Northern Ireland Unionist Leader Meets With Prime Minister of Ireland

[Octillion]

Originally Posted by Panonski

Well, Slovenia has lost it's land too and parts of Slovenia are occupied by foreigners at the moment, who deny Slovenians their rights.

Also, I like Irish for many reasons. One of them is that they helped a lot to Christianize Slovenia, we even had an Irish monastery here. In general, I like every European Catholic nation.



By your logic, gypsies can claim Slovenia as their homeland simply because they settled here somewhere in 16th century.

Wrong. By my logic, gypsies could only claim Slovenia as their homeland if they permanently settled in that country and formed an electoral majority, or even a significant minority, within Slovenia, which I take it they don't. Gypsies, as far as I'm aware, do not settle anywhere much but move around a lot and cross a lot of national boundaries.

[M.R.]

Originally Posted by Octillion

Wrong. By my logic, gypsies could only claim Slovenia as their homeland if they permanently settled in that country and formed an electoral majority, or even a significant minority, within Slovenia, which I take it they don't.

As for settling here, read second part of my post.

Electoral majority? When (if) Muslims become electoral majority in Europe, will Europe be their homeland?

Also, then by your logic Kosovo is Albanian homeland.

Gypsies, as far as I'm aware, do not settle anywhere much but move around a lot and cross a lot of national boundaries.

No, not really. There are many gypsy settlements here in Slovenia.

[Ostrogorski]

Originally Posted by Panonski

Electoral majority? When (if) Muslims become electoral majority in Europe, will Europe be their homeland?

Also, then by your logic Kosovo is Albanian homeland.

I think that term,you are all looking for,is "constitutive nation"...Brits are a constitutive nation in Ulster...and they are neither national minority nor ethnic minority,nor minority at all,but a majority!

Kosovo & Metohia is a different case,since Albanians aren't constitutive nation,and they are national minority,already having their national state - Albania!

[Octillion]

Originally Posted by Panonski

As for settling here, read second part of my post.

Electoral majority? When (if) Muslims become electoral majority in Europe, will Europe be their homeland?

Also, then by your logic Kosovo is Albanian homeland.



No, not really. There are many gypsy settlements here in Slovenia.

I take it from the second part of your post you mean your statement on gypsy settlements in the Slovenia established in the 16th century. If that is true and gypsies have indeed maintained permanent settlements in Slovenia from the 16th century, then why could they not claim Slovenia as their homeland? 400 or 500 years is a hell of a long time to be in a country and not consider it home. Other Slovenians may consider gypsies a foreign community no matter how long they have been settled in Slovenia, but that is not the point. It is what Slovenian gypsies see as their homeland, and not the majority of non-gypsy Slovenians.

In the instance of Ireland, you tend to forget that the provisional Irish regime did in fact agree to the treaty with Britain that provided for the division of Ireland. In the first example that you cite, Slovenia, is there a legal treaty with the Slovenian government allowing gypsies a state of their own where gypsies form an electoral majority? To my knowledge there is none. So a partitioned Slovenia with a gypsy homeland forming a separate Slovenian state does not arise and is purely hypothetical.

And in the second example, Kosovo is indeed a homeland for Kosovar Albanians. But is it part of Albania? No, it is not.

In Kosovo, is there a legal treaty or proposed treaty with Serbia allowing for a Kosovar state, partitioning Kosovo, or ceding Kosovo to Albania? No, there is not to my knowledge. Kosovo is part of Serbia, though under UN administration, and Kosovar Albanians are a majority in Kosovo but do they form an electoral majority or are they too divided to do so? Do the majority of Albanians want Kosovo to be part of Albania, a separate state to both Albania and Serbia, or divided between Serbia and Albania? To my knowledge, no referenda have been held there resulting in treaties between Serbia and Albania regarding Kosovo. As there are no legal treaties in force, and Kosovo's legal and constitutional status is technically still within Serbia but seemingly ultimately unresolved, this is not strictly analogous to the situation in Ireland, though in Kosovo they do share the situation of existing national-ethnic majorities and minorities and that is about all.

In contrast, Northern Ireland's legal and constitutional status is decidedly resolved and completely established. Ireland's division under the terms of Anglo-Irish Treaty was a rational and reasonable solution to a difficult situation that almost threw the entire UK, and not just Ireland, into civil war. The solution allowed for the majority of the people in the northeast of the country to secede from the rest of Ireland to remain in the UK. They were constitutionally and legally allowed to do this under the terms of the Anglo-Irish Treaty, and they did. Thus Ulster Protestants secured their homeland of then 300 years as a division of the United Kingdom and Irish Catholics in the new state of Northern Ireland became a national minority.

As far as an electoral majority of Moslems in Europe is concerned, when and if they take over then yes, they will claim Europe as an Islamic homeland, even if the native Europeans dispute this. However, it is the task of the people's of Europe to prevent a Moslem Europe from becoming a reality, if they can.

[Octillion]

Originally Posted by Sektor

I think that term,you are all looking for,is "constitutive nation"...Brits are a constitutive nation in Ulster...and they are neither national minority nor ethnic minority,nor minority at all,but a majority!

Kosovo & Metohia is a different case,since Albanians aren't constitutive nation,and they are national minority,already having their national state - Albania!

'Consituitive nation' is a new one to me. But what you say is correct. Irish Catholics in Ulster, as Gaelic Irish, are a national minority in Northern Ireland. Ulster Protestants constitute an entirely different national-ethnic entity and there form the majority. What Irish Nationalists and their supporters do is try to cast doubt on the legitimacy of Northern Ireland as a state and a division of the UK. But this is futile as legally and constitutionally Northern Ireland is a fact. And it is officially recognised as such by every country that formally recognises the United Kingdom and maintains diplomatic relations with her, including the Republic of Ireland.

[Theobald]

Originally Posted by Sektor

I think that term,you are all looking for,is "constitutive nation"...Brits are a constitutive nation in Ulster...and they are neither national minority nor ethnic minority,nor minority at all,but a majority!

Kosovo & Metohia is a different case,since Albanians aren't constitutive nation,and they are national minority,already having their national state - Albania!

What is so different ? The "Brits" also already have their "national state". And the Albanians in Kosovo are neither national minority nor ethnic minority, nor minority at all, they are a majority, that's a fact. So, by your logic, since Ulster rightly belongs to the Brits, Kosovo also rightly belongs to Albania.

[Ostrogorski]

Originally Posted by prometheus

My sympathy for the Isrish casue is due to several factors. First, I think the Irish nationalism isn't imperialistic. They just want to reunite their island and keep it to themselves. As far as I could discern, the Irish have no such ideas that they have some special "mission" in the world and that they want to spread "civilization" across the planet, through a violent military conquest, in order to create a "paradise on earth" (a Masonic dream). And that is precisely what the British have been doing for the last several hundred years (and now their murderous successors Americans are doing the same thing).

I think that,first and most important reason,for your sympathizing the Irish cause,is your presumption,that Irish-British case is similar to ex-Yugoslav case,which is not.And I'll stop here,because this is discussion about Ulster.

Originally Posted by prometheus

Secondly, I have a strong dislike of the so-called modern West and its ideology (liberalism, etc), which for its most part originated in Britain and was spread around the world, often with violent means.

Me,too...but,I don't blame Britain,or England for that matter...I blame liberal-bourgeois idea,that is not British concept,but rather a consequence of Humanism and Renaissance,Rationalism,Age of enlightenment,strengthening of the bourgeois class etc.

It was also promoted by many Catholic and Protestant philosophers and ideologists...I can also say that,if there weren't Catholics and Protestants,liberal thought would have never won!

Originally Posted by prometheus

UK was the model country for all future multicultural states. Hence no wonder that they supported a country like Yugoslavia, had a privileged relationship with that bandit creation, as the result of which "relationship" billions of (Anglo)-American dollars poured in for the keeping up that bastard country.

Interesting...and what do you say about Roman empire?Or Austrian empire,Holy Roman empire,Charlemagne empire?Bandit creations???

[Marulus]

Originally Posted by Theobald

What is so different ? The "Brits" also already have their "national state". And the Albanians in Kosovo are neither national minority nor ethnic minority, nor minority at all, they are a majority, that's a fact. So, by your logic, since Ulster rightly belongs to the Brits, Kosovo also rightly belongs to Albania.

It is mainly the military boots that decide. It is obvious. Because of the British boots in Norhern Ireland, this occupation has some "legality".

The same goes for Kosovo which is under NATO boots, for the time being, and the forces that control NATO will decide on what happens with that piece of territory, without asking neither Serbs nor Albanians what they think about that. Similar with Bosnia (no-one really cares what Croats, Serbs and Bosniaks think or want).

[M.R.]

Originally Posted by Octillion

I take it from the second part of your post you mean your statement on gypsy settlements in the Slovenia established in the 16th century. If that is true and gypsies have indeed maintained permanent settlements in Slovenia from the 16th century, then why could they not claim Slovenia as their homeland? 400 or 500 years is a hell of a long time to be in a country and not consider it home.

Because it's not their homeland. It takes much more than just being here to claim our piece of land as your homeland. Only Slovenians have that right.

Who is the majority in Kosovo? It is part of Serbia as far as I know, though under UN administration. Are Albanians a majority in Kosovo? Are Serbs? Who forms an electoral majority in this instance?

Albanians do.

In Kosovo, is there a legal treaty or proposed treaty with Serbia allowing for a Kosovar state or ceding Kosovo to Albania? To my knowledge, no treaties exist between Serbia and Albania regarding Kosovo.

If Kosovo achieves independence, would it suddenly become Albanian homeland?

By my logic, Ireland's division is perfectly rational, and reasonable, as the majority of the people in the northeast of the country seceded from the rest of Ireland to remain in the UK. They were constitutionally and legally allowed to do this under the terms of the Anglo-Irish Treaty, and they did. They secured their homeland of then 300 years, Ulster, as a division of the United Kingdom. You must remember that the law does not allow for popular opinion to influence it, but is an objective standard.

You're missing my point. We had Germans living here perfectly legally, but still that wouldn't mean Slovenia is their homeland.

As far as an electoral majority of Moslems in Europe is concerned, when and if they take over then yes, they will claim Europe as an Islamic homeland, even if the native Europeans dispute this.

But will they have right to do this?

However, it is the task of the people's of Europe to prevent a Moslem Europe from becoming a reality, if they can.

Of course here I agree.

[Errigal]

An important thing to remember about Ireland is that the Irish are a hard headed and strong people. Whether they are Orangemen or Nationalists you cannot make them do something they do not want to do. Even today's Ireland of the EU and Bono is still Ireland. So if people want a United Ireland, and I do, they will either have to ask the Protestants if they would like to join the Republic or they will have to try to kill us all. I am happily a citizen of the Irish Republic and I think my fellow Protestants in the North will some day join me but you will have to ask them to join of their own free will and that will take a lot of negotiations.

My grandmother said "Ireland is a hard country. Always remember that." It is still true underneath it all.

[Octillion]

Originally Posted by Panonski

Because it's not their homeland. It takes much more than just being here to claim our piece of land as your homeland. Only Slovenians have that right.



Albanians do.



If Kosovo achieves independence, would it suddenly become Albanian homeland?



You're missing my point. We had Germans living here perfectly legally, but still that wouldn't mean Slovenia is their homeland.



But will they have right to do this?



Of course here I agree.

As I said before, but it was after you posted this, if non-gypsy Slovenians consider gypsy settlers as a foreign community, this is not the point. You asked that because gypsies had settled in Slovenia in the 16th century, did they have the right to consider Slovenia as their homeland and I said yes. Why not? Here I disagree.

And if Kosovo achieved its independence would it become an Albanian homeland? I don't know. I'm not an Albanian Kosovar and cannot speak for them.

Ulster Protestants are ethnically British and, have formed a separate and cohesive community in Ireland and a separate and cohesive national identity for almost 400 years. Ulster to Ulster Protestants has more in common with Scotland and England than it does with the rest of Ireland.

As far as Ulster Protestants are concerned, and I agree with them, they are a separate nation to the Gaelic Irish and the part of Ireland that they occupy is far more a British territory than an Irish one. They see Ulster as separate country to the rest of Ireland and they regard Ulster as their homeland. It is different in its majority culture, religion, tradition and ethos, even the physical environment is different to the rest of Ireland as the Scottish and English colonists cleared vast tracts of the countryside for farms. It is substantially different to the rest of Ireland.

And Ulster Protestants have every right to consider Ulster as their homeland. Why shouldn't they? They are not like ethnic Germans, or gypsies, that have only ever made up a fraction of the population of their host countries in countries such as Slovenia. They are a cohesive national community of one million people with their own state and that state is constitutionally legal and internationally recognised as such. And they will not be forced out of the land they have lived in for centuries.

If the main objection to Northern Ireland is that it was national community that started out as a colony whereby the natives were dispossessed and the colonists took over. Then you are must condemn those lands where the natives were dispossessed at the hands of the settlers to start new countries, and by this logic, condemn the United States, Canada, Australia, South Africa, New Zealand, all of Latin America, Taiwan, and several others.

[M.R.]

Originally Posted by Octillion

You asked that because gypsies had settled in Slovenia in the 16th century, did they have the right to consider Slovenia as their homeland and I said yes. Why not? Here I disagree.

Because Slovenia is a homeland only for Slovenians. Others are foreigners.

Ulster Protestants are ethnically British and

What is 'ethnically British'? There is no British ethnicity.

have formed a separate and cohesive community in Ireland and separate and cohesive national identity for almost 400 years. Ulster to Ulster Protestants has more in common with Scotland and England than it does with the rest of Ireland.

So what? Europeans settled in America some time ago, and even consider themselves a "nation", but can they rightfully say America is their homeland? Of course not.

They see Ulster as separate country to the rest of Ireland and they regard Ulster their homeland.

That's how they see it, yes.

OK, I've seen the edit.

But if you are going to condemn those lands where the natives were dispossessed at the hands of the settlers to start new countries, then you ought to, by this logic, condemn the United States, Canada, Australia, South Africa, New Zealand, all of Latin America, Taiwan, Okinawa, and several others.

Yes I would and I do. So what?

BTW do you support Israeli occupation of Palestine?

[Errigal]

Originally Posted by Octillion

Ulster Protestants are ethnically British and, have formed a separate and cohesive community in Ireland and separate and cohesive national identity for almost 400 years. Ulster to Ulster Protestants has more in common with Scotland and England than it does with the rest of Ireland.

As far as Ulster Protestants are concerned, and I agree with them, they are a separate nation to the Gaelic Irish and the part of Ireland that they occupy is far more a British territory than an Irish one. They see Ulster as separate country to the rest of Ireland and they regard Ulster their homeland. It is different in its majority culture, religion, tradition and ethos, even the physical environment is different to the rest of Ireland as the Scottish and English colonists cleared vast tracts of the countryside for farms. It is substantially different to the rest of Ireland.

And Ulster Protestants have every right to consider Ulster as their homeland. Why shouldn't they? They are not like ethnic Germans, or gypsies, that only made up a fraction of the population of their host countries in countries such as Slovenia. They are a cohesive national community of one million people with their own state and that state is constitutionally legal and internationally recognised as such.

It is true that an Ulsterman is different from other Irishmen and have many things in common with their neighbours the Lowland Scots. At the same time I'd say Irishmen from Leinster (the south east of the island) have a lot in common with the southern English. I think people hugely overstate the cultural gap created by the Irish Sea for political reasons. I think the key point is that the future of Northern Ireland should be freely decided by those who live there.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Octillion

What you refer to here is out of context of the topic's discussion and quite beyond its scope.

It is much within the topic of the discussion as it responds directly to your assertion.

If you must absolutely call it something, call it inconvenient.

Originally Posted by Octillion

Yes I can, in all fairness. Irish Nationalists are not denied their freedom or identity in Northern Ireland

False. Their identity is Irish, not some semi-colonial lackeys of Westminster. Their freedom to reunite with their brothers of the South is denied just as well as their Free Irish identity. They have been deprived from it by means of force for hundreds of years.

Originally Posted by Octillion

they can vote, stand for elections, freely express their views and opinions in speech or writing, own property, earn a living, have freedom of movement, practise their religion, etc.; indeed they have the full civil rights of any UK citizen.

That is all fine for a colonial rabble. Not for a free nation.

Originally Posted by Octillion

They can also teach, learn, and speak the Irish language and practise other elements of Irish culture if they so chose.