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

One eyed Jack

[Deleted User] wrote: »

OEJ. Sorry, but I'm not doing this again with you. Islam is not the same as Catholicism. Just as you love to expand points far beyond what was originally said.. nah. I tried engaging with you before, but the goalposts kept shifting, and I progressively got frustrated because we moved to the point where I was arguing on things I hadn't contributed myself.

So. Nope. While I respect you, and I enjoy others (who are better at this than I am) engaging with you.. I won't be jumping down any rabbit holes with you.

What goalpost shifting or rabbit holes is there?

You made reference to Sharia Law in the UK which has as much legal recognition in the UK as Canon Law does here - that is to say, none. But I figured the point you were making was that people should be concerned about it, while at the same time you’re suggesting that immigrants should be put on 10 years probation but held to the same standard as everyone else, and Sharia Law is something to be concerned about?

I’m obviously more concerned about the idea of putting immigrants on 10 years probation being codified in civil law than I am about something which has no standing in law whatsoever, not least because of the fact that it’s holding immigrants to a different standard in law than everyone else. We removed the special position of the Church in Irish law by referendum way back in the 70’s, by a majority of 84% no less, and I see no reason to imagine that Sharia law would gain any influence whatsoever in Irish society any more than it hasn’t done in any other country in the West.

Of course if you just want to perpetuate the same tired rhetoric that’s been done to death now in the thread already where immigration is painted as potentially devastating to Irish society and don’t want there to be any discussion beyond that point, that’s fair enough, I’m not interested in going down that rabbit hole myself.

Hellokitty1212

Effects wrote: »

You can start with the "Jim Crow" laws from the early 19th century.
Black people couldn’t use the same public facilities as white people, live in many of the same towns or go to the same schools. Interracial marriage was illegal, and most Black people couldn’t vote because they were unable to pass voter literacy tests.

United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind, A case involving an Indian man who was deemed ineligible for citizenship in the USA because he wasn't white.

Pigford v. Glickman, a case where the USDA settled with African American farmers due to not allocating them loans, based on their race, up to 1996.

The 1830 Indian Removal Act, forcibly relocated Cherokee, Creeks and other eastern Indians to west of the Mississippi River to make space for white settlers.
The 1862 Homestead Act followed suit, giving away millions of acres of previously held Indian Territory west of the Mississippi. 270 million acres was converted to private ownership, overwhelmingly white, under the Homestead Acts.

The 1790 Naturalisation Act permitted only "free white persons" to become naturalised citizens, allowing entry to white Europeans. Only citizens could vote, serve on juries, hold office, and even hold property in some places.

General Sherman's Civil War plan to divide up plantations and give each freed slave "40 acres and a mule" as reparations was never followed through.
The only monetary compensation for slavery was paid to slave owners for loss of property, at $300 per slave.

But yeah, keep trying to convince yourself, and other people, that there was never any benefit to being white in the USA, and that black and white people were treated the same. :rolleyes:

We can all use Wikipedia.

Not one bit of that shows how white people were living high on the hog.

[Deleted User]

Effects wrote: »

But yeah, keep trying to convince yourself, and other people, that there was never any benefit to being white in the USA, and that black and white people were treated the same. :rolleyes:

"As the historian Matthew Frye Jacobson shows in his immigrant history “Whiteness of a Different Color,” the surge of newcomers engendered a national panic and led Americans to adopt a more restrictive, politicized view of how whiteness was to be allocated. Journalists, politicians, social scientists and immigration officials embraced the habit, separating ostensibly white Europeans into “races.” Some were designated “whiter” — and more worthy of citizenship — than others, while some were ranked as too close to blackness to be socially redeemable. "

"The newcomers also chose to live together in Italian neighborhoods, where they spoke their native tongue, preserved Italian customs and developed successful businesses that catered to African-Americans, with whom they fraternized and intermarried. In time, this proximity to blackness would lead white Southerners to view Sicilians, in particular, as not fully white and to see them as eligible for persecution — including lynching — that had customarily been imposed on African-Americans."

It's a good read if you're interested in how Italians were treated.

"As Irish immigrants moved inland from eastern cities, they found themselves in heated competition for jobs. The audio recording, Immigrant Laborers in the Early 20th Century, describes how West Virginia coal operators fired union laborers and gave the jobs to Irish, Italian and African-American workers because, "[the] coal company owned them." This competition heightened class tensions and, at the turn of the century, Irish Americans were often antagonized by organizations such as the American Protective Association (APA) and the Ku Klux Klan.

The Irish often suffered blatant or subtle job discrimination. Furthermore, some businesses took advantage of Irish immigrants' willingness to work at unskilled jobs for low pay. Employers were known to replace (or threaten to replace) uncooperative workers and those demanding higher wages with Irish American laborers."

I could easily post up plenty of other articles, and papers showing how migrants were treated in the US, and there were none of these benefits & handouts that you suggested existed.

All the links you provided relate to the the idea that all white people were given preferential treatment due to their race. Which isn't the case. Many cultural/national groups were discriminated against, and treated badly for a rather long time. Not as bad as what was done to African Americans, or Indians... but then, nobody is claiming that.

You still need to back up your original statement. You haven't done so yet.

One eyed Jack

Kivaro wrote: »

I understand that posters with a certain perspective will get a lot of leeway from the moderators of this forum. But isn't this thread about our views of Multiculturalism in Ireland.

I certainly hope not, as that would mean restricting the discussion to the point where we couldn’t discuss the effects of multiculturalism in other societies and countries as examples, and we’d be limited to discussing the effects of a small number of immigrants as a percentage of the Irish population as a whole. Limiting the discussion like that as regards the influence of multiculturalism in Irish society only, isn’t likely to work in your favour -

Academic Achievement among Immigrant Children in Irish Primary Schools

Many non-Irish nationals are as likely to be employed and as educated as Irish people

One eyed Jack

Effects wrote: »

Do you want me to post you some books?

This is exactly why there's no point spending time arguing with racists like you.
You just want to ignore history and pretend it never happened.

It’s that sort of hyperbolic nonsense robs you of any credibility. Regardless of how many books you might post up, there will be just as much evidence from a different perspective to counter your historical revisionist perspective. It’s not that anyone wants to ignore history or pretend it never happened, it’s that you’re trying to assert that people are responsible for the sins of their fathers. I don’t expect anyone should have to take that reparations nonsense seriously. It’s always just struck me as goading and an attempt at ‘payback’. It’s certainly not in any way constructive or intended to improve relations between different groups in society. It’s nothing more than a finger wagging exercise IMO and people who espouse it shouldn’t be surprised when anyone refuses to entertain their nonsense.

Necro

Effects wrote: »

Do you want me to post you some books?

This is exactly why there's no point spending time arguing with racists like you.
You just want to ignore history and pretend it never happened.

Effects wrote: »

You're just ignoring the obvious and trolling.

Mod:

Threadbanned, seeing as you want to personalise your posts on a repeated basis

Wibbs

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It’s that sort of hyperbolic nonsense robs you of any credibility. Regardless of how many books you might post up, there will be just as much evidence from a different perspective to counter your historical revisionist perspective. It’s not that anyone wants to ignore history or pretend it never happened, it’s that you’re trying to assert that people are responsible for the sins of their fathers. I don’t expect anyone should have to take that reparations nonsense seriously. It’s always just struck me as goading and an attempt at ‘payback’. It’s certainly not in any way constructive or intended to improve relations between different groups in society. It’s nothing more than a finger wagging exercise IMO and people who espouse it shouldn’t be surprised when anyone refuses to entertain their nonsense.

+1

Though that said I have zero problem acknowledging that Black Africans have consistently gotten the poo end of the stick in White Western nations(and not just White nations). That's undeniable. Now we can go back and forth with rankings in the victim Olympics and certainly it's not nearly so black and white(pun not intended) as the usual twitterati and daft academics would have us believe. People of all kinds have been screwed over by those in power since the agricultural revolution and racism, the fear and aggression towards the Other is one of the single most consistent things in human history and that Other varied all over the place.

It's one of the biggest reasons I am against modern western multiculturalism. Or at least large numbers of demographics that will never quite fit in with host nations. Racism and cultural identities and social problems along those lines don't go away. It is present in every single culture in history. From the earliest records of urban living this was in play. No amount of hopes and dreams or money or laws or government planning fired at the problem will solve it. Oh sure some improvement can be made, but it's largely on the surface. You're trying to rewire human nature. Good luck with that.

fantaiscool

Wibbs wrote: »

+1

Though that said I have zero problem acknowledging that Black Africans have consistently gotten the poo end of the stick in White Western nations(and not just White nations). That's undeniable. Now we can go back and forth with rankings in the victim Olympics and certainly it's not nearly so black and white(pun not intended) as the usual twitterati and daft academics would have us believe. People of all kinds have been screwed over by those in power since the agricultural revolution and racism, the fear and aggression towards the Other is one of the single most consistent things in human history and that Other varied all over the place.

It's one of the biggest reasons I am against modern western multiculturalism. Or at least large numbers of demographics that will never quite fit in with host nations. Racism and cultural identities and social problems along those lines don't go away. It is present in every single culture in history. From the earliest records of urban living this was in play. No amount of hopes and dreams or money or laws or government planning fired at the problem will solve it. Oh sure some improvement can be made, but it's largely on the surface. You're trying to rewire human nature. Good luck with that.

Interesting, your position becomes more clear. So your issue with multiculturalism is that you don't support it because you see it as a subversion of our genes? This is one topic I love talking about but just want to be clear on that definition first.

[Deleted User]

fantaiscool wrote: »

Interesting, your position becomes more clear. So your issue with multiculturalism is that you don't support it because you see it as a subversion of our genes? This is one topic I love talking about but just want to be clear on that definition first.

Where does he mention genes at all? :pac:

Wibbs

fantaiscool wrote: »

Interesting, your position becomes more clear. So your issue with multiculturalism is that you don't support it because you see it as a subversion of our genes? This is one topic I love talking about but just want to be clear on that definition first.

IMHO its little to do with our genes or the fashionable though woefully simplistic evolutionary psychology stuff. Well beyond the basics of our DNA informs culture and vice versa.

Humans are inherently tribal. We appear to be far less tribal and xenophobic than previous human species as from early on it was clear we established much larger groups than the small family groups they had. Though we seem to have limits on the numbers or the perceived numbers and the further from the "norm" in a population a group gets the more divides and clashes occur.

These stresses increased massively when we moved into urban living on the back of the agricultural revolution and social hierarchies, the idea of our property and our borders and our common culture took over. I would also consider that the shift in religion from that of polytheism to monotheism really revved this up in the human mind. With polytheism's many gods there was no real sense of the heretic, the unbeliever, the wrong. Someone else just worshipped a different deity to you. There was also oddly enough to the monotheist mindset no evil deity, no devil, no antigod in such systems. Monotheism changed all that. If there's only One True God(tm) then by definition if someone doesn't believe in that one they're wrong and evil and different. The Other. More social schism.

Add in modern White Western culture, which post WW2 and the fall of European empires has an insecurity and fear of hardline nationalism of the past, so has gone the other way and run to cultural equivalence and "liberalism" and a "feminine" agreeableness too. It's afraid to call a spade a spade and afraid to say actually our culture is better and yours is not compatible with it. It instead runs to appeasement which never works as it is rightfully seen as a weakness, an easy touch for more self confident cultures. That we even support with taxes. You can actually have examples where someone can go on a march and shout death to the west, or the Irish are racist scumbags and the next day go down to the dole office.

Justin Credible Darts

fantaiscool wrote: »

Interesting, your position becomes more clear. So your issue with multiculturalism is that you don't support it because you see it as a subversion of our genes? This is one topic I love talking about but just want to be clear on that definition first.

Tell me why people have to support it !
I am curious as to why you believe this, is it because you were brainwashed in to believing it is what it is expected.

Do you just accept everything you are told to accept, without reason.
As Wibbs pointed out, it is our nature to be tribal

TomTomTim

Deleted User wrote: »

Where does he mention genes at all? :pac:

I've come to the conclusion that "progressivism" is just a series of hallucinations. It's the only way I can explain how we're forced to constantly address points that we've never made, time and time again.

Strumms

Problem I have is not multiculturalism...

Problem is, openings our borders, homes, coffers, hospitals and everything we have to invite people from far far away to benefit from them. Without the slightest opportunity that when we are struggling... to be ever able to say... “for now, no more”...no, because it’s forever, evermore.... and more and more....

If w could say, “ok, 2021, we can accept 200, cost is xx million” but we can’t... we have to just keep accepting, keep housing, keep feeding, keep paying, keep clothing.

fantaiscool

Wibbs wrote: »

IMHO its little to do with our genes or the fashionable though woefully simplistic evolutionary psychology stuff. Well beyond the basics of our DNA informs culture and vice versa.

Humans are inherently tribal. We appear to be far less tribal and xenophobic than previous human species as from early on it was clear we established much larger groups than the small family groups they had. Though we seem to have limits on the numbers or the perceived numbers and the further from the "norm" in a population a group gets the more divides and clashes occur.

These stresses increased massively when we moved into urban living on the back of the agricultural revolution and social hierarchies, the idea of our property and our borders and our common culture took over. I would also consider that the shift in religion from that of polytheism to monotheism really revved this up in the human mind. With polytheism's many gods there was no real sense of the heretic, the unbeliever, the wrong. Someone else just worshipped a different deity to you. There was also oddly enough to the monotheist mindset no evil deity, no devil, no antigod in such systems. Monotheism changed all that. If there's only One True God(tm) then by definition if someone doesn't believe in that one they're wrong and evil and different. The Other. More social schism.

Add in modern White Western culture, which post WW2 and the fall of European empires has an insecurity and fear of hardline nationalism of the past, so has gone the other way and run to cultural equivalence and "liberalism" and a "feminine" agreeableness too. It's afraid to call a spade a spade and afraid to say actually our culture is better and yours is not compatible with it. It instead runs to appeasement which never works as it is rightfully seen as a weakness, an easy touch for more self confident cultures. That we even support with taxes. You can actually have examples where someone can go on a march and shout death to the west, or the Irish are racist scumbags and the next day go down to the dole office.

When you say things like “it goes against human nature”, “Humans are inherently tribal”, “racism doesn't go away”, you are claiming that these things are innate behavior. Innate behavior is a derivative of our genes, essentially we are born with it. You are therefore claiming that multiculturalism is a subversion of our genes. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Even if I grant you that premise (I don't), It wouldn't change my mind. Something "going against human nature" isn't anywhere near enough of a justification to disagree with it. Many things go against human nature. I'm not religious but take christianity as an example. The teachings of christianity are in direct opposition to "human nature". "love your enemy, turn the other cheek, everone is equal under god" etc.

When I find someones phone on the street and go out of my way to make sure they get it back, I'm going against "human nature" and my "selfish genes". I would rather live in a world where we strive to have values that go beyond biology. Using your view of "human nature" to revolt against multiculturalism doesn't hold up.

As an aside I've always found people identifying themselves as "Christian Nationalists" to be quite funny. The Gemma o Doherty types. An absolute misunderstanding of christianity.

AlekSmart

fantaiscool wrote: »

When you say things like “it goes against human nature”, “Humans are inherently tribal”, “racism doesn't go away”, you are claiming that these things are innate behavior. Innate behavior is a derivative of our genes, essentially we are born with it. You are therefore claiming that multiculturalism is a subversion of our genes. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Even if I grant you that premise (I don't), It wouldn't change my mind. Something "going against human nature" isn't anywhere near enough of a justification to disagree with it. Many things go against human nature. I'm not religious but take christianity as an example. The teachings of christianity are in direct opposition to "human nature". "love your enemy, turn the other cheek, everone is equal under god" etc.

When I find someones phone on the street and go out of my way to make sure they get it back, I'm going against "human nature" and my "selfish genes". I would rather live in a world where we strive to have values that go beyond biology. Using your view of "human nature" to revolt against multiculturalism doesn't hold up.

As an aside I've always found people identifying themselves as "Christian Nationalists" to be quite funny. The Gemma o Doherty types. An absolute misunderstanding of christianity.

Particularly when Christianity,and Religon in general is a pretty recent event in humanity's meandering journey....I suspect Humanity was inherently racist long before it could spell the word....?

Khumatmibro

It's an absolute disaster. I'm all for controlled immigration of skilled workers regardless of their country of origin/colour/religion etc. I also think a small percentage of charity cases is also great. Small number as in a number that can be housed, educated and successfully integrated into society. Not a free for all that benefits absolutely no one, the natives or the immigrants.

Rezident

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

People bang on about multiculturalism failing in other countries because of a few things they see in the news or websites, when in reality multiculturalism works very well in the UK and France etc for the most part.
Personally I couldn't care less who lives in Ireland, it makes Dublin way more interesting to me anyway to have lots of different people and cultures here. People lamenting losing our own culture, well every generation is different anyway and our Grandparents would have been moaning about things changing too. People are people in my view and I don't care where my neighbour is from as long as they're decent folks.

Do you really think multicuturalism is working well in France? How many lethal terrorist attacks carried out by non-French people in France so far? Is it one per month?

I saw an interview with a kid who had initially gone to an ISIS camp abroad but had gotten out of it in the end. He said they were asking the new recruits where they could carry out an attack. When one of them suggested France, the recruiter actually laughed and said they were ok, they didn't need any more in France!

Strumms

Khumatmibro wrote: »

It's an absolute disaster. I'm all for controlled immigration of skilled workers regardless of their country of origin/colour/religion etc. I also think a small percentage of charity cases is also great. Small number as in a number that can be housed, educated and successfully integrated into society. Not a free for all that benefits absolutely no one, the natives or the immigrants.

1000%.. unfortunately because we are tied to the EU.. what we want, like, need or desire as citizens of a sovereign state doesn’t have any bearing anymore. That doesn’t sound very democratic... that’s because... it isn’t.

The reality is, the EU has as regards immigration... completely failed and is failing each and every member state....

When in 26 or whatever years I go to avail of my state pension... I’ll probably be fûcking real happy I’ve been paying into a private one too.. because this country won’t have a pot to piss in by then... arriving in their droves now into The Republic Of Freebies... that will remain a choice for many, their hand out, our hands up... fûcked dot com .... the aftermath of the George Nkencho shooting should tell people everything. They are here many of them to be in receipt of money, property, medical help etc... all from our stash.....not to contribute..

Scoondal

Strumms wrote: »

Problem I have is not multiculturalism...

Problem is, openings our borders, homes, coffers, hospitals and everything we have to invite people from far far away to benefit from them. Without the slightest opportunity that when we are struggling... to be ever able to say... “for now, no more”...no, because it’s forever, evermore.... and more and more....

If w could say, “ok, 2021, we can accept 200, cost is xx million” but we can’t... we have to just keep accepting, keep housing, keep feeding, keep paying, keep clothing.

The thread is about multi-culturalism in Ireland.
It is not about taking in illegal immigrants or refugees.
You are free to start a thread about that, but your comments on this thread are off topic.

Johnnystephens

I lived in Birmingham in the 1980s during the Handsworth /Lozells race riots so it sort of turned me off multiculturalism..I know this thread is about Ireland but once bitten.....

Ted_YNWA

Scoondal wrote: »

The thread is about multi-culturalism in Ireland.
It is not about taking in illegal immigrants or refugees.
You are free to start a thread about that, but your comments on this thread are off topic.

Can I have my mod hat back please.

While well intentioned, leave it to the mods to issue any directions on thread.

Justin Credible Darts

Scoondal wrote: »

The thread is about multi-culturalism in Ireland.
It is not about taking in illegal immigrants or refugees.
You are free to start a thread about that, but your comments on this thread are off topic.

We hear things like Gay pride
Black Identity
Trans awareness.
etc
etc

Everyone is having their right to express themselves and be themselves, but why is it wrong for white native irish people to want to retain their national identity ? and not have it swallowed up.
Dont give me any of that white guilt brainwashing either the beta males lap up either.

Am I not entitled to want to preserve my identity ?
If a black person for example said he was black and proud, he would be commended for his pride in his identity.
You say white and proud and people will try twist it in to some sort of underhanded racist notion.

Strumms

It’s terrible apparently too that you would like your own country, to be ‘predominantly’ inhabited by Irish people!

I’m sure if you went to Lagos and said, “within 60 years, 55% of the population here in Nigeria will be white Europeans”... let’s just say, you’d probably get a few looks.

Scoondal

Justin Credible Darts wrote: »

We hear things like Gay pride
Black Identity
Trans awareness.
etc
etc

Everyone is having their right to express themselves and be themselves, but why is it wrong for white native irish people to want to retain their national identity ? and not have it swallowed up.
Dont give me any of that white guilt brainwashing either the beta males lap up either.

Am I not entitled to want to preserve my identity ?
If a black person for example said he was black and proud, he would be commended for his pride in his identity.
You say white and proud and people will try twist it in to some sort of underhanded racist notion.

My skin is peach colour. My wife is mid brown. My children are white and brown depending on the season living in Ireland.
Why are you proud of the colour of your skin ?
What do you identify as ? What identity are you trying to preserve ?

[Deleted User]

Justin Credible Darts wrote: »

We hear things like Gay pride
Black Identity
Trans awareness.
etc
etc

Everyone is having their right to express themselves and be themselves, but why is it wrong for white native irish people to want to retain their national identity ? and not have it swallowed up.
Dont give me any of that white guilt brainwashing either the beta males lap up either.

Am I not entitled to want to preserve my identity ?
If a black person for example said he was black and proud, he would be commended for his pride in his identity.
You say white and proud and people will try twist it in to some sort of underhanded racist notion.

And who, exactly is trying to steal your identity?
It's gas, posters on here seem to think that foreigners are going to eat all Irish people and destroy the culture!

[Deleted User]

Strumms wrote: »

The reality is, the EU has as regards immigration... completely failed and is failing each and every member state....

The EU, like all western nations (I know it's not a nation, but it counts the same for this), has been dabbling with virtue signalling, and immigration practices. However, look at the EU today. The two big boys (Germany/France) in the game, are facing extreme problems due to the past decisions, and are likely to pull the plug on any encouragement of immigration.

TBH the real problem isn't the EU. It's the UN. Migrants have rights. Refugees have rights. Pretty much everyone has rights.. and that means there's difficulties in blocking immigration, and dealing with refugees.

When in 26 or whatever years I go to avail of my state pension... I’ll probably be fûcking real happy I’ve been paying into a private one too.. because this country won’t have a pot to piss in by then... arriving in their droves now into The Republic Of Freebies... that will remain a choice for many, their hand out, our hands up... fûcked dot com .... the aftermath of the George Nkencho shooting should tell people everything.

I fully expect that there won't be a State pension in twenty years, and even if there was one, it would be drastically diminished.

They are here many of them to be in receipt of money, property, medical help etc... all from our stash.....not to contribute..

My problem is, even if they do want to contribute, either they're lacking in appropriate skills/education or there won't be the jobs here for them. Few people want to recognise that Ireland and Europe will be, most likely, facing hard times economically over the next decade, and likely for longer, both due to covid, and debt financing problems within companies and institutions.

Strumms

Deleted User wrote: »

I fully expect that there won't be a State pension in twenty years, and even if there was one, it would be drastically diminished.

My problem is, even if they do want to contribute, either they're lacking in appropriate skills/education or there won't be the jobs here for them. Few people want to recognise that Ireland and Europe will be, most likely, facing hard times economically over the next decade, and likely for longer, both due to covid, and debt financing problems within companies and institutions.

I agree, we won’t have a state pension or if we do it’s going to be a token amount...

Our disability allowance.... same, get sick ? Fûck, sorry, you are on your own, same as above.

Government won’t be of the ability to improve public transportation...roads, further metro / rail, healthcare, education grants...

We are investing in short term virtue signaling but the price will be great, it’s going I’m predicting to be a country full of difficulty...

More people living here all of a sudden... more Gardai, more cars, bikes, vans, uniforms / ppe, radios, stationary, civilian staff, insurance....

more hospital beds, doctors, admin staff, bigger waiting lists......

More everything..

Funny thing is.. the individuals who are advocating that we should be allowing everyone into this country are probably comfortable , but will one day maybe themselves or a loved one need a dig out, be it an operation, treatment whatever.... to be told that.. hmmm waiting list is two years, without a medical card... on your way out, you hear accents from all four corners of the planet, who have contributed a negligible amount to this state, but will have the help they need in hours, courtesy of the medical card you / we are paying for... you and that loved one, payed every fuçkin tax going here for a combined 50 years... but you are now a second class citizen in your own country....an absolute afterthought. It’s already started... it happened to me..

Deductions on your pay slips mean fûck all... because your ability to be in receipt of help has despite your contributions, been deducted from you... given to recent arrivals... who have really only contributed... well, what really... but everything from cash, accommodation, medical treatment... here, free... 365 days a year.

I’ve no problem helping anybody but when it’s at our expense, at the expense of our health, wellbeing, financial abilities.... no... not fair. We is fûcked.

[Deleted User]

Strumms wrote: »

Funny thing is.. the individuals who are advocating that we should be allowing everyone into this country are probably comfortable , but will one day maybe themselves or a loved one need a dig out, be it an operation, treatment whatever.... to be told that.. hmmm waiting list is two years, without a medical card...

I wouldn't be too sure about that. Oh, sure, there are many of those with comfortable/successful lives who are interested in all this. That's the same with all kinds of activism. It ticks their boxes, giving them satisfaction in improving the lot of a particular group of people. All the same, that sense of satisfaction, is also there for people who probably aren't that secure.

I remember my grandparents who would be considered quite poor by modern standards, but who also donated significant amounts of money to charity. Or how my grandmother volunteered to help others in the community, even as she got older and sicker.

The point being that the desire to help others is rather strong in Irish people.. and that comes just as much from the poor, as it does from the rich. In this modern age of social media, crusades against injustices, and activism, there's likely a lot of people out there on minimum wage who support the helping of refugees and migrants into Ireland.

The problem is the lack of awareness about the long-term costs, both economically, and the cost to social stability. There's little to no exposure of this in the media. Certainly nothing from the government.. and most suggestions to talk about it are dismissed as being unreasonable, racist, or whatever.

I’ve no problem helping anybody but when it’s at our expense, at the expense of our health, wellbeing, financial abilities.... no... not fair. We is fûcked.

Ahh well.. I'd like for us for solve the problems within Irish society first before taking on more problems that we're ill-equipped to deal with. Once those problems have been solved, (rather than deferred on to the next generation), then I'd be perfectly happy with helping those in need. In a pragmatic manner, fully aware of the risks, and capable of actually doing some good. Rather than allowing in people so that they can languish at the bottom of the economy. It just seems so short-sighted and ignorant to me. Fix our own problems with the economy, wealth inequalities, our poor, our wonky support systems, our over-reliance on international companies, etc. But, nah.. sure, it'll be fine.

Gentlemanne

Can't remember who but there was a poster who was convinced Muslims hate dogs.

Here's congresswoman Ilhan Omar beaming over her new pet

https://twitter.com/IlhanMN/status/1351276519851765765?s=19

There's good evidence that Trump hates animals, even criticising Pence for having pets. The only president for decades not to have a dog, because the real hatred of dogs is coming this narcissist who is on his way out

Justin Credible Darts

Scoondal wrote: »

My skin is peach colour. My wife is mid brown. My children are white and brown depending on the season living in Ireland.
Why are you proud of the colour of your skin ?
What do you identify as ? What identity are you trying to preserve ?

I am not proud of my skin color. I had no say in what color I was born I have said on here before things like black and proud, gay pride etc is the biggest load of brainwashed horsesh1t you will find.

If I build a wall I will take pride in what I created, if I dug the garden, I will take pride in my work. Pride should be reserved for something you attained, not were given unconditionally and without any say.

Why would anyone take pride in something they had absolutely no control of ?

Why gay pride,another ridiculous concept, those people did not chose to be gay.
I am not proud to be Irish either , because it was not my decision, it was out of my hands.

Thats like being proud of having blue eyes or a nose. I am referring to wanting my "tribe" , my identity group, my culture, my way of life, not being eroded.

And for the record, I have said countless times on here, I am in a mixed race marriage so dont even try to make this a racial issue.