Why do popular media ascribe religious differences to conflicts such as in Northern Ireland and as with the Rohingya in Myanmar rather than describing them as the inter ethnic conflicts they actually are?
Leaving aside the Myanmar situation for the moment, do you realise that religion really was the only significant difference between the two sides of the conflict in Northern Island?This was a conflict that originated between different groupings in Britain, and spilled into Scotland and Ireland, which served as bastions for the warring parties. The conflict was resolved in Britain and Scotland through long and bloody conflict, and persisted in Northern Ireland for about 400 years.But it was a religio-political conflict from the start, not an ethnic one.Right up until the end, there were very few ways to tell a Unionist from a Republican except by looking at the religious/sectarian signifiers.Maybe choose a better example next time. Or better, reconsider your hypothesis.
What's the difference between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland?
They're two different countries for a start - the Republic of Ireland is a sovereign country, Northern Ireland is a part of a larger state - the UK.They use different currencies (Pound Sterling vs the Euro), have somewhat different forms of government (a parliamentary government in a constitutional republic vs a parliamentary government under a constitutional monarchy). One's a small EU country, the other's part of a much larger and more significant state economically, historically and geopolitically.That aside, there's not that much practical difference - for a foreign visitor, they'd mostly seem very similar in terms of culture and general appearance, for instance. Both countries use English as their primary language. Both are part of the EU (the Republic of Ireland as a member state, Northern Ireland as part of a member state). Their legal systems are also very similar, that of the Republic of Ireland being originally based on the UK system anyway. Standards of living are similar; they're both very much developed countries.Northern Ireland did have a pretty significant problem with low-intensity violent insurgency and civil unrest (that didn't extend to the Republic of Ireland to any great degree), but that's largely ended in recent decades. There are still legacies of that conflict present in the form of political difficulties and social divisions - whilst those issues involve the Republic of Ireland, they're largely isolated to and unique to Northern Ireland in practice.
How did the partition, the division of Northen Ireland and Southern Ireland?
I appreciate the difference in phrasing, but I believe my response to your previous question serves to answer this one as well. I think that nonpartisan websites will be few, while I did attempt to be impartial.
How did Watergate affect the American public's view of their government?
Americans have become cynical and have come to believe the worst about government, politics and politicians. Watergate heightened public contempt for professional politicians in general.
What are the differences between the Irish Catholics and the Roman Catholics?
Irish Catholic is mostly a presumption of 2 things: Irish ethnicity & Catholic religion. I suppose there’s no doctrinal difference between Irish Catholics & French Catholics or Mexican Catholics, etc. The main reason this term is used is to identify the difference between Scots-Irish or some sort of Protestant Irish & the Catholics. There are very different views between Catholics & Protestants about religion that have leaked over into culture & politics in the past & today.As far as that term being used in the United States, it is something to differentiate between the Protestants who settled here during a different immigration waves, under very different circumstances & having reactions from the mainly Protestant Americans who had already established themselves in the country. The church was a focal point of culture & community for the Catholic immigrants in the US. In a country largely hostile to Catholicism in general - to include Italian, German, Czech & Polish communities - Catholicism was something the Irish identified with as a binding tie. Catholicism was also a cultural reference point going back to the old country. As a then-part of the British Empire, Catholics were systematically persecuted & maintaining the religion was very much in line with the idea of sainthood - maintaining your beliefs in spite of overwhelming opposition & hatred.
When gay marriage was legalized in Ireland, what was the reaction of Irish public and media?
Ah, this is one of those occasions where I can say ‘Before you ask why, ask if…’What makes you think Ireland is more religious than the USA?We might have been in the past, but not now.Most Catholics are nominal Catholics: they might go to Mass occasionally, get married and have funerals in RC churches, but they don’t take the church’s rules personally when it comes to contraception and divorce and so on. And as you can see, the second largest grouping is the ‘no religion’ group.In general, we were delighted: we all know/have family members who are gay. A day after the referendum, somebody asked me had I noticed the amount of same-sex couples holding hands on the street. I hadn’t. But after that prompt, I did, and was delighted that the ‘love that dare not speak its name’ finally felt comfortable enough to do so. It was LOVELY.Let’s hope the same spirit rules for the abortion referendum next year. After all, 1 in 10 adult women have had an abortion abroad since 1980. Me being one of them.
Which ethnic group has had the greatest impact on the United States?
This one seems easy! Looking at this question in a reverse angle, I would say the British. Not that they have actively worked to better the nation (although many have), without them, I would argue that the US might not exist at least not in the way it currently does (taking out all the ongoing issues) therefore, they have had the greatest impact on the USA.It was the British that were revolted against creating the USA. Without the American Revolution the US might have (and most likely would have) eventually evolved into a nation but the founding principles were those of a revolutionary outlook. Freedom of speech, religion, the right to bear arms all were considered and brought forward directly as a result of the revolt against the British.Again, I will stress it may have all happened without revolution in some way but look at Canada, where there was no revolution and separated by nothing more than an imaginary line. It was a nation formed later (officially 1867) and there are different ideals ingrained in the fabric of society. It would be the closest example of what might have happened based on geography and founding societies (although there are differences)To sum it all up, without the British influence (both at times positive and negative) no other ethnic group has truly created the nation, many have shaped and impacted but formed it, only the British.