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

What are your views on Multiculturalism in Ireland? - Threadbanned User List in OP

RyanthePirate

I would like to see a Boards.ie Consensus.

Economists agree that immigration has a net positive on the economy and this immigration is surely a wonderful thing for the county.

Agree/Disagree?

Mod:

I have updated the OP of this thread with a list of threadbanned users, I would advise posters to check on this before posting in the thread again or a forum sanction will be imposed for breaching same.

If you want to discuss your threadban feel free to PM the banning mod (or myself if you can't remember who that is and I'll point you in the right direction).

Threadbanned Users:
DelaneyIn
TheCitizen
V8 Interceptor
Hamachi - lifted 14/03/22, reinstated 28/03/22
Effects
biko
Kivaro
Eric Cartman
Swindled
Gradius
RobbieTheRobber - lifted 25/08/21 - reinstated 27/08/21
Cordell - lifted 16/08/21
Gangster Yippin
blindjustice
Eircom_Sucks
TomSweeney
Wojtek the Bear
Cordell
klaz
0ph0rce0
tonium22
tonycascarino
Real Donald Trump
Star Bingo
Nuts102
TomTomTim
Nosler
Absolute Zero
Hungry Burger

Find more posts tagged with

racism

i-am-a-racist-but...

we're-not-racist

Quick Links

Comments

[Deleted User]

seenitall wrote: »

All of these ethnic clashes in YU have their origin in Tito bundling a host of disparate nations together under a repressive regime and holding them together by force and fear.

And yet, people who lived there, were quite happy, didn't live under fear of by force, force and fear came with Milosevic. According to people I knew there

seenitall

bubblypop wrote: »

And yet, people who lived there, were quite happy, didn't live under fear of by force, force and fear came with Milosevic. According to people I knew there

Tell me about it. There are whole so-called “yugo-nostalgic” societies in many parts of ex-YU. Not everything was bad in the dear old YU

You were always guaranteed to have a job, for example, and the public law and order were quite something, as well. A very safe environment, as far as that goes. Compared to that, the uncertainty of a capitalism which has held on to the worst corrupting influences of the communist mindset (the nepotism and the brown envelopes ever the favourites) but where the communist certainties of a job and a roof overhead are gone, can seem like a very raw deal to Joe and Josephine in the street. But I digress. In any case, my point is that a lot of people who lived through both eras tend to look at YU through rose-tinted glasses. Of force and fear there is no doubt, there were times when telling a wrong joke in the wrong company could see you doing years of hard labour. By the 1980’s, though, the system had started collapsing in on itself and hearing of such cases was rare.

Sand

fantaiscool wrote: »

My stance is that these percentages are growing and I think it's reasonable to assume they will continue to grow. ...Take the 4% of mixed race people in Canada, who do you think they will reproduce with? They'll be Canadian in nature as they grew up there and will likely get hitched to a native Canadian I would think while the first generation mixed race will continue to grow also. Correct me if I'm wrong. I think I'm being logical here.

In reality, opposites do not attract. You're committing your life to another person - there needs to be something more shared than a passing attraction. People tend to marry within their own ethnic groups. Stats from the US show 'mixed marriages' are rare and that they breakup at a greater rate than marriages where both persons are from the same background. With the exception of Asians - marry an Asian and its for life. Your life or their life.

cgcsb wrote: »

It's COMPLETELY different in Ireland specifically because the West Kerry farmer has a realistic possibility of studying at Trinity if he wants to. In the UK you have your station and you don't move from it

Christ almighty, the UK has a class system but it has moved on from the 11th century. You may want to update your prejudices.

CruelCoin wrote: »

Oh, mind me asking, which do you feel is more likely?

A - Machines do all the work, and humans live an egalitarian life of relative comfort and leisure, sharing the spoils from the machines labour.
B - A small cabal of megarich control the machines and the means to make them. Most of humanity lives in abject poverty and squalor.

Humans being greedy and always chasing the rainbow, my own bet is on B.

I agree B is much more likely, but multiculturalism is a stepping stone on the path. Afterall, a neutral observer might point out that the small cabal of the megarich could surely be violently overthrown by the great mass of humanity in abject poverty and squalor right? Nope, not if the great mass is hopelessly divided into competing ethnic groups by mass migration and multiculturalism. Does anyone think the megarich are championing diversity and immigration out of the goodness of their hearts?

seenitall wrote: »

The unification was under a dictator, too. That’s what Tito was, he just wasn’t a nationalistic dictator. Communism was his thing. Biko is right.

Yugoslavia certainly wasn’t a democracy in any meaningful, pluralistic sense of the word.

Any multicultural society has to be held together by massive repression by the state. Only empires and dictatorships have been able to (temporarily) hold together different nations within the same state. People demonize nationalism today but national self determination was a liberal cause in the early 20th century. The state was rightly seen to be an expression of the people, a rejection of empire. In the 21st century, all those hard won lessons have been forgotten. Now people are winding the clock back to the 19th century and pretending that the people are an expression of the state. All of Europe is becoming increasingly repressive to try hold this mess together for as long as they can.

[Deleted User]

Sand wrote: »

In reality, opposites do not attract. You're committing your life to another person - there needs to be something more shared than a passing attraction. People tend to marry within their own ethnic groups. Stats from the US show 'mixed marriages' are rare and that they breakup at a greater rate than marriages where both persons are from the same background. With the exception of Asians - marry an Asian and its for life. Your life or their life.

That's not really true regarding Asians though. When it comes to mixed marriages, divorce is actually quite common, and if not, actual divorce, then "arrangements" are often made (like separation). While there is the initial fun and joy in exchanging cultural differences, and the appreciation of what you like about the opposite culture, reality kicks in after a while.

Asians tend to be extremely family focused, so moving away from her/his family support network can be very stressful. In addition to that reliance on family, there's the attitude that the cultural group might have towards yours. Asians tend to be extremely practical. If you provide tangible benefits by being married (money, security, status) then, the marriage will likely succeed (if the family approve of you), but should any of those factors decline, then the relationship is heading towards rocky shores.

I've known many people who jumped into a mixed marriage with an Asian person, and it's a minefield. Some people do very well, but many more don't. The key point is just how westernised the Asian person is before marriage.. and even then, there's a strong attitude towards cheating in many Asian cultures, which is increased when they join culturally social networks in the foreign country.

Don't get me wrong. If I marry, I'll likely marry an Asian woman. Experience has shown me that I click particularly well with them, in comparison to many other national/cultural groups.

Sand

Deleted User wrote: »

That's not really true regarding Asians though. When it comes to mixed marriages, divorce is actually quite common, and if not, actual divorce, then "arrangements" are often made (like separation). While there is the initial fun and joy in exchanging cultural differences, and the appreciation of what you like about the opposite culture, reality kicks in after a while.

Asians tend to be extremely family focused, so moving away from her/his family support network can be very stressful. In addition to that reliance on family, there's the attitude that the cultural group might have towards yours. Asians tend to be extremely practical. If you provide tangible benefits by being married (money, security, status) then, the marriage will likely succeed (if the family approve of you), but should any of those factors decline, then the relationship is heading towards rocky shores.

I've known many people who jumped into a mixed marriage with an Asian person, and it's a minefield. Some people do very well, but many more don't. The key point is just how westernised the Asian person is before marriage.. and even then, there's a strong attitude towards cheating in many Asian cultures, which is increased when they join culturally social networks in the foreign country.

Don't get me wrong. If I marry, I'll likely marry an Asian woman. Experience has shown me that I click particularly well with them, in comparison to many other national/cultural groups.

I was exaggerating a small bit, and I don't say Asian marriages are flawless, but it is true to say Asian-Asian marriages in the US divorce at a far lower rate than any other group in the US. Even to the extent that Asian-X marriages will divorce less often than a X-X marriage, whereas the wider pattern is mixed marriages between other groups divorce more often than non-mixed marriage.

fantaiscool

Sand wrote: »

I was exaggerating a small bit, and I don't say Asian marriages are flawless, but it is true to say Asian-Asian marriages in the US divorce at a far lower rate than any other group in the US. Even to the extent that Asian-X marriages will divorce less often than a X-X marriage, whereas the wider pattern is mixed marriages between other groups divorce more often than non-mixed marriage.

You keep using the US as an example and using their statistics but Ireland is completely different. It's completely different from the UK too for reasons stated previously. Time will ultimately tell in terms of how the population demographics go but I would be quite confident that the numbers of mixed raced people will increase here as will the number of interracial marriages and this will happen at an increased pace than it is happening right now due to the younger generation being more intertwined than ever before and my view is that it will only get more and more normalized. There is a real blind spot in the discussion here about this. Perhaps an unwillingness to accept the inevitable?

We have to understand that we are a completely different generation to the youngsters who will be coming through in 10 or so years for example, in much the same way our parents are a different generation to us with different attitudes. My parents were always pretty liberal and open minded but they have told me stories about how gay people they knew went through a lot of hassle that just wouldn't happen today and some of their acquaintances would still hold a somewhat homophobic view as was relatively standard for their era. Our generation came through and things like gay marriage were a no brainer. Abortion etc. Things that you wouldn't have put money on if you were a part of our parents generation. You could have found umpteen amounts of stats that would have told you gay marriage/abortion would never have gone through back in those days and there would have been a complete oversight as to how the impact the younger generation would have.

seenitall

Sand wrote: »

Any multicultural society has to be held together by massive repression by the state. Only empires and dictatorships have been able to (temporarily) hold together different nations within the same state. People demonize nationalism today but national self determination was a liberal cause in the early 20th century. The state was rightly seen to be an expression of the people, a rejection of empire. In the 21st century, all those hard won lessons have been forgotten. Now people are winding the clock back to the 19th century and pretending that the people are an expression of the state. All of Europe is becoming increasingly repressive to try hold this mess together for as long as they can.

Yup, this is how I see the current political processes that Europe is undergoing at the moment. It’s like a lot of Western Europe is determined to undergo various own versions of balkanisation and all the civil bloody strife these fragmentations within various national borders will bring. And bring it, they will. I was in the first row for a very similar conflict, and I will live to see it happening all over again, just on bigger canvases.

Perhaps it couldn’t have gone any other way. I mean, tell me a century that hasn’t seen major armed conflict(s) on European soil...over territory, ethnicity, religion, ideology, it’s always something. Perhaps it is just that we are due for it soon. I kinda get more resigned to it if I think of it that way. Otherwise it makes me too angry to think that it could have been avoided by more intelligent immigration and citizenship policies, and simply being guided by the wellbeing of Europeans instead of that of the world and his dog.

Sand

fantaiscool wrote: »

You keep using the US as an example and using their statistics but Ireland is completely different.

The US has been multicultural since its foundation two and half centuries ago and since its initial colonization by Europeans four centuries ago. Given native americans didnt consider themselves to be a single people and never forged a common identity prior to the arrival of Europeans [Indians is in itself an inaccurate categorization assigned by Europeans uninterested in the differentiation between native American nations/tribes, or India for that matter] you might even consider it to be multicultural back into unrecorded history. It is the perfect example to consider your claims.

If time heals all wounds as you claim, there would be no racial stife in the US. Yet the US is consumed with it. The more diverse it becomes, the less unified it is. The reality is people can be more kind when they are in a position of strength. When they are not - when they feel threatened by other ethnic groups - then strife naturally occurs. The only difference between Ireland and the US is that we went through eight centuries of mayhem to forge a partially successful (Ulster Unionists still unconvinced) common identity where the Irish now speak English as their native language. If we introduce more diversity we will be right back where we were in the 12th century.

Your dream is just a dream. Not a realistic policy that we in Ireland should bet the future of our children on. We dont need another eight centuries of bloodshed so you can get likes on Twitter.

fantaiscool

Deleted User wrote: »

That's not really true regarding Asians though. When it comes to mixed marriages, divorce is actually quite common, and if not, actual divorce, then "arrangements" are often made (like separation). While there is the initial fun and joy in exchanging cultural differences, and the appreciation of what you like about the opposite culture, reality kicks in after a while.

Asians tend to be extremely family focused, so moving away from her/his family support network can be very stressful. In addition to that reliance on family, there's the attitude that the cultural group might have towards yours. Asians tend to be extremely practical. If you provide tangible benefits by being married (money, security, status) then, the marriage will likely succeed (if the family approve of you), but should any of those factors decline, then the relationship is heading towards rocky shores.

I've known many people who jumped into a mixed marriage with an Asian person, and it's a minefield. Some people do very well, but many more don't. The key point is just how westernised the Asian person is before marriage.. and even then, there's a strong attitude towards cheating in many Asian cultures, which is increased when they join culturally social networks in the foreign country.

Don't get me wrong. If I marry, I'll likely marry an Asian woman. Experience has shown me that I click particularly well with them, in comparison to many other national/cultural groups.

I find it quite odd that a lot of guys who would describe themselves as nationalists often end up with Asian women. You see this quite a lot in the alt-right. I could pull up many an example. I have clicked well with Asian women myself and could see myself marrying one so I get the appeal but this phenomenon does surprise me. From my point of view I am a not the most attractive guy but that doesn't seem to be as much of a disadvantage with Asian women as it is with Irish women. I don't have an issue with marrying or having kids with anyone of any race but I have to say it is quite odd to see people who are ardently against multiculturalism and race mixing to be engaging in it. I'm not leveling the accusations of you being against race mixing, clearly you aren't if you are on here saying you will likely do it but I have seen this from others. Perhaps it's a case of "taking the easy way out".

fantaiscool

Sand wrote: »

The US has been multicultural since its foundation two and half centuries ago and since its initial colonization by Europeans four centuries ago. Given native americans didnt consider themselves to be a single people and never forged a common identity prior to the arrival of Europeans [Indians is in itself an inaccurate categorization assigned by Europeans uninterested in the differentiation between native American nations/tribes, or India for that matter] you might even consider it to be multicultural back into unrecorded history. It is the perfect example to consider your claims.

If time heals all wounds as you claim, there would be no racial stife in the US. Yet the US is consumed with it. The more diverse it becomes, the less unified it is. The reality is people can be more kind when they are in a position of strength. When they are not - when they feel threatened by other ethnic groups - then strife naturally occurs. The only difference between Ireland and the US is that we went through eight centuries of mayhem to forge a partially successful (Ulster Unionists still unconvinced) common identity where the Irish now speak English as their native language. If we introduce more diversity we will be right back where we were in the 12th century.

Your dream is just a dream. Not a realistic policy that we in Ireland should bet the future of our children on. We dont need another eight centuries of bloodshed so you can get likes on Twitter.

I just don't agree with the underlying premise in your posts and I don't think it's realistic. I think we may just be on opposite sides and that's fair enough. I would stand by my initial post. I am tempted to add more and take you on but I don't think it would be a useful expenditure of either of our time so I think we can agree to disagree and I guess time will tell us how this whole thing plays out.

rgossip30

fantaiscool wrote: »

I find it quite odd that a lot of guys who would describe themselves as nationalists often end up with Asian women. You see this quite a lot in the alt-right. I could pull up many an example. I have clicked well with Asian women myself and could see myself marrying one so I get the appeal but this phenomenon does surprise me. From my point of view I am a not the most attractive guy but that doesn't seem to be as much of a disadvantage with Asian women as it is with Irish women. I don't have an issue with marrying or having kids with anyone of any race but I have to say it is quite odd to see people who are ardently against multiculturalism and race mixing to be engaging in it. I'm not leveling the accusations of you being against race mixing, clearly you aren't if you are on here saying you will likely do it but I have seen this from others. Perhaps it's a case of "taking the easy way out".

From an ex pat point of view it maybe more to do with how irregular immigration has made it more difficult for legal immigration . The old saying applies you take people as you see them .

[Deleted User]

fantaiscool wrote: »

I find it quite odd that a lot of guys who would describe themselves as nationalists often end up with Asian women. You see this quite a lot in the alt-right.

I can't quite figure out if you're trying to suggest that I'm a nationalist (not exactly sure what that means, TBH, and what I do think it means isn't a bad thing). Again, not sure if you're trying to link me and my opinions with the alt-right.

Such a strange link to make.

I could pull up many an example. I have clicked well with Asian women myself and could see myself marrying one so I get the appeal but this phenomenon does surprise me. From my point of view I am a not the most attractive guy but that doesn't seem to be as much of a disadvantage with Asian women as it is with Irish women. I don't have an issue with marrying or having kids with anyone of any race but I have to say it is quite odd to see people who are ardently against multiculturalism and race mixing to be engaging in it. I'm not leveling the accusations of you being against race mixing, clearly you aren't if you are on here saying you will likely do it but I have seen this from others. Perhaps it's a case of "taking the easy way out".

Ahh well.. tbh I've encountered very few people who were against race mixing, and they were all Americans or Afrikaners (apart from the many Asians who are against it). Many of them were black themselves, and consider it wrong for races to intermix.. but then you find oddball ideas in all manner of places. These kind of attitudes don't rest exclusively with the alt-right.. and TBF when it comes to Ireland, the alt-right are mostly a figment of certain groups imagination.. needing to create the boogeyman to justify their own positions of protectors/crusaders against injustice. Oh, there's a wide variety of racists, and those with superiority/inferiority complexes... but I find that's common enough with people in general. Most people, I find, have one group or another they feel superior to in some manner.

Perhaps it's the case of taking the easy way out? Again.. not exactly sure whether that's directed against me, or what..

In any case, I've lived abroad extensively, mostly in Asia, although I have spent time in both Russia and Africa. I don't consider race to be particularly important. Culture is far more important, and a greater indication of how groups of people might behave.. and some groups have shown themselves to be less capable (for whatever reason) than others.

I'm against multiculturalism because it's so badly planned out. It's too full of vague notions, showing virtue, but little consideration for the practicalities, except when it goes to hell.. by which time it's too late to do anything about it, because nobody wants to step on anyone's toes or make the hard decisions. And I'm also against it because it tend to increase divisions between groups, rather than encourage integration between them.

You can point to the alt-right all you want, but the truth is that most real objections to multiculturalism comes from general conservative people, who aren't racist, who aren't xenophobic, but have seen other countries go tits up, and don't want to see the same thing happen here. Alas.. they won't be listened to, because Ireland will somehow be different, even by doing exactly the same half-arsed (but well-meaning) approaches that others did.

And if you do think Ireland will be different... The rest of Europe shut down criticism, and debate about immigration, multiculturalism.. and even going so far as, promoting the term of Islamophobia. The Irish government and the media here has performed the same way with regards to criticism of immigration. Shutting it down, and making it shameful for people to discuss, for fear of being labelled a racist or some other nonsense. Without real debate/discussion, we are going to end up the same as other countries who have already gone down this road of 'diversity'.

[Deleted User]

fantaiscool wrote: »

We have to understand that we are a completely different generation to the youngsters who will be coming through in 10 or so years for example, in much the same way our parents are a different generation to us with different attitudes. My parents were always pretty liberal and open minded but they have told me stories about how gay people they knew went through a lot of hassle that just wouldn't happen today and some of their acquaintances would still hold a somewhat homophobic view as was relatively standard for their era. Our generation came through and things like gay marriage were a no brainer. Abortion etc. Things that you wouldn't have put money on if you were a part of our parents generation. You could have found umpteen amounts of stats that would have told you gay marriage/abortion would never have gone through back in those days and there would have been a complete oversight as to how the impact the younger generation would have.

I think you're missing something extremely important though. Identity.

Social culture has gone the way of focusing on identities. Race is part of someone's identity, especially if they are a minority. As a minority, they can play the victim card for both social and economic benefits. Better funding, scholarships, government supports, initiatives to get <insert group> into entrepreneurship, etc. Being a minority brings a host of benefits, and as such, it will be used to benefit them... and as part of that, the demand to be recognised as that distinct and separate group, will also be made. To justify their need for those benefits.

Look at society at large now. Gender politics is everywhere, especially in the realms of young people.. They have chosen to identify themselves as "x, y, z", to show their distinctiveness from other people. "You can't label me", but they create a host of labels to cover everything.

We've seen the same with feminism, which has stopped seeking equality, and now, seeks to elevate women above equality. Justifying the need for more benefits to protect, or give women the 'chance' to be happy.

Social change is not heading towards generating community spirit. Western culture, and by extension, the migrant culture, is aimed squarely at reinforcing their identity apart from others. With the benefits that those groups receive, and the demands for recognition as being victims (for whatever reason), bitterness and hostility will grow in native groups who are being left behind.. after all, there is always only so much money to go around.. (and white people aren't exactly considered worthy of sympathy in comparison to other groups)

Nah. We live in an ever increasingly divided world where race, gender, etc are all becoming more and more important as time goes by.. and it's being fueled by the younger generation. Oh, it's the older generations that got the ball rolling, but the momentum is there for it to continue evolving on it's own now.

Wibbs

fantaiscool wrote: »

I find it quite odd that a lot of guys who would describe themselves as nationalists often end up with Asian women.

Speaking personally I don't get the attraction myself. It doesn't mean I would be against a relationship with an Asian woman, or with a Black women, or whomever if it happened organically, but my strong preference is for European women. On the political spectrum I'm overwhelmingly left of centre. For many Americans going by their definitions I'd be damned near a communist.

I am against identity politics of all stripes. If that's "alt right" then I would be in that case. I'm also against the blind acceptance of multiculturalism as a politic and a positive. If that's "alt right" then I would be in that case. I would be a cooperative nationalist as it were. I recognise different cultures and nationalities and those should be celebrated, while being cooperative with other cultures and nationalities so long as they're being cooperative in turn. I would not like some watered down pan global culture. Though I'd bet the farm that won't happen for a long time, if ever.

This anti nationalist philosophy is almost entirely White European in origin and a very recent thing, as I said earlier rooted in the guilt and fear of a post war Europe of that insane fringe nationalism happening again. A war that was in the west an entirely White European affair(even in the East it was a half White European affair).

Outside Europe and her colonies nationalism is still strong and if anything is growing. Ask a Korean, Japanese, Chinese person and you'll get a very different attitude going on. Even though the Japanese(and Chinese) have enough of a history to have their own version of "White Guilt" they most certainly don't.

fantaiscool wrote: »

I just don't agree with the underlying premise in your posts and I don't think it's realistic.

If it were only the US where the pattern plays out I could see some wriggle room for argument, but the same patterns can be seen across the board of all the ex European colonies where different races and ethnicities are found. People overwhelmingly hook up with "their own" and do so over long periods of time. This can be seen throughout history too, even when populations are living cheek by jowl and even when they're the same "race", but different ethnicities, faiths etc. The melting pot if it melts at all it does so around the edges. The very fact that while you certainly had isolated populations where no opportunity was present to mix things up, but the majority of modern humans weren't particularly isolated and yet show such diversity and distinctiveness in populations demonstrates this. The ex European new world colonies that have been going for near five hundred years demonstrate this tendency even when many were and are mixed up together.

Deleted User wrote: »

Nah. We live in an ever increasingly divided world where race, gender, etc are all becoming more and more important as time goes by..

Plus in the case of race and ethnicity it's more divided because there are more races and ethnicities in the multicultural west. Ireland didn't have a "race problem" 30 years ago quite simply because the place was 99% White European. We had a long standing and ongoing "ethnicity problem" in the north of the island. Add identity politics and the clear problems with multiculturalism on any sort of scale and here we are.

[Deleted User]

Ahh Nationalist.. haha.. the penny has dropped.

Yup. I'd consider myself to be a nationalist. I believe in Ireland and I'm quite proud of what the nation state has achieved since independence. I'm also relatively proud of Irish history before independence. Oh, I have no respect or liking of the IRA/Republican attitudes after independence, and have zero interest in a 'united Ireland'. I wouldn't consider any of that to be a negative.. nor would I connect it with being alt-right or a racial supremacist. If anything I've always considered most Irish (myself included when I first went abroad) to have an inferiority complex.

While I have no issue with a degree of immigration, and integration of foreign migrants, I do want Ireland to retain it's national/cultural distinctiveness, and I've seen what happens to countries who allow their commitment of historical values to be diluted by attempts to accommodate foreign populations. (Sharia law in the UK is a good example).

The funny one is that I do live in a nationalistic nation. China. They're incredibly focused on their nation/cultural presence, and how that applies to everyone else. I suspect that those who want to paint nationalism as a bad thing, can't see past German history (Nazism), or haven't really experienced true nationalism.

[Deleted User]

seenitall wrote: »

Tell me about it. There are whole so-called “yugo-nostalgic” societies in many parts of ex-YU. Not everything was bad in the dear old YU You were always guaranteed to have a job, for example, and the public law and order were quite something, as well. A very safe environment, as far as that goes. Compared to that, the uncertainty of a capitalism which has held on to the worst corrupting influences of the communist mindset (the nepotism and the brown envelopes ever the favourites) but where the communist certainties of a job and a roof overhead are gone, can seem like a very raw deal to Joe and Josephine in the street. But I digress. In any case, my point is that a lot of people who lived through both eras tend to look at YU through rose-tinted glasses. Of force and fear there is no doubt, there were times when telling a wrong joke in the wrong company could see you doing years of hard labour. By the 1980’s, though, the system had started collapsing in on itself and hearing of such cases was rare.

Yep, sure why would the people who actually lived there be right?
Typical of this thread.

seenitall

bubblypop wrote: »

Yep, sure why would the people who actually lived there be right?
Typical of this thread.

Wow, who pissed in your cornflakes today?

YU comprised some 22 mill souls, are you really so presumptuous to think you know how all of them feel in relation to their lives under a communist regime...difficult as it may seem to grasp, it wasn’t some fairyland either (I’m kinda bemused to have to so explicitly state this about an authoritarian, non-democratic regime in the first place); I’ve talked about different perspectives and never denied there are a lot of people who hold YU dear for some of the reasons I outlined for example, but there were a lot of people quite unhappy to be a part of it and wanting their own nations to have their self-determination and statehood. A lot.

I’ve noticed it’s really difficult for you to take any differing opinions on board, but there’s no need for sniping. “Typical of this thread”... I’ve said nothing to offend you.

[Deleted User]

seenitall wrote: »

Wow, who pissed in your cornflakes today?

YU comprised some 22 mill souls, are you really so presumptuous to think you know how all of them feel in relation to their lives under a communist regime...difficult as it may seem to grasp, it wasn’t some fairyland either .

Of course I don't know how all of them feel, which is why I said the ones that I know, I wouldn't presume to think that they don't know their own minds though, or that they are wrong in what they think. Like some.

[Deleted User]

Fran has a bone wrote: »

Around 20% foreigners here.

Gardai not getting involved for PR reasons.

Where did you find 20% foreigners here?
And what are gardai not getting involved with exactly?

doublejobbing 2

Fran has a bone wrote: »

You only have to look at the sheer hatred and polarization in the USA and increasingly England to see laissez-faire multiculturalism is an utter failure and disaster.

.

You nearly wonder if it is deliberate.

Whatever one may think about US foreign policy, post 9/11 you really got the impression of a nation together. I remember on the news in the days after the attacks, there were queues around the block, all races, of young men outside enlistment centres. All outraged, all eager to do their bit, as misguided as it might seem now given what we know about Iraq, intelligence failures et al.

You truly get the feeling that if the towers had never fell in 2001, that if 9/11 happened in America today exactly as it did in 2001, there would be a strong minority in the US who would take glee in the fact that so many bankers and policemen were killed in the attacks. The Trump extremists are nothing but a reaction to the radical left that got emboldened in the Obama years. People who hate success, freedom, liberty, everything that America seemed to represent.

I said it before here, but there really is no such thing as a happy, successful radical leftist. The hatred is just off the wall.

seenitall

bubblypop wrote: »

Of course I don't know how all of them feel, which is why I said the ones that I know, I wouldn't presume to think that they don't know their own minds though, or that they are wrong in what they think. Like some.

Ah here :pac:

Ok, bubblypop. Enjoy your weekend.

1800_Ladladlad

Joseph is neither a trailblazer or an innovator and should not be provided with a platform such as this to share her racist ideas in making Ireland a "better place". She's probably still trying to sell her self published book .....

https://twitter.com/Independent_ie/status/1350420097127624704

Hellokitty1212

bubblypop wrote: »

Where did you find 20% foreigners here?
And what are gardai not getting involved with exactly?

Did you see arrests in Blanchardstown for inciting hatred against white people ? No.

Hellokitty1212

1800_Ladladlad wrote: »

Joseph is neither a trailblazer or an innovator and should not be provided with a platform such as this to share her racist ideas in making Ireland a "better place". She's probably still trying to sell her self published book .....

https://twitter.com/Independent_ie/status/1350420097127624704

She is not a trailblazer, she is not an innovator and her thinking is not radical - bigotry has been around for a long time.

[Deleted User]

Hellokitty1212 wrote: »

Did you see arrests in Blanchardstown for inciting hatred against white people ? No.

What makes you think you should see arrests?
Do you see all arrests gardai make?

TomTomTim

1800_Ladladlad wrote: »

Joseph is neither a trailblazer or an innovator and should not be provided with a platform such as this to share her racist ideas in making Ireland a "better place". She's probably still trying to sell her self published book .....

https://twitter.com/Independent_ie/status/1350420097127624704

Lists like this are a great display of naked media bias.

[Deleted User]

1800_Ladladlad wrote: »

Joseph is neither a trailblazer or an innovator and should not be provided with a platform such as this to share her racist ideas in making Ireland a "better place".

TBF she is a trailblazer in promoting the alleged (extremely little evidence presented to support the viewpoint with credible research) widespread existence of racism (by Irish people, not by others) in Ireland... She's been a prominent (made so by RTE, and her university) "expert" on the subject.

So, yeah, she's trailblazing by creating an industry (her consulting business is likely doing well) that other minority groups can jump on and follow the yellow brick road to minority protections and funding.

She's probably still trying to sell her self published book .....

As am I.

The western market for publishing and establishing a useful brand presence is quite difficult these days. There wouldn't be too much of a market for her stuff in Europe, and the US is already swimming with 'race experts'.

Kivaro

Hellokitty1212 wrote: »

She is not a trailblazer, she is not an innovator and her thinking is not radical - bigotry has been around for a long time.

In fairness, she did "innovate" an Irish passport and Irish citizenship after serving her time as Administrative Secretary for the Nigerian Britain Association. It's actually funny reading her Wikipedia page where the only place a citation is needed is for this part:

She went on to work as the Administrative Secretary for the Nigerian Britain Association before emigrating to Ireland in 2002.[citation needed]

That citation alone could turn into a novel.

Wibbs

Hellokitty1212 wrote: »

Did you see arrests in Blanchardstown for inciting hatred against white people ? No.

Actually I think the Guards were dead right to back off and leave those morons to it. If they'd gone in making arrests they'd only make more martyred "victims" for the cause. And for what? A day in court and a fine if that? Not worth the Guard's or court's time and it would play right into the hands of the rabble and the rabble rousers.

Fran has a bone wrote: »

The Left would likely celebrate the death of "white men" if it happened now. This week alone this is their thoughts on Dunkirk

https://mobile.twitter.com/RVilkomerson/status/1348841255149694977

She's a middle class American White woman. About the most pampered and protected and neurotic and self hating demographic that exists. Little would shock me coming from such.

1800_Ladladlad wrote: »

Joseph is neither a trailblazer or an innovator and should not be provided with a platform such as this to share her racist ideas in making Ireland a "better place". She's probably still trying to sell her self published book .....

https://twitter.com/Independent_ie/status/1350420097127624704

When a one trick pony with a moron in the saddle and a bag on his head looking to keep a career going and a race baiting identity politic grifter are included in a list of trailblazers you know the level of sheer idiocy you're dealing with. The vast majority of Irish people reading that would be thinking WTF. And again the platforms and politics in this land aren't allowing other voices. This is dangerous in the long term.

Tipperary animal lover

bubblypop wrote: »

You have no idea what gardai have done in relation to any of those incidents, there was no aggravated assaults however, no need to make crimes up!
The garda station was not attacked, there were protesters outside, for sure, but AGS response to incidents is based on a number of factors and just because you think they should have come out, all guns blazing, I would rely on the members in blanchardstown to decide their best response.
No such thing as two tier policing.

No such thing me h*le... didn't they arrest debenham workers who where standing outside one of debenhams shops, socially distant wearing masks!! Over 100 the other night marching not many without masks for candlelight vigil and all clumped together, the balloon release over 100 again clumped together nothing said,.

All 3 things had in common, all held in the middle of this pandemic, only1 of the 3 the police took direct action and it was the 10 protesters outside debenhams... i think you could call that two tier policing or am i wrong?