New Irish Political Party

black_jack

bonkey wrote:

How dare you, sir.

We shall be driving around in the results of our own car design and production efforts.

(Well, it makes as much sense as some of the reasoning* I've seen presented here)

jc

* may be an overly-charitable description

I've get a deloren going cheap around here somewhere, if you believe all this.

Onto the original poster the kind of people who rant about all this usually do this from a barstool, and little less. However just occasionally they do so from a podium surround by jackbooted thugs marching by torchlight.

DublinWriter

bonkey wrote:

We shall be driving around in the results of our own car design and production efforts.

...We shall seek our own oil or maybe Seig our own Heil.

rsynnott

bonkey wrote:

How dare you, sir.

We shall be driving around in the results of our own car design and production efforts.

Certainly. Cars built by slave labour, no doubt. An daoinegluistain.

DublinWriter wrote:

...We shall seek our own oil or maybe Seig our own Heil.

Oh, it's already started; they're going on about producing large quantities of bioethenol soon.

bonkey

Oil is so.....passé.

Once we've set up our own extraction tech, we can use our natural gas to power our paddywagons.

Wow.

This is all heady stuff.

I feel like the Artilleryman from Jeff Wayne's WotW.

Only Irish.

jc

rsynnott

Yes, it is all a bit South Africa, no? We'd better get started on our nuclear weapons programme, quickly!

Nuttzz

I'm a fully qualified black helicopter pilot, just give me a pm when need*



*Note: helicopter must be black

Macmorris

bonkey wrote:

Oil is so.....passé.

Once we've set up our own extraction tech, we can use our natural gas to power our paddywagons.

I might have missed something but I didn't notice anyone on this thread proposing that we cut off foreign oil imports.

National sovereignty does not necessarily equal economic isolation.

rysnnott wrote:

Yes, it is all a bit South Africa, no?

What's all a bit South Africa exactly?

black_jack

Macmorris wrote:

I might have missed something but I didn't notice anyone on this thread proposing that we cut off foreign oil imports.

National sovereignty does not necessarily equal economic isolation.

that'd be the bit that flew far over your head. Sarcasm may be the lowest form of wit but it appears to be out of your league.

DublinWriter

bonkey wrote:

I feel like the Artilleryman from Jeff Wayne's WotW.

Bows an arrahs against the lighting!

*puts on a CD of David Essex's greatest hits and starts diggin a hole in his back garden*

Nevada will be the Uber-gruppen-Furher of our new sub-terranian paradise! His 22 posts so far to boards.ie will be published in special leather-bound editions and form the total word of law for our new country!

Comly red-headed maidens will dance around 100-foot high bronze statues of his likeness!

rsynnott

Macmorris wrote:

I might have missed something but I didn't notice anyone on this thread proposing that we cut off foreign oil imports.

National sovereignty does not necessarily equal economic isolation.

What's all a bit South Africa exactly?

Traditionally, most fascist regimes end up largely isolating themselves from the outside world; whether deliberately or because of the outside world's distaste for them.

In Apartheid South Africa, there was a major obsession with self-reliance, spurred on by the difficulty of trade in some goods. As a result, South Africa started producing petrol-like products through coal liquification; an expensive process, but one that made them quite independent from those nasty moralisng foreigners. Nazi Germany, incidentally, did almost exactly the same thing.

The nuclear weapons comment is based on South Africa's bizarre nuclear collabaration with Israel.

Macmorris

black_jack wrote:

that'd be the bit that flew far over your head. Sarcasm may be the lowest form of wit but it appears to be out of your league.

That's alright then. I was worried there for a second. I thought we might be facing a bit of an energy crisis if the little-Irelanders got their way.

Macmorris

rsynnott wrote:

In Apartheid South Africa, there was a major obsession with self-reliance, spurred on by the difficulty of trade in some goods. As a result, South Africa started producing petrol-like products through coal liquification; an expensive process, but one that made them quite independent from those nasty moralisng foreigners. Nazi Germany, incidentally, did almost exactly the same thing.

That may be true, but what did you mean when you said that something was a bit like South Africa. I don't think anyone has yet proposed that we isolate ourselves from the rest of the world. Just because some people are not happy with our loss of sovereignty to the EU and would like regain some of our independence, I think it's unfair to claim that that's the same thing as fascism or apartheid.

rsynnott

Macmorris wrote:

That may be true, but what did you mean when you said that something was a bit like South Africa. I don't think anyone has yet proposed that we isolate ourselves from the rest of the world. Just because some people are not happy with our loss of sovereignty to the EU and would like regain some of our independence, I think it's unfair to claim that that's the same thing as fascism or apartheid.

He doesn't just want to regain independence (which we certainly don't want; look at the mess we made when we had it), he wants a camp for immigrants, invasion of the North, and eugenics. (note the financially enouraging "Irish" families; if you look at his posting history you'll see what he thinks that word means). This is the sort of thing that gets worse and worse; we'd be the South Africa of Europe in a decade or so.

Macmorris

rsynnott wrote:

He doesn't just want to regain independence (which we certainly don't want;

What the hell do you mean by that? Of course people want to live in an independent Ireland. You'd have a hard time finding ten people in this country who don't want to live in an independent country.

You're right, independence was a failure in the past, but that doesn't mean that given the choice most Irish people wouldn't rather live in a successful independent Ireland than in a successful European Superstate. The only reason why Irish people have ever supported the EU was because of the money we get from it. If it wasn't for the money we'd have left long ago.

he wants a camp for immigrants,

Which would be a good thing as it would help keep track of them when it comes to deporting them. In the current set-up only something like 5% of failed asylum seekers get deported. The rest manage to evade the system. If they were in a secure holding centre if would be easier to monitor them.

The Australians have a system of holding their asylum seekers in camps and they're far from being considered a pariah nation.

invasion of the North,

Nobody has said anything about invading the north. Read back through the thread.

and eugenics.

Another good idea that would prevent a lot of social problems. Successful, intelligent Irish people should be given every incentive to have large healthy families so that their genes are preserved for future generations. Just because the Nazis believed the same thing doesn't make it any less sensible.

The Swedes had a eugenics programme up until the 1970s and they were far from being fascist or isolationist. Eugenics is not as controversial as many people think.

rsynnott

Macmorris wrote:

What the hell do you mean by that? Of course people want to live in an independent Ireland. You'd have a hard time finding ten people in this country who don't want to live in an independent country.

They like the idea in theory. When they look back and see what it entailed, I think you'll find they don't like it so much. Europe gave us a modern economy and civil rights. Independent Ireland carefully avoided both.

Macmorris wrote:

Which would be a good thing as it would help keep track of them when it comes to deporting them. In the current set-up only something like 5% of failed asylum seekers get deported. The rest manage to evade the system. If they were in a secure holding centre if would be easier to monitor them.

Tell me, what damage do you think immigrants are doing to you?

Macmorris wrote:

The Australians have a system of holding their asylum seekers in camps and they're far from being considered a pariah nation.

Not all that far, really; they're much criticised for their human rights; the immigration thing and no freedom of speech, in particular.

Macmorris wrote:

Nobody has said anything about invading the north. Read back through the thread.

"We retake our parliament and our country spreading wealth to all 5 our million citizens."

Retaking the 'country' sounds like invasion to me. How would you think it would work?

Macmorris wrote:

Another good idea that would prevent a lot of social problems. Successful, intelligent Irish people should be given every incentive to have large healthy families so that their genes are preserved for future generations. Just because the Nazis believed the same thing doesn't make it any less sensible.

Ah, inbreeding is good, yes? Why shouldn't intelligent, successful people of non-Irish ancestry be given the same thing? (From the poster's history it is reasonable to assume that he uses "Irish" as a racial designation). In fact, since they're successful, they should surely be able to afford their own children?

The Swedes had a eugenics programme up until the 1970s and they were far from being fascist or isolationist. Eugenics is not as controversial as many people think.

Actually, they were quite isolationist for most of that time.

tim3115

5% of failed asylum seekers get deported

And you said...

Tell me, what damage do you think immigrants are doing to you?

Why is the word failed used?

rsynnott

tim3115 wrote:

And you said...





Why is the word failed used?

I'd question the popular idea that a reasonable number of economic immigrants is a problem.

tim3115

I'd question the popular idea that a reasonable number of economic immigrants is a problem.

And I've pointed out on the other page why it is a problem.

rsynnott

tim3115 wrote:

And I've pointed out on the other page why it is a problem.

I missed that one, but based on what I've seen of your previous 'arguments', it is no great loss. Now get back on topic.

magpie

Its amazing that in this self-congratulatory flurry of sarcasm and mutual back-patting that none of you seem to have spotted this for what it is. A troll. Go about your business.

Macmorris

rsynnott wrote:

They like the idea in theory.

Exactly, which is why I said that if they were given the choice between a successful independent Ireland and a successful EU, most Irish people would rather live in an independent Ireland in which we would have control over our own affairs.

Tell me, what damage do you think immigrants are doing to you?

They're not doing any damage to me personally. I'm opposed to immigration on political grounds, because I believe it will be bad for Ireland in the long-term.

Not all that far, really; they're much criticised for their human rights; the immigration thing and no freedom of speech, in particular.

Being criticised is different from being isolated. Australia is about as far as it's possible to get from being a pariah state.

"We retake our parliament and our country spreading wealth to all 5 our million citizens."

Retaking the 'country' sounds like invasion to me. How would you think it would work?

I could be interpreted in that way, but I think when he said 'our country' he was referring mainly to the south of Ireland and he was talking about retaking the country, not from the 'Brits' or the unionists, but from the Europhile, Liberal elite who dominate politics and the media in the south and who seem intent on destroying the things that most Irish people still value highly

I'd question the popular idea that a reasonable number of economic immigrants is a problem.

So why don't you think it's a problem then?

And what would you consider to be a reasonable number of immigrants? More than 100,000 immigrants have come here in the last year. That's around the same as the annual number entering Britain. The difference is that Britain is a country with over ten times the population of Ireland. Would you therefore consider 100,000 immigrants a year to be a reasonable number for Ireland?

rsynnott

Macmorris wrote:

I could be interpreted in that way, but I think when he said 'our country' he was referring mainly to the south of Ireland and he was talking about retaking the country, not from the 'Brits' or the unionists, but from the Europhile, Liberal elite who dominate politics and the media in the south and who seem intent on destroying the things that most Irish people still value highly

What are these things which you value so highly that the evil liberals want to destroy, precisely?

And he is clearly talking about NI; 5 million people is a reasonable estimate for the two countries combined populations, and note his talk of Unionists at the end.

Macmorris

rsynnott wrote:

What are these things which you value so highly that the evil liberals want to destroy, precisely?

I think liberals despise the fact that a lot of Irish people still hold traditional nationalist views. Contrary to the opinions of people on this forum, most Irish people would still like to see a united Ireland, they would still like to see Ireland being an independent country, and they would like the indigenous white Irish to still be the majority in their country a hundred years from now. On those three issues, I think the liberal establishment in the republic of Ireland are hostile. Not only are they hostile but they seem to treat anyone who expresses those views with disdain.

rsynnott

Macmorris wrote:

I think liberals despise the fact that a lot of Irish people still hold traditional nationalist views. Contrary to the opinions of people on this forum, most Irish people would still like to see a united Ireland, they would still like to see Ireland being an independent country, and they would like the indigenous white Irish to still be the majority in their country a hundred years from now. On those three issues, I think the liberal establishment in the republic of Ireland are hostile. Not only are they hostile but they seem to treat anyone who expresses those views with disdain.

We don't have a liberal establishment, by any means; we are still socially one of the most backward European countries.

Ah, they'd like to see a united Ireland AGAINST THE WILL OF THE POPULATION OF NORTHERN IRELAND? Lovely. Anywhere else you'd like to invade while you're at it? The Channel Islands are quite nice, and they're used to it by now.

Ah, indigenous white Irish. Well, for a start, we're not indigenous; we're a mixture of original Irish, Celts, Anglo-Saxon and a few other thing. And besides that, why, precisely? When did racism become a nice, acceptable, traditional view?

billy the squid

Macmorris wrote:

I think liberals despise the fact that a lot of Irish people still hold traditional nationalist views. Contrary to the opinions of people on this forum, most Irish people would still like to see a united Ireland,

Would this be against the will of the majority of those actually living in the north, who would prefer to remain within the UK. Dublin taking on northern Ireland would cripple this country. just look at the state of Germany and its economy following reunification.

Of course every fascist movement needs its "prussian corridor"

hey would still like to see Irelan[d being an independent country,

Ireland is an independent country. unless by independent you mean Isolationist. which would not benefit anyone.

and they would like the indigenous white Irish to still be the majority in their country a hundred years from now.

National identity is not solely determined by skin colour, to suggest that it is is most definately racist and biggoted.

On those three issues, I think the liberal establishment in the republic of Ireland are hostile. Not only are they hostile but they seem to treat anyone who expresses those views with disdain.

you are mistaken, the "liberal establishment" as you like to call it is only hostile to views that encourage hatred of people because they have different colour skin, or come from a different country and not based on their deeds or their character.

black_jack

Macmorris wrote:

I think liberals despise the fact that a lot of Irish people still hold traditional nationalist views. Contrary to the opinions of people on this forum, most Irish people would still like to see a united Ireland, they would still like to see Ireland being an independent country, and they would like the indigenous white Irish to still be the majority in their country a hundred years from now. On those three issues, I think the liberal establishment in the republic of Ireland are hostile. Not only are they hostile but they seem to treat anyone who expresses those views with disdain.

Y'know whats funny? The assertion that there is a silent majority that runs at odds with the users of this forum, as if the plain people of Ireland don't have an internet connect and need you to tell us that in fact the opinion of some of the people here contradicts the majority of their countrymen. It's up to you to be their spokesperson, a job you've risen to admirably. :rolleyes:

Macmorris

billy the squid wrote:

Would this be against the will of the majority of those actually living in the north, who would prefer to remain within the UK.

No it wouldn't. It would be a united Ireland achieved with the consent and consultation of the people of the north, in the event of a majority of them voting to join up with the south.

Dublin taking on northern Ireland would cripple this country.

I remember the same kind of scare-mongering argument was used against the Nice Treaty and eastern expansion. The difference was that people who warned about the economic burden of backward eastern countries on Western Europe were accussed of being selfish and narrow-minded while the same claim never seems to be made about people who warn about the consequences of Irish unity.

Ireland is an independent country. unless by independent you mean Isolationist.

By independent I mean a country in which sovereignty rests solely with the people of that country in its own democratically elected legislature, a country which acts solely on its own national interests and is not obligated to accept laws or treaties that are not in that country's national interest. An independent country should have its own currency and be in control of its own national resources.

Many people in this country point to all we've gotten from Europe and expect us to be grateful. I take a different view. I think it's shameful that we're seen as being nothing but a sponge and a parasite on the productive countries of Europe. We consider it shameful for a man to live off charity. Why should it be any different for a country?

I would like Ireland to stand on its own feet and to be responsible for its own success or failure. That way at least our descendants might look back on us with pride rather than contempt.

National identity is not solely determined by skin colour, to suggest that it is is most definately racist and biggoted.

I didn't say that is was based soley on skin colour. I'm as apposed to large-scale Eastern European immigration (i.e. people who have the same skin colour as us) as I am to immigration from any other part of the world.

you are mistaken, the "liberal establishment" as you like to call it is only hostile to views that encourage hatred of people because they have different colour skin, or come from a different country and not based on their deeds or their character.

Liberals like to speak out against racism and 'intolerance' because it makes them feel good. If they were concerned for the welfare of ethnic minorities they wouldn't be supporting unrestricted immigration into this country as that's the main reason why people feel hatred and resentment towards the non-whites in the first place.

Macmorris

rsynnott wrote:

Ah, they'd like to see a united Ireland AGAINST THE WILL OF THE POPULATION OF NORTHERN IRELAND?

Who has ever said that a united Ireland should be achieved against the will of the population of the north? You're assuming that all united Irelanders are idiot-republicans. I don't want a united Ireland to be achieved without the consent of northerners and I doubt that most other united-Irelanders would want that either.

Ah, indigenous white Irish. Well, for a start, we're not indigenous; we're a mixture of original Irish, Celts, Anglo-Saxon and a few other thing.

That's not true. Read this:
http://www.insideireland.com/sample19.htm

The native Irish people are mostly descended from the original settlers who came to this island 9,000 years ago. The Celts, Vikings, Normans and British had almost no impact on the Irish gene-pool.


"The prevalence of ancient genes in Ireland suggests that the Irish have largely maintained their pre-Neolithic genetic heritage. There has been little genetic influence from outside the country since the first people came to Ireland almost 9,000 years ago."

When did racism become a nice, acceptable, traditional view?

Are you saying that it's racist to not want the indigenous Irish people to become a minority in their own homeland?

magpie

magpie wrote:

Its amazing that in this self-congratulatory flurry of sarcasm and mutual back-patting that none of you seem to have spotted this for what it is. A troll. Go about your business.

Actually one other poster did(Democrates) a few pages back.
It's against the charter to troll or call someone a troll so please report the post/thread dont mention it in thread or accuse anyone, we the mods are here to look after that.

As regards the thread,It's rare that I've come across one so full of turd.

Really people(and I'm speaking to the zenophobes here mainly but others too you can work out who you are) Have a bit of cop on.

Oh and as for the person who posted the following:

Are you saying that it's racist to not want the indigenous Irish people to become a minority in their own homeland?

It's supremacist and about as acceptable in Ireland as spuds and gravy on ice cream I would think.

If you want to peddle supremacist views thats fine but don't labour under the misconception that people agree with you or care much about your view other than to tell you supremacy is a misguided minority tautology of dubvious non humanitarian intent and has no value for the vast majority of humanity.



Locked and muppetry noted