Why did those who voted for the Good Friday Agreement do so? The short answer is we don’t know. Nobody can see inside another person’s head, and even if they tell you their reasons, they could well be lying.
But there are a number of reasons that probably featured in the thinking of many people as they entered the polling both nearly twenty years ago.
- We didn’t need the British authorities to tell us that they weren’t capable of defeating the IRA, and it was fairly obvious that the IRA wasn’t going to defeat the British Army. Stalemate, with little prospect but the stubborn obscenity of more deaths.
- Political progress. The 1981 hunger strike had shown the possibilities of republican progress at the political level. The GFA presented further possibilities, with Britain declaring its intention to withdraw should that be the will of the north’s people. This acceptance that constitutional change was a matter for the Irish people came with a price: Articles 2 and 3 in the Irish constitution, claiming jurisdiction over all Ireland, including the north, had to be abandoned. For some, this was too much. For most, it was a pill worth swallowing.
- In this last matter – the repeal of Articles 2 and 3 – we must remember that the south had its own simultaneous referendum. It didn’t vote on the same motions as we in the north. The south was asked to relinquish Articles 2 and 3, and in return there would be peace in the north. The overwhelming majority voted for that. Was the relinquishing of Articles 2 and 3 a bitter pill for southern voters? Frankly I doubt it. Many in the south had been taught to see northern republicans and nationalists as an angry ,confrontational bunch, prone to irrational violence. Who wouldn’t want to put space between themselves and such people?
The post- GFA goal for Sinn Féin and nationalists generally was to win over the unionist community, or a significant number of them, to the value of an independent Ireland. With this in mind, both Sinn Féin and the SDLP have for the most part acted with commendable fairness and friendliness. It was said that the DUP and Sinn Féin, if they met in a Stormont corridor or at an adjacent Stormont urinal, wouldn’t speak to each other Not so. The DUP wouldn’t do the smallest of small talk; Sinn Féin were happy to talk about anything. But as with tangoing , it takes two to hold a conversation.
In more recent years, I’m told, only the most conservative of DUP politicians (yes, Virginia, ‘conservative’ is a diplomatic word) maintain this stony-faced silence. Which is progress. In councils where there is a nationalist/republican majority, major roles such as that of mayor are rotated, giving unionists positions they would not hold if nationalists/republicans had taken the spoils their numbers entitled them to.
Has this outreach worked? Or has, for example, Martin McGuinness meeting with the queen melted unionist frostiness? If it has, they’re not letting on: we have Martin McGuinness’s word that not a single unionist politician congratulated him on his royal encounters. The same applies, with knobs on, for Gerry Adams’s meeting with Prince Charles.
So nearly twenty years after the signing of the GFA, are there signs that the policy of reconciliation has worked? Let’s be honest: the answer is No. Arlene Foster keeps snuffing out any suggestion, whether from Enda Kenny or Martin McGuinness, that there should be joint action by north and south on issues such as Brexit or NAMA. BBC Radio Ulster/Raidio Uladh’s Talkback callers such as ‘George from the Shankill’ make it clear that unionist thinking hasn’t shifted a millimetre since 1998.
What to do? Perhaps a brief experiment at council level might provide unionism with a wake-up call. Those councils which have a nationalist majority could, for a twelve-month period, follow the example of unionist-dominated councils and help themselves to the various positions of authority in the council. When unionist politicians complained about such treatment, it could be pointed out to them that this was the flip-side of what unionist councils have been doing for years.
It might sound like a throwback to the past, but it deserves consideration. There are few things more instructive than having another person’s shoes strapped onto your feet and being forced to walk a mile.
Perfidious Albion along with perfidious America sold the new Treaty as a universal panacea. It was all things to all men. A copper fastening to the British Irish that they were loved and wanted by the old country and a new peaceful dawn with watertight built in guarantees for the Irish Irish. Sadly neither was true but it got the signatures and Blair got the glory. Now nearly twenty years later the only change seems to be that the righteous have inherited the media and Sinn Féin have inherited the mantle of the SDLP. Meanwhile the British British keep a tight eye on the goings on to ensure absolute fairness – not for the benefit of their six counties but so that they can show the world how to give away their colonial possessions but still hold on to them.
Very eloquently put fiosrach.
As jude would say GRMA
Looking at life in this rock pool it is not difficult to see little has changed. The great hope of unionists is that integrated education will be forced on all and that at the end of the process we will all be god British unionists. (A letter in yesterday’s Irish News told of the experience of a nationalist who had passed through that system.)
One is reminded of the late lamented Ni PM, Terence O’Neill, “Give Catholics jobs and good homes and they will……”
Perhaps a good measure of how little life has changed here is in the religious/political demography of both public and private housing. Take North Belfast as an example, there are huge swathes of land that formerly held housing in areas that would called Loyalist. On the other hand there are large numbers of Nationalists needing housing in the same area. The simple answer, in a normal society would be to build housing for those in need on the vacant land.
Of course, don’t have real normality here. One can imagine the furore of unionist politicians, wanting to protect their seats, leading marches of those who would accuse those to be housed as stealing ‘their’ territory.
However, it’s not only in working class public housing that this attitude (we won’t live with Catholics) is found. Many will have noticed that as soon as a house is bought in what is thought of as a Protestant private housing estate , Protestant neighbours start putting for sale signs up. They don’t want to live with Catholic neighbours.
If this attitude can be changed, then maybe there is hope it might filter down into the UUP and DUP. However, I don’t think I’ll live long enough to see this change.
Just yesterday, courtesy of the BBC, we were treated to the thoughts of Laurence Robertson the Member of Parliament for Tewkesbury in Gloucestershire about the border. An inquiry into “the fate” of the border has been launched at Westminster. MPs will investigate whether the north of Ireland should have special status post-Brexit. Special status, darlin words, Joxer. The inquiry will also probe how the border could be policed and what visa controls may be needed in the future.
Laurence Robertson is the committee chairman and he wishes “to assess different options open to the government” with the aim of producing recommendations and conclusions ahead of the start of formal negotiations with the EU.
There is no cause for alarm even though the inquiry team consists of 13 MPs. The inquiry would welcome written submissions on the future of the border by 21 October. Mind you, I do not recall him saying what year.
In the interests of fair and impartial reporting, there was no one available to pose relevant questions on the matter.
Quite amusing from Jude what he is saying is that if Republicans cant get there way by smiling at Unionists the stick will be bought out again. Is it any wonder Unionists doubt the sincerity of Republicans?
‘George from the Shankill’ make it clear that unionist thinking hasn’t shifted a millimetre since 1998
Yet you have a contributor (Ryan) who is an open supporter of the IRA even though he was only a child at the end of the troubles so does that show Republicanism has moved an inch?
Unionists understand republicanism well enough you can be quite sure of that Jude.
“Yet you have a contributor (Ryan) who is an open supporter of the IRA even though he was only a child at the end of the troubles so does that show Republicanism has moved an inch?”
And?…..if you expect republicans to share your opinion on the IRA then your going to have a very, very long wait Robert. If it wasn’t for people like you the reality is the IRA would never have existed because there would have been no need for it to. As a Republican, I wont be taking any lectures from you Robert, remember that.
“Unionists understand republicanism well enough you can be quite sure of that Jude”
That’s just another way of saying Unionists reject peace/reconciliation. The Unionist state is gone and isn’t coming back Robert, I hope you understand that just as much as you understand Republicans….
“Is it any wonder Unionists doubt the sincerity of Republicans?”
Do we have reason to doubt the sincerity of Unionism?……lets have a look at the History books, shall we Robert? Lets start at the year 2016…….
And?…..if you expect republicans to share your opinion on the IRA then your going to have a very, very long wait Robert. If it wasn’t for people like you the reality is the IRA would never have existed because there would have been no need for it to. As a Republican, I wont be taking any lectures from you Robert, remember that.
Classic words from a ceasefire warrior and if it wasnt people like you many more of my community would be still alive i wont take any lectures about decency from somebody like you.
That’s just another way of saying Unionists reject peace/reconciliation
No unionists reject Republican insincerity personified by people like you and jude.
Robert – cut the personal attacks. Make your argument and if you do refer to individuals here, try to be witty.
Why be witty when i can be factual or does the truth cause you annoyance?
(i) Because I’m not talking about truth, I’m talking about abuse; (ii) Because I won’t put it up.
Jude
“Robert – cut the personal attacks.”
Does that not equally apply to Ryan?
BIG IDEA, SMALL TALK
Big ego DUPes balk at the idea of small talk
With SF mohawks who brandish a tomahawk
One shrewd idea, Jude
One’s eyes will be glued
At Gregory Og in Brogues being made to walk.
“But there are a number of reasons that probably featured in the thinking of many people as they entered the polling both nearly twenty years ago.
We didn’t need the British authorities to tell us that they weren’t capable of defeating the IRA, and it was fairly obvious that the IRA wasn’t going to defeat the British Army. Stalemate, with little prospect but the stubborn obscenity of more deaths.”
Not sure of the relevance of this. The PIRA had already ended its campaign before the referendum.
“Not sure of the relevance of this. The PIRA had already ended its campaign before the referendum.”
Pretty certain the PIRA ended its campaign in 2005 MT, it was on ceasefire since 1996, a ceasefire isn’t ending its campaign MT, the PIRA was on ceasefire many times before, in the 1970’s, for example……the GFA referendum was in 1998…..
“retty certain the PIRA ended its campaign in 2005 MT, it was on ceasefire since 1996, a ceasefire isn’t ending its campaign MT, the PIRA was on ceasefire many times before, in the 1970’s, for example……the GFA referendum was in 1998…..”
The ceasefire waa meant to be permanent.
MT, were there not insistent calls by unionist politicians for republicans to use the word ‘permanent’? I remember the call but I’m not sure I remember the response.
“MT, were there not insistent calls by unionist politicians for republicans to use the word ‘permanent’? I remember the call but I’m not sure I remember the response.:
There were, yes, and unionists were chastised for being churlish.
Seems.you’re saying they were right?
And people wonder why unionists have no faith in Republican sincerity but then truth has not always been a friend of Republicanism.
“Political progress. The 1981 hunger strike had shown the possibilities of republican progress at the political level. The GFA presented further possibilities, with Britain declaring its intention to withdraw should that be the will of the north’s people. This acceptance that constitutional change was a matter for the Irish people came with a price: Articles 2 and 3 in the Irish constitution, claiming jurisdiction over all Ireland, including the north, had to be abandoned. For some, this was too much. For most, it was a pill worth swallowing.”
I doubt anyone other than republicans themselves was motivated to vote by the prospect of ‘republican progress at the political level’.
As for ‘Britain declaring its intention to withdraw should that be the will of the north’s people’, that was already the case for decades before the GFA so was irrelevant.
And the abandonment of the South’s territorial claim was welcomed by many, if not most voters.
“The south was asked to relinquish Articles 2 and 3, and in return there would be peace in the north.”
No it wasn’t. There was already peace after the PIRA and loyalist ceasefires.
looks like their just making it up now as they go along.cul de sac describes it to a tee.
maybe ff moving north can change it.
The truth is that Unionists see any magnanimity from Nationalists as a sign of weakness and weakness in their eyes deserves contempt,
This softly softly approach does not work and only ends up in antagonising your support base. There should be no more bending the knee.
On a different point did any one else get a plain envelope through their door this morning?
I did along with other junk mail. when I opened this particular envelope out fell a wooden cross with a poppy attached requesting that I write the name of a relative who died serving in HM forces also enclosed was a request for a donation to the British legion.
I can only imagine the reaction of those whose relatives were killed by said forces when this drops through their door. Not much sensitivity shown there? I shall be returning mine in the enclosed envelope with a polite but appropriate response.
Mine has already been returned in the prepaid envelope, with the request (written on said cross) not to send junk mail to my address in future, with an explanation of my objection.
Could I encourage others of similar thoughts, to do likewise?
“The truth is that Unionists see any magnanimity from Nationalists as a sign of weakness and weakness in their eyes deserves contempt,
This softly softly approach does not work and only ends up in antagonising your support base. There should be no more bending the knee.”
100% correct Belfastdan
Sounds like tit-for-tat Jude. But I agree: SF need to do more to break the gridlock. The present policy of appeasement is not working, and has alienated many nationalist voters – myself included.
The attitude of the mayor of Derry who refused to attend the funeral of Bishop Daly says it all , there should be no more of the killing with kindness of unionist, they should be made aware of what its like to be a down trodden minority for a period of time
If the unionist want a political war then lets give it to them bar them from any positions of authority in any area controlled by nationalist especially west of the Bann and if the SDLP DONT LIKE IT TO BAD AS THEY ARE ONLY GREEN UNIONIST ANYWAY
No…i don’t agree with this puerile tit -for -tat business . The only thing that would do is proclaim very loudly that everything that was rotten in unionism was perfectly alright to be emulated .That would only say that you agree entirely with unionism’s behaviour down through the ages and that it was just such a fine way to act that you were going to copy it .It wasn’t ! You might as well say say that gerrymandering was just fine , state violence was just fine too and easily excused away… and that the asinine behaviour of a large rump of dullard, gormless , fundamentalist, unionism in councils across the land , was the right way to conduct business.It isn’t! it would be like saying that when Nelson Mandela was released from prison he should stick it to his political opponents and put his boot down on them .I have a notion that you are only stirring the pot with this notion and not really having much faith in it ever being a valid option, Jude. It might give nationalism a momentary frisson of “sticking it to the man”… but in the long term …and it has always been a loooooong game, it would prove counter-productive. Besr scenario is to continue to fertilise the stony ground stoically and promote the idea of what ” real republicanism” and living in a possible, positive future republic of equal citizens might look like…..and I’m not talking about some future Cathlolic/ultra Gaelics state that has no room for the dissenter(of whatever stripe)…or what currently passes for an equitable republic south of the imaginary border, either.
Thanks for detailed response, PK. I hate to say it but I sometimes see unionism as a child that takes and takes and then kicks the giver. With that in mind, I’m proposing a (temporary) situation where the unionist child discovers how distasteful such grabbing and kicking is. That done, revert to Position A and see if anything has changed. Right now the child is trampling over anyone in sight.
You can treat unionism as a child as much as you wish however i am sure you have no problem with me treating Republicanism as barely been house trained and expecting gratitude for meeting people hardly warrants respect let alone praise.
I suppose if we consider that we are dealing with an under-developed political child, your short, sharp shock is one way to look at it, Jude. The other way to deal with a recalcitrant child is to wait for the huff to wear off.The child usually grows out of lying star-shaped on the supermarket floor screaming for sweets. With “normal” politicking gradually working, somewhere along the line there should be a “wise-up moment” which dawns.If we try using the same tactics which gort us to the present situation , we might simply re-seed the ground with the same old bile which will add futher ammunition for the sulkers.That’s a recipe for never growing up.As for republicans being barely hoyuse-trained …well that kind of statement verges on casual racism of a sort and is is a vey simple-minded view given the blinkers that unionism has about its own past and its own actions.”House-trained?”.. How blind to their own faults can unionism be?
I agree that head-butting, PK, is a pointless exercise, certainly if that’s the beginning and end of it. But the unionist response to outreach from republicans has been just about zero. I’m not sure republicans are respected for continuing to reach out – if anything it appears to be viewed as a weakness, maybe a move to us all becoming good Northern Irish people. (Although I did hear a chat-show caller the other day on Talkback correcting William, insisting that he (the caller) wasn’t Irish. Odd, that – his accent was Irish…
Well…if he was born on the island and he doesn’t believe he’s Irish , what does he think he is? ….Portuguese?….German ? Dutch, maybe?…Unless of course he really was born somewhere else and simply picked up the accent while living here for a while, eh?
“You might as well say say that gerrymandering was just fine , state violence was just fine too and easily excused away”
Well gerrymandering and state violence was never ok or justified PK, the whole world would say the same. Jude isn’t saying nationalism should gerrymander or discriminate the way Unionism did and does still to some extent today. Unionist political parties and the Orange Order are involved in a Land fund that buys land simply so it doesn’t fall into Catholic hands, that still goes on today.
“it would be like saying that when Nelson Mandela was released from prison he should stick it to his political opponents and put his boot down on them ”
PK, Nelson Mandela disagreed with the IRA giving up their weapons and decommissioning. You cant compare the situation in the North with that in South Africa. In South Africa you had a tiny minority ruling over a vast majority. That was the case in Ireland in the 1800’s but when partition happened it was a majority discriminating, mistreating and gerrymandering against the minority. Mandela’s stance was tactical when he left prison. He was certainly not a peace advocate before he went into prison, he bombed train stations and shopping malls without warning, killing men, women and children. When he left prison he knew he had the World on his side because of his peace preaching and he knew that with Blacks being the vast majority that when Apartheid fell (again due to international pressure) that Blacks would rule the country, which they did and still do today. That situation is not the same as in the North. If Whites were the majority in South Africa, you can bet Mandela wouldn’t have been so peaceful even when he left prison. Mandela did whatever he had to do to take back his country, I don’t believe it was all about a “rainbow nation” or some fairy tale ending where Black and Whites embraced and loved each other. Get real. There is still massive problems in South Africa even today between Whites and Blacks.
“and it has always been a loooooong game”
So your idea is to….just keep doing what we’re doing….even though its clearly not working? Its been 18 years and yet Unionism STILL hasn’t changed…..It was Albert Einstein PK that said “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”. Think about that quote. In fact many republicans need to think over that quote because many of them have their head in the clouds if you ask me. I guarantee you, if Nationalism continues with this logic of turning a blind eye to Unionisms rejection of equality that in 18 years time we may still be in the same situation we’re in today.
BTW, Jude isn’t “stirring the pot”. He has stated the reality of the situation but you, like so many other nationalists, prefer to turn that blind eye of yours…..ya never know PK, maybe Unionism MIGHT favour equality for you and your family…..maybe! fingers crossed! tomorrow might be the day they change!…….
Ryan , I think you ran into this one without looking too carefully. I am not justifying gerrymandering or anything the orange Order is doing in terms of land-grabbing. I was saying the very opposite(although, I can understand that irony sometimes does not translate to cold print).
Nelson Mandela might have disagreed with the IRA giving up its weapons but that was the pragmatic thing to do in a changing time politically and in a complete and utter stalemate situation militarily.If Sinn Fein plays the same game of sulking like schoolgirls they are only going to copy unionism and it was always about opposing that attitude . There is no point in that because you haveto eventually talk to your political enemies. It has been quipped thta the good friday Agreement was “Sunningdale for slow-learners”. I believe it was .unionism has always moved slowly .They are a conservative bunch.There are no left-wing thinkers there.It’s taken them thirty years to get even to the point they could have been at long ago. They’ve always dragged their feet and they’ve always feared any kind of change .if they could have their way , they’d still be living in the 1950s with a neat little statelet especially carved out to suit their own little agenda alone.That’s not what the future can be like , especially in changing post- Brexit times. Changes are coming. For the young these changes move at a snail’s pace but to anyone who has lived through this past sixty years, looking back., the changes are radical.
You have to set the moral bar very high and stick to that position.There is no point in getting back down in the dirt and scrapping.unionism hasn’t even come to terms with their own hypocritical and immoral part in the history of Ireland and even their own part in the origin story of the violence that we all lived with. They still want to believe that it was simply good guys versus the bad guys.It wasn’t.
If anyone out there thinks that some return to the antipathy and violence of the past is the way to go they need to think again.None of it was glorious or glamourous. It was nasty and dirty and nobody came out of it with clean hands.Neither nationalism nor the holier- than- thou blinkered unionists. They all got down and dirty…bent the rules …broke the moral laws ..at times killed each other or simply killed just anybody out of pure hatred….only to get to this position, now. Somewhere along the line unionism will admit to itself that they were there too.We can do nothing but wait for that moment if we want to really start building a new Ireland.I know that if Sinn Fein , as their party gradually sheds old combatants and introduces new members who never knew that violence, don’t take this stance, they’ll build nothing .The same probably goes for unionism.
Can someone tell me what with happen the GFA and peace process of brexit results in a hard border ???. I cross border 4 times every day. The brits don’t deserve peace if a border comes back.
“Can someone tell me what with happen the GFA and peace process of brexit results in a hard border ???. ”
There wont be a hard border but lets just say there is then according to commentator Chris Donnelly there would need to be a new Good Friday Agreement, which I would like to see happening given Nationalism is in a better position politically today than in 1998. There is a chance people crossing from the North into Britain will have to show their passports. I always considered that Brexit made the GFA invalid since it would violate many things in the GFA but we’ll just have to see.
According to news articles I’ve read, the Irish Government is more concerned with the effect Brexit will have on the peace process than anything else, including trade with the UK. Tony Blair and John Major both warned Brexit will endanger the peace process and yet its happened…..
thanks Ryan, Its nervous times living in North Monaghan, knowing at the stroke of a pen, things could revert back to the 70’s again. Im old enough to remember my own road, cratered, filled in again, cratered, filled in again, booby trapped, ….. It would simply be suicide of the Peace Process if any tiny attempt of a hard border ever returns. People simply will not put up with it and any attempt to hinder people going about their business in their own natural hinterland will be severely resisted.
will be severely resisted.
Should that be taken as a threat of violence?
“thanks Ryan, Its nervous times living in North Monaghan, knowing at the stroke of a pen, things could revert back to the 70’s again. Im old enough to remember my own road, cratered, filled in again, cratered, filled in again, booby trapped, …..”
Why would roads be cratered or booby trapped?
“It would simply be suicide of the Peace Process if any tiny attempt of a hard border ever returns. People simply will not put up with it and any attempt to hinder people going about their business in their own natural hinterland will be severely resisted.”
What would ‘people’ do?
Me thinks you will find a lot of folk voted for the GFA out of blind faith towards their political representatives. Many a good person was demonised and character assassinated by people who didn’t even read the thing, for pointing out the bullxxxx within the document. Blind faith isn’t just strictly for religions you know.
looks like the name change from the ruc isnt working either,
their all quiet on the lad from the short strand.
gfa..got fxxk all .
“It might sound like a throwback to the past, but it deserves consideration”
Well, that’s the illusion right there Jude, we think we have “moved on”. We haven’t. We’re still in the past. The difference between now and 1998 is that there is less violence, which is a good thing obviously. But as Gerry Adams said “We don’t have peace, we just have a cessation of violence”. He’s 100% correct there. Who is to blame for us still being in the past? its quite obvious it is Unionism. I’m not just saying that because I’m a Republican, I try to put myself in a neutral, outside position and make a judgement and its very obvious it is Unionism refusing to make peace, to endorse equality and to move on. Even Richard Haass made a few comments about Unionism after the fruitless Haass talks. The reality is these people don’t want to move on. They still yearn for the “Protestant Parliament for a Protestant People”. Its very important for nationalism to reinforce the point its never returning. It needs nipped in the bud.
” Perhaps a brief experiment at council level might provide unionism with a wake-up call.”
That’s the answer. It might sound harsh but you have to realize what we’re dealing with here. We’re dealing with a people that have got their way for CENTURIES, not mere decades but centuries and they want it to be like that today. Sure, there is a minority of Unionists who DO want to move on, embrace equality, etc but they have next to no power or they fear challenging the hardcore within Unionism. Frankly, to put hope in moderate Unionism is not going to work, it never has and it never will. Basil McCrea was the latest victim of hardcore Unionism. Basil, like Trimble and so many others, tried forming a 21st century Unionism and the Unionist electorate rejected him and NI21. The hardcore or extremists get votes in Unionism, not the moderate. Hence the competition between who can be “super prod” at election time between Unionist parties.
Political Unionism is like a spoilt child. What nationalism is trying to do is give the child what he wants but he still isn’t happy and keeps playing up. When I was younger I certainly wasn’t spoilt but if I was “bold” or stepped out of line, my mother took things away from me, my Nintendo 64 game console, the TV remote or if I was really bad I was grounded for the week. That taught me not to mess about, my mother wasn’t going to tolerate it and it obviously made me a better person. Its a “Cruel to be Kind” philosophy, I suppose.
Political Unionism needs the same treatment. It needs to learn: if you step out of line, there will be consequences. The current tactic of Nationalism/Republicanism is to turn a blind eye and hope Unionism changes. Its clearly not working. In fact, it seems to be ENCOURAGING Unionism not to change.
“The post- GFA goal for Sinn Féin and nationalists generally was to win over the unionist community”
We don’t need Unionism to get a United Ireland, especially the way the demographics are going. To mislead Unionists into thinking that is giving them the confidence to behave the way they are behaving. They feel they have power over Nationalists. The main reason why SF/SDLP want to win over some Unionists (even SDLP/SF aren’t deluded enough to believe they will win over the extreme/bigot section of Unionism) is because they want to promote peace and to show the world who is at the forefront of those efforts. Sure, if they can win over some Unionists to Irish Unity then why not? that’s a good thing. But the way things are heading its not essential to get them on board.
I’ve always been of the opinion, at council level, that Nationalism should be doing what Unionism is doing: just do our own thing, have Irish symbolism everywhere like in the South, fly the Irish flag and promote Irishness. Why not? Lisburn and Larne do the same thing when it comes to Britishness?…..
“We don’t need Unionism to get a United Ireland, especially the way the demographics are going.”
I often here you repeat this Ryan but I think you are basing it on a false assumption. If the latest election results/opinion polls have taught us anything it is that being from the Catholic community doesn’t equate to a vote for a United Ireland.
Scott
Well according to Ryan every man woman and child born a Catholic has always been and ever shall be a nationalist. We must never stray from our allotted box.
Who is to blame for us still being in the past? its quite obvious it is Unionism. I’m not just saying that because I’m a Republican, I try to put myself in a neutral, outside position and make a judgement
Self awareness doesnt come easily to you does it?
As for the rest of your article typical republican mopery dont agree with us then you must be wrong still thats typical of the Republican outreach programe.
Jude
I agree with paddy on this. Although such yaa boo tactics might be satisfying it would be counter productive.
At some point, somehow,republicans have to persuade some people who are currently unionist,or undecided,to vote for a United Ireland.
What you are proposing is unlikely to achieve that.
On the other hand I would say the efforts of Martin McGuinness to reach out will not have gone unnoticed amongst more moderate unionists or indeed those who might be of the ‘plague on both your houses’ persuasion.
You suggest this tactic as a temporary measure but once started it may not be so easily stopped,, and worse, it could easily escalate.
it could easily escalate …….to what*democracy*
Democracy?…no billy .It could just escalate to the same old bitching, killing, stabbing, shooting , bombing that we’ve just neatly set to one side as being counter-productive to living. There’ll always be a few out there hankering for a brand new ruck, just like politicians are always hoking about for a new war to keep the troops occupied and the factories churning out bullets.
I reckon it’s hard for Unionist politicians to be all pally wally, best buddies with their Republican counterparts because ultimately the latter want to destroy and dismantle in a political and cultural sense everything the former holds dear. And it was only a few short years ago that the latter was supporting and cheering on the use of a private army to shoot and kill the formers party colleagues because the private army disagreed with them politically. If the private army where to pick up where it left off before, would the same politicians go back to whooping and hollering in support from the sidelines again?
Then there is Gerry’s infamous speech on how this outreach tactic is based not on sincerety, but on the cynical use of Trojan Horse tactics, lulling people in to a false reality in oreder to “break” them. With comments like that no wonder people keep their guard up as who wants to be taken for a mug if the other person is not being genuine? Republicans also talk a good game of mutual respect and harmony, but all the while their propaganda section and political newspaper is constantly making snidey comments from the sidelines, constantly running down Unionists at every turn. This forked tongue/bipolar approach is unsettling to say the least and inevitably leads to distancing and cooling of relationships.
Surely the perfect unionist response to GA’s claim that the Trojan horse of equality would break unionists would be to show that equality was the No 1 item on your agenda? If people break in the face of equality, then there’s something wrong.
Who doesnt have equality in Northern Ireland Jude or is this another red herring?
Hundreds and thousands who are in poverty, for starters. Others who are disadvantaged by our marvellous education system.
“Hundreds and thousands who are in poverty, for starters. Others who are disadvantaged by our marvellous education system.”
In NI political discourse ‘equality’ means ‘equality of opportunity’ not material equality.
Everybody outside the disabled and unfit have the chance to improve themselves if they are lazy they will not. As for poverty thats amusing nobody starves here perhaps you should go to thirld world countries who have real poverty but to say hundreds of thousands live in poverty is factual untrue.