The end of southern partitionism?

CaePae

Could Brexit result in the end of partitionism in the south. We have seen both Enda Kenny and Micheál Martin make statements in recent days that a border poll may be a possible and even desirable outcome of the UK's decision to leave the EU.

The Fine Gael leader said a future border poll is now a “possibility” in light of the decision by Britain to leave the EU.

Mr Kenny even likened the scenario to West and East Germany once the Berlin Wall was demolished.

The leader of Ireland’s main opposition party said he hopes Brexit will move Ireland closer to reunification.

“It may very well be that the decision of Northern Ireland to oppose the English-driven anti-EU UK majority is a defining moment in Northern politics,” he said.

Weather or not you think such a referendum would deliver a United Ireland, has the attitude of the southern political class changed?

CINCLANTFLT

I would have been very much of the view that we leave the North stone after it settled down... then we had Brexit... now I think the question had to be asked and if / when Scotland moves to its next referendum, we will really have to start discussing this in Dublin, London and Belfast...
Some people in the North and in Britain will understandably get very annoyed... even violent about this... but after Brexit, this is where we have ended up at...

CINCLANTFLT

North alone... not stone!!!

skywanderer

CINCLANTFLT wrote: »

North alone... not stone!!!

Smoke and Mirrors; Mehawlll watching to grab power is all it is.

Dyr

Enda would only want a border poll if it nailed partition down as a dead cert for the rest of time

Mehole is just wrapping the green flag around him as fianna fail leaders are inclined to do from time to time, it's just PR.

CaePae

Kennys intervention in Europe on behalf of Scotland a few days after the result felt like someone in the Dept. of Foreign Affairs was after pulling down a file from the shelf, dusting it off and saying, 'Right then, Unification'.

Brian?

I don't understand how calling for a referendum on unification is "the end of southern patriotism ".

CaePae

Brian? wrote: »

I don't understand how calling for a referendum on unification is "the end of southern patriotism ".

Perhaps you should read the thread title again.

NiallBoo

CaePae wrote: »

Perhaps you should read the thread title again.

Partitionism implies that there is one entity that someone wants to divide.

There exists two separate entries which some people want to join.

FrancieBrady

Might fit Kenny and Martin better to be making strong calls for a truth commission. Put the past properly behind us and side with those on record supporting such a process.
Far to many on this island have very little actual knowledge of what went on.
We are been dripfed what the British were doing by dint of persistence of victims. The IRA are willing to do this if everyone is on board
Time for our leaders to grasp what will be a painful nettle, but it will liberate ultimately and prepare the groundwork for what is increasingly looking like unity.

Speedwell

NiallBoo wrote: »

Partitionism implies that there is one entity that someone wants to divide.

There exists two separate entries which some people want to join.

Well, now, that's the best succinct explanation of the two sides of the debate I've heard in a long time, good job.


("...thank god I'm only watching the game..." The American, Chess)

Donnielighto

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Might fit Kenny and Martin better to be making strong calls for a truth commission. Put the past properly behind us and side with those on record supporting such a process.
Far to many on this island have very little actual knowledge of what went on.
We are been dripfed what the British were doing by dint of persistence of victims. The IRA are willing to do this if everyone is on board
Time for our leaders to grasp what will be a painful nettle, but it will liberate ultimately and prepare the groundwork for what is increasingly looking like unity.

Will they tell people where the bodies are and about he kangaroo courts?

FrancieBrady

Donnielighto wrote: »

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Might fit Kenny and Martin better to be making strong calls for a truth commission. Put the past properly behind us and side with those on record supporting such a process.
Far to many on this island have very little actual knowledge of what went on.
We are been dripfed what the British were doing by dint of persistence of victims. The IRA are willing to do this if everyone is on board
Time for our leaders to grasp what will be a painful nettle, but it will liberate ultimately and prepare the groundwork for what is increasingly looking like unity.

Will they tell people where the bodies are and about he kangaroo courts?

According to the ICLVR they are happy that the IRA are doing what they can on that. Despite how it is portrayed in the media.
And they have said they are willing to approach a truth commission, involving EVERYBODY involved honestly. Others have resisted this, the only way forward.
Resolution is not going to come any other way, and it is time OUR leaders stood up and pressured those reluctant.
We know why the British don't want to by seeing how hard they have fought to stop the BS inquiry finding the truth and the collusion ones.

Jawgap

CaePae wrote: »

Could Brexit result in the end of partitionism in the south. ......

I'm not sure how calls for a referendum link to the end of partitionism, southern or otherwise? I'd see the two as somewhat mutually exclusive.

There's a lot of uncertainty about at the moment, so running a referendum on a United Ireland would be a good idea as it might clarify matters, especially in relation to 'Brexit' and UI - at the moment it seems to be a given assumption that the 'remain' vote in NI is indicative, somehow, of broader popular support for a UI. I'm not sure the two are that intricately linked.

The extent or otherwise of a partitionist stance by the different parties would undoubtedly be revealed if a referendum was declared and each had to decide to support a vote for unification or 'abstain' - I don't think any party in the Republic would actively suggest voting against it, but they may raise issues and consequences for people to consider when deciding which way to vote.

Dyr

Under the good friday agreement the british government agreed to run a border poll if they believe it would be passed, that's essentially the trigger.

ancapailldorcha

CINCLANTFLT wrote: »

North alone... not stone!!!

CaePae wrote: »

Perhaps you should read the thread title again.

Please read the charter before posting again. This is a forum for serious discussion.

Bambi wrote: »

Enda would only want a border poll if it nailed partition down as a dead cert for the rest of time

Mehole is just wrapping the green flag around him as fianna fail leaders are inclined to do from time to time, it's just PR.

Please refrain from using language like "Mehole". Thanks.

Brian?

NiallBoo wrote: »

Partitionism implies that there is one entity that someone wants to divide.

There exists two separate entries which some people want to join.

There is one entity. It's called the island of Ireland.

If only it was as black and white as you seem to think. It's not though is it. Northern Ireland and the 26 counties are far from separate entities.

People born in entity A have a choice of being citizens of A's greater union with entity C. Or they can be citizens of entity B. Because until recently entity B claimed entity A as part of itself. People born in entity B are only entitled to citizenship of B.

A+B were formerly ruled directly from C. They were a single administrative district of C's empire. A and B were partitioned as independent political entities. Except A less so independent. B eventually became fully independent while A lost any independce, then got some devolved powers thanks to B.

Entity A and B have a combined Olympic and Ruby teams but separate soccer teams. In fact there are more all Island organisations than separate ones.

Entity A has 3 official languages. Entity B had 2, both of which are official languages of A.

Entities A and B are very far from separate.

Dyr

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Please refrain from using language like "Mehole". Thanks.

I only used it because I can't remember where the fadas go in his name

Iwasfrozen

Bambi wrote: »

I only used it because I can't remember where the fadas go in his name

Call him Michael, he won't mind.

lordarpad

The point was made to me that the self centered Dublin elite will not appreciate its circles being disturbed by uncouth Northerners

HiJacques

As much as it might turn non-SF Nationalists towards a UI there wouldn't be enough moderate Unionists who could be persuaded the same way.

KingBrian2

The most committed partitionists remain the Northerners who to this day are not convinced of the benefits of reunifying the island. So much so that many Unionists campaigned to have the UK leave in the EU. That is how much they want nothing to do with us.

mitchconnor16

Bambi wrote: »

Under the good friday agreement the british government agreed to run a border poll if they believe it would be passed, that's essentially the trigger.

We have yet to vote on the Republic's future in the EU, so until that happens, there should be no border poll.

eire4

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Might fit Kenny and Martin better to be making strong calls for a truth commission. Put the past properly behind us and side with those on record supporting such a process.
Far to many on this island have very little actual knowledge of what went on.
We are been dripfed what the British were doing by dint of persistence of victims. The IRA are willing to do this if everyone is on board
Time for our leaders to grasp what will be a painful nettle, but it will liberate ultimately and prepare the groundwork for what is increasingly looking like unity.

I very much agree with you that having a fully indpendent truth commission is badly needed to ensure that the horrors inflcited by both sides on each other are not repeated again.

eire4

KingBrian2 wrote: »

The most committed partitionists remain the Northerners who to this day are not convinced of the benefits of reunifying the island. So much so that many Unionists campaigned to have the UK leave in the EU. That is how much they want nothing to do with us.

Sure some campaiged to leave but the facts are the majority voted to remain. The landscape with regard to Ireland has radically changed in the wake of brexit and the fact that the majority of people in the 6 counties voted to remain just as they did in Scotland and which is now looking like leading to a second independence referendum in Scotland means that the 6 counties satus is very much up in the air.
Ultimately it will IMHO come down to money. If it looks like brexit will hurt the 6 counties economically while being inside the EU as part of a United Ireland will benefit the 6 counties economically then we will have Irish unity.There is also the case of the subsidies from London. If the UK begins to break up how much longer is London willing to keep paying to prop up Stormont?

HiJacques

eire4 wrote: »

Sure some campaiged to leave but the facts are the majority voted to remain.

The landscape with regard to Ireland has radically changed in the wake of brexit and the fact that the majority of people in the 6 counties voted to remain just as they did in Scotland and which is now looking like leading to a second independence referendum in Scotland means that the 6 counties satus is very much up in the air.

Ultimately it will IMHO come down to money.

If it looks like brexit will hurt the 6 counties economically while being inside the EU as part of a United Ireland will benefit the 6 counties economically then we will have Irish unity.

There is also the case of the subsidies from London.

If the UK begins to break up how much longer is London willing to keep paying to prop up Stormont?

The battle of the Boyne only matters to those who care about foreign royalty.

It's always undermined republican rhetoric for me and their supposedly socialist agenda.

Sinn Fein have been the most religious Communists in history.

It's impossible to define a future for the people of the island when both sides in the north are lead under false flegs.

Godge

eire4 wrote: »

I very much agree with you that having a fully indpendent truth commission is badly needed to ensure that the horrors inflcited by both sides on each other are not repeated again.

The problem with a truth commission is that nobody believes that Gerry Adams, Martin McGuinness, Martin Ferris et al., will tell the truth.

FrancieBrady

We are seeing more and more everyday the real problem with a truth commission.
The British have too much to hide. And are actively hiding and holding up inquiry after inquiry into their activities during the conflict/war.

Both 'sides' have far too much to hide from the rest of us in the middle here. We're probably not far enough removed as a society from the crimes that both committed in order to process and deal with the genuine truths yet.

FrancieBrady

Deleted User wrote: »

Both 'sides' have far too much to hide from the rest of us in the middle here. We're probably not far enough removed as a society from the crimes that both committed in order to process and deal with the genuine truths yet.

Is it good enough that a government would hide on matters like this?
Should people not be more critical of them for not leading the way on this? Should a single political party be the only ones publically willing to take part in this? (wether you believe them or not because of your bias is beside the point)

Godge

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Is it good enough that a government would hide on matters like this?
Should people not be more critical of them for not leading the way on this? Should a single political party be the only ones publically willing to take part in this? (wether you believe them or not because of your bias is beside the point)

It isn't beside the point.

If they are saying something that they actually won't do, then they are disingenuous at best, and that should be pointed out.

We all know that SF will publicly support a truth commission, but if one happens they will say they know nothing as SF was always distinct from the IRA. We all also know that isn't true.

FrancieBrady

Godge wrote: »

It isn't beside the point.

If they are saying something that they actually won't do, then they are disingenuous at best, and that should be pointed out.

We all know that SF will publicly support a truth commission, but if one happens they will say they know nothing as SF was always distinct from the IRA. We all also know that isn't true.

SF facilitated the gathering of evidence from members of the IRA for the Smithwick tribunal.
They were questioned by 3 members of that tribunal.

Judge Cory of the Cory Tribunal lambasted the British rearguard act of introducing the Inquiries Act saying it 'would make a meaningful inquiry impossible'

The suggestion that SF or the IRA wouldn't commit to a truth process is based on biased fancy, certainly not on any facts.
The suggestion that the British are afraid of the truth is based on fact.

The IRA would have to be there to make it meaningful. The Smithwicks tribunal and their engagement with the ICLVR indicates they would be.

eire4

Godge wrote: »

It isn't beside the point.

If they are saying something that they actually won't do, then they are disingenuous at best, and that should be pointed out.

We all know that SF will publicly support a truth commission, but if one happens they will say they know nothing as SF was always distinct from the IRA. We all also know that isn't true.

Well lets all get on board for calling for a truth and reconciliation commission. That way the British government the various churches, the IRA, the various loyalists terror groups etc can all be held to account as they should all be.

I will also point out that your continued one side is to blame approach when the British government's behaviour as well as that of various churches, secret societies etc all played a significant part in creating and maintaining the conflict for so long is very telling.

Godge

eire4 wrote: »

Well lets all get on board for calling for a truth and reconciliation commission. That way the British government the various churches, the IRA, the various loyalists terror groups etc can all be held to account as they should all be.

I will also point out that your continued one side is to blame approach when the British government's behaviour as well as that of various churches, secret societies etc all played a significant part in creating and maintaining the conflict for so long is very telling.

In light of the revelations about McKay and O'Hara coaching witnesses to an enquiry, how can anyone put any credible faith in Sinn Fein actually telling the truth to a Truth and Reconciliation Commission or any other inquiry for that matter?

FrancieBrady

Godge wrote: »

In light of the revelations about McKay and O'Hara coaching witnesses to an enquiry, how can anyone put any credible faith in Sinn Fein actually telling the truth to a Truth and Reconciliation Commission or any other inquiry for that matter?

Did SF not do the right thing there, the thing we bemoan the established parties of the state not doing? They got rid of the somebody who transgressed, no equivocation and promptly.
They told the truth straight away about a party member why would that mean they wouldn't to a T&R Commission?

Godge

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Did SF not do the right thing there, the thing we bemoan the established parties of the state not doing? They got rid of the somebody who transgressed, no equivocation and promptly.
They told the truth straight away about a party member why would that mean they wouldn't to a T&R Commission?

It is not as simple as that.

It took a full judicial inquiry to show that Michael Lowry acted on his own without Cabinet cover in the case of the mobile licence and that there was no blame on FG.

We don't have that level of assurance here. In fact O'Muilleoir is implicated in some of the remarks released. Hopefully there will be a PSNI enquiry into the corruption and everyone responsible will be caught and punished.

charlie14

Godge wrote: »

In light of the revelations about McKay and O'Hara coaching witnesses to an enquiry, how can anyone put any credible faith in Sinn Fein actually telling the truth to a Truth and Reconciliation Commission or any other inquiry for that matter?

Very few would put any credible faith in the British Army, MI5/MI6, UDA, UVF, SAS, RUC past members or those still within the PSNI, or many other factions either.
So do you believe there shouldn`t be a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, or just one that doesn`t include SF?

Godge

charlie14 wrote: »

Very few would put any credible faith in the British Army, MI5/MI6, UDA, UVF, SAS, RUC past members or those still within the PSNI, or many other factions either.
So do you believe there shouldn`t be a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, or just one that doesn`t include SF?

I believe people should be prosecuted for the crimes they committed, that includes anyone who was guilty of any illegal activity on Bloody Sunday and anyone who was a member of an illegal terrorist organisation.

FrancieBrady

In a conflict/war situation where all the players were involved, the only way to sort it out is a T&R Commission.
The law makers were as involved as anyone else, both in collusion and by irresponsibility.

charlie14

Godge wrote: »

I believe people should be prosecuted for the crimes they committed, that includes anyone who was guilty of any illegal activity on Bloody Sunday and anyone who was a member of an illegal terrorist organisation.

What about any other alleged activities or collusion by the security forces or British army. Should they be included in this Commission.?
There seems to be major questions around the legality of quite a few past activities there.

Godge

charlie14 wrote: »

What about any other alleged activities or collusion by the security forces or British army. Should they be included in this Commission.?
There seems to be major questions around the legality of quite a few past activities there.

I don't support a Commission.

I support prosecution of all who have done wrong.

FrancieBrady

Godge wrote: »

I don't support a Commission.

I support prosecution of all who have done wrong.

We have seen the level of willingness of a supposedly 'responsible' government to do that in the case of their own soldiers who did wrong and we can conclude it is never going to happen.

The only pragmatic solution for those who want the truth is a T&R Commission, selectively punishing one side would not work and would be quite spectacularly counterproductive. .

charlie14

Godge wrote: »

I don't support a Commission.

I support prosecution of all who have done wrong.

I take it these prosecutions would be undertaken by the British authorities.

I don`t think you are that naive to expect much in the way of prosecution by them of their own security forces and what might crawl into the light from those stones being overturned.
Same goes for your objection to a Commission imo.

The selective prosecutions you appear to favour would be reckless in the extreme

Godge

FrancieBrady wrote: »

We have seen the level of willingness of a supposedly 'responsible' government to do that in the case of their own soldiers who did wrong and we can conclude it is never going to happen.

The only pragmatic solution for those who want the truth is a T&R Commission, selectively punishing one side would not work and would be quite spectacularly counterproductive. .

SF would coach all the witnesses to the Commission, the same way they coached the witness to the NAMA enquiry - it would be worth nothing.

charlie14

Godge wrote: »

SF would coach all the witnesses to the Commission, the same way they coached the witness to the NAMA enquiry - it would be worth nothing.

.... and it`s your belief they would be the only one perhaps doing that ?

Just a btw as it`s not relevant to this thread, but with your mention of that NAMA enquiry, that 13 million sterling is still sitting in a bank in the Isle of Man that nobody is claiming faik.
Seems strange for a sale that was above board.

FrancieBrady

Godge wrote: »

SF would coach all the witnesses to the Commission, the same way they coached the witness to the NAMA enquiry - it would be worth nothing.

One swallow doesn't make a summer.
What you just inferred could be inferred about any party with a member who did something they shouldn't have.
And every party has those. Are FG all sterling loving fixers because one member took a bung?
Unless you have something to back that up I don't think the politics forum is the place for 'they are all the same' type rabble rousing soapboxing.

Brian?

Godge wrote: »

SF would coach all the witnesses to the Commission, the same way they coached the witness to the NAMA enquiry - it would be worth nothing.

Every witness that walks into a court room is coached. Most don't commit perjury. There's a huge difference, there is nothing wrong with coaching witnesses, asking them to lie is entirely different. If you believe SF will ask every witness to lie, just say it so it's nice a clear.

FrancieBrady

Brian? wrote: »

Every witness that walks into a court room is coached. Most don't commit perjury. There's a huge difference, there is nothing wrong with coaching witnesses, asking them to lie is entirely different. If you believe SF will ask every witness to lie, just say it so it's nice a clear.

Not 100% on the bones of the McKay story but did he ask/coach Bryson to lie? Is Robinson's name a complete invention?

Godge

Brian? wrote: »

Every witness that walks into a court room is coached. Most don't commit perjury. There's a huge difference, there is nothing wrong with coaching witnesses, asking them to lie is entirely different. If you believe SF will ask every witness to lie, just say it so it's nice a clear.

In this case the judge (Committee member McKay) coached a witness on how to implicate a defendant. If you think that is ok, you are living in a different country to me.

Are you suggesting that the gardai routinely coach witnesses in criminal cases? That is not my experience as a witness.

FrancieBrady

Godge wrote: »

In this case the judge (Committee member McKay) coached a witness on how to implicate a defendant. If you think that is ok, you are living in a different country to me.

Are you suggesting that the gardai routinely coach witnesses in criminal cases? That is not my experience as a witness.

I was doing a bit of reading on this. Did he not just (as far as anyone knows) just coach him on how to circumvent a committee, which Bryson thought would stop him or stymie him in naming who exactly he was accusing?
There is no evidence to suggest that it was anything other than that was there?

eire4

Godge wrote: »

In light of the revelations about McKay and O'Hara coaching witnesses to an enquiry, how can anyone put any credible faith in Sinn Fein actually telling the truth to a Truth and Reconciliation Commission or any other inquiry for that matter?

Well lets have the commission and then we can all see for ourselves do Sinn Féin and just as equally do the British government tell the truth. Not having a commission because you think something might happen is ridiculous as is your usual one sided finger pointing when lets face it the British government have lots of previous in terms of not telling the truth.