u/Jim__Bell

Thanks to Oliver Harper for posting these to FB.

https://www.irishnews.com/opinion/alex-kane-unionists-dont-hate-irish-culture-but-many-fear-the-change-it-represents-F5ELTSYAVNFXDFAAVFHYZHJU6E/

There are times when I – and I’m unapologetically pro-union – struggle to fathom why elements of unionism and loyalism seem to hate Irish culture, heritage and language so much.

I’ve mentioned before that my Dad, born when Ireland was united, albeit within the UK of Great Britain and Ireland, could both read and speak Irish.

The language was part of his upbringing and his parents, Protestant and pro-British, had no difficulty in acknowledging that the Irish language was part of the joint heritage of everyone who lived on the island.

That joint heritage was also recognised at the 1892 Ulster Unionist Convention, where pictures show ‘Erin Go Bragh’ displayed alongside ‘God Save The Queen’, and in murals in parts of Belfast and elsewhere. As it should have been.

It was also recognised through the Anglo-Irish identity that played such a fundamental role in Irish history.

For unionists to deny the Irish side of their identity is to deny a key part of their greater self.

To understand unionists requires understanding their psyche; and that means going back to the first Home Rule Bill in 1886.

Perceptions of that period are, of course, steered by your own perception and sense of identity. For unionists it was the realisation that their pro-British identity could be used as a bargaining chip to keep a British government in power.

So profound a shock was this new reality to their collective system that by 1905 they had created the Ulster Unionist Council, bringing together the entirety of the pro-British community in Ulster. In so doing they also created a new identity –Ulster unionism, an off-shoot of what would have been formerly recognised as British or UK unionism.

Interestingly, the use of the term Ulster unionist was actually a recognition, 16 years before the creation of Northern Ireland, that it would be Ulster unionism rather than British unionism which would be the key pro-union identity in this part of the United Kingdom.

Yet, within months of the opening of the Northern Ireland Parliament, the British government had given the nod of approval to a Boundary Commission, a nod that was to lead to Lord Carson’s comment, in the House of Lords in December 2021, that Ulster and Ulster unionism were mere puppets for a Conservative government intent on remaining in power.

As I see it, the Ulster unionist negativity, and in many cases outright rejection, of the Irish part of their identity, stems back to that point between 1886 and 1921, when they genuinely believed that their constitutional identity and preference was up for grabs; and that, in turn, they might find themselves overwhelmed and subsumed by what they feared would be an exclusively Irish identity.

I’m not, by the way, suggesting that events from a century ago should justify unionism’s approach to any manifestation of Irish today.

But in just the same way that nationalism and republicanism will, fairly quickly in any debate, find themselves referencing 1912 and the ‘Orange state’, the need and tendency to look backwards still dominates our view of each other.

The talk of an ‘Irish dimension’ in Green and White Papers in 1972 and the Anglo-Irish Agreement in 1985 rattled unionism precisely because it seemed to represent a prioritisation of Irish rather than British in their post-Stormont identity.

I suppose what I’m trying to say – in a clumsy way, perhaps – is that unionism fears Irish heritage, culture and language more than it hates it.

And it fears it because it carries with it the prospect of change which it will not be able to control.

Crucially, it carries with it, in the view of some elements of unionism and loyalism, the prospect of political, electoral and constitutional defeat for the Ulster unionist identity created in 1905.

Ironically, the greatest threat to that identity doesn’t come from Irish culture or language. It comes, as it has done so often, from a succession of UK governments dating back to 1886.

Indeed, in December 2024, 103 years after Carson’s ‘puppet’ speech, Jim Allister said in the House of Commons that Northern Ireland had been reduced to semi-colonial status – subject to laws that GB was not – by the NI Protocol and the Windsor Framework. Done, as he and others would argue, by a need to keep an Irish government happy.

Personally, I have no particular difficulty with signs, symbols, touchstones and manifestations of the Irish identity which quite clearly are part of our collective identity.

I don’t see it as any threat to my sense of who I am and want to be as a citizen of the UK.

To be honest, I think if unionism adopted a more laissez-faire approach to the issue and unshackled itself from old fears, it might discover there were votes to be had.

From the Irish Republican Education Forum:

>Found this in a university library. Can't find anything out about the two authors beyond a few other bits they wrote on the conflict.

>No organisation is mentioned and the publisher was called "Community Press (TU)" and seemed to be mainly focused on anti-imperialist publications. Anyone know anything about the authors or the publisher or if any of them were connected to any groups?

https://www.irishnews.com/news/northern-ireland/mlas-urged-to-overturn-1800s-law-treating-rough-sleepers-as-criminals-IUBPKQA3XZEMVPFV7FNRBTIW5Q/

MLAs have been urged to repeal a 200-year-old law that criminalises rough sleepers and begging.

The Justice Minister Naomi Long is to introduce an amendment on Tuesday to the Justice Bill, that would repeal sections of the Vagrancy Act 1824 and the Vagrancy Act (Ireland) 1847.

Dr Leanna O’Hara from Homeless Connect commented: “We commend the Minister’s leadership in bringing these important changes forward.

“We urge MLAs from across the Assembly to support this amendment. No one should be criminalised simply for experiencing homelessness.

“As the representative body for the homelessness sector, we believe that criminal sanctions are an ineffective response to what is fundamentally a social issue.

“Criminalising poverty does not address the root causes that lead people to beg or sleep rough. A properly funded, trauma-informed, multi-agency approach offers a far more effective path to positive outcomes than punitive measures.”

Dr O’Hara added that while repealing the acts would not solve the ongoing housing and homelessness crisis, it was a more “compassionate, evidence-based approach” to chronic homelessness.

Last November, figures obtained by The Irish News showed that police were already taking less action against those on the streets.

In 2024, there were just seven arrests for begging offices compared to 15 and 39 in the two previous years.

Only three charges for begging were brought in 2024, down from 19 in 2022.

At the time, PSNI Superintendent Daniel McPhillips had said those found begging were “dealt with in a sensitive manner” but said officers would continue to enforce the current law.

Miraculously, the kid went through the window and survived.

Since everyone's had a go suggesting a Trainwreckord, I'll throw one into the ring.

When the Sisters of Mercy went on strike against their record company in 1993, I don't think many saw the end result being this?

In Eldritch's own words:

>Could this possibly stand for "Screw Shareholder Value - not so much a band as another opportunity to waste money on drugs and ammunition, courtesy of the idiots at Time Warner"? Surely not. That would require a comma.

>SSV's only album ('Go Figure') features music by P.Bellendir and words by T.Schroeder. It was produced by P.Bellendir in 1997. It does not feature anything by Andrew Eldritch except some sampled vocals. Because of those sampled vocals, East West bought the record (without having heard it) and agreed to release Andrew from his recording contract. What led them to do such a strange thing, after years of intransigence?

>Despite their threats to sue Andrew for not delivering any Sisters records, they were perhaps more worried that a judge would regard a seven year strike as evidence that the contract was dead anyway. So they took what they could get. Andrew has neither the money nor the desire to spend years on a court case, and he was happy to accept immediate freedom on these particular terms. He was very happy for East West to get their SSV record.

>Unfortunately for East West, their SSV record is Not Very Good - to put it mildly. It's reasonable to assume that "techno without drums" is designed merely to bore and annoy. East West have not released the SSV album, but they did send tapes to the press. One copy landed on the internet, so you could pick the album up for free, in MP3 format. Maybe you still can, but of course we wouldn't be allowed to give you the URL if we knew it. We don't think the record's worth downloading, anyway.

>We gather that East West have remixed two tracks, but they're not allowed to remix any more. One day, East West may decide to release the SSV album. We can't recommend it.