N.I census correction,,catholics even closer

sanbrafyffe

i was just browseing the belfast telegraph today and noticed this thread
it stated that the correct results of the census which was issued a few days ago was that the correct statics of people referring to their religion now stood at
protestant,,42%
catholic,,41%
no religion.10%

in earlier days just after the census it stated that
protestant was 48% and catholic was 45%

have a read http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/2011-census-correction-29371141.html

Cody Pomeray

This phenomenon of referring to the occasional census statistics is not helpful to anybody. You might as well be watching a tortoise race. What does it matter when one group briefly eclipses the other?

Was the historic fact of Unionists out-numbering Republicans ever an adequate rebuttal to Irish reunification? Absolutely not. Such a manner of thinking only undermines the history of Northern Ireland separatism.

I suspect we share the opinion that re-unification is a slow moving inevitability. However, it must be done in mindfulness of the Unionist opposition, and not by way of a crude numerical advantage, such as the Unionists relied on in the past.

Iwasfrozen

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

This phenomenon of referring to the occasional census statistics is not helpful to anybody. You might as well be watching a tortoise race. What does it matter when one group briefly eclipses the other?

Was the historic fact of Unionists out-numbering Republicans ever an adequate rebuttal to Irish reunification? Absolutely not. Such a manner of thinking only undermines the history of Northern Ireland separatism.

I suspect we share the opinion that re-unification is a slow moving inevitability. However, it must be done in mindfulness of the Unionist opposition, and not by way of a crude numerical advantage, such as the Unionists relied on in the past.

We should be careful of falling into the trap of the Catholic = Nationalist, Protestant = Unionist mindset that undermines democracy, leads us to inaccurate results and perpetuates sectarian thought.

smcgiff

Christmas comes exactly 6 months early for Sinn Fein :pac:

Cody Pomeray

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

We should be careful of falling into the trap of the Catholic = Nationalist, Protestant = Unionist mindset that undermines democracy, leads us to inaccurate results and perpetuates sectarian thought.

That's a well worn line but we all know there is a broad, incidental correlation to religious identity.

As unremarkable as I think this data is, the point is not usually to paint every Catholic as a Nationalist/Republican, merely as a rough statistical guide.

I am pie

That 10% of ´no religion' needs to be viewed in parallel to the (presumably) 7% of other.

17% is a pretty large unknown in there and makes the slow increase of catholics and decrease of protestants statistically fairly insignificant? If you then consider than not 100% of either religion fits neatly into the national categories assigned to them you can start to realise this this is far from a zero sum game in the near to short term.

It is inevitable eventually but I think SF's 2016 target is naively optimistic. I´d say you are looking at minimum one more generation, i.e. 25years, quite frankly probably double that if you want to give yourself a buffer of a safe enough majority.

Looking at the flag protests you have to assume that the real focus of these protests is to prove how much of a pain in the 4rse the loyalist rent a mob can be, from experience I can tell you that they would quite literally run rampage if dragged into a republic whilst the still had the support of a silent enough large section of the populus up north. They would strike, transport between north and south would be crippled and the the whole thing would start to get very expensive, very quickly.

How much pain would the RoI be willing to take to absorb the loyalist scumbag brigade? No amount of constitutional gymnastics would appease them as they demonstrate anytime anytime touches the flag.

Unionists would nearly need to be in an electoral minority of less than 20% for unity to be safely achievable. It's regrettable but you have to ask consider if the RoI govt will prioritise absorbing all those Love Ulster type headbangers. Prob not unless SF is in power I would say.

That figure is plucked out of the air, but my point is that the focus needs to be convincing a larger majority of people their interests lie in being part of a new Irish republic rather than pointing to a survey and tell them to suck it up! We'd only be condemning ourselves to repeat history.

I am pie

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

That's a well worn line but we all know there is a broad, incidental correlation to religious identity.

As unremarkable as I think this data is, the point is not usually to paint every Catholic as a Nationalist/Republican, merely as a rough statistical guide.

I think that broad correlation is open to a lot of discussion and interpretation. Until we have a referendum doubt will persist as to what % of the catholics in NI would vote to remain within. Undoubtedly a minority, but to what extent we do not know.

Iwasfrozen

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

That's a well worn line but we all know there is a broad, incidental correlation to religious identity.

As unremarkable as I think this data is, the point is not usually to paint every Catholic as a Nationalist/Republican, merely as a rough statistical guide.

A well worn line? That's a coincidence because I made it up as I went along.

In all seriousness though I'm sick of people mixing politics with religion. Nationalists are not all Catholics and vice versa and perpetuating the myth that they are is only perpetuating the sectarian.

Cody Pomeray

I am pie wrote: »

Until we have a referendum doubt will persist as to what % of the catholics in NI would vote to remain within.

Of course, I'm not proposing that census data ever replace a referendum. I'm simply suggesting census data as a rough, incidental indicator of national allegiance.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

A well worn line? That's a coincidence because I made it up as I went along.

It features heavily in Irish political rhetoric throughout the 20th century... 'it was never about religion', 'no problem with Protestants', 'not all Protestants are unionists and vice versa', yes we know all of that. Nobody was suggesting there was anything but a rough statistical correlation in the North, yet it never stops people from un-necessarily making the point anyway.

Iwasfrozen

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

It features heavily in Irish political rhetoric throughout the 20th century... 'it was never about religion', 'no problem with Protestants', 'not all Protestants are unionists and vice versa', yes we know all of that. Nobody was suggesting there was anything but a rough statistical correlation in the North, yet it never stops people from un-necessarily making the point anyway.

A recent survey has called into question the viability of this assumptive correlation. Yet I see no recognition of this fact by nationalist parties.

Normally this would be would be fine, let them be delusional in their own time, but I have no doubt SF are now going to use this result to try and waste money on a border poll.

I am pie

I personally think you will be surprised as to how 'rough' that assumption is right now. It will depend on when the referendum is scheduled but if it were today I think you would find that a significant enough % would be put off by perceived (real or not) economic benefits of staying put.

That of course will change, but you cannot safely use the assumption that all catholics will vote unity without context, today context (perceived economic benefits) would weigh heavily against the unity vote. I believe the UK govt would have more ability to buy votes with a few flagship infrastructure projects and a loosening of corp tax rules. Whether they delivered anything would be another matter, but pre referendum they would arguably try and buy votes for the union.

Obviously the Unity side of the referendum would be seeking to schedule at the best possible moment for RoI, economic recovery well underway and possibly a few cretinous bankers in jail. That seems a long way off right now.

COYW

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

A recent survey has called into question the viability of this assumptive correlation. Yet I see no recognition of this fact by nationalist parties.

Normally this would be would be fine, let them be delusional in their own time, but I have no doubt SF are now going to use this result to try and waste money on a border poll.

Let them waste it. The vote will be for the people of N.I. and thus the British tax payer will have to foot the bill. Amalgamation with the RoI is probably as unattractive as it ever has been for the people of N.I.. Only a delusional fool would vote to drag N.I. into union with us. The union is as safe as it ever has been. There are plenty of Catholics in N.I. who consider themselves British or N.Irish.

SF would be better off teaching its members to respect the police, i.e. Gerry Kelly jumping on the front of a police van because they wouldn't do what he wanted them to do.

Iwasfrozen

COYW wrote: »

Let them waste it. The vote will be for the people of N.I. and thus the British tax payer will have to foot the bill. Amalgamation with the RoI is probably as unattractive as it ever has been for the people of N.I.. Only a delusional fool, i.e. a hardcore member Nationalist, would vote to drag N.I. into union with us. The union is as safe as it ever has been.

SF would be better off teaching its members to respect the police, i.e. Gerry Kelly jumping on the front of a police van because they wouldn't do what he wanted them to do.

That's very true. And a negative (or positive depending on your perspective) result would kill the concept for a generation. Perhaps through SF's own stupidity today's census figures will ironically work to benefit Unionists.

Manach

Given the attempt by FG/Lab to seemly blame every single historical social problem on Catholicism and divest themselves of any such heritage - perhaps linking Catholics with nationalism might be a tad premature.

gallag

Hopefully that 10% grows and people continue to put tangible things like economic outlook, corruption and health care at the forefront of their decision making instead of what very slightly different way they worship a centuries old fable.

everdead.ie

gallag wrote: »

Hopefully that 10% grows and people continue to put tangible things like economic outlook, corruption and health care at the forefront of their decision making instead of what very slightly different way they worship a centuries old fable.

I don't think having religion is a bad thing it's just a shame that at the moment there are pre-conceptions that come with with your religion in Northern Ireland.

I think the most telling thing is that even with this "higher" number of catholics and lower number of Protestants is that the whole Catholic = Nationalist, Protestant=Unionist thing can be put to bed obviously there are voters choosing the more conservative fiscal approach of the Unionist parties that are either/or both Catholic and Nationalist and members of the Protestant/and or Unionist Community voting for the SDLP/Sinn Fein based on their liberal fiscal policies.(I think I read somewhere that 2% of Protestants voted Sinn Fein in the last election?)

These numbers really mean nothing when it comes down to how people view them selves anymore as the GFA has meant both sides have been able to reach across communities, even if this is only a small positive step forward.

Karl Stein

I am pie wrote: »

Looking at the flag protests you have to assume that the real focus of these protests is to prove how much of a pain in the 4rse the loyalist rent a mob can be [...] They would strike, transport between north and south would be crippled and the the whole thing would start to get very expensive, very quickly.

To what ends would these actions be? 'Wah, wah, wah, take us back Britain'? Loyalists know only too well that the British will be more than happy to drop the hot potato when the time comes. What then for so-called Loyalism? Start shooting up bars in London and Manchester?

gurramok

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

A recent survey has called into question the viability of this assumptive correlation. Yet I see no recognition of this fact by nationalist parties.

A recent electoral poll counter acts your TV survey. http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/column-our-grassroots-initiative-shows-high-demand-for-a-border-poll-927617-May2013/

Immolation

Truth is that many of the Catholics won't vote for unification for purely economic reasons.
How much does Westminister pump in each year to balance the books, I've heard figures of 7 to 9 billion, the republic is hardly that flush at present.

R P McMurphy

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

That's very true. And a negative (or positive depending on your perspective) result would kill the concept for a generation. Perhaps through SF's own stupidity today's census figures will ironically work to benefit Unionists.

If a border poll is called and was against a United Ireland then could only delay another poll by seven years and not a generation. In fact would have to be held every seven years

Karl Stein

R P McMurphy wrote: »

If a border poll is called and was against a United Ireland then could only delay another poll by seven years and not a generation. In fact would have to be held every seven years

SF are all too aware of this as are the DUP/UUP which is why the DUP/UUP are reluctant to call SF's bluff. The DUP/UUP don't even want the idea in the consciousness of voters.

Cody Pomeray

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

A recent survey has called into question the viability of this assumptive correlation.

No it hasn't, and you're falling into a trap of not reading the poll accurately. The poll asked the public whether they would vote for secession if they were a referendum tomorrow. Answering No to that question doesn't mean you're no longer a Republican/ Nationalist. It probably means you're aware that the question of secession is not something that can literally be achieved overnight.

I'm in favour of a United Ireland, but even I would have said 'No' to that question, because the prospect of sudden re-unification would be silly and irresponsible. It can only arise when the Unionists can be made aware of the advantages of secession.

Radiosonde

Immolation wrote: »

Truth is that many of the Catholics won't vote for unification for purely economic reasons.
How much does Westminister pump in each year to balance the books, I've heard figures of 7 to 9 billion, the republic is hardly that flush at present.

That's often the argument that's put forward against leaving the UK, and a good reason not to leave tomorrow or the day after, but I'd question in the long run how many people contentedly imagine Northern Ireland's glorious future as a sort of grown son that won't move out of his parent's house because he'd lose his pocket money.

pablomakaveli

gurramok wrote: »

A recent electoral poll counter acts your TV survey. http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/column-our-grassroots-initiative-shows-high-demand-for-a-border-poll-927617-May2013/

That poll isn't exactly a good one either. It only shows us that people in Crossmaglen and Upper Cregan would support it (And considering there was only a 42% turnout it would be interesting to know what the opinions of the other 56% are).

Iwasfrozen

gurramok wrote: »

A recent electoral poll counter acts your TV survey. http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/column-our-grassroots-initiative-shows-high-demand-for-a-border-poll-927617-May2013/

The poll was biased.

LAST SATURDAY,over 1,000 people Crossmaglen in County Armagh and the Creggan Upper district electoral area in County Louth came out to vote on the question of Irish unity.

Iwasfrozen

R P McMurphy wrote: »

If a border poll is called and was against a United Ireland then could only delay another poll by seven years and not a generation. In fact would have to be held every seven years

Why would it have to be held every seven years?

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

No it hasn't, and you're falling into a trap of not reading the poll accurately. The poll asked the public whether they would vote for secession if they were a referendum tomorrow. Answering No to that question doesn't mean you're no longer a Republican/ Nationalist. It probably means you're aware that the question of secession is not something that can literally be achieved overnight.

I'm in favour of a United Ireland, but even I would have said 'No' to that question, because the prospect of sudden re-unification would be silly and irresponsible. It can only arise when the Unionists can be made aware of the advantages of secession.

You fall into the trap of assuming that referendum tomorrow = unification tomorrow. The question was only to gauge support for unification which only 35% of Catholics support.

R P McMurphy

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Why would it have to be held every seven years?


You fall into the trap of assuming that referendum tomorrow = unification tomorrow. The question was only to gauge support for unification which only 35% of Catholics support.

Sorry meant could be held once every seven years

Cody Pomeray

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

You fall into the trap of assuming that referendum tomorrow = unification tomorrow.

No I don't. That's a very weak reply. I have said nothing about the actual change-over, I would oppose a Yes vote in any referendum because the very carrying of that amendment or poll would be antagonistic and incendiary. Not only would I oppose a Yes vote, I would oppose a poll in the first place, as things stand. That doesn't make anyone less of a Republican, it just means they are a bit more pragmatic as regards how re-unification is achieved. Nobody wants to see an entire society being forced to adapt an alien nationality against their will, again.

Iwasfrozen

R P McMurphy wrote: »

Sorry meant could be held once every seven years

Could be but in reality it won't because the unionist politicians will have a much stronger position.

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

No I don't. That's a very weak reply. I have said nothing about the actual change-over, I would oppose a Yes vote in any referendum because the very carrying of that amendment or poll would be antagonistic and incendiary. Not only would I oppose a Yes vote, I would oppose a poll in the first place, as things stand. That doesn't make anyone less of a Republican, it just means they are a bit more pragmatic as regards how re-unification is achieved. Nobody wants to see an entire society being forced to adapt an alien nationality against their will, again.

Then don't support a United Ireland because 100% of Unionists are never going to agree to it. Unless we make a deal with the UK that entitles citizens from the North or all of Ireland to British citizenship then people are going to inevitably have an alien nationality forced on them or their children.

Cody Pomeray

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Then don't support a United Ireland because 100% of Unionists are never going to agree to it.

Who said anything about 100%? where are you getting that? 100% of such a large body of people wouldn't even agree that black is black. I am saying that society at large in Northern Ireland, which could be as straightforward as a simple majority of both broad communities respectively would agree to embark upon the union with the Republic.

R P McMurphy

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Could be but in reality it won't because the unionist politicians will have a much stronger position.


Then don't support a United Ireland because 100% of Unionists are never going to agree to it. Unless we make a deal with the UK that entitles citizens from the North or all of Ireland to British citizenship then people are going to inevitably have an alien nationality forced on them or their children.

I don't see them having a much stronger position regardless of the result of a border poll. The age demographic of the nationalist population is considerably younger that unionist. This would mean that polls every seven years would be called for given the changing demographics.

In relation to local politics, the changing demographic must be a worry to unionist politicans as in local politics tribal lines are very much to the fore. At this rate, the DUP will be playing second fiddle to a Sinn Fein led assembly within a few years

Iwasfrozen

R P McMurphy wrote: »

I don't see them having a much stronger position regardless of the result of a border poll. The age demographic of the nationalist population is considerably younger that unionist. This would mean that polls every seven years would be called for given the changing demographics.

How can you tell that?

Iwasfrozen

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

Who said anything about 100%? where are you getting that? 100% of such a large body of people wouldn't even agree that black is black. I am saying that society at large in Northern Ireland, which could be as straightforward as a simple majority of both broad communities respectively would agree to embark upon the union with the Republic.

I agree with you, which is why unification is going to inevitably require coercion. But I don't understand how you expect a majority in both communities to agree to it, the day unionists give up on the union is the day they stop being unionist.

gurramok

pablomakaveli wrote: »

That poll isn't exactly a good one either. It only shows us that people in Crossmaglen and Upper Cregan would support it (And considering there was only a 42% turnout it would be interesting to know what the opinions of the other 56% are).

Err, its more than the turnout in certain referendums here!! In that case we might as well disregard all elections and referendums that have less than a 43% turnout!

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The poll was biased.

I see democracy does not suit you when you have something against the residents of Crossmaglen?

Iwasfrozen

gurramok wrote: »

I see democracy does not suit you when you have something against the residents of Crossmaglen?

I have absolutely nothing against the good folks over at Crossmaglen I simply suspect their views are not indicative of greater Northern Ireland.

gurramok

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I have absolutely nothing against the good folks over at Crossmaglen I simply suspect their views are not indicative of greater Northern Ireland.

Indeed they are probably not. They are reflective of the Nationalist population imo.

ardmacha

I agree with you, which is why unification is going to inevitably require coercion

Presumably, it will require less coercion than maintaining British rule, when a majority don't want it.
But then again in these threads coercion of Irish people is always a matter of no consequence, while asking British people to stop trying to colonise the place is an infringement on their "human" rights.

Cody Pomeray

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I agree with you, which is why unification is going to inevitably require coercion.

On;y in the sense that any democratic vote is "coercion"; it is certainly not compatible with legal usage of the word. Coercion is an unsuitable term by any definition, in fact, but if you prefer to use it in relation to democratic decision making by both communities respectively, so as you can try defend the rights of any vestigial crackpots and extremists, go ahead.

Iwasfrozen

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

On;y in the sense that any democratic vote is "coercion"; it is certainly not compatible with legal usage of the word. Coercion is an unsuitable term by any definition, in fact, but if you prefer to use it in relation to democratic decision making by both communities respectively, so as you can try defend the rights of any vestigial crackpots and extremists, go ahead.

The only extremist is the one who calls ordinary unionists extremists. Any unionist who agrees to a United Ireland is by definition no longer a unionist.

gurramok

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Any unionist who agrees to a United Ireland is by definition no longer a unionist.

And Nationalists who want to stay part of the UK, in your eyes Nationalists or Unionists?

I'd agree they would become Unionists as per your definition.

COYW

What about people in N.I., from either community who classify themselves as Northern Irish? They want to retain links to the UK, but not to the same degree as Unionists and want a good relationship with us down here but do not desire any form of amalgamation.

Just wondering how they would be classified. Opinions?

Cody Pomeray

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The only extremist is the one who calls ordinary unionists extremists.

I am envisaging a future scenario where there is a reasonable prospect of Unionism becoming an irrelevance. Do you realize you've clocked up a straw man in every single reply so far?

pablomakaveli

gurramok wrote: »

Err, its more than the turnout in certain referendums here!! In that case we might as well disregard all elections and referendums that have less than a 43% turnout!

Fair enough then but how does a poll conducted in only two towns reflect the majority opinions in both NI and the ROI?

Iwasfrozen

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

I am envisaging a future scenario where there is a reasonable prospect of Unionism becoming an irrelevance. Do you realize you've clocked up a straw man in every single reply so far?

It's fine if you want to work in the conditional tense but to bring that back to reality you have to have a reasonable link.

gurramok

pablomakaveli wrote: »

Fair enough then but how does a poll conducted in only two towns reflect the majority opinions in both NI and the ROI?

Its an indicator of Nationalist opinion(as both places are overwhelmingly Nationalist in population) that the desire for a UI is still quite high and not as low as has been touted on this forum for a long time.

Iwasfrozen

gurramok wrote: »

Its an indicator of Nationalist opinion(as both places are overwhelmingly Nationalist in population) that the desire for a UI is still quite high and not as low as has been touted on this forum for a long time.

The whole point is that nationalists are not always catholic and vice versa.

Richard

gallag wrote: »

Hopefully that 10% grows and people continue to put tangible things like economic outlook, corruption and health care at the forefront of their decision making instead of what very slightly different way they worship a centuries old fable.

Religion doesn't particularly influence opinion on the national question. One's upbringing, however,influences both religious and political views.

gurramok

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The whole point is that nationalists are not always catholic and vice versa.

Can you answer the following?

And Nationalists who want to stay part of the UK, in your eyes Nationalists or Unionists?

Cody Pomeray

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

It's fine if you want to work in the conditional tense but to bring that back to reality you have to have a reasonable link.

I used the future tense and the imperfective aspect, no conditional.

I presuming you are referring to my wish regarding Unionism being made to be an irrelevance some time in the future? How can anyone provide a link to an aspiration

Happyman42

The tap will be slowly turned off and the concensus of 'we're in a better felt hole' will change. Britain is in the process of withdrawing by changing mindsets.
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/europe/osborne-targets-ni-spending-1.1443981
The south will recover economically and will be more attractive, simply because it makes economic sense not to be partitioned from the larger hinterland.

pablomakaveli

gurramok wrote: »

Its an indicator of Nationalist opinion(as both places are overwhelmingly Nationalist in population) that the desire for a UI is still quite high and not as low as has been touted on this forum for a long time.

But it isn't. You can't base it on such a specific grouping. All it tells us is how people in those two towns feel about it.

The matter would be decided by the populations of the ROI and NI. Also not everyone is a nationalist.

It's a pretty pointless poll that they conducted because it doesn't add anything to their argument. It seems like they picked those two towns because they knew they would deliver the results they wanted for their polls.