statue farce

[Jim]

Yes it is our aspiration, but the Dáil has never had jurisdiction over us, and neither have either of the ruling parties, since SF is not a ruling party in the south, so they don't know about us or most likely care about us unless it counts for a few hundred thousand extra votes to take from SF.

Compare it with Unionists from time to time being worried about what the British Government is doing in regards to NI, there have been plenty of times unionists have taken to the streets against the British government, because you dont pledge loyality to the Government you pledge your loyality to the monarch and to Britain as a country. We are not "loyal" to Fianna Fail or its Government, but the idea of Irish sovreignty in Ireland.

The way I see it, unionists are more important for outreach by the Irish Government because they are the ones holding back the unification, the British government would have let go of NI long ago if not for the unionist opposition, so I can see NI nationalists being made to take a back-seat in favour of their neighbours just the way unionists have complained of the same thing in reverse with nationalists getting more attention in recent years after the agreement.

[earl]

jim said:

earl said:

we have to learn from the mistakes of the past. NI was created without the consideration of the large minority in mind. They were ignored. And we've seen that NI has suffered from stability issues ever since. If we created a new Ireland, then the concerns of the Unionist population must be listened to and come under consideration. How can anyone love a flag that doesn't represent them? How can anyone sing an anthem that they had no part in? You Jim of all people should know what feeling alienated in the country of your birth feels like. So if the shoe was on the foot, you could hardly expect any Unionist to be thrilled with the idea that NI was to become a mere extension of the current Irish state, with all it's flags and symbols in tow. As far as I'm concerned, the current separation of this island is a transitory thing, and all the flags and symbols within are only temporary.
This isn't 'pandering'. It's accepting a reality. This island isn't a green and Gaelic utopia. There is an indigenous ethnic minority that relates itself to the British culture. Nothing we say or do will ever change that, no-more than you could be persuaded against your Irish heritage. Making sure that the majority of Unionists participate constructively towards the creation of a new Ireland is the only way a UI will work, else we'll end up back in the same state as 1921 with the roles reversed.

I didn't imply any opposite, I gave how northern nationalists would feel about your proposals. Like I said, I'll take a model that works. If this works then thats that. No one mentioned gaelic utopias, lets just remember northern nationalists when we are at this, we deserve as much consultation as unionists do, remember we call ourselves Irish but we have never been part of the Irish state so our opinion will be vastly different to a southern opinion.

Understood Jim.

[earl]

Every country that operates under a federal system allows states to fix their own state taxes on top of federal taxes. Do you really expect Unionist Reps to settle for less then that if they have their 6 county Parliament?
A Parades Tax/GAA could be introduced in the tribal environment of this Assembly. Pricking about with taxation is an ideal way to assert your distinction from the other region. So that assertion flies in the face of your earlier points about it being uniform, it'd cause more problems then it's worth.

Federal/union, whatever you want to call it, there's not one way of doing it. The tax rate and policies would be harmonised and that would not be one of the policies which could be devolved. Currently NI is trying to harmonise it's tax system with ours, so I don't see that in the event of the only way in which they can successfully do this, that they'd turn around and start messing with it.

Even if one Parliament favoured NATO Membership and involvement in Wars that do no have a UN Mandate? Can you see that being conceded by a 6 county Parliament?

Can Wales opt out of NATO? Can NI currently declare war on anyone? Same principle applies. The central government looks after that and would be the same here. The devolved government in NI would operate much as it does today, except in certain aspects where at the moment, they are being kept at arms length from Britain, there would be greater integration.

and can you also see them giving up the British Pound completely (if Britain hasn't switched to Euro by then)

As you've said, in this scenario a majority has voted to leave the UK and enter a UI. This isn't even a consideration. In a UI the euro is the currency. Can Scotland switch to a different currency at the moment? same rules apply.

Would it Hell.It'd cause more trouble then it was worth as the tribal card would be played more often and good governance wouldn't be in sight.
We could have dozens of reps aping Parnell's obstructionism.
I'd welcome WASP and Harry's input on the points Earl made that 6 counties Parliament wouldn't have control over.

Look at it this way. If it were to happen tomorrow, what would happen? How would it come about? NI's current political infrastructure would remain intact, as we'd be looking at a complete disaster if it were disbanded and then tried to swallow it all up into the ROI's current structure. The PSNI isn't going to get disbanded overnight and Gardaí marched straight onto the shankill. We've seen in the reunification of Germany the problems with trying to implement all integration immediately. In a more severe case, we've seen the carnage caused in Iraq from having a political and governance system completely wiped out and built from scratch. God knows how bad the hatred and bigotry, bubbling under the surface would explode onto the streets. It is very rarely that a mass and radical change to a countries set-up doesn't bring bloodshed.

Did I say that? Do not misrepresent what I said. What I said was quite clear and I gave the Canadian example, since you're so fond of Canada to back my point that no 1 sixth of any population anywhere in the world wield that much political power in a democracy.
Then I gave the example of the French-Canadians gaining other concessions, language in that example, which is relative to their percentage of the population and testament to their astute negotiating skills

On some past threads, you've stated that in the event of a UI, Unionists would stand a good chance of getting into a coalition government in the Dáil, and I agree with this. So either way, you're going to have 1/6 the population with a say in how things are run.

exactly the points I made in my response. The points you have so far ignored.

You must mean this:

They got other concessions (language status etc) roughly based on their population.

Sorry, didn't see this. I had my righteous groove on. We're probably in the same ballpark on this one, if looking at it from different angles. By the way, I would never intentionally ignore any of your points. It's too much fun arguing as many as possible! ;D

but she would be imposed on the Nationalist people of the 6 counties, who in this scenario, are the majority in the 6 counties because we're talking about after a United Ireland Referendum!

I think that this is all down to how the new constitution/treaty/whatever is worded. If it explicitly stated that she remains the figurehead of those of a British heritage, then I can't see your point. As you've said, the GFA covers this in any eventuality, so we'd be ensuring that this right was highlighted and protected in the event of a UI within it's new structure.

Plus Earl, Nationalists in the 6 counties are people like you and I.

I take offence to this. You're from the Pale, I'm an Ulsterman. I'm not going to pretend that I know how exactly a northern nationalist feels as I've grown up under different circumstances. But I do not make a distinction between me and some fella 40 miles from my home place in Fermanagh. On another thread I'm trying to describe what the Irish nation is, so why are you pointing this out to me? Are you being condescending?

And would the Unionists Reps really have the brass neck to try and get that into the referendum text after rejecting any scenario that would involve the President of Ireland being any sort of figure-head in the 6 counties?

Of course they would!!

You mean like guaranteed British Citizenship which is already guaranteed under the GFA, under which they are still British Subjects and have their link to the Queen?

Exactly. These terms in the GFA would have to be highlighted in the new framework of the island.

Probably in a decade, and this is based on the SDLP/FF talks which most likely will see Fianna Fail taking over the SDLP Seats, firstly and then targeting marginal seats as a way to invigorate conservative nationalists who are tired of the Stoops lack of imagination and failed campaigns.
You said so yourself on other thrends Earl, but you already knew that didn't you?

I can't see FF making any inroads into SF's majority anytime soon. After that, who knows.

Your smart-arsed comments when you didn't want to answer a point used to be so much better then this Earl.

I'm getting old. Sorry for the drop in quality.

My whole point, which was AGAIN ignored, was about needing a strong Ireland-wide organisation who would advocate including all the concessions to Unionism in the Referendum text. Fianna Fail are the only organisation who are capable of that. Fianna Fail The Republican Party who commemorate Wolfe Tone and the Easter Rising.

Point taken. By the way I'm not advocating that Unionists get all their concessions as nationalists aren't getting exactly what they wanted either. Give and take by all sides and a compromise could be achieved. We have to at least try.

So you got your tarots out as well then?

Now who's misquoting?? I used the word 'assume', not 'predict'.

and you're basing this on what example? What Unionist Rep has shown these qualities?

Davey Irivine (RIP) was a politician who could have done the business. Harry here, could do the business! Just because there currently isn't a Unionist politician who hasn't got the same bad habits doesn't mean that there never will.

Dude but the point has been made that we DO show their traditions respect. You've started thrends stating that!

I think we're getting our wires crossed here. From the language you are using, your take on the whole proposal is almost like NI would be totally independent. I think that we may be closer to agreement on some issues than we appear to be by our posts.

I'm all for Unionism having a voice in the Dail. I'm all for their views to be heard. I'm not all for 1 sixth of the population having that much political clout.
But it's down to Unionist Reps to ensure that. It's not for Nationalists to do all the work and then to go to them "do you like this" or "would you accept that". They're not children.

Even under the current system of government, the Unionist parties would stand a good chance of being in government, so they will have political clout regardless. And I agree with your other point here. I'm just throwing out a suggestion and seeing how it sticks. Unionists will never talk about this subject in that manner no more than you'd talk about us rejoining the UK.

Earl, I've explained why the border is a hindrance and at the start of this post I've stated why I believe it will continue to be a hindrance.

I've already stated how the border would operate. Same currency and tax rate each side, like in the UK's internal borders. Same agencies used to drum up employment for the area. The border would be purely administrative in practice, but symbolically, it lets the Unionists know that we are not trying to wipe them and NI under the carpet. It's in a state at the moment because there has been very little co-operation between those involved on both sides. In the scenario we are discussing, the circumstances are completely different and can't even be compared.

You could have just asked them what they would be comfortable with and then weigh that up against what you know Nationalists are comfortable with all over Ireland and then see if their proposals are do-able.

And you know what Setanta, If I were Taoiseach and this was happening now I would, but I'm a member on a cross-community thread who is trying to understand how we might ever do this and is throwing out suggestions to see how they'd go down. If I knew that the prerequisite for posting on this matter was an actual working model for a UI with the majorities consent, I wouldn't have posted up anything.

Such as? Because I haven't seen any Unionist Input on this thrend that says that their proposals wouldn't interfer with our sovereignty.

And you won't either. I'm trying to argue from a more Unionist perspective on this, as best I can, as this subject is strictly taboo amoung actual unionists.

www.sinnfein.ie/pdf/GreenPaper_23Feb05.pdf

Have mercy! Give me the bullet points!

[earl]

This has turned into too much of a head wreck. It took me most of the morning to quote and read back through the history of this thread and reply so I'll be damned if I'm going to spend my whole evening doing the same.
If you think that if the day ever comes and a UI occurs that the border will magically disappear within 24 hours, you are greatly mistaken. You can see how it's all going to play out. Logic alone dictates that it will not happen that way. If I were to talk passionately and about what I'd really like, it'd be a UI similar to the traditional model. But looking at it logically, with no emotion, I can't see it happening, at least not at first. There will definetly be a period where NI would still exist in some form or another within a UI structure. Whether it would remain this way or not would depend on how things work out, but even so, the border would slowly fade over time, not vanish instantly. One thing that EU strategies have shown is that the slow, boring route to change is a lot more successful than using electric-shock type jolts of change.

[Wasp]

First of all up to now I have found Earl blaming Unionists to much for events of the past and perhaps the present as well but I understand as a republican who has never lived here he is mainly only going to hear one side of the arguement.

But Earl has made a very big step IMO with the ideas he has put forward and IMO is certainly the type of politician that Unionists could talk to (if he was a politicain). Earl without doubt has a far greater understanding of Unionism than he ever let on or he just kept it a secret.

I think Earl and republic are heading on the same wave length and there views must and should be thought through by Unionists.

Setanta you have several times mentioned northern nationalists and so has Jim, the fact that northern nationalists would be a bit smaller in number to Unionists etc would you also say that in no way they can have much political clout in the sameway you said about Unionists?

[Republic]

From talking to some republicans (on other boards) I get the impression that they think a UI would give them the chance to get ''payback'' on unionists. Not so much in a violent sense, but in the obliteration of any britishness (culture etc) on this island.

[Jim]

wasp said:

Setanta you have several times mentioned northern nationalists and so has Jim, the fact that northern nationalists would be a bit smaller in number to Unionists etc would you also say that in no way they can have much political clout in the sameway you said about Unionists?

In the event of a united Ireland, northern nationalists would be a majority.

[Wasp]

I see your point Jim, I was talking about as how things stand as they currently are

[earl]

I concede oh great waffler!! I'll have to make sure I have me wheatabix next time.

WASP, We'll probably never agree on the past or many present situations. No doubt, normal service will resume soon enough! But we can agree on a future, a future of more respect for each others traditions, be that within the UK or within a UI.

[Wasp]

Setanta that does not answer my question, northern nationalists would also account for about 1 sixth of the population so will they be given the same political clout as Unionists or not. Jim has said that nortnern nationalists are to be consulted the same as Unionists which is fair enough, but will their political clout be equal to Unionists?

[Republic]

setanta said:

they'd be merging with all of the other people in the Republic of Ireland into one huge bloc numbering 5 sixths of the population.

That is dependent on a UI getting an almost 100% majority in a referendum.

[Republic]

setanta said:

Republic I don't want "payback" on anyone.

I didn't specifically mean you, but I know some republicans who want nothing but revenge on the brits.
I don't think they're shinners though, they are opposed to the GFA.

[Republic]

setanta said:

So is this thrend finished then?

Looks like it.
Hopefully you've come around to the idea of a true UI!

[Republic]

setanta said:

"true"?

Tolerant maybe?

[Republic]

setanta said:

republic said:

I didn't specifically mean you, but I know some republicans who want nothing but revenge on the brits.
I don't think they're shinners though, they are opposed to the GFA.

The Flat-Earthers in RSF and 32CSM who have NO support at all outside if a few die-hard families.

I've come across quite a few idiots on boards and p.ie