United Ireland?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 17, 2024, 09:20:48 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  International General Discussion (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  United Ireland?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3]
Poll
Question: Will there be a united Ireland in 2032?
#1
Aint gonna happen
 
#2
Yes - a confederation
 
#3
Yes - a federal republic
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 33

Author Topic: United Ireland?  (Read 6468 times)
politicus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,173
Denmark


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #50 on: April 16, 2012, 09:42:54 AM »

Well, in any case, the rump UK would, for all practically purposes, be the Greater England, in which Wales and Northern Ireland would, at best, be "autonomous entities" of sorts. While it may be possible, the nature of the UK would change radically
Yes, England would be even more dominant than today and have 510 out of 550 members in the House of Commons. Welsh first minister Carwyn Jones has an idea of a new upper house in this scenario where England, Wales and NI should have equal representation.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/jan/13/scottish-independence-wales-northern-ireland But I doubt the English would accept.
The problem with any kind of federal structure in Britain is that England is simply too big an entity compared to the rest.
Only the Danish Realm is worse off in this respect. Greenland and the Faroes only have about 2,2 % of the total population combined making federalism ludicrous. But NI's share of the population in a "Rump-UK" would actually only be slightly higher.
Logged
tpfkaw
wormyguy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,118
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.58, S: 1.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #51 on: April 16, 2012, 11:49:18 AM »

England should really be split into multiple smaller entities for devolution, but I guess that isn't a very popular idea. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_England_devolution_referendums,_2004
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,669
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #52 on: April 16, 2012, 11:50:22 AM »

Based off the 1979 referendum, devolution in Wales wasn't a very popular idea either.
Logged
YL
YorkshireLiberal
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,540
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #53 on: April 17, 2012, 12:48:49 PM »

England should really be split into multiple smaller entities for devolution, but I guess that isn't a very popular idea. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_England_devolution_referendums,_2004

While it's true that splitting England up for devolution isn't a simple concept, the assemblies offered in those referendums (two of which were cancelled of course) wouldn't really have had powers comparable with those of the existing devolved parliaments/assemblies, and I think this was part of the reason they were so decisively rejected.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,206
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #54 on: April 17, 2012, 12:56:57 PM »

...as that made it easy to paint them as just another talkshop and waste of taxpayer money.
The fact that a referendum actually went ahead despite a complete lack of establishment enthusiasm for the idea really says more than the actual results. Then again, there's a reason the Northeast was the place that had a referendum. Can you imagine the spectacle of a pilot referendum in the government's definition of the "Southeast"? Cheesy

Logged
patrick1
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,865


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #55 on: April 17, 2012, 11:35:18 PM »

While re-unification has romantic appeal to some Catholics in Northern Ireland, the suspension of Home Rule and the introduction of an army presence was initially welcomed as a protection against political Orangism. Even during the 'Troubles' it was more welcomed than perhaps many Catholics would care to admit (and always preferable to the police)

I wouldn't over-egg the pudding; the welcome wore out very quickly after the Falls curfew and the introduction of internment. It also depended on the regiment; a lot of Scottish regiments had a bad reputation for dealing with Catholic civilians and the UDR (officially part of the British Army) a worse one.

Yeah, the hallowed Black Watch got a very bad reputation with the Nationalist community. However, the UDR went even further and was effectively a wing of the UDA.

Several Irish posters here, as Observer states, also underestimate the desire for a united Republic. While it is certainly not a majority, on either side of the border, there is still a strong Republican constituency. Further, despite posts that label Sinn Fein a single issue, Adams party,  the goal of an all Ireland party with a voice on all issues continues. There is a generational shift occurring with the likes of a Pearse Doherty leading.  Ive also seen some posters say that no one was speaking out against the greed and corruption inherit in the Celtic Tiger era. I'd say you were listening to the wrong people or refused to listen to it because of some culture cringe. The media and government functionaries were not warning but others were.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.027 seconds with 13 queries.