And thanks for reading and commenting.
Best,
Tom

I wonder if it has something to do with many Americans saying they are "something-American" as opposed to the Irish who just say they are Irish no matter if their family background was Celtic, Norman, Viking, Scotch or English. For the most part anyway, some might argue if the Scotch-English Protestants are Irish but hopefully in time those differences will melt away too.

who have been in those islands since Paleolithic times. I don't want to go too far, however. As the archaeologist Colin Renfrew once observed, after the 1960s it became so vogue in Prehistoric studies of Britain to argue for language replacement as a way of explaining cultural change and to argue for the essentially indigenous nature of the British population that eventually someone would say that the British paleolithic ancestors evolved from Ice Age reindeer. I'm paraphrasing a little, but.

Later ancient and medieval immigrants have certainly contributed to the British isles gene pool, more strongly in some areas than others (England moreso than Ireland, for example), but there still is a strong degree of continuity, particularly since the Neolithic. But the statements I am making are based on an epistemology that is difficult, if not impossible, to reconcile with the knowledge your elders taught you.

I don't think most Americans equivocate regarding Native Americans, First Nations, whatever you want to say, being the first here. Indeed, when it comes to America the old dictum "vae victis" never seems to apply, being drowned out by all the hypocritical self-flagellating going on [crocodile tears aside, nobody is giving the land back] as we Jonny-come-latelies battle out amongst ourselves over who is most moral in the land. Indeed, Native Americans are often used as a rhetorical tool to beat each other over the head with as we address serious questions regarding nationality or immigration. It will be interesting to see, as this nation becomes less European, how these questions of indigenousness play out. A considerable number of Latin Americans immigrants to this country can claim to be natives of North America in a way the rest of us can't. Does this mean that being Native American will lose something of the resonance it has now?

Regarding the Old World, based on my reading and personal experience, Europeans readily admit to multiple waves of invasion in the formulation of different nations in Europe, unless they are Nazis. But you are right, they don't have this colonial obsession with nativity. For a whole bunch of reasons, it's difficult, if not impossible, to compare different concepts of nativity.

Ireland isn't based on a set of ideas, unlike the US. Also, unlike the US, identity isn't really a matter of voluntary association. To a large degree it is based on ancestry, even if that ancestry involves invaders. That's true of the Old World in general. Anybody can become an American, theoretically, provided you accept American ideals and partake to a greater or less extent in its pop culture.
And compared to Ireland, Britain is different as well, more cosmopolitan. I suspect this is because Britain was more closely linked to the continent since ancient times. Also, while there is and has been xenophobia (not to pick on the Brits, many societies tend towards xenophobia, or at least cultural bigotry), Britain has been a country based on a state or ruling dynasty and less on ancestry. Kings of England (not necessarily English kings) early on squashed alternative forms of identity, like clans or local loyalties, not based on the central state. Ireland never really had that. For some idiosyncratic parallels, English is to Irish kind of like Turkish is to Kurd, or Spanish is to Basque, I've always thought. On the one hand an expansionist, state and ideologically based identity capable of absorbing individuals, resisted by rural, local-based groups, many of whom were absorbed by the larger, antagonistic group.

In short, what exactly does Ireland stand for? What forms of behavior might one engage in to become Irish. Are these foreigners excluded eternally from being Irish? Or is it a case that, not surprisingly, the time it takes to become Irish is much longer than it takes to become American.

If the African immigrants are doing particularly well integrating into Irish society, why are they segregated into working class communities? Why are they not being represented in other communities? Simply because these migrants were brought into this country, it does not mean that they are welcome or accepted as members of the society; furthermore, the Irish have been racialized as a particular group due to the policies enacted by the British.

Due to this racialization, people outside of Ireland have created this image of what it means to be Irish; I bet that if I popped over one of my Chinese-Irish or Somali-Irish acquaintances over to the US, most Americans would have a hard time processing the fact that these individuals were actually Irish. How does this play out, you may wonder? Ask an American what their ethnic background is and you'll meet an individual who will give you a litany like, "I'm Irish, Norwegian, German, and Italian" as if these terms should automatically equate to a certain racial identity, when in fact, they are only a reflection of where some of your ancestors were born. There is an Irish stereotype and this stereotype has been internalized by the Irish people (and it could be argued that it has been exploited when you look at some of the musical exports of the last 10 years). Thus my remark on being Irish citizens, but never being perceived as being "racially" Irish.

I have first hand experienced racism by Irish people because being that I am Black and Native American, I have been perceived as being African when I am actually American. I had bricks thrown at me while they yelled that I should return to Africa; likewise, I've been the only person standing at a pole on the DART while the whole rest of the train is packed, not for any other reason than I am Black. I was leaving the line at Tesco when I was approached by an Irish older woman and asked where I was from; I informed her that I was from the US and she began asking me questions about what part of the country and why I was in Ireland. By the end of the conversation, it was pretty clear to me that she was fascinated by my dark skin, full lips, and coarse hair; and if I had granted her permission, she would have touched me as if I was some mythical creature she had only heard about.

I have met individuals from the Somali and Nigerian community who have shared their experiences of how they live on the fringe of Irish society; for countries now acting as a new host societies (meaning recent immigration), their particular brand of integration usually means assimiliation and if the immigrant community is unable to do so at a standard and pace that the government prefers, then it isn't uncommon to hear them speak about "those people" needing to return to their own country. There are children born in Ireland, have lived their whole lives in Ireland, yet they are not Irish citizens because their parents are not citizens or permanent residents (asylum seekers). And, the refugee system is a whole 'nother can of worms.

Take as an example the Irish educational system; it is my understanding that a disproportionate amount of schools are run and controlled by the Catholic Church (80 to 90%); these schools require proof that the child(ren) are Baptisted before they may enter school. Thus, if you are from a non-Catholic household (most usually Muslim households) which are usually composed of children from non-Catholic or non-religious homes, and as a result, there usually is a lack of interaction between Catholic and non-Catholic (read: White Irish and non-White Irish) children. As a comparative sample, this is much like how White Flight had an impact on urban schools due to the decrease in diversity across racial/ethnic, class, and religious lines. I use the educational system as an example because it is through primary and secondary education that the citizen learns their duty to the state and how the state is obligated to protect certain freedoms for the citizen. Essentially, this is when you learn what it is to be Irish or American or what-not.

Just because a country has done a "remarkable" job of receiving immigrants and refugees, does not mean that they have done a remarkable job in building a diverse society that is founded on a system of inclusion or creating resources to make sure these new arrivals are able to build within that society.

AV

P.S. For any curious American, there is a distinction between our multi-cultural society (as America was found as a migrant society) versus what is happening in the developing multi-cultural society of Ireland (as most migrants were recruited into Ireland during the Celtic Tiger when most young Irish, at the time, did not want to take low-skilled and low-paying jobs). Now Ireland's bubble has burst and they are trying to deal with a population that was invited in but not quite needed any longer.

One more thing, I should note and seek to clarify.

You said, "African kids" which implies that these were African born children now living in Ireland; is it possible that these "African kids" are actually Irish citizens born to African born parents? It is highly probable since this boom has been taking place since the mid-90s and "kids" usually implies persons between the age of infant to young adult. If that is the case, then I believe you prove my point because in spite of them probably being Irish born, and probably Irish citizens depending on when the "kid" was born, you have identified them as being "African kids" and not Irish kids of African heritage.