Border Poll discussion

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

They are entitled to think that-as with any division of a country there will be people unhappy with how it works out for them-look at Korea or India.

Sorry Rob, I don't understand what you are getting at.

FrancieBrady

Chips Lovell wrote: »

Without straying too far into semantics, I'd imagine there's a fair few unionists who'd see unification with Ireland as partition of the UK.

It wouldn't be for me to call them 'partitionists' though as an Irish citizen. That would be a perfectly legitimate term for a UK citizen to use though.

ancapailldorcha

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It wouldn't be for me to call them 'partitionists' though as an Irish citizen. That would be a perfectly legitimate term for a UK citizen to use though.

I've honestly never heard anyone in the mainland use the term "Partitionist". To be honest, most of them never even think about Northern Ireland. The older generation perhaps. For younger people, I'd say the DUP have just become a figure of hate given their pro-Brexit stance along with the weird pile of nonsense some of them seem to believe about the world being 2,000 years old, HIV denialism, etc.

RobMc59

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Sorry Rob, I don't understand what you are getting at.

Some people in Ireland may prefer for things to be "as they were"before and were happy being part of Britain -it's a valid point although obviously never going to happen.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Then they are NOT 'happy with the status quo' which is an Irish sovereign independent state.

Neither are those who want unification happy with the status quo. Do we need a label for them? Constitutional nationalists? Subversives? United Irishmen?

It is pejorative to label people as something which they do not accept as a label. We have seen that on these threads as the term "good republican" gets sanctioned, even when using it in the way that Gerry Adams used it.

I hold a position that a united Ireland would be a good idea sometime in the future when hearts and minds have been won over. There are a large number of people in this country who agree with me, but the sneers of "partitionism" still come my way.

facehugger99

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It wouldn't be for me to call them 'partitionists' though as an Irish citizen. That would be a perfectly legitimate term for a UK citizen to use though.

Ah, so the term 'partitionist' in relation to NI, changes meaning, not only based on who it refers to but by whom it is used.

Seems like a very slippery term indeed.

Are there any other factors that influence its meaning, perhaps the time of day it is used?

FrancieBrady

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I've honestly never heard anyone in the mainland use the term "Partitionist".

Well neither have I heard anyone in the UK use it. But if they did, to define those Chuck is talking about, then that would be legitimate in my view. You would have to make distinctions though if referring to outside the UK, i.e Irish partitionist, Uk partitionist.

It's a legitimate position, it is just that I'm agin it, in Ireland

BonnieSituation

facehugger99 wrote: »

The Constitution aspires to a unity of the people not a unity of the country.

It is a very clear and deliberate distinction.

Given that Francie threw up the text of Art 3, I was wondering if you could go through how it in anyway doesn't mean to refer to reunification and reintegration of the national territory?

facehugger99

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Given that Francie threw up the text of Art 3, I was wondering if you could go through how it in anyway doesn't mean to refer to reunification and reintegration of the national territory?

Of course it refers to a unification of the country.

Francie said it aspires to it.

Quite a difference.

BonnieSituation

facehugger99 wrote: »

Of course it refers to a unification of the country.

Francie said it aspires to it.

Quite a difference.

Eh?

Can you move the goalposts back please?

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

Of course it refers to a unification of the country.

Francie said it aspires to it.

Quite a difference.

'It is the firm will of the Irish Nation...'

WILL:
*a deliberate or fixed desire or intention.
*the thing that one desires or ordains.
*intend, desire, or wish (something) to happen.

jm08

facehugger99 wrote: »

Ah, so the term 'partitionist' in relation to NI, changes meaning, not only based on who it refers to but by whom it is used.

Seems like a very slippery term indeed.

Are there any other factors that influence its meaning, perhaps the time of day it is used?

There is even a wiki page about partitionists in relation to Ireland!

It has mostly been used to describe those in the Republic of Ireland who view Northern Ireland and the people who live there as separate and different. It is usually used among Irish nationalists and republicans "as a criticism of those in the south who pay lip-service to the ideal of Irish unity but who are smugly comfortable with a 26 county republic".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partitionism


Its a good read.

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

Ah, so the term 'partitionist' in relation to NI, changes meaning, not only based on who it refers to but by whom it is used.

Seems like a very slippery term indeed.

Are there any other factors that influence its meaning, perhaps the time of day it is used?

You are referring to different 'partitions'. Namely the partition of Ireland as opposed to the partition of the UK.

facehugger99

FrancieBrady wrote: »

'It is the firm will of the Irish Nation...'

WILL:
*a deliberate or fixed desire or intention.
*the thing that one desires or ordains.
*intend, desire, or wish (something) to happen.

Any particular reason you finished your quote from the Article at that point Francie?

Perhaps it wouldn't have suited your argument to quote the full Article - lets have a wee look shall we?

It is the firm will of the Irish Nation, in harmony and friendship, to unite all the people who share the territory of the island of Ireland, in all the diversity of their identities and traditions, recognising that a united Ireland shall be brought about only by peaceful means with the consent of a majority of the people, democratically expressed, in both jurisdictions in the island.


Not seeing anything aspirational in that about uniting a Country - perhaps you could point out the relevant section your were referring to?

No cheating now by curtailing the quote where it suits you

James Brown

facehugger99 wrote: »

Any particular reason you finished your quote from the Article at that point Francie?

Perhaps it wouldn't have suited your argument to quote the full Article - lets have a wee look shall we?

It is the firm will of the Irish Nation, in harmony and friendship, to unite all the people who share the territory of the island of Ireland, in all the diversity of their identities and traditions, recognising that a united Ireland shall be brought about only by peaceful means with the consent of a majority of the people, democratically expressed, in both jurisdictions in the island.


Not seeing anything aspirational in that about uniting a Country - perhaps you could point out the relevant section your were referring to?

No cheating now by curtailing the quote where it suits you

You quoted it;

It is the firm will of the Irish Nation, in harmony and friendship, to unite all the people who share the territory of the island of Ireland, in all the diversity of their identities and traditions, recognising that a united Ireland shall be brought about only by peaceful means with the consent of a majority of the people, democratically expressed, in both jurisdictions in the island.

How do you interpret this? Seems very clear to me, 'firm will' and so on.

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

Any particular reason you finished your quote from the Article at that point Francie?

Perhaps it wouldn't have suited your argument to quote the full Article - lets have a wee look shall we?

It is the firm will of the Irish Nation, in harmony and friendship, to unite all the people who share the territory of the island of Ireland, in all the diversity of their identities and traditions, recognising that a united Ireland shall be brought about only by peaceful means with the consent of a majority of the people, democratically expressed, in both jurisdictions in the island.


Not seeing anything aspirational in that about uniting a Country - perhaps you could point out the relevant section your were referring to?

No cheating now by curtailing the quote where it suits you

Bizarre


Is your point that the article refers to the 'firm will of the Irish Nation to unite the Irish people in mind only'

Because I haven't a clue otherwise what you are going on about.

facehugger99

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Because I haven't a clue otherwise what you are going on about.

I suspected it might go over your head - don't worry about it.

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

I suspected it might go over your head - don't worry about it.

I apologise. I don't know where you are making the distinction here. Can you point it out.


There are no full stops used in the sentence, but you bolded one bit, and inferred that it means , 'The firm will of the Irish Nation...' is to 'unite the people of Ireland' in mind only.

If you are saying something different please correct me.

facehugger99

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I apologise. I don't know where you are making the distinction here. Can you point it out.


There are no full stops used in the sentence, but you bolded one bit, and inferred that it means , 'The firm will of the Irish Nation...' is to 'unite the people of Ireland' in mind only.

If you are saying something different please correct me.

If you can't see the difference between a 'people' being united and a 'country' being united, then I'm at a loss to explain it any better.


If Ireland reach the Rugby WC final in September, all the people on the island of Ireland will be united in their support of the team.

Do you think that means that we'll magically become a unified country?

James Brown

facehugger99 wrote: »

If you can't see the difference between a 'people' being united and a 'country' being united, then I'm at a loss to explain it any better.


If Ireland reach the Rugby WC final in September, all the people on the island of Ireland will be united in their support of the team.

Do you think that means that we'll magically become a unified country?

What does it mean by 'united Ireland' to you, in the context of the words preceding it and after?

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

If you can't see the difference between a 'people' being united and a 'country' being united, then I'm at a loss to explain it any better.


If Ireland reach the Rugby WC final in September, all the people on the island of Ireland will be united in their support of the team.

Do you think that means that we'll magically become a unified country?

When 'partition' happened they didn't actually physically part the country? You know this, yes?


Uniting the country means 'we come together to self determine as a single homogeneous unit'.

The IRFU is an 'all-Ireland *united body'. *The two governing bodies came together as one, in other words.


They parted the governance of the country.

I am currently reading a 500 page document published by the Oireachtas of this jurisdiction which outlines a plan for Brexit and for Unification.

They are not talking about uniting 'the people' they are going into great detail on 'uniting all the executive branches of government' i.e. like rugby, uniting the separate governing bodies as one.

maccored

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I've honestly never heard anyone in the mainland use the term "Partitionist". To be honest, most of them never even think about Northern Ireland. The older generation perhaps. For younger people, I'd say the DUP have just become a figure of hate given their pro-Brexit stance along with the weird pile of nonsense some of them seem to believe about the world being 2,000 years old, HIV denialism, etc.

mainland ... europe, china, france? Does ireland have a 'mainland'?

ancapailldorcha

maccored wrote: »

mainland ... europe, china, france? Does ireland have a 'mainland'?

Most of the UK is Britain. Three of its four constituent nations form Britain.

blanch152

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I've honestly never heard anyone in the mainland use the term "Partitionist".

The term "partitionist" has only ever had limited usage.

Other than in this thread (and I am accepting bona fides on this), I have never seen it used in any way other than in a sneering or pejorative context by someone who claims to be a nationalist or republican.

facehugger99

FrancieBrady wrote: »

When 'partition' happened they didn't actually physically part the country? You know this, yes?

Are you referring to the island?

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Uniting the country means 'we come together to self determine as a single homogeneous unit'.

Uniting what country?

What phrase of the Constitution are you referring to?

You're staring to babble.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The IRFU is an 'all-Ireland *united body'. *The two governing bodies came together as one, in other words.


They parted the governance of the country.

I am currently reading a 500 page document published by the Oireachtas of this jurisdiction which outlines a plan for Brexit and for Unification.

They are not talking about uniting 'the people' they are going into great detail on 'uniting all the executive branches of government' i.e. like rugby, uniting the separate governing bodies as one.

Now this has gone full-babble. No idea where you're trying to shift the goalposts too.

You have a shadow-Constitution do you Francie?

blanch152

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Given that Francie threw up the text of Art 3, I was wondering if you could go through how it in anyway doesn't mean to refer to reunification and reintegration of the national territory?

It used to refer to reintegration of the national territory. As part of the GFA, we dropped that territorial claim and aspired to united the people rather than the territory.

facehugger99

blanch152 wrote: »

It used to refer to reintegration of the national territory. As part of the GFA, we dropped that territorial claim and aspired to united the people rather than the territory.

Yes - it was a double-dilution of the original article.

Possibly could be considered a bit partitionist by some.;)

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

Are you referring to the island?



Uniting what country?

What phrase of the Constitution are you referring to?

You're staring to babble.




Now this has gone full-babble. No idea where you're trying to shift the goalposts too.

You have a shadow-Constitution do you Francie?

You introduced the rugby analogy. Rugby is actually united, it's infrastructures and the people who support it.

Maybe if you could give us some examples of those who have 'the firm will' to 'unite the people' only, your argument might make some sense.

Can you link to somebody who wants to only do this?

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You introduced the rugby analogy. Rugby is actually united, it's infrastructures and the people who support it.

Maybe if you could give us some examples of those who have 'the firm will' to 'unite the people' only, your argument might make some sense.

Can you link to somebody who wants to only do this?

All of the people who voted to amend the Constitution so that it would say that instead of what it used to say?

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

All of the people who voted to amend the Constitution so that it would say that instead of what it used to say?

So when our Taoiseach, in his capacity as Taoiseach talks about a physical united Ireland he is actually being unconstitutional.

Who knew.