- Joined
- Sep 11, 2021
- Messages
- 1,165
- Reaction score
- 1,448
The above video and picture, seems to frame an ongoing debate in Ireland as to the correct response by Christians, maybe particularly traditional Catholics, to the issue of mass migration and the ongoing protests. Some, like Robert Nugent in the video above, seem to say that only pacifism and non-involvement in protests, is the correct response, while Coolock, pictured, symbolises for many now a fight back of some type against mass immigration. So on this question then of, sometimes just supposed, ‘violence’ on the part of the anti-mass migration movement, I wonder if these following points are worth considering.
Violence, in this debate, is generally caused by the State
We get this criticism now a lot, especially since Coolock, this idea that the anti-mass migration side of the debate in Ireland is indulging in ‘violence’ and ‘thuggery’ in general. But what actually started things in Coolock was that the state sent in its very intimidatory Public Order Unit at 3:30am, and gave the months long residents of that very advanced and well cared for camp, 30 seconds to clear out or be crushed by a JCB which immediately went to work destroying their camp and their belongings.
Was that not a violent act? Aren’t these critics completely blind to State violence and only harping on about the pretty mild examples of ordinary people causing a few disturbances in response to serious and sustained examples of Garda violence? Just in passing I might note that many of the same critics, who talk about supposed terrible Coolock ‘violence’ are absolute cheerleaders when it comes to sending in the latest missile system etc into Ukraine, to cause as much, very serious, violence as possible. Again the pattern is that for them violence by a state is not apparently violence at all, and maybe then the real point is how so many people are kind of State robots in their thinking, their morality is simply what the State states their morality should be.
Passive Aggressive type violence by the State against its native population
But I think on this score you can go further and ask is there a kind of ongoing passive aggressive atmosphere against ordinary people perpetuated by the current state, and have people the right to fight back against that? Sure the state at all times has some rights of control over the population, for example for crowd control or development planning, but have they exceeded their remit here and are in fact intimidating the population now?
We now live under huge taxes and state regulations, that for example almost always prevent a poorer Irish person from creating a house on his own land, and to a huge extent prevent young people from driving cars, frequently the only form of transport in large parts of Ireland. The state at the time of Covid imprisoned vast numbers of people into their own homes, and stopped them doing almost anything like religious services and most business etc etc, for what we now know, and they knew at the time, was little more than the flu. They almost systematically, and very deliberately, across their controlled media created a huge climate of fear and sustained it for years, intimidating the populace.
Is this the normal domain of a government? Or is there not something violent, or at least passively aggressive, in those acts? Something that, as a Christian, you are entitled to, and should, fight back against?
Recently an usher in Leinster house lost his job because of supposed ‘far right’ political views. (https://www.rte.ie/news/2024/0702/1457779-leinster-house-usher/) We all know the score, if you gently complain in the mildest way about mass immigration that can happen to you, in almost any job in modern Ireland. Is his sacking a violent act? Not in some peoples definition, but is it in fact a type of passive aggressive atmosphere that people do have the right, even duty, to fight back against?
Discrimination, Slander and Intimidation against the native Western populations
This sort of ongoing ‘passive aggressive’ type atmosphere by the state against ordinary people, is also true to quite an extent of the attitude many immigrants have towards the natives in countries like Ireland and England, as for example Niall McCormack, an artist living in Mayo, talks about here in reference to London:
I think this kind of passive aggressive atmosphere against the natives in countries like Ireland and England, is pretty routine, and any attempt to fight back is also routinely slandered as ‘racism’, ‘fascism’ and ‘far right thugs’ and whatever vile insult a corrupt political/media system can throw at people. It is not right for people now to characterise any attempt by these people to fight back as ‘violence’, when they had and have nothing to say to try and protect people from this terrible, intimidatory discriminatory and slandering, ongoing atmosphere.
Invasion
Bishop Athanasius Schneider is a well respected commentator on the question of what ought to be the true beliefs of Catholics, and for example he was interviewed sometime ago on Robert’s channel where the latter referred to the books of his that he owns and has read etc. Well this is what he has to say about this mass immigration:
He followed that up recently by saying in response to a question on mass immigration into Europe:
Obviously if this level of mass immigration can be called an invasion, and I believe it can and more and more Irish people are seeing that, then Christians are called now to defend their country and stop it. That is the Christian response to invasions, not, except maybe in the case of the Quakers!, pacifism.
Anyway just a few thoughts to throw into this debate, because certainly we should always act in a Christian way, here as everywhere else, but that path is not always so easy to discern!
by Brian Nugent, www.orwellianireland.com
