Sinn fein- the new nazi party?

monument

Originally posted by earwicker
It has for the most part been endorsed by the major players. It is not without difficulties regarding its implementation, but at least it has the merit of being a realworld attempt at a solution.

And their I was thinking there is massive problems with the GFA, that one major player is not endorsing it, and that it is stalled.... how wrong I most be.

Originally posted by earwicker
Anyway, it doesn't seem like we'll agree on this, so feel free not to respond.

That sums up NI politics well.

bus77

Originally posted by The Corinthian
What I put down to racism is the need to judge others based upon their ethnic background, such as the one you’re repeatedly demonstrated. You don’t even deny it.

You’ll note I never called you a Fascist. Neither have I claimed Sinn Fein are racist. I’ve only called you racist as you’ve demonstrated racist beliefs in this thread.

Basicly this was the course of events (in my head)...

I took your use of the word "Fascist"(I now understand it's idelology) to simply meen "Persuit of power/Racisim" and then "National Militarism" to meen you were trying to sum up the north/Sinn Fein In a sort of Nazi/Racist plot.

I was basicly trying to make you see the Ideology of the Nationalisim side of things by useing historical perspective only, and then getting pissed off and going deeper when you started calling me a racist.

damn it :mad:

Ahh It's not all bad though, I think I have the Americans sussed now (something about a Magic, sometimes fascist kingdom:D)

The Corinthian

Originally posted by bus77
I took your use of the word "Fascist"(I now understand it's idelology) to simply meen "Persuit of power/Racisim" and then "National Militarism" to meen you were trying to sum up the north/Sinn Fein In a sort of Nazi/Racist plot.

Actually I actually rejected that for SF (or any other group) to be Fascist it also need be racist - of course that’s not to say that the two are exclusive either, just that they are not necessarily and inextricably linked. Militant nationalism is something I did bring up with respect to both SF and Fascism, but that’s because both either actively peruse or condone it.

Nonetheless, until you brought it up, I don’t think I ever mentioned Fascism in response to your posts.

I was basicly trying to make you see the Ideology of the Nationalisim side of things by useing historical perspective only, and then getting pissed off and going deeper when you started calling me a racist.

The kernel of your argument boiled down to a historical justification for judging an entire ethnic group. This is a classic rationalization of race theory - the classification of a racial or ethnic group based upon history or pseudo-science.

Ahh It's not all bad though, I think I have the Americans sussed now (something about a Magic, sometimes fascist kingdom:D)

I think I’m beginning like you now. You remind me of when I was young and stupid.

earwicker

Originally posted by monument
And their I was thinking there is massive problems with the GFA, that one major player is not endorsing it, and that it is stalled.... how wrong I most be.

Indeed. You seem to think that I don't believe there are problems with the GFA. I never said it was perfect. I have been discussing the problems with it in this thread. I also said that it had problems with implementation. I don't get the point you are trying to make.

The GFA is, however, in place and has the majority of popular support. Tossing it out in favour of a half-baked idea of independence seems overly idealistic, precipitous and dangerous to me. Your negativity regarding the GFA also seems defeatist. It has not stalled completely. SF are communicating with the DUP, and the consensus view is that devolution seems now to be within striking distance. Should the process be thrown away then because the DUP and their supporters-- 25.71% of the population of NI-- disagree with it?

An odd understanding of the principle of consent.

<edit for clarity>

pdh

Yea, I support them, however I am getting a bit concerned that they are watering down republican socialist principles to gain popular support.

Will just have to keep a closer eye on them

monument

An independent state would be full devolution.

Leaving out the both paths - staying in the Union, or joining the Republic - which are *open* as options, the GFA could run its course, at which point an independent state *could* be another option.

It my view it could possible be a more democratic option, where the state is of the people of NI, not the Republic or the UK. A state where the current feeling of one group of people who do not want to be living under a UK government (or “under their flag”), is not just transferred to another group, who do not want to live under the Republic state.

As for consent – I don’t really know why you’re going on about it, as I haven’t said there is even one single person in NI that wants an independent state – but two main groups who are single-minded about wanting to be apart of two different states – rather then wanting a state of all the people of NI.

In addition – yes this idea of an independent state is probably overly idealistic. However, only dangerous to those who are single-minded about being “British” or “Irish”, nationalism based on race (culture, or religion) is the real dangerous thing in NI.

earwicker

Originally posted by monument

As for consent – I don’t really know why you’re going on about it, as I haven’t said there is even one single person in NI that wants an independent state – but two main groups who are single-minded about wanting to be apart of two different states – rather then wanting a state of all the people of NI.

In addition – yes this idea of an independent state is probably overly idealistic. However, only dangerous to those who are single-minded about being “British” or “Irish”, nationalism based on race (culture, or religion) is the real dangerous thing in NI.

If no one wants it, then why are you arguing for it? Even though I may recognize the frustration that gives rise to it, I've been disagreeing with the hypothetical because it often translates into doing nothing now.

But I'm glad we agree it is overly idealistic. And when I say its dangerous, I simply mean that no-one signed on to an agreement which asked them to shed their historical traditions and identifications. Under these current conditions, the implementation of an independent NI state would have no popular support, would be immesely problematic, and would have the effect of radicalizing and further entrenching both sides.

Looking away down the road at a possible independent NI state is all well and good. I probably might even agree with you. However, it does nothing in the here and now where sectarian divisions and identifications still exist and still reproduce themselves.

And, for what it's worth, doing something here and now is, to me anyhow, the most responsible and best course of action. That's why despite my reservations I think sticking with the GFA is the best option.

monument

Originally posted by earwicker
That's why despite my reservations I think sticking with the GFA is the best option.

I never said not to, in fact I said an independent state could be an another option after the GFA runs its course.

As for sectarian divisions and 'identifications', they are the very reason the middle ground of an independent state is better then nationalism based on race (culture, or religion) - a goverment for everyone of NI, not one side or the other...

Personally do *you* think that would be better?

earwicker

Originally posted by monument
I never said not to, in fact I said an independent state could be an another option after the GFA runs its course.

As for sectarian divisions and 'identifications', they are the very reason the middle ground of an independent state is better then nationalism based on race (culture, or religion) - a goverment for everyone of NI, not one side or the other...

Personally do *you* think that would be better?

I'm still not sure what you mean by "after the GFA runs its course." I'd be more concerned with getting it to the point where it can run its course.

As to your last question: Do I think a state can/ should transcend sectarianism and accommodate other cultures/ ethnicities? Yes. Should the state and church be separate? Yes. That said, this shouldn't have to mean that everyone has to live in a place where people can't identify with a background without being labelled racist or [insert slur here].

I think the point with respect to the current situation (and this to me is the thing of paramount importance here: to ignore it is plain silly) in the North, however, is that devolution needs to happen and there needs to be a fair representation of all parties.

Until the majority says otherwise, I accept that NI is the UK. In the future should the majority consent to join a properly secular Republic, I'd welcome them. If, in the far, far distant future, the majority decide to become a separate state, or the 51st state, my faded ghost will have to live with that too.

monument

I’m afraid I am going to push for an answer on this one… (keep in mind you have said what you’d accept, now I want to know what you’d think as better…)

Personally which do *you* think would be better (a) an independent NI, (b) NI as a UK region, (c) NI as a ROI region?

earwicker

It's pretty obvious what I think. The people of NI are the ones to make the decision.

<edit for clarity>

monument

Thet's very nice - but I asked you which do you personally think would be better, not what way you think it should come about.

So, which would you pick?

(a) an independent NI
(b) NI as a UK region
(c) NI as a ROI region

earwicker

Originally posted by monument
Thet's very nice - but I asked you which do you personally think would be better, not what way you think it should come about.

So, which would you pick?

(a) an independent NI
(b) NI as a UK region
(c) NI as a ROI region

Again, it's pretty obvious what I think.

I disagreed with your utopia, and I am not a unionist. Clear enough?

<edit for sleepy typos>

Mighty_Mouse

D)Ulster returned as part of the republic. A 32 county Ireland in which unionist culture is welcomed as much as nationalist culture. I think c could be a step towards the ultimate though

(c) NI as a ROI region

bus77

Originally posted by monument
(c) NI as a ROI region

But in another 30 years till this EU stuff takes hold.

The Corinthian

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
D)Ulster returned as part of the republic. A 32 county Ireland in which unionist culture is welcomed as much as nationalist culture. I think c could be a step towards the ultimate though

How can unionist culture be welcomed in the Republic? By definition it wishes to remain in the Union - hint: the name gives it away.

Having read through some of the reactions of self-professed nationalists in this thread, I would also have to say were I a unionist, or even protestant, I would be very sceptical of such a welcome.

After all neither side appears to be open to compromise at all. Unionists may continually reject any ‘hands of friendship’ but at the same time Nationalists appear to only want unification in only a republic, on their terms (and those are terms that those of us from the south mightn’t like either, BTW).

An interesting compromise that was mooted years ago (it might have been Conor Cruise O’Brien) was unification, but for Ireland to join the commonwealth. Nationalists immediately rejected this - yet expect unionists to compromise and accept cross border influence instead?

All very depressing, but hardly surprising. After all, when was the last time you heard a rebel or loyalist song about peaceful co-existence?

The Corinthian

Originally posted by bus77
But in another 30 years till this EU stuff takes hold.

Ironically, European unification may be the only even vaguely peaceful solution to the whole damned mess.

thejollyrodger

Mary Lou was easily the most attractive looking of the EU candidates.

Ugh.. she is ugly !! puke

I would never vote for Sinn Fein since they are a maffia terrorist organistion

Mighty_Mouse

How can unionist culture be welcomed in the Republic?

So nationalists in northern Ireland either; do not have a culture or have an unwelcomed one?

Having read through some of the reactions of self-professed nationalists in this thread, I would also have to say were I a unionist, or even protestant, I would be very sceptical of such a welcome.

The northern ireland peace process is still in very early stages but I think everyone has to hope for a time where the vast majority of both communities feel comfortable working peacefully together and have nothing to fear from each other. ie. things like cross community work, a community-wide acceptable police force in existance for say 10years, a history of joint decision making between cultures, north-south/north-uk permanent mechanisms, joint community schools/universitys/social centres and steps towards integrated housing etc etc etc ...........IMO will all contribute to a huge drop in the aminosity between both sides.

When this happens, if unionism have a right to most orange-order parades (in acceptable areas), right to have union-jack displayed, right to choose "god save the queen", maybe even government funding for traditional unionist practices such as lambeg drumming etc etc then what would unionists have to fear from joining a united Ireland?

ps. will also make sense economically at some stage in the future as the northern economy becomes more and more self-sufficient.

Meh

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
When this happens, if unionism have a right to most orange-order parades (in acceptable areas), right to have union-jack displayed, right to choose "god save the queen", maybe even government funding for traditional unionist practices such as lambeg drumming etc etc then what would unionists have to fear from joining a united Ireland?

If nationalists have a right to fly the tricolor, march in Easter Rising commemorative parades, government funding for traditional nationalist practices like the GAA and the Irish language, anti-discrimination legislation, fair employment laws etc. then what do nationalists have to fear from staying in the UK? What's sauce for the goose...

The Corinthian

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
So nationalists in northern Ireland either; do not have a culture or have an unwelcomed one?

I never said unionists were any better in this regard.

When this happens, if unionism have a right to most orange-order parades (in acceptable areas), right to have union-jack displayed, right to choose "god save the queen", maybe even government funding for traditional unionist practices such as lambeg drumming etc etc then what would unionists have to fear from joining a united Ireland?

Perhaps in time, but certainly not if some of the views that have been expressed towards the ‘descendants of foreign settlers’ in this thread remain.

Mighty_Mouse

then what do nationalists have to fear from staying in the UK? What's sauce for the goose...

Because fundamentally ulster is part of Ireland and the north is and always will be only a stepping stone to Irish independance.

Perhaps in time, but certainly not if some of the views that have been expressed towards the ‘descendants of foreign settlers’ in this thread remain.

War entrenches views and opinions but people have short memories and therefore I really think were gonna see massive changes in the next 20 years.

Tusky

C - anything else is a disgrace

Meh

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
Because fundamentally ulster is part of Ireland and the north is and always will be only a stepping stone to Irish independance.

The unionists could just as validly argue that fundamentally Ireland is part of the UK and the republic is only a temporary stage on the road to a full union of the British Isles. Why should we believe you over them?

The Corinthian

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
Because fundamentally ulster is part of Ireland and the north is and always will be only a stepping stone to Irish independance.

First you you give us the following entrenched view...

War entrenches views and opinions but people have short memories and therefore I really think were gonna see massive changes in the next 20 years.

...and follow it up with this. Pot. Kettle. Black?

Mighty_Mouse

The unionists could just as validly argue that fundamentally Ireland is part of the UK and the republic is only a temporary stage on the road to a full union of the British Isles. Why should we believe you over them?

Well your argument that the republic of ireland is a temporary state "on the way towards" a complete united kingdom seems a little radical to be honest. It kinda flys in the face of everything we know about the Irish english conflict (especially in the last 100 years).

So the english actually signed over the free-state as a step towards taking it back........hhhhmmmmm....interesting!:dunno:

DublinWriter

The older I get, the less reason I can see for NI being part of the ROI.

Call me a heretic, but bascially what's so great about having a 32 county state?

Will it make you sleep easier in your bed at night?

The whole 'Brits Out' philosophy makes me laugh. The Brits would pay BIG money to get out of NI, one of the least productive and most resource hungry regions of the UK.

The reason NI isn't part of the ROI is because there's roughly 600,000 people up there with other ideas about what country they want to belong to.

The other reason is because the Brits know that if they pulled out that it would make Kosovo look like a tea-party.

I also love the way most Nationalists naively view Unionists as basically misguided Irish people.

As long as basic human rights aren't being abused, I don't see a problem what state a person belongs to.

The whole arguement about it preserving Irish culture is a complete non-starter too, considering that only 5% of us actually speak our native language, no-body has actually read Ulysses, most of us work for foreign multi-nationals and we all watch Sky Sports.

earwicker

Originally posted by The Corinthian
Ironically, European unification may be the only even vaguely peaceful solution to the whole damned mess.

I agree with this.

On a related note, and this is really more of a general observation on some of the response on the thread rather than picking on any one poster: it's interesting that a certain proportion of the response to the North tends toward the negative and jaded. For every "nationalists are..." type statement there is a counter "unionists are..." type of statement. I worry that this tends to produce a type of quietism, because any statement is seemingly opposed (a priori you could almost say) by its polar opposite accusing the original of racism. And so it goes. It all speaks of defeatism and is not surprising. And I'm not blaming anyone for feeling this way.

But, surely there is still a way to express an opinion regarding what one believes to be the best course of action, and then trying to win people over/ persuade them (campaign--Shock!--in other words) that an idea or particular course of action is of benefit without it being swallowed in general negative and debilitating responses. For example, I can have a conviction regarding any issue and I can express it without being drowned in an argument that simply tars me as a racist or as someone who advocates ethnic cleansing.

Surely if I believe that I can offer something to the protestant population (not all are unionist, btw) that they will embrace (a say in a secularized, multicultural, modern, stable, properous republic) is it inherently wrong of me to do so because someone can point out to me that a hard-line minority will refuse? And we can look at it the opposite way as well (being part of the UK, etc). If the same criteria were applied to any other issue, we'd quickly see the absurdity. The point being that so long as we treat even the voicing of these issues to the negativity of paralyzing "X will refuse" (X may well refuse, but debate may change their minds) type statements, how can any movement/ change at all be possible?

As I say this negativity fascinates me. Sometimes I see it as a way of silencing everyone who tries to express a view. I'm not sure what's to be gained from this except maintaining a sort of "decorum" where controversial things aren't discussed. Other times I see it as a sort of dangerous defeatism that lets the extremes set the agenda. Still other times I see it as being the product of a well-meaning idealistic wish for peace that tends to offer solutions that have little to do with current political realities, something that has the same effect as defeatism. Debate in such a situation is made very difficult.

Anyway those are my random thoughts on some general trends I see in the thread.

So, not to be negative I'll say that the good thing about this thread is that it still proves debate is possible, even if some of it can be a little knee-jerky and negative.

<edit for typos>

DublinWriter

Originally posted by The Corinthian
Ironically, European unification may be the only even vaguely peaceful solution to the whole damned mess.

Yes, and we all know just how much the UK wants to embrace Europe.

Actually, the only solution to this is to invent a time machine, go back in time, and somehow prevent the plantation of Ulster.

All else is conjecture and word-play.

earwicker

Originally posted by DublinWriter
Actually, the only solution to this is to invent a time machine, go back in time, and somehow prevent the plantation of Ulster.

All else is conjecture and word-play.

You're funny. I like you.

monument

Why do you want to change the current alienation of one section of the community to be just an alienation of another section of the community?

Do you want to punish them because your community have been alienation, and unfairly treated for so long?

Palz

National Socialism did not work in Germany, We don't want it here.

roadsmart

Should have said that 10 years ago, at the time this thread was posted.

For Forks Sake

Holy zombie thread batman

Shaque attack

ha so it was ten years ago I last gave a **** about nonsense like this!

que pasa

The public has nothing to fear from Sinn Fein. They're the only Irish party with an All-Ireland strategy.

What happens if Scotland exists the Union and the north descends into chaos? It will make sense to have a party with an All-Ireland strategy to present the people if it does happen.

The only thing the public should be afraid of is the southern parties failure to prepare any type of unification manifesto.

The last persons you want in charge are the likes of Enda Kenny and Eamonn Gilmore when the inevitable occurs.

sillyoulfool

^^^^
That's the very reason we should fear SF, the last thing this state needs is unification with Northern Ireland.
God forbid we ever see the day.

Banjoxed

SF running Ireland, the Fianna Fáil like SNP running Scotland and UKIP succeeding in hijacking the Tories and running the show in England?

Canada is a nice place.

Balmed Out

Silly OP. On a local level I think Sinn Fein are great but on a national level with their please all policies ignoring the maths their just the new fianna fail. Think a lot of the same people voting for them too

Sound of Silence

A fine example of Godwin's law being brought out of a ten year slumber.

What a shite thread to resurrect.

Iwasfrozen

que pasa wrote: »

The public has nothing to fear from Sinn Fein. They're the only Irish party with an All-Ireland strategy.

What happens if Scotland exists the Union and the north descends into chaos? It will make sense to have a party with an All-Ireland strategy to present the people if it does happen.

The only thing the public should be afraid of is the southern parties failure to prepare any type of unification manifesto.

The last persons you want in charge are the likes of Enda Kenny and Eamonn Gilmore when the inevitable occurs.

We have two things to fear from SF, forcing us into a union with NI and Socialism.

Banjo String

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

We have two things to fear from SF, forcing us into a union with NI and Socialism.

Says the unionist.

Iwasfrozen

Banjo String wrote: »

Says the unionist.

Did a unionist say it too?

flutered

dark_knight_ire wrote: »

Just interested to find out what people here think. Most of the people here would be level headed.

Its apparent to me that sinn fein done very well in this election because they fought a hard campain put the work in, i mean its easy to listen and agree about everything the gov is doing wrong. But think about this sinn feins members come from the ranks of the IRA not all of them but they fund each other. They want their own police force and army. Remember 96 and the "raid" in adare. They shot Gardai killing one. Funny that it was called a raid when no attempt was make on the post office, they just rammed the garda car and jumped out opening fire. Sinn fein said it was nothing to do with republicans and then had to admit it later under huge evidence.

I would consider myself a republican but these guys are a different breed most of the people in the election are half criminals if not full criminals. They have no idea how to run a country. The green book the organiation ran on stated that the gov of ireland was an illegal gov, and they had the moral right to a "war" they want a socialist state. In which case this country would desent into the depths of hell if they got into power. I could never see a garda or a member of the defence forces saluting any member of sinn fein.

Remember this SF will not say sorry for any action taken like the murder of Gda McCabe they try to free these murders against the will of the irish people. They run protection rackets and extort money from hard working people. Of course they are to smart to get linked to this so they send their thugs in

I could list out so many thinks about them but i'd be here all day. I would be interested to hear comment for or against what i said. I don't mind a critic because unlike some if you disagree with me i would sent out a punishment mob.

a new poster, is there an election coming up, aww, forgive me, from now until the election is well over the scaremonger will be out in droves, it seems as if the status quo ae very worried.

flutered

Agent Orange wrote: »

Mary Lou was easily the most attractive looking of the EU candidates. No wonder she won.

The fact her party is made up of and affiliated with child-murdering psychopaths is a tad worrying however.

If you want to vote for a republican party then vote for a proper republican party - even Fianna Fail. At least they don't kill people.

has not fg got a guy at the top tabel of british intelligence, that to e is a hell of a lot moe to worry about.

hare05

The Corinthian wrote: »

Nationalist Socialist.

And last time I looked those were Sinn Fein's two core idiological principles.

If you'd actually read up on the Nazis you'd realise that 'Nationalist' only came into it to get the hardline racist vote and 'Socialist' didn't come into it at all other than the name. They were the fascist corporatist party, which, in any country it appears, calls itself whatever is popular in the current moment.

Sinn Fein does match up with early Nazi as far as ideology goes, but that ideology is hardly 'Socialist' beyond the populism of the term and neither are they truly 'nationalist'. They don't believe in the good of the nation, they believe in a mystical nation they intend to recreate us into when they get power.