What are your views on Multiculturalism in Ireland? - Threadbanned User List in OP

weldoninhio

weldoninhio wrote: »

Exactly, any NGO or social justice warrior who wants multiculturalism should be forced to bring their multicult to Africa for five years. Don't be hogging the greatness of multiculture in Europe like some coloniser. Bring it to the masses in Africa.

I think a lot of people misunderstand what it's like to work or volunteer abroad, especially in third world nations. I've done it myself a few times, as a teacher in East Africa. There is a seriously strong feel good factor in volunteering and helping out in these countries... and any person who is supportive of multiculturalism will feel the same as I did. That it was rewarding work, and it felt amazing to meet so many people who were grateful for my efforts.

The SJWs or NGO activists who volunteer and live long term in an African country will simply come back to Ireland even more dedicated towards bringing migrants in, due to the belief that western culture and western economics will help others. There's that virtue signalling that goes on, but it would be even greater for those who can back it up with actual first hand experience of African nations.

The problem I've noticed though is that volunteers are often shielded by the realities of the environment surrounding them. Often, volunteers will be held in compounds, similar to what you find in the M.East, surrounded by other foreigners, all pushing the same agenda. They'll go to select areas, get a taste of the poverty, but won't be forced to come to terms with the reasons why that poverty exists. Just as they fail to take responsibility for their own behavior, they'll extend that to others.

I had a great time on my volunteering trips. Awesome experiences. However, I'm a rather seasoned traveler, with experience of solo travelling throughout Asia, and I don't avoid the dodgy poor areas... and I meet all manner of people. The people who the volunteers are unlikely to meet.

In any case, these people going to a 3rd world nation for a few years won't change their perceptions. It'll simply reinforce them. I know.. I've seen it happen with American volunteers.

RandomName2

Hamachi wrote: »

I don’t have an issue with skills-based, high caliber migration.

I think only racists would be against that. Work visas are a well controlled type of immigration, and one that I'd find hard not to see as wholly beneficial.

Hamachi wrote: »

You speak of ghettoization as if this is a hypothetical in Ireland. It isn’t; it’s happening right now. I live in Dublin 15, the most diverse post code in Dublin. Very noticeable concentrations of particular ethnic groups have already formed out here.

There are large groups of exclusively black youths in Balbriggan. How do they happen to be here? Did their parents all get work visas?

Maybe they are all refugees? :rolleyes:

What's really bad here is that when the state caves in and allows people to remain, they will tend to remain in.. not great financial situations. If they could have achieved skilled employment they could have achieved work visas in the first place. You're going to have areas of specific ethnic minorities that are living in relative deprivation. We've already the misery and criminality that that leads to (Ballymun Towers anyone), but now it has another couple of layers of problems added on top.

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

You always hear from those in power telling you how Ireland is “too white” and there’s plenty of examples lately yet nobody ever says Africa is “too black”.

Still waiting on that pros and cons list.

joe40

Wibbs wrote: »

And yet still we have silence on the answer to this question:



No takers? Surely something so right and obvious should be easily answered? On the other hand the negatives are a doddle to list and give examples of.

I will defer to other posters who have greater knowledge of the situation in Dublin re ghettoization, I'm not all that familiar with the city but fully accept problem exist as described.
I live in the northwest border region, in a large town. There are quite a few immigrants, but probably mostly professionals.
I feel the experience my kids have of going to school with many different cultures, black, Asian, European etc has enriched their lives compared to I had in the same town growing up in the 80s.
Conversely I work in a large secondary school in the North about 20 miles away. 1600 pupils virtually all white Irish Catholic, It's grand but still has the usual sec school problems. The lack of immigrants does not confer an advantage. Most kids with ambition just want to get out of the town.

I feel my own kids are better prepared for a globalised world. I'm not dismissing the problems that exist but if all the immigrants left my town tomorrow I think it would be a poorer for it.

weldoninhio

Deleted User wrote: »

I think a lot of people misunderstand what it's like to work or volunteer abroad, especially in third world nations. I've done it myself a few times, as a teacher in East Africa. There is a seriously strong feel good factor in volunteering and helping out in these countries... and any person who is supportive of multiculturalism will feel the same as I did. That it was rewarding work, and it felt amazing to meet so many people who were grateful for my efforts.

The SJWs or NGO activists who volunteer and live long term in an African country will simply come back to Ireland even more dedicated towards bringing migrants in, due to the belief that western culture and western economics will help others. There's that virtue signalling that goes on, but it would be even greater for those who can back it up with actual first hand experience of African nations.

The problem I've noticed though is that volunteers are often shielded by the realities of the environment surrounding them. Often, volunteers will be held in compounds, similar to what you find in the M.East, surrounded by other foreigners, all pushing the same agenda. They'll go to select areas, get a taste of the poverty, but won't be forced to come to terms with the reasons why that poverty exists. Just as they fail to take responsibility for their own behavior, they'll extend that to others.

I had a great time on my volunteering trips. Awesome experiences. However, I'm a rather seasoned traveler, with experience of solo travelling throughout Asia, and I don't avoid the dodgy poor areas... and I meet all manner of people. The people who the volunteers are unlikely to meet.

In any case, these people going to a 3rd world nation for a few years won't change their perceptions. It'll simply reinforce them. I know.. I've seen it happen with American volunteers.

I'm not talking about poverty tourists doing a gap year. Send them over to stay. No compounds, housing next to the natives, for integration purposes. It'll massively improve Africa. Think of all the different foods they'd bring to the area.

weldoninhio

weldoninhio wrote: »

I'm not talking about poverty tourists doing a gap year. Send them over to stay. No compounds, housing next to the natives, for integration purposes. It'll massively improve Africa. Think of all the different foods they'd bring to the area.

No, I get that. However, they won't do it the way you want. Those countries and the NGOs who organise the 'missions' won't want to place their members at risk, so people will be placed in compounds, or embedded in favorable family hostels, kept cushioned from the overall experience.

joe40 wrote: »

I feel the experience my kids have of going to school with many different cultures, black, Asian, European etc has enriched their lives compared to I had in the same town growing up in the 80s.

Enriched them how? Come on, be more specific. Apart from being more comfortable with other races, I can't really think of other benefits..

Conversely I work in a large secondary school in the North about 20 miles away. 1600 pupils virtually all white Irish Catholic, It's grand but still has the usual sec school problems.

You think that a school with a diverse racial/cultural population doesn't have those problems? Those issues are typically due to how the school is organised and operated.

The lack of immigrants does not confer an advantage. Most kids with ambition just want to get out of the town.

Just as I wanted to leave my town.. as do many Irish people across the country... And that was while my hometown was multicultural (there being Africans and Asians in my hometown, and during my college classes twenty years ago).

I feel my own kids are better prepared for a globalised world. I'm not dismissing the problems that exist but if all the immigrants left my town tomorrow I think it would be a poorer for it.

Fine... but none of that really addresses the points that were made over the last couple of pages... It's just a rehash of the same vague belief that multiculturalism is positive.

Hamachi

RandomName2 wrote: »

There are large groups of exclusively black youths in Balbriggan. How do they happen to be here? Did their parents all get work visas?


Maybe they are all refugees? :rolleyes:

What's really bad here is that when the state caves in and allows people to remain, they will tend to remain in.. not great financial situations. If they could have achieved skilled employment they could have achieved work visas in the first place. You're going to have areas of specific ethnic minorities that are living in relative deprivation.

There are very significant concentrations of black and minority ethnic groups in these areas for sure.

To ensure there’s balance, I don’t want to over-state the problem. My understanding is that the black population of Balbriggan is ~15% of the town. I don’t know the precise demographics of Dublin 15. It varies widely between neighborhoods. However, my eyes tell me that that ethnic minority population is of the order of 20% - 25%. The most alarming metric for me is that these areas are starting to ghettoize as the existing Irish population opts to leave and few new comers are willing to purchase in diverse areas.

There are templates of this all over Western Europe. Neu Koeln and Wedding in Berlin, Saint Denis in Paris, Molenbeek in Brussels, Rinkeby in Stockholm, Rosengard in Malmo. The list is almost endless. The one common denominator is that these are immigrant-dominated zones that the natives actively avoid. Why are we so intent on replicating this failed urban model in Ireland? It’s almost the very definition of insanity.

My wife and I were in Paris last year. She’s a history buff and wanted to go see the basilica in Saint Denis, where Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette are buried. We had a look around the market square after our visit. There was literally nothing French about the place. It very closely resembled a souk that one visits in North Africa. The native French who live in central Paris, assiduously avoid Saint Denis, almost pretending that it doesn’t exist.

We’re not near that tipping point in Ireland just yet. However, if government and media continue trying to suppress debate around migration and the proper controls aren’t implemented, we are inexorably heading for the same outcomes as our neighbors. My hope is that a sensible, center right leader emerges in the coming decade, who will guide Ireland back to less turbulent waters.

Arthur Daley

joe40 wrote: »

I live in the northwest border region, in a large town. There are quite a few immigrants, but probably mostly professionals.

Most kids with ambition just want to get out of the town.

Ok, 20 miles separate these two towns. But do you not see the issue here?

What opportunity is there for the local kids? Even the kids themselves know they have to get out. But migrant 'professionals' have no issue in the area.

How long will it be before these rural Irish areas are irrevocably transformed. Is that what people want to see?

Where are these kids to go to? Dublin? But we read about the issues here in the previous posts.

Its a globalised world, but genuinely are these kids coming out of school going to build a career in Africa, India or China? Globalisation seems to only go one way.

Wibbs

joe40 wrote: »

I feel my own kids are better prepared for a globalised world. I'm not dismissing the problems that exist but if all the immigrants left my town tomorrow I think it would be a poorer for it.

Fair play to you for giving it a go Joe, but like I've noted previously these positives are very nebulous in form, more diversity is its own reward kinda thing, but little beyond that.

As for the globalised world it actually isn't particularly, not as far as different ethnic demographics are concerned. Worldwide the vast majority of Asians hang out, work with and settle down with other Asians, ditto for Africans and Europeans too for the most part. White Europeans are the group most likely to deal with non Europeans and even that is a minority of the time. Even in ex European New world colonies founded on immigration and different ethnicities it's more "globalised" but not by much. If anything they demonstrate how this stuff works, or doesn't. Ask any American from a big city over there which are the White areas, the Black areas, etc and they'll be able to list them handily enough.

Arthur Daley wrote: »

How long will it be before these rural Irish areas are irrevocably transformed. Is that what people want to see?

Going by other European nations dealing with this stuff it never goes that way. Rural areas are largely empty of non Whites, suburbia mostly follows that. It's the sink estates and inner city areas that are the ones that change.

Globalisation seems to only go one way.

Indeed, just like multiculturalism.

Arthur Daley

Deleted User wrote: »

Personally, I have no issue with Africans who have the skills/education to be able to compete, on an equal basis, with Irish people. They're welcome to come here as part of normal migration policies. However, that's not what we've been getting...

Depends on how you define 'high skilled' and whether that system can be gamed.
The 'engineers' and 'doctors' that we are promised? But even jobs like doctors and dentists are under threat of automation and AI.

We are told that:

the Taoiseach said most jobs are “vulnerable to digitalisation or automatisation”, adding: “The important thing now is that we think ahead.
“Almost anyone in employment at all levels could potentially lose their jobs as a result of AI, robotics or automation.

https://www.thejournal.ie/leo-varadkar-robots-ai-4417634-Dec2018/

Also, when did the European Union free market for labour expand out to cover the entire world. In theory the labour market for the World is limitless. Should Irish people have to compete on an 'equal' basis with the world for a job in Ireland? If not, why not?
Should people get a vote on these colossal changes

Eric Cartman

joe40 wrote: »

I will defer to other posters who have greater knowledge of the situation in Dublin re ghettoization, I'm not all that familiar with the city but fully accept problem exist as described.
I live in the northwest border region, in a large town. There are quite a few immigrants, but probably mostly professionals.
I feel the experience my kids have of going to school with many different cultures, black, Asian, European etc has enriched their lives compared to I had in the same town growing up in the 80s.
Conversely I work in a large secondary school in the North about 20 miles away. 1600 pupils virtually all white Irish Catholic, It's grand but still has the usual sec school problems. The lack of immigrants does not confer an advantage. Most kids with ambition just want to get out of the town.

I feel my own kids are better prepared for a globalised world. I'm not dismissing the problems that exist but if all the immigrants left my town tomorrow I think it would be a poorer for it.

fair play for being the first person to actually even try answer the question. Where the immigrants are mostly professionals I can see how this is a benefit, sadly only 12% of Non EU migrants have even set foot in a higher education institute and less than 2.5% have a degree , so your success is hard to replicate.

Hamachi

joe40 wrote: »

I feel my own kids are better prepared for a globalised world. I'm not dismissing the problems that exist but if all the immigrants left my town tomorrow I think it would be a poorer for it.

I don't want to be too hard on you; this is clearly an earnestly held belief. However, frankly it's fluff and doesn't stack up in the real world. If you want to prepare your kids for a globalized world, ensure that they can speak a major European language, understand the fundamentals of business, are proficient in maths, and ideally have the ability to code. These are the hard skills required to succeed in a globalized world. Going to school with a few migrant-background children is irrelevant.

Personally, I grew up in a working class family in the west, in an entirely monocultural environment. I'm in my late 30s, so this wasn't a million years ago. Today, I've done pretty well in that most globalized of industries - tech. What prepared me for this is having parents who understood the value of and who prioritized education. In terms of inter-personal relationships, I treat people how I would like to be treated myself. However, in the globalized world of which you speak, you're also going to need to teach your children to fight their corner. They will need to be able to handle some very astute operators, many of whom are from minority ethnic backgrounds.

This narrative of cultural poverty associated with less diverse environments and enrichment attributed to multi-culturalism is wooly-headed thinking that doesn't stand up to any scrutiny.

Arthur Daley

Arthur Daley wrote: »

Depends on how you define 'high skilled' and whether that system can be gamed.
The 'engineers' and 'doctors' that we are promised? But even jobs like doctors and dentists are under threat of automation and AI.

Except that I said that they would have skills/education that would enable them to compete equally with Irish people for employment. I didn't say anything about "high skills", or doctors. In any case, earlier in the thread, I showed the lower quality of educational qualifications that often come from African nations.

And every system can, and will be 'gamed'.

Also, when did the European Union free market for labour expand out to cover the entire world. In theory the labour market for the World is limitless. Should Irish people have to compete on an 'equal' basis with the world for a job in Ireland? If not, why not?

Ahh well, I'm a big believer of equality of opportunity, whether we're talking about migrants, women, men, whatever.

We should be able to effectively compete. That's the point of a university education and is well within the reach of most Irish people considering the grants/support available from the State. That a significant number of Irish people choose not to attend university/college is a different matter.

As for the European Union free market for labour... dunno why that's being directed at me.

Should people get a vote on these colossal changes

There are heaps of things that governments do that people should have a vote on... except we don't. That's just the way things are.

Arthur Daley

Deleted User wrote: »

We should be able to effectively compete. That's the point of a university education and is well within the reach of most Irish people considering the grants/support available from the State. That a significant number of Irish people choose not to attend university/college is a different matter.

As for the European Union free market for labour... dunno why that's being directed at me.

There are heaps of things that governments do that people should have a vote on... except we don't. That's just the way things are.

The reason for bringing up the EU free market for labour is that this is what Irish people were comfortable agreeing to. However if it is now suggested by some grouping(s) that our labour market should be open to anyone with a university degree that is a very different proposition, that should face rigorous challenge. At any time, but especially in a period with massive unemployment, and the flagging up of future disruption in the jobs market.

Changing the demographics of an island race after millennia is not like putting the VAT rate up or down. It is as fundamental as it gets. People should be consulted on these issues and debate should be comprehensive.

'That's just the way things are' is not good enough quite frankly for an increasing number of people. Those who genuinely try to understand Brexit have already seen this.

Arthur Daley

Arthur Daley wrote: »

The reason for bringing up the EU free market for labour is that this is what Irish people were comfortable agreeing to. However if it is now suggested by some grouping(s) that our labour market should be open to anyone with a university degree that is a very different proposition, that should face rigorous challenge. At any time, but especially in a period with massive unemployment, and the flagging up of future disruption in the jobs market.

Look. Anyone, and I mean anyone, who passes the requirements as a migrant, expat, or whatever, and has the skills/education to be a productive member of society, without causing trouble, should be able to do so.

That doesn't mean that we have to give out citizenship like candy though.

I'm an expat. I perform roles which are in demand, but there generally isn't the local population around to avail of the position. Typically, immigration/visa rules will take that into account, protecting the rights of workers from the host country. That was the case when I was a manager in Oz, or a teacher in Asia.

Changing the demographics of an island race after millennia is not like putting the VAT rate up or down. It is as fundamental as it gets. People should be consulted on these issues and debate should be comprehensive.

'That's just the way things are' is not good enough quite frankly for an increasing number of people. Those who genuinely try to understand Brexit have already seen this.

I genuinely have no idea why you're directing any of that at my posts...

Arthur Daley

Deleted User wrote: »

Look. Anyone, and I mean anyone, who passes the requirements as a migrant, expat, or whatever, and has the skills/education to be a productive member of society, without causing trouble, should be able to do so.

Well that needs to go to a vote, possibly several votes. It is just too fundamental. We could find 100s of millions possibly billions of people in India, China or Africa that fit that description. It is a stepping stone towards abolishing borders and nation states altogether. I am not suggesting that you are advocating that, but we are on the slippery slope in general

kildare lad

Hunky Monster wrote: »

I'd love for someone to list the pro's and cons for multiculturalism. I'd say that pro's list is quite quite short and includes things like "different food" while the negative list might include things like "more rapes"...

Here's my 2 cents , I've worked with loads of eastern Europeans , they work hard and pay their way mostly . We talk on our break , I chat to them on the sidelines of our kids sports , do I feel more enlightened because I know people from other countries , no I don't . They , like myself just wanna go their work and raise their kids . No problem with them what so ever , they integrate and pay their way. Their kids seem to be well brought up and you don't hear of eastern European kids running amok .

The same can't be said about kids from another continent who seem to embrace American " gangsta " culture . Looking at all the race problem going on all over the world , Ireland's gonna be in for a lot more social problems in the coming decade or two . To me there's far more cons than pros in taking immigrants from Africa . They've a higher unemployment rate than any other group here, they know how to play the system, that's the reason most came here in the first place . Most got modern housing, medical cards , children's allowance etc, and yet they turn around and say Ireland's a racist country. Btw it's a lot more than my parents or friends got when they emigrated from here during hard times. We're seeing fruits of an over generous Welfare system for people who came here for a free ride by mass anti social behavior in the areas they're living that are slowly turning into ghettos. If you calculated the amount of tax they've paid and compared it to the amount they've received from the state , we'd be massively in the red.

Snickers Man

Bonniedog wrote: »

The only ones who believe in a utopia are the advocates of mass immigration on the left.

Bosses and landlords just see the money. A strange alliance to be sure.

Wibbs brought up the concept of "utopia". If you're calling him a "left wing advocate" he'd probably be grievously offended.

I don't believe in Utopias; I believe in making the best of what you've got. People migrating from one place to another is simply a part of the human experience and has been since we got up on our hind legs. Modern transport technology just enables us to go further faster.

If you want to approach new arrivals with the attitude that they "don't bring their inferior cultures here" and "don't take our jobs" and especially "don't as much as look at our daughters" then intercommunal strife will be a self fulfilling prophecy.

If on the other hand you adopt a "take as you find" attitude, we'll get along fine. Well, most of us will.

As the late great John Hume put it "Difference, whether racial, linguistic, sectarian or national is an accident of birth. Respect for difference is the basis of all lasting peace".
So true.

TomTomTim

Anyone following the Dawn Butler nonsense in the UK? She was pulled by the police, while a passenger in a car, of what looked like a white driver. It seemed like a standard enough random stop, which happens to us all, with little to do with race. Of course, she's now claiming that it was racial profiling, which is absurd when you consider how politically correct the police in London seem to be. She's now calling for reform, where she is essentially demanding that the police only ever stop people when they have evidence they have committed a crime.

Snickers Man

Snickers Man wrote: »

Wibbs brought up the concept of "utopia". If you're calling him a "left wing advocate" he'd probably be grievously offended.

It's a reference to the claims of those regarding the positives of a multicultural society... those on the left and supportive of such change, tend to lean towards a utopian mindset.

I don't believe in Utopias; I believe in making the best of what you've got. People migrating from one place to another is simply a part of the human experience and has been since we got up on our hind legs. Modern transport technology just enables us to go further faster.

Except, mass migration wasn't something that was really considered until the end of WW2 where large masses of people were displaced. Typically, migrations happened due to a disaster of some kind, whether natural or by war... but people migrating even from county to another county within the same country wasn't common.

The US was something of an oddity in that it was build on the backs of immigration, but very few countries were welcoming of foreigners, and there were greater obstacles on a local level to people resettling.

If you want to approach new arrivals with the attitude that they "don't bring their inferior cultures here" and "don't take our jobs" and especially "don't as much as look at our daughters" then intercommunal strife will be a self fulfilling prophecy.

Well, when you lead with stuff that hasn't been said..... :rolleyes:

If on the other hand you adopt a "take as you find" attitude, we'll get along fine. Well, most of us will.

Okay... you're part of "sure it'll be grand" group. Except that hasn't worked anywhere to date.

You're welcome to show me where it has worked in the med-long term, though.

As the late great John Hume put it "Difference, whether racial, linguistic, sectarian or national is an accident of birth. Respect for difference is the basis of all lasting peace".
So true.

And sure, let's be taking what he said out of context and apply it to an entirely different situation, irrespective of everything that has happened previously in other countries...

Wibbs

Snickers Man wrote: »

I don't believe in Utopias; I believe in making the best of what you've got. People migrating from one place to another is simply a part of the human experience and has been since we got up on our hind legs. Modern transport technology just enables us to go further faster.

Not quite. Sure you always had small groups of people who migrated, but when people migrated in any sort of numbers it was almost always because of conquest and war and it didn't go well for the locals unless they fought back and drove them out. The history of our species has been one of the conquest of one culture over another, of one group over another.

If you want to approach new arrivals with the attitude that they "don't bring their inferior cultures here" and "don't take our jobs" and especially "don't as much as look at our daughters" then intercommunal strife will be a self fulfilling prophecy.

If on the other hand you adopt a "take as you find" attitude, we'll get along fine. Well, most of us will.

Which is again a very naive angle that completely ignores the realities of human nature. Laudable to be sure, but look around the world, look at any time period in the world and show where this worked? The Them V Us is written through human DNA like words in a stick of rock. When modern humans left Africa on our first "new arrivals" gig, what happened? We drove out and absorbed and made extinct at least three previous human sub species. That's how we kicked off.

As the late great John Hume put it "Difference, whether racial, linguistic, sectarian or national is an accident of birth. Respect for difference is the basis of all lasting peace".
So true.

Again it's a lovely sentiment, but again the reality is very different. Indeed it is far easier to argue that lasting peace(which tends not to be so long lasting) is based on stable economics rather than something quite nebulous like "respect". If you're buying and selling things to mutual benefit you get peace. Some distance between groups helps. "Respect" is an oft used and easy Oprah stylee buzzword these days and treated as a given, not something that is earned, which devalues it. The peace he was fundamentally involved in bringing is a shaky one even now and that's between peoples who are essentially the same.

Again and like I asked you before: what are the actual positives around multiculturalism? Can you point me to any nation where multiculturalism works and the various ethnic groups don't end up in the usual top to bottom socioeconomic strata? If all it takes is "respect", then why is interethnic struggle, social problems and violence the defining part of conflict around the world and has been "since we got up on our hind legs" and shows no indications of stopping any time soon?

To be frank SM all I'm reading are the same received and vague and easily spouted platitudes we've always heard rather than any reflection on realities.

Wibbs

I missed this one...

Snickers Man wrote: »

OK. Show me a monocultural "utopia" anywhere on this earth. A place with no poverty, no inequality issues, endless sunshine, flowing with milk and honey, where everybody has a chicken in the pot, ice cream to follow, and a warm comfy bed at the end of the day in which to rest and binge watch Netflix.

There isn't any. And it's all the fault of those bloody immigrants!!! :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Nope, sorry, you didn't answer my question at all and ignored all my other points. And in not answering doubled down and pulled the lazy de tuk ur jerbz nonsense. Next stop on the all aboard the lack of critical thinking train is the station of "it's racism!!!". Thing is and you'll have to sit down for this one. I agree with you. It is racism, or it's a huge part of it. Not all of it of course as Asians do very well in their various overseas diasporas and they're a different "race", sub Saharan Africans on the other hand consistently feature and coalesce at the other end of such societies. But it's a large part and yet another factor that isn't going away any time soon. Or are you another who's missed the BLM protests around the world?

On the other hand I'll happily answer your question. Indeed there are no monocultural utopias, all societies have inherent and internal problems of the ones you list. So why are you seemingly hell bent on importing more problems? If I find a small fire in my kitchen, I try to put it out or get it under control, I don't throw kindling at it. That's the part you seem to miss, unless you think multicultural nations by dint of being multicultural lessen the existing problems in a culture? Oh wait... They don't, they bring extra ones. This is a provable statement. Pretty much none of yours are.

Again show me where they haven't. It would be nice if you could actually answer my other very simple questions and points raised. If a truth of a thing is so self evident it shouldn't be so hard to do, and yet even with the best intentions nobody seems to be able to.

Wibbs

I have absolutely zero problems with actual asylum seekers, or legal immigration. I do have a problem with economic illegal migrants extracting the urine. The ones we turn away today were the same ones who showed up here 20 years ago and got in on a unique legal technicality usually by being fruitful in maternity wards. That's the difference and we're already seeing the same signs of "diversity" that every other nation that ran this nonsense has had to end up dealing with.

Slowyourrole

Wibbs wrote: »

I have absolutely zero problems with actual asylum seekers,

What benefits do you feel asylum seekers bring to native populations?

RandomName2

Slowyourrole wrote: »

What benefits do you feel asylum seekers bring to native populations?

Actual asylum seekers are likely to echo our own values. Persecution due to anti-feminism, anti-democracy, homophobia, religious intolerance is all more than likely to push people who are more 'Western' to.. well.. the West. Defectors from North Korea are unlikely to be waving communist flags and chanting 'death to capitalists'.

People who are fleeing persecution absolutely merit sanctuary. They are guaranteed it under UN human rights. We do not border any country that is likely to exact such persecution. Unfortunately, were we to receive a refugee from one of our neighbors (let's say Snowden from America) I doubt we would treat them as such, but instead would likely immediately bow to the pressure of our allies to ignore these individuals' right to asylum.

The Vietnamese boat people that Ireland received were a good example of genuine asylum seekers, received in a controlled and organized fashion. I would be surprised if Ireland didn't benefit from this small influx of people in the long run.

Wibbs

Slowyourrole wrote: »

What benefits do you feel asylum seekers bring to native populations?

As RandomName2 noted they're more likely to echo our values and be grateful for their new home. Plus they're going to be a small number of people, not tens of thousands, so more likely to integrate over time.

Take the example of the Vietnamese boat people mentioned. What not so many people realise, or have forgotten was Ireland was publicly pressured into taking them, because we weren't into inward immigration at all(same with the Hungarian Refugees in the 50's, never mind pre war Jews). Plus there were only a couple of hundred people involved and the usual Asian cultural background of strong parental and familial bonds and work ethic and self sufficiency meant they have tended to have been a positive wherever they ended up.

Oh and this is muy importante, those Vietnamese chose to come to a country that was one of the poorest in the EEC at the time. They didn't show up en masse when we had the Celtic Tiger. Bugger all Africans, or Georgians or Roma came here in the 70's or 80's. Funny that.

And legal immigration is about bringing in vetted people who have skills or resources that are positives for Ireland. We have a couple of hundred thousand Poles, Germans, Brits, Spaniards etc here legally as they're EU citizens and no ghettos and not exactly a load of gang stuff and other anti social behaviour.

However you still haven't answered my question about listing positives of multiculturalism. Again if they're so self evident why not? Surely it's an easy question to answer?

.anon.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

fair play for being the first person to actually even try answer the question. Where the immigrants are mostly professionals I can see how this is a benefit, sadly only 12% of Non EU migrants have even set foot in a higher education institute and less than 2.5% have a degree , so your success is hard to replicate.

Ok, I'll try and answer it from the perspective of someone who works with immigrants who (mostly) aren't 'professionals' - some happen to have degrees, but it's far from a requirement for the job we do. Around 50% of my colleagues are Irish - the other 50% is made up of people from pretty much every country you could think of, but Romanians and Africans are the two largest groups.

I've worked in 'monocultural' environments (i.e. everyone was Irish and white) before and it was grand, but I definitely prefer the multicultural environment I'm currently working in. Why do I prefer it? Well, it's kind of difficult to list the tangible positives (beyond the usual - and totally valid - stuff about how our culture is enriched by the art, music, food, etc of other cultures, except Indian food which is very nice but gives me terrible heartburn). I just find it more interesting, picking up bits and pieces of different languages and meeting and finding a hell of a lot of common ground with people whose backgrounds differ enormously from my own.

I know that's not a perfect answer, but I'm sure you'd equally struggle to tell me all the great things about monoculturalism.

I don't agree that we should only be letting people with third level qualifications in. But getting a job or an education should be the number one part of the asylum process from day one - because that seems to be the best way of integrating.

Wibbs

.anon. wrote: »

I know that's not a perfect answer, but I'm sure you'd equally struggle to tell me all the great things about monoculturalism.

Fewer ghettos and none along racial and cultural lines.
No social divisions and social segregation along racial and cultural lines.
No inter ethnic conflict. Less terrorism.
Less racism, because well fewer targets for it. Fewer or no prejudice along racial lines.
Fewer people requiring social welfare.
No demographics that may feel more affinity with external cultures. No demographics ending up feeling like they don't truly belong(much more an issue for second third and so on generations). Both the latter inevitably leads to parallel societies in miniature. QV ethnic enclaves in England, France, Holland, Sweden etc.
No demographics with cultures that hold views alien, even disturbing to western values. And yes I do believe western values are for the most part superior to many if not most others others. Some Eastern values coming a very close second. I make no apology for holding this view. Europe had the Enlightenment and all that came from it. Cultures that didn't have similar are quite simply out of place in the modern western liberal world and society.
No need for the local culture to have to kow tow to the more gobby members of an external culture. QV the Shelbourne statues nonsense.
Never mind that if "diversity" makes things better, why integrate much at all, surely that dilutes said "diversity"? It's illogical. I mean I like Irish and Western culture I sure as hell wouldn't give it up if I moved somewhere else, beyond politness to the host nation, so I can fully understand why people from other cultures wouldn't want to. And they largely don't.
No natives feeling increasingly remote from their own culture, no non natives feeling increasingly remote from their own and their new culture.
If "diversity" is so great why does nobody suggest it ever goes the other way and suggest say the Sudan would be sooo much better with more White and Yellow folks in their thousands knocking about?

In essence: Largely monocultural nations are safer, more cohesive with less crime, fewer social divisions(even cheaper to run), with fewer societal flashpoints.

Set against that lot we have the usual pretty vague stuff about art, music and food, which we'd get most of anyway in this globalised information world. Hell, I knew an Irish lad who on the back of Paul Simon's Graceland album growing an interest in him amassed a large collection of African records. In 1980's before the intewebs Dublin which was whiter than a polar bear in a snowstorm. Oh and the NGO's and other vested multicultural interests keep themselves in jobs. Handy for them. Never nind they foster many of the issues listed above. QV going on about how racist Ireland and the Irish are for not seeing culture through a different[insert culture/country here] lens.

Clarence Boddiker

The whole notion of, and the term itself "Enriched" is a complete load of bollox.
A mantra which was constructed in order to dupe the masses into going along with 'Multiculturalism'
Thats what it is, an empty construct, proven by the fact that those conditioned to parrot it relentlessly can rarely give any concrete examples of what this mythical Enrichment actually is.

On the other hand I accept that there are many who are so completely lacking in any cultural foundation themselves, without any notion of their own culture, that they would naturally be attracted to and excited by other cultures.

Arthur Daley

.anon. wrote: »

I don't agree that we should only be letting people with third level qualifications in. But getting a job or an education should be the number one part of the asylum process from day one - because that seems to be the best way of integrating.

Basically mass migration from outside the EU.

And what will you do when the world and his wife arrives under this system. How will it be funded? How do we shout stop if people subsequently decide they need to? What level is enough? What level is too much?


People need to own their own proposals and outline how their systems work. Stand over it.