Well, it certainly doesn’t speak very highly for the work of the DE in the past!
In a way, I’d been hoping this thread had ceased over the weekend - which was certainly a naive hope, bearing in mind the last century.
I’ve remembered a chat I had years ago with a colleague from Antrim, nominally Protestant and thus Unionist, though he was heartily sick of any group of people daring to speak in his name. He found it irritating that, when he came to England he was regarded as Irish but not British. Irritating but but anger-provoking.
He did say however that many of his friends and family found the attitude of some from the Republican community very frightening, when he heard calls that “the British should get out of Ireland”. He accepted that people in the Republic might feel that way, but he and his family thought that they WERE British.
And Irish, too.
He said that, to his ears, this sounded as if the Republicans wanted to drive him & his own out of a land his family had lived in for generations. Now known as ‘ethnic cleansing’
Absolute definitions are dangerous things.
Yes, and debates over definitions, while sometimes intellectually interesting and sometimes enlightening for what they reveal about the participants’ thinking are, ultimately, sterile.
The issue for your friend from Antrim is whether militant Republicans want him and his family to leave. The fact that they mouth the slogan “Brits out” does not necessarily mean that they do, given the sense in which militant Republicans ordinarily use the term “Brit” - people from Antrim are not regarded as British. On the other hand, they might want him out, not because he self-identifies as British culturally but because (if it is the case) he identifies as British politically and (again, if it is the case) he would refuse to accept an obligation of allegiance to an Irish state.
It’s an important question for him, but it’s not a question which is going to be resolved by debating what is meant by the term “British”.
Sadly, of course, Ireland has been treated that way before.
As for the thread closing, I think the really complicated bit does seem to be the six counties in the north of that island, the one that is just across a bit of water and part of which often seem to have a difficult nomenclature.
Wow - I deserve a deep breath now! 
LOL - if it is sad that the issue keeps coming up in threads, even sadder that the solution has yet to be found in the real world too.
He said he was fairly apolitical by nature, and joked that he couldn’t see the point of worrying about being ruled by London or Dublin if he was going to be ruled by Brussels whatever (I repeat, his joke).
He’s an intelligent chap, and didn’t seem to really think that he would be driven from the North - but his point was that lots of people in his community PERCEIVED that this was the Republican position, and that ‘allegiance to an Irish state’ wouldn’t save him.
(BTW, this really is a friend, not me - I am aware of the convention - but I am as English as you can get, and can prove it by my inability to speak any-one else’s language competently.)
Yes, I take the point. And my point was that he has this worry because he, and his friends, analyse this matter on the basis of an implicit or explicit assumption about what "British"means. And this is not a useful way to analyse the matter.
I don’t say this by way of criticism, by the way. It’s just to illustrate my point on the sterility in the real world of debates about definitions.