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

Referendum for Irish Unity 2022

24567…17

Comments

  • #32
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    gallag wrote: »
    How can it be called an "English occupation" when the majority of people in N.Ireland are from the irish/Catholic/nationlist/Republican community but would still vote in favour of remaining part of the UK? Time to move on buddy. I say lets have a vote the same time as Scotland and have a stronger union at the end of it.

    Not one single nationalist or republican would vote to retain the union.
    Plenty of catholics might, but not a single nationalist or republican.
    I also love how you just "know" how people would vote. No need for a referendum, Gallag "knows."
    British democracy in action.


  • #33
    Godge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    We will never be able to commence a truly genuine relationship with Britain UNTIL they cease occupying a quarter of our national territory. That's the truth of it. Of course, they know that and would be happy to implement it. The sticking point remains the settler population's intransigence.


    And someone from England might say that they will never be able to commence a truly genuine relationship with the people of the South of Ireland until they renounce their independence and rejoin the United Kingdom.


  • #34
    gallag
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,354 ✭✭✭gallag


    Crooked Jack wrote: »

    Not one single nationalist or republican would vote to retain the union.
    Plenty of catholics might, but not a single nationalist or republican.
    I also love how you just "know" how people would vote. No need for a referendum, Gallag "knows."
    British democracy in action.
    What about the 30% of sf voters that wish to retain the union? Why are sf dismissive of having a vote now?


  • #35
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    Godge wrote: »
    And someone from England might say that they will never be able to commence a truly genuine relationship with the people of the South of Ireland until they renounce their independence and rejoin the United Kingdom.

    I think it's time for Britain to get over its "bow down to us or we'll crush you" attitude. They're not the biggest bully in the play park any more.


  • #36
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    gallag wrote: »
    What about the 30% of sf voters that wish to retain the union? Why are sf dismissive of having a vote now?

    Well hold on a second. I'm an SF voter, how come I was never asked.
    Oh wait, you're referring to a small BBC poll with a loaded question.
    Pffft. Seriously, your version of democracy is warped.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    T runner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,307 ✭✭✭T runner


    kidneyfan wrote: »
    Ireland would have to have a rather higher status than Wales or Scotland. For example it might be appropriate for Dublin to become the diplomatic capital of the re United Kingdom and for the Supreme Court to be based in "Londonderry".

    Only problem with this is that the only people who want it are a minority of northern Prods.

    Northern Prods Do NOT want this. They were prepared to go to war with the British army over Irish Home Rule 100 years ago. If their particular area in NI loses Protestant control they vacate. Thats the whole problem of Ulster History since the plantation: A state promoted sectarian zero sum game. NI exists as a result of centuries Anti-Catholicism in Ulster on Fundamentalist and Social levels. They will not be a minority to a Catholic majority.
    Remove that and the only barrier to a UI is the economic difficulties of switching sovereignty.


  • #38
    T runner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,307 ✭✭✭T runner


    Aughrim1691. wrote: »
    I would vote No. Ulster will stay within the Union for the foreseeable. Federalism is a big no also. I'd be voting to preserve a way of life for my people and that is as important as any line on a map. Voting for the land and the sacred place it has for all Ulster Protestants.

    If people have aspirations for a centralized government, big government, fine. Not everyone agrees with that point of view.

    The best introduction to astronomy is to think of the nightly heavens as a little lot of stars belonging to one's own homestead. - George Eliot

    Do you not imagine this way of life would be very easily negotiated into any new state?

    I agree though a way of life is more important than any country. I just think Protestants underestimate the amount of power and influence they would have in a UI. The business oppurtunities by being part of a larger local market alone must be mouthwatering.


  • #39
    gallag
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,354 ✭✭✭gallag


    Crooked Jack wrote: »

    I think it's time for Britain to get over its "bow down to us or we'll crush you" attitude. They're not the biggest bully in the play park any more.
    Lol this is sad, do you actually think like this?


  • #40
    gallag
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,354 ✭✭✭gallag


    Crooked Jack wrote: »

    Well hold on a second. I'm an SF voter, how come I was never asked.
    Oh wait, you're referring to a small BBC poll with a loaded question.
    Pffft. Seriously, your version of democracy is warped.
    Thats how polls work, they cant ask everyone so they ask about 1000 people, I thought you would know this? Also, how was the question loaded? And would you agree sf seem to want the vote issue put on the back burner, why is that?


  • #41
    Fr Tod Umptious
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,208 ✭✭✭✭Fr Tod Umptious


    Godge wrote: »
    If there was a preferendum across the two major islands, this would be the winning outcome.

    I know that is hard for the die-hard nationalists to accept but the dream of a united Ireland is only a dream, a far-fetched dream.

    I am not a die hard nationalist and I do not believe in a United Ireland.

    But I do be believe in the Republic of Ireland in it's current form and that is the way I would like to keep it.

    So no thank you to a re-union with the UK


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    gallag wrote: »
    How can it be called an "English occupation" when the majority of people in N.Ireland are from the irish/Catholic/nationlist/Republican community but would still vote in favour of remaining part of the UK? Time to move on buddy. I say lets have a vote the same time as Scotland and have a stronger union at the end of it.

    This is such funny spin on a poll by a historically biased branch of the BBC.
    You are forgetting the question asked.
    'Would you opt to stay in the UK if a poll was held tomorrow'

    Spin is just that, spin.

    We know what happened in the real election in Mid Ulster, what the BBC told us again and again was the current abiding concern of Unionism...the flag issue,(you know the one they where going to bring the North to a standstill over) didn't figure at all in the minds of the 'actual' electorate.

    You need large supplies of salt to be consumed in pinches. ;)


  • #43
    P_1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,681 ✭✭✭✭P_1


    I would vote no.

    Our country is too conservative to make the Northerners want to join us. Until we become a more liberal society there is little point to the exercise.


  • #44
    Aughrim1691.
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8 ✭Aughrim1691.


    T runner wrote: »
    Do you not imagine this way of life would be very easily negotiated into any new state?

    I agree though a way of life is more important than any country. I just think Protestants underestimate the amount of power and influence they would have in a UI. The business oppurtunities by being part of a larger local market alone must be mouthwatering.
    I would never vote for it and the vast majority of Ulster Protestants would be the same because it goes against everything we are. It tries to set up a one identity/nationality. It sets up big government from Dublin over us, and it could harm our institutions.

    Then you have the symbolism problem which is the Tri colour would be representing the whole Island. So any time the President or Taoiseach goes abroad, he would be represented under the Tri colour. Completely neglecting a very proud people in Ulster who do not associate themselves with that flag at all.

    Also radicalism politics would finish. The likes of Sinn Fein and the DUP would be over. They would serve no other common purpose. You would have the elite politicians in the south telling us up here what to do because the majority down south would always win in a vote.

    Bad government comes from too much government. You are looking to completely change the fabric of society in a position on the Island which is just different from the rest and I think that should be accepted.

    The ironic thing is Republicans talk about radical politics but a United Ireland is not radical in the sense that it would be elitist more than ever. The idea that you could form a Socialist Irish Republic with the center of it being controlled from Dublin is not realistic and would not happen.

    And then you have the police. Do you disband the Garda? Are you going to merge the Garda with the PSNI? Would Garda be policing Protestant areas given the potential hostility?

    National flag: The national flag is defined as "the tricolour of green, white and orange" (Article 7).

    How would you go about changing that?


  • #45
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Aughrim1691. wrote: »
    I would never vote for it and the vast majority of Ulster Protestants would be the same because it goes against everything we are. It tries to set up a one identity/nationality. It sets up big government from Dublin over us, and it could harm our institutions.

    Then you have the symbolism problem which is the Tri colour would be representing the whole Island. So any time the President or Taoiseach goes abroad, he would be represented under the Tri colour. Completely neglecting a very proud people in Ulster who do not associate themselves with that flag at all.

    Also radicalism politics would finish. The likes of Sinn Fein and the DUP would be over. They would serve no other common purpose. You would have the elite politicians in the south telling us up here what to do because the majority down south would always win in a vote.

    Bad government comes from too much government. You are looking to completely change the fabric of society in a position on the Island which is just different from the rest and I think that should be accepted.

    The ironic thing is Republicans talk about radical politics but a United Ireland is not radical in the sense that it would be elitist more than ever. The idea that you could form a Socialist Irish Republic with the center of it being controlled from Dublin is not realistic and would not happen.

    And then you have the police. Do you disband the Garda? Are you going to merge the Garda with the PSNI? Would Garda be policing Protestant areas given the potential hostility?

    National flag: The national flag is defined as "the tricolour of green, white and orange" (Article 7).

    How would you go about changing that?

    Could anything be worse than the last 50 odd years of 'government' in N.I.?


  • #46
    gallag
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,354 ✭✭✭gallag


    Happyman42 wrote: »

    Could anything be worse than the last 50 odd years of 'government' in N.I.?
    Yes, the last five years of government in the Republic of ireland.


  • #47
    Aughrim1691.
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8 ✭Aughrim1691.


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Could anything be worse than the last 50 odd years of 'government' in N.I.?
    Absolutely. I didn't even bring up the economy. What currency would this United Ireland use? You want to use another countries currency? That isn't independence, true independence.

    A big reason why the Scottish referendum is a joke and will get close to a yes vote.


  • #48
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    gallag wrote: »
    Yes, the last five years of government in the Republic of ireland.

    What's the casulty figures for those 5 years again?
    Seems to me the North only got to be a better place to live since the Irish government got involved.


  • #49
    T runner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,307 ✭✭✭T runner


    Aughrim1691. wrote: »
    I would never vote for it and the vast majority of Ulster Protestants would be the same because it goes against everything we are. It tries to set up a one identity/nationality. It sets up big government from Dublin over us, and it could harm our institutions.

    Then you have the symbolism problem which is the Tri colour would be representing the whole Island. So any time the President or Taoiseach goes abroad, he would be represented under the Tri colour. Completely neglecting a very proud people in Ulster who do not associate themselves with that flag at all.

    Also radicalism politics would finish. The likes of Sinn Fein and the DUP would be over. They would serve no other common purpose. You would have the elite politicians in the south telling us up here what to do because the majority down south would always win in a vote.

    Bad government comes from too much government. You are looking to completely change the fabric of society in a position on the Island which is just different from the rest and I think that should be accepted.

    The ironic thing is Republicans talk about radical politics but a United Ireland is not radical in the sense that it would be elitist more than ever. The idea that you could form a Socialist Irish Republic with the center of it being controlled from Dublin is not realistic and would not happen.

    And then you have the police. Do you disband the Garda? Are you going to merge the Garda with the PSNI? Would Garda be policing Protestant areas given the potential hostility?

    National flag: The national flag is defined as "the tricolour of green, white and orange" (Article 7).

    How would you go about changing that?

    The flag issue isn't that big for most people. And as much as southerners can have difficulty understanding Northern Protestant identity the opposite is also true: we identity with being Islanders, that's who we are. It doesn't matter what flag flies over public buildings or none. Our identity does not change.

    Your identity is more complex: i saw some guy interviewed at the flag protests in Belfast who said that it was another erosion of identity. And he was telling the truth. He then said "imagine how it would feel if someone restricted the tricolour...etc.". Its easy to imagine, and in all honesty we wouldn't give a fiddlers.... He assumed our identity is a mirror image of his..its not. Our identity is primarily a geographical one, not necessarily a political one.

    An all Island state would be a completely different and new state to either existing state and crucially would be agreed.

    I'm not going to guess what any agreement might entail but id imagine:
    Keeping assembly and PSNI. So no complete change to Institutions and to the fabric of current society in NI. No change except that you have a lot more say in the National Parliament.
    Sectarian politics is long gone down south. But a temporary agreement could be accommodated where 1 of the 2 main Unionist parties must be part of any ruling coalition.
    New state=new flag.
    Dual citizenship for people in NI if they choose.
    A mega referendum or new constitution required.

    These are off the top of my head, but they would be agreed and that is key. I think Ulster Protestant culture should be protected. The fact is that Protestants south of the border have been treated very well since partition (as it was in our interest to do). They have maintained their elite position pre-partition almost fully intact. Dont believe me, just ask them.


  • #50
    T runner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,307 ✭✭✭T runner


    P_1 wrote: »
    I would vote no.

    Our country is too conservative to make the Northerners want to join us. Until we become a more liberal society there is little point to the exercise.

    The liberals up there are kept down too. Maybe a new country would have to have such a broad base of agreement that liberalism and radicalism might flourish.


  • #51
    kidneyfan
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,279 ✭✭✭kidneyfan


    Why not an independent 7 county Ulster (we'll take Donegal off your hands). Nice Defend-able border. Or why not just cut Northern Ireland into a patchwork that is mixed between the UK and the Republic. Seriously there are towns in holland and belgium that are cut up like mad between the two countries.

    Have the Diamond in the UK and the Short Strand in the republic.

    What is the problem. OK in one way it intensifies sectarian division. But in another we can all just forget about it.

    What does it matter to someone in Cork if most of Coleraine is in the UK?


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    T runner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,307 ✭✭✭T runner


    kidneyfan wrote: »
    Why not an independent 7 county Ulster (we'll take Donegal off your hands). Nice Defend-able border. Or why not just cut Northern Ireland into a patchwork that is mixed between the UK and the Republic. Seriously there are towns in holland and belgium that are cut up like mad between the two countries.

    Have the Diamond in the UK and the Short Strand in the republic.

    What is the problem. OK in one way it intensifies sectarian division. But in another we can all just forget about it.

    What does it matter to someone in Cork if most of Coleraine is in the UK?

    There was only a Unionist majority in 3 Ulster counties before partition, so 6 was deemed (by Ulster Protestants) to be the maximum they could safely take.
    Cutting Ireland up has failed. Partitioning countries was popular post ww1. Partitioning an Island country into a larger mildly sectarian Catholic part and a smaller apartheid like Protestant regime was just ridiculous and shortsighted. Cutting it up again to facilitate a sectarian majority in a few counties wont happen. If Protestants become a minority in NI then its time to leave the sectarian stick down and try and strike up a relationship with the other people on this Island.

    For teh Cork man? It means that another juristiction is trading on the Island and will inevitably continue to adopt a parasytic economic position.
    It means that The island he lives on is still divided by sectarian lines well into the 21st century.


  • #53
    kidneyfan
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,279 ✭✭✭kidneyfan


    T runner wrote: »
    Partitioning countries was popular post ww1.
    Terrible how the British Isles were partitioned. Time to put that right and put the red saltire back in the front of the Union Flag.


  • #54
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    gallag wrote: »
    Thats how polls work, they cant ask everyone so they ask about 1000 people, I thought you would know this? Also, how was the question loaded? And would you agree sf seem to want the vote issue put on the back burner, why is that?

    come on gallag, you can work this out. So contrary to what you said earlier 30 per cent of SF voters didn't say anything. 30 per cent of people in a small poll said they voted Sinn Fein and then said something? Yeah, that's the same.
    The only worthwhile poll, with any credibility, is a border poll.
    As for the question, how is it not loaded. Would you vote for a reunited Ireland tomorrow?
    No debate, no information, no explanation of the issues, just expect an uninformed electorate to wake up one day and cast a vote on the biggest decision in the country's history. Pfffft.
    And no, I would not agree SF has put the border poll on the back burner at all, quite the opposite in fact. They have promoted it consistently despite this farcical poll, have challenged the Brits and unionists to stand up and defend this corrupt occupation if they believe in it so much and from what I have heard are planning to escalate the campaign in the near future.


  • #55
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    kidneyfan wrote: »
    Why not an independent 7 county Ulster (we'll take Donegal off your hands). Nice Defend-able border. Or why not just cut Northern Ireland into a patchwork that is mixed between the UK and the Republic. Seriously there are towns in holland and belgium that are cut up like mad between the two countries.

    Sure why not just go house to house. 27 Newry Road is now part of a free Ireland. 28 Newry Road remains under British control. 29 Newry road is split; upstairs is now Ireland, downstairs in Britain.


  • #56
    garhjw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,424 ✭✭✭garhjw


    I would vote NO for 2 reasons.
    1. Economically, it would be a disaster.
    2. Sinn Fein would get more votes and that would be a disaster. Their "economic policies" are ruinous.


  • #57
    Chuck Stone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,030 ✭✭✭✭Chuck Stone


    gallag wrote: »
    The united kingdom of great Britain and Ireland is the future. A United ireland back within the UK, Ireland would have its own parliament just like wales and Scotland.
    COYW wrote: »
    I agree Gallag. It is the only genuine compromise I can see.

    This is absolute fantasy. The fury that would unleash would make the troubles look like a fucking kindergarten argument.

    Never going to happen.


  • #58
    Prop Joe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,368 ✭✭✭Prop Joe


    A new currency the British & Irish Pound or something along the lines of that.Each country could have there own design.

    Also what would the flag look like,I think they should keep the same one as with the national anthem


  • #59
    Godge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    What's the casulty figures for those 5 years again?
    Seems to me the North only got to be a better place to live since the Irish government got involved.

    Seen from another vantage point, the North only got to be a better place since Sinn Fein/IRA stopped their illegal terrorist murders.


  • #60
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Godge wrote: »
    Seen from another vantage point, the North only got to be a better place since Sinn Fein/IRA stopped their illegal terrorist murders.

    If you could only see that from your vantage point then you where part of the problem.
    Life only got better for real when the British where forced to realise that the only solution was to negotiate a deal with the Irish Government, which has seen the end of the Unionist gerrymandered failure. There is just some diehard Unionists left who haven't realised that it is better.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    CelticDragon7 wrote: »
    Whether you would vote Yes or No in any such referendum, would you support that there should be a referendum on the issue of Irish unity some time in 2022?

    (2022 would be 100 years on from the effective ratification of the Anglo-Irish Treaty in 1922 and so really the defining moment for permanent partition and so surely the people voting 100 years later could settle the issue for the foreseeable future one way or the other).
    Holding a referendum in 2022 simply because it is a century since the Anglo-Irish treaty, is symbolic but also pretty daft.

    Presuming you want to want the result to support unification, there's no guarantee that there will be sufficient support for it by 2022. It may take until 2027 for that or even could happen in 2017, then fall again, as often happens with these things - yet you'll have tied yourself to a fixed date rather than a point where you have the best chance of getting the desired result.

    And if it fails what then? It's not like you can realistically do a Nice or Lisbon on it and have another referendum six months later; politically it would likely be years if not decades before you could try again. Or, given you've set a 'century precedent', one can easily argue "better luck in 2122".

    Symbolism is only of use if it sways public opinion, which would be minimal in this case IMHO. Hold a referendum when you're going to win, not because of some silly romantic anniversary.


Advertisement