On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 10:31:34 +0100, "Des Higgins"
<dazzhiggins@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >Terry me ole pal; I never claimed to have any dimensions at all.
>>
>> I've identified one. It's a beginning.
>>
>> > My only
>> >role in discussing NI here is to
>> >point out the hypocrisy of others,
>>
>> Your only role is to point out what you think is the hypocrisy of
>> nationalists. You don't bother very much with pointing out the
>> hypocrisy of the British or Unionists.
>>
>
>Get me a unionist or Telegraph reader who wishes to defend internment,
>Bloody Sunday, or criticise the role of the RoI government over the past
50
>years of this mess and I will hound them too.
>Google threads between me and Matthew Huntbach, Falcon, Gavin Bailey,
John
>Crawford, Concerned Ulsterman and others. Right now, you and others have
>scared most of them off. Bailey and Huntbach and others have
ironically,
>in the past accused me of being republican.
>
>Do you knwo how to dig up old threads. There are literally hundreds of
them
>with me arguing against the above. With Huntbach it went on for about 3
>years.
That's interesting. So what you're really saying is that there aren't
enough obvious Unionists about now for you to come across as balanced.
That's another way of putting one of the points I was making.
>
>> The problem thiough is that if you only point out the hypocrisy of one
>> group and leave the others alone then you actually sup****t them by
>> ommission.
>>
>
>That does not have to follow. My enemies enemy is my friend??
It doesn't have to follow in terms of your individual view. It's the
impression that's created, by what's left out.
It's arguably possible that O'Reilly's gang at the Sunday Independent
are a reasonably balanced bunch and we get a false impression of them
because they've only been attacking Republicans for the past few
years.
>I can criticise anyone I like on SCI, as can you.
>
>> So unless you're going to point out everyones hypocrisy, it probably
>> not a good idea to go down that road in the first place,
>>
>
>Life is too short. I can post what I like to who I like. There is no
time
>to reply to every piece of ****e here.
But would you agree that if all anyone sees is people attacking
Republicans all the time then it creates a one dimensional picture of
the North?
>I do not have the time you have.
>
>> >especially those who claim to have the
>> >"whole" story. Everyone (you, me,
>> >the cuddle club, Tony O'Reilly) has simplistic notions of what will be
>good
>> >for NI. At least I admit it.
>>
>> Everyone has a political view of course. But that's not really what's
>> going on here. What's going on is that some people are trying to drown
>> out some political views and encourage others. That's what O Reailly
>> tries to do. That's what the Cuddle Club tries to do.
>
>It goes in cycles.
That's a good point. It goes in cycles. That makes sense.
> Right now I see very little uninist propaganda on SCI
>and to be honest, if there is any, I no longer care. Using SCI as a
>political vehicle is meaningless.
>Maybe MIchael Adams is right.
>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It's fair enough I suppose if free staters like yourself are so
>> >> >> determined to define your modernity by how much you like the
British
>> >> >> and how many of them are your friends and I was there and it was
>> >> >> lovely etc., but just don't confuse that with an adult
appreciation
>of
>> >> >> what's actually going on in the North.
>> >> >
>> >> >I do not like the British; I have not met all of them. I did live
>there;
>> >I
>> >> >do have many British friends and I do object to simplistic
>> >generalisations
>> >> >that expect me to dislike them just because it suits a particular
>> >propaganda
>> >> >version of events.
>> >>
>> >> The point I was making to you is that liking or disliking individual
>> >> British people has got nothing to do with it!
>> >
>> >So I should then automatically dislike them or what.
>>
>> What I'm saying to you is that whether you like any or all of them or
>> not, has got nothing to do with anything.
>
>If that is the case then why the **** did you bring it up. This is
surreal.
>Of course it has nothing to do with anything.
>
>>
>> > This point is either
>> >childishly meaningless or you have me here.
>>
>> Of course I have you. Southerners seem to think there is some special
>> virtue in being nice to the British. They do it in a way that they
>> wouldn't do to Americans for example. There's obviously some
>> psychology thing at work there, and politically you've identified the
>> old Ireland of anti-British feeling and the all new modern Ireland of
>> pro-British feeling. Obvioulsy some of you think you're great fellas
>> for being in teh latter category, so much so indeed that you've become
>> incapable of criticisng the British no matter what they do. So again,
>> just to be clear, pro or anti British is no part of it. That's just an
>> ols southern legacy YOU have that for some reason you want to impose
>> on teh North.
>
>That is chilidsh knee jerk analysis. I am entitled to do as I please
>regardiung how I percieve the UK as a whole or as individuals that I
know.
>It is moronic to criticise me for not hating the British somehow just as
it
>would be moronic to simply love them all.
I'm not criticising you for not liking the British. I'm saying it's
not an issue in the North. So don't impose it upon the North.
But it is a southern thing. That's just a fact. It's like the "hating
the Catholic Church" thing many of you have. You define yourselves as
those who are not anti-British. You're reacting against the old
republican idealism that many of you were brought up with. And then
some of you try to impose that reaction you have upon the North.
So to sum up, none of that translates very well to the North. We were
faced with very different issues, real issues, not idealist bollix.
Our experience is different. The North is different.
> I lived in teh UK for a few years and enjoyed it. While
>there, I met some idiots who
>accused me of makingh a mess of NI (me as an assumed Irish republican in
>their eyes). Theye were idiots
>just as the ones who were not idiots were not. You cannot generalise
beyond
>that and attemptihng to do so is ridiculous.
And you now know that what you've just said there is not relevant to
anything about the North. It's a southern perspective.
>I am entitled to say what the **** I like about NI seeing as if you have
your
>political way, I will be faced with living in a united Ireland, for good
or
>for bad.
So if someone were against a UI it would be in their interests to
ensure that political stability was not achieved there?
These are just general points. They're not directed personally at you.
>> The British are totally unaccounable in the North and anyone in that
>> position can do all sorts of things. Don't respond to the genuine
>> complaints that people in teh North have, by trying to pretend that
>> those nice British people wouldn't do whatever it was was claimed
>>
>
>In NI, genuine complaints (and there are many) get swamped in teh
propaganda
>war.
Of course they are. Any reasonable complaint is immediately condemned
as a republican conspiracy. You can understand that that would cause
problems and it would be a good way for the British and Unionists to
deflect criticism. And we're not just talking about media and
newsgroups here. That's what happens in the real world too. You've
done it yourself in the other post.
>> Have you ever tried to downplay genuine complaints in the North by
>> pointing out that some British were nice or that the IRA did something
>> similar. As if that meant something to a victim of the British Army.
>> >>
>> >> What you don't seem to appreciate is that politics is about
structures
>> >> and accountability, not about whether you like people or not. The
>> >> British who run the North aren't accountable to the people who live
>> >> there, not to the electorate nor to the media. That's a political
>> >> problem, and one that needs to be dealt with.
>> >>
>> >
>> >This is a further tangent.
>> >You are now just turning this into a Free Stater versus the true
>patriotic
>> >downtrodden NIer thread.
>>
>> What I'm saying is that there are those in the South who exemplify
>> the Free state tradition and they exist in all parties. That's an
>> idenifiable fact.
>>
>> Of course it depends on how successful you free staters are at
>> converting any last vestiges of republicanism in the South to your way
>> of thinking, whether or not "true patriotic downtrodden NIer", seems
>> just irony or an accurate description of the facts
>>
>
>My views on how southerners view NI are a simple reaction to the equally
>prevalent simplistic republican view from other southereners that all NI
>needs is to kick the brits out.
But that's not the Northern view. So now you're agreeing with me that
your analysis is coloured by your experience of southern republican
idealism. And then you try to impose that stuff on the North when
you're talking to Northerners.
> I am entitlked to my views just as you are
And you're entitled to make mistakes like imposing old southern
republican idealism upon the North. You're also entitled to learn from
those mistakes.
I don't know what your particular expertise is, or even if you have
one, but if you do I'm sure you wouldn't think that just any old
ill-informed view of your subject would do. You need to know what
you're talking about don't you.
|
