In the event of united Ireland could DUP attract a significant vote in the Republic / 26 Counties ?

BalcombeSt4

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122813392#Comment_122813392

That's a good point.

But I would presume the DUP would bring with them the votes from rural Down, & Antrim, Fermanagh, north Derry, plus east Belfast.

In a United Ireland, those small right-wing Nationalist parties would become irrelevant & I could see the pro-life / anti-LGBT camp would vote DUP to disrupt the more Liberal parties & especially the Socialist ones like PBP. I see that as being unlikely but I think that would be the best way for the right & far-right to maximise their votes.

The problem with Sinn Fein is they don't really have any clearly defined positions, the media calls them the "Irish Left-Wing party" but they certainly don't call themselves that. As a person on the left I don't want to see Sinn Fein compromise any Socialistic policies and move to the center just to win middle-class votes, Kieran Allen pointed Fianna Fail in 1932 had a more radical manifesto than current-day Sinn Fein, so much so that Cumman na Gael used it as "proof" that FF were really just "reds under the beds" which is laughable now but it's something think about. As long as know Trump-style movement in Ireland comes to power I'd be content with that but not happy. He also pointed out that in an interview from around 1981/82 Gerry Adams said he didn't know of anyone in the Republican Movement (Provos) who was influenced by Karl Marx, which is such obvious bullsh!t, nearly every IRA Volunteer in the Maze had something by Marx & Engels, and less but still a lot by Lenin. Just to be clear I'm a Democratic Socialist but more to the side of people like Anton Pannekoek & Rosa Luxemburg he advocated for Worker's Councils to be in charge of a Socialist state, not a small band of radical revolutionaries who controlled the working class with an iron fist & molded them into a society that they choose, not just Stalin, but Lenin &Trotsky were up to their necks in it as well and all share blame for the dungeon the USSR turned into.

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122836263#Comment_122836263

The man who did more than anyone else in the 20th century to ensure we remained in poverty for nearly all of it. The man who encouraged / provoked the taking up of arms against a democratically elected government of Irishmen and Irishwomen. Who handed great power with zero accountability to a church who completely abused that power. But we're all supposed to love him now because some idiot in the DUP said something about him?

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122841755#Comment_122841755

No, a gross misrepresentation of what I highlighted. The use of this sectarian trope from a bigot (amongst his other issues) is not something I would want to use to justify an argument (as misinformed/misguided as they were) .

You + the usual suspects obviously see it as a quote that deserves merit, which it telling as I said.

Irish History

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122826723#Comment_122826723

You only think that because you are clearly ignorant of the historical facts.

The Annals of Tigernach state that Ireland was divided into the five provinces upon the slaying of the High King of Ireland Conaire Mór - therefore obviously united in order to be divided.

This is the accepted conventional history by scholars down until the 19th century, when idiot revisionists arrived on the scene. Who are they to state otherwise?

When England illegally invaded, Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair was the High King of Ireland (without opposition) - therefore Ireland was a sovereign state in which Irish people were united by known and accepted factors which define a nation - such as language, law, and common descent.

At the Council of Constance (ecumenical council) in1416, it was stated that Ireland ranked as one of the four original constituent States of Europe, taking its place after Rome and Byzantium, and before Spain.

Ireland existed as a Nation/State/Kingdom, and was recognised as such throughout the western world - with its own High King, language, writing (both Ogham and 18 letter alphabet) - Brehon laws, the very essence of a unitary political State, long before the 10th century upstart England even existed!

Irish writing is the oldest vernacular literature in Western Europe - Irish law is the oldest, most original, and most extensive of the European legal systems. It is a unique legal inheritance, an independent indigenous system of advanced jurisprudence for the Nation/Kingdom/State of Ireland that was fully evolved by the 8th century.

We Irish are Gaels, and our country is named in our stead. We are a distinct people - and our country Ireland is one of the oldest countries in the world.

Our Gaelic political and social order, and associated culture, originated/evolved in Ireland during prehistoric times - and still dominates to this day, despite all the foreign interference.

When the Roman Empire fell, Ireland saved the western world by opening centres of learning throughout Europe - meanwhile in what was to become England, people were figuratively walking around on their knuckles!

Irish History

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122831407#Comment_122831407

Why lie???

There have been polls since Brexit that show that over 50 percent want the reunification of Ireland.

And more to the point, there are plenty of polls that show that less than 50 percent want to remain trapped within the political entity of the UK.

And then of course - the vast majority of Irish people want the reunification of our people, our country, and the end of England's/Britain's centuries old demonic occupation in Ireland.

Have you ever seen a serous poll/survey that suggested otherwise???

Irish History

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122834512#Comment_122834512

Nonsense.

Gaelic culture and all that entails is Ireland's native culture.

Any other culture in Ireland is obviously foreign to Ireland.

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122845757#Comment_122845757

Your man DeValera thought the same that we were all - or should be - dancing at the crossroads, and look where that got us. So many peoples lives ruined, through poverty, emigration, exploitation in mother and baby homes and laundries etc. And no parity of esteem for others. They were out. Your posts show how dangerous extreme Irish nationalism can be / has been.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122846422#Comment_122846422

So many peoples lives ruined, through poverty, emigration, exploitation

In the ha'penny place in comparison to the poverty, emigration and exploitation of the invaders we repelled, which is why the Irish republic endured.

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122846459#Comment_122846459

So why then did so many hundreds of thousands of people flee in the 20th century from Ireland to the UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand etc, if having the monarchy as head of state was so bad in those countries?

As said before this thread should be closed anyway as the OP's hypothetical question has long ago been answered. A bit like asking the Germans 90 years ago if there was a united Germany-Poland would the Jews attract a significant vote.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122846616#Comment_122846616

Nobody is in denial about emigration in the 50's and 60's to English speaking realms. There was suffering and many suffered needlessly, but what you cannot accept in your own denial is that it was all more acceptable than what the colonists did. Nobody to this day bar a few would voluntarily go back to being ruled by Britain.

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122846932#Comment_122846932

Every European country had colonies "back in the day". A lot of people would be of the opinion Ireland was never a Colony, it was a Home Country. When people from these islands went to India ( something like a third of the administration in India were Irish I think ) to build railways or whatever, the native people out their did not care if the white person was from Dublin or Liverpool or Glasgow. The people out in India, for example, were the real colonised.

Nobody is suggesting that all the European countries that had colonies 150 years ago or when should all of a sudden colonise again. Now stop diverting the thread, this all has nothing to do with the OP's hypothetical question which was answered in depth long ago.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122847503#Comment_122847503

Wasn’t me that brought Dev onto it …again.
The DUP will find affinity with those who still have a misty eyed view of the British Empire still left in Ireland

Hotblack Desiato

Yes, all three of them.

Capt'n Midnight

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122831164#Comment_122831164

The Kriegsmarine were never in a position to support an invasion.

After the invasion of Norway most of their heavy units were damaged or sunk which meant their fully operational large ships were down to three cruisers and four destroyers, And they'd have to face the joint-largest navy on the planet. A navy which had recently destroyed most of the remaining Kriegsmarine destroyers by sending a battleship into the confined waters of a fiord.

Irish History

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122846422#Comment_122846422

Here fool, I wasn't giving an opinion nor an interpretation of the facts. I posted historical facts period- what's extreme about it???

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122845757#Comment_122845757

As I have said already, I completely reject nineteenth century notions of tying culture to place. There is no such thing as a native culture, there were always others who came before.

You are also mixing up culture with heritage. Culture is living and of today, it is not of the past, therefore it cannot be native to anywhere, neither can any modern culture be foreign to where it is. Heritage is dead culture, the culture of people in the past, not the culture of people today. I respect and appreciate heritage, but it has no hold on the culture of today, at best it is a benign influence on culture of today, at worst, as with the trappings of exclusionary republicanism, it is a dark influence on culture.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122852181#Comment_122852181

Culture is living and of today, 

You can like or hate aspects of your culture but you cannot deny those things are a part of the culture of a place.

You have real difficulties with that exclusionary stance. Imagine if you will, having that exclusionary stance if you were a member of the Arts Council. Won't wash.

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122847503#Comment_122847503

Back with some more revisionist blinkered historical inaccuracies outright mistruths I see.

Every European country had colonies "back in the day".

No, "every" European country did not have colonies "back in the day", But nice attempt to minimalise the affect The British Empire had one, Ireland was part of this take over along with other colonies. It's simple stuff.

A lot of people would be of the opinion Ireland was never a Colony, it was a Home Country.

Again incorrect, but who's surprised.

Ireland was (despite your wilful ignorance) the first colony established.

As for your loose and irreverent 'definition' of it being a "Home Country" (as if that somehow made the treatment different), this is again something you've misunderstood; The Home Country reference was simply part of the Acts of Union to create the United Kingdom. It doesn't magically erase the history of the colonisation nor make the one hundred years or so after make for better reading. At least for those not wearing rose tinted glasses.

A lot of people would be of the opinion Ireland was never a Colony, it was a Home Country.

The people out in India, for example, were the real colonised.

Who is "a lot of people" for that matter care to back it up…I'd hazard that it's just you that considers this in another lazy attempt to minimialise what had actually happened here. "Never a Colony" yet Ireland being the first colony, was the test ground for how the British 'managed' (to put it mildly) the natives in other countries they colonised.

Ireland was the very definition of a colony and described as the "laboratory" for future expansion of HM's Empire.

Colonists followed the conquerors, settling across the island and especially in Munster and Ulster. By the early 18th century, nearly a third of the island’s population was of immigrant stock, descendants of 350,000 (mostly Protestant) settlers who had colonised Ireland during the course of the 17th century. The colonists brought with them their English language, fashions, culture, and commercial ways, which parliamentary legislation privileged while outlawing Irish language and dress, together with Irish agricultural, social, political and cultural practices.

Sectarianism, cultural stereotyping, dehumanisation and expropriation underpinned early modern English imperialism. The revolution in Irish landholding, which began with the plantations of the early 17th century and culminated with the Cromwellian and later the restoration land settlements, resulted in the wholesale transfer of land – roughly eight million acres – from Catholic to Protestant hands. Moreover, Irish land, together with access to Irish labour, funded English imperialism in Ireland and beyond and provisioned colonies, especially in the Atlantic and India. By the end of the 17th century Ireland was well and truly embedded in a subservient economic structure, something that characterised the later British empire.

In this – and in so many other ways – Ireland served as a laboratory for the British empire. It was in Ireland that imperial and anglicising policies were formulated. Race-based ideologies were developed and “tools of empire”, such as mapping, were tested. Just as the Irish were victims of English imperialism, some – Catholics as well as Protestants – actively engaged in the business of empire or served in imperial armies and administrations.

When people from these islands went to India ( something like a third of the administration in India were Irish I think )

I'd love to see where you pulled that number 33% from.

Sure some Irish participated in the military, vast numbers for purely economic reasons. Some Irish even participated in the slave trade again for self economic reasons; but that in no way proves that this was somehow the policy of the Irish people.

Some Indians even participated in the wars fought by the British Forces to defeat the Mughal in India- Does that mean India were automatically complicit in their own downfall?

You've yet to also acknowledge the post in reference to the violence The British unleashed in creating their, in your eyes, benevolent, Empire……or was it the "sure every one was doing it" defence you've suggested….

to build railways or whatever, the native people out their did not care if the white person was from Dublin or Liverpool or Glasgow.

Similar to the Irish colonisation; they didn't care if they were English/Scottish etc. but the fact remains, the colonisation occurred despite your blinkered and selective historical opinions.

Oh and, more importantly, they weren't there "to build railways or whatever"; it was for the mammon gain of The British Empire, irrespective of who or what they harmed.

The people out in India, for example, were the real colonised.

Colonists followed the conquerors, settling across the island and especially in Munster and Ulster. By the early 18th century, nearly a third of the island’s population was of immigrant stock, descendants of 350,000 (mostly Protestant) settlers who had colonised Ireland during the course of the 17th century. The colonists brought with them their English language, fashions, culture, and commercial ways, which parliamentary legislation privileged while outlawing Irish language and dress, together with Irish agricultural, social, political and cultural practices.

Nobody is suggesting that all the European countries that had colonies 150 years ago or when should all of a sudden colonise again.

The sentence makes absolutely no sense.

Now stop diverting the thread, this all has nothing to do with the OP's hypothetical question which was answered in depth long ago.

Coming from you, the accusation of "diverting" is hilarious.

This thread should be closed anyway as the OP's hypothetical question has long ago been answered.

Just because you're not getting your way, does not mean the thread should be closed.

Your presence here isn't a pre-requisite. You don't like it? You leave, but you don't get to dictate to others. Given your posts, it's easy to see how you think that should be the case.

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122852181#Comment_122852181

Culture is inexorably intertwined with heritage. A custom or culture doesn't come in to being or evolve without the inherent heritage behind them.

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122846422#Comment_122846422

Still running with the sectarian & bigoted trope I see.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122852195#Comment_122852195

Places don't have culture, people do.

That is the bit you are struggling to get your head around.

Heritage is dead culture, living culture is of today, not of things that happened in the past.

I don't exclude you from having your nineteenth century view of the world living on the dreams of yesterday type culture. I only point out that is your culture, not mine, and not the culture of the majority of people on this island.

I don't impose my culture on anyone, unlike you I am not an adherent to the one true and infallible culture.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122852587#Comment_122852587

Sometimes today's culture is a prisoner of past cultures, sometimes it rises above it.

It was the culture of many people in 1950s Ireland to send women to a Magdalene home if they got pregnant outside of marriage. That is a shameful part of the shared heritage, but it is not, and never will be, part of my culture.

Ditto PIRA thugs blowing people up.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122852776#Comment_122852776

So, you are running the grants dept of the Arts Council, you are asked for funding for an Orange band in Monaghan.
Do you write back and tell them they have no part in the culture of the country because Culture is defined as what you like/agree with?

Given it's remit is the following:

Developing an inclusive and diverse culture is central to the Arts Council’s strategic vision for the Arts in Ireland as outlined in “Making Great Art Work”. This core purpose is inclusive in nature, as it values everybody irrespective of background, disability, religion, gender identity, sexuality, age,  marital status, ethnicity, socio economic background -

Do you realise how antiquated your exclusionary view is?

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122853221#Comment_122853221

How many times do I have to explain it to you?

Orange bands are not part of my culture, neither are the Wolfe Tones.

De Valera, Magdalene laundries, Wolfe Tones, bombing people to bits in Brighton and Birmingham, Up the Ra, Gerry Adams and the Disappeared, all of those appear to be part of your culture. I am not denying you the right to have all those wholesome icons as part of your culture, all I am saying is that they are not part of mine.

Why would that affect me in the Arts Council? I am happy to allow you to have your "culture", why wouldn't I fund it if the right application came in? The problem is, it would be difficult to see how I could approve a project seeking funding to put up a memorial to those who worked hard to ensure the Disappeared stayed disappeared or to the great work of the nuns of the Magdalene laundries. Does your inclusiveness stretch to those?

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122852792#Comment_122852792

Sometimes today's culture is a prisoner of past cultures, sometimes it rises above it.

The key word is 'sometimes'; but not always in such negative terms as you would have us believe. Culture continuously evolves with the time and losses/gains to that culture are reflective of the day.

That does not however separate them from their respective origin and history.

It was the culture of many people in 1950s Ireland to send women to a Magdalene home if they got pregnant outside of marriage. That is a shameful part of the shared heritage, but it is not, and never will be, part of my culture.

None of my points ever stated or insinuated that they had to be something you embraced and saw as part of 'your' individual culture. I'm sure there are some that would hark back to theses dark points in our history as 'justice for the fallen women'; but the culture has changed/grown and now the majority do not see it as part of todays culture.

But in your posts you seem to only want to focus on the past errors ( And like I said, no country can look back and be infallible) yet you actively support the culture that echoes sectarianism and bigotry. You purportedly don't seek division.. yet have painted yourself in to a corner on culture on a solely point scoring basis.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122853241#Comment_122853241

😁
They are a part of your culture, you just don't like them. So what?

BTW, because it is a 'part' of all our 'culture' the Arts Council have funded OO bands in Monaghan.

If we still discriminate against women and children or don't enshrine their rights or give them adequate redress for what they experienced then that too is a part of our culture, sadly.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122853301#Comment_122853301

Where in any single one of my posts have I ever expressed support actively for a culture that echoes sectarianism and bigotry?

You must be mixing me up with someone else.

If you are classifying the Birmingham bombings and the Magdalene laundries as mere "errors", I don't think I am the one with a cultural problem.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122853335#Comment_122853335

You cannot impose a culture on anyone, once you do that, you are guilty of cultural imperialism. Ironic that a good republican like yourself should be attempting to do that.

Quite simply, the nativist nationalistic good republican cult that dances at the crossroads, sings about bombing people to bits and celebrates terrorists does not have the right to impose their "culture" on the rest of us.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122853904#Comment_122853904

I'm not imposing anything.
Your anti Irish language, anti UI mindset is a part of the culture here since independence. I accept that as a democrat, I don't agree with you but that doesn't exclude you from our culture.

You are a part of my culture just as I am a part of yours. The DUP are as well, and they will attract votes for that reason. If they do and they remain democrats best of luck to them I say.

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122853894#Comment_122853894

Where in any single one of my posts have I ever expressed support actively for a culture that echoes sectarianism and bigotry?

You must be mixing me up with someone else.

Have a look back to the posts you've thanked. Your rush to address one side only without addressing the clear sectarianism and blinkered revisionism in others post. As long as they're heaped against one other poster, you're willing to entertain and support their gibberish. It's telling.

If you are classifying the Birmingham bombings and the Magdalene laundries as mere "errors", I don't think I am the one with a cultural problem.

You clearly want to continue to muddy the waters with 'whatabouttery' in specific incidents in our history rather than stay on the point you've regrettably lost on.

I've clearly noted that no nation is infallible in it's history, The Irish nation included (although the Irish nation did not sanction IRA atrocities). But I'm sure you'll continue to move the goalposts.