Deleted User wrote: » And? What's the relevance?
TheBlackPill wrote: » and if its old fashioned orientalism why dont they gravitate to east Asian cultures?
TomTomTim wrote: » Why don't you try argue some points without insulting people, and see how that goes for you?
Slowyourrole wrote: » The problem with multiculturalism isn't generally the people who want to come here.
Hamachi wrote: » With inference being that the issue lies with Irish people? Care to elaborate on that one?
macpaccrack wrote: » Ah nothing but if it was the other way around it would be all over this thread. 2 foreign nationals killed by Irish drivers in scummy hit and runs in the last 2 weeks.
Slowyourrole wrote: » The issues tend to arise with the resistance to change.
Gatling wrote: » Yeah seem to be a big issue everyone wants to come here and we've to change to suit their sensibilities and beliefs .
Gervais08 wrote: » Provide me with one improvement that mass immigration and multicultural change would bring to Ireland that currently we are resistant to would you ?
Wibbs wrote: » Because East Asian cultures are too close to old style European cultures for the current college socialist mind. IE they tend towards conservatism, community, "family values", enterprise etc. Never mind East Asian cultures tend to be pretty hardcore culturalists, if not outright racist in a way not seen in Europe for decades and don't welcome "diversity". Oh and they're successful economically and that's a big no no. If the Chinese diaspora were a country it would be one of the wealthiest in the world. On the other hand they can't come out and point the finger at them either as they're not White. East Asian cultures and successes are a hard swallow for your college socialists. At this stage it is obviously clear that the pro multicultural people quite simply can't actually argue the points. Pretty much every post reinforces this. They haven't actually thought their politic through beyond the surface and are mired in the oppressor/oppressed narative so when pushed they parrot it by way of insult and because of the near given of an irony bypass don't see it and think they're fighting the good fight.
Hamachi wrote: » You just don't get it I'm afraid. Imagine those pesky natives having the audacity to say that they quite like their country the way it is today and don't see any compelling reason to overhaul the demographics. That just won't do and if you object, you're resistant to change. Continue voicing a contrary opinion and you'll be branded with the big gun epithets...
xvril wrote: » I have always found irish people to be extremely racist towards travellers.
rgossip30 wrote: » I suggest you hire a traveler to do your roof, garden or tarmac your drive .
excludedbin wrote: » To answer the question, you first have to accept that "mass immigration" is anything more than a right wing buzzword.
Mass migration refers to the migration of large groups of people from one geographical area to another. Mass migration is distinguished from individual or small scale migration; and also from seasonal migration, which may occur on a regular basis.
Sloan Hundreds Village wrote: » It's not the Oxford English, but wikipedia suffices all the same.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_migration Sweden could well be 30% Islamic by 2050, from <2% in 2000. This is not a normal, regular, natural, individual, seasonal, or skilled migration pattern, but a' mass migration' of people from one distant region, to another that it had very little in common with prior.
Justin Credible Darts wrote: » amazing how when all the white people moved to south africa, blacks complained about losing national identity. but if a white swedish person about his home country losing their national identity...its perceived as some form of racism
Justin Credible Darts wrote: » amazing how when all the white people moved to south africa
but if a white swedish person about his home country losing their national identity...its perceived as some form of racism
excludedbin wrote: » You mean invaded, forcibly colonised, and oppressed the natives when they dared speak out. I know, I know, you lot think immigration is the same thing as "invasion" but please, try to maintain some kind of perspective. You're just making yourself look more ridiculous by comparing them. Because they haven't been invaded, forcibly colonised, and oppressed by foreign occupiers. I mean really, do you actually think South African Apartheid is in any way comparable to having to see brown people in the same country as you?
excludedbin wrote: » Okay but that doesn't change the fact that immigration into Europe isn't comparable to Apartheid or that it's an "invasion" or comparable to one.