As we move towards what appears an inevitable border poll (calm down, Virginia ), it might help if we pull back and examine some of the stances adopted by the different parties.
Unionist parties, notably the DUP, find the idea of coming together to discuss what a re-united Ireland might look like simply absurd. What is the point in talking about the place of unionists in a re-united Ireland, when by definition a reunited Ireland would mean breaking the union with Britain? The term “existential threat” is probably overused, but in this case it makes sense. The whole point in being a unionist is to be part of the union with Britain. If that comes to an end, the raison d’etre of unionist parties ends with it.
That’s a logical response. Why help construct your own gallows? What nationalists and republicans mean, however, is that they would like unionists to have a part in shaping the new Ireland, and that they would discover a new and much-improved existence within the new Ireland.
Some unionists on the other hand – Jeffrey Donaldson comes to mind – believe that the benefits of being within the UK have not been stressed and should be. The general idea behind this is that nationalists and maybe even republicans would see the benefits of being British and abandon their troublesome project of working towards a reunited Ireland.
If encouraging unionists to become part of a reunited Ireland seems absurd, then encouraging nationalist and republicans to stay within the UK is even more absurd.
Why so? Because nationalists and republicans know what it’s like to be within the UK. We’ve been living in it for centuries and in NEI for one hundred years. The theory or plan for something is very often different from the experienced reality. So guess what, guys – we’ve been there, endured that, worn the Union blanket. And we’re clear that we don’t want it. So calling on us to listen while you explain the benefits of living within the UK is beyond pointless.
So maybe it’s an exercise in futility to encourage either nationalists or unionists to get together and talk, each side listing the benefits of their vision. Except that in the case of being within the UK, it’s not a vision – it’s reality and has been for some time.
What talking with unionists might do would be to clarify how a reunited Ireland might look and work, and especially what place unionists might hold in this new Ireland. It might also spur nationalists and republicans to create, in the south, a society that would be attractive for at least some unionists. A society with a fully realised national health system, with a strong economy and an enlightened education system. Instead of argument, example.
“But but” you say, Virginia. But what if unionists still rejected the notion of such an Ireland? Well, then we’d have to fall back on democracy, as outlined in the Good Friday Agreement. A vote should be taken north and south, to bring into being what for centuries has been a dream. Some people won’t like the realisation of that dream – northern unionists, of course, but also those southern political parties who would have to make major adjustments to accommodate all those distasteful nordies. They likewise would have to accept democracy, when and if the Irish people vote for reunification.
As Elvis put it, “A little less conversation, a little more action, please”.
Comments are closed.