ILoveYourVibes wrote: » Its not what you said no.
ILoveYourVibes wrote: » Ireland is 88% white Irish.
dominatinMC wrote: » Lies. Simple as.
Sardonicat wrote: » She can't appear white, but if she was white there'd be no problem? Do you think if her name was Svetlana or Agneskia she wouldn't encounter dopes who would try and make her sound more Irish? I encounter dopes who are deeply offended that I haven't 'lost' my English accent despite living here since I was nine. Idiots who call me a plastic paddy who have been alive for less years than I've lived here and wouldn't have a clue what living in a Midlands town in England at the height of an IRA bombing campaign meant to Irish people. When your Dad gets attacked on his way home from work, flaming turds posted through your letter box, other kids rubbing nettles in your face because you're an ugly, freckled murdering Paddy doesn't hammer home your Irisness and doesn't persuade you to hide it, some equally, ignorant dopes in this country with a fixed idea of what Irish should look like, sound like, pray like or be named are quickly put back in their box. These cnuts exist here, as I'm sure you've experienced. They are also a dying breed. And it has nothing to do with skin colour
dominatinMC wrote: » That's clearly not what I said, but anyway, you will see as you want to see..:rolleyes:
ILoveYourVibes wrote: » No i have not. She obviously can't appear to be white. But she could adopt a white Irish name etc Or not dress in indian clothing. I mean if she were called Ruth from london and was white ...i doubt there would be much issue.
ILoveYourVibes wrote: » I am the only one who spoke about what she wrote. The rest of you were calling her a bitch and telling her to go home. It was a cesspit.
cfuserkildare wrote: » Why not Irelands Native Language??
ILoveYourVibes wrote: » You have enjoyed the race bashing you mean.
Hamachi wrote: » Same here. I was enjoying the exchange of rational debate, particularly with posters who hold contrary, but reasoned positions. The thread has been totally derailed by a Finnegan’s Wake-like stream of consciousness. Shame.
Arthur Daley wrote: » A dash of spice. We had a dash of spice for decades now. Nobody has an issue with a dash of spice. The issue is a tiny minority (and check out the polls the loony left were and remain a tiny minority) are attempting to force a whole jar of spice on the plate of the majority. What happens when you overload your recipe with spices? Exactly
dominatinMC wrote: » It's actually embarrassing reading some of the rubbish ILYV posts. As in, I'm embarrassed that I wasted time reading it. I've followed this thread over the last few days and I've enjoyed the reasoned, logical, sometimes illogical, debate. I've been educated and informed by some posters. However, this poster has completely derailed the thread at this point, maybe the best course of action is to ignore and engage with other, more rational, thinkers
Wibbs wrote: » Actually the more times I read this the more I'm convinced... well at best that you have zero clue about what we're discussing and is just stream of consciousness emotionals and it's a waste of keyboard time to even debate.
Hard to imagine a dish that can’t be improved by adding a dash of spice. Good thing.
Hamachi wrote: » I guess I should take this at face value if this lady is tweeting about her lived experience. However, I have to admit that I find it less than credible. Generally, if you are a down-to-earth, easy going type person, you’ll find friends and fit in here. Conversely, high maintenance drama queens tend to be simply ignored. Frankly, most Irish people won’t a give a fiddlers about her keeping her Indian name. They’ll simply minimize contact with the person to the greatest extent possible, depriving them of the oxygen of attention. I wonder could this be fueling the message behind this tweet?
ILoveYourVibes wrote: » Yes ...we are as culturally diverse as ..Iran. Yes ....I would love to have the cultural and religious freedom Iran has
ILoveYourVibes wrote: » Polish of course. Why does this matter?
wildeside wrote: » Imagine a world where this debate was about whether or not we should allow a total of 200 people a year to migrate here, from Denmark. Of course that wouldn't even be a debate. Now imagine instead of Denmark it was Poland or New Zealand or Canada or Austrailia. Still any debate? What about Japan? What about South Korea? Still no debate? Now for any those countries increase the number to 2000 a year. What about 20,000? What about 50,000? I'm guessing people start shifting around in their chairs a bit more as the number start to get much higher. Point being, one of the fundamentals here is purely one of scale. Nobody's arguing for no immigration. I think as a nation we've done very well so far and I think we can be pround of how welcoming we've been. But logically there must be some tipping point in the human psyche where push-back starts to manifest itself, which is only human. Now what if you do the same mental exercise above but the countries in question are Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, India, North Korea, United Arab Emirates, Eritrea, South Sudan, Libya? Any honest, rational person will start getting more uncomfortable a lot more quickly. Reason? You're a racist bigot obviously. The other reason might be that the first group are all western liberal democracies either in Europe, direct lineage to Europe or have adopted western liberal democratic values and institutions. The latter group of countries are not and instinctively this puts us on edge as we don't know exactly what values and culture we are importing. We don't automatically know the cut of their jib so to speak and can't effortless navigate these cultures, they are unfamiliar to us and so we fear them. And some of those fears may be valid. We don't know for certain that migrants from these countries will adopt our values, values which took many hundreds of years to evolve and refine throughout the west, they were hard-won, often through conflict (we didn't just download these values from an app) But many of these same migrants will adopt our values and it's precisely because of those values that they want to come here or to any western liberal democracy. But, as the numbers from any particular culture/origin country increase the impetus to assimilate and adopt those values can decrease. If you look at the most advanced, freeist countries in the world then you won't be surprised to find their foundation is that of a liberal democracy. Values and ideas matter, civilisations are built on them .... or destroyed by them (identity politics anyone?) I think we've benefitted enormously from immigration, we are one of the richest per-capita countries in the world. I don't think we should forget how far we've come. It's easy to romanticise the past. But we also shouldn't be naieve about immigration and should learn from the mistakes of others. We should not bury our heads in the sand and cross our fingers hoping people will all just sit around the campfire singing kum-by-yah. The problem is there is no real forum to have a debate .... and debate is one of the foundational principles of a liberal democracy.
cfuserkildare wrote: » What is the second most spoken language in Ireland at the moment?
ILoveYourVibes wrote: » When you read her tweets she talks about people being offended at her keeping her indian name.
Sardonicat wrote: » Wait a minute - did you not say the problem wasn't our Irishness but our whiteness? You've just fundamentally contradicted yourself with that post.
endacl wrote: » Hard to imagine a dish that can’t be improved by adding a dash of spice. Good thing.
Wibbs wrote: » Then have the basic bloody manners not to crap on whatever country and culture you find yourself in. Pretty bloody simple I'd have thought.
Deleted User wrote: » I really hope you're not suggesting an Irish person in India could fit into the community more than she could here if she wanted to.