Northern Ireland- a failure 99 years on?

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yep, could go with that no problem. What would be critically important for any integrity would be that it is under the control of and answerable to the new government and not separate in anyway.

Of course, as usual, downcow won't elaborate on what Unionists are planning on doing that would require a separate police force. But that is the way things go around here.

P.S. As an Ulsterman I would object to being policed by somebody wearing a crown as an emblem, but if compromise had to made I could live with it.

A crown in a republic?

In historical instances where entities predate the state, like the RCSI etc, there are no issues with symbolism. But to have a crown in a new entity as a sop to Unionists is anathema. So no.

Symbols are important and it is important to avoid separatism at all costs.

AGS regions should cross traditional boundaries as they do now to avoid this.

BonnieSituation wrote: »

A crown in a republic?

In historical instances where entities predate the state, like the RCSI etc, there are no issues with symbolism. But to have a crown in a new entity as a sop to Unionists is anathema. So no.

Symbols are important and it is important to avoid separatism at all costs.

AGS regions should cross traditional boundaries as they do now to avoid this.

Yes, I can see how it would be anathema to some, but personally symbolism has never bothered me, nor flags or anthems.
The attachment to flags and symbols is ridiculous here.
I'd prefer a functioning island wide police force TBH and I think that should be the primary concern of any democrat..

I think the regional workaround proposed by Tom should be enough but if Unionists need a win so be it.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

First George Osbourne pointing at belligerent Unionism now the Financial Times has a go. Arlene on Question Time tonight with Brandon Lewis, should be fun.




https://www.ft.com/content/b596905e-9878-433d-9516-181e2432e4ee

A great article. Thanks for that. I have circulated around unionist friends.
Fits with what unionist are saying. The dup won’t be forgiven by many and hopefully will get hammered at the next election.

Here’s some of the stuff I enjoyed most from your link

“ The arc of history may bend towards reunification but it can be very long. Polling does not suggest a majority in the province for a united Ireland. It also shows deeper ties, such as attachment to the UK’s NHS.”

“ There is a better way: making the “best of both worlds” argument for the Union, which the province’s hybrid state allows.
Staving off reunification means not forcing a choice. It means easing tensions, not provoking them. It lies in retaining younger moderate Protestants and peeling the nonaligned from the nationalist cause. It means winning back people in those east Belfast coffee shops, who look at Britain and Ireland and see modern liberal economies and are repelled by the sectarianism and conservatism of older unionists.
Although the long term drift is towards reunification, a hybrid state could last longer than many imagine. But this demands a shrewd unionist leadership.”

Great stuff. A rise in uup and alliance vote is excellent for the union and I believe strongly that will happen at next election.

downcow wrote: »

A great article. Thanks for that. I have circulated around unionist friends.
Fits with what unionist are saying. The dup won’t be forgiven by many and hopefully will get hammered at the next election.

Here’s some of the stuff I enjoyed most from your link

“ The arc of history may bend towards reunification but it can be very long. Polling does not suggest a majority in the province for a united Ireland. It also shows deeper ties, such as attachment to the UK’s NHS.”

“ There is a better way: making the “best of both worlds” argument for the Union, which the province’s hybrid state allows.
Staving off reunification means not forcing a choice. It means easing tensions, not provoking them. It lies in retaining younger moderate Protestants and peeling the nonaligned from the nationalist cause. It means winning back people in those east Belfast coffee shops, who look at Britain and Ireland and see modern liberal economies and are repelled by the sectarianism and conservatism of older unionists.
Although the long term drift is towards reunification, a hybrid state could last longer than many imagine. But this demands a shrewd unionist leadership.”

Great stuff. A rise in uup and alliance vote is excellent for the union and I believe strongly that will happen at next election.

The DUP types are just going to disappear and fade to black in the background?

What convinces you that Unionism is 'shrewd'?

And what convinces you that the Alliance will not plump to re-enter the EU at the first chance given?

downcow wrote: »

I am pleased to see sf do an about turn (pardon the pun) on the military helping out in hospitals.
Tbh I have also been surprised and disappointed at those questioning it. UNISON union were quick off the mark last night to condemn it. They are back paddling hard today as members have started transferring to other unions.
People Before Profit were a disgrace on the radio this morning also opposed to it. The interviewer was aghast that they were preferring paying private health care providers as opposed to bringing army in.

Logical move and glad sf have came on board, if a little late. Lives have been lost because of sf earlier resistance.
I was very happy to have help from Roi ambulances and if their army wants to help they will be very welcome.

EDIT. Unison now say the do not oppose army coming in and that they made a big mistake last night

you are pleased to see SF being progressive and not living in the past. maybe Unionism could learn from that

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Hi downcow,

Did you find that post where I stated that Unionism must be faced down?

You've had a fair few days now.

Shouldn't be too hard.

Thanks.

I have posted it for you and I won’t be playing your games

jm08 wrote: »

Its not in unionists hands either. You seem to just ignore that the soon to be majority of nationalists/republicans in NI have as much say (and soon to be more) in this as unionists.

This is not correct. There might be more nationalists/republicans than unionists. But that is not what will determine NI's future. The swing vote is what would might call the Statusquoists. Which while far from seeing eye to eye with unionists nevertheless will have them vote together and a comfortable majority over the nats/reps. It is these statusquoists that have had their position copperfastened by the Brexit deal which turbocharges the

"There is a better way: making the “best of both worlds” argument for the Union, which the province’s hybrid state allows.
Staving off reunification means not forcing a choice. It means easing tensions, not provoking them."

tendency.

BonnieSituation wrote: »

You didn't.

Please link me to it.

Thanks. If not please retract your assertion and lies.

No intentions of either. Not playing your silly games

Congratulations resident Unionists and Parititionistas, you have developed an understanding of what's known as 'playing the long game'. The DUP saw an opportunity to halt the soft unification of Ireland and they were faced down.

This soft unification of Ireland will continue apace now that the northeast's economy will be stitched into the rest of Ireland via being locked in to the EU Customs Union. The idea of reimposing a British frontier in Ireland is history.

As I mentioned earlier in the thread to DC, the very best Unionists can hope for now is to slow down the official ending of British jurisdiction.

ittakestwo wrote: »

The rest of the UK subsidies NI by €10bn eacy year but they can't even take full control over NI. This must really irritate London. It must have dawned on everyone following Brexit, what a **** deal the UK actually gets with NI. They have to pay the way for the most unprofitable part of Ireland to a level that the south probably couldn't even afford yet in some respects the UK cant act unilaterally or with full sovereignty because of the fact there is an Irish nation of people living within the UK who cant be separated from the rest in the ROI. Further more with the rise of nationalism in England alot don't even see NI as part of thier nation.

If the UK was the United Kingdom of Great Britain it would be €10bn a year better of and be able to act completely sovereign and not have to deal with the irish problem.

A lot of nationalists who are not to hung up on identity might not even want to change the status quo. They are Irish and can't be separated from any other part of Ireland while also being given a massive boost from the south east English tax payer who seem to have no way of ridding themselves of this problem.

If you think nations can be looked at as the sum of the monetary transactions between the regions comprising them, then you know nothing of nations, and even less of Northern Ireland.

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

If you think nations can be looked at as the sum of the monetary transactions between the regions comprising them, then you know nothing of nations, and even less of Northern Ireland.

NI isn't a nation.

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

If you think nations can be looked at as the sum of the monetary transactions between the regions comprising them, then you know nothing of nations, and even less of Northern Ireland.

Thought you and downcow had decided NI was a region.

AngeloArgue wrote: »

The idea that changing demographics in Northern Ireland are going to inevitably lead to a united Ireland is far from certain. At least at anytime in the near future. Who knows what it will be like in 50 years?

When asked the question straight without linking it with other conditions such as Brexit, Northern Catholics do not en masse support it. Polls typically show support varies when asked the question straight between 25-35%.

Another thing is that as the social status of Catholics improves their rates of birth reduces. We are also seeing substantial population growth from immigrant backgrounds from outside of Europe who may prefer the status quo.

Even if nationalist parties become the majority they are still obliged to power share and they are still obliged to respect the present constitutional status unless the people decide otherwise in a referendum which I believe a sizeable number of Catholics will not support.

Interesting post. I still think the United Ireland people are looking at the whole situation through rose tinted specs as I am not aware of any polling showing a majority within NI favouring unification. From recollection a very large minority (something like 40%+) of Catholics favour the status quo citing the NHS as a major factor in their thinking. So what'll happen if ye get your referendum and you lose it? Is there any room for that eventuality in people's thinking? Not seeing it. I'd be a soft republican myself in that I have no interest in forcing a bunch of people up north into a country that I still believe they don't want to be part of. If they change their minds that's their business and I'll welcome it but I don't see it happening. The numbers, no matter how you wish it, just aren't there especially as wealthier and better educated Catholics' reproduction rates fall.

The thread headline asks the question is Northern Ireland a failure 99 years on ?
To anybody that ever goes up there it soon becomes obvious its a complete basket case.
Virtually ungovernable. Loads of areas where no regard for law or order.
No Industry to really talk about.
The most dodge people award in the whole of Ireland goes to people from Tyrone.
Be wary of Tyrone people.