The impetus to protect the massively lucrative asylum sector – lucrative that is if you happen to among the landlords, hoteliers, low wage employers and NGOs who benefit to the tune of several billion euro annually – has been led not by spontaneous #Craggy Island Is For All local groups, but by the cat’s paw of the NGOs.
One such formation, the Northside Community Forum, has been encouraging local groups among its affiliates to support their statement effectively backing unlimited immigration. The statement blames “agitators from outside” for the protests, recognises that “people are concerned” about poverty, housing, “inequality” and all the other things that NGO sector has signally failed to alleviate, despite receiving the guts of €6,000,000,000 in taxpayer funding every year.
Their letter reads as follows:
Dear XXXXXX
I am writing to you on behalf of the Northside Community Forum, of which Northside Partnership is the current Secretariat.
Northside Community Forum members have, over the last number of weeks, expressed concern at the rising level of protest and activity targeting vulnerable adults and children that are seeking refuge in our communities.
In responding to these protests, and in standing in solidarity with vulnerable people and our communities, the Forum has prepared and published the attached statement.
In the coming days Forum members will be posting the statement on their social media platforms and websites.
Your support in raising awareness of the statement is greatly appreciated.
Northside Community Forum.
The Forum is funded by the Social Inclusion and Community Activation Programme (SICAP) which comes under the Department of Rural and Community Development and also receives money from the EU Social Fund. In other words, it is not an independent entity. It would not exist were it not for state funding.
Several people involved with local sports and other groups have privately expressed concern that any reluctance to support the effort of state funded-NGOs to claim that “communities” are overwhelmingly supportive of the migrant accommodation centres might find them out of favour when their own funding comes to be granted or renewed.
The question also needs to be asked, on behalf of the people – you and me – who involuntarily fund the NGOs through their tax, as to why that money is being used to organise political activities?
This is an especially pressing question when those activities are completely in line with official state policy. That is surely a dangerous phenomenon in a democratic society.
Leaving aside there willingness of a vocal part of the ‘pro-refugee’ alliance to encourage and participate in acts of violence – as evidenced by what happened in East Wall last night – the cross-party consensus on mass immigration has echoes of the very ideology that the corporate left claim to hate above all else.
The NGOs ranging from heavy hitters such as the Immigrant Council of Ireland to various “you, me and the baby makes three” smaller firms; and drawing in the leaderships of the trade unions along with the liberal left parties of Sinn Féin, People Before Profit, Labour and the Social Democrats have now upped the ante by calling for what they hope to be a large pro government manifestation.
The crush of taxpayer-funded NGOs and political parties demanding open borders are seriously at odds with the Irish people, who – as yet another poll showed this week – believe we need limits on immigration and know we can’t accommodate the numbers already here.
In fact, the plethora of taxpayer-funded bodies in the advert for #IrelandForAll’s march highlights the reality of what’s actually happening: the government is funding the groups now marching in solidarity with the government – and opposing the majority of the people.
The organisations who have backed this march are part of a NGO structure now getting billions of Euro in government funding, and employing tens of thousands of people – indeed, much of the turnout might simply be Dublin-based employees turning up to attend, though surely they wouldn’t be so crass as to claim overtime.
One of the groups listed as taking part is Northside For All which appears to have partly been the brainchild of Sinn Féin in the Dublin Bay North constituency where they are clearly worried that a projected second seat might not be the certainty it might have once seemed should local dissent not recede back into the morass of clientelism and apathy before the election.
The fact that Sinn Féin – once as much of a pariah and as much outside of the establishment loop as the new bogey person of the For Roysh – has now seamlessly moved through the hedge might give pause for reflection among some of those who remember the days when protests were baton charged; when Ministers refused to meet community groups that included Sinn Féin members; when elected councillors were banned from RTÉ; when people’s houses were raided for being seen buying books and newspapers, and so forth.
Given the Left’s penchant for theory, they might also do some research on “benign corruption.” This is a concept within counter-insurgency strategy which attempts to draw revolutionary opponents into the system by involving them in structures which require the engagement of those opponents with the state.
A classic example of this was the manner in which large amounts of money began to come on stream into nationalist working class communities in the north in the 1990s. While the IRA and Sinn Féin had previously “discouraged” such contact, and left any potential beneficiaries in no doubt as to the potential dangers of such engagement, by the 1990s republicans were in control of most of the groups that were drawing down such money.
This grew to be large sums from several state and international sources following the IRA’s decision to call a halt to its armed campaign, and Sinn Féin’s abandonment of its opposition to taking part in the governance of Northern Ireland.
The term “benign” is appropriate as it not only serves as an effective way to basically entice revolutionaries who can reap political dividends by being perceived to be the conduits for state support, but is mostly beneficial to the communities. It also of course creates and perpetuates state dependency and undermines local initiative. Which is the entire point of the exercise on the part of the state.
One of the earliest examples of such a tactic was the manner in which the United States threw money into inner city areas which had been the scene of serious rioting in the late 1960s. One of the consequences of that was to institutionalise black radicals. Malcolm X was suspicious of both the motivations and outcome of this, and favoured self-organisation and locally owned businesses and community self-organisation rather than state dependency through government funded “community programmes” and generational welfare.
Ironically, Sinn Féin prior to the leftist infiltration of the 1960s were saying very similar things as Malcolm Black America now has its Democratic ward heelers like Jackson and Farrakhan. You can compile your own list of former Irish radicals from across all sectors before Charlie and the Bert discovered the key to their soul….
Loading ...