A 'movement' for a 'new republic'

[Statsman]

It was the catchphrase of the count results, but what do you take it to mean, because I'm fecked if I can make any sense of it. It strikes me as just a nice woolly 'yes, we can' bit of fluff that appealed to the youth who supported CC's campaign, and I don't mean voted for, but went door to door and online doing the hard yards to get her home.

However, I wonder how long that wave of enthusiasm will last when they discover that, as a result of electing CC:

• Not one single house has been built.

• Not one single hospital bed has become available.

• We haven't become a nation of Gaelgeoirs.

• Not a single extra cent has been allocated to the Gaeltacht areas.

• Gaza is still a mess and Israel still has the unwavering support of the USA.

• The government are still the government.

• Bunreacht is still the constitution.

And so on.

In fact, the only way 'a new republic' can come into existence is a successful Border Poll, and that remains in the gift of London, and always will. So, how long can the parties of the Left continue to milk their grand slogan? As a left-leaning voter I'm afraid I'm not convinced, but then again I prefer hard policy to fluffy aspiration.

[Gatsbygirl]

It was the catchphrase of the count results, but what do you take it to mean, because I'm fecked if I can make any sense of it. It strikes me as just a nice woolly 'yes, we can' bit of fluff that appealed to the youth who supported CC's campaign, and I don't mean voted for, but went door to door and online doing the hard yards to get her home.

However, I wonder how long that wave of enthusiasm will last when they discover that, as a result of electing CC:

• Not one single house has been built.

• Not one single hospital bed has become available.

• We haven't become a nation of Gaelgeoirs.

• Not a single extra cent has been allocated to the Gaeltacht areas.

• Gaza is still a mess and Israel still has the unwavering support of the USA.

• The government are still the government.

• Bunreacht is still the constitution.

And so on.

In fact, the only way 'a new republic' can come into existence is a successful Border Poll, and that remains in the gift of London, and always will. So, how long can the parties of the Left continue to milk their grand slogan? As a left-leaning voter I'm afraid I'm not convinced, but then again I prefer hard policy to fluffy aspiration.

It's just a campaign slogan---a pretty good one it must be said, when compared to "Time For Change" ,or the usual bland clichés about moving forward together, etc.

Like all campaign slogans its purpose is to get the candidate over the line, not to actually...um...change anything of substance

If CC wanted to really bring about a "New Republic" she would have remained as an activist politician on the ground fighting the good fight for housing, reform, better health provision, holding the government to account in the Dail, battling daily in the real world.

Instead she has opted for an ivory tower at the heart of the Establishment ---a 90 room mansion with its cooks, cleaners, secretaries, daily privileges far removed from the lives of ordinary people, where she will do what the government of the day tells her to do, and from whose lofty perch she can make occasional speeches and benign statements about justice, equality and whatever you're having yourself, while of course drawing an enormous salary (none of this is controversial. I don't begrudge her. It's how our Presidency works).

But in that sense the "new republic" will look a lot like the "old republic" with its haves and have nots, its privileged elites and its struggling plebs.

[Statsman]

It's just a campaign slogan---a pretty good one it must be said, when compared to "Time For Change" ,or the usual bland clichés about moving forward together, etc.

Like all campaign slogans its purpose is to get the candidate over the line, not to actually...um...change anything of substance

If CC wanted to really bring about a "New Republic" she would have remained as an activist politician on the ground fighting the good fight for housing, reform, better health provision, holding the government to account in the Dail, battling daily in the real world.

Instead she has opted for an ivory tower at the heart of the Establishment ---a 90 room mansion with its cooks, cleaners, secretaries, daily privileges far removed from the lives of ordinary people, where she will do what the government of the day tells her to do, and from whose lofty perch she can make occasional speeches and benign statements about justice, equality and whatever you're having yourself, while of course drawing an enormous salary (none of this is controversial. I don't begrudge her. It's how our Presidency works).

But in that sense the "new republic" will look a lot like the "old republic" with its haves and have nots, its privileged elites and its struggling plebs.

Well, she's been a barrister and TD; she's been at the heart of the establishment for most of her life, really.

[Brabantje]

It was the catchphrase of the count results, but what do you take it to mean, because I'm fecked if I can make any sense of it. It strikes me as just a nice woolly 'yes, we can' bit of fluff that appealed to the youth who supported CC's campaign, and I don't mean voted for, but went door to door and online doing the hard yards to get her home.

However, I wonder how long that wave of enthusiasm will last when they discover that, as a result of electing CC:

• Not one single house has been built.

• Not one single hospital bed has become available.

• We haven't become a nation of Gaelgeoirs.

• Not a single extra cent has been allocated to the Gaeltacht areas.

• Gaza is still a mess and Israel still has the unwavering support of the USA.

• The government are still the government.

• Bunreacht is still the constitution.

And so on.

In fact, the only way 'a new republic' can come into existence is a successful Border Poll, and that remains in the gift of London, and always will. So, how long can the parties of the Left continue to milk their grand slogan? As a left-leaning voter I'm afraid I'm not convinced, but then again I prefer hard policy to fluffy aspiration.

Tbf, i see that phrase as a gauntlet being thrown down to the left parties as a whole: "Get your shit together and start working for the common good, or get off the stage."

What should be noted is the governmental fall out of that campagn:

• A slight lurch to the right (getting tougher on immigration)
  Real anger within FF at the manner in which MM runs the party
  As of yesterday, apparent apoplexy in FG over FF's secret employment of Ivan Yates, and his impact on FG's candidate

In short, the left might need to hold their fluffy bunny, kumbaya, all in this together act together for a little while longer as all is not well in government circles.

[Gatsbygirl]

Well, she's been a barrister and TD; she's been at the heart of the establishment for most of her life, really.

I'm sure that CC worked hard and sincerely at whatever she did

What amused me somewhat was this "She's the anti-Establishment" candidate

If you are "anti-Establishment", is running for the Presidency---a ceremonial and largely toothless position of enormous privilege ---the best use of your time and talents?

The Presidency is at the very heart of "the establishment"

[Statsman]

Tbf, i see that phrase as a gauntlet being thrown down to the left parties as a whole: "Get your shit together and start working for the common good, or get off the stage."

What should be noted is the governmental fall out of that campagn:

• A slight lurch to the right (getting tougher on immigration)
  Real anger within FF at the manner in which MM runs the party
  As of yesterday, apparent apoplexy in FG over FF's secret employment of Ivan Yates, and his impact on FG's candidate

In short, the left might need to hold their fluffy bunny, kumbaya, all in this together act together for a little while longer as all is not well in government circles.

FF will change leader, problem, to some degree, solved. The real rot is the complete breakdown in trust that Yates represents. It could get really ugly.

However, I'm reluctant to stray that far off topic this early in my own tread.

[midlander12]

It was the catchphrase of the count results, but what do you take it to mean, because I'm fecked if I can make any sense of it. It strikes me as just a nice woolly 'yes, we can' bit of fluff that appealed to the youth who supported CC's campaign, and I don't mean voted for, but went door to door and online doing the hard yards to get her home.

However, I wonder how long that wave of enthusiasm will last when they discover that, as a result of electing CC:

• Not one single house has been built.

• Not one single hospital bed has become available.

• We haven't become a nation of Gaelgeoirs.

• Not a single extra cent has been allocated to the Gaeltacht areas.

• Gaza is still a mess and Israel still has the unwavering support of the USA.

• The government are still the government.

• Bunreacht is still the constitution.

And so on.

In fact, the only way 'a new republic' can come into existence is a successful Border Poll, and that remains in the gift of London, and always will. So, how long can the parties of the Left continue to milk their grand slogan? As a left-leaning voter I'm afraid I'm not convinced, but then again I prefer hard policy to fluffy aspiration.

None of which, by constitutional design, CC can do anything about anyway.

The push for a United Ireland referendum by 2030 bemuses me, as it seems to me that a vote in the next five years would almost certainly result in a NO, however narrowly, and probably set the issue back at least another decade. Then again, no UK govt will authorise one until there's a consistent series of polls showing a YES majority, so I suppose it's easy to look for something you know you can't get and don't really want anyway as it won't give you the result you need. And add in the possibility of a Farage govt from 2029 stirring the pot along with the loyalist far-right....

Incidentally, the first time I heard the phrase 'a United Ireland in 5 years' was Brian Lenihan Snr when I was still at school. It's a long time to be holding your breath.

As long the Gaeilgeoir thing, I visit designated Gaeltacht areas at least once a year and hear less Irish every time (and in one case, literally none). It is I suppose the latest online 'vibe' thing but I can predict here and now that there'll be less Irish spoken at the end of CC's presidency than at the start of it, outside the rarefied confines of the Aras and certain Trinners students societies. Maybe we should ask the Welsh how they manage it. In the meantime, hopefully CC will deliver any comments on the EU, Ukraine and related subjects in Irish so they'll attract less attention.

[midlander12]

I'm sure that CC worked hard and sincerely at whatever she did

What amused me somewhat was this "She's the anti-Establishment" candidate

If you are "anti-Establishment", is running for the Presidency---a ceremonial and largely toothless position of enormous privilege ---the best use of your time and talents?

The Presidency is at the very heart of "the establishment"

Well of course Mary Robinson was 'anti-establishment' too. The hand that rocked the cradle rocking the system etc.

[Brabantje]

FF will change leader, problem, to some degree, solved. The real rot is the complete breakdown in trust that Yates represents. It could get really ugly.

However, I'm reluctant to stray that far off topis this early in my own tread.

The left have demonstrated that they can work effectively together and that's a start to whatever shape this new republic might take. As, outside of govt, nothing will change.

I take your point about reunification however. Part of me thinks that the permanent govt have been beavering away quietly for the last couple of years in the background while the cynical me suggests no progress on, well, any of the issues you highlight until both FF and FG are out of office.

It's an effective slogan though. "Do you want change or more of the same?" In essence.

[Brabantje]

None of which, by constitutional design, CC can do anything about anyway.

The push for a United Ireland referendum by 2030 bemuses me, as it seems to me that a vote in the next five years would almost certainly result in a NO, however narrowly, and probably set the issue back at least another decade. Then again, no UK govt will authorise one until there's a consistent series of polls showing a YES majority, so I suppose it's easy to look for something you know you can't get and don't really want anyway as it won't give you the result you need. And add in the possibility of a Farage govt from 2029 stirring the pot along with the loyalist far-right....

Incidentally, the first time I heard the phrase 'a United Ireland in 5 years' was Brian Lenihan Snr when I was still at school. It's a long time to be holding your breath.

As long the Gaeilgeoir thing, I visit designated Gaeltacht areas at least once a year and hear less Irish every time (and in one case, literally none). It is I suppose the latest online 'vibe' thing but I can predict here and now that there'll be less Irish spoken at the end of CC's presidency than at the start of it, outside the rarefied confines of the Aras and certain Trinners students societies. Maybe we should ask the Welsh how they manage it. In the meantime, hopefully CC will deliver any comments on the EU, Ukraine and related subjects in Irish so they'll attract less attention.

My sense of the Irish language (as parent of two fluent speakers educated as gaeilge) is that, yes there is decline in traditional gaeltacht areas (something mirrored in Scotland) but serious growth in urban areas and a nascent "renaissance" of the language through popular culture.

[Statsman]

The left have demonstrated that they can work effectively together and that's a start to whatever shape this new republic might take. As, outside of govt, nothing will change.

I take your point about reunification however. Part of me thinks that the permanent govt have been beavering away quietly for the last couple of years in the background while the cynical me suggests no progress on, well, any of the issues you highlight until both FF and FG are out of office.

It's an effective slogan though. "Do you want change or more of the same?" In essence.

Yes, the Left has shown they can work together in an area where rivalries can easily enough be set aside. However, as I've kind of hinted at on the Galway West thread, when it comes to the issue of winning seats in the Dáil, it becomes more problematic, largely because it's not an alliance of equals, but one big party, a couple of small-medium parties and a couple of micro parties. The reality of a voting or transfer pact is always going to favour the big fish (SF) at the expense of the others, and I really don't see Lab or the Soc Dems being content to elect SF candidates at the expense of their own potential future growth. SF need to be more generous than would really suit their long-term strategy.

[Brabantje]

Yes, the Left has shown they can work together in an area where rivalries can easily enough be set aside. However, as I've kind of hinted at on the Galway West thread, when it comes to the issue of winning seats in the Dáil, it becomes more problematic, largely because it's not an alliance of equals, but one big party, a couple of small-medium parties and a couple of micro parties. The reality of a voting or transfer pact is always going to favour the big fish (SF) at the expense of the others, and I really don't see Lab or the Soc Dems being content to elect SF candidates at the expense of their own potential future growth. SF need to be more generous than would really suit their long-term strategy.

I would see that in a GE as being a non-agression pact. Incumbents won't be challenged and in non winnable seats, resources directed elsewhere. Part of the reason the SDs are a small to medium party is currently geographical and that will change. If they grow at the speed SF did in 2020 that presents it's own problems.

[midlander12]

Yes, the Left has shown they can work together in an area where rivalries can easily enough be set aside. However, as I've kind of hinted at on the Galway West thread, when it comes to the issue of winning seats in the Dáil, it becomes more problematic, largely because it's not an alliance of equals, but one big party, a couple of small-medium parties and a couple of micro parties. The reality of a voting or transfer pact is always going to favour the big fish (SF) at the expense of the others, and I really don't see Lab or the Soc Dems being content to elect SF candidates at the expense of their own potential future growth. SF need to be more generous than would really suit their long-term strategy.

Plus there's the lingering suspicion that SF would just ditch them and go in with FF if the numbers added to 88 or whatever an overall majority is now. There was someone on the BOC show on Radio 1 yesterday saying as much (don't know who it was). I'm not sure personally that this will be as big a possibility next time because the FF brand may be so tarnished that even SF might pass on the opportunity.

[Gatsbygirl]

My sense of the Irish language (as parent of two fluent speakers educated as gaeilge) is that, yes there is decline in traditional gaeltacht areas (something mirrored in Scotland) but serious growth in urban areas and a nascent "renaissance" of the language through popular culture.

I don't want to stray off topic on this interesting thread, but...

We need to be careful pushing this Irish speaking thing

I think Irish is a beautiful language, although my own "school Irish" is poor.

I was at a sort of junket in the Blasket Centre in the Kerry Gaeltacht with some friends last year

I looked around me. I was surrounded by a sort of privileged elite, all speaking fluent Irish, many being paid by the State for various gigs---retired teachers turned poets, retired lecturers turned writers, academics, managers of summer schools, coordinators of this that and the other...

When I said I spoke little Irish, there was a slight whiff of disapproval "But you SHOULD. You're a retired teacher. You have no excuse"

Meanwhile outside in the "real Kerry", in the ordinary world, fewer and fewer people spoke Irish.

We must beware of compulsion creeping back in---a modern version of that rap on the knuckles from a bullying primary teacher because we got some obscure point of Irish grammar wrong, that many of us remember

There was an element of it during the election too, in the criticism of HH's lack of Irish. And like the Orange Order thing, had Heather been miles ahead in the polls her lack of Irish would have been pushed more. But HH's campaign faltered and there was no need

Irish is beautiful. But we should not be compelled to learn it. Struggling citizens working long hours to put food on the table have more pressing concerns, and have little time for the luxury of learning Irish, a difficult language to master from scratch

And if we are to have a real "New Republic" and a UI, we will have to accept that a large swathe of our Northern citizens will have no Irish. And that's ok. It shouldn't bar them from the highest office in the land

[Brabantje]

I don't want to stray off topic on this interesting thread, but...

We need to be careful pushing this Irish speaking thing

I think Irish is a beautiful language, although my own "school Irish" is poor.

I was at a sort of junket in the Blasket Centre in the Kerry Gaeltacht with some friends last year

I looked around me. I was surrounded by a sort of privileged elite, all speaking fluent Irish, many being paid by the State for various gigs---retired teachers turned poets, retired lecturers turned writers, academics, managers of summer schools, coordinators of this that and the other...

When I said I spoke little Irish, there was a slight whiff of disapproval "But you SHOULD. You're a retired teacher. You have no excuse"

Meanwhile outside in the "real Kerry", in the ordinary world, fewer and fewer people spoke Irish.

We must beware of compulsion creeping back in---a modern version of that rap on the knuckles from a bullying primary teacher because we got some obscure point of Irish grammar wrong, that many of us remember

There was an element of it during the election too, in the criticism of HH's lack of Irish. And like the Orange Order thing, had Heather been miles ahead in the polls her lack of Irish would have been pushed more. But HH's campaign faltered and there was no need

Irish is beautiful. But we should not be compelled to learn it. Struggling citizens working long hours to put food on the table have more pressing concerns, and have little time for the luxury of learning Irish, a difficult language to master from scratch

And if we are to have a real "New Republic" and a UI, we will have to accept that a large swathe of our Northern citizens will have no Irish. And that's ok. It shouldn't bar them from the highest office in the land

No one should be compelled to learn any language outside of school. And in that regard, the language of the state needs to be treated as a living, breathing language rather than an academic subject with endless declensions and an módh coinnealach bate into you by a pioneer pin wearing puritan. Focus should be on functionality rather than academic perfection. The reality is that they're are very few people who dish and write prefect English every time, so why should Irish be policed in that fashion?

[roc_enthusiast]

They are trying to stoke a particular variety of nationalism.

I mean nationalism as in the habit of identifying oneself with a single idea around a "nation" or other unit, placing it beyond good and evil and recognising no other duty than that of advancing its interests (as per George Orwell's description etc.).

The Irish "progressive" radical social democratic left desire power. Not directly for themselves, but for their idea of a "nation", that they tacitly require everyone chooses to sink their own individuality into, as they do themselves.

We are talking about appeal to emotion. They demand a passionate nationalistic feeling that attaches itself to this idea, of a nation of "Ireland", unified, with its own national language, and socialist, and opposed to the EU and the US, and all the rest of it.

Which is not to say these things are bad in themselves. But the point is they are attempting to define and impose a dominant form of "nationalism", to which a majority of people pledge their allegiance, and they shall be the high priests of it. "A movement for a new Republic" etc.

[knownunknown]

They are trying to stoke a particular variety of nationalism.

I mean nationalism as in the habit of identifying oneself with a single idea around a "nation" or other unit, placing it beyond good and evil and recognising no other duty than that of advancing its interests (as per George Orwell's description etc.).

The Irish "progressive" radical social democratic left desire power. Not directly for themselves, but for their idea of a "nation", that they tacitly require everyone chooses to sink their own individuality into, as they do themselves.

We are talking about appeal to emotion. They demand a passionate nationalistic feeling that attaches itself to this idea, of a nation of "Ireland", unified, with its own national language, and socialist, and opposed to the EU and the US, and all the rest of it.

Which is not to say these things are bad in themselves. But the point is they are attempting to define and impose a dominant form of "nationalism", to which a majority of people pledge their allegiance, and they shall be the high priests of it. "A movement for a new Republic" etc.

A multi-cultural nationalism, an oxymoron. Nationalism is about a shared reality and culture but these people don’t believe that Ireland has a culture, these far left, socialist types. They will fawn over the keffiyeh and long to share in their cultural identity because they feel they have none of their own.

They dream of a multi-cultural utopia that has never and can never exist. What happens in practise is ghettos of people living in different bubbles with no shared identity or culture.

A true multiculitral society is one with the ability to assimilate those who arrive, like the French, Irish, English, Indian, Chinese, etc..etc.. who now consider themselves American.

[Gatsbygirl]

They are trying to stoke a particular variety of nationalism.

We are talking about appeal to emotion. They demand a passionate nationalistic feeling that attaches itself to this idea, of a nation of "Ireland", unified, with its own national language, and socialist, and opposed to the EU and the US, and all the rest of it.

Which is not to say these things are bad in themselves. But the point is they are attempting to define and impose a dominant form of "nationalism", to which a majority of people pledge their allegiance, and they shall be the high priests of it. "A movement for a new Republic" etc.

It reminds me of a particular brand of Nationalism that the nuns beat into us as small schoolkids in the early sixties .

There were different "high priests" then. I guess every movement has its high priests, its insiders, its gate-keepers.

Except tthat early sixties brand of Nationalism was austere, Catholic, Irish-speaking, disciplined, puritanical. It was enforced with daily floggings in the school, and indeed more subtle brain-washing techniques for us children, such as marching in step, belting out rebel songs in Irish, singing hymns, wearing badges and miraculous medals, doing a particularly rigid, expressionless and "modest" form of Irish dancing which kept the body strictly in check..

It defined itself as anti-English. As young Irish girls we were taught that modesty, obedience, purity, sanctity were much prized and were uniquely Irish definitions of womanhood which were under threat.

We had a nun who warned us regularly. " When you go to pagan England, you must be soldiers of Christ and fight for your Faith and for your Irish heritage"

I always remember that "pagan England"

Younger members will think I exaggerate but it is all true. The past is another country

Those formative years gave me a fear of high priests and gate-keepers of every stripe, and of obsessive notions about what constitutes Irishness and Irish identity.

[midlander12]

It reminds me of a particular brand of Nationalism that the nuns beat into us as small schoolkids in the early sixties .

There were different "high priests" then. I guess every movement has its high priests, its insiders, its gate-keepers.

Except tthat early sixties brand of Nationalism was austere, Catholic, Irish-speaking, disciplined, puritanical. It was enforced with daily floggings in the school, and indeed more subtle brain-washing techniques for us children, such as marching in step, belting out rebel songs in Irish, singing hymns, wearing badges and miraculous medals, doing a particularly rigid, expressionless and "modest" form of Irish dancing which kept the body strictly in check..

It defined itself as anti-English. As young Irish girls we were taught that modesty, obedience, purity, sanctity were much prized and were uniquely Irish definitions of womanhood which were under threat.

We had a nun who warned us regularly. " When you go to pagan England, you must be soldiers of Christ and fight for your Faith and for your Irish heritage"

I always remember that "pagan England"

Younger members will think I exaggerate but it is all true. The past is another country

Those formative years gave me a fear of high priests and gate-keepers of every stripe, and of obsessive notions about what constitutes Irishness and Irish identity.

Ah yes, 'dirty England' with its 'buckets of dead babies' (that was a quote from an aunt of mine, who'd never been there of course). I grew up convinced 'England' was some sort of hedonistic nirvana, which I suppose it was compared to rural Ireland, whereas everywhere else it was known as the 'sick man of Europe' and something of an austere, rundown and rather conservative slum. But as always, everything's relative.

[Bubblypop]

A multi-cultural nationalism, an oxymoron. Nationalism is about a shared reality and culture but these people don’t believe that Ireland has a culture, these far left, socialist types. They will fawn over the keffiyeh and long to share in their cultural identity because they feel they have none of their own.

They dream of a multi-cultural utopia that has never and can never exist. What happens in practise is ghettos of people living in different bubbles with no shared identity or culture.

A true multiculitral society is one with the ability to assimilate those who arrive, like the French, Irish, English, Indian, Chinese, etc..etc.. who now consider themselves American.

Consider themselves American while also keeping their own traditions and cultures alive.
There is no reason that both can't exist in one person side by side. You can be Irish and Nigerian. The majority of Americans define themselves by their ancestry, Irish American, Italian America etc.
There is no one particular type of Irish person that is more Irish then another Irish person. There are people all over the world sharing in our culture, our songs our music our dancing.
A truly multi cultural society allows for individualism

[Irish History]

.
Foreign British Spectator newspaper - known for its anti-Irish sentiment.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/how ... e-ireland/

Critics fear this could lead to a constitutional crisis about Irish (re)unification. When the Brexit footage resurfaced, Connolly denied being pro-Brexit, saying she was only supporting the democratic process. Still, Brexit has revived the (Northern) Irish question. Connolly has urged the government to prepare for unification, echoing Sinn Fein leader Mary Lou McDonald’s call for a referendum by the end of the decade. A Connolly presidency may not guarantee unification – she may just be offering fodder to supporters – but it would make the issue harder to ignore.

[NewBroom]

My sense of the Irish language (as parent of two fluent speakers educated as gaeilge) is that, yes there is decline in traditional gaeltacht areas (something mirrored in Scotland) but serious growth in urban areas and a nascent "renaissance" of the language through popular culture.

It's an illusion created by those with vested interests i.e. state jobs and funding for promoting Gaeilge. I was chatting to our 20yr olds on this matter and yes, they say that they and their friends think the language is kinda cool and have aspirations to learn and use it more. More to do with the likes of Kneecap than anything else as far as I can see. Which in itself should be a bit concerning given their political views. But aside from this, when I explore it further, it's all a bit of guff too. They haven't in truth anymore Irish than previous generations with our school Irish. It's fluffy and popular and a bit green tinged. They're also as much influenced by streamed shows coming in from Netflix etc

A 'new republic' - I can't see any great change towards the left. The biggest impact by far on our state in the next decade or two will be by the new Irish, how will they organise and how will they vote. And also of course the growth of many languages and demands for parity with English & Irish as official languages and so on. Will they give a **** about the North, not likely either.

[Brabantje]

Ibec seen to recognise the growth of the language as an opportunity.
https://sitecore-prd-ne-cd01.azurewebsi ... pportunity

[Irish History]

None of which, by constitutional design, CC can do anything about anyway.

The push for a United Ireland referendum by 2030 bemuses me, as it seems to me that a vote in the next five years would almost certainly result in a NO, however narrowly, and probably set the issue back at least another decade. Then again, no UK govt will authorise one until there's a consistent series of polls showing a YES majority, so I suppose it's easy to look for something you know you can't get and don't really want anyway as it won't give you the result you need. And add in the possibility of a Farage govt from 2029 stirring the pot along with the loyalist far-right....

Incidentally, the first time I heard the phrase 'a United Ireland in 5 years' was Brian Lenihan Snr when I was still at school. It's a long time to be holding your breath.

As long the Gaeilgeoir thing, I visit designated Gaeltacht areas at least once a year and hear less Irish every time (and in one case, literally none). It is I suppose the latest online 'vibe' thing but I can predict here and now that there'll be less Irish spoken at the end of CC's presidency than at the start of it, outside the rarefied confines of the Aras and certain Trinners students societies. Maybe we should ask the Welsh how they manage it. In the meantime, hopefully CC will deliver any comments on the EU, Ukraine and related subjects in Irish so they'll attract less attention.

Not directed at you personally - just picking up on these points.

would almost certainly result in a NO, however narrowly, and probably set the issue back at least another decade. Then again, no UK govt will authorise one until there's a consistent series of polls showing a YES majority, so I suppose it's easy to look for something you know you can't get and don't really want anyway as it won't give you the result you need. And add in the possibility of a Farage govt from 2029 stirring the pot along with the loyalist far-right....

RE: Brit Gov. not calling a referendum until there is a consistent series of polls showing a YES majority.

The actual GFA states “if at any time it appears likely to him that a majority of those voting would express a wish that Northern Ireland should cease to be part of the UK and form part of a united Ireland”.
Key words are - "if at any time". There is nothing in the GFA that states a consistent series of polls.
The reality is that there has already been THREE polls that showed a majority in favour of the reunification of Ireland. LucidTalk (2017) 46% to 45%, OFOC/Deltapoll (2018) 52% to 39% and Ashcroft (2019) 46% to 45% - yet we Irish are still being denied by the foreign British the democratic right to vote in our own country about our own country.

Another thing is that the criteria does not mention a survey'poll per se - therefore election results must be taken into consideration. Irish people now elect the most MP's sent to Westminster - Irish people elect the most Councillors - Irish people elect the most MLA's (I'm including Alliance because recent surveys within the Party show it is now a majority Nationalist political Party).
Also - LESS than 50 percent of the people in the occupied 6 counties of Ireland right now in 2025 want to remain within the political entity called the UK.

RE: Border Poll itself.

We can get it - all we have to do is use the leverage we already have. Also once there is a border poll, if we lose, we can have another one after 7 years. Anyway, the campaign has not yet begun, and one has only to think of the surge the YES campaign received once the referendum was called in Scotland. I believe that once a referendum is called here, the north given the history of England in Ireland and the chance to right a wrong, will vote to end foreign British rule in Ireland.

RE: Farage.

If he does become brit PM and does what he says he will do, and that creates a hard border in Ireland - then that will just encourage the majority Irish and most of the middle ground to want the 6 counties to leave the UK. History has shown that it is when people in the north are most unhappy with foreign British rule, the support for the reunification of Ireland increases. Which is why logic suggests that trying to make the north work and pumping money into the north by Micheál Martin is a total nonsense as far as the reunification of Ireland is concerned. If people in the 6 counties are content within the UK, they are hardly going to vote to leave it. Think about it - has anyone heard the Unionists whinge about the Micheál Martin so-called "shared Island" AKA kill the idea of the reunification of Ireland with kindness and keep the north within the UK project. His British/Unionist handlers love him.

Those are the actual facts and the reality of the matter, and I have not mentioned the bogus results in the 6 county census - the lie hiding in plain sight. The question is - why isn't Fianna Fail and Fine Gael in the Irish Gov. not only not pushing the British Gov. for a vote on the reunification of Ireland, but are not even preparing the south for the reunification of our country.

Why do people blindly accept all this inaction - shouldn't we Irish have learned by now that England's word is meaningless and they never signed a treaty that they didn't try to change or renege on.

Perfidious Albion is an actual thing you know.
.

[roc_enthusiast]

Ibec seen to recognise the growth of the language as an opportunity.
https://sitecore-prd-ne-cd01.azurewebsi ... pportunity

That link doesn't work for me.

But the mention of Ibec brings to mind a book written by Gerard O'Neill, of Amarach, who has been very active in IBEC over the years.

The book was, 2016: A New Proclamation for a New Generation.

It's about "proudly re-proclaiming the Irish Republic", very similar to the slogan of the OP.

Anyway, in 2016, everyone was trying to ride the coattails of the men of 1916.

Just the Shinners in particular and their radical left associates never eased off on it, like the rest of them, in particular FFG.

So definitely that was a driver to their use of the slogan in this election.