The wondrous adventures of Sinn Fein (part 2)

grayzer75

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

looking at the last general election only those who voted for SF and the SDLP (and probably not even all of those) are certs to vote yes. That is less than 40%. not so clear cut.

There's also quite a few Alliance who would lean towards a UI now after the whole Brexit fiasco so that might bump it up a bit.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The collolary is also true, if it were definitive not to pass why would Unionists be so afraid of one happening?

I'll tell you why I think that is the case. Because thinking that votes for political parties when a UI is not on the agenda means anything is foolish.


Unionists fear the calling of a poll because they fear the damage a campaign could do to the carefully crafted myths about a UI. They fear people looking too closely at how much NI actually costs, how much Ireland has changed and how much value is placed on their place in the Union by the other members of the union

If a UI is 'on the agenda' the figures would change dramatically, that is why those posting general election trends are keeping their heads in the sand.

The whole picture is the more relevant one.

https://eamonnmallie.com/2020/03/a-northern-irish-identity-is-the-new-passport-to-unite-us-by-david-mcnarry/

As always, caught up in the past, republicans are missing the development of the Northern Irish identity, which will act as a buffer to prevent a united Ireland.

ohnonotgmail

grayzer75 wrote: »

There's also quite a few Alliance who would lean towards a UI now after the whole Brexit fiasco so that might bump it up a bit.

maybe they will but that still would not be enough.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

This is the kind of thinking that leads FGers to suggest celebration of the Black and Tans.

They'll never actually confront the idea that there is a deep connection that partition has not broken. A connection to our own struggle for freedom and what was done by the British and in the north a deep conviction that the only solution to the problem they have (which never was as simple as a lack of prosperity) is an end to partition.

If there was a deep connection, a UI would be a bigger issue at election time in the Republic. Wasn't a UI low down in the list of priorities for voters at the last GE even among SF voters?

With regards NI, the recent opinion poll on a UI showed that there isn't a sufficient number (think it was 30 odd %) that have a deep conviction for a UI.

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

maybe they will but that still would not be enough.

I think they would


Ni and stormont deosnt work,the dup used the petition of concern to put a stop to covid restrictions with hospiteals already above 100% capacity....which will result in fcuk knows how many deaths

Pull the plug,hold the poll,time for indulging them.is over

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

https://eamonnmallie.com/2020/03/a-northern-irish-identity-is-the-new-passport-to-unite-us-by-david-mcnarry/

As always, caught up in the past, republicans are missing the development of the Northern Irish identity, which will act as a buffer to prevent a united Ireland.

That's an 'opinion' piece by a former leader of UKIP blanch.

You sure are going to have to mix with some strange allies to oppose a UI.

This is just a fabulous Charlie Flanaganesque exhortation:

Next year Unionism will celebrate – Nationalism will not, Northern Ireland reaching a landmark 100 years in existence. Surviving a century is a remarkable achievement which ‘everyone’ should mark with popular recognition. Few should begrudge the right of unionists to rejoice.

Feck me, seen it all now.

grayzer75

blanch152 wrote: »

There has been a persistent delusion for the last 40 years that a united Ireland is inevitable because Catholics are outbreeding Protestants. This sectarian viewpoint has dominated an awful lot of republican thinking and every so often gives rise to demands for a border poll at the slightest sign of the delusion becoming true.

What the delusion ignores is that rising prosperity in Northern Ireland since the end of the terrorist campaign erodes support for a united Ireland, even though that rising prosperity lags the rest of the UK and other countries like Ireland. To pursue the united Ireland objective, Sinn Fein need recessions.

It's to do with a failed statelet which consistently let down a very large minority of the population and nothing to do with Catholics outbreeding anybody.

My father in law (brought up protestant) will vote for a UI as he sees it as a progressive way forward rather than anything based on sectarian lines.

The border poll will happen at some stage and it may be brought forward by whatever happens in Scotland.

There will be certain parties in the south who will canvass for it not to happen because they will become smaller players and others will seek to form alliances with parties from the north e.g. FG / DUP would fit perfectly together.

McMurphy

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Fianna Fail ministers arrived to the first Dáil sittings armed.

The last ex IRA member to sit at cabinet was under a FG/Lab government.

jm08

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

this is the vote share from the last general election in NI

Party % share
DUP Democratic Unionist Party 30.6%
SF Sinn Féin 22.8%
APNI Alliance Party 16.8%
SDLP Social Democratic & Labour Party 14.9%
UUP Ulster Unionist Party 11.7%
AONT Aontú 1.2%


It doesn't look so clear cut to me.

I don't think you can go on Westminster elections because SF are absentee and Alliance SDLP would gain from that. Do you have voting percentages for Assembly / European elections?

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

If there was a deep connection, a UI would be a bigger issue at election time in the Republic. Wasn't a UI low down in the list of priorities for voters at the last GE even among SF voters?

With regards NI, the recent opinion poll on a UI showed that there isn't a sufficient number (think it was 30 odd %) that have a deep conviction for a UI.

I think we aren't ready yet for a UI and have said I don't think the threat of Brexit should be the catalyst.

I fully believe that many realise the same thing and have placed a UI on a backburner list of priorities.

But the right time is approaching. Michael's Unity Unit is no accident. Politicians know the day is coming for the first border poll. The campaign will be transformative in my view. That is why Unionists and partitionists fear it so much.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That's an 'opinion' piece by a former leader of UKIP blanch.

You sure are going to have to mix with some strange allies to oppose a UI.

This is just a fabulous Charlie Flanaganesque exhortation:



Feck me, seen it all now.

I can pull articles including academic studies from all over the political spectrum on the Northern Ireland identity.

That you would try to shoot the messenger was all too predictable, making it easy for you just ensured my expectation was correct.

blanch152

jm08 wrote: »

I don't think you can go on Westminster elections because SF are absentee and Alliance SDLP would gain from that. Do you have voting percentages for Assembly / European elections?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_Northern_Ireland_Assembly_election

In 2003, the combined SF/SDLP vote was 40.5%.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Northern_Ireland_Assembly_election

In 2017, it was 39.8%

As I keep saying, best case is that support for a united Ireland has stagnated over the last two decades.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

I can pull articles including academic studies from all over the political spectrum on the Northern Ireland identity.

That you would try to shoot the messenger was all too predictable, making it easy for you just ensured my expectation was correct.

Naw, I was just having a giggle at your choice of ally here.

Go ahead, show these 'academic studies form all over the political spectrum'.

Bishop of hope

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This is an easily settled,hold the poll and see imo

A failed poll now would knock it back a, decade again at least I'd say.
SF will have carefully weighed this up and after brexit in January I'd see them stepping up their campaign.
If brexit goes hard on NI I'd see opinion shifting towards a UI then perhaps, but they're carefully biding their time as it could have an adverse affect here too.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Naw, I was just having a giggle at your choice of ally here.

Go ahead, show these 'academic studies form all over the political spectrum'.

You should never ask a question that you don't know the answer to.

http://www.niassembly.gov.uk/globalassets/documents/raise/knowledge_exchange/briefing_papers/series4/northern_ireland_identity_garry_mcnicholl_policy_document.pdf

"An analogous, but much starker, pattern emerges among Catholics. Irish
Catholics are over twice as likely to be nationalist than 'neither unionist nor nationalist' while Northern Irish Catholics are almost twice
as likely to be 'neither unionist nor nationalist' than 'nationalist'. "

" This analysis of the relationship between identity
choice and other facets of ethno-national positions suggests that the 'Northern Irish' identity is politically meaningful in the sense that it
is related to relatively moderate aspects of ethno-nationalism within both communities, but particularly so within the Catholic
community, "

"Northern Irishness does appear to be a real common ingroup identity,
inclusive of both Protestants and Catholics. It is associated with pro-social attitudes towards outgroup members so that prejudice is at
a lower level than with Irish or British identifiers"

This study, and any follow-ups, should be key inputs into the Secretary of State's considerations of any border poll.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

You should never ask a question that you don't know the answer to.

http://www.niassembly.gov.uk/globalassets/documents/raise/knowledge_exchange/briefing_papers/series4/northern_ireland_identity_garry_mcnicholl_policy_document.pdf

"An analogous, but much starker, pattern emerges among Catholics. Irish
Catholics are over twice as likely to be nationalist than 'neither unionist nor nationalist' while Northern Irish Catholics are almost twice
as likely to be 'neither unionist nor nationalist' than 'nationalist'. "

" This analysis of the relationship between identity
choice and other facets of ethno-national positions suggests that the 'Northern Irish' identity is politically meaningful in the sense that it
is related to relatively moderate aspects of ethno-nationalism within both communities, but particularly so within the Catholic
community, "

"Northern Irishness does appear to be a real common ingroup identity,
inclusive of both Protestants and Catholics. It is associated with pro-social attitudes towards outgroup members so that prejudice is at
a lower level than with Irish or British identifiers"

This study, and any follow-ups, should be key inputs into the Secretary of State's considerations of any border poll.

Unlike you, obviously, I read this paper and there it states that the 'Northern Irish' identity may be different things to different people and isn't a 'group with similarities' at all.

A
different interpretation of 'Northern Irish' as identity choice is that it may be simply another manifestation of the two main identities.
Some Protestants may adopt the term as a way of expressing their belonging to a particular part of the UK while some Catholics may
use the term to indicate their belonging to the Northern part of Ireland (McKeown, 2014). Accordingly, Northern Irish Catholics and
Northern Irish Protestants may be just as different from each other as Irish Catholics and British Protestants are.

I.E. what this identfier signifies is all still out there. Nobody really knows.

That YOU would cling to it as something meaningful in relation to a border poll is fairly predictable just as anything out of the mouth of David McNarry would be.

joeguevara

Deleted User wrote: »

They can hold another every 7 years.


Theres no time like the present to hold the 1st one imo

While the Secretary of State For Northern Ireland is permitted to call a Border poll when they please, the GFA states that it is mandatory’if at any time it appears likely to him that a majority of those voting would express a wish that Northern Ireland should cease to be part of the United Kingdom and form part of a united Ireland‘.

However it also must be concurrently agreed in the Republic. It was announced in February that any referendum was not planned for the next 5 years. Now, that is not set in stone but unless SF formed a majority government earlier, this wouldn’t change. Having one in the North without one here, is a waste of time.

And what happens if it passes. Do you know exactly how it works operationally. Unless it’s known how public services, police, courts elections, etc., would work, why would anyone think its in the best interest of anyone to hold a poll.

It would be exactly how the Brexit referendum was done. A simple question with absolutely not a notion of what happens.

Are you suggesting that it’s a good idea for one now as some sort of straw poll. Imagine the unrest if it passes and cannot be implemented.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Unlike you, obviously, I read this paper and there it states that the 'Northern Irish' identity may be different things to different people and isn't a 'group with similarities' at all.



I.E. what this identfier signifies is all still out there. Nobody really knows.

That YOU would cling to it as something meaningful in relation to a border poll is fairly predictable just as anything out of the mouth of David McNarry would be.

You clearly didn't get as far as the conclusions

"From the analysis we can draw two main conclusions. First, Northern Irishness does appear to be a real common ingroup identity, inclusive of both Protestants and Catholics"

What you quoted was from a paragraph that offered three possible options for the meaning of Northern Irish, one of which you cherrypicked. The academic study, unlike you, went on to consider each and everyone of the three, before reaching the conclusion I post above.

Your post is an astonishing failure to understand the outcome of the study.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

You clearly didn't get as far as the conclusions

"From the analysis we can draw two main conclusions. First, Northern Irishness does appear to be a real common ingroup identity, inclusive of both Protestants and Catholics"

What you quoted was from a paragraph that offered three possible options for the meaning of Northern Irish, one of which you cherrypicked. The academic study, unlike you, went on to consider each and everyone of the three, before reaching the conclusion I post above.

Your post is an astonishing failure to understand the outcome of the study.

Nobody denies it exists blanch. What you cling to is an unbacked up assertion that it will impact for your anti-UI crusade.

FrancieBrady

joeguevara wrote: »

While the Secretary of State For Northern Ireland is permitted to call a Border poll when they please, the GFA states that it is mandatory’if at any time it appears likely to him that a majority of those voting would express a wish that Northern Ireland should cease to be part of the United Kingdom and form part of a united Ireland‘.

However it also must be concurrently agreed in the Republic. It was announced in February that any referendum was not planned for the next 5 years. Now, that is not set in stone but unless SF formed a majority government earlier, this wouldn’t change. Having one in the North without one here, is a waste of time.

And what happens if it passes. Do you know exactly how it works operationally. Unless it’s known how public services, police, courts elections, etc., would work, why would anyone think its in the best interest of anyone to hold a poll.

It would be exactly how the Brexit referendum was done. A simple question with absolutely not a notion of what happens.

Are you suggesting that it’s a good idea for one now as some sort of straw poll. Imagine the unrest if it passes and cannot be implemented.

You think that if a border poll is called Dublin will refuse to hold a concurrent poll here?

Wha?

joeguevara

joeguevara wrote: »

While the Secretary of State For Northern Ireland is permitted to call a Border poll when they please, the GFA states that it is mandatory’if at any time it appears likely to him that a majority of those voting would express a wish that Northern Ireland should cease to be part of the United Kingdom and form part of a united Ireland‘.

However it also must be concurrently agreed in the Republic. It was announced in February that any referendum was not planned for the next 5 years. Now, that is not set in stone but unless SF formed a majority government earlier, this wouldn’t change. Having one in the North without one here, is a waste of time.

And what happens if it passes. Do you know exactly how it works operationally. Unless it’s known how public services, police, courts elections, etc., would work, why would anyone think its in the best interest of anyone to hold a poll.

It would be exactly how the Brexit referendum was done. A simple question with absolutely not a notion of what happens.

Are you suggesting that it’s a good idea for one now as some sort of straw poll. Imagine the unrest if it passes and cannot be implemented.

Its not a matter of if,but when it passes


Seems to me,theres a.majority there to support it,even those who oppose reunification in their refusal to support calls for border poll amounts to tacit admission its likely to pass imo

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

Its not a matter of if,but when it passes


Seems to me,theres a.majority there to support it,even those who oppose reunification in their refusal to support calls for border poll amounts to tacit admission its likely to pass imo

your conclusion is way off

joeguevara

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You think that if a border poll is called Dublin will refuse to hold a concurrent poll here?

Wha?

I presume that there is a missing comma between called and Dublin.

I never said anything about it being refused. I said that it is currently not in the plans and if not agreed to hold one concurrently, the northern one would have been For nothing.

Also, unless it was expected to pass, and not on a whim as it was suggested where it is expected to fail, why would a republic referendum be on the current government’s agenda? Do you think it’s appropriate to have a referendum on a whim as public policy?

joeguevara

Deleted User wrote: »

Its not a matter of if,but when it passes


Seems to me,theres a.majority there to support it,even those who oppose reunification in their refusal to support calls for border poll amounts to tacit admission its likely to pass imo

If it is likely to pass as is your assertion then it is mandated that it is called. Has SF stated that the Secretary of State is in breach?

FrancieBrady

joeguevara wrote: »

I presume that there is a missing comma between called and Dublin.

I never said anything about it being refused. I said that it is currently not in the plans and if not agreed to hold one concurrently, the northern one would have been For nothing.

Also, unless it was expected to pass, and not on a whim as it was suggested where it is expected to fail, why would a republic referendum be on the current government’s agenda? Do you think it’s appropriate to have a referendum on a whim as public policy?

What are you on about here Joe?

If a border poll is called, there will be a concurrent one here. It doesn't matter if Michael Martin wants one or not.

Technically, there is no requirement for one here as constitutionally we 'aspire to a UI' and have already answered the question at referendum.
But I think there should be one, if only to silence partitionists who would probably go all Trumpian.

joeguevara

Deleted User wrote: »

They should ,a jokeshop of a party

The irish government should aswell....but well,less said about their incompetence,the better

But if they have no evidence of that assertion then what value is stating that the Secretary of State is in breach. It would have to be grounded in fact based evidence. Instead of on a whim doing that, surely it would be way more beneficial if they stated a nationwide significant opinion poll that would show the evidence. Also, without knowing how to implement the requirements for a UI, simply having a poll without a clear and achievable plan to make it work would be a recipe for disaster. Or is the current Brexit position where the U.K. will more than likely crash out without a clue of how much it will impact them, a position that you would welcome here?

joeguevara

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What are you on about here Joe?

If a border poll is called, there will be a concurrent one here. It doesn't matter if Michael Martin wants one or not.

Technically, there is no requirement for one here as constitutionally we 'aspire to a UI' and have already answered the question at referendum.
But I think there should be one, if only to silence partitionists who would probably go all Trumpian.

Irrespective of your desire, you have completely missed the point that a poll in the republic is required concurrently and not something that was agreed in the past. And also, if it is shown that the proposed premature northern poll won’t succeed, why waste time here.

And instead of yearning for one, why not admit that SF haven’t done anything to trigger the mandatory northern poll and also why not admit that you have no idea on what would happen next. Or is it a case of shout now, think after like Boris did.

FrancieBrady

joeguevara wrote: »

Irrespective of your desire, you have completely missed the point that a poll in the republic is required concurrently and not something that was agreed in the past. And also, if it is shown that the proposed premature northern poll won’t succeed, why waste time here.

And instead of yearning for one, why not admit that SF haven’t done anything to trigger the mandatory northern poll and also why not admit that you have no idea on what would happen next. Or is it a case of shout now, think after like Boris did.

Joe...you have gotten t wrong again...check and read the GFA, there is NO requirement for a poll here.
The Irish Government of the time did say that is how it would be done though, a poll here at the same time as a poll in the North. And they said that in response to it being pointed out that constitutionally, we had already decided what we wanted.


As to a referendum being held here without a full examination of the issues? That is not how we do referendums. Work has already been done and more would be done on fleshing out what a UI would mean.

The Brexit referendum bore no resemblance to referendums here.

joeguevara

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Joe...you have gotten t wrong again...check and read the GFA, there is NO requirement for a poll here.
The Irish Government of the time did say that is how it would be done though, a poll here at the same time as a poll in the North. And they said that in response to it being pointed out that constitutionally, we had already decided what we wanted.


As to a referendum being held here without a full examination of the issues? That is not how we do referendums. Work has already been done and more would be done on fleshing out what a UI would mean.

The Brexit referendum bore no resemblance to referendums here.

As outlined by Attorney General “A fundamental principal of the Good Friday Agreement is that it is a settlement based on the exercise of the right to self-determination by the people of the island of Ireland. The requirement that the right was to be exercised, concurrently, on both parts of the island by way of a separate referendum in each jurisdiction was recognition of the realpolitik of a divided island. The reconciliation of the tension between the right to self-determination and the reality of political life on the island of Ireland is to be found in the policy of consent.

Good analysis of the above here https://senatormarkdaly.files.wordpress.com/2017/04/section-6.pdf

As for how referendums are done, I was referring to blaazs calling for a referendum now without the full roadmap in place.

My reference to Brexit was connected to the call for a referendum on a whim.

Another good analysis of the requirements for north and south polls held concurrently are outlined here https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/irish-reunification

There has been some commentary that asserts that it may be possible that a southern referendum is not required but it is not backed up by any real reason. Also it is usually followed up with the fact that the significant constitutional changes that would be required for a United Ireland would require referendum.

Concurrently is not simultaneous but does require that they are held under the same conditions and be close together.

Also, it has not been raised that a pro referendum result is not in itself a definite UI. Legislation would be required from all jurisdictions and full agreement between Irish and U.K. governments and input from E.U. is just as important.

But, nah, go ahead, call a referendum on a whim and without a clue of the afterwards.

FrancieBrady

joeguevara wrote: »

As outlined by Attorney General “A fundamental principal of the Good Friday Agreement is that it is a settlement based on the exercise of the right to self-determination by the people of the island of Ireland. The requirement that the right was to be exercised, concurrently, on both parts of the island by way of a separate referendum in each jurisdiction was recognition of the realpolitik of a divided island. The reconciliation of the tension between the right to self-determination and the reality of political life on the island of Ireland is to be found in the policy of consent.

Good analysis of the above here https://senatormarkdaly.files.wordpress.com/2017/04/section-6.pdf

As for how referendums are done, I was referring to blaazs calling for a referendum now without the full roadmap in place.

My reference to Brexit was connected to the call for a referendum on a whim.

Another good analysis of the requirements for north and south polls held concurrently are outlined here https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/irish-reunification

Yes, that is an interpretation of the constituional ammendment. But it is also valid to say that as long as we constitutionally aspire to a UI, then our acceptance is a given.

We can argue to the cows come home over that, but it is correct to say that no definitive demand is made that a referendum be held here in Schedule 1 of the GFA.

As I said, I believe one should be held and it will be, no matter what a particular government might say their desire is.

P.S. Where did Blaas call for a referendum without a roadmap? We don't do referendums like Brexit. Why would you assume we would?