Act of Union partially repealed

Purple said:
Would you not give the PBP a chance?
Click to expand...

I would, but their candidate in my constituency last time around was not very convincing. He could chant the slogans, but not much else.

I don't have my 'lot'.
I have an agenda for an All Ireland Republic governed on principles of social democracy.
The party that best fits that description is SF.
All other parties are welcome to join the fray, they just need to get past their partitionist mindset.
 
Purple said:
So what are the principles of social democracy?
Click to expand...
Danny Morrison explained it in simple terms. It is taking money from the rich and giving it to the poor. Surely you aren't against that. Mind you Wolfie is building up a little stash of bitcoin just in case.
 
Last edited:
Duke of Marmalade said:
Danny Morrison explained it is simple terms. It is taking money from the rich and giving it to the poor. Surely you aren't against that. Mind you Wolfie is building up a little stash of bitcoin just in case.
Click to expand...
Yes, but who are "the rich" and who are "the poor"?
Are we talking income or wealth (capital) or net income or disposable income? There are plenty of people at the top of one list and at the bottom of the others.
 
WolfeTone said:
I have an agenda for an All Ireland Republic governed on principles of social democracy.
The party that best fits that description is SF.
Click to expand...
SF have set UI back 100 years, so sorry Leo not in your lifetime.
In 1912 the unionists had very valid reasons to fear an independent UI. Rome rule, the prosperous protestant north subsidising the peasant catholic south, the loss of being part of the most prosperous and powerful (and indeed civilised) country on earth at that time.
Their fears were proved right in spades in the decades that followed independence. What a basket case the Free State was which saw amongst other things a fall in the protestant population of ethnic cleansing proportions.
Two things occurred to completely transform that situation. Joining the EEC and Charlie Haughey's cute hoorism is squeezing the maximum financial benefit from that. Almost more importantly, the catholic church was exposed for being even worse than the unionists of 1912 feared. The catholic church's stranglehold on the 26 counties' social framework has been so demolished that some unionist fundamentalists are even calling - "heck not so far please!".
Conditions are so completely reversed from 1912 that a UI should have been a very valid option for protestants. Instead we have their leader not even able to say Teashop. That is because SF/IRA have weaponised UI and Irish culture.
In principle I would favour a UI in the right circumstances. But a UI that would see triumphalist "Up the 'Ra" celebrations from SF would make me throw up.
 
All good points, but the vast majority of Irish people felt excluded from this prosperous and powerful state.

So much so that they were looking for ways to leave it.

The concerns of the Unionists of NI were understandable but that did not justify them in tearing a gerrymandered chunk out of the country under threat of war.
 
(waving hand emoji), hi, just Slab here, to say I'm not dead.

The 'good Republican' comments of MLMCD were, from memory, in the context of my court prosecution for failing to file tax returns..... should've learned from Al Capone.....
 
Purple said:
So what are the principles of social democracy?
Click to expand...

I should qualify - my principles of social democracy. Without wanting to open such a massive rabbit-hole I try to keep it simple. Social and democratic programs administered by elected representatives, access to education, housing, health care. Usual stuff really.

When things go a bit pear-shaped, a parliament where we can argue over the rights and wrongs of implementation of those programs.

Duke of Marmalade said:
Mind you Wolfie is building up a little stash of bitcoin just in case.
Click to expand...

The accumulation of private being another principle of social democracy. Access to property rights. Bitcoin solves this.

Duke of Marmalade said:
SF have set UI back 100 years,
Click to expand...

Which is kind of funny, because it was SF (the good ol' SF, that is) that established it in the first place. The SF of today want to claim lineage to this travesty. But FF, FG and rest won't let them. They say SF today had nothing do with partition in 1921. Instead, it was their own forefathers that caused the mess - and they are so proud of this debacle they continue to hang portraits and name bridges and train stations after them.

Duke of Marmalade said:
the prosperous protestant north subsidising the peasant catholic south,
Click to expand...

Hmmm, its that El Salvadorion poor theme again. You are poor, you shall stay poor, stop taking risks with your poverty, you may end up better off

Duke of Marmalade said:
the loss of being part of the most prosperous and powerful (and indeed civilised) country on earth at that time.
Click to expand...

There it is again. Obviously being a poor peasant in the most prosperous and powerful country on earth is a honour bestowed upon the catholic rabble.
I wonder what changed their mind wanting to have a go by themselves?

Duke of Marmalade said:
What a basket case the Free State was which saw amongst other things a fall in the protestant population of ethnic cleansing proportions.
Click to expand...

Well a fall in Protestant population is not disputed, but it ethnic cleansing is a bit of a stretch. No doubt sectarianism was alive and well.
But as Arlene pointed out to us recently, the mere prospect of being governed over by people that she herself recently governed over would be enough to send her fleeing out of her own country. I hope she wasnt implying that item no1 in a UI (established through exclusively peaceful and democratic means) would be the ethnic cleansing of Protestants?
Duke of Marmalade said:
Conditions are so completely reversed from 1912 that a UI should have been a very valid option for protestants. Instead we have their leader not even able to say Teashop
Click to expand...

But it is a valid option. Many Protestants live here. They have a prominent record in public life. Our first President was Protestant. How many Catholics sat on the throne of England?
Nope the only thing stopping Protestants for seeing a UI as a realistic prospect is...
Duke of Marmalade said:
But a UI that would see triumphalist "Up the 'Ra" celebrations from SF would make me throw up.
Click to expand...

So c'mon Leo, Mícheál, et al... put your money where your mouth is. Come out from behind the partitionist mindset. Take your politics beyond the border and offer the people Ireland, Catholic, Protestant and Dissenters the real prospect of a UI.
 
@WolfeTone You have largely misconstrued my point, which is not a new phenomenon, possibly my bad.
I was pointing out the understandable reasons why protestants in the 6 counties were extremely fearful of an independent republic in 1912.
I further pointed out that their fears of a century ago have been blown out of the water in recent times.
The fact that they are as resistant to a UI today as 100 years ago is because SF have weaponised the debate - e.g. pantomime displays of pigeon Irish in the NI Assembly.
 
Last edited:
On that we agree.

Well that's FF, FG, Labour and Greens then.
In my version there is a strong ethos of accountability and a culture of administrative excellence and efficiency so that the greatest societal good is gained from the public money the State takes and spends. Sadly that is almost totally lacking in Irish political life and is opposed by the self proclaimed socialist parties.
 
Last edited:
cremeegg said:
The concerns of the Unionists of NI were understandable but that did not justify them in tearing a gerrymandered chunk out of the country under threat of war.
Click to expand...
The gerrymander accusation possibly applies to the counties of Fermanagh & Tyrone but the other 4 countries got their democratic wish and taking the 6 as a whole the majority were in favour.
Should Hong Kong be subject to the will of the Chinese people? Geographically it would seem to have even less right than NI to a separate treatment and in terms of demographics China has 200 times the population of HK whereas RoI has maybe 2.5 times the population of NI.
 
Oh Duke, its not like you to leave so many open goals.

A gerrymander by its nature includes a core area, the 6 were indeed taken as a whole.

I don't see any similarity between the formation of NI and HK, oh wait I do. Brits with guns.
 
Duke of Marmalade said:
You have largely misconstrued my point, which is not a new phenomenon, possibly my bad.
I was pointing out the understandable reasons why protestants in the 6 counties were extremely fearful of an independent republic in 1912.
Click to expand...

I don't think I did, I think I understood it clearly. It would help however if we could agree on some realities.
In 1912 there was no push for an independent Republic. Home Rule was positively underpinned by Irish nationalist support to remain within the kingdom of richest and most powerful nation on earth. The figures speak for themselves, in the 1910 UK general election political support for an independent Republic was an oddity at best.
Queen Victorias visit to the thronging streets of Dublin peasantry waving Union Jack's and media gushing in 1909 provides good insight. The tens upon tens of thousands (40,000?) that would fight Britain's cause in Europe would dwarf anything ever assembled by Collins and crew in GOIRA.

Irish nationalism was firmly in the camp of remaining in the UK.
Protestants had a rational fear of a Catholic dominated parliament. But with an effective 25% block, it would remain to be seen how rational that fear would have become.
Personally, I consider that conversative Unionist and Conservative nationalist views have more in common than not.
The emergence of a typical right v left parliamentary democracy would have been more likely in a HR parliament rather than the cold houses for Catholics and Protestants North and South that did emerge as a consequence of partition.




Duke of Marmalade said:
The fact that they are as resistant to a UI today as 100 years ago is because SF have weaponised the debate - e.g. pantomime displays of pigeon Irish in the NI Assembly.
Click to expand...

With respect, this is puerile thinking. Basically anything SF espouse is "weaponising".

The Irish language has broad support across the political spectrum. It is recognised officially in the South. It is recognised as an official language of the EU. The UN Economic, Social and Cultural committee has called for an Irish language Act. Britain has language Acts for Wales and Scotland. Anyone interested in the language will know that there is vibrant support and resources available to support the language.
There is a significant body of Irish language literature dating back hundreds of years that is of major interest and value in the field of linguistics around the world.

The only "weaponising" is of the narrow-minded Gregory Campbell type too ignorant to not recognise that Irish language is very much a part of his culture and heritage also. That he choose not to recognise it is his business. But to actively oppose Gaelic culture, in Ireland, any part of it, is the weaponising of the issue.
Gregory needs to come down of his monumentous wooden pallet space rocket - another debasement of heritage and culture - and accept that as much as he lights up the night sky 'them' uns' aren't going away and Ulster is far, far from "British".
 
WolfeTone said:
I don't think I did
Click to expand...
Oh I think you did.
I may have been loose in not distinguishing between Home Rule and the Free State/UI but that was not my point.
Protestants had genuine reasons to fear independence of any form for Ireland 100 years ago (this is notwithstanding your point that their fears might have been proven unfounded). Those reasons have been swept away by recent economic and social near revolutions in the 26 counties.
And yet the protestants of NI are as against UI today as they were ever against HR or any other form of independence 100 years ago. Why this abhorrence when there is no real material threats to them in a UI?
Maybe the memory of a needless prolongation of terrorist violence in pursuit of Danny Morrison's determination to end partition and get the Brits out has determined them that SF/IRA should not get their Tiocfaidh ár lá, and I have great sympathy with that viewpoint.
 
Duke of Marmalade said:
Maybe the memory of a needless prolongation of terrorist violence in pursuit of Danny Morrison's determination to end partition and get the Brits out has determined them that SF/IRA should not get their Tiocfaidh ár lá, and I have great
Click to expand...

Well if that is the predominant reason then all the more reason for FF/FG/SDLP to end the pretence of being anyway radically different.
It's time to step into the fold as a unified force, on an All-Ireland basis and offer the electorate a real alternative to SF.
What is stopping them? Other than their ingrained two-state partitionist mindset.

Obviously the conflict has left a bitter taste, but when it comes to a UI don't for a second think that if SF were out of the equation that resistance to a UI would still not be profoundly part of Unionist identity. Arlene said as much recently, when asked what would she do if there was a UI, she said she would leave the country! This in the face of the economic transformation that is the South.
Nope! Unfortunately the inherent bigotry still prevails deep in psyche of Ulster Protestant Unionism.

Speaking of which, the references to 'real fear' of Protestants of a HR Parliament are obviously false as their status in the UK would not have changed one bit. In fact in a parliament with greater say over the social and economic affairs of the country they lived in, arguably their lot could improve. After all they seem to like the idea of a parliament for NI - but only if holds a Protestant majority?

As for the Catholics, that numbered the Prods three to one, they had nothing to fear. They already lived the peasantry lifestyle. The cheek of them wanting to better their lot!
 
Last edited:
@WolfeTone I think we are nearer to agreement. I am not dwelling on the minutiae of HR, just reflecting that protestants have far less (in fact nothing) to fear whether real or perceived compared to 100 years ago, but still fiercely against UI. Why?
 
Last edited:
Duke of Marmalade said:
bit still fiercely against UI. Why?
Click to expand...

Ok, we can agree that for economic reasons there is nothing to fear?
This will put a dent in the argument that it will cost us €30bn a year (of whatever the subvention is, a nonsense of an argument anyway).

Two other plausible reasons.

1. The inherent bigotry of living in a country that is minority Protestant with the prospect of allegiance to the British monarch being quashed.

2. As you mentioned, the recent conflict.

But as 2. goes, it is in my opinion, incumbent on nationalist Ireland to offer an alternative political to a SF Ireland.
There is method to my madness, increasing votes for SF will force a reaction from nationalist Ireland that I have suggested. Unifying FF/FG/SDLP and providing that alternative to SF that Unionism cannot ignore or disparage.
Alternatively, nationalist Ireland can pretend it has separate radical agendas and watch as SF eats its lunch.

On 1. In order to progress matters in this area two things could happen.
We can aspire to "break" this mindset with equality. Or we can facilitate this mindset by re-entering an arrangement with the British monarch as heas of state or some unique constitutional arrangement that guarantees Unionist subservience to the Crown.
 
@Duke of Marmalade

Duke of Marmalade said:
I would agree with you except that I don't think that a UI is the be all and end all.
Click to expand...

Neither do I

WolfeTone said:
I'm of the view that if the two-state solution could work, then by all means let it work.
Click to expand...

WolfeTone said:
in my opinion, after 100yrs, it has not worked. There is considerable evidence to support that view, see 20th century.
Click to expand...


The be all and end all, in my book, is to consign the centuries of division between Catholic and Protestants on this island to the history books once and for all.

How that is achieved is open to differing opinions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register