The discussion should take place in advance, otherwise you are repeating the folly of Brexit, but I now understand that is the aim of exclusionary nationalism - get the people to vote for something without thinking.
The federal arrangement could be interesting and could potentially have support in the various regions of Ireland if an acceptable federal type model could be proposed.
Potentially could be based on a regional assembly concept. But how many regional assemblies would people suggest in a united Ireland? Perhaps a minium of 3 based on a rough estimate of 2.5 million people per regional assembly?
Unlike for Brexiters, I'm confident that when partitionists, crypto-unionists, bean counters, me-feiners, and assorted malcontents are made aware of the potential mess of not seeing through the vision for Ireland then they'll think better of voting to maintain the division of our country
Not an ounce of uniting the people in that post.
It does in a discussion forum. The people want to know my opinion :)
Helps when having a discussion.
Partitionist Phases of Grief:
Phase 1: 'never going to happen'.
Phase 2: 'we can't afford it'.
👉️ Phase 3: 'Unionists must buy in'. 👈️
Phase 4: 'NI must go independent'.
Phase 5: ‘We’ll reject unification in the south’.
Phase 6: Acceptance
So the solution to partition is to keep a version of it based on the partition/border. Sounds like you are trying to sell the Brooklyn Bridge.
The people looking for a UI can stuff it? You seem to be going to great lengths to do the people out of the choice of a UI and failing that out of a democratic choice.
Farcical.
You still a nationalist?
You have no idea what the outcome will be. There is no organisation or body warning of set consequences. There is no elite of money men selling the idea for personal profit.
There is no impending exclusion from any market.
There is no comparison to Brexit.
We should plan as best we can. Get councils on the same page. Organise taxation etc.. But if FF/FG are still active I do expect a complete shitshow.
I don't think this list is the slam dunk you think it is
Just a bit of craic Mr Fox. 😉
Now you're just cherry picking Eire Nua, the original federal UI concept. But aside from that, of course you can propose this to your hearts content. Good luck winning a majority. One thing that hasn't really dawned on you however, is that by giving the 6 counties some manner of federal devolution, you are actually handing power over to NI Nationalists not Unionists, as the Nationalists will be in the majority after a successful UI vote.
I anticipate a number of unionists moving to Britain after a UI vote. Indeed the former First Minister had said as much. I don't know how many and who knows maybe the British will offer them some manner of repatriation grant. Hence i would anticipate as a couple decades tick by, the NI Nationalist majority will grow at a larger rate, and the Unionist population will decline at a faster rate, similar to the Unionist decline after Independence here.
I have to wonder if it's really in your interest to promote awarding NI Nationalists a veto say, on Constitutional change for the entire island.
You forgot the primary reason - that a significant number of supposed nationalists in the north will like their cheap cars and NHS and decide life is comfortable as it is - don't rock the boat.
Plenty of Scots thought that way when they were formally asked...
Renua for one
What's wrong with the name of the country?
Why is ending partition by keeping an internal partition 'logical'?
Too Irish.
The Scots were lied to, so much so a significant number decided to believe the promises.
It would stick in the craw of belligerent Unionists to say it, is what's wrong. Like Irish street signs it might mean themuns got something.
I don't disagree, a lot of people are dependent on the state for jobs/housing/health as it stands.
What are the short-term benefits?
What are the medium-term benefits?
What are the long-term benefits?
Sell it to me.
Whose majority?
An all Ireland majority?
So, even though we know the 50%+1 type of thinking was not healthy back then, sure feck it, if it's in your interest to repeat the same mistakes of the past, go on ahead....
Yeap, we have grown a lot as a nation alright!! ROFL
Yes, a majority in a new country. Cannot be done any other way in my opinion and be truly democratic. We can also decide to protect minority rights robustly - constitutionally.
You cannot (and I wouldn't) expect Unionists to agree a new country and then campaign against it, which is the 'other' way favoured by those who haven't thought it through.
Perhaps, but only an idiot or foaming at the mouth sectarian RA head would actually want to achieve a UI with such a small margin and of course, is a recipe for a lot of trouble down the road.
Such small margins of victory is not exactly a ringing endorsement of Unification.
As I have said lots of times before, you need to unify the people before territory.
So NI should not have a veto on its own future, as stated in the GFA?
You voted for the GFA, but again you seem to be distancing yourself from it.
As usual, you are off and running with a ball of your own making.
The people of the north have a veto on a UI.
They do not have a veto on the constitutional arrangements of a new country.
Nowhere in the GFA are they given such a veto.
Yes, but you do know that the people in the North will want to know what they are getting in joining the South?
They are not going to vote on a black cheque to be given to the Irish government....
We all know this...
If it was 50+1 not in favour of a UI, you wouldn't be singing that tune.
To be fair, an awful lot of Americans said they would emigrate if Trump got in. And they are still there.
I don't want to see anyone having to leave their homes, careers, friends and family behind because of reunification. They are welcome to take advantage of any opportunities available to them in a modern European country.
😁😁 Mark, stop talking about take-overs, you'll scare the horses.
Any 'new' government will include Unionists who stand for election. It won't be 'us' ruling them.
Constitutional issues cannot be decided on promises or appeasements and have to be decided by the electorate of the new country.
The government will design a White paper where a vision of a new country will be laid out and after that it will be down to a vote if any of them are to be constitutionally enshrined WHEN unification happens.
Tell me how you think it can be done any other way, not how you'd like it to be done.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w4.vanillicon.com/v2/40cd2c7cc45c017341a2e78709e5b61f.svg)
