So it's better to dumb down the issues, and the concerns?
I've spent time in the M.East and have Muslim friends living in the west. The issue is not with Muslims, in themselves. The issue is the incompatibility of their beliefs with that of western culture. Small numbers of Muslims in a community tend to behave very well, and not cause problems. However, when numbers rise, there tends to be a change in behavior and expectations for how they should live, and the behavior of those around them.
France is a good example of this... where in the South, the Muslim population was initially (decades) spread out, and dispersed. However, in the last 2 decades, France has seen significant numbers of Muslims arriving and taking residence in various suburbs, where they have forced their own culture and acceptable social norms (dress, behavior, etc) on the native population. This has gotten to the point where French women are barred from entering cafes because it goes against the Moroccan Islamic culture.
And that's the primary concern. Islam is a religion that controls the society of Muslims, which is fine when it relates to just Muslims, but in a western nation, their religion will seek to extend control over non-Muslims. It's all part of the Quran, and the subsequent teachings of various thinkers in the Muslim world. The duty to extend the power and influence of Islam over non-believers.
People in DP are "asylum seekers", economic migrants should just be returned to sender.
I'm not saying it has a cause, I'm saying, the last time Ireland was far from multicultural, I didn't like it. I love a mix of people, and yes that will come with certain difficulties, I can struggle at work to understand accents, it is got cultural norms that can at times be very frustrating, but for me, I'd like Ireland to be a mix of people, I love the idea, I don't feel it devalues or dilutes Irish culture, just as more culture to the island.
People are often scared of change, people are often afraid of people they don't know or mix with, have zero contact with.
I assume we're talking about economic migrants here. Not Asylum seekers, since they account for very small numbers. I accept he could be including refugees in this, but again, most refugees are, in reality, economic migrants.
Wherever they has been more than a single person in a community there has been cases of division, inequality and social unrest.
Actually, that's not true. In fact, small numbers of different cultures are very capable of working together in harmony. Funny.. I'm arguing your own argument for you. Alas, the counter is just as obvious and factual, (oh, and yes, I know you've just dismissed what I wrote with a flippant response)
The benefits are far greater and wide reaching when you ultimately look at the planet and how it has evolved as people learn they have more in common than what separates them.
The planet is irrelevant. Narrow your scope to nations.
I have not painted multiculturalism as being seamless, or without issues at any point, but while you ask me not to dismiss the concerns of others, I can equally ask others to look at the reality of the way the societies around the world are evolving. Absolutely there is conflict with integration, but there is conflict without it also and in worst cases which ultimately can and has led to military conflict which has done much more damage to countries and the societies involved historically.
You're not doing your argument any favors with the above. Just because there is conflict without multiculturalism, we should ignore the negatives of multiculturalism? The lack of integration and assimilation, in the modern sense, has resulted in serious problems for all European nations. Surely you can see that?
Do you have any Muslim pals? I don't think it's just facilities, its attitude. It could be seen up North, plenty of facilities, but still IRA, there is probably generational anger there. What does cop on before it's too late mean?
It's as if there aren't differing views on this topic that are valid, there is one view, foreign Muslims are bad to stop them?
You let them work and you also have the problem of lobbying and protesting that Nwankwo was a great worker, a friend of all, member of the local GAA club, his life is here now, and all the rest of the associated BS that comes out when someone is found not to need asylum.
Same old same old as suggesting that anyone advocating for moral duty is suggesting that all migrants should be facilitated on social support without question. Is it not the case that the strongest advocates for supporting migrants are the ones calling for them to be allowed to work? But no, that's smug charity apparently.
Where would they be working? This was covered multiple times earlier in the thread, but I guess it's time to do it again. Many of the migrants we receive come from third world nations, or nations that have massive inequalities for access to education, or even that their educational standards are far below that of European certification. In many countries, degrees can be purchased, due to the corruption within countries, or the level of examinations is a joke due to the State desire for students to pass, so that statistics make their policies look better. So, many migrants will either have very limited education, and/or have dubious qualifications to work.
But even if that was to be ignored, where would they be working? Ireland is a reasonably technologically advanced nation, where a large chunk of it's economy is based around B2B services, IT, etc. Our manufacturing industry is rather small, which is where unskilled migrants typically would end up working in. Alternatively, there's Agriculture, but again, that industry is rather small, and also focuses heavily on machinery, cutting down the need for unskilled labor. Our entertainment, and subsequent service industry had been struggling even before Covid, and while it is improving, many companies have shut down as a result of past losses. Then, throw in a rather strong recession that's likely to hit soon, due to instabilities on the world market both due to covid, but also the problems with debt financing.
So, where are all the jobs for these migrants? Oh sure, skilled and experienced migrants will likely be able to find work, especially if they're specialists of some kind.. but even then, many skilled/educated people will struggle to find work due to language problems, or simply that there isn't work available for them. The employment market in Ireland isn't that large... And then there's the rather expensive costs of living in Dublin and getting set up, before and after getting work. Which means gaining State supports to get set up... and likely also to supplement their own incomes.
Alternatively they enter the Black economy, pay little to no tax, and generally contribute very little to the economy... while also needing and accessing State services that are already under strain, and are poorly funded.
The point is that it's too easy to say that migrant will work.. if they're allowed, but what if there's few options for them? It might be different if we were likely to enter Celtic Tiger 2.1 but that's not happening. SO... what's your answer?
Don't present change as evolution.
The results of immigration, and multiculturalism in all western nations has led to division, inequalities, and ultimately social unrest.
Some seem to have the view that any sense of empathy, social awareness or moral duty is borne out of an inherent lack of self-esteem. And therefore making it easy to ignore the interest, enthusiasm or benefit many see in having a rich and shared cultural experience which, of course, has been derided here as being inconsequential and dismissed out of hand.
Except, it hasn't been dismissed out of hand. It's just been criticised as being wanting. This has been done to death, and yet, you're dismissing what has been said, out of hand. The results of immigration, and multiculturalism in all western nations has led to division, inequalities, and ultimately social unrest. You want to focus on the positives... fine. However, don't dismiss the concerns of others just because they don't want Ireland to turn out as badly as other nations... many of whom are wealthier, and still unable to resolve the problems that comes with such diverse cultures.
Your argument that those who question multiculturalism being in support of asylum seekers does not hold water. We see it time and again with it being suggested people support asylum seekers but simultaneously calling for measures to prevent them coming to the country in order to apply. If so many applicants are rejected, it gives lie to the claim that the floodgates have been opened does it not? Which is it?
The benefits of multicultural experience extend beyond exoticism, though that in itself cannot be dismissed as if being inconsequential. they have been pointed out before, and dismissed out of hand before, I don't feel the need to repeat myself in that respect.
Some seem to have the view that any sense of empathy, social awareness or moral duty is borne out of an inherent lack of self-esteem.
Nope, I merely posited that this could be but one aspect of "genetic improvement" particularly here in Ireland.
And I'm not seeing the moral duty as you call it with accepting economic migrants who come here sight unseen and minus work. Thirty percent of all social housing payments are going to non EU migrants living here. Nearly one third. Maybe you think it's our "moral duty" to import further social problems on top of our existing ones but I don't. But hey, we're still peddling one of the three apparent benefits of multiculturalism; charity and often smug charity with it.
NB; pretty much nobody who questions this multiculturalist lark says no to actual asylum seekers. The clue is in the actual part. Take the extra EU African disapora, the majority of whom came here when the birthright passport loophole was in play. Today the vast majority, well over 90% of the same demographic are rejected on the basis of asylum, as are Romanians and Georgians. Did something magical happen in the mid 00's to the arrivals?
And therefore making it easy to ignore the interest, enthusiasm or benefit many see in having a rich and shared cultural experience which, of course, has been derided here as being inconsequential and dismissed out of hand.
The benefits still seem to be hard to pin down outside of the aforementioned exoticism, not least to some migrant groups down the line. It's all largely surface feelings and the more exotic the better. OK do you think Zambia, or Tanzania, or Myanmar, or Cambodia would be similarly improved by a "rich and shared cultural experience" of tens of thousands White European migrants? As for shared culture; a study into attitudes of different groups living here found Nigerians "are strongly likely to feel that they do not have many values in common with Irish people" Not so much sharing going on there and that's just one group.
Cant' really figure out if this is disconnected excerpts lifted straight from a Spiked column or a screen play for a movie but this line struck me once again for it's familiarity.
The Irish psyche is already more primed than most for this because of our insecurity oft to the point of self hatred.
Less about racism, more about the multiculturalist politic that sees majority White, ostensibly Christian nations as being the ones that are in need of improvement. The same multiculturalist politic would have a holy fit if one were to even suggest that what majority Black or Asian non Christian nations need is an enhancement to their genes by adding White people. And they'd be right for a change.
Plus the old exoticism comes into it too sometimes to the point of a fetish. Interestingly where mixed race couples are presented in the media and advertising it's almost always White women with non White men. Black women are even more absent than White men. The addition of White Italian, German, Spanish or Polish genes into the mix doesn't get much of a look in.
There's also an element of the actually welcome swing back from seeing non White people as lesser just because they're Black or Asian, but with extra over compensation. Not unlike how feminism has evolved from rightfully looking for equality, to now more and more painting maleness and masculinity itself as being lesser.
The Irish psyche is already more primed than most for this because of our insecurity oft to the point of self hatred. So of course this so called "genetic enhancement" would play well to some here.
When I lived in France, I lived 5 minutes from a mosque, I worked closer to one... didn’t stop terror attacks there. There are about 2,400 mosques in France, yet still... not good enough... Muslims are still shooting and blowing up French people.
why should people have to be handed resources and facilities to placate them from killing people ?
if I was a practicing Catholic and I moved to Somalia, what happens ? I’d be killed on the spot..Militant Islamists al-Shabaab hate Catholics and murder them....no Catholics or any other religion target Muslims in the EU or anywhere.
people need to cop on before it’s too late.
A genuine question, can any Labour or Sinn Fein supporter or anyone who wants to go back to the way it was explain the reason for their support?
I honestly can't fathom why someone should be allowed fly into Ireland, have a child within a few weeks and then for them and their child to be called Irish citizens. All I can think of is that they have decided we are all humans and borders should be scrapped or something??
We probably need to prepare ourselves for this being overturned and changed back to the way it was via the Dail not referendum. Constant media articles and Sinn Fein and Labour are still pressing to scrap it. I remember Bacik on Niall Boylan a few years ago laughing about it saying she wanted it overturned and didn't care if people voted for it, people are racist etc...
Sinn Fein will eventually get into government here and they will change it. They were opposed to the original referendum and still campaign for overturning our birth right laws. The disconnect between the party and their supporters is incredible but they continue to vote for them.
Once it's changed we will return to the days of the early 2000s with huge birth tourism happening again. Sickening if it happens.
One bright spot is the UK and the EU will be raging if we implement this so hopefully pressure or threats from them will prevent it.
The Danes are really leading the way and showing up everyone else, great to see. All done with a left wing government, will wonders never cease 😀 Imagine if Ireland followed suit, wishful thinking I know.
Also the UK home secretary secured legal advice to redirect vessels stopped in the English Channel back to the continent. About time as well, the French need to sort out their immigration system
The constant abuses of our immigration laws and lack of willingness to implement deportations throughout Europe is farcical.
The Irish are good enough at sports, for a small island nation of barely 5 millions their results are astounding, especially considering that GAA hoovers a lot of good athletes that otherwise might be stellar soccer (or tennis or whatever) players. Also Irish are exceptionally good at music and acting and arts, again, considering their numbers. Also business, somehow this island managed to be one of the best places to do business, attracted a lot of FDI and became one of the best countries in the world to live it.
So if the genes need improving then let's bring into the gene pool more people from nations that are great at science and technology.
I think most people understand the referendum. I’m not sure you do. It stopped someone getting off the plane to have a child and gain Irish citizenship for the child, but clearly didn’t stop people living here getting naturalisation after a while, nor stop the children of naturalised citizens giving citizenship to their children. That wasn’t asked. The referendum didn’t give those rights either, they were always there, so maybe brush up on the text.
lol.
Oh and by the by, that Times poll has come up in the thread a couple of times already.
I for one know quite well what the 2004 referendum was about "lol" and it was a clear message by one of the largest margins of any Irish referendum that said nope, we don't want jus soli and by extension "anchor babies" which was about the biggest reason for the referendum being called in the first place. There wasn't a single constituency that was a nay. Never mind and as has been pointed out not one of our EU neighbours has jus soli, so a few of them wouldn't be too happy to have an outlier that means get naturalised here and have automatic free movement throughout the EU. Of the nations around the world that have jus soli, most have quite strict applications of it. The US being a good example. Few have such leaky legislation as Ireland had. A few of the opposing politicos and NGO's were calling racism about it at the time of course. Oh and a very large majority of those naturalised citizens you reference got that way before that jus soli loophole was closed. When it was closed the numbers showing up Irish maternity hospitals dropped right off. Take Nigerians as an example, between 2000 and 2004 their numbers increased by 80%, while the number appealing for asylum dropped off a cliff. There was little need to. Though the Nigerian consulate of all people made a public statement decrying the chancers "fleeing for their lives" and laid the blame for that perception on some quarters of the Irish media and surprise surprise, our old friends the vested interest NGO's.
The Times straw poll doesn't count for much as such polls are often slanted depending on how is polled and how the questions are framed and by whom. What counts is an actual vote by referendum. Though I strongly suspect that vote will never be put to the Irish electorate. If they were so confident that it would pass in one of the biggest about faces in Irish voting history, you'd think they'd be up for it to bolster that mandate?
71% vs 29% is fairly decisive, would you agree?
The 2004 referendum gives children born to Irish citizens citizenship. There are a lot of people born in other countries who have been naturalized as Irish citizens. Most of the lads quoting the 2004 referendum don't even understand that they are supporting birthright citizenship to the children of naturalized citizens who may be from Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe etc. They don't even agree with that 2004 referendum result yet they quote it to somehow support their stance lol
The French have practiced Laicite for a hundred years, it was initially targeted at Christians. Same rules apply.
The French are fairly wise to the idea that modern multiculturalism is driven by the US, and largely reject it.
Well the 2004 referendum was fairly decisive, and another one will also be decisive.
"In a behaviour and attitudes poll pubished in the Sunday times on November 2018, 71% said that all children born in Ireland should be entitled to Irish citizenship."
First time anyone will have seen this brought up in the thread but imagine how many times it would have been referenced had the result been 71% disagreed lol
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.
So to recap; the multiculturalism of immigration had pretty much zero influence on Irish society moving away from the church and it kicked off before we were even close to the multicultural Ireland of today, but this means multiculturalism is a good thing anyway? The two points don't belong in the same argument. If the multiculturalism of the last twenty years never happened the power of the Catholic Church would still be fading. Indeed many of the people coming since would be more religious than the locals are today. Poles tend to be more Catholic, Africans tend to be more Christian across different denominations, Russians more Orthodox, Middle Easterners more Muslim.
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.
Annnnd we're back to surface exoticism. It never really goes away as an "explanation".
Plenty of sweeping statements in this thread without evidence to back it up.
Plenty of evidence has been put forward by those questioning this politic, those who follow this politic can only seem to wheel out vague talk of exoticism, the more exotic the better of course, charity and "the Irish were immigrants once". Actually we haven't seen that latter one in a while. It's doubtless due a rehash at this stage.
hahaha... come on. You're still trying to link multicultualism to our social changes. You do it again in the above sentence.. I'm not saying but... I am saying.
Funny.
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.
Of course there are some positives to immigration. However, lets be clear here.. do you see a difference between immigration and multiculturalism? I do.
The problem is that the benefits don't cancel out the negatives. It doesn't work that way..
You've missed the point, either intentionally or not.. In any case, change isn't the problem. Few people here want Ireland to stay the way it was before. We do want positive change in this country, especially change that will make the country better for future generations of Irish people.
We don't want change based on short-term considerations like virtue signalling, which creates a host of problems for future generations.
hahaha... funny.. since you haven't provided any evidence to support your own sweeping statements.
However, there are plenty of {prior} posts with heaps of evidence attached, and many of the regular posters, being aware that such evidence was previously posted, will continue on the assumption that they don't need to rehash past support pieces.
Just to add... I don't put up much evidence anymore, because of the manner of responses on this thread ("on the other side"), which tend to deflect/dismiss without any honest engagement. There's little point spending 30 minutes on a post when the person you're responding to disappears for a few days, just to come back later to repeat the same points, ignoring your evidence. It's just the way this thread has evolved. Mostly we post our opinions, and sometimes we will engage in something more detailed.. but honestly, that's becoming rarer and rarer.
Why does Chu seem to hate the Irish so much? Everything about her seems to be rooted in a sort of contempt for how our country is.
The French are still struggling to come to terms with all the positives: https://www.thejournal.ie/france-terror-attacks-trial-bataclan-5543504-Sep2021/
![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://w8.vanillicon.com/v2/87962ff026856470eacf12f9c3179c90.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c9236bc67b608c3603b1ed089c896282.svg)