Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

How can we integrate Unionism into a possible United Ireland?

16768707273128

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,116 ✭✭✭✭Junkyard Tom


    You're twisting people's words again. Yes there are certainly Catholic/Nationalist players/fans from the North who support the Rugby team. So stop crying about it and make suggestions that would be acceptable to all the people who play/support Rugby in the north. Go on, rack your brain there and then ignore this post as you know damn well you have no answers.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,189 ✭✭✭Brucie Bonus


    Is that why NI is a portion of the Irish province of Ulster? Why did they call it Northern Ireland, if there was no Ireland pre partition? Why did they keep the name Ulster, if Irish province's didn't exist prior to partition?

    The current set up is new historically speaking. Could all change again.

    The island of Ireland, a country, was partitioned. The fact that it has divided Ulster shows that. We don't need some foreign organisation to authorise it.

    You are of course free to disown the Irish community in the North.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,523 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    "Grattan's Parliament" refers to the Parliament of the Kingdom of Ireland between 1782 and 1800.

    One of the mechanisms that kept the Kingdom of Ireland subordinate to Britain was "Poyning's law" — an Act (of the Irish parliament) which provided that no legislation could be enacted by the Irish parliament unless it had first been approved by the English Privy Council - i.e. English/British ministers. The English authorities could either veto proposals entirely or alter or amend them before they were considered by the Irish parliament.

    The Irish parliament represented a narrow political ascendancy - a small class consisting of"

    • Gaelic/Norman families that had accepted Anglicanism and British rule and thereby held on to (some of their) land and status - e.g. the O'Briens, the Butlers
    • English families granted land in the Tudor settlements - e.g. the Brabazons, the Chichesters
    • Families descended from Cromwellite adventurers who had been granted land in Ireland, expropriate from the losing side in the Confederate wars - the Fosters, the Clotworthys.

    For most of the seventeenth and and much of the eighteenths centuries, this political ascendancy was very insecure. Largely alien to the bulk of the population in nationality, culture, language and religion, and mostly insecure in the possession of their land (whose former owners, now tenants, were still around) they were very aware that they were kept in power by English/British military force. Thus the fact that the kingdom was politically dependent on England/Britain was simply a reflect of the reality that it was militarily dependant on England/Britain.

    By the late eighteenth century, however, nearly a hundred years after any serious military disturbance in Ireland, the protestant ascendancy began to acquire some self-confidence and sense of security, and to become more assertive, demanding increased political authority and taking advantage of the stresses imposed on the British government by the American revolution to press for it.

    One of the manifestations of this was the substantial (but not complete) repeal of Poyning's law - from 1782 the British privy council could no longer amend legislative proposals to be put to the Irish parliament (though it could still veto them). This meant there was more bargaining about what would and what would not be considered by the Irish parliament; the British no longer controlled its agenda unilaterally. "Grattan's Parliament" refers to the period after 1782, when the Irish parliament had this greater measure of legislative independence.

    This didn't translate to true independence, by any means. Irish government officials were still appointed from Britain, for example, and of course the British could still veto proposed Irish legislation outright, or instruct the Lord Lieutenant (appointed by Britain, always an Englishman) to withhold the royal assent from any Bill that had been enacted. But it was a step towards greater independence, and the British feared pressure for further steps. They also feared, with one eye on the American experience, what might happen if they resisted that pressure. These fears were among the considerations that led them ultimately to promote and carry through the Acts of Union in 1800.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,680 ✭✭✭✭downcow


    I was comparing the intrasagence of Ireland rugby masters with the intrasegense of the NI football masters. I am the one being fair.

    if you think it is belligerent unionists who have a problem with the ss being played at Ireland rugby then I assume you think it is belligerent republicans who have a problem with gstq being played at NI matches?

    I actually don’t believe either group is belligerent or indeed restricted to one community



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,680 ✭✭✭✭downcow


    The irony of this post is incredible. 

    and of course factually incorrect as usual from Tom. To suggest there are no catholic players or fans in the NI football team is just absurd.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,683 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    The rugby team is representing a country you think doesn't exist - Ireland. And it's supporters/player in the main are happy with the situation despite you trying to colour it otherwise.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 514 ✭✭✭FraserburghFreddie


    Seems to me that Britian(Once it was conquered by the Normans)used feudalism to rule which was apparently the dominant system in medieval Europe.So hardly alien to any population in Europe as values were considerably different from present day.British concerns regarding America were correct as America declared war on Britain in 1812 whilst Britain was embroiled in the Napoleonic wars.( chancers attacking Britain when it's fighting a war in Europe sounds familiar..)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,680 ✭✭✭✭downcow


    Let me replace Ireland rugby with ni football and see if this penny will drop for you.

    “The (ni football) team is representing a country you think doesn't exist - (northern) Ireland. And it's supporters/player in the main are happy with the situation despite you trying to colour it otherwise.”

    the big difference is that I see both situations could be improved to be more inclusive by dropping some exclusive unnecessary trappings. Think about it. What was that you said about belligerence?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,683 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Where did I 'try' this downcow?

    I challenged you on your nonsense about the Irish rugby team.

    With regard to the NI team, we have been here before and I know you struggle with it.

    GSTQ is the English anthem, it underscores the fact that NI is not a country. It cannot agree an anthem or a flag as a result. It has to be imposed.

    Post edited by FrancieBrady on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 514 ✭✭✭FraserburghFreddie


    GSTQ is the official British national anthem.Scottish or Welsh anthems are unofficial,so NI using GSTQ is correct.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,683 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    And many within NI don't consider themselves British and so that anthem doesn't represent them.

    The rugby team and supporters have no such issues in the main (northern Irish participation and support is on a par with other parts of Ireland) and that is why there is no push of any significance to change it. Downcow has been challenged before and now to point to it.

    NI soccer seems realise that it is not representative and change is coming from within, which is to be welcomed.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,680 ✭✭✭✭downcow


    I think we are now agreeing. Let me summarise

    You have no issue with the use of an anthem at Ireland rugby matches which some fans and players seriously dislike and find exclusive.

    I have a significant issue with the use of an anthem at Northern Ireland football matches which some fans and players seriously dislike and find exclusive.

    sort of sums up how we take a very different approach to minorities

    as for stating that gstq is the English anthem, it just makes it too easy to debate with you when you demonstrate to all posters your default position when losing an argument ie just state any nonsense



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,683 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    No downcow, no.

    There is NO significant issue in rugby...you tried and failed to show it was an issue.

    By your own admission here on these forums it is a huge issue in soccer because how could GSTQ represent all. And credit where it is due NI soccer is taking steps to sort that out.

    Rugby supporters and players have pride in the Irish team because they are not conflicted on the issue. Their support is the proof of that. There is little to no issues and support is on a par with the rest of Ireland's regions.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,680 ✭✭✭✭downcow


    I can’t work out whether you are being serious and therefore demonstrating an incredible lack of awareness of reality or whether you are just on the windup. I am beginning to contemplate that you are actually serious. If so, I genuinely feel sorry for you. Even the most sectarian and unaware people I know are completely aware that either anthem played in a setting where both unionist and nationalist are present is not a comfortable place for all.

    but I am not interested in this nonsense anymore. Let’s agree to differ



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,683 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Not uncomfortable enough to not support the Irish team in the case of rugby or to participate in an All Ireland organisation.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,680 ✭✭✭✭downcow


    And likewise. Not uncomfortable enough the prevent nationalists playing for and supporting NI and belonging to an NI organisation.

    but I am really now finished with this nonsense.

    next silly post you do on this I’ll leave to all the readers to insert the necessary words to demonstrate we are talking about mirror images.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,523 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Fascinating fact of the day; the UK doesn't have an "official national anthem". There is no royal proclamation, no Act of Parliament, no Order in Council, designating GSTQ as the national anthem. It's simply custom and practice that crown/government agencies use it when they want a representative piece of music.

    It functions in practice as the representative anthem of the UK state (the Crown), but the state/the Crown is distinct from the people. People or groups of people (like sporting associations) are free to adopt any representative anthem they want, or none. No disloyalty is implied by not adopting GTSQ; if you're not the Crown or an agent of the Crown, it's not disloyal to not pretend to be the Crown, or an agent of the Crown.

    Also, GTSQ is the de facto anthem of the UK, but not of its constituent countries. In the sporting context, the general trend - there are exceptions - is for representative teams which represent the whole UK to use GTSQ, but representative teams which represent parts of the UK to use other songs. At the Olympics, GTSQ is used for Team GB (which, despite its name, represents the whole of the UK) but at the Commonwealth Games, where England, Scotland, Wales and NI compete in separate teams, GTSQ is not used at all. The English cricket team uses "Jerusalem".

    NI sporting associations are free to adopt GTSQ, but they are equally free to adopt any other anthem and, in the toxic sclerotic politics of that unhappy province, either choice is loaded with unavoidable political significance and is likely to give more offence than pleasure.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,680 ✭✭✭✭downcow


    Excellent piece. Very informative and reassuring. Just a pity you went all subjective on us in the last paragraph.

    this completely backs my position and desire that gstq should be used at UK events like Poppy Day, olympics, etc, while we should use country specific anthems for when the home nations participate in sporting events eg the commonwealth games, football

    your piece is very interesting and of course official adoption can be a process of foisting upon a people and often required when there is resistance to consensually evolving an anthem (eg ROI).

    it lovely that gstq did not require imposition the status of these things in the eyes of the followers is much more important than legal recognition All you say above about gstq could be applied to many situations like the colours of a football team

    thanks for that info



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,680 ✭✭✭✭downcow


    Going back to op question. Have we all agreed that it would be a good thing to consider a new anthem as an aid to integrating unionists in a hypothetical United country on this island? Is there any poster that thinks that should not be considered?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 514 ✭✭✭FraserburghFreddie


    Your anglophobia is well known here francie but out of step with world perception of the UK.The attached link of world soft power rankings will make very uncomfortable reading for you.

    https://www.marketing-interactive.com/soft-power-index-2022



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,680 ✭✭✭✭downcow


    Now there’s a surprise. I thought listening to the recent posters on here that Ireland would have been way above my nation. Lol maybe I didn’t read far enough, but I can’t even find them.

    Is it any wonder nationalists are wishing, in increasing numbers, to maintain our part in the one of the most influential countres in the world?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,683 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Tell us again how you support getting rid of GSTQ from NI soccer. How you 'recognise' the issue with it.

    No matter how many unionists tell you down the pub that they hate the Irish rugby set-up there is no movement within it to change the status quo.

    People are happy and secure enough in their Irishness to support the 'Irish' team in rugby and it clearly annoys the soccer boys.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,683 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    'Marketing-Interactive part of Brand Finance??? 😁😁😁😁😁

    Oh dear jaysus!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,523 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Which anthem to use doesn't depend on the nature of the event, but on the nature of the team, because the anthem signifies the team, not the event. A team representing UK should use an anthem that represents the UK at all the events in which it participates; a team representing England, Scotland, NI, etc should use an anthem representing England, Scotland, NI, etc at all the events in which it participates. (And a non-representative team - e.g. a club team - shouldn't be using an anthem at all, or if they have to use something should use one representing the club, or the game at large.)

    It's bizarre to suggest that GTST didn't require imposition, and that this is "lovely" because it means that GTSQ acquired acceptance naturally, through consensual evolution. Surely the discussion going on in this very thread, and the fact that give rise to it, show that GTSQ hasn't achieved acceptance ? It's use is highly contentious, and frequently partisan (which makes it all the more difficult for those wanting to use it in a non-partisan way).

    We've touched on this problem before, when discussing the fact that NI doesn't have a flag, because of the ructions would certainly ensue if anybody tried to propose one. The anthem problem is similar; there's a faction within NI that wouldn't accept any anthem for NI other than GTSQ, and this faction overlaps considerably with people who use GTSQ themselves as a partisan rallying-cry. And there's a counter faction that wouldn't accept GTSQ on any terms. And neither can claim to be representative of NI.

    There's really no parallel to this state of affairs in IRL. There are lots of people who don't like the anthem for a number of reasons and would favour something else, but none of the reasons are that they belong to a community that has a particular anthem of its own that they feel should be adopted to represent IRL as a whole.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 514 ✭✭✭FraserburghFreddie


    It's great you feel so passionate about rugby and football which are very popular around the world,more evidence of British soft power. 😉



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,683 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    No issue with what the British have given the world Fred. I embrace the British aspects of my culture and actively take part in preserving what they left behind here.

    I don't deny, like some.

    I'm a lover and consumer of many aspects of their culture and secure enough in my own culture to say it too.

    Would I rush breathlessly onto a forum with the results of a survey by a fluffy marketing company to praise them?

    Nah...that would be embarrassing,



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 514 ✭✭✭FraserburghFreddie


    And yet you are constantly linking twitter claptrap on an industrial scale daily as if "it must br true, its on twitter."



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,683 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 971 ✭✭✭bob mcbob


    Second interesting fact of the day - God Save the Queen (King) actually started as a music hall dirge in 1745/46 as a result of the Jacobite revolution. The mainly Highland Scottish army got within 100 miles of London so this song was sung in music halls almost as an act of defiance against the Jacobite army as they marched south.

    Here are all the verses - the sixth / last is particularly interesting. Needless to say this is now not very popular in Scotland.

    *******

    Long live our noble Queen,

    God save the Queen!

    Send her victorious,

    Happy and glorious,

    Long to reign over us;

    God save the Queen!

    ****

    O Lord our God arise,

     Scatter her enemies

    And make them fall;

    Confound their politics,

    Frustrate their knavish tricks,

    On Thee our hopes we fix,

    God save us all!

    *****

    Thy choicest gifts in store

    On her be pleased to pour;

    Long may she reign;

    May she defend our laws,

    And ever give us cause

     To sing with heart and voice,

     God save the Queen!

    *******

    Not in this land alone,

    But be God’s mercies known,

    From shore to shore!

     Lord make the nations see

    That men should brothers be

    And form one family, 

    The wide world over.

    *******

    From every latent foe,

    From the assassins blow,

    God save the Queen!

    O’er her thine arm extend,

    For Britain’s sake defend,

    Our mother, prince, and friend,

     God save the Queen!

    ********

    Lord grant that Marshal Wade

    May by thy mighty aid

    Victory bring.

    May he sedition hush,

    And like a torrent rush,

    Rebellious Scots to crush.

    God save the King!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,683 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    You could see 'Sweet Caroline' being the new anthem of England if the Union breaks up. 😁



Advertisement