Kara_Jane_Adams wrote:Gallup opinion polls about Martin Luther King conducted in the 1960s found that disapproval of him among Americans intensified as the Civil Rights Movement grew. Which is just one of the reasons I couldn’t care less about people who disapprove of non-violent protest.
RedDave2 wrote:Is your opinion that he would have been better served going full violent protest instead? I'm honestly not sure if that would work better or worse. On the one hand, I do think the civil rights movement benefited from his peaceful approach getting white folk on side.
The flip side is America still has huge racial divides.
Yossarian wrote:You seem to be implying that XR is violent?
RedDave2 wrote:Look, however anyone feels about Corbyn, when labour threw their weight behind XR, they should have used that as one (not only) of their key things - get labour to agree to the three points bill, to organise the CA, to call the climate change as soon as their get voted in and then XR will work towards that vote. Have they done that? (if they have, then I'm happy to be called wrong.
monkey wrote:Labour's XR support has so far been a couple of wishy-washy promises from shadow cabinet members. They wouldn't be the first political party to wrap themselves up in some nice environmentally-friendly packaging only to forget about it the second they got a taste of power. For reasons I've already banged on about, XR should be as politically unaffiliated and as broad church as possible.
Ok, both valid points but at least it gets them to the bigger table, like it or not. I do agree there is a huge risk there so maybe not the best solution.Kara_Jane_Adams wrote:And risk alienating huge swathes of people by turning a global environmental concern into a national political one. Terrible idea.RedDave2 wrote:Look, however anyone feels about Corbyn, when labour threw their weight behind XR, they should have used that as one (not only) of their key things - get labour to agree to the three points bill, to organise the CA, to call the climate change as soon as their get voted in and then XR will work towards that vote. Have they done that? (if they have, then I'm happy to be called wrong.
Diluted Dante wrote:Gonz isn't joining in due to the ludicrous arrests the police are making, which would cost him his career. Which goes back to my original post. Fuck the police.
Diluted Dante wrote:Fuck the police.
davyK wrote:kneecap wrote:Tl;dr if you from NI you get to be Irish, British or both and neither govt is supposed to get a say in denying you this.
Yeah. I seems to have over simplified this. There's quite a row about it on local radio this morning. The problem appears to be the legislature and its incompatibility with the concept of some things in the GFI it seems.
Drawing lines on a map eh?
kneecap wrote:snip
You have good points; particularly about the young vote.
There's a lot of pluses to Irish Unity. I'm a unionist but I feel Irish. I don't feel British simply because I don't live in Britain. I live in the UK. Which is the United Kingdom of GB and NI.
I'm not sure any nationalist party, moderate or otherwise, reaches out to me or describes to me what it would look like.
Sinn Fein is all about victim politics and nothing about what a united Ireland could be on the global stage. The way they weaponised the Irish language which was just a big a part of the Protestant culture until recent times made it a toxic issue.
Irish Unity to me is something I'm wary of. I am wary of economic changes and as much as I shouldn't kow-tow to threats, I don't want my kids to grow up in the mess I did. And there is a chance of a hard core loyalist body becoming active.
There are horrific behaviours being tolerated here in the North. I myself am affected by them - and no-one has the balls here to deal with them. Unity will have to deal with them if we are to join the 21C. And that won't be pretty. Maybe it would be better with a unified government dealing with them.
I'm for a change and some pain but I'd want to be confident that medium to long term it would be for the good. I don't see that at the minute.
If I thought hardline loyalism was going to be faced down then that would be a big mark in the plus column. But it's also wrapped up in organised crime and the Dublin mob and the terrorists here would end up having a rumble.
A lot of Northern Nationalists need to start portraying themselves as modern Irishmen and not be defined by their opposition to the English.
A lot of Northern Unionists need to be able to state they Irish if they do. And start voting moderate in bigger numbers and not be afraid of Sinn Fein.
Moderate unionists have no voice now (neither to moderate nationalists for that matter). If a unionist party were to somehow appeal to a catholic vote block then it would probably delay any unification and/or ease the transition but that ain't there. Nor do I think it ever will. Many unionists do face the fact of unity but none dare mention it.
davyK wrote:I think NI being in the customs zone whilst part of the UK would out really well.
Of course it is the beginning of unification too. And there would be resistance.
ChopperByrne wrote:It's against what hard line Unionists want though. Treating NI differently to the rest of the UK. NI having to do customs checks with the rest of the UK. Completely understand why the DUP are against it.
Kow wrote:Enticing the people of northern Ireland with genuine economic change and social systems would benefit everyone. I have a lot of family in the north who are basically apolitical. They consider themselves Irish but would not even consider moving south as they would lose so much, especially NHS. Reforming the politics of the south would knock out that barrier to reunification and be great for the south, which suffers from shite infrastructure. Although Britain's self destruction is helping things along too.
Kow wrote:O yeah, I forgot!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!