Opinions on Irish identity

recedite

jm08 wrote: »

Why do you regard Sinn Fein as sectarian? I think they are a lot of things, but I don't see them as sectarian now.

Whether they are now doesn't really matter though. The legacy of being the political wing of the IRA lives on. Gerry can deny he was ever a commander, but the majority of people will always believe otherwise.

You wouldn't expect the nazi party to do well in Germany now, even if they had genuinely given up that whole jew-hating thing.

Sometimes a name change and a reboot is in order. The RUC managed to do it.

jm08

blanch152 wrote: »

And I am sure that there are many in the unionist camp who do not see the DUP as sectarian.

There is no doubt that from the material available for sale on their website to the presence in their ranks of terrorists through their treatment of Mairia Cahill and Paudie McGahan, the defence of the "good" republicans, etc. (and I could go on and on) that SF is still a party with deep sectarian roots.

As I have said many times, a plague on both their houses.

You will need to be more specific than that. Mairia Cahill and McGahan are victims of abuse, not sectarianism.

jm08

Ulsterman96 wrote: »

both are routed in sectarianism, and both only represent their own people, though it can be said that SF are changing their image to more drastically to represent a larger community, aka the minority community, which even thought it can be seen as a stunt to make them seem the lesser of two evils, its still a good thing that the minority community i.e those of different sexual orientation are fairly being represented as I believe it is peoples rights to love those of the same sex.

My protestant grandfather lived in a area that mainly voted DUP representatives, but they did nothing for the community and he would always argue with them when they called to his door asking for their vote, he considered himself British, but he voted SF purely because they got things done for him as he was a protestant willing to vote for them. He always told me a United Ireland was coming in my lifetime.

So they can't win then - if they try and help someone out from the other tribe, its a stunt!

You make my point for me, Sinn Fein are trying to become a mainstream party but unionists won't give them a chance.

Just to declare, I'm from the ROI and have never voted Sinn Fein even though there are candidates in my constituency, so I'm not in Sinn Fein's camp. All I want to do is give credit where it is due. I think the UUP have also tried, but their is no hope for the DUP. They don't even try not to look like a party of sectarian bigots.

blanch152

jm08 wrote: »

You will need to be more specific than that. Mairia Cahill and McGahan are victims of abuse, not sectarianism.

There were two other examples given in my post which you chose to ignore.

Furthermore, as long as SF are celebrating any aspect of "the Troubles", then they are sectarian and haven't left the past behind.

Orange Order marches and Hunger Strike Commemorations are two sides of the same coin.

jm08

blanch152 wrote: »

There were two other examples given in my post which you chose to ignore.

What two examples of sectarianism? Since both catholics & protestants were terrorised by the IRA (not Sinn Fein), I don't think you can label them sectarian.

Furthermore, as long as SF are celebrating any aspect of "the Troubles", then they are sectarian and haven't left the past behind.

Orange Order marches and Hunger Strike Commemorations are two sides of the same coin.

That is not sectarianism though and I don't think anyone is celebrating 'The Troubles'. Commemorating the dead maybe. Thats what people do. Orange Order marches celebrate the defeat of the catholic native Irish in a battle 400 years ago. No one has a problem really with them doing that. The problems are caused when they attempt to march in places they are not wanted. The Orange Order is a sectarian organisation since roman catholics are not allowed join. Anyone can join Sinn Fein.

You might be interested in this exhibition in Kilmainham Gaol. Not sure if its over yet.

The long history of the Irish hunger strike

New exhibition in Kilmainham Gaol tells the story from Thomas Ashe to Bobby Sands


https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/heritage/the-long-history-of-the-irish-hunger-strike-1.3228103

James Brown

Surely the troubles are part of our identity, as is the rising and the civil war? The British seem to commemorate their conflicts without being accused of being stuck in the past. I don't see the legitimacy in talking about putting such things behind us, yet bringing them up when ever thought to be politically expedient. I suppose your Irish Identity depends on your personal narrative not the politics of convenience. I can't see either Fianna Fail or Fine Gael moving on, even after the GFA, so it's not surprising that SF/DUP are still mired in it.

FrancieBrady

Ulsterman96 wrote: »

both are routed in sectarianism, and both only represent their own people, though it can be said that SF are changing their image to more drastically to represent a larger community, aka the minority community, which even thought it can be seen as a stunt to make them seem the lesser of two evils, its still a good thing that the minority community i.e those of different sexual orientation are fairly being represented as I believe it is peoples rights to love those of the same sex. 
My protestant grandfather lived in a area that mainly voted DUP representatives, but they did nothing for the community and he would always argue with them when they called to his door asking for their vote, he considered himself British, but he voted SF purely because they got things done for him as he was a protestant willing to vote for them. He always told me a United Ireland was coming in my lifetime.

Can you name a policy of SF's that is 'sectarian' (I think some may have to look up what 'sectarian' is.)
Do you think the DUP connection withand protection of, the OO (marches etc) is 'sectarian'?

Can you name a policy of SF's that is discriminatory to any minority gender, culture or identity?
Can you name any DUP policies that are the above.

SF are no saints, but I think if you run the above test you can only conclude that they are light years ahead of the DUP.


And yet, the data shows that a huge percentage of protestants who identify as 'Northern Irish' were voting for the DUP in 2014 and their percentage of the vote rose in the subsequent years.

jm08

recedite wrote: »

Whether they are now doesn't really matter though. The legacy of being the political wing of the IRA lives on. Gerry can deny he was ever a commander, but the majority of people will always believe otherwise.

You wouldn't expect the nazi party to do well in Germany now, even if they had genuinely given up that whole jew-hating thing.

Sometimes a name change and a reboot is in order. The RUC managed to do it.

Sinn Fein are not sectarian though and I don't think they ever were. Their targets were British security forces. If they were sectarian, I'd imagine people like Ian Paisley would not have died of old age. I think you need to have a little re-think in suggesting that Sinn Fein is somewhat similar to the Nazi Party!

Both tribes in Northern Ireland need to address the past together and nothing will change until that happens.

Ulsterman96

This thread is really becoming a representation of the troubles faced on this island, and most particularly Northern Ireland, and gotten of topic, so to clear things up on my perspective of the politics in Northern Ireland and you's can continue with your own debating, I encourage it anyhow on the topic of SF/DUP 
-both will never rid of that stench of association with republican paramilitaries and loyalist paramilitaries. I will be honest, SF has distanced itself further away from the hatred of the past in contrast to that of the DUP and in doing so, have become more progressive, but still both parties have their main agendas of which can be defined by many people and many of the followers, but it seems to be the same old story, vote SF for a United Ireland, vote DUP to remain in the UK. Vote Green, Vote Orange, a SF vote is an Irish vote, a DUP vote is a British vote. And any other party can not compete with this, or even edge into the middle, because a vote for an alternative, is to take a vote away from both the DUP/SF. I agree with what jm08 has said:
Both tribes in Northern Ireland need to address the past together and nothing will change until that happens.


[font=Open Sans, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]100% absolute tribalism in a modern disguise.[/font]

FrancieBrady

Ulsterman96 wrote: »

This thread is really becoming a representation of the troubles faced on this island, and most particularly Northern Ireland, and gotten of topic, so to clear things up on my perspective of the politics in Northern Ireland and you's can continue with your own debating, I encourage it anyhow on the topic of SF/DUP 
-both will never rid of that stench of association with republican paramilitaries and loyalist paramilitaries. I will be honest, SF has distanced itself further away from the hatred of the past in contrast to that of the DUP and in doing so, have become more progressive, but still both parties have their main agendas of which can be defined by many people and many of the followers, but it seems to be the same old story, vote SF for a United Ireland, vote DUP to remain in the UK. Vote Green, Vote Orange, a SF vote is an Irish vote, a DUP vote is a British vote. And any other party can not compete with this, or even edge into the middle, because a vote for an alternative, is to take a vote away from both the DUP/SF. I agree with what jm08 has said:
Both tribes in Northern Ireland need to address the past together and nothing will change until that happens.

I don't apologise to anyone for supporting the idea of a UI, and I don't think there is anything wrong with a politicl party supporting it either. It is a legitimate aim.
I also don't see anything wrong with Unionism, I only have a problem with it when it is bigoted, sectarian and suprematist.

In fact I find the debate between the strands of republicanism and unionism fascinating.
So I don't see what your problem is other than a dislike of the debate and possibly boredom.

.

[font=Open Sans, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]100% absolute tribalism in a modern disguise.[/font]

In all fairness, you said you were young, but I think you will realise one day that all politics is about types of tribes of one kind or another, left, right, FF-FG, Tory - Lab etc etc.

blanch152

jm08 wrote: »

What two examples of sectarianism? Since both catholics & protestants were terrorised by the IRA (not Sinn Fein), I don't think you can label them sectarian.

That is the most peculiar justification for a claim that the IRA weren't sectarian.

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Surely the troubles are part of our identity, as is the rising and the civil war? The British seem to commemorate their conflicts without being accused of being stuck in the past. I don't see the legitimacy in talking about putting such things behind us, yet bringing them up when ever thought to be politically expedient. I suppose your Irish Identity depends on your personal narrative not the politics of convenience. I can't see either Fianna Fail or Fine Gael moving on, even after the GFA, so it's not surprising that SF/DUP are still mired in it.

The Troubles are certainly not any part of my identity as an Irishman, if we are to acknowledge them, we have to consider them as shameful acts done in our name. If the Brighton bombing made you anything other than shamed to be Irish, there is something wrong with you. Ditto Birmingham, Guildford, Canary Wharf and countless other atrocities.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I don't apologise to anyone for supporting the idea of a UI.

Nobody is suggesting you should apologise for supporting the idea of a United Ireland. I support the idea of a United Ireland should certain conditions be met.

It is your defence of (I use those words carefully as you claim you are not a supporter) the tribal and sectarian politics of Sinn Fein that attracts criticism.

I have no problem at all with your support of a United Ireland and acceptance of the principle of consent. How you square that with the other parts of what you say are what gives me difficulty.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

That is the most peculiar justification for a claim that the IRA weren't sectarian.






The Troubles are certainly not any part of my identity as an Irishman, if we are to acknowledge them, we have to consider them as shameful acts done in our name. If the Brighton bombing made you anything other than shamed to be Irish, there is something wrong with you. Ditto Birmingham, Guildford, Canary Wharf and countless other atrocities.

That is ridiculous to be honest. Just as you cannot invent yourself a nice cozy warm identity, you cannot cherrypick one with all the good bits either.

I'm Irish and part of me is all the good and bad bits. The DUP are as much a part of what it means to be Irish as Seamus Heaney is.
I try to change the bad and cherish the good

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That is ridiculous to be honest. Just as you cannot invent yourself a nice cozy warm identity, you cannot cherrypick one with all the good bits either.

I'm Irish and part of me is all the good and bad bits. The DUP are as much a part of what it means to be Irish as Seamus Heaney is.
I try to change the bad and cherish the good

So we agree that Guildford, Birmingham, Canary Wharf and the other atrocities committed by the IRA and supported by Sinn Fein and today celebrated and commemorated by Sinn Fein, are a shameful part of our heritage.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

So we agree that Guildford, Birmingham, Canary Wharf and the other atrocities committed by the IRA and supported by Sinn Fein and today celebrated and commemorated by Sinn Fein, are a shameful part of our heritage.

I'm ashamed of the entire conflict, of every act of violence and those, all those who allowed it to happen.
I accept my own responsibilities in that too.

That's what makes me who I am.

cameramonkey

blanch152 wrote: »

So we agree that Guildford, Birmingham, Canary Wharf and the other atrocities committed by the IRA and supported by Sinn Fein and today celebrated and commemorated by Sinn Fein, are a shameful part of our heritage.

why are you just picking the actions of one group? Why dont you include the murders by the UK government and military support for loyalist terrorist by the UK government in your condemnations?

You post is a clumsy attempt to put the blame for the conflict on just one.

jm08

blanch152 wrote: »

That is the most peculiar justification for a claim that the IRA weren't sectarian.

Well you have come up with the most bizarre arguments that Sinn Fein is a sectarian organisation.

The Troubles are certainly not any part of my identity as an Irishman, if we are to acknowledge them, we have to consider them as shameful acts done in our name. If the Brighton bombing made you anything other than shamed to be Irish, there is something wrong with you. Ditto Birmingham, Guildford, Canary Wharf and countless other atrocities.

Of course they are shameful acts, but they certainly were not done in my name.

I'd be interested to know what you think of the British legal system who destroyed the lives of about 15 innocent Irish people who were falsely accused of some of these bombings?

FrancieBrady

@ulsterman96

We know that the Northern Irish 'identity' is disparate and is not in any way cohesive and seems split into the familiar sides when it comes to voting, so I don't expect you to answer this on behalf of them all.

As we have seen on this very thread - the penchant of one side in the south is to continuously blame one side and to raise what they did every time there is mention of the conflict/war.
What would somebody with a Northern Irish identity propose about dealing with the past?
Would you favour a Truth and Reconciliation process - investigate and imprison all who were involved - or to just forget it all and move on - or some other process?

murphaph

FrancieBrady wrote: »

@ulsterman96

We know that the Northern Irish 'identity' is disparate and is not in any way cohesive and seems split into the familiar sides when it comes to voting, so I don't expect you to answer this on behalf of them all.

As we have seen on this very thread - the penchant of one side in the south is to continuously blame one side and to raise what they did every time there is mention of the conflict/war.
What would somebody with a Northern Irish identity propose about dealing with the past?
Would you favour a Truth and Reconciliation process - investigate and imprison all who were involved - or to just forget it all and move on - or some other process?

The Irish identity also votes many different ways as does the British or German. I guess you can't infer everything from which political party a person with a certain identity votes for.

People blame the IRA the most because the original civil rights issues were dealt with early on in the conflict once the discriminatory NI government was replaced by direct rule. The loss of life that occurred after this point in the mid seventies was entirely avoidable (even if you accept the loss of life up to this point was not).

Junkyard Tom

murphaph wrote: »

the original civil rights issues were dealt with early on in the conflict once the discriminatory NI government was replaced by direct rule.

This bizarre summation displays nothing other than an astonishing lack of knowledge.

murphaph

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

This bizarre summation displays nothing other than an astonishing lack of knowledge.

They were certainly dealt with to an extent that the IRA had no good reason to continue killing people. Correct?

FrancieBrady

murphaph wrote: »

They were certainly dealt with to an extent that the IRA had no good reason to continue killing people. Correct?

You are trying to drag this off topic.
I asked how a NI identity proposed to deal with the past?
Maybe tell us how your identity proposes to deal with it.
Very relevant as another tranche of suppressed material is released today from a previous violent and revolutionary period on this island arising from the same divisions and issues.

blanch152

cameramonkey wrote: »

why are you just picking the actions of one group? Why dont you include the murders by the UK government and military support for loyalist terrorist by the UK government in your condemnations?

You post is a clumsy attempt to put the blame for the conflict on just one.

Not at all, there is nobody denying for example that the DUP are sectarian or that the Birmingham Six were subject to appalling injustice (I marched in support of them years ago, even though some of those I marched with supported the actual bombings) or that the reaction of British soldiers on Bloody Sunday was wrong or that there was collusion between security forces and loyalist terrorists.

Nobody on here denies these things, yet there are some who deny that the IRA campaign was wrong, who deny that SF is a sectarian organisation which commemorates and celebrates sectarian acts of terrorism, whose website profits on the back of those sectarian acts, which condones the covering-up of child abuse, which protects its leader from his very murky past, which collects terrrorists released from prison etc. etc. That is why my response only focussed on one side, because there is only one side on here denying culpability or whitewashing what happened.

If there were posters from the Unionist community defending the gay marriage ban or Bloody Sunday, then I would be after them, but there aren't. They just don't post on here, it is only the defenders of SF (not supporters as they don't vote for them) who post on here defending the indefensible.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Not at all, there is nobody denying for example that the DUP are sectarian or that the Birmingham Six were subject to appalling injustice (I marched in support of them years ago, even though some of those I marched with supported the actual bombings) or that the reaction of British soldiers on Bloody Sunday was wrong or that there was collusion between security forces and loyalist terrorists.

Nobody on here denies these things, yet there are some who deny that the IRA campaign was wrong, who deny that SF is a sectarian organisation which commemorates and celebrates sectarian acts of terrorism, whose website profits on the back of those sectarian acts, which condones the covering-up of child abuse, which protects its leader from his very murky past, which collects terrrorists released from prison etc. etc. That is why my response only focussed on one side, because there is only one side on here denying culpability or whitewashing what happened.

If there were posters from the Unionist community defending the gay marriage ban or Bloody Sunday, then I would be after them, but there aren't. They just don't post on here, it is only the defenders of SF (not supporters as they don't vote for them) who post on here defending the indefensible.

I'm am not sure why you cannot accept a point of view that believes it was all wrong.l, from start to finish. The start being the circumstances that allowed the lid to come off.

Please deal with the on topic stuff asked.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I'm am not sure why you cannot accept a point of view that believes it was all wrong.l, from start to finish. The start being the circumstances that allowed the lid to come off.
.

A point of view that believes it was all wrong is not compatible with defending or supporting either the DUP or SF.

If an Alliance/Green/SDLP/PBP (maybe even UUP at a stretch) supporter is on here stating they believe it is all wrong, that is credible. Unfortunately, there are few enough of those.

jm08

murphaph wrote: »

They were certainly dealt with to an extent that the IRA had no good reason to continue killing people. Correct?

No they were not. The Sunningdale Agreement (1973) was violently rejected by Unionists.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

A point of view that believes it was all wrong is not compatible with defending or supporting either the DUP or SF.

If an Alliance/Green/SDLP/PBP (maybe even UUP at a stretch) supporter is on here stating they believe it is all wrong, that is credible. Unfortunately, there are few enough of those.

Why is it not compatible?
You mistake defending republicanism (Which like every other 'ism' cannot always be defended) with defence of SF.

And you wreck almost every reasonable discussion in your crusade.

It was all wrong. It is over.
How will/should the multiple identities deal with the past?

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

That is the most peculiar justification for a claim that the IRA weren't sectarian.






The Troubles are certainly not any part of my identity as an Irishman, if we are to acknowledge them, we have to consider them as shameful acts done in our name. If the Brighton bombing made you anything other than shamed to be Irish, there is something wrong with you. Ditto Birmingham, Guildford, Canary Wharf and countless other atrocities.

I believe our shared history makes up our identity. That does not necessarily mean you condone events or even celebrate them.
Neither the actions of the IRA, the Unionists, the British army or Fianna Fail and Fine Gael for that matter could make me ashamed of being Irish. Neither they, nor any political party, own my Irishness. I won't go into one man's freedom fighter, another man's terrorist territory for it is a complete bore at this point. Also you can want a united Ireland and not be a SF supporter. Just like you might wish to remain under British jurisdiction and not condone their previous actions.
Talk about stuck in the past; while people use the troubles as a political football in the most selfish of ways, we'll keep having the same tired arguments.
It's unfortunate our politicians, in the south, use such a sad chapter in our history for point scoring, which chips away at the GFA and makes a mockery of the deaths.
Hopefully the younger generation will be bored of the point scoring and simply want to get on with living.
I don't think there will ever be a day were all business is wrapped up and done. Even with a United Ireland, we'll have the Ulster Scots etc.

Ulsterman96

I do not have a solution to the troubles still faced in Ireland, north and south, the Northern Irish identity does not have a solution, the Irish do not have a solution, the British also do not have a solution, only opinions, it wouldn't even surprise me if some people believed committing mass genocide as a viable way to deal with the whole us vs them problem. Ireland will be divided for decades to come, Ireland will still be troubled even when united, our grandchildren will be faced with the issues faced with us today, but theres no reason we cant ease the burden for the future. I can not tell people how to live, how to act, what to believe, what not to believe, me and me alone can only contribute to a peaceful future for Ireland, by keep on doing what Im doing, and that is: I do not judge someone on their religion or their political stance, I judge them on their individuality, if someone is sectarian to me, I do not assume the people of his religion is all like that, he's just a bad apple, I do not support any paramilitary on both sides, I do not condone them, people can give me that old argument "but we had no choice" this might have been true in some instances, but when you plot, when you participate in the murder of innocent people, you lose all creditability as a human being, and your cause loses creditability, and so do the people who support it, this is applied to the British Army as well. I recognise the fact, there was mistreatment of catholics by the government of NI, and also by the Protestant people, but I also recognise, that it wasn't all government members, and it wasn't all protestants who mistreated them and vice versa with the protestants in the south after independence. I see republicans as normal people with a belief, I see loyalists as normal people with a belief, and I respect both their opinions, I just do not accept the murder or hatred caused on behalf of those beliefs. I am friends with both catholics and protestants, I have dated both protestant and catholic girls, and currently dating a catholic. People are just people trying to make a living, just as I am, and just as you's are, if a UI comes, then it comes, if it doesnt, then it doesnt, I wish we get along with our lives without killing each other, leave the troubles in the past, I do not see members of the IRA as heroes, and I do not see members of the UDA as heroes either, I seem them as glorified murderers. I see the likes of Van Morrison, Seamus Heaney, W.B Yeats, CS Lewis, Rory McIlroy, Oscar Wilde, Stiff Little Fingers, U2, The Undertones, Terri Hooley, and many others, I see these people as those who Ireland should be proud of, they got on with their lives, and brought enjoyment to both sides, not just one. 
this is all my own opinion 

FrancieBrady

Ulsterman96 wrote: »

I do not have a solution to the troubles still faced in Ireland, north and south, the Northern Irish identity does not have a solution, the Irish do not have a solution, the British also do not have a solution, only opinions, it wouldn't even surprise me if some people believed committing mass genocide as a viable way to deal with the whole us vs them problem. Ireland will be divided for decades to come, Ireland will still be troubled even when united, our grandchildren will be faced with the issues faced with us today, but theres no reason we cant ease the burden for the future. I can not tell people how to live, how to act, what to believe, what not to believe, me and me alone can only contribute to a peaceful future for Ireland, by keep on doing what Im doing, and that is: I do not judge someone on their religion or their political stance, I judge them on their individuality, if someone is sectarian to me, I do not assume the people of his religion is all like that, he's just a bad apple, I do not support any paramilitary on both sides, I do not condone them, people can give me that old argument "but we had no choice" this might have been true in some instances, but when you plot, when you participate in the murder of innocent people, you lose all creditability as a human being, and your cause loses creditability, and so do the people who support it, this is applied to the British Army as well. I recognise the fact, there was mistreatment of catholics by the government of NI, and also by the Protestant people, but I also recognise, that it wasn't all government members, and it wasn't all protestants who mistreated them and vice versa with the protestants in the south after independence. I see republicans as normal people with a belief, I see loyalists as normal people with a belief, and I respect both their opinions, I just do not accept the murder or hatred caused on behalf of those beliefs. I am friends with both catholics and protestants, I have dated both protestant and catholic girls, and currently dating a catholic. People are just people trying to make a living, just as I am, and just as you's are, if a UI comes, then it comes, if it doesnt, then it doesnt, I wish we get along with our lives without killing each other, leave the troubles in the past, I do not see members of the IRA as heroes, and I do not see members of the UDA as heroes either, I seem them as glorified murderers. I see the likes of Van Morrison, Seamus Heaney, W.B Yeats, CS Lewis, Rory McIlroy, Oscar Wilde, Stiff Little Fingers, U2, The Undertones, Terri Hooley, and many others, I see these people as those who Ireland should be proud of, they got on with their lives, and brought enjoyment to both sides, not just one. 
this is all my own opinion 

That doesn't really answer my question but I can assume some things from it (quite happy to be contradicted)
It seems to me that it is a bit of an abdication.
You have abdicated from dealing with the past and seem to want to move on.

And when you say you will accept a UI you seem to say you abdicate from any involvment in shaping the future.
You seem to be saying you will just go with the flow to avoid conflict and allow others to decide.

Ulsterman96

I wasn't alive during those times, I had no say in it, Im perfectly happy to keep on doing what Im doing by not being sectarian or judgemental onto others, I want no part of the same old fight, green vs orange, protestant vs catholic, etc, I see us as equals, and like I've stated many of times before, I will only support a new Ireland if the people who advocate for it can show me that is in my best interests and the interests of the people around me from both sides, then I will give a united Ireland my vote, if not, then my vote will be a no, simple democracy. I contribute to peace, by not contributing to hatred. If you think that is just going with the flow, then so be it, Ill go with the flow wherever it goes, as long as the people of this island do not have to deal with what they had to deal with before I was born. Im just a young Northern Irish lad, from a mixed background, who feels lucky to have been born in a such a beautiful place, I love my Irish and my British countrymen, I am saddened that some decide to hate each other, but I alone can not change the hearts and minds of which has been shaped due to hundreds of years of dark history, I understand if there is people on this forum who hate me just for not having a side or a horse in their race, but that is your right to hate me and to pick apart anything I say or do, but the end of the day, we are all men, women and children of Ireland, I just decide not to conform to the same old troubled story of Ireland

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That doesn't really answer my question but I can assume some things from it (quite happy to be contradicted)
It seems to me that it is a bit of an abdication.
You have abdicated from dealing with the past and seem to want to move on.

And when you say you will accept a UI you seem to say you abdicate from any involvment in shaping the future.
You seem to be saying you will just go with the flow to avoid conflict and allow others to decide.

You want him to take sides, just like every other person on one side of another of any conflict.

He isn't taking sides, and that is confusing you. Fair play to him.

A Little Pony

screamer wrote: »

I think a northern Irish identity is exactly what is needed and missing in northern Ireland. You have people who are culturally displaced clinging to some dead Dutch king for identity or clinging to an Irish flag. Really neither of these represent northern Ireland and the sooner that the northern Irish identity is established and becomes the cultural identity the better. For what it's worth I don't ever see northern Ireland belonging to any country but itself and that self determination needs to happen and so those elected who can't seem to get their **** together in stormont are really not helping things.

If you just think Unionists look at William of Orange then you are mistaken. Much more to us than remembering the great victory at the Boyne.

James Brown

A Little Pony wrote: »

If you just think Unionists look at William of Orange then you are mistaken. Much more to us than remembering the great victory at the Boyne.

How does Loyalism to the British align with celebrating the defeat of an English King by a Dutch monarch, in part financed by the Catholic Pope? If the other side of things had won I can't see Nationalists or other Irish people celebrating in the same way.
Is it a case of separating tradition/religion and Britishness? Or is it just for the pageantry?

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

You want him to take sides, just like every other person on one side of another of any conflict.

He isn't taking sides, and that is confusing you. Fair play to him.

I don't want him to take sides. I said two very specific things.
1. That it seemed that he was turning a blind eye to dealing with the past. Which means everyone walks away and there is no truth, no closure.

2. That it seemed he was abdicating having anything to do with his future. That it was somebody else's decision.

FrancieBrady

Ulsterman96 wrote: »

I wasn't alive during those times, I had no say in it, Im perfectly happy to keep on doing what Im doing by not being sectarian or judgemental onto others, I want no part of the same old fight, green vs orange, protestant vs catholic, etc, I see us as equals, and like I've stated many of times before, I will only support a new Ireland if the people who advocate for it can show me that is in my best interests and the interests of the people around me from both sides, then I will give a united Ireland my vote, if not, then my vote will be a no, simple democracy. I contribute to peace, by not contributing to hatred. If you think that is just going with the flow, then so be it, Ill go with the flow wherever it goes, as long as the people of this island do not have to deal with what they had to deal with before I was born. Im just a young Northern Irish lad, from a mixed background, who feels lucky to have been born in a such a beautiful place, I love my Irish and my British countrymen, I am saddened that some decide to hate each other, but I alone can not change the hearts and minds of which has been shaped due to hundreds of years of dark history, I understand if there is people on this forum who hate me just for not having a side or a horse in their race, but that is your right to hate me and to pick apart anything I say or do, but the end of the day, we are all men, women and children of Ireland, I just decide not to conform to the same old troubled story of Ireland

So I missed your answer on the phone.

I cannot understand how somebody whose identity wants a better tomorrow is prepared to just leave the past unresolved and un-confronted.
I again, make no bones about my belief that the past has to be confronted and dealt with in a truth recovery process.

And I also cannot understand how you can resign your future to be in somebody else's hands and kinda disbelieve that anyone would do that.

Not voting for a particular outcome (either way, UI or remain in the UK lest I be accused of wanting you to take sides.) effectively means you are voting for the side that wins, so you may as well have an opinion.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So I missed your answer on the phone.

I cannot understand how somebody whose identity wants a better tomorrow is prepared to just leave the past unresolved and un-confronted.
I again, make no bones about my belief that the past has to be confronted and dealt with in a truth recovery process.

And I also cannot understand how you can resign your future to be in somebody else's hands and kinda disbelieve that anyone would do that.

Not voting for a particular outcome (either way, UI or remain in the UK lest I be accused of wanting you to take sides.) effectively means you are voting for the side that wins, so you may as well have an opinion.

Both communities need to learn how to understand each other but also how to understand the new emerging middle ground.

Yes, your worldview is being challenged and you are struggling to see how a Northern Irish identity fits in with a bipartisan approach to Northern Ireland. Essentially, as I interpret the approach of the Northern Ireland identity to the past is that it doesn't really matter that much.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Both communities need to learn how to understand each other but also how to understand the new emerging middle ground.

Yes, your worldview is being challenged and you are struggling to see how a Northern Irish identity fits in with a bipartisan approach to Northern Ireland. Essentially, as I interpret the approach of the Northern Ireland identity to the past is that it doesn't really matter that much.

Did you ever find any data that shows this is middle ground?

All we have seen is research that shows that this is old ground, still voting for the status quo.

And my world view isn't being challenged at all.
I want the same things this guy wants, but I recognise that none of it is going to happen by itself.
We are where we are because a lot of brave, resilient and progressive people on both sides worked hard to achieve it.

Junkyard Tom

blanch152 wrote: »

Both communities need to learn how to understand each other but also how to understand the new emerging middle ground.

You really do have a poor understanding abut the north, there was always a large middle ground, people like my own parents for example, who would have nothing to do with either SF or the DUP. They tended to either not vote at all or vote for moderate parties like the SDLP and the less fundamentalist UUP.

Far from an emerging middle-ground voting patterns would indicate a polarisation of politics with the bottom falling out of the middle-ground. The blame for this lies squarely at the feet of the DUP, you know this, yet continue relentlessly with your 'both sides' crusade.

FrancieBrady

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

You really do have a poor understanding abut the north, there was always a large middle ground, people like my own parents for example, who would have nothing to do with either SF or the DUP. They tended to either not vote at all or vote for moderate parties like the SDLP and the less fundamentalist UUP.

Far from an emerging middle-ground voting patterns would indicate a polarisation of politics with the bottom falling out of the middle-ground. The blame for this lies squarely at the feet of the DUP, you know this, yet continue relentlessly with your 'both sides' crusade.

I did offer to take ulsterman59 to meet like minded souls. I know loads of people who think like him. Of all ages.

That was after one of the bogus claims that this 'movement' was cohesive and young. It really isn't.

Bishopsback

Ulsterman96 wrote: »

I wasn't alive during those times, I had no say in it, Im perfectly happy to keep on doing what Im doing by not being sectarian or judgemental onto others, I want no part of the same old fight, green vs orange, protestant vs catholic, etc, I see us as equals, and like I've stated many of times before, I will only support a new Ireland if the people who advocate for it can show me that is in my best interests and the interests of the people around me from both sides, then I will give a united Ireland my vote, if not, then my vote will be a no, simple democracy. I contribute to peace, by not contributing to hatred. If you think that is just going with the flow, then so be it, Ill go with the flow wherever it goes, as long as the people of this island do not have to deal with what they had to deal with before I was born. Im just a young Northern Irish lad, from a mixed background, who feels lucky to have been born in a such a beautiful place, I love my Irish and my British countrymen, I am saddened that some decide to hate each other, but I alone can not change the hearts and minds of which has been shaped due to hundreds of years of dark history, I understand if there is people on this forum who hate me just for not having a side or a horse in their race, but that is your right to hate me and to pick apart anything I say or do, but the end of the day, we are all men, women and children of Ireland, I just decide not to conform to the same old troubled story of Ireland

Interesting post.
Its not as simple as you think though.
You say we are all men and women of Ireland, but that's not necessarily true, but it shows that is what you compartmentalise us all as, that's actually choosing a side sort of.
Many of your compatriots consider themselves Northern Irish/British, not Irish, as they consider that not part of their identity.
They would consider that their right too, no matter what your opinion.

mfceiling

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So I missed your answer on the phone.

I cannot understand how somebody whose identity wants a better tomorrow is prepared to just leave the past unresolved and un-confronted.
I again, make no bones about my belief that the past has to be confronted and dealt with in a truth recovery process.

What do you suggest is done about the past francie? Genuine question.

Would you look in to every single killing, maiming, sectarian incident? That would take forever tbh.

I myself have no idea what the answer or solution is. So many people suffered in the troubles. Each person or family might want different things. One family might not want the past being brought back up again, one family might fight to their dying day to get the answers to their loved ones death. Who's to say what should or shouldn't be done?

By the way being from Northern Ireland is an identity...a lad today called me a Nordie prick!!

Ulsterman96

I have stated, my side is my own side, I am proud of both my British identity and my Irish, I choose to represent it via my Northern Irish identity, and I have stated that I will vote in my best interest, and the interest of all sides of the divide. I never claimed my identity wants a better tomorrow, I want a better tomorrow, but I am not going to go out and force my better tomorrow down the throats of people who can not be changed, I am contributing to my better tomorrow, but not being backwards or full of hate and my vote belongs to whoever can guarantee me a bright future for myself and my fellow countrymen. Its really that simple, Im getting on with my life, Im not letting the past drag me down like it has done to many of other young people. If a party shows up that concerns itself over the poor innocent people sleeping and dying in the streets of Belfast every night, if there is a party concerned over our large suicide rate, most particularly in males, if there is a party focused only on the real problems, not just problems about a language or a flag, or an identity, or us vs them, then they will have my backing, but right now, Im not going to represent a side that does not represent the wellbeing of EVERYONE. thats its, I am not a republican, I am not a loyalist, I am not a protestant, I am not a catholic, I am not a nationalist or a unionist. I am just an ordinary young lad trying to manoeuvre my way through this landmine landscape shaped by identity, politics, religious, sectarianism, us and them mentality. Im sure theres a lot more like me in Ireland, and its really not a bad thing, if you can tell me how it is a bad thing, then feel free, but for now, I'm happy enough to keep doing what Im doing.

FrancieBrady

mfceiling wrote: »

What do you suggest is done about the past francie? Genuine question.

Would you look in to every single killing, maiming, sectarian incident? That would take forever tbh.

I myself have no idea what the answer or solution is. So many people suffered in the troubles. Each person or family might want different things. One family might not want the past being brought back up again, one family might fight to their dying day to get the answers to their loved ones death. Who's to say what should or shouldn't be done?

Yes, that is very true.
I believe the only way forward is a truth process, convened by the governments and attended by the governments, with all sides at the table.
All sides, including the government undertake to tell what they know about what happened.
And there is not necessarily immunity either.

There is no other way.
What we have now is one sided recrimination, usually from those claiming to be neutral.
Families can opt out if they wish.

By the way being from Northern Ireland is an identity...a lad today called me a Nordie prick!!

That's a term of endearment where I am from!

Ulsterman96

Northern Irish is a vague term, it means many of things to different people who choose to use it, the statistics prove this, Ive only shared what It means to me, and me alone, can it become what I wish it could become, maybe, is it just a phase, a confused one at that, maybe. There is no full prove boundaries for this identity, just like any other identity, for example the Irish, people always assume you've got to be catholic and a republican to be Irish, but to me, thats not true, same can apply to any identity, it depends on the person who identifies as it, you can not define individuals identity

FrancieBrady

Ulsterman96 wrote: »

Northern Irish is a vague term, it means many of things to different people who choose to use it, the statistics prove this, Ive only shared what It means to me, and me alone, can it become what I wish it could become, maybe, is it just a phase, a confused one at that, maybe. There is no full prove boundaries for this identity, just like any other identity, for example the Irish, people always assume you've got to be catholic and a republican to be Irish, but to me, thats not true, same can apply to any identity, it depends on the person who identifies as it, you can not define individuals identity

The idea that to be Irish means to be Catholic and republican only, went out years ago. Maybe in the depths of middle America it still is, but then they think leprachauns roam the land too.

You are entitled to your identity, but I'm glad you said that it is your own identity and not part of a cohesive group.
Too many willing to make bogus claims on the basis of that myth.

blanch152

Ulsterman96 wrote: »

I have stated, my side is my own side, I am proud of both my British identity and my Irish, I choose to represent it via my Northern Irish identity, and I have stated that I will vote in my best interest, and the interest of all sides of the divide. I never claimed my identity wants a better tomorrow, I want a better tomorrow, but I am not going to go out and force my better tomorrow down the throats of people who can not be changed, I am contributing to my better tomorrow, but not being backwards or full of hate and my vote belongs to whoever can guarantee me a bright future for myself and my fellow countrymen. Its really that simple, Im getting on with my life, Im not letting the past drag me down like it has done to many of other young people. If a party shows up that concerns itself over the poor innocent people sleeping and dying in the streets of Belfast every night, if there is a party concerned over our large suicide rate, most particularly in males, if there is a party focused only on the real problems, not just problems about a language or a flag, or an identity, or us vs them, then they will have my backing, but right now, Im not going to represent a side that does not represent the wellbeing of EVERYONE. thats its, I am not a republican, I am not a loyalist, I am not a protestant, I am not a catholic, I am not a nationalist or a unionist. I am just an ordinary young lad trying to manoeuvre my way through this landmine landscape shaped by identity, politics, religious, sectarianism, us and them mentality. Im sure theres a lot more like me in Ireland, and its really not a bad thing, if you can tell me how it is a bad thing, then feel free, but for now, I'm happy enough to keep doing what Im doing.

I think you have expressed yourself very well in this post and others, yes there are many whose worldview is threatened by your outlook, but it is refreshing and optimistic, two things that Northern Ireland really needs right now.

A Little Pony

Matt Barrett wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

If you just think Unionists look at William of Orange then you are mistaken. Much more to us than remembering the great victory at the Boyne.

How does Loyalism to the British align with celebrating the defeat of an English King by a Dutch monarch, in part financed by the Catholic Pope? If the other side of things had won I can't see Nationalists or other Irish people celebrating in the same way.
Is it a case of separating tradition/religion and Britishness? Or is it just for the pageantry?

A false King. It's just part of who we are and has been for centuries.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

I think you have expressed yourself very well in this post and others, yes there are many whose worldview is threatened by your outlook, but it is refreshing and optimistic, two things that Northern Ireland really needs right now.

Fascinating. How can anyone's worldview be challenged by an identity that is happy with the status quo? Both the op(who has no intention of dealing witb the past or influencing the future, like thousands and thousands others) and those voting along the same party lines?

Ulsterman96

"(who has no intention of dealing witb the past or influencing the future, like thousands and thousands others)"

I deal with the past by moving on, I influence the future by not acting like those in the past.