‘There was an IRA march in the middle of Glasgow’, I was casually informed by a woman the other evening. When I pointed out that it was most unlikely that this would be permitted, she told me that the Police were there stewarding it. In the end, she said that it may not have been the IRA but one of those ‘violent’ groups – republicans, probably. I felt it judicious to disengage from the conversation at that point . She was referring to a 1916 commemoration parade by Cáirde na h-Eireann which was legitimately happening with the full consent of Glasgow City Council and which passed off without incident. The significance of the conversation was that this was the considered thought of a middle class, educated woman whose views were more conditioned obviously by right wing journalism than the actual facts.
The Ulsterisation of Scotland has been deployed several times recently by columnists making flawed parallels between the desire for independence in Scotland and the pursuit of a United Ireland. Scottish nationalists want to rescind the 1707 Acts of Union, a negotiated settlement between two sovereign states. Irish partition, on the other hand, was largely imposed on Ireland by Britain, a foreign power, which resorted throughout its inglorious Empire to this device and met invariably with disastrous results.
The right wing press focused on Tory recovery, following the Holyrood Election and totally ignored the fact that the new Scottish Parliament has a majority of members who want independence from Britain. There are none who deceive better than those who practise self-deception. In reality, the Tories were the beneficiaries of a Labour collapse but the ‘NO’ side fell well short of the 55% they achieved in the Referendum. Nicola Sturgeon’s SNP Government will encounter minimal, parliamentary resistance to implementing its policies. Ruth Davidson, Scottish Tory Leader relentlessly milked the independence issue but still only achieved 22% of the vote; she eschewed all mention of toxic Tory policies such as Trident renewal, increasing university fees, austerity cuts, attacks on the rights of trade unionists and all the other issues which David Cameron and his cronies plan to implement against the interests of working people. The Prime Minister never visited Scotland throughout the campaign.
Post EU Referendum, regardless of the outcome, we will witness the Greens, ardent believers in an Independent Scotland, joining with the SNP to convince the people of Scotland that their interests will be best served in separation from the United Kingdom.
A receptive audience, particularly among the young, awaits.
It seems the right wing press is omnipresent and loudest throughout these islands. Says a lot about where the money and power lies. And the lies the duped people of Scotland swallowed!! Pray the won’t get fooled again, the disunited kingdom is hanging by its fingernails.
“The Ulsterisation of Scotland has been deployed several times recently by columnists making flawed parallels between the desire for independence in Scotland and the pursuit of a United Ireland. Scottish nationalists want to rescind the 1707 Acts of Union, a negotiated settlement between two sovereign states. Irish partition, on the other hand, was largely imposed on Ireland by Britain, a foreign power, which resorted throughout its inglorious Empire to this device and met invariably with disastrous results.”
Ireland became an English possession long before the British Empire.
Was never England’s country to take possession of MT, no matter when it was FULL STOP
“Was never England’s country to take possession of MT, no matter when it was FULL STOP”
Not surr what point you’retrying to make. If one is taking possession of something by definition one doesn’t have possession already
Like I said, and all the later countries England/Britain invaded, Ireland never belonged to Britain. Even the Romans saw it as a land apart, the land of winter, yet the greedy hands of Britannia couldn’t help but grab it. Ireland had its own language, civilization, structure and culture yet the English, in their pomp, saw our ancestors as barbaric and in need of civilising. All the while war reigned throughout its own kingdom. No, Ireland was and never shall be Britains right to claim ownership of. The colonisation has brought about a still volatile and impermanent situation to this day. While the anscestors of said colonists have every right to live here, they do not have the right to stymie the economic, social and political progress of the land they live in. I do not accept your pithy attitude as regards the illegal continued rule in a part of Ireland nor did England of ancient times ever have the right to govern any part of Ireland. This country was never annexed in the way, albeit brutally, in the way Wales was. Ireland’s economy has never benefitted under British rule. Does that make it any clearer dearest MT?
“Like I said, and all the later countries England/Britain invaded, Ireland never belonged to Britain”
Yes it did: from 1707 until 1800.
“No, Ireland was and never shall be Britains right to claim ownership of.”
It was, but not any more.
“While the anscestors of said colonists have every right to live here, they do not have the right to stymie the economic, social and political progress of the land they live in.”
They’ve as much right as anyone else. Are you a racist?
“I do not accept your pithy attitude as regards the illegal continued rule in a part of Ireland nor did England of ancient times ever have the right to govern any part of Ireland.”
There is no “illegal rule” in any part of Ireland.
Englsnd did have the right to govern Ireland, though it was in medieval and early modern times, not ancient times.
“Englsnd did have the right to govern Ireland,” – glass half full – I like the past tense…
‘“Englsnd did have the right to govern Ireland,” – glass half full – I like the past tense…’
England ceased to be a separate state in 1707 and, in any case, Ireland and Britain were united in 1801.
“Not surr what point you’retrying to make. If one is taking possession of something by definition one doesn’t have possession already”
So are you supporting the annexation and occupation of other countries MT?
You will be supporting the use of violence to take back that territorial possession next if you’re not careful.
At least we have established that England is in possession of the north east of Ireland.
What do you think we should do about it?
“So are you supporting the annexation and occupation of other countries MT?”
Not sure of the relevance of your question. The diplomatic and military events of the 12th century aren’t relevant measures for making judgements about today. In any case Ireland was neither annexed nor occupied.
“At least we have established that England is in possession of the north east of Ireland.
What do you think we should do about it?”
England isn’t in possession of the north-east of Ireland.
“Ireland became an English possession long before the British Empire.”
That’s right MT, King Henry wasn’t it that annexed Ireland and England has occupied Ireland ever since.
So are you now accepting that part of Ireland still remains occupied?
Ireland was never annexed. Wales was. Which is why the Welsh have no representation on the Butcher’s Apron. One thing about the English. They are stickers for protocol.
“Ireland became an English possession long before the British Empire.”
That’s right MT, king henry wasn’t it?
So are you now accepting that england occupied Ireland and still occupies a part of it?
Eh? Why would I ‘accept’ something that isn’t true. If it waa his possession then by definition he wasn’t ‘occupying’ it.
It is simplistic nonsense to assert that the unon between England ans Scotland was a ‘negotiated settlement between two sovereign nations.’ Like the Irish Act of Union was a grubby accommodation brought about in the teeth of opposition from the vast majority of the Scots population, on foot of massive bribes of the Scottish elite by their English counterparts. In Burns words a ‘parcel of rogues ‘ were blatantly ‘bought and sold by English gold’.
“’ Like the Irish Act of Union was a grubby accommodation brought about in the teeth of opposition from the vast majority of the Scots population, ”
Interesting claim. Have you any evidence that the ‘vast majority’ of Scots opposed the Act of Union? Or even that the ‘vast majority’ of Irish opposed the Irish Act?
oops, got an error first time didn’t think it posted
Wasn’t the 1707 Act of Union mostly about Scotland being rescued from economic ruin in the wake of the Darien fiasco?
MT, if England had the right to build up an empire which then evolved into a British Empire why then did it crumble? The countriesit invaded colonised and often misruled did not see it as their right to do so and therefore sought to independently govern themselves. But you refuse to see this with your imperial view. Why even the colonisers in what is now the United states sought independence from British rule so please explain that away for me. Poynings law was rescinded in 1782 giving Ireland legislative independence albeit for an exclusively protestant parliament, but even here we see resistance to the overbearing rule of the British Empire. The Irish act of union then lined the pockets of these same greedy politicians and oversaw the degeneration of an already misgoverned country. The majority of people in Ireland have never accepted British rule.
“MT, if England had the right to build up an empire which then evolved into a British Empire why then did it crumble?”
Your question is based on a fallacious premise, i.e. that a legal right to acquire imperial possessions means that such possessions will last forever.
“The countriesit invaded colonised and often misruled did not see it as their right to do so and therefore sought to independently govern themselves.”
Indeed. Many did. But that doesn’t mean they weren’t up to that time lawful British possessions.
“But you refuse to see this with your imperial view.”
Refuse to see what? I don’t have an “imperial view”.
“Why even the colonisers in what is now the United states sought independence from British rule so please explain that away for me.”
What is there to explain? Didn’t you learn about the American Revolution at school? There are hundreds of books about it if you’re interested.
“Poynings law was rescinded in 1782 giving Ireland legislative independence albeit for an exclusively protestant parliament, but even here we see resistance to the overbearing rule of the British Empire. The Irish act of union then lined the pockets of these same greedy politicians and oversaw the degeneration of an already misgoverned country.”
What point are you trying to make?
“The majority of people in Ireland have never accepted British rule.”
Have you any evidence for this statement?
My god, the stance the you take on this debate is completely defensive. The approach you have taken, and I have read your comments, and approach to them on other debates, bears this out. I say this because you have not once tried to explain anything but have employed only a few words of refutation. A career in law me thinks thou has had, if not thoust should have had!!
Nationalist argument= England invaded us so we all the unionist should now leave
Question, since the plantation of Ulster happened at a similar time as the first European colony (Jamestown) was established in the USA, should all people of European people leave North America and leave it to the native Americans. Surely nationalists would have to agree without otherwise they are Hippocrates?
“Nationalist argument= England invaded us so we all the unionist should now leave” – Scott, I have never in my life heard a nationalist or republican voice that sentiment.
Your lucky Jude because I’ve heard it plenty
“Nationalist argument= England invaded us so we all the unionist should now leave”
Scott, in my younger years I went for a time to study in portadown college. This would be in the 80s. We were constantly fighting one another and had to stick together in groups, nationalist and unionist.
The tutors would often chip in and stick up for the unionist side saying the south was a foreign country and if we were Irish we would go and live there.
So no, I would never say that to you as I know too well what it feels like.
I am an Irish person living in Ireland, and I want my country to be run from within Ireland.
Other than that, I have no preconditions and would welcome you to work with us as equals in that new ireland.
If unionism refuses to, then once there is a nationalist majority which is only a few years more away, then I expect it will go ahead anyway and you can decide for yourself then what to do about it.
No one should tell you what to do however. You will have to decide for yourself how to deal with it.
No Scott we would just like it if you’d work with the rest of the people on the island for the betterment of Ireland. This is your homeland, all of it. So that argument is non-starter lad.
Bt the way, what’s a hippocrate?
Nationalist argument= England invaded us so we all the unionist should now leave
Ok after a little bit more considered thought I accept this as a stupid statement on my part. I know that it’s not the majority nationalist view and allow I have heard it said its most definitely a minority opinion. I apologise for any offence I may have caused
That’s very gracious of you, Scott. I wasn’t at all offended but good of you to make the gesture. Maybe we should all take our cue from you…As I say I haven’t ever heard it but I’ve no doubt there are those with such stone-age views…
“Ok after a little bit more considered thought I accept this as a stupid statement on my part. I know that it’s not the majority nationalist view and allow I have heard it said its most definitely a minority opinion. I apologise for any offence I may have caused”
I wouldn’t worry about it Scott, national issues are (and should be) emotional issues and from time to time we will all say the wrong thing.
I would prefer passionate debate than typical stony faced impartialness you get from politicians.
I could well apologise in advance for some of the things I would say. 🙂
Your opinion is respected regardless of what it is, we have to spit it out to give others the opportunity to show us the error of our ways or how else do we learn from one another?
Just so you understand, I consider myself damaged goods. I would be incapable of supporting British rule in Ireland, I have had a few bad experiences, some i may discuss others i will certainly not.
There are a group on both sides who will find it incredibly hard to change, I would be one of those on the republican side of the fence.
From time to time I will likely say something extreme, if I go too far, just tell me to catch myself on.