Blog

Unionism – A discussion

Periodically the thoughts of some unionists turn to unity, not of Ireland, but of unionism. From a recognition of a loss of power, a loss of control and, to some degree, a loss of political direction comes a desire to gather those of like mind ever closer together. With that desire comes an overwhelming belief that individual political endeavour “splits” the vote and if only every unionist supported every unionist candidate outcomes would be better, at least in the sense of controlling the political narrative.

Such thoughts of course require the unionist population to abandon all hope of expansive, forward thinking, modern political agendas in return for universally accepting the political agendas of the ideologically pure. Those who question science, believe in alternative facts, harken back to a misremembered past, will not moderate their views. A manifesto, if it moves beyond symbolism, will be their manifesto.

Circling the wagons around a concept of the union defined only by the flag and a misremembered glorious era of empire is the quickest way to lose what those in leadership say they value most, the union itself. Like it or not people, including unionists, are free to make political decisions which improve their lives and the future of their children.

It is in this that collective unionism follows a misguided and ultimately self-defeating strategy. The idea that the constitutional position should be maintained is entirely valid and one I agree with, but the constitutional position is not on the ballot in any forthcoming election and barring a significant change in public opinion won’t be. What is on the ballot is real politics, an area that political unionism either fails to engage with or internally holds diametrically opposed positions. In such circumstances the emphasis becomes “unionist unity” around the constitutional question.

A recent example of this has been the furore over comments by Leo Varadkar that a Reform government would bring a United Ireland ever closer. His comment was met with a tsunami of condemnation directed at him and denigrating his comments. Nowhere did I read of a unionist leader questioning the foundation of his assertion, simply put, will people support the Union under every variation of political ideology? Do the values of those in Government make any difference to those who live within the society they create? Does the fact that Reform cloak their actions in a Union flag excuse those values no matter how unpalatable?

Some in unionism take comfort in the fact that it is likely that a referendum, held now, would not result in a United Ireland. A position I agree with but with a reservation. Under the current process a referendum won’t be held now but if the conditions were met this could only have come about through a significant change in public opinion. The most recent “shock” to the status quo came with the Brexit result, it did not dramatically change the level of support for a United Ireland. While it’s entirely possible that such a dramatic change could come about because of one cataclysmic political event it is more likely that change will be gradual and as a result of multiple events creating small, sometimes imperceptible, shifts in public opinion.

Irrespective of whether a single event or a series of small changes Unionism resolutely refuses to consider the possibility that public opinion will shift and refuses to engage with the concept that the genesis of such changes occurs in the present. This failure to recognise risks represents a grave threat to the very thing unionists purport to want to protect.

There will be those who meet with generosity of spirit to discuss the unity of unionism, resolutely avoiding raising anything of any consequence lest they inadvertently create a point of friction. These are dry meetings in many ways, no policy, no vision, not a single understanding of the changing world outside the bubble. Certainly no one with the courage to challenge the prevailing narrative is likely to be included.

Those who believe in creating a better society with free political thought to debate, discuss and propose a better way forward risk being labelled as Lundy’s and ostracised.

Maintaining the union depends on recognising the threats, raising our heads, scanning the horizon and identifying the short-, medium- and long-term actions needed to improve the quality of life of all of our citizens. For those whose only interest is self-interest predicated on inaction and slogans this task is beyond them. A unionism that unites behind a single constitutional point, ignoring the vast array of societal issues that define the political issues which citizens are regularly invited to vote upon, is a unionism that has abandoned politics for the comfort blanket of groupthink.

Cold War Reset

It’s a coup. We usually envisage such events as sudden, militaristic regime changes in a far off nations, usually considered unstable. Tanks rolling through the gates of a Presidential palace, troops seizing a tv station. But some coups are longer in the making.

The greater the constitutional safeguards, the greater the general stability, the longer and more insidious is the coup. The drafters of the US Constitution, wary of power being vested in a single monarch, established three branches of government executive, judicial and legislative to protect the Republic. This represented a system of checks and balances, a separation of powers, a desire to prevent any one individual or group from taking complete control.

For nearly 250 years the Constitution served its intended purpose. To take total power in the US required the seizing of all three pillars of Government. Yet that is the situation that exists today, a collaborative project between those acting on behalf of foreign powers, right-wing ideologues and some of the richest men in the world.

While the attempt to overthrow the election result on January 6th 2021 failed it created an opportunity for deeper preparation for the consequences of the 2024 election. Project 2025 became the template, an understanding by those who would take power that the complete dismantling of the checks and balances must be initiated with undue haste.

The creation of a strike force capable of entering every government agency and disrupting them from day 1 led to the creation of DOGE, a private tech army tasked with undermining every facet of the existing administration. By its actions in programs such as USAID the immediate consequences include hunger and disease proliferation in the poorest countries in the world.

The Congress is ineffective and under MAGA control, the Senate has too many Democrats blind to the threat, too frightened to stand up to the bully or too dependent on financial support from the same sources as Trump. The White House has turned its gaze on the judges who still try to apply the law with a ferocity that concerns even the right-wing members of the Supreme Court.

There’s no point at which a coup slows down or stops, every action is determined by the need to protect those responsible, that means greater control, more restrictions, the loss of freedom. Controlling the sources of information, silencing those who try to use any remaining legal routes to challenge, declaring emergencies to expand authoritarian rule.

Trump and those around him look with envy upon the regimes of Xi Jinping and Putin. Those same regimes need the US to be on the same trajectory to remove any obstacle to their expansive plans. Putin mistimed his invasion of Ukraine, Trump was supposed to be back in the White House and Kyiv unprotected but impatience or economic reality made him invade when he did. Now he gets to reset his objectives. Xi Jinping values a US Government with no interest in supporting Taiwan, or South Korea, or Japan. In return for not interfering in others ambitions Trump gets to cast his gaze on Canada and Greenland.

Why would Greenland be of such interest, not to Trump, but to those who direct him? A massive land of ice a mile deep becomes a massive land of opportunity when the ice melts. To do that requires the end of initiatives to address climate change and yes “drill baby drill”. This coup will decimate North America and, if it beds in, will have catastrophic consequences across the world. There can be no diplomacy with those who have taken control, even to try will be seen for what it is, a sign of weakness.

Introduction

Yesterday Donald Trump was reinstalled as the President of the United States of America and there are dystopian consequences for the world today and the world our children and grandchildren will inherit.

We weren’t meeting the challenges with decarbonising our energy sector before Trump returned, now with his “drill, baby, drill” mantra and opposition to tackling climate change we face all of the worse impact projections in a far shorter timescale.

Whatever social justice advances the USA has made in the past 50 years now seem to be on the verge of regression, the demand amongst the populist driven political class will be to follow that path.

Meeting this challenge means not following the apocalyptic path being trod by the Trump world with the focus on greater and greater wealth being funnelled into the accounts of a smaller and smaller number of people. Instead we must chart a new path, a path where the greater good is measured not in the wealth of a few but in the well-being of the many. A path where selflessness replaces selfishness.

What if we thought of societal development less in terms of what we gain for ourselves but more in terms of what changes would benefit future generations? What if, by our actions, we prepared stronger foundations upon which our children and grandchildren will build the society they develop? What if by giving a little, changing a little, investing a little we made their lives easier when faced with the challenges they will face? Wouldn’t that be worth doing, wouldn’t that be worth talking about.

The next generation

There are many challenges facing us now or coming in the future for the next generations to address which can be alleviated by action now. Actions however have a demand for resources which are not always available. We do not have the finances to make all of the changes we want to, we do not have the manpower across many sectors to implement the changes needed and we do not always have the time to see the ultimate results of our actions.

None of these mean we should do nothing, instead our actions should be driven by implementing those changes which have the greatest impact in the shortest time at the lowest cost. Delaying anything, construction, treatment, learning or transformation means higher costs and less impact over a far longer time period.

What follows are a series of suggestions, actions that mean change, change that is not focussed simply on today’s needs but the needs of future generations