“I think therefore I am,” René Descartes is famed for saying. Our awareness of the fact that we can think, he argued, was proof that we exist. Nice one, René. But there are other ways of persuading yourself that you exist, that you have a life. One of these is memory. “I remember therefore I am” makes a lot of sense too. We all know the pleasures (and pains) of recalling the recent or remote past, and how it makes up who we are. We also know how distressing it is to see someone who can’t remember the past, who forgets who you are, where they are, what happened five minutes ago, what they said they would do.
All of this as preamble to our present political impasse. Arlene Foster has an article in today’s Belfast Telegraph. In it she rejoices in the £1.5 billion she says she has squeezed out of the British government. She goes on: “We have not put forward red lines. We wanted to establish the Executive last Thursday. Sinn Féin blocked this.” The contrast is between her party, a money-getter with no preconditions, and Sinn Féin, an abstentionist party with a red-line obsession.
It looks clear where the blockage is coming from. But what Arlene is doing is starting DUP-Sinn Féin relations about a month ago. Viewed that way, her party is the reasonable one, Sinn Féin the obstructionists. But is Arlene forgetting (or deliberately removing from her mind) the past twenty years of DUP-Sinn Féin relations? Because that’s what Sinn Féin say is at the root of their disagreement.
Put bluntly, and it couldn’t be put bluntly enough, the DUP are ignoring commitments made to Sinn Féin and everyone here in previous Agreements. I know the DUP didn’t sign up to the Good Friday Agreement, but it’s fair to assume they’re content to work within its framework. The Good Friday Agreement promised us a Bill of Rights. That hasn’t been delivered. The DUP did sign up to the St Andrews Agreement. That Agreement promised an Irish Language Act. That hasn’t been delivered.
So let’s, with an effort, set aside the RHI scheme. Let’s set aside equal marriage. Let’s set aside everything except those two Agreements, especially the second of them. Have the DUP forgotten that they signed the St Andrews Agreement? The fact that it was Britain which promised an Irish Language Act doesn’t alter the fact that the DUP signed up to the package. Now they’re asking Sinn Féin to act as if that Agreement, and the GFA, never happened. Forgotten. Blown away in the mists of time. All that exists is today.`Or no – the past month approximately, which would include the DUP’s Treasury-raid.
What would be the point in Sinn Féin saying they’ll go back into the Executive with the DUP? Since the DUP don’t believe in honouring past Agreements, why would they expect Sinn Féin to keep their promise?
This really does come down to a basic question of how we see reality and ourselves. If we cut ourselves off from our past deeds, we’re damaging ourselves psychologically and potentially others around us. I don’t think it would be wise to get too close to people who live in that unhappy state.
People do have short memories. A lot of people seem to have forgotten that SF are the political wing of an armed militia that murdered hundreds of people.
As the DUP are the political wing of the UDA!
Great to hear Brendan Hewitt,s broad outlook on the history of the conflict. I now feel wiser
Brendan
I have put this question repeatedly to Unionists and their Supporters and others who condemn the IRA and I have yet to receive a straightforward honest answer.
If the Protestant Unionist people of N. Ireland and the politicians they elected had treated their Catholic fellow citizens with fairness, decency and respect, would all the death and destruction that took place have been avoided ..??
The answer is of course, Yes it would have. But honestly answer they will not, because to do so means that they and their predecessors with their abuse of power and the bigotry, brutality and arrogance that went with it, must accept a large measure of responsibility for what inevitably took place ..!!
“People do have short memories. A lot of people seem to have forgotten that SF are the political wing of an armed militia that murdered hundreds of people”
There was thousands of people killed/injured during the Troubles by all sides but some people (ahem!) forget that the IRA would never have existed if it weren’t for the sectarian state that was enforced here and it wasn’t enforced by Sinn Fein or any Republican. Indeed the very first bombings/killings/sectarian murders were committed by Unionists. Ian Paisley Snr was busy setting up his own militia as early as the late 1950’s, the Ulster Protestant Volunteers, which were backed by senior Unionist politicians at Stormont who even attended the meetings. There were Unionist politicians who had bodyguards who were sectarian murderers. John Taylor, the UUP politician, had Billy McCaughey as his bodyguard for a time, an RUC man involved with the UVF and responsible for numerous sectarian murders of Catholics.
Short memories indeed Brendan…..well, its not really short memories, its more that some people cant handle the Truth (ahem!)….
Brendan, looks like some have forgot, or seem not to understand that the conservatives and successive British governments were the political wing of a murderous army that terrorised people in this country.
A similar problem exists for some people when looking at the DUP’s relationship with unionist paramilitaries.
You’re correct there Eamon however, the more appropriate comparison is with the political wing of loyalism, the DUP and OUP whom have for years represented, and lobbied for loyalist terrorists, even promoting their children to elected office without election.
As to Brendan’s point, the simple fact is, the Provisional Irish Republican Army were the successor of the last legitimate government in our country, the Second Dail, and Sinn Féin murdered no one.
Mark
That is how they saw themselves of course, but they had no legitimacy.
Many killers see themselves as doing God’s work but that does not make it so.
Mark thanks for your reply to Brendan’s point i have copy pasted it to a word document i keep for Jude. The other thing i would say is that no nationalist has any apology to make to anyone for what the IRA were forced to do to protect the Catholic people of the north east of Ireland. The IRA would never have existed had the protestant population of the north east of Ireland not murdered their catholic neighbors by the dozens over the years since its inception and burnt them out of their homes. While being led by the murderous RUC and their clergy and on and on.
gio don’t forget i always have my finger on the wonderful scroll button brrrmm brr-mm ,no feeding the trolls as you would say old boy
Stephen
What the IRA were forced to do to protect the Catholic people ?
Yes in order to protect them they were forced to kill quite a few of them.
Gio., see my point above.
The DUP do not honour their word on any agreements either, their own or those made by ‘their government’ in Westminster They do not respect Republicans/Nationalists and now it seems Catholics too.They champion the Orange sectarian agenda.
Well ‘Cropples will not lie down’.The supremacy of the 1921 gerrymandered statlet is gone forever. That is the reality of where we are at – can you not smell the coffee ??
So, what do the ordinary people of this island want?
Historically Protestants have been at the forefront in the struggle for equality, fraternity and religious freedom from the time of Wolfe Tone.
They must regain that position and play their part in leadership in the building of a ‘New Ireland’ where all traditions can build and shape a society that we can share equally with mutual respect as a cornerstone. So lets talk about a united Ireland with a new form of government, new constitution, new parliament. Put every thing on the table and open the discussion.
The alternative is not something that I want to contemplate.
Well said Hugh , I agree. Not least because we need to root out the corrupt clan or mafia of ROI politicians once and for all and replace the system with something that works “for the many”.
Whaaaaat?
What is the difficulty with a wider Culture Act which would include the Irish Language and Ulster Scots? Yes we all know Ulster Scots is a bit silly but surely the main thing is to obtain the rights so keenly sought by Irish speakers?
It looks as though it is not about language rights at all but rather a stick to beat themuns with.
I think it’s because these things were already agreed Gio. Why should they be renegotiated? Why do you not argue for their implementation?
Kieran
I do support their implementation.
But if it is about Irish Language rights rather than making political capital, then why does it matter if it comes as part of a package with some rights for UlsterScots.?
How could that hurt Irish language speakers.
This looks like it is about point scoring rather than actually getting the rights through.
“why does it matter if it comes as part of a package with some rights for UlsterScots.?”
That’s a new package you are talking about, Gio. Let’s sort out the old packages first and then maybe we can look at some new packages.
Because, unless the former is done, the latter would be undermined and untrusted from the start. But let’s not just zero in on an ILA; there are other issues of rights and equality that must be addressed.
Question is: What does the DUP fear from these rights? Surely they are interested in the best for all our citizens. Don’t they?
Ceannaire
What does it matter if it is a new package?
We have been told all along this is about rights for Irish speakers.
Now it seems it is not.
As for the DUP and their interests, I would say they are primarily interested in the best for their own voters, just like SF.
“I do support their implementation.”
Glad to hear you support their implementation Gio.
“But if it is about Irish Language rights rather than making political capital, then why does it matter if it comes as part of a package with some rights for UlsterScots.?”
Because that would be a renegotiation on what was agreed Gio, and is in direct conflict to your support for the Implementation of an ILA. You haven’t answered why we should consider renegotiating what was previously agreed? It doesn’t make sense Gio and I’m surprised you would entertain it.
“This looks like it is about point scoring rather than actually getting the rights through.”
I would actually agree with this point, but from its converse position. I think you have unwittingly hit the nail on the head here – Namely, that the advocacy of combining Ulster Scots with an ILA is actually about point scoring against Nationalism. How can you as a Nationalist be in favor of this type of political move?
Kieran
Politics is the art of the possible. Things get re-negotiated all the time.
No ILA was agreed in detail so of course there was always going to be negotiation.
In the end it is about achieving what you can.
If there is no point scoring here by SF then I still don’t see why they are not happy to have Irish language rights as part of a wider agreement.
The details of how that might look are unclear and of course it might just be another stalling tactic from the DUP.
But by rejecting it SF look like the ones who are obstructing a deal
A smart move from the DUP I suppose.
“The cogent argument is very simple.
Nationalists want Irish language rights. A Culture Act has the potential to deliver that.
Why not look at it at least?”
So your case to Nationalism to renegotiate the ILA is because a Cultural Act will provide Irish Language rights? This is not an argument at all Gio, in fact it is self-refuting, as an ILA will provide Irish language rights. So you haven’t provided a cogent argument. Considering this I would add that it would only be an unreasonable man who would continue to hold a self-refuting argument after it pointed out to him, in this light I respectfully ask you to listen to reason and abandon your call for a Cultural Act.
“Of course, unionism has always been intransigent. That does not absolve SF in this case.”
SF and the SDLP both want and ILA, the whole of political Nationalism agrees on this one. The political vacuum will be lifted when past agreements are implemented; doing so will also demonstrate good faith and build trust and confidence among Nationalism that there is a genuine willingness from Unionism to share power on an equal basis.
“We are faced with a political vacuum now because no agreement can be reached.”
Not true, an agreement on ILA has already been agreed.
“Yet if the offer is there of Irish language rights in a Culture Act then why not take it.?”
Because we already agreed to Irish language rights to be provided via an ILA.
“Who cares if Ulster Scots is included.”
Red herring – an ILA will only deal with Irish language, and it would only be right that it should.
“How does that affect Irish speakers?”
It denies them and Irish Language Act as agreed.
“Is it the case that not only must we succeed but the enemy must also fail?”
This statement presupposes there is no agreement, but there is. So your point it is completely irrelevant.
I’ve a few questions for you Gio – Why do you not ask any questions of Unionism? For example; their reluctance to implement past agreements? Why do you not think it relevant to probe why they have a problem with the Irish Language Act and ask if their answers are reasonable? Why do you assume it is nationalism that is guilty of point scoring? Do you not see Unionisms intransigence as something that should be tackled head on and exposed for what it is?
You appear to me to be very one sided Gio and I can’t understand why.
Kieran
We are going round in circles a bit.
The purpose of an ILA is to provide rights for Irish speakers.
By refusing to even look at a wider Culture Act SF are risking throwing the baby out with the bath water.
They would prefer no rights for Irish speakers rather than have those rights encapsulated in a wider agreement.
You seem to be saying that an Irish Language Act is more important than the rights it is intended to provide.
So what will be the result?
I cannot see the DUP who feel strong at the moment, agreeing to ILA Same Sex Marriage, and getting Arlene to step aside can you?
(I assume that is now the SF position)
Stalemate Direct Rule, sit on our hands and hope the Tories collapse so that JC can ride to the rescue.
It might work out that way or it might not. But in the meantime there will be no ILA.
As to your other point about me it is fairly obvious.
There are virtually no supporters of unionism on this site and therefore there is no-one to question about unionist policies.
I am not here to add another: ‘Aren’t unionists terrible but Sinn Fein are great’ comment to the many many we already get. Too often this seems like a forum for people to just have a go at unionists without any constructive debate at all.
Basically this is a strongly pro SF site which rarely questions their view of things, and of course that is Jude’s right.
On the day Jude does a piece defending DUP policies I will be first in line to ask him a few questions.
It might work out that way or it might not. But in the meantime there will be no ILA.
“Politics is the art of the possible.”
Indeed, and it was through politics that agreement was made to provide an Irish Language Act. Let us implement this and make the possible a reality!
“Things get re-negotiated all the time.”
Maybe so, but what is the case to renegotiate this time? Can you make a cogent argument to sell to Nationalism?
“No ILA was agreed in detail so of course there was always going to be negotiation.”
This is a red herring, as any ILA ‘detail’, will concern the Irish Language, not the inclusion of another language.
“In the end it is about achieving what you can.”
Absolutely, so why renegotiate what you have?
“If there is no point scoring here by SF then I still don’t see why they are not happy to have Irish language rights as part of a wider agreement.”
Because this is not the agreement they signed up to.
“The details of how that might look are unclear and of course it might just be another stalling tactic from the DUP.
But by rejecting it SF look like the ones who are obstructing a deal
A smart move from the DUP I suppose.”
Intransigence has always been the modus operandi for Unionism. But for you to suggest that it is SF who appear to be obstructing a deal is highly ironic and totally disingenuous! Only a fool or a unionist would believe that type of rhetoric! And the fact a Nationalist is sponsoring this suggestion is quite disappointing indeed.
Kieran
The cogent argument is very simple.
Nationalists want Irish language rights. A Culture Act has the potential to deliver that.
Why not look at it at least?
Of course unionism has always been intransigent. That does not absolve SF in this case.
We are faced with a political vacuum now because no agreement can be reached.
Yet if the offer is there of Irish language rights in a Culture Act then why not take it.?
Who cares if Ulster Scots is included.
How does that affect Irish speakers?
Is it the case that not only must we succeed but the enemy must also fail?
I’m not sure if you’re deliberately ignoring what you’ve been told several times now or not but I’ll explain again anyhow.
This is about trust.
The DUP have signed agreements but failed to live up to them.
They have broken trust.
Before any new arrangements are entered into previous agreements must be honoured in order to re establish trust otherwise there is absolutely no point in sharing power with a partner that cannot be trusted to fully engage with and come to agreement with.
Michael
Then it is not about Irish language rights.
It is politics.
Part of the ‘Trojan horse’ strategy.
Once again I’ll repeat myself.
This is about trust.
It is extremely difficult to enter into a partnership when one partner refuses to honour previous agreements.
Michael
I’m sorry I am not deliberately trying to be annoying.
I get what you are saying.
It is something of an all or nothing strategy though, which makes best the enemy of good, and in my view an opportunity for Irish language rights is being sacrificed here.
Perhaps it will prove to be worth it in the end if the DUP cave in and agree to all of SF demands. It doesn’t seem very likely though.
They arnt “Sinn Fein demands”.
The are pre existing agreements already signed up to by the DUP.
Until the DUP can show they can be trusted to honour agreements then how can anyone enter into partnership with them. It would be pointless. There would be no trust.
If the DUP want agreements on Ulster Scots, Military Covenants or whatever else they need to show good faith on things they committed to previously.
Michael
And Arlene standing aside? Is that not a Sinn Fein demand?
Or has that one been dropped?
Arlene standing aside while her role in the RHI fiasco is investigated is a request made by several parties not just SF.
It’s a sensible request which has been roundly ignored.
So now you’re jumping from ILA to RHI.
Michael
It is SF that are doing the jumping.
I did think it was a demand, but you are telling me it is only a request.
So it is not a red line any longer?
I’ve no insight as to what are red lines or not.
But doesn’t all come back to trust again?
Can Arlene be trusted with this RHI fiasco going on?
Several parties think she should stand aside for a while.
Can the DUP be trusted after it has reneged on several previous agreements?
How can you enter into a partnership of power sharing when one partner cannot be trusted to uphold its agreements and its leader is implicated in £500mil renewable heating scandal?
Michael
It is this vagueness I find frustrating.
Even if an ILA is agreed does Arlene still have to step aside?
It was a definite red line previously so I assume it still is.
What do you think?
Not really that vague at all.
Until Arlene and the DUP can be trusted id imagine there’d be no return to normal politics.
If you want to know what SFs red lines are you wouldn’t need to ask them.
I haven’t heard SF make any changes to what they previously said.
Michael
So you don’t know either!
“What does it matter if it is a new package?”
Because “packages” don’t really get implemented here, Gio. Just parts of them. Why add another on to it?
I say let’s do some housekeeping, sort out what we have agreed and then, by all means, sit down and talk about further deals, as required.
It would be like starting with a clean sheet.
Gio,
We do indeed appear to be going round circles. Your initial query was: “What is the difficulty with a wider Culture Act…” I’ve taken time to respond to you, giving what I feel are reasonable and factual answers, but this type of reasoning still doesn’t seem to be resonating with you. I have to conclude that you are not open to persuasion but rather you are an agitator and therefore not a man of reason. In light of the evidence you are an unreasonable person, a time waster. Have you ever been persuaded from your opinions based on where the evidence may lead?
It is quite difficult for me to understand why you seem quite so hung up on a wider Cultural act! Considering Nationalism, and all that has been presented to you against a Cultural Act, you appear to be sorely reluctant to concede on its preposterousness. I’ve pointed out several times why it doesn’t make sense. I’ve answered all your questions and I’ve also asked you to explain why Nationalism should even consider entertaining it; you have not been able to provide any type of reasonable response, you have not provided a persuader to Nationalism, the only equitable thing to do in this circumstance is to abandon your position as irrational and argue for the logical: implementing the ILA.
I want to ask you again: Given your support for the implementation of an ILA, why do you not argue for the implementation of the same Irish Language Act?
Regarding your commenting style, I take your point on the majority of comments being pro nationalist/republican, but given your nationalism, surely some of those comments make sense to you, some you might even agree with? I can’t understand why you would argue against your own position? It is totally absurd to create a debate based on a point you don’t hold.
Ireland needs persuaders, not agitators and time wasters. I implore you to show us your Nationalist side and become a persuader for the nationalist cause. Surely this is more noble and productive than your devil’s advocate game? Let us persuade unionists and not agitate nationalists!
What makes you think Gio is nationalist in his outlook?
Kieran
I don’t particularly like the nationalist label (anti physical force republican might be better0 but I will let it go for now.
Is this site about persuading unionists?
All I ever see is posts saying how bigoted/sectarian/racist/triumphalist they are and suggestions that they know where the next boat leaves, the planter scum.
So that is not very persuasive in my view.
I think it more likely that debate here might influence republican/nationalist voters rather than unionists, if anybody.
But rather than make constructive criticism of SF or indeed the SDLP the easy option is to constantly bash the unionists.
Certainly it goes down well but it is not very thought provoking in my view.
On the ILA issue I have given you reason enough I think.
Clearly for SF an Irish Language Act Is more important than Irish language rights, and clearly how they are attained is more important than the attaining of them.
The difficulty is not the ILA per se.
This is basically a matter of trust.
The DUP has reneged on previous agreements that it has signed up to.
How can anyone enter into government and reach agreements with them on how to govern when they can’t be trusted to honour those agreements?
Not only that but it has shown time and time again utter disdain to the Irish population here.
“but rather a stick to beat themuns with”
Having a little sneer at them low class Catholic/Republicans that don’t speak proper, Gio ..?
Buachaill Ón Éirne
Eh?
Gio,
I think the reason why SF, and not to mention the Irish Language Groups themselves, oppose any Culture Act is because they see it for what it is: a dilution of what they want. I’m sure there will be loopholes included to ensure certain aspects of an Irish Language Act will be avoided or dodged or contested by local authorities.
Not to mention that an ILA was what was agreed by the parties in 2006. Irish already should have parity of esteem here, as guaranteed by the GFA.
Ryan
How could loopholes be included against the wishes of SF?
“Ryan
How could loopholes be included against the wishes of SF?”
Well that is why the talks are going no where Gio. SF want a stand alone ILA whilst the DUP want a Culture Act which will obviously include details which they favour. SF don’t want this but the DUP don’t want an ILA either, hence deadlock. I doubt very much Unionist majority councils want to be forced by the law to promote, display and protect the Irish Language or even Ulster Scots, hence the pursuit of a Culture Act which wont force them.
Ryan
I don’t understand your point.
If SF play an equal part in creating a Culture Act then it would not have any loopholes they did not like surely.
Let the Ulster Scots lobby do their own campaigning. If they are successful, they would have my best wishes. I would like to think that we would be above mocking their efforts in Stormont if it ever rises from the grave. And if Direct Rule is imposed here ie if the poxy proxy council doesn’t survive, why is the money cut by 5%? Is this a punishment?
The fear some Irish speakers have with a combined languages act is that it legally pegs Irish to a regional dialect indefinitely. This could have the effect of blocking the advancement of Irish.
For instance, no Irish in courts without Ulster Scots getting the same provision, sounds reasonable until you realise Ulster Scots isn’t capable of having this provision because it isn’t anywhere near as linguistically developed as Irish.
The effect in the name of ‘equality’ could be to have no provision for either in courts. Thus the development and outworkings of an ILA are curtailed and held back because Irish is legally tied to an under developed regional dialect of Ulster Scots.
The EU and UN language bodies have been very clear on this, Irish needs its own act. If some provision is to be made for Ulster Scots, do it in a separate act.
Cal
That is a reasonable point but I am not sure if it would really be an issue.
The devil is in the detail and I would have thought it possible to negotiate a way of avoiding such an impasse.
If UlsterScots is not up to the task then why not have a ‘where possible’ clause inserted?
Would the ILA require that the entire proceeding of the court be carried out in Irish if requested?
Gio , you certainly know about strawman arguments…..forget about your wider culture act , begin with what’s already been agreed and signed on paper ! Anyhow at present it’s all immaterial ….who could agree anything with Unionism , they’re renown for their perfidy , their DUPlicity and their two faced double dealing….I wouldn’t trust them to go to the shops for me !
What is the difficulty with Irish Languafge rights within a wider cultural act. Surely the important thing is getting those rights for Irish language speakers?
Or was it never about Irish language rights at all?
As previously replied this isn’t simply about an ILA.
This is about trust.
This is about being able to trust your partners in government to honour agreements they signed up to.
If they refuse to honour previous agreements then how can they be trusted to honour any new agreements?
Michael
I understand that and I agree the DUP should have done the right thing on this a long time ago.
But if it is implemented as part of a package then it is still implemented and that agreement would be honoured surely?
Is the important thing not to get the rights for Irish language speakers?
It does look as if that is not enough it must also be a victory.
The DUP have made little effort to fulfil its previous obligations under earlier agreements.
Honour previous agreements, reestablish trust and then discuss new issues where new agreements can be made and honoured.
There is little point in discussing anything rationally……it’July! The nonsense of bonfires took up the first hour of local radio this morning and the idiots were discussing the idiocy endlessly as if they were unaware how crazy it was to even talk about the practice of burning huge pyres of pallets and tyres every summer.What planet do these people live on ? …you might ask.Where in the whole wide world could the practice be defended by anyone with a functioning brain? yet here we have people who pretend to be politicians defending this mad and wholly weird practice.They say it is cultural….Aye cultural on Venus maybe but nowhere else on planet earth.Extrapolate from that a political party that doesn’t want a Bill Of Rights for its citizens and you’re looking at an impasse that is the final cry at an attempt at power-sharing and a party that never sticks to its agreements.How can anyone make laws and politics work with people like that? I think we are at the end of this road, except some people don’t even know they are there.Mr Brokenshire has certainly not added any visionary light to the process.
The big mistake was made last week. Theresa May should have said to the DUP that there will be no money until they agree a deal in the North, i.e implement the St Andrews Agreement, i.e ILA and equality.
Im sick to the teeth of unionism supremacy and their right to dictate.
Its obvious NI is ungovernable on an equality basis.
So lets be blunt, can any give me the headcount stats please? whats the latest census?
Yes, how many nationalists & unionists are there?
I know its disgusting to talk like this, but thats the only language the DUP understand.
At the next election will there be a Nationalist First Minister? is the headcount there for that?
On everyday matters, does it matter Stormont is running or not?
If not, give it a rest for 10 years.
Right Paddy
Conversation overheard in Local Bar a few years ago – Honestly
Time – End of June
John (Protestant) – Should we have another one Tommy ..??
Tommy (Catholic) – Maybe we’d better, for you’ll probably not speak to me for the next two months ..!!
I have a feeling that the DUP will be on their best behavior this summer, with all eyes on them from the English. They know they can’t be seen lighting bonfires with Irish flags on them because they will be exposed as the bigots which they are.
Ciaran, God help your innocence!
The Twelfth is the Twelfth and they intend to have it bigger and ‘better’ than ever.
Don’t forget as well that the DUP has to keep a beady eye on cultural supremacy. You can’t have cities or bridges or roads named after taigs. Sure nobody would know how to pronounce them. And why should Irish be on top? Why can’t it be English like it always was? And as for Nelson – that well known ex MLA and leveller of playing fields – didn’t he get a room in Belfast City Hall named after a taig? I mean, how much more do yis want? Do yis want to be called crocodiles again?
“Don’t forget as well that the DUP has to keep a beady eye on cultural supremacy”
As Chris Donnelly said Fiosrach: That is the DUP objective.
Was it Jean-Paul Sartre who opined that Descartes was being too presumtios in saying “Je pense, donc je suis? Should havecofined hmself to “Je pense, don’t Je pense”!
“donc”
As I said the other day on this blog: there is no point in having agreements if they aren’t going to be honoured. Even a child would know that. If Republicans 20 years ago could see us today: still no Irish Language Act, Bill of Rights, no change in attitude from Unionists, etc they would never have voted for the GFA. Whats the point? Its not being implemented.
Its like this: if we go out to a restaurant and order a big meal with a nice drink and the order comes back with something very different, do we pay the bill? of course not, we demand what we order or refuse to pay the bill. If that doesn’t work, we stand up and walk out of the restaurant completely.
Sinn Fein/SDLP know that their voters have said Enough is Enough. It doesn’t matter if there’s another Assembly Election and Unionism gains/loses 1 or 2 extra MLA’s, the numbers mean nothing at this point and the numbers game is always going to be in Republicanisms favour in the future anyway. If Unionists aren’t going to play fair, treat people with respect and implement agreements in full then Stormont should stay closed and we should go back to the drawing board. There has to be a dramatic change in Stormont, the very first change should be the renaming of the First/Deputy First Minister roles as the Joint First Ministers Office. Giving the DUP the power to give the false impression they rule the roost is only encouraging this backward, supremacist Unionist attitude.
When it comes to Sinn Fein, gaining the most MLA’s over the DUP shouldn’t be their top priority, it changes nothing really whether they are the biggest party or not. An Irish Language Act, Funding being allocated on the basis of Objective Need, etc is much more important.
I want Stormont to succeed for everyone here but in its current format its not doing that.
I wonder then Ryan, was signing up to the GFA which led to decommissioning, was that a mistake? How far has the republican goal been achieved by accepting the GFA? Unionists seem to be doing far better by never accepting the GFA.
“I wonder then Ryan, was signing up to the GFA which led to decommissioning, was that a mistake?”
Well I wouldn’t have agreed to armed conflict at all Oriel27, except in the situation of self defence, like in the late 1960’s, where it was clearly justified.
Nelson Mandela certainly didn’t agree with the IRA decommissioning. Personally I don’t believe any group has fully decommissioned. The OIRA, last active in the early 70’s, still has arms dumps as reported by the Irish News. The UVF/UDA obviously haven’t disbanded/disarmed despite the GFA being signed 20 years ago. Indeed Loyalists are the most active groups today, still engaging in drug dealing, crime, intimidation, racist/sectarian attacks, etc which sinks their argument of “existing to protect the Protestant Community”. Their existence is more about poisoning the Protestant Community with drugs, if nothing else.
My stance is every group here, including the British State, should disarm/disband. MI5 are still active on our streets and intimidating local people to become spies as reported by the Andersonstown News. One Catholic man was even followed on Holiday with his family and intimidated into becoming a spy. When he spoke out the intimidation stopped.
” How far has the republican goal been achieved by accepting the GFA? Unionists seem to be doing far better by never accepting the GFA.”
Its wrong to suggest Republicans have gained nothing from GFA. Power Sharing is guaranteed. You have to remember that Unionism fought that tooth and nail for decades. Ironically they could’ve shared power with SDLP but refused. Instead they ended up with SF when backed into a corner lol There was prisoner releases, which obviously benefitted republicans. The Principle of Consent, though usually seen as negative for republicans, is actually a positive. Both Westminster/Dublin have to enforce the decision of any border poll, including Irish Unity. Reform of the RUC was obviously a benefit. Parity of Esteem is obvious a benefit, putting Irish on Par with Britishness (not in the Sunningdale Agreement). Acknowledgement of Self Determination was a benefit, all sides, including representatives of the UDA/UVF, agreed the pursuit of Irish Unity (and retention of the Union) was legitimate. The scrapping of the Government of Ireland Act (1920). I could go on.
The Republican goal has always been a waiting game Oriel27. Yes its crude but its true. Republicans were basically told back in the early 90’s where the demographics were going and how they could vote for Irish Unity when that day comes. They then reasoned that they should get elected into the Dail, try to promote reconciliation with Unionism and rebuild the North’s economy in the time between the 90’s and the demographics changing. In that way the transition to Irish Unity would be a lot easier than prolonging the troubles, which would make Irish Unity harder to implement. That’s always been my understanding, anyway.
And then there was support for the police and the rule of English law. Can we get out of that too?
“And then there was support for the police and the rule of English law. Can we get out of that too?”
Well we should be supporting the police and encouraging reform. That’s why the PSNI should have 50/50 recruitment back. The PSNI aren’t the RUC but there is still a lot of issues there, especially the worrying claim that former RUC officers were allowed back into the service despite getting handsomely paid off. Some of these people are even investigating historical cases involving their own mates. Hardly impartial.
I am about to reveal the solution to the present impasse at Stormont. Sinn Féin and the other parties favourable to an Irish language act will agree to an English Language Act. All public signs will be in both English and Irish. All communications from government and public bodies will be in both languages. English will be allowed in the courts. All rites of passage documents will be in both languages. Children can be taught in English medium schools. The local TV stations will broadcast some of their programmes in English. Can I be fairer than that. Problem solved.
But that’s absurd, fiosrach. This is Ireland – it’s only natural that we speak English, not that benighted gobbledegook that our primitive ancestors gobbled.
Pistols at dawn,jude.
You know what? I don’t want to share power with people who discriminate against my native tongue and who spew hatred for gay people. Forget Stormont. A house built on sand can not last.
Great discussions back and forth.
Out of all these,the one uppermost in my mind,is the point forwarded
That if the DUP will not honouragreements previously signed,
how can you make new agreements with this group.
If previous agreements are implemented honestly and fairly,
Then go for the gusto.
Slantie