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

Gradius

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:

There's an excellent essay on the ignorance/blindness to one's own culture in retort to statements that seem to invariably begin with the incredulous "what even IS X culture? Lol"

Can't find it right now, but it's you that would benefit from it, so go looking.

Kid Charlemagne

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

"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

Ah yeah I know all the plamàs they (and all the other nations of the world) like to come out with about themselves. Everyones a great bunch of lads according to themselves. Usually a backhanded way to try and make out that their particular random geographical splotch has somehow produced a more discerning brand of humanity than everywhere else:pac:

Kid Charlemagne

Gradius wrote: »

There's an excellent essay on the ignorance/blindness to one's own culture in retort to statements that seem to invariably begin with the incredulous "what even IS X culture? Lol"

Can't find it right now, but it's you that would benefit from it, so go looking.

I think you misread my post - I specifically mentioned "values" - not culture. They are two completely different things.

Gradius

As for the thread question, it is one that is nonsensical.

If you start with "specific thing" and then wonder if "different specific thing is also same specific thing", it is both linguistically illogical, philosophically illogical, and tautological to boot.

Example: "is the colour blue still blue if you change the definition of blue to include not-blue?"

The question is rubbish. Blue is blue, not-blue is not blue, if you make alterations to blue and call it new-blue, then new-blue ALSO isn't blue.

An interesting question to add: if new-blue is simply the addition of, say, orange, to actual blue....

Then what are you left with if you remove orange?? Nothing? The absence of existence? Gas

Gradius

Kid Charlemagne wrote: »

I think you misread my post - I specifically mentioned "values" - not culture. They are two completely different things.

Value and culture are intrinsically connected.

Cats and pots of honey are completely different things, value and culture are not.

ExMachina1000

Kid Charlemagne wrote: »

Ah yeah I know all the plamàs they (and all the other nations of the world) like to come out with about themselves. Everyones a great bunch of lads according to themselves. Usually a backhanded way to try and make out that their particular random geographical splotch has somehow produced a more discerning brand of humanity than everywhere else:pac:

Its just you vs all of the nations and peoples of the world.

Did you know that in Nigeria they actively try to discourage immigration as they want to keep their culture intact

Kid Charlemagne

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Its just you vs all of the nations and peoples of the world.

Quite the opposite my man, I see common shared values across all of humanity. I've been in many countries and met many people, never met one nationality I disliked.
There's the occasional a***h*** for sure but...

Galwayguy35

Someone born here but who's parents are from another country would be Irish but their heritage would be from that country.

A person not born here who got citizenship would be an Irish citizen.

Gradius

Kid Charlemagne wrote: »

Quite the opposite my man, I see common shared values across all of humanity. I've been in many countries and met many people, never met one nationality I disliked.
There's the occasional a***h*** for sure but...

There ARE many commonalities shared amongst different people. They can be good natured, can laugh, can share etc.

However, dogs and viruses also share many commonalities. They eat, procreate, they need to go loo, they don't wear clothes, they don't build cities etc.

The point is that different things are defined by differences. The other way is the path to sheer ignorance.

It's incredibly naive to judge things on similarities. It's all well and good to share a joke with a person from Afghanistan, say. "He's just like me!" Bring up the issue of a woman being stoned to death as righteous and you may rapidly be brought back to reality as to "differences" and "values" and "culture".

ittakestwo

Nqp15hhu wrote: »

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

England is not a state but you say people born in England or English despite that not being their citizenship.

By the same fact, people from Ireland are Irish. There is noway of getting around this even if you were brought up in an apartheid that brainwashs you of this fact. People born anywhere within Ireland whether it be NI, RoI or Cork are Irish by the fact they're all with Ireland and the demonym of Ireland is Irish.

Who is the patron Saint of the Irish? St Patrick and therefore is the patron of everywhere in Ireland including NI.

Gradius

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Someone born here but who's parents are from another country would be Irish but their heritage would be from that country.

A person not born here who got citizenship would be an Irish citizen.

That sounds good in theory.

But, it's just another way of saying "not actually Irish is actually Irish." It's a complete contradiction, just like my "blue" example above.

You can equally apply that "logic" the other way: "if you are actually Irish, you are not actually Irish." Its illogical. Both make as much sense.

That cat was raised amongst dogs, therefore is now a dog.

Can a banana be considered an apple? Sure, the same way you can think of a buffalo as a pineapple, it's still not a pineapple though.

If 1 million pygmies moved into Ireland, and all were considered Irish...if some visitor asked you the simple question "ehhhh, why do some of you look entirely different?" How would you answer?

ittakestwo

ittakestwo wrote: »

. People born anywhere within Ireland whether it be NI, RoI or Cork are Irish by the fact they're all with Ireland and the demonym of Ireland is Irish.

Not true.
Children born in Ireland are not automatically Irish

Temptamperu

bubblypop wrote: »

Not true.
Children born in Ireland are not automatically Irish

Why not?

Temptamperu

Temptamperu wrote: »

Why not?

That's the law, most countries do not give automatic citizenship to children born in their country

Kid Charlemagne

Gradius wrote: »

That sounds good in theory.

But, it's just another way of saying "not actually Irish is actually Irish." It's a complete contradiction, just like my "blue" example above.

You can equally apply that "logic" the other way: "if you are actually Irish, you are not actually Irish." Its illogical. Both make as much sense.

That cat was raised amongst dogs, therefore is now a dog.

Can a banana be considered an apple? Sure, the same way you can think of a buffalo as a pineapple, it's still not a pineapple though.

If 1 million pygmies moved into Ireland, and all were considered Irish...if some visitor asked you the simple question "ehhhh, why do some of you look entirely different?" How would you answer?

Soooooooo? Irish are a different species? Or..?
:pac:

Kid Charlemagne

Gradius wrote: »

There ARE many commonalities shared amongst different people. They can be good natured, can laugh, can share etc.

However, dogs and viruses also share many commonalities. They eat, procreate, they need to go loo, they don't wear clothes, they don't build cities etc.

The point is that different things are defined by differences. The other way is the path to sheer ignorance.

It's incredibly naive to judge things on similarities. It's all well and good to share a joke with a person from Afghanistan, say. "He's just like me!" Bring up the issue of a woman being stoned to death as righteous and you may rapidly be brought back to reality as to "differences" and "values" and "culture".

You've really, really, really, missed my point my man.
:pac:

Gradius

Kid Charlemagne wrote: »

Soooooooo? Irish are a different species? Or..?
:pac:

Yes, Irish people are distinct. That's why they aren't called American, or German, or giraffes.

For the same reason a Rhino born in Dublin Zoo isn't referred to as "the Irish rhino".

Different things are different. Differentiation. It's why when you feel hungry you don't eat tarmacadam: your brain is telling you it's different from food. I hope.

Gradius

Kid Charlemagne wrote: »

You've really, really, really, missed my point my man.
:pac:

You couldn't differentiate what Irish culture is or means. That's your ignorance, your problem.

You said values are completely different from culture. That's wrong.

You said you've been to different countries and people share some commonalities. So what?

Do you have some secretive, hidden point amongst that stuff?

indioblack

Kid Charlemagne wrote: »

Soooooooo? Irish are a different species?

Oh yes.
If you're in any doubt, read this thread.

Kid Charlemagne

Gradius wrote: »

Yes

You think Irish are a different species? Really?
I assume you are messin pal, good one :pac::pac::pac::pac:

Gradius

Kid Charlemagne wrote: »

You think Irish are a different species? Really?
I assume you are messin pal, good one :pac::pac::pac::pac:

"Irish are all ass"???? Are you a pervert? Really?

You can dream anything up by picking and choosing

Duffy the Vampire Slayer

Ireland was once the only European nation to have birthright citizenship.

Colombia is the only American nation not to have it, which has come into play with the recent Venezuelan influx.

Gradius

Duffy the Vampire Slayer wrote: »

Ireland was once the only European nation to have birthright citizenship.

Colombia is the only American nation not to have it, which has come into play with the recent Venezuelan influx.

It's almost like it has some sort of....meaning!

It's all well and good to say anyone can be Irish, but all it does is devalue the idea itself.

If everyone on earth is given a nobel peace prize, does it automatically increase the prestige of every individual on earth, or does it devalue the prize itself?

Like many things, people won't miss one of the cornerstones of their identity until it has been full given away and rendered meaningless.

Duke of Schomberg

Dr Turk Turkelton wrote: »

Apparently he is partial to a glass of Um Bongo. Word has it, it is considered a nectar of the gods in his native land.

I taught a refugee from the Congo a few years ago - he told me that Um Bongo is a Coca Cola franchise, and that because of the political situtation in the Congo they don't operate there, so, to paraphrase the advertisement . . . "Um Bongo, Um Bongo, can't drink it in the Congo".

DelaneyIn

joe40 wrote: »

English is not an ethnicity, it's a nationality. Of course he can be English.

False.

The English people are an ethnic group and a nation native to England, who speak the English language of the Germanic language family and share a common history and culture. The English identity is of early medieval origin, when they were known in Old English as the Angelcynn.

“He is English" can plausibly mean at least three different things:

1)He is a British citizen.

2)He is ethnically English.

3)He is culturally English.

They are all orthogonal concepts, you can be any of those without being the other.

However, people, such as yourself, would like to abolish the latter two, and insist that only the first exists.

DelaneyIn

spring lane jack wrote: »

David Norris is Congolese well that's the shock of the day for me anyway.

He was born in Kinshasa. I wonder why he’s not referred to as “new Irish” seeing as he was born in Africa or as to why the media didn’t claim he would be our first African born president when he ran for office? It wouldn’t have been down to his skin colour, would it?;)

Norris isn’t a real African to the MSM but anyone born or whom lives here is “New Irish.” Such double standards are as glaring as they are hilarious.

joe40

DelaneyIn wrote: »

False.

The English people are an ethnic group and a nation native to England, who speak the English language of the Germanic language family and share a common history and culture. The English identity is of early medieval origin, when they were known in Old English as the Angelcynn.

“He is English" can plausibly mean at least three different things:

1)He is a British citizen.

2)He is ethnically English.

3)He is culturally English.

They are all orthogonal concepts, you can be any of those without being the other.

However, people, such as yourself, would like to abolish the latter two, and insist that only the first exists.

Well there must be millions of people who think they're English but aren't. Maybe third or fourth generation Irish but don't know it.
Plenty can't trace their ancestors back more than 2 or 3 generations.

Gradius

DelaneyIn wrote: »

He was born in Kinshasa. I wonder why he’s not referred to as “new Irish” seeing as he was born in Africa or as to why the media didn’t claim he would be our first African born president when he ran for office? It wouldn’t have been down to his skin colour, would it?;)

Norris isn’t a real African to the MSM but anyone born or whom lives here is “New Irish.” Such double standards are as glaring as they are hilarious.

Certainly interesting, I didn't know that about him either. However, I think it's fair to say that the term "new Irish" has a quite distinct chronology. There were people leaving the country up to a certain point, and then suddenly we actually had 2 coins to rub together and the rest of the world poured in to "help" us, again, at a very certain point of time. They sure as hell saw the value in "being Irish".



So it's fair to say that the term "new Irish" is quite well defined to many. They weren't here, and then out of the blue they were. So I suppose the likes of Norris escapes it because he was here when the going wasn't so good and didnt come in on the tidal wave (not that his particular situation lends itself to any kind of hardship!)

So, besides the hard elements of money and housing and healthcare squandered, people are even blase enough to be giving away the very identifier of themselves. Sort of surprising, sort of not.

Giveitawaygiveitawaygiveitawaynow, giveitawaygiveitawaygiveitawaynow!

DelaneyIn

joe40 wrote: »

Well there must be millions of people who think they're English but aren't. Maybe third or fourth generation Irish but don't know it.
Plenty can't trace their ancestors back more than 2 or 3 generations.

Do the native English people get a say in how their ethnicity is being eroded and changed dramatically over such a brief period?

If I settled in New Zealand, I think it would be extremely wrong of me to claim to be as native as the Maori people. Few would disagree with this view. Yet, the native Irish have inhabited this island longer than the Maori have theirs and people would call it racist for someone claiming the above view with regards to the Irish in place of the Maori.

Why the double standards and hypocrisy?

Oranage2

DelaneyIn wrote: »

Do the native English people get a say in how their ethnicity is being eroded and changed dramatically over such a brief period?

If I settled in New Zealand, I think it would be extremely wrong of me to claim to be as native as the Maori people. Few would disagree with this view. Yet, the native Irish have inhabited this island longer than the Maori have theirs and people would call it racist for someone claiming the above view with regards to the Irish in place of the Maori.

Why the double standards and hypocrisy?

Because nationalism and race is associated with Nazism, something we're all thought is wrong.