Majoritarianism

Observer B

Active member
Joined
Sep 13, 2019
Messages
180
You would think that Eire's objective would be to consolidate a cross community majority for a united Ireland.
However by being so intransigent on the backstop, the Eire government has antagonised the moderate Unionists they will need in future votes and made a united Ireland less likely.
Let's hope they are seeing sense now.
You are making a broad assumption that all moderate unionist would give preserving the union priority over economic well being. This is definitely not the case.
 


Mickeymac

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2010
Messages
41,282
You would think political Unionism’s long-term objective would be to consolidate a cross-community majority against UI. However, by being so intransigent on the backstop, the DUP have antagonized the moderate nationalists they will need in future votes and made UI more likely. Let’s hope they are seeing sense now.

Are you saying folk that would cherish unification should encourage them to see sense.:ROFLMAO:
 

Glaucon

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 13, 2012
Messages
8,509
Is their any reason why we should now have to have a majority in each of the "two" communities in Northern Ireland before we progress with any issue of substance???
Yes. NI is a divided society and it can only be brought forward with the agreement of both communities, or rather, the main parties of both communities. This is hard because NI is incredibly divided at almost all levels, but there's no realistic alternative.

Any attempt to establish majoritarianism to do down Unionists in the same way the Stormont government did down Nationalists between 1922 and 1972 should be avoided at all costs. Of course, there are issues where national allegiance is irrelevant and a simple majority is the obvious way forward, but when it comes to issues of identity, one must tread incredibly carefully.
 

McSlaggart

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
18,440
Yes. NI is a divided society and it can only be brought forward with the agreement of both communities, or rather, the main parties of both communities. This is hard because NI is incredibly divided at almost all levels, but there's no realistic alternative.

Any attempt to establish majoritarianism to do down Unionists in the same way the Stormont government did down Nationalists between 1922 and 1972 should be avoided at all costs. Of course, there are issues where national allegiance is irrelevant and a simple majority is the obvious way forward, but when it comes to issues of identity, one must tread incredibly carefully.

The Good friday agreement vote was passed by a simple majority of the population of Northern Ireland. The current arrangement is based on the idea of a simple majority (if you have any other evidence please put forward.) "majoritarianism" never appears to be an issue unless unionists wish to claim that they are disadvantaged by it.
 

Mickeymac

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2010
Messages
41,282
The Good friday agreement vote was passed by a simple majority of the population of Northern Ireland. The current arrangement is based on the idea of a simple majority (if you have any other evidence please put forward.) "majoritarianism" never appears to be an issue unless unionists wish to claim that they are disadvantaged by it.


50% plus one vote is the current, any deviance from that needs to be agreed by both sides.....end of.
 

Glaucon

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 13, 2012
Messages
8,509
The Good friday agreement vote was passed by a simple majority of the population of Northern Ireland. The current arrangement is based on the idea of a simple majority (if you have any other evidence please put forward.) "majoritarianism" never appears to be an issue unless unionists wish to claim that they are disadvantaged by it.
If a majority of Unionists lose faith in the agreement, it is finished. You cannot agree something with your own side only. Otherwise, it's worth nothing whatsoever.

Your claim that majoritarianism is never an issue "unless Unionists wish to claim...." belies your true intentions. You share that trait with most Sinn Féin supporters, it must be said.
 

McSlaggart

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
18,440
If a majority of Unionists lose faith in the agreement, it is finished. You cannot agree something with your own side only. Otherwise, it's worth nothing whatsoever.

Your claim that majoritarianism is never an issue "unless Unionists wish to claim...." belies your true intentions. You share that trait with most Sinn Féin supporters, it must be said.
Good Friday Agreement result was a majority of 71 %. The DUP was against the agreement. If the DUP wish to change the terms of the Agreement then they need to do it now!!!! No point in crying that the status cannot be changed by a simple majority just at the moment you think you will lose. If they wish to change the terms and have a half way house in the 6 counties then make the proposal. Do it now and not when they the think the terms of the good friday agreement may actual go against them.
 

EnglishObserver

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 30, 2010
Messages
3,031
Good Friday Agreement result was a majority of 71 %. The DUP was against the agreement. If the DUP wish to change the terms of the Agreement then they need to do it now!!!! No point in crying that the status cannot be changed by a simple majority just at the moment you think you will lose. If they wish to change the terms and have a half way house in the 6 counties then make the proposal. Do it now and not when they the think the terms of the good friday agreement may actual go against them.
Why would Loyalists follow that approach?
 

EnglishObserver

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 30, 2010
Messages
3,031
What is the difference between Loyalists and unionists?
Good question.

In my opinion Unionists support the unity of The UK.

The term Loyalist is more difficult. During the troubles I would have defined it as being anyone who used illegal means or supported the use of illegal means to keep NI (or some part of it) out of an independent united Ireland. In some ways it might be a redundant term at the moment. Others define it differently.
 

death or glory

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 1, 2012
Messages
20,193
Good Friday Agreement result was a majority of 71 %. The DUP was against the agreement. If the DUP wish to change the terms of the Agreement then they need to do it now!!!! No point in crying that the status cannot be changed by a simple majority just at the moment you think you will lose. If they wish to change the terms and have a half way house in the 6 counties then make the proposal. Do it now and not when they the think the terms of the good friday agreement may actual go against them.
But the major Unionist party of the time, the Ulster Unionists were for the GFA.
It never would have stood a chance if no major Unionist party had supported it.

The backstop is not supported by any major Unionist party.
 

McSlaggart

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
18,440
Good question.

In my opinion Unionists support the unity of The UK.

The term Loyalist is more difficult. During the troubles I would have defined it as being anyone who used illegal means or supported the use of illegal means to keep NI (or some part of it) out of an independent united Ireland. In some ways it might be a redundant term at the moment. Others define it differently.

What part of the main unionist parties could that not be applied to? Remember Drumcree.
 

McSlaggart

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
18,440
But the major Unionist party of the time, the Ulster Unionists were for the GFA.
It never would have stood a chance if no major Unionist party had supported it.

The backstop is not supported by any major Unionist party.
So what? The majority of people in "northern Ireland" would support it.
 

death or glory

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 1, 2012
Messages
20,193
So what? The majority of people in "northern Ireland" would support it.
The majority of people in Northern Ireland supported the death penalty for terrorists.
 

death or glory

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 1, 2012
Messages
20,193
The problem would have been defining who was a terrorist.
The majority of people in Northern Ireland would describe a terrorist as a member of an illegal terrorist organisation.
 

Mickeymac

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2010
Messages
41,282
If a majority of Unionists lose faith in the agreement, it is finished. You cannot agree something with your own side only. Otherwise, it's worth nothing whatsoever.

Your claim that majoritarianism is never an issue "unless Unionists wish to claim...." belies your true intentions. You share that trait with most Sinn Féin supporters, it must be said.

Off topic, the thread is not for SF obsessives to derail.
 

Paddyc

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
10,316
You would think that Eire's objective would be to consolidate a cross community majority for a united Ireland.
However by being so intransigent on the backstop, the Eire government has antagonised the moderate Unionists they will need in future votes and made a united Ireland less likely.
Let's hope they are seeing sense now.
You'd think that the DUP's objective would be to consolidate a cross community majority for the Union.
However by being so intransigent on the backstop and on issues of community identity, the DUP has antagonised the moderate Nationalists they will need in future votes and made a united Ireland more likely.

Let's hope they continue to fail to see sense now.
 

EnglishObserver

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 30, 2010
Messages
3,031
What part of the main unionist parties could that not be applied to? Remember Drumcree.
You might be right about Unionist parties (from time to time) - but there are plenty of Unionists not active in politics who it wouldn't apply to.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top