In 1986, when I was editor of In Dublin magazine, we ran a cover story about racism in the capital. The focus was the activities of a group calling itself the National Socialist Irish Workers' Party, having links with Nazis in Europe and the US and seeking to generate racist responses here.
Among its activities had been attacks on a Jewish butcher in Clanbrassil Street and hate filled material posted in telephone kiosks and the sleeves of albums by black artists in record shops. The cover-image we used was a bloodied swastika; the caption: Irish Nazis: why Dublin is a Fascist Haven. The article inside was entitled "The Rising Fascist Tide".
It might appear, in the light of developments in Ireland 2001, that we were anticipating something in the Irish psyche. Actually, we were not. The article, by Colm Keena, was good, but oversold by the headlines. Stories about the dark side of human nature are good sellers, and the swastika, as any bookseller will tell you, comes second only to the naked female body for shifting units.
The episodes described in the article, although disturbing, did not reflect anything significant within the culture of the city at that time.
The same can be said concerning present day hype about racism, and the seeming determination of journalists and others to discover it at every corner and bend in the road. A desire to shift units has combined with priggishness and a repugnance against Irish culture and society to maximise media sanctimony on a subject fast replacing unmarried mothers as the great liberal piety.
Last week, the Taoiseach felt obliged to mark International Day Against Racism by warning that racism now threatens to undermine the fabric of our society. This is the kind of thing politicians say to keep the liberal media off their backs, but it is nonsense.
A recent survey by the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia found Ireland below average in "active tolerance" and above average in "passive tolerance" towards minorities and migrant groups. What is the difference between active and passive tolerance, and how are two people going to agree on what that difference might be? Needless to say, the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia needs a healthy supply of racism to justify its existence.
Immigration is essentially an economic phenomenon and, as such, should be subject to economic analysis rather than the fudge of compassion, moral superiority and political correctness we are experiencing here.
The questions we face are essentially practical ones: How many outsiders can our economy absorb? How secure is our present economic situation and how might it be maintained to the best advantage of both indigenous and incoming populations? What will be the consequences of present immigration trends in the event of an economic downturn? Can we integrate different cultures without causing radical damage to incomers or indigenous population?
TO IGNORE these questions in favour of a national exhibition of piety is to expose ourselves to the risk of serious damage once an economic chill sets in. This would hit hardest those who had come here in the good times with little more than hope in their souls.
Fundamentally, what we describe as racism is simply fear of the unknown. As with many fears, this expresses itself as something else - in this case anger at the encroachment of outsiders on this society and its resources.
Even to draw attention to the issues is to risk a charge of racism. To absorb different peoples organically from around the world is one thing, but artificially to place would-be immigrants, without incomes, facilities or back-up, in areas which are not equipped to deal with large number of strangers is a recipe for disaster.
And to smear as racist anyone who points this out is cowardly and actively intolerant. Hectoring about racism is self-fulfilling, because nothing equals the success rate of media browbeating in galvanising certain mindsets in the plain people of Ireland. It is easy for commentators to present themselves in a graceful light by comparison with the backward yobs of the midlands or the inner city, but harder to approach this complex subject so as to allow light rather than heat to emerge.
The most intolerant group in Irish society is that comprising self-styled liberals and secular-pluralists that has spent 30 years undermining its own cultural foundations. If I was an immigrant, I would be deeply suspicious of the capacity of such people to respect my racial or national identity, having shown such scant regard for their own.
We have much to gain, economically and culturally, from the successful integration of a wide range of cultural experiences, but only if the indigenous culture is strong, vibrant and self-confident will it successfully absorb new elements. Those who argue for the destruction of Irish life in the cause of a "multi-cultural society" are proposing that the indigenous population should become the hole in the doughnut. This is a recipe for real trouble.
jwaters@irish-times.ie