Rule of Land or Rule of Blood?

[malbui]

Picking which passport to take and which one to leave home is worth considering.

Two of my countries offer ID cards that are good for travel within the EU and associated lands and I keep both of those in my wallet at all times. Passports stay in my safe except for specific journeys. Such as, for example, my trip to the UK next week.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Two of my countries offer ID cards that are good for travel within the EU and associated lands and I keep both of those in my wallet at all times. Passports stay in my safe except for specific journeys. Such as, for example, my trip to the UK next week.

I got one of those Diplomatic Passport from Lethal Weapon 2 that gives you Immunity to shoot people in front of Cops.

 

[catsmate]

I saw someone who was technically qualified to claim Irish citizenship via close Irish descent but did not meet the criteria of wanting to have a strong link to Ireland.

If they were entitled to citizenship by descent, i.e. a grandparent born on the island, there is no requirement of a connection. That only applies when the descent is more distant and has not been registered.

IOW if anyone is applying for an Irish passport in the hope of still being an EU citizen, you need to make an effort to show you are interested in Irish culture and Irish links in your application.

Not true.

 

[catsmate]

Picking which passport to take and which one to leave home is worth considering.

True. I have a friend who has a Somali passport for emergencies.

Two of my countries offer ID cards that are good for travel within the EU and associated lands and I keep both of those in my wallet at all times. Passports stay in my safe except for specific journeys. Such as, for example, my trip to the UK next week.

Passport cards are fairly common.

I got one of those Diplomatic Passport from Lethal Weapon 2 that gives you Immunity to shoot people in front of Cops.

I travelled on the real thing for a while back in the '90s. Moderately useful.

 

[Manopolus]

What has changed?

The people moving are browner than they used to be. In the case of Latinos (and Turkish, for a Euro perspective), many of them are still Caucasian... but nonetheless, browner.

That's one thing.

But then again, nothing has changed. The ancestors of some of those who hate these people used to hate migrating Germans just as much back in the 1850s. Also, some of those people's ancestors would be those exact migrating Germans. The latter is true of my entire region of Kansas -- with a little Irish Potato Famine blood mixed in. Many of the descendants of those German and Irish immigrants also hate Mexicans.

So for an ethnic take on the question in the OP: Give it 100 years and it eventually amounts to the same thing at a later date. As soon as the generation which actually migrated dies off, they'll all consider themselves to be entirely local and be just as insular as those who once hated them for daring to migrate.

 

[Vixen]

I managed to get Finnish citizenship via jus sanguinis by declaration as an adult. The law has now changed and now only persons under a certain age (21 or 18) and fulfilling conditions can claim jus sanguinis; I haven't checked. It's now tightened up so if you are beyond the aforesaid age, you still have to do the required five year's residency (the coalition Basic Finns are increasing this to eight years), need a job or student visa, if not from the EU or Nordic region (Norway*) plus you have to pass a language proficiency test, and they are very advanced; Sunday broadsheet newspaper level. However, not to worry too much as you can opt to do the other official language, Swedish, instead, as it is impossible for a Brit to learn Finnish to high academic standard within five years, if ever . Swedish is a germanic language so not difficult for an English speaker, although their pronunciation of words is VERY irregular and baffling, together with a Scottish-type sing-song lilt. (Most peculiar.)

Luckily I achieved automatic citizenship some years before Brexit, which was fortuitous in making my escape from the UK after it.

Passport by Username Vixen, on Flickr


*Any citizen of Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Norway can travel, work and reside in each others countries without a passport or permit, although it is probably wise to take at least an ID card with you.

 

[ahhell]

My children were born and live in the U.S. but also have German citizenship because my sexy wife is German. Although she has been careful to keep their documentation, getting German birth certificates and keeping their passports current. We just today went to the consulate to renew the passports again.

America is rather generous in that regard, with citizenship by both land and blood. I don't know how many other nations allow it to be both ways like that.

Most countries have a bit of a mixed system.

As a rule, The old world does mostly jus sanguinis with some caveats and the new world does jus soli with some caveats.

Soli makes a bit more sense to me, I'm an Irish Citizen and I've been there once in my live. Between my Dad and I, we've probably spent 6 of our combined 140 years in Ireland but me and my children are citizens. Silly really.

I saw someone who was technically qualified to claim Irish citizenship via close Irish descent but did not meet the criteria of wanting to have a strong link to Ireland. IOW if anyone is applying for an Irish passport in the hope of still being an EU citizen, you need to make an effort to show you are interested in Irish culture and Irish links in your application.

No such requirement, my 7 and 5 year old sons have made no such effort, nor have I. Question if my dad has either. It was just a matter of filing the paper work and sending some birth and wedding certificates. That had to be appostilled though, bit of a pain in the ass, I had to go through 5 US states.

 

[Vixen]

Most countries have a bit of a mixed system.

As a rule, The old world does mostly jus sanguinis with some caveats and the new world does jus soli with some caveats.

Soli makes a bit more sense to me, I'm an Irish Citizen and I've been there once in my live. Between my Dad and I, we've probably spent 6 of our combined 140 years in Ireland but me and my children are citizens. Silly really.

No such requirement, my 7 and 5 year old sons have made no such effort, nor have I. Question if my dad has either. It was just a matter of filing the paper work and sending some birth and wedding certificates. That had to be appostilled though, bit of a pain in the ass, I had to go through 5 US states.

The person I saw making that claim must have been referring to the following:

Naturalisation by Association

If you have a substantial connection to Ireland – such as an Irish great-grandparent – then you could apply for Irish citizenship by association.

Unfortunately, I can't find the original link to the claim but she must have been one of those case-by-case applications.

 

[ahhell]

The person I saw making that claim must have been referring to the following:



Unfortunately, I can't find the original link to the claim but she must have been one of those case-by-case applications.

Fair, my grandparents were born in Ireland, 130 years ago, though, I got my citizenship about 100 years after they left. My kids are citizens, because I did the paper work before they were born, entirely because I had one due.

Still fairly silly, but it will at least get my kids free drinks 20 years from now on St Patricks day and you Euro's can't keep us out when Trump wins the elections! Suck it!

 

[gnome]

You're free to adhere to the progressive view that all people are essentially the same and interchangeable, but do you not even understand the view point of those who disagree? It's pretty simple, really; people from different cultures have different viewpoints. They don't all agree with your progressive liberal "anything goes" worldview.

Wouldn't want any of that "wretched refuse" eh?

 

[Hlafordlaes]

You're free to adhere to the progressive view that all people are essentially the same and interchangeable, but do you not even understand the view point of those who disagree? It's pretty simple, really; people from different cultures have different viewpoints. They don't all agree with your progressive liberal "anything goes" worldview.

"Worldview"? Until the rise of the nation-state post-Westphalia, empires and monarchies did have citizenship rules and rights based on place of birth, service to the empire/crown, and such. Yet twenty-five years in the military, regardless of your race/color/background, got you Roman citizenship, no ethnic preconditions. The Hungarians are about the only ones famous for requiring learning the language to become a citizen, an effective barrier. Cf. Hungary today.

But in the past, loyalty to a ruler was the common essential element, not pure ethnicity. In fact, empires prided themselves on containing many lands and cultures. No empire collapsed solely on the basis of not being ethnically pure. Meanwhile, local markets and trade routes were full of a broad mix of peoples. Silk Road, anyone? It's the spanking-new nation-state that has given rise to hard borders and which has promoted greater intermingling of those within to the exclusion of others, creating an illusion that living in ethnically pure communities is the historical norm, that all of history was the same as today.

Snowflake cultures afraid of "anyone not exactly like me" are a right-wing fantasy designed to (1) provide a false, unearned sense of superiority and (2) divide, conquer, and rule, as per Trump. Doing wonders for South Korea and Japan, btw, both in line to disappear.

The US is one of the very few first-world nations not facing a dire demographic meltdown, and that is very much thanks to messy immigration. Ditto Spain in Europe, doing better than many of its neighbors, particularly Italy. Yet so many fail, utterly fail, to accept non-Aryan immigration at the very same time they are happy to order pizza or enjoy rice pudding (from Africa, not China), unaware of their patent foolishness and the very real fact that they, too, are multicultural themselves.

Nice try. Whining is not an argument.

 

[ahhell]

These are just excuses for implementing migration restrictions.


What is fascinating is that we see movement of people into a country as a problem for that country, when historically it has always been perceived as a boon: more workers, more soldiers.

What has changed?

I Don't think that's true at all, its always been seen as a mixed bag at best. Generally opposed by the masses especially when particular large groups of weird foreigners with their weird foreign ways fill up the slums. When its relatively small scale, nobody cares. When millions of Irishmen, Italians, Slavs, Latins,......move in there's pretty much always an anti-immigrant reaction.

 

[rdwight]

Interesting thread. For those in the US with duel citizenship to EU countries, would you recommend it for others and their children? I've recently been considering it for a retirement spot and to see some extended family more but hasn't really been a pressing matter. Is it easy to get the wife in by way of marriage/kids through me/my parent? (I am direct from parent) I've been waiting for simblings with more time on their hands to get the process down and done but they seem as lazy as me sometimes.

 

[a_unique_person]

Ireland offers automatic citizenship to anyone born overseas with an Irish parent. Am Australian took them up on the offer about 2000 and had dual Australian/Irish citizenship. Or so he thought. In fact there was an old Australian law that automatically revoked your citizenship if you took up any other citizenship.

He only found out when he tried to travel overseas and he was told he was not in fact a citizen anymore.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

I Don't think that's true at all, its always been seen as a mixed bag at best. Generally opposed by the masses especially when particular large groups of weird foreigners with their weird foreign ways fill up the slums. When its relatively small scale, nobody cares. When millions of Irishmen, Italians, Slavs, Latins,......move in there's pretty much always an anti-immigrant reaction.

But the distinction has always been between migrants who can work, and vagrants who were undesirables regardless of origin.

 

[malbui]

Yeah, you need to get rock solid legal advice. I have distant family who are Australian/Irish dual nationals and so it’s certainly possible, but context and specifics are fundamental.

 

[arthwollipot]

Ireland offers automatic citizenship to anyone born overseas with an Irish parent. Am Australian took them up on the offer about 2000 and had dual Australian/Irish citizenship. Or so he thought. In fact there was an old Australian law that automatically revoked your citizenship if you took up any other citizenship.

He only found out when he tried to travel overseas and he was told he was not in fact a citizen anymore.

Which is why we are no longer to blame for Rupert Murdoch. He had to become an American citizen in order to own American newspapers, which automatically revoked his Australian citizenship.

 

[ahhell]

But the distinction has always been between migrants who can work, and vagrants who were undesirables regardless of origin.

Again, I disagree. Go back and look at the reaction to mass immigration of Irish, Italians, and Eastern Europeans to the US. There was a huge demand for labor and yet still widespread antipathy towards immigrant labor. There has almost never been a large group of immigrants with more vagrancy than willing workers, yet, there has almost always been a negative reaction to easily identifiable immigrant groups. Granted there have been claims to the contrary but mostly post hoc rationalization for anti immigrant sentiment.

Interesting thread. For those in the US with duel citizenship to EU countries, would you recommend it for others and their children? I've recently been considering it for a retirement spot and to see some extended family more but hasn't really been a pressing matter. Is it easy to get the wife in by way of marriage/kids through me/my parent? (I am direct from parent) I've been waiting for simblings with more time on their hands to get the process down and done but they seem as lazy as me sometimes.

I'm not sure, really the only reason I did it was so that my kids can take advantage of it. I'll let you know in about 16 years as to whether its worth it.

 

[Elaedith]

Ireland offers automatic citizenship to anyone born overseas with an Irish parent. Am Australian took them up on the offer about 2000 and had dual Australian/Irish citizenship. Or so he thought. In fact there was an old Australian law that automatically revoked your citizenship if you took up any other citizenship.

He only found out when he tried to travel overseas and he was told he was not in fact a citizen anymore.

I have dual Australian (by birth) and British (by descent) citizenship. I applied for a British passport in 2000 and did not lose my Australian citizenship. I was originally going to apply for a visa as I had been offered a two-year postdoc in the UK. Somebody from the British consulate rang me and said there is no point applying for a visa because I was already a British citizen and could simply apply for a passport (I made sure to check that doing this would not affect my Australian citizenship).
Out of curiosity I checked why this would be different for Ireland and it appears to be because Irish citizenship by descent is not actually automatic; you may be automatically entitled to it but there is an application process to get it. In contrast, British citizenship by descent is usually automatic - I didn't have to apply for citizenship as I already had it from birth.

 

[theprestige]

These are just excuses for implementing migration restrictions.


What is fascinating is that we see movement of people into a country as a problem for that country, when historically it has always been perceived as a boon: more workers, more soldiers.

What has changed?

That makes no sense. The statistically significant majority of immigrants to any country won't be eligible for citizenship under either rule.

Restricting immigration by blocking onsie-twosie birthright citizenship applicants won't make much of a difference either way. The vast majority of immigrants will be applying for citizenship from a rule of merit.

Maybe you're thinking of the way the US's current birthright citizenship laws create a moral hazard for *illegal* immigration? I have no problem with citizenship by birth on the land. I do have a problem with citizenship for anyone born on the land to someone who entered the country illegally and has never made that right.