https://jonn.substack.com/p/some-num...ome-history-to
interesting comparisons in this article, but the graph of population sizes since 1800 absolutely astounded me
Printable View
https://jonn.substack.com/p/some-num...ome-history-to
interesting comparisons in this article, but the graph of population sizes since 1800 absolutely astounded me
Interesting article. One thing that astounded me though was this..
For the record, though: in 1841, the population of Ireland was 8.2 million, more than three times that of Scotland, and over half that of England. Then the potato blight came. There are still fewer people living on the island of Ireland than there were in 1841.
Yes it must have been horrifying, 1 million died and many more forced to leave.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Dwr
And the UK government response at the time is perhaps the most extreme example that we have never been in a union of equals.
Why is it unequal? We are not a federation so individual states have no say in making laws
Why is it unequal?Quote:
Originally Posted by Feedback
Because poor Irish catholics were treated with contempt and allowed to starve, die in vast numbers and in some cases emigrate to survive whilst the predominantly protestant voters and industrial workers of Britain were relatively protected.
Many historians have concluded that the direst effects of the famine were a result of deliberate government policy - not just neglect.
That is not to say that industrial or agricultural communities in Britain didn't suffer during bad harvests or during trade downturns - as was a regular occurrence during the 50 years leading up to the famine - but the Westminster government (and the monarchy) would never have allowed death and suffering on 'the mainland' to the extent they were willing to see in Ireland.
Nothing much to do with federations, individual states or influence over law making. In fact after the 1832 Reform Act (and after Catholic Emancipation) Irish people were as well represented (as in not well represented) in parliament as the English, Scots or Welsh - in some cases with a more relaxed property qualification for the vote. But they were not the people starving to death.
All subjects of Queen Vic - but some more equal than others!
what I found interesting is that London has roughly 3 x the population of Wales.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rjk
London has 73 elected MPs and 1 elected mayor.
Wales with a much smaller population has 40 elected MPs and 60 elected Members of the Senedd. A bit over the top or what.
You think London should have more influence?Quote:
Originally Posted by lisvaneblue
Quote:
Originally Posted by lisvaneblue
I agree that constituencies should be more equal in terms of population (Chartist demand from the 1830s) but there must be some recognition of geography as well. No doubt the next boundary changes will move seats from the north and west to the south and east!
However, that is only part of the picture. In 2019 it took:
864,743 to elect the lone Green MP
642,303 votes for zero Brexit Party MPs
334,122 to elect each Liberal Democrat
50,817 to elect each Labour MP
38,300 votes to elect each Conservative MP
38,316 to elect each Plaid Cymru MP
25,882 to elect each SNP MP
No, I think London has it about right in terms of elected representatives per head of population.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rjk
Do 3m people really need a 100 elected reps? Smacks of over control and gravy train expense.
Let's get rid of the ones in London and I think the figure of representatives will be about right.Quote:
Originally Posted by lisvaneblue
So nothing to do with an unequal union then.Quote:
Originally Posted by jon1959
Get rid of all Conservative MPs
Everywhere
That will sort things out
finally some senseQuote:
Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY
I honestly have no idea what point you are trying to make - or how it is relevant to the post from Rjk you disputed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Feedback
He said the response of the government (in London) to the Irish famine showed 'we have never been a union of equals'. Surely that is about the way the UK government affects the lives of people in different parts and in different circumstances (better not to be poor, Irish or catholic) rather than some legalistic analysis of the different acts of union (England with Scotland and then Ireland?).
A case could be made about unequal rights in the union - nationalist have done that for centuries - but that wasn't the point made.
Hasn't worked in ScotlandQuote:
Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY
The union is unequal and there is no way for it to be equal. Wales is a sidebar to England in the union. That’s it.Quote:
Originally Posted by jon1959
However the potato famine is more complex than stated in this thread. The then conservative government in the first year of shortages ensured through their actions no one died, they looked to remove the dependence of the Irish people on the potato and they removed the laws keeping corn prices high. They did this as a British government of Ireland. It worked.
In subsequent years the local land owners - Irish and British - forced the changes they led to the starvation of people but kept polices that helped them. Not London or England but the influence of the Irish land owners
People like to blame London and conservatives and often do so correctly but the food shortages in Ireland and the change in policies was driven by Irish land owners not English ignorance.
The British government became driven by a small group demanding the action for their pocket. That was and remains the issue in many governments
https://www.irishcentral.com/roots/t...8889-237694361
It will work in EnglandQuote:
Originally Posted by lisvaneblue