Today’s Alliance Party vehemently deny that it continues to be a small ‘u’ Unionist party, fully supportive of Northern Ireland’s constitutional status remaining that of a region within the United Kingdom.
However, I would venture, Alliance are no-more than a relatively liberal pro-UK party committed to simply advancing modernity in this region of the UK.
Alliance share the same constitutional status position as the other British Unionist parties, and indeed SF and the SDLP: that is, the constitutional status of NI will be decided by its citizens. However, when Irish republicans seek to promote their reunification of Ireland policy, Alliance seek to shutdown that debate. This they do with two mischievous pieces of trite mantra: a) the constitutional question has supposedly been ‘settled’ (permanently?) by virtue of the GFA, and b) the other parties must end their “tribal politics” and build a united community.
It’s understandable, why Alliance would level its “tribal politics” accusation in response to instances of DUP, UUP and TUV bigotry and sectarianism. However, to use such offensive slurs in response to Irish republicans wanting to discuss the building of a united Ireland is a partisan attempt to demonise and shutdown that legitimate political debate.
If Alliance were genuinely non-partisan as regards the constitutional question then it must explain why, during its 46 years existence, the party has failed to develop and promote one of the following demonstrably non-Unionist and non-Nationalist solutions to our intractable issue of division and strife:
- An independent Northern Ireland state
- Joint sovereignty of NI by the UK and RoI governments
Founded by members of the New Ulster Movement in 1970, the Alliance Party’s own constitution stipulated it was a pro-UK Unionist party.
In its manifesto of 1975, the party stated:
‘Alliance supports the constitutional position of Northern Ireland as an integral part of the United Kingdom’
‘The [NI] link [with the UK] is in the best economic and social interests of all the people of Northern Ireland’
‘…The present constitutional claim by the Republic of sovereignty over Northern Ireland is a formidable barrier against better relations…’
Alliance forever wear a politely tinted pro-UK set of goggles. These blind the party to appreciating just what matters to their Irish Nationalist constituents, beyond the usual bread-and-butter politics forever present in a normal society. During its 46 years existence, did Alliance develop any policies specifically designed to advance the underrepresented nation(al) identity and cultural needs of its Irish Nationalist constituents? No. Furthermore, as recently as last year, Alliance shunned the main Easter Rising state event which was of vital importance to its Irish Nationalist constituents. By contrast, the Alliance Party officially attend each and every pro-UK state commemoration and celebration event of importance to its British Unionist constituents.
When the Alliance Party refer to “tribal politics” they in truth mean British Unionists should embrace UK modernity and Irish Nationalists should be quiet about reunification and just assimilate into the UK Union… the happy-ever-after fairytale of NI colony’s middle-class British Unionism.
“It’s understandable, why Alliance would level its “tribal politics” accusation in response to instances of DUP, UUP and TUV bigotry and sectarianism. However, to use such offensive slurs in response to Irish republicans wanting to discuss the building of a united Ireland is a partisan attempt to demonise and shutdown that legitimate political debate.”
How?
How. Me Tonto.
Me know how…….who?
You speak Apache?
I believe Jessica, Mark and I had a similar conversation before regarding whether or not the Alliance party was a Unionist party. Mark, If I remember right, claimed that article 13 of the party constitution stated clearly that the party was Unionist. He claimed that he had read the constitution himself and seemed quite sure.
This peaked my interest and as I couldn’t find anything online to support this claim, I emailed Naomi Longs constituency office asking if they could clarify what the constitution said or provide me with a link so I could read it myself.
Below is the reply I received.
Hi Scott,
The Alliance Party Constitution makes no opinion on the Union. It is a document that outlines the structure of the Party. eg. Party Council, nomination of new Leaders. Moreover, there are only 12 articles in the document. Unfortunately, it is only available to Party members.
In addition, the Alliance Party operates on the basis that it has no set opinion on the status of Northern Ireland. Rather, we operate to serve the people of Northern Ireland regardless of their race, creed or sexuality and it is for them to decide the constitutional nature of Northern Ireland.
If you have any other queries please do not hesitate to contact me.
Kind regards
Peter.
Scott, Dia duit ar maidín aris.
You are of course right, we did have some debate on just this topic several weeks ago, I did say that I thought it was Art. 13 of the Alliance party coru agus rialicha which states their support for the union between Ireland and Britain, and that the last time I had, myself, read their coru was 1987, again, I did confirm this some years ago with their party policy officer who, again, confirmed this was still the case.
My point at the time being, if the Alliance party were ‘cross-community’ in respect of the indigenous and imposed communities in Ireland, yes, there are Protestants in the Saor Stat, why would they set themselves up as being in favour of that which, traditionally, half the population of the six counties finds reprehensible?
The Alliance party might well make their coru available to only their membership, I should suggest, in light of what I call lies by them, regarding their public v. political approach to their own constitution, they might reverse that position and permit the voters to read for themselves what that position is, after all, they have sat in government (despite achieving only 7% of the popular vote in the six counties, less than one third that of the DUP) and we are all very well aware of the precise constitutional position vis. Sinn Féin, DUP, SDLP, and OUP, indeed, via UCC.ie one can access the Sinn Féin constitution but, to use the word’s of an old friends slightly affected uncle ‘it’s all done with smoke and mirrors’ which appears to be the veil behind which the Alliance party hides their true intent.
I should suggest, the article by Ruaidri above, shows a greater insight into past Alliance party thinking (for those reasons you mention) on the issue, I should further suggest they have not changed their constitutional position in respect of the Ireland v. Britain position.
‘Til they do, why should any voter whose ideal is re-unification of our sovereign nation, place any trust in smoke and mirrors?
“why should any voter whose ideal is re-unification of our sovereign nation, place any trust in smoke and mirrors?”
If a UI or maintenance of the Union were a persons overriding primary political aspirations then I imagine they wouldn’t vote for the Alliance party.
The political ground that Alliance occupy though is for a significant, however I admit it’s never been a majority of people, the constitutional question isn’t the issue that drives their politics.
Alliance put a higher degree of priority on issues that effect people across the tribal political divide such as education, health etc.
Where they fall on the political spectrum is Liberalism and they try and represent liberals of all colours including orange and green Liberals.
So simply put if your must important political issue is the constitutional question then you shouldn’t vote Alliance. They will neither strengthen the Union or move you closer to a UI.
I really think the point Ruaidri is trying to make, and Ruaidri can of course correct me if I am mistaken, is, as I was pointing out a few weeks ago, and regardless of what you say above (even in the O Neill style unionist rush to shore up a Catholic vote in 1970 et. seq.) twelve articles in a political party constitution, supposedly to appeal to all sections of a dreadfully divided community in a north east corner of a small island, appears to have a paucity of purpose, I maintain, it was, in 1987 and 2007, in the constitution of the Alliance party that they support the union between Great Britain and occupied Ireland so long as the majority of the population there support it. My point, in response both to yourself, and Ruaidri was, if that party were ‘cross-community’ why should they include such an article?
Once again, please use your contacts in this political party, which has in my home constituency, less support than Paul Berry, to publish their party constitution so better to appeal to all voters, as before, smoke and mirrors is great for the stage but, for impacting tax payer lives, it’s a lot of tat.
On a related point, as we clearly enter an era of ‘identity politics’, John Hume once remarked that we, meaning specifically the six counties, live in a post nationalist society. I should draw attention to the fact that, post Brexit (one would think all ‘liberal’ parties would respect democracy) and the election of Donald J. Trump as President of the United States, we clearly live in a deeply nationalistic society.
There is nothing wrong with nationalism, were there, immigrants, including tens of thousands of Irish abroad, would leave their customs and practices, even religion, at home and adapt to the practicalities of where they have landed.
This ‘identity politics’ I feel will become more pronounced here, unionism already is, over the coming years, the, as recently described, ‘letsgetalongism’ of the Alliance, and increasingly, stoop parties may have a place but equally needs recognise it’s place.
PS Mark
I found the Sinn Fein constitution on the UCC.ie website you mentioned. It seems to be from 1917. Is this the current SF party constitution?
Ní a lios agam.
“I found the Sinn Fein constitution on the UCC.ie website you mentioned. It seems to be from 1917. Is this the current SF party constitution?”
Given that the current party calling itself SF was only formed in 1970, no.
” the indigenous and imposed communities in Ireland, ”
The racist underbelly of nationalism exposed again.
I’m off today MT, go suck on another sweet.
I believe it is long overdue, MT, that you write your own blog so that I can better understand what it is you believe, always questioning is not answering.
‘The [NI] link [with the UK] is in the best economic and social interests of all the people of Northern Ireland’
This is untrue. Whether it was true in 1975 is a matter for debate, but it is certainly not the case in 2017.
Claiming not to have an opinion on the constitutional question always strikes me as the ultimate cop out, as it is the source from which all economic and social issues here flow.
I’d like to hear Alliance (and the other pro-Union parties) argue just how the Union benefits us here in NI. While not perfect, prosperity and modernity prevail down south whilst we stagger from one disaster to another. Microsoft announce x hundred jobs in Dublin. A branch of Greggs opens in Belfast.
‘The south can’t afford us’ seems to have become a Unionist mantra. Says a lot about Unionist self respect. Other than that, I’m at a loss to see what the arguments are. The UK looks to be hitting an economic iceberg in the not too distant future as austerity policies coupled with Brexit uncertainty really start to bite. Both local Councils and the NHS are running on empty and close to collapse.
Has anyone got an argument as to why the current constitutional arrangement is in the best economic and social interests of all the people of Northern Ireland?
“Has anyone got an argument as to why the current constitutional arrangement is in the best economic and social interests of all the people of Northern Ireland?”
Neither London or Dublin gives a shit about the people of Northern Ireland.
They are happy to tolerate unionist scandals and theft of public money so long as they can get on with their own business.
If it wasn’t for Brexit, no one in the south would give a toss about the border or the 1 million Irish citizens north of it.
There are at least two Gregg’s in Belfast and one in Ballymena. However, like the Alliance Party, no sign of one in Derry.
Why is it necessary for some people to categorizen
Ta bron orm Dominic what are you meaning?
Here one is either Irish, or otherwise, it’s just the same in Germany, Mexico, Afghanistan or, either, Korea.
Mark, all due respect but who appointed you as boundary commissioner?
Dominic, you wholly misunderstand my question, ‘what are you meaning’ is meant to elucidate just what your comment before actually meant.
Why are some people obsessed with putting people into boxes with regards to the question of sovereignty. Is it better to define themselves or others. If Alliance say they leave it up to individual members why is that not good enough for some. Some people seem to want to put their own boundaries on people and narrow debate. Republicans are famous for it.
Thank you Dominic for the clarification, I did think that is what you meant, which is why I made the further comment, I am Irish, my Daddí is, my Granda’s, Great Granda’s etc, why not pigeon hole folk, it’s the only way we can identify with one another.
I have nothing in common with folk across the road, this suits me, and them.
Maith go leor
Yes fiosrach ..Ha ha …i can’t help thinking of the Monty Python “Argument sketch” every time MT chimes in …..
https://youtu.be/kQFKtI6gn9Y
I’m not too sure if MT has a sense of humour. He comes across as a pedantic evangelical flat earthier but his co intellectual thinks he is the poor mans Socrates so who knows? Anyway I have found it best to just put one point to him at a time. It gives him less wriggle room.
Ha ha …I’m not sure Socrates would agree but i started to feel that he was actually in a more Kafkaesque scenario like the aforementioned “Argument Sketch” where every word uttered is up for grabs and is to be fought and tussled over but never answered except by the utterance of yet another question…on and on and on spiralling into some labyrinthine mental condition of word -paranoia.If he hasn’t got a sense of humour ,he’d surely need to buy one soon.
Thanks for that link Paddy, I always wanted to see the dead parrot sketch. The Brits aren’t all bad.
Well yes , Dominic.We could start with Shakespeare and work our way right up to Keith Richards and so on…There are some good lads in there alright!
That’s a lot of cultural history Paddy
Why not simply take them at their word? Why is there an assumption of some kind of deceit here?
Vote for them if you like their policies.
It is not as if they can somehow trick people into voting the wrong way on the constitutional issue.
When the time comes for a referendum perhaps the Alliance party will choose a side at which point their supporters can leave or stay as suits them.
“Why not simply take them at their word? Why is there an assumption of some kind of deceit here?”
You always question SF in making the northern institutions work. So, Gio, why not simply take them at their word? Why is there an assumption of some kind of deceit here?
ceannaire
I am not saying SF are being deceitful I am saying they are conflicted.
A unified Ireland is their raison d’etre and yet they find themselves trying to make a divided Ireland run well.
Do you not see any conflict there?
No gio…No conflict in that …..You get both parts running as well as possible and then you join them together to hopefully make a stronger and more serviceable new unit …like a transmission and a car engine .No conflict at all. At the moment ,either the transmission or the engine has ground to a halt again and needs a little more work done..
“No gio…No conflict in that …..You get both parts running as well as possible and then you join them together to hopefully make a stronger and more serviceable new unit …like a transmission and a car engine .No conflict at all. At the moment ,either the transmission or the engine has ground to a halt again and needs a little more work done”
If getting NI running as well as possible is how a ‘united Ireland’ will be achieved, why did the Provo movement spend 27;years trying to destroy it?
Evolution MT, everyone develops at a different pace.
Oh by the way MT .This is not 1971 any more. I think they had some notion of destroying the economy back then . They thought it might make the Westminster government let go because of cost but the ey just loved paying for it all just so long as it was happening in Paddyland and not on their own streets .We slipped into the 21st century some seventeen years ago MT….and the Troubles ended way ….way…way back in the mists of time, nearly twenty years ago… Some of the kiddies even think it’s history now .
Ask me now why World War One was fought . and what the reason was for all that slaughter of millions of young people..there’s a good lad. and I’ll ask you another question too if i have some spare time ..
“Oh by the way MT .This is not 1971 any more. I think they had some notion of destroying the economy back then . They thought it might make the Westminster government let go because of cost but the ey just loved paying for it all just so long as it was happening in Paddyland and not on their own streets .We slipped into the 21st century some seventeen years ago MT….and the Troubles ended way ….way…way back in the mists of time, nearly twenty years ago… Some of the kiddies even think it’s history now .”
I’m afraid that doesn’t answer the question.
“Ask me now why World War One was fought . and what the reason was for all that slaughter of millions of young people..there’s a good lad. and I’ll ask you another question too if i have some spare time ”
Why?
Dominic, I fear you may be wrong about ‘everyone’, some have not evolved from 1690 yet, nor ever shall.
Why does the sky seem blue?
I have been speaking to them a lot over the past few weeks and I can tell you there is no conflict.
It is a 32 county plan, to get the best people doing the best they can in every single part of Ireland. We have had people up from Kildare, Cork, Tip and Kerry helping out with the canvassing. It isn’t about the two states doing well, it is about making every part of Ireland the best it can be.
Sinn Fein did their best over 10 years to make power sharing work, unionism rejected it and abused the position the people gave them in various scandals.
This election will allow the people to show how they feel about this
If unionism doesn’t want power sharing to work, it is their choice, but there will be no going back to how it was. Everyone should vote according to their conscience and lets see where the pieces fall.
“A unified Ireland is their raison d’etre and yet they find themselves trying to make a divided Ireland run well.
Do you not see any conflict there?”
Well, as PK pointed out, there is an argument about making the north a more stable and attractive proposition to the south. No-one wants a UI where the south is relatively prosperous, with the potential to thrive and the north is a backwater.
I see no conflict.
“No-one wants a UI where the south is relatively prosperous, with the potential to thrive and the north is a backwater.
So in such a scenario, nationalists would oppose a ‘united Ireland’?
Whether they are Unionist or not they certainly got themselves into a panic back when Anno Lo came out with her pro united Ireland statement. They certainly went into overdrive to distance themselves from her comments.
The truth of the matter is that the small “U” Unionist is their natural target vote as Alliance make little or no impact in majority Nationalist areas.
“Whether they are Unionist or not they certainly got themselves into a panic back when Anno Lo came out with her pro united Ireland statement. They certainly went into overdrive to distance themselves from her comments.:
I don’t recall that I only recall the DUP going into.overdrive. Alliance was relaxed about it.
It’s like voting for our dog. Nice enough dog but you would only vote for him if you knew he had no chance of power. And he,at least, has his red lines.
They’re a liberal unionist party and a sort of self-selecting priesthood, whose role is to embody and live out the true nature of our remote, capricious, unknowable NIO overlords.
They are committed unionists but not preposterous sectarian bigots. This is what ‘cross-community’ means in the better-heeled areas of NI.
FJH has their number. In many ways, they’re much worse than those unionists who carry their red, white and blue banners openly.
Anna Lo took her party at its word and, believing she was ALLOWED to express a nationalist opinion, did so. The reaction was instructive.
What was most striking was that while the consternation and embarrassment from her party colleagues was pretty general, it was a few of the more high profile Catholics within Alliance who reacted with the most anger, bitterness and denunciation.
I won’t name names, but a few of them were rather undressed by that incident, weren’t they?
“Anna Lo took her party at its word and, believing she was ALLOWED to express a nationalist opinion, did so. The reaction was instructive.”
I know it was awful what they done to Anna Lo after she expressed her preference for a UI. They made her party president………
Well their voting for Unionist terrorists in the 80s for mayor while denouncing SF is all the evidence I required of their Unionism.
They were explicitly set up as a soft-U party and a Unionist party is what they remain.
And I will make the firm prediction based on this theory – upon re-unification the Alliance party will cease to exist. Their raison d’etre having entirely disappeared.
They do play one important role – identifying fools – anyone who denies AL are U is not worth wasting time talking to.
“…I will make the firm prediction based on this theory – upon re-unification the Alliance party will cease to exist. Their raison d’etre having entirely disappeared.”
Ah, that’s too easy.
They’re a front party for the colonial administrators. When the colonial administrators leave, of course the front party will wind up.
The more interesting question is not what will happen to Alliance when there’s a UI, but what will happen to Alliance TYPES?
They won’t just disappear, you know. There will always be new masters to serve.
I’ve read my history of Ireland from 1922 on, I think we both know PRECISELY where they will go.
Treating them as a barium meal to identify where the cancer is on the body politic will be their final use. Then we will cut them out and toss them in the autoclave.
Were you back on slugger recently and banned again or was that someone else with the BP moniker?
I actually did get banned recently, which was the first time that has happened, after many years of posting there. I’m not really sure why, the point of contention was trivial, but the ban appears to be permanent. I think Mick’s tolerance for me just snapped. Sad that it ended like that. So it goes.
“Well their voting for Unionist terrorists in the 80s for mayor while denouncing SF is all the evidence I required of their Unionism.:
When and where was this?
Could it have been here in the 80’s? I think that’s what he said.
“Could it have been here in the 80’s? I think that’s what he said.”
‘Here’ isn’t very helpful. Which council? What year? Who was the terrorist?
Why so vague?
MT Vessels,
do you know *anything* about Irish history? 80% of what you write are questions the other 20% denunciations.
You are a professional time waster. Your sole purpose is to challenge every single factual statement made by a Nationalist. Then ignore the answer.
Rinse. Wash. Repeat.
Nor, apparently, can you use a search engine to research a question.
No. of course not. Why? Because you are a professional time waster.
“do you know *anything* about Irish history?”
Yes. A lot more than most of the contributors here, including, I expect, you.
“You are a professional time waster. Your sole purpose is to challenge every single factual statement made by a Nationalist. Then ignore the answer.”
That’s untrue. I only challenge unfactual statements, statements that aren’t clearly based on reason, and those that are racist, sectarian or pro-terror. Unfortunately that’s quite a lot.
People should welcome the opportunity to explain their views or to be corrected when they are wrong. And if views cannot be sustained under challenge then surely people should question why they hold those views. Usually prejudice and ignorance are the reason .
“Yes. A lot more than most of the contributors here, including, I expect, you.”
Oh? Like common knowledge facts about recent Alliance history?
You are a joke 🙂
“Oh? Like common knowledge facts about recent Alliance history?”
So, it would seem, yes.
“You are a joke :)”
I’m not. But your inability to.engage in serious discussion is noted.
In Strabane District Council, once notorious for excluding nationalists from chairs of committees, an Alliance councillor was ordered by the party to give a crucial vote to a nationalist, he refused and left the party: It may attract a certain kind of Unionist who seems soft but when put to the test fails. It also shows the commitment of the leadership of the party to a fairness and equality that has eluded Unionism. That was in the 80s. Their use of the Irish language on their posters during this election shows that same commitment to fairness and equality within the political sphere we all inhabit today, including Sinn Fein.
So it was People before profit last week. Alliance party this week. I look forward to the hatchet job on the Greens next week lol
Scott
There’s a reason they call themselves Sinn Fein.
And the reason is ……?
Oh, I didn’t say that they had run her out of town, or anything like that.
The reaction was more like this.
http://giphy.com/gifs/spit-JBaHnGYrgjqiQ
A wee thing I noticed on my way out of town earlier, outside the mayter’s memorial, there’s a, wrongly spelled, ‘vote Sinn Féin’ poster, things are changing, hopefully for our better.
“Deception”?
I fear my lady doth protest too much.
I would that you were warm or cold, but because you are lukewarm, I spew you out of my mouth.
That’s the proper reaction to the Alliance Party (spit!)
Was David Ford Justice Minister? Why was he not banging on the psni door for twenty years asking them to get a few ruc thugs into prison?
Funny big u unionists are always calling the alliance nationalists.
Could it be that people of a ‘firmer’ stance on both sides see their own position as the centre ground which makes everybody else part of ‘themuns’
Question; how can a party in NI be neutral then? Any suggestions?
It’s all about forcing people onto your ground, nationalism/unionism, and closing down any other debate that might unite people.
I would say unionism fears debate.
What is wrong with exploring all options that may make our lives better?
Mike Nesbitt obviously doesn’t fear debate
Then why is there a wall of silence against the states stance on preventing documented evidence of state murder of innocents getting into the hands of the families legal teams on the false premise of national security?
It is a clear and blatant wrong yet Mike supports this.
It is not acceptable to me and will never be. This must be rectified.
We need a renewed debate on what the good Friday agreement means as it has been dragged through the sewer by unionism including Mike who fails to recognise the relevance the Irish tri colour has to nationalists. There must be official recognition of our identity and desire for a united Ireland.
It cannot be swept under the carpet while he puts out leaflets sparking costly flag protests, attacks on the alliance party and stands shoulder to shoulder with loyalist paramilitaries against democratic council decisions. Not acceptable.
He has already made it clear he is against an Irish language act.
Again, I have heard nothing from either Collum of Mike on how they plan to work through these issues together,
All well and good to say we want to work together when you have agreed together to park all the issues you differ on.
Where is the debate between SDLP and UUP informing the people HOW they plan to work around these issues.
They cant even agree to tell their supporters to transfer to one another.
How can you say they don’t fear debate when they have failed to answer these questions?
I didn’t say MN doesn’t need to be challenged but he must be up for that given his recent statements. Otherwise he will be found out pretty quickly. No one can stand over the state’s stance on these matters in my view. The other matters you allude to must be up for discussion too. I not saying we roll over and play dead.
Perhaps when he and anyone else from whatever party, independent or individual have stood up and debated these issues and made their views clear about how we move forward on them to the public, then I will give praise for their fearlessness and wiliness to engage in positive debate.
If they could do it before the election I would be even more impressed
We should all make speeches to please you?
Exactly Dominic.
Who is closing down or limiting the debate AG or Dominic?
“Question; how can a party in NI be neutral then? Any suggestions?”
Imagine two twins, both adopted at birth who grew up on a foster family.
One child was mistreated more than the other and disliked his foster parents as a result. The other was given preferential treatment or allowed to get away with more and was happier with the adopted parents.
The unhappy child wants to seek out and live with his real parents, the other child who is happy with the foster parents does not and as usually gets his way and his sibling is not permitted to even discuss their biological parents or to even find out if they would both be better off with them instead
What would the neutral option be?
One child wants to talk about finding the biological parents and whether they would be better off reunited.
The other child doesn’t, but more out of fear of losing the preferential treatment he receives from the foster parents.
How do they be neutral while the wishes of one child is not allowed to even be discussed and explored?
What would the neutral option be AG?
Crappy analogy Jessica, too emotional.
Flanders doesn’t seek reunification with the Netherlands and Wallonia doesn’t seek reunification with france (if that’s the right term).
Anyhoo, you didn’t answer my question so I’ll ask again:
“Question; how can a party in NI be neutral then? Any suggestions?”
You have Irish nationalism on one side and Irish nationalism on the other, so how do you be neutral?
Ireland does seek reunification, a referendum has been denied until it becomes clear that unity would win in the view of the british SOS which is not democracy but fascist control and puts all the effort for change on one side without any support for debate or informed discussion.
If Ireland is reunited under those terms, it will not work out well for unionism and Ireland will be reunited.
Your effort to propose neutrality is just another effort to detract from those seeking reunification and to placate them into neutrality.
Unfortunately for you, the DUP are working against your more intelligent approach.
You efforts will become more and more desperate as you are trying to hold back a tide which is gradually gaining momentum which will swell further once brexit kicks in.
It is an emotional topic for me AG, and many others.
Because you don’t like that, does not make my analogy crappy
“It’s all about forcing people onto your ground, nationalism/unionism, and closing down any other debate that might unite people.”
Or trying to force them on to the other ground: unionists saying Alliance are nationalist and nationalists saying they are Unionist. Then there’s Jim Wells saying Mike Nesbitt isn’t a unionist for voting SDLP second preference, and the many nationalists here who argue that the SDLP isn’t nationalist.
The ironic thing is that, if the likes of Wells is right, then he’s arguing that unionists are a minority.
It also makes Colum and Mikes position more honest, courageous and ground breaking.
I agree, Dominic. More power to them.
unionists were always a minority in Ireland MT
“unionists were always a minority in Ireland MT”
Nationalists were always a.minority in the British Isles.
Does that include Scottish, English and Welsh nationalists?
I would not be so sure, especially post brexit
Prehaps a referendum on the union is in order
Here’s an outrageous notion: Maybe some people don’t give a brass monkey’s about who’s in charge as long as things keep functioning.
That’s not a fault.
Some unionists are outraged at this as they see themselves like Dev’s summary of ‘they’re a British garrison in Ireland’ and nationalists are outraged as they see some sort of duty to re-unite Ireland.
Do what ye’s want but to go after those who don’t share your extremes is malicious and cowardly.
If you could come out with some convincing arguments as to why people should join in your neurotic melee then you might gain more traction.
But you’s can’t.
So you’re angry.
Tough.
Get over it and let people get on with their lives.
Here is another outrageous notion AG.
Let us all sit down and have a reasoned debate, including leading economists, respected members of both parliaments, business community, religious groups, community workers etc… and discuss all options as to what would offer the best for all of our people.
That would allow our economy to keep pace with the rest of this island and with GB.
That would be acceptable to a majority of our people in both parts of this island, that would ensure peace endures and that society here can heal and unite.
When the best options are decided upon, put them to the people and let the decision stand.