nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Hot take: Multiculturalism is good

sk8erboii

Reactionary types beware: Multiculturalism is defined as the spread of people and ideas.

I know you're already thinking about white genocide, catholic oppression and that liberal arts girl that rejected you for being rough around the edges. But hear me out, because im about to tell you why multiculturalism is good.

The one reason: It's the default state of humanity.

You ever wonder why those forgotten tribes like in the sentinel islands is rare and in many ways primitive? Because they are not like us. The rest of the world has managed to collectively cooperate. One guy comes up with a great idea and someone else from another country copies it and improves it. Thats multiculturalism.

I made this thread as a response to the obvious xenophobic hatemongering in other posts.

Like some scumbag throwing acid to a child's face, somehow implicates every immigrant and they should be put under a proverbial spotlight. Its tenuous logic at any point of view.

Right now I want you to imagine if Ireland became your insular and backwards utopia. Forget about the Wakanda syndrome (That if a nation somehow closes its borders and focuses on itself it will become advanced) and look at case studies. The empire Japan is the poster boy for the self-serving xenophobic nation state. And it was 200 years behind until it stopped the blockade then it entered modernity.

If Ireland had no multiculturalism (which includes the Catholic church) it would literally be a depressing backwater even moreso than it was for hundreds of years. Everything you ever owned, knew and f*cked is influenced by foreign people.

That doesn't mean genocide, asmuch as self-victimizing citizens in the top 10 quality of life in the world would have you think. It simply means acknowledging that Ireland and multiculturalism are deeply intertwined, even back to the building of 'native' structures (which were built by people that came from spain, scandinavia and france).

Ireland's golden days when it was all 'native' never existed. In fact, those days were among the most depressing and oppressive in history that the population never recovered. Blighted by a food that came from Peru.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

buried

sk8erboii wrote: »

In this thread: People wont admit they just dont like brown people and try to tell you America isn't multicultural and that there are no multicultural nations despite the entire world being born on the movement of people since the beginning of prehistory.

I'm actually laughing lads. Did you all think people stayed in their towns from birth to death until recently or what?

That hasn't always resulted in the best result Sk8. Do you read any history whatsoever? Genuine question now, not being aggressive or smart. People moved during the $hitshow of the crusades and we're still living with that mess after it, for example.

sk8erboii

buried wrote: »

That hasn't always resulted in the best result Sk8. Do you read any history whatsoever? Genuine question now, not being aggressive or smart. People moved during the $hitshow of the crusades and we're still living with that mess after it, for example.

Its the default state of humanity lad for better or for worse. For example europe was colonized three or four times in prehistory, each time the ‘indigenous’ population were supplanted violently. But also each time, europe evolved socially and technologically. Mass migration is a huge catalyst for sure

Jmsg

It's a very sad state of affairs when literally the only person who can (pretend to) engage in a dialogue offering an argument in favor of such an eminent political matter of our times broadly effecting life in our country - multiculturalism - is someone trolling.

buried

sk8erboii wrote: »

Its the default state of humanity lad for better or for worse. For example europe was colonized three or four times in prehistory, each time the ‘indigenous’ population were supplanted violently. But also each time, europe evolved socially and technologically. Mass migration is a huge catalyst for sure

The middle east got supplanted violently during the crusades and that part of the world ended up totally f**ked. And they did, up until that episode, that part of the world was the apex of forward pushing culture in the likes of science and mathematics. You can't just blindly say this sort of thing has always been done without a cause or effect, which it seems to me, and a lot of other posters here, you seem to want to do, y'know?

buried

Jmsg wrote: »

It's a very sad state of affairs when literally the only person who can (pretend to) engage in a dialogue offering an argument in favor of such an eminent political matter of our times broadly effecting life in our country - multiculturalism - is someone trolling.

lol, fair point, I don't think they is though, but if they is that could be how bat$hit lunatic things have become

Sunny88

GinAndBitter wrote: »

Is that you sk8rboii?

No
My point was if Irish are so insular and xenophobic shouldnt we be racist against all foreigners
Where are the threads about the Germans and the Filipinos and the Mongolians

gozunda

Sunny88 wrote: »

No
My point was if Irish are so insular and xenophobic shouldnt we be racist against all foreigners
Where are the threads about the Germans and the Filipinos and the Mongolians

Those darn Mongolians and their hairy yaks! Nice yurts though ....

Jmsg

buried wrote: »

lol, fair point, I don't think they is though, but if they is that could be how bat$hit lunatic things have become

Trolls feed off subverting dominant viewpoints, so said poster belonging to said category would in fact likely be a good sign politically for Irish people.

[Deleted User]

19 pages because an OP doesn't understand the meaning of a word. Bravo AH.

Sunny88

[Deleted User] wrote: »

19 pages because an OP doesn't understand the meaning of a word. Bravo AH.

Its good that youth is idealistic

Monkeynut

whats going on?

Jmsg

Sunny88 wrote: »

Its good that youth is idealistic

Today's youth are simply naive. They unquestionably lap up the globalist scheme as "progressive" and true and good and right. But there's a real sense in which the state of the current generation is the fault of the previous one who were the "revolutionaries", that is against their parents' traditional influence and values. As you can't negate a negation, this situation necessitated that no such revolutionary impulse was left harnessable in the succeeding stock resulting in their world (ours currently) being defined purely by nihilism and materialism.

[Deleted User]

Sunny88 wrote: »

Its good that youth is idealistic

By 23, I'd imagine a person should be capable of disentangling the different types of multiculturalism being talked about.

[Deleted User]

sk8erboii wrote: »

People wont admit they just dont like brown people

There's that magic phrase you only ever see uttered by the likes of you. Brown people. You're obsessed with it. Would be interesting to see what a search of that term against your name would bring up.

What do you even mean by it? I think I've seen you use it in relation to black people in movies. I've certainly seen you inferring that it equates to Muslims, who are not a race. Brown is used to describe Latinos and Hispanics also so your description is puzzling at best.

gozunda

sk8erboii wrote: »

Its the default state of humanity lad for better or for worse. For example europe was colonized three or four times in prehistory, each time the ‘indigenous’ population were supplanted violently. But also each time, europe evolved socially and technologically. Mass migration is a huge catalyst for sure

The default state of dogs and humans is to have fleas. Thankfully that is no longer the case.

It is also true that in Europe in the last couple of decades at least, we seem to have evolved past the need for the destruction of cultures by means of mass migrations and violence.

Talking of 'violent supplatings'(sic) and looking back at history. The (Western) Roman empire was invaded and destroyed by barbarians in the fifth century. Its fall marked the death knell of then known education and literacy, technology, organised economics and not least, the rule of written law within Europe.

The 'dark ages' which followed were dark not only the barbarians brought civilisation to its knees but because life was often nasty, brutish and short.

Socially and technologically Europe descended into chaos for a thousand years after that particular violent 'supplanting' ....

[Deleted User]

gozunda wrote: »

The default state of dogs and humans is to have fleas. Thankfully that is no longer the case.

It is also true that in Europe in the last couple of decades at least, we seem to have evolved past the need for the destruction of cultures by means of mass migrations and violence.

Talking of 'violent supplatings'(sic) and looking back at history. The Roman empire was invaded and destroyed by barbarians in the fifth century. Its fall marked the death knell of education and literacy, technology, organised economics and not least, the rule of written law.

The 'dark ages' which followed were dark not only the barbarians brought civilisation to its knees but because life became nasty, brutish and short.

Socially and technologically Europe descended into chaos for a thousand years after that particular violent 'supplanting' ....

Why do people always want to bring up the Romans? They wiped out dozens of cultures to impose their own version of standardisation.. The same thing that people seem to be so afraid of happening nowadays. Nor were they the only source of high level culture, our very own country is prove of that

tryinlanister

agreed

Wibbs

gozunda wrote: »

The 'dark ages' which followed were dark not only the barbarians brought civilisation to its knees but because life became nasty, brutish and short.

Socially and technologically Europe descended into the pits of hell for a thousand years after that particular violent 'supplanting' ....

Actually.... it didn't G. The "Dark ages" as an idea is more about 18th and 19th century classicists lamenting the fall of "their" Rome(or their idea of it) and labelling the gap between that fall and the Renaissance as "dark". It's mostly bollocks. Rome died after a long illness, one mostly self inflicted. In its wake for about a century things went a bit south in Western Europe alright(the eastern empire Roma Nova kept going into the 14th century). However that started to change pretty rapidly. The Roman church continued on as a de facto empire until the Reformation. By the time Charlemagne rocked up Western Europe was doing pretty well. Food production was higher than in Rome for example. Consider this; Byzantium was Rome and how more advanced did they become? The newly born Islamic empire was certainly advanced in the early days, yet the "dark ages" primitive Europeans were able to stop their empire building in Europe and they only got as far as Spain(and didn't last too long there).

The best thing to happen to Europe was the rise of Rome. And the fall of Rome. Otherwise we'd have been like China, centralised, inward looking, traditionalist, with the occasional burst of innovation, but mostly stagnant.

Wibbs

riffmongous wrote: »

Nor were they the only source of high level culture, our very own country is prove of that

And how do we know of our contemporaneous culture? Because men worshipping a Roman god using an imported system of recording wrote them down in the Roman language(mostly). And what's so wrong about standardisation? Cultures aren't equal. Some are better than others. When a better one comes along it mostly keeps the best(and the prettiest) of the old culture and leaves the rest to dusty books for academics to read.

[Deleted User]

Wibbs wrote: »

And how do we know of our contemporaneous culture? Because men worshipping a Roman god using an imported system of recording wrote them down in the Roman language(mostly).

And what's so wrong about standardisation? Cultures aren't equal. Some are better than others. When a better one comes along it mostly keeps the best(and the prettiest) of the old culture and leaves the rest to dusty books for academics to read.

But if we'd got the actual Romans rather than just their god we wouldn't know very much about it at all, which is why I find it odd that it's always that one side of the debate who lament the fall of the Empire to the barbarians. Should they not be cursing the foundation of the Empire? To me it just seems like it makes a handy political idea of us versus the invaders, that you better not think too much about

Don't ask me, I am not the one against it in this thread (at least)
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=109616563&postcount=100

AllForIt

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/sex-education-school-birmingham-homophobic-graffiti-lgbt-a8814901.html

Parents have been demonstrating against the school’s No Outsiders programme, which includes teaching about LGBT+ relationships.

A developing story in the UK is that a group of Muslim parents withdrew their kids from a state school in protest at a new subject which aims to promote equality for all including homosexuals, which not surprisingly given that 50% of Muslims in the UK think homosexuality should be a criminal offense, appears to be their main gripe with it. It is not a Muslim school but a schools where the vast majority of pupils are Muslim.

Putting aside completely whether this subject should be taught at all in any school, the issue is that because the school is 99% Muslim a mass walkout and protest was possible. I believe the school has withdrawn the subject altogether to appease them. Ordinarily one would feel as with the issue of religious instruction in schools here, parents would have a right to withdraw their kids from that particular lesson but because of their numbers they have succeeded in having the subject withdrawn from the curriculum altogether.

Well I suppose this is a great example of why Muslims choose to live in ghettoized areas as it gives them power to get what they want according to their religion beliefs. The irony though of Muslims complaining about an equality lesson when they are screaming Islamaphobia left right and center. Equality for Muslims but who cares about anyones eles's equality.

Sadly I think these are the type of things that are likely to increase as devout Muslims continue to assert themselves in western society.

gozunda

riffmongous wrote: »

Why do people always want to bring up the Romans? They wiped out dozens of cultures to impose their own version of standardisation.. The same thing that people seem to be so afraid of happening nowadays. Nor were they the only source of high level culture, our very own country is prove of that

Because the OP brought up violent supplantings and Europe. It was also recognised as one of the last great widespread civilised periods before the modern era....

Jackman25

Omackeral wrote: »

There's that magic phrase you only ever see uttered by the likes of you. Brown people. You're obsessed with it. Would be interesting to see what a search of that term against your name would bring up.

What do you even mean by it? I think I've seen you use it in relation to black people in movies. I've certainly seen you inferring that it equates to Muslims, who are not a race. Brown is used to describe Latinos and Hispanics also so your description is puzzling at best.

There used to be another idiot hill16bhoy on boards that was very fond of that phrase too. I think we are seeing the re-incarnation.

gozunda

Wibbs wrote: »

Actually.... it didn't G. The "Dark ages" as an idea is more about 18th and 19th century classicists lamenting the fall of "their" Rome(or their idea of it) and labelling the gap between that fall and the Renaissance as "dark". It's mostly bollocks. Rome died after a long illness, one mostly self inflicted. In its wake for about a century things went a bit south in Western Europe alright(the eastern empire Roma Nova kept going into the 14th century). However that started to change pretty rapidly. The Roman church continued on as a de facto empire until the Reformation. By the time Charlemagne rocked up Western Europe was doing pretty well. Food production was higher than in Rome for example. Consider this; Byzantium was Rome and how more advanced did they become? The newly born Islamic empire was certainly advanced in the early days, yet the "dark ages" primitive Europeans were able to stop their empire building in Europe and they only got as far as Spain(and didn't last too long there).
The best thing to happen to Europe was the rise of Rome. And the fall of Rome. Otherwise we'd have been like China, centralised, inward looking, traditionalist, with the occasional burst of innovation, but mostly stagnant.

Wibbs respectfully I disagree. The dark ages has been legitimately recognised as a period in which Europe after the fall of the Western Roman Empire lost most of its learning and much of its culture. What the Roman church brought in was organised repression and a period in which Europe stagnated under religous dogma for a over millennia. Howevever that's as far I am going here with a discussion of Rome et al - as we would need to start a thread all for itself for that particular discussion.

realitykeeper

In and of itself, multiculturalism is not that important, what matters is the circumstances in which it happens. During WWII there was quite a bit of multiculturalism in Europe as populations were moved about and countries were invaded by various armies. The diamond bonanza in South Africa in the late 19th century saw an influx of migrants to that part of the world.

When the USA said send us your poor and huddled masses, they had a thriving economy with real potential for more growth.

Ireland today is a welfare state with a national debt of 200 billion euro and a stratospheric minimum wage by global standards. Under the circumstances, I think the migrants who come here will ultimately regret their decision. Should we let them in? Who cares, Ireland has been mismanaged and misdirected to the point that it doesn`t really matter what we do, the country is facing a very bleak future in my opinion.

Mr. teddywinkles

seamus wrote: »

And over longer timescales the entire human race will likely be some form of tanned colour, with some minor variances here and there. Pure white or black people will be rare occurrences and will be highly desired as attractive.

But you're talking many generations. By the time Europe is no longer majority white, our great-great-great-great-grandkids will be long in their graves.

And it will happen not by immigration, but through simple intermarrying.

It's a complete Boogeyman for xenophobes.

Great diversity there so. How very boring and bland. Upside no rascism although there probable be something else by then

[Deleted User]

AllForIt wrote: »

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/sex-education-school-birmingham-homophobic-graffiti-lgbt-a8814901.html

A developing story in the UK is that a group of Muslim parents withdrew their kids from a state school in protest at a new subject which aims to promote equality for all including homosexuals, which not surprisingly given that 50% of Muslims in the UK think homosexuality should be a criminal offense, appears to be their main gripe with it. It is not a Muslim school but a schools where the vast majority of pupils are Muslim.

Putting aside completely whether this subject should be taught at all in any school, the issue is that because the school is 99% Muslim a mass walkout and protest was possible. I believe the school has withdrawn the subject altogether to appease them. Ordinarily one would feel as with the issue of religious instruction in schools here, parents would have a right to withdraw their kids from that particular lesson but because of their numbers they have succeeded in having the subject withdrawn from the curriculum altogether.

Well I suppose this is a great example of why Muslims choose to live in ghettoized areas as it gives them power to get what they want according to their religion beliefs. The irony though of Muslims complaining about an equality lesson when they are screaming Islamaphobia left right and center. Equality for Muslims but who cares about anyones eles's equality.

Sadly I think these are the type of things that are likely to increase as devout Muslims continue to assert themselves in western society.

And here we have a gold plated reason why "multiculturalism" does not work in the real world, people migrating from a country with one culture to another country with a completely different culture, usually bring their culture with them. In theory, multiculturalism works when elements of each (imported) culture are retained and others are dropped to ensure harmony with the native culture. This clearly isn't the case here, where a group of Muslims are trying to force a change on the local community school, as they have already done to the local community by replacing the original inhabitants. This is not multiculturalism, it is culture invasion and replacement.

OK granted, many people see the LGBT lifestyle as invasive as well.

Calltocall

I agree for the most part that multiculturalism is good, we’ve been part of it ourselves, when we were on our knees we flocked to better opportunities and a more advanced society, it keeps the human race moving forward and that cycle will repeat until the end of time, people from poorer places with less opportunities will flock to better opportunities, it’s a human condition rather something that originates from a particular country, the downside is when you have people that flock to countries with completely different values to the country they move to, basically completely incompatible, it’s not something that can really be spoken about in the open but it’s the reality, for instance take homosexuality, this country along with many western countries have equal rights for gay people etc and rightfully so however how is that squared with someone that comes to these shores who is raised to believe that homosexuality is evil and that one should be executed for being gay which happens quite a bit in parts of the world, it’s an uncomfortable truth and it’s ironic that an awful lot of people who push multiculturalism are gay yet the people they are trying to help privately think they are an abomination,it’s a weird contradiction. The catholic church which i am no fan of are the number 1 target of lgbtq groups here yet I often think they’re not the ones you need to be worrying about.

[Deleted User]

Deleted User wrote: »

And here we have a gold plated reason why "multiculturalism" does not work in the real world, people migrating from a country with one culture to another country with a completely different culture, usually bring their culture with them. In theory, multiculturalism works when elements of each (imported) culture are retained and others are dropped to ensure harmony with the native culture. This clearly isn't the case here, where a group of Muslims are trying to force a change on the local community school, as they have already done to the local community by replacing the original inhabitants. This is not multiculturalism, it is culture invasion and replacement.

OK granted, many people see the LGBT lifestyle as invasive as well.

My opinion is there has to be a fundamental basis of human rights, that applies to everyone equally and anything that is incompatible with it is illegal, no matter what culture or country it is. It's the only way I've found to be consistent..

Auntie Semite

AllForIt wrote: »

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/sex-education-school-birmingham-homophobic-graffiti-lgbt-a8814901.html

A developing story in the UK is that a group of Muslim parents withdrew their kids from a state school in protest at a new subject which aims to promote equality for all including homosexuals, which not surprisingly given that 50% of Muslims in the UK think homosexuality should be a criminal offense, appears to be their main gripe with it. It is not a Muslim school but a schools where the vast majority of pupils are Muslim.

Putting aside completely whether this subject should be taught at all in any school, the issue is that because the school is 99% Muslim a mass walkout and protest was possible. I believe the school has withdrawn the subject altogether to appease them. Ordinarily one would feel as with the issue of religious instruction in schools here, parents would have a right to withdraw their kids from that particular lesson but because of their numbers they have succeeded in having the subject withdrawn from the curriculum altogether.

Well I suppose this is a great example of why Muslims choose to live in ghettoized areas as it gives them power to get what they want according to their religion beliefs. The irony though of Muslims complaining about an equality lesson when they are screaming Islamaphobia left right and center. Equality for Muslims but who cares about anyones eles's equality.

Sadly I think these are the type of things that are likely to increase as devout Muslims continue to assert themselves in western society.

This is only just beginning and will probably spread.
Will be interesting to see how O'Gorman, Mullally et al react

Also anyone could've seen this coming from miles away.