Are travellers a distinct ethnic subset within Ireland?

DenMan · 14-12-2008 03:46PM

If they have Irish passports, attend Irish schools/colleges then they are Irish and European citizens, subjected to the same rules and laws as any other citizen of this country. If you ask a traveller "who are they" I would hope they would say they are Irish. That's part of the whole problem. You can't give additional rights to already existing citizens, that makes no sense whatsoever. They should be subjected and made accounable for all actions they make, just like any other citizen of this country. If additional rights are given to travellers what happens to the majority of the Irish population? Would they be exempt from their actions because they have less rights than the travelling community? Has to have a bit of give and take.

javaboy · 14-12-2008 03:47PM

galwayrush wrote: »

There are as many thieving scumbags in the settled community as in the travelling community.

I would guess there are significantly more settled scumbags simply because the settled population is so much bigger than the travelling population.

If you're talking about percentage wise, then in my experience there are proportionally more troublemakers within the travelling community.

billy the squid wrote: »

More of a symbolic thing really. despite what you see posted above, you don't get any tax credits for being a member of an ethnic minority. at least none of the immigrants I have worked with never did.

So legally there would be little or no impact considering the rights and special status they already enjoy? Can't see too much of a problem with it really. At the same time I can't see a need for it either.

Crann na Beatha · 14-12-2008 03:48PM

This post has been deleted.

Davidius · 14-12-2008 03:49PM

In an ideal world ethnic equality laws shouldn't exist because it only serves to emphasise the idea that we're not all the same.

These laws are racist. There should be laws against these laws!

Thirdfox · 14-12-2008 03:50PM

billy the squid wrote: »

More of a symbolic thing really. despite what you see posted above, you don't get any tax credits for being a member of an ethnic minority. at least none of the immigrants I have worked with never did.

I wouldn't be quite so sure of that... immigrants don't get benefits for their ethnicity but travellers are indigenous to Ireland (for the purposes of international law). Granting ethnicity status would give them extra rights under the ICCPR and the Declaration on Rights etc. etc. because they are different to the Chinese/Poles etc. who came here recently.

When did travellers settle in Ireland? It wasn't in the recent past, correct? No other ethnicity minority can claim this.

As for equality statutes - I believe that this would go beyond non-discrimination and give positive rights (not tax benefits :rolleyes: ) to them. Of course, just because one has a right doesn't mean it will be exercised.

billy the squid · 14-12-2008 03:50PM

DenMan wrote: »

If they have Irish passports, attend Irish schools/colleges then they are Irish and European citizens, subjected to the same rules and laws as any other citizen of this country. If you ask a traveller "who are they" I would hope they would say they are Irish. That's part of the whole problem. You can't give additional rights to already existing citizens, that makes no sense whatsoever. They should be subjected and made accounable for all actions they make, just like any other citizen of this country. If additional rights are given to travellers what happens to the majority of the Irish population? Would they be exempt from their actions because they have less rights than the travelling community? Has to have a bit of give and take.

Native americans would have US passports, attend US schools, be US citizens, yet they are still an ethnic group.

If you asked a traveller who are they , they would probably say they are either a traveller or irish traveller.

brianthebard · 14-12-2008 03:51PM

Thirdfox wrote: »

It would be a subset of our laws if they were to apply - but it would only be in relation to their own culture/religion/political matters etc. I don't know exactly what legislating freedoms other indigenous people enjoy. For example until recently in Canada - Shari'a (Islam) law and in the US, Halacha (Judaism) arbitration courts can be held for certain internal matters - family law/divorce cases apparently.

So we could have Traveller arbitration courts deciding their internal matters too in relation to some issues. If parties agree to of course. But this can exist outside of being granted ethnicity status - it certainly would aid their case though.

This is an interesting idea and i think it should be explored in more detail. There is definitely a need for a group established to support travellers, not a lobby but someone who can get things into legislation, or put before the dail at any rate.

DenMan wrote: »

If they have Irish passports, attend Irish schools/colleges then they are Irish and European citizens, subjected to the same rules and laws as any other citizen of this country. If you ask a traveller "who are they" I would hope they would say they are Irish. That's part of the whole problem. You can't give additional rights to already existing citizens, that makes no sense whatsoever. They should be subjected and made accounable for all actions they make, just like any other citizen of this country. If additional rights are given to travellers what happens to the majority of the Irish population? Would they be exempt from their actions because they have less rights than the travelling community? Has to have a bit of give and take.

Well lets start by giving them equal rights, which they don't get yet, and then talk about whether additional rights are needed. I don't see how a question of who they are is the same as where they are born, and I don't see why that means we need to homogenise the entire population based on being born in the same country.

javaboy · 14-12-2008 03:51PM

Thirdfox wrote: »

I wouldn't be quite so sure of that... immigrants don't get benefits for their ethnicity but travellers are indigenous to Ireland (for the purposes of international law). Granting ethnicity status would give them extra rights under the ICCPR and the Declaration on Rights etc. etc. because they are different to the Chinese/Poles etc. who came here recently.

When did travellers settle in Ireland? It wasn't in the recent past, correct? No other ethnicity minority can claim this.

As for equality statutes - I believe that this would go beyond non-discrimination and give positive rights (not tax benefits :rolleyes: ) to them. Of course, just because one has a right doesn't mean it will be exercised.

Any idea what kind of positive rights they might get?

Thirdfox · 14-12-2008 03:56PM

Thirdfox wrote: »

I wouldn't be quite so sure of that... immigrants don't get benefits for their ethnicity but travellers are indigenous to Ireland (for the purposes of international law). Granting ethnicity status would give them extra rights under the ICCPR and the Declaration on Rights etc. etc. because they are different to the Chinese/Poles etc. who came here recently.

When did travellers settle in Ireland? It wasn't in the recent past, correct? No other ethnicity minority can claim this.

As for equality statutes - I believe that this would go beyond non-discrimination and give positive rights (not tax benefits :rolleyes: ) to them. Of course, just because one has a right doesn't mean it will be exercised.

Oh, as a good example of indigenous ethnic minorities being granted extra rights (though this may not be due to the ICCPR or the Declaration) - in China (that bastion of human rights

), the 55 native ethnic minorities are not subject to the one child policy, are given extra education opportunities (lower requirements for university) and have a parliament of their own (which I've been told has almost no power).

billy the squid · 14-12-2008 04:01PM

Thirdfox wrote: »

Oh, as a good example of indigenous ethnic minorities being granted extra rights (though this may not be due to the ICCPR or the Declaration) - in China (that bastion of human rights ), the 55 native ethnic minorities are not subject to the one child policy, are given extra education opportunities (lower requirements for university) and have a parliament of their own (which I've been told has almost no power).

But if they were to break the law in China they would still end up in the clink like anybody else. Going by what is in this thread it seems there are those that fear that Travellers will be allowed to get away with all sorts of laws if they are given ethnic status.

javaboy · 14-12-2008 04:05PM

billy the squid wrote: »

But if they were to break the law in China they would still end up in the clink like anybody else.

Yes that's fine but some laws don't apply to them on the basis of their ethnicity. Or to put it another way, there are laws which only apply to regular Chinese people. I don't think that's ethical.

Going by what is in this thread it seems there are those that fear that Travellers will be allowed to get away with all sorts of laws if they are given ethnic status.

Forget about some of the more outrageous claims. Would there be any laws that don't apply to members of the travelling community if this was implemented and what would they be?

Thirdfox · 14-12-2008 04:06PM

javaboy wrote: »

Any idea what kind of positive rights they might get?

It would depend on how our government would ultimately react - would they go the way of the Canadians with high levels of autonomy for the Quebecois, or react like the French in relation to its native Muslim minority (apparently the largest community in Europe).

Certainly not tax benefits, but maybe something in the area of having their own laws for their people, their own education system (or maybe just an amended curriculum due to their needs)... a lot of this is down to how organised they want to be - they may not want to have their own parliament etc. but potentially they will have a right to one if ask for it. In which case they would probably have to get a budget from the Irish government to fund their programmes and projects - it boils down to them having control over the aspects of their lives (along with the financial backing of the state) instead of operating in the current system alongside everyone else.

asdasd · 14-12-2008 04:10PM

In what sense are Travellers a historic "ethnic" group. Generally I notice this kind of horse**** being posted by people who decry Irish people ( pretty much anyone else for that matter) as having a distinct ethnicity. it is all social construct, dont you know.

So

1) What is the original language of this ethnic group. Ethnic groups have a distinct language, and historically have had distinct laws. Irish people - Irish and Brehon law. I presume that travellers have a distinct language, law and history. what is it? Lets not get the stupid answer "cant" - which is a form of English ( unless Travellers are English planters)
2) Why is this distinct ethnic group not metioned in any history of the country by actual real historians. What are mentioned are the original Irish, Normans, Vikings and Old and New (protestant) English. When, or where, did the come from? Find a book that gives me their "separate" history. Written by historians, not sociological numpties.
3) Why, if this group, is a distinct separate group have the same surmanes as settled Irish people.

The reason to apply for "ethnic" status, is to allow the continuous whine about the wah-wah-wacism of plain people of Ireland from the old reliables - Dublin 4 and its hinterlands.

billy the squid · 14-12-2008 04:10PM

javaboy wrote: »

Yes that's fine but some laws don't apply to them on the basis of their ethnicity. Or to put it another way, there are laws which only apply to regular Chinese people. I don't think that's ethical.

Forget about some of the more outrageous claims. Would there be any laws that don't apply to members of the travelling community if this was implemented and what would they be?

I honestly can't think of any off the top of my head, which is why I think it is more of a symbolic goal. It would be for the Government of the day to decide whether or not they should have extra rights and entitlements.

asdasd · 14-12-2008 04:11PM

it boils down to them having control over the aspects of their lives (along with the financial backing of the state) instead of operating in the current system alongside everyone else.

separate but equal, jesus wept.

Thirdfox · 14-12-2008 04:12PM

billy the squid wrote: »

But if they were to break the law in China they would still end up in the clink like anybody else. Going by what is in this thread it seems there are those that fear that Travellers will be allowed to get away with all sorts of laws if they are given ethnic status.

That is definitely not the case - autonomy, even in Canada

does not mean you get away with murder/tax evasion etc.. But certainly you have more freedoms than others though - mainly in help in preserving your culture.

One point - until very very recently - a Han Chinese (majority) in the city having more than one child in China was illegal. But in the interest of promoting ethnic diversity - the ethnic minorities were above the law in that regard.

asdasd · 14-12-2008 04:14PM

Well lets start by giving them equal rights, which they don't get yet, and then talk about whether additional rights are needed.

What equal rights are denied. Sounds to me like a racist libel against the Irish people. We have transfered hundreds of millions of working class taxpayers money to a lumpen proletriat group ( to quote your Master) and you have the ****ing gall to call Irish people racist. What an utter prick.

Guy:Incognito · 14-12-2008 04:15PM

galwayrush wrote: »

There are as many thieving scumbags in the settled community as in the travelling community.

Yet there is a huge multiple of tax paying law abiding citizens in the settled community compared to the travellers. In pure numbers there are as many but that reflects even worse on the travellers as there are so few of them.

If the boards population decided to set ourselves up as a hippy commune on some council land in the midlands and stop paying anything towards the country while sending out a thief squad to steal from others everythign we need, should we be given ethnic minority status too?

AlmightyCushion · 14-12-2008 04:20PM

asdasd wrote: »

What equal rights are denied. Sounds to me like a racist libel against the Irish people. We have transfered hundreds of millions of working class taxpayers money to a lumpen proletriat group ( to quote your Master) and you have the ****ing gall to call Irish people racist. What an utter prick.

Banned for abuse.

Thirdfox · 14-12-2008 04:21PM

billy the squid wrote: »

I honestly can't think of any off the top of my head, which is why I think it is more of a symbolic goal. It would be for the Government of the day to decide whether or not they should have extra rights and entitlements.

And in reality - I think they only thought of the symbolic goal when they decided to apply for that status. But I just came across it in the news and thought of what could potentially happen from a legal standpoint - and how that may or may not be a wise move to make.

Though I wonder what the ECHR would have to say about this if it came up - under our margin of appreciation perhaps?

Blackjack · 14-12-2008 04:22PM

Stekelly wrote: »

If the boards population decided to set ourselves up as a hippy commune on some council land in the midlands and stop paying anything towards the country while sending out a thief squad to steal from others everythign we need, should we be given ethnic minority status too?

I'd be against the thief squad, but we should be able to claim access to water, electricity, copper and anything else for wherever we set up, without having to have any regard for the neighbouring community or the rest of society at large unless it suits us to do so.

javaboy · 14-12-2008 04:22PM

asdasd wrote: »

1) What is the original language of this ethnic group. Ethnic groups have a distinct language, and historically have had distinct laws. Irish people - Irish and Brehon law. I presume that travellers have a distinct language, law and history. what is it? Lets not get the stupid answer "cant" - which is a form of English ( unless Travellers are English planters)

The definition of an ethnic group is not set in stone. There is a lot of debate about whether your ethnicity is defined by your genetic traits (i.e. it's entirely a product of your birth) or if it's defined entirely by behaviour or something in between. Anyway I don't having an original language is an absolute requirement for an ethnic group in too many definitions.

2) Why is this distinct ethnic group not metioned in any history of the country by actual real historians. What are mentioned are the original Irish, Normans, Vikings and Old and New (protestant) English. When, or where, did the travellers come from? Find a book that gives me their "sepearate" history. Written by historians, Not sociological numpties.

How long does a separate ethnic group have to be in existence to be recognised as such? Who gets to decide the rules on ethnicity, you? You could have put forward the same argument hundreds or thousands of years ago to deny the Irish, the Normans, the Vikings etc. their ethnicity too.

3) Why, if this group, is a distinct separate group have the same surmanes as settled Irish people.

That's no basis on which to deny someone the status of a separate ethnic group imo.

Guy:Incognito · 14-12-2008 04:23PM

billy the squid wrote: »

I wouldn't like it if anyone, traveller or otherwise dumped rubbish outside the house next door to me. The settled community are very well versed in the art of fly-tipping too.

But what has that got to do with the ethnic status of the travelling community?

My boss is currently getting fined every time he puts rubbish in the drive outside our office (he parks a few rads and boiler packageing till the guy comes to collect it) This is on land that he pays for.

How many travellers have been fined by litter wardens over the filth in halting sites?

There is absolutely no getting away from the fact that they are treated differently (in a good way for them and discriminating against us) in a lot of things.

Yet they stil come whinging when they want somethign for nothing.None of you pc rubbish willl change any of this.

billy the squid · 14-12-2008 04:24PM

Thirdfox wrote: »

And in reality - I think they only thought of the symbolic goal when they decided to apply for that status. But I just came across it in the news and thought of what could potentially happen from a legal standpoint - and how that may or may not be a wise move to make.

Though I wonder what the ECHR would have to say about this if it came up - under our margin of appreciation perhaps?

One would have to go away and think about all that and do some research into it. I personally am of the belief that travellers meet the criteria that distinguishes them as an ethnic group. their own language, culture and common history which is documented as far back as the 13th century.

krudler · 14-12-2008 05:15PM

billy the squid wrote: »

One would have to go away and think about all that and do some research into it. I personally am of the belief that travellers meet the criteria that distinguishes them as an ethnic group. their own language, culture and common history which is documented as far back as the 13th century.

I really dont think being unable to speak coherently and without adding "boss" at the end of every sentence qualifies as a language, its also nonsense to label everyone who has a problem with travellers as racist, the fact they choose to live in filth and treat the land they live on (which doesnt belong to them) as their own dumping grounds is their own doing, they have halting sites built for them and put their horses in the houses and live themselves in the caravans, dont pay tax or have any sort of income in the legal sense unless selling dodgy carpets is a viable enterprise these days yet the majority of them are loaded, go to the crescent in Limerick any Sunday and you'll see a fleet of 08 vans parked outside,
I used to work in the Omniplex and every sunday they'd arrive in and pay for things with a wad of money big enough to choke one of their horses, make a nuisance of themselves and get kicked out then threaten legal action for "discrimation" , so basically they want everything for nothing, when they start paying taxes, treat their surroundings with respect and dont hassle people in the surrounding area then people wont be as fast to judge them, but until then any negative views people have is entirely warranted, the pc brigade have this romantic view of what travellers are, are god love em sure dont they have a hard life, living in a tin box with a sky satellite dish on it, just like their gypsy ancestors:rolleyes:

Wertz · 14-12-2008 05:23PM

billy the squid wrote: »

@wertz

But people's perception on whether or not travellers are crooks is irrelavent to whether or not they are a distinct ethnic group.

I don't follow...what has that to do with what I posted?

billy the squid · 14-12-2008 05:25PM

krudler wrote: »

I really dont think being unable to speak coherently and without adding "boss" at the end of every sentence qualifies as a language

It shows how ignorant you are of traveller culture. Cant is a traveller language.

its also nonsense to label everyone who has a problem with travellers as racist,

Why? If you have a problem with black people you would be racist, why should people who have a problem with travellers be called racist.

The rest of your post doesn't deal with the question of ethnicity and is more like sweeping generalisations which don't merit a response.

Orange69 · 14-12-2008 05:30PM

brianthebard wrote: »

This is an interesting idea and i think it should be explored in more detail. There is definitely a need for a group established to support travellers, not a lobby but someone who can get things into legislation, or put before the dail at any rate.

Well lets start by giving them equal rights, which they don't get yet, and then talk about whether additional rights are needed. I don't see how a question of who they are is the same as where they are born, and I don't see why that means we need to homogenise the entire population based on being born in the same country.

Every post you have written in this thread is full of liberal BS and makes me want to puke. Its retarded ideas like yours which is destroying society is the west by bending over backwards to accommodate all "minorities"and "cultures" while abusing and ignoring the majority who pay the bill for these sanctimonious social experiments.

Orange69 · 14-12-2008 05:33PM

billy the squid wrote: »

Why? If you have a problem with black people you would be racist, why should people who have a problem with travellers be called racist.

The PC thought police approve of this message :rolleyes:

billy the squid · 14-12-2008 05:35PM

Orange69 wrote: »

The PC thought police approve of this message :rolleyes:

So you approve of racism then?

Are travellers a distinct ethnic subset within Ireland?

Comments