How long before Irish reunification?

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

How would you characterise race relations in the US now? Perfect or in need of huge work still?

It's a damm sight better than 1954 with the SCOTUS ruled in Brown vs Board of Education.

Francie's politics is a bit like losing weight...Force is BAD outcome, CHOICE and natural CHANGE = GOOD outcome that can sustain itself.

Ah, like the choice to keep all-white schools?

Dytalus

15-20 years

blanch152 wrote: »

Francie, I never had you picked out as a supporter of apartheid and segregation. You are right about how the mask drops.

Keep the status quo to maintain the divide and hope the demographic numbers achieve the change. Resist any modernisation in case it dilutes the us and them mentality.

C'mon. As someone who is (I assume, anyway) like Francie with regards to personal freedoms, I don't like the idea of forcing people to do things they don't want to do....in principal. This is a pretty fair opinion to hold. Desegregation movements in the US and South Africa were about the abolishing of laws that mandated segregation. There's no such law in place to be removed in NI - so the scenarios are not directly comparable.

In practice though, I agree something needs to be done. I think making it mandatory to integrate, or illegal not to be or..whatever, is crossing a line and too simple a solution for a complex problem. How many schools are segregated because they're run by religious organisation? That's a simple enough fix - remove the church from public education (private education, fine...have at). This is something we've proven pretty poor at doing in the Republic, and "let he without sin..." runs through my head.

But how many are effectively segregated because of where they are? How do you bring catholic/nationalist students to a school that's in a unionist/protestant dominated area? Do you bus them in? Does that not risk a repeat of the Holy Cross dispute, where schoolchildren were intimidated because they were "in the wrong neighbourhood"? And that was for Catholic students in a Catholic School, what if you bus in (a la what they tried to do in the US with limited success) a group of Protestant children into a school in a predominantly Catholic area that is - due to location - predominantly Catholic. What do you do if the kids get harassed on the way to school (like Holy Cross) and while in the school from the Catholic students (or worse, their parents)?

It's a powder keg. I don't agree with your blanket "forced integration" idea, but likewise I don't agree with Francie's "do nothing/do the minimum" approach. I think there should be increased funding for the development of new, non-denominational and integrated schools (through the IEF, or just straight government spending) which don't have the baggage associated with the currently existing Catholic/Protestant schools. Make them the new standard in schooling.

I agree something needs to be done. I don't think it's as easy as saying "force them to integrate" - in the absence of a law mandating segregation, you need to address the reasons for segregation. Some can be directly addressed, and others can't be. Saying "this is how the law says it is" and forcing mixing and exposure between the two communities in Northern Ireland has not, historically, gone down well (see: reaction to Irish language road signs etc.)

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

It's a damm sight better than 1954 with the SCOTUS ruled in Brown vs Board of Education.



Ah, like the choice to keep all-white schools?

The guys who want to 'force' change are desperate suddenly to mark me as the bad guy.

I am an advocate of 'choice' here Mark. Ideally, imo, there would be NO religiously run schools anywhere.

But there are, and people use them and value them.

Forcing people to do things to your religious beliefs or non-religious beliefs is fundamentally wrong and has proven to be on both sides of the divide and in both jurisdictions. Change has to come from people being given CHOICE, it is inherently slower but a much more stable and permanent solution.

Ireland is done with the politics of 'force', whatever side wishes to engage in it.

We all know who exactly would be up on their high moral horses here if anyone suggested 'forcing' a UI.

As I said, it's amazing what is revealed when the 'moralists' drop their guard.

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Change has to come from people being given CHOICE, it is inherently slower but a much more stable and permanent solution.

It is good to know that you are also a white supremacist, as you are against brown vs board of education, that is de-segregating public schools in the south.

Got to give those white kids the CHOICE to go to an all-white school.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

It is good to know that you are also a white supremacist, as you are against brown vs board of education, that is de-segregating public schools in the south.

Got to give those white kids the CHOICE to go to an all-white school.

Oh dear, again.

Sad that you do this Mark. Just a sign that your bitter, dictatorial argument is utterly defeated.

Stop moaning ffs

10-15 years

The outright fear of a UI here borders on irrational.

That said the same folks are earlier in this thread saying the conversation wouldn’t even ever happen and yet here we are and it’s front and center. And the Brits themselves are working on in it in their constitution institute

maccored

30-40 years

facehugger99 wrote: »

The choice needs to be taken out of their hands.

Good old dictatorship. Easy to see who support the above in this thread. Im sure a few of those supporters loved maggie too.

facehugger99

maccored wrote: »

Good old dictatorship. Easy to see who support the above in this thread. Im sure a few of those supporters loved maggie too.

Lack of choice = Dictatorship.

Sure, if you're a 7 year old maybe.

Plenty of things need to be taken out of people's hands. whether it's wearing your seatbelt or paying your taxes, or even, shock horror, sending your children to school.

The greater good to society will trump the selfish inclinations of the individual for many issues.

If you think that makes us into something akin to North Korea, you're really making yourself look rather foolish.

Your references to Thatcher are weird - if anything she was in favour of breaking down society in favour of a more individualistic outlook. Maybe read a book sometime.

maccored

30-40 years

facehugger99 wrote: »

Lack of choice = Dictatorship.

Sure, if you're a 7 year old maybe.

Plenty of things need to be taken out of people's hands. whether it's wearing your seatbelt or paying your taxes, or even, shock horror, sending your children to school.

The greater good to society will trump the selfish inclinations of the individual for many issues.

If you think that makes us into something akin to North Korea, you're really making yourself look rather foolish.

lack of choice? Francie mentioned choice and you said "Nope, fcuk them. You force them to start integrating their children."

one of us looks foolish alright.

maccored

30-40 years

facehugger99 wrote: »

Your references to Thatcher are weird - if anything she was in favour of breaking down society in favour of a more individualistic outlook. Maybe read a book sometime.

Unlike you I lived under Thatcher's rule. Right wing fascist arsehole. Im pretty sure I'd get that from a book too. Stop pretending she gave a **** about anything but money

facehugger99

maccored wrote: »

Unlike you I lived under Thatcher's rule. Right wing fascist arsehole. Im pretty sure I'd get that from a book too. Stop pretending she gave a **** about anything but money

I'm happy you were able to get that little rant out of your system, anyway........

maccored wrote: »

one of us looks foolish alright.

It's really the only thing you've said that I in any way agree with.

FrancieBrady

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

The outright fear of a UI here borders on irrational.

That said the same folks are earlier in this thread saying the conversation wouldn’t even ever happen and yet here we are and it’s front and center. And the Brits themselves are working on in it in their constitution institute

Something we might have to look out for in the interests of people. 'Partitionists losing the run of themselves' if there is a progression to a UI.

They do indeed get more and more irrational in thought anyhow.

FrancieBrady

maccored wrote: »

Unlike you I lived under Thatcher's rule. Right wing fascist arsehole. Im pretty sure I'd get that from a book too. Stop pretending she gave a **** about anything but money

Thatcher was fond of 'forcing' people too. Divided UK society as a result and it is still suffering from that to this day.

facehugger99

Looks like Francie's retreated to the safety of 'echo-chamber' mode. :pac:

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

Looks like Francie's retreated to the safety of 'echo-chamber' mode. :pac:

Echo chamber?

If a republican said this about anything there would be more people up on the high moral ground preaching around this place, it would cause a landslide.

facehugger99 wrote:

Nope, fcuk them.

You force them ....

facehugger99

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If a republican said this about anything there would be more people up on the high moral ground preaching around this place, it would cause a landslide.

Maybe in your feverish imagination.


Forcing people to do things can be very beneficial.

Perhaps we should have just asked people nicely to stop smoking in pubs and restaurants back in 2004?

You know, given people a choice because change has to come from people being given CHOICE?

Fcuk sake - put on your big-boy pants and get real.

Your primary driver appears to be retaining the sectarian status-quo.

Who stands to benefit politically from that approach I wonder?

No need to answer, I'm sure your SF-shillery is entirely coincidental. :rolleyes:

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

Maybe in your feverish imagination.


Forcing people to do things can be very beneficial.

Perhaps we should have just asked people nicely to stop smoking in pubs and restaurants back in 2004?

You know, given people a choice because change has to come from people being given CHOICE?

Fcuk sake - put on your big-boy pants and get real.

Your primary driver appears to be retaining the sectarian status-quo.

Who stands to benefit politically from that approach I wonder?

No need to answer, I'm sure your SF-shillery is entirely coincidental. :rolleyes:

Wouldn't you now like to hide by calling me a SF shill?

I never once said I favoured religious control of education FH.


I said that RATHER than forcing people together that investing in CHOICE is a much better way to do it.

You are the bigot here, you want to force people together whether they want it or not. That is the simple outcome of what you propose and it bears no similarity to anti smoking legislation, none what so ever.

blanch152

Dytalus wrote: »

C'mon. As someone who is (I assume, anyway) like Francie with regards to personal freedoms, I don't like the idea of forcing people to do things they don't want to do....in principal. This is a pretty fair opinion to hold. Desegregation movements in the US and South Africa were about the abolishing of laws that mandated segregation. There's no such law in place to be removed in NI - so the scenarios are not directly comparable.

In practice though, I agree something needs to be done. I think making it mandatory to integrate, or illegal not to be or..whatever, is crossing a line and too simple a solution for a complex problem. How many schools are segregated because they're run by religious organisation? That's a simple enough fix - remove the church from public education (private education, fine...have at). This is something we've proven pretty poor at doing in the Republic, and "let he without sin..." runs through my head.

But how many are effectively segregated because of where they are? How do you bring catholic/nationalist students to a school that's in a unionist/protestant dominated area? Do you bus them in? Does that not risk a repeat of the Holy Cross dispute, where schoolchildren were intimidated because they were "in the wrong neighbourhood"? And that was for Catholic students in a Catholic School, what if you bus in (a la what they tried to do in the US with limited success) a group of Protestant children into a school in a predominantly Catholic area that is - due to location - predominantly Catholic. What do you do if the kids get harassed on the way to school (like Holy Cross) and while in the school from the Catholic students (or worse, their parents)?

It's a powder keg. I don't agree with your blanket "forced integration" idea, but likewise I don't agree with Francie's "do nothing/do the minimum" approach. I think there should be increased funding for the development of new, non-denominational and integrated schools (through the IEF, or just straight government spending) which don't have the baggage associated with the currently existing Catholic/Protestant schools. Make them the new standard in schooling.

I agree something needs to be done. I don't think it's as easy as saying "force them to integrate" - in the absence of a law mandating segregation, you need to address the reasons for segregation. Some can be directly addressed, and others can't be. Saying "this is how the law says it is" and forcing mixing and exposure between the two communities in Northern Ireland has not, historically, gone down well (see: reaction to Irish language road signs etc.)

There is a fallacy with the choice option - what Catholic is going to choose to send their child to a Protestant school or vice versa?

Your proposal for new schools, while interesting, will only bring change over decades. If an integrated society in Northern Ireland is to be achieved (and I believe that to be an essential necessary prerequisite for a united Ireland) then progress must start immediately. Therefore the first step is to make all schools non-denominational, i.e. to remove religious organisations from the patronage, governance and management of schools in Northern Ireland. Renaming and rebranding of schools has to be part of that process as well. This would need to be done over a period of two to three years at most.

Once that is done, it is possible that Francie's "do nothing but wait" approach for people to exercise choice might work. Five years could also be allowed for this choice to manifest itself. If it doesn't happen by then, forced integration will have to be a reality, otherwise people will remain in the trenches, and we will have a divided Northern Ireland for decades more.

It is interesting that United Irelanders talk about creating a welcoming society for unionists, but as soon as a constructive proposal comes along, the likes of Francie retreat into defensive mode, against all change. The mentality of "do nothing but wait" and we will outbreed the other lot appears to take hold.

A second point you raise is around segregation of areas. The disgraceful actions of republican and loyalist terror groups that led to ethnic cleansing across Northern Ireland need to be reversed.

maccored

30-40 years

facehugger99 wrote: »

Forcing people to do things can be very beneficial.

i think thats all you need to read to get the idea francie.not much point debating with that kind of mindset

maccored

30-40 years

facehugger99 wrote: »

I'm happy you were able to get that little rant out of your system, anyway........




It's really the only thing you've said that I in any way agree with.

another post that says nothing other than trying to be funny smartass comments

maccored

30-40 years

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Thatcher was fond of 'forcing' people too. Divided UK society as a result and it is still suffering from that to this day.

but no francie - i've been told by people who have no idea what thatcher was like tell me she was loverly and nice

Stop moaning ffs

10-15 years

Real charmer.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

There is a fallacy with the choice option - what Catholic is going to choose to send their child to a Protestant school or vice versa?

Your proposal for new schools, while interesting, will only bring change over decades. If an integrated society in Northern Ireland is to be achieved (and I believe that to be an essential necessary prerequisite for a united Ireland) then progress must start immediately. Therefore the first step is to make all schools non-denominational, i.e. to remove religious organisations from the patronage, governance and management of schools in Northern Ireland. Renaming and rebranding of schools has to be part of that process as well. This would need to be done over a period of two to three years at most.

Once that is done, it is possible that Francie's "do nothing but wait" approach for people to exercise choice might work. Five years could also be allowed for this choice to manifest itself. If it doesn't happen by then, forced integration will have to be a reality, otherwise people will remain in the trenches, and we will have a divided Northern Ireland for decades more.

It is interesting that United Irelanders talk about creating a welcoming society for unionists, but as soon as a constructive proposal comes along, the likes of Francie retreat into defensive mode, against all change. The mentality of "do nothing but wait" and we will outbreed the other lot appears to take hold.

A second point you raise is around segregation of areas. The disgraceful actions of republican and loyalist terror groups that led to ethnic cleansing across Northern Ireland need to be reversed.

You are proposing that your 'method' of integration, which is essentially a fascistic dictat, would be seen by anyone as 'constructive'? :D:D

I'm about as non religious as you could get and all I see that as is 'destructive'.

Fine policy if you want to crash and burn society and rebuild...I think it was called 'scorched earth' policy.

Stop moaning ffs

10-15 years

Is Catholicism in NI as dead as it is here?
Or do they hang onto it as to separate from themmuns?

Unionists don’t seem to have the first clue that the church is a dead entity here and nobody would give a flying flamingo about their religion or even care.

facehugger99

maccored wrote: »

but no francie - i've been told by people who have no idea what thatcher was like tell me she was loverly and nice

Why don't you start a thread on Thatcher?

I'm sure it would be fascinating.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You are proposing that your 'method' of integration, which is essentially a fascistic dictat, would be seen by anyone as 'constructive'? :D:D

I'm about as non religious as you could get and all I see that as is 'destructive'.

Fine policy if you want to crash and burn society and rebuild...I think it was called 'scorched earth' policy.

I see it as equivalent to demolishing apartheid.

I know that the greatest fear of the two entrenched sides in Northern Ireland, particularly the two extremist parties, is integration and normalisation.

It is clear now Francie that you prefer segregation, you prefer a society divided along religious lines, and you prefer sectarianism, so long as your side, in the form of a united Ireland, has the upper hand. That is not a united Ireland that I can subscribe to, and neither can most.

The things I have talked about, the normalisation of Northern Ireland, the integration of its people, the removal of the influence of religion on education etc. have to happen first before we can consider a united Ireland.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

I see it as equivalent to demolishing apartheid.

I know that the greatest fear of the two entrenched sides in Northern Ireland, particularly the two extremist parties, is integration and normalisation.

It is clear now Francie that you prefer segregation, you prefer a society divided along religious lines, and you prefer sectarianism, so long as your side, in the form of a united Ireland, has the upper hand. That is not a united Ireland that I can subscribe to, and neither can most.

The things I have talked about, the normalisation of Northern Ireland, the integration of its people, the removal of the influence of religion on education etc. have to happen first before we can consider a united Ireland.

Nonsense.



You lied before about what was said because it is the only way you can mask what you revealed about yourself. That you favour fascistic diktats to get people to do what you want them to do. NI tore itself apart and went up in flames because of policies and people like that.

I have always favoured 'choice', because if people chose to change that is healthy and by extension society is healthier. And it is there in my posts since this conversation started. Stop your shameful lies now please.

maccored

30-40 years

facehugger99 wrote: »

Why don't you start a thread on Thatcher?

I'm sure it would be fascinating.

only if you were there telling us all how great she was

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Nonsense.



You lied before about what was said because it is the only way you can mask what you revealed about yourself. That you favour fascistic diktats to get people to do what you want them to do. NI tore itself apart and went up in flames because of policies and people like that.

I have always favoured 'choice', because if people chose to change that is healthy and by extension society is healthier. And it is there in my posts since this conversation started. Stop your shameful lies now please.

You really have a way of inventing things that people didn't say. Here are all my posts today on the subject of education in the North.

blanch152 wrote: »

Voting for a united Ireland anytime in the next 40 years would be as stupid as voting for Brexit. The only way it can happen is for the North to sort out its education system, sort out its industrial development and become self-sustaining and move towards convergence before unity is discussed.

blanch152 wrote: »

Bingo, that didn't take long.

Sectarianism starts in the religious controlled schools on both sides. For all the comedy, Derry Girls hits that nail on the head. Anyone defending religious controlled schools in the North, is, in my opinion, a proponent of the maintenance of a sectarian divide.

blanch152 wrote: »

They don't have to teach it. The mere fact of segregation, as we saw in South Africa and previously in the Deep South of America fosters differences and promotes hatred. Learned behaviour isn't always taught. Schools are where sectarianism starts in Northern Ireland.

This is pretty basic stuff.

blanch152 wrote: »

Where I do agree with you is that Northern Ireland is a very different place to the rest of us in Ireland. That means it needs different solutions. The practically complete absence of sectarianism in the South (apart from the reflected views of extreme Republicans) means that we don't need to rush the move away from religiously controlled schools.

However, it is very different in the North. On two sides, we have bitterly divided communities, with political leaders on both sides who engage in rabble-rousing (remember Gerry Adams with his "break these bastards" speech in 2014). These communities then have segregated schools where the language of the playground and religious education helps to foster and maintain the divide. All of that makes the desegregation of schools in the North an urgent necessity.

blanch152 wrote: »

There is a fallacy with the choice option - what Catholic is going to choose to send their child to a Protestant school or vice versa?

Your proposal for new schools, while interesting, will only bring change over decades. If an integrated society in Northern Ireland is to be achieved (and I believe that to be an essential necessary prerequisite for a united Ireland) then progress must start immediately. Therefore the first step is to make all schools non-denominational, i.e. to remove religious organisations from the patronage, governance and management of schools in Northern Ireland. Renaming and rebranding of schools has to be part of that process as well. This would need to be done over a period of two to three years at most.

Once that is done, it is possible that Francie's "do nothing but wait" approach for people to exercise choice might work. Five years could also be allowed for this choice to manifest itself. If it doesn't happen by then, forced integration will have to be a reality, otherwise people will remain in the trenches, and we will have a divided Northern Ireland for decades more.

It is interesting that United Irelanders talk about creating a welcoming society for unionists, but as soon as a constructive proposal comes along, the likes of Francie retreat into defensive mode, against all change. The mentality of "do nothing but wait" and we will outbreed the other lot appears to take hold.

A second point you raise is around segregation of areas. The disgraceful actions of republican and loyalist terror groups that led to ethnic cleansing across Northern Ireland need to be reversed.

blanch152 wrote: »

I see it as equivalent to demolishing apartheid.

I know that the greatest fear of the two entrenched sides in Northern Ireland, particularly the two extremist parties, is integration and normalisation.

It is clear now Francie that you prefer segregation, you prefer a society divided along religious lines, and you prefer sectarianism, so long as your side, in the form of a united Ireland, has the upper hand. That is not a united Ireland that I can subscribe to, and neither can most.

The things I have talked about, the normalisation of Northern Ireland, the integration of its people, the removal of the influence of religion on education etc. have to happen first before we can consider a united Ireland.

The essence of my proposal is in bold - to remove religious organisations from the patronage, governance and management of schools in Northern Ireland.

Somehow, that secularisation, that removal of the malign influence of religion, is one of a number of "fascistic diktats" that I have proposed. It is a measure that affects organisations - schools and religious orders - but not people. It is a measure less stringent that what was done in the American South and in South Africa to deal with the similarly entrenched prejudices in those countries. It is a relatively mild proposal, yet rather than consider the merit, the retreat into defensive mode takes over.

Take a serious look at yourself Francie, and consider how you have responded and the nature of your responses before you make a complete fool of yourself. I have said it already - anyone defending religious controlled schools in the North, is, in my opinion, a proponent of the maintenance of a sectarian divide.

Stop moaning ffs

10-15 years

You don’t seem to have considered that both communities might not want their schools taken out of churches hands. Particularly the Protestants. They’d see it as their ‘culture’ being forcibly taken from them.