Ireland is now only 82% Native Irish.

Water John

Is that Eugene Nicks?

Lone Stone

i love Brazilian women

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Do people care how low that % gets? Would it matter if there was a hypothetical surge in people moving over, say the UN migration pact actually ends up being implemented as its written, would it matter to the people on this thread if the foreign born population increased so much that in their kids adulthood the population born here became something like 50% or less?

Would that be an issue

recedite wrote: »

That's an interesting question, and while it seems difficult or impossible to answer, it is in fact quite simple to answer.
The answer is No, not after it happens. And before it happens, they are mostly oblivious to it.


After it gets to that level, the people redefine themselves as "a nation of immigrants" and "the majority" are quite happy then with that situation.
You can see this effect working in London and some of the other cities of the UK. They have a very different attitude to issues such as Brexit when compared with some other parts of England that are still inhabited by "native" English people.

And then its already far too late

Franz Von Peppercorn

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Just stop.

You obviously haven't a notion. And I, personally, take huge exception to history being used to promote some xenophobic agenda.

The Gaels didn't arrive until around 2,500 BCE.
There is a 12th century work called Lebor Gabála Érenn (The Book of Invasions) which contains the origin myths/stories of the Gaels (Sythia to Egypt to Iberia to Ireland). It tells how the Gaels defeated the previous inhabitants of Ireland.

I don't think people take the lebor Gabála Érenn seriously these days. The genetic evidence is that the then Irish were pretty much the descendants of the original inhabitants, as they would in fact tend to grow to the then carrying capacity of the Island. Its hard to even find viking genetics in Ireland.

Ireland is an Island - it has no "native" population. What it has is a population consisting of the descendants of various immigrants - some of whom arrived over 10,000 years ago in the Stone Age and some of whom arrived far more recently.

By that logic there were no native Americans either. In fact theres no native population anywhere, once you can prove that a few thousand years ago somebody intermarried somewhere.

The blood of the Irish contains Gael, Norse, Dane, Anglo, Saxon, Norman, Welsh, Pict, French, Basque.... English, Polish, Nigerian,... all depending on when people's ancestors arrived on this ISLAND.

Mostly Gael though. And it really doesn't contain the Anglos or the Saxons as a separate people, and very little Welsh, Pict, French, even Danes. And since you probably think that all of these people don't really exist either as separate people then why bring them up.

What bugs me is the modern ideology that ethnic groups don't exist at all, you don't have to believe in "purity" to assume the existence of ethnic groups just the existence of a culture, language and laws passed down by a people who, like any group, will absorb immigrants ( or captives in some cases) over time.

Church on Tuesday

vladmydad wrote: »

But does anyone find the complete silence on the issue a little Orwellian, I mean it’s a radical societal change in just 20 years with unknown ramifications for future generations and yet it’s just not spoken of.

The ramifications may be that we have a half decent football team within the next 20 years.

Atoms for Peace

Mitochondria have their own DNA and are strikingly similar to bacteria. This could possibly be the result of symbioses of single cell organisms which led to the creation of Eukaryotic cells and eventually us. So therefore we are basically descended from "germs" and continue to pass on their dna.

greencap

dxhound2005 wrote: »

The Census.

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cp8iter/p8iter/p8itd/

Where did you get your figure from?

Remembered it from a YouTube video by that computing forever guy.

If you're going to start a whole new thread with a declaration and a topic centering entirely on statistics, then maybe, you know...include the source of the statistic.

greencap

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Not my stats but I assume its the census.

Ah here we go:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_Republic_of_Ireland#Ethnic_groups

Thanks, finally.

"(total White: 92.4%)" . Looks like this country won't be looking much different any time soon. OP fear mongering.

Chinasea

vladmydad wrote: »

Ireland is only 82% native Irish

There is no debate in Irish media or politics about this and we have never voted on the issue. In fact it’s actually taboo. What are your thoughts?

15.5% of which are cooking your pizzas, delivery your junk food, cleaning up puke in hospitals, collecting and disposing of your rubbish and waste, cleaning toilets etc. Never mind them having no-where to live, cause gawd forbid they might even dare and ask for some help towards rent or even think of putting themselves on a social housing list for fear of mobbing.

As for your "taboo reference". Actually I wish the media would focus and expose more the likes of these racist myths that are constantly being floated and peddled on social media as if they are real. There are several alone posted daily in this little dark corner of pure hate & hysteria.

Franz Von Peppercorn

greencap wrote: »

Thanks, finally.

"(total White: 92.4%)" . Looks like this country won't be looking much different any time soon. OP fear mongering.

White Irish 82%. Whites have different cultures and ethnicities.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Chinasea wrote: »

15.5% of which are cooking your pizzas, delivery your junk food, cleaning up puke in hospitals, collecting and disposing of your rubbish and waste, cleaning toilets etc.

Oh. No upper class jobs then? Shocking if true.

Never mind them having no-where to live, cause gawd forbid they might even dare and ask for some help towards rent or even think of putting themselves on a social housing list for fear of mobbing.

There are obviously resource issues in terms of housing etc.

As for your "taboo reference". Actually I wish the media would focus and expose more the likes of these racist myths that are constantly being floated and peddled on social media as if they are real. There are several alone posted daily in this little dark corner of pure hate & hysteria.

Like what? Nobody here has said anything racist as far as I can see. Except perhaps attacks on the inbred Irish.

Your argument is a fairly good example of how debate is designed to be shut down. As I said before, in the modern age we cant really expect nor want full 100% irishness on the island.

However how much can Ireland absorb in a generation? Legit question.

Chinasea

Chinasea wrote: »

15.5% of which are cooking your pizzas, delivery your junk food, cleaning up puke in hospitals, collecting and disposing of your rubbish and waste, cleaning toilets etc. Never mind them having no-where to live, cause gawd forbid they might even dare and ask for some help towards rent or even think of putting themselves on a social housing list for fear of mobbing.

As for your "taboo reference". Actually I wish the media would focus and expose more the likes of these racist myths that are constantly being floated and peddled on social media as if they are real. There are several alone posted daily in this little dark corner of pure hate & hysteria.

The unemployment rate for all recent immigrants was 20 per cent though there were large variations by nationality. Brazilians 30 per cent of those in the labour force were unemployed, while only 4.5 per cent of German national immigrants were in this category.

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cp11eoi/cp11eoi/lfnmfl/

Black Africans recorded the highest unemployment rate (36 per cent), and were four times more likely to be unemployed than White Irish individuals.

https://www.esri.ie/news/ethnicity-and-nationality-in-the-irish-labour-market/

If you look at it economically then there are preferable nationalities i.e German versus Black African and Brazilian. This is whether or not they are working under the counter as that doesnt benefit us either.

It is not racist to point this out and it is not racist to have preferences based on facts. The other can of worms is the islamic element which is a security issue. I wouldnt like to see this kind of thing happening in Ireland:

...in Belgium there is enough to have started political parties, with aims for an islamic state, and they have election success. They literally sound like ISIS.

In 2018, they candidated in 28 municipalities. Its goals are an Islamic state. Its policies include men and women to be separated on public transport, schools must be forced to offer halal meat and anyone must be able to wear a headscarf anywhere. Its policy is to replace the civil and penal laws of Belgium with Sharia law

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Belgium#Islam_party

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=108885912&postcount=504

RWCNT

Lone Stone wrote: »

i love Brazilian women

https://youtu.be/29OLhebbj5c

dxhound2005

greencap wrote: »

Thanks, finally.

"(total White: 92.4%)" . Looks like this country won't be looking much different any time soon. OP fear mongering.

Out of a matter of interest, who told you that 7% of our population are Travellers?

Lefty Bicek

Whether or not mass-immigration has worked, it is a disgrace that the people of Ireland were, and have been, ignored and lied to. As they were, by eg Dick Roche, Proinsias de Rossa et al.

And still are.

They did this aided and abetted by useful idiots in the media. Further down the intellectual food chain, we find the kind supercilious fluteheads that we see on this forum and others.

There is a lot of merit in the old saying 'When in Rome, do as the Romans do.' In other words, multiculturalism must be abandoned as a failed experiment. It does not work, it is detrimental. This has been acknowledged by Merkel and Cameron. We don't have a colonial legacy to atone for, so we needn't go down that path anyway.

Practically - large parts of many British cities are sh1tholes on account of being overwhelmed by people from backward parts of the globe, who are sullen, non-integrating, non-working, ungrateful, and have a mediaeval world-view.

Even the immigrants who arrived in Britain forty, fifty years ago and worked hard - their grandchildren who have never known anything else except Britain, and the liberal comfortable life, are the most dogmatic, the most disaffected, the most virulent anti-Westerners. It's a mental illness.

It's laughable to see the right-on's squirming about all this. However, we don't need to import anyone who is ambivalent about Western values. We just don't need them.

It'll be interesting to see the influence on Irish life a generation from now of the children and grandchildren of Polish immigrants to Ireland. In general, the Poles have a pretty strong feeling of ethnic homogeneity, aren't overburdened with liberal squeamishness, and don't have much truck with ingrate outsiders.

If anyone can find news reports of the Polish authorities being forced to erect security barriers in the main shopping districts of their cities this Christmas, can you please put them up ? I can't find any.

greencap

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Out of a matter of interest, who told you that 7% of our population are Travellers?

I responded to this already.

I was trying to remember stats i had seen elsewhere in a similar topic. I remembered the number as being 7 instead of 0.7.

All this because OP for some reason wasn't arsed to cite his statistics, which the whole thread is based off.

Easily avoided.

greencap

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

White Irish 82%. Whites have different cultures and ethnicities.

So what.

Joe prim

As a pure-bred Tuatha De Danann, I'm angry as hell over this whole Celtic invasion , and can only hope that eventually Lugh lámh órga will strike down that 82% and restore our Golden Age of harp stroking and cock-adorning.

dxhound2005

greencap wrote: »

I responded to this already.

I was trying to remember stats i had seen elsewhere in a similar topic. I remembered the number as being 7 instead of 0.7.

All this because OP for some reason wasn't arsed to cite his statistics, which the whole thread is based off.

Easily avoided.

And you felt entitled to fire out this rant based on some half remembered nonsense. Talk about not being arsed.

OP.

Did you exclude the traveller population from your statistic?

I believe the travellers constitute an additional 7 percent.

I don't know that you did omit this number.

However, if you did, and given that travellers are Irish then I'll be forced to consider your original post to contain a lie by omission.

If this is the case then you are a steaming sack of sht.

Please cite your statistic OP.

Because I smell horse sht.

Bottom line is that inviting half the world into Europe disenfranchises the locals, especially the younger generation who are competing for jobs and housing. Its a dick move. Ireland has a relatively small population and can be overwhelmed with numbers very easily. I truly believe the do gooders have no notion just how many people there are out there in the third world who would love to come over.

TomSweeney

vladmydad wrote: »

Without the racist, xenophobic accusations and all that crap, does anyone have any concerns about just how rapidly the Irish people are decreasing in Ireland ?
It’s a very recent phenomenon and given that immigration into Ireland is ever increasing and that the birth rates of the “new” Irish are dramatically higher than natives. It is inevitable that 82% will soon be 70% , 55%, 40% etc.

There is no debate in Irish media or politics about this and we have never voted on the issue. In fact it’s actually taboo. What are your thoughts?

Ideally though when people grow up here they will be Irish, so their parents might be from someplace else but they will speak with Irish accents and be culturally Irish - Ideally

If areas areghettoised and people don't want to integrate - that's another topic.

TomSweeney

vladmydad wrote: »

Don’t the people make the place ?
I mean if I went to Japan in 40 years and saw (hypothetically) 50% Nigerian , am I in Japan anymore ?

If they speak Japanese and have adapted to Japanese culture then yes ... you really are in Japan

Lefty Bicek

TomSweeney wrote: »

If they speak Japanese and have adapted to Japanese culture then yes ... you really are in Japan

The Japanese attitude towards you might be a bit more nuanced though.

greencap

dxhound2005 wrote: »

And you felt entitled to fire out this rant based on some half remembered nonsense. Talk about not being arsed.

OP.

Did you exclude the traveller population from your statistic?

I believe the travellers constitute an additional 7 percent.

I don't know that you did omit this number.

However, if you did, and given that travellers are Irish then I'll be forced to consider your original post to contain a lie by omission.

If this is the case then you are a steaming sack of sht.

Please cite your statistic OP.

Because I smell horse sht.

Yes.

I did search.

Couldn't find the information.

Hence the word 'believe' and the questions in my post.

It is an openly speculative response, not a new thread offered as fact.

So is not held to the same standard.

Now do you have an actual point to make, or are you just going to clog the thread up with more pointless digressions?

If you're going to make a thread entirely centered on a 'shock' statistic, there's a burden of actually citing the stat.

dxhound2005

greencap wrote: »

Yes.

I did search.

Couldn't find the information.

Hence the word 'believe' and the questions in my post.

It is an openly speculative response, not a new thread offered as fact.

So is not held to the same standard.

Now do you have an actual point to make, or are you just going to clog the thread up with more pointless digressions?

If you're going to make a thread entirely centered on a 'shock' statistic, there's a burden of actually citing the stat.

I agree. And my contribution was not a digression, but totally germane to this requirement. You should have cited facts.

4068ac1elhodqr

dxhound2005 wrote: »

I believe the travellers constitute an additional 7 percent.

Think that's '0.7'%, not actual '7.0%' (which would seem dramatically high).

2016 estimates:
Irish 82.2%, Irish travelers 0.7%, other white 9.5%, Asian 2.1%, black 1.4%, other 1.5%, unspecified 2.6%

One interesting thing to note is that the Irish in the UK (with many decades, if not centuries of steady neighbourly migration) - have been overtaken by a country from the far-end of Europe (Romania), and all within a very short time span.

greencap

dxhound2005 wrote: »

I agree. And my contribution was not a digression, but totally germane to this requirement. You should have cited facts.

I just told you, I tried.

I couldn't find them.

That's why I didn't say the number 'IS' in my post.

I said I believed the number to be 7%, and openly asked for confirmation.

What is your malfunction?

dxhound2005

greencap wrote: »

I just told you, I tried.

I couldn't find them.

That's why I didn't say the number 'IS' in my post.

I said I believed the number to be 7%, and openly asked for confirmation.

What is your malfunction?

Ten times less than yours.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

18% Non Native Irish isn't too bad. British citizens alone make up over 2% of that and Polish account for about 3%. The remaining C12% is broken down over almost 200 nationalities. A reasonable mix.

greencap

Rey Wrong Sympathizer wrote: »

Think that's '0.7'%, not actual '7.0%' (which would seem dramatically high).

2016 estimates:
Irish 82.2%, Irish travelers 0.7%, other white 9.5%, Asian 2.1%, black 1.4%, other 1.5%, unspecified 2.6%

One interesting thing to note is that the Irish in the UK (with many decades, if not centuries of steady neighbourly migration) - have been overtaken by a country from the far-end of Europe (Romania), and all within a very short time span.

Thank you, this has been covered already.

There's a few posts clogging up this thread now, which could have been avoided if the OP had just backed up his assertion.

Lefty Bicek

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Ten times less than yours.

0.7 is ten times less than 7.0, which you didn't comprehend a minute ago.

Fast learner

Ash.J.Williams

I always felt Irish, and grew up raised Irish but the last 10 years I've identified as post cromwellian Anglo saxon planter. Always wondered as a kid why our land was flat and the Catholics had the hilly land.

wakka12

Billy86 wrote: »

We have the highest birth rate and lowest death rate in the EU, no?

Added to that, my girlfriend is Canadian. If we moved back to Dublin and had a kid, that kid would be an Irish native. This would also be true if my partner were Chinese, Nigerian, Indonesian, Brazilian etc, non white and the child was their colour of skin and not pasty white like mine.

Irelands birth rate is 'high' in europe because countries like italy and spain have such incredibly low birth rates that it will cripple the countries demographic distribution in not so long, irelands birth rate is low in world terms and will lead to great demographic problems in future, just at a slower rate than other euro nations

Franz Von Peppercorn

greencap wrote: »

Yes.

I did search.

Couldn't find the information.

Hence the word 'believe' and the questions in my post.

It is an openly speculative response, not a new thread offered as fact.

So is not held to the same standard.

Now do you have an actual point to make, or are you just going to clog the thread up with more pointless digressions?

If you're going to make a thread entirely centered on a 'shock' statistic, there's a burden of actually citing the stat.

Its hardly shocking. The census has been out for years. Its not uncommon knowledge.

dxhound2005

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

0.7 is ten times less than 7.0, which you didn't comprehend a minute ago.

Fast learner

That other post somehow managed to put my name over that nonsense. It is their mistake not mine.

greencap

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Ten times less than yours.

You're willfully ignorant at this stage.
Fail.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

0.7 is ten times less than 7.0, which you didn't comprehend a minute ago.

Fast learner

Pretty sure they guy you are responding to did understand the difference between 0.7 and 7. In fact pointed it out.

greencap

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Its hardly shocking. The census has been out for years. Its not uncommon knowledge.

Neither is a lot of stuff.

Unfortunately we don't all know the exact same things, automatically.

Or know things which are said to be true.

Which is why we use 'citation'.

Lefty Bicek

dxhound2005 wrote: »

That other post somehow managed to put my name over that nonsense. It is their mistake not mine.

Indeed it did. My apologies.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=108888436&postcount=277

I was thrown by your post which hadn't put it into quote form...

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=108888307&postcount=270

4068ac1elhodqr

The point about the sheer speed and size of Romanian migration (in the UK) is interesting indeed.

Romanian nationals living in the UK in 2017 (411,000) is a jump of 25% just on the previous year, and the largest increase for any country in a single year.

1m+ Polish
350,000 Irish nationals
346,000 Indians.

The freedom of movement for Romanians is much more recent, than say Poland who joined the EU way back in 2004.
The Polish have been moving to the UK ever since the end of WW2, so have some historical connection, and are of positive influence.
India & Ireland are both native English speakers, but the reducing Irish's influence to their only neighbours of the UK mightn't be good, in a post-brexit world.

IsMiseJoe

dxhound2005 wrote: »

It's in the category of countries with between 1 and 10 citizens living here. Possibly they came when Yugoslavia was a country, and have not felt the need to declare as Bosnian or whatever since.

I understand they can still identify as a Yugoslavian.

Surely they can't be travelling on an old Yugoslavian passport still - for travelling purposes would they have to take up citizenship of one of the other countries that emerged from the break-up of Yugoslavia?

Even for administrative purposes in Ireland would they not need citizenship of an actual country that exists?

greencap

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

Indeed it did. My apologies.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=108888436&postcount=277

I was thrown by your post which hadn't put it into quote form...

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=108888307&postcount=270

Tut tut. Someone made an error.

dxhound2005

IsMiseJoe wrote: »

I understand they can still identify as a Yugoslavian.

Surely they can't be travelling on an old Yugoslavian passport still - for travelling purposes would they have to take up citizenship of one of the other countries that emerged from the break-up of Yugoslavia?

Even for administrative purposes in Ireland would they not need citizenship of an actual country that exists?

It is fewer than 10 people, maybe as few as one.

sasta le

Look how bad all the Muslims are intergating

dxhound2005

Rey Wrong Sympathizer wrote: »

The point about the sheer speed and size of Romanian migration (in the UK) is interesting indeed.

Romanian nationals living in the UK in 2017 (411,000) is a jump of 25% just on the previous year, and the largest increase for any country in a single year.

1m+ Polish
350,000 Irish nationals
346,000 Indians.

The freedom of movement for Romanians is much more recent, than say Poland who joined the EU way back in 2004.
The Polish have been moving to the UK ever since the end of WW2, so have some historical connection, and are of positive influence.
India & Ireland are both native English speakers, but the reducing Irish's influence to their only neighbours of the UK mightn't be good, in a post-brexit world.

The "ethnic" group with the largest increase in recent censuses in the UK is Mixed Race. If someone has grandparents of four different nationalities/races marrying someone with four more and then producing offspring it gets complicated.

Harry Palmr

People falling for a another Putinbot dog-whistle thread. Are the mods asleep or are they all Putinbots?

Graniteville

My father was a good Northern Loyalist Presbyterian with a union jack passport. My mother is from tipp, but her Father was from France.

Does that make me 1/4 french, 1/2 British and a touch Irish. Or because I was born and bred here, am I 100% Irish?

A staff member of mine who is black, but born here to nigerian parents - is she Nigerian or Irish (she says 100% Irish and has a Leinster season ticket to prove it)? Her accent is Irish, she'd put most of us to shame with her fluency in the Irish language and is studying tourism to promote Ireland.

At the end of the day, we're all part of the same world.

Lefty Bicek

Graniteville wrote: »

My father was a good Northern Loyalist Presbyterian with a union jack passport. My mother is from tipp, but her Father was from France.

Does that make me 1/4 french, 1/2 British and a touch Irish. Or because I was born and bred here, am I 100% Irish?

A staff member of mine who is black, but born here to nigerian parents - is she Nigerian or Irish (she says 100% Irish and has a Leinster season ticket to prove it)? Her accent is Irish, she'd put most of us to shame with her fluency in the Irish language and is studying tourism to promote Ireland.

At the end of the day, we're all part of the same world.

Rubbish.

dxhound2005

At the end of the day we all have to get up in the morning.

4068ac1elhodqr

dxhound2005 wrote: »

The "ethnic" group with the largest increase in recent censuses in the UK is Mixed Race. If someone has grandparents of four different nationalities/races marrying someone with four more and then producing offspring it gets complicated.

You seem to confusing inward migration, with birth rates, easy mistake to make?