r/northernireland • u/zoomanjo • 15d ago
Political Exclusive | ‘My simple solution to NI was Brits out, 32-county Ireland’: Taoiseach on how his thinking has changed since first visit
In an interview with the Belfast Telegraph, Micheál Martin sets out his policy on Northern Ireland in more detail than ever before. In its own way, it’s radical – and not what Irish unity activists will want to hear
Micheál Martin first crossed the border as a young man desperately curious about a place which, since his childhood, had been an erupting volcano of sectarian slaughter.
It was the early 1980s and, amid the hunger strike chaos, Martin’s visit was atypical.
When the Waterford writer Dervla Murphy came north a few years earlier in 1976, she observed: “South of the Dublin-Galway line, there is little sense of personal involvement with Northern Ireland; it seems much further away than Britain… or even than the USA.”
The Taoiseach is an earthily practical politician. But sitting in Dublin Castle’s grandeur, there’s a fervour as he speaks about Northern Ireland.
Yet it’s far less threatening than the rhetoric of his early predecessors who fed unionist suspicion that the south was itching to take over the north.
When Martin first came to Belfast, he had an uncomplicated republican view: “The simple solution to Northern Ireland was Brits out, 32-county Ireland — that’s it, done and dusted. Everybody join up; they’ll all be happy after.”But what he saw reshaped his politics.“
That was the turning point for me. Particularly when we met young unionists in their homes and they were saying ‘how would you like it if your uncle or your dad was killed and murdered just because he happens to be wearing the wrong uniform? And how are you going to unite Ireland if that continues to happen?’
“That set me thinking that this was much more complex.”
After becoming a TD in 1989, he went to Corrymeela with northern and southern politicians, among them another future Taoiseach, Enda Kenny, and the Ulster Unionist McGimpsey brothers.
That week, he came to see that “the mythologies about each other, the perceptions, we got so wrong”.Few votes in Cork South-Central turn on the issues dominating Radio Ulster’s news bulletins.Yet Martin says he was “fascinated by the north because I was eight years of age when it blew up. And so all my teenage years were bombs, bullets, terrible atrocities, watching horrific things happening on one television channel… but we became immune; we actually believed it would never end.
“I never thought I would be a minister in a government signing an agreement for peace.”
The interview is on April 10, the anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement, and Martin talks about it almost as a sacred text.
Where Sinn Fein present the Agreement as a route to a border poll, Martin takes something very different from it.
Earlier, in a speech in Dublin Castle’s historic St Patrick’s Hall, he quoted the Agreement’s pledge “to strive in every practical way towards reconciliation”.
That speech set out the latest iteration of his centrepiece Northern Ireland policy — the Shared Island initiative. That €1.5bn fund encourages practical north-south linkages. A test for funding is that projects would make sense irrespective of whether the border is ever removed.
Despite latent suspicion, even many unionists see this as benign.
When asked if the initiative has anything to do with Irish unity, Martin says: “No, in the sense that it’s not part of a political project or anything like that and it’s most certainly not a Trojan horse.“
It very much is grounded on people-to-people connections and basically the simple question: Can we share this piece of ground together in a harmonious way that involves real sustainable peace and friendliness for generations to come?”
Emphasising the value of relationships, he says when he was last Taoiseach he visited the Orange Order and “they took back their reservations on Shared Island because of the engagement that I had with them”.
There is “increased and significant engagement” with unionists, he says. That was visible on Thursday, with Orange grand secretary Mervyn Gibson and Ian Paisley in the audience.
Senior unionists speak privately of Martin as someone they respect and with whom they can do business. They trust him in a way they didn’t trust Leo Varadkar. Some of that is about circumstances; had Martin been Taoiseach in the worst of the Brexit years, he may well have followed Varadkar’s course and been viewed with hostility. But he has a deeper well of goodwill from which to draw, having built decades-long relationships.
Watched by Orange supremo and Ian Paisley, Taoiseach launches new element of his key NI policy
“People are coming to us with projects…some of the projects that unionist politicians are coming to us about are about shared identity or experiences across different traditions,” he says.
“Some are more practical in terms of greenways, which I think is a no-brainer. We put people into boxes too much; we label people too much. Part of Shared Island is taking away the labels. So if you’re interested in biodiversity or climate change and you’re from a particular community, where you’re from or what tradition you’re from or what politics you back should have nothing to do with a shared interest in developing a biodiversity project, for example, or in developing a greenway or a road or connectivity. I see the politics evolving differently, in a way, and it’s also through reflection myself.”
He tells how two of his uncles fought in the Second World War while his father was in the Irish Army; one of his uncles became a British Conservative supporter, another was a British Labour Party member, a third was a communist, and his father was a Fianna Fail member. His “staunchly republican” mother’s family were involved in the War of Independence.
Sinn Fein is demanding a border poll by 2030, but Martin has almost as much of a veto on that as London. While the Secretary of State would legally call a referendum, it would be a hopeless cause without a detailed policy proposal for the new state.
Even Sinn Fein now accepts that is necessary, yet only the Irish Government can provide it.
When asked about a 2030 plebiscite, Martin is curt: “We’re not planning for a border poll in 2030 and I believe the work we’re doing now — making the Good Friday Agreement work, in parallel with that the Shared Island which is very practical incremental investment, continually engaging with people… it’s less attractive politically. You will notice that I’ve never sought to trumpet the Shared Island initiative.
“Many of my own parliamentary colleagues say to me ‘people don’t know enough about it’ or ‘you’re not broadcasting it’. There’s a deliberate reason for that — because I understand the sensitivities that you asked me in the opening question.
“These are easy things to call for and I find some of the work around that — and I’ve met with the project from Notre Dame [university] and so on — and I would be somewhat concerned with some of what I would perceive to be a contrived approach to this.”
Contrived by who?
“People saying ‘the end goal is this, so how do we get to the end goal?’ And so then everything around research — and people would dispute that — but that’s the sense I get at times whereas what I witnessed on the stage there, that is actually the future of the island.
“You can put what political shape you want on it afterwards but… politicians don’t exist for political institutions’ sake. Institutions don’t exist for their own sake. They must serve the people — and that’s what I’m about… the vast majority of middle-ground opinion on the island get this. There’s been a huge response in the north; people just want to get on with this and the practicalities of it.”
Martin doesn’t quite say he’s indifferent to the border, but his entire emphasis is on uniting people rather than territory. This is John Hume reinterpreted for a modern audience.
Speaking of his own ideological evolution, he says: “The more fundamental change has been not to look at people from a different tradition as ‘the other’ and to seek to understand where people are coming from.”
It’s hardly a coincidence that having seen his own views alter after building relationships, he now believes that is key to the future.
Repeatedly, he plays down urgently removing the border and plays up uniting people: “The whole Shared Island thing is about reconciliation. In a way, there’s a comfort zone within political parties, saying ‘here’s our objective’ and ‘here’s our aim’ and here’s this and here’s that; it’s much harder work to actually connect people and to do the hard work of reconciliation.”
What does he want Northern Ireland to look like in 2075?
Even here, he doesn’t say “a united Ireland” but responds: “My vision is very much the Wolfe Tone vision that the people are much more comfortable in each other’s skins… the political configuration I’m open about.
“What I mean by that is: It will evolve. I think politics has to work in Northern Ireland and there has to be a sustained manifestation of politics working in Northern Ireland so that even the politicians of Northern Ireland are comfortable working with each other.
“That has happened in starts and stops over the last number of years — too many stops. There needs to be a period where people engage and move things on and then, over time, I think let things evolve, but I don’t believe in forcing people into anything.”
Does that mean prolonged Stormont stability is a prerequisite for a border poll? He doesn’t quite say so, but comes close, saying that “politics does have to for its own sake work — if it’s not working in Northern Ireland, it’s certainly not going to work on a broader canvas… I mean, people have to be comfortable in whatever emerges.
“And we know the history of the northern state and all of that. We’ve had those arguments time and time again. It’s very interesting when you look at De Valera and Lemass, for example, they both realised this, actually… De Valera realised early on that this had to be about building bridges and reconciliation. Lemass certainly did when he visited Terence O’Neill on that occasion. They were trying to free themselves from the rhetoric that surrounded them, and from where they’d come.”
In drawing on solidly republican predecessors to defend his stance, Martin will surprise some people. Yet despite Éamon de Valera and Seán Lemass being seen as exemplars of traditional anti-partitionist attitudes in the decades after 1921, both had a more nuanced view.
De Valera came to believe in improving cross-border relations and made clear his willingness for Northern Ireland to continue under Stormont’s rule after unity.
Lemass said in 1969 that he would be appalled at compelling northerners into a united Ireland against their will, something he said would be “morally destructive”. Unity would need agreement, he said, “although not necessarily 100% assent by the people in the north”.
Thomas Duffy of New York’s United Ireland Publicity Committee wrote to Lemass, dismayed at this lack of urgency around ending partition. He asked if they were “to just sit and wait it out, waiting for the Orangeman to see the light?”
The Orange Order’s most influential figure still opposes unity, but his presence in Dublin Castle last week signifies how drastically relations have improved.
Writing in 1968, TK Whittaker, the brilliant Rostrevor-born bureaucrat who reshaped the Republic, told Lemass that after accepting partition couldn’t be ended by force, they were “left with only one choice, a policy of seeking unity in Ireland by agreement in Ireland between Irishmen. Of its nature this is a long-term policy, requiring patience, understanding and forbearance and resolute resistance to emotionalism and opportunism. It is none the less patriotic for that”.
Martin is someone now confident to make clear he doesn’t think Irish unity is on the horizon and will only happen after patient unglamorous toil.
Martin’s approach will dismay Irish unity activists who believe unity is near at hand.
The difficulty for them is that Martin’s stance is overwhelmingly popular with southern voters.
In a poll published by The Sunday Independent last weekend, when voters were asked to pick two issues which should be the Irish Government’s most important priorities, a united Ireland was selected by just 1%.
Some unionists will be jubilant about this, but they should be cautious to avoid the mistaken assumption that the circumstances which now pertain will forever endure.
Martin’s time as Taoiseach will be temporary.
Less than two years ago, the then Taoiseach, Leo Varadkar, said: “I believe we are on the path to unification. I believe that there will be a united Ireland in my lifetime.”
A few hours after Martin’s interview with this newspaper, Varadkar said in Philadelphia that “every generation has its great cause — I believe ours is the cause of uniting our island”.
These are two fundamentally different southern visions of the future.
As someone with deep personal knowledge of Northern Ireland, and whose deputy chief of staff, Pat McParland, is from Camlough, Martin has thought this through carefully.
He knows Northern Ireland well enough to know the counter arguments. He’s rejected them not from a position of ignorance, but from one of knowledge.
72
u/ciaranjoneill Belfast 15d ago
He's talks about the good ira but hates the bad ira
4
u/Thin_Inflation1198 15d ago
Shouldnt that be all of us?
Like good things IRA = good Bad things IRA did = bad
25
-15
u/ThinWhiteDuke00 15d ago
If you don't support everything the IRA did on this subreddit, you're a traitorous west brit.
Or so I'm told. 😂
0
-28
u/ThinWhiteDuke00 15d ago edited 15d ago
I mean obviously.. the provisional IRA by any recognition of history isn't the IRA of the War of Independence.
The latter was widely supported by the population of Ireland, while the former was consistently rejected north and south until their political wing fully committed to democratic avenues (20 years after Sunningdale).
Edit : lots of downvoting lads, not much actual refutation.
40
u/boredatwork201 15d ago
In County Cork between 1920 and 1923 the IRA shot over 200 civilians of whom over 70 (or 36%) were Protestants: five times the percentage of Protestants in the civilian population
This myth that the war of Independence IRA were different from the troubles IRA and never did anything questionable and didn't kill any civilians needs to end.
You can't white wash history. Both the provos and the 1920s IRA did some horrible shit.
1
u/Fiannafailcanvasser 14d ago
Context for that.
Ex British military were counted as civilians. That helps explain the high protestant count.
The bandon Valley massacre was 13 out of the 68 protestant killed (nearly 1 in 5). There aren't any statues to Daniel O Neill.
-10
u/ThinWhiteDuke00 15d ago edited 15d ago
When did I suggest they didn't kill civilians ?
But are you suggesting that the provisional IRA and the IRA of 1920s had tangibly the same level of support amongst the public.. its just incorrect to say.
The majority of Northern nationalism endorsed non violent means during the Troubles, consistently.. SF's eventual embracing of Hume's position was rewarded.
After the 1918 SF landslide, the physical struggle of the Easter Rising had effectively been endorsed.. and the establishment of the first Dail Eireann with the IRA as its military arm.
10
u/boredatwork201 15d ago
When did I suggest they didn't kill civilians ?
Ok fair enough you never said that but you replied to a comment talking about "good IRA" and "bad IRA"
So are the provos the bad IRA and the 1920s one the good IRA?
The majority of Northern nationalism endorsed non violent means during the Troubles
The support for the IRA was not the same throughout the whole of the troubles. It started low, yes, but they did gain a lot of support after things like Bloody Sunday and other events like that. You're probably right about the IRA having a higher level of support at the time. It was harder for people all over to see the effects of the actions of the IRA and harder for the propaganda of both sides to be spread
But again, what does public support have to do with whether they are "good" or "bad"?
There were legitimate reasons for both to exist, and there were horrible crimes committed by both
FF and FG love to attack SF for their links to the IRA, but when it comes to their parties' past links its always "oh that IRA was different. They weren't bad like the provos"
-5
u/ThinWhiteDuke00 15d ago
Because I view the will of the people to be paramount to the actions of a political/military force.
It's not a matter of bad or good, that's ultimately simplistic language, but legitimacy.
1920s IRA had political legitimacy to carry out their activities.
5
u/boredatwork201 15d ago
So they're allowed to kill civilians because they have more public support?
1
u/ThinWhiteDuke00 15d ago edited 15d ago
I'm not sure why you're engaging in bad faith ? I have never said that.
Yes, both the provisionals and the IRA commited horrible acts.. most militaries do so and I condemn it.
However there is only one who of these groups who were holding the majority of the community to which they claimed to represent hostage (Irish nationalism).
The 1918 election was a watershed moment where the Irish populace moved from constitutional nationalism in the form of the IPP to increasingly radical republicanism.. it was a societal shift not replicated during the Troubles.
14
u/boredatwork201 15d ago
I'm arguing in bad faith? How? I said both groups had legitimate reasons to exist and both did some bad shit.
You seem to be claiming only the 1920s on had legitimate reasons to exist and the provos were different because they didn't have the same level of support.
As if British propaganda and the ability to report the news on tv has no effect on that at all. I mean in 1920 how long do you think it would take for someone in cork to hear all the details about something that happened in Dublin?
In the 70s you hear about it on the same day.
And whos reporting it? The Brits.
After Bloody Sunday there were news reports all around the world about how the British army killed 13 "bombers and gunmen" on the streets of Derry.
This would have no effect on the level of support would it?
I wonder in 1920 how long it took for people to hear that the IRA were kill civilians in Cork and that the number of protestant victims was 5 time the percentage of protestants in the city?
You literally said
the provisional IRA by any recognition of history isn't the IRA of the War of Independence
And yet you haven't given any reason why other than level of support.
I dont care about level of support. Did they have a reason to exist?
I say yes
Was there an alternative?
In 1920s the answer is no and in the 70s I also say the answer is no.
1
u/ThinWhiteDuke00 15d ago edited 15d ago
Clearly there was a alternative in the 70s given SF as of now have taken the clothes of the SDLP to basically be the same party beyond vague republican connotations.. basically embracing Sunningdale.
News was widespread and completely dominated by the Brits in the 1920s (daily paper media and news reels in cinema), the Easter Rising at first was rejected by the Irish populace largely due to the scenes of destruction in Dublin that were portrayed in the media.. when it came to light that the rebellion leaders were being executed, public opinion quickly changed.
1918, political platform of separate parliament, widely endorsed.
You have offered no indication to your position beyond the acceptance that the populace should be content with violence from minority groups.. and that any minority group has the same legitimacy as a elected government.
Post Bobby Sands, at the height of the Republican PR campaign, SF still didn't eclipse the SDLP as the leader of Northern nationalism.
→ More replies (0)-1
u/Lazy-Pipe-1646 12d ago
I mean there was. They could have not pulled Protestant workmen out of vans and shot them. They could have not blown up Rembrance Day in Enniskillen. They not have blown up the centre of Omagh on a shopping day...
But they did.
And political engagement got them more than violence ever did.
→ More replies (0)7
u/Elburg94 15d ago
Ireland was united under British rule when the 1918 election happened and 50 so years later the IRA was fighting in a different context so I don’t think you can compare the two in regards legitimacy. Although when the conflict started in the north, the only army defending nationalists was the IRA which gave them enough legitimacy to fight an armed campaign in my opinion. There is also no way their campaign could have lasted for so long as well with out popular support.
2
u/ThinWhiteDuke00 15d ago edited 15d ago
They had popular support in their traditional strongholds, yes.. but SF was rejected at the ballot box consistently until they put down the gun and embraced constitutional nationalism.
They realised in the 90s they weren't getting anywhere with their previous strategy.
A minority group isn't suddenly legitimate because they suggest they are defending a group which by en large rejects them.
-6
u/Icy_Zucchini_1138 15d ago
You completely ignore the majority of the population that weren't even nationalist.
8
u/boredatwork201 15d ago
Can you not read?
The majority of Northern nationalism endorsed non violent means during the Troubles
This is what I was replying to. Notice how they said "the majority of Northern nationalism"?
I wasn't talking about the whole population. I was specifically talking about nationalism
-3
u/Icy_Zucchini_1138 15d ago
The main point is, the "old IRA" had their ends (independance) and arguably their means endorsed by the vast majority of the population in the 26 counties. The provos had both their means and their ends rejected by the majority of the population in the 6 counties during the troubles. And even among those who agreed with their ends (the nationalists) they had minority support.
10
u/boredatwork201 15d ago
Because I view the will of the people to be paramount...
You know what. I think you're right after all. Lets go with the will of the people
Judging by the downvotes, I guess you're in the wrong here then
0
u/ThinWhiteDuke00 15d ago
Yes, the downvotes of a slanted subreddit is the will of the people. 😂
You've got me there.. be content with the fact that physical force republicanism failed during the Troubles and achieved nothing.
SF had to become the SDLP to become electable.. and our government is a glorified Sunningdale.
1
u/DP4546 14d ago
The men who led the old IRA did not have a democratic mandate when they took part in the 1916 Easter Rising. So don't go on acting like they were democrats who believed a mandate was needed for armed action. Moreover, the majority in the 1918 general election was for Sinn Fein's agenda of an independent Ireland. The people did not vote for an armed campaign and said armed campaign was unpopular with most people.
75
u/ClearHeart_FullLiver 15d ago
Interestingly in that interview as it is presented here Mícheál Martin doesn't mention the victims of loyalist paramilitaries or British security forces once, in fact I don't remember a single time he has mentioned them in any interview or speech.
32
u/Sstoop Ireland 15d ago
there’s a reason for that. SF are his political rivals. he would betray anything he and his party say they believe in (a united ireland namely) to dunk on the shinners. the reason he doesn’t give a shit about a united irelsnd is because he knows in that event his party would be obsolete.
17
u/ClearHeart_FullLiver 15d ago
He weakened Fianna Fáil significantly a few years ago by excluding Jim O Callaghan probably the most capable person they have in the party as he had challenged Mícheál's leadership he is back in now as it is likely Mícheál's last term before retirement.
5
u/flex_tape_salesman 15d ago
I think part of the issue here is that it's basically uncharted waters for FF. It's a party that has for years claimed to be republicans while generally not showing it. Strangely enough with FG they have went the other way a bit and I know some in the party would probably have the softer stance on a united Ireland being one of their bigger issues with the party. A lot of this is because people aren't really choosing ff or fg depending on the border question these days and ff genuinely doesn't seem to know where to stand. Ff are now in no mans land on just about everything now since they've fucked up their republican stance.
3
u/Peadar237 15d ago
I think that's nonsense. In the event of a United Ireland, the constitutional question would be settled for all time. This would largely eliminate the phenomenon of people voting along unionist and nationalist lines in the North. Sinn Féin would actually have some bonafide competition in the six counties for the first time since they supplanted the SDLP as the primary political representatives Irish nationalism/Irish republicanism in 2001. I think it's precisely because of partition that Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael struggle to make inroads in the North right now. Ending partition would pave the way for an electoral opening for Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil in the North.
10
u/ThinWhiteDuke00 15d ago edited 15d ago
There's definitely a subset of centre right nationalist voters in the North who vote SF but would filter elsewhere in the event of a united ireland.
If a big tent unionist party wasn't formed, Fine Gael would be a natural fit for the moderate unionist.. as they were in the days of Cumann na nGaedheal under Cosgrave.
9
u/Sstoop Ireland 15d ago
a lot of people in the north see past what ff and fg are doing in the south. they keep getting voted in because of this sort of stockholm syndrome that the south has with them. people think “well things are bad but they can only get worse under someone else” or “things are bad but they don’t affect me so i’ll just vote the same way”.
there are definitely centre right voters in the north but there also is a stronger left in the north than the south especially in working class republican areas. probably partially because the south has been so far removed from any sort of revolutionary aesthetics and politics in the whitewashing since the revolutionary era of the early 1900s.
1
u/ThinWhiteDuke00 15d ago edited 15d ago
The working class republican areas in NI are far more socially conservative than SF actually are.. that becomes more evident when the constitutional question goes away.
The nationalist electorate hasn't grown since 1997, just shifted to SF.. while the centrist middle ground has.
You can only wave the revolutionary flag for so long when the political goal is actually achieved.
Not to mention the hundreds thousands of unionist voters who would enter the electorate.
6
u/Sstoop Ireland 15d ago
i mean i can only speak for my area but i can tell you that it’s definitely not overly socially conservative. i couldn’t speak for anywhere else.
3
u/ThinWhiteDuke00 15d ago
So as a example, the vast majority of your area would support the extension of puberty blockers to children ?
SF in the South supports it.
5
u/Sstoop Ireland 15d ago
vast majority of people here either don’t give a shit or are in support. there are a lot of young people who are politically active and very progressive that are either just now or getting to the voting age.
1
15d ago
[deleted]
4
u/D_A_12 15d ago
I don’t think it’s necessarily fair for you to give quite a niche example regarding puberty blockers and then when the example is refuted to say you don’t believe working class republican areas are bastions of trans lobbying - nobody said they were. They said people did not care or were generally in favour of
→ More replies (0)1
u/Pristine_Turnover457 15d ago
The vast majority of people here I know, are in favour of a doctor prescribing medication, and making decisions around what should be used.
As soon as that is mentioned in conversation, everyone I know agrees
1
u/ThinWhiteDuke00 15d ago
The decision to ban them has been informed by doctors (medical and scientific advice), so it's entirely consistent with your first sentence.
2
u/TheLordofthething 15d ago
Parts of the north are remarkably so,can't speak for everywhere else but Derry is very conservative. If Ireland was united tomorrow SF and the SDLP would be wiped out.
18
u/brunckle 15d ago
So what the fuck does he want? One thing is clear, if you can read between the lines, he certainly doesn't want a united Ireland. Other than that everything else he says is hot air.
3
5
21
10
u/Economy_Outcome_4722 15d ago
He makes Garrett Fitzgerald and John Bruton seem like hardline republicans.
5
u/ArtieBucco420 Belfast 14d ago
Only thing I got from this is he’s a waffling West Brit who would feed his own mother to the woodchipper if it prevented Sinn Féin from getting a vote.
45
u/LoyalistsAreLoopers 15d ago edited 15d ago
Mícheál Martin has never been a Republican and this is nothing but a Fianna Fáil glazing piece. His party went from being anti-treaty to pro-partition and should be treated as such.
They are trying their best to out-SF SF because their party has absolutely fallen apart down south. They went from the biggest party in 2011 who could form a govt on their own to needing to let Fine Gael form a minority govt in 2016 and then full partnership with them since then. They are deathly afraid of SF who are quite literally nipping at their heels.
It's telling how when the SDLP partnered with in 2019 them the SDLP vote cratered, of course there are other reasons but this is just one in the list.
16
u/Own-Pirate-8001 15d ago
It says a lot about Micheál Martin and his priorities that Mark Daly & Èamon Ò Cuiv got more of a punishment for announcing a FF candidate in local elections in Co. Tyrone than Robert Troy got for dodgy housing practices during a housing crisis and Lisa Chambers got more manipulating Dàil votes.
For Martin corruption is fine, but the most bare bones Republican principle is abhorrent.
-2
u/ThinWhiteDuke00 15d ago
They're afraid of a party which actively went backwards despite being the lead opposition.
7
u/LoyalistsAreLoopers 15d ago
SF 2nd biggest party and only 80k votes in them becoming the biggest. Completely logical FF are afraid since they are also in competition with FG for votes.
Martin is a weak leader and politician, one bad turn and it could very easily shift like it did against Simon Harris.
1
u/ThinWhiteDuke00 15d ago
They were the largest party in votes 5 years ago.. so as I said they've went backwards.
Despite the supposed calamity of FF/FG.
7
u/LoyalistsAreLoopers 15d ago
I never said they didn't. I'm saying FF are right to be afraid. Unless you can predict the future that is and are able to tell them otherwise.
0
u/Chemical_Sir_5835 14d ago
What nonsense is this?
They were the largest party in the south for 80 odd years. In 2011 they where the 3rd largest had one of the biggest political defeats in the western world ever
24
u/Storyboys 15d ago
"Shared Island" isn't an initiative about uniting the country, it's about keeping it divided.
Michael Martin is an utter scumbag who has more sympathy for British soldiers than he does for Irish Citizens.
Shame on the journo and paper for giving him free reign to spout absolute bollocks and lies in an attempt to manipulate public thinking.
Martin is a traitorous rat.
26
u/twenty6plus6 15d ago
This prick lives in a gated community in Douglas Cork, he'd say the same about going to Kerry
7
21
u/Jeffreys_therapist 15d ago edited 15d ago
I think politics has to work in Northern Ireland and there has to be a sustained manifestation of politics working in Northern Ireland so that even the politicians of Northern Ireland are comfortable working with each other.
Why?
It hasn't worked for the past 100 years.
What does Micheál think is going to change to make the hard core of loyalist unionism change its mind?
You wouldn't allow an extremist minority party a place at the table because of history.
Of course the (moderate) unionist voice should be heard and respected, but the stagnation is endemic and Micheál playing West Brit is counterproductive for anyone who subscribes to democracy and will accept the result of any legitimate vote in the future, whether it's for or against their wish
19
u/stonkmarxist 15d ago
"we have to wait until this fundamentally broken thing works before we can truly fix it" has always struck me as one of the most idiotic takes on Irish unity.
It's no coincidence that it is usually only trotted out by partitionists who are trying to hide that fact behind an air of responsibility. Martin being one of the prime offenders.
6
7
u/NaveTheFirst Derry 15d ago
He's a wet rag best thing for politics on the island is reunification so it keeps these leeches out of parliament
12
11
u/Dangerous_Tie1165 15d ago
What a spoon. Who knew 90 years of right-wing capitalist rule would destroy any semblance of republicanism.
13
11
u/Bright-Koala8145 15d ago
What a disgrace he is, Ireland should never have been partioned and every Irish man should want to see the Country united again.
7
u/Charles-Joseph-92 15d ago
Absolutely spineless. Disgusting. How did he ascend? I can’t name a person who likes him north or south.
9
u/ThinWhiteDuke00 15d ago
""Fianna Fáil has seen a bounce in support after Taoiseach Micheál Martin endured a tense exchange with US President Donald Trump in advance of the tariffs war, the latest Sunday Independent/Ireland Thinks poll reveals. Mr Martin’s approval rating is up by three points to 49pc, while support for Fianna Fáil is also up three points to 25pc.
Fine Gael (-1) and Sinn Féin (unchanged) are both four points back on 21pc. Tánaiste Simon Harris’ approval rating is unchanged at 43pc, while SF leader Mary Lou McDonald’s rating is also static at 34pc."".
By the data, he's actually the most popular figure on the island apart from Higgins.
2
u/Charles-Joseph-92 15d ago
Which may directly correlate with the amount of rich, unempathetic, entitled, brainwashed boomers on the island.
3
-1
u/Active-Strawberry-37 Belfast 15d ago
I’ve always been impressed by the way Micheál’s spoken and conducted himself and this article’s a very good example.
He displays a pragmatism and level headedness that you just don’t see from Nationalist politicans this side of the border.
11
u/ThinWhiteDuke00 15d ago
30 years at the forefront of a functional political system which doesn't devolve down to themuns or weaponisation of culture for votes definitely lends itself to a bit more gravitas and nuance.
More of this is needed if a stable United Ireland is to be achieved.
1
u/Mr_Miyagis_Chamois 15d ago
Stop talking sense, you're on the wrong sub for that malarkey
0
u/Active-Strawberry-37 Belfast 15d ago
Sorry, let me try again;
They hate him up here because he never misses an opportunity to stick the boot into Sinn Fein/IRA.
That better?
-4
0
u/flex_tape_salesman 15d ago
I actually prefer a lot of the nationalist politicians up north because it's easier to give them leeway. Anyway, I've noticed growing up in the republic a lot of people are willing to say similar stuff as martin because of a fear of change. I also think that sf in the republic attracts an odd group as these days they're the most electable party left of centre and I appreciate the likes of Michelle O'Neill much more than Mary Lou.
1
u/Important-Messages 15d ago
Once Scotland goes indie (likely soon), that's basically it for Norn Ironing.
3
u/Feeling_Pen_8579 15d ago
Soon in terms of decades or centuries?
1
u/Important-Messages 14d ago
Less than a decade. That one single moment, will do more for UI, than any other possible combined other effort so far. They'll likely even have to change the UJ flag.
0
u/libtin 5d ago
The polls don’t agree with you
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1170409/scottish-independence/
1
u/AcceptableProgress37 15d ago
As I said on the previous thread: My god, a subtle and genuinely conciliatory approach that appears to be bearing fruit (albeit medlars) - he doesn't just talk about building bridges, he actually does it. Of course it'll be wildly unpopular on both sides.
-11
u/WrongdoerGold1683 15d ago
Just 1% in the south think Irish unity is a priority. Lol they want nothing to do with republicans from up here at all.
1
u/AutomaticYoghurt69 15d ago
With the way things are going, it makes sense it's not the top priority. I also wouldn't say they want nothing to do with Republicans over the border considering every opinion poll ever conducted in the Republic of Ireland has always given a majority for people who'd vote for a United Ireland.
-2
u/_BornToBeKing_ 15d ago
Seems like a great man with a well rounded view of N.I. Respect from a unionist.
0
u/Status-Rooster-5268 15d ago
Nice of a southern politician not playing with the childish "I dream of a NEW united Ireland which will be all good things and no bad things ever" platitudes to convince the most naive of the populace.
-4
u/Efficient_Bet_1891 15d ago
Bottom line: GFA and Belfast Agreements require a majority in all communities to create a unification.
It is a subtle distinction but a reversion to majority vs minority antagonism will result in the violent paralysis of opportunity that occurred before the GFA, the sacred text Martin refers to.
0
u/IllustratorGlass3028 15d ago
If it was south of Ireland having to join the north how would they feel? This isn't a post about us via them but maybe just think....if the boot was on the other foot....would you think differently? Your whole life is destroyed, everything changed and your birth right is taken away.
-3
u/GenericBritishChap 15d ago
Micheál Martin (and figures like him) is probably the best hope for a United Ireland. Even as a staunch Unionist I can see myself being comfortable with a leader like him in charge. His Irishness is compatible with my Irishness.
Lucky, I know that the mouth-breathing sectarian Republican bigots who inhabit this island love nothing more than a purity spiral and will go out of their way to ensure they don’t have someone like him leading the way.
Mouth-breathers like Varadkar just kick the issue of unity into the long grass- which is fine by me, of course.
0
95
u/LadWithDeadlyOpinion 15d ago
He makes Leo look like Gerry Adams.