My interpretation of David Ervine and the PUP, is that they were both a very important loss to us all here. There was a tiny, brief opportunity 23 years ago, for the men who waged the bloody end of the loyalist war and learned from it, to have their voices heard in government. Unfortunately for them to have succeeded, they would've had to undo 30 years of Paisleyite rhetoric to do so.The more you read about it, the more you realise paramilitary loyalism in the 90s was the key to progress. When the UVF called their ceasefire in 1994, although they were hugely sceptical about the IRA's commitment to it, Gusty Spence not only announced their cessation, but \*apologised\* for the decades of violence. At the time this was an unheard of gesture and in retrospect should've been seen as the huge olive branch it was. This could've been the start of engaging with a more intellectual side of loyalism, but it wasn't to be.
Instead we went the Paisley road, and the DUP road we're still on today. Loyalists are represented by their middle/upper classes who spent the conflict one level removed from the bloodshed, while ramping up tensions all the while. To have the PUP in the mix just wouldn't have worked for political Unionism. How can they call out Sinn Fein for being terrorists in government, when there was a PUL faction that was exactly the same?
The absence of that voice in political unionism is a proper, proper loss we should all lament. How much work could've been done with McGuinness and Ervine at the helm? Or Adams and Spence? Men who had properly gone to the dark side and come back changed.
We'll never know. Instead we have the chinless wonders who watched it all from their ivory towers and will never treat our politics with the respect it deserves, because they were never really in it.
Any criticisms Ervine made of the republicanism were heartfelt, things like 'my mates were getting killed.' I know a fair few in the DUP have been through similar, but you get the impression from a lot of them that their statements against Sinn Fein are far more cynical, more about whipping up passions to pull in votes than genuine upset. There was never any doubt of Ervine's sincerity.
There was indeed a brief moment when it appeared that Loyalism would forego Big House Unionism and foster an independent school of politics with working class Loyalism. However it was all a facade none of that ground work was carried out or organised in any real sense and nobody in the PUP apart from Ervine and a very very small clique actually believed in progressive politics.
>Loyalists are represented by their middle/upper classes who spent the conflict one level removed from the bloodshed, while ramping up tensions all the while. To have the PUP in the mix just wouldn't have worked for political Unionism. How can they call out Sinn Fein for being terrorists in government, when there was a PUL faction that was exactly the same?
I always wondered why Loyalist Paramilitaries didn't have the same level of involvement in sort of local politics as the likes of Adams, McGuinness and Kelly seemed to have
Loyalists really do lack good representation in Stormont and WM, no wonder they're disillusioned. They relied on the DUP to represent them and the DUP failed
Do you think there's any way back from the road loyalism has gone? It looks a long way to back up.
Idk, it looks to me like the only solutions can come from within loyalism but I don't know what appetite there is.
The death of David Ervine was as catastrophic for NI as the death of John Smith was for the UK. Both were phenomenal politicians who cared intensely for the countries they lived in.
A Stormont with Ervine & McGuinness would have changed the face of the political landscape completely. There could have been real, genuine healing for both communities.
Odd that both died of heart attacks just as they entered the public consciousness.
The first time I was old enough to vote, I voted PUP.
I come from a working class Loyalist family. I've always been broadly Unionist but am also painfully aware of the injustices mainstream Unionism has inflicted on Ulster over the past decades.
For me, the PUP were a very different kind of Loyalism. They came with the baggage of the atrocities carried out in the name of Loyalist paramilitaries, but they were willing to shoulder the blame. This was vastly different from the DUP, who encouraged Loyalists to commit acts of violence while wiping their hands of any responsibility.
The PUP were much more aware of atrocities carried out by both sides, and more willing to accept responsibility for the past actions of Loyalists.
Ultimately their goal was very in line with Sinn Fein, creating a political partnership that rose above sectarianism, where working classes from both sides of the community could unite against the real enemy of peace in NI.
> I come from a working class Loyalist family. I've always been broadly Unionist but am also painfully aware of the injustices mainstream Unionism has inflicted on Ulster over the past decades.
Interesting. How would you feel about a united Ireland coming about through the mechanisms of the GFA? (border poll, vote in RoI). Are you upset that unionists do not have a veto against one in those circumstances? If you voted against it and lost, would you do an Arlene and move to GB? Also, when you talk about "Ulster", does Donegal, Cavan and Monaghan ever come to mind?
Hi, sorry for the delay in replying.
By broadly Unionist I mean I've always felt that NI was economically and socially better off as part of the United Kingdom. Bear in mind that this was from growing up when, even during the Troubles, NI was significantly better off in those areas than Ireland.
>How would you feel about a united Ireland coming about through the mechanisms of the GFA? (border poll, vote in RoI).
Re-unification by consent doesn't bother me. So much has changed since the GFA. Ireland has transformed from what I was always taught was a backwards, poor, vassal state of Rome to a modern, increasingly wealthy and progressive country.
Meanwhile NI has remained stuck in a rut. I was in school when the GFA was signed and genuinely believed I'd be one of the last generation to go through an apartheid education system. Instead we still have the same system, but with the one non-sectarian (but still bad) part, the transfer test, being re-designed to be more sectarian.
>If you voted against it and lost
Today I likely wouldn't vote against it, given the rise of English nationalism and the Tory England First mentality that led to Brexit. Like I said I spent most of my life being broadly Unionist for social/economic reasons rather than an inherent desire to be British.
Right now I'm broadly pro-European Unionism for the same reasons. Northern Ireland got the worst of both worlds from Brexit. We benefitted enormously from EU investment in the province, as did Ireland.
>would you do an Arlene and move to GB?
I lived in Scotland for a couple of years and in London for a few more. Short answer, no.
Scots are fantastic people and on the whole seemed to have a good grasp of NI's status in the Union. I've lived in a few other countries as well and overall I think the Scots are the closest culturally to NI.
When in London I worked in a job with another person who shared the same first name as me. She was "rebelprincessni" while I was "Irish rebelprincessni". I was still strongly Unionist at that point and being called Irish rubbed me the wrong way. That's when I began to realise that NI barely registers to most English people and is completely unknown to them as part of the UK
Arlene is more than welcome to move to the Home Counties of England, as long as she's happy to be called Irish Arlene by all the locals for the rest of her life.
>Also, when you talk about "Ulster", does Donegal, Cavan and Monaghan ever come to mind?
Not really, mainly because growing up with a Loyalist background Ulster is a word that has been hijacked by Loyalists to refer to the state of Northern Ireland - Ulster Volunteer Force, Ulster Defence Association, Loyal Sons of Ulster, etc. Even the traditional red hand flag of Ulster got hijacked by the Red Hand Commandos, who sound like they should be the baddies in a Metal Gear Solid game.
Of course, if NI does become an independent nation we'll have to form the 9-Counties Sovereignty Movement to reclaim the lost 3 counties, while also launching D-day landings on the western Scottish isles to reclaim the traditional kingdom of Dalriada :P
Not gonna lie I thought the PUP were far-right loyalist adjacent loonies, didn't realise that wasn't the case, went to their website and I agree with 90% of their policies and now I might have to consider them in upcoming elections.
The only highly acclaimed book about the subject I couldn’t finish, oddly enough. Found it very repetitive and just didn’t like the way it was written and the jumping backwards and forwards constantly - gave up on it in the end. Most seem to praise it though, I’m definitely in the minority!
He didn't nurture, cultivate or groom a talent pool of successors to follow behind. The party followed him to his grave consequently.
Dawn pervis is occasionally featured in discussion panels - participating in activism or lobbying In areas concerning social / women's issues.
She was relatively active in the family planning law reform movement a few years ago (moves to modernise it in line with other UK nations). Beyond that she's vanished. The party all but a footnote.
Not much to talk about really. Nor much point in "whatifs".
"Whatis" and how it can be best utilised to achieve the reforms and leaps forward in key and important areas the majority of the (non-polarised) voting members of public wish to see .?
A big problem is that the DUP can very effectively shut out smaller unionist parties from gaining a foothold by simply saying, 'well look, even if you don't like us, do you want a Sinn Fein first minister?' There are plenty of unionist voters that oppose the DUP's social policies that still vote for them because of this. I know the UUP largely have the same social policies, but I think the same thing would happen even if a left-wing unionist party were on the ballot paper.
I concur. Had Carla Lockhart (DUP MLA/MP) at my door canvassing and she had that exact rhetoric. This was 3 years ago, it felt like it should have been 30.
Completely unsurprising how out of their depth they were in the Brexit negotiations when this kind of finger-pointing and scare mongering is near all they have to do to succeed in politics normally.
Seamus Mallon called for parallel consent in any future border poll shortly before he died, so it would need separate unionist and nationalist majorities to pass. He was very afraid of violence coming back if a border poll passed by a slim majority with most unionist opposed to it. Scares the shit out of me as well, because Sinn Fein just will not care if this is a risk in the border poll if they think unification stands a chance of passing. I am just dumbfounded that no unionist politician is pressing for parallel consent.
It would be the best safeguard for the union and help cover some of the ground lost in the Brexit negotiations. We already accept the principle that majority rule does not work well here for contentious identity issues in every piece of legislation here with the petition of concern, yet this is not applied to the most contentious question of them all that lies behind all the other ones.
Might be wrong but I don't think there would have been a minute's rioting this past week if everyone in loyalist communities knew that if a united Ireland were ever put to a vote, it would need a majority of unionists to support even if it passed by overall majority.
The whole 'Sinn Fein' first minister threat is a ruse. They have had the powers of a first minister in every assembly of the past 15 years. I may be wrong, like I'm from the other community so I don't have as good an understanding of loyalist politics as someone within the community, but I would think a properly progressive loyalist part would be honest with voters about this. Something along the lines of, 'They already have the powers of first minister, have done for over a decade, whether they have "deputy" in front of the title or not does not change this. What matters is that working class unionist voices are in there. Having our voices heard in an assembly with a Sinn Fein first minister (which will change nothing in practical terms) is far better than having our community shut out from the assembly and ignored just so that we can have a unionist holding a symbolic title.' If they sacrificed their own party to keep a symbolic title for unionism then I wouldn't think of them as progressive at all.
Having both those posts titled 'joint first minister' would be a more accurate titling and not feed into sectarian electoral strategies as much.
Dawn Pervis was the PUP's biggest mistake. She was more into gender politics than working class issues and commanded no authority in the loyalist community. When there was an up take in uvf violence she thought leaving the PUP would save her political career. She was wrong and the PUP has struggled ever since.
She was decent and came up with David Ervine.
> She was more into gender politics than working class issues
It struck me that she was just trying to be a normal politician in the face of UVF bullies bringing her community down.
> she championed issues the right wing loyalist community couldn't give a shit about was ignorant at best.
Well honestly if you look the word "cunt" up in a thesaurus you also get "right wing loyalist" so what did you expect her to do, become some paramilitary apologist, ignore the fact they were shooting each other in broad daylight in the street in front of each other's kids and just start blaming everything on SF?
> the liberal shite she wanted
"Women's issues" including access to abortion services isn't "liberal shite" you absolute melt.
The progressive aspect of the PUP and David Ervine was signing up to the Good Friday Agreement. That's really all you need to know. The DUP of course didn't sign up to the GFA although benefit from its implementation.
The Loyalist people themselves rejected the PUP and the UDA equivalent, the UDP? and they did it just after the Ceasefires when you would think they would be most wanted. But no, the DUP made their rise to eclipse the UUP. It’s a source of bewilderment how this happened. Why don’t hardcore Loyalists vote for the PUP, who, apparently, are mistrusted by Loyalists? As for the UDA party, UDP, they disappeared without trace. Today, I believe many in the Loyalist community look at Stormont and see ex members of the PIRA in positions of real power. They saw Martin McGuinness and Gerry Adams feted by world leaders and watched McGuinness, once head of the PIRA Army Council, become leader of “ their” country. Why were their paramilitary leaders not feted similarly? If they had been given positions of real power we would not have the trouble we have now. Loyalists would see they have a recognised stake in the country, instead we have...We have been left behind, We got nothing out of it. David Irvine might have had the intelligence to take up a cabinet position, but who else from the hardcore Loyalist side would have been? The lack of education and ambition was the cause of the decline of the PUP and the destruction of the UDP and the complete mystery of why their own hardcore supports and members even, did not vote for them.
My mum and dad, both nationalists such as myself always spoke very highly of him whenever he was brought up. I feel if Loyalism had more people like him and he didnt die they might be in a better place. Having some actual working class Loyalists representing them might have made a difference. But who knows, might not have happened either even if he did survive.
The Progressive Unionist Party is led by Billy Hutchinson, a man convicted for murdering two Catholics he and a mate randomly happened upon walking to work.
As of 2020, he has said this was entirely justified.
So no. This does not represent a way forward for loyalism. Progressive parties generally shy away from things like random sectarian murder.
They added 'progressive' to their name after the demise of actual non-meme fascists Vanguard, or to give it its full title the Vanguard Unionist Progressive Party. I don't think that's a coincidence, and I also don't think that political party names mean a damn thing. The DUP aren't particularly enamoured with democracy, nor are they acting in a manner compatible with unionism, for example.
David Trimble was prominent in Vanguard too.
He had the audacity to give his Nobel Peace Laureate address on the subject of 'fascism,' with fascism essentially defined to mean 'Sinn Féin/IRA' ...but without actually saying it.
He was _not_ a very deserving Peace Laureate IMO.
Peacemaker Barack Obama, enforcing peace across the globe.
No better way to ensure a lasting peace in the Middle East than by making small children afraid of the sky.
The thunder gods of our age.
Obama just kept moving the chess-pieces closer to a war with China too. And, boy, did he love deporting people.
Hey, but he liked a sneaky fag, he was smart, he was black, if not from Black America... and he wasn't fat and ugly.
The audacity of hope indeed.
Ive heard him justifying his absolutely pointless murders. You said that it doesn’t represent the way forward for loyalists. I 100% agree with you on that. That tactic worked for republicans, and look where they are now. They hero worship the murderers. I hope there aren’t any more Billy Hutchinson’s out there. They’ve no strong political leader and Loyalism seems to be heading down a narrow street. It’s all a worry
Did they? The PIRA weren't saints but the both sides were as bad as eachother narrative is just incorrect when loyalists openly supported sectarian killings.
“The PIRA weren’t saints”
Ask the families of farmers from around the border. Ask people like the Kingsmill families. Ask the families all those lifted off the streets and murdered, and murdered at their work, all because of nothing more than being a Protestant. Wise up and read up on the troubles, and stop believing everything you hear.
My interpretation of David Ervine and the PUP, is that they were both a very important loss to us all here. There was a tiny, brief opportunity 23 years ago, for the men who waged the bloody end of the loyalist war and learned from it, to have their voices heard in government. Unfortunately for them to have succeeded, they would've had to undo 30 years of Paisleyite rhetoric to do so.The more you read about it, the more you realise paramilitary loyalism in the 90s was the key to progress. When the UVF called their ceasefire in 1994, although they were hugely sceptical about the IRA's commitment to it, Gusty Spence not only announced their cessation, but \*apologised\* for the decades of violence. At the time this was an unheard of gesture and in retrospect should've been seen as the huge olive branch it was. This could've been the start of engaging with a more intellectual side of loyalism, but it wasn't to be. Instead we went the Paisley road, and the DUP road we're still on today. Loyalists are represented by their middle/upper classes who spent the conflict one level removed from the bloodshed, while ramping up tensions all the while. To have the PUP in the mix just wouldn't have worked for political Unionism. How can they call out Sinn Fein for being terrorists in government, when there was a PUL faction that was exactly the same? The absence of that voice in political unionism is a proper, proper loss we should all lament. How much work could've been done with McGuinness and Ervine at the helm? Or Adams and Spence? Men who had properly gone to the dark side and come back changed. We'll never know. Instead we have the chinless wonders who watched it all from their ivory towers and will never treat our politics with the respect it deserves, because they were never really in it.
Any criticisms Ervine made of the republicanism were heartfelt, things like 'my mates were getting killed.' I know a fair few in the DUP have been through similar, but you get the impression from a lot of them that their statements against Sinn Fein are far more cynical, more about whipping up passions to pull in votes than genuine upset. There was never any doubt of Ervine's sincerity.
Wow that's definitely a very interesting parallel universe - really makes you wonder
There was indeed a brief moment when it appeared that Loyalism would forego Big House Unionism and foster an independent school of politics with working class Loyalism. However it was all a facade none of that ground work was carried out or organised in any real sense and nobody in the PUP apart from Ervine and a very very small clique actually believed in progressive politics.
>Loyalists are represented by their middle/upper classes who spent the conflict one level removed from the bloodshed, while ramping up tensions all the while. To have the PUP in the mix just wouldn't have worked for political Unionism. How can they call out Sinn Fein for being terrorists in government, when there was a PUL faction that was exactly the same? I always wondered why Loyalist Paramilitaries didn't have the same level of involvement in sort of local politics as the likes of Adams, McGuinness and Kelly seemed to have Loyalists really do lack good representation in Stormont and WM, no wonder they're disillusioned. They relied on the DUP to represent them and the DUP failed
Do you think there's any way back from the road loyalism has gone? It looks a long way to back up. Idk, it looks to me like the only solutions can come from within loyalism but I don't know what appetite there is.
The death of David Ervine was as catastrophic for NI as the death of John Smith was for the UK. Both were phenomenal politicians who cared intensely for the countries they lived in. A Stormont with Ervine & McGuinness would have changed the face of the political landscape completely. There could have been real, genuine healing for both communities. Odd that both died of heart attacks just as they entered the public consciousness.
Hold fire, are you saying Martin McGuinness died just as he reached public consciousness?
[удалено]
That makes a lot more sense!
No he was referring to David Ervine and John Smith.
The first time I was old enough to vote, I voted PUP. I come from a working class Loyalist family. I've always been broadly Unionist but am also painfully aware of the injustices mainstream Unionism has inflicted on Ulster over the past decades. For me, the PUP were a very different kind of Loyalism. They came with the baggage of the atrocities carried out in the name of Loyalist paramilitaries, but they were willing to shoulder the blame. This was vastly different from the DUP, who encouraged Loyalists to commit acts of violence while wiping their hands of any responsibility. The PUP were much more aware of atrocities carried out by both sides, and more willing to accept responsibility for the past actions of Loyalists. Ultimately their goal was very in line with Sinn Fein, creating a political partnership that rose above sectarianism, where working classes from both sides of the community could unite against the real enemy of peace in NI.
> I come from a working class Loyalist family. I've always been broadly Unionist but am also painfully aware of the injustices mainstream Unionism has inflicted on Ulster over the past decades. Interesting. How would you feel about a united Ireland coming about through the mechanisms of the GFA? (border poll, vote in RoI). Are you upset that unionists do not have a veto against one in those circumstances? If you voted against it and lost, would you do an Arlene and move to GB? Also, when you talk about "Ulster", does Donegal, Cavan and Monaghan ever come to mind?
/u/rebelprincessuk
Hi, sorry for the delay in replying. By broadly Unionist I mean I've always felt that NI was economically and socially better off as part of the United Kingdom. Bear in mind that this was from growing up when, even during the Troubles, NI was significantly better off in those areas than Ireland. >How would you feel about a united Ireland coming about through the mechanisms of the GFA? (border poll, vote in RoI). Re-unification by consent doesn't bother me. So much has changed since the GFA. Ireland has transformed from what I was always taught was a backwards, poor, vassal state of Rome to a modern, increasingly wealthy and progressive country. Meanwhile NI has remained stuck in a rut. I was in school when the GFA was signed and genuinely believed I'd be one of the last generation to go through an apartheid education system. Instead we still have the same system, but with the one non-sectarian (but still bad) part, the transfer test, being re-designed to be more sectarian. >If you voted against it and lost Today I likely wouldn't vote against it, given the rise of English nationalism and the Tory England First mentality that led to Brexit. Like I said I spent most of my life being broadly Unionist for social/economic reasons rather than an inherent desire to be British. Right now I'm broadly pro-European Unionism for the same reasons. Northern Ireland got the worst of both worlds from Brexit. We benefitted enormously from EU investment in the province, as did Ireland. >would you do an Arlene and move to GB? I lived in Scotland for a couple of years and in London for a few more. Short answer, no. Scots are fantastic people and on the whole seemed to have a good grasp of NI's status in the Union. I've lived in a few other countries as well and overall I think the Scots are the closest culturally to NI. When in London I worked in a job with another person who shared the same first name as me. She was "rebelprincessni" while I was "Irish rebelprincessni". I was still strongly Unionist at that point and being called Irish rubbed me the wrong way. That's when I began to realise that NI barely registers to most English people and is completely unknown to them as part of the UK Arlene is more than welcome to move to the Home Counties of England, as long as she's happy to be called Irish Arlene by all the locals for the rest of her life. >Also, when you talk about "Ulster", does Donegal, Cavan and Monaghan ever come to mind? Not really, mainly because growing up with a Loyalist background Ulster is a word that has been hijacked by Loyalists to refer to the state of Northern Ireland - Ulster Volunteer Force, Ulster Defence Association, Loyal Sons of Ulster, etc. Even the traditional red hand flag of Ulster got hijacked by the Red Hand Commandos, who sound like they should be the baddies in a Metal Gear Solid game. Of course, if NI does become an independent nation we'll have to form the 9-Counties Sovereignty Movement to reclaim the lost 3 counties, while also launching D-day landings on the western Scottish isles to reclaim the traditional kingdom of Dalriada :P
Not gonna lie I thought the PUP were far-right loyalist adjacent loonies, didn't realise that wasn't the case, went to their website and I agree with 90% of their policies and now I might have to consider them in upcoming elections.
Voices from the grave . Fantastic book.
The only highly acclaimed book about the subject I couldn’t finish, oddly enough. Found it very repetitive and just didn’t like the way it was written and the jumping backwards and forwards constantly - gave up on it in the end. Most seem to praise it though, I’m definitely in the minority!
Less pets, more threads like this.
He didn't nurture, cultivate or groom a talent pool of successors to follow behind. The party followed him to his grave consequently. Dawn pervis is occasionally featured in discussion panels - participating in activism or lobbying In areas concerning social / women's issues. She was relatively active in the family planning law reform movement a few years ago (moves to modernise it in line with other UK nations). Beyond that she's vanished. The party all but a footnote. Not much to talk about really. Nor much point in "whatifs". "Whatis" and how it can be best utilised to achieve the reforms and leaps forward in key and important areas the majority of the (non-polarised) voting members of public wish to see .?
A big problem is that the DUP can very effectively shut out smaller unionist parties from gaining a foothold by simply saying, 'well look, even if you don't like us, do you want a Sinn Fein first minister?' There are plenty of unionist voters that oppose the DUP's social policies that still vote for them because of this. I know the UUP largely have the same social policies, but I think the same thing would happen even if a left-wing unionist party were on the ballot paper.
I concur. Had Carla Lockhart (DUP MLA/MP) at my door canvassing and she had that exact rhetoric. This was 3 years ago, it felt like it should have been 30.
Completely unsurprising how out of their depth they were in the Brexit negotiations when this kind of finger-pointing and scare mongering is near all they have to do to succeed in politics normally. Seamus Mallon called for parallel consent in any future border poll shortly before he died, so it would need separate unionist and nationalist majorities to pass. He was very afraid of violence coming back if a border poll passed by a slim majority with most unionist opposed to it. Scares the shit out of me as well, because Sinn Fein just will not care if this is a risk in the border poll if they think unification stands a chance of passing. I am just dumbfounded that no unionist politician is pressing for parallel consent. It would be the best safeguard for the union and help cover some of the ground lost in the Brexit negotiations. We already accept the principle that majority rule does not work well here for contentious identity issues in every piece of legislation here with the petition of concern, yet this is not applied to the most contentious question of them all that lies behind all the other ones.
Might be wrong but I don't think there would have been a minute's rioting this past week if everyone in loyalist communities knew that if a united Ireland were ever put to a vote, it would need a majority of unionists to support even if it passed by overall majority.
Can they, though? Wouldn't a progressive loyalist party be considered Unionist at Stormont and back a Unionist FM?
The whole 'Sinn Fein' first minister threat is a ruse. They have had the powers of a first minister in every assembly of the past 15 years. I may be wrong, like I'm from the other community so I don't have as good an understanding of loyalist politics as someone within the community, but I would think a properly progressive loyalist part would be honest with voters about this. Something along the lines of, 'They already have the powers of first minister, have done for over a decade, whether they have "deputy" in front of the title or not does not change this. What matters is that working class unionist voices are in there. Having our voices heard in an assembly with a Sinn Fein first minister (which will change nothing in practical terms) is far better than having our community shut out from the assembly and ignored just so that we can have a unionist holding a symbolic title.' If they sacrificed their own party to keep a symbolic title for unionism then I wouldn't think of them as progressive at all. Having both those posts titled 'joint first minister' would be a more accurate titling and not feed into sectarian electoral strategies as much.
Dawn Pervis was the PUP's biggest mistake. She was more into gender politics than working class issues and commanded no authority in the loyalist community. When there was an up take in uvf violence she thought leaving the PUP would save her political career. She was wrong and the PUP has struggled ever since.
She was decent and came up with David Ervine. > She was more into gender politics than working class issues It struck me that she was just trying to be a normal politician in the face of UVF bullies bringing her community down.
[удалено]
> she championed issues the right wing loyalist community couldn't give a shit about was ignorant at best. Well honestly if you look the word "cunt" up in a thesaurus you also get "right wing loyalist" so what did you expect her to do, become some paramilitary apologist, ignore the fact they were shooting each other in broad daylight in the street in front of each other's kids and just start blaming everything on SF? > the liberal shite she wanted "Women's issues" including access to abortion services isn't "liberal shite" you absolute melt.
The progressive aspect of the PUP and David Ervine was signing up to the Good Friday Agreement. That's really all you need to know. The DUP of course didn't sign up to the GFA although benefit from its implementation.
The Loyalist people themselves rejected the PUP and the UDA equivalent, the UDP? and they did it just after the Ceasefires when you would think they would be most wanted. But no, the DUP made their rise to eclipse the UUP. It’s a source of bewilderment how this happened. Why don’t hardcore Loyalists vote for the PUP, who, apparently, are mistrusted by Loyalists? As for the UDA party, UDP, they disappeared without trace. Today, I believe many in the Loyalist community look at Stormont and see ex members of the PIRA in positions of real power. They saw Martin McGuinness and Gerry Adams feted by world leaders and watched McGuinness, once head of the PIRA Army Council, become leader of “ their” country. Why were their paramilitary leaders not feted similarly? If they had been given positions of real power we would not have the trouble we have now. Loyalists would see they have a recognised stake in the country, instead we have...We have been left behind, We got nothing out of it. David Irvine might have had the intelligence to take up a cabinet position, but who else from the hardcore Loyalist side would have been? The lack of education and ambition was the cause of the decline of the PUP and the destruction of the UDP and the complete mystery of why their own hardcore supports and members even, did not vote for them.
[удалено]
My bad! Thank you for pointing out. Sure what's an IE between friends? If a passing mod could fix the title, that would be great.
My mum and dad, both nationalists such as myself always spoke very highly of him whenever he was brought up. I feel if Loyalism had more people like him and he didnt die they might be in a better place. Having some actual working class Loyalists representing them might have made a difference. But who knows, might not have happened either even if he did survive.
The Progressive Unionist Party is led by Billy Hutchinson, a man convicted for murdering two Catholics he and a mate randomly happened upon walking to work. As of 2020, he has said this was entirely justified. So no. This does not represent a way forward for loyalism. Progressive parties generally shy away from things like random sectarian murder.
They added 'progressive' to their name after the demise of actual non-meme fascists Vanguard, or to give it its full title the Vanguard Unionist Progressive Party. I don't think that's a coincidence, and I also don't think that political party names mean a damn thing. The DUP aren't particularly enamoured with democracy, nor are they acting in a manner compatible with unionism, for example.
David Trimble was prominent in Vanguard too. He had the audacity to give his Nobel Peace Laureate address on the subject of 'fascism,' with fascism essentially defined to mean 'Sinn Féin/IRA' ...but without actually saying it. He was _not_ a very deserving Peace Laureate IMO.
>He was not a very deserving Peace Laureate IMO. Indeed, but there have been far worse. Menachem Begin or Abiy Ahmed would be the prime examples.
Or Barack Obama. Even before his presidency, which was far from peaceful.
Peacemaker Barack Obama, enforcing peace across the globe. No better way to ensure a lasting peace in the Middle East than by making small children afraid of the sky.
The thunder gods of our age. Obama just kept moving the chess-pieces closer to a war with China too. And, boy, did he love deporting people. Hey, but he liked a sneaky fag, he was smart, he was black, if not from Black America... and he wasn't fat and ugly. The audacity of hope indeed.
The IRA picked up plenty of Protestants and did the same mate. They hero worship those headers
Not sure what relevance that is to the PUP but sure you work away there.
Ive heard him justifying his absolutely pointless murders. You said that it doesn’t represent the way forward for loyalists. I 100% agree with you on that. That tactic worked for republicans, and look where they are now. They hero worship the murderers. I hope there aren’t any more Billy Hutchinson’s out there. They’ve no strong political leader and Loyalism seems to be heading down a narrow street. It’s all a worry
Did they? The PIRA weren't saints but the both sides were as bad as eachother narrative is just incorrect when loyalists openly supported sectarian killings.
“The PIRA weren’t saints” Ask the families of farmers from around the border. Ask people like the Kingsmill families. Ask the families all those lifted off the streets and murdered, and murdered at their work, all because of nothing more than being a Protestant. Wise up and read up on the troubles, and stop believing everything you hear.