nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

United Ireland....... Persuade the unionists.....

martinedwards

Ok instead of the usual, yellow numberplate/petrol bomb as soon as you cross the border/Derry girls are easy thread......

Boards seems to be a strongly Pro united Ireland community

Ok, lets say that there is a border poll.

Having a minority with strong anti ruler views has historically not been the most peaceful system in the North.

so,

how would you persuade the folk that are terrified of all the things that they PERCEIVE to be against them in an all island Irish nation?

and lets be honest, "Suck it up, my auntie Brigit was spat on by a brit soldier in 1972" isn't going to persuade the likes of Sammy Wilson that it's a good idea.

Discuss!

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

pgj2015

Crush On You wrote: »

Our flag is poxy. Plain Green Flag with a gold harp is much better.

I very much disagree, I love our flag.

[Deleted User]

Deleted User wrote: »

Mate,yous are proposing a solution that previously ended in civil war (wesrminister had virtually zero oversight 1922 to 1969,was defacto an indepndant state)

Mate, I am not proposing a solution. I am saying repeatedly, that unification would be a train wreck. I honestly don't care what other 'solution' is taken, as long as it doesn't involve the North joining with the Republic, or that the Republic finance the North.

Yous will have to excuse me,if i think something new should be tried......ive seen nothing to see it wont work out tbh,and outlined why its doomed to never work under british rule...as they have kept it divided for political interests....indepndance state likely to end in civil war.....while a utd ireland will likely 2 out of 3 governmemts to include unionist representation

A united Ireland means disaster for the Republic. So, you're wiling to sacrifice the Republic for a very vague chance for the North.

Everything else has been tried and failed,it (along with joint dub-london rule) are only options left imo

Then think of something else, but one that doesn't include unification.. at least, not until they're sorted our their deep-rooted divisions, and managed to get their economy (and services) away from being dependent on others.

Fr D Maugire

Crush On You wrote: »

Our flag is poxy. Plain Green Flag with a gold harp is much better.

I would not have a major issue with such a change, but the current tricolour is more about what it is supposed to represent. I saw someone suggest in a thread that we should stop putting orange on our National athletic kits and maybe add blue to be more appealing to those from the North, which is kinda ironic as Northern Irelands sports kits are usually just green and white so the colour seemingly causing the problem is orange, which of course represents the Protestants.

Also Green is associated with Republicanism and was the colours of the United Irishmen who were the first to push for an independent Republic. Of course, most of the United Irishmen founders were Protestant Ulster Scots. But Unionists tend to never mention that part.

Mad_maxx

Deleted User wrote: »

I think both communities are too comfortable up there to vote for a UI. The only way i see it happen is if Scotland leave resulting in a breakup of the union. England and Wales go it alone and the North basically gets flung out the door for being the expensive useless nuisance of a place that it is.

the Scots will never vote to go it alone , i dont use it as a pre cursor for reunification

Mad_maxx

Deleted User wrote: »

The average Protestant from Donegal or Monaghan or Dublin who would be from the same stock as the NI Protestants seem to have settled well as Irish people. The same would eventually happen in a united Ireland.

Dublin protestants are mostly anglican and of english stock , ulster protestants are presbyterian and of scottish ancestry

Cee-Jay-Cee

I do not want a united Ireland so therefore I fully support the Unionists in their fight against it or any proposal for a border poll.

The only people I ever see calling for a border poll or united Ireland are people in the republic and a few hard line republicans in NI. There certainly doesn’t appear to be a huge appetite for it in Northern Ireland.

IMO It’s such a ridiculous notion, up there with the Ireland should switch to driving on the right argument, neither of which is ever going to happen...thankfully.

As soon as the catholic’s/republicans in NI find out what joining this country will entail for them financially that’ll be the end of it I think.

Del2005

Crush On You wrote: »

Our flag is poxy. Plain Green Flag with a gold harp is much better.

Do you think that the French, Italian, Côte d'Ivoire and the loads of other countries that use 3 colour blocks have poxy flags also?

The unionists wouldn't except that, they will insist on a red hand somewhere, and our flag already incorporates the unionists so why should it be changed?

It'll take years to get to the stage where a vote for a united Ireland is possible, then it'll take decades after that to decide what the options will be. We don't want to do a Brexit and vote without knowing what we are voting for.

Mad_maxx

Deleted User wrote: »

No....they have a place in a utd ireland (have something like a 66% likelyhood of being in each government)

They can prosper, thrive and raise lifestyle and prospects of working class loyalists beyond recognition....deporting/relocating to a country,that still has food banks and monarchy simutaneously,condemns them to generations of poverty,they are born in ireland and irish and we should do better by em

while i dont think its something which would ever be considered , unionists dont care about poverty , they are a people who want nothing other than to be british and to march around displaying it

Mules

I don't know. If you're a unionist you believe in maintaining the union between Britain and Northern Ireland. How the feck could you persuade someone to basically become (as they would see it) part of a different country. I wouldn't fancy becoming British/Spanish/French or whatever.

Anyway, that's not very helpful so my ideas are;
1 Federalism, Stormont for the north, the Dail for the Dubs and different parliaments for the other provinces as well.
Better representation for everyone.
2 Different flag & anthem
3 Make Ulster Scots an official language

*Ireland may have to reopen some older links with the UK. A more formal relationship, like Commonwealth membership or something.

Tbh, I don't think you could persuade a genuine unionist but if there is a UI we would have to try to make it as good as we can for them.

* We should also keep Leo away from them as he doesn't seem to be popular up there

Speedline

Mad_maxx wrote: »

while i dont think its something which would ever be considered , unionists dont care about poverty , they are a people who want nothing other than to be british and to march around displaying it

Which is odd seeing as 100 years ago they called themselves irish. The English would call them irish too.

Mules

Speedline wrote: »

Which is odd seeing as 100 years ago they called themselves irish. The English would call them irish too.

True, but there's an awful lot of water under the bridge since then.

Capt'n Midnight

Mules wrote: »

True, but there's an awful lot of water under the bridge since then.

It's no longer a bridge or tunnel.

They are making noises about a submerged floating tube bridge, again. Buoyancy will hold it up and cables to the sea bed will hold it down.

And magic will protect it from trawlers, undersea explosions, and submarines.

[Deleted User]

Sadly, the unionists probably won’t be persuaded in the end, they’ll just be outvoted. There’s very little chance of a consensus, impossible to see it at the moment. I know it’s unfortunate but that’s what’s most likely.
I know people say it shouldn’t be just 50% + one vote, but it has to be like that. Partition certainly can’t continue when the majority don’t want it.
It’d be great to think reconciliation is possible, but anyone who has spent time in NI in recent years will have to have seen that it is incredibly divided, it really is very deep.

[Deleted User]

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

Sadly, the unionists probably won’t be persuaded in the end, they’ll just be outvoted. There’s very little chance of a consensus, impossible to see it at the moment. I know it’s unfortunate but that’s what’s most likely.
I know people say it shouldn’t be just 50% + one vote, but it has to be like that. Partition certainly can’t continue when the majority don’t want it.
It’d be great to think reconciliation is possible, but anyone who has spent time in NI in recent years will have to have seen that it is incredibly divided, it really is very deep.

That’s great. So we increase the size of our state to absorb a large militant minority? Brilliant.

it’s correct that we can’t absorb unionists though. A unionist will continue to believe in the union of Northern Ireland (or a part of it) with Britain. That’s by definition. It’s impossible. It’s literally a contradiction in terms.

We can try and persuade some Protestant and Catholic unionists to abandon unionism. However , by definition, a unionist can’t ever be comfortable in a united Ireland.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

That’s great. So we increase the size of our state to absorb a large militant minority? Brilliant.

it’s correct that we can’t absorb unionists though. A unionist will continue to believe in the union of Northern Ireland (or a part of it) with Britain. That’s by definition. It’s impossible. It’s literally a contradiction in terms.

We can try and persuade some Protestant and Catholic unionists to abandon unionism. However , by definition, a unionist can’t ever be comfortable in a united Ireland.

It’s what will happen most likely. Could be a few choppy years, but hard to see how unionists could make a coherent argument when they have insisted on majoritarianism in those six counties for 100 years. In all likelihood the vast majority of unionists will accept democracy immediately, the State will bend over backwards to accommodate their culture and things will move on.
Unionism is a hard legacy to be born with, in a sense not having to defend the flawed concept of partition could make them a bit more comfortable with their heritage.

dd973

Progressive pro independence Scots find them an embarrassing throwback and view the Orange/Rangers F.C types through the same prism as we do, sectarian fools stuck in the 19th Century.

Young middle class Protestants up there outside of Belfast and the traditionally staunch towns like Larne and Portadown are surprisingly socially liberal and are where to look in terms of offering a E.U country with legalised abortion, LGBT marriage and so on.

dd973

Fr D Maugire wrote: »

I would not have a major issue with such a change, but the current tricolour is more about what it is supposed to represent. I saw someone suggest in a thread that we should stop putting orange on our National athletic kits and maybe add blue to be more appealing to those from the North, which is kinda ironic as Northern Irelands sports kits are usually just green and white so the colour seemingly causing the problem is orange, which of course represents the Protestants.

Also Green is associated with Republicanism and was the colours of the United Irishmen who were the first to push for an independent Republic. Of course, most of the United Irishmen founders were Protestant Ulster Scots. But Unionists tend to never mention that part.

Green, White and Navy Blue Tricolour with a Harp in the middle? The Navy Blue having a dual purpose as it's actually the official colour of our state hence the carpets in the Dail.

Imreoir2

Allinall wrote: »

You’ll need to persuade an awful lot of southerners first, including this one.

Why? You don't have to get everyone to agree to it, just the majority.

If every poll ever on the question is any indication, then those opposed to unification in the south are a small minority that can safely be ignored as a referendum on the question would easily pass with overwhelming support.

Room1o1

If a united Ireland did happen would it mean a new state and a new constitution? Would need to think about that alot first

VinLieger

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Why? You don't have to get everyone to agree to it, just the majority.

If every poll ever on the question is any indication, then those opposed to unification in the south are a small minority that can safely be ignored as a referendum on the question would easily pass with overwhelming support.

Those polls should be taken with a grain of salt, they are done without any details being put to them like the massive economic and security implications not to mention the very real question and possibility of needing to change our flag and national anthem and possibly a lot more to appease the unionists.

Your attitude by the way is exactly the same as the bexiteers, any poll on such a divisive and massive change in the status quo should never require a simple majority of 50.1%.

Simply ignoring the wishes and concerns of a large proportion of people North and South of the border so you can masturbate over your united Ireland fantasy becoming a reality will not lead to a successful reunification.

[Deleted User]

I think it’s be very interesting to hear an anti UI campaign in the South. It’s be so hard to make it sound like anything other than being about greed or not willing to confront a difficult reality.
Not a hope it’s be successful, but it’s still be interesting.

Del2005

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

I think it’s be very interesting to hear an anti UI campaign in the South. It’s be so hard to make it sound like anything other than being about greed or not willing to confront a difficult reality.
Not a hope it’s be successful, but it’s still be interesting.

Currently the vast majority of people don't care about a united Ireland and any that do think it'll be a united Republic of Ireland. When people find out that we'll loose our flag and national anthem, change our constitution to pander to a bigoted community you will see people start to oppose it.

Saying that its greed is reducing people's genuine objections to completely changing our country to join another country is resorting Trump/Brexit levels of debate.

Why do we need to change our already inclusive flag to another inclusive flag? Look at the still ongoing hatred of Ireland's Call to see how people will react. to changing our anthem.

VinLieger

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

I think it’s be very interesting to hear an anti UI campaign in the South. It’s be so hard to make it sound like anything other than being about greed or not willing to confront a difficult reality.
Not a hope it’s be successful, but it’s still be interesting.

Not willing to confront a difficult reality? You are throwing off genuine pragmatic concerns about security and economics as greed...

Also while completely ignoring the very real conversation that will have to be had about flags, anthems and a host of other things that haven't been in anyway considered by people like yourself who are obsessed with achieving something and really don't care how you get there or who you step on.

I would argue you and people like you are actually the greedy ones unwilling to confront the difficult reality of what a UI might actually have to look like instead of the green tinted, shamrock covered version you've been obsessing over for decades.

Del2005

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Why?

If every poll ever on the question is any indication, then those opposed to unification in the south are a small minority that can safely be ignored as a referendum on the question would easily pass with overwhelming support.

Do you want a united Ireland? Yes or No, of course people will say Yes.

Do you want to change our flag and national anthem, completely change our constitution and join the commonwealth for a united Ireland? Yes or No, I don't think that there will be a massive yes to this question

When the polls ask the 2nd question we'll see the true support for a united Ireland.

The other issue is will nationalists in the North who want to join the Republic of Ireland vote to join a Federal Ireland in the commonwealth? Because that's not what they have wanted for generations

Mad_maxx

Speedline wrote: »

Which is odd seeing as 100 years ago they called themselves irish. The English would call them irish too.

They only refer to themselves as Irish in a geographical sense , certainly not or never political sense

Mad_maxx

dd973 wrote: »

Progressive pro independence Scots find them an embarrassing throwback and view the Orange/Rangers F.C types through the same prism as we do, sectarian fools stuck in the 19th Century.

Young middle class Protestants up there outside of Belfast and the traditionally staunch towns like Larne and Portadown are surprisingly socially liberal and are where to look in terms of offering a E.U country with legalised abortion, LGBT marriage and so on.

Not everyone views abortion and " LGBT " issues as hugely important

I would not be relying on those to gather support amongst young unionists

Both sides up North are considerably more socially conservative than we are down here

No coincidence that SF are less ashamed of being socially conservative up north

[Deleted User]

VinLieger wrote: »

Not willing to confront a difficult reality? You are throwing off genuine pragmatic concerns about security and economics as greed...

Also while completely ignoring the very real conversation that will have to be had about flags, anthems and a host of other things that haven't been in anyway considered by people like yourself who are obsessed with achieving something and really don't care how you get there or who you step on.

I would argue you and people like you are actually the greedy ones unwilling to confront the difficult reality of what a UI might actually have to look like instead of the green tinted, shamrock covered version you've been obsessing over for decades.

Woe horsey!
I’m not obsessing at all, I spend a bit of time in both jurisdictions but I can easily live with the status quo.
My point is that people who want partition to continue are going to have a hard time arguing for, without sounding very self interested. Wanting partition to continue will sound very like wanting to cut off Northern Catholics once again, due to selfishness. Plus not wanting to change the anthem/flag will seem very petty.
An nationalist majority is coming in the North, the South does need to get ready for that. Partition is going to dominate politics in the south very soon. It is already more significant in the North for the last five years, because all sides can see an end to it.

Mad_maxx

going to get hammered for this but im fully in favour of a united ireland but im not typical of most people in favour

1. id never vote SF or any far left political party

2. i believe we can afford unification and that the international markets would cheer on reunification

3. i believe we here in the south should rejoin the commonwealth today , its a harmless club of nations but would be a positive gesture towards unionists now and also post unification , allow them their little bit of nostalgia which they cherish so much , i view that a costless exercise

4. those down here who say No seem to believe opting out of a United Ireland is like opting out of a fancier spec new car , whenever the mainland of the UK decide they are sick of the North , they will let it go and its up to us to deal with it , along with a sufficient number of voters in favour of reunification , i fully expect this to happen inside twenty five years at most

[Deleted User]

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Not everyone views abortion and " LGBT " issues as hugely important

I would not be relying on those to gather support amongst young unionists

Both sides up North are considerably more socially conservative than we are down here

No coincidence that SF are less ashamed of being socially conservative up north

Getting the majority of unionists on board is a bit of a nonsense, sadly there's no way that's going to happen in time, partition will almost certainly end first. Even the likes of Varadkar and M Martin know this is the case.

It's true that there is more conservatism in the north, especially among Protestants. But the divide is so strong that DUP supporters won't come over to nationalism.

Mad_maxx

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

Getting the majority of unionists on board is a bit of a nonsense, sadly there's no way that's going to happen in time, partition will almost certainly end first. Even the likes of Varadkar and M Martin know this is the case.

It's true that there is more conservatism in the north, especially among Protestants. But the divide is so strong that DUP supporters won't come over to nationalism.

im not in favour of pandering to unionists at all and i take the view that nothing has ever been expected of unionism , from the media down here most of all , unionism has never been once asked to atone for their behaviour down the years

i dont view joining the commonwealth as pandering but i dont believe we need more than a proper majority to proceed either , this " we must wait until unionists are ready " could mean anything and is spectacularly vague