> But again I don't get it. What was so different
> about the Irish immigrants that made them so
> much more detestable to established citizens
> than say, Russian immigrants, or Germans,
> or Dutch?

In the late 19th and early 20th century, Irish Americans had the highest alcoholism rates out of American ethnic groups. The rates were higher than in Ireland itself. This didn't describe everyone obviously, but it created a negative stereotype.

> >America adjusted to the people who joined it,
> >and the people and their culture changed as
> >well. "No Irish need apply" is a blanket
> >statement that doesn't describe any whole
> >group...
> You've lost me again. You're saying
> that "Irish" didn't mean Irish, it
> meant "immigrants?" Do
> you mean that it wasn't the Irish in particular
> that were prejudiced against, but all
> immigrants, the majority of whom just
> happened to be Irish?

I was mixing my points, sorry. The book is about different ethnic groups and immigration. I was saying that the attitudes of treating all Irish as drunkards was obviously wrong.

> >...but there was a difference between the
> >people who immigrated, and the people they
> >became a part of.
> Huh?

I think I was trying to say that the makeup of the Irish, as with many other immigrant groups, changed, and the attitudes of society at large changed for them to be accepted.

Hostility to immigrant groups still exists today, just see the current Reform Party. A lot of Irish people came over at one time due to famine, most of them had to start out in poorer environments, and many of them turned to alcoholism. Resentment was widespread, but we eventually got over it.

MarkN