Discussion on a United or re-partitioned Ireland

[backstothewall]

I recall that cross-border survey done in 2015 asked the "Do you support Irish unification?" question and then "Do you support Irish unification if it would result in increased taxation?" and there was a noticeable drop between answers that's telling. When dealing with reunification as a distant abstract ideas Irish people take a romantic course and are all for it, but if it every was seriously put to a vote, it wouldn't take all that much for many people to be put off, especially if fears of an economic horror show or violent Unionist resistance became part of the narrative.

I still think it would pass in the south, and wouldn't even be especially close. The SSM vote showed the electorate can decisively ignore negative campaigning on occasion. But I doubt it would be a 60+% landslide affair.

I don't think money would be an issue. To give him his dues even a blueshirt like Kenny put Europe on notice that we would expect the same generous terms from the EU that Germany got in the 90's if this were to come to pass. A precedent was set there and spread across the entire continent the numbers would be fairly insignificant. Certainly not enough to back out of supporting Ireland or Cyprus who are the only people ever coming for the cash.

Between Europe and America supporting the project i suspect we would be awash with money, north and south.

[Gather round]

I'd imagine most people in the south are knowledgeable and well-educated enough to know that unity will entail merging with another two million or so people presently residing in another jurisdiction, just over half of whom would identify as British/unionist and may not be too keen on the idea of unity right now. That's just basic Irish history/knowledge, no?

No, I'm not implying any lack of education in Southern voters. Rather that- like voters anywhere else- they sometimes vote irrationally*, believe contradicting things at the same time, or simplify complex issues. The key stat is the two million- given that scale it's likely upheaval for everyone, not just Unionists.

* you still as keen on an election where your favored candidate expects to lose?

I think the significant thing about this poll is that a very considerable majority would support unity right now; usually when people express positive sentiment for unity in these types of polls, it's a distant desire for a vague emotional or romantic concept. That's why I think Brexit is a game-changer

Agreed it's a game changer. We just don't know yet to what extent, though March's election may be telling.

I don't think money would be an issue. To give him his dues even a blueshirt like Kenny put Europe on notice that we would expect the same generous terms from the EU that Germany got in the 90's if this were to come to pass. A precedent was set there and spread across the entire continent the numbers would be fairly insignificant. Certainly not enough to back out of supporting Ireland or Cyprus who are the only people ever coming for the cash...Between Europe and America supporting the project i suspect we would be awash with money, north and south

We discussed this upthread. Cyprus has similar divides to Ireland, and is only a fraction of the size. But it's little closer to political unity thn when I worked there as a student. In 1981...

I still think it would pass in the south, and wouldn't even be especially close. The SSM vote showed the electorate can decisively ignore negative campaigning on occasion. But I doubt it would be a 60+% landslide affair

So it'll pass with about 55% support then. Is that a precise estimate, or like BttW above a hopeful guess?

On the other hand polling before referenda often indicates one outcome but the campaign can crystallise things in unpredictable ways.Interesting that 21% of SF supporters would not vote for a United Ireland

I think we can rule out ****taking/ carelessness/ not understanding the question for that sort of scale. They don't think a UI is imminent, so won't vote thus until they think it is?

[DannyInvincible]

No, I'm not implying any lack of education in Southern voters. Rather that- like voters anywhere else- they sometimes vote irrationally*, believe contradicting things at the same time, or simplify complex issues. The key stat is the two million- given that scale it's likely upheaval for everyone, not just Unionists.

* you still as keen on an election where your favored candidate expects to lose?

Thankfully, I don't have to throw all my eggs into one basket. Such is the beauty of the PR system.

I very much agree with McCann's progressive outlook on social issues - equal marriage for those of the same sex, full reproductive rights for women, et cetera - and also have great time for his critiques/analyses of and insights into the structures of economy, capital and societal power. He also did stellar work for the Bloody Sunday families, is a strong advocate for holding power to account and seeks disclosure of the truth of what happened during the conflict in the north; I feel similarly and very strongly on that, for what it's worth, both for familial reasons and more general reasons relating to a belief that transparency can be cathartic for all concerned and will ultimately generate the trust and reconciliation we broadly desire as a society. Naturally, that would ultimately be good for social stability, cross-communal harmony and international relations.

However, I also wish to see an exception being made for the north in respect of Brexit, so that it can remain within the EU, along with the rest of Ireland and in line with the will of the region's people. The notion of a return to a more physical border, be it military, customs-based or whatever with impediments to the movement of people, labour and goods, in my natural and familial hinterland of Derry and Donegal is repugnant to me, my family, my friends and my community. It's not just ideologically and emotionally incendiary, it will also present a major material nuisance. It's a very immediate and pressing concern, but McCann won't offer me anything on that front - he supported Brexit, after all, or the idea of a "Lexit" even (which I feel was ultimately misguided, albeit emanating from a good place) - nor will he vigorously pursue Irish cultural matters such as the promised Irish language act, which are also important to me.

So, I'll give McCann my first-preference as he'll hopefully offer an important, alternative voice in Stormont if re-elected, but if he's not re-elected, it's not as if Stormont will become an irrelevance for me or as if I'll have no stake or interest in what's going on there, so I'll allot my secondary and tertiary votes or preferences accordingly and carefully based upon weighing up my mix or spectrum of views/beliefs and evaluating which potential representatives align or correlate best with those or based upon who I feel will provide them the best and broadest representation.

Is that irrational? It's simply me hoping, or trying to ensure even, that my feelings on matters will be broadly represented surely. Unless one has the means and time to set up their own party or stand as an electoral candidate themselves, the way any electoral system operates forces voters to try and simplify or (perhaps crudely) prioritise their spectrum of views to some degree, but PR specifically enables me to sort of compartmentalise or balance all my interests better than other electoral systems, if that makes sense, just like it does for any other voter.

Agreed it's a game changer. We just don't know yet to what extent, though March's election may be telling.

I will admit - with a wry grin - that potential constitutional upheaval is a big part of the reason why I'm so looking forward to the election. Let's see how it goes and where it leaves us. Maybe we're finally on the direct path to Irish unity...

I'll also enjoy that feeling of sweet schadenfreude if the DUP do indeed - as I hope they do - suffer detrimental consequences on account of their galling corruption, long-standing bigotry, continuous disrespect and reneging on various agreements.

[backstothewall]

Thankfully, I don't have to throw all my eggs into one basket. Such is the beauty of the PR system.

I very much agree with McCann's progressive outlook on social issues - equal marriage for those of the same sex, full reproductive rights for women, et cetera - and also have great time for his critiques/analyses of and insights into the structures of economy, capital and societal power. He also did stellar work for the Bloody Sunday families, is a strong advocate for holding power to account and seeks disclosure of the truth of what happened during the conflict in the north; I feel similarly and very strongly on that, for what it's worth, both for familial reasons and more general reasons relating to a belief that transparency can be cathartic for all concerned and will ultimately generate the trust and reconciliation we broadly desire as a society. Naturally, that would ultimately be good for social stability, cross-communal harmony and international relations.

However, I also wish to see an exception being made for the north in respect of Brexit, so that it can remain within the EU, along with the rest of Ireland and in line with the will of the region's people. The notion of a return to a more physical border, be it military, customs-based or whatever with impediments to the movement of people, labour and goods, in my natural and familial hinterland of Derry and Donegal is repugnant to me, my family, my friends and my community. It's not just ideologically and emotionally incendiary, it will also present a major material nuisance. It's a very immediate and pressing concern, but McCann won't offer me anything on that front - he supported Brexit, after all, or the idea of a "Lexit" even (which I feel was ultimately misguided, albeit emanating from a good place) - nor will he vigorously pursue Irish cultural matters such as the promised Irish language act, which are also important to me.

So, I'll give McCann my first-preference as he'll hopefully offer an important, alternative voice in Stormont if re-elected, but if he's not re-elected, it's not as if Stormont will become an irrelevance for me or as if I'll have no stake or interest in what's going on there, so I'll allot my secondary and tertiary votes or preferences accordingly and carefully based upon weighing up my mix or spectrum of views/beliefs and evaluating which potential representatives align or correlate best with those or based upon who I feel will provide them the best and broadest representation.

Is that irrational? It's simply me hoping, or trying to ensure even, that my feelings on matters will be broadly represented surely. The way any electoral system operates forces voters to try and simplify to some degree, but PR specifically enables me to sort of compartmentalise or balance all my interests better than other electoral systems, if that makes sense, just like it does for any other voter.



I will admit - with a wry grin - that potential constitutional upheaval is a big part of the reason why I'm so looking forward to the election. Let's see how it goes and where it leaves us. Maybe we're finally on the direct path to Irish unity...

I'll also enjoy that feeling of sweet schadenfreude if the DUP do indeed - as I hope they do - suffer detrimental consequences on account of their galling corruption, long-standing bigotry, continuous disrespect and reneging on various agreements.

+1

I can't put it any better than that

[backstothewall]

We discussed this up thread. Cyprus has similar divides to Ireland, and is only a fraction of the size. But it's little closer to political unity thn when I worked there as a student. In 1981...

That simply isn't true. The only difference since up thread and now is that the talks they are having on reunification have made significant further progress, and that statements such as this are now disparagingly referred to as "Alt-Facts"

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...r-final-stages

[Gather round]

Is [all] that irrational?

I'd say from your POV, wanting an election NOW (as opposed to any particular set of preferences) is irrational. Because the likelihood is you'll lose more from McCann not being around than gain elsewhere.

I will admit - with a wry grin - that potential constitutional upheaval is a big part of the reason why I'm so looking forward to the election. Let's see how it goes and where it leaves us. Maybe we're finally on the direct path to Irish unity

Indeed. Of course you might get the upheaval (understatement?) without the real change. Or, if you prefer, chaos in health, education, housing and public finances, but no Irish cultural legislation. Maybe the chance of Irish Unity (which I accept has risen from close to zero in the last year) still won't be that high...

I'll also enjoy that feeling of sweet schadenfreude if the DUP do indeed - as I hope they do - suffer detrimental consequences on account of their galling corruption, long-standing bigotry, continuous disrespect and reneging on various agreements

The DUP may well lose out, either symbolically (with SF as biggest party) or in influence (if UUP and TUV make gains). But then you think all unionists are basically as bad as each other, so where's the satisfaction in that? Unless there's a significant swing from them to Nationalists overall, will things really have changed?

That simply isn't true. The only difference since up thread and now is that the talks they are having on reunification have made significant further progress, and that statements such as this are now disparagingly referred to as "Alt-Facts"

OK,variously

a) I offered a brief opinion only

b) the content of that Graun article supports rather than contradicts my opinion. These are the first multilateral talks since the 70s. Officials on all sides describe them as the last as well as best chance, which hardly suggests overwhelming confidence or unbroken progress. T he article accepts that Turkish Cypriots won't want to lose land or the 40,000 soldiers guarding them. Of the three 'guarantors', Greece is economically weak, Britain distracted by Brexit and Turkey effectively a dictatorship with dodgy links to war in Syria and beyond

c) Alt-facts? Spare me your trendy jargon, hipster

d) I accept your knowledge of the local situation may be more detailed and up-to-datet han mine. That said, are you really offering much more than a coincidence- that the 80-20 ethnic split is similar to Ireland- and an over-emphasis on scale? If you argue as many Irish Nationalists do that unity is the only rational choice for a small island, then it must be even more so for a tiny one...

[Wolfman]

More alt-waffle, more like.

Is it really so difficult to make a meaningful point?

[Gather round]

Is it really so difficult to make a meaningful point?

I'll answer that if and when you make one.

[Wolfman]

I already have.

[Eminence Grise]

Oh no you didn't.
Oh yes I did.
Oh no...

And there was me thinking panto season was over.

[Gather round]

And there was me thinking panto season was over.

Aye, it's behind you.

Anyway relax. The other constant of a politics thread will soon apply, when Wolfie gets kicked off for just too much sectarian gibberish

[backstothewall]

d) I accept your knowledge of the local situation may be more detailed and up-to-datet han mine. That said, are you really offering much more than a coincidence- that the 80-20 ethnic split is similar to Ireland- and an over-emphasis on scale? If you argue as many Irish Nationalists do that unity is the only rational choice for a small island, then it must be even more so for a tiny one...

I never offered any coincidence or made any arguments about what is or isn't rational. The only reason i raised the example again was to demonstrate how insignificant the financial sums required to bring about Irish or Cypriot unity would be, and that for such low sums it wouldn't be worth trashing the precedent set in Germany.

You added all that other stuff. Not me

[Wolfman]

Anyway relax. The other constant of a politics thread will soon apply, when Wolfie gets kicked off for just too much sectarian gibberish

Presumably the last word is ironic? It's certainly as ever, not a point worth repeating.

[DannyInvincible]

I'd say from your POV, wanting an election NOW (as opposed to any particular set of preferences) is irrational. Because the likelihood is you'll lose more from McCann not being around than gain elsewhere.

I've outlined my interests and preferences. If McCann loses out, so be it. I'm aware of the likelihood of it happening, but I can still weigh things up in a perfectly rational manner.

Indeed. Of course you might get the upheaval (understatement?) without the real change. Or, if you prefer, chaos in health, education, housing and public finances, but no Irish cultural legislation. Maybe the chance of Irish Unity (which I accept has risen from close to zero in the last year) still won't be that high...

The prospect of Irish unity has become much more likely over the past year. Even members of the British and Irish establishments speak of it as a solution to the north's Brexit woes.

The DUP may well lose out, either symbolically (with SF as biggest party) or in influence (if UUP and TUV make gains). But then you think all unionists are basically as bad as each other, so where's the satisfaction in that? Unless there's a significant swing from them to Nationalists overall, will things really have changed?

You're putting words in my mouth. I said that, as an ideology, unionism has demonstrated itself to be intransigent and beyond compromise. I was referring to political unionism and clarified that I was specifically referring to the DUP, UUP and TUV. (Would you disagree with my perception?)

I don't think unionists are bad people or "as bad as each other", as you put it. Plenty of unionists are empathetic, compromising and tolerant. Sure aren't you a shining example?

With the exception of guys like Doug Beattie, such unionists just don't tend to fill the ranks of the parties that profess to represent the unionist people.

I think nationalism will do a lot better in this election than it has done in previous elections where apathy seems to have afflicted the nationalist voter.

[CraftyToePoke]

With the exception of guys like Doug Beattie, such unionists just don't tend to fill the ranks of the parties that profess to represent the unionist people.

So do you feel there is a section of Unionism not represented in elected office by Unionist politicians ? By that I mean is there an emerging demographic who may be willing to begin to have the conversation about on what terms Irish unity might be acceptable, if not with Nationalist Ireland yet, then among themselves for now.

Economic Unionism has always seemed a fall back position, that the people are simply better served in terms of prospects and services inside the UK but the London government seems to have gone a touch every man for himself here to my eye. They never seem to mention NI in Brexit interviews unless directly faced with a question on it and even then its coming over like sound bite lip service to NI.

[Gather round]

The only reason i raised the example again was to demonstrate how insignificant the financial sums required to bring about Irish or Cypriot unity would be, and that for such low sums it wouldn't be worth trashing the precedent set in Germany

But you didn't demonstrate that, either by quoting figures or comparing the different contexts. Unity in Ireland and/ or Cyprus won't inevitably be proportionately cheaper than the much larger Germany. East Germany didn't have a noisy majority of Soviet loyalists, or a huge garrison of outside troops who hung around for 40 years AFTER everyone else accepted that the DDR was toast.

You added all that other stuff. Not me

I guessed at your motives. To be fair, I also tend to quote other people, sometimes at length, before replying. That you hit on Cyprus for the reasons I gave was a reasonable guess.

The prospect of Irish unity. has become much more likely over the past year. Even members of the British and Irish establishments speak of it as a solution to the north's Brexit woes

We agree it's increased. March 2 may indicate by how much.

You're putting words in my mouth. I said that, as an ideology, unionism has demonstrated itself to be intransigent and beyond compromise. I was referring to political unionism and clarified that I was specifically referring to the DUP, UUP and TUV. (Would you disagree with my perception?) I don't think unionists are bad people or "as bad as each other", as you put it. Plenty of unionists are empathetic, compromising and tolerant. Sure aren't you a shining example?

See reply to BttW above. I quote you (plural) and then draw conclusions from what you say. Unionism as intransigent and Unionist voters as tolerant contradict each other. You're clearly exaggerating the former for effect. So I do disagree- the UUP as a party, independents like Sugden and Harmon, even Paisley Junior and some other individuals in the DUP aren't beyond compromise.

I'm an example (shining or otherwise) of someone who's never voted for or supported a Unionist party (closest I've got was being bought a drink by a young Gregory Campbell in the HoC bar )

So do you feel there is a section of Unionism not represented in elected office by Unionist politicians ?

It's not as if there isn't a choice- four parties (plus briefly the NI21), those independents and at a pinch the local Tory and UKIP set-ups. In last year's election, Foster could credibly claim to represent the whole spectrum from Big House through Garden Centre and Prayer Meeting to Sink Estate. A measure of the new demographic you mention might be any increase this time for Alliance, Green, PBP etc. (the non-nationality parties, if you like).

Current scoreboard (2016 Election)

Unionist 49% (DUP 29%, UUP 13%, TUV 3%, UKIP/Tory 2%, PUP 1%, Indeps 1%)

Nationalist 36% (SF 24%, SDLP 12%, Indeps <1%)

Others 15% (AP 7%, GP 3%, PBP 2%, Others & Indeps 3%)

[Wolfman]

Ha, never voted for a Unionist party, yeah right. If it walks like a duck...

[DannyInvincible]

So do you feel there is a section of Unionism not represented in elected office by Unionist politicians ? By that I mean is there an emerging demographic who may be willing to begin to have the conversation about on what terms Irish unity might be acceptable, if not with Nationalist Ireland yet, then among themselves for now.

Economic Unionism has always seemed a fall back position, that the people are simply better served in terms of prospects and services inside the UK but the London government seems to have gone a touch every man for himself here to my eye. They never seem to mention NI in Brexit interviews unless directly faced with a question on it and even then its coming over like sound bite lip service to NI.

Liberal and/or progressive unionists fill the ranks of Alliance and the NI Green Party. Unionists like Basil McCrea of the ill-fated NI21 are thoroughly decent and respectful of difference and contrasting perspectives. All you have to do is look at GR for proof of the emerging demographic of unionist who is prepared to have a discussion on Irish unity and consider it. He has more or less said on a couple of occasions on this forum that he'd be open to the idea if the circumstances were right and he felt alienated enough by what the Tories are presently doing in/to Britain and the north of Ireland (for example, privatising the NHS). Such alienation appears to be an ongoing process and I'm sure many moderate unionists feel similarly, especially since Brexit. Surveys also indicate that unionists are generally a lot more tolerant than the representatives for whom they vote would lead us to believe.

See reply to BttW above. I quote you (plural) and then draw conclusions from what you say. Unionism as intransigent and Unionist voters as tolerant contradict each other. You're clearly exaggerating the former for effect. So I do disagree- the UUP as a party, independents like Sugden and Harmon, even Paisley Junior and some other individuals in the DUP aren't beyond compromise.

I'm an example (shining or otherwise) of someone who's never voted for or supported a Unionist party (closest I've got was being bought a drink by a young Gregory Campbell in the HoC bar )

You may never have voted for a party that officially designate themselves as "Unionist" for assembly purposes, but you are a unionist though, no? You identify as British and support the union, to the best of my knowledge. That's a unionist in my book. Would you disagree?

I identify as a nationalist/republican but I will also vote for McCann of PBP in the upcoming election. PBP officially designate as "Other", just like Alliance and Green, but voting for a party who designate as "Other" doesn't/won't negate my nationalism/republicanism. Likewise, you don't have to vote for those parties who designate as "Unionist" to actually be a unionist.

[Wolfman]

My only problem with your response is it's going generate a lot more waffle from a certain quarter.

[Gather round]

My only problem with your response is it's going generate a lot more waffle from a certain quarter

Relax, I'll be brief for the slow of thinking.

First, I've always been openly a non-party small-u unionist. I see unionism as a cross-party single issue, not one that dominates politics for a whole roster of parties.

Second and similarly, I've always thought a United Ireland notionally possible in the future. As opposed to DI and others on this thread, for whom it's a foundation myth/ article of faith/ inevitability given enough time. And in the last year, I've said it has become more likely and I might support it. I've also supported Scottish Independence for the last couple of years.