How do you define someone who is Irish? (multiple choice poll)

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

They're still Irish.

They're not ........... and that's obvious, from appearance alone.

Is it so bad to have African origins that it's insulting to acknowledge said origins?

MadDog76 wrote: »

They're not ........... and that's obvious, from appearance alone.

Is it so bad to have African origins that it's insulting to acknowledge said origins?

Oh, don't try to turn it around into some racist thing. The problem is that most of us have somewhat different views on what "Irish" is. For some people, direct line of decent is the most important issue, and it obviously is a part of it. Others take into account the myriad ways of becoming a part of a national society and how that affects them and their children.

Societies are fluid. You can try lock down their "borders", but it won't work because humans are naturally inclined to move around and settle in other places. Many of them may well consider themselves to have a main affinity to their previous place, but their children, raised in this country, will see themselves otherwise - and the State will recognise that too. At that point, one is really just being an arsehole to insist that, say, a child born to French parents who has lived, been schooled, grown up in Ireland isn't Irish, but is actually French and will never be accepted. NEVER! They are FRENCH!

Buuuuut. The French don't agree either. You see how this attitude ends up with millions stateless and with fewer rights too, because of this weird and selfish attitude that "I am Irish. I get to say who isn't Irish. Regardless of what the State says, you are not Irish and never will be because you're black/Asian/born to European parents."

That's my issue here. Firstly that it's absolutely contrary to the facts written down by the Irish State (and intentional distortions to the truth always get my goat, so you can imagine my blood pressure has been high all year), and secondly that it is absolutely ignoring the human implications of such a ridiculous attitude.

Heritage is important for many people. Who their grandfather was and where he was born is important to..er.. some people. But it's not everything. And the law and the State recognises that.

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

You're seriously saying that only white skinned people can be Irish?

Traditionally, yes ......... and there's nothing wrong with that.

Those kids are African-Irish ........ again, nothing wrong with that ......... in fact, they're probably quite proud of their heritage and why shouldn't they be ........ you have heard of African-Americans haven't you?

Hoop Dogg wrote: »

To be honest the idea of someone "receiving" Irish citizenship has always baffled me. You are who you are and just have to accept it whether you like it or not. You can't just decide one day that you are Irish and not Polish or Nigerian etc.

The thing is, that's the central part of it. As long as certain prerequisites are met - a legitimate claim - it does come down to which you feel most accurately describes you and where your national loyalties lie. As someone born in Ireland to mixed-nationality parentage, I have a legitimate claim to citizenship of a different country. But I was born and brought up here (with one Irish parent, if that helps at all), and I am therefore Irish. Sure, you can call me a mongrel or whatever you like, but it doesn't change that I am precisely as Irish as Mad Dog or NoFreeGaffs or anyone that would see that taken from me.

NoFreeGaffs wrote: »

Would you have a problem with a white American calling themselves Native American? An Australian of Anglo descent calling himself aborigine?

If the Native American tribe (or Aborigine tribe) in question accept that under their laws the person is one of them, then who am I to argue about it? Especially if said person is only being questioned because they're a dread halfbreed.

One thing you're missing out on is that this is part of how nationalities and peoples actually stay viable. Small, isolationist, genetically-starved populations end up inbreeding and that leads to lovely national health crises, such as cystic fibrosis in Ireland. The same way that we in general don't agree with inbreeding due to population health, we generally accept a certain amount of immigration and naturalisation for the sake of that same health.

Now, where it might become a problem is if a huge number of people of a similar origin come to a country and, due to sheer numbers, change the national identity to something more associated with another region. However, that hasn't happened yet and rarely happens bar in cases of actual invasion. Albeit it we did it in certain parts of the US, UK and Australia.

...Which in retrospect, makes a whole argument a bit disingenuous. We're probably one of the prime culprits of the whole thing! And, much like the British getting upset when people from their conquered countries follow them home, we're really bitching about the descendants of people who moved to other countries coming back again? :P On top of that, we really don't have the argument of population pressure to fall back on. The population of Ireland has still not reached its pre-Famine figures, mostly due to...dah dah, rampant emigration. Most of them are quite happy to be American, Australian or British now, but will acknowledge some Irish blood. Some feel they are more Irish than whatever, and, through actual work and effort and moving to another country, make that a reality. Fair play to them for having a bit of get-up-and-go about it, really.

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

I think identity is quite complex and I would never tell a black person they cannot define themselves as Irish just because they are black. If they want to identify as African Irish fair enough but who am I to dictate another persons identity. I find it very strange that you want to deny and supress the identity of some Irish people who clearly identify themselves as Irish purely and only based on skin colour.

People can consider themselves whatever they want, Governments can dictate certain criteria to define if a person is/isn't entitled to legal citizenship within a country ......... and I can consider a person Irish, or not Irish, based on logic and reason.

You can consider a 45 year old Nigerian man who arrived in Ireland 5 years ago Irish if you wish .......... the Irish Government can bestow legal citizenship on him if they wish .......... I'll always consider him a Nigerian who has decided, for whatever reasons, to settle in Ireland and he's more than welcome in my opinion.

Deleted User wrote: »

What is with SJWs and looking to be outraged :pac: Have you travelled much? Try being white and saying in Ethiopia "I'm Ethiopian". People are for sure welcome in Ireland imo but we should be proud of being Irish and not just be claiming everyone as Irish. If someone is from Africa but living here I'd see them as from African descent, not Irish, there is nothing wrong with that, everyone should be proud of where they are from.

If I had kids in Japan would you see them as Japanese?

My brother was born in Africa. He African? He's white and moved with his British/Irish parents to Ireland when he was pretty young, but you know, potential corruption and all :P

Actually, I think they moved to England first and then Ireland, in retrospect. But he spent most of his childhood in Ireland either way.


Again, part of the issue is that people aren't so easily classifiable as fruit are. For some of the hardliners in here, you're only of a particular nation if both your parents, all of your grandparents and as many great-grandparents you can identify are Irish, you speak the language, you grew up in Ireland and preferably without any moving around because that's bad. Under their puritan views, a large part of the world is effectively stateless. We can see that that is not the case, so there's bollockology going on somewhere!

The Chinese call their diaspora, 'Overseas Chinese', simple as, no such thing as 'plastic Chinese' or all this hogwash about how someone born and raised in Manchester or London to Irish parents just wouldn't be able to understand our 'celtic souls' or 'unique banter' or 'our far-removed alien way of life'.

If Shane MacGowan was born in France or Germany to the same parents he'd be regarded as an Irish national born overseas, however any connection to that place 20 minutes over the water is deemed to invalidate any connection with Ireland as if the two things are mutally exclusive. I've met England-born people of Irish parentage who range from indifference to their background to those who carry Irish passports, are fully informed about Irish politics and history, are in touch with contemporary Ireland (not some Ballykissangel fiddly-dee fantasy like we think), live and work here and have accents that range from a slight lilt to a full on Irish one. We're talking about 300,000 or so people so they're not all going to be homogeneous.

Someone's geographical birthplace isn't the sole determinant of what defines people in terms of their culture or nationality as 'special' as some of us like to think we are about being born or educated here.