Foreign-sounding names and discrimination MERGED

Sofiztikated

Choosing someone on the basis of what their name is not racist. Discrimination yes, but not racist.
/Pedantic.
After reading though all there posts, and everyone claiming "Oh, I'm not racist" bla bla bla, is it ever ok to stand up for your prejudices?
For example, and this is hypothetical, mind, if i only ever have bad dealings with a certain nationality, say, laziness, sickies, theft, etc, is it ok for me to be wary of the next one that comes my way?

General Zod

It's also worth taking into account that people who are going through what is now probably 100's of CV for any particular job will see "foreign" names and see "work permit" rather than "non-irish".

It's still incorrect for them not to be thorough in their examination.

I'd like to know if the CV's submitted had "nationality" listed as well as just "name".

General Zod

Sofiztikated wrote: »

For example, and this is hypothetical, mind, if i only ever have bad dealings with a certain nationality, say, laziness, sickies, theft, etc, is it ok for me to be wary of the next one that comes my way?

it's one thing to know your predujices, but it's another to act upon them.

Dudess

Rebelheart wrote: »

The irony of this topic on the benefit of "Irish names". Just try and live life, apply for posts etc in this country while having your name in Irish rather than being weak-willed and conforming to the name the English gave your family and see how you get on with your application.

The amount of undereducated and insecure people in this benighted land - people who invariably start spelling your surname with O' when a scintilla of education would inform them that you wrote Ó, and that your name means something, and that it is your name and this should be respected - it's all over their heads, these "Irish" people.

But how many times do you think the same illiterates ask, "What's that properly?"or "What's that in English?" as they are determined to force you into their comfort zone by spelling your name in English? I have often been in queues where the foreigner in front of me has been asked to spell his or her name, but when I arrive at the desk I am asked for the "proper" version of my name. That's it. It's all about comfort zones and people with Irish names, as opposed to people with English versions of Irish names, are now outside the comfort zones of far too many of what one poet referred to as "the new English called the Irish". The truth hurts.

So much for "Irish names" being a benefit in Ireland in 2009. But then again, why bother with the lost opportunities of us unashamedly Irish people with genuine and meaningful Irish names when we have loads of lovely foreigners to show the world we care about. The truth hurts # 2.

It doesn't hurt me...

galah

General Zod wrote: »

It's also worth taking into account that people who are going through what is now probably 100's of CV for any particular job will see "foreign" names and see "work permit" rather than "non-irish".

It's still incorrect for them not to be thorough in their examination.

I'd like to know if the CV's submitted had "nationality" listed as well as just "name".

If you're from the EU, you don't need a work permit...

General Zod

galah wrote: »

If you're from the EU, you don't need a work permit...

Correct. But the study included Irish names, African names, Asian names and German sounding names.

Two out of 4 of these categories could make an employer at first glance consider if the applicant needs a work permit or not, which might be enough for employers to discard the CV.

I reiterate, it's not correct, it's discriminatory, but it might not be a case of not being thorough enough in doing their job rather than personal bias.

dochasach

[

SWL wrote: »

Have you absolute proof that Irish employers are hiring on that basis or are it your own racist/xenophobe views. Maybe you can tell me where you are from, so I can compare your country with Ireland. The above obviously don't happen in your country but tell me were it is so I can compare.

I employed plenty of Irish and foreigners in my time, my right arm to keep the Irish lads, Asian lads as well as the Indian guys plenty of initiative tells them do something and they will do it and use their initiative to figure it out also great with customers.

European were pretty much useless, tell them do something, no initiative to figure it out had to be spoon feed eve thing and this is 6 + months into a job that is pretty straightforward.

It’s funny seeing poster here particularity from EE ranting about racism and discrimination, when I have found employing EE that they are among the most intolerant and racist people I have come across. Threaten and spitting at Asian employees simply because they were Asian, bullying a Gay member of staff over been Gay. Preferential treatment happens in your country also so don't pretend it don't and less of the racism crap, people have had it said so often usually in the wrong context that they are beginning not to care anymore.

But tell me your country so I can compare good chance I have visited or lived there so it will be straightforward.

The U.S. And if you look back at my post you'll see that I've accepted the fact that name discrimination almost identical to the type in this article has been measured there.

That being said, if you can extrapolate from your personal experience that the tens of millions of people in EE are racist and intolerant, and extrapolate from personal experience that the 299.99 million Americans you haven't met personally are more racist than the average Irish bloke, shouldn't I be able suggest that, based on my experience, Ireland is a decade if not a generation behind the U.S. in its acceptance of newcomers?

I've been treated well here. But I've heard impolite Irish voices whispering about a black friend, comments that should've embarrassed my grandfather. I've witnessed a Spanish boy being singled out and attacked on a train and heard from another Spanish student that locals were hurling stones at her and her friends. I won't go into details over a vandalism incident, but the reaction of a local guard that it was probably because our vehicle fit the profile of a non-national (license tag from more than two years in the past) was interesting. I've also seen Irish government foot-dragging over the process for allowing legal immigration, over supporting multi-denominational schools, over allowing Gardi to speak a second language that isn't Irish. RTE (partially subsidized by foreigners) dredges up the stereotypical 'scam asylum seekers' , 'citizenship tourists', 'bad foreign drivers', and 'money exporting Polish on the dole', perfect memes just in time for the 2004 Citizenship referendum and the last election. No one has gathered official statistics, but a glance at the newspapers will show that the percentage of attacks on foreigners in Ireland far exceeds their percentage in the population, but this is smugly assumed to be foreigner-on-foreigner violence until proved otherwise. And the 2007 story leading to Ireland's first all black school http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2522914.ece would've been shocking in the U.S. unless it happened in the south prior to 1970.

All of these have direct parallels in U.S. history most of which took place before MLK and certainly before Obama. The kind of blatant racism you still hear and see in Ireland has diminished in the U.S. to the point where it only makes for entertaining Jerry Springer programs and fodor for election year mud slinging. I can't claim that racists don't exist there, they have just been reduced to an irrelevant minority. That hasn't yet happened here. But I'm sure that it will. If there is anything to 'the luck of the Irish', this country might be able to skip past some of the worst parts of civil rights struggles elsewhere to a future where everyone is judge by the content of their character. A future where multinational employers looking to relocate here won't passover Ireland because of embarrassing reports such as this as well as the embarrassing threads that appear on boards.ie whenever the topic of 'non-nationals' is in the news.

asdasd

All of these have direct parallels in U.S. history most of which took place before MLK and certainly before Obama. The kind of blatant racism you still hear and see in Ireland has diminished in the U.S. to the point where it only makes for entertaining Jerry Springer programs and fodor for election year mud slinging.

to have direct parallels with US history we would have to

1) Enslave Blacks for the next 300 years
2) Have De Jure laws discriminating against the descendants of the slaves for 100 more years, including segregation etc.
3) Fix that, and think we are marvelous.


The school in Dublin is nothing like the American South. In Dublin people have traditionally gone to the same schools as their parents, siblings etc. Tough on immigrants, but not specifically black, and but not the same as discriminating against people who have been in a country for generations longer than most whites. In fact people from down the country might - would - find it harder, as would Dubliners and blow ins who moved some where else. And there is a Catholic bias.

I bet, by the way we have more Africans per capita ( i.e born in Africa) than the US.

If you can find a De Jure example of actual racism in Ireland - rather than anecdotal evidence of a Spanish friend being shouted at by skangers - post it here.

Tigger

Rebelheart wrote: »

The irony of this topic on the benefit of "Irish names". Just try and live life, apply for posts etc in this country while having your name in Irish rather than being weak-willed and conforming to the name the English gave your family and see how you get on with your application.

The amount of undereducated and insecure people in this benighted land - people who invariably start spelling your surname with O' when a scintilla of education would inform them that you wrote Ó, and that your name means something, and that it is your name and this should be respected - it's all over their heads, these "Irish" people.

But how many times do you think the same illiterates ask, "What's that properly?"or "What's that in English?" as they are determined to force you into their comfort zone by spelling your name in English? I have often been in queues where the foreigner in front of me has been asked to spell his or her name, but when I arrive at the desk I am asked for the "proper" version of my name. That's it. It's all about comfort zones and people with Irish names, as opposed to people with English versions of Irish names, are now outside the comfort zones of far too many of what one poet referred to as "the new English called the Irish". The truth hurts.

So much for "Irish names" being a benefit in Ireland in 2009. But then again, why bother with the lost opportunities of us unashamedly Irish people with genuine and meaningful Irish names when we have loads of lovely foreigners to show the world we care about. The truth hurts # 2.

does it hurt to have to type in english?

dochasach

asdasd wrote: »

to have direct parallels with US history we would have to

1) Enslave Blacks for the next 300 years
2) Have De Jure laws discriminating against the descendants of the slaves for 100 more years, including segregation etc.
3) Fix that, and think we are marvelous.

I never said Ireland was 300 years behind the U.S., just a few decades. I think you'll skip the slavery part and probably most of the KKK lynchings as well.

The school in Dublin is nothing like the American South. In Dublin people have traditionally gone to the same schools as their parents, siblings etc.

How is this different from the U.S. South or South Africa under apartheid for that matter. "It's a family tradition, not racism at all!"

I bet, by the way we have more Africans per capita ( i.e born in Africa) than the US.

It's possible, but not really relevant. Africa is closer to Ireland. There is a much higher percentage per capita of central and South American immigrants in the U.S. than here. Go figure. Come back to me when at least 3% of the people in Ireland are illegal immigrants, more than 20% are bilingual (you can include Irish if it helps), and you have a black protestant Taoseach.

If you can find a De Jure example of actual racism in Ireland - rather than anecdotal evidence of a Spanish friend being shouted at by skangers - post it here.

First of all, I would call the results of this study discrimination and not racism. (And as another pointed out, blatently stupid discrimination. If a woman marries a foreigner and takes his surname, she is also discriminated against.)

Since employment biases based on name aren't encoded into law, why bring up 'De Jure' racism? If you must, I'd point to catholic religious requirements in official oaths, the fact that a priest's signature can help me attain citizenship, the fact that schools funded by all of us can discriminate against non-catholics. Biases towards the Irish language in Gardi and other civil service jobs and the constitutional change that resulted from the 2004 citizenship referendum.

Now where is racism encoded into U.S. laws written during the past 40 years?

Capt'n Midnight

dochasach wrote:

Since employment biases based on name aren't encoded into law, why bring up 'De Jure' racism? If you must, I'd point to catholic religious requirements in official oaths, the fact that a priest's signature can help me attain citizenship, the fact that schools funded by all of us can discriminate against non-catholics. Biases towards the Irish language in Gardi and other civil service jobs and the constitutional change that resulted from the 2004 citizenship referendum.

:rolleyes:
You no longer need a knowledge of Irish to join the civil service or the Guards.

Prodestant schools get higher funding than catholic ones, but the key point with schools is that the government don't set them up. You set them up yourself and then, maybe, the government will give you money. For a long time the only people with the means and desire to setup schools where the religious. Look at the educate together schools and the queue to get into them. Also the numbers of people who have "taken the soup" to get their kids into prodestant schools is quite high. If catholic schools barred all non-practicing catholics ?
Maybe if we lived in a country where the state provided schools, but we live in one where ALL schools are provided by people with their own agendas and biases.

asdasd

How is this different from the U.S. South or South Africa under apartheid for that matter. "It's a family tradition, not racism at all!"

I think I made it clear that the "discrimination" would apply to people not from the area, not specifically to blacks. The "black school" was created not by law but as a overflow school but because they couldn't get into a local school, like many migrants - including Irish migrants - in the area. There is no comparison with the de Jure laws of the Southern States which didn't apply to immigrants but to citizens.

There are practical reasons why someone may not want their children in a school with non-English speakers - given the massive increase in immigration in these areas - which is not the same as a superior attitude to Americans who have been in the country for generations.

Come back to me when at least 3% of the people in Ireland are illegal immigrants, more than 20% are bilingual (you can include Irish if it helps), and you have a black protestant Taoseach.

Why "black" specifically. We didn't discriminate against blacks in our history, and it probably wouldn't take 300 years anyway, had we Americas relative population of blacks.

I think it is fantastic that the Americans have a black president, but we have had protestant heads of State. This kinda of argument is like a Russian wondering when Ireland was going to have a Georgian as a head of State, because they discriminated against Georgia, and were ruled by Stalin. That's their history, not ours.

Since we didn't enslave blacks for centuries, unlike the US, we dont wither have the "guilt" to make up for, or have a significant population of blacks . We clearly have less of a pool of candidates for the highest office. Come back to me when the US elects a Native American.

As for illegal immigrants. Ireland probably has that percentage of legal immigrants, indicating we - or our political classes - are more in favour than the US of open borders. We allow EE immigrants to come here visa free - and Eastern Europe is almost as poor as Mexico.

Work out the relative population sizes there. The US does not allow very much legal immigration from Mexico - Mexico is about 35% ( 0.3) of the US population. We allow 100M Eastern Europeans - about 25 times our population. That would be as if the US allowed Mexican to immigrate had Mexico a population of 7.5 billion which is more than people on the Earth. They have illegals because they dont allow much legal immigration.

Now where is racism encoded into U.S. laws written during the past 40 years?

40 years? Where would I stop? Era, type in miscegenation and American States. I cant do everything.

If you must, I'd point to catholic religious requirements in official oaths, the fact that a priest's signature can help me attain citizenship, the fact that schools funded by all of us can discriminate against non-catholics. Biases towards the Irish language in Gardi and other civil service jobs and the constitutional change that resulted from the 2004 citizenship referendum.

So learning "Irish" is racist. Jesus wept. Is learning Danish in Denmark racist?

The schools are historically Catholic for reason related to Protestant Establishment discrimination against the Catholic Irish - the only real discrimination which has happened on this Island - and religious schools are something we tend to have with the rest of the world. Such discrimination would be "sectarian" at worst. But it is neither. It has historical roots.

The 2004 citizenship referendum puts us on par with pretty much the rest of the world.

Capt'n Midnight

Be interesting if they used names As Gaelige in that survey too.

SWL

dochasach wrote: »

Since employment biases based on name aren't encoded into law, why bring up 'De Jure' racism? If you must, I'd point to catholic religious requirements in official oaths, the fact that a priest's signature can help me attain citizenship, the fact that schools funded by all of us can discriminate against non-catholics. Biases towards the Irish language in Gardi and other civil service jobs and the constitutional change that resulted from the 2004 citizenship referendum.

Now where is racism encoded into U.S. laws written during the past 40 years?

You seem to expect a lot from a country in less than five years, is the above not reverse discrimination, change everything that was in place immediately for over 90 years to suit a minority who are here less then 5 years. The Irish language is the official language of the State. Expecting Sate official to understand or use it is not too much to ask, you can lean it, no restriction on that unless someone can’t be bothered and it’s easier to play the discrimination card etc

As for the 2004 citizenship referendum, it was passed by the electorate of the country you may to like but its called democracy.

dochasach

SWL wrote: »

You seem to expect a lot from a country in less than five years, is the above not reverse discrimination, change everything that was in place immediately for over 90 years to suit a minority who are here less then 5 years. The Irish language is the official language of the State. Expecting Sate official to understand or use it is not too much to ask, you can lean it, no restriction on that unless someone can’t be bothered and it’s easier to play the discrimination card etc

Immigrants didn't just arrive 5 years ago, they've been here for 100 years or more, overwhelmed on occasion by the number of emigrants but still here. Read the cyclops episode of Ulysses and you'll swear bits of it were plagiarized from this thread.

As for the 2004 citizenship referendum, it was passed by the electorate of the country you may to like but its called democracy.

Democracy is not an excuse for tyranny by the majority. There are many examples of this kind of democracy in action. Just look at the history of Jim Crow laws:

1879 The California constitution prohibited public bodies from employing Chinese and called upon the legislature to protect "the state…from the burdens and evils arising from" their presence. A statewide anti-Chinese referendum was passed by 99.4 percent of voters.

I don't think even the 2004 citizenship amendment passed with that kind of majority. Strangely enough, in both the 2004 and 1879 referendums, nearly all of those directly impacted by it were disenfranchised . The fact that it didn't pass with 100% majority shows that Ireland has made some progress.

IzzyWizzy

In my case, I have an Irish first and last name and I do feel it works in my favour when sending off CV's. I sort of have the opposite problem in that I get the ignorant comments of 'oh you're not Irish' and 'where are you REALLY from?' when I go to the interview due to my not so Irish appearance, but at least once I'm there I can show them that I'm a native English speaker and make a good impression. I do think that if I had a Spanish or Italian surname, a lot of my applications would be thrown in the bin.

I think the Irish need to wake up to the fact that things have changed a lot in the last few years, and that it's very common to be Irish born with one (or two) foreign parents. You just cannot make assumptions based on names or skin colour anymore. In my college class alone, there were Irish born girls of Chinese, Vietnamese, Iranian, Italian and French origin, and there are a lot of 'foreign' people who went to international schools or lived abroad and speak flawless English.

SWL

dochasach wrote: »

Immigrants didn't just arrive 5 years ago, they've been here for 100 years or more, overwhelmed on occasion by the number of emigrants but still here. Read the cyclops episode of Ulysses and you'll swear bits of it were plagiarized from this thread.



Democracy is not an excuse for tyranny by the majority. There are many examples of this kind of democracy in action. Just look at the history of Jim Crow laws:

1879 The California constitution prohibited public bodies from employing Chinese and called upon the legislature to protect "the state…from the burdens and evils arising from" their presence. A statewide anti-Chinese referendum was passed by 99.4 percent of voters.

I don't think even the 2004 citizenship amendment passed with that kind of majority. Strangely enough, in both the 2004 and 1879 referendums, nearly all of those directly impacted by it were disenfranchised . The fact that it didn't pass with 100% majority shows that Ireland has made some progress.

Didn't the 2004 Referendum bring us in line with US policy?

Immigrants were here in tiny numbers, and certainly had more bottle than the present lot, very few cried about racism discrimination etc, when things didn't go the way the wanted them too

asdasd

Democracy is not an excuse for tyranny by the majority. There are many examples of this kind of democracy in action. Just look at the history of Jim Crow laws:

A sovereign nation deciding how to control access to it's citizenship is not tyranny of the majority, but a response by a minority to potential majority tyranny. As a nation of about 0,06% of the world we get to decide who we are, the majority populations do not. The point of a Nation State decide who gets to come into the country, who gains citizenship. Anything else is tyranny.

Democracy cannot exist unless the demos actually manages to decide what constitutes itself, and people are not sovereign unless the nation state they control is sovereign, and thus border controlled. We have this law in common with 90% of the world. It is no different from an Native American controlling access to his reservation.

Comparisons with the California law are nonsensical.

dochasach

asdasd wrote: »

I think I made it clear that the "discrimination" would apply to people not from the area, not specifically to blacks. The "black school" was created not by law but as a overflow school but because they couldn't get into a local school, like many migrants - including Irish migrants - in the area. There is no comparison with the de Jure laws of the Southern States which didn't apply to immigrants but to citizens.

If you have to dig centuries old U.S. history to find something comparable to the Irish treatment of newcomers in the 21st century, don't forget that blacks in the U.S. were only considered (3/5ths?) citizen, not full citizens.

There are practical reasons why someone may not want their children in a school with non-English speakers - given the massive increase in immigration in these areas - which is not the same as a superior attitude to Americans who have been in the country for generations.

You lost me here.

Why "black" specifically. We didn't discriminate against blacks in our history, and it probably wouldn't take 300 years anyway, had we Americas relative population of blacks.

I think it is fantastic that the Americans have a black president, but we have had protestant heads of State. This kinda of argument is like a Russian wondering when Ireland was going to have a Georgian as a head of State, because they discriminated against Georgia, and were ruled by Stalin. That's their history, not ours.

Since we didn't enslave blacks for centuries, unlike the US, we dont wither have the "guilt" to make up for, or have a significant population of blacks . We clearly have less of a pool of candidates for the highest office. Come back to me when the US elects a Native American.

The U.S. didn't enslave blacks for centuries. British, French, Spanish, Irish... living in the colonies took advantage of slavery in north America long before the U.S. became the U.S.

The fact that slavery continued for an ugly 89 years after the founding of the United States of America was a terrible, unfortunate and possibly necessary compromise which helped force the king out at least a century earlier than otherwise would've been possible.

As for illegal immigrants. Ireland probably has that percentage of legal immigrants, indicating we - or our political classes - are more in favour than the US of open borders...

You make some really good points here which is why I argue on American message boards and pubs in favor of more open immigration there. On the other hand, you aren't counting the millions of people who become U.S. citizens by birth or marriage. The U.S. has also had a significant head start in accepting immigrants during the 19th century, after two world wars and other times. I also don't think Bush or Obama owes Ireland a free pass on illegal immigration, as Bertie has argued for on previous shamrock exchanges.

"We allow 100M Eastern Europeans - about 25 times our population. "

You lost me again here. You're talking about theoretical immigration. There is no way Ireland would really allow all of Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria... to work here. You saw what a panic the few dozen African 'asylum seekers' and 'citizenship tourists' created in 2003?

40 years? Where would I stop? Era, type in miscegenation and American States. I cant do everything.

Maybe my googling skills aren't up to snuff, but I don't see any laws that were passed after 1970, much less laws that are still enforced. I'm sure you could find some jurisdictions somewhere. I don't know how we got down the track of laws when I'm discussing the social zeitgeist. Would a person named 'Llemopcaw Ubuntuski' feel safer and more at home here or in Washington D.C.?

So learning "Irish" is racist. Jesus wept. Is learning Danish in Denmark racist?

No it isn't racist, but like Jim Crow laws, it is very convenient to keep outsiders out.

The schools are historically Catholic for reason related to Protestant Establishment discrimination against the Catholic Irish - the only real discrimination which has happened on this Island - and religious schools are something we tend to have with the rest of the world. Such discrimination would be "sectarian" at worst. But it is neither. It has historical roots.

Yes and there is plenty of history behind discrimination in other countries too. Excuses don't make it right.

The 2004 citizenship referendum puts us on par with pretty much the rest of the world.

But not yet on par with the U.S. Anyone born there becomes a citizen of the U.S. regardless of race, gender, religion, ethnicity.

dochasach

SWL wrote: »

Didn't the 2004 Referendum bring us in line with US policy?

No. Though I heard this fallacy repeated by populist local radio hosts as an excuse for why Ireland must pass the referendum. That's all water under the bridge here. But the truth is that U.S. citizenship is remains jus soli plus jus sanguinis for the children of some Americans born abroad. You should be grateful for the fact that Canada and the U.S. grant citizenship at birth, otherwise children of all the Irish who left over the 80s might have no choice but to come home now for jobs.

Immigrants were here in tiny numbers, and certainly had more bottle than the present lot, very few cried about racism discrimination etc, when things didn't go the way the wanted them too

Did you know Leopold Bloom personally? I'm surprised that my experience based critiques of the status quo is causing such a stir here. Thin skin? Methinks thou dost protest too much. Honestly, if Ireland had to deal with 1/10th of the hypersensitivity, threats of discrimination lawsuits, imagined and politically motiviated discrimination that you see in the U.S, this country would fall over.

Actually, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe there is no racism here. Why only the other day I heard someone say, "I'm not a racist but..." Then they qualified it with "Most of my friends are ..."

It is much easier to see and oppose racism and support the oppressed on someone else's soil. Clare Boylan dealt with this tendency for 'charity at arm's length' humorously in her book "Black Baby."

SWL

dochasach wrote: »

No, though I heard this fallacy repeated by populist local radio hosts as an excuse for why Ireland must pass the referendum. That's all water under the bridge here. But the truth is that U.S. citizenship is remains jus soli plus jus sanguinis for the children of some Americand born abroad.



Did you know Leopold Bloom personally? I'm surprised that my experience based critiques of the status quo is causing such a stir here. Thin skin? Methinks thou dost protest too much. Honestly, if Ireland had to deal with 1/10th of the hypersensitivity, threats of discrimination lawsuits, imagined and politically motiviated discrimination that you see in the U.S, this country would probably fall over.

Actually, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe there is no racism here. Why only the other day I heard someone say, "I'm not a racist but..." But they qualified it with "Most of my friends are ..."

Your post are suggesting that racism is in endemic in Ireland and I'd complete disagree with, historically Ireland and the U.S. are two completely different countries so continually trying to compare them is pointless, having been to the states on several occasions I still won’t hold it up as a paragon of virtue even taking into account the Obma election. Still far more racism and reverse racism there any where else I have visited or lived.

In todays environment is appears people are easily offended and all too quick with the racism and discrimination card, particularly in American culture, you showed that yourself by disputing the Irish language for Gardi and its official use, (not taking into account the fact that Irish is the official state language of this country, of course you could learn it the same way I would be expected to speak German if I were a guard in Germany, but its easier and less time consuming to shout racist or discrimination.

Institutional racism in Ireland doesn’t exist not the way black Americans had to seat at the back of a bus and were refused work. The word racism is from board.ie not the actual word defined in a dictionary, there appears to be many takes on it usually to suit the thread that is been discussed

I want an immigration green card system in this country, I would also like to in the short term to reverse the Nice treaty in relation to accession counties (which we were told we could do in the event of a downturn), that make same a racist to the majority of posters, despite the fact it based on economic common sense. We have 30,000 plus new PPS numbers since the start of the year, plus 500,000 on SW if you include FAS and other courses. Going to climb to 600,000 by next year. Common sense would say short time to stop immigration, but I guarantee you the racist card will be thrown in my face in the next couple of post.

Certainly the U.S. have made progress but from a very low base. I sure you agree. So I don’t think Ireland is an s racist as the U.S. is today

But as I said the definition of a racist seems to change, and I think that would be a fair statement to your replies. Perceived racism and actual racism are polar opposite the former made by people who like t use it as emotional leverage in an argument.

techdiver

SWL wrote: »

but I guarantee you the racist card will be thrown in my face in the next couple of post.

Not by me. I agree 100% with your post.

SWL

dochasach wrote: »

No it isn't racist, but like Jim Crow laws, it is very convenient to keep outsiders out.



For the third time now - Irish is the Official language of this country. If it doesn’t suit you hard luck, as I said on previous post nobody is stopping you from learning to speak the language. So put up or shut up.

techdiver

dochasach wrote: »

No it isn't racist, but like Jim Crow laws, it is very convenient to keep outsiders out.

So how the hell is increasing inward migration during a recession going to help the host nation. Many of the inward migrants will either end up with no jobs or replace resident workers placing more pressure on the welfare system. That's not racism/discrimination, it's bloody common sense.

Dyr

allowing Gardi to speak a second language that isn't Irish

Are you referring to the fact that they decided that non nationals can now police irish citizens? More madness from the euro reformers.

pipsqueak

So whats going to happen in ten years time when young Donnacha Adjebola from termonfeckin applies for a job??
poor old employer wont know what to think!!:p

dochasach

SWL wrote: »

dochasach wrote: »

No it isn't racist, but like Jim Crow laws, it is very convenient to keep outsiders out.

For the third time now - Irish is the Official language of this country. If it doesn’t suit you hard luck, as I said on previous post nobody is stopping you from learning to speak the language. So put up or shut up.

And English was the official language of the country where the Jim Crow laws were written. Many of these laws simply required that the voter be able to read the constitution in English. Harmless and very popular, what could possibly be wrong? I began with the assumption that subtle social pressures work against newcomers in Ireland and now you've convinced me that some very recent Irish laws are directly comparable to Jim Crow laws of the late 19th century.

There seems little point in arguing this further. It's obvious that some have made up their mind. This study is the clearest way of unearthing the hidden discrimination which runs through this society. Another way would be for RTE (if they can be bothered) to follow an immigrant (or actor) as he/she goes through the process of fitting in here. As I've said before, these problems are not specific to Ireland, most societies are frayed on the borders. But there remains an air of smugness which allows too many to continue in the belief that Ireland is a paragon of social justice, when those who would know better are chastised for presenting inconvenient truths.

Also, your assumptions on my attitude towards the Irish language are completely wrong. I am more pro-Irish than the average native, but I must admit I'm not yet above the local average in my Irish fluency (as other foreign friends and members of my household are.) I understand the history behind its loss and the effort to bring it back, and yet in some cases efforts to promote Irish are nothing but mirror images of the British laws imposed to quash it. The fact that some gaelscoileanna can and do discriminate based on the parent's ability to speak Irish is yet another example of where your argument falls over. Preserve civil service jobs for those who speak an unpopular, not necessarily useful but official language, then decouple civil service from the real economy. Make it a special case where you are always promoted and can't be fired. Then make sure newcomers aren't allowed to learn the prerequisite language??? It's not apartheid, but it is a step in that direction.

dochasach

SWL wrote: »

Your post are suggesting that racism is in endemic in Ireland and I'd complete disagree with, historically Ireland and the U.S. are two completely different countries so continually trying to compare them is pointless, having been to the states on several occasions I still won’t hold it up as a paragon of virtue even taking into account the Obma election. Still far more racism and reverse racism there any where else I have visited or lived.

I don't hold up the U.S. as a paragon of virtue with respect to social justice. I only contend that it seems to be a generation ahead of Ireland and nearly as far ahead of most other countries. To paraphrase that English bloke, it's the most racist country in the world, except for all of the others.

Your experience might contradict this, but try a few objective measure of racial and ethnic integration:

Percentage of HR managers, political figures, CEOs... who are members of an ethnic or racial minority.

Percentage of police force who are members of an ethnic or racial minority.

Percentage of civil servants who speak a foreign language at home.

Number of workers in immigration service who weren't born in Ireland

Number of laws designed to protect ethnic and racial minorities.

Number of affirmative action laws (laws which require that when all else is equal, the minority should get the job?)


Can we get back to the topic of name discrimination?
You have 3 candidate CVs. All have equal qualifications. All have the right to work in Ireland. Who do you give the interview to:

Paddy Murphy, Llemopca Uhura, Rolf Woskowski?

(Heh, had to use that Woskowski name. Long ago, someone I knew used to complain about a Mexican named Woskowski who was taking a job from her poor, dear son. The fact that a Mexican named Woskowski existed back then says something about the level of integration even during the turbulent 1970s.)

The study which was publicized in newspapers around the world showed a bias.

Institutional racism in Ireland doesn’t exist not the way black Americans had to seat at the back of a bus and were refused work...

This is why I claimed that Ireland is only a generation behind the U.S. The institutionalized racism and discrimination left the U.S. in about 1969-1970. The subtle 'black like me' racism continued for another 30 years. We're somewhere in that period.

I want an immigration green card system in this country, I would also like to in the short term to reverse the Nice treaty in relation to accession counties... but I guarantee you the racist card will be thrown in my face in the next couple of post.

I don't think you're a racist. But something has you focused on imaginary fears. The immigrants from the accession states did not cause the economic mess we're all in. They have an uphill battle if they're trying to take your job. Many are going home on their own accord, which is actually contributing to the downturn (e.g. rents have fallen because the demand isn't there anymore.)

Certainly the U.S. have made progress but from a very low base. I sure you agree. So I don’t think Ireland is an s racist as the U.S. is today

The U.S. is an enormous country. I find it difficult to believe that you got a feel for the racism there as compared to here unless you are black and lived in several states from the Northeast to the midwest to California and the Pacific Northwest. I can't agree with you that racism is worse there, but I will admit that it is different and maybe impossible to compare directly. A new immigrant from Nigeria would be much better to go to the U.S. given all of the stereotypes about scams and 'asylum seeking.' By contrast, a black American with African roots might be better off here where she can side step the 300 years of cultural baggage weighing her down.

It's so hard to generalize. Some of the most racist people I've known in the U.S. were of Irish descent, but then many of the black and native Americans I knew there also had Irish blood.

But as I said the definition of a racist seems to change, and I think that would be a fair statement to your replies. Perceived racism and actual racism are polar opposite the former made by people who like t use it as emotional leverage in an argument.

I'm sorry I ever used the word racism in this argument. It entered this thread long before I did and it clouds the issue. I think parochialism is the word I used. And it should be no shock to anyone that this exists in Ireland. It's time to move on. We're at a point in history where this kind of thinking works against all of us.

techdiver

dochasach wrote: »

Percentage of HR managers, political figures, CEOs... who are members of an ethnic or racial minority.

Percentage of police force who are members of an ethnic or racial minority.

Percentage of civil servants who speak a foreign language at home.

Number of workers in immigration service who weren't born in Ireland

Number of laws designed to protect ethnic and racial minorities.

Then ask yourself one very important question after that - What is the percentage of non-Irish in the working pool?

greendom

Bambi wrote: »

Are you referring to the fact that they decided that non nationals can now police irish citizens? More madness from the euro reformers.

Are you seriously suggestion that only Irish born citizens can join the police force in Ireland? Why should a non-national not be allowed to perform this function, providing he/she passes the test like anyone else.

I wonder how the New York police force would have managed if they'd only allowed US born citizens to apply :rolleyes: