Nation of emmigrants

Mr Benevolent · 28-04-2009 10:54PM

Meh, we love the past. If we put half that effort into thinking about the future we'd be as civilised and advanced as Germany is in 2009.

conorlechance · 28-04-2009 10:58PM

ah now the germans have their problems, and well at least we don't have school shootings and berlin nazis.

Mr Benevolent · 28-04-2009 11:02PM

Nah, we just had pointless civil war and half a century of religious suppression.

Anyway, back on topic. I'm emigrating in a few months.

Terry · 28-04-2009 11:09PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

The Irish made up a massive 24% of all prisoners deported to Australia.

You might want to read this

http://www.caribbeannetnews.com/2005/03/18/day.shtml

I would like to add that the reason for the slave uprising on Saint Patrick's day was that the black african slave's Irish masters would all be too pissed to fight back:D

And this book looks quite good.

http://www.jmr.nmm.ac.uk/server/show/ConJmrBookReview.180/outputRegister/lowhtml although probably not good if you like wallowing in self pity.

I see the sarcasm, but thanks anyway.
24% of British people.
We're not British.

asdasd wrote: »

this was an interesting thread until the "blacks of yurup" silliness.

anyway - tipp and kerry. beat that

Just wanted to clarify the reason.

Shacklebolt wrote: »

Two points here-

1. Ireland was regarded as a major centre for learning and knowlege throughout Europe during this time period not the backwater you are implying.

2. Yes we were invaded-your little commas seem to be doubting the accuracy of the term but thats exactly what it was, an invasion.

This and this:

conorlechance wrote: »

ah now the germans have their problems, and well at least we don't have school shootings and berlin nazis.

We really need a law like the holocaust denial one.
One which prevents Irish people from denying that we were once under the thumb of the British and from saying that the potato famine didn't happen and that we were not used as slaves and that the 800 years thing is a myth.

conorlechance · 28-04-2009 11:33PM

Confab wrote: »

Nah, we just had pointless civil war and half a century of religious suppression.

Anyway, back on topic. I'm emigrating in a few months.

where

asdasd · 28-04-2009 11:34PM

Ireland has seemingly benefited from the slave trade and colonisation to a degree not all that far apart from your France's, England's, Germany's etc...

um, no.

FF is obsessed with monserett but it was not an Irish colony. it was tiny, and Ireland - the state, or anyone living here - did not benefit. And the claims of Irish slave ownership are disputed.

Morzadec · 28-04-2009 11:59PM

asdasd wrote: »

um, no.

FF is obsessed with monserett but it was not an Irish colony. it was tiny, and Ireland - the state, or anyone living here - did not benefit. And the claims of Irish slave ownership are disputed.

What I mean (didn't explain in the post) is that we are living in a first-world country. The only colonised country that can claim this. Coincidence?

I'm saying that the legacy of colonisation still exists. But not for Ireland because we can not be compared to other colonised countries. We were part of a Union (whether willing or not) that was benefitting hugely economically from colonisation. Postcolonial African countries are still economically-speaking (and in other terms, as well politically etc...) dealing with the legacy of colonisation.

The wealth that European countries received from the slave trade is obvious, and the economic exploitation never completely evaporated. Ireland then joined the EU and received a lot of economic benefit from countries' whose wealth was based on this, if you get me.

What I'm saying is that, now, in the modern day the legacy of colonisation is having no negative bearing on our country from what I can tell. Instead it can be seen as having ultimately (paradoxically considering the frequent identification with colonised countries) benefitted Ireland, albeit in a very indirect way.

Fratton Fred · 29-04-2009 12:38AM

asdasd wrote: »

um, no.

FF is obsessed with monserett but it was not an Irish colony. it was tiny, and Ireland - the state, or anyone living here - did not benefit. And the claims of Irish slave ownership are disputed.

Montserrat is a good example of irish hypocrisy tbh. There was a chap called Patrick as well that springs to mind.

Slavery has been around for years and to call the Irish the Blacks of europe is rubbish. If that title belongs to anyone then surely it should belong to the Slavs, where the bloody term came from.

wexican · 29-04-2009 12:49AM

I'm from Wexford and Clare. Nothing fancy!

Hazys · 29-04-2009 03:49AM

Terry wrote: »

Give me percentages.

1 in every 80 Irish people were used as slaves during that time. That doesn't take the Van Diemen's land thing into account either.

I think there may have been more black people on the entire African continent that there was Irish people on our fair isle.

99% of Africians were slaves in american between 1500 & 1900 which was more than the 1.25% of Irish people as slaves for a much shorter period in time as slavery was abolished in Europe well before the Americas.

Look how many countries in the Americas that have huge african populations, they didnt get there by going on holidays and never went home. There are more people of african decent around the world than anybody else, the vast majority was because of slavery. The main reason there is so many irish around the world is because of the Famine and not slavery (being treated like sh1t by the british and being 2nd class citizens is terrible but it is still not as bad as slavery)

To compare the extent of slavery between africa and Ireland is just ridiculous.

seanybiker · 29-04-2009 03:57AM

conorlechance wrote: »

not exciting at all but maby some of you

Im a mc donagh so I presume going back years and years my family where
Knackers ha ha. Me grandfather joined the cops a year after they where formed 1924 i think. My father was a cop. My eldest brother is a cop and my twin brother is going in next week to templemore to become a cop. i think we are a little different than our namesake. Lol

Snowie · 29-04-2009 07:08AM

dads from liverpool mums from shropshier dads dads dad was from norway, mums dad was welsh....

Rented Mule · 29-04-2009 07:35AM

Born and raised on the Southside of Chicago, where everyone was the child/grandchild of an immigrant from somewhere.

getz · 29-04-2009 08:18AM

Terry wrote: »

Nice take on history there.
So the Vikings and English were masters of technology back then?
Or were they still burning witches at the stake?

As for potatoes, well the English got them at the same time as us (1536, during which time we were under British rule, although not part of Britain).

We were under British rule during the industrial revolution.
We were not allowed to own anything under their laws.

That's murder and not slavery.

under british rule-you seem to forget -or you do not want to know, that the british goverment between the 1860s to 1870s was dominated by irish members of parliment 105 of them ,more than england wales or scotland what ever they wanted they could get, so much for [we were not allowed to own anything under THEIR laws]

asdasd · 29-04-2009 12:12PM

under british rule-you seem to forget -or you do not want to know, that the british goverment between the 1860s to 1870s was dominated by irish members of parliment 105 of them ,more than england wales or scotland what ever they wanted they could get, so much for [we were not allowed to own anything under THEIR laws]

Where do you pick up this rubbish. Clearly Engish MPs dominated parliment in accordance with their population. Why would Ireland want home rule if we dominated the Westminister.

shindig-jp · 01-07-2009 05:52PM

An emigrant leaves their land to live in another country. The person is emigrating to another country. An immigrant is a person who once resided somewhere else and now lives in your country.

Strange when people are filling out a landing card that they don't know if they are coming or going ..

I'm Irish and immigrated from Japan.

Hagar · 01-07-2009 05:57PM

getz wrote: »

under british rule-you seem to forget -or you do not want to know, that the british goverment between the 1860s to 1870s was dominated by irish members of parliment 105 of them ,more than england wales or scotland what ever they wanted they could get, so much for [we were not allowed to own anything under THEIR laws]

I'm open to correction on this but of those 105 weren't they almost entirely Englishmen with lands in Ireland being elected as owners of those lands from "rotten borroughs"?

ScumLord · 01-07-2009 06:01PM

My family tree consists of 800 generations of highly aquaphobic people we're stuck on this damned island!

mike65 · 01-07-2009 06:05PM

Good to see the usual injured/poor me BS being wheeled out again. Any chance the Irish could start looking forward rather than back? Any chance?

FruitLover · 01-07-2009 06:07PM

conorlechance wrote: »

the irish, the blacks of europe(whatever that means)

It means we have bigger cocks.

hoser expat · 01-07-2009 06:49PM

UK born with Irish grandparent, emmigrated to Canada at a young age, 30 years in Canada, then 7 years in USA, then back to Uk for a year, now have been in Ireland for a year and plan on staying.

An Fear Aniar · 01-07-2009 07:51PM

Confab wrote: »

Ireland was nothing until the Vikings and then the English 'invaded'. We took on their mannerisms, technology and customs and gradually grew out of grubbing around in the dirt for 'tatos and rabbits. Ireland was in the Stone Age until well into the second millennium.

That's not really correct. If you read Bede's Ecclesiastical history, for example you will see he often mentions that Saxons went over to Ireland for their education.

There wasn't much in the way of technology that the Vikings or Normans introduced that needed to be caught up with either - in many cases the Normans went native and adopted Gaelic customs and practices.

The time Ireland seriously began to lag behind the rest of Europe was during the Industrial Revolution - but we weren't in charge of our own destiny by that time....

.

An Fear Aniar · 01-07-2009 07:56PM

Hagar wrote: »

I'm open to correction on this but of those 105 weren't they almost entirely Englishmen with lands in Ireland being elected as owners of those lands from "rotten borroughs"?

Yes, I think so. Ordinary Irish people were not allowed to vote until 1918, and when they did, voted for Sinn Féin.

Daniel O'Connell, Parnell, they would have been elected by a small number of wealthy people.

.

wes · 01-07-2009 09:40PM

The parents are from Azad Kashmir. I was born and have lived here all my life and proud to be Irish.

Ponster · 01-07-2009 09:51PM

asdasd wrote: »

this was an interesting thread until the "blacks of yurup" silliness.

anyway - tipp and kerry. beat that

Tipperary and Tipperary. all the way back to 1785 on one side and 1825 on the other.

Sea Sharp · 01-07-2009 11:13PM

Donegal & Wicklow.

Rented Mule · 02-07-2009 11:11AM

FruitLover wrote: »

It means we are bigger cocks.

Fixed

getz · 02-07-2009 11:43AM

An Fear Aniar wrote: »

Yes, I think so. Ordinary Irish people were not allowed to vote until 1918, and when they did, voted for Sinn Féin.

Daniel O'Connell, Parnell, they would have been elected by a small number of wealthy people.

.

it was just the same as the the rest of the british isles ,ALL MP were from the upper classes, even to day,all the ruling leaders have busineses,or organizations backing them both in the UK and ireland.so in a way its no different from the passed,by the way my g,g,grand parents are from ireland so i like to think like millions of others, i am english/irish,woman dident get the vote in england untill 1921,wasent that the same in ireland ?

Nation of emmigrants

Comments