# Would you vote for a United Ireland?



## Betsy Og (19 Oct 2017)

I'd vote Yes.

I'd struggle to say why, probably, in the end, for the same reason I'd have voted for independence if I was a Scot - i.e. it feels right, it's the natural order, nationalist sentiment, heart overruling head.

Would that have caused me to vote for Brexit if I was English?, don't think so. The economic suicide is more pronounced and certain on Brexit (admittedly there's more than a dash of that going around re Scotland and UI), and I'm not fuelled by xenophobia (which seemed to be a fair element of Brexit). So the heart may have had a pang of sticking it to the stuffed shirts in Brussels, but don't think it would have been strong enough to overrule the head and land the UK is the soup in which it is currently flailing around....

So the questions are:


How do you think you would vote?
Do you have any strong reasons or are you conflicted and allowing the heart a 'free vote' on this one?
Is Brexit the clearest instance of national hari kari in the Western World since WWII?


----------



## Firefly (19 Oct 2017)

It would be a no for me I'm afraid. We'd be skint and the hassle that would come with it would clog up our already clogged up governmet further. NI is like a present to the English for all those years of oppression


----------



## Delboy (19 Oct 2017)

I'd vote yes for what may be a once in a lifetime opportunity if it arose.

Yes it would cost the South money but in the long run, and with support from the EU USA and Brits, I think it would work out for the better (though security issues up North would be a serious headache). But how would my forefathers react if I was to vote no because it might hit my pocket hard, after all they had to go through to get even 26 counties free? A sentimental view of it, but it's how I look at it.

I respect the Brits for the Brexit decision. It seems mad now but who knows how it will work out.
They made a decision and are running with it, not like the soft Paddies who vote again to appease our European betters. While I think there's no appetite here to leave the EU, I'd like to think that Brexit has caused us to take a more critical look at our relationship with Brussels. When the IMF were telling the EU element of the Troika to take it easy during our bail out, then you'd have to question what we're a part of. 
I know plenty of fishermen who'd have no time for the EU- we lost a lot there for example.


----------



## Betsy Og (19 Oct 2017)

Delboy said:


> They made a decision and are running with it



I don't see the "shame" in asking the country to reconsider - esp in this case where its not to allow the European project to trundle on - its purely about what's best for the country. I'd be v confident of a stay decision given the supposed benefits evaporated immediately and its beginning to dawn on normal folk that there's lots of downside but hardly any upside. It now seems to be just a personal crusade for the Tory brexiteer element who won't be the ones to suffer the fall out, there'll still be brandy and cigars in the study and just keep the riff raff out.


----------



## blueband (19 Oct 2017)

I think you might be surprised how much appetite there could be if it was put to the vote! it wasn't only the fishermen who lost out.


----------



## dub_nerd (19 Oct 2017)

The Good Friday Agreement says that only the people of NI will decide on the future status of NI. We agreed to that in a referendum. So there's no question of us getting to vote for a united Ireland before a majority in NI vote for it. If they did, I'd consider also voting for it on condition that a) the chances of unmanageable civil unrest seemed low and, b) the UK agreed to pay a _very_ large amount of money for a transitional period ... and given the shambolic Brexit negotiations I'd only agree to that _after_ the transitional money was agreed and signed for in blood.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (19 Oct 2017)

dub_nerd said:


> The Good Friday Agreement says that only the people of NI will decide on the future status of NI.


I don't think that is quite true.  The people of NI have a veto over changes to their status but they would need the consent of the people of the 26 counties to become part of a UI, same as they would need the consent of the Russian people to become part of the Russian Federation.

However, I agree with the rest of your post which essentially says that if the price is right we would relieve the UK of its burden.  But then I guess that if the price was right I would be in favour of the RoI applying for membership of the RF.


----------



## Purple (19 Oct 2017)

What's the RF?

As for a United Ireland... I don't know.
There is a big cultural gap between us and Norn-Ireland and for me we are on the right side of that gap.


----------



## Delboy (19 Oct 2017)

RF = Russian Federation I presume


----------



## odyssey06 (19 Oct 2017)

1. I'd vote no.

2. Because we are a million miles from being ready for a united Ireland, economically and it needs not just a majority of people in N Ireland to want it, but a majority of Unionists to want it. 

3. Venezuela? The Euro? In the long run I think UK will be OK economically and I can understand why England voted to leave, versus Scots, Welsh, and those who think of themselves as 'British'. In hindsight, they should never have signed up to Maastricht, I think that was the point when they should have shouted stop. 
Would have been a lot easier to extricate themselves them on favourable terms and with far less impact than doing it now. If it does turn out to be economic hari-kari then they will be bringing Irish farmers, French wine makers, German car markers, Spanish farmers with them.


----------



## michaelm (20 Oct 2017)

dub_nerd said:


> the UK agreed to pay a _very_ large amount of money for a transitional period ... and given the shambolic Brexit negotiations I'd only agree to that _after_ the transitional money was agreed and signed for in blood.


This would be the key to get it over the line.  The Brits would be delighted to get out of Ireland and they'd pay big money to do so, viewing it as money well spent.


----------



## Leper (21 Oct 2017)

I'd vote No. The republic has enough problems of its own without inheriting the problems of others. But, try explaining that to the Celtic jerseyed morons (aka steamed-up barstool republicans) who were screaming for Slovenia to beat England recently. England scored three minutes into injury time to win. If they hadn't scored Rep of Ireland wouldn't have qualified for the WC playoffs before they even kicked a ball from the 2nd last game.


----------



## Betsy Og (23 Oct 2017)

Some seem to fear "contaigon", e.g. on the cultural side. I wouldn't see this as an issue. Nationalists could certainly emerge from the bunker. Maybe unionists/loyalists would get more entrenched, but that's hardly likely to spread to the 26 since I don't think there are too many closet unionists.

I would expect there would have to a watering down of some the "green", in terms of flag, anthem and maybe even Commonwealth membership. All open for discussion in my view. Tbh I'd be inclined to leave well enough alone for as long as possible, maybe the dwindling number of unionists will eventually get comfortable with the increasingly secular south. I think like most people in the South, once our northern counterparts are getting fair play (which they pretty much are now AFAIK), then we're not really that pushed about a 4th green field, we've enough on with the other 3. Would probably still vote Yes though.

You'd wonder will someone eventually come along in the Commons and just say, right, that's it, sick of writing cheques, do whatever ye want, ye are being set free, best of luck....


----------



## Purple (23 Oct 2017)

We'd need to wait until there is a Democrat President in the USA so that we can get a "peace dividend" ,i.e. hand-out, for taking on the economic basket case that is Northern Ireland. That and a big cash injection from HRH's government and the EU. 
I think we'd have to join the Commonwealth as well but we can do that without the UK monarch being our head of state.
We'd have to come up with a flag that symbolises peace between the green and orange traditions, maybe a green section and an orange section with white in between to symbolise peace between the two?... oh, wait...


----------



## hfp (24 Oct 2017)

As a 'Northerner' I would probably be inclined to vote no even though my heart is probably more with Ireland than the UK, and I have more family ties down south


I'm a Civil Servant - I'd probably be screwing myself out of a job!! About 30% of Northern Ireland residents are Public Sector employees, there's not going to be equivalent jobs for that many people in a united Ireland.
I'm rather attached to the NHS with all its faults
We'd get screwed on the exchange rate  - when the Euro first came in we got around 1.4 / 1.5 Euro to the pound, now you're lucky if you get 1.10 - wages, investments and pensions would take a serious hit if they were to be converted to Euro at todays rate.
With all the Brexit shenanigans going on I don't think the UK Government or the clowns in Stormont are competent enough to actually manage the transition.
On the other hand I would love to see the look on Arlene Foster's face if and when it did happen!!


----------



## TheBigShort (24 Oct 2017)

If there was a vote, I would vote Yes, without hesitation.

I think the reality of the outcome of a vote in favour of ‘Yes’, in both jurisdications would differ somewhat from the perceived outcome.


_The cost of NI_

Its true that NI is heavily subsidised, but a ‘Yes’ vote on both sides of the border today would not translate in a hand-over of ownership tomorrow. In all probability, the process of transfer would take up to a decade or more. We only have to look to ‘Brexit’ to see the complexities and realities of transfer of power.

Firstly, the Irish and British governments, adhering to the GFA, would have to ensure a smooth as transition as possible. It would also be a responsibility of the EU and in the interests of the US to see this also. In political terms, this usually means $$££€€. Investing in transport, education would be key to any smooth transition, providing sustainable jobs for a decade or more.The EU, in supporting the GFA would also have an interest that any transfer of powers within its borders is done as smoothly as possible.

Part of the British strategy to combat the IRA was to invest heavily in public services in the North. The reason for this, I believe, was that if you provide people, young people in particular, with a job that has a future and potential prospects, then they will be less inclined to joined the ranks of paramilitaries. NI needs to divest from public sector jobs but invest in private sector jobs.

However, having said all that, my understanding is that some 30% of NI workforce is employed in the public sector. In the RoI, it is closer to 16%?. The workforce in NI is 900,000 (300,000 Public sector), in the ROI it is 2.2m (352,000 public sector?). A combined workforce would equate to 3.1m workforce and 652,000 public sector workforce (ie 21% in the public sector). * _Figures are rough and are probably someway out, but the point is that a combined economy of RoI and NI wouldn’t be_ _as heavy as burden as generally implied, assuming a transitional period of a decade or more._

Secondly, if a ‘Yes’ vote were ever to occur on both sides of the border, in real terms, it would take a sizeable chunk of the unionist vote to achieve this. We are a long way from that happening, but if it were to happen, then in effect it would mean Unionism was split. If Unionism were to split on the nationality question, then it is effectively dead. If Unionism was to split on the national question, then a smooth transition under the principle of ‘exclusively peaceful and democratic means’ should be achievable.

On the other hand, any remaining rump of Unionism, opposed to a UI, should they take the Carson line ‘that there are more important things than parliamentary majorities’, or more recently, the sinister musings of John Taylor who stated that 50% plus 1 vote in favour of a UI would lead to a civil war, then we would have to consider what was the point in standing up to the IRA for all those years only to succumb, once again, to the threat of loyalist violence?

So to answer the question, Yes, unequivocally.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (24 Oct 2017)

hfp said:


> We'd get screwed on the exchange rate  - when the Euro first came in we got around 1.4 / 1.5 Euro to the pound, now you're lucky if you get 1.10 - wages, investments and pensions would take a serious hit if they were to be converted to Euro at todays rate.


It's an interesting point but the financial gurus would argue that this is an illusion.  The exchange rate is the exchange rate.  Certainly I would envisage that you would have the option of keeping your deposits in sterling or converting to euro, an option which currently exists in theory.

On State pensions there would be a big reluctance, I think, to have them switched from £ to € even if in theory the prevailing FX rate is the fair basis for doing this. Of course when it comes to the OAP there would be the sweetener that RoI rates are about double NI rates.

The unification of Germany is an interesting precedent.  The Ost Mark was trading at 4 to 1 in the black market prior to unification but as a sweetener the German government converted all Ost Mark deposits to D-marks at 1 for 1

But of course all this is a long way off. If the wheels come off Brexit then expect parity to be breached and it could actually turn out to be a sweetener as in the German case to have your sterling deposits converted to euro at par.


----------



## Betsy Og (25 Oct 2017)

Duke, I'm anxious to know where you stand on the substantive issue - i.e. how you'd vote?, I think of you are being like the Oracle from the Matrix when it comes to matters Nordy. 

p.s. any connection to other Nordy Duke, the Special one? He of dreadlocks and crooning.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (25 Oct 2017)

Ah _Betsy_, you are winding me up

But you have given me pause for thought.  As you seem to be aware from my earlier musings, I was born and reared in West Belfast, in a culture where we sang "A Nation Once Again" and "Kevin Barry" in primary school class.

I am all for people uniting, a united Europe, a united Spain, a United Kingdom.  But I fear the republican movement has seriously poisoned the case for a United Ireland.

Nowhere is this best exemplified than with the current impasse in NI.  Seems to be all about an Irish language Act.  Something that is seen as harmless pampering of a Gaelic speaking minority in Scotland or Wales has been positioned as a symbol of sectarian one upmanship by Sinn Fein.  The unionist community, including its many good guys, have been thoroughly turned off the concept.

So at the present time my heart would not be for a UI.  As a citizen of the Republic my head would most certainly not be for a UI (unless it came with a very substantial EU/UK bribe).

So the answer to your question is that I would vote No.

p.s.  The answer to your p.s. is No.


----------



## Betsy Og (25 Oct 2017)

Yep, the Irish language thing seems all faintly ridiculous. From my admittedly very limited (& historic at this stage) contact with the unionist community the vibe I got is that they don't really see the south as being a threat, but that SF are operating a good few octaves above where they need to be and where most Southerners are. Whether than would ever lead Unionists to want to join a much diluted 'normal' country rather than continually banging heads with the headbangers is probably a bit of a stretch, but there's probably something in that. It's like us 'free staters' sometimes say - they're a different breed up there (talking about nationalists) - as in, would they ever chill out and move on at this stage.

Deary me, looks like its only myself and the Celtic jersey/slab of Dutch Gold brigade who would be voting yes, never thought I'd be in that camp .


----------



## TheBigShort (25 Oct 2017)

I think it's somewhat naive to dismiss the importance of the Irish language Act at this point. 
Regardless of your interest in it (if any) the simple point behind it is that was what was agreed at St Andrews. Simple as that. 
Secondly, as someone who can broadly understand Irish (my grammar is poor) and whose grandparents grew up in an Irish speaking household, I am wholly supportive of any political parties that advocate for it's protection and the introduction of an Irish language Act.
It's a shame that the Act has somewhat got tangled up as a SF demand, whereas in reality, FF/FG/Lab/Greens/Alliance/SDLP/PBP are all in favour of an Irish language Act. It's a pity they are not more vocal about it.
Finally, it wasn't that long along that homosexual acts were criminalized and the notion of gay marriage was scoffed at. Travellers too were dismissed in their efforts to be recognized as an ethnic minority. But look where we are today.
Irish speaking people, and those who support the Irish language are entitled to express their views and pursue their ambitions. It just so happens, that ambition is reflected in a desire for an  Irish language Act. Which is already agreed upon, which similar Acts have been introduced in Wales and the South of Ireland. The EU even affords Irish official recognition. 
It's high time the bigotry of unionism, hiding behind the 'threat' of the Irish language was exposed to everyone, and beaten by everyone.


----------



## Betsy Og (25 Oct 2017)

I take your point but why would FF/FG/Lab be saying anything about it, nowt to do with us....for the time being at least. Overall it seems a very trivial thing to be log jammed over, considering where NI has come from. Even in the South Irish is a bit of a cinderalla topic, and I'm saying that as someone who is fairly proficient and interested. For instance I think its a pure waste of money having EU legislation and whatever else produced as gaeilge. I can live with tokenism as long as its not costing loads of cash, or put it another way I'd rather that cash went to TG4 or Conradh na Gaeilge or supporting gaeltacht communities or whatever.

The problem is ok a) unionist intransigence, but also b) SF's capacity to toxify pretty much anything it touches, like this current Jailteacht issue. Could they stop attaching themselves to Irish culture like they have some ownership of it, ditto the GAA, or the IRA at Play as it was, since the South had to outvote the North on Rule 22 - the GAA was within weeks of being anti the security forces while SF signed up to PSNI - that would've looked great wouldn't it...... sigh


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (25 Oct 2017)

Well B/S you are right that the St Andrews agreement committed the Government to introducing an ILA along the lines of Wales and Ireland.  The DUP signed up for that.  So why have SF managed to make this stick in the unionist craw (and not just the DUP)?  It didn't seem to be an issue when SF collapsed the Executive but it is now.  Clearly an ILA can be as long as a piece of string.

If an when this all comes to grief I presume we will learn what the sticking points were.  If a Wales type situation was on offer from SF then it is the DUP that have welshed (no pun intended) on St Andrews.  I suspect though that SF have put up really unpalatable demands.


----------



## TheBigShort (25 Oct 2017)

Betsy Og said:


> I take your point but why would FF/FG/Lab be saying anything about it, nowt to do with us....



Because, apparently, they all support a UI. They all support the GFA and they all support the Irish language. They also all support the rights of Irish citizens abroad, as far away as Egypt even, so to neglect the rights of Irish citizens in Ireland is simply not a runner.



Betsy Og said:


> Overall it seems a very trivial thing to be log jammed over, considering where NI has come from.



Depends on your perspective. I thought gay marriage was quite trivial, until I began to understand the discrimination felt by gay people. As far as logged jammed is concerned, it does seem to be that way, but only after ten yrs in government, together with dealing with legacy issues, bill of rights, gay marriage etc. Unfortunate as it is, the ILA is basically the acid test of a new NI. One that isn't dictated by traditional, conservative unionist thinking.



Betsy Og said:


> For instance I think its a pure waste of money having EU legislation and whatever else produced as gaeilge.



I don't think it is a waste of money at all. It means should anyone want a copy of EU legislation in any of the dozens of official EU languages then they can do so.
I do think it is a waste of money to _publish _thousands of hardcopies, in any language, but I'm not sure if that is what actually happens.
Certainly I can't ever recall reading a full copy of an EU treaty in English.



Betsy Og said:


> Could they stop attaching themselves to Irish culture like they have some ownership of it, ditto the GAA, or the IRA at Play as it was, since the South had to outvote the North on Rule 22 - the GAA was within weeks of being



GAA, SF, IRA (old, New, Provo etc.), FF, FG, Lab, IRB, Easter Rising, Battle of the Boyne, Conradh na Gael, RTE, TV3 TG4, FAI, IF A, IRFU, The Chieftains, Dubliners, Pogues, West life, U2, Yeats, Wilde, Roddy Doyle, etc...etc... are all _part _of our past, present and culture. Impossible not to attach them to our culture regardless of what anyone thinks of them.


----------



## TheBigShort (25 Oct 2017)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> So why have SF managed to make this stick in the unionist craw (and not just the DUP)? It didn't seem to be an issue when SF collapsed the Executive but it is now. Clearly an ILA can be as long as a piece of string.



Outside unionism, I'm not sure who is against the ILA. As mentioned above, it should be somewhat trivial. I think it is the DUP that are making it political. Lord John Taylor Kilclooney described it as the biggest threat to Unionism since partition?!?! 
It's a minority language, supported by citizens of the north!!!


----------



## Purple (26 Oct 2017)

Betsy Og said:


> Could they stop attaching themselves to Irish culture like they have some ownership of it, ditto the GAA


 That accusation could be leveled at the Gaeilgeoirs and the whole Gaelscoileanna thing (the best form of social apartheid out there). I constantly get the vibe that if you speak Irish fluently and have a country accent you are somehow more Irish than the rest of us. If you can have a west Kerry accent while watching the GAA on TG4 then you really are part of the chosen race. 
Having had Irish beaten into my dyslexic head for 13 years in school I will admit that I am not positively inclined towards the language or the cultural baggage that goes with it. I'm more positively disposed towards the liberal, pluralistic enlightened modern Ireland than the misogynistic, homophobic, repressive, priest ridden (pun intended), insular Ireland of the past. I see the Irish language and much of the culture that goes with it as part of that old Ireland. Maybe that's unfair but I can't separate the two. Think Paddy Kavanagh and Monaghan.


----------



## Delboy (26 Oct 2017)

Generalise much 
The 'liberal, pluralistic enlightened modern Ireland' that you speak of seems to have replaced the 'priest ridden' (for which I think there was no need to imply a pun) hierarchy with a new leadership in the form of the Irish Times/SJW's working in packs/unaccountable and foreign funded NGO's/Communication spin doctors etc.
We know with the benefit of hindsight what the former did....it's too early yet to see the full extent of the damage the latter will cause.

As for Gaelscoileanna...yes, your previous experiences in a non-Gaelscoil has probably coloured your throughts on the subject of Irish. Which you have cause to remind us on a regular basis. But your lack of knowledge/experience of the Gaelscoil area itself always shines through.

Perhaps the Ireland of today has just modernised it's prejudices rather than discard them altogether, or so it looks to me


----------



## Betsy Og (26 Oct 2017)

The language was alive long before any of that stuff, I don't think it has cultural baggage as such. Admittedly I do wince when I hear someone with an Irish name coming on a talk show as 9 times out of 10 they are craw thumping types - but that's hardly the fault of the language. 

TheBigShort - on your big list of Irish culture, it is the inappropriate politicising of them that I have an issue with. Even the gaelic revival of the late 1800's was not to generate a weapon against someone, it was to re-establish our own distinct identity. So the Irish language is SF's current weapon, are they moving onto traditional music after that, flutes will be banned from orange marches (...would there be anyone left ) to be replaced by fiddles. After that we'll have set dancing at all crossroads on a rota basis, then all sportsgrounds must be opened to the GAA.

I personally don't want my culture weaponised.....


----------



## odyssey06 (26 Oct 2017)

Betsy Og said:


> The language was alive long before any of that stuff, I don't think it has cultural baggage as such. Admittedly I do wince when I hear someone with an Irish name coming on a talk show as 9 times out of 10 they are craw thumping types - but that's hardly the fault of the language.



Irish is loaded with cultural baggage, at this stage it is 10% living language and 90% politico-nationalist-cultural baggage.
It's hard to separate the language from its speakers... how do we know the dancer from the dance?

If someone loves languages - I think JRR Tolkien said he looked forward to discovering a new language the way some people look forward to opening a new bottle of wine - then they have my best wishes. But I see too many people using Irish as a stick to beat people with, or something to use in 'virtue signalling'.

And a significant attraction of Gaelscoileanna to parents in urban areas has nothing to do with the language per se i.e. it is more about the kind of students it deters. That's not the fault of the language either but it would be naive to think Gaelscoileanna is just about the language.


----------



## Betsy Og (26 Oct 2017)

odyssey06 said:


> Irish is loaded with cultural baggage, at this stage it is 10% living language and 90% cultural baggage.



ah here.....

Re gaelscoileanna, they just reflect the locality in which they are based. So around me in rural Munster they are normal schools for normal people. In cities its all about social selection, so is the gaelscoil any more guilty than the private school?, the rugby school?, the school located in the affluent area? In border areas I gather there's a fair old republican tinge to proceedings but, guess what......

It's just another example of hijacking. Go to a gaeltacht area ...best in Summer... and see how natural it is. You don't have to wrap yourself in a tri-colour or give out about the foreigners.....


----------



## odyssey06 (26 Oct 2017)

Betsy Og said:


> Re gaelscoileanna, they just reflect the locality in which they are based. So around me in rural Munster they are normal schools for normal people. In cities its all about social selection, so is the gaelscoil any more guilty than the private school?, the rugby school?, the school located in the affluent area? In border areas I gather there's a fair old republican tinge to proceedings but, guess what......



Yes and if you had asked me about rugby in Ireland in the 1980s I would also have said it is 20% a sport and 80% cultural baggage... In Wales or New Zealand the figures would be reversed.
Thankfully Irish rugby has now grown beyond that.
The Irish language is still stuck in the 80% cultural baggage zone, of which urban gaelscoileanna are a part.
And too many genuine people who love the language are conniving in this hijacking.


----------



## Delboy (26 Oct 2017)

My kids go to an Gaelscoil. They go because it's local, it's small (and not a child factory as so many schools in Dublin appear to me who went to a 2 teacher school in the west back in the day) and because in an ever more globalised world, I wanted my kids to be able to speak Irish to keep the language alive into the future.
They go because the Gaelscoils have a good academic record and because it's a feeder into a nearby Gaelcholaiste which enables me to avoid all the fee paying, rugby playing bs that comes with living in Sth Dublin. 

There is an open entrance policy into the school. Siblings get first priority and then it's the waiting list. Anyone can apply to the waiting list, there is no Irish language requirement though it is encouraged at home. 
Probably 1 of the most open policies around.

But hey, lets keep the generalised bashing going.


----------



## Betsy Og (26 Oct 2017)

At least I gained 10% in the recent poll. 

Irish mainly exists in educational apathy - even there much of it is "I studied it for years and haven't a clue." Same is true of anything, I got a B in honours French and I wouldn't embarass myself trying to speak 2 sentences. The whole beating it out of you (pre-independence) and beating it into you (post-independence, and I'm still referring to the language..) are historical at this stage. No-one beat Irish into me, or any of my classmates. I don't gush over memories of physics either, why the negativity on Irish.

Irish then exists in gaeltachts, not a whole lot more than geographical & linguistic curiosities at this stage, but still there nonetheless.

Irish exists on TG4, where I get a top up while watching sports.

Irish exists as a tokenistic addendum to many aspects of Irish life, e.g. Government Departments, the GAA, general national schools, occasionally in the church.

Irish is also hijacked by opportunistic parents, extreme right wingers, jailteacht republicans.

So apart from moaning former students, Irish is a taught language which is there to be enjoyed by all, needs more outlets, is sometimes hijacked, but to say its 80% cultural/other baggage is very unfair to it I think.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (26 Oct 2017)

It will be fascinating to find out the detail on why SF/DUP could not agree an ILA.  I might be wrong and all that SF are arguing for is Wales style tokenism.  But I wouldn't be surprised to learn that they wanted bonus points at A-levels (like down here, how unfair is that?), 10% quotas for the public service, all roads and streets with bilingual names etc.  

My guess is that SF will be shown up as mostly to blame but I stand to be ejected.


----------



## Purple (26 Oct 2017)

Delboy said:


> But hey, lets keep the generalised bashing going.


Indeed;


Delboy said:


> which enables me to avoid all the fee paying, rugby playing bs that comes with living in Sth Dublin.


----------



## TheBigShort (26 Oct 2017)

Betsy Og said:


> it is the inappropriate politicising of them that I have an issue with



I don’t disagree, but I think you will find that it is the Unionists that are politicising the issue, not SF. An ILA was agreed upon at St Andrews, the broad political spectrum across Ireland, North and South supports an ILA. There is a Gaelic Language Act in Scotland, a Welsh Language Act in Wales, An Official Languages Act in RoI, Irish is an official language of the EU, one of 24 official languages. SF, it appears to me, are simply requiring what was agreed to be implemented, to be implemented.

It is the obstruction of that implementation that is politicising the issue – in a normal society, it would be a no-brainer, legislation drafted, amended, put in front of select committee, amended again etc…etc…then put before parliament and passed – without fuss. Irish speakers can then get on with their business, non-Irish speakers can then get on with their business.


----------



## Delboy (26 Oct 2017)

I firmly believe the fee paying school industry to be infested with rugby bs...so not, not generalising at all


----------



## TheBigShort (26 Oct 2017)

Why is a gaelscoil in Munster 'natural' and one in a border region, say like Donegal, a 'hi-jacking'? How can any Irish person hi-jack something that is already part of their culture and tradition and already belongs to them?


----------



## Purple (26 Oct 2017)

Delboy said:


> I firmly believe the fee paying school industry to be infested with rugby bs...so not, not generalising at all


I went to a GAA school (Christian Brothers) in South Dublin. It was infested with GAA BS as it was a feeder school for a large GAA Club. Students got time off to train, announcements were made during classes about training in the local GAA Club. Teachers were also coaches with the Club and students who were on the A teams were singled out for special treatment.

My son goes to a school which plays rugby. They also play Gaelic Football, Hurling and Football as well as many other sports. My son doesn't play rugby and it has never gone against him in school. 

My views on Gaelscoil are indeed Dublin focused. Sending your kids there in Dublin means that they will be almost exclusively surrounded by middle class white kids of Irish parents. You get the exclusivity of a fee paying school without the fees and with a moral superiority thrown in for free.

Anyway, we are off topic here.


----------



## Delboy (26 Oct 2017)

Purple said:


> My views on Gaelscoil are indeed Dublin focused. Sending your kids there in Dublin means that they will be almost exclusively surrounded by middle class white kids of Irish parents. You get the exclusivity of a fee paying school without the fees and with a moral superiority thrown in for free.


Most of them are open to all who apply...that so many don't is their problem. Or perhaps quotas should be imposed on children of African/Eastern Europeans immigrants to make them go to Gaelscoils, I'm sure they'd be delighted with that!
Anyways sending your kids to an awful lot of schools in Sth Dublin means they will be surrounded by gasp/horror ' middle class white kids'. The cruelty of it. The issue for so many seems to be that some of those schools are Irish language based.

But I'm surprised to hear that people who learn a language have a moral superiority complex. I thought learning languages was something that Liberals would be very approving of. Or are some languages more worthy than others!
I could get my kids to learn Chinese for example. But I wouldn't want to be accused of being anti-democratic/anti human rights!

Irish really does seem to rattle certain people here. That's a major psychological study waiting to happen


----------



## TheBigShort (26 Oct 2017)

Delboy said:


> Irish really does seem to rattle certain people here. That's a major psychological study waiting to happen



I agree.

We were 'taught' French at school. Out of 90 pupils in my year I know of 1 that lives and works using the French language. The other 89 just have to get by with English.
Yet, to my recollection, putting down the Irish language as 'useless' was common place, whereas French and other European languages was to be of benefit - clearly not.
The point of learning a language has been diminished to 'it will get you a job!'. Whilst employment opportunities are important, languages are a doorway to other cultures, offering differing perspectives and insights to the thinking of other peoples. Irish is no different. If anyone care to spend sometime (away from the trauma of school teachings) check out Irish place names and their origins to appreciate the eloquence in Irish language.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (26 Oct 2017)

TheBigShort said:


> I don’t disagree, but I think you will find that it is the Unionists that are politicising the issue, not SF. An ILA was agreed upon at St Andrews, the broad political spectrum across Ireland, North and South supports an ILA. There is a Gaelic Language Act in Scotland, a Welsh Language Act in Wales, An Official Languages Act in RoI, Irish is an official language of the EU, one of 24 official languages. SF, it appears to me, are simply requiring what was agreed to be implemented, to be implemented.
> 
> It is the obstruction of that implementation that is politicising the issue – in a normal society, it would be a no-brainer, legislation drafted, amended, put in front of select committee, amended again etc…etc…then put before parliament and passed – without fuss. Irish speakers can then get on with their business, non-Irish speakers can then get on with their business.


B/S all that was agreed at St Andrews was that Government would pass an ILA.  Everybody agrees with an ILA even the DUP, after all they signed up to St Andrews.  The problem is that an ILA is as long as a piece of string.  It could range from a timid Wales style arrangement which the DUP signed up for to a requirement that it becomes the first official language and every public servant should be fluent in it.  SF pulled the plug on Stormont over Cash for Ash but that has lost its potency with time so the suspicion is they have wheeled out a wholly unrealistic ILA to replace that excuse.  We will find out in time who has shown the bad faith over St Andrews.

Now we down here look with condescension on these petty squabbles up there.  But how do you think we will react to the following situation?  When Britain leaves the EU English will not be an official language of any member state.  So at least some savings can be made in not having to publish EU legislation in English.  Or will the Irish Government have the maturity to admit that we were only joking about Irish being our official language, we want to change that to English.


----------



## TheBigShort (26 Oct 2017)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> B/S all that was agreed at St Andrews was that Government would pass an ILA. Everybody agrees with an ILA even the DUP, after all they signed up to St Andrews. The problem is that an ILA is as long as a piece of string. It could range from a timid Wales style arrangement which the DUP signed up for to a requirement that it becomes the first official language and every public servant should be fluent in it. SF pulled the plug on Stormont over Cash for Ash but that has lost its potency with time so the suspicion is they have wheeled out a wholly unrealistic ILA to replace that excuse. We will find out in time who has shown the bad faith over St Andrews.



This it the text from St Andrews

_The Government will introduce an Irish Language Act reflecting on the experience of Wales and Ireland and work with the incoming Executive to enhance and protect the development of the Irish language._


It remains to be seen, how Acts that were introduced in Ireland and Wales without much fuss, can cause such a logjam in NI. You could be right, maybe it is SF demanding that all public servants be fluent in it (although that is not the experience of Ireland or Wales), or perhaps it is the mentality of ‘curry my yogurt’ or the cultural sensitivity of ‘Tuaisceart Éireann’ at a FIFA play-off draw in Zurich.

Your bet is with SF, mine is with DUP.



Duke of Marmalade said:


> Now we down here look with condescension on these petty squabbles up there. But how do you think we will react to the following situation? When Britain leaves the EU English will not be an official language of any member state. So at least some savings can be made in not having to publish EU legislation in English. Or will the Irish Government have the maturity to admit that we were only joking about Irish being our official language, we want to change that to English.



English is an official language of the Irish state. Section 2 of Official languages Act. Article 8 of the Constitution. It will also remain an official language of the EU.


----------



## Purple (26 Oct 2017)

The National Anthem "The Soldiers' Song" was written and copyrighted in English. How come we sing it is Irish?


----------



## Purple (26 Oct 2017)

TheBigShort said:


> We were 'taught' French at school. Out of 90 pupils in my year I know of 1 that lives and works using the French language. The other 89 just have to get by with English.
> Yet, to my recollection, putting down the Irish language as 'useless' was common place, whereas French and other European languages was to be of benefit - clearly not.


I agree. I think it is bordering on pointless to teach any language in the way we teach them. They need to be taught as spoken languages and students need to be immersed in them for a good chunk of time.


----------



## Betsy Og (26 Oct 2017)

TheBigShort said:


> Why is a gaelscoil in Munster 'natural' and one in a border region, say like Donegal, a 'hi-jacking'? How can any Irish person hi-jack something that is already part of their culture and tradition and already belongs to them?



Did I not say the school is just reflective of the area? The hijacking is more a risk at the political level. 

Interesting asides - gaelic is the majority language on the Western Isles of Scotland (Outer Hebrides), some of which are strictly presbyterian - so the language does not need to be exclusive possession of one tradition. According to John Bishops latest show (one need look no further for one's worldview), there's an Irish language project in Sandy Row or somewhere like that - a real 'go figure' moment.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (26 Oct 2017)

TheBigShort said:


> English is an official language of the Irish state. Section 2 of Official languages Act. Article 8 of the Constitution. It will also remain an official language of the EU.


Yes, it was a stupid point I made.  Not original, I picked it up from some Fake News outlet, can't remember where, that's my excuse.  

The founding fathers of our republic had the common sense to give both the English language and the English currency primacy in our affairs.


----------



## TheBigShort (26 Oct 2017)

Betsy Og said:


> gaelic is the majority language on the Western Isles of Scotland (Outer Hebrides), some of which are strictly presbyterian - so the language does not need to be exclusive possession of one tradition.



Absolutely. Google Ulster Unionist convention of 1892 - God Save the Queen / Erin go Bragh.


----------

