We now know that the appropriate compensation for each individual case of Anglo-Irish abuse is €20,000. The average annual population of Ireland has been, say, 5m, with many millions more abroad. If one multiples that over the last 600 years, then brings a class action on behalf of the entire Irish race for racial abuse at the hands of the English, I estimate that we are entitled to a compensation package of about €13 trillion.Amusing, but to nitpick, the tort that the referenced compensation was to amend was actually for Irish-Anglo abuse, i.e., the abuse of Britons by Irishmen. No reason to assume that compensation for the reverse case (Anglo-Irish abuse) would be symmetrical. A further nit: the article recycles the hoary old No Irish Need Apply story, which seems to have very little there there.*
The most interesting feature of the piece from which the quote comes, at least to this U.S. reader, is the apparent subsumption of all ethnic, tribal, and national animosities under the blanket term "racism". As in, "Is it possible that we harbour such a deep-seated resentment against the English that we have become blind to our own racism?" This is apparently some Irish guy talking here, talking about the English. The few commenters seem to agree that yes, a pasty-white Irishman taking a piss on the pasty-white English is racist!
Just as "fascist" evolved from "proponent of a nationalistic, authoritarian political movement with populist overtones" to "any person I disagree with", "racist" seems to be moving from "proponent of legal, moral or ethical distinctions of people based on race" to "somebody who dislikes something based on any cultural distinction whatsoever." And in a few decades I guess it will get to "any person I disagree with" also.
*Disclaimer: Yes, Irish in North America and England abused, treated poorly, etc. Not relevant.