Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
How long before Irish reunification?
Options
Comments
-
FrancieBrady wrote: »They are all Irish mark. That was where we where.
You set out to prove that they are different. They are no more different than a Munster man or woman is to a Leinster man or woman.
Very patronising francie. I am not Irish. I am Northern Irish and British. I know you would like to squeeze is all into your little bigoted box but it won’t happen.0 -
Very patronising francie. I am not Irish. I am Northern Irish and British. I know you would like to squeeze is all into your little bigoted box but it won’t happen.
And as if that is not bad enough, Francie has boasted that he has proposed a plan to resettle people (relocation grants" he calls it) who could not live with their road being renamed Bobby Sands road, their kids having to learn Irish at school, discrimination against non Irish speakers in university admissions and public sector job recruitment like happened here etc.
He has yet to explain how he would fund such a plan. It would be very interesting. Do Francies superiors approve of his proposal?0 -
15-20 years
Treat them like the british soldiers treated my family up north in the 70s, shoot at their feet to make them dance?FrancieBrady wrote: »What do you propose to do for people who say they 'couldn't live in a UI' jan?
On a 21st century note, however, a united Ireland is becoming more and more an inevitability. I'd be happy to pay more tax for it, I'd change the tricolor back to the harp on a blue/green background, I'd forgo the anthem to that dreadful "Ireland's Call".
I'm sure I'm not the only one. But at the end of the day, as per the terms of the GFA, the only way a united Ireland will return, is if the people of both North and South vote for it in a majority. To paraphrase a well known political term, that day will come, and it will be soon.0 -
Hmmm, so you are now denying the separate ethnic identity of travellers as well as the separate ethnic identity of both British and Northern Irish people born on this island.
Your post takes bigotry to a new level.
Being born on this island means you are entitled to be Irish, it doesn’t mean that you are Irish. There is a huge difference and that was recognised in the GFA.
Once again, when you strip away the layers, you see the bigoted racist aspect of Irish republicanism raise its ugly head.
Which would be a brilliant theory if I hadn't said over and over and over again that I do not deny anyone their 'identity'.
:rolleyes:0 -
And as if that is not bad enough, Francie has boasted that he has proposed a plan to resettle people (relocation grants" he calls it) who could not live with their road being renamed Bobby Sands road, their kids having to learn Irish at school, discrimination against non Irish speakers in university admissions and public sector job recruitment like happened here etc.
He has yet to explain how he would fund such a plan. It would be very interesting. Do Francies superiors approve of his proposal?
And you have proposed nothing to help those people who say the 'couldn't live in a UI'.
You will either ignore them (like Irish people were ignored at partition and after) or you will force them to stay while their political reps sails off into the sunset.
As the son of a victim of partition and having lived on the southern side of the border all my life so far, it isn't hard to emphatise with those people who were sundered from their state.
I wouldn't want anyone to go through that. If you wish to leave and do not have the means, then help should be made available.
I actually have no doubt at all that Britain would fund that, but if they wouldn't we should.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
Very patronising francie. I am not Irish. I am Northern Irish and British. I know you would like to squeeze is all into your little bigoted box but it won’t happen.
Nobody is going to deny you your right to identity as you wish, this is not going to be anything like the original partition of this island...those mistakes are well recognised and seared into the collective memory.
Having the choice to stay or go is an enhancement of your rights actually and it should be a choice - available to all who wish to avail of it - not just to those who can afford it.
What do you think of Arlene's decision to abandon some of those who elected her btw?0 -
10-15 years
I would think if you'd been blown up and traumatised on a school bus as a child you might be worried about the thought of the cowardly scum who do that kind of thing being able to persecute protestants even more,as the extremist republicans will do if they got their way.FrancieBrady wrote: »Very patronising francie. I am not Irish. I am Northern Irish and British. I know you would like to squeeze is all into your little bigoted box but it won’t happen.
Nobody is going to deny you your right to identity as you wish, this is not going to be anything like the original partition of this island...those mistakes are well recognised and seared into the collective memory.
Having the choice to stay or go is an enhancement of your rights actually and it should be a choice - available to all who wish to avail of it - not just to those who can afford it.
What do you think of Arlene's decision to abandon some of those who elected her btw?0 -
FrancieBrady wrote: »Nobody is going to deny you your right to identity as you wish, this is not going to be anything like the original partition of this island...those mistakes are well recognised and seared into the collective memory.
Having the choice to stay or go is an enhancement of your rights actually and it should be a choice - available to all who wish to avail of it - not just to those who can afford it.
What do you think of Arlene's decision to abandon some of those who elected her btw?
Thanks Francie. So you are going to allow me to leave if I won't knuckle down and admit I am Irish!
I am interested in the rest of that sentence though - Are you proposing to fund the relocation of those who wish to move to another part of the UK?0 -
That makes no sense at all Rob.I would think if you'd been blown up and traumatised on a school bus as a child you might be worried about the thought of the cowardly scum who do that kind of thing being able to persecute protestants even more,as the extremist republicans will do if they got their way.
Arlene chose to represent her community while the conflict was still happening. She, in fairness to her, had no problems then representing her people.Thanks Francie. So you are going to allow me to leave if I won't knuckle down and admit I am Irish!
No, the conversation on this started with the results of a poll that showed that 18% of your community say they 'couldn't live with a UI'.
It's a response to something your own people say.I am interested in the rest of that sentence though - Are you proposing to fund the relocation of those who wish to move to another part of the UK?
Yes, as there are bound to be those who could not afford to leave, like Arlene.0 -
Advertisement
-
15-20 years
+1droidman123 wrote: »I am from dublin, so i,m not irish either,i am "eastern irish"
Makes as much sense as someone from the north of Ireland identifying as not irish but northern irish, in the same way.
Partitionism was an invention of the British, before the partition act there was no such thing as "Northern Ireland".0 -
10-15 years
Do you think being blown up as a child might have affected her?FrancieBrady wrote: »
That makes no sense at all Rob.I would think if you'd been blown up and traumatised on a school bus as a child you might be worried about the thought of the cowardly scum who do that kind of thing being able to persecute protestants even more,as the extremist republicans will do if they got their way.
Arlene chose to represent her community while the conflict was still happening. She, in fairness to her, had no problems then representing her people.Thanks Francie. So you are going to allow me to leave if I won't knuckle down and admit I am Irish!
No, the conversation on this started with the results of a poll that showed that 18% of your community say they 'couldn't live with a UI'.
It's a response to something your own people say.I am interested in the rest of that sentence though - Are you proposing to fund the relocation of those who wish to move to another part of the UK?
Yes, as there are bound to be those who could not afford to leave, like Arlene.
She maybe suffering from post traumatic stress and possibly terrified of the unchecked terrorists coming for her again -she should be given some slack in the circumstances.0 -
Do you think being blown up as a child might have affected her?
She maybe suffering from post traumatic stress and possibly terrified of the unchecked terrorists coming for her again -she should be given some slack in the circumstances.
That isn't credible, because she stood for election at a time of conflict. She has publicly and vociferously represented her electorate since the late 80's and will fight publicly and vociferously for the Union (without fear of 'uchecked terrorists coming for her again'* ) but if she loses, she will move away.
*they were never after her specifically in the attacks she experienced btw0 -
15-20 years+1
Makes as much sense as someone from the north of Ireland identifying as not irish but northern irish, in the same way.
Partitionism was an invention of the British, before the partition act there was no such thing as "Northern Ireland".
This thought process isn't exactly conducive to uniting the two communities, though? Whether you approve of the current situation or not, Northern Ireland is a distinct nation from Ireland itself. And if, in the future, NI joins Ireland (as a good many would like) then this blasé disregard for their self-identity is going to fuel those hardcore unionists who are afraid the Republic will treat them like the UK treated republicans and catholics post-partition.
How do you think that'll pan out for the New Ireland? How did it pan out for the UK?
While arguably you could call everyone from there "Irish" in that they are from the island of Ireland, that doesn't erase their nationality of being 'Northern Irish' (as in - of Northern Ireland). You also have the issue that 'Irish' simultaneously means 'of the nation of Ireland', alongside 'of the island of Ireland' (in the same way 'British' is used to mean 'of the island of Britain' and as shorthand for 'of the United Kingdom' - language is funny, complex, and ever malleable). Some folks in NI very much do not want to be seen as the former, and so don't want to be called 'Irish'. Even if technically it is correct to do so because of the latter.
Is it so hard to just...not say it?0 -
Ulster Says No. It will never happenFrancieBrady wrote: »If you wish to leave and do not have the means, then help should be made available.
I actually have no doubt at all that Britain would fund that, but if they wouldn't we should.
That sounds fair, but I'm not sure how many would be willing to take up the offer. I would foresee a large percentage of that 18% would rather stay and obstruct and disrupt rather than up stakes and move. A smaller percentage would probably even take up arms. What's the plan for that eventuality?0 -
This thought process isn't exactly conducive to uniting the two communities, though? Whether you approve of the current situation or not, Northern Ireland is a distinct nation from Ireland itself. And if, in the future, NI joins Ireland (as a good many would like) then this blasé disregard for their self-identity is going to fuel those hardcore unionists who are afraid the Republic will treat them like the UK treated republicans and catholics post-partition.
How do you think that'll pan out for the New Ireland? How did it pan out for the UK?
While arguably you could call everyone from there "Irish" in that they are from the island of Ireland, that doesn't erase their nationality of being 'Northern Irish' (as in - of Northern Ireland). You also have the issue that 'Irish' simultaneously means 'of the nation of Ireland', alongside 'of the island of Ireland' (in the same way 'British' is used to mean 'of the island of Britain' and as shorthand for 'of the United Kingdom' - language is funny, complex, and ever malleable). Some folks in NI very much do not want to be seen as the former, and so don't want to be called 'Irish'. Even if technically it is correct to do so because of the latter.
Is it so hard to just...not say it?
Fully agree with this ^.
The conversation about this started because a few poster were making the claim that 'Nordies' were a different people. They didn't even make the distinction between chosen identities, that people have a right to.
Just that everyone 'up there' was different.0 -
That sounds fair, but I'm not sure how many would be willing to take up the offer. I would foresee a large percentage of that 18% would rather stay and obstruct and disrupt rather than up stakes and move. A smaller percentage would probably even take up arms. What's the plan for that eventuality?
Partition came about originally because Carson, Craig etc brought the gun back into Irish politics and threatened violence.
I have no doubt that there will be some who will do the same against a UI, but I think that a sustained campaign against it would be un - maintainable for a number of reasons.
1. What would be the point of it?
2. With the British and Irish governments and the rest of the EU fully invested in the success of a UI, any violent elements would be isolated very quickly, on both sides.
3. the pragmatic history of Unionism. History shows us that political reps of Unionism will hold the Never Never line but when that fails they just get on with things in a pragmatic way. 'Parades' 'the Flag' the Anglo Irish Agreement and GFA in particular.0 -
10-15 yearsIt will be interesting to see how long FFG can delay a United Ireland !
They have done a good job so far i.e. from their point of view .0 -
15-20 yearsThis thought process isn't exactly conducive to uniting the two communities, though? Whether you approve of the current situation or not, Northern Ireland is a distinct nation from Ireland itself. And if, in the future, NI joins Ireland (as a good many would like) then this blasé disregard for their self-identity is going to fuel those hardcore unionists who are afraid the Republic will treat them like the UK treated republicans and catholics post-partition.
How do you think that'll pan out for the New Ireland? How did it pan out for the UK?
While arguably you could call everyone from there "Irish" in that they are from the island of Ireland, that doesn't erase their nationality of being 'Northern Irish' (as in - of Northern Ireland). You also have the issue that 'Irish' simultaneously means 'of the nation of Ireland', alongside 'of the island of Ireland' (in the same way 'British' is used to mean 'of the island of Britain' and as shorthand for 'of the United Kingdom' - language is funny, complex, and ever malleable). Some folks in NI very much do not want to be seen as the former, and so don't want to be called 'Irish'. Even if technically it is correct to do so because of the latter.
Is it so hard to just...not say it?
No, no it isn't. It is a creation of the british in 1921. This did not exist before. It is an artificial creation.
Everyone born on the island of Ireland is Irish. The clue is in the name.0 -
15-20 yearsThis thought process isn't exactly conducive to uniting the two communities, though? Whether you approve of the current situation or not, Northern Ireland is a distinct nation from Ireland itself. And if, in the future, NI joins Ireland (as a good many would like) then this blasé disregard for their self-identity is going to fuel those hardcore unionists who are afraid the Republic will treat them like the UK treated republicans and catholics post-partition.
How do you think that'll pan out for the New Ireland? How did it pan out for the UK?
While arguably you could call everyone from there "Irish" in that they are from the island of Ireland, that doesn't erase their nationality of being 'Northern Irish' (as in - of Northern Ireland). You also have the issue that 'Irish' simultaneously means 'of the nation of Ireland', alongside 'of the island of Ireland' (in the same way 'British' is used to mean 'of the island of Britain' and as shorthand for 'of the United Kingdom' - language is funny, complex, and ever malleable). Some folks in NI very much do not want to be seen as the former, and so don't want to be called 'Irish'. Even if technically it is correct to do so because of the latter.
Is it so hard to just...not say it?
No, no it isn't. It is a creation of the british in 1921. This did not exist before. It is an artificial creation.
Everyone born on the island of Ireland is Irish. The clue is in the name.
In fairness, as someone who openly supports unification, I think this reasoning is pretty facile.
In some sense, every state/country is an artificial creation, some just happened longer ago than others. While the Ulster Scots people certainly have a significant shared history with Irish folk (sufficiently so that they would be well within their rights to identify as Irish), they also do have a separate history and culture which is blatantly not Irish.
The people in the North on both sides are a varying mishmash of Irish and Ulster Scots influenced culturally in my experience (being one myself). I think to steamroll over this and ignore it, and telling people from the Ulster Scots side that their culture and history which is distinct from ours doesn't matter, and they can just suck it up and be Irish is foolish. It certainly won't win many friends from the middle ground of Unionism, and this is a cohort who will certainly need to be convinced for unification to proceed.0 -
Advertisement
-
15-20 yearsIn fairness, as someone who openly supports unification, I think this reasoning is pretty facile.
In some sense, every state/country is an artificial creation, some just happened longer ago than others. While the Ulster Scots people certainly have a significant shared history with Irish folk (sufficiently so that they would be well within their rights to identify as Irish), they also do have a separate history and culture which is blatantly not Irish.
The people in the North on both sides are a varying mishmash of Irish and Ulster Scots influenced culturally in my experience (being one myself). I think to steamroll over this and ignore it, and telling people from the Ulster Scots side that their culture and history which is distinct from ours doesn't matter, and they can just suck it up and be Irish is foolish. It certainly won't win many friends from the middle ground of Unionism, and this is a cohort who will certainly need to be convinced for unification to proceed.
It is pretty risible to suggest that someone who was planted there a couple of centuries ago by the British can consider that their culture and history should be incorporated in an Irish nation. This is Ireland. If you don't like it you know where the boat is. How is republican/nationalism culture and history respected up North in the current artificial British creation? My family has ties up North as I mentioned. We were shot at by the British army.0 -
In fairness, as someone who openly supports unification, I think this reasoning is pretty facile.
In some sense, every state/country is an artificial creation, some just happened longer ago than others. While the Ulster Scots people certainly have a significant shared history with Irish folk (sufficiently so that they would be well within their rights to identify as Irish), they also do have a separate history and culture which is blatantly not Irish.
The people in the North on both sides are a varying mishmash of Irish and Ulster Scots influenced culturally in my experience (being one myself). I think to steamroll over this and ignore it, and telling people from the Ulster Scots side that their culture and history which is distinct from ours doesn't matter, and they can just suck it up and be Irish is foolish. It certainly won't win many friends from the middle ground of Unionism, and this is a cohort who will certainly need to be convinced for unification to proceed.
The original debate over this originated in somebody (Facehugger, I think) refering to the the people of NI as 'Nordies' and inferring that they were ALL different. Not just those who identify as British.
There are cultural variations throughout this island and people are entitled to indulge them.
But as the occupants of the island of Ireland, we are all Irish ultimately. Paisley had no problem with that designation and I see no problem with it.
If a Dubliner and a Belfast resident goes to England they will both be seen as 'Irish' regardless of how they 'identify'. I don't see any point in negating that fact of life, while still absolutely respecting how somebody wants to identify.
Insisting that there is a 'difference' is the dogmatic position imo.0 -
15-20 yearsNo, no it isn't. It is a creation of the british in 1921. This did not exist before. It is an artificial creation.
A vast majority of modern countries are 'artificial' creations. Modern Germany didn't exist before 1921 either. Russia had different borders back then too.
There was no single Irish 'state' prior to the arrival of the British either. Would there have been, given time and without being interrupted with invasion? Probably - all of Europe was heading that way with larger kingdoms/whatevers gobbling up smaller ones all across the continent. By that same standard, is our own nation artificial? How far back must a state exist to be real, and in what manner must it be started?
As I said, whether you agree with it or not they are a separate nation. Recognised by both our government and the international community. They have different laws, taxes, systems of governance.... You can argue against it all you like, it does not make you correct. Acting like their statehood (and the nationality of those therein) is a lie is only going to poison any chance at a successful New Ireland.
I want a New Ireland, I genuinely think the people of NI have been failed by the UK and think they deserve better. I think it's the best option for lasting peace on this island with Brexit looming. And I think both those things are worth sacrificing some of my comforts. But shouting at a good portion of them 'you are who we say you are, dwi', acting like their self-determination is irrelevant and their self-identity is a sham? That's not an Ireland I want, nor is it one I would vote for. It's certainly not one the people of Northern Ireland would (nor should) vote for.
Yes....that was my point. But one can be both 'Irish' (geographically) and 'Northern Irish' (nationally), and it also costs nothing to be polite about it and not use the former for the people who don't want it used for them.Everyone born on the island of Ireland is Irish. The clue is in the name.
I knew a guy in school whose legal name was 'Johnny'. Not Jonathon, his birth cert and passport both said 'Johnny'. Do you know what we called him? 'John'. He asked us to call him that because he hated Johnny. We would have been technically correct calling him that, but we would also have been jerks. It cost us nothing, and meant a great deal to him.0 -
Ulster Says No. It will never happenFrancieBrady wrote: »If a Dubliner and a Belfast resident goes to England they will both be seen as 'Irish' regardless of how they 'identify'.
True. Most English people have been denying the Northern Irish identity for years. It's all just "the Irish fighting each other".0 -
FrancieBrady wrote: »Absolutely...how many times do i have to say, I have no problem whatsoever with how people wish to identify. But as their prominent spokespeople have said, they are Irish people who identify as British.See above on the GFA...on which we all got to vote, because we are all the same...Irish people.
You clearly do not even know what is in the GFA in relation to this.
Here is the relevant text.(vi) recognise the birthright of all the people of Northern Ireland to
identify themselves and be accepted as Irish or British, or both, as they
may so choose, and accordingly confirm that their right to hold both
British and Irish citizenship is accepted by both Governments and would
not be affected by any future change in the status of Northern Ireland.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/136652/agreement.pdf
It is not up you to tell anyone in Northern Ireland what identity they are. The GFA enshrines the right for the individual alone to choose.
So, leave your nationalist bigotry and supremacy aside for once.0 -
15-20 yearsIn fairness, as someone who openly supports unification, I think this reasoning is pretty facile.
In some sense, every state/country is an artificial creation, some just happened longer ago than others. While the Ulster Scots people certainly have a significant shared history with Irish folk (sufficiently so that they would be well within their rights to identify as Irish), they also do have a separate history and culture which is blatantly not Irish.
The people in the North on both sides are a varying mishmash of Irish and Ulster Scots influenced culturally in my experience (being one myself). I think to steamroll over this and ignore it, and telling people from the Ulster Scots side that their culture and history which is distinct from ours doesn't matter, and they can just suck it up and be Irish is foolish. It certainly won't win many friends from the middle ground of Unionism, and this is a cohort who will certainly need to be convinced for unification to proceed.
It is pretty risible to suggest that someone who was planted there a couple of centuries ago by the British can consider that their culture and history should be incorporated in an Irish nation. This is Ireland. If you don't like it you know where the boat is. How is republican/nationalism culture and history respected up North in the current artificial British creation? My family has ties up North as I mentioned. We were shot at by the British army.
So do you believe that Irish culture hasnt changed in the centuries since plantation? Or that those changes haven't been in any way influenced by British culture?
At the end of the day, whether you like it or not, those people's culture and history HAS been incorporated into the culture and history of the North. It has fundamentally altered the history and culture of this island, so in a sense, despite misdeeds from centuries ago, Ulster Scots culture should absolutely be incorporated into the culture of a New Ireland.
If you wish to move towards unification, and the New Ireland we're all told about, then like it or lump it, compromise will have to be made. I'd consider accepting a significant portion of the country's right to their history a pretty small compromise.
I'd rather not get deep into the tit-for-tat who shot at who, needless to say join the club on that point. I'm sure Unionists could easily point out family members who were shot at by the IRA.
The simple fact is, without some of these people on side, unification will never happen. Telling them to like it or f*ck off back to Britain results in only one outcome- a huge No vote for unification.0 -
FrancieBrady wrote: »Insisting that there is a 'difference' is the dogmatic position imo.
Because there is a difference. It is why there is a GFA agreement for the Northern 6 counties of Ulster and not Munster.0 -
You clearly do not even know what is in the GFA in relation to this.
Here is the relevant text.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/136652/agreement.pdf
It is not up you to tell anyone in Northern Ireland what identity they are. The GFA enshrines the right for the individual alone to choose.
So, leave your nationalist bigotry and supremacy aside for once.
WHERE did I tell anyone what their 'identity' was. I have said over and over again that I fully respect what anyone wants to identify as.
It is those who declaim that ALL 'Nordies' are different that are the bigots and dogmatists here.0 -
Ulster Says No. It will never happenIt is pretty risible to suggest that someone who was planted there a couple of centuries ago by the British can consider that their culture and history should be incorporated in an Irish nation. This is Ireland. If you don't like it you know where the boat is. How is republican/nationalism culture and history respected up North in the current artificial British creation?
If we're going to have a United Ireland then we should be aiming a little higher than the people who created the division in the first place. Criticising one side's mistakes while no learning anything from them is pretty pointless.My family has ties up North as I mentioned. We were shot at by the British army.
That must have been very scary. Seeing guns on TV is one thing, having them in proximity, and even having them pointed at you, is something else. Nevertheless, an argument must stand or fall on its own merits, not on who the arguer is related to, or who may have shot at them.0 -
Advertisement
-
Because there is a difference. It is why there is a GFA agreement for the Northern 6 counties of Ulster and not Munster.
Why are you not hopping up and down ranting when someone claims ALL 'Nordies' are different, if almost half of them have the 'right' to identify as Irish?
Your hypocrisy is shining through here.
I have NO problem whatsoever if people wish to identify as British or Irish or female or Polish or German or Traveller.0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement