I'll reserve judgement until the end of this campaign. The acid test will be has he progressed us.Originally Posted by gastric
At this point, we are three points behind where we realistically would have expected to be.
The Englishmen came over in the year 2005
But little did they know that we'd planned a wee surprise
Sir David scored the winner, and Windsor Park went wild
And this is what we sang...
As a commenter on the site said, there's an awful lot of bubblegum and fluff in that. People generally seem more tolerant of diversity now because they see either a framework for a current settlement or a blueprint for a future resolution, depending on their political perspective. That double reality of sorts, made real (for now, at least) by some ingeniously ambiguous language, democratically accommodates both of the main identities north of the border, but segregation along communal lines is still very much a reality, as in, we'll recognise and accept your identity, but we'll stick to our own, cheers. If that's how people want to live, so be it; that's a reasonably normal and unobjectionable way to live. People ought to accept difference, but there's no need to force everyone into a big jacuzzi for a love-in because we have to be all mature and everything now. The attitude that encourages that - and Moriarty comes across as being guilty of it - strikes me as the exceptionally patronising I know what's better for yous than yous do yourselves type.
Sectarianism itself is still very real within many communities. The potential for violence, unrest and conflict is evidently still there too as the social problems in many working-class communities that breed discontent just haven't been dealt with at all.
You ever seen these things?
There are more of them nowadays in this supposed post-conflict era than ever there were during the whole of the Troubles. I'm not sure what the bigger joke is; that they're trivially promoted as novelty tourist attractions, as if a relic of past conflict rather than a blunt reminder of the currency of sectarian tension and division, or that they call them by the ludicrously inappropriate misnomer of "peace walls". Peace isn't something that can be imposed upon communities.
Last edited by DannyInvincible; 18/11/2012 at 12:08 PM.
Excellent post. Nail on the head Danny. Sums up alot of my thoughts on that article and its inferences.As a commenter on the site said, there's an awful lot of bubblegum and fluff in that. People generally seem more tolerant of diversity now because they see either a framework for a current settlement or a blueprint for a future resolution, depending on their political perspective. That double reality of sorts, made real (for now, at least) by some ingeniously ambiguous language, democratically accommodates both of the main identities north of the border, but segregation along communal lines is still very much a reality, as in, we'll recognise and accept your identity, but we'll stick to our own, cheers. If that's how people want to live, so be it; that's a reasonably normal and unobjectionable way to live. People ought to accept difference, but there's no need to force everyone into a big jacuzzi for a love-in because we have to be all mature and everything now. The attitude that encourages that - and Moriarty comes across as being guilty of it - strikes me as the exceptionally patronising I know what's better for yous than yous do yourselves type.
Sectarianism itself is still very real within many communities. The potential for violence, unrest and conflict is evidently still there too as the social problems in many working-class communities that breed discontent just haven't been dealt with at all.
You ever seen these things?
There are more of them nowadays in this supposed post-conflict era than ever there were during the whole of the Troubles. I'm not sure what the bigger joke is; that they're trivially promoted as novelty tourist attractions, as if a relic of past conflict rather than a blunt reminder of the currency of sectarian tension and division, or that they call them by the ludicrously inappropriate misnomer of "peace walls". Peace isn't something that can be imposed upon communities.
Excellent post, DI. I thought the very same as I read the article yesterday.
End Apartheid Now! One Team in Ireland!
I think it's fair to say that the situation in Ulster (including the Troubles) differed from circumstances in the rest of the island where there wasn't such an emphasis on a connection between political/national allegiance and religious identification. Perhaps, demographic conditions in Ulster bred a more close-knit, tribal or "insular" outlook amongst Protestants inhabiting the province. I use those words purely descriptively rather than as a means of casting an opinion on the validity of the modern or historical position of many Ulster Protestants. Over time, that inevitably led to an entrenchment of positions in Ulster. Many of the Ulster-Scots community in east Donegal identify as British, for example, despite not being entitled to British citizenship. Likewise, the likes of Rory McIllroy might find it difficult to reconcile or see any relevance between his British unionist Catholic identity with the Irish nationalist Catholic identity south of the border. It's all down to personal circumstance.
Personally, my religious beliefs do not drive my sense of identity.
Last edited by Not Brazil; 18/11/2012 at 4:46 PM.
The Englishmen came over in the year 2005
But little did they know that we'd planned a wee surprise
Sir David scored the winner, and Windsor Park went wild
And this is what we sang...
Perhaps eligibility discussion should be curtailed. Look at the effects,....even on seasoned campaigners. Chaos looms!
Aye, they cannae use a 'Spellchecker', especially the Scottish folk...
I didn't know geysir was a Scot.
The Englishmen came over in the year 2005
But little did they know that we'd planned a wee surprise
Sir David scored the winner, and Windsor Park went wild
And this is what we sang...
Good news for the other Irish team
Hull City boss Steve Bruce praises son Alex's impact.
Hull City manager Steve Bruce has said his son Alex fully deserves a first-team place in the Tigers' defence.
The Northern Ireland international, 28, joined the Championship club in July, following his release from Leeds.
And with Jack Hobbs sidelined through injury, Alex has been given a regular run in his father's team, making 15 appearances so far.
"I thought he had his best game for us," he (Steve) said. "In the second half when we came under the cosh some of his heading ability was terrific.
"His mother deserves a pat on the back."
Not sure if that's a criticism of what I posted, but I did refer to religious identification rather than strict beliefs, as we all know that theology, the doctrine of transubstantiation or a veneration of the Virgin Mother or whatever weren't at the root of the conflict. I would imagine your sense of identity has been coloured by the cultural environment around you from birth, like my own, naturally. My own sense of identity is not driven by religious beliefs either, but it is probably little surprise that my ancestors happened to be Catholic and I would see myself as an Irish nationalist, as that identity, due to the entrenchment of cultural positions in the north, would have been carried with them through the generations simultaneously. I hope I'm not assuming too much, but I presume your forefathers were "cultural", if not religious, Protestants, like the ancestry of most modern-day unionists, who saw loyalty to the Crown and an identification with Britain as being in the best interests of preserving their identity and culture. Whilst religious beliefs have less resonance nowadays, that related British identity has been inherited generation through generation. It is undeniable that there has been a traditional link between Protestantism and the British unionist identity in Ulster. Religion has long been a general social marker and whilst polls show that many Catholics/nationalists might be currently content to remain within the UK - one might even be cheeky and refer to them as political/economic-rather-than-cultural unionists, by definition - culturally they still identify with the sense of Irishness that is fundamentally non-British in nature. British-identifying Catholics and Protestants who identify with the aforementioned Irish national identity (rather than with the Northern Irish identity or the Irish identity that is a secondary or British regional one) are very much the exception rather than the norm.
It's not him I had in mind...
Whilst all that is true it wasnt exactly what I was getting at.
My family's history is as mixed and as effed up as the next persin's but something that I have never got my head around in relation to Unionism specifically is how since partition it has become a byword for Protestant.
However I am aware within my family and of others around Dublins north inner city at the time where the idea if secession from the union was looked upon with distaste and anger. They had no desire to see Ireland leave the union but at no point was this belief and desire allowed to dilute the proud Irish nationalism they espoused and practiced.
I grew up in that environment and understood somewhat the pragmatism of such a situation at the time but I always thought it strange looking at it from a southern perspective how Unionism and Loyalism in the north morphed into a staunchly "British" identity unlike in Scotland, Wales and England you can easily identify and be a proud nationalist but be pro-Union.
I hope that makes sense. Posting on a phone such long posts is difficult.
DID YOU NOTICE A SIGN OUTSIDE MY HOUSE...?
It wasn't a criticism at all DI. Both of my late parents were not religious in any way. Some might say they were "culturally Protestant". I would say they were "culturally British".
I'm not Scottish, so I thought it must have been geysir.
It therefore renders your post #4448 rather strange, and somewhat irrelevant.
The Englishmen came over in the year 2005
But little did they know that we'd planned a wee surprise
Sir David scored the winner, and Windsor Park went wild
And this is what we sang...
Ha ha, if you say so...
This was the context of my questioning of Not Brazil's very definitive communication of his British identity. I can't fathom why being British is so much more important than being Northern Irish. In the same way as being Irish is so much more important to me than being European.
I don't think I was even criticizing the identity, I was more perplexed. Some saw fit to take umbrage with the comment though. Ah well...
I happily identify with being Northern Irish.
My Nationality is British.
The Englishmen came over in the year 2005
But little did they know that we'd planned a wee surprise
Sir David scored the winner, and Windsor Park went wild
And this is what we sang...
Being Irish is more important to me than being from Dublin or Leinster, I'd imagine NB feels much the same way. Everyone has a very complex identity, and some parts of it speak to them more than others.
Divide and rule. Wasn't the establishment of the Orange Order - importantly, with the support of the British government - crucial to Protestantism becoming synonymous with unionism and a strong loyalty to the British crown in Ulster? The Orange Order stoked up religious tension and distrust between Catholics and Protestants in Ulster at a time when the multi-denominational United Irishmen were posing a serious threat to British authority and, in turn, eventually helped secure a loyal Protestant stronghold in the north. Would I be correct in saying the organisation's effective tying of adherents of the two religions along conflicting political lines didn't spread so successfully beyond Ulster because their influence didn't extend further south and because efforts to do so would have been largely pointless anyway given the overwhelmingly Catholic/relatively small Protestant population in the other three provinces?
I suppose that's how many Catholics/nationalists north of the border feel at the minute. According to recent polls anyway. They wouldn't identify as British and would see themselves exclusively as Irish in a cultural sense, by and large, but would be happy enough to remain within the UK, possibly due to a mix of economic factors and a conservative uneasiness with the prospect of political overhaul given things like civil rights and institutional sectarianism are no longer pressing issues like they were in the past.They had no desire to see Ireland leave the union but at no point was this belief and desire allowed to dilute the proud Irish nationalism they espoused and practiced.
I suppose the lack of equivalent United Scotsmen or United Welshmen-type groups in both might have had something to do with it. The British crown's authority in Scotland and Wales never came under threat in the same way it did in Ireland, where violent insurrection was not just frequent and commonplace but also widespread. There was no need to stir up tensions along religious lines in Scotland and Wales.I grew up in that environment and understood somewhat the pragmatism of such a situation at the time but I always thought it strange looking at it from a southern perspective how Unionism and Loyalism in the north morphed into a staunchly "British" identity unlike in Scotland, Wales and England you can easily identify and be a proud nationalist but be pro-Union.
Eh? I don't think so.
It's just the former Danny; money before principles.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks