Did immigration to France etc bring positives too?
How France went about immigration might be looked at too. Bring laws in that restrict some religious practices but not others. I feel the welcome we give newcomers will have a strong influence on the practices of the newcomers. The more they are felt welcomed the more they'll integrate, the more they feel unwelcome the more they keep to themselves. So we have a responsibility in this situation.
I'm not saying that multiculturalism had a role to play in the shrinking of the Irish Catholics churches' hold on society here, I'm just pointing out what Ireland was like when we were less multicultural.
Many seem to shine the spotlight on what is bad if we have mass immigration and ignore the positive. With any action, there are good and bad parts to it.
I find it interesting that what can be a negative for one can be positive for another. I like change, I like having different perspectives on things, I feel the great mix of people brings this to my life.
Plenty of sweeping statements in this thread without evidence to back it up.
And from the map, its clear to see where the ideology is coming from. For all intents and purposes, only 2-3 countries outside of the America's practise birth right citizenship. It's a historical oddity of former colonies in the Americas, particularly the US. And I don't believe its a particularly popular policy in the 21st century US either.
Chu and her ilk are attempting to implement 18th century colonial era policies on Ireland, obviously to the detriment of the indigenous people of Ireland.
There's a logical fallacy there... Irish people were rejecting the Church and it's teachings long before any significant multiculturalism occurred here. It simply took time to gain enough momentum to effect change.. the same with most social movements of those times (it's kinda different now since momentum can be gained much quicker due to social media)
Also.. the idea of being single minded doesn't made sense either. Irish governance was already changing, with the decline of censorship, and the increase in individual rights. None of which came about from foreign influences.
The fact of the matter is that a population starts questioning and seeking change when they're no longer with the status quo, especially when there are obvious inequalities at play. Religion or conditioning can slow that desire or stop it completely, but that's extremely difficult in any western nation to maintain.
I'd not see it was a bad situation for there to be a range of uses on topic, we'd a very singled-minded society back in the 50 60 70 s with the church. I'd not like that returning.
It's funny how you can have something happen,let's say x happens, you might say, look x happened to see we shouldn't have done Y, I might see the same thing and love it.
Yet again, Chu shows her complete ignorance of a subject and plows ahead with ideological bluster.
NO other country in the EU or wider Europe practiced or practices jus soli - NONE.
(Dark blue = jus soli)
You mean a bigger target? I'd say the anchor baby scheme is nothing compared to the English language schools scheme and various other schemes.
I was a bit young but I have been told there was serious alarm in the country at the time at people arriving in to ports pregnant, or actually giving birth, when the so-called "anchor baby" route was at it's height.
Why return to that? Wouldn't we be the only European country that would allow that?
Wouldn't this just make us a target?
This can be debated till the cows come home but the simple fact is the same issues that are happening in America and Western Europe are starting to take hold here now. This will continue into the future, perhaps more so here because we have concrete plans supported by all political parties for increasing immigration massively over the next few decades unlike other countries like France who are now actively looking at severely restricting it.
It is what it is at this stage.
in favor of adopting a feel-good belief that everything will be fine.. because of reasons that haven't been thought out and reasoned through
Because people need to feel better about themselves and they find comfort in thinking it's all good, even though they know it's an illusion - no one is able to offer any advantages, they can only say that nothing bad will happen, but they can't point out the good when asked. Still, they persist.
History tells us multicultural empires always break apart on ethnic lines. Current events show us that our European neighbours are desperately struggling and failing to integrate the new ethnic groups within their borders which are increasingly asserting themselves. Whatever way you cut it, ethnic groups sharing the same territory always leads to conflict.
This is what bothers me. History has shown us what happens to multicultural societies over the long term. It's not a secret. And yet, so many people advocate for multiculturalism in western societies, usually with an emphasis on immigration from regions that are vastly different from us. (Africa, M.East, etc) I have to assume that they believe it will be different this time, but what are we doing that's different from past multicultural societies.
IMHO It seems to me that we're simply following the US while ignoring the unique differences available to the US, such as it's geography/location in the world. Western nations have adopted the inclusive and diversity is our strength crap that came from US administrations, and US social sciences.. but where has that led us? The US is incredibly divided, even if you ignore the racism directed towards African Americans, and Hispanics. There is very little unity left in that nation, and that's what we should be aiming to emulate? Added to which, from an economic standpoint, and what the nation can provide for it's population, there are huge areas across the whole country, which have fallen to 3rd world standards, with many pockets simply disappearing from being supported, or improved... how is that a good thing? Oh, I know the US has their own problems with being a military power, and other economic issues, but they're still one of the most economically powerful nations in the world.
What happens to a country like Ireland where it's wealth and economy is most strong only on paper? An economy heavily focused on services produces little, and is seriously dependent on other markets to remain stable. We already, even during our boom periods, had problems providing an adequate amount to services to the whole country, and in many areas, those services have been encouraged to shrink to just cover the major population centers. Which is another project (the focus on cities) that tends to cause serious problems in the long term in every country,
I really wish people would think. Think about what's gone before us. Even the changes/problems of the last three decades seem to be dismissed and ignored.. in favor of adopting a feel-good belief that everything will be fine.. because of reasons that haven't been thought out and reasoned through. It's just so... idiotic.
Funnily enough, I agree with a lot of that. Membership of an ethnic group is not always clear-cut, but clearly being of Irish descent is the key factor. I'd add to that someone needs to identify as being Irish and be recognised by other Irish people as Irish.
I think non-Irish who express an interest in Irish music/sport/art etc are just interested. They do not become Irish as a result. No one would accept that an Irish person who learns a foreign language has changed their ethnicity.
Where we disagree is the tactical nihilism you're deploying: "What difference does it make?"
The Irish falling to less than 3 in 4 of the Irish population has occurred in just 30 years. With less than replacement levels of fertility, and mass migration continuing unabated then the ethnic Irish are going to continue to decline until ultimately they are a minority and it may come within my lifetime.
Irish people have already had an experience of being part of a state where they were a minority. It led to persistent mistreatment and ethnic conflict, and ultimately the Irish formed their own nation state, violently, with violence continuing for decades after. So we already know from bitter experience what difference it makes for the Irish to become a minority. History tells us multicultural empires always break apart on ethnic lines. Current events show us that our European neighbours are desperately struggling and failing to integrate the new ethnic groups within their borders which are increasingly asserting themselves. Whatever way you cut it, ethnic groups sharing the same territory always leads to conflict.
And even despite your tactical nihilism, you acknowledge that people would be scared to understand that the ethnic Irish share of the population has declined so much, so quickly and continues to decline.
No-one is diluting anything.
80 million people around the world claim Irish ancestry. There are GAA clubs in all corners of the world. People Irish dance everywhere.
In fact, I would think that Irish traditions and culture is getting stronger for the last 100 years. I see no reason to worry.
Out of curiosity, would you be happy for 150,000 migrants (from everywhere and anywhere) to enter the country each year (for safety, work, economy blah blah etc.) such that, in 20-years from now, the majority of the country would be occupied by foreign migrants?
Say in 2040, 80% of the country was migrants.
Would that be acceptable to you?
(let's assume for the sake of argument there is sufficient housing / school places to go around)
I understand what you are saying, but I generally disagree.
I believe Ireland is a much better place to live them it was, and I don't believe it was more honest, it was safer, but I don't believe that immigrants have changed it. The drug culture that began in the early 80s and the Celtic tiger are what has changed the country the most.
That's fine.
If you are diluting Irish culture as effectively something mushy that doesn't really exist, but is maybe shared among the world in some way - that's absolutely your right.
Its all about the Muslims for you, Anne 🙄
I have family in many different countries, some of whom are very Irish in the culture, despite never living here, some of my family in this country are not.
What is your point?
Interesting. Hadn't thought about it like that.
I think the explanation may have more to do with the history of that nation being governed by illegitimate power. If the authorities governing over a people are seen to be illegitimate then corruption could be a form of rebellion and dissent. Over time it becomes accepted, even celebrated. When you talk about southern European countries, Italy was carved up between Spanish, French and Austrian rulers for centuries. Greece and much of the Balkans were under Ottoman and to some extent Austrian rule. Spain was probably the least affected by rule from outside Iberia, but it was still a union of many kingdoms which didn't always have the same loyalty. And then there is the aftereffects of the civil war and Franco. All these multicultural empires fell apart as people sought legitimate national governments by, for and of their own people.
Ireland is northern European but I think there has been a similar mindset and a similar cause with rule from London for so long. So I think it's more to do with history than a north/south thing.
It's a complex interaction of a shared history, sense of community, music, language, traditions, values, food etc. - and all the rest.
But we know what we mean when we say Irish culture, even if you couldn't pinpoint it or offer a ridiculously strict definition.
We know it's not the burqa, chopping hands off for stealing, or abstaining from alcohol.
If you were to contrast Irish culture with culture from somewhere like Saudi Arabia, we know exactly what the differences are - even without a definition.
I still don't understand what the issue is if 3 out of 4 people living here are ethnically Irish? What difference does it make? Sounds like something that is said to scare people.
People bring change with them, and a lot of the change that they bring with them is less than obvious. I get that there's an attitude on boards that people are afraid of change, and that it's wrong to think that way, but for myself, I've seen a lot of change in Ireland/"the West" over the last three decades, with a lot of it being negative. Now, some of that is natural, due to the advancement of technology and the response of society to adapt to the new environment. Or the relaxation of social norms, such as teenagers being able to see nudity in movies. Many little changes over time to culminate in an overall change to the culture of a country. Which is normal.
When a country is homogeneous, or relatively so, that change to society tends to follow a... somewhat unified direction. [At least, it used to before the social sciences gained so much influence, and their divisive ideas became commonplace]. The problem with multiculturalism, or the statistic of 20% of the Irish being foreign born is that it's a massive change to the demographic of the country in a short period of time, but also the beliefs/ideas/desires that comes with them. It's one thing if they were all from other western nations, in which case, the desires for change would follow a fairly similar line, due to a shared history of morality, or belief systems, but when you're talking about large groups from Africa, M.East, etc all with very different backgrounds, morals, etc, the implementation of change will be more fractured, introducing a much wider range of ideas. Beneficial or desired for one group but not desired by another.
I hated growing up in Ireland, and I was incredibly happy to leave. However, after leaving Ireland, I spent time in a wide range of countries, and at the end of it all, I recognised that Ireland was a better country for people to live in overall. It still wasn't a country I wanted to live in but, it was safer, generally more honest, and so on. As more people come in though, that is changing. Quickly.
Not really explaining what I mean very well, but I don't have the time right now to organise/format my thoughts. Hopefully you know what I mean.
Bubblypop, that's my issue with the demographic change. People have needs, and desires... usually heavily influenced by the culture they grew up in. Some break away to be different, but most people carry those needs/desires within themselves, wanting their new home to adopt/provide them. The problem is that with so many different cultures, there is going to be a clash in expectations for what the country provides, and how society alters in order to provide it.
@Sand, @[Deleted User]
It sounds like what you’re describing is not a unique Irish phenomenon, but there is a unique name for that kind of person and that kind of behaviour in Irish society -
Being 100% Irish means being born to two Irish parents. Not that being born to one means someone is less irish, if that what they consider themselves.
Irish culture is whatever people believe it to be. We can claim Irish music, dance, food etc but as you point out, these things change over time. Some Irish people have no interest in traditional 'Irish culture' that doesn't make them any less Irish then someone who plays the bodhran while dancing the siege of Ennis.
There are non Irish people living in Ireland that embrace our traditionally irish culture, are they more Irish then those who dont?
You're right that the question of Irish culture - or indeed Irish "values" - is vague and hard to define. Ultimately, there is no set of values that 100% of Irish people subscribe to and are unique and different from British. French, German, Italian or Spanish "values".
It's interesting to me because, in terms of values, there are distinct differences between the Northern European nations and the Southern European nations. All under the umbrella of western culture but there's still very strong differences that can be recognised once you shrug off the superficial cover of marketing/propaganda. The corruption index is a pretty good example of this when you compare countries, but also consider how that is shown in the way people live their lives on a local setting. With Spain, I was shocked at the amount of corruption and lying that was a daily part of peoples lives, with anything from the casual expectation that people were cheating on their partners, to the about of Bad debts (credit control/debt reconciliation) that goes on at every level of business. It's worse in Italy.
And while it happens in Ireland, its only in recent years that it's become more common, but still hasn't reached the acceptance that goes on elsewhere. I'd say, from living abroad, and looking back at Irish people, that our culture is was one of naivety, and that most Irish are were pretty damn direct in their behavior. There's very little of the scams that you see elsewhere, and while people do lie to each other, it's almost as if most them were white lies, with few really bad consequences. The same with the type of crime, and violence that happened here until the 90s, where truly brutal violence was rare (compared to what happened in France or Greece), and our crime was very tame in comparison. I can remember when murder was extremely rare, and managed to shock the nation. Compare that with other nations in Europe..
That's all changing now, of course. I don't know if it's the internet, globalization, new generations, or multiculturalism (where Irish people are adapting to their neighbors), but the change is happening regardless. Irish people are losing their innocence, and I guess, if I was to talk about Irish culture, I'd say that that innocence would have been a core part of it. The rest of Europe always seemed more sophisticated, and rougher. The silk glove over the mailed fist. So, if we're looking at a distinct Irish culture that foreigners could have adopted to become Irish, they could have embraced that innocence, and the honesty that most Irish had. (oh, before anyone goes nuts about the honesty reference, think back to any experiences in southern Europe.. and if you have none, then you really need to get out more).
You're right that the question of Irish culture - or indeed Irish "values" - is vague and hard to define. Ultimately, there is no set of values that 100% of Irish people subscribe to and are unique and different from British. French, German, Italian or Spanish "values". What I find is that when people try to define <insertnationhere> values, it's basically neoliberalism clothed as nationalism. A trojan horse, trying to convince the vast majority of any given nation that their interests are inherently the same as the wealthy and powerful who rule over them. That to question the interests of the elites is a form of treachery.
Irish culture and Irish values are organic, constantly changing and the individuals who form the ethnic Irish learn, challenge and adapt to changing circumstances. A thousand years ago, the ethnic Irish spoke Gaelic. Now the ethnic Irish speak English. 100 years ago, Ireland was renowned for the grip the Catholic Church held over society. Now it is utterly powerless, routinely demeaned and held in contempt as a public virtue. The language and religiosity changed, but not the people. The Irish people today are still overwhelmingly descended from the inhabitants of Ireland 1,000 years ago, let alone 100 years ago.
If you ask what are migrants supposed to assimilate into, its is the Irish people - not something so variable as the culture or values they hold. If you then consider if its non-viable for that to occur, well that is a real concern to hold.
I'd ask you what is your measure of being Irish, and by extension how you determine someone is "100% Irish" but I'm fairly certain it would be a useless exercise. You have no objective measure, right? If my views and analysis were just "fearmongering" you'd be able to present an objective argument against them. But you cant. The grim reality for people who have a concern for the Irish people is that you actually don't have to present an argument. The policies you support are being imposed top-down regardless of the negative impact on the Irish people. So, I can show why your views are incorrect and harmful. But they still get implemented anyway.
The 1 in 5 foreign born is actually conservative. It doesn't consider the children born to migrant parents in Ireland. So the ethnic Irish could reasonably be expected to be less than 3 in 4 of the population within their own homeland.
A border would be very hard to police. I believe there are 130+ roads that cross from ROI to NI. But if stopped by police and it’s found that someone entered illegally from U.K., they should be arrested and returned ASAP. No appeal, no bleeding hearts, no nothing. Arrested and released into the custody of the PSNI to deal with.
I would tend to agree, however the issues it would cause for the peace process would be enormous!
I think one way of solving this issue and the issue of any EU immigrants into Ireland, is to require all persons living in the country to register as residents.
This is a massive omission by the Irish government
It should be monitored and regulated the same as any other border. Covid has reinforced the need for this considering the lack of measures in place to prevent the spread of the virus during periods when Ireland was locked down, but the North wasn't, and had elevated numbers of people with the virus. Similar problems with Irish people going to the UK, or British people coming here for sports events or entertainment. The same counts for immigration.
TBH I've never agreed with there being a soft border with the North, and we should be examining every person who seeks to enter the Republic (while also keeping note of those who leave).
Do posters think we should close the border with the UK?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w9.vanillicon.com/v2/9c6ef39403f5dc93bd4b9e77a11c1821.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w8.vanillicon.com/v2/8078e6b81295c08b3df3e770f66e931c.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/6b0748b4741870baaad828fe92174b3c.svg)
