Stormont power sharing talks

tomwaterford

Red_Wake wrote: »

Do you actually believe that Unionists make up their entire culture to denigrate, what you perceive, as Irish culture?

Yes, particularly in relation to this language

Do you have evidence to suggest they've culture that amounts to.anything else other than trimplulism

Red_Wake

tomwaterford wrote: »

Red_Wake wrote: »

Do you actually believe that Unionists make up their entire culture to denigrate, what you perceive, as Irish culture?

Yes, particularly in relation to this language

Do you have evidence to suggest they've culture that amounts to.anything else other than trimplulism

How do you expect anyone to believe you'd respect and coexist with Unionists, when you come out with statements like that?

FrancieBrady

Red_Wake wrote: »

How do you expect anyone to believe you'd respect and coexist with Unionists, when you come out with statements like that?

He is talking about 'loyalism'.

'Co-existing on an equal basis' is not kowtowing, sweeping stuff under the carpet or pretending.

Now if you can pretend, like others here, that the reason Stormont has collapsed is the fault of the Irish people of northern Ireland then you carry on doing that.
It really won't help or make any difference.

The rest of us will keep the pressure on these religiously fundamentalist, suprematists to honour the committments to equality for everyone made in various agreements that they want to cherrypick from.

If the Irish people of northern Ireland had rolled over on the flag issue, marches etc like it is suggested they should do here, you would be dealing with more futile conflict at the flashpoints.

tomwaterford

Red_Wake wrote: »

How do you expect anyone to believe you'd respect and coexist with Unionists, when you come out with statements like that?

What is wrong with this statement??

They've no interest in respect or coexisting.... continue ly voting in the dup...treating any minority with contempt (LGBT,refugees,polish immigrants in the north have been treated terribly in loyalist area)


Hardly as bad as refering to Ireland's national games as terrorists at play?

If they weren't forced to,they wouldn't share power with nationlists...they treat nationlists issues with contempt and block and play to rules to avoid/skirt around Irish language issues etc

steddyeddy

Red_Wake wrote: »

Do you actually believe that Unionists make up their entire culture to denigrate, what you perceive, as Irish culture?

Bonfires with Irish flags?

FrancieBrady

If we were to write a list of all the things the DUP have dug their heels in about since before the GFA and after, it would be TL;DR.
And all of it based on their insecure anti-Irish and fundamentalist ideology.
And they capitulated on every one of them because their position is basically untenable and northern Ireland is a much much better place for that reason.

Their can be no hiding place for bigotry and suprematism on this island, not in a political party nor behind the skirts of a church.

blanch152

Red_Wake wrote: »

Do you actually believe that Unionists make up their entire culture to denigrate, what you perceive, as Irish culture?

It is very hard to understand but that type of sentiment appears to be widespread among Northern nationalists. It speaks to either

(1) an astonishing level of paranoia

(2) an embittered and entrenched hatred of unionists

(3) I really can't think of a third option.

Either way it doesn't augur well for mutual respect and recognition of each others culture. If one side believes the others culture is solely for the purpose of degenerating theirs there is little hope of any reconciliation progress in the North, a necessary precondition for progress towards a united Ireland.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

It is very hard to understand but that type of sentiment appears to be widespread among Northern nationalists. It speaks to either

(1) an astonishing level of paranoia

(2) an embittered and entrenched hatred of unionists

(3) I really can't think of a third option.

Either way it doesn't augur well for mutual respect and recognition of each others culture. If one side believes the others culture is solely for the purpose of degenerating theirs there is little hope of any reconciliation progress in the North, a necessary precondition for progress towards a united Ireland.

I'll challenge you to a list.
I will list unionist anti Irish/fundamentalist stances over the last 30 years and you come back with nationalist/Republican ones of the same weight, and we'll put the 'they are all the same' claim to bed once and for all.
You up for it?

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If we were to write a list of all the things the DUP have dug their heels in about since before the GFA and after, it would be TL;DR.
And all of it based on their insecure anti-Irish and fundamentalist ideology.
And they capitulated on every one of them because their position is basically untenable and northern Ireland is a much much better place for that reason.

Their can be no hiding place for bigotry and suprematism on this island, not in a political party nor behind the skirts of a church.

There is nobody on here defending the DUP's religious bigotry, misogyny or homophobia. However, it is interesting that the main thing being raised by nationalists on here is the Irish Language Act, mirroring SF's major concern out in the real world.

A real gamechanger for SF would be to back down on the Irish Language Act issue, accepting a Minority Languages Act instead, but in return insisted on same sex-marriage legalisation and adoption of UK abortion law. Now that would show they are interested in all the citizens of Northern Ireland rather than their own little patch.

Given the outrage that suggestion will create on here, I hold out little hope of it making it.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

There is nobody on here defending the DUP's religious bigotry, misogyny or homophobia. However, it is interesting that the main thing being raised by nationalists on here is the Irish Language Act, mirroring SF's major concern out in the real world.

A real gamechanger for SF would be to back down on the Irish Language Act issue, accepting a Minority Languages Act instead, but in return insisted on same sex-marriage legalisation and adoption of UK abortion law. Now that would show they are interested in all the citizens of Northern Ireland rather than their own little patch.

Given the outrage that suggestion will create on here, I hold out little hope of it making it.

Acquiesce to make some people feel a little better about not calling out unadulterated bigotry and supremacy that has been going on since the foundation of the statelet?
Not going to happen in my name.
We have reached a crossroad.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I'll challenge you to a list.
I will list unionist anti Irish/fundamentalist stances over the last 30 years and you come back with nationalist/Republican ones of the same weight, and we'll put the 'they are all the same' claim to bed once and for all.
You up for it?

You are the one that portrays me as having made a "they are all the same" claim as if it can be measured.

Why 30 years? Why not 50 years or the normal 800 years of oppression?

Looking back 20 years I only need to give one example - the Omagh bombing - to balance out the unionists anti-Irish stances (the fundamentalist stances should be disregarded) . Now I know the response will be that was not SF or the IRA and was condemned by ordinary nationalists, but there are many unionists who do not support the DUP position on everything.

If, as you appear to do, wish to tarnish the entire Unionist community with responsibility for the attitude of the DUP, then you must accept responsibility for the Omagh bombing and all other dissident republican activity.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Acquiesce to make some people feel a little better about not calling out unadulterated bigotry and supremacy that has been going on since the foundation of the statelet?
Not going to happen in my name.
We have reached a crossroad.

Not at all, make a big step towards representing all the people of Northern Ireland and be magnanimous towards the other side. Probably something beyond any of the actors in the North at the moment, but something we outsiders can wish for.

Junkyard Tom

blanch152 wrote: »

It is very hard to understand but that type of sentiment appears to be widespread among Northern nationalists. It speaks to either

(1) an astonishing level of paranoia

(2) an embittered and entrenched hatred of unionists

This year was the most peaceful 12th in decades. Why? The parades commision has put a stop to orange/unionist parades being forced through where they're not wanted. Meanwhile Orangemen called for the DUP to include marching up the Garvaghy Road as a condition of DUP support for the Tories.

Either way it doesn't augur well for mutual respect and recognition of each others culture.

Why should anyone have any interest in respecting, or appeasing, any culture that is built on (long gone) supremacism and sectarianism? To hell with that.

I'll tell you how we begin to reconcile, Unionists apologising for thier treatment of the minority and, you know, actually causing the troubles. How would that sit with the DUP?

there is little hope of any reconciliation progress in the North

Would your bizarre prescription for reconciliation expect Black people in the US to reconcile with the Klan?

a necessary precondition for progress towards a united Ireland

Nope. 50% plus one vote. You're not against the GFA are you?

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

You are the one that portrays me as having made a "they are all the same" claim as if it can be measured.

Why 30 years? Why not 50 years or the normal 800 years of oppression?

Looking back 20 years I only need to give one example - the Omagh bombing - to balance out the unionists anti-Irish stances (the fundamentalist stances should be disregarded) . Now I know the response will be that was not SF or the IRA and was condemned by ordinary nationalists, but there are many unionists who do not support the DUP position on everything.

If, as you appear to do, wish to tarnish the entire Unionist community with responsibility for the attitude of the DUP, then you must accept responsibility for the Omagh bombing and all other dissident republican activity.

Time and again on here I have described ordinary unionists as pragmatic reasonable decent people. And made the point time and again, that they are the reason Unionist politicians cannot and never have delivered the Never Never Never Armageddon they have so often threatened ( let's do the list to prove that).
All acts of violence were terrible, I accept that. Everybody, including those in the south who sat on their moral high ground, is tarnished by that. But it is over.

We have had circa 30 years talking about a settlement and an agreement.

I still challenge you to a list of behaviour under that settlement, that I contend will prove that there is one political party that is holding up normality and progress.

ARE you up to the challenge?

blanch152

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Would your bizarre prescription for reconciliation expect Black people in the US to reconcile with the Klan?

There is no comparison. At all.

Junkyard Tom

Don't pick one part of the post out so you can conveniently ignore the remainder.

blanch152 wrote: »

There is no comparison. At all.

I'll be a gentleman and make it easier for you:

1. Why should anyone have any interest in respecting, or appeasing, any culture that is built on (long gone) supremacism and sectarianism?

2. I'll tell you how we begin to reconcile, Unionists apologising for thier treatment of the minority and, you know, actually causing the troubles. How would that sit with Unionists? [amended DUP for Unionists]

3. Would your bizarre prescription for reconciliation expect Black people in the US to reconcile with the Klan?

4. Under the terms of the GFA a 50% +1 vote is all that's required for a UI, do you respect that agreement? [amended for clarity]

That's four questions.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Not at all, make a big step towards representing all the people of Northern Ireland and be magnanimous towards the other side. Probably something beyond any of the actors in the North at the moment, but something we outsiders can wish for.

No.
Belligerent bigoted Unionism is not going to be appeased. Neither is lazy hat doffing partitionism. That is just kicking the problem down a road.

Red_Wake

FrancieBrady wrote: »

blanch152 wrote: »

Not at all, make a big step towards representing all the people of Northern Ireland and be magnanimous towards the other side. Probably something beyond any of the actors in the North at the moment, but something we outsiders can wish for.

No.
Belligerent bigoted Unionism is not going to be appeased. Neither is lazy hat doffing partitionism. That is just kicking the problem down a road.

How would you describe the current SF response to unionism?

And is it a productive way of resolving the situation?

At the minute, it seems like nationalists are waiting for your 50% +1 votes, which is a product of demographic change as much as anything else[and could be set back by any number of national/international events], and hoping that in the event of unification, your opposing community will effectively cease to exist[which given the belligerence you repeatedly bring up, is unlikely].

Personally, as a voter in the ROI, were I asked to vote for a UI, I would vote for partition to continue. How would you persuade me that my concerns[economic, political, cultural and social] are unfounded?

steddyeddy

blanch152 wrote: »

There is no comparison. At all.

Well apart from the Orange Order/klan links. Sectarianism and supremacy.

blanch152

steddyeddy wrote: »

Well apart from the Orange Order/klan links. Sectarianism and supremacy.

The mere fact that people make glib comparisons between Unionists and the KKK as one poster did, shows how far mutual understanding and mutual respect have to go before the idea of unification can even be tabled.

FrancieBrady

Red_Wake wrote: »

How would you describe the current SF response to unionism?

And is it a productive way of resolving the situation?

All the other parties would describe the behaviour of the DUP since the GFA as frustrating and intolerable any longer.
You cannot expect anybody to go on and on and on appeasing. (which is what southern partitionists always seem to want)

At the minute, it seems like nationalists are waiting for your 50% +1 votes, which is a product of demographic change as much as anything else[and could be set back by any number of national/international events], and hoping that in the event of unification, your opposing community will effectively cease to exist[which given the belligerence you repeatedly bring up, is unlikely].

Personally, as a voter in the ROI, were I asked to vote for a UI, I would vote for partition to continue. How would you persuade me that my concerns[economic, political, cultural and social] are unfounded?

Off topic, open another thread.

Red_Wake

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Red_Wake wrote: »

How would you describe the current SF response to unionism?

And is it a productive way of resolving the situation?

All the other parties would describe the behaviour of the DUP since the GFA as frustrating and intolerable any longer.
You cannot expect anybody to go on and on and on appeasing. (which is what southern partitionists always seem to want) 

I'm asking about the SF response - how would you describe it, and is it constructive to making inroads to a long term solution?

If they're not doing the latter, they're guilty of kicking the can down the road as well. Would you agree or disagree?

FrancieBrady

Red_Wake wrote: »

I'm asking about the SF response - how would you describe it, and is it constructive to making inroads to a long term solution?

If they're not doing the latter, they're guilty of kicking the can down the road as well. Would you agree or disagree?

I think SF had no choice and were right to do what they did.

Now the two governments have to play their part and pressure the DUP to allow progress to normality to continue.

This 'can' has been kicked down the road since the GFA,

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I think SF had no choice and were right to do what they did.

Now the two governments have to play their part and pressure the DUP to allow progress to normality to continue.

This 'can' has been kicked down the road since the GFA,

There is always a choice, I outlined one in an earlier post.

blanch152 wrote: »

A real gamechanger for SF would be to back down on the Irish Language Act issue, accepting a Minority Languages Act instead, but in return insisted on same sex-marriage legalisation and adoption of UK abortion law. Now that would show they are interested in all the citizens of Northern Ireland rather than their own little patch.

.

Choice isn't lacking, courage is.

steddyeddy

blanch152 wrote: »

The mere fact that people make glib comparisons between Unionists and the KKK as one poster did, shows how far mutual understanding and mutual respect have to go before the idea of unification can even be tabled.

So Catholics in the North should get to know an organisation that hates Catholocs so much their members are banned if they go to a Catholic's funeral. No thanks. Maybe black people get to know the KKK or jews try to understand anti-semetic groups.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

There is always a choice, I outlined one in an earlier post.




Choice isn't lacking, courage is.

Appeasement to satisfy the lazy is no longer an option.
The road to normality has been waymarked with this Never Never Never stance...then capitulation and we get on with it.
And all the while unionism is finding out it isn't hell. It is just 'normal'.

Courage is to hold your ground and not give in.

steddyeddy

Red_Wake wrote: »

I'm asking about the SF response - how would you describe it, and is it constructive to making inroads to a long term solution?

If they're not doing the latter, they're guilty of kicking the can down the road as well. Would you agree or disagree?

It isn't constructive to ignore the fact that the DUP and their voters woupd do anything to fight Irish culture in the North. Cutting funds to send special needs to gaeltacht schools while pouring money into the Orange Order. They haven't accepted Irish culture. They didn'teven want to sign up to the GFA.so yes, SF were right to end government. It wasn't conducive to parity of esteem to continue.

FrancieBrady

steddyeddy wrote: »

It isn't constructive to ignore the fact that the DUP and their voters woupd do anything to fight Irish culture in the North. Cutting funds to send special needs to gaeltacht schools while pouring money into the Orange Order. They haven't accepted Irish culture. They didn'teven want to sign up to the GFA.so yes, SF were right to end government. It wasn't conducive to parity of esteem to continue.

'Esteem' it seems is appeasing religiously fundamental and culturally bigoted parties so that they can set up roadblocks further down the road.
That is the 'courageous' option apparently.

Fascinating really.

tomwaterford

blanch152 wrote: »

The mere fact that people make glib comparisons between Unionists and the KKK as one poster did, shows how far mutual understanding and mutual respect have to go before the idea of unification can even be tabled.

Tbf both are built on open bigotry and trimplulism??



Only on boards would you get someone to bat for the Orangemen, completely ignoring their anti Catholic anti Irish stance and say they should be understood/respected

If you grew up about them and they calling your mother's and sisters Fenian sluts and spitting into your garden passing and pissing on your local church.....it's somewhat hard to find anything to like about them


Except their delicious irony of playing the famine song in Ireland (another little lovable misunderstood song :rolleyes: )


It's a bigot organisation,it always was and most prodestants I've met my own age,from about Antrim wouldn't touch it with a barge pole....but you continue to beat the drum for em.....it's not that your blinded by anti SF has made you Scrabble desperately for allies...so you've leaned onto an organisation,which most likely dispises you

A Little Pony

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

According to the 2011 census, Irish was the main language of 0.238% of Northern Irish residents, while Ulster Scots was the main language of 0.004%. In other words, a grand total of 0.242% of the population of Northern Ireland speaks either as their primary language

Both the DUP and Sinn Fein should get their Language Act (or Acts) provided their assembly members agree to finance all the additional costs, including translation, signage, etc. out of their own pockets.

Fantastic post. It is just a sham and has nothing to do with the language at all. Sinn Fein aren't going anywhere with this one.

A Little Pony

steddyeddy wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

If they don't have Ulster Scots with it then they won't be getting it. Pretty much as simple as that.

Ulster Scotts isn't a language. It's quite simple.

It doesn't matter what it is. Sinn Fein is NOT getting an Irish Language Act unless Ulster Scots is included. I am just giving the reality of it. Sinn Fein can cry and moan about it to the cows come home, it won't matter. You know this too.

tomwaterford

A Little Pony wrote: »

It doesn't matter what it is. Sinn Fein is NOT getting an Irish Language Act unless Ulster Scots is included. I am just giving the reality of it. Sinn Fein can cry and moan about it to the cows come home, it won't matter. You know this too.

And there is the exact unionist mindset

We know it's not a language

But anything Irish can go smoke itself,
If we can't have out little add on to take the piss out of it.....a 16th century mindset mascarading as a culture/political ideology

A Little Pony

steddyeddy wrote: »

Red_Wake wrote: »

I'm asking about the SF response - how would you describe it, and is it constructive to making inroads to a long term solution?

If they're not doing the latter, they're guilty of kicking the can down the road as well. Would you agree or disagree?

It isn't constructive to ignore the fact that the DUP and their voters woupd do anything to fight Irish culture in the North. Cutting funds to send special needs to gaeltacht schools while pouring money into the Orange Order. They haven't accepted Irish culture. They didn'teven want to sign up to the GFA.so yes, SF were right to end government. It wasn't conducive to parity of esteem to continue.

Orange culture is Irish, so how is it against Irish culture when Orange culture has a lot of Irish symbolism.

A Little Pony

tomwaterford wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

It doesn't matter what it is. Sinn Fein is NOT getting an Irish Language Act unless Ulster Scots is included. I am just giving the reality of it. Sinn Fein can cry and moan about it to the cows come home, it won't matter. You know this too.

And there is the exact unionist mindset

We know it's not a language

But anything Irish can go smoke itself,
If we can't have out little add on to take the piss out of it.....a 16th century mindset mascarading as a culture/political ideology

The worst thing to ever have happened to the language is Sinn Fein. Good luck to Sinn Fein because if Irish Nationalists are gullible enough to believe them then fair play to them. The executive will only come back if the pay is stopped as that is what most of them only care about.

Junkyard Tom

A Little Pony wrote: »

The worst thing to ever have happened to the language is Sinn Fein.

No that would be British colonialism.

Good luck to Sinn Fein because if Irish Nationalists are gullible enough to believe them then fair play to them.

The SDLP and Alliance are in favour of an ILA too, it's not just a SF demand. It's really telling that the Welsh and Scots have LA's yet Unionists in the north are determined to block one, how un-British of them.

Junkyard Tom

Dear blanch152, please be a good sport and address these questions.

1. Why should anyone have any interest in respecting, or appeasing, any culture that is built on (long gone) supremacism and sectarianism?

2. I'll tell you how we begin to reconcile, Unionists apologising for thier treatment of the minority and, you know, actually causing the troubles. How would that sit with Unionists?

3. Would your bizarre prescription for reconciliation expect Black people in the US to reconcile with the Klan?

4. Under the terms of the GFA a 50% +1 vote is all that's required for a UI, do you respect that agreement?

Many thanks.

blanch152

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Dear blanch152, please be a good sport and address these questions.

1. Why should anyone have any interest in respecting, or appeasing, any culture that is built on (long gone) supremacism and sectarianism?

As opposed to respecting or appeasing any culture being built on the basis of future 50% +1 supremacism and sectarianism?

It is easy to make glib phrases like that about another's culture. It is much more difficult to respect the others culture and disregard the blatantly sectarian aspects (certain Wolfe Tones songs, Provisional IRA badges, Hunger Strike celebrations etc. which are disgusting sectarian parts of our own culture).

Both sides in the North need to do more to respect the other side's culture. I set out a proposal in an earlier post about how SF could be magnanimous and reach across the divide without compromising on Irish culture. An alternative first step would be to ban the sale of sectarian material from their website.

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

2. I'll tell you how we begin to reconcile, Unionists apologising for thier treatment of the minority and, you know, actually causing the troubles. How would that sit with Unionists?

I don't recall Unionists putting guns to the heads of IRA bombers to force them to detonate the bombs. The causes of the Troubles are multifold but there is no doubt that there are many on the Nationalist side who bear huge responsibility as well as others on the Unionist side. In particular, those who carried on the fight after Sunningdale carry a large amount of blame.

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

3. Would your bizarre prescription for reconciliation expect Black people in the US to reconcile with the Klan?

No. Two very very different situations in two very very different societies.

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

4. Under the terms of the GFA a 50% +1 vote is all that's required for a UI, do you respect that agreement?

Many thanks.

Of course, I respect the GFA, but I don't think you can have a solid foundation for a united Ireland based on a 50% +1 vote. For a united Ireland to succeed peacefully, it would need an overwhelming vote of close to 70% demonstrating that many Unionists have been convinced and won over.

Otherwise, there is a real risk that the South will reject it.

Junkyard Tom

blanch152 wrote: »

As opposed to respecting or appeasing any culture being built on the basis of future 50% +1 supremacism and sectarianism?

It is easy to make glib phrases like that about another's culture. It is much more difficult to respect the others culture and disregard the blatantly sectarian aspects (certain Wolfe Tones songs, Provisional IRA badges, Hunger Strike celebrations etc. which are disgusting sectarian parts of our own culture).

Both sides in the North need to do more to respect the other side's culture. I set out a proposal in an earlier post about how SF could be magnanimous and reach across the divide without compromising on Irish culture. An alternative first step would be to ban the sale of sectarian material from their website.

None of this answers the question posed, it's a rant of whataboutery and moral equivalence. I'll answer my own question. I, and I suspect many like me, have absolutely no intention of respecting a culture that that largely built on trying to disrespect me.

The causes of the Troubles are multifold but there is no doubt that there are many on the Nationalist side who bear huge responsibility as well as others on the Unionist side.

You're trying to 'balance the books'. There was systemic discrimination against the minority and the civil rights movement was met with brutality, the UVF were blowing things up and trying to blame it on Republicans long before the PIRA even formed. When are unionists going to apologise for creating the conditions for conflict?

I'll answer that: 'NEVER, NEVER, NEVER'

No. Two very very different situations in two very very different societies.

Black people faced far worse treatment but the analogy stands. Nobody should be expected to love thine abuser.

Of course, I respect the GFA, but...

No buts. 50% +1.

blanch152

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

None of this answers the question posed, it's a rant of whataboutery and moral equivalence. I'll answer my own question. I, and I suspect many like me, have absolutely no intention of respecting a culture that that largely built on trying to disrespect me.



You're trying to 'balance the books'. There was systemic discrimination against the minority and the civil rights movement was met with brutality, the UVF were blowing things up and trying to blame it on Republicans long before the PIRA even formed. When are unionists going to apologise for creating the conditions for conflict?

I'll answer that: 'NEVER, NEVER, NEVER'



Black people faced far worse treatment but the analogy stands. Nobody should be expected to love thine abuser.



No buts. 50% +1.

Grand so, we can agree to differ.

Junkyard Tom

blanch152 wrote: »

Grand so, we can agree to differ.

You'll agree to differ with history too then and this the British version of it.

A Little Pony

blanch152 wrote: »

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Dear blanch152, please be a good sport and address these questions.

1. Why should anyone have any interest in respecting, or appeasing, any culture that is built on (long gone) supremacism and sectarianism?

As opposed to respecting or appeasing any culture being built on the basis of future 50% +1 supremacism and sectarianism?

It is easy to make glib phrases like that about another's culture. It is much more difficult to respect the others culture and disregard the blatantly sectarian aspects (certain Wolfe Tones songs, Provisional IRA badges, Hunger Strike celebrations etc. which are disgusting sectarian parts of our own culture).

Both sides in the North need to do more to respect the other side's culture. I set out a proposal in an earlier post about how SF could be magnanimous and reach across the divide without compromising on Irish culture. An alternative first step would be to ban the sale of sectarian material from their website.

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

2. I'll tell you how we begin to reconcile, Unionists apologising for thier treatment of the minority and, you know, actually causing the troubles. How would that sit with Unionists?

I don't recall Unionists putting guns to the heads of IRA bombers to force them to detonate the bombs. The causes of the Troubles are multifold but there is no doubt that there are many on the Nationalist side who bear huge responsibility as well as others on the Unionist side. In particular, those who carried on the fight after Sunningdale carry a large amount of blame.

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

3. Would your bizarre prescription for reconciliation expect Black people in the US to reconcile with the Klan?

No. Two very very different situations in two very very different societies.

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

4. Under the terms of the GFA a 50% +1 vote is all that's required for a UI, do you respect that agreement?

Many thanks.

Of course, I respect the GFA, but I don't think you can have a solid foundation for a united Ireland based on a 50% +1 vote. For a united Ireland to succeed peacefully, it would need an overwhelming vote of close to 70% demonstrating that many Unionists have been convinced and won over.

Otherwise, there is a real risk that the South will reject it.

Outstanding post and agreed with every word of that. Particularly the sectarian numbers games these people try to play which has no meaning in the real world.

FrancieBrady

A Little Pony wrote: »

It doesn't matter what it is. Sinn Fein is NOT getting an Irish Language Act unless Ulster Scots is included. I am just giving the reality of it. Sinn Fein can cry and moan about it to the cows come home, it won't matter. You know this too.

Could you link to something that shows where this is coming from?
Maybe you have some inside knowledge?
Or maybe you are just indulging in the tried and tested and ultimately failed DUP tactic of shouting NEVER NEVER NEVER as loud as they can in the hope it hits the fact they have once again backed themselves into the untenable cul de sac they have become so familiar with. - Flags, marches etc

steddyeddy

A Little Pony wrote: »

Fantastic post. It is just a sham and has nothing to do with the language at all. Sinn Fein aren't going anywhere with this one.

Great we'll let the SDLP and Alliwnce continue. They want the same thing.

steddyeddy

A Little Pony wrote: »

Outstanding post and agreed with every word of that. Particularly the sectarian numbers games these people try to play which has no meaning in the real world.

You see Irish isn't sectarian. It was spoken by both sides a century ago. It would be a great way to build bridges across communities.

Professor Moriarty

steddyeddy wrote: »

You see Irish isn't sectarian. It was spoken by both sides a century ago. It would be a great way to build bridges across communities.

In fact, many of the stalwarts of the Gaelic Revival and other Irish cultural revivals were wealthy Protestants.

But you can't compare maintaining and promoting one of Europe's most ancient languages with aggressive bigotry and sectarianism. Or a dialect. To do so insults your neighbour and simply exposes frightened and biased thinking. The rest of the world is casting Unionism adrift. The Tory/DUP temporary little arrangement will be dropped soon As the UK sunders further, English/Scottish/Welsh politicians will do what is best for their electorate.

Unionists who think that England will care about them are deluded. For its own sake, Unionism should think about who will be its friend in the future. Protestant ascendancy is over. Paranoid sulking and sectarianism won't bring it back. It's time to grow up.

blanch152

steddyeddy wrote: »

You see Irish isn't sectarian. It was spoken by both sides a century ago. It would be a great way to build bridges across communities.

Nobody anywhere ever said Irish was sectarian. Why are you answering a point that was never ever made?

Irishweather

I've looked at the census (1901) and no one in either side of my family spoke Irish.

I can certainly tell you that it has been a LONG old time since Irish was spoken with any capacity in my area.

You can go on about Protestants speaking Irish etc, that was a LONG time ago, maybe in and around the 1800's. Looking at the population statistics in my area, i'm not sure that even happened anyway, with the fact that the Planter population here was higher than the Irish since about 1650.

Irishweather

A Little Pony wrote: »

Fantastic post. It is just a sham and has nothing to do with the language at all. Sinn Fein aren't going anywhere with this one.

To be fair, I think people should be given a right to speak Irish if they want.But, I personally don't want Irish to get to the stage where we have it put on some sort of Pedestal, i.e given Irish Language Road Signs in North Antrim, more Irish Language schools than necessary, Irish language legislation, making Irish an Official language.

You know wasting of money and enforcement of Irish when it is not necessary.

After all, English is our first language here in Northern Ireland, not Irish.

Professor Moriarty

Irishweather wrote: »

To be fair, I think people should be given a right to speak Irish if they want.But, I personally don't want Irish to get to the stage where we have it put on some sort of Pedal Stool, i.e given Irish Language Road Signs in North Antrim, more Irish Language schools than necessary, Irish language legislation, making Irish an Official language.

You know wasting of money and enforcement of Irish when it is not necessary.

After all, English is our first language here in Northern Ireland, not Irish.

Irish is an official language of the EU.

Professor Moriarty

Irishweather wrote: »

I've looked at the census (1901) and no one in either side of my family spoke
Irish.

I can certainly tell you that it has been a LONG old time since
Irish was spoken with any capacity in my area.

You can go on about
Protestants speaking Irish etc, that was a LONG time ago, maybe in and around
the 1800's. Looking at the population statistics in my area, i'm not sure that
even happened anyway, with the fact that the Planter population here was
higher than the Irish since about 1650.[/

Would you have a link to this please?