When this question arises, as it often does in Ireland in one form or another, the usual response is - Sure, wasn't Phil Lynnott and Paul McGrath Irish? Our own Earnán Ó Maille often tells us about the Irish Ashanti, those people of the Caribbean who are the fruit of forced mating between kidnapped Irish girls and kidnapped Africans. And I don't say that these arguments are wrong. But, it's also clear that a black person born in Ireland, even if only one parent is of African stock, is Irish plus African. They are not 100% Irish. They possess a surplus to being Irish. And this should be a good thing. Why would they want to restrict themselves to being only part of what they are? And we see this dynamic in the USA. Black people are referred to as African Americans. Not just Americans. Only one group are referred to as just Americans, and those are those of English stock. And that makes sense. The USA is the bastard child of England. It's language is the language of England. It's laws are the laws of Englishmen. Its cultural mores are the cultural mores of Englishmen. Everyone else is X + American. Irish American, Italian American - even Native American. They can never be 100% American. They all possess a surplus to being American. And so when we look at a black schoolboy in an Irish school uniform, we are not terrible wacists because our eyes tell us that he is something other than Irish. He is something other than Irish. He will always also be African. And so those who are 100% Irish do have a right to recognise the fact that we are uniquely Irish, uniquely Celtic - without having moronic SJWs and Libtards calling us wacists and whatever other term of abuse is flavour of the moment with this demented clique.