Giving some of N.I. back to the Republic

Mr Cumulonimbus wrote: »

Post #256:

You do understand that the expression "very few to none" does not actually mean 'none' - unless you choose to ignore the other three words.

So are there very few to no commonalities with the English & Scots too?

There's probably more between the Scots and English, than southern and northern Irish, as they have significantly more points of reference, but yes - ultimately the cultural relationship between them, would not be dissimilar as ours would be to them.

England v Ireland in the rugby this Saturday? Not noticeable? Quite......

I think you'll find that there's lots of people who don't notice rugby. Same with GAA. Or cricket (one which I note you omitted). If you're relying on sport as your sole binding force in a nation, you're going to have a bit of a problem there.

Most people north & south speak English as their first language. It's only one example of a commonality. But because it's only one, is it also insignificant?

And English is also the language of... England. And we both watch both the Premier league. Should we rejoin the union? By your logic there's certainly a rational for doing so.

Please read what I've actually, repeatedly written on this. Your average Joe in NI has grown up with a different educational system, currency, economy, politics and political parties, social welfare system and even traditions than a southerner. They had World War II - we had 'the Emergency'. They had 'the Troubles' we, basically didn't. They have a different demographic mix; they even have protestants; we got rid of most of ours in the 1930's.

Many of the things they've grown up with bare closer similarity to other UK citizens than to us. There's a few nationalistic aspirations based upon stuff that happened a long time ago all right, but that's an aspiration, not something in common. There's a few north-south initiatives, such as the GAA too. Indeed another thing that we had in common was UTV and BBC Northern Ireland (unless you were unlucky to grow up in the south east, in which case you got the Welsh channels).

But I use the Euro and before that the Punt. I have to pay for my medical care and dentists through the nose. I did the Leaving Cert and had to learn Irish, because without it I couldn't get into most universities here. Since the nineties at least, I've been able to drink in a pub after 11pm and shops have always been able to open on Sundays. We had Quinnsworth and Superquinn growing up (although, now we all must bow to the almighty Tesco) For me a parade is something they have on Paddy's day. I've never seen a machine gun wielded on the streets in my home town.

And that's the thing; it would be nice if we were the same, but we're not. Certainly while neither is a Kerryman to a Dub, the difference it tiny when compared to either that Kerryman or Dub to some bloke in Belfast, or Ballymena or Coleraine.

Whether this is because of nearly a century of partition or because we were always different (even prior to partition 'ulster' was a bit of a special case), doesn't really matter any more, it just is, and grasping at straws and pretending we're all one happy nation because the have a few things in common, and frankly not many more than we have with the other British nations, is pretty delusional.

The Corinthian wrote: »

You failed to cite, rebut or even mention anything I said in my post. Instead you attacked me directly, claiming that anything I said was clearly because my "experiences with people from the north are very limited". And that was the height of your arguments, not that you wrote much, against anything I wrote.

Attack the post, not the poster - as the expression goes - and you only did the latter.

Well I thought it would clearly relate to the point in this quoted text "almost southerners have common cultural points of reference with each other when we mix - politics, education, economics, and so on - we've very few to none with nordies". If you believe this then I would assume you know relatively few people from the North

The Corinthian wrote: »

You do understand that the expression "very few to none" does not actually mean 'none' - unless you choose to ignore the other three words.

I genuinely don't want to turn this into a discussion on it's own. I just think you shouldn't have used the term 'none' tbh.

There's probably more between the Scots and English, than southern and northern Irish, as they have significantly more points of reference, but yes - ultimately the cultural relationship between them, would not be dissimilar as ours would be to them.

What areas are covered by the term 'cultural relationship' by your understanding of it?

I think you'll find that there's lots of people who don't notice rugby. Same with GAA.

But many do notice or follow them all the same.

Or cricket (one which I note you omitted).

Not intentionally I assure you. An all-Ireland body administers it too, with players from both north & south (Kevin & Niall O'Brien from Dublin) on the team. I watch it now and again, plus a great win over the Windies last night too.

If you're relying on sport as your sole binding force in a nation, you're going to have a bit of a problem there.

I'm not simultaneously denying that there are divergent forces too.

And English is also the language of... England. And we both watch both the Premier league. Should we rejoin the union? By your logic there's certainly a rational for doing so.

I personally have no urge to do the bit in bold, despite speaking English and watching the PL. As a rationale I think thats a very weak argument.

There's a few north-south initiatives, such as the GAA too. Indeed another thing that we had in common was UTV and BBC Northern Ireland (unless you were unlucky to grow up in the south east, in which case you got the Welsh channels).

Charles Rocher listed the following in addition to sport:

'RTE (broadcast in the north now), music, dance, language (both English and Irish), literature, film/TV, etc etc.'

Since leisure time, as well as work, is important to people north and south, we have alot of commonality in this area don't you think?

And that's the thing; it would be nice if we were the same, but we're not. Certainly while neither is a Kerryman to a Dub, the difference it tiny when compared to either that Kerryman or Dub to some bloke in Belfast, or Ballymena or Coleraine.

As opposed to people in Lifford and Strabane, Blacklion and Belcoo, Crossmaglen and Dundalk, Derry and Donegal?

pretending we're all one happy nation because the have a few things in common, and frankly not many more than we have with the other British nations

Not pretending at all, and definitely not as regards to 'one happy nation'.

The Corinthian wrote: »

Did the satellite view of Europe I rebutted with not register with you? How by the same logic, Europe should not have any 'imaginary' borders either?

Who said there shouldn't be borders? Again you attribute an argument to me I have not made - I'm losing count as to how many times you've done this and how often I've asked you to stop and, frankly, it's boring having to wade through.

No one has every suggested that heterogeneity is observable at an imaginary line, and already I pointed out that simelar 'blurring' occurs at national borders elsewhere; that's how national boundaries work.

You specifically said the two populations and used the imaginary line as a delineator - I've shown this idea that there are two species on either side of the border to absolute rubbish.

I'm done here except to say your two piece, two colour jigsaw concept of the people of Ireland is evidence only of your poor understanding and prejudices.

Mr Cumulonimbus wrote: »

I genuinely don't want to turn this into a discussion on it's own. I just think you shouldn't have used the term 'none' tbh.

Fair enough.

What areas are covered by the term 'cultural relationship' by your understanding of it?

I listed out a whole ream of examples. ancapailldorcha even cited them.

But many do notice or follow them all the same.

Yes, I understand that; I was pointing out that it is a weak example. Other than being one of the few, and simelar examples existing that could apply to our cultural affinity with the English, for example, it also is nowhere near universal. A weak example.

I'm not simultaneously denying that there are divergent forces too.

A lie of omission is still a lie; you're avoiding any mention of such forces and have been going to pains to only cite the similarities. That's a bias meant to mislead through omission, I'm afraid. At least I admit there are similarities; my argument is that they're too few or frankly not significantly much more than for any other nation in the UK.

I personally have no urge to do the bit in bold, despite speaking English and watching the PL. As a rationale I think thats a very weak argument.

But the problem is that the arguments you've used, showing how the populations north and south are simelar, can also be applied to England. You may not have any urge, but look at all we have in common with the English using the same logic as you've used for the nordies. Not a Hell of a difference, TBH.

Charles Rocher listed the following in addition to sport:

Sure; music, dance, language (both English and Irish), literature, film/TV, etc etc... and stuff... Actually, when they make Irish obligatory in school then I might take his point a little more seriously.

As opposed to people in Lifford and Strabane, Blacklion and Belcoo, Crossmaglen and Dundalk, Derry and Donegal?

So, the whole of Ireland has to unite with them, because the border areas are not unalike them? Bit daft.

Not pretending at all, and definitely not as regards to 'one happy nation'.

I think you are pretending, or in denial. We realistically stopped being one nation a good few years ago. You might disagree, but in my experience, this would be for ideological rather than practical reasons.

Charles Rocher wrote: »

You specifically said the two populations and used the imaginary line as a delineator - I've shown this idea that there are two species on either side of the border to absolute rubbish.

Then the Germans and French are not different peoples? After all, you've never claimed there shouldn't be borders and seeing as you never commented on my European satellite photo (avoided doing so), you must concur there too.

That's why your satellite photo was so laughable.

I'm done here except to say your two piece, two colour jigsaw concept of the people of Ireland is evidence only of your poor understanding and prejudices.

Or your blinkered 'nation once again' concept is little more than a romantic aspiration that is at best woefully out of date and at worst the dangerous delusion of a fanatic.

The Corinthian wrote: »

I listed out a whole ream of examples. ancapailldorcha even cited them.

So what examples are you using to support the following statement:

There's probably more between the Scots and English, than southern and northern Irish, as they have significantly more points of reference, but yes - ultimately the cultural relationship between them, would not be dissimilar as ours would be to them.

A weak example.

It's not weak when thousands throughout this island follow these sports.

A lie of omission is still a lie; you're avoiding any mention of such forces and have been going to pains to only cite the similarities. That's a bias meant to mislead through omission

You do remember what it was I originally disagreed with you about, don't you?

But the problem is that the arguments you've used, showing how the populations north and south are simelar, can also be applied to England. You may not have any urge, but look at all we have in common with the English using the same logic as you've used for the nordies. Not a Hell of a difference, TBH.

I've never used my argument in this thread as a basis for any sort of political launching pad, plus neither have I said it applies exclusively to this island.

Sure; music, dance, language (both English and Irish), literature, film/TV, etc etc... and stuff...

They are commonalities.

Actually, when they make Irish obligatory in school

Where?

So, the whole of Ireland has to unite with them, because the border areas are not unalike them?

Again you're attributing stuff to me I haven't said.

I think you are pretending, or in denial.

Nope. It's your artful interpretation of my posts thats stands out more.

We realistically stopped being one nation a good few years ago.

Nation versus state. Are they one and the same in an Irish context?

You might disagree, but in my experience, this would be for ideological rather than practical reasons.

Once again, looking for things I haven't said.