UN Migration Pact Ireland's Position?

hill16bhoy wrote: »

I asked are Lydon and the Gallaghers English?

You're demanding a strict dichotomy which simply doesn't exist when it comes to identity. They're clearly not of English descent, but ethnicity is more complicated than that. Do they identify as English? Do English people recognise them as being English?

Lydon apparently travels under an Irish passport and lives in the US so I would imagine his identity is complicated. The existence of fringe cases doesn't deny the existence of the English as a group however.

Dallas Thousands Ammonia wrote: »

Do you still carry hate in your heart against them, sure why can't we all live in peace, it's 2018.

Again with the gaslighting, from the poster who's far more interested in whipping up a race war than living in peace.

Dallas Thousands Ammonia wrote: »

Are they, have you asked them personally? They could well be, it's indeed likely or probable they may consider themselves to be.

I didn't ask for you flagrant racism upon the english, which is utterly ignorant of the current treatment (not historical attitudes, many generations ago) of Irish people in Britain. Shame on you.

If they (theselves) consider themselves to be, that clearly demonstrates the sheer 'ease of assimilation' of celtic-germanic Europeans, esp. the Irish within Britian.

Compare that to the slow and painful integration of other cultures, which may not even speak a word of English or have any prior interest or shared cultural experiences of the land of Britian.

More gaslighting.

Gaslighting = trolling.

View

Sand wrote: »

English people are a nation, an ethnic group which emerged in the early medieval period and which are descended from both Celtic Britons and the Germanic tribes which entered the country with the fall of the Roman Empire and those who have merged with that ethnic group since then.

English identity is distinct from the imperialist/multi-national British identity. Recognising the English as a distinct ethnic group does not deny anyone their British passport or British identity.

The ethnic English are a minority within their own capital. Birmingham will shortly follow and no doubt in more and more towns and cities in the next decade or two. That dramatic demographic shift has occurred in just two generations, due to mass migration and declining birth rates.

The “ethnic” English clearly aren’t a minority within London unless you confine your definition of “ethnic” to “white”. Even then it’s a meaningless definition since it isnt one based on a distinct ethnic group. English Heritage estimate that as much as 40% of the population of London was Irish in the 1840s/50s. Following that there were waves of immigration from Eastern Europe. Few of today’s descendants of those people would identify their family’s original ethnic origin correctly, most would if pushed to do so probably just identify as English, hence the identity isn’t distinct but blurred.

RandomName2

Sand wrote: »

You're demanding a strict dichotomy which simply doesn't exist when it comes to identity. They're clearly not of English descent, but ethnicity is more complicated than that. Do they identify as English? Do English people recognise them as being English?

Lydon apparently travels under an Irish passport and lives in the US so I would imagine his identity is complicated. The existence of fringe cases doesn't deny the existence of the English as a group however.

Strictly speaking hill16bhoy is correct on this. Statistically he was bound to be correct eventually, seeing as he put most of his early efforts into arguments that crumbled into dust. Apart from the nonexistence of the Polish state before WW1. Again, he was technically correct in relation to this (Polish ethnicity and nationalism existed before WW1 of course).

It's no real surprise that the discussion, which is about the wider ramifications concerning the aspirations of the UN Migration Pact, has boiled down into a dialogue about the demographics of various London boroughs. In my opinion it's merely giving hill16bhoy a platform to say that all his opponents are racists: and this really is an easy out for him as it grants him the capacity to win other arguments, that could not have been won through evidence, simply through moral invective.

The fact that White British people (and not even white people as a whole) are a minority in London merely demonstrates that there was a significant amount of immigration at one time, and is very difficult to relate this to any current issues. Indeed, I suspect that this has more to do with Britain's colonial past than anything else. Either way, the initial statement was a factoid.

Sand wrote: »

You're demanding a strict dichotomy which simply doesn't exist when it comes to identity. They're clearly not of English descent, but ethnicity is more complicated than that. Do they identify as English? Do English people recognise them as being English?

Lydon apparently travels under an Irish passport and lives in the US so I would imagine his identity is complicated. The existence of fringe cases doesn't deny the existence of the English as a group however.

People who are born, brought up and live all their lives in a country are natives of that country and 100% entitled to be classed as such.

Loads of English people carry Irish passports. It doesn't mean they aren't English. It doesn't mean they can't feel both English and Irish.

The crux of the matter is this: Lydon, the Gallaghers, Morrissey and Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, not one of whom has a parent who was born or brought up in England, are considered English by the extreme right because they are white.

This extreme right are far less inclined to class a born and bred English person of Jamaican or Nigerian or Pakistani parantage as English, because they are not white.

That is outright racism.

Your statement that English people are a minority in London, when they are not, is a dead giveaway as to your views.

Ian Wright and Sadiq Khan and David Lammy are just as English as Lydon or the Gallaghers or Morrissey or Stephen Yaxley-Lennon.

They are English. They are Londoners, born and bred.

But Wright, from Woolwich, Khan, from Tooting, and Lammy, from Tottenham, weren't counted when you falsely claimed that English people are a minority in London.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8GlFY1jDxU

View wrote: »

The “ethnic” English clearly aren’t a minority within London unless you confine your definition of “ethnic” to “white”.

I'm not the gatekeeper of English identity. The English are. Anyone who identifies as English, and who is recognised as English by the English can pass for English. Whatever else you can say about London, its people are increasingly drawing its culture and identity from the Caribbean, Africa and the Indian sub-continent.

The reality is the BAME population of the UK identify primarily as British, not English, Scottish or Welsh. So you're getting offended on behalf of people who themselves acknowledge they're not of the same ethnic background or identity as Scottish, Welsh or English people.

hill16bhoy wrote: »

People who are born, brought up and live all their lives in a country are natives of that country and 100% entitled to be classed as such.

Sure, they were born, brought up and lived all their lives in a country called the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. They have British passports. They overwhelmingly identify as being British to the extent they identify with the UK.

But the UK is not England. England is not a country. England is a nation/ethnicity with no political expression. I doubt you would be arguing that all South African citizens are Bantu people. I sincerely doubt you would claim that all the residents of Northern Ireland are English.

Captain Obvious

Sand wrote: »

Sure, they were born, brought up and lived all their lives in a country called the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. They have British passports. They overwhelmingly identify as being British to the extent they identify with the UK.

But the UK is not England. England is not a country. England is a nation/ethnicity with no political expression. I doubt you would be arguing that all South African citizens are Bantu people. I sincerely doubt you would claim that all the residents of Northern Ireland are English.

OK, let's just assume that English is a particular ethnicity separate from the nationality. What is the issue with this English ethnicity being a minority in London?

Captain Obvious wrote: »

OK, let's just assume that English is a particular ethnicity separate from the nationality. What is the issue with this English ethnicity being a minority in London?

It's evidence of a rapid demographic shift, brought about in just two generations by mass migration. All of human history demonstrates that rapid demographic shifts leads to political strife and upheaval. For example, Brexit.

All of this is of course a tangent to the primary issue of the thread: is this global pact to facilitate further mass migration in the interests of Ireland? The answer is no.

Sand wrote: »

Sure, they were born, brought up and lived all their lives in a country called the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. They have British passports. They overwhelmingly identify as being British to the extent they identify with the UK.

But the UK is not England. England is not a country. England is a nation/ethnicity with no political expression. I doubt you would be arguing that all South African citizens are Bantu people. I sincerely doubt you would claim that all the residents of Northern Ireland are English.

England is generally classed as a country. It is one of the constituent countries of the United Kingdom, which is a nation state.

Englishness also confers Britishness, by default, because England is part of Great Britain.

I've no idea why you put forward the hypothetical suggestion that anybody would consider all the residents of Northern Ireland as English, no more than I would have no idea why anybody would put forward a hypothetical suggestion that all residents of England are Northern Irish, Scottish or Japanese.

hill16bhoy wrote: »

Englishness also confers Britishness, by default, because England is part of Great Britain.

I've no idea why you put forward the hypothetical suggestion that anybody would consider all the residents of Northern Ireland as English, no more than I would have no idea why anybody would put forward a hypothetical suggestion that all residents of England are Northern Irish, Scottish or Japanese.

Britishness does not confer Englishness though, does it? Afterall, Glaswegians are just as British as any other British citizen. But Glaswegians aren't English.

I find it odd that you are very aware of the ethnicity and identity of the founders of your favourite football club, but you are in full denial that the English might have an ethnicity and identity of their own.

Sand wrote: »

Britishness does not confer Englishness though, does it? Afterall, Glaswegians are just as British as any other British citizen. But Glaswegians aren't English.

I find it odd that you are very aware of the ethnicity and identity of the founders of your favourite football club, but you are in full denial that the English might have an ethnicity and identity of their own.

No, born and bred Glaswegians aren't English. No flies on you.

Glaswegians with an ethnic background in, say, Donegal, are still Glaswegians, and they are still Scottish.

Mick McCarthy is no less a Yorkshireman for having a father from Waterford.

Noel Gallagher is no less a Mancunian for having Irish parents.

Ian Wright is no less a Londoner for having a Jamaican ethnic background.

There is no singular and exclusive English identity in which skin colour is an intrinsic part.

Neither is there a singular and exclusive Irish identity in which skin colour is an intrinsic part.

You are confusing ethnicity with nationality.

View

Sand wrote: »

I'm not the gatekeeper of English identity. The English are. Anyone who identifies as English, and who is recognised as English by the English can pass for English. Whatever else you can say about London, its people are increasingly drawing its culture and identity from the Caribbean, Africa and the Indian sub-continent.

Given that London has a large population of immigrant background, it is unsurprising that its population draws on culture and identity from all parts of the world. That doesn’t mean though that it precludes the population with an immigrant background from simultaneously also being English and drawing its culture and identity from England. It isn’t an either/or issue.

Sand wrote: »

The reality is the BAME population of the UK identify primarily as British, not English, Scottish or Welsh. So you're getting offended on behalf of people who themselves acknowledge they're not of the same ethnic background or identity as Scottish, Welsh or English people.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8GlFY1jDxU

Again given that British is the nationality, it is unsurprising that that’s the case. It is pretty similar amongst the white British population. It isn’t an either/or situation.

A football player who dons the English jersey and goes out to play for England is English (and clearly is self-identifying as such), irrespective of whether they are from a white or BAME background.

View

Sand wrote: »

It's evidence of a rapid demographic shift, brought about in just two generations by mass migration. All of human history demonstrates that rapid demographic shifts leads to political strife and upheaval. For example, Brexit.

Your example is nonsense. London should have been a hot bed of support for Brexit were it true. Instead of which it was the areas that had minimal levels of EU immigration that were the strong Brexit supporting one’s.

Sand wrote: »

All of this is of course a tangent to the primary issue of the thread: is this global pact to facilitate further mass migration in the interests of Ireland? The answer is no.

The global pact is not there to facilitate further mass migration. Nowhere in it is there a statement that that is the pacts purpose. And given that Ireland has a very low population density, it is fairly ridiculous to argue that migration is a problem for Ireland.

Captain Obvious

Sand wrote: »

It's evidence of a rapid demographic shift, brought about in just two generations by mass migration. All of human history demonstrates that rapid demographic shifts leads to political strife and upheaval. For example, Brexit.

All of this is of course a tangent to the primary issue of the thread: is this global pact to facilitate further mass migration in the interests of Ireland? The answer is no.

First of all, about a quarter of the population is from Europe so it's extremely likely they are there through freedom of movement within the EU as opposed to the mass migration from outside the EU. Second, London is an international city by design. It has benefited massively financially from hosting international companies. Thirdly, you haven't explained how the demographic shift is a negative. The only thing that leads to political upheaval seems to be resistance to the change rather than the change itself.

Jamie2k9

Belgium Goverment have lost there majority over the weekend after the minority (left) party pulled out over the UN pact.

Hopefully Europe looks a lot different in June 2019 after the elections.

Chips Lovell

Locked for review

EDIT: Open again

PBP TD Brid Smith calls UN Migration treaty protestors fascist filth and Nazi's. Pathetic !

Wheeliebin30

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Belgium Goverment have lost there majority over the weekend after the minority (left) party pulled out over the UN pact.

Hopefully Europe looks a lot different in June 2019 after the elections.

It was a far right wing party who rejected it, where are you getting it was the left from???????

batgoat

Redneck Culchie wrote: »

PBP TD Brid Smith calls UN Migration treaty protestors fascist filth and Nazi's. Pathetic !

I'm inclined to agree, propaganda has centered around the bill to misrepresent it as if it's some earth changing convention. Eg if we are to look at your posts, you come across as far right and full of hot air. You seem to have brought some of your homophobic views into the discussion and I have very little little doubt that you hold plenty of racist views.

Just having a glance at the other videos of that youtube account btw, they come across as pretty racist and far right wing. Strange that.......

Eric Cartman

Redneck Culchie wrote: »

PBP TD Brid Smith calls UN Migration treaty protestors fascist filth and Nazi's. Pathetic !

Brid smith is just so far out of touch with reality and embedded in her own 'multiculturalism is a paradise' mantra that she bares no relevance in this debate. Anyone who just calls those who want a rational debate on immigration 'nazis' is clearly irrelevant.

batgoat

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Brid smith is just so far out of touch with reality and embedded in her own 'multiculturalism is a paradise' mantra that she bares no relevance in this debate. Anyone who just calls those who want a rational debate on immigration 'nazis' is clearly irrelevant.

Except, the reliance is on misrepresenting the pact and building conspiracies around it. Hardly rational if you're reliant upon lying about it. Anyway good news, 164 countries have signed the pact.

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2018/dec/10/un-states-agree-historic-global-deal-to-manage-refugee-crisis

batgoat wrote: »

I'm inclined to agree, propaganda has centered around the bill to misrepresent it as if it's some earth changing convention. Eg if we are to look at your posts, you come across as far right and full of hot air. You seem to have brought some of your homophobic views into the discussion and I have very little little doubt that you hold plenty of racist views.

Just having a glance at the other videos of that youtube account btw, they come across as pretty racist and far right wing. Strange that.......

Any chance you can play the ball and not the man? I'm charmed you've taken the time to read my posts and assume I'm a racist. Very dangerous rhetoric from the likes of you and Brid Smith to call anyone with doubts about the pact a Nazi and fascist filth. You sound very much like one of the PBP and anarchist mob in the counter protest. I could assume the same about you that you are a member of one of these far left group of thugs.

batgoat wrote: »

Except, the reliance is on misrepresenting the pact and building conspiracies around it. Hardly rational if you're reliant upon lying about it. Anyway good news, 164 countries have signed the pact.

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2018/dec/10/un-states-agree-historic-global-deal-to-manage-refugee-crisis

Most sensible countries opted out. You should probably buy the Guardian paper instead of viewing it online, it's going bankrupt because nobody buys it.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Brid smith is just so far out of touch with reality and embedded in her own 'multiculturalism is a paradise' mantra that she bares no relevance in this debate. Anyone who just calls those who want a rational debate on immigration 'nazis' is clearly irrelevant.

The problem is that the people who claim they want "a rational debate on immigration" almost always don't want such at all, and instead turn out to be crypto-Nazis.

This thread and this website has been a very good demonstration of such.

And it's only a microcosm of what crypto-Nazis are doing across social media.

The Twitter timeline of a certain Irish "investigative journalist" is another very instructive example of how people who proclaim themselves as "concerned" and "reasonable" eventually out themselves as being nakedly racist and crypto-Nazi.

RandomName2

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

It was a far right wing party who rejected it, where are you getting it was the left from???????

I've never heard anyone describe New Flemish Alliance as far-right before, but yes they are nationalist, and not left wing.

They are also the largest party in Belgium.

batgoat

Redneck Culchie wrote: »

Any chance you can play the ball and not the man? I'm charmed you've taken the time to read my posts and assume I'm a racist. Very dangerous rhetoric from the likes of you and Brid Smith to call anyone with doubts about the pact a Nazi and fascist filth. You sound very much like one of the PBP and anarchist mob in the counter protest. I could assume the same about you that you are a member of one of these far left group of thugs.

Can you explain why you're either choosing to lie about the pact or are so poorly informed you don't understand anything about it? I think it's far more dangerous that the pact was hijacked by the far right to propagate a conspiracy with no basis. It was already proven in this thread that all concerns in relation to it amount to nothing.

Redneck Culchie wrote: »

Most sensible countries opted out. You should probably buy the Guardian paper instead of viewing it online, it's going bankrupt because nobody buys it.

Like Hungary which is considered pretty undemocratic and freedoms are diminishing? But they shout like buzzwords that you like such as 'globalist agenda'.... You no doubt think it's great that they've targeted NGOs for example.

Eric Cartman

hill16bhoy wrote: »

The problem is that the people who claim they want "a rational debate on immigration" almost always don't want such at all, and instead turn out to be crypto-Nazis.

This thread and this website has been a very good demonstration of such.

And it's only a microcosm of what crypto-Nazis are doing across social media.

The Twitter timeline of a certain Irish "investigative journalist" is another very instructive example of how people who proclaim themselves as "concerned" and "reasonable" eventually out themselves as being nakedly racist and crypto-Nazi.

im just done with this post, really, come on , this isnt AH.