of the denominational education systems have their horizons lifted and get out.

    We might be getting to the bottom of why you seem so tragically uninformed about NI.

    How can somebody who has said 'that partition has affected both communities and all politics in the north' be depicted as you have depicted me above?
    Again, you seem more interested in demeaning and denigrating one side than you are in looking at the bigger picture. Which is certainly what my education taught me to do.


  • Advertisement
  • #642
    blanch152
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,195 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    It doesn't really wash that you continue to ignore the argument here.
    I am not referring to the 'event' of partition.
    I am referring to the effects of partition.

    You cannot seem to mount a counter argument without projecting something onto the opposing argument that isn't there.

    *And again with the SF 'bad' stuff. :) In a state which comes to a violent standstill every year for the celebration and triumphalism around something that happened in 1690. That has an Order (connected to the highest offices) that has taken that event to mean that they have a god given right to supreme power for protestants.

    Nobody on here disputes that the DUP and the Orange Order are bad. Nobody on here spends endless hours blindly defending every single nugget of what the DUP do. But equally as bad as the DUP or the Orange Order are the Bobby Sands murals, the murals of IRA terrorists, the IRA t-shirts and badges on sale in the SF shop.

    I blame both sides, you blame one, that is the difference between us. You engage in a constant defence of all things nationalist, not even condemning the nauseating displays I mention above.

    Partition has no real effect on ordinary life today. It has a psychological grip on nationalist and unionist politicians that serves as a crutch for their failures in governing Northern Ireland. Partition didn't make SF reject the compromise of a Minority Languages Act, partition didn't make SF not take their seats in Westminister and thereby allow the DUP to grab power, partition didn't make SF hand back power over social welfare cuts to Westminister because it was too cowardly to make them themselves etc. etc. Stop blaming something that happened 100 years ago for the failures of today.

    The constant whine from nationalists is that it is all the fault of partition/DUP/Westminister government/Dublin government/unionists i.e. everyone but themselves.


  • #643
    blanch152
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,195 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Again, you seem more interested in demeaning and denigrating one side than you are in looking at the bigger picture. Which is certainly what my education taught me to do.

    Are you not guilty of this yourself?

    There isn't a single post of yours that is in any way critical of any nationalist or SF position.

    On the other hand you will find many posts by Jawgap (or myself of Murphaph or any of the so-called partitionists) that condemn DUP intransigence or Orange Order bigotry as appropriate.


  • #644
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,726 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    blanch152 wrote: »
    Are you not guilty of this yourself?

    There isn't a single post of yours that is in any way critical of any nationalist or SF position.

    On the other hand you will find many posts by Jawgap (or myself of Murphaph or any of the so-called partitionists) that condemn DUP intransigence or Orange Order bigotry as appropriate.

    I criticise were it is warranted.

    You never answered my question earlier...who is intrumental in stagnating the GFA and has refused to adopt the ordinary rights enjoyed by others on these islands?

    I find your claim that you and J and M are evenhanded in your criticism when I have on this thread alone pointed out clear one-sided blaming and partitionist attitudes.

    Unlike you and the others I have never hidden the fact that I am republican.
    I am a republican who places the majority of the blame for the state of the island where it lies, 'partition and the suprematist mindset' of some of Unionism.
    I also believe that some criticism can be leveled at how nationalists have responded to that partition and it's subsequent effects.


  • #645
    murphaph
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,130 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Baron de Charlus wrote: »
    The plantation of Ulster occurred in 1609. If you go back far enough, pretty much everywhere, including Yorkshire, was occupied and/or ethnically cleansed at some point in time.

    The point is that Northern Ireland isn't occupied today.
    Indeed. Berlin, where I live, was once Slavic as is evidenced by the many Slavic placenames in and around the city. The Spandau in Spandau Ballet is Slavic in origin, for example.

    Yorkshire has quite clearly plenty of Danish placenames, like Grimsby, where the by ending indicates the presence of a farm of some sort in days gone by.

    The "Irish" were also "guilty" of invading Wales and Scotland and even taking slaves. It's ancient history. The north is not occupied. The British would leave in the morning if they could get shot of the place!


  • #646
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,726 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    murphaph wrote: »
    Indeed. Berlin, where I live, was once Slavic as is evidenced by the many Slavic placenames in and around the city. The Spandau in Spandau Ballet is Slavic in origin, for example.

    Yorkshire has quite clearly plenty of Danish placenames, like Grimsby, where the by ending indicates the presence of a farm of some sort in days gone by.

    The "Irish" were also "guilty" of invading Wales and Scotland and even taking slaves. It's ancient history. The north is not occupied. The British would leave in the morning if they could get shot of the place!

    That is funny. Did you read that back?


  • #647
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,296 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    Baron de Charlus wrote: »
    The plantation of Ulster occurred in 1609. If you go back far enough, pretty much everywhere, including Yorkshire, was occupied and/or ethnically cleansed at some point in time.

    The point is that Northern Ireland isn't occupied today.

    I always thought that when a placed was 'occupied' the occupying power bled it dry of resources, manpower and wealth......

    ......not provide a subvention equivalent to 25 to 30% of the economy!!!

    Interestingly, doing a quick calculation, it might be worth noting that in the aftermath of WW2, the Marshall Plan saw West Germany receive about $1.5 billion over 4 years from about 1948 to 1952 - adjusted for inflation, that's about $38 billion at 2017 prices......which equates to about stg£28 billion....or to put it another way over the last 4 years NI has had more money poured into it than West Germany got in the Marshall Plan!!

    Worth noting too, that West Germany opted to repay a good chunk of the aid they received too.


  • #648
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,296 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    We might be getting to the bottom of why you seem so tragically uninformed about NI.

    How can somebody who has said 'that partition has affected both communities and all politics in the north' be depicted as you have depicted me above?
    Again, you seem more interested in demeaning and denigrating one side than you are in looking at the bigger picture. Which is certainly what my education taught me to do.

    Not at all - I'm interested in exploring the productivity gap in NI and discussing how much it might cost to close it. As an aside, I'd also be interested in any evidence, beyond political rhetoric, that indicates there is a political willingness to improve education outcomes and qualifications.

    If all the money the UK has thrown at education in NI hasn't solved the issue how much might we have to come up with just to keep things as they are, never mind improve the system.


  • #649
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,726 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Jawgap wrote: »
    Not at all - I'm interested in exploring the productivity gap in NI and discussing how much it might cost to close it. As an aside, I'd also be interested in any evidence, beyond political rhetoric, that indicates there is a political willingness to improve education outcomes and qualifications.

    If all the money the UK has thrown at education in NI hasn't solved the issue how much might we have to come up with just to keep things as they are, never mind improve the system.

    It is impossible to reach a consensus on this if you are not willing to look at the whole picture.
    Trying to isolate one thing while ignoring everything else is pointless.


  • #650
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,012 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    So you'd be opposed to Scottish independence?

    Waffle, waffle. Northern Ireland isn't occupied.

    Scotland formed as it's own entity and is still seen as such. It wasn't created as a political ruse to explain stealing land. I would support it of course.

    Oh yes it is, (Arlene is behind you! 'Oh no she isn't' etc.).


  • #651
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,012 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    blanch152 wrote: »
    To be fair, any Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, Labour or Green Education Minister ruling from Marlborough Street would be better than whatever eejit SF installed in Stormont.

    To be fairer, imagine sweet deals for the building industry being put on hold because the DUP wants eubonics Ulster Scots on sign posts or same sex couples outlawed.


  • Advertisement
  • #652
    jm08
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,338 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    blanch152 wrote: »
    I blame both sides, you blame one, that is the difference between us. You engage in a constant defence of all things nationalist, not even condemning the nauseating displays I mention above.

    I get the feeling you blame Sinn Fein. How you are going to square that one when Mary Lou takes over is going to be interesting.
    Partition has no real effect on ordinary life today.
    Removing the visible border helped in that. Its now in a situation where that border is going to be visible again and that will have a huge effect on everyone on this island.
    It has a psychological grip on nationalist and unionist politicians that serves as a crutch for their failures in governing Northern Ireland. Partition didn't make SF reject the compromise of a Minority Languages Act, partition didn't make SF not take their seats in Westminister and thereby allow the DUP to grab power, partition didn't make SF hand back power over social welfare cuts to Westminister because it was too cowardly to make them themselves etc. etc. Stop blaming something that happened 100 years ago for the failures of today.

    If the ILA is all so minor, why are the DUP so strongly objecting to it. If a similar situation arose in the Republic with Ulster Scots, I don't think we would have any ideological reasons to spend 20 years fighting it.

    It would be pointless for Sinn Fein to take up their seats in Westminister as NI reps don't have enough representation to make any difference (similarly with Scotland and Wales). It would also be wrong for them to take their seats because they would be going against the wishes of the people who voted them in on an abstentionist platform. Nationalists could have voted for the SDLP if they wanted representation in Westminister.

    Anyway, NI representation if a waste of time in Westminister (except for the odd time that their support is needed as is now. John Major could have used the Unionist support to keep him in power at one stage, but unlike May, he didn't buy their support.
    The constant whine from nationalists is that it is all the fault of partition/DUP/Westminister government/Dublin government/unionists i.e. everyone but themselves.

    I had great hopes for the Peace Process, and I think Sinn Fein and nationalists bent over backwards to try and make it work. Without firm management from London, the Unionists (DUP) reverted back to their old ways as in Stormont Gov. Part 1 when, they, as the majority needed to be generous to the minority catholics. They are the ones who continue to ramp up the sectarian divide with their out of control celebrations of 12th July for example. I saw recently that in a mixed area in Belfast, there are aprox. 800 catholics on a housing waiting list and about 40 protestants. This is heading in the pre-1970s days again. The British Gov have had their shot at improving it and they are failing (mainly due to lack of interest). Time to try something new now. At least the Irish Gov. have the interest of all people on this island at heart. That may require challenging the DUP which won't go down very well with them, but it needs to be done.


  • #653
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,726 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    jm08 wrote: »
    I get the feeling you blame Sinn Fein. How you are going to square that one when Mary Lou takes over is going to be interesting.


    Removing the visible border helped in that. Its now in a situation where that border is going to be visible again and that will have a huge effect on everyone on this island.



    If the ILA is all so minor, why are the DUP so strongly objecting to it. If a similar situation arose in the Republic with Ulster Scots, I don't think we would have any ideological reasons to spend 20 years fighting it.

    It would be pointless for Sinn Fein to take up their seats in Westminister as NI reps don't have enough representation to make any difference (similarly with Scotland and Wales). It would also be wrong for them to take their seats because they would be going against the wishes of the people who voted them in on an abstentionist platform. Nationalists could have voted for the SDLP if they wanted representation in Westminister.

    Anyway, NI representation if a waste of time in Westminister (except for the odd time that their support is needed as is now. John Major could have used the Unionist support to keep him in power at one stage, but unlike May, he didn't buy their support.



    I had great hopes for the Peace Process, and I think Sinn Fein and nationalists bent over backwards to try and make it work. Without firm management from London, the Unionists (DUP) reverted back to their old ways as in Stormont Gov. Part 1 when, they, as the majority needed to be generous to the minority catholics. They are the ones who continue to ramp up the sectarian divide with their out of control celebrations of 12th July for example. I saw recently that in a mixed area in Belfast, there are aprox. 800 catholics on a housing waiting list and about 40 protestants. This is heading in the pre-1970s days again. The British Gov have had their shot at improving it and they are failing (mainly due to lack of interest). Time to try something new now. At least the Irish Gov. have the interest of all people on this island at heart. That may require challenging the DUP which won't go down very well with them, but it needs to be done.

    Indeed. You have Jawgap here who only wants to look at 'education' in terms of SF's failures and who wants to blithely ignore that 'education' and the lack of oppurtunity for nationalists in the Unionist controlled system (which was a direct result of partition) was one of the main reasons why the place went up in flames in the first place.

    Agenda driven rubbish from the anti UI brigade, which would want to step up it's game from scaremongering and patronising, if they are to have any chance in a UI ref.


  • #654
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,296 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Indeed. You have Jawgap here who only wants to look at 'education' in terms of SF's failures and who wants to blithely ignore that 'education' and the lack of oppurtunity for nationalists in the Unionist controlled system (which was a direct result of partition) was one of the main reasons why the place went up in flames in the first place.

    Agenda driven rubbish from the anti UI brigade, which would want to step up it's game from scaremongering and patronising, if they are to have any chance in a UI ref.

    Well actually no.

    If you look to the report I linked it was education in the context of the role the mis-management of it has led to a significant production gap developing in NI.

    More than several posts into the discussion and long after you introduced the fallacious notion that partition causes poor educational outcomes I mentioned that SF have held the education portfolio for most of the last 18 years - I only asked what had they done with that role and the money poured into the system?

    It's an important question as one would assume that in the event of a UI then, as part of the billions in money we'll have to pour into NI, we will have to fund an education system that by a number of objective measures is inefficient and not fit for purpose.

    But feel free to continue to deflect and personalise the matter - again, it really just highlights the lack of evidence around the substantive idea being pushed that somehow every will be fine in a UI and that we'll all be better off.


  • #655
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,726 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Jawgap wrote: »
    Well actually no.

    If you look to the report I linked it was education in the context of the role the mis-management of it has led to a significant production gap developing in NI.

    More than several posts into the discussion and long after you introduced the fallacious notion that partition causes poor educational outcomes I mentioned that SF have held the education portfolio for most of the last 18 years - I only asked what had they done with that role and the money poured into the system?

    It's an important question as one would assume that in the event of a UI then, as part of the billions in money we'll have to pour into NI, we will have to fund an education system that by a number of objective measures is inefficient and not fit for purpose.

    But feel free to continue to deflect and personalise the matter - again, it really just highlights the lack of evidence around the substantive idea being pushed that somehow every will be fine in a UI and that we'll all be better off.

    Who said everything would be 'fine'?
    A UI will be subject to the same pressures, constraints, political inadequacy and adequacy as we are now.
    It isn't some 'romantic notion' as you guys are wont to keep alluding to.

    And no, I have no interest in discussing it in piecemeal fashion with somebody who doesn't want to look at the whole picture. And whose entire argument is designed to find and highlight what he pretends is the failings of one side.

    All sides are doomed to failure because you cannot overcome the effects of partition.
    The current situation of a stagnant peace process and no executive tells you all you need to know about that without charts and graphs.


  • #656
    blanch152
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,195 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    I criticise were it is warranted.
    .


    I take it you are against provocative and unnecessary displays of sectarian symbolism, and as well as condemning the Orange Order for these, you will criticise the sale of Bobby Sands and IRA memorabilia on the SF website and the painting of sectarian commemorative murals in nationalist areas?

    I think I will be waiting.

    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    You never answered my question earlier...who is intrumental in stagnating the GFA and has refused to adopt the ordinary rights enjoyed by others on these islands?

    I find your claim that you and J and M are evenhanded in your criticism when I have on this thread alone pointed out clear one-sided blaming.

    So you are against one-sided blaming.

    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Unlike you and the others I have never hidden the fact that I am republican.
    I am a republican who places the majority of the blame for the state of the island where it lies, 'partition and the suprematist mindset' of some of Unionism.

    But you are in favour of one-sided blaming.

    I see.


  • #657
    p_singh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2 ✭p_singh


    From the mirror -
    "Irish premier Leo Varadkar will today call for Northern Ireland to become part of the Republic of Ireland.

    The Taoiseach is set to reveal that he aspires to a United Ireland by consent and with cross-community support.


    But his comments are likely to spark fury among unionists in Belfast.

    The Irish Premier is expected to say he will follow the idea of ex-SDLP leader John Hume of an “agreed Ireland”.

    Mr Varadkar said: “In terms of a United Ireland, our constitution is clear on this. Our constitution aspires to there being a United Ireland. I share that aspiration.

    “But only on the basis that it is done by consent, and when it does come about I would like to see it command a degree of cross-community support. And that’s the way I would envision it.”


  • #658
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,296 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Who said everything would be 'fine'?
    A UI will be subject to the same pressures, constraints, political inadequacy and adequacy as we are now.
    It isn't some 'romantic notion' as you guys are wont to keep alluding to.

    And no, I have no interest in discussing it in piecemeal fashion with somebody who doesn't want to look at the whole picture. And whose entire argument is designed to find and highlight what he pretends is the failings of one side.

    All sides are doomed to failure because you cannot overcome the effects of partition.
    The current situation of a stagnant peace process and no executive tells you all you need to know about that without charts and graphs.

    Ah go on.

    I think your arguments are a bit like NI - bankrupt and incapable of standing on their own merits.

    The unpalatable truth is that despite having their hands on the levers of power for nearly two decades the politicians there have demonstrated one common attribute - a complete inability to wean the place off its addiction to deficit funding. When they get to grips with that, then a UI becomes a much more viable prospect.


  • #659
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,012 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    p_singh wrote: »
    From the mirror -
    "Irish premier Leo Varadkar will today call for Northern Ireland to become part of the Republic of Ireland.

    The Taoiseach is set to reveal that he aspires to a United Ireland by consent and with cross-community support.


    But his comments are likely to spark fury among unionists in Belfast.

    The Irish Premier is expected to say he will follow the idea of ex-SDLP leader John Hume of an “agreed Ireland”.

    Mr Varadkar said: “In terms of a United Ireland, our constitution is clear on this. Our constitution aspires to there being a United Ireland. I share that aspiration.

    “But only on the basis that it is done by consent, and when it does come about I would like to see it command a degree of cross-community support. And that’s the way I would envision it.”

    It would seem Varadkar's mouth may get him into a right dilly of a pickle.
    FG folk usually wait until their resignation is tendered before getting all misty eyed about a United Ireland.
    He's great at deflection and telling us bad things are bad, false promises, but he should have really ran these thoughts by the PR team.

    http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/politics/leo-varadkar-aspires-united-ireland-11782421
    In a pre-Christmas sit-down chat with political correspondents, Mr Varadkar revealed Mr Trump’s book The Art Of The Deal is part of his political library.

    Ha, I say :)

    I wonder what childish fun the DUP might try pull off the back of this, 'The climate change con' as part of the school curriculum?


  • #660
    blanch152
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,195 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    p_singh wrote: »
    From the mirror -
    "Irish premier Leo Varadkar will today call for Northern Ireland to become part of the Republic of Ireland.

    The Taoiseach is set to reveal that he aspires to a United Ireland by consent and with cross-community support.


    But his comments are likely to spark fury among unionists in Belfast.

    The Irish Premier is expected to say he will follow the idea of ex-SDLP leader John Hume of an “agreed Ireland”.

    Mr Varadkar said: “In terms of a United Ireland, our constitution is clear on this. Our constitution aspires to there being a United Ireland. I share that aspiration.

    “But only on the basis that it is done by consent, and when it does come about I would like to see it command a degree of cross-community support. And that’s the way I would envision it.”

    The only people who will have an issue with that are the extreme unionists in the DUP who don't ever wish to see a united Ireland and the extreme nationalists in Sinn Fein who want a united Ireland as soon as there is a 50% plus one majority and aren't willing to wait for cross-community support.

    For the rest of us in the middle, it is very reasonable though the economic issues would need a decade of fixing before it could happen.


  • Advertisement
  • #661
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,726 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    blanch152 wrote: »
    I take it you are against provocative and unnecessary displays of sectarian symbolism, and as well as condemning the Orange Order for these, you will criticise the sale of Bobby Sands and IRA memorabilia on the SF website and the painting of sectarian commemorative murals in nationalist areas?

    I think I will be waiting.

    I have criticised them, I think it is wrong and unnecessary but they are symptomatic of what I am talking about - the 'effects of partition'. It is quite usual for sides to become entrenched and to taunt one another after partition. It is a protective stance.

    Quite the most lavish of these is the annual 12th extravaganza.
    So you are against one-sided blaming.




    But you are in favour of one-sided blaming.

    I see.

    I note that as well as 'projecting' things not said onto arguments that you gleefully and wilfully miss phrases like 'majority of'. :rolleyes:


Advertisement