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

The "inbreeding" stuff is beyond silly on so many levels, though the whole "breeding" thing seems to wind up both the Right On and the Right Wing. The latter gets the horn over the notion of being "replaced, bred out", the former seems to get the horn about us all turning into beautiful sallow skinned brown eyed people. Both seem obsessed with "racial purity" or the lack of it and neither is going to happen.

Cultural diversity which isn’t based upon biology, brings innovation and new ideas and leads to a better educated and informed society, as evidenced by the drop-off in adherence to religion that has been witnessed in Irish society in the last 50 years or so.

Which happened before inward migration to this country kicked off in the late 1990's and that had pretty much zero to do with those changes. If we look to our closest neighbour they've imported attitides in a few communities that far more ape Irish Catholic attittudes of the 1950's than Irish agnostic attitudes of today. Cultural migrations positive and negative can and do happen without physical ones and for most of human history that's been the case. Where it hasn't such migrations were on the back of conquest and invasion. Even in those cases the numbers were usually pretty low. An example where they weren't was in Europe during the agricultural revolution where the population of existing hunter gatherers was effectively replaced across Europe.

One of the truly unfortunate aspects of Irish history is that being on the periphery of Europe, and importing much of our cultural cues from the far side of the Atlantic,

The vast majority of our "cultural cues" came from much closer to home and from the near side of the Irish sea, or from the Vatican. The American influence is at best a 20th century thing and didn't have much impact until the 21st and even then is mostly surface stuff and hard lines drawn on the interwebs. Outside a minority of of dribbling eejits going on about "MAGA" or "intersectionality" our political landscape is very different, as is our social landscape(and long may that continue). If we took so much from America then it doesn't explain your contentions around our cultural attitudes to entrepreneurial pursuits. Napoloeon described the English as a nation of shopkeepers and it would be apt to describe Americans as a nation of salesmen. The American Dream(tm) is almost entirely based on entrepreneurship.

Your take on the Famine and reasons for it is beyond head scratching.

We already had more than enough genetic diversity in our population. The disease aspect would hold some weight in a much smaller population, but even there the chances of a percentage of the existing population having some resistance would be very high. There isn't an epidemic in history that killed 100% of any population, or anything close to it, even in genetically narrow populations. During the Black Death there are reports of small villages consisting of quite interrelated people cut off from the rest of the country where many died, even the majority, but there were always survivors and that's with numbers in the hundreds, even dozens. With more diversity you also increase the risk of population specific diseases and conditions where they weren't present before. An example would be sickle cell disease found in African populations but pretty much nowhere else. This "benefit" of diversity is an utterly empty one.

As for American cultural cues. The American Revolution was inspired in many regards by the French one, it doesn't mean America has too many French cultural cues beyond extremely local ones(It has far more German). The vast majority of Ireland's cultural cues over the last five centuries came from England and Rome.

It’s not so empty that it can be so easily dismissed, which is the same thing that’s been done throughout the thread in relation to both multiculturalism and immigration - ask for the positives, when the positives are given, point out that they’re of no significance whatsoever compared to the potential negative consequences of an imagined mass invasion of immigrants who are portrayed as being of a hive mindset.

I'm afraid that is very easily dismissed, because it has pretty much zero reality or evidence in science or human genetics. It can't be a positive if there is zero evidence of its effect and if one takes the position that it has an effect, then it can just as easily argued that it can bring negatives too, like previously rare in a population genetic conditions and illnesses and not just in the native populations. One example is the incidence of rickets and vitamin D defiencies in BAMR populations in the UK.

Sure the American revolution was inspired by the French, but that’s using a different argument to dismiss the idea that we imported much of our cultural cues from the US. I’m not suggesting we didn’t import anything in terms of our culture from England and Rome, we did obviously. The point I was making is that we developed very differently to the rest of Europe because we’re on the periphery of Europe.

Again this is a mix of nonsense, half truths and bias along dubious historical facts. One could have argued that being on the edge of Europe in the case of not being part of the Roman Empire had an effect, but even here there was some cross polinisation and after Rome fell, one of the few places in Europe that kept a spark of that classical world alive was in Ireland and then exported much of it back into what had once been that empire. Never mind the rest of Europe who never fell under that influence. Did Sweden, Norway develop "very differently to the rest of Europe"? Of course not. The Vikings came and then the Normans which brought the country ino their world and wider Western Europe. Then we became part of Britain which was hardly on the periphery of Europe or the world for that matter. For a time it was central to both.

Both multiculturalism and immigration are inevitable and as much as some people may want to, it’s just not possible to control either phenomenon to the degree they would want to, let alone does it do anything to promote their own ideas of what being Irish mean or what ideas they mean by culture.

Of course it's possible and it wasn't inevitable. About the only nations with mass movements of peoples before the post war world and 20th century were European colonies that were built on the mass movement of peoples, or areas of actual physical invasion. That degree of demographic shift across much of Western Europe has never occurred before in European history. Ireland has only had to deal with this politic in the last 20 odd years. Odd that it wasn't "inevitable" beforehand. If Ireland didn't have the give birth for passports loophole in the 90's and early 00's a huge proportion of the non EU migrants here quite simply wouldn't be. When we close that loophole the numbers dropped and when we applied the criterias of asylum seekers the vast majority, nearly 100% of those coming here from most of the nations that came in the 90's and early 00's were refused entry because they were chancers. And we're already seeing the exact same trends every single other "multicultural" nation in Europe has seen before us.

None of that is arguing the case in favour either multiculturalism or immigration because I don’t think there’s any need to.

Now here is the perfect example of the complete non argument in favour of the politic of physical migration multiculturalism. It's the debate equivalent of Nothing to see here, no need to debate it at all, it just is. AKA the "arguments" are slimmer than a Parisien catwalk model and well you know it. That's how empty and wishy washy this philosophy and politic is.