Enda Kenny on Immigration - honest debate or oppotunist sh1t stirring?

ballooba

The_Minister wrote:

Kenny is courting xenophobes, quietly, and softly.

You may be able to interpret it that way if you misconstrue what he's saying. But you will be sorely disappointed if you expect Enda to take that line as Taoiseach.

ballooba

Seeing as some people seem unable to click the link and read the speech, I have pasted it below:

Speech by Fine Gael Leader, Enda Kenny TD at special meeting of the Fine Gael Parliamentary Party and Dáil Candidates, Clontarf Castle, 23rd January 2007

1. Introduction
The recent, dramatic growth in the rate of immigration into Ireland is resulting in what is arguably the greatest economic and social transformation of our country since independence.

I believe that this transformation presents Ireland with both a huge challenge and huge opportunity. Given Ireland's history of emigration, the country has a special responsibility to address the challenge of immigration.

I believe that immigration can be excellent for Ireland's future. But the thing is we must get it right.

We live in a country that exported our people.... not by the boatload..... or by the planeload...... but by the generation.

We live in a country where hundreds of thousands of families lived for the postal order that put food on the table and clothes on their backs... thanks to a father and often his sons... slaving on the building sites of London and New York and San Francisco.

So, it's safe to say, that we live in a country where you'd have to have a very small mind, a very short memory and a very hard heart, not to welcome the stranger, who is trying to make a better life, a more hopeful life for themselves and their families.

As a Celtic and Christian people, we understand better than most the special challenges of immigration and integrating new communities. Now is time for a real national debate on these issues so that we can make the necessary changes to meet these new challenges. We have a chance to get this response right and to avoid the mistakes that were made elsewhere.

I believe that immigration and multi-culturalism can be good for Ireland but the current system is not being managed well. We need as system that is good for the Irish and good for the immigrants. As of now, we have a system that is not serving the interests of either.

2. Principles of Fine Gael's approach.

Fine Gael has three priorities to make immigration work for Ireland:

1. Immigrants have rights and responsibilities. They should have the right to be free of discrimination and have their contribution to the country recognised, but they have the responsibility to integrate into our community, comply with our laws and respect our cultural traditions. I do not want to see a situation developing in which our immigrant population live separate lives. We have a responsibility to facilitate and encourage this integration.
2. Immigration must be managed in a way that keeps Ireland safe. We must ensure that Irish laws are understood by and adhered to by immigrants. We also need to send a strong message that people who want to come to this country to commit serious crime are not welcome and will be dealt with severely.
3. Immigration must be a force for improving, not threatening living standards. We must protect Irish jobs and the rights of those who come to work here. Companies that pay below the minimum wage should pay severe fines, and immigration levels from non-EU countries must be explicitly linked to economic conditions and the needs of the labour market.

3. Analysis of current situation

The growth in the non-national population in recent years has been phenomenal, particularly since EU enlargement in 2004. Prior to then, much of the growth comprised of Irish emigrants returning home but since then the pattern has changed dramatically.

It now stands at over 400,000, or one tenth of the total population. In the last year alone, over 200,000 new PPS numbers were issued to foreign nationals registering to work or to access social services.

The Government's response to the challenge of immigration has been weak and fragmented. There are a whole myriad of government departments and state agencies responsible for different aspects of immigration and the asylum processes. Each of these bodies is fulfilling a role but no-one is taking overall responsibility for managing the issue. While the establishment of the Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service (INIS) was a small step in the right direction, much more needs to be done to bring clarity and coherence to the government's approach.

4. Suggested structural changes

As a first step, I want the review of the INIS which is due in March, to be a fundamental re-appraisal of the way in which these services are organised and delivered with the objective of creating a streamlined system which will manage and oversee the entire immigration process, rather than just providing services.

The fragmented system is replicated at political level with various ministers having responsibility for different aspects of the issue. If I am elected to Government, I intend to bring coherence to the political response by appointing a Minister of State for Immigrant Affairs who will be attached to the Department of the Taoiseach. This new ministerial role will include responsibility across all relevant government departments. This Minister will lead a high level group which will manage and coordinate the government's activities that relate to immigration and ensure that its impact on public services and on the labour market is monitored continuously.

5. Specific pressures that have arisen.

I want to refer briefly to some specific areas where the rapid growth in immigration has led to pressures and to suggest some practical solutions that are consistent with Fine Gael's principles.

Rights and Responsibilities

*Education
The right to education is a basic, and one of the most empowering, civil rights. A good education for every child is the key to achieving the kind of society in which each of us lives up to our rights and responsibilities.

The growth in multiculturalism within the education system comes at a time when the system is already under enhanced pressure, with significant expansion of pupil numbers being forecast. The Department of Education's figures show that, over the next five years, we will need an extra 2,300 classrooms to deal with the increase in the numbers attending primary school of at least 58,000. Clearly foreign-national children will only be part of this number, but this does give a sense of the expansion that will be needed if the education system is to cope with future demand. It is currently estimated that there are 31,000 foreign national children in the primary school system alone.

As things stand, there are many teachers, particularly in large urban centres, whose classes include significant numbers of children with language difficulties. The current system for allocating language support teachers is not serving the interests of these children. It provides that schools with 14 non-English speaking pupils are awarded one language support and those with 28 or more receive a second but a third post can only be granted in exceptional services. These rules take no account of the reality of the new situation in which many schools have far more than 28 non-English speaking pupils. I am aware of one school in west Dublin which has over 200 non-national pupils but just two language support teachers, plus one additional, discretionary teacher. Even where adequate support is available, it is only available to each child for two years which is not enough in many cases.

This system is not serving the interests of either our immigrants or our own population and must be changed. Although the current Government has belatedly promised to recruit more language teachers, these outdated rules have not yet been changed. As a first step, the allocation of language support resources must be revamped so that schools with higher demands receive appropriate support. We must also undertake a national audit to find out the true extent of this problem and to establish whether other measures, such as providing additional language support outside normal school hours, are needed and what additional teaching resources are required.

Tackling deficiencies in adult literacy is a key challenge for the education system. Ten years ago, it was estimated that over half a million Irish adults needed help but just 35,500 people have benefited from adult literacy programmes since then. There is evidence that over a quarter of those who have undertaken these courses were from non-English speaking backgrounds in order to improve their knowledge of English. These programmes were not designed as language classes and should be targeted at people with literacy problems, rather than those with fluency problems. We need to develop dedicated English language classes for adult immigrants that are focussed on their needs.

Keeping Ireland Safe

*Crime
Yesterday we saw the latest crime figures which revealed a shocking increase in the rate of serious crime, including the highest number of murders in the history of the state.

There is no doubt that immigration is having an impact on crime rates. For example, 22% of those sent to Irish prisons in 2005 were from outside the European Union. There is also evidence that a number of foreign crime gangs are operating in Dublin, many of them behaving like "mafia" style organisations.

We need a much more rigorous screening of those applying to come here from outside the European Union to establish if they have criminal records. We should refuse entry to those who have been involved in serious criminal activity. In addition, I believe that those who are convicted of serious offences and sentenced to 5 or more years imprisonment by the Irish Courts should be deported automatically after they have served their sentences. This would send a strong message that people who want to commit serious crime are not welcome in this country and will be dealt with severely.

*Road Safety
The ongoing carnage on our roads has been a scourge on our community since long before immigration became an issue. While many positive steps are being taken by the authorities to promote road safety, more needs to be done to integrate the non-national community into this new approach.

This is important because a worryingly high number of road accidents involve non-national drivers. For example 44 of the road fatalities in 2006 were people born outside the country. Anyone who has had family members living abroad will relate to the distressing images of families arriving here to collect the bodies of their loved-ones who have lost their lives on the Irish roads.

Many of our new population have come from countries where the driving systems are very different to Ireland's. I believe that they have a responsibility to learn about and comply with our road safety regime and we have a responsibility to facilitate that and enforce compliance. There are a number of obstacles to achieving this. At a most basic level, for example, is the astounding fact that the full Rules of the Road handbook has not been updated for over 10 years and that it is yet to be made available in other languages. This basic information gap should be rectified as a mater of urgency.

I am also concerned that the current rules governing the re-registration of imported vehicles allow the owners of such vehicles to avoid re-registering them for up to two years. As a result, vehicles are not becoming part of the Irish system and their owners can avoid having their road worthiness tested. As well as exploring ways of addressing this loophole, we must ensure that the Gardai use their powers to impound vehicles that they deem to be unsafe.

One of the cornerstones in the battle to reduce road fatalities is the introduction and enforcement of the penalty points system. However, as migrants from other EU countries are not required to transfer their driving licences, penalty points cannot be applied to their licences. I was shocked recently to be informed that 20% of the penalty points which should have resulted from offences detected by the Gardaí could not be applied, in many cases because of this loophole. This is not fair to the Irish licence holders who cannot evade penalty points in this way. It also means that the deterrent effect of the penalty points system is not applying to a proportion of the driving population.

In government, I will pursue this matter with our EU partners to find a mechanism to close this loophole and ensure that penalty points can be effectively applied in a way that respects the right to free movement of our immigrant population.

Linking Immigration to Economic Conditions

*Economy / Labour market
The growth in immigration has been an essential component of Ireland's economic success. In fact, it has had a direct impact on our economic growth with the ERSI estimating that immigration added at least 3% to GNP growth over the period 1993 to 2003.

Ireland has been fortunate that the education levels of immigrants to date has been very high. For example, over half of the immigrants to this country have third level qualifications compared to just over a quarter of the native population.

The impact of immigration on the labour market must be monitored closely and there must be rigorous enforcement of the employment protection laws and serious penalties for any employers who attempt to exploit immigrant workers through low pay or unfair conditions. Pat Rabbitte was right to raise this issue and the need for vigilance.

Since EU enlargement there has been a big increase in the numbers coming here from the new member states and a big fall in the number of work permits being issued to people from non-EU countries.

Most skills needs in the economy can be met from within the European Union, particularly in the low-skilled area. I believe that we should cut back on the number of low-skilled work permits granted to non- EU citizens and use this system to make Ireland the destination of choice for highly skilled migrants. To achieve this, we should introduce a Green Card system for those with advanced science and engineering skills; people with a track record of entrepreneurial success: those with company specific skills linked with inward direct investment; and people with the specific knowledge and skills required by Irish exporters.

There are now at least 50,000 Chinese language students in Ireland, most of whom are highly educated and come from a prosperous and fast developing region of China. Rather than viewing these people as a sources of cheap labour or as a market opportunity for the language schools, we should engage closely with the large Chinese community to develop links with the fast growing economies of China and the wider Asian markets.

Conclusion
I am raising these issues now because I believe that the challenge of immigration is not being addressed by the political system. My objective is to ensure that immigration remains a positive experience for our society and our economy. To achieve this we must have the courage to debate the issue openly and honestly. This time of prosperity is the appropriate time to do so and to make the policy changes needed to deliver a coherent, coordinated system that works in the best interests of everybody living in Ireland.

InFront

I honestly don't think it matters balooba. Some people will automatically read into that speech what they would like it to read.

Originally posted by The Minister
In the speech he refers to controlling immigration, and creating a special ministry for "immigration affairs". He make comments about tying the number of non-EU immegrants (i.e. blacks) to economic nessecity, rather than the sympathetic approach that is taken now. He wants to cherry-pick the most well-trained non-Eu's and slash the number coming to Ireland.

I don't really understand, why someone would have a problem with that? What's the problem? Don't you want to attract well educated immigrants too?

Since when do non-EU immigrants = blacks? When did Russia and China and South Asia and the Middle East join the EU?

Originally posted by The Minister
His comments on adult literacy programs consisting of 1/3 immegrants, seems to suggest a "they took our course" mentality.

Or just maybe... a "many of them need education resources" mentality?

InFront

The_Minister wrote:

The bit about being White silently sounds in the minds of anti-immegrants when they hear that.

What bit about being white?

ballooba

InFront wrote:

I don't really understand, why someone would have a problem with that? What's the problem? Don't you want to attract well educated immigrants too?

Also, it's normal policy in countries like Australia, Canada and the US.

The_Minister

InFront wrote:

What bit about being white?

Sorry, I wasn't clear enough. If you ask a Stormfronter to describe the Irish, they say "Celtic and Christian and White", its even a slogan of one of their groups. I meant that when you look at the entire speech, it seems obvious that he is going for the racist vote. If you take the speech up front, as completely honest, with no spin, then I agree with it (I'm actually for quite a few of the measures that he proposes). But, I think that he has managed to touch on every Stormfront issue in one speech, from the whole car crash thing, to "they took our jobs!".
Maybe, I am cynical, and reading too much into this, but this speech just reads like the speech that you would write if you wanted to court racists without loosing the centre.
It's a pity that this came in the week when Fine Gael had done something to really impress me.

magick

I am cynical, and reading too much into this

yes


yes you are........

SeanW

I liked what I read - it didn't look like Enda K. was sh1t stirring at all, quite the opposite, it looked like he was genuinely examining the practical issues with immigration and lack of adequate response in language training, law and order, employment standards. I thought it was a very good point he made about the Rules Of the Road being over 10 years old and not translated, and the loopholes in the laws relating to drivers licenses, penalty points etc.

He has a point on all of it because if you listen to the real crap-stirrers and racists their complaints are all "they don't respect the rules of the road" "they can't speak English" "they're here to take our jobs" and so on. Most of this nonsense can be dispelled with proper governmental policy on immigration that limits the flow to what the economy can handle, but gives those immigrants full legal protection and good employment standards, applies penalty points to all EU licenses, and places more burden on immigrants to integrate while giving them all the information and education they need to do so.

Bravo to Mr. Kenny for telling it like it is. Fixing all this, won't happen overnight. But, on this issue like many others, the alternative coalition gives me the impression that they're serious about doing the business.

ballooba

SeanW wrote:

Bravo to Mr. Kenny for telling it like it is. Fixing all this, won't happen overnight. But, on this issue like many others, the alternative coalition gives me the impression that they're serious about doing the business.

I take it you'll be voting Rainbow now.

Zombrex

ballooba wrote:

Judging on your comments it would appear that you still haven't read the speech.

Excuse me I did read it, and as your post shows he did say that.

He is linking "Celtic" and "Christian" with "Irish". WE are a Celtic and Christian people. Who is "we" exactly. Was Enda's speech not for any of the Irish who are black, hispanic Asian, Muslim, Jewish (of course not, they aren't really that Irish are they? I mean, they just kinda live here. But that isn't who "we" are)

This idea simply feeds the idea that non-celtic, non-Christian people are simply not Irish. They are not part of what it is to be Irish.

It is the sub-conscious drawing of the line in the sand that happens every day to a black or Asian Irish person (which many would consider an oxymoron)

They live here. They work here. They were born here. They grew up here. But they aren't "us"

We must intergrate them, we must learn to live along side them, everything is good. But they aren't "us"

To a black kid of African descent who was born here and considers himself as "Irish" as everyone else this patronising way of viewing people different to the classical view of "Irish" is the underlining problem.

I would imagine that most people reading this will probably have no idea what I'm talking about, because this attitude is so entrenched in societies sub-conscious ideas of what is Irish. "But we are all celtic and christian, that is what "irish" is, majority rules, so whats the problem? If they don't like it they can leave."

oscarBravo

Wicknight, I'd venture to suggest that you're making a mountain out of a molehill. Is it absolutely necessary to shoot down every vague generalisation by pointing out the exception, even when the generalisation is made in the context of promoting inclusion?

For example: if I were to describe Ireland as an English-speaking country, would you splutter indignantly that I'm discriminating against those for whom it's not their first language? If I describe it as a rainy country, would you feel the need to point out that it was sunny a couple of days last week?

ballooba

Wicknight wrote:

Excuse me I did read it, and as your post shows he did say that.

So you are still maintaining that Enda called Ireland a "Celtic Christian State"?!?

Wicknight wrote:

He is linking "Celtic" and "Christian" with "Irish". WE are a Celtic and Christian people. Who is "we" exactly. Was Enda's speech not for any of the Irish who are black, hispanic Asian, Muslim, Jewish (of course not, they aren't really that Irish are they? I mean, they just kinda live here. But that isn't who "we" are)

Would those people be immigrants? Or are they "Native Irish"? Do you think they would like to cut themselves off completely from the native culture of the home of their parents and grandparents?

How do the classifications on the page linked below sit with you? Note the people who have classified themselves as Irish English, Irish-American, Irish-European, Irish-Other. Why didn't these people just tick the box that said Irish?
http://www.census.ie/statistics/persclassbynationality2002.htm

Zombrex

oscarBravo wrote:

Wicknight, I'd venture to suggest that you're making a mountain out of a molehill. Is it absolutely necessary to shoot down every vague generalisation by pointing out the exception, even when the generalisation is made in the context of promoting inclusion?

It is when you are talking about the attitudes of the Irish to what we consider to be "Irish"

You don't have to go very far on this forum to find posters who would actually state that being "Irish" does mean coming from Celtic Christian roots.

I'm not saying Enda is a raving racist. I understand that his speech was in good faith. But it is yet another example of this underlying sub-conscious idea in the society as a whole about what is actually Irish.

This has been a problem for the entire debate on immigration since the 90s. It is nearly always phrased in a "them and us" manner, even when people have good intentions.

You cannot tackle the issue of multiculturalism when the underlying attitude facing people from different roots and backgrounds than the traditional "Celtic/Christian" is that they aren't really "Irish"

oscarBravo wrote:

For example: if I were to describe Ireland as an English-speaking country, would you splutter indignantly that I'm discriminating against those for whom it's not their first language?

Well as you yourself pointed out to me he didn't describe the country, he describe the people.

If I said, "we are an English speaking people" would you not infer from that that I did not consider those who did not actually speak English to be the people I was addressing?

I find it rather ironic that people were giving out to me for misquoting Enda and pointing out that he actually said "people" not country when in fact the choice of the word "people" emphasises my point a lot more than the word "country".

Zombrex

ballooba wrote:

So you are still maintaining that Enda called Ireland a "Celtic Christian State"?!?

No, I happily take that back. What he actually said was much worse

ballooba wrote:

Would those people be immigrants? Or are they "Native Irish"?

Thank you for proving my point ballooba :rolleyes:

ballooba wrote:

Why didn't these people just tick the box that said Irish?

I would imagine because they have joint nationality. You will notice that all these people are still counted under "Irish".

Tea drinker

Hi Wicknight
I think Kenny's "post" is an honest attempt to look at immigration in an open fashion.
I think that we need to be open to deal with issues like Kenny has raised. Otherwise, we would resemble the dreaded storm fronters.
If we walk around on eggshells constantly we are making a BIG, politically correct lie.

I THINK Irish people will have (and are entitled to) an underlying subconcious notion of what the vague "nationhood" / Irish people "thing" is. Many of these will differ significantly. Many will contain something of a religous nature, many will have diddly di i in there.
Why is this vague and differing notion of Irishness a problem?
To whom is it a problem?
Is some of the problem because it differs from your notion? We are all entitled to our opinion:) ...as are you.

When I say we, I mean all the catholic, Aetheist, was catholic and is now Aetheist, Catholic when drunk, Muslim when sober, Old protestand stock, New protestants, bad BMW mechanics/tyre fitters. Young people, old people shy and outgoing people, moneygrabbers, donors.
I'm tired!.
Wow look at all the people I left out!!!!!!!!
Please note this post is ONLY wrote in English. As such it is only directed at english speakers. Which makes me a bad man?

Tea drinker

From kenny's speech:

ballooba wrote:

and to avoid the mistakes that were made elsewhere..

Does anyone have clarification on what the mistakes were? He would surely have this info to hand, to back up the statement

ballooba

Wicknight wrote:

Thank you for proving my point ballooba :rolleyes:

Questions don't prove a point, and you didn't answer them.

ballooba

Tea drinker wrote:

Does anyone have clarification on what the mistakes were? He would surely have this info to hand, to back up the statement

France would an obvious example, including the 2005 riots.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France_riots

Zombrex

ballooba wrote:

Questions don't prove a point, and you didn't answer them.

You presume with your question that these non-celtic, non-christian, people aren't "Irish", that they have some other "native culture" somewhere else to hang on to. You then ask do I not think they would want to hang on to that?

Not only is this an assumption that these people aren't from "Irish" culture, but also that they might not actually wish to be from Irish culture.

As I said, thank you for proving my point.

Zombrex

Tea drinker wrote:

I THINK Irish people will have (and are entitled to) an underlying subconcious notion of what the vague "nationhood" / Irish people "thing" is.

"Celtic and Christian" isn't particularly "vague" Tea Drinker

Tea drinker wrote:

Wow look at all the people I left out!!!!!!!!
Please note this post is ONLY wrote in English. As such it is only directed at english speakers. Which makes me a bad man?

The fact that you are trying to classify it is the problem Tea Drinker.

Surely an Irish person, from the point of view of personal identity (rather than legally), is anyone who thinks of themselves as Irish. If we start of defining what "Irish" is then we start off defining what it isn't. For a speech that was supposed to deal with inclusion starting off with a statement that excludes a large number of people who consider themselves "Irish" seems a little counter productive. But it does, accidentally, highlight this issue.

oscarBravo

Wicknight wrote:

You don't have to go very far on this forum to find posters who would actually state that being "Irish" does mean coming from Celtic Christian roots.

...which they believe implicitly and state explicitly. The fact that some people have that particular exclusionist attitude isn't (IMO) a good reason to read that interpretation into a speech, particularly when the broad context of the speech runs counter to the beliefs of the kind of people you're talking about.

Wicknight wrote:

I'm not saying Enda is a raving racist. I understand that his speech was in good faith. But it is yet another example of this underlying sub-conscious idea in the society as a whole about what is actually Irish.

Only if you insist on interpreting it as an exclusionist stance, which it clearly wasn't. I'm strongly opposed to the idea that every speech must be framed in terms that make it impossible to read a worst-case interpretation from it, particularly on the grounds that it can't be done.

Wicknight wrote:

You cannot tackle the issue of multiculturalism when the underlying attitude facing people from different roots and backgrounds than the traditional "Celtic/Christian" is that they aren't really "Irish"

The problem is, Kenny didn't say that. I'm pretty sure he didn't mean to imply it. What you're saying is that because it's possible for some people to take that meaning from it, he shouldn't have said it. I disagree.

Wicknight wrote:

If I said, "we are an English speaking people" would you not infer from that that I did not consider those who did not actually speak English to be the people I was addressing?

Depending on context, no, I wouldn't. If you said "we, the Irish, are an English speaking people" I'd pragmatically assume that you were referring to the fact that the vast majority of Irish people speak English, and wouldn't jump to the conclusion that you were sneakily trying to accuse Gaeltacht dwellers of non-Irishness. Because that would be silly.

If I described Pakistan as a Muslim country, or Pakistanis as a Muslim people, would you leap to the conclusion that I was trying to somehow dis Christian Pakistanis?

Zombrex

oscarBravo wrote:

...which they believe implicitly and state explicitly. The fact that some people have that particular exclusionist attitude isn't (IMO) a good reason to read that interpretation into a speech, particularly when the broad context of the speech runs counter to the beliefs of the kind of people you're talking about.

Oscar you are missing the point. I'm not reading this speech as exclusionist, I'm sure Kenny meant it to sound inclusionist.

The point is that his attitude expressed in this speech already defines what is inclusion on his terms.

There is very little point saying in good faith "hello we are Irish and we will welcome you into our land" if you are talking to some who is actually Irish.

oscarBravo wrote:

Only if you insist on interpreting it as an exclusionist stance, which it clearly wasn't.

If that what you think my point was then you have missed it. This isn't about inclusion and exclusion. It is about how you define "us" and "them", since ultimately what you choose to include or exclude is defined along those terms.

Say I am chatting to a black man in a pub. Being the liberal nice tolerant inclusionist kinda guy I say "Look man, I am so happy you are here. I think it is fine, its great. I welcome you with open arms to my land and my culture and I hope your culture intergrates and enriches our culture. I wish all the rest of my Irish brothers were more tolerant, more welcoming to you, your family and your culture"

The black man turns around and goes "I'm Irish you partionising w**ker" and walks off

I go "What was his problem! I was just trying to be nice, trying to let him know that I welcome him to my culture with open arms. No need to be so rude about it!"

As far as I'm concerned I was being inclusionist, being tolerant. The point I that escaped me was that this black man was actually a black Irish man, he already was my Irish brother

It doesn't matter how good intentioned we are if we are missing the actually point that how we define "them" and how we define "us" is already wrong.

oscarBravo wrote:

The problem is, Kenny didn't say that. I'm pretty sure he didn't mean to imply it.

Why are you "pretty such" he didn't mean to imply that?

oscarBravo wrote:

What you're saying is that because it's possible for some people to take that meaning from it, he shouldn't have said it. I disagree.

No, I'm not.

I'm saying that that comment was indicative of this underlying attitude a lot of Irish have towards people who don't fit a certain mold of what is or is not "Irish"

Kenny cannot tackle these issues if he is still holding on to that idea, as many Irish are. I doubt he is even aware he actually is, he probably thought that his comment was perfectly fine.

oscarBravo wrote:

If I described Pakistan as a Muslim country, or Pakistanis as a Muslim people, would you leap to the conclusion that I was trying to somehow dis Christian Pakistanis?

No.

But I would jump to the conclusion that your comments were indictive of, and supporting, a general idea in society that Christian Pakistanis are not proper Pakistanis.

You might mean no harm by that. But it is still what is implied.

If that attitude wasn't already in place within society then people wouldn't phrase things as they do, in that way.

What purpose does Kenny's comments serve if not to unite the people he is addressing under the common shared culture of Celtic roots and Christian belief? He was saying that we celtic christian people must be tolerant of these other people, we must show them open arms. The problem is that it is the man in the pub again. "We" aren't just celtic, "we" are also black, Asian, middle eastern etc and "we" aren't just Christian, we are also atheist, Muslim, Hindu etc.

Its all very well to speak of inclusion. But so long as it is "us" including "them" it won't work, not in the long term.

ballooba

Wicknight wrote:

"Surely an Irish person, from the point of view of personal identity (rather than legally), is anyone who thinks of themselves as Irish.

Even people who have never set foot on the island?
Even people who have holidayed here?
What about people who have spent a summer here?
What about people who have come here to work for a few years before returning home?
What about people who have moved here permanently but grew up elsewhere?
What about 3rd generation immigrants?
What about descendants of the Vikings?

Of course you have to defne what being "Irish" is.

is_that_so

Wicknight wrote:

I'm saying that that comment was indicative of this underlying attitude a lot of Irish have towards people who don't fit a certain mold of what is or is not "Irish"

Kenny cannot tackle these issues if he is still holding on to that idea, as many Irish are. I doubt he is even aware he actually is, he probably thought that his comment was perfectly fine.

What purpose does Kenny's comments serve if not to unite the people he is addressing under the common shared culture of Celtic roots and Christian belief?

With greatest of respect I would suggest that you are indulging in pedantry, much the kind of the thing that Sinn Fein are past masters of. Any set of words can be digested, parsed, analysed and interpreted.

Your own position is exclusionist . You are effectively dismissing an awful lot of people, who might consider Kenny's speech a message that makes perfect sense, as being wrong-thinking or worse.


TBH this discussion has really wandered off-track completely

For the record I am comfortable with Pakistan as a Muslim country and Ireland as an English-speaking country.
They are general truisms that serve as a starting point for this discussion but they might not be so for another. Otherwise the purpose of the discussion is lost in bickering about discourse.

SeanW

Umm ... up until about 20 years ago Ireland was almost totally celtic, Catholic and white. Migration was going the other way - out. We've only had any immigration and different peoples and cultures in the last decade or so.

So to say that Ireland comes from a Christian, Celtic tradition is a fair comment. I don't think Enda Kenny said that you have to be white, Celtic and Catholic to be 'Irish' and I don't think he meant it either. So I don't think its fair to brand him some kind of subconcious exclusionist or whatever you're saying.

Zombrex

ballooba wrote:

Even people who have never set foot on the island?
Even people who have holidayed here?
What about people who have spent a summer here?
What about people who have come here to work for a few years before returning home?
What about people who have moved here permanently but grew up elsewhere?
What about 3rd generation immigrants?
What about descendants of the Vikings?

You are still trying to define for yourself what you consider to be "Irish" so you can define others and say "he is Irish", "he isn't Irish"

Maybe you should find someone who has never set foot on the island but who consider themselves Irish and ask them why they consider themselves Irish

ballooba wrote:

Of course you have to defne what being "Irish" is.

You do for logistical things like passports and citizenship (though there are plenty who don't have a passport but who consider themselves Irish, and plenty who do have a passport but don't consider themselves Irish)

But in the grand scheme of things, no you don't.

I would ask you how you define the "Irish" people.

Zombrex

is_that_so wrote:

Your own position is exclusionist . You are effectively dismissing an awful lot of people, who might consider Kenny's speech a message that makes perfect sense, as being wrong-thinking or worse.

Ok, 2 points

Firstly what am I excluding these people from?

Secondly for me to exclude these people from anything one must first accept that yes that is what Kenny meant and yes there are a large number of people out there who think like this. If that is the case then my point is proven anyway.

is_that_so wrote:

For the record I am comfortable with Pakistan as a Muslim country and Ireland as an English-speaking country.

Are you happy to classify the Irish as Celtic and Christian?

is_that_so wrote:

They are general truisms that serve as a starting point for this discussion but they might not be so for another.

Which axioms would that be then...?

ballooba

Just an FYI, In case it appears that I am saying that Ireland is a Celtic and Christian country. I'm not advocating that view at all.

I do think it was a mistake for Enda to use that language. Maybe he should have just said "As a nation we understand" or something like that. I don't think that he intended to appeal to the Stormfront types in his speech.

People have criticised him also for referencing topics which are popular with Stormfront types. Of course you sometimes have to use the same language and topics when countering an argument. Look at the way FF has attempted to take back things like the Easter Parade from the Provos. That Kenny is seeking to address the issues popular with Stormfront types in a sensible and positive fashion is the way forward in my opinion.

Being Irish is something that is very hard to nail down, but I still don't buy into Wicknight's view that everyone who thinks they are Irish is Irish.

Note that I have mentioned Stormfront a few times in this thread. I'm not suggesting that groups like Residents Against Racism are much better either.

oscarBravo

Wicknight wrote:

It is about how you define "us" and "them", since ultimately what you choose to include or exclude is defined along those terms.

...only if you've decided in advance that the point of the exercise is to define "us" versus "them".

Wicknight wrote:

Say I am chatting to a black man in a pub. Being the liberal nice tolerant inclusionist kinda guy I say "Look man, I am so happy you are here. I think it is fine, its great. I welcome you with open arms to my land and my culture and I hope your culture intergrates and enriches our culture. I wish all the rest of my Irish brothers were more tolerant, more welcoming to you, your family and your culture"

The black man turns around and goes "I'm Irish you partionising w**ker" and walks off

I go "What was his problem! I was just trying to be nice, trying to let him know that I welcome him to my culture with open arms. No need to be so rude about it!"

As far as I'm concerned I was being inclusionist, being tolerant. The point I that escaped me was that this black man was actually a black Irish man, he already was my Irish brother

It's a flawed analogy, for a simple reason: the audience is completely different. You're representing Enda's speech as if it was aimed at a non-Celtic (whatever that means), non-Christian audience as a subtle dig. On the contrary, it was aimed at the so-called Celtic/Christian audience - the vast majority of Irish people, and the ones who are used to being an even bigger majority.

The bottom line is, you're taking a speech that's aimed at getting Irish people of all stripes to work at getting along together, and twisting it into a subtle subconscious projection of white superiority.

Wicknight wrote:

It doesn't matter how good intentioned we are if we are missing the actually point that how we define "them" and how we define "us" is already wrong.

What if we're not actually trying to define "us" or "them", but people keep interpreting our every word, thought and gesture as if we were?

Wicknight wrote:

Why are you "pretty such" he didn't mean to imply that?

It runs contrary to the thread of the speech as a whole.

Wicknight wrote:

I'm saying that that comment was indicative of this underlying attitude a lot of Irish have towards people who don't fit a certain mold of what is or is not "Irish"

...and I'm saying that although it is possible to interpret it in that way, it's no more valid an interpretation than any other, and probably less valid than most given the context of the speech.

Wicknight wrote:

But I would jump to the conclusion that your comments were indictive of, and supporting, a general idea in society that Christian Pakistanis are not proper Pakistanis.

And you'd be wrong.

Wicknight wrote:

He was saying that we celtic christian people must be tolerant of these other people, we must show them open arms.

That's a bad thing, how?

Wicknight wrote:

The problem is that it is the man in the pub again. "We" aren't just celtic, "we" are also black, Asian, middle eastern etc and "we" aren't just Christian, we are also atheist, Muslim, Hindu etc.

It's fair to assume that any member of a minority race or sect in this country is well aware of the need to be tolerant towards minority races and sects, which means they're not the target audience.

Zombrex

SeanW wrote:

Umm ... up until about 20 years ago Ireland was almost totally celtic, Catholic and white.

Almost being the key word there.

"We" are not a Celtic Christian people because I am not Celtic nor am I Christian.

SeanW wrote:

So to say that Ireland comes from a Christian, Celtic tradition is a fair comment.

Except that isn't what he said. I find it rather amusing that I'm being given out to for reading to much into what he said when people seem to be falling over themselves to re-phrase his comments differently so they say something else.

SeanW wrote:

I don't think Enda Kenny said that you have to be white, Celtic and Catholic to be 'Irish' and I don't think he meant it either.

He didn't say you have to be, or you don't have to be. It didn't even get that far. He simply defined that as what we are. The only problem is that isn't what "we" are.

As a Celtic and Christian people, we understand...