the Love Ulster march part II

[Wasp]

I have to say now that republic did not say unionist desires etc are stupid in anyway shape or form. He is probably the most neutral Irishman I know. Saying that it is very easy to get wires crossed or to misinterpret peoples posts.

[An Fear Dubh]

I am not sure what you are Republic all I know is what you are not. You are not a unionist but you think you understand that ideology.

I admit you do have a very good grasp of it possible more articulate that a lot who claim to be unionist. But I feel that while your analysis and interpretation is extremely good, you lack the final ingredient that would make your analysis unassailable. I think it is a credit to you that you have been able to pick through everything to complete such an analysis.

So while you views are extremely helpful to those who have never encountered unionist ideology, because you are not a unionist it lacks the conviction a unionist would bring, but you are good training for republicans. And therefore at crucial points you can not cross the rubicon that faces unionism, but revert to something else, what you do truly believe.

This is not a criticism of you but it is a understandable result of your desire to present the unionist argument. I am glad and welcoming of this input, it ensures that I can not 'wing it' because I know you are more than able to highlight any lapse, and I know others enjoy the logical argument you bring. But for all your strengths the one small weakness I have encountered is fundamental - you are not a Unionist.

Okay Republic what did you say and what did you mean when you said -
Republic said, "...I do agree that marches are stupid. Why anyone feels the need to walk down a road in a huge group is beyond me. They are provocative, militaristic and triumphant."

The Orange Order is put forward as part of Protestant culture in the north. Is what you said not the same as saying that Protestant culture in the north is stupid. I did ask more than once that you clarify the point. The desire to maintain that culture is often repeated by numerous unionists. Surely Wasp you are not saying that you wish to stop marching??! But Republic has said that such a culture of marching is stupid, perhaps you did not read that properly Wasp.

As an active republican I have never claimed to be doing anything in anyones name but my own. I do claim that I am supported in my actions by the local community within which I live and play an active part. The population of the southern part of Ireland have difficulty in understanding the issues facing those who have lived in the north and in relating to them. Which is a rather amazing ability, but republicans like Setanta prove that such an understanding is possible if the desire to relate is there.

[Republic]

No, I think a part of northern Protestant culture is stupid, OO marching etc.
Not all of it.
I think that many aspects of republican culture are stupid too.
I find some aspects of my own culture stupid, eg St Pats day parades.
Maybe stupid was not the right word, but i cant think of any other word tbh. Maybe i need a thesaurus

I am not sure what you are Republic all I know is what you are not

Me too. I know Im a proud ROI citizen. Have not come to a definite conclusion about politics!!

I understand unionism as best I possibly can.
Its not perfect but I try.
What would make my analysis unassailable? Or where do you think it is flawed? What parts of unionism, in your opinion, do I not understand?

As for the rest of your post, whether it was meant as a compliment or not, Im taking it as one! ;D

One last thing, do you feel that southerners on the whole, do not have a desire to relate to Irishmen and women in NI?

[An Fear Dubh]

I was definately being complimentry, you will find I never beat about the bush, or try to be smart. I know I am not that clever.

So you admit to saying that part of northern protestant culture is stupid. And there was Wasp thinking you were the most neutral person he knew. What do you say now Wasp having that point clarified for you?

I think that many parts of republican ideology (it is not a culture no matter how much republicans wish it was) are misinterpreted. You maybe mixing nationalist culture with republican ideology.

So if stupid it is not the right word, what is the right word? And the lack of the right word does not really work in your case. As you have proved yourself able in the use of multiply words longer than four letters.

And I would not be as foolish as to issue wide sweeping statements on vast numbers. So of course I do not think all southerners have a desire not to relate to northerners. But certainly people like Setanta prove that there is the ability to allow a transfer of ideas and a common objective. And if he is the exterme (as SF is accused) then there are certain to be many others that share common ground.

[Republic]

anfeardubh said:

So you admit to saying that part of northern protestant culture is stupid. And there was Wasp thinking you were the most neutral person he knew. What do you say now Wasp having that point clarified for you?
.

that does not mean i am not neutral.
in fact i think my criticism shows that i am neutral.
i am equally at home criticising either unionism or republicanism, therefore i think that definitely makes me neutral!

If my comment shows that i am not neutral, then should i not be classed as biased towards republicanism?
which is not the case at all.

i do not have a preference for either side. i am neutral and my criticism of one side does not therefore mean that i am in favour of the other side.

do you get what im saying?

[An Fear Dubh]

I understand what you are saying. And I must say again I think you have a good grasp of Unionist views.

I think that some republicans have acted stupidly, and therefore an aspect of republicanism is stupid. But that does not make me neutral, I am still a republican. But as I have said I do not know if you are neutral or not, I can only evaluated what you have presented. It was Wasp that thought you were neutral and fair to Unionism, and he may well still believe that. Criticizing both sides does not make you neutral it just makes you a critic. It is easy to be a critic the harder thing is to defend your own beliefs.

I am not saying you are a republican or favour the republican view. As I have said, I do not know what you are, but I know what you are not.

I have spoken at length to some unionists, and it was put very strongly to myself that the Orange Order marching was a core part of Protestant culture. Now if someone who is a unionist wants to now tell me that is not the case, I would like to hear that. Republic has said "...I do agree that marches are stupid. Why anyone feels the need to walk down a road in a huge group is beyond me. They are provocative, militaristic and triumphant."

If you (Republic) do not understand a core part of protestant culture, but find it stupid and without logic (because that is what stupid means). How then can you think that you fully understand unionism? You only have a good grasp, and it is better that someone who is a unionist explains their fears and desires. As you may get it wrong and lead people to believe something that is not the case. This is why I hate 'devils advocate' and 'what if' scenarios. Let us deal with what is fact not what someone might interpret to be a fact.

[Republic]

I understand that it is a part of their culture, I just do not see the point of it.
Just because i do not agree with it, does not mean that i do not understand that its a part of their culture.

I was actually thinking being 'neutral' today.
I think i try to be an unbiased critic more than anything.
I call it as i see it.
Sometimes i get it right, other times not.

I do not approach any issue with a particular ideology or preconceived desire, so that makes me unbiased IMO.
I try to take the most logical conclusion, whether it falls in favour in republicanism or unionism does not bother me.
I am not sure how clear i have made myself, but hopefully you know what i mean.

[Republic]

If you (Republic) do not understand a core part of protestant culture

LOL
i missed this part.
Im a protestant, or at least a lapsed one in the strictest sense of the word.
Im mainly a christian, but i have a (southern) protestant background, as well as having a catholic background.
Im mixed so maybe thats why im unusual ;D

[Wasp]

Now how do I explain this then lol. First of all I stand by everything I said to do with republic being fair to Unionism and being neutral, I have no doubt in that whatsoever. On republics view of parades then that is his opinion and I am sure he is not the only one with that opinion. I have no problems whatsoever with the word stupid being used as again this is a personnal opinion.

Not every republican/loyalist/nationalist/unionist agree on everything. Republicans disagree on things and so does everyother political group along with the voters. But to disagree does not make you anti anything nor does it stop you from being neutral etc.

The parades etc are a very big part of our culture but to seldom go does not make you any less of a Unionist/loyalist. This year so far I went to about two parades and just watched the first few bands and then home. My main reason for this was to let my baby son see and hear the bands as he loves music, all kinds of music be it the tune to cornation street. Seeing him try to dance in my arms to the bands was brilliant, it was loads of fun and we all had a great laugh. This for me was a family thing and the first parade my son has seen would be important just in the sameway a child sees something pleasing for the first time. I will be for the Somme parade but I will miss the twelth. I might be at perhaps a further one or two parades this year with my sons and for me it is a family day out, even if it is only for a hour.

Now try to stop or prevent this part of my culture where I live then you will find I will attend more parades in support of those parading and I will take a bigger interest in that part of my culture if you know what I mean.

[An Fear Dubh]

It is good that you do not approach with preconceived desire, I am unsure about the lack of an ideology. Is it possible to exist without an ideology? Is this like when people say they have no interest in politics, again something I think is near impossible. But an unbiased critic is just a critic, you need to be more than a critic, otherwise we will never make progress.

But understanding is much more than agreeing or disagreeing, because to agree or disagree means you have an ideology that comes into conflict (disagree) or agreement with the subject. To truly understand you may have to empathize with the subject. As you can not empathize you do not truly understand.

I wonder though does cultural expression have to have a point? And how much culture has no point at all? What is the point of art? Dancing, music, fashion?? You must see the point if you called it stupid though? Otherwise how can you draw such a conclusion if you do not see the point of it.

I think you have made yourself very clear, but you seem reluctant to admit to the point I have made. And are just circling looking for an exist strategy. I am not robbing you of making assessments, but let us not pretend that you fully understand (empathize with - if that term suits you better) Unionism, you have shown you do not.

[Republic]

anfeardubh said:

It is good that you do not approach with preconceived desire, I am unsure about the lack of an ideology. Is it possible to exist without an ideology? Is this like when people say they have no interest in politics, again something I think is near impossible. But an unbiased critic is just a critic, you need to be more than a critic, otherwise we will never make progress.

But understanding is much more than agreeing or disagreeing, because to agree or disagree means you have an ideology that comes into conflict (disagree) or agreement with the subject. To truly understand you may have to empathize with the subject. As you can not empathize you do not truly understand.

I wonder though does cultural expression have to have a point? And how much culture has no point at all? What is the point of art? Dancing, music, fashion?? You must see the point if you called it stupid though? Otherwise how can you draw such a conclusion if you do not see the point of it.

I think you have made yourself very clear, but you seem reluctant to admit to the point I have made. And are just circling looking for an exist strategy. I am not robbing you of making assessments, but let us not pretend that you fully understand (empathize with - if that term suits you better) Unionism, you have shown you do not.

well i have never claimed to be flawless in my understanding of unionism!
but nonetheless i do think i understand it fairly well.

Now as for my exit strategy, I think i explained that my remark was casual and i was not too concerned about the issue!
At least i tried to explain what i meant, unlike someone else (thats you sideshow , but unfortunately, your questioning has left me more confused on the issue than i was at the start ;D

Re ideology, you could be right.
I think where me and you differ is that i try and approach everything like a historian, trying to be unbiased and unsympathetic to either side of a given argument.

[An Fear Dubh]

Okay I will give you that you might approach it like a historian should. But I am thinking of all those revisionists historians that try to re-write history because of their ideology is in conflict with the facts.

So maybe you are that extremely rare breed of historian, but this means you will never get published or considered seriously, because you lack a personal view.

That's your exit sorted, and yes, sideshow was a no show! But I was not trying to confuse.

[Republic]

anfeardubh said:

So maybe you are that extremely rare breed of historian, but this means you will never get published or considered seriously, because you lack a personal view.

Thanks for the vote of confidence

We are taught to consider all the evidence and then make an unbiased but critical judgement upon the evidence. If I ever get around to writing a book thats how I will have to approach it.
i believe there are many good historians who follow this method, but it is true that are also many who have a highly personal approach to the subject.
Have you ever read Niall Ferguson? Hes a great historian but is a raging capitalist and imperialist. You would love him ;D
www.penguin.co.uk/static/cs/uk/0/articles/waroftheworld/index.html
www.amazon.co.uk/Empire-Britain-Made-Modern-World/dp/0141007540

[Harry]

Firstly St Patrick isn't part of one's side culture, relating St Patricks parades to OO parades and comparing them as like for like makes no sense. I enjoy St paddys day like the rest of them, but again this could be reasons for another thread ;D ;D ;D

Unionists seek to highlight our suffering to the people of Dublin. No doubt alot of Dublin folk sympathise with the Republican struggle and enjoy the romantic notion but have little real understanding what hurt was inflicted on others in the pursuit of Irish Unity. I 100% fully support the intentions of the march but can also see hidden motives, well there not hidden but its clear elements of the march tinker on the brink of provocative. Have a victims march, we don't really need bands etc which will take the spotlight of the victims and sour the march because others will use the bands presence as a means to justify attacks. I realise the stigma that is currently attached with the OO and band parades and alot of it is nonsense and is merely due to others intolorance but we must address this and having the OO cause a riot in Dublin will only be spun by the media to 'look at these Orangemen now coming here and causing trouble'.

Obviously there is potential to let republicans shoot themselves in the foot as they did at the last march but we must be careful it doesn't backfire. Regardless of opinions of Willie, he is most certainly a victim and has suffered a great deal at the hands of Republicans and this can never be denied.

[Blue Angel]

To be honest I would have just let the last march go ahead, I can't pretend to be a believer in free speech and only extend that right when people are saying things I agree with. Harry how many Dubliners really empathise with the republican struggle is very, very debatable also I'd say. Leaving that aside, as pointed out before just because we don't like leaders from any side is no reason to try and pick and choose who they should be. I think Frazer is a poor leader for many reasons (not least his own associations with unionist paramilitaries which many both unionist and nationalist have commented on is awkward given he condemns republican paramilitaries) and but yes no-one can deny he is a victim and it would be the most intelligent course of action to just let him march.