View on Romanians

lazydaisy

tintinr35 wrote:

she was refering to the J1 students in california this summer who wrecked that house me thinks

Yes them, but not just them. The J1 visas have a rep.

lazydaisy

The Corinthian wrote:

I’m Italian, which is relevant to this discussion in two ways. Firstly because, from my experience, it really does not matter where you’re from, you will encounter various prejudices from the Irish, both good and bad. In fairness, the Irish are not alone in this (every nationality does it), but you should be aware that it’s not simply because you’re Romanian..

Yes, but as an Italian you may be vulnerable to stereotypes, but I doubt its of the "oh" underscored by tones of disappointment variety. I doubt you wouldnt be brought home to meet a girlfriend's mother or be turned down for work because you are of Italian origin.

..

Even the one’s who have made their here are tame in comparison to many on mainland Europe - I’ve not yet heard of any case of child snatching yet here, which is one of their favoured industries elsewhere. It’s actually difficult to find anyone from a major city in Italy and not hear a first hand story of a crime or attempted crime by one. Suffice it to say were I to say anything further on the subject; I’d probably get banned, so I’ll keep it to myself. You get the picture...

Uh huh. You mean much like the Italians and Sicilians who immigrated to the US to spread their criminal habits. I guess you've never been to Sardinia, plenty of kidnapping there, and not by Romanians or Gypsies.

..

If it is confusion between Romanians and gypsies, then that could account for much of the attitudes. I expect that this is something that will change with time as people in Ireland realise the distinction.

So are you saying that its ok to be racist towards those that are gypsies? The race is incidental to the argument. Its the fact that people are acting on prejudicial feelings that is the problem.

dlofnep

I've no opinions on Romanians, I don't know any to be honest. I don't think I'd treat you any differently if you told me that you were Romanian. I respect all cultures. I'd probably ask you questions about your country.

Raskolnikov

Draupnir wrote:

My opinion is that you are bad at penalties. Other than that, I have a few Romanian mates and have known about 100 - 150 Romanians over the years through working for the Eastern health Board.

9/10 have been decent people looking to make a life for themselves.

There is always one bad apple and predominantly, I have found them to be Gypsies.

Of course, I know lots of Irish people.

9/10 of those are decent people......

I'm afraid that sums it up for me.

Capt'n Midnight

lazydaisy wrote:

I guess you've never been to Sardinia, plenty of kidnapping there, and not by Romanians or Gypsies.

Wow, I've been to Norn Iorn too, in both places its mostly internal feuding amongst the natives.

Victor

Moved form PI to Humanities.

The Corinthian

lazydaisy wrote:

Yes, but as an Italian you may be vulnerable to stereotypes, but I doubt its of the "oh" underscored by tones of disappointment variety. I doubt you wouldnt be brought home to meet a girlfriend's mother or be turned down for work because you are of Italian origin.

I never said that they were negative, although some are - being told by a girlfriend’s mother, when I was 14, that all Italian guys are only after one thing springs to mind. I was simply pointing out that people in Ireland, and in fairness anywhere else, will have preconceived notions.

A bit like you in relation to what I said.

Uh huh. You mean much like the Italians and Sicilians who immigrated to the US to spread their criminal habits. I guess you've never been to Sardinia, plenty of kidnapping there, and not by Romanians or Gypsies.

Actually nothing like it. Not even close. If you think so you’re really speaking from a position of pure ignorance. Seriously.

So are you saying that its ok to be racist towards those that are gypsies? The race is incidental to the argument. Its the fact that people are acting on prejudicial feelings that is the problem.

Who’s being racist? That they are not Caucasian, I accept, but that’s absolutely no reason to hold any opinion against Gypsies, and neither have I suggested it is. My objection is that they represent a culture that is endemically parasitic.

Nevyn

Look people who have never experienced another culture are stuck with sterotypes and it is not like they have to in a susposed multicuteral Ireland
travel abroad to learn that different people from the same country are not
the same culturally.

They just need to learn to ditch the 'village' mentalilty that a lot of irish people
have. Really in a Ireland where people are afraid to go from nortside to southside
do we expect them to know the differnce between people from Tuscany, Naples,
Sciliy and those who are second generation chipper families ? nevermind who
is romanian, romany gypsy or those from the Carpathian mountains.

Redleslie2

The Corinthian wrote:

My objection is that they represent a culture that is endemically parasitic.

Their alleged endemic parasitism is somewhat tame when compared to that of the aristocracy and the historical ruling class in general though isn't it?

The Corinthian

Redleslie2 wrote:

Their alleged endemic parasitism is somewhat tame when compared to that of the aristocracy and the historical ruling class in general though isn't it?

I’m sure it is tame in a Marxist-Leninist-Trotskyite fantasy World.

Thank you for sharing that tangental thought with us.

Laguna

Redleslie2 wrote:

Their alleged endemic parasitism is somewhat tame when compared to that of the aristocracy and the historical ruling class in general though isn't it?

This is a perfectly legitimate rationale "The Corinthian", to believe otherwise is to be living in a fantasy world as you say.

The Corinthian

Laguna wrote:

This is a perfectly legitimate rationale "The Corinthian", to believe otherwise is to be living in a fantasy world as you say.

Certainly - assuming the two of you live in the same fantasy World.

Of course, you're hardly going to disagree that it was completely off topic, are you?

Laguna

The Corinthian wrote:

Certainly - assuming the two of you live in the same fantasy World.

Of course, you're hardly going to disagree that it was completely off topic, are you?

Christ, I've encountered the old Boards rule again, "I'm right, you're wrong".
The aristocracy are endemically parasitic, do you deny this?, does Prince Charles get up every morning and go on and work on a site?, Does Prince Philip stack shelves in Tesco?, no, they get their riches from the taxpayer.. if that isn't a prime example of a parasite, well.

Yes, the comment was off topic, but does that discount its validity?

stevenmu

I haven't read the full thread so apologies if this was already gone in to.

To the OP, I think a lot of the reason 'foreign nationals' get funny reactions from Irish people is that because up untill recently there wasn't very many 'foreign nationals' living here. I think that most Irish people genuinely aren't racist, but in the last 5 to 10 years there has been a lot of immigration and 'racism' has become the new media darling. Everywhere you look there's talk about how racist the Irish are and about how terrible it is (racism is of course terrible). Personally I know from experience that when I first meet a 'foreign nationals', and I come in contact with many through my job, the first thought through my head is "don't appear racist, for God's sake, don't appear racist" and I kind of panic and start trying to think through everything I'm about to say in case it may have racist connotations. This naturally makes me seem less open, and more hesitant to talk to someone. I may be very wrong but I think many other Irish people experience the same thing. You're english seems very good so maybe you're familiar with the phrase 'walking on eggshells', which means people are very carefull to not say something they shouldn't ( or 'put a foot wrong' and crush something) in case they cause offence.

This can be seen in most of the media (newspapers, TV etc), and for some reason it's especially noticeable here on boards.ie. I think there's a lot of 'racism'/'anti-racism' hype going around, and any topic in which there's a mention of nationality/race all of a sudden turns into page after page of people calling each other racist (which is the reason I only read the first page of this thread, if I'm wrong and the other pages actually contain interesting conversation, someone please correct me).

So I don't think that most Irish people are racist, and I think that the 'awkwardness' exhibited by the girl was probably her not knowing how to deal with somebody of a different nationality. As crazy as it sounds, I would suggest that people from other countries who want to get on well with Irish people actually try and find ways of putting us at ease with your ... erm (not sure of the PC term for this) ... foreign-national-ness. I'm pretty sure that most of us are more worried about saying something stupid or offensive to you, than you are worried about us not liking you.

The Corinthian

Laguna wrote:

Christ, I've encountered the old Boards rule again, "I'm right, you're wrong".

No, a bit closer to the other old Boards rule again, "I'm right, ‘cos you're talking through your rear end".

The aristocracy are endemically parasitic, do you deny this?, does Prince Charles get up every morning and go on and work on a site?, Does Prince Philip stack shelves in Tesco?, no, they get their riches from the taxpayer.. if that isn't a prime example of a parasite, well.

What you’ve just described is a small subset of the British aristocracy. There’s a big difference between that and equating some individual who may have at best inherited some property that costs more to maintain than they can afford and, incidentally, receives no more income from the taxpayer than you do. Maybe less. So on that point, yes; you are talking crap.

Even if we’re talking only about that wee subset of the British aristocracy, then the argument could be made (I’m not going to make it incidentally) that they bring in more as a tourist attraction and through tabloid and memorabilia sales than they cost the taxpayer. Let alone the whole national figurehead stuff that a lot of the British, bizarrely, take seriously. So even there, both of you are likely (but I’ll concede it’s debatable) to be still talking rubbish.

Yes, the comment was off topic, but does that discount its validity?

It wasn’t valid though. It was a sweeping, class-war cliché. And it was off topic and meant, I suspect, simply as a troll.

Perhaps we can get to said topic now?

Redleslie2

Laguna wrote:

Christ, I've encountered the old Boards rule again, "I'm right, you're wrong".
The aristocracy are endemically parasitic, do you deny this?, does Prince Charles get up every morning and go on and work on a site?, Does Prince Philip stack shelves in Tesco?, no, they get their riches from the taxpayer.. if that isn't a prime example of a parasite, well.

Yes, the comment was off topic, but does that discount its validity?

It was on topic, I was putting TC's venal prejudice in perspective. How many wars have the roma foisted on the world over the course of their history compared to the aristocracy or the bourgeoisie or anyone else for that matter. They'd have to pick an awful lot of pockets to catch up! :v:

To the OP, most other non-nationals I know here encounter the same attitude from Irish people, kids should be taught basic psychology in school here to try deal with the problem of stereotyping.

Redleslie2

The Corinthian wrote:

I’m sure it is tame in a Marxist-Leninist-Trotskyite fantasy World.

Thank you for sharing that tangental thought with us.

How does one in the 'real world' define endemic parasitism then?

The Corinthian

Redleslie2 wrote:

It was on topic, I was putting TC's venal prejudice in perspective.

No, you were quite blatantly looking to troll and are attempting to create ridiculous parallels to justify this troll. Now, it may make sense in a Marxist-Leninist-Trotskyite fantasy World, but that’s about it.

How does one in the 'real world' define endemic parasitism then?

Back under your bridge with you.

Laguna

Redleslie2 wrote:

How does one in the 'real world' define endemic parasitism then?

Look mate, if there's one thing I've learnt on boards its don't bother trying to discess anything that conflicts with someone elses mindset. You're wasting your time, The Corinthian has decided

The Corinthian wrote:

I'm right, ‘cos you're talking through your rear end

You can't discuss anything with someone who has adopted that attitude.

Redleslie2

The Corinthian wrote:

No, you were quite blatantly looking to troll and are attempting to create ridiculous parallels to justify this troll. Now, it may make sense in a Marxist-Leninist-Trotskyite fantasy World, but that’s about it.

Back under your bridge with you.

Fair enough question I would have thought given your provocative, predictable, nasty and downright ignorant attitude to roma culture but yeah, run away then. You're displaying debating skills and views that are more suited to stormfront. Not for the first time either eh?

Redleslie2

Laguna wrote:

Look mate, if there's one thing I've learnt on boards its don't bother trying to discess anything that conflicts with someone elses mindset. You're wasting your time, The Corinthian has decided
You can't discuss anything with someone who has adopted that attitude.

True, but the exact same noxious language that was used to facilitate the dehumanisation and attempted extermination of the gypsies and everyone else in the 30's and 40's and should not go unchallenged here or anywhere else, even if it is an ultimately futile exercise.

Laguna

Redleslie2 wrote:

True, but the exact same noxious language that was used to facilitate the dehumanisation and attempted extermination of the gypsies and everyone else in the 30's and 40's and should not go unchallenged here or anywhere else, even if it is an ultimately futile exercise.

You're completely right, but surely you acknowledge that the Internet is never going to be be a place where you can have a rational conversation with the majority of people, it's a place where peoples social inhibitions evaporate and they reveal their true character, the ideal hunting ground for bigots and small minded people who wish to pass on their ideologies.

I myself have no issue with anyone from any part of the world, after all, what's a country but an artificially created boundary?. I hate the concept of nationality anyway, coupled with religion, it's the root of all problems in the world, if we were no longer British/Irish/American/Muslim/Jewish/Christian then what would we be?, human. I personally think racism and segregation will exist until the point in time where the Earth is perhaps faced by a catastophic event and for its survival (e.g. in the aftermath of the catastrophe, e.g. a meteor or something) the concept of nationality and religion are dropped.

I digress, I know, but it really bugs me why a poor chap who happens to be Romanian actually feels the need to ask on Boards how the Irish view Romanians, it's sad that some people take issue with him in 2005.

One sentiment echoed on here earlier which I couldn't disagree with more is

stevenmu wrote:

As crazy as it sounds, I would suggest that people from other countries who want to get on well with Irish people actually try and find ways of putting us at ease with your ... erm (not sure of the PC term for this) ... foreign-national-ness.

This indicates to me that some people out there feel any immigrant (inlcuding myself) is under some obligation to make Irish people feel more comfortable with who you are and where you're from. Why are the Irish uneasy with foreigners?, did the Irish not travel the world for the last five hundred years?, surely behaviour such as this would invoke empathy for foreigners from the Irish?, that'd be my logical assumption but then maybe I'm being overly romantic.

Wibbs

Redleslie2 wrote:

Their alleged endemic parasitism is somewhat tame when compared to that of the aristocracy and the historical ruling class in general though isn't it?

WTF? Reds under the bed or trolls under the bridge? It's all sooo confusing. Maybe I'm just too bourgeois to see the point.:rolleyes:

Laguna wrote:

You're completely right, but surely you acknowledge that the Internet is never going to be be a place where you can have a rational conversation with the majority of people, it's a place where peoples social inhibitions evaporate and they reveal their true character,

Maybe that's a good thing. Get a grip on the their real feelings an' all that.

ideal hunting ground for bigots and small minded people who wish to pass on their ideologies.

On both side of the fence.

I myself have no issue with anyone from any part of the world, after all, what's a country but an artificially created boundary?. I hate the concept of nationality anyway, coupled with religion, it's the root of all problems in the world, if we were no longer British/Irish/American/Muslim/Jewish/Christian then what would we be?, human. I personally think racism and segregation will exist until the point in time where the Earth is perhaps faced by a catastophic event and for its survival (e.g. in the aftermath of the catastrophe, e.g. a meteor or something) the concept of nationality and religion are dropped.

It exists. It's a place called LaLaland. Catastrophe or no, human nature and the fight for resources will bring us quickly back to the way it's always been. Nationallity, tribalism, whatever you want to call it, is like the poor. It will always be with us. It's lovely that some think otherwise, but I think humanity will always disappoint in this.

I digress, I know, but it really bugs me why a poor chap who happens to be Romanian actually feels the need to ask on Boards how the Irish view Romanians, it's sad that some people take issue with him in 2005.

Sad, but true, so he asked a valid question. Now how do we deal with this and how do we(and they) work so this can be lessened?

One sentiment echoed on here earlier which I couldn't disagree with more is

Actually they have a point. Education and tolerance go both ways.

This indicates to me that some people out there feel any immigrant (inlcuding myself) is under some obligation to make Irish people feel more comfortable with who you are and where you're from.

As I said, education and tolerance is a two way street. Same goes for good manners on both sides. As a guest in someones house(or country) one is courtesy bound to respect their attitudes. Even, if at first, there appears little common ground. They of course should respect yours and seek through dialogue a common humanity. Good manners rather than fantasy and PC rhetoric are far better solutions to the problem.

..but then maybe I'm being overly romantic.

Not really a bad thing, but yes you are a bit. I prefer my romanticism seasoned with a little realism.

Redleslie2

Wibbs wrote:

Maybe I'm just too bourgeois to see the point.:rolleyes:

Can't help you there I'm afraid.

It exists. It's a place called LaLaland. Catastrophe or no, human nature and the fight for resources will bring us quickly back to the way it's always been. Nationallity, tribalism, whatever you want to call it, is like the poor. It will always be with us. It's lovely that some think otherwise, but I think humanity will always disappoint in this.

Why don't we have slavery anymore then? Or serfdom or feudalism? Surely this 'human nature' should have guaranteed that the social relations those systems upheld would 'always be with us'. Why do India and Nepal have caste systems while we don't? Whose concept of human nature is correct there?

secret_squirrel

Getting back onto the topic the OP posted about :rolleyes:

OP Generally you will meet 3 types of people anywhere not just in Ireland.

1. People who are too ignorant to realise Romanian <> Romany, Gypsy, Roma etc. (A peculiarly irish assumption imo)

2. People who are too ignorant to realise that Romanian <> Generic Eastern European Big Issue Seller/ Beggar.

3. People are willing to take another person as the find them - regardless of nationality.

Fortunately most people come into the 3rd category. Its worth challenging the assumptions of those in the first two categories, but dont bust a gut trying. Some people like wallowing in their ignorance.

The Corinthian

Laguna wrote:

Look mate, if there's one thing I've learnt on boards its don't bother trying to discess anything that conflicts with someone elses mindset. You're wasting your time, The Corinthian has decided
You can't discuss anything with someone who has adopted that attitude.

I rebutted what you said, which you’re now trying to pass off as ‘attitude’ without bothering to address it :rolleyes:

Redleslie2 wrote:

Fair enough question I would have thought given your provocative, predictable, nasty and downright ignorant attitude to roma culture but yeah, run away then.

Actually, I’m not terribly interested in feeding your troll, TBH. You came out with a sweeping statement, about a social class being parasitic. You later quietly amended this to object to their past, historical, behaviour (sins of the father, and all that), rather than their present. All this of course in addition to the fact that you were attempting to compare a sub-culture to a culture (apples and oranges).

So poor was your analogy, so obvious your need to change this into yet another discussion on class war that I don’t think anyone (other than perhaps yourself) has denied that this has brought the discussion completely off topic.

So when I say I’ve no interest in feeding your troll, it is because we’re not discussing class war or even racism. If you want to discuss those, feel free to bugger off and start your own thread on them.

You're displaying debating skills and views that are more suited to stormfront. Not for the first time either eh?

What are you trying to say? Trying to paint me as a Nazi to give yourself an ideological opponent to justify your existence? I suspect that was the intent of your troll to begin with.

Can't help you there I'm afraid.

If I remember correctly you’ve suggested extermination of certain social classes in the past, so you’re not being entirely truthful.

Why don't we have slavery anymore then? Or serfdom or feudalism? Surely this 'human nature' should have guaranteed that the social relations those systems upheld would 'always be with us'. Why do India and Nepal have caste systems while we don't? Whose concept of human nature is correct there?

That would work well as a rebuttal if he were talking about slavery, serfdom or feudalism. Pity for you he was not.

Redleslie2

Laguna wrote:

You're completely right, but surely you acknowledge that the Internet is never going to be be a place where you can have a rational conversation with the majority of people, it's a place where peoples social inhibitions evaporate and they reveal their true character, the ideal hunting ground for bigots and small minded people who wish to pass on their ideologies.

In fairness I encounter just as much bigotry and stupidity at work and in social situations as I do online and it's worse because for the sake of pragmatism it has to be tolerated quite often. Most recently, I was getting a lift with a black south american friend of mine, we were stuck in traffic and some guy in the car opposite glares at him and honks one of those tarzan call horns. What kind of twat has a tarzan call horn? And whyyyy? Does he have a normal beep beep horn and reserves tarzan for when he sees black people? Boggle.

I myself have no issue with anyone from any part of the world, after all, what's a country but an artificially created boundary?. I hate the concept of nationality anyway, coupled with religion, it's the root of all problems in the world, if we were no longer British/Irish/American/Muslim/Jewish/Christian then what would we be?, human. I personally think racism and segregation will exist until the point in time where the Earth is perhaps faced by a catastophic event and for its survival (e.g. in the aftermath of the catastrophe, e.g. a meteor or something) the concept of nationality and religion are dropped.

I'd prefer the meteor but it looks like dwindling water and energy sources along with the proliferation of technology are going to be the catalysts for this century's rumbles.

This indicates to me that some people out there feel any immigrant (inlcuding myself) is under some obligation to make Irish people feel more comfortable with who you are and where you're from. Why are the Irish uneasy with foreigners?, did the Irish not travel the world for the last five hundred years?, surely behaviour such as this would invoke empathy for foreigners from the Irish?, that'd be my logical assumption but then maybe I'm being overly romantic.

What it boils down to is, we're just not cool.

turbot

Jumping into this discussion a little late...

I have lots of friends from throughout Eastern Europe. My experience is that these people are really decent; warm, caring, fun, kind, honest. They are great people, and I love them dearly. I'd even go as far as saying my particular friends live in ways that leads to me saying "They demonstrate a lot of the good behaviours, warmth, friendlyness, and so on that they Irish are supposed to be famous for".

With respect to Romania, I have met many and had a couple of friends who were romanians. They were decent, hardworking, often passionate and for all extents and purposes, the kinds of members of society I would encourage.

At the same time, I too have had a couple of times where I have experienced first hand romanian gypsies behaving in ways I think are utterly desplicable.... Partially to because I didn't want to go along with racial stereotypes, I trusted on in particular who quite cunningly then stole several hundred euroes from me. Based upon their behaviours I would go as far as describing these particular individual romanian gypsies I encountered as scourge on humanity.

I also see evidence that many romanian gypsies are capable of similar, and had I have had numerous discussions with friends, taxi drivers, colleagues where the general consensus is to be very careful around them, based upon their *personal* experiences. It's unfair to generalsie that all romanian gypsies are so bad, though they have certainly established a notorious international reputation.

So, if you are from the Romania, and you are not a gypsy, to help mitigate the prejudices that I know so many people hold, I suggest that when someone asks where you are from, you help them draw a distinction by saying.

"I'm from part x Romania, though I'm not a gypsy... it's a shame they are such a nuisance, the Romanian people are very different."

Or something similar. This means, at least you should reduce the misclassification I think you've experienced.

Good luck!

Redleslie2

The Corinthian wrote:

Actually, I’m not terribly interested in feeding your troll, TBH. You came out with a sweeping statement, about a social class being parasitic. You later quietly amended this to object to their past, historical, behaviour (sins of the father, and all that), rather than their present. All this of course in addition to the fact that you were attempting to compare a sub-culture to a culture (apples and oranges).

Quietly amended what? Are the saudi royal family parasites? I think so. Are they more powerful and repressive than the average family of gypsies? I think so.

So poor was your analogy, so obvious your need to change this into yet another discussion on class war that I don’t think anyone (other than perhaps yourself) has denied that this has brought the discussion completely off topic.

So when I say I’ve no interest in feeding your troll, it is because we’re not discussing class war or even racism. If you want to discuss those, feel free to bugger off and start your own thread on them.

Oh I think you'll find that you brought in the racist angle when you labelled roma culture as endemically parasitic. And since they are generally very poor, it's also a class war angle. Now that you've been collared you want to pretend it's not an issue. Tell us. Do you regard the poor in general as endemically parasitic? Or just gypsies.

What are you trying to say? Trying to paint me as a Nazi to give yourself an ideological opponent to justify your existence? I suspect that was the intent of your troll to begin with.

So what was that 'Marxist-Leninist-Trotskyite' comment in aid of then? Were you by any chance attempting to intimate that anyone who objects to your repugnant views must be a member of some tiny marginal lefty sect that nobody takes any notice of, like the swp or something? Because surely all reasonable people regard gypsies as scum? The nazis hated them, and so do you. Yes? You both refer to them as parasites and you use the term endemic which implies they are a disease.

If I remember correctly you’ve suggested extermination of certain social classes in the past, so you’re not being entirely truthful.

Can't remember, I probably didn't, but if I did, I'm sure they were baddies. Though obviously you and I disagree about who the baddies are and why.

That would work well as a rebuttal if he were talking about slavery, serfdom or feudalism. Pity for you he was not.

He was claiming that social relations are immutable but let him answer for himself eh?

The Corinthian

Redleslie2 wrote:

Quietly amended what? Are the saudi royal family parasites? I think so.

Sure they are, but that’s not what you said. There’s a big difference between citing specific dynasties and accusing anyone who though accident of birth belongs to “the aristocracy and the historical ruling class in general”. Would you care to backtrack a little more?

Oh I think you'll find that you brought in the racist angle when you labelled roma culture as endemically parasitic.

Actually, the only time I really mentioned race was to highlight that it had nothing to do with their behaviour.

And since they are generally very poor, it's also a class war angle. Now that you've been collared you want to pretend it's not an issue. Tell us.

It’s not a class war thing. I’m not the only one who’s pointed that out to you. Get over it.

Do you regard the poor in general as endemically parasitic?

Poverty does not make you parasitic - that’s horrifically condescending of you.

People from all walks and strata of life can be either productive or parasitic within Society. A lot of wealthy people can be dishonest and parasitic, but so can a lot of poor. The same goes for the good in people. The good and evil in humanity is no more tied to individual wealth than it is to individual race.

So what was that 'Marxist-Leninist-Trotskyite' comment in aid of then? Were you by any chance attempting to intimate that anyone who objects to your repugnant views must be a member of some tiny marginal lefty sect that nobody takes any notice of, like the swp or something?

No just you.

Because surely all reasonable people regard gypsies as scum? The nazis hated them, and so do you. Yes? You both refer to them as parasites and you use the term endemic which implies they are a disease.

I already pointed out that I considered Roma culture to be parasitic in nature - that is to say that it is a culture where people are brought up believing that they should beg or steal from Society without any attempt at contribution or even personal growth. It doesn’t matter what colour you are if you’re brought up in that kind of environment, you’re not going to be given any real choice to follow any other, potentially more productive, path. This cultural environment is endemic; it is not going to change and is self-perpetuating. If a disease it is, it is a social one, not biological.

So, are you perhaps going to deny or ignore the testimony of everyone in this thread, and elsewhere, as mere prejudice? Do you think that their behaviour is acceptable? Perhaps justified? If you think that responding ‘no’ to any of these questions suddenly makes you a Nazi, then there’s little more than I can do for you.

Can't remember, I probably didn't, but if I did, I'm sure they were baddies. Though obviously you and I disagree about who the baddies are and why.

Oh they were ‘baddies’, were they? A technical term, no doubt. Well that makes mass murder quite alright then :rolleyes:

He was claiming that social relations are immutable but let him answer for himself eh?

He never made any such blanket claim on the mutability of social relations.

I’m not stopping him from defending himself, but if you insist in trying to change the goalposts at every opportunity in a discussion, I’ve no hesitation in taking you up on it, regardless who you were originally addressing.