travellers and ethnicity

landser

I heard a guy from pavee point (? Connors) on Morning Ireland this a.m. talking about the Irish Govt.'s need to recognise travellers as an ethnic minority in Irish Society. THere is some human rights conference on in Austria, and this is where this argument is being put forward.

His main drive for seeking this status was that the government would then have to give them more free hand-outs for sitting on their asses.

The point that travellers are not a seperate ethnic group unto themselves was made to Connors, whose only retort was that Irish travellers were seen as an ethnic minority in the UK and that this was because they were travellers not that they Irish (very unlikely)and the fact that they had a different culture means they are ethnically different.

FFS, they are not ethnically different (unlike the romany gypsies of central europe who are). they are Irish people who live in caravans and drive 4x4's. it's even a stretch to say that they have a different culture.... the fact that someone lives in a caravan does not a culture make.

i live in an apartment, don't want to work and fancy my sister... can i have a grant please!

uberwolf

these threads always descend into a dual mandate. Debating whether it's racist to diss travellers and then those who don't give a flute and detail some horror story they've had.

Shame the thread starter bypassed the usual bedding in before this happened.

Travellers have a different lifestyle no doubt. Culture maybe, ethnicity not IMO. But is it down to my or anyone else opinion?

It's a lifestyle/culture that I object to. Maybe thats because it grates with the majority population. But I think it's dated and that just because it suits a few people to continue that we shouldn't have to support it economically nor infrastructurally.

A piece in teh Irish Times last week was discussing the discrimination which resulted in early deaths for travellers. 12 years younger than the nations average I think it was. Of course in this instance one of the principal causes was this very lifestyle that is so sacrosanct. A woman who appeared to be a rather rough looking 35 had 7 children all under 8 or 9 in the picture accompanying the article.

It's an exercise in removing responsibility for the consequences of your decisions.

And we can we please not have to tip toe around sensibilities if this thread stays open. Abuse is one thing but the climate of PC is threatening open debate in to many places

BuffyBot

His main drive for seeking this status was that the government would then have to give them more free hand-outs for sitting on their asses.

You know, I'm sure he didn't actually say that...

i live in an apartment, don't want to work and fancy my sister... can i have a grant please!

Well, what you do is your business - but no you can't have a grant

landser

uberwolf wrote:

these threads always descend into a dual mandate. Debating whether it's racist to diss travellers and then those who don't give a flute and detail some horror story they've had.

Shame the thread starter bypassed the usual bedding in before this happened.

Travellers have a different lifestyle no doubt. Culture maybe, ethnicity not IMO. But is it down to my or anyone else opinion?

not sure what you meant by the second paragraph of your reply.

It is my opinion that travellers do not have what one would term " a culture". culture is difficult to define, but living in a carvan and travelling around the country cannot be considered to be a culture in any normal sense of the word. at best it is a way of life.

If the travellers are recognised as an ethnic minority, which they are not, it'll mean even more demands from local and national governement, for which i will have to pay

uberwolf

landser wrote:

not sure what you meant by the second paragraph of your reply.

What I mean is this. It is very difficult to debate well this emotive topic. That task is only possible if efforts are made to avoid making incendiary remarks that allow anyone who disagrees with you slap you down with out actually engaging your point. It's simiar to the mistake Myers made. He had a topic to debate but he failed to start a debate because people were able to focus on some other aspect of his piece other than the point.

when you say things like "sitting on their asses" and when you perpetuate stereotypes like incest you provide a stick. everyone starts shouting at each other and the thread ends up locked with no exchange of debate.

Which would be a shame, cos we're reading off the same hymn sheet (approx), and by saying what I did I was trying to deflect from the insults and focus on the debate by extending your points.

landser

fair point.

billy the squid

His main drive for seeking this status was that the government would then have to give them more free hand-outs for sitting on their asses.

If you were to say the same thing about farmers you would be accused of making generalisations, but it would seem it is ok to say it about members of the travelling community.

iIMHO the travelling community is a minority cultural group. they have their own history, customs, and language.

I think peoples opinions on the issue are clouded by horrer stories they have heard from their friends and the media.

but there are plenty of horror storyies to go around, about settled people, foreigners, etc. it just tends to get more attention if a traveller is implicated in such a story. the likes of the Sunday World love a good tinker criminal story.

Trojan

Oh, the irony - Billy immediately does as uber foretells

landser

billy the squid wrote:

iIMHO the travelling community is a minority cultural group. they have their own history, customs, and language.QUOTE]

firstly, i note that you refrain from using the expression "minority ethnic group".

as for being a cultural group, that could well be argued along the lines you set out above. likewise the population of Sligo (or any other area) are also a minotrity cultural group within that definition having their own history, culture and if not a language, a very strong accent with varied slang akin to what travellers have (travellers, at best, have a dialect and not a language). Are the people of sligo therefore entitled to special status?

My family also has its own history and customs.

uberwolf

the_syco wrote:

non-relevant off-topic inflammatory rubbish deleted by moderator

I'd swear you did that on purpose.

the_syco

uberwolf wrote:

I'd swear you did that on purpose.

Did what?

bonkey

uberwolf wrote:

Travellers have a different lifestyle no doubt. Culture maybe, ethnicity not IMO. But is it down to my or anyone else opinion?

While its no legal definition, dictionary.com defines ethnic as Of or relating to a sizable group of people sharing a common and distinctive racial, national, religious, linguistic, or cultural heritage.

If they have a distinct culture, surely then the question of whether or not they are an ethnic group is solely down to whether or not they are a "sizeable group"?

jc

billy the squid

landser wrote:

billy the squid wrote:

iIMHO the travelling community is a minority cultural group. they have their own history, customs, and language.QUOTE]

firstly, i note that you refrain from using the expression "minority ethnic group".

not all travellers in ireland are necessarily of Irish decent,, so I will say minority ethnic group now if you like,

as for being a cultural group, that could well be argued along the lines you set out above. likewise the population of Sligo (or any other area) are also a minotrity cultural group within that definition having their own history, culture and if not a language, a very strong accent with varied slang akin to what travellers have (travellers, at best, have a dialect and not a language). Are the people of sligo therefore entitled to special status?

shelta is not a linguage? I would disagree with this, but that is my point of view,and I do respect you for making yours.

Oh, the irony - Billy immediately does as uber foretells

let the personal swiping begin.

actually my point is that he has the misconseption that travellers are looking for extra money for doing nothing. while neglecting to mention that there are very many hard working and tax paying travellers out there, in the same way that farmers,and indeed civil servants are perceived to be always haveing their hand out while at the same time they do nothing to earn it. this is not the case. the professions i mention all have hard working people in their ranks and such a generalisation is unfair.

billy the squid

Throw them in prison, and burn their caravans. When they get out, they can go into social houses.

like they did to the jews during the night of broken glass, great idea

actually the jews called them gettoes

I don't give a funk about their "culture difference". The only difference I see is that I put my rubbish in a bin, and if I move, I don't leave large amounts of rubbish lying around. Also, I don't.

The pat Kenny show has a feature all about people (settled people) carrying out illegal dumping, even more so since the privitisation of refuse collection.

landser

bonkey wrote:

While its no legal definition, dictionary.com defines ethnic as Of or relating to a sizable group of people sharing a common and distinctive racial, national, religious, linguistic, or cultural heritage.

If they have a distinct culture, surely then the question of whether or not they are an ethnic group is solely down to whether or not they are a "sizeable group"?

jc

you'll note the word distinctive is used in this definition. this is of greater import than whether they are a sizeable minority (which they probably are).

living in caravan may well be distinctive... living in an apartment might also be such.... am i part of an ethnic grouping because of this? nope.

aodh_rua

billy the squid wrote:

actually the jews called them gettoes

Actually they were called ghettos.

Everyone is entitled to explore their culture and feel secure in expressing their customs. However, by the same token, society expects certain responsibilities in return. I have yet to see lands taken up by a traveller camp returned to their previous condition by the travellers. I don't know how they can have a regular relationship with the revenue commissioners since they've no fixed abode and seem to exist in a cash economy. The 'settled' community are bound to feel aggrieved when the travellers apply for €115 million (according to the Last Word yesterday) for cultural projects, when the impression is there that they do not constructively engage with the community that'll be paying the bill.

bonkey

landser wrote:

you'll note the word distinctive is used in this definition.

Yes, I know. If you look at the point I was responding to, you'll notice that uberwolf said they may have a distinct culture, but that doesn't make them an ethnic group. Thats the point I was questioning....not whether or not they have a distinct culture.

living in caravan may well be distinctive... living in an apartment might also be such.... am i part of an ethnic grouping because of this? nope.

Because as we all know, the only difference between the travelling community and ourselves is that they live in caravans.....

Looking at one aspect which is different and saying that single difference doesn't make a seperate culture, is as strong an argument as saying that a single shared trait between two groups means their cultures are the same.

jc

Trojan

Billy, I'm not making a personal comment. I find it quite ironic that your first post on this thread immediately proves uberwolfs point that people using low-brow language gives you something obvious to criticise and allows you to ignore any of the real issues that need to be discussed.

You did just that, which is amusing. My comment in no way reflects on you personally, just the choice of argument.

Unfortunately it's unlikely that the issue of travellers will ever be discussed in a meaningful way until people heed uberwolfs advice.

landser

bonkey wrote:

Looking at one aspect which is different and saying that single difference doesn't make a seperate culture, is as strong an argument as saying that a single shared trait between two groups means their cultures are the same.jc

OK, then let's go through each of the points raised by the definition:

racial: no they are white and european

national: again no, they are irish (as much as anyone can be irish)

religious: No, Catholics to a man

linguistic: they do not have a seperate language, see my point above

cultural: they have lifestlye differences at best, as do many people

they are not an ethnic minority

bonkey

landser wrote:

OK, then let's go through each of the points raised by the definition:

No. before you do that go back and look at the point I was answering.

You may disagree with uberwolf, but he said that they may be a seperate culture, but this did not make them a seperate ethnic group.

This is the point I was addressing: not whether or not they have a seperate culture, but whether or not having a seperate culture would constitute them being an ethnic minority.

No matter how many times you want to analyse what I was looking at, nowhere did I say that they had a seperate culture or ethnicity. I said that if they have a seperate culture - as uberwolf conceded they might - that this should mean they would consitute a seperate ethnic group - which would seem to point at a discrepancy in what uberwolf said.

Now, if you want to start a seperate discussion as to whether or not I think they are a distinct culture, I'd be more than happy to do so, but I'd rather you do me the courtesy of waiting till I actually voice an opinion in that regard before telling me my conclusions are wrong because they aren't culturally seperate.

jc

bonkey

Trojan wrote:

Unfortunately it's unlikely that the issue of travellers will ever be discussed in a meaningful way until people heed uberwolfs advice.

I've deleted most of the posts which didn't heed it.

Next, I'll start removing the users if they persist in that behaviour.

This is not a "bash the travellers" thread.
You want that, go somewhere else.

jc

bonkey

landser wrote:

(travellers, at best, have a dialect and not a language).

Almost every reference I can find from a quick google of the word describes Shelta as a language.

I take it that you've some basis for your decision that it isn't? Would you share it with us? I'll accept personal opinion if you're linguistically qualified, or have some done some social research into the community you're making this judgement on, but then I'm sure you can supply the technical reasons why it isn't a seperate language...

As a somewhat related aside....would you consider Swiss-German to be a Gernan dialect, a seperate language, or possibly both?

jc

Roisin Dubh

I don't consider them a separate ethnic-group.

I feel they should settle. I remember when I lived with my parents in a rural area how travellers were constantly coming to the door trying to sell stuff to us. Dad actually did buy a painting from them but I often wonder where the Travellers got the painting from? Hmmmm... Could all be legit but I tend to not really trust Travellers.

How can we when all these stores are abound of them breaking into Castletown House (a few years ago I think and then leaving bags on rubbish in there before stoning an RTE camera crew!).

Travellers should settle. The idea that you can just park on someones lawn and then claim it as your own is bound to stir up trouble. They should also pay taxes - which many I hear do not.

Unsettled live encourages children to grow up with a disrespect for the law, especially when they see their caravans being moved on by the Gardai.

uberwolf

would a mass killing of travellers be ethnic cleansing?

seems a facetious question, but it struck me as an alternative means of answering the issue.

culture strikes me as implying different behavioural norms. Obviously people agree that travellers have this much. Their most boisterous opponents take glee in pointing out their outrages. A tacit acknowledgement of differences in this respect?



I should apologise, I'm dropping in and out of this thread from other work I'm doing - my arguments are a little disjointed as a consequence

Roisin Dubh

uberwolf wrote:

would a mass killing of travellers be ethnic cleansing?

seems a facetious question, but it struck me as an alternative means of answering the issue.

culture strikes me as implying different behavioural norms. Obviously people agree that travellers have this much. Their most boisterous opponents take glee in pointing out their outrages. A tacit acknowledgement of differences in this respect?



I should apologise, I'm dropping in and out of this thread from other work I'm doing - my arguments are a little disjointed as a consequence

Oh come now! No one here is uggesting massacres of Travellers! I am certainly not in favour of that! But I wish they would just settle instead of parking on peoples land without permission and then some of them extorting money in return for moving!

uberwolf

Roisin Dubh wrote:

Oh come now! No one here is uggesting massacres of Travellers! I am certainly not in favour of that!

nor indeed was I :rolleyes:

billy the squid

Trojan wrote:

Billy, I'm not making a personal comment. I find it quite ironic that your first post on this thread immediately proves uberwolfs point that people using low-brow language gives you something obvious to criticise and allows you to ignore any of the real issues that need to be discussed.

You did just that, which is amusing. My comment in no way reflects on you personally, just the choice of argument.

Unfortunately it's unlikely that the issue of travellers will ever be discussed in a meaningful way until people heed uberwolfs advice.

fair enough point taken.

billy the squid

Roisin Dubh wrote:

I don't consider them a separate ethnic-group.

I feel they should settle. I remember when I lived with my parents in a rural area how travellers were constantly coming to the door trying to sell stuff to us. Dad actually did buy a painting from them but I often wonder where the Travellers got the painting from? Hmmmm... Could all be legit but I tend to not really trust Travellers.

didnt martin Cahil steal paintings at one stage, he was settled. Criminality is not confined to the travelling community and it is not a good enough reason to deny that they are an ethnic group. If it was then you could say the same about Nigerians, or members of the IRA.

How can we when all these stores are abound of them breaking into Castletown House (a few years ago I think and then leaving bags on rubbish in there before stoning an RTE camera crew!).

see above

Travellers should settle. The idea that you can just park on someones lawn and then claim it as your own is bound to stir up trouble. They should also pay taxes - which many I hear do not.

who told you that? one of your mates down the pub no doubt.

again you would choose to deny recognition of an ethnic(yes landser I'll use the word ethnic) minority on the basis that you dont trust them.

I have notised from your other posts that you have a distrust of immigrants, would you consider these people to be ethnically different to Irish people or not. whether you trust them or not is irrelevent. and i mean that with the upmost respect.

Unsettled live encourages children to grow up with a disrespect for the law

take a walk through your nearest council estate, and ask how much respect for the law your local skangers have. again irrelevent.

, especially when they see their caravans being moved on by the Gardai.

garda victimisation of travellers is not unheard of.

landser wrote:

OK, then let's go through each of the points raised by the definition:

racial: no they are white and european

not all europeans are white, and not all travellers are irish. there are travelling families with meditaranian ancestry. this mixed in with irish travelling families has created a hybrid ethnic group. the only similarity i can think of is the creation of a hybrid language amongst the spannish speaking people of the United states called spanglish. which is a mix of english and spannnish.

national: again no, they are irish (as much as anyone can be irish)

what makes them Irish may I ask?

religious: No, Catholics to a man

There are over a billion catholics in the world. not all of them are white. a person's religion does not make them an ethnic minority.

linguistic: they do not have a seperate language, see my point above

your forgetting shelta. it is still used by the travelling community and has as many if not more distinctive characteristics as any settled person's language.

cultural: they have lifestlye differences at best, as d

Travellers also have customs which are unique to travellers. Living in a caravan might be a lifestyle, funeral rites, for example,burning the dead person's caravan to free their spirit, is a custom (for want of a better word).

Roisin Dubh

didnt martin Cahil steal paintings at one stage, he was settled. Criminality is not confined to the travelling community and it is not a good enough reason to deny that they are an ethnic group. If it was then you could say the same about Nigerians, or members of the IRA.

Yes but there are only around 25,000 Travellers south of the border and 7,000 north of it. So the constant occurrence of this chaotic behaviour such as that which I have mentioned, together with the Gardai constantly finding weapons e.g. swords etc. at Traveller encampments in apparent preparation for clan warfare, and especially the stoning by 700 travellers of the RTE camera crew a few years ago that approached Castletown House, surely is a sign of a dysfunctional way of life that encourages disrespect for the law - seeing the law as the "settled peoples" law as opposed to the law of the land. That is my conclusion.

again you would choose to deny recognition of an ethnic(yes landser I'll use the word ethnic) minority on the basis that you dont trust them.

I have notised from your other posts that you have a distrust of immigrants, would you consider these people to be ethnically different to Irish people or not. whether you trust them or not is irrelevent. and i mean that with the upmost respect.

I agree with the Government that they are not an ethnic group. It isn't just that they are white and Catholic and have no separate language unlike the Romas. Even their surnames are Gaelic, e.g. Conners, McDonagh, etc. They are in the vast majority of cases NOT some kind of historically separate ethnic-group. I have read somewhere years ago that present-day travellers may have begun in the 19th century, perhaps as a result of Irish tenants having been evicted by the cruel landlords. Now that the Irish have regained their property rights, it is best for all to live under a roof. It is certainly better from the point of view of the health of the Travellers themselves. We are constantly hearing whinging in the media from Travellers about appalling living conditions. All I can say is "You are choosing that! Settle for flips sake and you'll have far better living conditions than living at the side of the road!". This is common sense!

your forgetting shelta.

What the hell is shelta?

billy the squid

What the hell is shelta?

did you try google?

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

Yes but there are only around 25,000 Travellers south of the border and 7,000 north of it. So the constant occurrence of this chaotic behaviour such as that which I have mentioned, together with the Gardai constantly finding weapons e.g. swords etc. at Traveller encampments in apparent preparation for clan warfare, and especially the stoning by 700 travellers of the RTE camera crew a few years ago that approached Castletown House, surely is a sign of a dysfunctional way of life that encourages disrespect for the law - seeing the law as the "settled peoples" law as opposed to the law of the land. That is my conclusion.

my point is that there is also crime in the settled community also. again it is irrelevent to whether or not the traveling community is or is not an ethnic minority.

agree with the Government that they are not an ethnic group. It isn't just that they are white and Catholic and have no separate language unlike the Romas

you happen to be wrong about that. see the link above. having learned some of it from my parents i can assure you, its a language.

Even their surnames are Gaelic, e.g. Conners, McDonagh, etc. They are in the vast majority of cases NOT some kind of historically separate ethnic-group. I have read somewhere years ago that present-day travellers may have begun in the 19th century, perhaps as a result of Irish tenants having been evicted by the cruel landlords.

have you ever heard of an island called Monserat. it is not unusual for black people to have names like Paddy O Reily or Seamus McCarthy. it is also worth mentioning that immigrants in ellis island often took names which were native to their new english speaking host.

Irish Travellers have their roots in a Celtic (and possibly pre-Celtic) nomadic population in Ireland. They are very definitely not Roma (or ‘Gypsies’). Neither are Travellers the product of An Gorta Mór or the ‘Great Hunger’ of 1845 – 50. While the original Irish nomadic population may have been supplemented at various times in Irish history by dispossessed labourers and other marginalised people, there was clearly a distinct Traveller population before the ‘Famine’."

source: Third World on our doorstep? by Robbie McVeigh

There are certain "clans" within the irish travelling community who are indeed decended from the roma

http://www.irishclans.com/articles/travellers.html

so now what you have in ireland are the decendents of a) native irish nomads from celtic times b) roma gypsies who have been here since the 1300s and displaced people from the great famine.

I would like to know your source, as it would appear to be inaccurate.

also might be worth mentioning that the shelta that I know has its roots in the italian language, I doubt that the displaced during the famine took up holidaying in the great city of Rome.

AmenToThat

I dont know if I would see them as being differen ethnically to me............probably not!
Culturally however I do believe they are different to the majority of the population and as such I think they are deserving of special attention in this regard.