Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,596
Do we really want Ireland's Call to be the national anthem?
RIC Commemoration
- Thread starter cremeegg
- Start date
Jaysus no! I was thinking more along the lines of Horslips Dearg Doom, probably a non-runner for the use of an Irish word
Or my preference, Thin Lizzy - Emerald.
Has all the ancient tribal warrior stuff and tragedy of battle that nations lean on for spiritual uplift.
Lansdowne will be rocking for the soccer and rugby too.
Last edited:
God Save Ireland.
(we will need the help)
Danny Boy probably not a runner cos of the whole Derry-Londonderry Air thing.
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,596
God save our gracious President, we could borrow the tune, would buy in the unionists.
If we make Mickie Dee President for life we could lift something from Darby O'Gill and the Little People.
Did the IRA in 1916 have a mandate? No, Did they have one in 1919? yes, because the First Dail gave it to them via the Declaration of Independence and which was confirmed when the IRA swore an oath of allegiance a year later. Did then engage in sectarian killing, yes but no where near to the same degree of PIRA and they never targetted civilians in GB and beyond like PIRA did.
As for the economic side of the UI arguement, like other economic arguments there is no agreement on the impact but the minimum cost to replace the British subvention is around €4.5 billion and the max seems to be around €11 billion per annum. That is before you start to count the impact on some unionists deciding to leave NI for "the mainland" which will happen to some degree, the thousands of public servants who will not be needed on both sides of the border as departments and quango's merge and the costs of unifying and merging systems for those departments and quangos.
As for flags and emblems, why not copy Australia and have a tri-colour with a Union Jack in the corner? Or the Red hand of Ulster in the corner, or the NI flag with a Tricolour in the corner?. Would we be prepared to rejoin the Commonwealth as a sop to our new unionist citizens and have the queen as head of state?. As for an Anthem, why not copy Spain and have no lyrics at all. Mountains of Mourne anyone?
As for the economic side of the UI arguement, like other economic arguments there is no agreement on the impact but the minimum cost to replace the British subvention is around €4.5 billion and the max seems to be around €11 billion per annum. That is before you start to count the impact on some unionists deciding to leave NI for "the mainland" which will happen to some degree, the thousands of public servants who will not be needed on both sides of the border as departments and quango's merge and the costs of unifying and merging systems for those departments and quangos.
As for flags and emblems, why not copy Australia and have a tri-colour with a Union Jack in the corner? Or the Red hand of Ulster in the corner, or the NI flag with a Tricolour in the corner?. Would we be prepared to rejoin the Commonwealth as a sop to our new unionist citizens and have the queen as head of state?. As for an Anthem, why not copy Spain and have no lyrics at all. Mountains of Mourne anyone?
Can you fit a Lambeg Drum solo into that?
So it was illegal then. The highest offices in this State commemorate illegal military juntas intent on overthrowing the recognised authority of the day. Nice!
The economic argument is more interesting, as that at least is a battle to be won rather than re-fighting the battles of the past.
The question of public servants who will not be needed is worth looking at. NI has a bloated public service some 30% of workforce. Ireland has a much leaner service, around 16% of total workforce. In a UI there will obviously be considerable overlap and costs to amalgamation and merging etc. But using a simple calculation of % of workforce, it does not appear too bad.
NI has a workforce of some 800,000 @30% in public sector that amounts to 240,000
Ire has a workforce of some 2.1m @ 16% in public sector that amounts to 336,000
The combined workforce in a UI is 2.9m with total public sector workforce of 576,000, or just under 20% public sector.
The average % public sector workforce in OECD is around 18%. I think we could survive a just-above-average public sector for sometime.
Obviously there will be costs at merging, amalgamating etc, but as I have mentioned before, in the event that the people of Ireland, north and south, ever vote for a UI, it will be as much in Britains interest, as the EU and US, that such a transition occur as smoothly as possible. The underlying threat to a unification are paramilitaries. The objectives of Irish, British, EU and US administrations would be to nullify their presence to the greatest extent possible. In my view, providing ample rewarding opportunities in education and employment is the best way to do this.
After referenda votes endorsing a UI, I would expect the following decade or two to be supplanted with considerable levels of capital investment from around the globe for those who see an interest in the peaceful democratic process winning through.
The notion that Ireland will be left to fill some blackhole such as the subvention each year is in nobodys interest. Bankrupting the country, sky-rocketing unemployment and the youth falling into the hands of paramilitaries intent on destroying the democratic process is not in anybodys interest.
Thats how it was before the illegal insurrection in 1916. The nationalist and republican community in NI have accepted it, why wouldn't the nationalist and republican community down south accept it?
The difference is that this State and this Government are derived from that insurrection in 1916 whereas the PIRA didn't recognise the legitimacy of this country and considered members of our police and armed services to be legitimate targets. They waged a terrorist campaign against us as well as against the UK.
Their former(?) members who are now members of our parliament are unrepentant about previously viewing this country as illegitimate and the government of this country, of which they aspire to be members, as their enemy.
Because that was 100 years ago and things have moved on.
BTW, I hate the "Down South" thing. This isn't "Southern Ireland" or "The Republic" or "The South". It isn't The Republic of Ireland either (that's a football team). This is Ireland. That's all. It's "Ireland" and "Northern Ireland". The most northerly point of this island is in Ireland so "down south" should be used when referring to Cork.
You appear intent on battling over old ground?
This State and this Government are not derived from that insurrection in 1916. It is derived from the negotiated Anglo-Irish Treaty of 1922.
In 1916 the Proclamation, or in 1919 the Declaration of Independence, made no reference to a two-state solution. The opposite in fact, they laid claim to Ireland in its entirety.
This State and this Government are not derived from that insurrection in 1916. It is derived from the negotiated Anglo-Irish Treaty of 1922.
In 1916 the Proclamation, or in 1919 the Declaration of Independence, made no reference to a two-state solution. The opposite in fact, they laid claim to Ireland in its entirety.
Last edited:
I didn't know, Im sorry - I love it!
But for the sake of discussion, if I use the phrase "down south" or something similar, it is not meant in a geographic sense as you quite rightly point out the most northerly point being in Donegal - which begs the question, shouldnt it be "North-Eastern Ireland" and not "Northern Ireland"?
But rather it refers to the legal jurisdiction referred to in Bunreacht na hÉireann as Éire or Ireland.
It's not a "legal Jurisdiction", it's a country. The name of the country is Ireland.
or as the say in Northern Ireland about us, Mexico (South of the border)
We're not arguing legal definitions here. This country is derived from the 1937 Free State which is derived from the 1920 Government of Ireland Act (there was a Southern Ireland then) which was a result of the War of Independence which was caused by the 1916 Rising. That's the way this State sees things. The IRA didn't see it that way so they didn't recognise this country or the legitimacy of our government. I suppose we should have been charging IRA members with treason.
They can say what they like as long as they don't want to cross the Rio Grandeor as the say in Northern Ireland about us, Mexico (South of the border)
So it was illegal then. The highest offices in this State commemorate illegal military juntas intent on overthrowing the recognised authority of the day. Nice!
Thats how it was before the illegal insurrection in 1916. The nationalist and republican community in NI have accepted it, why wouldn't the nationalist and republican community down south accept it?
Illegal, yes but then you could put the same argument against the French Resistance in the 2nd world war. That also was illegal as was George Washington and his gang,
Not at all, the French Resistance derived its authority from the sovereignty of the existing French nation being illegally occupied by the German army. The American revolution in no small part to the lack of political representation in Westminster while having to endure laws bestowed by that parliament upon the colonies.
A fundamental tenet of any parliamentary democracy is the sovereign right of its people to decide its own laws and customs, not to be dictated to by foreign entities from foreign parliaments or foreign oppressors.
Ireland was represented at Westminster, through free and fair elections.
Yes, and in the December 1919 election Sinn Fein (which became Fianna Fail) won an overwhelming mandate on a platform of Independence. Maybe we should we have waited another 100 years but we would be an economic and social basketcase, just like Northern Ireland.
Any idea how our PS pay compares to the OECD average?