Multiculturalism = a total crock of poo

lazydaisy

Snickers man - Multiculturalism does not advocate treating your neighbor as yourself. That is the whole point if it. It is saying not do that as your neighbor may have different tastes than you. It is also not in invention of the right, it is an export from "imperial america".

It is not easy. The whole thing around cutoms trying to cohabitate is difficult. Take for example circumcision, a normal custom in the middle east and africa. Are Irish hospitals going to start training their doctors to accommodate this custom?

Since when is spanish not caucasion? Even if your spanish you're still white.

WK - I get the same. I was in stephens green and two nuns asked me if i was in the country to learn english. Taxi men often ask me what part of spain I am from despite being rather pale. So I dont think a lot of Irish people know what they are talking about when it comes to race. They think anyone with slightly dark features are mexican or spanish.

Besides which Jesus was a palestinian and the whole country worshipped him for decades and no one minded when Mary was wearing a burkha but it seems to be a problem when ordinary muslim women wear them???

tim3115

Clearly you don't understand that a dark, black or asian featured person can be Irish

An asian person is now Irish? Hmm, interesting one that.

Hobbes

tim3115 wrote:

An asian person is now Irish? Hmm, interesting one that.

If they were born here they would be. May look Asian but would be Irish.

I still don't understand your White comment, because white isn't a race. If it was then you have no problems with Polish people or people from say Afganistan living here?

lazydaisy

A person with asian features who is raised in Ireland would be Irish or Irish-Asian to adopt a more american label, as the US is full of hyphenated beings.

Birthplace isn't necessarily a cultural identifier anymore.

Hobbes,

White is a race. It is one of several, white, black, red, and yellow, and it refers to skin colour, not culture or nationality, but the term racism has been adopted to include prejudice based on skin colour, nationality, and I believe religion.

tim3115

If you want to be specific, the Nordic race is what interests me most.

I was using the blanket term for arguement sake.

neilled

tim3115 wrote:

An asian person is now Irish? Hmm, interesting one that.

Err yes, People are damn quick to claim the Jason Sherlocks and O'hAilpins of this world for their counties.

Zombrex

tim3115 wrote:

An asian person is now Irish? Hmm, interesting one that.

Yeah ... your "race" that you are so very proud of were originally from Germany, does that mean you are German?

Zombrex

neilled wrote:

Err yes, People are damn quick to claim the Jason Sherlocks and O'hAilpins of this world for their counties.

Phil Lynott, even if he was black and wasn't actually born here

The idea that "Irishness" is in your blood (what ever that means, humans replace their blood every few days), is laughable, and is normally just trundled out when people want a justification for excluding others.

neilled

Put simply claiming blood lineage is no substitute for deeds.

Captain Trips

Wicknight wrote:

Ireland .. would have thought that would have been obvious ...



If I was surrounded by Muslims in lidl on Parnell St does that mean I have to start following their culture?

What it means is that if you are surrounded by Muslims in Saudia Arabia, you had better start following their culture regarding women (your girldfiren had better cover that hair and arms, legs) and alcohol, etc., etc., .

But if a Muslim is surrounded by Irish people here, he gets to complain of inequality/racism/prejudice and does *not* have to integrate at point of death or torture (e.g., Saudi). This was witnessed in France when then native culture disallows headdress in school (likewise, they also do not allow baseball caps in class), the new population cries prejudice/discrimination!!.

Examples of this discrimination against native cultures can also be found in Malmo, Sweden's 3rd largest city. I'm sure Swedish women in Saudi would adapt quickly ot the local customs, but in Malmo, the large Turkish Muslim population has refused to accept local Swedish customs. They account now for 7% of the population and 80% of the rapes. Swedish women, you see, are "whores".

Welcome to MultiCultureLand!!!

Captain Trips

Hobbes wrote:

Actually it doesn't. It means.. (www.dictionary.com)
1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

I wasn't aware that the last part of 1 was there. WHat word can be used so to imply differences in character and ability when comparing different races?

The chinese are hard workers, harder than Irish people. That is racist, therefore, and I shall not say it. Although it's racist against Irish people on the CHinese person's different character and ability and superioriryt in this regard to Irish people. But it's okay to be racist like this.

God help anyone who says Irish people are hard workers, harder working than the CHinese people.

gaf1983

lazydaisy wrote:

... and no one minded when Mary was wearing a burkha but it seems to be a problem when ordinary muslim women wear them???

Did Mary wear a burkha? I had no idea... Anyway Mohammed wasn't around for another few hundred years so it seems unlikely that those who interpret his word as meaning women should wear burkhas where around back when she was around. Anyway how the hell is it possible to know whether or not Mary wore a burkha? I mean I wouldn't have a clue whether Isaac Butt or Charles Stewart Parnell or Lee Harvey Oswald wore either y-fronts or boxers and they were all around much more recently than Mary so to make assumptions about what someone wore about 2000 years ago is very ambitious in my opinion.

For the record I've got no idea what she wore, can't ever remember there being refernces to what she wore in the Bible, but then I've never read that book I'm only going on what I can remember from religion class and mass.

And to Hobbes I say this: you said that if an Asian person is born here that makes them Irish. Well according to our citizenship laws, as amended by the referendum a few years back, being born here alone doesn't make them Irish, they have to fulfill a number of other conditions. I was born in England and despite the fact that my friends used to call me a "Proddy Bastard" that doesn't mean I'm English as my parents are both Irish and I only lived there for 2 years - in order to be English I would have had to satisfy a number of other conditions laid down by UK law.

In my opinion the debatabase website offers a fairly comprehensive outline of the pros and cons of rich countries relaxing their immigration policies, though it doesn't really touch that much on multiculturalism, which is what this thread is about. The same organization have another page outlining the respective arguments in the multiculturalism vs integration debate.

Here's one take on our recent influx of immigrants taken from the Overheardindublin.com website:

The Blame Game!

I had just moved down to Dublin from the North to start a new job about two years ago and jumped in a taxi to get home after my first day, blissfully unaware of how slow-moving the traffic would be. Attempting to ease the tension between myself and the semmingly pissed-off driver, I commented on how heavy the traffic was.
"Yeah" he huffed, "and it's all their fault", pointing to a couple of young black lads crossing the road at O'Connell bridge.
Surprised at this dubious claim, I asked him to explain.
"Sure doesn't everyone slow down to get a look at them ..."

The sad thing is, he actually meant it!



Overheard - Taxi, Dublin city centre by Paul
Posted - Tuesday, 07th December 2004

Snickers Man

grubber wrote:

Snickers man I think you've got your knickers in a twist. Havw a look at message #74 above, in which YOU are replying to my posting as to what I mean by M/C.

You have never outlined what you understand multiculturalism to be, (on this thread anyway) other than something that was 'invented' by 'limp-wristed loonie lefties'. You have intimated and insinuated that you consider it to be a bad thing but you have not outlined what specifically is your problem.

Is it people migrating from one country to another?

You can't stop that Mankind has always done that. Learn to live with it. Through tolerance.

Is it people retaining some element of their pre-existing culture when moving to another country?
Like should people living in England be allowed call their children Brendan, or Deirdre or even Ahmed or Nkwanko? Should it be forbidden to speak a language other than English in England?
Should it be forbidden to play 'foreign games' like hurling or GAA in public parks in England, or anywhere else?
Should it be forbidden to practice a religion other than Christianity?
What exactly are you objecting to? What do you have to leave on the boat before you get off in your new country?


Is it people demanding that the law change to reflect their preferences?

This is the one area that has to be sacrosanct. Female circumcision: no. Stoning to death for adultery: No. Carrying ceremonial weapons around because that's what they all do at home:no.

Any changes to the law would have to be done using the mechanisms of the host country. Laws evolve all the time, that's perfectly normal. But I;'m sure most immigrants are quite happy to accept the laws of their new country, as long as they're fair.

What EXACTLY do you object to, apartfrom limp wristed loony lefties?

grubber wrote:

You've got it wrong. Multiculturalism is not thought of as a "nasty" word. Libbos and the loony left love it. It is very fashionable. Though to me it is fatally flawed.

I think you'll find they don't use it at all. They use words like pluralism, democracy, tolerance, freedom.

It's the new right that use the world multiculturalism.

grubber wrote:

Anyway Snickers Man I think I'm banging my head off a brick wall.

I rather wish you would.

floor_pie

.What I dont want to see is the like of 50 cent around.What is the origin of most people in gaol both in the USA and in UK.And yes your gong to say it because there from poor areas etc. We have enough Irish scumbags around without opening the door for a scumbag increase from outside Ireland.We are kind of stuck with what we have,but no more please.

If I had my way only educated non whites,Europeans or of European lineage and Japaneese would be allowed stay here long term.Any one else can stay short term.

But I can do nothing about it and its gonna happen,so i tend to just accept it.Which is a shame really but what you gonna do.

annR

Captain Trips wrote:

I wasn't aware that the last part of 1 was there. WHat word can be used so to imply differences in character and ability when comparing different races?

The chinese are hard workers, harder than Irish people. That is racist, therefore, and I shall not say it. Although it's racist against Irish people on the CHinese person's different character and ability and superioriryt in this regard to Irish people. But it's okay to be racist like this.

God help anyone who says Irish people are hard workers, harder working than the CHinese people.

The whole thing is fraught with trickiness I agree. I know what you mean above. It seems silly not to be able to say these things when you believe they are generally true. However supposing you were put in a situation where you had an Irish person and a Chinese person applying for a job. Would you pick the Chinese person because 'Chinese are harder workers'. Surely the danger is that it's quite easy to go from a general statement to applying it specifically to some person.

Hobbes

lazydaisy wrote:

White is a race. It is one of several, white, black, red, and yellow, and it refers to skin colour

Except that even with common colours many people of certain countries have varying traits beyond skin.

For example calling someone Asian is like calling someone in Ireland "European" although it is quite easy to see a difference between Irish and say Germans/French/Spanish (and even English).

Asia has Koreans, Japanese and Chinese of which there are a further 12(?) races in China (Han being the major one). Yet they do not look alike except to people who haven't spent time with Asian people (Amazing that Asians think all Europeans look alike )

Captain Trips wrote:

The chinese are hard workers, harder than Irish people. That is racist, therefore, and I shall not say it.

The racist point is to imply that all Irish are lazy or to infer that. However to say that chinese are hard workers is incorrect as well. There are plently of lazy Chinese, just to get to Ireland from China would require hard work to begin with so its liable to draw a certain trait in that sense.

Incidently when I was in Xian in China every chinese person I met thought all Europeans were rich. Why? Because only people with a bit of cash would show up in Xian, however even that is a bit untrue as the exchange rate it was quite easy to spend very little money compared to the EU.

GuanYin

grubber wrote:

Well PSI. You set very stringent rules on how I should answer your questions. Whereas you can't be bothered to look back to YOUR OWN postings and the points you previously made.

Did I miss something from your post that you asked? If so please directly and I will endeavour to do so.

I notice you didn't answer all of mine.

Anyway I will make a general point to (hopefully) answer your questions re the fairness or otherwise of Irish people going to other countries for work.

Well two answers really. Firstly it depends where they go to. So, for example, the emigration for most of the period after 1922 was to the UK and the USA. I don't believe those 2 countries, regarded this immigration as harmful because a/ the economies were large enough to absorb it, and b/, the Irish are natural mixers and will integrate easily with host populations that are generally of the same cultural, religious values as themselves.

How does this image you paint reconsile with the "NO IRISH" signs that adorned shops, bars and other public areas in the UK and US?

I seem to remember form history that the Irish were treated as second class citizens in these countries during the early emmigration booms. It was only in more recent times, several generations worth of settling later, that new irish influx was accepted.

My Second answer however goes back to my point about whether emigration is"good" for the emigrants. And I wouldn't be so sure about this at all. Through most of the history of our Republic, governments used emigration as part of economic planning. Whereas if we had told them to stuff the Holyhead boat and demanded a functioning economy, arguably Ireland wouldn't have been the "poor man" of Europe for so long. In other words, it was mostly the young and energetic people who emigrated. And they went off to build up Britain and the USA, instead of building up their own country.

Yes I know this might sound simplistic. And yes, of course there will always be emigration. But the scale of Irish emigration during parts of the last century was appalling for such a small country. It blighted us for decades

How does this fit the profiles of Asian and African countries, they have populations tens to hundreds of that of Ireland.

Zombrex

Captain Trips wrote:

What it means is that if you are surrounded by Muslims in Saudia Arabia, you had better start following their culture regarding women (your girldfiren had better cover that hair and arms, legs) and alcohol, etc., etc.,

I would expect Irish people in Saudia Arabia respect the laws of the country they are in, just like I expect others to respect the laws of Ireland.

The idea that Muslims should have a completely seperate legal system based on Islam seperate from non-Muslims, while in Ireland is not part of the ideals of multiculturalism. In fact it quite the opposite.

I really hate the way these threads are always hi-jacked by people spouting references to every Islamic nut case and nut jobs as if they represent the Islamic religion, or Muslims in general.

I would be very offended if I was in Germany or America and I had someone spouting on about how I am a terrorist and support baby killings just because of the IRA.

I am Irish, I am proud to be Irish, I think the rest of the world should respect the Irish culture. We are great after all

But that has nothing to do with terrorists who use pride in my country to justify murders and killing. It has nothing to do with the ridiculous "community policing" policies Sinn Fein want to introduce. It has nothing to do with the corruption in Fianna Fail. It has nothing to do with the Catholic Church molesting every school boy under the sun.

I would be offended if someone in America or Europe could not see past this, and I think minority cultures in Ireland should be equally offended if morons in Ireland cannot see past the issues of current groups like Muslims to the people behind them.

I don't expect Irish people to welcome with open arms honour killings, or marital rape by Muslims, any more than I expect Japanise people to accept blowing up British soldiers, or drunken child abuse by Irish people.

But equally I would be rather pissed off if I was met in Japan by an angry mob at the airport saying "Go home Paddy! We don't want your semtex here!"

Captain Trips wrote:

But if a Muslim is surrounded by Irish people here, he gets to complain of inequality/racism/prejudice and does *not* have to integrate at point of death or torture (e.g., Saudi).

He has to follow native laws, just like as you would have to do in Saudi Arabia

Captain Trips wrote:

This was witnessed in France when then native culture disallows headdress in school (likewise, they also do not allow baseball caps in class), the new population cries prejudice/discrimination!!.

What French people aren't allowed object to the removal of religion from schools. If it happened here I would be all for it, but I would imagine 99% of the country would be up in arms over the issue.

Captain Trips wrote:

Examples of this discrimination against native cultures can also be found in Malmo, Sweden's 3rd largest city. I'm sure Swedish women in Saudi would adapt quickly ot the local customs, but in Malmo, the large Turkish Muslim population has refused to accept local Swedish customs. They account now for 7% of the population and 80% of the rapes. Swedish women, you see, are
"whores".

Very clever .. now if you support multiculturalism you must be supporting rape!! Oh no, I have completely changed my mind, Islamic men are monsters lets keep them all out.

Would it surprise you to know that pretty much the exact same idea was held in Britian and America about the Irish around 200 years ago. Irish immigrants accounted for the largest percentage of rape and murder in New York city during the early 1800s

The Chicago Post wrote -

"the Irish fill our prisons, our poor houses...Scratch a convict or a pauper, and the chances are that you tickle the skin of an Irish Catholic. Putting them on a boat and sending them home would end crime in this country."

Sounds kinda familiar ...

To those who believe we are a proud white race of people there is actually detailed studies and report published in promonent scientific journals at the time explain why Irish people are strongly related to "negros" and that we have an in build predispoition toward crime. And this wasn't just Stormfront style rantings, it was the accepted view of the day.

How Irish people can, little over 100 years later, turn around and with the same warped logic that was used to descriminate and persecute them for hundreds of years and apply it to other cultures is beyond me.

cyclopath2001

lazydaisy wrote:

Take for example circumcision, a normal custom in the middle east and africa. Are Irish hospitals going to start training their doctors to accommodate this custom?

They already are. I know of a number of Irish parents of centuries old Catholic stock, who've have their children circumcised.

In Ireland, many people have already adopted a middle-Eastern moral and cultural code: Christianity.

oscarBravo

grubber wrote:

If I travel to Nigeria I expect to see a predominantly black population. In Ireland I expect to see a predominantly white population.

Both of thise are broadly in line with what I'd expect too. If I walked out the door in the morning and saw more black than white people, that would be unexpected.

Then again, twenty years ago if I'd seen any black people, it would have been a bit of a surprise.

grubber wrote:

More and more Western European countries have had the experience of mass immigration and are now facing huge problems, partly caused by politicians who through their fashionable "multiculturalism" create expectations which cannopt be fulfilled. There are some towns and cities in England where the indigenous people are in the minority. Ireland has potentially a bigger problem because the existing population is low. Therefore Ireland is at risk of being swamped by foreigners.

Sorry it's a simple, unsophisticated answer. But there you are.

That was an answer?

grubber

neilled wrote:

Ah but you see dathi, it all depends on what you view multiculturalism as - multi culturalism is not the various groupings arriving in one place and expecting to carryon as they always did "back home" and its not about the locals carrying on as they always done either - it is about the people adapting and changing. And in my view there is no multiculturalism up north - thats called segregation and walling yourself off.

I think alot of people are missing the point - Irish people have went all over the world and created Irish communities ( and causing all sorts of problems for the "locals" whilst they were at it) that over time have come to view themselves as full blooded spanish,American, Canadian, Austrialian etc, without forgetting where they are from.

This is a rather sweeping statement. What are these problems caused by Irish people to the locals "all over the world"? Are the problems different in character from those caused by settlers of any nationality?

neilled wrote:

Thats my definition of multiculturalism - the new one seems to have been dreamed up by the members of the ranting right, as well as their lefty loon bedfellows.

All i want is a bit of balance - you can be whatever skin colour you like and still be as irish as anyone else - but you dont have to forget where you come from.

That's a definition of multiculturalism? I must have missed it.

grubber

annR wrote:

Integration is not the opposite of M/C, that's segration. M/C "celebrates diversity" by NOT segregrating those people who are different but by integrating them. I think you can integrate people who are different.

AnnR, I still believe M/C to be the opposite of integration. The reason M/C was coined was in recognition that there were some cultures to whom integration with "the infidels" was anathema. So the PC brigade came up with the idea that made segregation respectable. Of course they didn't call it segregation. The phrase they are fond of is "celebrating diversity"

Have a look at the link supplied by gaf1983
http://www.idebate.org/debatabase/topic_details.php?topicID=152

Zombrex

grubber wrote:

This is a rather sweeping statement. What are these problems caused by Irish people to the locals "all over the world"? Are the problems different in character from those caused by settlers of any nationality?

Irish immigrants were hated, absolutely hated, in America Britian and Austrialia when they first arrived. They were linked with crime, disease and drunkness. As I pointed out in my previous posts it was a widely held belief that the Irish were closely related to "negros" (Africans) who were largely slaves or considered primative sub-humans. Signs saying "No blacks, No Irish" were common in all resturants and pubs in New York, Chicago etc

Zombrex

grubber wrote:

AnnR, I still believe M/C to be the opposite of integration.

What? Firstly you don't seem to understand what intergration means. It is not making everyone do as we do. Secondly multiculturalism is cultures existing side by side and this goes hand in hand with integration. If a culture is integrated into Irish society it is not lost, but exists in tandom with native culture, and if effected by native culture and affects native culture. The great melting pot as it were.

ciaran13

In Italy, a court stirred controversy in October by ruling in favor of a Muslim father who contended that a small-town school could not display a crucifix in class, a common practice for generations in Italian classrooms. this is not multiculturalism, if they choose to live in most catholic country in world then they shud learn to "integrate" and not jus talk bout it


yet there was absolute outrage by muslims in France when a law was suggested that would ban students from wearing head scarves (known in Arabic as a hijab) in schools, saying it threatens the foundation of the French secular state.


is this whats gonna happen in ireland? all crosses and religous paintings removed from the schools they founded but hijabs will be allowed??

ciaran13

and another thing lets get one thing strait
you cannot compare irish immigrants going to america with modern day immigrants comming here
the irish that went to america were on their own as soon as they landed there was no help for them from us governmentunlike. today ireland spends millions on these people who arrive on these shores

samb

ciaran13 wrote:

and another thing lets get one thing strait
you cannot compare irish immigrants going to america with modern day immigrants comming here

Any two groups of immigrants can be compared and contrasted. Of course they are not identical but they share many traits such as their motivation to escape a life of poverty.

ciaran13 wrote:

the irish that went to america were on their own as soon as they landed there was no help for them from us governmentunlike. today ireland spends millions on these people who arrive on these shores

This is utter nonsense, any economist will tell you that the Irish economy and health service are reliant on immigration.

oscarBravo

ciaran13 wrote:

and another thing...

[OT] is anyone else reminded of Douglas Adams' So long and thanks for all the fish: "Thunder rumbled in the distance like someone saying 'and another thing...' half an hour after admitting that he's lost the argument."

lazydaisy

cyclopath2001 wrote:

In Ireland, many people have already adopted a middle-Eastern moral and cultural code: Christianity.

So so so true!!

lazydaisy

Hobbes, I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to say. Koreans, Japanese, and Chinese are Asians, just as Irish, Germans, and French are European. What's your point? These all refer to nationalities, not race. Race is specifically about skin colour. I think your confusing cultures/tribes/nationhoods with race.

You cant compare Irish immigration to America with current immigration in Europe. America is an experiment in pluralism and federalism. The whole foundation of it was based on immigration. European nations have had their customs and codes solidified for centuries. Its much harder for Europe in this way. They also have a sense of kinship, which is why more socialist economic policy worked for them, but when you have to live with people "outside your tribe" I'm not sure these values are remain functional.

The Irish immigrants who fled to America were probably also considered repellant by mother Ireland. It is their descendants who reaped the rewards of immigration.

What will surely be fascinating to watch in the upcoming years with the swelling of immigration into Ireland, the outpouring of Irish young professionals who cant afford to live there anymore because of escalating costs, is how these parents who don't even like their children going to school with other kids who have unsavory northside accents, will fare when their kids are going to school with a bunch of children who dont know English. Ireland need to work on its classicm before it can even go near dealing with multiculturalism.