By Bosco – Irish Sentinel Contributor –
Many proponents of mass immigration engage in intellectual dishonesty. They posit various arguments to support their claim; one, Ireland is a land full of immigrants and two, the Irish emigrated to other countries so why shouldn’t foreigners emigrate here.
Let’s address the first “argument”. It is true that the present Irish nation is a mixture of Gael, Norman, Viking, English, Welsh, and Scot. The fact that many Irish they can find ancestral lines that originate outside the Island doesn’t justify immigration, no more than a person who might find out that an ancestor was conceived through rape and is here on account of it, justifies the violation in the past.
The intellectual dishonesty contained in this “argument” emerges on account of terminology, or to be more precise, a false equivalence. There was no mere mass immigration in the past, there was, however, several invasions and conquest. To assert equivalence between immigration and invasion would be like confusing the rape, abduction and forced marriage of a 12-year-old Muslim girl to a 60-year-old man to be a lawful marital union. Rape of a minor is not marriage, and invasion is not immigration, despite what those on the left might think.
Moreover, when foreigners invaded our land, whether they were Viking, Norman or British, their means of immigration began with a sword and musket. They also didn’t arrive to our land in hundreds of thousands per year (unless the army was brought in to quell a rebellion). Also, their immigration was permitted, like today, only to suit those powerful who ran the country over and above those natives who lived in the country and whose interests were ignored. The plantation of Ulster was no different to Israeli settlements in the West bank, Israeli settlements, by the way, the likes of Sinn Fein would vehemently denounce. However, settle Ireland at your leisure is the shinner’s cry, and it achieved through the subtleties of modern engineered mass immigration. Sinn Fein are more than fine with that. In fact, they desire it and don’t hide the fact. Sinn Fein, as well as the other parties, Fianna Fail and Fine Gael, demonstrably and unapologetically seek mass immigration.
Apparently, they think that the Irish aren’t reproducing themselves at sustainable numbers requiring foreign blood to make up the short fall, to guarantee future pensions and the like. The same parties of course are themselves introducing policies that will ensure non reproduction. Abortion has already murdered over 10,000 Irish babies, the LGBT agenda is naturally sterile (including transgenderism that will mutilate the reproductive organs) and the pursuit of sexual promiscuity has led to the proliferation of sexually transmitted diseases which detrimentally affect fertility. The very problem those in power seek to supposedly fix (non-reproduction of native stock) is at the same time, manufactured by those in power (policies that ensure non reproduction of native stock).
Those foreigners who seized power in Ireland through invasion (and the mercenaries from abroad to achieve and sustain the conquest) ensured that the plantations and land dispossessions that did occur were not permitted unless the best interests of those who controlled the land were fulfilled. When the French protestant Huguenots or protestant Germans from the palatine for example, settled into Ireland during the religious wars of the continent, the native Irish weren’t consulted (sounds familiar?). There weren’t scores of Irish people on the quays waving homemade signs reading cead mile failte and showering the immigrants with bouquets and welcome mats. The Irish were too busy being persecuted and dispossessed in their own lands to concern themselves with such a performance at any quays. For withal, to compare immigration with invasion would be like identifying the deeds of the Boston strangler with the work of an itinerant chiropractor. It is absurd if not, downright dishonest.
The second “argument” beloved by the left is that the Irish emigrated therefore the Irish should welcome immigrants into Ireland. ‘What is good for me, is good for thee’ type of argument. This claim can be translated into a type of equation; the Irish performed X in the past, therefore non-Irish should be allowed perform X in the present. Well, some of the Irish were pirates in the past (it is how St Patrick was brought to the Island) so do we now legitimise piracy in the present? Do you see how absurd this claim is when variables are changed? When the Irish were forced into emigration by famine and poverty they invariably went to untamed lands like America and Australia. The arriving Irish didn’t receive a welcome but hostility from their hosts and there were no handouts, unless it was a summons or an eviction. There were no middle class NGO’s raping the exchequer to hand out freebies to the new Irish emigre arrivals on the quays of New York, Boston or Botany bay.
Despite the falsehood disseminated by neo pagans, the Catholic Church does not promote open borders and unbridled immigration. One of the most influential doctors of the Church, St Thomas Aquinas wrote the following about unfettered immigration. “The reason for this was that if foreigners were allowed to meddle with the affairs of a nation as soon as they settled down in its midst, many dangers might occur, since the foreigners not yet having the common good firmly at heart might attempt something hurtful to the people.”
We see this actualise in nations across Europe where descendants of immigrants, now elected to office, seek to destroy their host nation from within. There are radical black and Asian academics who label the generations of working-class British, French and German as “privileged” despite them living in tenements and hovels for most of their existence. We already have the phenomenon appearing in Ireland, where Irish people are apparently “privileged” because of their white race. Yes, our people were so privileged that Jonathon Swift gave this account
“Whoever travels this country and observes the face of nature, or the faces and habits and dwellings of the natives, will hardly think himself in a land where law, religion or common humanity is expressed. The miserable dress and diet and dwelling of the people, the general desolation of most parts of the kingdom; the families living in filth and nastiness upon buttermilk and potatoes, without a single shoe or stocking to their feet, or a house so convenient as an English hog-sty to receive them. (Jonathan Swift, 1727)”
Why stop there, let’s describe more privilege:
“The ‘hanging gale’ [the practice of allowing an incoming tenant to leave his rent in arrears until after at least one harvest] is one of the great levers on oppression…the lower classes are kept in a kind of perpetual bondage. This debt hangs over their heads, and keeps them in a continual state of anxiety and terror.” (Edward Wakefield, economist, 1812)
“In Ireland alone the whole agricultural population can be evicted by the mere whim of the landlord, either at the expiration of a lease or, in the far more common case of their having no lease, at six months’ notice. In Ireland alone, the bulk of a population wholly dependent on the land cannot look forward to a single years’ occupation of it”. (John Stuart Mill)
“If they have turf and potatoes enough, they reckon themselves provided for: if a few herrings, a little oatmeal, and, above all, the milk of a cow be added, they are rich, they can enjoy themselves and dance with a light heart, after their day’s work is over”. (Martha Louise Blake of the Blake Family of Renvyle House, landlords in Connemara, County Galway, 1823-1824)
“If there be a market to attend, a fair or a funeral, a horse race, a fight or a wedding, all else is neglected and forgotten”. (George Nicholls, English Poor Law Commissioner, 1837)
“The hovels which the poor people were building as I passed, solely by their own efforts, were of the most abject description; their walls were formed, in several instances, by the backs of fences; the floors sunk in the ditches; the height scarcely enough for a man to stand upright; poles not thicker than a broomstick for couples; a few pieces of grass sods the only covering; and these extending only partially over the thing called a roof; the elderly people miserably clothed; the children all but naked”. (Isaac Weld, 1832).
These are but a sampling of the eyewitness testimony of the “privilege” our ancestors lived, yet we have interlopers verbally spitting on the grave of those misfortunate souls. Those interlopers given a voice too by the traitors within.
So, whenever you read about Ireland and mass immigration, don’t be fooled. For a start, those executing the policies have engineered the problems sought to fixed in the first place and are the only ones to seek to benefit from the solution i.e., mass immigration (many of the politicians are multiple landlords don’t forget and intend to make a financial killing off of increased competition for scarce resources).
Secondly, there will be no guarantee of money for pensions in the future as the vast majority of the immigrants coming to these shores are net takers, not net givers and many may be recipients of income tax not generators of it. I would also argue, as seen from Ukraine, that many of the “new” Ukrainians who no doubt professed love of their new country, were the first to abandon it when Ukraine was involved in war. Thirdly, don’t allow the left to confuse invasion for immigration. If immigration can be used to justify invasion, then it must follow that Sinn Fein’s anti-British policy is also a manifestation of xenophobia, an anti-immigration sentiment towards the British (to apply Sinn Fein logic therefore, the parachute regiment who murdered innocent Irish people in Derry were just mere immigrants expressing their own foreign culture in Ireland, but for some consistent reason, Sinn Fein won’t see it like this). And finally, just because our ancestors did something in the past doesn’t mean what is occurring today is equivalent, nor does it legitimise modern immigration.
After all, just because a parent smoked cigarettes in the past isn’t a valid argument for why their child should be allowed smoke in the present when the parent knows that smoking can injure their child. The immigration we see today, as it is going, will utterly decimate, or worse, our people. As indicated in a previous article, there is no such thing as multiculturalism, for cultures compete for limited space, and one can dominate the others, including the indigenous culture, leading to a native annihilation.