Was Unionism merely reactionary?

There are two dimensions to the question of Unionism; the first relates to how far discussion of Union in any shape or form was dominated by parliamentary figures as opposed to common folk – thus more prone to a ‘reactionary’ state, as politics and pragmatism inevitably preceded principle. Contrastingly, the other dimension accounts for populist, principled sentiment and can be found in the forms of Unionist nationalism that emerged at many points over the years, such as with the rise of the United Irishmen in the early 20th Century. Unionism ‘in action’ was on the whole significantly more reactionary than the dominant forms of Scottish and Irish anti-Unionist nationalism; fundamentally, Unionism was pro-establishment whilst anti-Unionism was not. Anything other than pro-Unionist discourse was rarely expressed in any way in parliament prior to the later 20th century partly since those anti-Unionist nationalists from Scotland or Ireland given seats at Westminster did not always take up the offer.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.