All Ireland unionism and an important theory
‘Dilettante’ is rapidly becoming one of my favourite blogs. Written by a ‘half Irish’ Conservative, based in Manchester, it takes a keen interest in constitutional issues and is stout in its defence of the Union.
In his latest post Dilettante explains that ‘what we have we hold’ is not the limit of his unionist philosophy. He envisages a United Kingdom which could one day readmit the Republic of Ireland.
This aspiration, he notes, is usually filed under the bracket ’neo-unionism’, but it a deeply amenable concept to many secular unionists.
Although it is hardly a likelihood in the near to medium future, why not advocate such a possibility, in order to emphasise that ’Irishness’ is not necessarily the preserve of an independent Irish state?
The Republic of Ireland seceded from the United Kingdom. I’m proud to be an Irishman from the part of Ireland which did not secede and I’d enthusiastically welcome any popular movement in the south to rejoin.
Of course there are few signs that any such movement could develop, but the notion that the Republic might join the Commonwealth is frequently mooted. The Queen is likely to visit in the not so distant future.
The importance of the idea, which is as yet a pipe dream, is its desirability in theory. It helps frame the context of unionism which recognises, and aspires to overarch, all the cultures of the British Isles.
In his latest post Dilettante explains that ‘what we have we hold’ is not the limit of his unionist philosophy. He envisages a United Kingdom which could one day readmit the Republic of Ireland.
This aspiration, he notes, is usually filed under the bracket ’neo-unionism’, but it a deeply amenable concept to many secular unionists.
Although it is hardly a likelihood in the near to medium future, why not advocate such a possibility, in order to emphasise that ’Irishness’ is not necessarily the preserve of an independent Irish state?
The Republic of Ireland seceded from the United Kingdom. I’m proud to be an Irishman from the part of Ireland which did not secede and I’d enthusiastically welcome any popular movement in the south to rejoin.
Of course there are few signs that any such movement could develop, but the notion that the Republic might join the Commonwealth is frequently mooted. The Queen is likely to visit in the not so distant future.
The importance of the idea, which is as yet a pipe dream, is its desirability in theory. It helps frame the context of unionism which recognises, and aspires to overarch, all the cultures of the British Isles.
Comments
Thankyou for the high praise!
How would that go down these days?
Not a snowballs chance in hell.
From my perspective one issue I have with it's current portrayal is the tendency to use it as a 'come on' to talk up some kind of gerrymandered all-Ireland state. The polarisation of the two states on this island - irrespective of tribe - isn't reversible and those who disingenuously suggest otherwise aren't living in this reality.
The challenge for the southern unionist cause then is to become established as something more than little-Irelander lip service to northern unionism
I don't for one second expect to see the Republic of Ireland rejoin the UK. However, what in the main turned me off Unionism in the first place was the very notion of "ourselves alone" promoted by most so-called "Unionists", and the implicit anti-Irishness of it all.
Furthermore, ludicrous though the notion of the Republic of Ireland rejoining the UK may be, it is really not much more ludicrous than the idea of modern-day Unionists ever embracing a United Irish Republic (based on a "struggle for freedom", in Brian Cowen's words, which they simply don't recognise). That's a challenge worth putting out there.
As for the North East, yes I accept that it doesn't pay its way in the UK, and it lags behind in terms of knowledge formation. But it does still have a lot of industry, such as Nissan and parts of the chemical and pharmaceutical industries, which generate foriegn currency, and is quite good at exporting its people, providing squaddies and skilled graduates (as well as cricketers). The area still has greater market potential than NI, however, because its on the mainland and generally better connected to other parts of the UK than NI - Durham is 3 hours out of Kings Cross, while last time I flew London-Aldergrove it took 5-6 hours when you factored in getting to the airport, check in etc. On the EU's map of 'Objective 1 transitional support regions', where GDP per capita is 75% or lower of the EU average, you can clearly see that South Yorkshire, Merseyside and Cornwall are the only parts of England included, while the whole of Ireland is included. http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/objective1/map_en.htm
I would agree that there is a long way to go to balance the books in the North East, but this is an easier task than in NI. To go back to my original point, this is precisely why we need to sort out the periphery problems we already have before we introduce another, bigger one, such as the rest of Ireland.
Ditto Northern Ireland (excepting the cricketers). In fact, David Cameron's repeated observation is that he sees Northern Irish people contribute at the highest echelons of business, the military, the entertainment industry and sport, across the UK, yet miss out in terms of politics.
I take issue with your 'does Northern Ireland pay its way' argument though. If you're looking to cut out from a country all those bits that cost other bits money, that could be said to amount to an argument for southern secession. A Republic of the South of England, capital city London, not paying for the rest of the country in any way.
Northern Ireland is a part of my country, the United Kingdom. If sections of it are poor, then we help them (or don't, depending on your point of view). The idea that we should only hold Northern Ireland if it turns a profit views it less as an integral part of our country than an exploited imperial possession - surely the very worst accusation the nationalists can throw at us?
The prospect of the ROI rejoining the UK is not one I'd be in favour of, and while it's entirely legitimate to campaign for such a union, you would be much better served by a campaign group free from any tribal or sectarian connotations. The RM is too tribally focused. Whining on about the impact of Ne Temere on southern Protestants makes for an interesting historical study but it should be completely irrelevant to a totally secular, culturally encompassing, modern unionist movement.
I'd suggest if you want it be made more realistic the manifesto would include changes to the British state and its constitution to make it palatable. A new flag, new currency design, disestablishment of the Churches and a totally secular state, abolition of the monarchy, a new name for the state, a new written constitution, sizeably disproportionate representation for Ireland in Parliament (given that she would be vastly outnumbered and outvoted), devolution (with power of veto over sensitive areas) and a shake up of the legal system would be essential prerequisites to any union.
The Reform Movement is a largely non-tribal 'think tank' created largely from academic sources within the traditional elements of southern unionist heritage - Trinity College Dublin for example.
A (The?) leading light of the Reform Movement has always been David Christopher - a man with no loyal order or religious background, not that it matters much but in the context of the above assertions it is an important distinction. Make no mistake, political unionism is at it's heart.
As a side note sharing web hosts is a tenuous irrelevance but well done for the idiotic conspiracy theories.
On the subject of the RM's notes about Protestant persecution in the south - I find the matter is certainly of interest in the subcontext of a general disappearance of public displays of unionism in 26-county Ireland since the dawn of the Irish Free State.
In the absence of any real ideological opposition in RoI politics it's certainly something that must be explored further. On the otherhand people in the mainstream, like Shane, can continue to miss the point completely.
Sorry, plunged off on a point of philosophical principle.
I think it's an equally legitimate aspiration for people in the RoI to aspire to 're-union' with the UK (i.e. equally legitimate with the aspirations of NI nationalists)
- but we live in a world of practical politics and as someone from the Southern minority, it's good that Reform and others are focussing on practical issues like Equal Citizenship Rights (the same right to be British, Irish or both as exists in NI) and on rejoining the Commonwealth.
Rev. Stanley Gamble made a very positive speech at the Orange County Donegal meeting recently covered in the Irish Times - http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0712/1224274512513.html
I know Reform are revamping their web presence at present so I'll write to Dilettante directly seeing as his emails seemingly got lost along the way...
Also,religion is becoming less of an influence on whether someone is unionist or not. As there have been a growing number of Catholics in Northern Ireland who are becoming unionists and in the Republic some unionists are Catholic such as Stan Gebler Davies and Connor Cruise O'Brien.