Why is Traveller disadvantage not a mainstream concern?

antoobrien wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

As far as I am aware they are classified in Ireland as a distinct cultural group.

Just because you don't like some traveller traditions, doesn't mean things like their languages and traditionally nomadic way of life and commonly held supernatural beliefs, or any other characteristics of traveller society, do not represent culture.

Permabear wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Yes, I agree with this. Anecdotally, travellers might often have their own business interests in the black economy to support their welfare dependence. If this is the case, the opportunity cost of work in the white economy could be a barrier to employment for many within the traveller community. So welfare reform could help travellers' situation in the long term.

Again, I agree. But traveler children are taken out of school at an early age by their parents, who perceive (correctly) that education poses a threat to the perpetuation of traveler culture.

I think that's a very broad and baseless assumption to make. There may well be many reasons why traveller children leave school early. 60% of travellers felt discriminated against at school according to the All Ireland report on Traveller Health (UCD, 2010). So I would imagine one could also mention bullying against traveller children combined with a huge lack of contact between traveller parents and education (therefore perhaps, no real appreciation for its importance). I'm sure we could come up with lots of plausible reasons why traveller children are often not effectively engaged with education.

Dismissing the issue as traveller parents maliciously plotting to deprive their children of education for the greater good of the group culture is a very hasty, nasty and, as far as I can see, unsupported conclusion to arrive at.

the only way for parents to perpetuate the existing culture is to make sure that their children stay illiterate and ignorant

So you think that these children grow up illiterate and "ignorant", and yet you expect them to somehow morph into parents capable of making sound, logical decisions compatible with mainstream, settled society?

No, it's not really all that much "fun." It's a life characterized by hard drinking, feuding, illiteracy, antisocial behavior, poor health, and an early grave.

With "a life characterised by hard drinking..." I think you're overstepping the mark from discussing observed characteristics of the group as a whole into broader generalisations at the individual level here.

My point was that living in a caravan and dealing in horses is not unacceptable as a way of life in itself- unless it is detrimental to one's offspring, for example.

In that context, I would question your assertion that "The state should strive to replace a culture of idleness and dysfunction with one of work, education, and responsibility".
Just a few pages ago you were saying "As a liberal[...] Travelers can live how they wish, as far as I'm concerned". You now seem to be promoting a state sponsored "responsibility" drive, "responsibility" being an unpalatably vague term, especially when being promoted at the hands of the state.

Unless you're advocating that the state should take children away from their natural parents I don't see any way for the government to "act decisively" to prevent children from "being conditioned to adhere to the traditional way of life of their forbears."

I wouldn't suggest removal of children from their parents as anything but a last resort. I think one has to be very careful so as not to alienate the traveller community, which appears to place a very heavy importance on family.
But that option (after other penalties have been applied) should certainly be explored as part of the stick approach in allowing traveller children access to education.

Educational provisions for traveller children in the past twenty years, like TESS and distance learning for travellers in the UK, have apparently given rise to favourable results. (Cathy Kiddle, Traveller Children, 2000). Perhaps something similar should be explored in Ireland.

You wish to represent travelers as passive victims of social forces beyond their control.

Not necessarily. That would suggest I deny that traveller parents are capable of making foolish, or unwise parenting choices. Which is not the case.

Rather, I am merely putting their choices in context by highlighting the cyclical nature of the travelleing community's way of life. Children who, for whatever reasons, do not engage in education and work may be less likely to promote engagement in education and work among their offspring in turn.