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

Giving some of N.I. back to the Republic

RoyalCelt

Districts_of_Northern_Ireland_by_strength_of_religious_majority_2011.png

The greener the image is the more dominant Catholics are in the area.

First off I know nobody is going to want a major change for at least another 20 years when hopefully the ROI economy will be fairly sound again.

When it does however sort itself out the Catholic majorities in certain areas will have increased even more so why not allow certain areas to join the ROI.

Would the unionist extremists to the East really care if Fermanagh, Tyrone, half of Armagh, half of Down, most of Derry and possibly the north of Antrim leave the UK and join the Republic. That way the majority of people in the north can be relatively happy and hopefully we can move on.

Would the north be viable as a country if all those areas joined the republic? I'd imagine that's the reason the Unionists wouldn't want them going but at the same time the big money received from the UK would be used for an even smaller area possibly making up for the loss.

Thoughts?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

A. Rasher

Never going to happen, its going to have to be all or nothing.

sin_city

They'll have to have a vote. Not all Catholics would want to be part of a united Ireland.

It would be all 6 counties or none.

I think a more important thing is to get us out of the EU and to have control over 100% of our laws.

No point in swapping London rules for Brussels rules.

You know originally the unionists wanted all 9 counties of Ulster but that would have been a Catholic majority.

There were only Armagh, Down, Antrim and Derry that had unionist majorities but this would have been a state too small so Fermanagh and Tyrone were added as they were 50/50.

Mad4simmental

Give it all back

efb

Do they want the rest of ulster? And Louth?

A. Rasher

Actually, there was something I was wondering not too long ago, is there a more detailed map like the one in the OP available, going down to individual electoral areas?
Just curious really

RoyalCelt

Lads I'm deadly serious and not taking the piss. Why can't part of the north be split. Surely it's the right of people in say Fermanagh to leave the UK if they want?

RoyalCelt

A. Rasher wrote: »

Never going to happen, its going to have to be all or nothing.

Why does it have to be all or nothing? What would it matter to the hard-liners in the majority unionist areas if the majority catholic areas went back to the rebublic. Aren't they always tell them to go back to their own country anyway?

It would also give the remaining park of NI a big majority of protestants which would surely make them happy? However that there is the reason the likes of Sinn Fein would never go for something like this. They would know any hope of the rest of the north being re-united would be pretty much gone for our lifetimes at least.

Mad4simmental

Unfortunately peace will never be unless one day it is all ROI. It will always be them and us and fighting people's lives lost and family's left to pick up the peaces.

Reekwind

RoyalCelt wrote: »

Lads I'm deadly serious and not taking the piss. Why can't part of the north be split

For the same reason that the North comprised the six counties to begin with: the rump would be even less economically viable as a state. The initial proposals for the North had envisaged divorcing only the three Unionist-minority provinces from the rest of the island, something arbitrarily changed by London to provide Belfast with more territory

If a referendum were held today then I'd be confident that three, maybe four, of the counties of Ulster would rejoin Ireland. But that would leave the remainder simply too small to exist independently (even with British subsidies). So it's not in the interests of London or Belfast (or Dublin) to let that happen. Again, we have to live with old failures of British statecraft

Fratton Fred

How can you get something "back" that you never "had" in the first place?

[Deleted User]

Hi OP

You need to stop thinking in terms of religion

Latest census data showed that nearly 50% of the NI population was Catholic, but it also showed that close to 25% of the population said they were 'Irish only'

That implies that half of the catholic population may not have the affinity to the Republic that some like to think they have.

T runner

Fratton Fred wrote: »

How can you get something "back" that you never "had" in the first place?

Just pedantry. You know he means back under Irish control rather than British control. Looks like the English will be back to governing only little old Blightey in the next few decades anyway. 3rd biggest deficit in the world? I cant see NI on their books in any kind of credit sense, if at all, in 30 years.

T runner

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Hi OP

You need to stop thinking in terms of religion

Latest census data showed that nearly 50% of the NI population was Catholic, but it also showed that close to 25% of the population said they were 'Irish only'

That implies that half of the catholic population may not have the affinity to the Republic that some like to think they have.

Having affinity with an all Ireland state and having affinity with the Republic are not always the same thing.

In the aftermath of the GFA many more Catholics are using the term Northern Irish. This doesn't necessarily mean that they want NI to remain in the UK, but it offers a neutral enough identity.

Identity is complicated.
British: political: Citizen of the UK, holds a British passport.
British: geographical and/or political: all residents of the Island/Country of Great Britain inc countries Eng, Scot and Wales (not NI).
British (NI): Citizen of UK, always Protestant, Culturally British-like, complete ancestral link to the Island of Britain hugely important. Distinct and alien from "Irish Catholics" in NI or the Republic. "British" is main identity. Catholics need not apply.
British (NI-2): Citizen of UK, usually Protestant, Culturally British-like, perceived ancestral link 400 years ago to GB not as important. Room for Catholics here. N.Irish or British main identity. Many would acknowledge their Irishness, at least in the minimum Island level.
British (NI-3): Citizen of UK or resident of member country of UK. Usually Protestant, but many Catholics.
Irish: Political: Citizens of the Republic of Ireland. Includes many NI Catholics and some NI Protestants.
Irish 2: Can be Geographical and/or cultural and/or Polictical. All residents of the Island/Country of Ireland.

etc.

Remember also. All the main parties up North still think very much in terms of religion.

gallag

Why do people still think the way someone worships god will affect the way they want their country governed? Mabey a Catholic might like the NHS and the other benefits remaining part of the UK brings, also a prod might want a U.I, I think us atheists will soon be a majority so what difference will that make?

Fratton Fred

T runner wrote: »

Just pedantry. You know he means back under Irish control rather than British control. Looks like the English will be back to governing only little old Blightey in the next few decades anyway. 3rd biggest deficit in the world? I cant see NI on their books in any kind of credit sense, if at all, in 30 years.

Lol, sixth largest economy in the world and predicted to grow faster than any other major western economy. Recently voted as having global influence and expected to become the largest European economy over the next fifteen years.

let's face reality shall we, NI ain't going anywhere in the foreseeable future.

the_syco

sin_city wrote: »

They'll have to have a vote. Not all Catholics would want to be part of a united Ireland.

This. And also I wonder will Belfast be funded like Donegal if NI becomes integrated into the Republic?

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater

the_syco wrote: »

This. And also I wonder will Belfast be funded like Donegal if NI becomes integrated into the Republic?

How do you mean??

A. Rasher

gallag wrote: »

I think us atheists will soon be a majority so what difference will that make?

yeah but, are you a Protestant atheist or a Catholic atheist?

(in other words, religion can be a good indicator of cultural heritage, and most people will 'vote' (for want of a better word) the way their parents voted, and their parents before them)

Cork boy 55

A. Rasher wrote: »

Actually, there was something I was wondering not too long ago, is there a more detailed map like the one in the OP available, going down to individual electoral areas?
Just curious really

This image is from 2001 its from this thread here
http://www.politics.ie/forum/northern-ireland/128715-repartition-plan-b.html

The Bann divide

gallag

T runner wrote: »

Just pedantry. You know he means back under Irish control rather than British control. Looks like the English will be back to governing only little old Blightey in the next few decades anyway. 3rd biggest deficit in the world? I cant see NI on their books in any kind of credit sense, if at all, in 30 years.

Hang on, by this logic and with the UK having one of the strongest and fastest growing economies in the world and with Ireland not doing as well would that mean even less chance of a UI?

Reekwind

gallag wrote: »

Why do people still think the way someone worships god will affect the way they want their country governed?

Because there's a strong correlation between faith and voting patterns in NI?

sin_city

It's nothing to do with the content of the religion.

I feel Irish. Most Catholics in the north would feel Irish to some extent and the Protestants feel British as they would see themselves as coming from the stock of the plantation 400 years ago or whatever it was.

RoyalCelt

To the people saying the north wouldn't be viable if some counties broke away so what... if say Fermanagh decide they want to join the Republic, along with Derry and Tyrone what's to stop them if a majority vote for it? Isn't it their right to do so?

Also to the poster going on about not going on about religions. Religion in the north generally defines what sort of person you are... if NI is 90% atheist in 50 years the former catholics and protestants will likely still think the same.

A. Rasher

But, where would you draw the line? (pun not intended(well, maybe)) would it be the old Irish county borders, or the NI districts, or electoral wards, or house by house, field by field... you could end up with a situation like the India-Bangladesh border, where you have Indian territory inside Bangladeshi terrotory inside Indian territory...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Bangladesh_enclaves
I think that whole mess was caused by a game of chess, (not figuratively speaking, an actual game of chess)

Its only ever going to be NI as a whole voting on this,

buyer95

A. Rasher wrote: »

But, where would you draw the line?

That would be an ecumenical matter.

RoyalCelt

Well a county like Fermanagh would be fairly simple and could be moved over fairly simply. Not saying the people want it to happen but if they did why not?

sawdoubters

we are all united Europe now Germany and france control us

http://www.social-europe.eu/2013/03/germany-has-created-an-accidental-empire/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2292401/Could-Germany-spark-war-I-fear-possible-says-Dominic-Sandbrook.html

Reekwind

RoyalCelt wrote: »

To the people saying the north wouldn't be viable if some counties broke away so what... if say Fermanagh decide they want to join the Republic, along with Derry and Tyrone what's to stop them if a majority vote for it? Isn't it their right to do so?

I fully agree. The point is that that sort of self-determination will never be permitted precisely because it undermines the viability of the North. Which neither Belfast or London want

It's not a matter that the North can't be split but that it won't be split

Manach

If we truly wished to undermine Ulster we'd just need to gift them Leinster House and the inmates therein.

Cork boy 55

A. Rasher wrote: »

But, where would you draw the line? (pun not intended(well, maybe)) would it be the old Irish county borders, or the NI districts, or electoral wards, or house by house, field by field... you could end up with a situation like the India-Bangladesh border, where you have Indian territory inside Bangladeshi terrotory inside Indian territory...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Bangladesh_enclaves
I think that whole mess was caused by a game of chess, (not figuratively speaking, an actual game of chess)

Its only ever going to be NI as a whole voting on this,

The Bann line offers a neat Geographic solution form a geographic point of view Bann-neagh-bann-Mournes

IMO a Territorial-constitutional solution would have been better than current constitutional solution to the conflict around the current pale

Re-partition + full guaranteed civil rights for both communities left on both sides of new line of control of the pale, Thus creating a smaller pale with
a large Loyalist population thus freezing the conflict.
Voluntary compensated population swaps would be the final phase
I imagine the only people moving would be the die hards and numbers would be in the tens of thousands not hundreds of thousands.
population swaps and movements are a regular part of conflict resolution in history.
They can be bloody and chaotic and unfair but they can also be peaceful well organised well conducted and fair. I am talking about swaps now not mass expulsions. A property for a property of same value.

If the pale of NI had been smaller to begin with there properly would not have been much violence