The problem with your moral contortionism is that it is irrelevant in the context of the political ambitions of your Party as what happened 100 years ago is not an obstacle to Irish Unity. What happened 20-50 years ago is.First, there is sometimes a tendency to relate to events of the revolutionary period of 100yrs ago as a having some sort different set of values and morals.
as what happened 100 years ago is not an obstacle to Irish Unity.
In any negotiations about a united Ireland FF or FG having a heritage of insurrection and conflict doesn't matter.
SF having a leadership which engaged in conflict and terrorism does.
You're being obtuse, at best.You are kidding right?
The events of 100yrs that partitioned the country is not an obstacle to Irish Unity.
This is just ridiculous.
Yes, it is. It's aa great testimony to the Unionists.Michelle O'Neill, Martin McGuinness, is that the leadership that Unionists share power with in NI?
Amazing really isn't it, Unionists share power with SF
Knowing the SF will probably be in power soon is an obstacle.but it is anathema to them to share power with FF or FG on an All Ireland basis, and you think SF is the obstacle.
In a negotiation for a united Ireland the historical events of 100 years ago will not be an obstacle to progress.
Is that what you think?Please, the events of 100yrs ago that brought about partition are no longer an obstacle!
I agree.The naivety of this view is beyond comprehension.
Maybe to you and others who have been brainwashed by the Shinner cult.The inference is that Unionists would be quite willing to engage in a UI if it were not for those nasty Shinners (that they already share power with).
This country is predominantly secular. I think that's more of a problem for the DUP but not for younger liberal protestants. Having some criminal who killed or tried to kill your parents grinning at you from the other side of the table is more of a problem for Unionists.The ingrained bigotry of being governed in a country that is predominantly Catholic has evaporated has it? Because I'm pretty sure you have cited that bigotry on a number of occasions in this thread?
@WolfeTone How much did the IT pay you for this article?Emma de Souza in the Irish Times today said:Voicing support for the preservation of the United Kingdom is not condemned as "divisive" or "unhelpful". So too should support for Irish unification be considered equivalently legitimate. The call to silence such views under the veil of "not now" is no more than an attempt to undermine a key principle of the Belfast Agreement.
A fascinating lady, Wolfie.The Irish language is an important part of Protestant heritage
Linda Ervine gives a brief summary of how intertwined the Irish language is with Protestant culture.
Why so? Linda herself states the obvious - SF weaponisation, such as currying me yoghurt all over the floor of the Assembly.
I agree with you. In that case my vote would change from "It depends" to "No".Any notions of a United Ireland with the Tricolour, Bunreacht na hÉireann and Amhrán na bhFiann as official symbols and law are pie in the sky.
Yep. But if it's just down to talking until everyone agrees then it will never happen.Not without bloodshed anyway. And perhaps before any prospective referendum on a UI it needs to be reaffirmed by everyone that flags and anthems and constitutional arrangements, whatever form they take, are not worth shedding one more drop of blood.
I think it's actually written somewhere that a UI can only be achieved through exclusively peaceful and democratic means that has been resoundingly endorsed by the Irish people.
Emerson's article points out that the Parties are dancing around the black hole that is the details of what a United Ireland will look like and are all attempting to push each other in. The Shinners are the Sumo masters in that context. They are the most vociferous but refuse to get into details, saying only that everything must be on the table but refusing to say what their position is on specific issues.I don't have the Emerson article but I accept it is reasonable. One thing I don't accept is this persistent focus on SF when it comes to a UI. SF has a base of 15% of electoral support north and south. They may be the loudest voice in the room as far as a UI go, but it's the other 85% that need to plug into the discussion.
Does anyone expect anything different? They would be crazy to engage.Unionism can put its head in the sand if it wants but make no mistake, it is the political strategy of Unionists, not SF, that has propelled the UI discussion to top of the political charts by their persistence in seeking a hard Brexit that the people of NI never voted for.
Unionists destabilised the UK by refusing to accept the HR parliament, achieved through exclusively peaceful and democratic means, in 1914. Unleashing a century of militant Irish Republicanism.
They are destabilising it further by pursuing a hardline on NI Protocol. They are ready to resist constitutional change further having not signed up to the principle of self-determination (DUP).
Why would vested interest groups in the business and employment sectors be in the conversation?The other parties FF/FG/SDLP/Labour, and the trade union movement, civil society and religious orders, the business sector, volunteer sector, sporting organisations etc, etc need to get on board the discussion and ask themselves, are they prepared to change the flag, change the anthem?
Yep. But if it's just down to talking until everyone agrees then it will never happen.
They are the most vociferous but refuse to get into details, saying only that everything must be on the table but refusing to say what their position is on specific issues.
Why would vested interest groups in the business and employment sectors be in the conversation?
I agree. They are a social, economic and political basket case. I think to get a majority vote in the 6 there will have to be some "concessions" up front. I use " " because tbh I don't think its a big deal to change the flag and anthem. The union flag will still fly where it currently files, likewise the tricolour. In 2021 does it really matterOther than 4th green field and a sense of obligation/guilt to northern nationalists I see nothing in it for the 26 to take on the 6. This palaver about "only when Ireland is united will our country flourish" is pure horse manure, the 6 as they currently exist are a dead weight,
Same here. The National Anthem was actually written in English. Singing it in Irish was part of the makey-up Irishness we invented after Independence in order to create a non-British national identity.I think to get a majority vote in the 6 there will have to be some "concessions" up front. I use " " because tbh I don't think its a big deal to change the flag and anthem. The union flag will still fly where it currently files, likewise the tricolour. In 2021 does it really matter
???
Yep, if the Shinners were really interested in a united Ireland they'd put structural reform of the Health Service which reduced waste and overall spending while improving services at the heart of their agenda, along with committing to reducing the higher rate of marginal tax.from anything i hear our northern friends are more bothered about the NHS and free at the point of access healthcare, maybe personal tax rates.
Yep, if the Shinners were really interested in a united Ireland they'd put structural reform of the Health Service which reduced waste and overall spending while improving services at the heart of their agenda, along with committing to reducing the higher rate of marginal tax.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?