Do you have to be ethnically Irish to be considered Irish?

randd1

For example, a black lad that was born and bred in Ireland, grew up with Irish culture, contributes to Irish life through Irish values that he holds? Irish through and through for me, regardless of what his ancestry was and where they were from.

A white lad with Irish parents that came here from another country that fits in ok, but retains mostly the influence and values of where he grew up? Part Irish.

A lad of mixed race that comes here, no Irish parentage, lived here most of his life but retains mostly the influence and values of where he grew up? Not Irish in my book.

A foreign lad that comes here young, has no Irish parentage, lived here most of his life and contributes to Irish life through Irish values that he holds, is proud he lives in Ireland? Irish for me.

I'd see it less along the lines of race and ancestry, and more along the lines of acceptance of Irish culture and history as theirs, and the willingness and want to contribute to it, and the pride in it despite it's faults.

donalsim

donalsim wrote: »

Well yeah the other 2 points skew things alright

I consider kids born in Ireland by foreign parents to be Irish

I would too, if they live their life here, the law does not!

Oranage2

What is this thread even about? Is it just for certain groups of white people to call people who are black or Asian not Irish?

Ridiculous...

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

Merely regarding the definition of ethnicity. Simple as that.

And of course there are scales of ethnicities when compared to the whole. Travellers are considered in Irish law to be a different ethnicity based on some tiny genetic differences and differences in culture and lifestyle. Or do you disagree that Travellers are an ethnic group within Ireland?

I agree that they fit the legal and informal definition of an ethnicity, but this is all made-up crap anyway.

As I mentioned earlier, there's something of a catch-22 where, in order to tackle discrimination, it's necessary to defend the group that society has arbitrarily categorised as being of one unit. But by recognising them as a unit, we are reproducing and entrenching categorisation of humans that is not logical or scientific.

Black, traveller, Protestant, etc are all racial/ethnic categories that are defined capriciously. All are so diverse that to attempt to rank them on Irishness is bizarre. What if my ancestors came over in the 17th century but I speak better Irish than those who have been here since the Bronze Age? What about blue eyed, pale Brazilian students vs a black Irish person? After all, every blue eyed person in Ireland descends from the same ancestor as the Brazilian.

Such tedious computation is all based on completely arbitrary variables, we might as well be going about measuring one another's chins and the shapes of our ears. Tick a box if you can roll your tongue, you're now a class of people.

No, there is no ranking of Irish ethnicity, and some guy on the internet making outlandish claims like "protestant means less irish" should be given the derision that is deserved.

CIARAN_BOYLE

Call yourself what you want but don't take historic slights.

Nothing as entertaining as watching a Black Irishman and An English man of Indian descent arguing about historic slights between England and Ireland.

Badly Drunk Boy

frosty123 wrote: »

"you don't have to be irish to be irish"

Prize for the first one who can name the movie that gibberish comes from

I was just watching that song on YouTube a few weeks, leading from another discussion here. A classic!! :pac:

Flight Of The Doves

Wibbs

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

As I mentioned earlier, there's something of a catch-22 where, in order to tackle discrimination, it's necessary to defend the group that society has arbitrarily categorised as being of one unit. But by recognising them as a unit, we are reproducing and entrenching categorisation of humans that is not logical or scientific.

Oh I would agree. It's more loathsome identity politics at work, though the geneticists that supported the classification of Travellers as an ethnic group would appear to disagree with your take on the science of it. The same science can't seem to make up its mind even using the same data. So "race" isn't scientific, but here we have an example of group being marked out by the same science. Both are more sociopolitical positions and lord knows that's driven the interpretation of science since way back.

No, there is no ranking of Irish ethnicity, and some guy on the internet making outlandish claims like "protestant means less irish" should be given the derision that is deserved.

And yet to illustrate your view you list some rankings yourself:

Black, traveller, Protestant, etc are all racial/ethnic categories that are defined capriciously. All are so diverse that to attempt to rank them on Irishness is bizarre. What if my ancestors came over in the 17th century but I speak better Irish than those who have been here since the Bronze Age? What about blue eyed, pale Brazilian students vs a black Irish person? After all, every blue eyed person in Ireland descends from the same ancestor as the Brazilian.

The problem with the denial of ethnicity and the shades within it - and I can certainly see and appreciate the well meaning behind it - but it's a naive view and forgets that human beings overwhelmingly categorise themselves along such lines and have done throughout human history and geography. It's one of our most innate traits to define the "Us" and by default the "Them". And it's not going away soon, no matter how some may choose a more enlightened view on things. That some is almost entirely a western or western influenced and very recent view with it. Far fewer non western cultures and those in them think along those lines and they don't see their national, ethnic, religious even racial self definitions as nearly so capricious. To do so is a very White, Western point of view and not even a majority one at that.

Temptamperu

In this day and age if you are born in an Irish hospital you are Irish.

ExMachina1000

Oranage2 wrote: »

What is this thread even about? Is it just for certain groups of white people to call people who are black or Asian not Irish?

Ridiculous...

Are white people who are born in China ethnically Chinese?

Riddle101

The thing about Irish ancestry is depending on what time period you look at. Ireland has been inhabited by different groups of people. The first settlers in Ireland were most likely travelers who settled here during the stone age. They would probably be considered true Irish but even they might come from a different origin.

Years later we had the Celts, who settled in Ireland and became a dominant group in Ireland but they have their origins from central Europe and were made up of different groups.

The Vikings also came from Scandinavia and settled here. Their culture had a big impact over here with several cities established by them.

Then Dermot MacMurrough invited the Normans over and we know what happened there. They integrated with our people. Normans are descended from Vikings and Franks, but they also settled in England as well.

The Plantation Period occurred later on in 16th- and 17th-century when English and Scottish people settled in Ireland.

If we were to look at it in the same way as the woman in the video in the OP. The Irish bloodline would be considered polluted because of the different groups that have settled here and integrated. She called herself Anglo-Saxon as if that made her ethnically English, but England is now made up of diverse groups so their bloodline would be polluted too.

I don't agree with her by the way but to be ethnically Irish when our bloodline is probably made up of different groups would mean our ethnicity would be divisive.

For me, to be considered Irish you would need to at least be born in Ireland, be a native of Ireland and an Irish citizen, failing that if your parents are Irish you could also claim to be Irish too, but if you were born in a country like the United States to Irish parents who immigrated to America you can also consider yourself Irish American or just American. It depends on how a person wants to identify themself, but I would consider David Lammy English because he was born in Archway, North London, and grew up in Tottenham. He has every right in the world to call himself English.

Oranage2

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Are white people who are born in China ethnically Chinese?

Like albino?

Sure why do you ask?

jaffusmax

If someone knows what the craic is! Then they Irish.

Had a polish chap say to me “hey boy what’s the craic” in my mind I can converse with him as an Irish lad to lad!

Hamachi

Temptamperu wrote: »

In this day and age if you are born in an Irish hospital you are Irish.

Perhaps, but the law isn’t on your side in that assertion.

Judging by the results of the referendum on the 27th amendment to the constitution, 80% of the population would also dispute your statement.

ittakestwo

lets say out of your eight great grandparents, seven were Irish and one wasn't. Are you Ethnically Irish? Do you have to look at the persons skin color first before you can answer this question.

jaffusmax

The mind can be ethnically Irish, British, Chinese.........., the body is just a vessel that can be made from whether parts (genetic material) that happen to be available at a particular place and time.

Or another way to put it, yes my body is not genetically what you call Irish but my mind is.

Nqp15hhu

ittakestwo wrote: »

Funny because yesterday in a different thread you were claiming people born in Ireland are not Irish.

No, I said that people born in Northern Ireland are Northern Irish. Northern Ireland is not part of the Irish state.

Nqp15hhu

joe40 wrote: »

I haven't read that exact study (thanks for posting) but I am familiar with the idea that the general Irish population have well established genetic lines on this islands.
The idea that we are all descendants from the Celts is not accurate. There is no evidence of a large influx displacing the native population.

That doesn't take away from the fact that there has been considerable mixing. You're right, absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Is an Northern Irish protestant, whose ancestors came during the ulster plantation not Irish? He or she may choose to be considered British but if a united Ireland came about, would they be Irish?
The study you posted mentioned Donegal as having close genetic links to Gaelic past, which makes sense, but are they more Irish than the large protestant population in East Donegal.
That is what I mean when I have issues with Irish ethnicity. What does it mean?
If we are going to make a big deal about Irish ethnicity, how many generations do you have to go back to be considered Irish.

I am Irish and I'm proud to be Irish, but if someone is born here and identifies as Irish I'm happy to accept them as Irish. As Irish as I am.

Am I more Irish than Phil Lynott, or Paul McGrath?

The author of the report you published is Irish according to himself. Born to Italian parents but grew up in Spiddal. I'm not going to deny him that.

There is no sizeable Protestant population in Donegal

Kid Charlemagne

buried wrote: »

Of course they can. They don't even have to be born here and without heritage to become Irish. But that also depends how you want to go about it. As long as anybody that arrives on this island and embraces and respects the indigenous Irish culture, anybody can easily assimilate into the community. But that is what it ultimately takes. You just have to look at history to find the examples. The French Norman warlords that came over here in the 12th Century ended up by the 13th Century just as Irish than the people that were here in the 12th. They embraced the Irish culture. It's the culture what matters. Embrace the sitting culture and the community.

Well they also took anything that was and wasn't nailed down and imposed feudalism on the populace, Im not sure they were the eager beaver integrationists you're depicting them as here:pac::pac::pac:

Kid Charlemagne

randd1 wrote: »

contributes to Irish life through Irish values

Irish values? Id love to know what the **** they are supposed to be? Eating soda bread? Playin tin whistles? Dancing at the crossroads????:pac::pac::pac:

buried

Kid Charlemagne wrote: »

Well they also took anything that was and wasn't nailed down and imposed feudalism on the populace, Im not sure they were the eager beaver integrationists you're depicting them as here:pac::pac::pac:

The Irish monasteries did the exact same sort of tactic long before the French Normans arrived here, especially in the building up of their armies. They also took everything that wasn't nailed down in their locality too, the Normans just copied the system but it worked better for the Normans as they had better structure defences such as motte and bailey's, and later fortified walled castles.

Bobblehats

jaffusmax wrote: »

The mind can be ethnically Irish, British, Chinese.........., the body is just a vessel that can be made from whether parts (genetic material) that happen to be available at a particular place and time.

Or another way to put it, yes my body is not genetically what you call Irish but my mind is.

Hopefully some bastard here won’t come along and draw parallels to a man; trapped in a woman’s body.

Kid Charlemagne

Kid Charlemagne wrote: »

Irish values? Id love to know what the **** they are supposed to be? Eating soda bread? Playin tin whistles? Dancing at the crossroads????:pac::pac::pac:

Indeed, but that’s a post colonial issue. After all you wouldn’t sneer at the idea of French culture or French values I assume, and certainly the French wouldn’t.

buried

buried wrote: »

The Irish monasteries did the exact same sort of tactic long before the French Normans arrived here, especially in the building up of their armies. They also took everything that wasn't nailed down in their locality too, the Normans just copied the system but it worked better for the Normans as they had better structure defences such as motte and bailey's, and later fortified walled castles.

Odd take. I’m almost reluctant to challenge it because you sound so certain.

joe40

Nqp15hhu wrote: »

There is no sizeable Protestant population in Donegal

There is sizeable number in the East of the County. Still a minority but a significant minority in areas.
Obviously not as plentiful as in the North.

buried

Deleted User wrote: »

Odd take. I’m almost reluctant to challenge it because you sound so certain.

Sure challenge away man, but anybody that thinks that the image of Irish monasteries, depicted by Jesuit stamped propaganda school books, that these city states were nothing but a bunch of pious lads in robes with silly haircuts, sitting around praying all day giving out alms and charity to the locals, defenceless and waiting every day to be attacked by barbarian marauders, well they are very much wrong.

buried

buried wrote: »

Sure challenge away man, but anybody that thinks that the image of Irish monasteries, depicted by Jesuit stamped propaganda school books, that these city states were nothing but a bunch of pious lads in robes with silly haircuts, sitting around praying all day giving out alms and charity to the locals, defenceless and waiting every day to be attacked by barbarian marauders, well they are very much wrong.

I see. So the monastery on say skellig was a city state? Was it?

Monasteries in the later medieval period would get quite rich alright, particularly in England, which explains some of the state plunder by Henry VIII.

As for the school books etc I’d say Ireland is in the second generation of revisionism at this stage.

Edit: this is off topic here but there's a good thread on being misinformed about history here, if you want to discuss. No Googling has convinced me that Irish monasteries had large armies yet, but I could be wrong.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058146697&page=20

buried

Deleted User wrote: »

I see. So the monastery on say skellig was a city state? Was it?

Monasteries in the later medieval period would get quite rich alright, particularly in England, which explains some of the state plunder by Henry VIII.

As for the school books etc I’d say Ireland is in the second generation of revisionism at this stage.

Yeah that is a fair point fvp but Skellig Michael is a different entity altogether, considering it was more than likely founded in the early 6th century, and those who were the founders of it were a different sort of early independent church who were more into the actual hostile and hermetic living of monastic life that was akin to those that had their origins in the deserts of the middle east.
The city state monastic houses I am speaking of were the ones built inland, more than likely on previous semi-urban centre's and roadway/river crossing meeting points, built in the 8th and 9th centuries. Long before Norman invasion but close enough to the feudal brutality of that time (12th C). These inland city states would have no way survived their inland hostile environment, not even after one attack had they not have a standing army ready to utilise and also equip. The monastery of Clonmacnoise for example, had several cadres of warlords from around the immediate area who were in fealty to the Abbot. One warlord was even brought to Clonmacnoise to be 'Risen' from the dead after his head was chopped off in a battle, he was that brutally important to them and their existence.

buried

Deleted User wrote: »

Edit: this is off topic here but there's a good thread on being misinformed about history here, if you want to discuss. No Googling has convinced me that Irish monasteries had large armies yet, but I could be wrong.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058146697&page=20

Yeah sorry for dragging this off topic too, I will check out that thread too thanks fvp, I will throw up that annal from Clonmacnoise on that thread about the headless warlord when I dig it out. Very interesting stuff.

Kid Charlemagne

Deleted User wrote: »

Indeed, but that’s a post colonial issue. After all you wouldn’t sneer at the idea of French culture or French values I assume, and certainly the French wouldn’t.

French culture - no, but this idea of French values! Gimme a break!

ExMachina1000

Kid Charlemagne wrote: »

French culture - no, but this idea of French values! Gimme a break!

"The French motto “Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity” reflects the values of French society. Equality and unity are important to the French. The French also value style and sophistication, and they take pride in the beauty and artistry of their country. Family is also highly valued in French culture"

Source: Tinternet

For Ireland:

https://culturalatlas.sbs.com.au/irish-culture/irish-culture-core-concepts