Irish Language Act in the North: Have Sinn Fein scored a major own goal?

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

I think I explained my views here. I didn't say what you think I said.

You just don't like the policy you mean. Because it is not in the slightest hypocritical.
If the 'majority' want their MP to take their seats then the 'majority' have to vote for a single candidate that will.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You just don't like the policy you mean. Because it is not in the slightest hypocritical.
.

In your opinion, it isn't hypocritical. In mine, and based on the clear arguments put forward (which haven't been refuted just whatabouted), it is.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If the 'majority' want their MP to take their seats then the 'majority' have to vote for a single candidate that will.

You see, this is the type of entrenched politics that the North is infamous for. On the one side we have the sectarian "No surrender" bigots, on the other we have the "we won't take our seats" sectarians.

Havockk

blanch152 wrote: »

In your opinion, it isn't hypocritical. In mine, and based on the clear arguments put forward (which haven't been refuted just whatabouted), it is.





You see, this is the type of entrenched politics that the North is infamous for. On the one side we have the sectarian "No surrender" bigots, on the other we have the "we won't take our seats" sectarians.

People in the North now have a reason, with Brexit that could very well upend the political paradigm. I fully expect to see a Border poll in the next 5 to 10 years and I also think it could very well pass.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

In your opinion, it isn't hypocritical. In mine, and based on the clear arguments put forward (which haven't been refuted just whatabouted), it is.





You see, this is the type of entrenched politics that the North is infamous for. On the one side we have the sectarian "No surrender" bigots, on the other we have the "we won't take our seats" sectarians.

I have refuted your 'hypocritical' assessment.

It is not SF's problem if the electorate do not pick another single candidate who will take their seat.

The absolutely astonishing idea that a party must change it's clear and transparent policy because the combined majority of other voters want that is stunningly ludicrous and entirely typical of somebody who can never find a good word to say about SF.

BTW. Politics in the north of Ireland is entrenched. This has been known for sometime by everybody and is not news. And there are very clear reasons why it is 'entrenched'.

FrancieBrady

Havockk wrote: »

People in the North now have a reason, with Brexit that could very well upend the political paradigm. I fully expect to see a Border poll in the next 5 to 10 years and I also think it could very well pass.

The absurdity of partition is coming into sharp focus alright.

oscarBravo

FrancieBrady wrote: »

They are standing for election in their own country though. They dispute the legitimacy of the British to run it.

If you need to set aside objective reality and peer through a particular political prism in order for your position to make sense, you don't really get to sneer at people who aren't prepared to follow the same contortions.

There's a great deal of cakeism about a strategy of signing up to the GFA - which makes it clear that Northern Ireland is part of the UK until its people decide otherwise - while still mouthing the tired rhetoric of the government of the UK not having legitimacy to rule that part of the UK.

Cakeism is a transparently feeble strategy on the part of the Tories, and Sinn Féin are no better.

FrancieBrady

oscarBravo wrote: »

If you need to set aside objective reality and peer through a particular political prism in order for your position to make sense, you don't really get to sneer at people who aren't prepared to follow the same contortions.

There's a great deal of cakeism about a strategy of signing up to the GFA - which makes it clear that Northern Ireland is part of the UK until its people decide otherwise - while still mouthing the tired rhetoric of the government of the UK not having legitimacy to rule that part of the UK.

Cakeism is a transparently feeble strategy on the part of the Tories, and Sinn Féin are no better.

Divert again? Sigh.

The GFA makes it legitimate to aspire to Irish Unity. What is hindering Irish unity in the mind of a republican or a SF member?

The illegitimate presence of a foreign power.

That is what a republican or SF voter sees when they look through their prism.

Good loser

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Divert again? Sigh.

The GFA makes it legitimate to aspire to Irish Unity. What is hindering Irish unity in the mind of a republican or a SF member?

The illegitimate presence of a foreign power.

That is what a republican or SF voter sees when they look through their prism.

Are Sinn Fein paying you to make these posts? All day every day you're on here defending every SF policy to the absolute limit.

Their policies (so called) are of very little interest to me on the whole but this abstentionist issue does matter and it is live and SF could make themselves useful to the entire electorate north and south. It would be an act of true patriotism.

It may make no difference to the SF vote but it would do the State some service. Didn't the Copenhagen group say a hard border would cut GDP in the North by a massive 16%?

If nothing else think how discomfited the DUP and the Tories would be if they took their seats. And Jeremy Corbyn.
If a United Ireland was on offer in Westminster and depended on the SF seven seats to achieve it what would they do?

The current value of these seats is £100 m per seat on the DUP comparison.

Junkyard Tom

Good loser wrote: »

If nothing else think how discomfited the DUP and the Tories would be if they took their seats. And Jeremy Corbyn.

Precisely. SF's anti-Brexit stance would galvanise support for Brexit. Why can't you see this as very probable?

Do you really envision British newspapers, ITV, SKY and the BBC saying: 'actually those Irish guys who supported the IRA campaign that killed hundreds of British soldiers are talking sense'?

Stop fooling yourself.

FrancieBrady

Good loser wrote: »

Are Sinn Fein paying you to make these posts? All day every day you're on here defending every SF policy to the absolute limit.

Their policies (so called) are of very little interest to me on the whole but this abstentionist issue does matter and it is live and SF could make themselves useful to the entire electorate north and south. It would be an act of true patriotism.

It may make no difference to the SF vote but it would do the State some service. Didn't the Copenhagen group say a hard border would cut GDP in the North by a massive 16%?

If nothing else think how discomfited the DUP and the Tories would be if they took their seats. And Jeremy Corbyn.
If a United Ireland was on offer in Westminster and depended on the SF seven seats to achieve it what would they do?

The current value of these seats is £100 m per seat on the DUP comparison.

Can we first stop with the sensationalist, 'on here all day every day?'.

I get a notification when somebody has posted, I answer that post if I have something to say. It is a very simple thing with a phone in your pocket.
Even simpler it seems when struggling with your argument to start hyperventilating about spooks and bots etc. A number of posters seem to start that. Don't be that poster!

Contrary to other issues were SF could have had a temporary gain by taking seats I would strongly imagine that they see a huge opportunity here politically.
The DUP are driving the statelet into the ground all on their own. FG are talking about a UI ffs!

Funny that you are looking for SF to do the state some service after ignoring them and their electorate for decades.

EDIT: FG have been convinced (IMO by SF and others truly concerned about northern Ireland) that Special Status for northern Ireland is the bottom line in the negotiations.
Enda, - 'doing the state some service' - was against this at one point. Now that they have been convinced it is evident that SF are happy to have Dublin do the heavy lifting for a change. To have nationalists and moderate unionists looking to Dublin for leadership is a good thing ultimately.
Keeping Leo on message is the job for SF now imo.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I have refuted your 'hypocritical' assessment.

It is not SF's problem if the electorate do not pick another single candidate who will take their seat.

The absolutely astonishing idea that a party must change it's clear and transparent policy because the combined majority of other voters want that is stunningly ludicrous and entirely typical of somebody who can never find a good word to say about SF.

BTW. Politics in the north of Ireland is entrenched. This has been known for sometime by everybody and is not news. And there are very clear reasons why it is 'entrenched'.

I am now going to apply the whataboutery test to your statement to show how absurd and hypocritical the SF position is.

So you think it is absolutely astonishing and stunningly ludicrous that Sinn Fein and others have called for the DUP to oppose Brexit?

Seriously?

You also think it absolutely astonishing and stunningly ludicrous that the DUP should be asked to accept a hypotethical future majority vote in favour of unity?

As always with Sinn Fein, it is one rule for them and another rule for everyone else. The DUP should accept the North's majority vote against Brexit but Sinn Fein can reject the North's majority vote for candidates to take seats in Westminister. Stunning hypocrisy as always from that party.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

EDIT: FG have been convinced (IMO by SF and others truly concerned about northern Ireland) that Special Status for northern Ireland is the bottom line in the negotiations.
Enda, - 'doing the state some service' - was against this at one point. Now that they have been convinced it is evident that SF are happy to have Dublin do the heavy lifting for a change. To have nationalists and moderate unionists looking to Dublin for leadership is a good thing ultimately.
Keeping Leo on message is the job for SF now imo.

Sinn Fein are reduced to attempting to keep FG on message and that is somehow a success?

oscarBravo

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The GFA makes it legitimate to aspire to Irish Unity. What is hindering Irish unity in the mind of a republican or a SF member?

The illegitimate presence of a foreign power.

Cakeism. Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom until its people decide otherwise. Aspiration to unity is a perfectly valid position; this inane carping on about it being "illegitimate" for the government of the UK to govern all parts of the UK is just tiresome nonsense.

We amended the Constitution of the Republic to relinquish our claim on Northern Ireland and replace it with an aspiration to future unity. In the meantime, it's part of the UK. You may not want it to be a part of the UK, but that doesn't change facts, and what you or any other republican wants isn't the arbiter of legitimacy.

That is what a republican or SF voter sees when they look through their prism.

Yes, I know. Prisms distort your view of the world.

FrancieBrady

oscarBravo wrote: »

Cakeism. Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom until its people decide otherwise. Aspiration to unity is a perfectly valid position; this inane carping on about it being "illegitimate" for the government of the UK to govern all parts of the UK is just tiresome nonsense.

We amended the Constitution of the Republic to relinquish our claim on Northern Ireland and replace it with an aspiration to future unity. In the meantime, it's part of the UK. You may not want it to be a part of the UK, but that doesn't change facts, and what you or any other republican wants isn't the arbiter of legitimacy. Yes, I know. Prisms distort your view of the world.

Those who have accepted the absurity of partition dont get to tell anybody what is legitimate and what is not.

In fact it is those who accepted partition that are moving toward the SF and republican position

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Sinn Fein are reduced to attempting to keep FG on message and that is somehow a success?

Reduced?
I would say they have done the state some service convincing FG on separate status.
Leo is getting kudos for finally looking after the interests of Irish people in the north.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Those who have accepted the absurity of partition dont get to tell anybody what is legitimate and what is not.

In fact it is those who accepted partition that are moving toward the SF and republican position

SF have accepted partition. Their MLA's are part of the partitionist infastructure.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

SF have accepted partition. Their MLA's are part of the partitionist infastructure.

SF have accepted the GFA. They have a legitimate aspiration to end partition.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Those who have accepted the absurity of partition dont get to tell anybody what is legitimate and what is not.

In fact it is those who accepted partition that are moving toward the SF and republican position

There is nothing absurd about a particular line drawn on a map that is any more or less absurd than any other line drawn on a map.

You are mistaking people wanting the best outcome for people on the ground for acceptance of republicanism. It just so happens at this point in time when Brexit is the worst outcome for these islands, that some people believe that the North having special status within the EU (that doesn't mean unity on this island by the way) is a less bad option.

Most of the time the SF position has been one that making the ordinary people of Northern Ireland suffer is the best one.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Reduced?
I would say they have done the state some service convincing FG on separate status.
Leo is getting kudos for finally looking after the interests of Irish people in the north.

Delusion extraordinaire here. SF haven't convinced anyone of anything.

For Leo and for most Irish people reversal of Brexit and maintenance of the constitutional status quo is the best option. The other options are only fallbacks.

jm08

blanch152 wrote: »

Most of the time the SF position has been one that making the ordinary people of Northern Ireland suffer is the best one.

How do you explain the large vote Sinn Fein gets in NI? Its not as if there are not other parties they could vote for.

I think Sinn Fein is correct to let Dublin negotiate on behalf of those who want to remain in the EU. All you have to do is look at how much hop Scotland and Wales get from the Tories to realise that they are irrelevant. Dublin has a much bigger say in the Brexit negotiations than any of the devolved Governments of the UK.

oscarBravo

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Those who have accepted the absurity of partition dont get to tell anybody what is legitimate and what is not.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

SF have accepted the GFA. They have a legitimate aspiration to end partition.

Partition has been accepted by everyone who signed up to the GFA, including SF. Partition was ratified in a constitutional amendment voted for by 94% in the Republic. It was ratified by 71% in Northern Ireland. Partition is a fact.

You don't have to like it, and you have every right to campaign tirelessly for it to change. But accepting the terms of the GFA means accepting that this is how things are, until they are no more. That includes the fact that we as a people have said that we recognise the fact of UK sovereignty in Northern Ireland.

Claiming to be supportive of the GFA while also claiming that UK sovereignty in Northern Ireland is illegitimate is just doublethink; it's delusional.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

SF have accepted the GFA. They have a legitimate aspiration to end partition.

Yes, but both are legitimate and that is the point. Partition is the preferred choice of the majority at the moment and SF are part of that infastructure until the partitioned states vote otherwise. Therefore partition is legitimate and SF currently help to implement policy for the partioned state.

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

Classic whataboutery.

I haven't been asked about the DUP hypocrisy, neither is this thread about DUP hypocrisy but yes, the DUP are hypocritical in their stance on Brexit and if you want to start a thread on it, I will say that there and there won't be anyone on the DUP thread arguing night and day that the DUP are not hypocritical.

However, none of that makes Sinn Fein any less hypocritical. Is it not possible to actually debate the merits and demerits of something that Sinn Fein do, without dragging the DUP/British/FG/Unionists/Protestants/partitionists/anonymous internet posters into it?

Hold on a second.
Are you not with all this bluster of this thread having nothing to do with the DUP very conveniently ignoring the actual title of this thread :

Have Sinn Fein scored a major own goal.

It may have slipped your mind but the title is in reference to the break- down in talk to re-establish the NI Assembly between two parties. SF and the DUP.

Your fallback position on any thread, regardless of what the title is appears to always have something or other on SF wedged in, but to attempt to just discuss SF while ignoring the DUP in the context of this thread, is a ludicrous as your post on the winner of a seat in a first past the post electoral system not being representative of their constituency because they did not get more votes than all the other candidates combined.

For me as someone who has a keen interest in politics but has to date never voted SF, going by the title of the thread and the two parties involved, with everything we know subsequently from the release of documents etc. there is no question that the party that shot that scored a major own goal was not SF but the DUP.

FrancieBrady

oscarBravo wrote: »

Partition has been accepted by everyone who signed up to the GFA, including SF. Partition was ratified in a constitutional amendment voted for by 94% in the Republic. It was ratified by 71% in Northern Ireland. Partition is a fact.

You don't have to like it, and you have every right to campaign tirelessly for it to change. But accepting the terms of the GFA means accepting that this is how things are, until they are no more. That includes the fact that we as a people have said that we recognise the fact of UK sovereignty in Northern Ireland.

Claiming to be supportive of the GFA while also claiming that UK sovereignty in Northern Ireland is illegitimate is just doublethink; it's delusional.

This is crazy limbo dancing.

Where in the GFA does it state a political party must accept the legitinmmacy of British rule?

It enshrined the right to aspire to Irish unity.

Try running this one through your language filter, 'We accept partition but we will strive to have Irish unity'.

Doesn't really work as a coherent political creed does it?

Red_Wake

jm08 wrote: »

blanch152 wrote: »

Most of the time the SF position has been one that making the ordinary people of Northern Ireland suffer is the best one.

How do you explain the large vote Sinn Fein gets in NI? Its not as if there are not other parties they could vote for.

I think Sinn Fein is correct to let Dublin negotiate on behalf of those who want to remain in the EU. All you have to do is look at how much hop Scotland and Wales get from the Tories to realise that they are irrelevant. Dublin has a much bigger say in the Brexit negotiations than any of the devolved Governments of the UK.

Let?

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

This is crazy limbo dancing.

Where in the GFA does it state a political party must accept the legitinmmacy of British rule?

It enshrined the right to aspire to Irish unity.

Try running this one through your language filter, 'We accept partition but we will strive to have Irish unity'.

Doesn't really work as a coherent political creed does it?

They have accepted it, they are part of its infastructure.

oscarBravo

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Where in the GFA does it state a political party must accept the legitinmmacy of British rule?

Have you even read it?

"The participants endorse the commitment made by the British and Irish Governments that,
in a new British-Irish Agreement replacing the Anglo-Irish Agreement, they will:
(i) recognise the legitimacy of whatever choice is freely exercised by a majority of the
people of Northern Ireland with regard to its status, whether they prefer to continue to
support the Union with Great Britain or a sovereign united Ireland;
(ii) recognise that it is for the people of the island of Ireland alone, by agreement
between the two parts respectively and without external impediment, to exercise their
right of self-determination on the basis of consent, freely and concurrently given,
North and South, to bring about a united Ireland, if that is their wish, accepting that
this right must be achieved and exercised with and subject to the agreement and
consent of a majority of the people of Northern Ireland;
(iii) acknowledge that while a substantial section of the people in Northern Ireland
share the legitimate wish of a majority of the people of the island of Ireland for a
united Ireland, the present wish of a majority of the people of Northern Ireland, freely
exercised and legitimate, is to maintain the Union and, accordingly, that Northern
Ireland’s status as part of the United Kingdom reflects and relies upon that wish; and
that it would be wrong to make any change in the status of Northern Ireland save with
the consent of a majority of its people..."

It enshrined the right to aspire to Irish unity.

Yes. Nobody's arguing with the right to aspire to a change in the legitimate status of Northern Ireland. The question is whether its current status is legitimate.

The republican stance is basically "it's not what we want, therefore it's illegitimate", which is (a) counter to the entire spirit of the GFA, and (b) petulant and childish.

Try running this one through your language filter, 'We accept partition but we will strive to have Irish unity'.

Doesn't really work as a coherent political creed does it?

How about: "we accept that partition is the current reality, but we will strive to have Irish unity".

You seem to share the bizarre view that accepting that something is currently legitimate means that it can never be changed. It's dogmatic and ridiculous.

jm08

Red_Wake wrote: »

Let?

Leave the Irish Government argue from the EU side rather than try and argue with the DUP / Rees Mogg types who will not change their mind.

FrancieBrady

oscarBravo wrote: »

Have you even read it?

"The participants endorse the commitment made by the British and Irish Governments that,
in a new British-Irish Agreement replacing the Anglo-Irish Agreement, they will:
(i) recognise the legitimacy of whatever choice is freely exercised by a majority of the
people of Northern Ireland with regard to its status, whether they prefer to continue to
support the Union with Great Britain or a sovereign united Ireland;
(ii) recognise that it is for the people of the island of Ireland alone, by agreement
between the two parts respectively and without external impediment, to exercise their
right of self-determination on the basis of consent, freely and concurrently given,
North and South, to bring about a united Ireland, if that is their wish, accepting that
this right must be achieved and exercised with and subject to the agreement and
consent of a majority of the people of Northern Ireland;
(iii) acknowledge that while a substantial section of the people in Northern Ireland
share the legitimate wish of a majority of the people of the island of Ireland for a
united Ireland, the present wish of a majority of the people of Northern Ireland, freely
exercised and legitimate, is to maintain the Union and, accordingly, that Northern
Ireland’s status as part of the United Kingdom reflects and relies upon that wish; and
that it would be wrong to make any change in the status of Northern Ireland save with
the consent of a majority of its people..." Yes. Nobody's arguing with the right to aspire to a change in the legitimate status of Northern Ireland. The question is whether its current status is legitimate.

The republican stance is basically "it's not what we want, therefore it's illegitimate", which is (a) counter to the entire spirit of the GFA, and (b) petulant and childish. How about: "we accept that partition is the current reality, but we will strive to have Irish unity".

You seem to share the bizarre view that accepting that something is currently legitimate means that it can never be changed. It's dogmatic and ridiculous.

What?

Republicans who signed up to the GFA recognise the rights of the majority.

They did not accept the legitimacy of British interference and rule in Ireland.
Don't be silly.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Delusion extraordinaire here. SF haven't convinced anyone of anything.

For Leo and for most Irish people reversal of Brexit and maintenance of the constitutional status quo is the best option. The other options are only fallbacks.

Funny that very recently they were against special status for northern Ireland and have no gotten it in the legal framework.

Coincidence?

Red_Wake

jm08 wrote: »

Red_Wake wrote: »

Let?

Leave the Irish Government argue from the EU side rather than try and argue with the DUP / Rees Mogg types who will not change their mind.

In other words, rely on the charity of others.

jm08

Red_Wake wrote: »

In other words, rely on the charity of others.

I don't think the Irish Government regards the people of NI as charity cases well, no more so than the people of Donegal, Cavan and Monaghan (or any border town).

recedite

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Republicans who signed up to the GFA recognise the rights of the majority.

They did not accept the legitimacy of British interference and rule in Ireland.

As pointed out earlier, that is classic Orwellian doublethink.

Red_Wake

jm08 wrote: »

Red_Wake wrote: »

In other words, rely on the charity of others.

I don't think the Irish Government regards the people of NI as charity cases well, no more so than the people of Donegal, Cavan and Monaghan (or any border town).

I was suggesting the SF politicians are the charity cases if anything. It's them who are expecting others to look after their constituents.

blackwhite

FrancieBrady wrote: »

They are standing for election in their own country though. They dispute the legitimacy of the British to run it.

Are you taking about SF or dissidents here?

SF signed up to the Good Friday Agreement. One of the overriding principles of the GFA was that all parties agreed that British jurisdiction over NI was legitimate up until the people of NI vote otherwise, but that a United Ireland couldn't be stopped if the people of NI and the peoeple of the ROI voted in favour of re-unification.

Are you telling us that Sinn Fein are actually opposed to the Good Friday Agreement after all? Funny that they've forgoetten to make some sort of public statement about that.

Or are they pulling the kind of stroke that the DUP are so fond of, and ignoring the elements that they don't like?

blanch152

jm08 wrote: »

How do you explain the large vote Sinn Fein gets in NI? Its not as if there are not other parties they could vote for.

I think Sinn Fein is correct to let Dublin negotiate on behalf of those who want to remain in the EU. All you have to do is look at how much hop Scotland and Wales get from the Tories to realise that they are irrelevant. Dublin has a much bigger say in the Brexit negotiations than any of the devolved Governments of the UK.

More delusionary posting.

Sinn Fein has no say in whatever either government decides. It can't agree to participate in a Northern Assembly, it won't take a seat in the Westminister parliament and it refuses coalition as a smaller party in the Dublin parliament.

Sinn Fein isn't letting anyone do anything. It is the government of this State that is being quite generous by listening at all to Sinn Fein as they don't have to.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What?

Republicans who signed up to the GFA recognise the rights of the majority.

They did not accept the legitimacy of British interference and rule in Ireland.
Don't be silly.

It is there in black and white. Anyone who signed up to the GFA accepts the legitimacy of the majority choice, which in this case happens to be the rule of the British Queen.

maccored

blanch152 wrote: »

More delusionary posting.

Sinn Fein has no say in whatever either government decides. It can't agree to participate in a Northern Assembly, it won't take a seat in the Westminister parliament and it refuses coalition as a smaller party in the Dublin parliament.

Sinn Fein isn't letting anyone do anything. It is the government of this State that is being quite generous by listening at all to Sinn Fein as they don't have to.

SF doesnt take their seats in the british parliament. its utter naivety to somehow believe that by doing so now will make the DUP stop lying. the british government need the DUP and as long as thats the case, the DUP will make sure stormont stays closed so they will remain (in their eyes) important. they denied they were near an agreement and now it turns out they were. and people on here, blinded by their own hatred of SF, let the DUP off with it. ****ing ridiculous.

blanch152

maccored wrote: »

SF doesnt take their seats in the british parliament. its utter naivety to somehow believe that by doing so now will make the DUP stop lying. the british government need the DUP and as long as thats the case, the DUP will make sure stormont stays closed so they will remain (in their eyes) important. they denied they were near an agreement and now it turns out they were. and people on here, blinded by their own hatred of SF, let the DUP off with it. ****ing ridiculous.

People on here let the DUP off with it?????

What are you talking about?

How do people on here have the power to let the DUP off with anything?

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

It is there in black and white. Anyone who signed up to the GFA accepts the legitimacy of the majority choice, which in this case happens to be the rule of the British Queen.

They accept the democratic will of the people. Nowhere does it say, nor have I ever heard SF or a republican accept that the British presence in Ireland is legitimate.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

They accept the democratic will of the people. Nowhere does it say, nor have I ever heard SF or a republican accept that the British presence in Ireland is legitimate.

It says so in the GFA as pointed out by another poster. SF signed up to this.

Are you sure you're not mixing SF up with Republican SF?

jh79

"In political science, legitimacy is the right and acceptance of an authority, usually a governing law or a régime"

SF have accepted than NI is part of the UK.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

It says so in the GFA as pointed out by another poster. SF signed up to this.

Are you sure you're not mixing SF up with Republican SF?

You can waffle away about it all you want. But this does not mean they accept the legitimacy of British rule.

recognise the legitimacy of whatever choice is freely exercised by a majority of the
people of Northern Ireland with regard to its status, whether they prefer to continue to
support the Union with Great Britain or a sovereign united Ireland;

They do recognise the legitimacy of what the majority have chosen for now though.

recedite

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You can waffle away about it all you want. But this does not mean they accept the legitimacy of British rule.

They do recognise the legitimacy of what the majority have chosen for now though.

The majority have chosen to remain within the UK of GB and NI.

Maybe not direct "British rule" as such. It was SF that chose that, by collapsing Stormont.

FrancieBrady

recedite wrote: »

The majority have chosen to remain within the UK of GB and NI.

Maybe not direct "British rule" as such. It was SF that chose that, by collapsing Stormont.

I can respect the decision of the majority but be totally against what the majority voted for.

Please don't dig the hole any bigger on this.

SF and republicans have not recognised British rule in Ireland as being legitimate.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

They do recognise the legitimacy of what the majority have chosen for now though.

?????

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

?????

Will those who are against abortion suddenly change and accept it after a vote?

No, of course they won't. The democrats among them will accept that is what the majority want.

Same thing applies to SF and republicans. They accept that the majority want British rule for now. That does NOT mean they accept the legitimacy of that rulw or presence.


I will leave you to ponder that not very complicated nuance. No interest in debating this ridiculous notion anymore.
If SF accepted the legitimacy of British rule in Ireland it would be bigger than them taking their seats in Westminster.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Will those who are against abortion suddenly change and accept it after a vote?

No, of course they won't. The democrats among them will accept that is what the majority want.

Same thing applies to SF and republicans. They accept that the majority want British rule for now. That does NOT mean they accept the legitimacy of that rulw or presence.


I will leave you to ponder that not very complicated nuance. No interest in debating this ridiculous notion anymore.
If SF accepted the legitimacy of British rule in Ireland it would be bigger than them taking their seats in Westminster.

"In political science, legitimacy is the right and acceptance of an authority, usually a governing law or a régime"

Westminster is the ultimate authority over NI because it is still part of the UK, SF accepted this as part of the GFA. That is why NI will be leaving the EU. Ticks all the boxes for the above definition.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

"In political science, legitimacy is the right and acceptance of an authority, usually a governing law or a régime"

Westminster is the ultimate authority over NI because it is still part of the UK, SF accepted this as part of the GFA. That is why NI will be leaving the EU. Ticks all the boxes for the above definition.

Just because you see the word 'legitimacy' in the GFA and you know the meaning of it, does not mean what you think it does.

Here it is again:

recognise the legitimacy of whatever choice is freely exercised by a majority

WHere does that say they 'recognise the legitimacy of British rule in Ireland'.

Exactly! It doesn't say that at all. :rolleyes:

Professor Moriarty

jh79 wrote: »

"In political science, legitimacy is the right and acceptance of an authority, usually a governing law or a régime"

Westminster is the ultimate authority over NI, SF accepted this as part of the GFA. That is why NI will be leaving the EU. Ticks all the boxes for the above definition.

Indeed. However, the goalposts would have shifted considerably. Whether it is seen as a good or a bad thing, real politik dictates that the GFA is redundant in the event of anything more than a very soft Brexit. Anyone who doesn't realise that is delusional or wilfully blind to reality.