Sectarian head-count : pathetic, eh? Imagine working out political percentages by counting the number of Catholics and Protestants in a given electoral region. So base. So…sectarian.
Except that it’s as accurate a way as you’ll get of how people here vote. You may think it contemptible. On the other hand, you may accept that for all sorts of historical reasons, Catholics tend to be nationalists and Protestants tend to be unionists. If you don’t accept it, you’re closing your eyes to reality.
Numbers of Catholics and Protestants are in my thoughts because I’ve just come from one of my favourite blogsites – https://bangordub.wordpress.com/. I don’t know how he does it or where he finds the time to do it, but Bangordub is very, very good at number-crunching. At the end of last month, he produced a few figures which are interesting, to put it mildly.
How about this: “It should be noted that Catholics were in a majority at every age below 42 in 2013.”
Or this: “Census figures from 2011 show that among those aged 60 and over, 55% (198,000) were Protestant, 33% (118,000) were Catholic.”
Or this: “According to the 2011 Census, 36% of those aged 16 to 24 were Protestant (82,000), 44%were Catholic (100,000) and 20% were ‘other/non-determined’ (45,000)”
What does that give us stark notice of? That the Protestant population is at its strongest at the post-40 mark and beyond, while the Catholic population is at its strongest among young and early-middle-age people.
There is an increase in those describing themselves as ‘other’, which is the lifeline to which the Belfast Telegraph and those with unionist sympathies cling. They interpret this increasing number of non-religion-aligned as a sign that old loyalties are dying – that we’re moving towards John Hume’s ‘post-nationalist’ era. That the union is safe.
People who see things that way could be right. But if they are, it’ll be a reversal of every voting indicator in the history of this state. The more likely outcome, over the next ten years approximately, is that there will be a majority of Catholics in this state, which is another way of saying a majority of nationalists/republicans.
Sectarian head-counting: don’t you just hate it?
Jude you were almost purring there perhaps you should stick some bromide in your tea tonight?
Neill – you have acute hearing. Two teaspoonfuls at lunchtime AND at tea-time…But as RJC remarks above: “Live by the sword and die by the sword” (That’s a metaphor, btw)
‘Live by the sword, die by the sword’ as the fella said.
Dem Bones, Dem Democratic Bones
Those extra wee green votes will rock
D’tugboat of the smug Southern block
Dem Democratic Bones
Prefix Twenty 6 ochones:
Green’s a clash with Brown ‘n Alcock !
The best course of action for political Unionism is more curry my yoghurt style jokes
There is already a Catholic majority here in the 6 counties, a small one but one that is still growing while the protestant population declines. Its no secret that Catholics have larger families than Protestants, there would’ve been a Catholic majority in this statelet years ago if emigration had not occurred because many Catholics left to find work due to discrimination before and during the troubles, (or were harassed out).
Sectarian or not, religion does play a massive part in politics here and those denying it are just deluding themselves. Can you name one Protestant majority area with a SDLP or SF MP? Can you name one Catholic majority area with a DUP/UUP MP? I certainly cant. The fact that Catholic and Protestant “areas” even exist is further proof! Its a sorry and sad way of life here in the north eastern part of Ireland but republicans didn’t refer to this state as the “sectarian statelet” for nothing over the past 9 decades.
As for this growing number of people classing themselves as “Other”, its kind of desperate to see Unionism think that means support for them (while their share of the vote is continually dropping) and then refuse point blank to consider that these “Other” people might actually vote for a nationalist party and want Irish Unity. The Belfast Telegraph is especially slavish to this Unionist notion of a lot of Catholics wanting to vote Unionist (even though Unionism gets around just 1% of Catholic vote), as a Catholic myself I have yet to meet one of my fellow Catholics who votes Unionist and who even backs the Union but that’s just my own personal experience.
To me the Unionist inbuilt, gerrymandered majority, the “Protestant Parliament for a Protestant People” has well and truly collapsed. How Unionism/Loyalism, especially the hardliners, will react to that exactly when its officially public (by say there being a SF First Minister or a Nationalist majority Assembly) I don’t know but I think the Loyalist fleg protests back in late 2012 and early 2013 might give us a clue……
“There is already a Catholic majority here in the 6 counties”
The figures that I have looked at suggest the more-Catholics-than-Protestants-day will come sometime in 2016.
The key matter is votes not people.
The gross figure will include newborns who will have to wait 18 years until they can cast their first vote in 2034.
Higher mortality among Protestants reduces their voter poll at the opposite end of the age scale.
So you can predict that circa 2032 there will be a larger Catholic electorate than Protestant.
Catholic numbers are boosted by the influx of eastern Europeans. I wonder how their children will vote? On the one hand eastern European children integrate into existing Catholic schools, play GAA and assimilate into that culture while on the other hand their families are intimidated out of certain areas…
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-28128657
I know, Jude and be prepared to hear all about the vast swathes of, “Unicorn Catholics”. Those who unionists say will vote to retain the British link. The fact that these voters exist only in the fairy tale minds of unionism is neither here nor there. I stand to be corrected though.
In my experience I find the ‘others’ to be younger people mostly who are too cool or liberal? to vote or otherwise involve themselves in the grubby sectarian squabbles. They are relatively flush with money and find that they don’t really have time for all that nonsense. But when the squeeze comes and goes they usually revert to the tribal pattern.
The “Catholic Unicorn” question is an interesting one. There is a danger of conflating a Catholic’s rejection of Orangeism, and the DUP and UUP with support for a United Ireland.
The annual Northern Ireland Life and Times survey consistently shows support for a United-Ireland-tomorrow at about 20%. The NILT survey is often accused of a Unionist bias but I have never seen a convincing argument as to how it is biased year after year in a systemic way.
The counter to the NILT survey is that SF and the SDLP together pull in 42% of the vote. Again that conflates votes for nationalist parties with a potential vote to reject the Union. That might seem an absurd and illogical statement but with no referendum on partition on the horizon you have to question how big a factor partition is in voters’ intentions.
I can understand people currently voting nationalist or unionist on tangible and immediate matters such as support or rejection of Orange parades. Less so in anticipation of a potential referendum20 years away.
Demographics are going to kill triumphalist Orangeism but not the Union.
You’re right that distaste for the DUP/UUP/OO doesn’t necessarily conflate to support for a United Ireland, although I never really pay too much heed to predictions of when partition will end. I think that there are too many unknown factors for anyone to be able to accurately predict when a United Ireland will occur. Demographics alone will not bring an end to partition, although I suspect we may witness a gradual melting of the border as opposed to a sudden shift.
Despite a largely positive result for Unionism in the Scottish referendum, we still witnessed Unionist/Loyalist violence on the streets of Glasgow. One shudders to think how a Yes vote for UI would go down amongst certain sections of society here, and one of the tasks we face is how best to bring about a United Ireland without a drop of blood being shed. An Ireland in which our Rangers supporting brothers can feel a part of.
We’re currently witnessing Ulster Unionism’s death by a thousand cuts. Mostly self-inflicted too by the looks of things. Triumphalist Orangeism would appear to be first on the chopping block. Can’t say I’ll miss it.
What I find baffling with relation to the demographic change is that Unionism appears simply to be sticking its fingers in it ears going ‘lalalala can’t hear you lalalala the union is safe lalalala’
Can Unionist politicians really be that short sighted? Between the curryied yoghurt/toilet paper pantomime, and now Craigavon Council with yet more flegging do Unionist politicians seriously believe that this sort of behaviour represents a good long term strategy? Is the notion of ‘Catholic outreach’ really that abhorrent to them?
I would imagine that from a Unionist politician’s point of view the demographic threat is always a little too far in the future to worry about. Especially when there is a very real election in a couple of months and the TUV is on the hunt for voters disenchanted with the DUP and UUP.
There must be a feeling in Unionism that there is political capital to be made as the true defender of the Union. For example, Paul Berry rematerialised last week to denounce the DUP for supporting Mitchel McLaughlin as speaker. No doubt that’s his first salvo in a campaign to return to the Assembly. You have been warned William Irwin MLA!
A little off tangent but remember the fate of the SDLP. At the turn of the millennium their talk of post-nationalism sounded too much like soft-unionism and they duly hemorrhaged votes to SF.
In hindsight, the SDLP’s contempt for their voters back then was monumental. They’d have representative on the telly talking in techno-babble and party jargon, they might as well have been speaking in tongues. So much for engagement with the electorate. Then there was the dismissive “SF is only borrowing our votes”. So the problem was with the voters not what they were promoting. A bit of Gregory Campbell’s belligerence and simplicity would have served them better.
Many thanks for the kind words Jude. The premise for the blog is that the correllation between the demographics and the actual voting patterns is actually quite close. Personally I am quite non religious but, as with everything, change is always possible. Perhaps the non aligned are simply not voting?