Gay, It's Still 'No!'

Are some politicians in the Irish Republic thick, or is it that they don't comprehend basic rejection when they see it - even though they have becomes accustomed to it for over 80 years?  Fine Gael TD Gay Mitchell, has suggested the Queen and her successor should have a role in any future 32-county Irish Republic.

My long-time experience of Northern Ireland has led me to conclude that Unionists have a far better knowledge of their nationalist underlings than is ever reciprocated.  I have known hundreds of Unionists in my time.  Some have an absolute and unquestioning devotion to the Monarchy.  Others would, quite simply, swap the entire Royal Family for a British republic.  The notion that persists with so-called 'constitutional' nationalists revolves around taking away from the Ulster British population what is, far and away, their most sacred pillar of identity (the Union) and replacing it with a few crumbs of comfort disguised as institutional salad dressing.  It wouldn't matter a jot if the Queen moved in to Leinster House and had a gaggle of servants attending to her every need.  The fact is that Irish sovereignty over Northern Ireland is something Unionists are not prepared to accept - whatever tit-bits are suggested by those who are, rhetorically, opposed to the very things which binds all Unionists.

Gay, it's been 'No!' since 1921; it will continue to be 'No!' until such time as your crowd appreciates the sincerity of Unionist determination.

Comments

[Armaghlite]

"Unionists have a far better knowledge of their nationalist underlings"

Nationalist Underlings?

Yet again you show yourself up for what you really are.

[Andrew McCann]

That's right, I do. A person who detests those who are trying to destroy my country. Do you honestly think I would describe such types in endearing terms?

[DST]

Thank goodness this wasn't the beginnings of ANOTHER ATW epic about THE GAYS, complete with fervid imaginings of what WE get up to in bed!

Anyway... Andrew has a point about the diversity of views across unionism.

[aileen]

LOL DST!

I would reckon tht most of us thought that this was going to be about you and yours ;o)

[Hugh Green]

I thought this post was going to be about how Andrew was still not gay.

[Colm]

It looks as if this is turning into 'one of those' threads :)

[NRG]

"Armaghlite" - I apprecaite the pun but how do you think a name like that makes Unionists feel about Republicans and Republican areas. Any wonder some us think you are not serious about giving up the violence. Anyway SLF's "Arm alight" pun was better. I also agree Andrew's phrase was out of order.

I think Gay's point is worth an airing. The South is not and interesed in the North and we are about it. If there is a deabte that will lead to more normal relations between the 2 juristictions then I think these sort of ideas are all good contributions to that process.

It strikes me that the Irish would have had a lot of fun over the last 80 years mischief making, if they had stayed in the Commonwealth. They have a greater right to be there than many, as Ireland was part of Britian and not part of the Empire and people from Ireland played a major role in securing and maintaining the Empire.

[smcgiff]

NRG,

'as Ireland was part of Britian'

Ireland was part of the UK, but it's debatable whether Ireland was part of the empire or not. For many the difference was academic.

You rightly pointed out Andrew's Underling term was most unfortunate, and if he were more fluent in German he could easily have used the term Untermenschen (And David earlier wondered why the media don't publicise his site!!!)

I would believe, however, Andrew's views are very much in the minority.

I do agree with Andrew that the idea of the UK monarch (or any for that matter) over the 26 counties is a ridiculous idea. Andrew will further be pleased to note that the idea has been rubbished by most commentators - So, Andrew will surely be following up with a, 'They know us after all' thread.

[NRG]

I meant that Ireland was part Britain in the sense that along with Scotland, Wales and England it took part in the ruling of the Empire. Many of Britain’s Military heroes were Irish, and Ireland sent MP’s to Westminster, etc, etc.

Ireland was not ruled by Britain in the way that states in the Empire were. (Despite the revised version of events that nationalism tries to portray and their violent attempts to remove historical truths that don't fit their opression myths)

[Armaghlite]

NRG,

I take your point. I in know way agree with, condone or justify violence regardless of where it comes from - I just thought the name was funny (given that i'm from Armagh).

If it gives the impression that I in some way agree with people actually using explosives then I might consider changing it!

[smcgiff]

'(Despite the revised version of events that nationalism tries to portray and their violent attempts to remove historical truths that don't fit their opression myths)'

NRG,

Are the Penal laws treated as Myth or Legend in Northern Ireland text books? It wasn't until 28 years of union before Catholics were given emancipation.

So, Ireland may have been part of the UK, but not all Irish were treated equally.

[NRG]

Ahhh..as sure as night follows day, someone suggests Nationalism is not always entirely truth and the MOPE-ery starts to flow.

Grow up - bad stuff happened to everyone, everywhere, sometime in the past. Only Irish Nationalists aren't mature enough to get past it or admit the even more recent bad stuff they have done opressing Protestants in the South and brutalising the population in the North. You should follow the example of the rest of the Irish people who have moved on and left you backwoodsmen behind.

We could trade historical points all day, and pick and choose bits and pieces from the past to judge by todays standards. The simple point I am making is that there is much more shared history between the British and the Irish than some people care to admit to.

If we are to have a good relationship between North and South it is healthy that people in the South explore and debate the positive side to the history in balance to the relentless propaganda about the negative sides (the true bits and the myths).

[Colm]

NRG

Can you not see that you are engaging in exactly the same one sided MOPEry here that you claim to resent from nationalists. Or are you saying that when you post an opinion nobody is entitled to come back with a rebuttal, Thay must only agree with your version of history.

[d4]

NRg - your right about shared history et al - but oppression of Prods in the South?
Do you have any evidence ? Prods left, definately and this was to the disadvantage of the Country - it let the Mad Monsignors take over in the 50's, it kept us socially and economically repressed when we should not have been and it was definately a bad thing for the advancement of our Country. But oppression?? I've never heard any evidence of that. Yes the mad IRA blew up the occasional aristocrat - but they hardly the state - they only ever got the same amount of votes down here as the monster raving looney party in Britain (until the whole peace thing and boom down here leading poorer people to change voting habits) even now at their Zenith the Sinners, sorry Shinners only get 10% support down here.

But back to my point, I have several Protestant friends, none of them to my knowledge are any more oppressed than me - The first President of the Republic (Douglas Hyde) was a Protestant - and what about all the high flyers on the Dublin Business scene who are good old D4 and D6 prods - the owner of the company I work for is a very proud Irish Protestant - forever telling us about his "Proddy Work Ethic" - His words not mine.

I don't see any sectarianism down here - this place is very open, changing and increasingly diverse. And while the economic boom will no doubt end - the social transformation of this country is irreversible.

[Andrew McCann]

Smcgiff

Untermenschen is a term I've used for nationalists many times.

[Armaghlite]

That says more about you and your upbringing than about anything else....

[smcgiff]

Sieg Heil, Andrew,

'Untermenschen is a term I've used for nationalists many times.'

Silly me for lampooning those beyond parody.

[Reg]

"Only Irish Nationalists aren't mature enough to get past it or admit the even more recent bad stuff they have done opressing Protestants in the South and brutalising the population in the North. You should follow the example of the rest of the Irish people who have moved on and left you backwoodsmen behind."

NRG = bigotry (or should it be NRG = unionist MOPEry?)

I'm afraid it is you who sounds like the immature backwoodsman.

[smcgiff]

NRG,

‘Ahhh..as sure as night follows day, someone suggests Nationalism is not always entirely truth and the MOPE-ery starts to flow.’

Using terms such as mopery is the last vestige of the corrupt of argument.

You were stating that Ireland was treated as part of the UK, rather than as an empire’s dominion. I pointed out cases where I believed this was not the case. Mopery? Away with yeah!

I sincerely hope for a greater relationship between the UK and the Republic of Ireland (And it’s moving in that direction). We’ve a fantastic amount in common. Unfortunately, greater political integration is not possible, at least in the short term, for historical reasons (which are now derided as mere mopery by some).

I believe the UK today is far different to what was the case over a hundred years ago. If Ireland had remained within the UK I think it would be treated similarly to Scotland or Wales of today. However, that’s not necessarily a good thing. I think Ireland is NOW better off than Scotland and Wales as an independent country, and not a periphery of London. If Ireland were part of the UK today I’d still probably be a nationalist. :-)

[Colm]

Rule of commenting no 453..

When someone uses the phrase MOPEry in a comment it means they are about to engage in a huge dollop of it themselves.

[NRG]

...then there is the dreary inevitabilty that will Nationalists jump about and whine at imagined ills.

[Colm]

Or that some unionists will blindly deny real ones

[Reg]

"...then there is the dreary inevitabilty that will Nationalists jump about and whine at imagined ills."

(Sigh) I know. The blaggards.

Thank the Good Lord (reformed version) that unionists never, ever do that!

[Andrew McCann]

'Silly me for lampooning those beyond parody.'

Silly you - period!

[The Phantom]

Just read this. "Nationalist underlings" indeed.

I suspect Andrew to be on one "nationalist" payroll or another , as he presents such a brutal face of their "unionist" underlings, or is it overlords, or whatever the hell it might be.