Mary-Lou "United Ireland is within touching distance"

[Sister Sara]

Kind of makes a joke of us being independent though.

True, and so does not being able to hold a unity referendum if US and UK were to deem our ties with China and Russia too close and against their interests.

 

[Purple]

True, and so does not being able to hold a unity referendum if US and UK were to deem our ties with China and Russia too close and against their interests.

We could. Nothing stopping us. The bit of the island that's in the UK could only do it with the agreement of the UK. That's how representative democracy works.

If we had strong ties to dictatorships and oppressive police states that are opposed to the principles upon which our State, the EU and democratic countries hold to be precious and fundamental (in other words if the far left were in charge) then they'd be right to do what they could to stop Northern Ireland becoming part of a new country on this island.

 

[Sister Sara]

The bit of the island that's in the UK could only do it with the agreement of the UK

True, but the point is if the polls were indicating that a UI referendum could pass in the North, the UK is obligated under the GFA to hold such a poll.

Appreciating this is all speculative, but not facilitating a poll as obligated under an international treaty is oppressive and likely to lead to revolt as has happened in the past.

 

[Purple]

True, but the point is if the polls were indicating that a UI referendum could pass in the North, the UK is obligated under the GFA to hold such a poll.

Appreciating this is all speculative, but not facilitating a poll as obligated under an international treaty is oppressive and likely to lead to revolt as has happened in the past.

Yes, it's very speculative.
The referendum would have to be on specific terms of how a United Ireland would be constituted.

A revolt would be fine. That can be done peacefully and respecting democracy. A terrorist campaign by a small group of child murderer would not be fine. Both happened before, the former was headed by the SDLP, the latter by Sinn Fein/IRA. I do hope you are not referring to the latter as a revolt.

 

[Sister Sara]

The referendum would have to be on specific terms of how a United Ireland would be constituted.

Of course, based on a parliamentary representative democracy. Anyone intending to seize power for themselves don't require referendums, they tend to just do it.

A revolt would be fine. That can be done peacefully and respecting democracy. A terrorist campaign by a small group of child murderer would not be fine. Both happened before, the former was headed by the SDLP, the latter by Sinn Fein/IRA. I do hope you are not referring to the latter as a revolt.

The SDLP were not formed until early 1970's. The Civil Rights Association was formed in the mid-1960's whose members included a broad range of opinion across the political spectrum including Unionists. Following the abandoned IRA border campaign many republicans also got on board with civil protest. The first executive council of NICRA would include one Unionist and five (former?) IRA members who had taken the path of civil protest out of 13 members on the executive.

Unfortunately the authorities didn't accept peaceful revolt and protest of the people and used and enabled violent attacks against them, initiating the revival of the moribound IRA.

 

[Purple]

Of course, based on a parliamentary representative democracy. Anyone intending to seize power for themselves don't require referendums, they tend to just do it.

Is that two points or one?
Groups intent on seizing power for themselves who don't have a mandate, don't have popular support within the community they claim to represent, have no realistic chance of victory, blow up children and enrich themselves through criminal enterprises and murder, are called terrorists. They don't put much stock in parliamentary representative democracy.

The SDLP were not formed until early 1970's. The Civil Rights Association was formed in the mid-1960's whose members included a broad range of opinion across the political spectrum including Unionists. Following the abandoned IRA border campaign many republicans also got on board with civil protest. The first executive council of NICRA would include one Unionist and five (former?) IRA members who had taken the path of civil protest out of 13 members on the executive.

I agree. So what?

Unfortunately the authorities didn't accept peaceful revolt and protest of the people and used and enabled violent attacks against them, initiating the revival of the moribound IRA.

That's a very one eyed view of history but even if true it in no way justifies the actions of the Provisional IRA after that point or the disgusting lionisation of their members who murdered so many innocent people by their current manifestation, Sinn Fein.

 

[Sister Sara]

I agree. So what?

So the civil rights movement wasn't headed by the SDLP as you stated.

You have a tendency to try re-write history - the ethnic cleansing of Protestants from the South and Catholics from the North through government policy, Civil rights movement being headed by an organisation that didnt exist at the time.

That's a very one eyed view of history

Its accurate, factually so and well documented if you would care to inform yourself.

 

[Purple]

So the civil rights movement wasn't headed by the SDLP as you stated.

The SDLP were the political party which emerged from the Civil Rights Movement. They were supported by the majority of the Catholic population. The IRA decided to murder children instead. That's the point.

You have a tendency to try re-write history - the ethnic cleansing of Protestants from the South and Catholics from the North through government policy, Civil rights movement being headed by an organisation that didnt exist at the time.

So the Protestants just left the border area and their population declined because, maybe they weren't really Irish in the first place? Like, not one Ireland Gaelic (Catholic) and Free? The Stormont Government weren't concerned with the Catholics our breeding them? There were no Catholic areas burned out in Belfast? Next you'll be telling me that Sinn Fein are the same as other political parties and the former IRA Army Council don't still run it from Belfast.

 

[bkenn14]

Purple
Have you ever watched the FF TD Dan Breen interview in 1967,
I was going to post have you ever listened/heard,
the referance to the missing reflects bad on FG/FF to this day,

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

The first executive council of NICRA would include one Unionist and five (former?) IRA members who had taken the path of civil protest out of 13 members on the executive.

Gosh! That's new to me. So Chichester Clarke was right - NICRA was just a front for the IRA who had decided as a matter of tactics, not principle, to try a new strategy.

 

[Purple]

Purple
Have you ever watched the FF TD Dan Breen interview in 1967,
I was going to post have you ever listened/heard,
the referance to the missing reflects bad on FG/FF to this day,

No, but FF are the party that most Sinn Fein people supported after Partition and went on the same journey into democratic politics that the present day Sinn Fein are going on now. Right from vote rigging to pseudo-republican to populist pseudo socialism to isolationism to xenophobia, to facilitating child abuse etc. SF are a reincarnation of FF but are still in their 1970's phase. The difference is that FF were always an Irish based party and was always run by their elected leadership.
Many of the members of both FF and FG who were veterans of the Civil War and the War of Independence excused the most abhorrent behaviour, particularly the FG people who were in the first post Treaty Government.

 

[bkenn14]

No,

Too Touchy for some
Well then you have wasted time on thousand upon thousands of post where you ref FF and FG without fully understanding what you were posting about,
No FF of FG members or supporters have never made any attempt to help find any of the Disappeared on there watch,

 

[Purple]

Well then you have wasted time on thousand upon thousands of post where you ref FF and FG without fully understanding what you were posting about,

Wow, one interview of one man who is erroneously credited with starting the War of Independence. Without that interview, even if I read books about him (including his biography "My fight for Irish Freedom) and the period and the Soloheadbeg ambush and the overall period and the subsequent evolution of constitutional politics in Ireland, I cannot fully understand FF or FG.

Is that what you are saying?
Is it shown to every Leaving Cert history student? If not is their education on that period pointless?

 

[Sister Sara]

The SDLP were the political party which emerged from the Civil Rights Movement

Yes. So they didnt head the NICRA, that was my point.

The NICRA was comprised of opinion across the political spectrum from communism to progressive unionism. The point of NICRA was to end the apartheid gerry-mandering state of Unionist domination, upheld by the British and to present itself as a non-sectarian by being inclusive of all positions held in NI (with obvious exception of anyone wanting to sustain the discriminatory practices).

Here is an excerpt from Irish Times interview with NI Secretary Lord Brookeborough from 1968 to give a flavour of the mindset of the British establishment.

It has nothing to do with 'ethnic cleansing' Catholics (albeit some Protestants may have wanted that, and vice-versa), the discriminatory policies were designed to keep Catholics in their place and not to allow them positions of power and influence that may move Ireland closer to re-unification.

 

[Sister Sara]

Gosh! That's new to me. So Chichester Clarke was right - NICRA was just a front for the IRA who had decided as a matter of tactics, not principle, to try a new strategy.

Well that was what was certainly argued at time by Clarke, and then Paisley.

Rather, there is no evidence however that the IRA used, or tried to use or influence the NICRA to carry out protests for its own agenda. The IRA members that were part of the council had moved into Marxist ideology and had abandoned military actions - evident when the fighting started again they were labelled as 'I ran away' by their own community and it would follow another split and the birth of the Provos.

Bernadette Devlin made some salient points in her maiden speech in House of Commons. The housing issue was not simply a Catholic issue, Protestant working class were as likely to be discriminated against in Nationalist controlled areas such as Omagh. It was the policies instituted by the Unionist party that created this outcome. The matter simply came to the fore in Derry in the largely Catholics areas.

"
In Dungannon, the Catholic ward already has too many houses in it. There is no room to build any more in that ward. It would appear logical that houses should be built, therefore, in what is traditionally known as the Protestant ward or, euphemistically, the “Nationalist” or “Unionist” ward, where there is space. But this would give rise to the nasty situation of building new houses in the Unionist or Protestant ward and thus letting in a lot of Fenians who might outvote the others.

I wish to make it clear that in an area such as Omagh the same corruption is carried on because Protestants need houses and the only place for them is in a Catholic area. The one point that these two forms of activity have in common is that whether they are green or orange, both are Tory. The people of Northern Ireland have been forced into this situation. " - Bernadette Devlin

Nothing to do with ethnic cleansing, all to do with sustaining power and control in the hands of Unionism.

 

[Purple]

The NICRA was comprised of opinion across the political spectrum from communism to progressive unionism. The point of NICRA was to end the apartheid gerry-mandering state of Unionist domination, upheld by the British and to present itself as a non-sectarian by being inclusive of all positions held in NI (with obvious exception of anyone wanting to sustain the discriminatory practices).

Yes, and the IRA joined in order to subvert it and the political party that emerged from it was the SDLP.

Here is an excerpt from Irish Times interview with NI Secretary Lord Brookeborough from 1968 to give a flavour of the mindset of the British establishment.

It has nothing to do with 'ethnic cleansing' Catholics (albeit some Protestants may have wanted that, and vice-versa), the discriminatory policies were designed to keep Catholics in their place and not to allow them positions of power and influence that may move Ireland closer to re-unification.

Are you seriously offering Lord Brookeborough, the man who called for exclusively Protestant employment and the exclusion of Catholics (yes, specifically Catholics) and who it politically responsible for the reactivation of the UVF, as the voice of an honest broker in your argument?

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

@Sister Sara Very interesting interview with LB. He defends discrimination against Catholics on the basis that "if you scratch a Catholic you will find a rebel".
My father worked in Mackies textile machinery factory as the only RC in a cost office of fifty and based on the Falls Road. He recalled to me that during WWII when Mackies was heavily involved in making armaments for the British war effort Catholics would be regarded with suspicion that they actually supported the enemy - the RC Adolf Hitler. At risk of him spinning in his grave I suspected my father of those sympathies - though of course he was subsequently appalled by the revelations of the Holocaust.
So we now have what LB feared, unashamed enemies of the very concept of NI in "power" in the statelet and yet despite the title of this thread we are as far away as ever from a UI.

 

[Sister Sara]

Are you seriously offering Lord Brookeborough, the man who called for exclusively Protestant employment and the exclusion of Catholics (yes, specifically Catholics) and who it politically responsible for the reactivation of the UVF, as the voice of an honest broker in your argument?

I'm simply offering one bared-faced bigot of a British government minister openly hostile to constitutional reform through democratic means if such reform is not to his liking.
In other words, it was all about sustaining power, sustaining the discriminatory Unionist domination.

Yes, and the IRA joined in order to subvert it and the political party that emerged from it was the SDLP.

You are making stories up again. The IRA was moribound. The civil rights movement crossed over political allegiances and was the best effort since the creation of NI to lead the people away from discriminatory policies of one religion over the other. Its sad that those who were vehemently opposed to reform of NI still have their talking points being spouted today. The IRA no more subverted the civil rights movement for its agenda than people like John Hume subverted it from being an IRA front to being a movement for real democratic change.

The subverters were the Unionst Party, Ian Paisley and loyalists who repeatedly held counter demonstrations to have peaceful protest banned.

 

[Sister Sara]

He recalled to me that during WWII when Mackies was heavily involved in making armaments for the British war effort Catholics would be regarded with suspicion that they actually supported the enemy - the RC Adolf Hitler

I get that Protestants viewed Catholics with suspicion. But this sounds like outright paranoia - they (the Catholics) were literally making the armaments that would be used to kill the enemy.
I mean, perhaps there was some sense of hoping the Gerries would give the Brits a bloody eye, or two, on the battlefield but I don't understand how this paranoia couldnt get past the fact that Catholics working there were actually assisting Britains war effort?

So we now have what LB feared, unashamed enemies of the very concept of NI in "power" in the statelet and yet despite the title of this thread we are as far away as ever from a UI.

Just shows you how paranoid the Unionist mentality was in the 20th century.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

they (the Catholics) were literally making the armaments that would be used to kill the enemy.

I don't get your point. The risk was mostly of espionage. If only they could find some neutral country close by where there would be plenty in high places able and willing to pass on any such info to the Fuhrer.

Just shows you how paranoid the Unionist mentality was in the 20th century

That is an interesting poser. One of the main reasons for the change in perspective was the 25 years or so of direct rule. By the time the GFA came around most if not all the grievances of the Nationalist had been addressed.
It is tempting to conclude that NI would have settled down much earlier if the Brits had not built Stormont Castle for a Protestant people.