why so afraid to go it alone

thehighground

ionix5891 wrote: »

did you not hear "we the Irish people" are special

one of the main beliefs of nationalism (didn't Sein Fein welcome the Nazis i mean the National Socialist German Workers’ Party with open arms back in the day? ) is that other people (the "they" vs "us") are sub-human somehow

I don't know why you remain in Ireland. You obviously hate Ireland and Irish people!

You want to bed in with the two nations who were at the heart of two world wars in the last 100 years? Spare me!

ionix5891

thehighground wrote: »

I don't know why you remain in Ireland. You obviously hate Ireland and Irish people!

You want to bed in with the two nations who were at the heart of two world wars in the last 100 years? Spare me!

you want to turn this nation into what these countries have been over 60 years ago? You obviously hate Ireland and Irish people!

nationalism is very dangerous in large doses and has time and time again **** on democracy

marco_polo

thehighground wrote: »

I don't know why you remain in Ireland. You obviously hate Ireland and Irish people!

You want to bed in with the two nations who were at the heart of two world wars in the last 100 years? Spare me!

Ah crys of Nazi, the last refuge of the despratate debater.

Pity they didn't setup some kind of organisation in Europe to maintain stability and ensure that could never happen again. Oh wait ..:rolleyes:

The Corinthian

thehighground wrote: »

I don't know why you remain in Ireland. You obviously hate Ireland and Irish people!

TBH...

thehighground

lenny_leonard wrote: »

That's just another notch in the belt of an inept Yes campaign. As has been pointed out quite a few times, no reasonable person here is saying that every Yes voter was well informed either. It's time to stop repeating that pointless comment.

Well Lenny, I haven't been very convinced to vote 'No' the next time by any of the 'Yes' campaigners here either.

I was merely pointing out (for the first time, so I wasn't repeating anything) that I actually asked the 'Yes' campaigners about the Treaty - and was not completely lazy like some people like to accuse the 'No' voters of.

thehighground

IRLConor wrote: »

Repeating it won't make it reasonable or sensible.

You either believe that:

1. The veto on direct taxation is not an "assurance" given by other states but a right that Ireland may exercise at any time it pleases.
   
   OR
   
2. The veto on direct taxation is somehow ignorable by the other states and they can force their will upon us. If you believe this, then the logical conclusion is that you don't believe that any of the provisions in any of the EU treaties has any real weight. That is such a blatantly mad position that I find it hard to believe that you could support it.

Are you a EU bureacrat? *sigh* Should I go on the bold step now for not 'believing'

No, they can make us the pariahs of Europe (look at a lot of the 'Yes' posters here even - telling us what an ungrateful lot we are and we owe it to Europe to say 'Yes'.) How long will it before the 'Yes' campaigners take the position that our tax should be harmonised with the rest of Europe?

thehighground

ionix5891 wrote: »

did you not hear "we the Irish people" are special

one of the main beliefs of nationalism (didn't Sein Fein welcome the Nazis i mean the National Socialist German Workers’ Party with open arms back in the day? ) is that other people (the "they" vs "us") are sub-human somehow


this line of thinking followed to its conclusion is mainly responsible for WW2 and nationalist/patriotic bullcrap is feeding the current US military exercise over in the middle East

You referring to De Valera's neturality stance during the World War II? At that stage he was Leader of Fianna Fail.

which of these positions do you support

"If you dont know Vote no" or "If you dont know abstain"?

because the first was used a lot by the NO campaigners who went door to door

Its none of your business how I vote - and for the record - I did not have any 'No' campaigners at my door.

thehighground

sink wrote: »

And I believe this €50 note in my pocket is not worth the paper it's written on. It's value is written in law but I believe bureaucrats can circumvent that an make it essentially worthless. I don't ever sign legal documents and I don't follow the law of the state because essential bureaucrats can circumvent them all and make anything I do/don't essentially meaningless. I'm going to put a paper bag over my head and hide in the corner now.

The people who run the European Bank that issue the €50 notes are bankers, not bureaucrats. Mind you, the bankers can go bad as well

thehighground

The Corinthian wrote: »

TBH, the entire population in NI is substantially culturally different to the Republic's - regardless of their religion. Their attitudes are pretty alien to your average southerner as is much of what is considered normal there. Culturally the gulf is pretty similar to that which exists between the republic and, say, Scotland. Few people, including in the north, kid themselves that we really are 'one people'. We're not. Maybe we were once, but a lot of time has passed.

So unless you want to adopt one standard for the north and another for the rest of Europe, as it suits you, you'll have to apply the same measure in both cases. Otherwise, you are really only a xenophobe and petty nationalist, desperately trying to find plausible excuses to justify your prejudices and blind principles.

Don't agree with you about the cultural difference. There may be a huge resentment from NI nationalists that they were sold down the river and then neglected for years by the south, but culturally we are the same. I've worked and socialised with northerners and I certainly don't see too much of a difference other than that they have just been through a very horrific time which would obviously affect them.

I'd actually say there is a greater cultural divide between Dublin middle class and culchies.

thehighground

marco_polo wrote: »

Ah crys of Nazi, the last refuge of the despratate debater.

Pity they didn't setup some kind of organisation in Europe to maintain stability and ensure that could never happen again. Oh wait ..:rolleyes:

Can I refer you back to ionix5891 post here (I think ionix supports the 'Yes' side: I know, I know, I shouldn't have responded to such drivel such drivel.

Quote: (one of the main beliefs of nationalism (didn't Sein Fein welcome the Nazis i mean the National Socialist German Workers’ Party with open arms back in the day? ) is that other people (the "they" vs "us") are sub-human somehow".

Do you honestly think that Ireland is in anyway relevant to the maintenance of the stability of Europe. Catch yourself on :rolleyes:

ionix5891

thehighground wrote: »

Do you honestly think that Ireland is in anyway relevant to the maintenance of the stability of Europe.

Whats easier to bend and break

a single straw

or

27 straws stitched together?


We need Europe alot more than Europe needs us, and i dont think anyone in Europe wants any more fundamentalist/nationalist nuts who cant look ahead and only look behind. If we listened to Sein Fein and voted NO 35 years ago (or on any of the other treaties they opposed) Ireland would have been a very different place now, up there with Moldova.

EU formed out of the terrible wars of last century, so it will never happen again, the latest countries to join are after coming out from behind the iron curtain they were involuntary put behind. Europe allowed nationalism and communism to spread under a century ago and look how that ended up

Once again Ireland did pretty well for itself as a small country because we were able to leverage ourselves against they EU, if we "go it alone" it would make it much harder to face the globalized world.

The Corinthian

thehighground wrote: »

Well Lenny, I haven't been very convinced to vote 'No' the next time by any of the 'Yes' campaigners here either.

But as I have already pointed out, your motivations are not actually being addressed here. You oppose EU integration on the basis of nationalistic principle, not economics - so no economic argument will ever sway you. That is why I consider your approach to this discussion less than honest.

thehighground wrote: »

Don't agree with you about the cultural difference. There may be a huge resentment from NI nationalists that they were sold down the river and then neglected for years by the south, but culturally we are the same. I've worked and socialised with northerners and I certainly don't see too much of a difference other than that they have just been through a very horrific time which would obviously affect them.

I've worked and socialised with northerners also, and frankly found that the cultural differences between us and them are not dissimilar to those between us and the Scots or even the English. I'm not alone in this belief, as many northerners - Catholic and Protestant - also see this divide.

Now you can claim all you want that you "don't see too much of a difference", but this falls flat when you then note that the level of difference are much the same as will other people from the British Isles - which you would consider far greater. In short, you dismiss cultural differences on a basis of nationalist ideology - irredentism - rather than fact.

I'd actually say there is a greater cultural divide between Dublin middle class and culchies.

Which if anything further weakens the argument of cultural divide based upon nationality. Indeed, there are many Irish who will identify with a foreigner of similar social background than a fellow citizen of a vastly different background. Where does that leave a nation's supposed cultural integrity?

sink

thehighground wrote: »

The people who run the European Bank that issue the €50 notes are bankers, not bureaucrats. Mind you, the bankers can go bad as well

The ECB is the only institution which is allowed to print money, it's also a public institution of the EU and hence all it's workers are public servants aka 'bureaucrats'. But arguing with you seems pointless your blinded by you nationalism and I don't see you ever changing. Just remember nationalists caused more wars throughout human history than religion and resources combined, but then again this probably doesn't bother you. You're still guided by primitive fears and emotions.

thehighground

ionix5891 wrote: »

Whats easier to bend and break

a single straw

or

27 straws stitched together?


We need Europe alot more than Europe needs us, and i dont think anyone in Europe wants any more fundamentalist/nationalist nuts who cant look ahead and only look behind. If we listened to Sein Fein and voted NO 35 years ago (or on any of the other treaties they opposed) Ireland would have been a very different place now, up there with Moldova.

EU formed out of the terrible wars of last century, so it will never happen again, the latest countries to join are after coming out from behind the iron curtain they were involuntary put behind. Europe allowed nationalism and communism to spread under a century ago and look how that ended up

Once again Ireland did pretty well for itself as a small country because we were able to leverage ourselves against they EU, if we "go it alone" it would make it much harder to face the globalized world.

Would you just do me a favour please and go read up the definitions of

1. Nationalism
2. Republicanism
3. Fascism
4. Communism
5. Capitalism

Then go and read up on your European history of the 100 years before talking about stuff you obviously don't know anything about.

Worth noting is that the Irish Constitution was written when all these 'isms' were happening in Europe. You can read all about it here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Ireland

thehighground

The Corinthian wrote: »

But as I have already pointed out, your motivations are not actually being addressed here. You oppose EU integration on the basis of nationalistic principle, not economics - so no economic argument will ever sway you. That is why I consider your approach to this discussion less than honest.

Do you know the difference between nationalist and republican principles?

Who appointed you judge of my honesty or dishonesty? Do I have to go on the bold step again if found guilty of something not being completely swung by economics For instance, it was claimed that Ireland was the heart of the British Empire (after the Act of Union as the Kingdom of Great Britain & Ireland) but once there was food shortages, guess who went hungry? If things get sticky - the French & Germans will look after themselves first of all.

I've worked and socialised with northerners also, and frankly found that the cultural differences between us and them are not dissimilar to those between us and the Scots or even the English. I'm not alone in this belief, as many northerners - Catholic and Protestant - also see this divide.

Now you can claim all you want that you "don't see too much of a difference", but this falls flat when you then note that the level of difference are much the same as will other people from the British Isles - which you would consider far greater. In short, you dismiss cultural differences on a basis of nationalist ideology - irredentism - rather than fact.

Which if anything further weakens the argument of cultural divide based upon nationality. Indeed, there are many Irish who will identify with a foreigner of similar social background than a fellow citizen of a vastly different background. Where does that leave a nation's supposed cultural integrity?

A lot to do with the fact that we all speak English maybe? Watch the same football games, TV, etc.

The big difference I would find with Northerners from Unionist/Protestant divide is that they are very judgemental. Also, they feel a bit uneasy about gaelic sports, Irish language etc. - all because of what has happened over the last 40 years or so. That can be a bit of a barrier.

From both sides of the divide, they would argue until the cows come home about two flies going up the wall.

The Corinthian

thehighground wrote: »

Then go and read up on your European history of the 100 years before talking about stuff you obviously don't know anything about.

You might try to rebut what he said rather than simply attempt to brush it away without giving a reason why.

thehighground

sink wrote: »

The ECB is the only institution which is allowed to print money, it's also a public institution of the EU and hence all it's workers are public servants aka 'bureaucrats'. But arguing with you seems pointless your blinded by you nationalism and I don't see you ever changing. Just remember nationalists caused more wars throughout human history than religion and resources combined, but then again this probably doesn't bother you. You're still guided by primitive fears and emotions.

I did say, the bankers could go bad as well. (In fact, banking is extremely corrupt - thats why they need a hell of a lot of regulation)

I'm well aware of the problems nationalism (and indeed fascism) causes - I'm happy as a republican that the Irish Constitution protect us from these excesses of nationalism - pity the Lisbon Treaty doesn't do the same for the member of the EU.

ionix5891

thehighground wrote: »

1. Nationalism
2. Republicanism
3. Fascism
4. Communism
5. Capitalism

can people please put a tick beside each one of these that describes Sein Fein

sink

thehighground wrote: »

Do you know the difference between nationalist and republican principles?

To be fair you should not deride someone who does not know the difference. The media has spun the word republicanism to mean the same thing as nationalism. In the true sense of the word (Liberty, rule of law ect.) I would consider myself a republican and so would most democrats. But true sense of the word is not the common interpretation of it and therefore I distance myself from the term in order not to confuse people into thinking I'm a nationalist. If you are a republican in the true sense of the word I suggest you do the same so people do not get you're political ideology mixed up.

The Corinthian

thehighground wrote: »

Do you know the difference between nationalist and republican principles?

I do, but it is evident that you're a bit more fuzzy on the subject. For you republicanism is intertwined with nationalism; the reality is a republic is not necessarily limited to a nation state. By definition.

Who appointed you judge of my honesty or dishonesty?

You're more than free to judge me in return if you wish, as I am to judge anyone I observe being less than open or truthful.

Do I have to go on the bold step again if found guilty of something not being completely swung by economics For instance, it was claimed that Ireland was the heart of the British Empire (after the Act of Union as the Kingdom of Great Britain & Ireland) but once there was food shortages, guess who went hungry? If things get sticky - the French & Germans will look after themselves first of all.

Which of course returns to your paranoid accusation that we will simply become a protectorate of sorts of the EU. So far, outside of rejecting the vetoes we have by putting your hands over your ears and crying "I don't believe them", you've done precious little to justify that paranoia here.

If you're right, then the Eurosceptic camp have a point, but you'll have to make a believable case for it - otherwise you just sound like a xenophobic nutter.

A lot to do with the fact that we all speak English maybe? Watch the same football games, TV, etc.

Like the Scots, Welsh or English? Perhaps we should rejoin the UK then seeing we have such cultural commonality.

But that's different, you'll argue - why we're still waiting to hear - but it has nothing to do with being of divergent cultures which was your original argument.

thehighground

The Corinthian wrote: »

You might try to rebut what he said rather than simply attempt to brush it away without giving a reason why.

He/she thinks that nationalism was to blame for the 2 world wars - completely missing out in particular (and very relevant to the EU) the part imperialism had to play?

thehighground

sink wrote: »

To be fair you should not deride someone who does not know the difference. The media has spun the word republicanism to mean the same thing as nationalism. In the true sense of the word (Liberty, rule of law ect.) I would consider myself a republican and so would most democrats. But true sense of the word is not the common interpretation of it and therefore I distance myself from the term in order not to confuse people into thinking I'm a nationalist. If you are a republican in the true sense of the word I suggest you do the same so people do not get you're political ideology mixed up.

To be fair, in an earlier post I explained that I was a republican (even put a link to wiki) and declared that I have never voted SF to distance myself from the popular (mis) understanding of what a republican is!

I just got annoyed that everyone keeps going on about being a nationalist, despite having explained it already.

sink

thehighground wrote: »

To be fair, in an earlier post I explained that I was a republican (even put a link to wiki) and declared that I have never voted SF to distance myself from the popular (mis) understanding of what a republican is!

I just got annoyed that everyone keeps going on about being a nationalist, despite having explained it already.

If you are a true republican then would you not agree that one of the basic tenants of republicanism is civic duty? Civic duty is where the Irish electorate falls flat on it's face. Until this problem is solved the true spirit of republicanism can not exist in this state or elsewhere in Europe. To try to force the situation to come about through political means is impossible. It would require a sociological revolution which is not likely to happen. So we must instead strive to make the EU better and more accountable but also accept that it will never be ideal.

The Corinthian

thehighground wrote: »

He/she thinks that nationalism was to blame for the 2 world wars - completely missing out in particular (and very relevant to the EU) the part imperialism had to play?

Nationalism was a significant factor in both World Wars. What you seem to fail to understand is that nationalism and republicanism are not the same thing. Nationalism can exist and be exploited in most government types; from Fascism, through to monarchism and even communism. Imperialism may also be promoted through nationalism, and often is intertwined with it, as it was in both World Wars. I suggest you look at the propaganda of the early twentieth century at how imperialism was promoted using nationalism.

So he is correct in that nationalism was both a significant cause and tool of both World Wars - competition between the European nation states was at the core of the both the first and second World wars, the latter of which was further fuelled by ethnic nationalism.

As such Irish republicanism is in fact not really republicanism. It's nationalism that prefers a republic - or more correctly opposes a monarchy - as it is defined principally on nationalist or ethnic grounds rather than form of government. The proof of this is that it is more than happy to exclude, expel or coerce a population (Northern Unionists) on largely ethnic grounds - something that Republicanism would find repugnant.

In the same way, 'Irish republican' Eurosceptics would reject a democratic EU. It could hold all the principles and values of a republic, but ultimately it does not follow the nationalist ideal, based upon ethnic grounds. This is why 'Irish republicans' tend to go pale when you suggest making the EU more democratic by putting power in the hands of the parliament. They (you) ultimately don't care whether it's democratic or even a republic - only that it is ethnically homogeneous.

So I suggest you don't confuse republicanism and nationalism.

thehighground

sink wrote: »

If you are a true republican then would you not agree that one of the basic tenants of republicanism is civic duty? Civic duty is where the Irish electorate falls flat on it's face. Until this problem is solved the true spirit of republicanism can not exist in this state or elsewhere in Europe. To try to force the situation to come about through political means is impossible. It would require a sociological revolution which is not likely to happen. So we must instead strive to make the EU better and more accountable but also accept that it will never be ideal.

I agree that civic duty is only ONE of the basic tenants of republicanism. Another one would be liberty - i.e., free to vote for who and what I want without being bullied by a crowd of dictators. The most important tenant in this instance, as far as I'm concerned is the rule of law, which cannot be ignored by the government. Opposition to corruption is another one - but shock, horror 2007 was the THIRTEENTH year in a row that the auditors for the EU have refused to sign off on their financial accounts. And you want to give them even more power. Hmmm?

thehighground

The Corinthian wrote: »

... What you seem to fail to understand is that nationalism and republicanism are not the same thing......

Nice try there. :rolleyes: What a chancer you are:D

I'm not wasting anymore time on you!

Scofflaw

'Tenet' = article of faith, fundamental part of position.

'Tenant' = people paying rent.

I don't think that even qualifies as pedantry.

cordially,
Scofflaw

The Corinthian

thehighground wrote: »

Nice try there. :rolleyes: What a chancer you are:D

I'm not wasting anymore time on you!

That's the most pathetic attempt at sidestepping I've ever come across. You're caught out talking shìte and that's all you can come up with?

thehighground

Scofflaw wrote: »

'Tenet' = article of faith, fundamental part of position.

'Tenant' = people paying rent.

I don't think that even qualifies as pedantry.

cordially,
Scofflaw

No Scoffs, You've just made a very valuable clarification/useful contribution.

I'd like to confirm that I actually meant was 'Tenet' as in article of faith, fundamental part of position.

sink, perhaps you would like to confirm what you meant as well. Wouldn't want to mislead anyone :rolleyes:

thehighground

The Corinthian wrote: »

That's the most pathetic attempt at sidestepping I've ever come across. You're caught out talking shìte and that's all you can come up with?

:D:D:D