Sajid Javid will import more Muslim Voters

Tory Policy on Immigration control

Breakfast was enlivened today (03/12/18) by the Home Secretary Sajid Javid on BBC Radio 4, saying he’s ‘determined to implement the will of the British people,’ followed by his declaration that he loves immigration, believing it has brought ‘immense benefits’ and made the UK, ‘culturally richer’ than it was before.

Javid doesn’t need to do this carrot and stick routine; he must know that net migration rose to 300,000 in the year after the referendum. An estimated 273,000, arrived in the year ending June 2017. The ONS estimates that 248,000 have followed this year, more than double the government’s target. However many carrots about implementing our will, he waves at us, Javid’s big stick tells us that we must have mass migration. It’s ‘enriching,’ a moral imperative and only heartless fascists disagree.

Where he sees ‘richness’ others see a cauldron of resentment, with his kind of fantastical attitude adding to the brew. The effect of silencing the white British voice for so long has given us Brexit.

A particularly distressing aspect of Javid’s faith in migration and multiculturalism, has been the double standard it imposes, often forcing the indigenous population to accept what has previously been unacceptable behaviour.

He threw out a few crumbs to those who might disagree, restating his loathing for grooming gangs. In October when he first mentioned, ‘Asian paedophiles,’ he was slammed for, ‘sewing division.’ The Runnymede Trust called his words, ‘dangerous and irresponsible, while David Lammy MP accused him of, ‘Bringing a great office of state into disrepute.’

His words, which he termed, ‘unsayable,’ disconcerted his interviewer again this week. Evan Davis immediately tried to make a link between them and the climate in which a Syrian boy was recently filmed being pushed over at school. Bullying is now an epidemic in our unhappy land, but bullies are really only white. No one uses the term for black knife wielding teenage gangs although that is what they are. The saddest case of black on black bullying was perhaps Nigerian school boy Damilola Taylor.

He’d led a happy life until 2000 when his parents moved he and his sister to south London, to get NHS treatment for the girl’s epilepsy. Three months later, Damilola was stabbed on his way home from Peckham Library, and bled to death thirty minutes later, just short of his eleventh birthday. There was public concern but no headlines screaming, ‘horrific’ as for the Syrian lad, or money collected for his parents.

The Syrian refugee crisis had not accreted to our ‘cultural richness’ at the time, and most people saw juvenile murder in south London as part of our modern, multiracial culture.

Viewed objectively that acceptance is astonishing and tragic. At the age of sixty I look back on this strange evolution in British thinking, to the time when this consensus, that black and Asian culture cannot be criticised and must be privileged above indigenous attitudes, came to be set in stone.

The Secondary Modern I attended in Wolverhampton from 1968- 73 was known for its well behaved girls, who mostly got jobs in the local department store. It became a scary sink school within two years of the mass arrival of Afro-Caribbean girls. From a culture of respect, even fear, of the teachers we moved rapidly to girls physically attacking teachers and each other. The lives of children and staff were profoundly changed by their arrival, but no one said a word about it.

At that time huge numbers of people from the developing world were introduced to English towns, and accepted, in the belief that it would somehow be OK in the end. Those who were not sure about migration fell silent after the death of Martin Luther King 4th April, 1968, and Enoch Powell’s Rivers of Blood speech, on April 20th 1968.

Those events came against a background of the civil rights movement in the US. Aged twelve I attended a memorial service for Dr. King with my mother. My father didn’t like foreigners and stayed at home. I was with those who saw a glorious struggle ahead, for civil rights and social justice in Britain. Only bad people, recalcitrant white men like my Dad, didn’t go along with it all. Working class men were left to mutter ‘Enoch was right,’ quietly into their pints.

Ten years later, living near Brixton I found a climate of violence and fear I had never experienced. As a nursing auxiliary in Lambeth, I found old white women on the Stockwell Park Estate afraid to go outside. Mugging was rife; after being attacked and losing my bag three times to groups of young black men, I was accused of ‘racist body language.’ When I wrote about this I was reported to the, ‘Race Today Collective’ which combined Marxism with radical anti-racism.

By then the white population had fallen silent under continual accusations of racism, which have continued unabated. In 1981 following the Scarman Report blacks were the first community in the UK to be rewarded for rioting and hyper sensitised to the idea of ‘institutional racism.’

After this keenly orchestrated animosity it’s not surprising that all the bowing and cringing by white liberal elites has not created the ‘togetherness’ once envisaged and still fantasised about by Sajid Javid. We are unhappily divided. Immigration will continue unabated, but perhaps we should rejoice that white British people did have their say, a once in a lifetime opportunity and they took it – even if their views will be totally ignored in the end.

Subscribe

Or

Free speech isn’t free – Make a donation to the Salisbury Review

 

 

 

 

 

9 Comments on Sajid Javid will import more Muslim Voters

  1. Was there ever a nation so thoroughly destroyed, by its own elite, in such a short period of time?
    That question could also be applied to almost all of the countries of Western Europe and Scandinavia.
    This is terminal decadence.

  2. Your biggest problem you have in the UK: white liberals. They are the most vociferous in calling other whites racist and xenophobic in order to establish their liberal credentials and feel good about themselves; they think that only white people are capable of racism (it’s universal); they refuse to condemn non-white racism (because they know they can’t without consequences); they only hang out with the progeny of immigrants like themselves (i.e. wealthy urban Oxbridge-educated elites who speak The Queen’s English and who don’t wield knives in shopping precincts in broad daylight, push hard drugs or gang-rape white girls in care) so they can’t see what the problem the rest of you have with immigration.

    • Cannot agree with you more. Quite honestly, there are days when I’d rather immigration swept away the white liberals.

      Some years ago I saw a picture of a Hindu Temple in London. Behind it was some dreary skyscraper built by some whiz-kid Oxbridge graduate. I looked at the Temple’s carved columns and beautiful masonry, and for a brief moment felt absolutely at ease with immigration. Not because it was good in itself, but because the people that encouraged it were the true problem. I felt a better sense of place with the temple than the skyscraper.

      It was the Church of England smashing, House of Lords destroying, unthinking white elite that drove me mad.

      (I’m not trying to sound overly pro-immigration at this point mind, just highlighting the contrast between some immigrants and our “enlightened” rulers)

  3. And today there has been news that the government has stopped issuing visas to wealthy nationals from Russia and China on grounds of national security and money laundering. Yes. People who have made some money, live under forbidding regimes, want out, want and actually are able to contribute economically to Britain? Nope, we don’t want that. We want Third World muck that will live off the welfare state to which they barely/do not/will not contribute and get their rods in between our little girls. Yes, we want more of that. Desperately. Of course, I am not British; just paraphrasing your government’s attitudes.

    Anywhere else, this would be seen as suicide. What is the plan?

    • Good observation Krishnan. And another thing – white liberals do not realize that genuine refugees, and migrants who can contribute much to the host country are often fleeing their own countries to get away from persecution, genocide, FGM, witchcraft, honor killings, pogroms, misogyny, forced conversion etc. – but what do the naive white liberals do? Because they are committed ideologically to no borders and the right to migrate, they also let in all the people whom we are desperately trying to escape from! I am in despair trying to find a country with strong borders which will keep out the rather numerous nasty elements among my compatriots!

      • You know, you have to look at it from the refugees’ perspective as well – when they flee en masse like they do from the Middle East, they are rendering their states and everything it stands for hollow. All they have left is a sense of resentment and utter confusion which plays up in their interactions with their host countries. After nearly 50 years of instability, there is not much of Afghanistan left but a smattering of towns and villages no one’s interested in. Same with Syria. Or Libya. Or Yemen. Or Eritrea. Or Somalia. What they lack really is a sense of nationalism, in the sense that they do not find it worthwhile to stand up and prevent the disintegration of their countries. Blame whitey all you want; but the mess is mostly of their own kindred’s making.

        I may be brutal here, but it does place front and centre the argument that colonialism for many societies was an unfettered good. Why else would people from Middle East brave all odds to be under ‘white’ rule and pretend to obey white law? Some societies, like India or South-East Asia or some African states, have done relatively well post-colonialism, but the great majority of them have stagnated and rotted. Were the UN to suddenly disappear tomorrow, most of these states would not even be functioning or be recognised even by their own people. Much of the 50s and 60s, if you were to read the history, was about Marxist-inspired anti-colonialism struggles all across the Third World. If anything, the refugee crises across Europe buries the argument that self-determination and anti-colonialism were worthy pursuits for all subjugated people without discrimination. Marxists shoot themselves in the foot yet again; yet manage to annoy at the same time. Incredible.

  4. In the first it was considered racist if one physically attacked person for no other reason than the fact that they belonged to another race, then it was racist if one spoke ill of someone from another race, now it is racist if it is suspected you may have thought ill of someone from another race. In the dispiriting business of applying for a job in the modern UK, it is common to come across phrases such as: ‘Owing to the under-representation of members of the Inuit community in the role of Community Art Project Co-ordinator, applicants from the Inuit community are particularly welcome to apply for this role.’ If one is not an Inuit should one stop filling in the form upon reaching that point, since rejection is inevitable?

  5. You mention Marxism. As ever it lies behind most of the political evils you describe. Having failed in all its predictions of revolution, it explained its failure away with recourse to colonialism. The workers of Europe were living high on the hog of enslaved imperial labour. This was rubbish, of course and shown up as such by the continued and increased prosperity of Europe once the colonies had gone and Marxist goons had wrecked them. This did not deter the hard left which then fell to repudiating reason itself, such that Marxism is now, in effect, a religion – or should I say a cult. Like a cult it’s heavily into self blame and self torture, so “racism” is no longer the unreasoning hatred of anyone on grounds of origin. No, it’s something “whites” do to others – increasing to “blacks” – because Asians have also discredited Marxist tripe by doing well in a formerly western dominated world. Does this mean an antagonistic view of Africa? Not really. To my mind Africa had a spell of bad luck – like Europe in the Dark Ages. And the violence you describe arising from the mass immigration of the sixties is less a matter of an African propensity to violence and more the result of moral and cultural destabilisation affecting both sides – residents and newcomers. All this is lost on our masters of course. They collapse everything back into some imagined proto-fascism. One day, they might actually come smack up against it – and it probably won’t be “white”. Thanks to their efforts at demonising white Europe; at blaming it in the way a fascist blames a Jew; at denying Europeans the basic right of preserving their homelands the fascism at which our masters will meet their much merited comeuppance will probably be Islamic. Trouble is, that will doubtless take us all down.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.