Is Unionism a Culture of Fear?

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,741
Child you proclaimed NI as undemocratic, therefore by your own logic any political process in the aforementioned previously proclaimed undemocratic NI has no democracy, simples. But not happy with having already shown yourself to be gormless unimaginative half wit you add to the insurmountable body of evidence by proclaiming that only those who agree with you can be viewed as being democratic...
A lot of Ulster folk do this.

Anyway looking to the future;

"It's well past time that Republicans, including SF Nua, started thinking like people who really could rule Ireland. That means taking an absolutely brutally realistic view of our situation - geopolitical, cultural and economic - and not depending on what the ordinary uneducated person thinks - with is mostly based on the English tabloid media.

In my view, that means coming to the understanding that Scotland is the prize that both Ireland and England have always been in competition for. Divide and conquer wasn't just about separating people in Ireland, but separating Ireland from what is effectively our own offspring, i.e. Scotland. If anybody thinks about Scotland, they think about Gaelic Scotland. The lowland Scots have practically no culture. Genocide in Ireland was always about breaking Ireland's ability to be a rival for Scotland.

The war with the Prods in the North is only playing into England's hands. They are actually our bridge to Scotland and so a great benefit to us. And we need Scotland. Today, the Irish population in general is weak, effeminate and open to any trendy suggestion - no matter how daft. But, the Gaelic warrior aristocracy lasted much longer in Scotland, and hence Scotland is a masculine and military nation. Indeed, the average person around the word, when they think of the British Army, are really thinking of the Scottish regiments.

We should not bother with any personal hatred of the English. Only the English régime are enemies, and we need to work towards their destruction - or, at least curtailment. Hopefully, inter-ethnic chaos and violence will do the job for us - and we should encourage such inter-ethnic conflict so as the weaken the enemy, while doing our best to halt immigration into Scotland and Ireland. Annexing parts of Northern England will also become a possibility, and would be highly desirable, as people try to escape the ethnic chaos in the south.

A federated Scotland and Ireland has enormous geopolitical power. We command the exist from the Baltic, and we command the North Atlantic as far as Iceland. We are effectively the forward position of the Great World Island, i.e. Eurasia. The obvious move is to ally with the BRICS countires, and offer deep sea port access to China and Russia, including military vessels, while denying NATO access. A deep sea port in Ireland or Scotland would solve Russia's "North Atlantic problem," which was always the fact that it was so easy to hem in its Baltic fleet. Germany suffered from the same problem in WW2, when even the massive Bismark could not get out of the Baltic safely. Such access is worth a lot of money and political support to Russia and China.

This is the level Republicans need to be thinking on. Not petty squabbles over parochial matters.

We should accept that there is no solution to the six counties problem within an Irish only context. Within a Scottish-Irish context, there is no problem. The Unionists rightly want to be linked to Scotland, and we should too. This is not about doing stuff to satisfy the Unionists, it's about doing what the Dal Riada saw was necessary 1200 years ago, and is even more necessary today. Republicans need to stop thinking in terms of improving the status quo, and make the leap to a much more revolutionary form of thinking.

I mean that we should not only spend our time thinking of new answers to old questions, but accept that some of those questions are simply the wrong questions, or just belonged to a context that no longer exists. I think that most of us will agree that the GFA was set up to answer a question that had been asked in the 1880s, i.e. how to integrate the Ulster Protestants into an essentially southern Catholic population. In the new context of an emerging Scotland, a weakening England and USA, along with the emergence of the BRICS countries, that is simply now the wrong question, and no matter what answer you give to it, it's always going to be the wrong answer. More relevant questions are: Is partitionism the partition of Scotland from Ireland? Who caused the partition of Ireland from Scotland? Certainly not the Gael. For what purpose was Ireland partitioned from Scotland? Cui bono? Who gains from it?"
 


between the bridges

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 21, 2011
Messages
46,085
Didn't even bother reading that pet...
 

between the bridges

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 21, 2011
Messages
46,085
A lot of Ulster folk do this.

Anyway looking to the future;

"It's well past time that Republicans, including SF Nua, started thinking like people who really could rule Ireland. That means taking an absolutely brutally realistic view of our situation - geopolitical, cultural and economic - and not depending on what the ordinary uneducated person thinks - with is mostly based on the English tabloid media.

In my view, that means coming to the understanding that Scotland is the prize that both Ireland and England have always been in competition for. Divide and conquer wasn't just about separating people in Ireland, but separating Ireland from what is effectively our own offspring, i.e. Scotland. If anybody thinks about Scotland, they think about Gaelic Scotland. The lowland Scots have practically no culture. Genocide in Ireland was always about breaking Ireland's ability to be a rival for Scotland.

The war with the Prods in the North is only playing into England's hands. They are actually our bridge to Scotland and so a great benefit to us. And we need Scotland. Today, the Irish population in general is weak, effeminate and open to any trendy suggestion - no matter how daft. But, the Gaelic warrior aristocracy lasted much longer in Scotland, and hence Scotland is a masculine and military nation. Indeed, the average person around the word, when they think of the British Army, are really thinking of the Scottish regiments.

We should not bother with any personal hatred of the English. Only the English régime are enemies, and we need to work towards their destruction - or, at least curtailment. Hopefully, inter-ethnic chaos and violence will do the job for us - and we should encourage such inter-ethnic conflict so as the weaken the enemy, while doing our best to halt immigration into Scotland and Ireland. Annexing parts of Northern England will also become a possibility, and would be highly desirable, as people try to escape the ethnic chaos in the south.

A federated Scotland and Ireland has enormous geopolitical power. We command the exist from the Baltic, and we command the North Atlantic as far as Iceland. We are effectively the forward position of the Great World Island, i.e. Eurasia. The obvious move is to ally with the BRICS countires, and offer deep sea port access to China and Russia, including military vessels, while denying NATO access. A deep sea port in Ireland or Scotland would solve Russia's "North Atlantic problem," which was always the fact that it was so easy to hem in its Baltic fleet. Germany suffered from the same problem in WW2, when even the massive Bismark could not get out of the Baltic safely. Such access is worth a lot of money and political support to Russia and China.

This is the level Republicans need to be thinking on. Not petty squabbles over parochial matters.

We should accept that there is no solution to the six counties problem within an Irish only context. Within a Scottish-Irish context, there is no problem. The Unionists rightly want to be linked to Scotland, and we should too. This is not about doing stuff to satisfy the Unionists, it's about doing what the Dal Riada saw was necessary 1200 years ago, and is even more necessary today. Republicans need to stop thinking in terms of improving the status quo, and make the leap to a much more revolutionary form of thinking.

I mean that we should not only spend our time thinking of new answers to old questions, but accept that some of those questions are simply the wrong questions, or just belonged to a context that no longer exists. I think that most of us will agree that the GFA was set up to answer a question that had been asked in the 1880s, i.e. how to integrate the Ulster Protestants into an essentially southern Catholic population. In the new context of an emerging Scotland, a weakening England and USA, along with the emergence of the BRICS countries, that is simply now the wrong question, and no matter what answer you give to it, it's always going to be the wrong answer. More relevant questions are: Is partitionism the partition of Scotland from Ireland? Who caused the partition of Ireland from Scotland? Certainly not the Gael. For what purpose was Ireland partitioned from Scotland? Cui bono? Who gains from it?"
Pet is this proof yer TG's sock?
 

DT123

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 31, 2011
Messages
14,145
A lot of Ulster folk do this.

Anyway looking to the future;

"It's well past time that Republicans, including SF Nua, started thinking like people who really could rule Ireland. That means taking an absolutely brutally realistic view of our situation - geopolitical, cultural and economic - and not depending on what the ordinary uneducated person thinks - with is mostly based on the English tabloid media.

In my view, that means coming to the understanding that Scotland is the prize that both Ireland and England have always been in competition for. Divide and conquer wasn't just about separating people in Ireland, but separating Ireland from what is effectively our own offspring, i.e. Scotland. If anybody thinks about Scotland, they think about Gaelic Scotland. The lowland Scots have practically no culture. Genocide in Ireland was always about breaking Ireland's ability to be a rival for Scotland.

The war with the Prods in the North is only playing into England's hands. They are actually our bridge to Scotland and so a great benefit to us. And we need Scotland. Today, the Irish population in general is weak, effeminate and open to any trendy suggestion - no matter how daft. But, the Gaelic warrior aristocracy lasted much longer in Scotland, and hence Scotland is a masculine and military nation. Indeed, the average person around the word, when they think of the British Army, are really thinking of the Scottish regiments.

We should not bother with any personal hatred of the English. Only the English régime are enemies, and we need to work towards their destruction - or, at least curtailment. Hopefully, inter-ethnic chaos and violence will do the job for us - and we should encourage such inter-ethnic conflict so as the weaken the enemy, while doing our best to halt immigration into Scotland and Ireland. Annexing parts of Northern England will also become a possibility, and would be highly desirable, as people try to escape the ethnic chaos in the south.

A federated Scotland and Ireland has enormous geopolitical power. We command the exist from the Baltic, and we command the North Atlantic as far as Iceland. We are effectively the forward position of the Great World Island, i.e. Eurasia. The obvious move is to ally with the BRICS countires, and offer deep sea port access to China and Russia, including military vessels, while denying NATO access. A deep sea port in Ireland or Scotland would solve Russia's "North Atlantic problem," which was always the fact that it was so easy to hem in its Baltic fleet. Germany suffered from the same problem in WW2, when even the massive Bismark could not get out of the Baltic safely. Such access is worth a lot of money and political support to Russia and China.

This is the level Republicans need to be thinking on. Not petty squabbles over parochial matters.

We should accept that there is no solution to the six counties problem within an Irish only context. Within a Scottish-Irish context, there is no problem. The Unionists rightly want to be linked to Scotland, and we should too. This is not about doing stuff to satisfy the Unionists, it's about doing what the Dal Riada saw was necessary 1200 years ago, and is even more necessary today. Republicans need to stop thinking in terms of improving the status quo, and make the leap to a much more revolutionary form of thinking.

I mean that we should not only spend our time thinking of new answers to old questions, but accept that some of those questions are simply the wrong questions, or just belonged to a context that no longer exists. I think that most of us will agree that the GFA was set up to answer a question that had been asked in the 1880s, i.e. how to integrate the Ulster Protestants into an essentially southern Catholic population. In the new context of an emerging Scotland, a weakening England and USA, along with the emergence of the BRICS countries, that is simply now the wrong question, and no matter what answer you give to it, it's always going to be the wrong answer. More relevant questions are: Is partitionism the partition of Scotland from Ireland? Who caused the partition of Ireland from Scotland? Certainly not the Gael. For what purpose was Ireland partitioned from Scotland? Cui bono? Who gains from it?"
You really need to get a job.
 

Novos

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 14, 2016
Messages
3,364
No, of course you don't. And you might also have said that you have no idea what you are talking about yourself, because it is increasingly clear that you don't. The idea that we wouldn't have needed the GFA and that unionists would have transformed themselves and the discriminatory establishment here on their own without being forced into it by a variety of others is ridiculous. They were resisting the implementation of the McBride Principles right up to their full implementation at the end of the last century. We'd never have had the disbandment of the thoroughly discredited UDR and RUC if it had been left to the goodwill of unionists. To suggest that we wouldn't have needed the GFA shows that you understand nothing. You display all the characteristics of a parvenu. Maybe that is because you are one. :)
One Man One Vote ...1968
I know you are anti British and anti unionist, but get real. Change was happening and nearly 4000 people didn't need to die for it.
 

Novos

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 14, 2016
Messages
3,364
The GFA will recognise a All Ireland if the people vote that way- hardly a settlement set in stone- I will leave it up to the people- what about yourself -
You find yourself in almost the same situation as Scotland Michael. Well... except they can have a referendum any old time they like and the didn't have to murder anyone.
 

Strawberry

Moderator
Joined
Jul 13, 2014
Messages
18,105
To answer the thread title - no it isn't. Unionism at its worst is a culture of racial and religious supremacy, while Unionism at its best is a thing rarely found in Northern Ireland.

If you find a DUP politician openly campaigning for the Irish language to be put on a par with the Welsh language, for example, then you have found Unionism at its best.
 

Novos

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 14, 2016
Messages
3,364
To answer the thread title - no it isn't. Unionism at its worst is a culture of racial and religious supremacy, while Unionism at its best is a thing rarely found in Northern Ireland.

If you find a DUP politician openly campaigning for the Irish language to be put on a par with the Welsh language, for example, then you have found Unionism at its best.
You have your own politicians to to that for you. They failed you, just like they always do.
Nationalism at it's worst is smashing Jewish Grave stones. Joining with the disaddents IRA and practicing sectarianism.
 

McSlaggart

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
19,204
One Man One Vote ...1968
I know you are anti British and anti unionist, but get real. Change was happening and nearly 4000 people didn't need to die for it.
Could you please give us the details.
 

Irish-Rationalist

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2016
Messages
3,205
To answer the thread title - no it isn't. Unionism at its worst is a culture of racial and religious supremacy, while Unionism at its best is a thing rarely found in Northern Ireland.

If you find a DUP politician openly campaigning for the Irish language to be put on a par with the Welsh language, for example, then you have found Unionism at its best.
It might appear that way on the surface, but I'm not sure racial supremacy is the correct terminology. Unionism is not a race, it is a political ideology which incorporates an ethnicity of British descent.

Britain and Ireland have been inhabited for thousands of years by a single people that have remained in the majority, with only minor additions from later invaders like Celts, Romans, Angles , Saxons, Vikings and Normans.

The Irish, English, Scottish and Welsh have a great deal in common with each other, at least from the geneticist’s point of view...

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/05/science/05cnd-brits.html?_r=0

Unionism is nationally and politically supremacist, and religious supremacism has also played its role. It's British colonial supremacism which characterises unionism, not authentic racial supremacism, although elements of unionism have manifested distinctly racist attitudes and behaviours towards non-caucasians.
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,741
You have your own politicians to to that for you. They failed you, just like they always do.
Nationalism at it's worst is smashing Jewish Grave stones. Joining with the disaddents IRA and practicing sectarianism.
It is that attitude on both sides that will insure Northern Ireland will remain an unstable, dysfunctional kip.
 

Novos

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 14, 2016
Messages
3,364
No, of course you don't. And you might also have said that you have no idea what you are talking about yourself, because it is increasingly clear that you don't. The idea that we wouldn't have needed the GFA and that unionists would have transformed themselves and the discriminatory establishment here on their own without being forced into it by a variety of others is ridiculous. They were resisting the implementation of the McBride Principles right up to their full implementation at the end of the last century. We'd never have had the disbandment of the thoroughly discredited UDR and RUC if it had been left to the goodwill of unionists. To suggest that we wouldn't have needed the GFA shows that you understand nothing. You display all the characteristics of a parvenu. Maybe that is because you are one. :)
Friday 22 November 1968
Reforms Package Announced
Terence O'Neill, then Northern Ireland Prime Minister, announced a package of reform measures which had resulted from meetings in London with Harold Wilson, then British Prime Minister, and James Callaghan, then British Home Secretary. The five point reform plan included:
a nine member 'Development Commission' to take over the powers of the Londonderry Corporation;
an ombudsman to investigate complaints against government departments;
the allocation of houses by local authorities to be based on need;
the Special Powers Act to be abolished as it was safe to do so; and
some reform of the local government franchise (the end of the company votes).
 

Novos

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 14, 2016
Messages
3,364
Could you please give us the details.
Friday 22 November 1968
Reforms Package Announced
Terence O'Neill, then Northern Ireland Prime Minister, announced a package of reform measures which had resulted from meetings in London with Harold Wilson, then British Prime Minister, and James Callaghan, then British Home Secretary. The five point reform plan included:
a nine member 'Development Commission' to take over the powers of the Londonderry Corporation;
an ombudsman to investigate complaints against government departments;
the allocation of houses by local authorities to be based on need;
the Special Powers Act to be abolished as it was safe to do so; and
some reform of the local government franchise (the end of the company votes).
 

Mickeymac

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2010
Messages
42,306
Friday 22 November 1968
Reforms Package Announced
Terence O'Neill, then Northern Ireland Prime Minister, announced a package of reform measures which had resulted from meetings in London with Harold Wilson, then British Prime Minister, and James Callaghan, then British Home Secretary. The five point reform plan included:
a nine member 'Development Commission' to take over the powers of the Londonderry Corporation;
an ombudsman to investigate complaints against government departments;
the allocation of houses by local authorities to be based on need;
the Special Powers Act to be abolished as it was safe to do so; and
some reform of the local government franchise (the end of the company votes).



You neglected to explain what became of O'Neill shortly after returning to NI after being told by the lousey Brits to implement a few reforms to Catholics:D


Btw.....Were the so called "reforms" ever implemented and if so.......by whom and when?
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top Bottom