Irish national identity or Irish national identities?

[DannyInvincible]

Following on from the off-topic discussion in the 'Euro 2012 Qualifying Group B - General Discussion' thread on Irish identity and whether those who define themselves through union with Britain can be construed as genuinely Irish.

Not quite. I recognise your identity as real (valid?) enough, but it isn't definitive because there are other Irish identities which are equally valid.

OK, a few questions... What are these other Irish national identities and what is it that distinguishes them from one another? What do we refer to them as seeing as a single umbrella term of "Irish" clearly doesn't suffice in highlighting their evident differences? Would you consider Irish nationalists and republicans your compatriots? Do you consider your national identity to be solely Irish? And, assuming you don't possess one, would you ever consider acquiring an Irish passport as a means of expressing your claimed Irish identity?

Your identity isn't superior to anyone else's. It's just your identity. At the crudest level, a means of distinguishing your group of people from others.

I didn't state it was superior. I made clear that it wasn't.

You go ahead and distinguish if you must, it's a free country. Or rather, two free countries.

Touché.

Ulster Unionism as a political movement has one basic objective which it has achieved pretty well since the 1920s: staying out of the Irish Free State/ Republic. Who cares what Wolfe Tone and Henry Joy did 200 years ago?

Well, from a significant number of Ulster Protestants espousing an independent Irish republic along with their Catholic and dissenter compatriots as Irishmen united around 200 years ago to the generally-homogeneous (as far as national allegiance is concerned) modern Ulster Protestant identity that sees itself as firmly rooted in the British unionist tradition and separate from the Irish as was originally espoused by their Protestant ancestors, it indicates that some fundamental aspect of what constitutes an Ulster Protestant identity must have been altered along the way. The argument goes that the fomenting of sectarian divisions by the authorities was key to the alteration. Rather generally, Protestantism in NI is now viewed as a social marker or as a by-word for unionism.

Here are some cited figures from Wiki:

Four polls taken between 1989 and 1994 revealed that when asked to state their national identity, over 79% of Northern Ireland Protestants replied "British" or "Ulster" with 3% or less replying "Irish", while over 60% of Northern Ireland Catholics replied "Irish" with 13% or less replying "British" or "Ulster". A survey in 1999 showed that 72% of Northern Ireland Protestants considered themselves "British" and 2% "Irish", with 68% of Northern Ireland Catholics considering themselves "Irish" and 9% "British". The survey also revealed that 78% of Protestants and 48% of all respondents felt "Strongly British", while 77% of Catholics and 35% of all respondents felt "Strongly Irish". 51% of Protestants and 33% of all respondents felt "Not at all Irish", while 62% of Catholics and 28% of all respondents felt "Not at all British".

If they are 100 per cent as Irish as I am, how can half the Protestant population feel not at all Irish?

You do realise that support for republicanism in Britain overall (ie a Republic of Britain, not Sinn Fein) is currently running at about 15%? While I imagine it's rather lower than that amongst Ulster unionists, probably not at the 0.001% level you exaggerate for effect above. Put simply, unionists don't want to be forced out of their own country- that doesn't make us all slavish monarchists.

Sorry, I was imprecise. I should have said "Protestant Irish republicans", but surely you knew that anyway. I'm well aware of British republicanism. Protestant Irish republicans are very few and far between in contemporary Ireland, however.

I predict you will finish second with 22 or 23 points and enter the play-offs, as alas for you Sweden are likely to qualify automaticaly as the best runner-up.

Now that's the final straw!

[Plastic Paddy]

Part of the mistake made by many nationalists on the question of Irish identity/ies is to elide Irishness and the state of Ireland (for the avoidance of doubt, the republic). Quite clearly this overlooks a significant portion of the population of the island who, while having an Irish component to their identity, do not hold citizenship of, or affinity for, the republic. It is only recently - post GFA, really - that enough room has been created within the umbrella and language of Irishness for more than one articulation of an Irish identity to be expressed. To answer your last question directly Danny, anyone in GR's position could legitimately argue that their UK passport is indeed an Irish one too; after all, it refers on its cover to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. That it is not of the republic does not make it any less Irish, and this I believe is the salient point.

I was discussing the prospect of a united Ireland with some friends recently. The one point that stuck in my mind afterwards was made by a Protestant Unionist friend from Portadown, which in itself speaks of the progress made towards mutual understanding in recent times. That was, if we are ever to see a united Ireland, then the republic in its current form will have to be dismantled. In other words, no new all-Ireland state could ever be created by merely incorporating or assimilating the northern six counties into the existing state. It will have to be built anew by a partnership of equals from north and south. All hypothetical of course but it illustrated that there are indeed multiple versions of Irishness in existence (Danny, your survey data back this up) and none is pre-eminent nor has a right to claim exclusivity for its adherents.

PP

[culloty82]

In many ways, the Unionist tradition can best be described as one of "Protestant nationalism", in that they've taken arms to defend their own interest primarily, whether that was for independence, as in 1798, or for Ulster, as in 1914. Also, many Ulstermen tried to keep interest in the Irish language alive in the 19th century, one of the most famous being Samuel Ferguson, so they've always taken an interest in Irish heritage and see nothing incompatible in being British politically and Irish geographically. Then you've the diaspora question, personally I feel that in the second generation, they would be more strongly attached to the home nation than to Ireland, but if like America, future generations claim a cultural Irishness, we can hardly deny them that. Finally, there's the immigrant communities - they're the reverse of emigrants in that it's the second and further generations who will be primarily Irish, but it is more complex than saying only Irish nationalists are "properly Irish".

[Gather round]

I didn't state it was superior. I made clear that it wasn't

My apologies for misreading. Er, drink may have been taken...

What are these other Irish national identities and what is it that distinguishes them from one another?

At the most basic level, I'm both British and Irish, you're just Irish. Why the problem?

What do we refer to them as seeing as a single umbrella term of "Irish" clearly doesn't suffice in highlighting their evident differences?

I'm comfortable referring them as I do; there's no intended confusion involved. I suggest you do likewise.

Would you consider Irish nationalists and republicans your compatriots?

If you/ they don't identify as British, no. We would be from two spearate Irish nations.

Do you consider your national identity to be solely Irish?

This is a bit pointless, given that I've oft-repeated the answer. I'm British and Irish.

And, assuming you don't possess one, would you ever consider acquiring an Irish passport as a means of expressing your claimed Irish identity?

No need, I already have a passport that says (Northern) Ireland on the cover. Mind you, I'm open-minded and as mercenary as the next guy. If the Dept of Foreign Affairs were to do an introductory 'Prod passports for five euro' offer, I'd buy one. Ye never know when it would be handy...

some fundamental aspect of what constitutes an Ulster Protestant identity must have been altered along the way. The argument goes that the fomenting of sectarian divisions by the authorities was key to the alteration. Rather generally, Protestantism in NI is now viewed as a social marker or as a by-word for unionism

I'm aware of the argument, but to me it's both ancient history and of limited relevance, and in any case distorted. Historical changes in attitudes from the 18th to 20th centuries didn't happen in a vacuum, and weren't encouraged purely to advantage British imperial policy, as you seem to be suggesting.

If they are 100 per cent as Irish as I am, how can half the Protestant population feel not at all Irish?

The survey stats you quote illustrate both loaded questionning, and (I'll admit) some odd answers by many Prods and unionists. They're self-contradicting, basically: pretty much 100% of unionists identify with the name 'Northern Ireland'; that makes them (Northern) Irish. You don't see the 'Northern' or the 'Ireland' painted out in graffiti in unionist areas.

The loading in such surveys often/ usually gives respondents only a choice between British and Irish, rather than both. Add to that that the Republic routinely refers itself as (all of) Ireland, and is understood thus abroad, and you can see why unionists get defensive.

But ultimately I don't represent them nor they me. If my fellow unionists claim they ain't Irish, it's ultimately harmless, no?

I'm well aware of British republicanism. Protestant Irish republicans are very few and far between in contemporary Ireland, however

I'm a lifelong British republican who happens to be Irish. I don't self-style as Irish republican simply to avoid the suggestion I'm going to turn up on a ceilidh float with my old neighbor Caral ni Chuilin

Put tritely: I like that there is a republic in Ireland. Two would be even better!

Not sure I follow your other point. Most Prods in the Republic (and they're still a sizeable 5% or so of the population) accept the state and its institutions, do they not? Do you just mean that they invariably tend not to vote Sinn Fein?

if we are ever to see a united Ireland, then the republic in its current form will have to be dismantled. In other words, no new all-Ireland state could ever be created by merely incorporating or assimilating the northern six counties into the existing state. It will have to be built anew by a partnership of equals from north and south. All hypothetical of course but it illustrated that there are indeed multiple versions of Irishness in existence (Danny, your survey data back this up) and none is pre-eminent nor has a right to claim exclusivity for its adherents

That's a bit stark actually. It's all very well looking forward to a new Republic (the fourth, after 1916, 1937 and 1948?). I'd say most people are pretty content with the current one. Otherwise, a fair point.

Also, many Ulstermen tried to keep interest in the Irish language alive in the 19th century

I'm quite happy to keep it alive in the 21st, I'd like to see it flourish. Although I'd advise Caral ni C as above to avoid simply driving it into the Ghetto, as Alliance MLA described the current row.

[Not Brazil]

I was discussing the prospect of a united Ireland with some friends recently. The one point that stuck in my mind afterwards was made by a Protestant Unionist friend from Portadown, which in itself speaks of the progress made towards mutual understanding in recent times. That was, if we are ever to see a united Ireland, then the republic in its current form will have to be dismantled.

The lines between "identity", "political aspiration", and "religious background" are often blurred.

The 2009 "Life and Times" Survey indicated that 47% of Catholics in Northern Ireland think that the long term policy for Northern Ireland should be within the Union.

http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/2009/Polit.../NIRELND2.html

The 2007 Survey indicates that 22% of Protestants either feel more Irish than British, or equally Irish and British.

Only 35% of Protestants consider themselves British, not Irish.

http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/2007/Identity/IRBRIT.html

The 2008 Survey indicates that more people in Northern Ireland think of themselves as Northern Irish than Irish.

http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/2008/Commu...s/NINATID.html

[Not Brazil]

Do you consider your national identity to be solely Irish? And, assuming you don't possess one, would you ever consider acquiring an Irish passport as a means of expressing your claimed Irish identity?

I'm not "solely Irish". I am British and Irish.

On the passport question, I have spoken with three people over the weekend (all Unionists) who hold Irish Passports - two of them are pensioners (those kind people in Dublin give pensioners free Passports apparantly, unlike the British), and the other travels to China regularly on business and has done his sums...he calculates it is much cheaper to be an Irish Passport holder.

[Not Brazil]

it is more complex than saying only Irish nationalists are "properly Irish".

Those who espouse such views are on a par with the BNP.

[Predator]

The 2009 "Life and Times" Survey indicated that 47% of Catholics in Northern Ireland think that the long term policy for Northern Ireland should be within the Union.

It is quite important to note that 39% of that 47% were in favour of devolution.

[Plastic Paddy]

That's a bit stark actually. It's all very well looking forward to a new Republic (the fourth, after 1916, 1937 and 1948?). I'd say most people are pretty content with the current one. Otherwise, a fair point.

Not necessarily my view GR, just reporting that of a friend. I have some sympathy with it however, in as much as any future all-island union will probably have to be on a federal or confederal basis to assuage people who would look culturally and politically to Belfast rather than Dublin. All hypothetical, of course.

The lines between "identity", "political aspiration", and "religious background" are often blurred.

The 2009 "Life and Times" Survey indicated that 47% of Catholics in Northern Ireland think that the long term policy for Northern Ireland should be within the Union.

http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/2009/Polit.../NIRELND2.html

The 2007 Survey indicates that 22% of Protestants either feel more Irish than British, or equally Irish and British.

Only 35% of Protestants consider themselves British, not Irish.

http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/2007/Identity/IRBRIT.html

The 2008 Survey indicates that more people in Northern Ireland think of themselves as Northern Irish than Irish.

http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/2008/Commu...s/NINATID.html

Thank you NB. I shall check back for the results of the 2010 survey, due anytime now.

I think Predator's point validates my view on the structure of any future all-island union but the numbers you quote are compelling reasons in themselves why there will be no change to the status quo anytime soon.

PP

[Not Brazil]

It is quite important to note that 39% of that 47% were in favour of devolution.

Yes - devolved Goverment within the Union has strong cross community support, as oppossed to the other options. 68% of Protestants favouring devolution as well.

[Predator]

I'm going to hazard a guess that most of that 39% vote for parties whose main aim is Irish reunification.

[DannyInvincible]

I'll try and give a more detailed response to some of the points made when I get a bit more time, but for the meantime, I thought this was an interesting read: http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/dd/report7/report7c.htm

Not sure how old it is, mind, but obviously still relevant.

In unionist thought, Irish is, by and large, merely a subset of or a supplementary element to unionists' British identity. It's quite clearly considered subordinate by most, if considered at all. It appears to take the form of a regional identity rather than a national one.

Anecdotally, I'm aware of even Ulster Protestants around the areas of Raphoe, Convoy and St. Johnston in east Donegal - or the Laggan district, as it's known - who, despite being born and having grown up in the Irish state, see their national identity as British. Some would even refuse to acquire an Irish passport.

[DannyInvincible]

The survey stats you quote illustrate both loaded questionning, and (I'll admit) some odd answers by many Prods and unionists. They're self-contradicting, basically: pretty much 100% of unionists identify with the name 'Northern Ireland'; that makes them (Northern) Irish. You don't see the 'Northern' or the 'Ireland' painted out in graffiti in unionist areas.

Funny one, this, actually. My friend mentioned it to me a few years ago and I actually later came across an example of it myself. I think it was on a sign-post giving directions and distances to various places near Castledawson or somewhere along the Belfast to Derry road. Naturally, good old "Londonderry" was up there accompanied with half of the term daubed over with paint, as you might commonly expect. The strange thing, however, was that it was the "-derry" bit that had been scribbled over.

What would you make of the idea of a nationwide referendum where all Irish people - yourself included, obviously, as a proud Irishmen - could exercise our self-determination as one? Would you have any issues with that?

I'm going to hazard a guess that most of that 39% vote for parties whose main aim is Irish reunification.

From that piece I posted hosted by CAIN:

Jonathan Stephenson, a "British-born English Protestant", identifies two strands of thinking in the SDLP. There are those "who would want to see a united Ireland in the morning in which Protestants would play a part and have full expression of their civil and religious liberties and everything else, but it would be a unitary state". But there are also those, the much larger group in his estimation, "who would want to see themselves able to realise being Irish [and] they would want to see that reflected in the institutions of the area in which they live, but they wouldn't want to ... see the attainment of a unitary Irish state."

I would imagine that a significant proportion of that 39 per cent would be within Stephenson's latter train of thought. They'd be content - even willing - to maintain the status quo, but remain nationalists in name and would still look to Dublin and a connection with who they'd view as their compatriots in the Irish state as having a significant role to play in defining their Irish identity. The vast majority of Ulster Protestants or traditional unionists, on the other hand, see the Irish state as having no relationship with their alleged Irish identity. I think that's the distinction.

[Predator]

Talking about the unionist view of being "Irish", I was reminded of Sammy Wilson's words to Ali G:

"So, is you Irish?"
"No I'm British."
"So is you 'ere on 'oliday?"

[Gather round]

In unionist thought, Irish is, by and large, merely a subset of or a supplementary element to unionists' British identity. It's quite clearly considered subordinate by most, if considered at all

Subordinate yes, hardly ever considered obviously no- as I mentioned pretty much 100% of unionists (the odd Sperrin hillbilly excepted ) identify with the Irishness demonstrated by the name 'Northern Ireland'. If they didn't, presumably we'd all be clamoring for it to be officially renamed Ulster, or Lilliput, or Puckoon, whatever....

It appears to take the form of a regional identity rather than a national one

Indeed, but that makes it no less valid. Just like the Luxembourg province in Belgium, say, or that Finnish island in the Baltic where 100% speak Swedish.

Anecdotally, I'm aware of even Ulster Protestants around the areas of Raphoe, Convoy and St. Johnston in east Donegal - or the Laggan district, as it's known - who, despite being born and having grown up in the Irish state, see their national identity as British. Some would even refuse to acquire an Irish passport

Of course such people exist. It would be a surprise if they didn't, given that the drawing of the border left people 'stranded' on both sides, albeit many more on the Northern. People will often inherit their parents' or grandparents' attitude, and obviously the places you mention are near the border. It's be more surprising if they were in Cork or Kerry.

As long as they pay their taxes etc. and are able to get a Brit passport for foreign travel, what's the problem?

What would you make of the idea of a nationwide referendum where all Irish people - yourself included, obviously, as a proud Irishmen - could exercise our self-determination as one? Would you have any issues with that?

I'd have no issues with a two-nationwide referendum...

The vast majority of Ulster Protestants or traditional unionists, on the other hand, see the Irish state as having no relationship with their alleged Irish identity. I think that's the distinction

My Irish identity isn't "alleged"- it's self-evident and doesn't need to be assessed by you. But yes, it's got nothing to do with the Republic of Irish state.

[Not Brazil]

Anecdotally, I'm aware of even Ulster Protestants around the areas of Raphoe, Convoy and St. Johnston in east Donegal - or the Laggan district, as it's known - who, despite being born and having grown up in the Irish state, see their national identity as British. Some would even refuse to acquire an Irish passport.

I'm not sure that the "Ulster Protestants" born in Donegal (or Cavan & Monaghan) are entitled to a British Passport, unless they were born before 1949.

The British Nationality Act 1981, retained the facility for those born in the Republic of Ireland before 1949 to register as British subjects, but did not infer British Citizenship.

[Not Brazil]

The vast majority of Ulster Protestants or traditional unionists, on the other hand, see the Irish state as having no relationship with their alleged Irish identity. I think that's the distinction.

My Irish identity has nothing "alleged" about it, and it has nothing to do with the 26 County State.

[Wolfman]

So out of interest, what do you associate it with then ?

[backstothewall]

I think the point here is that to be Irish one need not necessarily give allegiance to the Irish Republic. The Republic is merely the latest in a long list of arrangements for running part of this island. Many others have come and gone, and this one will probably be the same. To be Irish one need no more offer it allegiance than the Republic of Connaught in 1798.

[DannyInvincible]

Indeed, but that makes it no less valid. Just like the Luxembourg province in Belgium, say, or that Finnish island in the Baltic where 100% speak Swedish.

To take the Åland Islands as an example; the nature of their inhabitants' identity is something that is by no means clear-cut and is something which remains under dispute to this day within both Finland and Sweden as well as on the islands themselves.

I'd have no issues with a two-nationwide referendum...

How would that work exactly? One for the Irish nation and another for that other nation... What's it called again?

I'm not sure that the "Ulster Protestants" born in Donegal (or Cavan & Monaghan) are entitled to a British Passport, unless they were born before 1949.

I'm not sure they would be either, but I do know some would refuse to acquire an Irish passport, presumably, even if it meant they'd have to go without one altogether.

I think the point here is that to be Irish one need not necessarily give allegiance to the Irish Republic. The Republic is merely the latest in a long list of arrangements for running part of this island. Many others have come and gone, and this one will probably be the same. To be Irish one need no more offer it allegiance than the Republic of Connaught in 1798.

Sure, it doesn't command allegiance to any entity, but what the Irish Republic does do is represent or channel an Irishness distinct from Britain or Britishness, which is undeniably the type of Irishness with which the vast majority of people on the island identify. For me, to consider Irish as a subset of Britishness is just something I cannot really accept, as is probably evident. It's something different if the term is going to be downgraded to a secondary level in such a fashion. Does that view equivalate with the views of the BNP on Britishness of Englishness or whatever? I wouldn't have thought so, but I invite criticism if it's felt it does. To me, viewing Irishness as a subset of Britishness would be like viewing Englishness as a subset of German.