Ian Paisley despised the Catholic Church, often professing his belief that the pope was the anti-Christ. Yet he had no problem helping Catholic constituents, viewing it instead as an opportunity to show good will and possibly hoping at some point they might see the error of their ways and convert from an otherwise direct path to hell.
I recently described unionism on the blog as a sliding scale between white supremacist, right-wing neo-Nazi to Catholic-hating elitist which is when I realised I had something in common with the old firebrand. I despise unionism and all it stands for, yet I have no problem with the individuals who are brought up in what is known as a unionist or loyalist community and often get on very well with any I meet.
So what exactly is the problem?
For me, Irish Unionism is not a nationality, it is not a religion, it is not a way of life, but quite simply it is a form of Irish apartheid, and something that should be opposed and not tolerated, never mind encouraged. Its actions disenfranchised Irish nationalists in their own lands for selfish reasons and the similarities with the American south led by the white democrats is quite startling.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disenfranchisement_after_the_Reconstruction_Era
The Protestant minority in Ireland always had it better, thanks to English laws enforced through centuries of military occupation, and nowhere more than in the north which suffered the direct plantation of Protestants to control the lands on behalf of the Crown.
With the pressure to introduce Home Rule in Ireland, Unionism developed into a militaristic apartheid which led to various bloody conflicts over the last 100 years.
It amuses me to see unionist supporters posting that it is up to republicans to convince them of the merits of a united Ireland or that republicans should be reaching out to unionists.
To me, that is the equivalent of the blacks in Alabama reaching out to the Klu Klux Klan. No thanks.
Unionism is a sickness in Ireland, with the main symptoms that of sectarian bigotry and low self-esteem, leading to feelings of English subordinance.
Thankfully the illness has reached its breaking point and now that the unionist majority in the gerrymandered north is on the decline, Ireland is at long last taking the next steps on the road to recovery.
As with all infections, some people can suffer the symptoms more severely than others.
It seems the best way to measure how ill someone is infected is by assessing their level of bigotry whether it be against Muslims, Catholics, nationalists or whomever, and the more outrageous the behaviour, the more infected they are. When you hear the firebrand ministers insulting their neighbours from the pulpit, you can be sure the unionist bug is flowing through their veins.
That’s the most amusing article I have read in years in fairness most of it is witless, idiotic and with no sense of irony coming from a republican contributor.
Still it isn’t in the same league as her I knew an IRA volunteer man who was slapped by his partner story in fairness knowing Jessica`s background she is probably talking about her husband or partner.
Talk about playing the Man (well in this case Woman) rather than the Ball Neill…..
Tell us what you mean by “Irony”? Why is it ironic Jessica has said what she said. Explain your point Neill and back it up with some evidence and examples because this is what blogs is all about: debate. Or are you just here to gob off and shout “its all them’uns fault” because it is getting all rather pathetic, no offence….
“amusing”?
Neill, you’re a bigger man than I.
Swap the words ‘unionist’ with ‘nationalist’ and you’d have a riot on your hands. Well, not you, Dr C would…
Fair point, AG…
What is a fair point Jude, you think had I wrote this with the words switched there would be riots?
Really?
I’m simply saying let’s have no more name-calling and no more fucks. That’s all.
The problem I have with people like Jessica and Ryan is that reconciliation is only skin deep and you don’t have to dig too deep to feel the real animosity.
By and large most people have moved on and wish to live in peace with their neighbours and to do it slowly is the best way rather than one big act of reconciliation.
Am I an unionist you bet however do I believe in the dup or uup’s social or financial policies no.Does that make me any less a unionist no. Does Jessica and Co utterances make Republicans sectarian no the simple point is this to put down a marker that unionism is by nature a sick and bigoted disease is as pointless and clearly untrue as saying that Republicanism is sick and bigoted.
“The problem I have with people like Jessica and Ryan is that reconciliation is only skin deep and you don’t have to dig too deep to feel the real animosity. ”
I would truly love there to be reconciliation neill.
Yes, I have laid down a marker that unionism is inherently sectarian, but I have also given you evidence as to why I believe so.
Simply disagreeing without response to the evidence provided does not absolve my claims one iota.
How do you feel that partition denies the democratically expressed wishes of our nation, that it was and still is abused by a unionist majority to deny our culture and rights.
Yes, it has been reduced to a veto of concern and will disappear altogether in time, is that a good enough reason to ignore it as it is now though?
Prove to everyone reading this that unionism is not sectarian if you can?
I have made an allegation, here is your opportunity to disprove it.
I don’t think this article is fair. I do not agree with the political objectives of Unionism but I certainly do not “despise” the people that adhere to them. Hate is the same as fear and comes about from a lack of understanding.
It is our job to convince people North and South of the merits of a united Ireland. But we have to unite people in the North first of all – it is only then that we can approach the South with a proposal for reuniting the country.
“I don’t think this article is fair. I do not agree with the political objectives of Unionism but I certainly do not “despise” the people that adhere to them. Hate is the same as fear and comes about from a lack of understanding. ”
You are entitled to your opinion Colmán, but if you read what I said, while I despise unionism, i did not say I despised the people from those communities.
I suppose in unionist speak, it would be similar to their own attitude towards gays, hate the sin, not the sinner.
I hate the fact Irish unionists want to maintain English rule in Ireland.
As for lack of understanding, I am quite comfortable with my understanding of them and very confident in my conclusions.
jessica
From your previous post:
“Unionists are impotent, pathetic and narrow minded little people who will in time be no more than an irritation.”
Today:
“I have no problem with the individuals who are brought up in what is known as a unionist or loyalist community”
All your posts about reconciliation ring hollow to me. It seems you mean that Unionists must reconcile themselves to a future in a United Ireland where they are despised.
“Unionists are impotent, pathetic and narrow minded little people who will in time be no more than an irritation.”
Sounds even better a second time gio. 🙂
““I have no problem with the individuals who are brought up in what is known as a unionist or loyalist community All your posts about reconciliation ring hollow to me. It seems you mean that Unionists must reconcile themselves to a future in a United Ireland where they are despised.”
They can do what they like they usually do anyway, I have given up on reconciliation. 20 years on and unionists are still hell bent on retribution and would love nothing more than a return to conflict to bring back the army to safeguard the way of life they want returned.
The road map to a united Ireland has been signed and sealed, it will happen whether unionists like it or not. A 51% nationalist majority, 49% unionist is sufficient.
If they have no interest in what’s best for the people of Ireland, we should ignore them and move on. Why should they be allowed to continue holding us all back for their selfish interests?
Whether or not they are despised doesn’t really matter. I despise the Fine Gael brand of unionism also by the way.
jessica
You can label people as unionist as much as you like but you are clearly mistaken.
You have labelled first the SDLP and now FG as unionist.
So in the event of a referendum on a UI they will both be campaigning for a No vote will they?
Perhaps you should define this unionism of which you speak, because as far as I can tell it means anyone who does not support Sinn Fein.
“Perhaps you should define this unionism of which you speak, because as far as I can tell it means anyone who does not support Sinn Fein.”
That is a very good point gio,
Also, I think there is a great deal of assumption among unionist posters here, that everyone who votes for traditionally unionist parties, or lives in traditionally unionist areas are in fact unionists.
My interpretation of unionism is primarily support for the partition of Ireland and denial of the rights of Irish citizens in the North that the Irish flag represents us in the north of Ireland as much as those in the southern part of the country, that the Irish language and culture is equal in the north as that of the English language and that the Irish heritage is equal to that of those who see British culture as their heritage.
My definition of unionism in Ireland is basically the refusal to share power and a deliberate struggle to maintain control through the union with Britain using undemocratic partition against the expressed wishes of the people of Ireland.
“All your posts about reconciliation ring hollow to me. It seems you mean that Unionists must reconcile themselves to a future in a United Ireland where they are despised.”
Like Catholics were/are despised Gio? As I had to remind Neill and I now remind you: It wasn’t Catholics that ran a state of sectarianism and discrimination, that was Unionism and Unionist political parties today refuse to acknowledge it, never mind apologize for it.
Being critical of Unionism doesn’t mean Jessica doesn’t believe in reconciliation. The reality is political Unionism has made absolutely no attempts at reconciliation and out reach to Catholics/Nationalists/Republicans, if you disagree then please offer examples of when they did.
I cant speak for Jessica but I think it would be fair to say Jessica has no more love for Unionists than Unionists would have for her. That’s very different from her hating Unionists or Unionists hating her.
The truth is Unionism has been a major problem on this island for centuries, you can either be outraged at this statement but that’s the reality and history clearly shows it. But History is History, it cant be changed but is political Unionism taking actions to make sure our future is better than our history? From what I see: no and it seems they have no intentions of changing any time soon….
““Unionists are impotent, pathetic and narrow minded little people who will in time be no more than an irritation.””
“Let me elaborate further as I stand by this comment 100%.”
“impotent”
In the past unionists have abused their control of the police to get their own way.
The police reforms have almost done away with this, no longer can they simply expect to be forced down Garvaghy road, no more workers strikes, no more holding us all to ransom with state wide protests and orange order led civil disobedience.
Transformation of the PSNI has emasculated unionism, you only need to look at the lacklustre flag protests and the failure of their graduated response to see for yourself the true impotence that remains.
“pathetic and narrow minded little people”
A few examples, Gregory Campbells “curry my yogurt”.
Peter Robinson, “I would trust them to go to the shops for me”
Arlene Foster “Rogues and renegades”
Edwin Poots “party members have to hold their noses when doing business with Sinn Féin”
Danny Kennedy “political institutions are contaminated”
How much more pathetic and narrow mindedness can you expect from an elected representatives of unionism.
“in time be no more than an irritation”
This is not suggesting any vilification of unionism, but that when true democracy and independent control of our own affairs is achieved, the people from unionist backgrounds will be treated as equals, though will be expected to adhere to democratic principals and the rule of law just like the rest of us. Preference to be part of the UK is perfectly acceptable, but can only come about by democratic means and by convincing the majority of the country it is what is best.
It was and is never acceptable to partition a country in order to create a divided majority against the democratically expressed wishes of the nation. It was wrong and true reconciliation can only come about when that wrong is undone.
jessica
Perhaps what you should have said is:
“Some Unionists are…”
“Perhaps what you should have said is:
“Some Unionists are…””
You are absolutely right gio.
My emotions got the better of me.
I should know better than to tar everyone with the same brush.
My apologies
Great article Jessica, strong words which I’m sure many Unionists would disagree with but you, like them, are entitled to your opinion but I’ll point out you have a mountain of evidence to back up what you just typed.
Paisley was a fundamentalist crackpot, just like many fundamentalist crackpots that went before him which unfortunately the Irish had the grave misfortunate to share this beautiful island with. I’ve come across many Unionists who bash Catholics for voting for “Sinn Fein IRA murderers” but yet I point out the majority of Catholics didn’t vote for SF until the peace agreement of the late 1990’s. On the other hand Unionists were voting for Paisley decades before that, when in his prime of spreading hatred of Catholics which caused a flood of young protestants to join terrorist groups for the sole reason of “killing a taig”. The more extreme Paisley got, the more Unionist votes he got. When I mention this to Unionists they either suddenly don’t reply or try to justify it…..that’s why I’ve come to the conclusion that hypocrisy runs through the veins of Unionism just as much as bigotry.
Unionism is often compared to White Supremacists of the Southern States of the USA. Was it a coincidence that the Civil Rights Movement here took inspiration from the non-violent Civil Rights Movement in the USA? I think not. I often find it interesting how the Southern states of the USA was planted by mostly Ulster Scots/Scots Irish farmers (Irish Catholics mainly settled in the industrial cities in the northern USA) and their descendants for decades (or centuries) implemented supremacist policies against Black people just like the Ulster Scots did here in Ireland against Irish Catholics. Is it genetic? Is there such thing as a “bigot” gene? or a “bitter” gene? or maybe even a “I’m – Unionist – therefore – I’m – entitled – to – Special – Treatment ” gene? I don’t know but I tend to try to not group people together on their race/ancestry, never mind grouping people together on perceived political opinion but Unionists do do a good job of living up to stereotype.
Arlene Foster is now the new leader of the largest Unionist party and already she has bashed any hope of bringing Unionism into the 21st century. She has declared that she wont be going to any “so called commemorations” (her words) of the Easter Rising. She’s keen to make her stance very clear: I’m showing no respect or acceptance of “them’uns” commemorations or values. The stance of Sinn Fein (and the SDLP) has been to respect what’s perceived as Unionist events but Unionism has no intention whatsoever of returning that same respect.
Is Unionism a virus? a disease? a sickness? Well it certainly inflicts an unusual and very unhealthy amount of bigotry in many who associate with it. But hey, guess what? I have good news, I have the cure! Its a thing called: EQUALITY. This Equality needs to be administered in a particular way though in order to work effectively, it needs to be administered ruthlessly and zero tolerance should be given to protests from the sick. Its not only for the sick’s own good, but for everyone’s.
Not saying you were dismissing them by the way Ryan, thanks for your response, the gene thing was a good point I wanted to pick up on.
Jessica
33 posts out of 78 at the last count on this particular topic!With all due respect,do you have a life outside the Jude Collins blogspot ?
I think Jessica, that Unionism as an ideology has many innate problems. For many years the lack of positive and progressive leadership has resulted in a community being left behind and still living in a beyond era – whilst the Nationalist community have moved on. Unionism is having an identity crisis, yet no one there to help them through the crisis – the supremacy of the old Northern state, their little bastion of power and control is gone – I feel there is still an inclination within the Unionist community that a return of same is possible. The leadership within Unionism has failed to reach out or even fail in wanting to reach out. In relation to shared History and reconciliation, it is clear Nationalism is ahead of the game. Unionism, with much of their narrow minded narratives, don’t want to move from beyond them. I see Arlene wont engage with Easter Rising commemorations – I never expected her to celebrate same, obviously, but if we are to move forward a common shared and respected History is paramount. In the past Nationalists have attended War commemorations out of respect, to be dignified – this respect and dignity is perhaps what is missing within Unionism …
I agree with you completely TheHist, but I think we have bent over backwards long enough.
If they cant get their shit together then it is their own problem and we should move on and look at building the Ireland the rest of us want to live in without them.
They will always be welcomed, they know that themselves really, but the constant procrastination is becoming very tiresome.
As you say, they are not looking forward, but looking everywhere and anywhere for some magic rabbit to appear out of a hat that will restore their confidence and as you rightly say, “their little bastion of power and control”
If we just move on, the realisation will sink in eventually. I think there is enough meat on the bones of the GFA in terms of equality for british AND Irish identities to allow us move in out own separate directions.
It is time the dog started wagging its own tail and not the other way around.
Jessica, you seem to have a problem describing Irish unionists.
Simple – the term is an oxymoron, and beyond logic.
By the way, I see our new First Minister, following up on the Fresh Start promises, has said she will have nothing whatever to do with the 1916 Uprising commemorations.
That, to me, means that almost 50% of the north of Ireland population do not, in effect, have a First Minister.
“That, to me, means that almost 50% of the north of Ireland population do not, in effect, have a First Minister.”
All of the people of Ireland including the north of Ireland have a first minister Sherdy, he is called an Taoiseach.
Until we get a strong leader in Dail Eireann, the interests of the Irish citizens in the north will be neglected.
It is time the Irish citizens in the north used our “equal status” as Irish under GFA to take our vote in Dail elections. Perhaps that will help an Taoiseach to grow a spine.
“That, to me, means that almost 50% of the north of Ireland population do not, in effect, have a First Minister.”
There’s a reason why the Deputy First Minister has the same powers as the First Minister Sherdy, and I think Arlene’s words and actions before and after her election as DUP leader showed why. Who could forget her “Keep them’uns out” logic when it came to Nationalists filling roles in the Executive when the DUP were doing the hokey pokey of resigning and then returning to Executive roles, one of which was Health Minister, at a time when our Hospitals were in serious trouble and people were even dying due to lack of beds, doctors, etc but the DUP thought their game of hokey pokey was more important….
Sherdy
You cannot put people in boxes in such a black and white manner. People can be unionist and still retain their Irishness. People can be African American,or British and European etc.
To you that may be illogical but others are entitled to disagree.
Of course one cannot be an Irish Nationalist and also a Unionist but no-one claims to be as far as I know.
“You cannot put people in boxes in such a black and white manner. People can be unionist and still retain their Irishness. People can be African American,or British and European etc.
To you that may be illogical but others are entitled to disagree.”
No I think you are spot on gio.
I think what you are confirming, is that unionism is not one grouping but has a variance which I would tend to agree with after recent posts.
Perhaps we are not using the correct terminology.
Thought provoking Jessica, Unionism is definitely not a nationality …..but what is it ? Is it a sycophantic belief in the divine right of one human being to rule over another ? Is it the “school bully syndrome” where you think grovelling will offer you protection …..but from what ? Is it the misconception that sharing similar right-wing views makes you part of a “stronger gang” ? I wish someone would conduct a proper psychoanalysis of Unionism……they’re definitely extremely insecure….I think Sigmund Freud ,were he alive ,would have a field day ! From the format of the GFA we can dismiss those yearning to return to the infamous and inglorious days of Stormont…not even if hell freezes over, but there are those who think they can make “Northern Ireland” work. After 18 years even they fail miserably to grasp even the idea of equality . In the council chambers where they are a majority it’s pre-1969 business as usual . On tv and radio they constantly belittle and denigrate our language ,our games and our culture . They seem to be oblivious to their falling head count , to changing demographics , to a young ,vibrant , confident and well educated Nationalist youth and to my generation who will never lie down again ! Presently they would fail to convince even the palest of pale green Nationalist that this place could become a viable entity…
why return to stormont.
Mike Nesbit said it best Seamus, it is the wrong side of history.
Goodness you must be glad Pastor McConnell didn’t get prosecuted.
Republicans can’t deny the fact the Irish Catholic Church made it easy for the likes of Paisley to whip up fear within the predominantly Protestant community. All he had to do was point to the free state to demonstrate how much of a grip the church had in all aspects of society, be it sport,politics,schools etc.
When an Irish Taoiseach declares he’s a catholic first and an Irishman second then it does indeed sound ominous for any Protestant.
“Goodness you must be glad Pastor McConnell didn’t get prosecuted.”
He is dosed with it MT 🙂
As Ryan quite rightly pointed out, equality is the cure.
“but quite simply it is a form of Irish apartheid, and something that should be opposed and not tolerated, never mind encouraged.”
OK Jessica, here’s today’s challenge, square away what you’ve just said with the more modern forms of unionism e.g. Tina McKenzie’s.
Just because there are so many daft versions of unionism doesn’t mean that other forms don’t exist.
And if other forms exist then a lot of your (borderline hate-filled) statements ring hollow.
“Unionism is a sickness in Ireland, with the main symptoms that of sectarian bigotry and low self-esteem, leading to feelings of English subordinance”
I and other (smarter than me) unionists such as Brian John Spencer and Linda Ervine have NONE of those qualities; rather we see the qualities of Irish culture (especially those of an Ulster-Irish variety) and place NO sectarian obstacles in such cultural paths.
‘Unionism’ had to form an electoral pact to secure East Belfast, one of the most Protestant areas in NI, luckily for you they won (narrowly) otherwise your post would be on even shakier foundation.
AM – I’d agree with you re B J Spencer and L Ervine. But does the fact that these two people stand out not support to some extent the notion of a core of unionism that is intolerant, etc?
“AM – I’d agree with you re B J Spencer and L Ervine. But does the fact that these two people stand out not support to some extent the notion of a core of unionism that is intolerant, etc?”
Unionism needs to first define itself and separate itself from the bigotry.
It has been given long enough to do this. Time it cut to the chase. It is not up to nationalists to do this for them, and I personally have had enough listening to them desperately trying to figure themselves out and dealing with the sectarianism and hatred they inspired for generations.
It happened, deal with it.
The IRA did not suddenly starting attacking the British state forces for no reason.
“OK Jessica, here’s today’s challenge, square away what you’ve just said with the more modern forms of unionism e.g. Tina McKenzie’s.”
First of all, does Tina McKenzie consider herself a unionist?
If she does, then would it not be up to her to square away her beliefs against the truths I have outlined in this article.
You say you are a unionist AG.
Why don’t you give it a go?
Why should I be denied allegiance to my own country over unionism taking part of the country into a sectarian state to prop itself up within the UK against the democratic wishes of the nation?
Where do I fit in with your ideals of unionism first AG?
“rather we see the qualities of Irish culture (especially those of an Ulster-Irish variety) and place NO sectarian obstacles in such cultural paths.”
As I said, there is a sliding scale between those who veto the language act, and those that are happy to let others veto it.
What annoys you the most AG, is that my post is accurate and you know it.
“I recently described unionism on the blog as a sliding scale between white supremacist, right-wing neo-Nazi to Catholic-hating elitist which is when I realised I had something in common with the old firebrand. I despise unionism and all it stands for, yet I have no problem with the individuals who are brought up in what is known as a unionist or loyalist community and often get on very well with any I meet.”
Out of curiosity, when you meet these individuals from the unionist or loyalist community do you tell them that you believe them to be of a background that is “sliding scale between white supremacist, right-wing neo-Nazi to Catholic-hating elitist” and that “I despise unionism and all it stands for”?
Out of curiosity, when you meet these individuals from the unionist or loyalist community do you tell them that you believe them to be of a background that is “sliding scale between white supremacist, right-wing neo-Nazi to Catholic-hating elitist” and that “I despise unionism and all it stands for”?
Many years ago now AG, I worked in a factory in Portadown. The union jack waved on a flag pole that I had to walk under every day.
Sectarianism was a given, the Catholics knew how to deal with it and ignored most but were always a able to stand our corner in arguments which did arrive from time to time and occasionally when emotions got high some hurtful things were said on both sides.
Most of the year we would all get along fine in the main. Just normal people doing a days work. But come the 12th, it was like the full moon had come out and the vast majority of the protestant workforce took on a totally different persona.
During the garvaghy road standoffs, there was an organised protest during work hours where management and most of the protestant workforce congregated under the flag.
I have no idea what they possibly achieved but it happened. Catholics were left alone in the top factory and it was strange times. One of the management was on TV in sash attacking police.
After the summer holidays it was as if it never happened, all friends again.
I want to be clear, I have nothing against the unionist people, it is when the symptoms of unionism shows it ugly head it is this change that I detest.
What I want you to consider when you are promoting unionism in Ireland, it is like promoting the white democrats in the American south, the orange marches are no more cultural than the processions by the klu klux klan.
And to answer your question, No, I don’t bring up politics or religion with those I know hang ulster flags out their windows or I know hold deeply religious views as to do so would change our relationship completely as I have seen so often in the past.
Even when I hear them making what I consider offensive remarks, quite often I bite my tongue to avoid trouble.
It is unionism that has left us in a place where Irish nationalists are left with a choice to turn a blind eye and let unionism get on with its public dismissing everything Irish, acting at time without thought and with impunity.
Let me give you another personal example, when naming my first child, I was advised by family members not to give him an Irish name in case he was attacked by unionists when he was older, i.e. giving the child an Irish name might somehow mark him for unionist aggression later.
You are intelligent enough to know I am not making this up AG.
If you are saying it is time nationalists stood up and spoke out more than we do, then I agree. That is what I am doing now is it not?
Well we’ve all got our prejudices and fair fucks to Jessica for admitting to hers. This article’s certainly brought out mine. Personally I find the republican dismissal of slavery and apartheid as something comparable with the position of Catholics in Ireland or Northern Ireland deeply racist and disgusting.
With such a bigoted hypocritical view its little wonder that Sinn Fein’s founder was in favour of launching pogroms against its tiny Jewish community at a time when Belfast had a Jewish Lord Mayor or that Catholics in Wexford felt justified in boycotting the entire Protestant population because a Protestant woman wanted a say in the upbringing of her own children. It’s no wonder that he hear stories of crowds of Catholic youths in Derry beating children back across the peace bridge telling them they have no place west of the river.
We’re seeing the same strategies of exclusion being used by republicans today that served to decimate the rural Protestant populations in the south. Comments above criticise the first minister but in her home country of Fermanagh, in Lisnaskea 120 children are told there’s no place for them to be schooled in their own town and they can just piss off to Enniskillen with the rest of the prods. God forbid that a republicanism that claims to cherish all the children of Ireland equally should consider changing the status of Catholic schools in Lisnaskea to make room for non-Catholic children. Clintyclay shows us Sinn Fein’s preference for segregation is no illusion. Perhaps that’s why we keep hearing of apartheid – it’s shinner projection to disguise their own hypocrisy.
Byc – are you saying Catholic schools (or a Catholic school) in Lisnaskea turned away non-Catholic children? And if so, why? I’d be interested in further detail.
I’m not privy to intake selection in Lisnaskea schools Jude but as long as Catholic schools anywhere are permitted to use religion (rather than AQE/GL scores or locations) as a selection criteria, non-Catholic children will only ever be second best place fillers.
I’s sure you know that the education minister has closed Lisnaskea high school as he previously closed Donaghadee and other rural high schools which didn’t have sufficient places to offer the full breadth of the national curriculum. His solution was to build a new state school in Enniskillen that would cater for non-Catholic children gathered in from from the surrounding county. My question is why didn’t the minister consider the obvious, republican, alternative – end religious community as an acceptable selection criteria ond require all the nations’s school to make equal provision for the pastoral care of all the nation’s children.
You must see that the centralisation of minority school provision will drive the centralisation of rural minority communities. Bussing may mean that effect isn’t as dramatic as the removal of Protestant children from rural communities in the south to boarding schools in county towns and Dublin but a republican education plan should be for the integration of our society, not its further division and Sinn Fein are too smart and too cynical not to see the effect of their policy.
I’ve nothing against Catholic patronage – Catholic schools are excellent – but the CMMS is privileged to provide a state funded education to our children – it has not entitled to use that privledge to damage our society with segregation that breeds fhe sort of intolerance being shown in comments here.
“damage our society with segregation that breeds fhe sort of intolerance being shown in comments here” – I simply don’t agree with you that Catholic schools ‘breed’ intolerance. Nor, for that matter, does the state or Protestant sector. I know this because I’m a product of a Catholic education, I spent my working life going into schools and classrooms of all kinds and this intolerance you spoke of is nowhere evident. State schools do have a unionist ethos and Catholic schools do have a Catholic ethos; but I have never heard a teacher of either stripe utter a single word that could be interpreted as intolerant. Where does your information that they do promote intolerance come from?
It isn’t necessary for a school system to have an overtly discriminatory policy or even bigoted teachers in our society Jude. It’s enough that it provides the infrastructure for the separation that underpins prejudice. Others will provide the indoctrination. I’m aware that John Cushnahan attended the same school in (I think) the same year as Gerry Adams and that they obviously saw very different paths to repairing our divisions. I can never understand why people who hate partition in our island and more than happy with partition in our towns.
Here’s a little anecdote that might throw light on my position. When I taught the Post-Graduate Certificate in Education, which involved people who had a degree being equipped for teaching in the classroom, the subject of integrated education was considered. Most of my group of students, I regularly found, were very strongly for integrated education. When I asked why, they said in so many words what you’ve said – that separation produced bigotry. I then asked them to put up their hand if they’d been educated in a Catholic or a state/Protestant school. Almost every hand would go up. “Do you consider yourself a bigot?” I would ask. They would vigorously – and rightly – deny that they were anything of the sort. “I came through the Catholic system” I’d tell them. “And neither am I”.
“I can never understand why people who hate partition in our island and more than happy with partition in our towns.”
Do you think the two might be in any way connected BYC?
They are Jessica. The partition of our Island is absolutely a consequence of sectarianism in our society. Sectarianism did not spring into being as a result of partition. I don’t know if that’s the product of English policy in Ireland or something that goes back to the martyrdom of Patrick Hamilton in Aberdeen in 1528 but I do know that if you want to fix partition you need to fix sectarianism and for too long the republican position has been that getting rid of the English would remove the problem when it obviously wouldn’t.
“They are Jessica. The partition of our Island is absolutely a consequence of sectarianism in our society. Sectarianism did not spring into being as a result of partition. I don’t know if that’s the product of English policy in Ireland or something that goes back to the martyrdom of Patrick Hamilton in Aberdeen in 1528 but I do know that if you want to fix partition you need to fix sectarianism and for too long the republican position has been that getting rid of the English would remove the problem when it obviously wouldn’t.”
More lies and bullshit
Sectarianism in Ireland stemmed from protestant supremacy. Catholics were the majority but were treated like shite.
Home rule was about to end that supremacy for protestants and rather than accept equality and to build a society with their catholic neighbours, unionism decided to threaten civil war to maintain control and when that was failing decided instead to create a new portioned statelet in the north east of ulster.
Unionism and english rule in Ireland has delivered sectarianism for centuries but thankfully now English rule is nearing its end.
Getting rid of the English has been proven it will work in Ireland, look at the south of Ireland. We don’t see sectarianism in the republic. though unionism still exists there
Had unionism been prepared to be part of the Irish nation then, it doesn’t take a genius to know how much greater this country could have been.
Even now at the beginning in of the last days, unionism will fight kicking and screaming to the very end to cling on to its sectarian roots than to make peace with the rest of the country.
Unionism is a lost cause
Wheats got you so worked up this time?
I said partition was the result of sectarianism And that we’d have to fix sectarianism to fix partition.
You said that partition sustains sectarianism and that if the English left and we had all-Island majority rule sectarianism would disappear (as you say it has in the south) because unionists would have nothing to gain from sectarian behaviour (or it wouldn’t be tolerated).
Those aren’t actually opposing positions.
“if the English left and we had all-Island majority rule sectarianism would disappear (as you say it has in the south) because unionists would have nothing to gain from sectarian behaviour (or it wouldn’t be tolerated). ”
Not sure who you are referring this to, but that wouldn’t be my preference though could well be the way it goes if the GFA is allowed to be implemented in line with the demographics.
My preference would be to negotiate an all island settlement now when unionism is at its strongest as this would in my opinion provide the best chance of it being accepted willingly and therefore provide a lasting peace.
My fear is that if it happens after the inevitable swing to nationalist majority, the chances of civil unrest would be greater.
Such negotiations for agreement would take years and I believe they are already well underway.
“Personally I find the republican dismissal of slavery and apartheid as something comparable with the position of Catholics in Ireland or Northern Ireland deeply racist and disgusting.”
I am very glad that you find republican dismissal racist and disgusting BYC.
Now tell me what you feel about the fact it is very much true.
Here are a few direct quotes from the link I also presented which you have ignored.
“measures deliberately set up in order to prevent black citizens from registering to vote”
Where there not measures in Ireland to prevent Catholics from voting?
“the white Democrats used paramilitary groups from the 1870s to suppress black Republican voting ”
Carson created the first paramilitaries in Ireland on behalf of unionism, was the UVF sole focus not to subvert democracy and guarantee the continuation of protestant supremacy?
“They overturned a duly elected biracial government and widely attacked the black community, destroying lives and property.”
Did unionism not attack Catholics in the late 1960s with the help of the police to drive out Catholics, burning their homes in pogroms?
“instituted overt racial segregation throughout federal government workplaces and established racial discrimination in hiring.”
Any catholic my age will have first hand experience of sectarianism in the work place, is was rampant in northern Ireland. There were factories with walls painted with murals of King Billy so what few Catholics working there could not escape the discrimination.
Unionism today cannot get away with such acts, but a section of unionism is still desperate to somehow get back to exactly that position of privilege it once had. It is unionisms failure to let go of the past is what is holding us back.
Those days are gone forever, while you may by disgusted at a republican for daring to tell the truth about what unionisms true roots are, perhaps you would also like to comment on the examples provided above which back up my claims.
Carson claimed his agenda was to protect the rights of Irish (and later Ulster) people as citizens of the empire. I’ve never read him make any claim to supremacy. He did challenge Redmond saying that he had never tried to understand Ulster. You should read the speeches. Redmond didn’t bother to respond to him.
Your saying that the failure of the Stormont government to enact the 1948 reforms on local government until the MacCrory commission and 1973 act improved on them was the same as apartheid? It’s a wonder my own miscegenated family escaped prison then. Perhaps the border campaign undermined those northern politicians who would have favoured reform.
On the pogrom question do you ever wonder how An Culturlann sits in an abandoned Presbyterian church or how another abandoned Protestant church sits in the grounds of St Matthias’ church up the road. Did the west Belfast Protestant populations just evaporate?
Are you saying that there was a pogrom of unionists from the Falls Road, Byc? That’s pretty rich. Do the words ‘Bombay Street’ mean anything to you?
They do Jude and I know how important an event it is to the republican narrative. Have you read Malachai O’Doherty’s more general account of the day?
See my comment above, byc
http://malachiodoherty.com/2009/08/12/the-pogrom-myth/
I don’t know whether he’s right or wrong but i can’t see why he’d lie.
Well I like Malachi and I’d never accuse him of being a liar. But I would accuse him of being resolutely anti-republican – something which I think he’d maybe concede himself.
“http://malachiodoherty.com/2009/08/12/the-pogrom-myth/
I don’t know whether he’s right or wrong but i can’t see why he’d lie.”
The rioting in Belfast was indeed started by republicans in support of what was going on in Derry.
I have covered in a little more depth here BYC.
http://www.judecollins.com/2015/12/truth-justice-and-reconciliation-part-3-by-jessica-mcgrann/
I am sure you are not suggesting that a riot during a turbulent time which was in relation to civil rights justifies the burning of hundreds of catholic homes and the displacement of thousands of civilians by loyalists with the direct assistance of the police?
“Your saying that the failure of the Stormont government to enact the 1948 reforms on local government until the MacCrory commission and 1973 act improved on them was the same as apartheid? ”
I did not say it was the same as the south African apartheid, I said it was a form of apartheid which means “separateness”, or “the state of being apart”,
Ireland is one country, any political settlement can only begin with that factual reality.
“On the pogrom question do you ever wonder how An Culturlann sits in an abandoned Presbyterian church or how another abandoned Protestant church sits in the grounds of St Matthias’ church up the road. Did the west Belfast Protestant populations just evaporate?”
I am not pro catholic BYC, and I would be all for an agreed settlement once and for all that will prevent such animosity between our people. If we strip away the unionist / republican / catholic and protestant, we are all Irish. Perhaps we should start with what unites us.
In relation to your point, the pogroms if the 1960s were deliberate and organised by political unionism with the assistance of the police.
Can you at least acknowledge the difference and where my post here is coming from?
What has unionism done to convince the majority population on this island that division is in our interests?
Ireland already has a united people, united in its culture of music, song, dance and language.
Why should we trade that for a culture of sectarian marching, the ritual burning our flag and symbols, a unionist ethos of derision and hatred of anything that differs from its narrow minded views?
Ireland is already united in sport, rugby, golf, rowing, cricket, hockey.
Why should we give that unity up to support sectarian division, where our people will be pilloried for making the wrong choice, where the same sectarian division that divides our country, will also divide the people within the unionist state.
Ireland is already united in infrastructure, travel, tourism, roads, railways, gas and power, the banks.
Our economies are directly intertwined and even interdependent.
Why should we want to reinforce the expensive waste in duplication of our countries administration, maintenance of its infrastructure, division its natural resources?
Ireland may not be perfect, we may not have the wealth of england, we may not have the military capacity of england, we may not have the political maturity of england. But what we do have is ours, the independence to stand on our own two feet, the opportunity to give our people what england cannot, a soul. The opportunity to build a united nation, a united people, to end forever the causes of past divisions and conflict, to give the Irish community throughout the world a home nation that they can be proud off.
Only by bringing together our islands resources, talents, passions, capabilities can we give the best opportunities for all of our people.
Only by merging together our economies can our businesses flourish, more jobs, more wealth which in turn will lead to better education, better healthcare, better welfare and care of our elderly and those with special needs.
No, unionism is an ideology of division in Ireland, division over a relationship with England that in itself is divided. For some it is for purely economic betterment, others reject their Irish roots and prefer the notion of ulster as a fantasy 6 county province of Britain. For some, Ulster loyalism, sees itself primarily as a self-contained cultural community with a secondary political allegiance to the British state for others it is an Ulster British tradition which defines itself as being an integral part of Greater Britain with a secondary regional patriotism for Northern Ireland.
Division within division.
In the words of Michael McGimpsey, who defined unionism in an interview on, 16 October 1991
http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/issues/politics/union/fcchap2.htm
•As I see it, I’m an Irish Unionist. I’m Irish, that’s my race if you like. My identity is British, because that is the way I have been brought up, and I identify with Britain and there are historical bonds, psychological bonds, emotional bonds, all the rest of it you know. I’m not so much anti-united Ireland as I am pro-Union with Britain, and I would be quite prepared to take a united Ireland tomorrow, if somehow the whole of Ireland could have some form of Union grafted [on] . . . But to talk of independence in Northern Ireland, Northern Ireland is not a country, Northern Ireland is a province of Ireland and it is a province in the UK and I think that the notion of a national identity or group identity or racial identity or cultural identity here is a nonsense. We have a particular ethos OK, but it draws so heavily from the Irish and from the British that I think independence is a nonsense.
So that coherence of argument from a moderate unionist is what we should build upon is it?
So at least some portion of unionism believes it is Irish, but not the same Irish as that lot down the road.
Is it not time unionism got over its hatred of all things Irish. One thing is for sure, Northern Ireland will always be part of Ireland.
I do not want my children growing up in a state who’s whole psychological ethos is derived from hatred and sectarian bigotry. Those are things I despise.
It is not the unionist people that I despise, but their ideology.
Only unification will deal with those differences and put them to bed.
Unionist leaders have not even attempted to convince nationalists why the union might be better for us.
They have constantly abused the veto to block the Irish language act, to prevent anything that might benefit those from a nationalist tradition to enforce unionist agendas. Our political representatives are treated with derision, a “stench”, “rogues”, “renegades”, unfit to manage things on their own and requiring hand holding and policing to make sure they don’t run off with the coffers. Our culture is mocked, “curry my yogurt”, our political leaders vilified, our church treated with disdain.
I have seen enough of how unionist rule will look, and I want no part of it.
Honest of you to list all those West Brit pastimes as the things that unite us Jessica. It’s a pity republican aversions keep us out of the commonwealth and stop Team Ireland competing as one at Commonwealth games.
You seem to spend a lot of energy fighting a straw man of your own imagination though. The GFA has been in place almost twenty years and no-one apart from republican dissidents and vanishing unionist fringe of the TUV/UKIP (2 MLAs and falling) is challenging it. If you had more faith in your demographic projection you’d be arguing for an end to petitions of concern. If we had that we’d already have equal marriage and perhaps an Irish language act as these are Alliance and Green Party policy. If you exclude the liberal centre from any decision making you can hardly complain if people then vote for the more extreme parties that appear to make the decisions.
“Honest of you to list all those West Brit pastimes as the things that unite us Jessica. It’s a pity republican aversions keep us out of the commonwealth and stop Team Ireland competing as one at Commonwealth games.”
Is it republican aversions or partition that did that BYC?
“The GFA has been in place almost twenty years and no-one apart from republican dissidents and vanishing unionist fringe of the TUV/UKIP (2 MLAs and falling) is challenging it. ”
You misunderstand I am not challenging it at all, I in fact support it.
I am challenging unionism to convince nationalist Ireland that it offers anything more than continuous sectarian division.
As you say, it is 20 years on since the GFA agreement and it still isn’t implemented, unionists still don’t treat nationalists with respect.
Is it ever likely to change?
How should we react when there is inevitably a nationalist majority?
Perhaps it would help if you define unionism as an ideology to me, justify partition, justify why I should accept my flag and my culture are treated any less by the state I pay taxes to as much as anyone else.
jessica
You say that Unionists do not treat Nationalists with respect, a point I agree with to some degree.
But you also make it clear you have no respect for Unionism or Unionists.
Should we not aspire to mutual respect?
Is it not possible that there are Unionists (perhaps in the younger generation) who aspire to a Union where people are equal in all respects within a political union.
Is that not a legitimate political view, albeit one you disagree with?
Generations of unionists have lived on this island yet you seem to think they must all be racists bigots supremacists etc.
I find those views appalling and a bit scary to be honest.
No better than what happened in the worst days of Unionist rule (before you point that out!)
“But you also make it clear you have no respect for Unionism or Unionists.”
I treat everyone with respect gio.
We may get passionate in our arguments but it is an emotional subject, often coupled with traumatic experiences which can lead to colourful dialog which you will just have to forgive.
Why should any single person reading this have any respect for an ideology that is built upon the denial of democracy, that has stolen my right to live in a peaceful Ireland, free of foreign rule and to participate fully in the affairs of my own country?
Justify unionism for me gio which you still haven’t done?
“Is it not possible that there are Unionists (perhaps in the younger generation) who aspire to a Union where people are equal in all respects within a political union. Is that not a legitimate political view, albeit one you disagree with?”
I have no problem with anyone in Ireland aspiring to be part of the EU, the UK or holding any political view or being of any religion.
I do have a problem with what unionism has done over the past 100 years, with the fact the unionists today, still cannot admit what unionism has done was wrong, who still try to justify the division it has brought to my country and it pisses me off.
What I say to anyone who believes in unionism and refuses to accept that they have divided my country and caused sectarian conflict, just who the hell do you think you are?
jessica
I don’t see how you can use the language you have used about Unionists and Unionism and then claim to treat them with respect.
It is not for me to justify Unionism (maybe Am G or neil can help) but I would justify the right to be a Unionist.
Despite the historic wrongs done by British governments and Unionism here in Ireland it is still a perfectly legitimate aspiration.
The GFA accepts that, Sinn Fein accept that, most people in my experience accept that.
Wanting a future in the Union is not the same thing as condoning the wrongs of the past. Just as wanting a United Ireland does not equate with condoning the atrocities of the IRA. You cannot hold people today responsible for what happened 50 years ago.
“I don’t see how you can use the language you have used about Unionists and Unionism and then claim to treat them with respect.
It is not for me to justify Unionism (maybe Am G or neil can help) but I would justify the right to be a Unionist.
Despite the historic wrongs done by British governments and Unionism here in Ireland it is still a perfectly legitimate aspiration.”
I have agreed that there needs to be more clarity around my use of the term unionist gio.
I also agree that seeking Ireland to be part of the UK, EU or any relationship with other countries is a perfectly legitimate aspiration.
Partition of my country was not legitimate, was not democratic, was not self determination and quite simply was wrong and unjust.
I do not have an aspiration for unification, I have a unbending determination to have that injustice undone and a proper relationship as equals between all aspirations on this island.
Unionism on top of that injustice of partition is therefore not a legitimate aspiration and I don’t see how anyone can see it as such.
I must say gio, for someone who dislikes being referred to as unionist, and considers himself a poor republican, you certainly appear to have a pro partitionist mind-set.
Do you feel that is ok to divide a country because one group with a narrow majority or at least narrow electoral majority of MPs if not population wise in one part of that country do not like a proposed legislation?
What if Muslims wanted a separate state within England, would that be a legitimate entity if the majority overall in England were against it and it was enforced militarily.
jessica
If you can offer any pro partition comments I have made I would be interested!
I would prefer to see a United Ireland and I hope to see it in my lifetime.
I’m sorry I have to keep repeating that.
I think Unionists have the right to put the case for the Union and should not be reviled for it.
Present day Unionists are not to blame for how the partitioned state came into being, just as present day US citizens are not to blame for how the native population was treated and had their land taken.
Partition is a reality.We start from where we are not from where we wish we were.
“If you can offer any pro partition comments I have made I would be interested!”
You just made another one in this very post.
“Partition is a reality.We start from where we are not from where we wish we were.”
I take it by this you mean, partition may have been unjust, it may have led to a sectarian state in which sectarianism is still a real problem, but rather than deal with the root cause and rectify that injustice and correct the problems of our past, lets keep partition and expect everyone to just move on. That is pro partition.
It is also not dealing with the root causes of division here.
Any long term solution has to be agreeable to a majority of people on both islands. I say both islands as there will inevitably be a British dimension, but I assure you it will not involve partition.
Until you gasp that, you are not going to get anywhere.
There are two options, we agree a settlement when unionism is at its strongest, or we wait it out and negotiate when there is a nationalist majority.
jessica
Acknowledging that partition is a reality is not pro partition. You yourself acknowledge it. That is a silly comment really.
“Acknowledging that partition is a reality is not pro partition. You yourself acknowledge it. That is a silly comment really.”
It was not the acknowledgement so much as the acceptance.
There are many of us who do not accept the legitimacy of the border and believe it is right to do all we can to have it removed and the division of our country lifted. I believe it will be to the advantage of every person on the island but there are some who prefer division over prosperity and will fight it all the way.
Can you not just accept that is a legitimate aspiration and not assume everyone considers partition legitimate just because you do?
jessica
I thought I had made it clear enough that I am not in favour of continued partition
I am pointing out that that is our starting point whether we like it or not, whether we think it legitimate or not.
You should continue to aspire to remove the border by all peaceful means. I fully support you in that.
I just want to point out, that not 1 single person here has defended unionism.
No-one??
It is not ok to say you are a unionist but then ignore the reality of what unionism has done in the past and is continuing to do.
Simply shouting abuse for daring to question unionism is pathetic.
I often hear vilification of loyalist groups who seem to take the blame for everything bad within unionism.
I will reiterate, Unionism having caused division in the first place, is persisting division and I am alleging that it has nothing else to offer only division.
Unionism has acted in the same manner the white supremacists in the American south did to blacks both with paramilitary wings that unionism introduced to Ireland.
The reason there is hush around the criticism of unionism is its militancy. Fear that it will lead to violent response.
Don’t rock the boat, you might set things off.
Wait until the demographics change and the veto of concern wont be abused.
Bullshit
If unionism cannot accept a democratic decision to not fly a flag 365 days of the year or not to march down a road their presence causes offence, what is it going to do if there are calls for a referendum on unification?
These issues need to be addressed now and not wait until people are killed by angry unionists objecting to calls for implementation of the GFA later.
I guess that’s one possible explanation why loyalist groups didn’t have to fully decommission and the state hasn’t bothered looking for their arms.
I guess the unionist threat hasn’t gone away
God you do go on about reunification it happening now or any time to the medium term.So what are you and your fellow republicans going to do pick up your weapons again?
“God you do go on about reunification it happening now or any time to the medium term.So what are you and your fellow republicans going to do pick up your weapons again?”
Reunification is happening now neill.
We have even seen the first steps in joint policing.
The very last step will be a referendum of the people.
What I am interested in is what unionism is going to do when it realises, considering track record in terms of violent response.
Which minister was found to be openly guilty of sectarianism I will give you a little clue it wasn’t a unionist party the alliance party or the SDLP…
“Which minister was found to be openly guilty of sectarianism I will give you a little clue it wasn’t a unionist party the alliance party or the SDLP…”
found to be openly guilty by who?
The Orange Order is the most sectarian organisation on these islands, lets look at the membership within said parties and that will give you a more realistic measurement of sectarianism within the political parties here.
Because you didn’t answer it was Conor Murphy a Sf minister you know the party that isn’t sectarian and all along we have been told it was only unionists that could be sectarian and yet one of the highest members of Sf did it and you want to sweep it under the carpet. Get your party fixed before you have the audacity to criticise other parties and political beliefs here.
“Get your party fixed before you have the audacity to criticise other parties and political beliefs here”
Unionism in Ireland is sectarian at its core.
It is about dividing a country to leave a gerrymandered majority in control of a deliberately newly redrawn border and isolating the rest of the population within that border from the rest of their country against the wishes and by threat of violence.
It was a recipe for disaster from the off and has proven out to have led to civil right abuses, sectarian policing, sectarian administration and even tolerated sectarianism in the workplace.
I don’t even need to go look for any specific incidents, the whole world knows it was rotten to the core and still has a rotten core which needs to be undone.
Can I remind you again, I am not a member of Sinn Fein.
“minister was found to be openly guilty of sectarianism ”
If you are serious about dealing with sectarianism, do you think members of political parties should be members of the orange order or any grouping including paramilitaries that would be considered unethical post GFA?
http://leftfootforward.org/2011/11/new-study-of-orange-order-exposes-bigotry-at-the-core/
According to the research, just under a third of DUP members (30.5%) are Free Presbyterians and slightly more (34.6%) are members of the Orange institution.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/politics/inside-the-dup-domination-by-free-presbyterian-church-and-orange-order-laid-bare-30330698.html
All SF mlas are Catholics and your point is?
“All SF mlas are Catholics and your point is?”
I would love to see more protestants in Sinn Fein on both parts of the island. As for as I know, there is no exclusion on protestants being members.
I am not a member of Sinn Fein so I would not know, but I would be against any exclusion and would indeed consider it sectarian. I don’t give a monkeys about religion, I might have ben brought up a catholic and my mother might kill me if she heard me say it, but I find some protestant ministers more reasonable than the catholic church. I have posted on this blog before I would like to see Sinn Fein do more to help the more deprived loyalist areas as well nationalist areas. Both deserve more as reparations for what Britain allowed happened here. A joined up approach would I believe have got more financial leverage out of them, but you hardly blame the Tories for tightening up when both sides are still at each others throats.
My point was, 34% of the DUP are members of a blatantly sectarian organisation.
Do you think that is a good thing?