Northern Ireland.. Whats the big deal?

philologos · 21-03-2009 06:06PM

Jim236 wrote: »

Get a history book, there has only been failed attempt after failed attempt to establish a cross-party assembly since the Unionist-controlled government was brought down in 1972. Only since 1999 has any progress been made, and even then the assembly has still been suspended several times. Only since 2007 has there been any sign that devolution might work.

I'm quite aware that it's failed. However in the current Assembly they do make decisions on financial matters, or at least I assume they do otherwise it wouldn't be much of a parliament.

Jim236 wrote: »

I'm not an accountant so I'm not even gonna try scrutinise any figures, but I think if the North moved towards being more independent on private investment than public then the public finances would be in a much better shape. They might be in a better position now with the recession, but when things start to turn around Stormont really should push to increase FDI and lose it's reliance on public sector jobs to keep the population in employment. When that happens there won't be such a big hole in the public finances to fill.

Fair enough, but you'd have to guarantee this investment first. That's not as easy as it sounds.

Jim236 wrote: »

I never used the West/East Germany unification as an example to follow, read my post more carefully.

I never said that you did, but it is an example where uniting a country hit home financially pretty hard.

Jim236 wrote: »

Don't the Irish in the North get any say no? Judging from your posts you don't seem to acknowledge that any Irish live in the North, and that the Irish nation to you stops at the border, and that if you are born in the North, you're born British.

Of course they do. They have elected officials to do that for them. I don't see how that is any justification for removing flags.

Jim236 wrote: »

Former power-sharing? By power-sharing you mean a government controlled by Unionists, who as a result of gerrymandering won elections in Nationalist-dominated areas? Who had a rule of 1 vote per household knowing that Protestants owned more houses than Nationalists, and who only allowed Protestants to be employed? They're just a few reasons why that government failed and why the troubles came about, but it was anything but power-sharing.

From studying political institutions this semester at university, Northern Ireland isn't the only model that uses it. Austria also uses conciliatory politics in it's legislature to an extent, but the most similar to Northern Ireland in terms of conflict would be that the same model was used in Lebanon between Christians and Muslims.

fingerbob · 21-03-2009 06:09PM

Of course they do. They have elected officials to do that for them. I don't see how that is any justification for removing flags.

I didn't say anything about removing them, I'm just talking about the signifigance of them as they just continue to divide the community and back to your original point, will prevent from the people here moving on.

Jim236 · 21-03-2009 06:16PM

Jakkass wrote: »

I'm quite aware that it's failed. However in the current Assembly they do make decisions on financial matters, or at least I assume they do otherwise it wouldn't be much of a parliament.

Yeah they do make financial decisions, Peter Robinson himself holds the ministry of finance, but these decisions were made by direct rule legislators in London when no assembly existed or was suspended which was effectively the case between 1972 and 2007, and that was the point I was trying to make.

I never said that you did, but it is an example where uniting a country hit home financially pretty hard.

Yeah fair enough, but you have to accept that if years down the line Irish unity ever did come about the North won't ever be as bad as East Germany was, and to some extent still is. Like I said in my previous post, thats why the Irish government is pumping billions in the North as part of the NDP, so that if a United Ireland ever does come about that the infrastructure will already be there.

Of course they do. They have elected officials to do that for them. I don't see how that is any justification for removing flags.

Whos removing flags? It was the Unionists who banned Irish tricolours and oppressed the Irish population, and suppressed their culture.

From studying political institutions this semester at university, Northern Ireland isn't the only model that uses it. Austria also uses conciliatory politics in it's legislature to an extent, but the most similar to Northern Ireland in terms of conflict would be that the same model was used in Lebanon between Christians and Muslims.

All I'm saying is the ideal situation in the North is that there can be free elections, and that from those elections parties are free to organise a majority government without any particular party having to be part of that government. And that in any future debate on a United Ireland leading up to a referendum, that the public are given the facts of how reunification will and won't benefit the North without bringing religion or green and orange politics into it. That could be 20 years down the line, or 50 years down the line, or never, but IMO its the ideal situation to bring about a United Ireland. The way things stand it won't happen anytime soon.

philologos · 21-03-2009 06:20PM

fingerbob wrote: »

I didn't say anything about removing them, I'm just talking about the signifigance of them as they just continue to divide the community and back to your original point, will prevent from the people here moving on.

If the flags are the cause of the division that is? I don't see how possibly they do.

Jim236 · 21-03-2009 06:22PM

The flags are not the cause of division, they just symbolise it.

fingerbob · 21-03-2009 06:23PM

Jakkass wrote: »

If the flags are the cause of the division that is? I don't see how possibly they do.

Sorry, one of the causes of it. A big one is schools, the vast majority of catholic and protestants attend different schools and also there needs to be more mixed housing estate projects or successful ones even!

Jim236 · 21-03-2009 06:26PM

fingerbob wrote: »

also there needs to be more mixed housing estate projects or successful ones even!

You could have that overnight by removing those 'peace walls'. While Bertie was around the world saying how much Ireland is now at peace, there were still more of these walls being built around the North. Theres now more peace walls than there was just 5 years ago.

fingerbob · 21-03-2009 06:32PM

Jim236 wrote: »

You could have that overnight by removing those 'peace walls'. While Bertie was around the world saying how much Ireland is now at peace, there were still more of these walls being built around the North. Theres now more peace walls than there was just 5 years ago.

Indeed, but there will implications that are involved in removing them. I don't understand why there's more now though. Thing's will change though, you see it outside of the urban working class areas. I have plenty of protestant friends and my girlfriend is too, not that it even matters to any of us. Eventually this mentality will trickle through to all sections of society (maybe except for these CIRA and RIRA idiots). There needs to be more cross community projects in youth and when the generations that didn't experience the troubles grow up hopefully the situation will have sorted itself out. Alot of "traditions" need to stop or become more accomodating though. I just hope theres no more of these shootings or retaliations as it's only gonna take us 10 years back.

21-03-2009 06:46PM

Sofiztikated wrote: »

I always said that to solve this, it would take a few brawny lads, some shovels, and a few stout wooden poles. Get the brawny lads to use the shovels to dig a really deep trench around the border. Then use the poles as levers, thus making Norn Iron its own island, and let them do their own thing.
I don't understand the argument that "We're one landmass, so we should be one country."
The continent of Europe is one land mass (mostly) but is many countries, why should a smaller one be any different?

And build a bridge in its place to allow a Donegal road connection to Dublin as we travel through the North to get there

Donegal, particularly Letterkenny, has a lot of economic and social links to the North so cross border cooperation is important - not "let them do their own thing"

PK2008 · 21-03-2009 09:51PM

In fairness is there any real differencce between Ireland and the UK anyway?

I know they have a monarch but isnt she more of a figurehead, like the internal institutions, political structures (ie democracy and all that jazz), civil law is prety much the same- I mean its not like we have 2 completely different countries, if it wasnt for the accent and sea we'd be identical

In a way i can understand why the northern brits didnt want to part of the whole "catholic Ireland" which was pretty backward in its day, but today I dont think theres much difference

As the OP says its mostly just a flag- waste of time money, effot and worst of all life

Karlusss · 21-03-2009 10:11PM

This whole thing about voting to see which country you want to join is silly, I think.

You could cut a lump out of the border between the US and Canada with more Canadians and democratically the lump would go to Canada.

Northern Ireland was cut from Ireland in a way that reflected Protestant majorities in those counties. So having a plebiscite, while it makes democratic sense, is a weird thing to do because of how it was set up. If all of Ulster was included in the partitioned North, there'd be a nationalist majority by now. It's an artificial majority.

As neutral as everyone here may be to Northern Ireland, the fact remains that thousands of people DO want the right to live in the country that their nationality reflects without having to leave their homes. This applies to both sides. And it's not going to go away because Boards doesn't care.

newmills · 21-03-2009 10:14PM

[quote=flangdiddy
No offense to NI, but i visited the other day, and its certainly not worth 100 years of sweat!

I mean Dublin's much larger than Belfast

[/quote]

Sorry what do you mean by that? Where did you visit the other day that gives you the full impression of the north, it's people, it's sights etc?

So what that dublin is much larger than belfast. Hitler killed more people than osama bin laden - does that make him better!!:rolleyes:

PK2008 · 21-03-2009 10:19PM

Karlusss wrote: »

This whole thing about voting to see which country you want to join is silly, I think.

You could cut a lump out of the border between the US and Canada with more Canadians and democratically the lump would go to Canada.

Northern Ireland was cut from Ireland in a way that reflected Protestant majorities in those counties. So having a plebiscite, while it makes democratic sense, is a weird thing to do because of how it was set up. If all of Ulster was included in the partitioned North, there'd be a nationalist majority by now. It's an artificial majority.

As neutral as everyone here may be to Northern Ireland, the fact remains that thousands of people DO want the right to live in the country that their nationality reflects without having to leave their homes. This applies to both sides. And it's not going to go away because Boards doesn't care.

Say it did become part of Ireland, what would really change for those people?

I mean the ROI isnt really that different from the UK, they'd take down the Union Jack from a few buildings, put up the Tricoulour and we'd have a few more knobs in Dail Eireann- what a victory!!!

Adamcp898 · 21-03-2009 10:22PM

Karlusss wrote: »

Northern Ireland was cut from Ireland in a way that reflected Protestant majorities in those counties. So having a plebiscite, while it makes democratic sense, is a weird thing to do because of how it was set up. If all of Ulster was included in the partitioned North, there'd be a nationalist majority by now. It's an artificial majority.

Each county in ulster was given the vote as to which country they wanted to belong to, the ones with a protestant majority picked Britain, the rest picked Ireland so of course the ones that make up Northern Ireland now have a protestant majority.........

Jim236 · 21-03-2009 10:27PM

PK2008 wrote: »

In fairness is there any real differencce between Ireland and the UK anyway?

I know they have a monarch but isnt she more of a figurehead, like the internal institutions, political structures (ie democracy and all that jazz), civil law is prety much the same- I mean its not like we have 2 completely different countries, if it wasnt for the accent and sea we'd be identical

I disagree, I think theres a lot more than a different accent and head of state that sets us apart from Britain. The Irish language, GAA, Irish music, Irish culture in general just to name a few, and even the political structures we have are more similar to the US than the UK.

In a way i can understand why the northern brits didnt want to part of the whole "catholic Ireland" which was pretty backward in its day, but today I dont think theres much difference

You're takin the mick right? You're trying to say the 'Protestant country for the Protestant people' was ahead of it's time and as modern a country yeh could get? :rolleyes:

Also you can't say the North and the republic are equal, they're not. The North is still a good 10-20 years behind the republic, mainly because of how much religion is intertwined with Northern politics, whereas the republic is now quite a very secular state and has removed any influence the Catholic church previously had in political affairs.

PK2008 · 21-03-2009 10:34PM

Jim236 wrote: »

I disagree, I think theres a lot more than a different accent and head of state that sets us apart from Britain. The Irish language, GAA, Irish music, Irish culture in general just to name a few, and even the political structures we have are more similar to the US than the UK.

You're takin the mick right? You're trying to say the 'Protestant country for the Protestant people' was ahead of it's time and as modern a country yeh could get? :rolleyes:

Also you can't say the North and the republic are equal, they're not. The North is still a good 10-20 years behind the republic, mainly because of how much religion is intertwined with Northern politics, whereas the republic is now quite a very secular state and has removed any influence the Catholic church previously had in political affairs.

What????

Didnt they have divorce and condoms for sale in the North years before we "de-catholised"? Pfff we were years behind UK, wasnt til the 90's that we caught up with the rest of the world. Even i wouldve hated to live in the old catholic Ireland that my parents grew up in- nothing but mass and guilt (and unemployment).

What has GAA, Irish music and language got to do with it- i mean half of us dont even participate in those and we live here- plus dont they have all that up the North aswell???

As far as the structure sthings is concerned- we're free to speak our minds, vote, practice religion etc, and so are they - pretty much the same except for a few details- nothing worth killing anyone over

Svalbard · 21-03-2009 10:44PM

PK2008 wrote: »

What????

Didnt they have divorce and condoms for sale in the North years before we "de-catholised"? Pfff we were years behind UK, wasnt til the 90's that we caught up with the rest of the world. Even i wouldve hated to live in the old catholic Ireland that my parents grew up in- nothing but mass and guilt (and unemployment).

What has GAA, Irish music and language got to do with it- i mean half of us dont even participate in those and we live here- plus dont they have all that up the North aswell???

No, his point is a good one.

Throwing off the yoke of the Catholic Church may be a fairly recent development, but it has happened, it is the reality today and it isn't going to change.
There's no point saying 'sure, it was only the 1980's or 1990's that...etc' - its 2009 now and Ireland is effectively secular in all but name.

Religion plays no role in modern politics south of the border.

In NI religion is still hugely involved in politics, albeit on a more tribal rather than theological level.

PK2008 · 21-03-2009 10:49PM

Svalbard wrote: »

No, his point is a good one.

Throwing off the yoke of the Catholic Church may be a fairly recent development, but it has happened, it is the reality today and it isn't going to change.
There's no point saying 'sure, it was only the 1980's or 1990's that...etc' - its 2009 now and Ireland is effectively secular in all but name.

Religion plays no role in modern politics south of the border.

In NI religion is still hugely involved in politics, albeit on a more tribal rather than theological level.

How so? Are they taking direction from the pope now?

I thought the whole point of protestantism was that your religious leaders had no say in the government- actually sounds like a pretty good idea to me (and Im a catholic...by default anyway), something we didnt really achieve until the 80's

I think ye are straining to find differences- nothing worth shooting a fella for anyway

Svalbard · 21-03-2009 10:53PM

Svalbard wrote: »

In NI religion is still hugely involved in politics, albeit on a more tribal rather than theological level.

I believe my answer is there.

As I said it doesn't matter when it happened, the 1980's, 1990's or last tuesday, Ireland no longer listens to what the CC has to say.

Svalbard · 21-03-2009 10:56PM

PK2008 wrote: »

I think ye are straining to find differences- nothing worth shooting a fella for anyway

Hey, a guy said Ireland is secular and that religion is not as important to politics in the ROI as it is in NI. You claimed he's wrong. I merely pointed out that you are wrong.

I never said anything to suggest I support murder either.

PK2008 · 21-03-2009 10:59PM

Svalbard wrote: »

I believe my answer is there.

As I said it doesn't matter when it happened, the 1980's, 1990's or last tuesday, Ireland no longer listens to what the CC has to say.

Look ye have the UK political system which is one of the most progressive systems in the world- some would say more progressive than the ROI's (which is pretty much modelled on it anyway- its not like we tore down the whole social and political structure after the Brits left, we just sat in their seats, changed a few titles and operated basically the same type of society- albeit not as well.

Just admit it ye want to get one over on the prods, thats the only thing that drives nationalists

PK2008 · 21-03-2009 11:00PM

Svalbard wrote: »

Hey, a guy said Ireland is secular and that religion is not as important to politics in the ROI as it is in NI. You claimed he's wrong. I merely pointed out that you are wrong.

I never said anything to suggest I support murder either.

But you didnt really now did you, you just gave your opinion without any facts, that dont prove jack

I tell you who is years behind- the Northern Nationalists, they dont want to join modern Ireland they want to join Ireland 1916- we've long moved on from all that crap and have nothing in common with them

Karlusss · 21-03-2009 11:02PM

Adamcp898 wrote: »

Each county in ulster was given the vote as to which country they wanted to belong to, the ones with a protestant majority picked Britain, the rest picked Ireland so of course the ones that make up Northern Ireland now have a protestant majority.........

Yeah exactly, ergo the country was founded on the basis of a Protestant majority. My point is you can slice anything any way to get a result you want. A vote on Irish independence should have been voted on by the entire country as a whole at the time. Then maybe unionists would have been in the country against their will, but no more than nationalists were in the UK against their will.

When they had an abortion referendum, they didn't let the constituencies in favour of it have it, and keep the ones who weren't out of it.

Svalbard · 21-03-2009 11:24PM

PK2008 wrote: »

Look ye have the UK political system which is one of the most progressive systems in the world- some would say more progressive than the ROI's (which is pretty much modelled on it anyway- its not like we tore down the whole social and political structure after the Brits left, we just sat in their seats, changed a few titles and operated basically the same type of society- albeit not as well.

Just admit it ye want to get one over on the prods, thats the only thing that drives nationalists

The UK has a progressive political system, but NI is it's own little backward microcosm.

I have no interest in 'getting one over' on anyone.

Adamcp898 · 21-03-2009 11:33PM

Karlusss wrote: »

Yeah exactly, ergo the country was founded on the basis of a Protestant majority. My point is you can slice anything any way to get a result you want. A vote on Irish independence should have been voted on by the entire country as a whole at the time. Then maybe unionists would have been in the country against their will, but no more than nationalists were in the UK against their will.

When they had an abortion referendum, they didn't let the constituencies in favour of it have it, and keep the ones who weren't out of it.

But at the time of said vote more than country was involved so why not let the whole of Britain vote aswell...............

We could go on and on about it but I don't think there's any point in goin any further

PK2008 · 21-03-2009 11:35PM

Svalbard wrote: »

The UK has a progressive political system, but NI is it's own little backward microcosm.

I have no interest in 'getting one over' on anyone.

Yeh well, thats their problem, soon as they learn how to work together the sooner they'll have a decent system, joining the ROI isnt going to sort out their differences

Karlusss · 22-03-2009 01:03AM

Adamcp898 wrote: »

But at the time of said vote more than country was involved so why not let the whole of Britain vote aswell...............

We could go on and on about it but I don't think there's any point in goin any further

Because Britain wasn't granting itself independence after 751 years of colonial rule of some description.

flangdiddy · 22-03-2009 04:03AM

Mairt wrote: »

Its STILL part of Ireland.

We're a devided island nation surrounded by water, we've never been physically part of the UK.

Is it worth killing for, no its not - at least not in my opinion.

Is it worth dying for, absolutely it is.

Thankfully we've entered into a peaceful and democratic process now, and please god the armed struggle will be consigned to history.

haha you get off the net and you die for it so! unless you mean by "its wort dying for" you mean in other peoples cases?

fingerbob · 22-03-2009 02:45PM

PK2008 wrote: »

But you didnt really now did you, you just gave your opinion without any facts, that dont prove jack

I tell you who is years behind- the Northern Nationalists, they dont want to join modern Ireland they want to join Ireland 1916- we've long moved on from all that crap and have nothing in common with them

I hope that with the above, along with the "getting one over the prods" statement, people are realising you have no idea what you are talking about.

Capt'n Midnight · 22-03-2009 03:05PM

Zillah wrote: »

I have a modest proposal on how we can turn a profit from the people of Northern Ireland.

I wouldn't expect a swift response around here.

We could not afford to support NI in the style they have become accustomed to.
Better Healthcare and housing.
Real schools, not pre-fabs, not paying for the running of a school that you have to build yourself. And free school books.
Proper traffic policing.
Total broadband coverage, if you can't get ADSL they give you satellite for the same price.

Northern Ireland.. Whats the big deal?

Comments