Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

Options
1346347349351352643

Comments

  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I still don't understand what the issue is if 3 out of 4 people living here are ethnically Irish? What difference does it make? Sounds like something that is said to scare people.

    People bring change with them, and a lot of the change that they bring with them is less than obvious. I get that there's an attitude on boards that people are afraid of change, and that it's wrong to think that way, but for myself, I've seen a lot of change in Ireland/"the West" over the last three decades, with a lot of it being negative. Now, some of that is natural, due to the advancement of technology and the response of society to adapt to the new environment. Or the relaxation of social norms, such as teenagers being able to see nudity in movies. Many little changes over time to culminate in an overall change to the culture of a country. Which is normal.

    When a country is homogeneous, or relatively so, that change to society tends to follow a... somewhat unified direction. [At least, it used to before the social sciences gained so much influence, and their divisive ideas became commonplace]. The problem with multiculturalism, or the statistic of 20% of the Irish being foreign born is that it's a massive change to the demographic of the country in a short period of time, but also the beliefs/ideas/desires that comes with them. It's one thing if they were all from other western nations, in which case, the desires for change would follow a fairly similar line, due to a shared history of morality, or belief systems, but when you're talking about large groups from Africa, M.East, etc all with very different backgrounds, morals, etc, the implementation of change will be more fractured, introducing a much wider range of ideas. Beneficial or desired for one group but not desired by another.

    I hated growing up in Ireland, and I was incredibly happy to leave. However, after leaving Ireland, I spent time in a wide range of countries, and at the end of it all, I recognised that Ireland was a better country for people to live in overall. It still wasn't a country I wanted to live in but, it was safer, generally more honest, and so on. As more people come in though, that is changing. Quickly.

    Not really explaining what I mean very well, but I don't have the time right now to organise/format my thoughts. Hopefully you know what I mean.

    Bubblypop, that's my issue with the demographic change. People have needs, and desires... usually heavily influenced by the culture they grew up in. Some break away to be different, but most people carry those needs/desires within themselves, wanting their new home to adopt/provide them. The problem is that with so many different cultures, there is going to be a clash in expectations for what the country provides, and how society alters in order to provide it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 188 ✭✭Anne_Widdecombe


    It's a complex interaction of a shared history, sense of community, music, language, traditions, values, food etc. - and all the rest.

    But we know what we mean when we say Irish culture, even if you couldn't pinpoint it or offer a ridiculously strict definition.

    We know it's not the burqa, chopping hands off for stealing, or abstaining from alcohol.

    If you were to contrast Irish culture with culture from somewhere like Saudi Arabia, we know exactly what the differences are - even without a definition.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,573 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    I think the explanation may have more to do with the history of that nation being governed by illegitimate power. If the authorities governing over a people are seen to be illegitimate then corruption could be a form of rebellion and dissent. Over time it becomes accepted, even celebrated. When you talk about southern European countries, Italy was carved up between Spanish, French and Austrian rulers for centuries. Greece and much of the Balkans were under Ottoman and to some extent Austrian rule. Spain was probably the least affected by rule from outside Iberia, but it was still a union of many kingdoms which didn't always have the same loyalty. And then there is the aftereffects of the civil war and Franco. All these multicultural empires fell apart as people sought legitimate national governments by, for and of their own people.

    Ireland is northern European but I think there has been a similar mindset and a similar cause with rule from London for so long. So I think it's more to do with history than a north/south thing.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Interesting. Hadn't thought about it like that.



  • Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Its all about the Muslims for you, Anne 🙄

    I have family in many different countries, some of whom are very Irish in the culture, despite never living here, some of my family in this country are not.

    What is your point?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 188 ✭✭Anne_Widdecombe


    That's fine.

    If you are diluting Irish culture as effectively something mushy that doesn't really exist, but is maybe shared among the world in some way - that's absolutely your right.



  • Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I understand what you are saying, but I generally disagree.

    I believe Ireland is a much better place to live them it was, and I don't believe it was more honest, it was safer, but I don't believe that immigrants have changed it. The drug culture that began in the early 80s and the Celtic tiger are what has changed the country the most.



  • Registered Users Posts: 188 ✭✭Anne_Widdecombe


    Out of curiosity, would you be happy for 150,000 migrants (from everywhere and anywhere) to enter the country each year (for safety, work, economy blah blah etc.) such that, in 20-years from now, the majority of the country would be occupied by foreign migrants?

    Say in 2040, 80% of the country was migrants.

    Would that be acceptable to you?

    (let's assume for the sake of argument there is sufficient housing / school places to go around)



  • Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    No-one is diluting anything.

    80 million people around the world claim Irish ancestry. There are GAA clubs in all corners of the world. People Irish dance everywhere.

    In fact, I would think that Irish traditions and culture is getting stronger for the last 100 years. I see no reason to worry.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,573 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    Funnily enough, I agree with a lot of that. Membership of an ethnic group is not always clear-cut, but clearly being of Irish descent is the key factor. I'd add to that someone needs to identify as being Irish and be recognised by other Irish people as Irish.

    I think non-Irish who express an interest in Irish music/sport/art etc are just interested. They do not become Irish as a result. No one would accept that an Irish person who learns a foreign language has changed their ethnicity.

    Where we disagree is the tactical nihilism you're deploying: "What difference does it make?"

    The Irish falling to less than 3 in 4 of the Irish population has occurred in just 30 years. With less than replacement levels of fertility, and mass migration continuing unabated then the ethnic Irish are going to continue to decline until ultimately they are a minority and it may come within my lifetime.

    Irish people have already had an experience of being part of a state where they were a minority. It led to persistent mistreatment and ethnic conflict, and ultimately the Irish formed their own nation state, violently, with violence continuing for decades after. So we already know from bitter experience what difference it makes for the Irish to become a minority. History tells us multicultural empires always break apart on ethnic lines. Current events show us that our European neighbours are desperately struggling and failing to integrate the new ethnic groups within their borders which are increasingly asserting themselves. Whatever way you cut it, ethnic groups sharing the same territory always leads to conflict.

    And even despite your tactical nihilism, you acknowledge that people would be scared to understand that the ethnic Irish share of the population has declined so much, so quickly and continues to decline.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    History tells us multicultural empires always break apart on ethnic lines. Current events show us that our European neighbours are desperately struggling and failing to integrate the new ethnic groups within their borders which are increasingly asserting themselves. Whatever way you cut it, ethnic groups sharing the same territory always leads to conflict.

    This is what bothers me. History has shown us what happens to multicultural societies over the long term. It's not a secret. And yet, so many people advocate for multiculturalism in western societies, usually with an emphasis on immigration from regions that are vastly different from us. (Africa, M.East, etc) I have to assume that they believe it will be different this time, but what are we doing that's different from past multicultural societies.

    IMHO It seems to me that we're simply following the US while ignoring the unique differences available to the US, such as it's geography/location in the world. Western nations have adopted the inclusive and diversity is our strength crap that came from US administrations, and US social sciences.. but where has that led us? The US is incredibly divided, even if you ignore the racism directed towards African Americans, and Hispanics. There is very little unity left in that nation, and that's what we should be aiming to emulate? Added to which, from an economic standpoint, and what the nation can provide for it's population, there are huge areas across the whole country, which have fallen to 3rd world standards, with many pockets simply disappearing from being supported, or improved... how is that a good thing? Oh, I know the US has their own problems with being a military power, and other economic issues, but they're still one of the most economically powerful nations in the world.

    What happens to a country like Ireland where it's wealth and economy is most strong only on paper? An economy heavily focused on services produces little, and is seriously dependent on other markets to remain stable. We already, even during our boom periods, had problems providing an adequate amount to services to the whole country, and in many areas, those services have been encouraged to shrink to just cover the major population centers. Which is another project (the focus on cities) that tends to cause serious problems in the long term in every country,

    I really wish people would think. Think about what's gone before us. Even the changes/problems of the last three decades seem to be dismissed and ignored.. in favor of adopting a feel-good belief that everything will be fine.. because of reasons that haven't been thought out and reasoned through. It's just so... idiotic.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,919 ✭✭✭Cordell


     in favor of adopting a feel-good belief that everything will be fine.. because of reasons that haven't been thought out and reasoned through

    Because people need to feel better about themselves and they find comfort in thinking it's all good, even though they know it's an illusion - no one is able to offer any advantages, they can only say that nothing bad will happen, but they can't point out the good when asked. Still, they persist.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    This can be debated till the cows come home but the simple fact is the same issues that are happening in America and Western Europe are starting to take hold here now. This will continue into the future, perhaps more so here because we have concrete plans supported by all political parties for increasing immigration massively over the next few decades unlike other countries like France who are now actively looking at severely restricting it.

    It is what it is at this stage.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,648 ✭✭✭✭Kermit.de.frog



    I was a bit young but I have been told there was serious alarm in the country at the time at people arriving in to ports pregnant, or actually giving birth, when the so-called "anchor baby" route was at it's height.

    Why return to that? Wouldn't we be the only European country that would allow that?

    Wouldn't this just make us a target?



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,919 ✭✭✭Cordell


    You mean a bigger target? I'd say the anchor baby scheme is nothing compared to the English language schools scheme and various other schemes.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,115 ✭✭✭archfi


    Yet again, Chu shows her complete ignorance of a subject and plows ahead with ideological bluster.

    NO other country in the EU or wider Europe practiced or practices jus soli - NONE.

    (Dark blue = jus soli)


    The issue is never the issue; the issue is always the revolution.

    The Entryism process: 1) Demand access; 2) Demand accommodation; 3) Demand a seat at the table; 4) Demand to run the table; 5) Demand to run the institution; 6) Run the institution to produce more activists and policy until they run it into the ground.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,024 ✭✭✭gsi300024v


    I'd not see it was a bad situation for there to be a range of uses on topic, we'd a very singled-minded society back in the 50 60 70 s with the church. I'd not like that returning.

    It's funny how you can have something happen,let's say x happens, you might say, look x happened to see we shouldn't have done Y, I might see the same thing and love it.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    There's a logical fallacy there... Irish people were rejecting the Church and it's teachings long before any significant multiculturalism occurred here. It simply took time to gain enough momentum to effect change.. the same with most social movements of those times (it's kinda different now since momentum can be gained much quicker due to social media)

    Also.. the idea of being single minded doesn't made sense either. Irish governance was already changing, with the decline of censorship, and the increase in individual rights. None of which came about from foreign influences.

    The fact of the matter is that a population starts questioning and seeking change when they're no longer with the status quo, especially when there are obvious inequalities at play. Religion or conditioning can slow that desire or stop it completely, but that's extremely difficult in any western nation to maintain.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,573 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    And from the map, its clear to see where the ideology is coming from. For all intents and purposes, only 2-3 countries outside of the America's practise birth right citizenship. It's a historical oddity of former colonies in the Americas, particularly the US. And I don't believe its a particularly popular policy in the 21st century US either.

    Chu and her ilk are attempting to implement 18th century colonial era policies on Ireland, obviously to the detriment of the indigenous people of Ireland.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,024 ✭✭✭gsi300024v


    I'm not saying that multiculturalism had a role to play in the shrinking of the Irish Catholics churches' hold on society here, I'm just pointing out what Ireland was like when we were less multicultural.

    Many seem to shine the spotlight on what is bad if we have mass immigration and ignore the positive. With any action, there are good and bad parts to it.

    I find it interesting that what can be a negative for one can be positive for another. I like change, I like having different perspectives on things, I feel the great mix of people brings this to my life.

    Plenty of sweeping statements in this thread without evidence to back it up.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,024 ✭✭✭gsi300024v


    Did immigration to France etc bring positives too?

    How France went about immigration might be looked at too. Bring laws in that restrict some religious practices but not others. I feel the welcome we give newcomers will have a strong influence on the practices of the newcomers. The more they are felt welcomed the more they'll integrate, the more they feel unwelcome the more they keep to themselves. So we have a responsibility in this situation.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,919 ✭✭✭Cordell


    The French are still struggling to come to terms with all the positives: https://www.thejournal.ie/france-terror-attacks-trial-bataclan-5543504-Sep2021/



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Why does Chu seem to hate the Irish so much? Everything about her seems to be rooted in a sort of contempt for how our country is.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I'm not saying that multiculturalism had a role to play in the shrinking of the Irish Catholics churches' hold on society here, I'm just pointing out what Ireland was like when we were less multicultural.

    hahaha... come on. You're still trying to link multicultualism to our social changes. You do it again in the above sentence.. I'm not saying but... I am saying.

    Funny.

    Many seem to shine the spotlight on what is bad if we have mass immigration and ignore the positive. With any action, there are good and bad parts to it.

    Of course there are some positives to immigration. However, lets be clear here.. do you see a difference between immigration and multiculturalism? I do.

    The problem is that the benefits don't cancel out the negatives. It doesn't work that way..

    I find it interesting that what can be a negative for one can be positive for another. I like change, I like having different perspectives on things, I feel the great mix of people brings this to my life.

    You've missed the point, either intentionally or not.. In any case, change isn't the problem. Few people here want Ireland to stay the way it was before. We do want positive change in this country, especially change that will make the country better for future generations of Irish people.

    We don't want change based on short-term considerations like virtue signalling, which creates a host of problems for future generations.

    Plenty of sweeping statements in this thread without evidence to back it up.

    hahaha... funny.. since you haven't provided any evidence to support your own sweeping statements.

    However, there are plenty of {prior} posts with heaps of evidence attached, and many of the regular posters, being aware that such evidence was previously posted, will continue on the assumption that they don't need to rehash past support pieces.

    Just to add... I don't put up much evidence anymore, because of the manner of responses on this thread ("on the other side"), which tend to deflect/dismiss without any honest engagement. There's little point spending 30 minutes on a post when the person you're responding to disappears for a few days, just to come back later to repeat the same points, ignoring your evidence. It's just the way this thread has evolved. Mostly we post our opinions, and sometimes we will engage in something more detailed.. but honestly, that's becoming rarer and rarer.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,144 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    I'm not saying that multiculturalism had a role to play in the shrinking of the Irish Catholics churches' hold on society here, I'm just pointing out what Ireland was like when we were less multicultural.

    So to recap; the multiculturalism of immigration had pretty much zero influence on Irish society moving away from the church and it kicked off before we were even close to the multicultural Ireland of today, but this means multiculturalism is a good thing anyway? The two points don't belong in the same argument. If the multiculturalism of the last twenty years never happened the power of the Catholic Church would still be fading. Indeed many of the people coming since would be more religious than the locals are today. Poles tend to be more Catholic, Africans tend to be more Christian across different denominations, Russians more Orthodox, Middle Easterners more Muslim.

    I find it interesting that what can be a negative for one can be positive for another. I like change, I like having different perspectives on things, I feel the great mix of people brings this to my life.

    Annnnd we're back to surface exoticism. It never really goes away as an "explanation".

    Plenty of sweeping statements in this thread without evidence to back it up.

    Plenty of evidence has been put forward by those questioning this politic, those who follow this politic can only seem to wheel out vague talk of exoticism, the more exotic the better of course, charity and "the Irish were immigrants once". Actually we haven't seen that latter one in a while. It's doubtless due a rehash at this stage.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Registered Users Posts: 332 ✭✭MarkEadie


    "In a behaviour and attitudes poll pubished in the Sunday times on November 2018, 71% said that all children born in Ireland should be entitled to Irish citizenship."


    First time anyone will have seen this brought up in the thread but imagine how many times it would have been referenced had the result been 71% disagreed lol



  • Posts: 3,801 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    The French have practiced Laicite for a hundred years, it was initially targeted at Christians. Same rules apply.

    The French are fairly wise to the idea that modern multiculturalism is driven by the US, and largely reject it.


    Well the 2004 referendum was fairly decisive, and another one will also be decisive.



  • Registered Users Posts: 332 ✭✭MarkEadie


    71% vs 29% is fairly decisive, would you agree?

    The 2004 referendum gives children born to Irish citizens citizenship. There are a lot of people born in other countries who have been naturalized as Irish citizens. Most of the lads quoting the 2004 referendum don't even understand that they are supporting birthright citizenship to the children of naturalized citizens who may be from Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe etc. They don't even agree with that 2004 referendum result yet they quote it to somehow support their stance lol



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,144 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    I for one know quite well what the 2004 referendum was about "lol" and it was a clear message by one of the largest margins of any Irish referendum that said nope, we don't want jus soli and by extension "anchor babies" which was about the biggest reason for the referendum being called in the first place. There wasn't a single constituency that was a nay. Never mind and as has been pointed out not one of our EU neighbours has jus soli, so a few of them wouldn't be too happy to have an outlier that means get naturalised here and have automatic free movement throughout the EU. Of the nations around the world that have jus soli, most have quite strict applications of it. The US being a good example. Few have such leaky legislation as Ireland had. A few of the opposing politicos and NGO's were calling racism about it at the time of course. Oh and a very large majority of those naturalised citizens you reference got that way before that jus soli loophole was closed. When it was closed the numbers showing up Irish maternity hospitals dropped right off. Take Nigerians as an example, between 2000 and 2004 their numbers increased by 80%, while the number appealing for asylum dropped off a cliff. There was little need to. Though the Nigerian consulate of all people made a public statement decrying the chancers "fleeing for their lives" and laid the blame for that perception on some quarters of the Irish media and surprise surprise, our old friends the vested interest NGO's.

    The Times straw poll doesn't count for much as such polls are often slanted depending on how is polled and how the questions are framed and by whom. What counts is an actual vote by referendum. Though I strongly suspect that vote will never be put to the Irish electorate. If they were so confident that it would pass in one of the biggest about faces in Irish voting history, you'd think they'd be up for it to bolster that mandate?

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,144 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Oh and by the by, that Times poll has come up in the thread a couple of times already.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



Advertisement