#pro irish reunification

[stay-pos-cos]

Did anyone else grow up to be anti-imperialist because of A Bug's Life? Like it's how I was able to understand the Irish "Famine" and civil war.

Is this too niche?

[cruelsister-moved2]

who knows hopefully this will age really badly but i wish americans understood that there could never be an irish reunification like. anywhere in our lifetime probably. and if there WAS it would most likely provoke a brutal civil war. and most importantly - due to said threat of civil war - most people who actually live in the north just want like. peace. equality. an end to sectarianism. and not to be cynical but irish reunification wouldn’t actually do much to address the issues faced there i.e poverty, sectarianism, lack of healthcare/womens & LGBT rights etc etc. which are issues with their roots in british occupation so you know it’s all delicately interconnected but its mildly frustrating to see the sopping wet kitten of europe like only ever being discussed as revolution fantasy material for irish americans 😐

[moogleroom]

Tired of yanks posting that stupid reuinification of ireland 2024 image everytime some news site or politician goes on about how its totally happening guys just wait like if a vote ever happened everyone would happily vote yes & the entire country would come together in unified bliss & everyone will be happy forever

[werewolfetone]

Actually let me put this in its own post. it's so wild how it genuinely seems to have never once crossed the minds of the majority of data meme "pro irish reunification" online posters that there could be anyone in ireland who might have the slightest objection to immediate reunification. "oh if the british government just does this they will instantly be able to--" have you ever seen a bonfire before 🎤

[determinate-negation]

As protests erupt worldwide against Israel’s ferocious bombardment and ground invasion of Gaza, which has claimed the lives of more than 10,000 Palestinians (Reuters, 11/6/23), US media ponder how all of this impacts Jewish people. Sadly, the way this is often framed completely mischaracterizes Jewish opinion and the pro-Israel movement, falsely acting as if Jewish opinion is unquestionably unified in support of Israeli military attacks and in opposition to Palestinian rights.

[...]

A Washington Post report (10/31/23) on the Jewish response to pro-Palestinian protests on campuses stated, as a factual observation, that “Jewish students hear ‘the river to the sea’ as an open call for the eradication of Israel, a haunting proposition given the legacy of the Holocaust that led to Israel’s creation.”

There are a few problems here. One, it is hardly established that the American Jewish student body is monolithic on this issue. College groups that support Palestinian rights often include Jews; in fact, FAIR (5/22/23) reported how a Jewish staffer at the AP was forced out of her job because of her past pro-Palestinian advocacy in college. Two, the phrase “the river to the sea” is often mischaracterized, as it refers to a one-state solution, not anyone’s deportation.

However, to back up this assertion, the Post quotes Jonathan Greenblatt, the CEO of the pro-Israel Anti-Defamation League, saying that while “there’s nothing wrong with advocating for a Palestinian state,” there is also “nothing wrong with advocating for a two-state solution.” However, he says, “there’s something profoundly wrong with advocating for a final solution.”

The “final solution” is a reference to the Jewish Holocaust, or Shoah. But many Jews and non-Jews alike advocate for a one-state solution where all people have rights, regardless of their religion or ethnicity. It is intellectually dishonest for the Post to quote a pro-Israel partisan to assert that the choice for Jews is between a two-state solution and Auschwitz.

For example, in the post-Brexit economy, the idea of Irish reunification is becoming more and more real (Guardian, 10/6/22). Yet no one would seriously characterize the Republic of Ireland absorbing the North as a Protestant genocide. Nor were white residents of South Africa exterminated or forced to emigrate when their country turned to a democratic one-person-one-vote system.

[pulsar-1919]

Anti-immigration rioting currently going on in Dublin, I just know people like the Irish Freedom Party (our fairly recent and small right wing party) is going to take advantage of people's anger over today's stabbing and Ashling Murphy's murder to drum up votes, so I took a look through their other policies

They are in favour of 'Itrexit' - Ireland leaving the EU and dropping the euro currency

They are vehemently anti-abortion (their constitution says 'pro-natal' but their leader has been quoted saying 'abortion is a stain on this country'

They are seeking changes to the 1989 hate speech legislation (which isn't even very effective for prosecuting hate crimes) in order to protect free speech - citing that hate speech legislation has been used in other countries against Christian pastors (I smell homophobia and transphobia)

They are pro reunification (and everyone is in theory, of course it would be nice, but right now it would cost the relative peace that Northern Ireland has had in my lifetime)

Reminding people to look beyond one issue before giving a party like this a vote

[whatevergreen]

Is nobody going to mention the staggering hypocrisy of pro-Irish Joe Biden (and many others) who opposes the British rule of Northern Ireland, while supporting Israel, its occupation, and slaughter of Palestinians?

But of course Biden has Irish ancestry and the Irish are white, and not such a spanner in the maintenance of US imperialism.

And that said: the vast majority of the resident Irish who support Irish reunification - and this includes the Irish government - support Palestinians precisely because of what they have experienced for centuries under British occupation and oppression.

Israel is now retaliating by refusing to allow Irish citizens to leave Gaza.

The head of Ireland's largest political party Sinn Fein has just called for Israel's ambassador to be expelled.

You cannot support a united Ireland and support Israel.

For that matter people supporting a free Tibet, supporting Ukraine, or the Uyghurs shouldn't be pro-Israel either but who wants to guess how many hypocrites and fools are doing just that?

[badgraph1csghost]

I know we're all talking about that quote from Data about the Irish Reunification of 2024, but the episode that quote comes from gives me a pretty big ick right now with the Gaza bombardment. Either intentionally or not, Star Trek TNG 312-"The High Ground" has a pretty significant pro-imperialist message; Data's famous quotation is delivered in something that seems to be a statement of defence for terrorism as a political motivator, and Picard and Riker try to convince the audience that they're not convinced that the Rutian security forces are any better than the Ansata terrorists they're fighting. But in the end, it comes down to the Federation narcing on these people and leading the police straight to their secret base. The hero ship gets its captain and doctor back, sails off into the sunset, and the Federation probably stops trading with Rutia and pretends nothing ever happened.

Obviously, there's nothing overtly suggesting that the Ansata are Palestinians and the Rutians are Israelis, but again, it's not about particulars, it's about imperialism and how the Enterprise is basically the extension of the Western world in the 24th century. I've always seen Star Trek as existing in a universe where all of Earth became Americans and, as a TV show, Americans are very possessive of Star Trek and the Enterprise captains. Even though Picard is French, the prefix of the Enterprise is still "USS". It's like how the Original Series decided to do "Taming of the Shrew" with Shatner as Petruchio and France Nuyen as Katherina right at the height of the Vietnam war. It was American imperialism beating down the savage Vietnamese in a censor-friendly manner.

So yeah. Good on Ireland for getting one step nearer to making "Irish Reunification of 2024" more than just a plausible near-future reference in a Star Trek list, but that was just one line in an otherwise really janky episode.

[thelearnedwobbly]

See normally I'd just block this and move on, because while this is just plain wrong, and not only that, it's dangerously wrong, I normally just do not have the wherewithal to unpack posts like these, nor do I typically have the leg to stand on, but someone I care about deeply reblogged this, so I feel a need to unpack the assumptions being made here.

I'm Irish. Should mention that up front. I have family who fought in our wars of independence going back literally centuries, and I can literally name family members who fought with the Fenian Brotherhood and the First IRA, including survivors of the Easter Rising, Irish War of Independence, and Irish Civil War(incidentally my great granddad was all three)

The cause of Irish independence is extremely deeply held to me, and realistically if I'd been born a couple decades earlier I probably would have been a Provo.

And before someone makes the argument that that makes me a hypocrite, that if I support Irish independence and the reunification with the occupied North then I must be racist--I support free Palestine. I believe that they have every right to live safe and happy lives without the IDF brutalising them, without the threat of bombs or rockets or tanks destroying their homes. I believe that they deserve to be fully independent and equal members of the international community. Hell, I'm an anarchist, so I'd rather we tear down borders altogether, but we're not there yet, so I'll settle for harm reduction and national sovereignty.

The problem is that this entire argument I keep seeing--that Palestine are just defending themselves, that they're freedom fighters no different from any others, that they're only being called terrorists due to racism or zionism or islamophobia--is predicated on a massive logical fallacy.

It's one that a lot of bad actors--including those in Israel--are counting on you to not notice.

Hamas is not Palestine.

This is not a case where the people attacking Israel are a group of grassroots freedom fighters who just want a better world. Hamas are a theocratic authoritarian minority government with a massive paramilitary wing that is occupying the Gaza Strip. The IDF do not have a formal presence inside the Strip, but Hamas does.

Hamas are not freedom fighters. Their founding charter calls for the extermination of all Jewish people. It calls not for a free Palestine but for a mass pogrom of Israelis, and the establishment of a far-right islamist regime instead.

Hamas opened this war by killing thirteen hundred innocent people. And you can try to claim that they were 'settler-colonials' or whatever buzzword is the current way to describe living, breathing, thinking, feeling, hoping people--many of whom in the Kibbutzes Hamas destroyed wholesale, slaughtering children alongside noncombatants--were pro-peace activists. Leftists and progressives who wanted the same thing this post ostensibly does.

Palestine and Hamas are not interchangeable. Hamas is not the only possible answer--they are not an example of extremists being the only ones willing to fight, as sometimes happens in history, and I know this, because Fatah is right there.

Fatah, who have a democratic majority in the West Bank. Fatah, who want a peaceful two-state solution. Fatah, who have a militant wing they use when necessary. Fatah, who do not use their citizens' bodies as human shields. Fatah, who do not call for the extermination of their enemies, down to the last man, woman, and child.

Men, women, and children who did not ask to be born in Israel. Innocent people whose only 'crime' is of faith. People whose ancestors moved to Israel on a broken British promise, just two years after the end of World War Two and the Holocaust. People who, until the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, had a real chance at peace through negotiations with Fatah...until the far-right of Israel shot that peace dead, then tore up the Oslo Accords and took power.

The Israeli government under Likud are absolutely an increasingly-corrupt right-wing regime intent on theocratic and autocratic rule...but the Israeli people are not their government any more than Palestine is Hamas. This is not a war of revolution, and Hamas are not freedom fighters, any more than Likud and the current IDF are liberators or whatever propaganda they're spouting right now. But they were attacked first, and not in the manner of a freedom fighter; not in the desperate use of limited force against civilian officials because every other option has been closed to them; wanton, pointless slaughter and kidnapping; rape and torture of random, innocent Israelis, many of whom were anti-Likud. The IDF had entire units on strike due to Netanyahu's attempts to gut the judiciary and increase his own power; there were protests in the streets. And then Hamas killed their families and kidnapped their friends, and many of them picked up weapons to defend themselves. Do you blame them?

There is no easy 'good guy' or 'bad guy' here, and I question Tumblr's current fixation on trying to find one; sometimes, two right-wing regimes hellbent on establishing theocratic rule go at each other, and the civilians--and the people who actually want to fix the problems of their forefathers--get caught in the middle. That is who you should root for.

I just...do not understand how so many people who should know better have failed to research this before making their voices heard; I barely understood this conflict a year ago, and I have refrained from saying anything until I'd done my own independent research. Now I can avoid putting my foot in my mouth, and I'm so late to the races I'm seeing people I genuinely care about claiming an antisemitic terror organisation are comparable to an Irish nationalist militia whose primary motivation when the fighting began was preventing pogroms against catholic neighbourhoods. And that really fucking hurts, to say nothing of how badly my Jewish friends are hurting to see leftists and progressives unbashedly rooting for Hamas or framing the IDF as intrinsically evil; claiming that Jewish people in Israel should pay for the mistakes of terrified ancestors and the idiocy of the British government of the late 1940s. Even if you don't mean to be antisemitic, even if you just care deeply and want to avoid seeming like you're sitting this one out, I promise you, the people you're trying to support wouldn't want you to root for their oppressors--whether that's Hamas or Likud.

I'm trying to find a pithy or cathartic way to end this. I can't. This is a humanitarian tragedy with no easy answers, and people I know don't mean to are repeating propaganda uncritically from both sides because they don't want to be seen to be silent--take the time, breathe, think about what these posts are trying to sell you, and do your own research. And I get that this is a busy, shitty world, with a lot going on, and you can't always make that time, but if you can't do that, you need to try to avoid weighing in, because you're extremely liable to do more harm than good. And I don't mean 'boost people who seem to know what they're talking about', I mean don't even reblog a post if you can't vet it, because the information war is active, and you are very likely to become a casualty.

you know when irish people were fighting for freedom the rebels were never considered revolutionaries or freedom fighters. we had only ever been called terrorists by the british government, because when you call a people fighting for their rights and their freedoms terrorists you can distance yourself from them. people aren't fighting because they've been radicalised by 800 years of colonialism or 75 years of brutal settler imperialism, they're fighting because they're dirty terrorists trying to hurt our democracy and kill our children. and now we don't have any responsibility to reckon with the years of subjugation and settler violence and attempted genocide, because how can you expect us to deal with terrorists? the same story repeats itself over and over n it's shocking how people will eat it up every time when it comes to protecting and maintaining western power.

[phantom-of-the-memes]

from someone from the north i’m curious,(in your personal experience)what does the republic think of the irish in the north, do they want unification, or do they not care for us?(not attacking just curious as i don’t talk to many people from the south )

That’s a great question honestly.

In my experience from where I’ve gone to school and lived in the south, people are very idealistically pro “free the six counties”, “up the ra”, etc. I’ve yet to meet someone from the south who thinks otherwise.

I think we all want reunification and are quite republican, but through the veil of our safety and our ignorance in the south, if you get what I’m saying?

Like we’re very anti-English and death to the English monarchy. I remember being about ten when Queen Elizabeth visited the republic for the first time. Even as young as that, my classmates and I were joking about assassinating her and hoping someone would.

But again I think it’s easy for us to speak on matters of the north because we don’t suffer the consequences of any of them.

If you ask anyone here about actual northern politics and what social issues are happening there, they wouldn’t have a clue. I actively seek out information and news on northern politics, but not many people would.

We learn about the troubles in history and a bit of politics, but not a lot. Mostly what people in class would have to say about the troubles is supportive of the IRA.

So whether it’s that these people truly care for the north or it’s just about screwing over the English in a way that will hardly affect us, I’m not sure.

We don’t have the trauma youse have that could inform on how best to go about reunification.

So overall all yeah, I think southerners see northerners as our siblings who were separated from us. That’s how I see you anyways.

[news247worldpressposts]

#Breaking: #NorthernIreland has appointed #MichelleO'Neill as the first Irish nationalist leader in its history after an agreement with pro-#UK unionists

Northern Ireland has appointed Michelle O’Neill as the first Irish nationalist leader in its history after an agreement with pro-UK unionists. The development is seen by many as a milestone on the path to reunification. Source: X

[notquitetwilight]

there's some weird-ass pro-british people floating around your blog rn, so i just thought id let you know that in one of my classes today we were talking about the royals, and someone put "GB get tf out of Ireland" in the chat and it got a million of the little "^^^^" comments and someone wrote "IRELAND FOREVER" and it made me think of you

this is iconic and it seriously brightens my mood to know that universally people prefer ireland to britain but also that irish republicanism makes u think of me 🥺👉🏻👈🏻💖💞💘💓💕💗

[quark-nova]

Last time a king had a reign that short it ended with Ireland ditching the whole monarchy thing.

Today, Northern Ireland got a pro-reunification First Minister for the first time.

Maybe Data was right about the Irish Reunification of 2024?

[werewolfetone]

Sorry for being a killjoy about this again and obviously I’m aware that getting this mad over a meme is pretty much pointless but this post which keeps showing up on my dash for some fucking reason pisses me off so bad because you ppl genuinely do not seem to realise that the entire population of britain could all individually come out as pro irish reunification and many of the people who are currently getting ready to do an orgy of british nationalism IN NORTHERN IRELAND for the next two months would not only still be there but would also still be genuinely willing to see people die to prevent it. but god forbid that someone point out that northern irish people have diverse and varied opinions on their own politics I guess

[bondsmagii]

Does ireland have a more plausible path to reunification now that football fingers is in charge?

literally being 100% serious here but Ireland is going to reunify sometime over the next decade or so. here's how I think it's gonna happen.

Brexit has fucked over Northern Ireland exponentially. there's a border in the Irish Sea, effectively cutting off the whole island anyway, and any hard border on the land itself is going to be impossible. it's just not practical, because when Ireland was partitioned they did such a stupid job of it. I mean, the border runs through towns, farmland, and even people's houses. a hard border (with customs and immigration control and all the expected shit) would just not be feasable. what are you gonna do? stop people bringing their sheep from field to barn because one's in the EU and the other isn't? stop people from bringing their grocery shopping from the front door to the kitchen because the kitchen is the EU and the meat is from outside the EU? come on.

so Northern Ireland has become a pain in Britain's arse again, and this time they can't shoot at the problem or unlawfully detain and torture it, so they're going to go for the other tried and tested British reaction to a problem: they're going to listen closely and think practically. ha! no. they're going to ignore it. so Northern Ireland is going to continue to get fucked over, with more issues with operating businesses, supply chains to supermarkets and the NHS, uncertainty, general inconvenience, etc. alongside this is the growing cost of living crisis in the rest of the UK, which is felt all the more in Northern Ireland because it's always been Britain's lowest priority, so there is no longer any convenience or security in remaining part of the union. this is going to piss off moderate unionists, and it's going to really piss off all the Protestants who used to not give a shit at all. only the hardliners are going to remain loyal to a union who doesn't give a shit about them, and those guys are sticks in the mud. you're never going to persuade them to use their noggins, and they're such a minority at this point that they're not worth listening to. gradually, this dissatisfaction and annoyance is going to turn to anger and disgust, and the majority required for reunification is going to appear.

I have seen this start to happen already. I cannot tell you the amount of ex-unionists I've seen who have changed their tune completely, realising as they have that Britain has never cared about them. I have seen regular non-political Protestants getting so pissed off about this that they've gone full pro-unification. I've seen Protestants, who formerly exclusively described themselves as British, claiming their right to an Irish passport and beginning to describe themselves as Irish Protestant. this is unprecedented. and I have seen it happening a lot. if the Republic is down for it, and the people vote it, and Britain keeps its promise, this is very plausible. the only thing I would be :/ about is the Britain keeping its promise part, but Northern Ireland is now such an inconvenience for it re: Brexit meaning Brexit (🙄) that I think they'd be happy to let us go lmao.

(yes, this will cause trouble with some of the hardline loyalists. I imagine there will be some civil unrest and a few shootings. but the loyalist paramilitaries were always backed up by the British military, and without them they're pure shite. couldn't hit a barn door with a bazooka, as my old man used to say.)

anyway tiocfaidh ár lá, probably in 2024.

[somethingusefulfromflorida]

All joking aside, Prince Philip’s death could very well pave the way for the abolition of the monarchy within our lifetime.

He wasn’t the king, he was the prince consort, just the husband of the ruling queen, politically insignificant; if Elizabeth had died before him, he wouldn’t have become king, it would have passed directly to their son Charles. His death is largely irrelevant for succession and the continued existence of the monarchy, but it paves the way for a more significant death, that of Elizabeth herself.

Elderly couples, especially those who have been together for decades, tend to die shortly after one another, overcome by stress and grief. In the US, former first lady Barbara Bush died in April 2018, followed shortly by her husband president George Bush Sr that November. Now, I don’t know how much of Elizabeth and Philip’s relationship was based on real love ad how much was for appearance’s sake, but I have to assume that the queen isn’t going to just get over this like it was nothing. She’s in relatively good health and could potentially have lived to be as old as her mother had, 101, but now I think she’s going to slowly deteriorate. She has the best healthcare on the entire planet, so it’s not like she’s just going to up and die tomorrow, but I figure her lifespan will be cut short by at least a few years than it otherwise would have been.

This is significant because the UK has never had a monarch like her. She SHATTERED the record for longest reign, which will likely go unbroken for centuries as it would require someone to ascend to the throne at a very young age and then live to be almost 100. Charles and William and George will be old when they take the throne (I don’t expect George to be king until the 2060s or 70s. As life expectancy increases, it’s unlikely a king or queen will die with any youthful heirs; they’d all be middle aged)

Elizabeth is an outlier. She is beloved in ways that Charles never will be. She is seen as England Incarnate, she’s been around so long that she’s become their mascot. People can’t imagine an England without her, she’s part of the background, she comes with the drapery! When she dies, Charles won’t be nearly as popular as she is; politicians and public figures haven’t grown up under his reign, generations haven’t lived and died, he hasn’t cemented himself as part of the cultural zeitgeist like she has.

I think once Elizabeth dies (place your bets; I’m guessing 2022 or 2023), there will be greater calls for the abolition of the monarchy. That’s not to say the monarchy will be immediately dissolved, just that it will become more politically and socially acceptable for people to call for its dissolution. When Elizabeth is gone, people will start to question why there even needs to be a monarchy in the first place.

It will become a partisan political issue; Tories will support the monarchy, while Labour will waffle back and forth about whether or not to commit to choosing a side one way or the other contingent on the results of the next election. SNP, Sinn Fein, and the Lib Dems will be staunch republicans (meaning they’ll support a republic, not to be confused with the American definition of Republican which is the exact opposite). The reign of King Charles III will be a window for abolitionists and Celtic nationalists; I figure there will be another Scottish independence referendum, maybe even talks of Irish reunification as the aftermath of Brexit threatens to reignite the Troubles. The future of the monarchy depending on how the UK responds to upcoming and as yet unforeseen political crises. There will be wars and recessions and partisan squabbling over whose fault the wars and recessions are, but if the UK suffers unduly then Charles will become the perfect scapegoat. Conservatives will call for his abdication to make way for the extremely popular Will and Kate, while the opposition will call for total abolition. If it’s not dissolved under Charles, then it never will be. William is more popular than his father, and Kate is beloved like Princess Di. Once they’re on the throne, popular support for republicanism will evaporate.

I see a European war on the horizon as Russia continues to interfere in eastern Ukraine and the Caucasus mountains and perhaps even the Baltics. NATO might try to step in and launch coalition forces against Russia (or more likely they’d start a proxy war, funding and selling arms to local forces to fight the pro-Russian rebels; Cold War 2.0), at which point the UK will go full isolationist and withdraw from the alliance. Conservatives will call for a NATO Brexit, “Nexit” if you will.

The death of Prince Philip is a meme right now, but I think it will have major political implications in the coming decades. His death is the first domino to fall, but there’s no way of knowing whether it’ll start a full cascade or if it’ll fizzle out and leave the rest of the dominos standing for future generations to try and topple. When Liz dies, I give 25 - 33% odds of abolition, if Labour can grow some balls and appoint a leader who actually inspires people.