Are the Irish entitled to charter Derry and Belfast?

Niall996

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2011
Messages
11,823
The simple answer is that the land belongs to the people who live in it.
Indigenous people should resist colonisation at the time, if they don't like the implications of losing ownership of their land.
There's no point complaining about it later.

In the case of Derry, although it has built by the planters, it has been colonised in modern times by nationalists. Anyone who knows the place will be aware that the remaining planters now live in outlying rural areas, or have retreated to rough housing estates on the outskirts such as the aptly named New Buildings.
Colonisation cuts both ways.
So it’s safe to go to Derry then? Unionists have been moved out?
 


recedite

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2010
Messages
1,540
So it’s safe to go to Derry then? Unionists have been moved out?
Depends whether you are a unionist carrying a big bongo drum or just a nationalist :wink:

BTW I didn't say they have been moved out of the city. They moved out. Subtle difference.
Either way they failed to do what they did hundreds of years ago; ie defend the planter's town inside the walls. And now they have lost it.
 

Oliver Cromwell McIvor

Well-known member
Joined
May 14, 2018
Messages
2,933
The simple answer is that the land belongs to the people who live in it.
Indigenous people should resist colonisation at the time, if they don't like the implications of losing ownership of their land. There's no point complaining about it later.
May I ask you then Sir, why is it that so-called Irish nationalists care not a jot about the current plantation that's taking place right under their noses? A plantation so total that in the end it'll make Cromwell's wee effort look like a Jock stag weekend in Belfast?
 

recedite

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2010
Messages
1,540
May I ask you then Sir, why is it that so-called Irish nationalists care not a jot about the current plantation that's taking place right under their noses? A plantation so total that in the end it'll make Cromwell's wee effort look like a Jock stag weekend in Belfast?
That is indeed a fascinating question.
The answer lies in the fact that nationalism in Ireland is largely steered and defined by Sinn Fein.
While others have tried to donn the nationalist mantle, it never seems to fit anyone else quite as well, perhaps because no other party (within living memory) has produced so many nationalist martyrs. And one martyr is worth a thousand fine speeches.

SF is not only a "cultural marxist" party but they were actual full-on marxists in the 1960's and 1970's. But nowadays they don't talk about that much.

Part of the reason is that the NI loyalists became sympathetic with union jack waving British nationalists in Britain, early on, which seems only natural.
As a result, NI republicans went the opposite way - the far left.

All this has resulted in the current, somewhat incongruous, SF policy;
"Brits out, and the rest of the world in".
 

Oliver Cromwell McIvor

Well-known member
Joined
May 14, 2018
Messages
2,933
A very concise and interesting explanation Mr Recedite.

Its a pity they are such utter clampits. By the time they realise the new Planters couldn't give a shiny sh!te about Irish culture - Green or Orange - 'twill be too late.
 

Talk Back

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
6,295
I am a staunch nationalist but I heard someone bring up the fact that Belfast was created by planters and it's made me think. Can republicans really complain of living under occupation in unionist-built cities or talking about a foreign presence when the cities wouldn't even exist without them? Yes the UI started there too but honestly it doesn't change the fact loyal prods built Belfast. It seems ungrateful to live in a place they built up and complain about them or brag about a nationalist majority in that same city when it wouldn't exist without their help.
Belfast was not "created by the foreigners - Belfast existed before the foreigners were planted in Ireland.
 

RasherHash

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
24,219
Belfast was not "created by the foreigners - Belfast existed before the foreigners were planted in Ireland.
Everywhere planters go they pretend there was no one there before them.
 

recedite

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2010
Messages
1,540
Everywhere planters go they pretend there was no one there before them.
That's true, but if there was no actual town, then the planters who put up the first stockade and built the first houses are entitled to say they built the town.
Just like the native Americans sold Manhattan island to the Dutch settlers for a pittance. For them it was just a place to go fishing.
Likewise the native Irish (woodkerns) were not great townspeople at the time, often preferring to live in the woods, or follow their herds of cattle around.
Other towns around the coast would have been the same story eg Dublin and Wicklow. There may have been a few people knocking around the area before the foreigner landed, but probably not in an organised town or village. The few locals would either have scarpered immediately, or stayed and intermarried.
 

Mickeymac

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2010
Messages
38,668


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top