Wednesday, April 18, 2007

Autumn Follows Summer

"If I should mention, as a matter of course, that autumn follows summer, that does not mean that I am all for getting a ladder and pulling the leaves off the trees". - John Wyndham, The Kraken Wakes

This blog, 2005 :

As the Native Brit population declines, and natives become the minority in more and more areas, politics will almost inevitably become split on ethnic lines. The demographics are still pointing all one way, the Tories are unlikely to win this year and less likely to make major changes if and when they do ever win.

So in 20 years or so there'll be a nativist British party, representing a substantial proportion, if not a majority, of the native English. The only question is what the name of that party will be.

It may not be the BNP. It may be Veritas, or UKIP, or English Nationalist. It may even be the Tories, but it's unlikely. By the time they wake up to the fact that, with 80% of ethnic minorities voting Labour, natives being the minority in the major cities, and inward migration unchecked, they may never recapture urban seats, they may have been fatally compromised in the eyes of native voters.

The Times, today :

About 70 people are packed into a back room of the Golden Lion pub, with not a skinhead or pair of Doc Martens in sight and more tweeds than T-shirts. They are male and female, young and old, working class and middle class, ex-Labour and ex-Tory, several of them Daily Telegraph readers. They are mostly solid Yorkshire folk who have watched immigrants transform areas in which they grew up and believe — rightly or wrongly — that their way of life is under threat. They are bewildered more than hate-filled. They are fearful more than fear-inspiring, and feel gagged by political correctness. They do not come from sink estates. They are stakeholders, people with something to lose. "We’re being overwhelmed," laments a retired Latin teacher. "I've nothing against other races. It's just that they keep flooding into the country to breaking point," says a lorry driver. "We can't invite the whole world to live in England," says a former merchant marine officer. Few will give their names.


Anonymous said...

As a British-born child of Caribbean immigrant parents, who came to these fair isles in the 1950's, may I say that I share their concerns. English culture is on a life-support machine.

Anonymous said...

Regarding your 2005 post on demography. You seem to presume that democracy itself will survive the split along ethnic lines. By that time, perhaps more in vogue will be 4th Generation Warfare and weapons training. Well, you're getting the last one down I see...

When the demographic shift calls into question democracy itself some more elemental forces might begin to assert themselves. That force being that Britons are the only ones with the moral claim to say "this land is my land." So 50% or 25% or 1% of our population doesn't change that inalienable right.

The authorities, the elites, the media know this. Nick Griffin's remark he's leading a "peasant's revolt" - he knows this. Every Moslem in England knows this.

And there are many ways this "elemental force" of inalienable British demesne over this green and pleasant land - their right by blood - can assert itself.

We are not beholden to democracy. Not when our democratic leaders are traitors.

And yes, I am British.

Anonymous said...

Wow. That Times article! How can one criticize it for giving us the best 3 paragraph precis of the BNP's political platform:

"The BNP would deport all illegal immigrants, asylum-seekers and subversive foreigners, and offer existing immigrants money to return home...

He would create civilian anti-crime patrols. Anyone who has done National Service would be allowed to keep guns to shoot burglars, and as “a last resort against a tyrannical government”. He would restore hanging for the worst murderers, paedophiles, rapists and drug-dealers, and bring back the birch.

He would abolish affirmative action programmes and hate-crime legislation, ban the promotion of homosexuality, prevent the NHS from recruiting foreign workers and stop women soldiers serving on the front line. State schools would restore mandatory (nonhalal) lunches and morning assemblies with Christian worship (minorities should “either accept our ways or go somewhere else”). A BNP government would take Britain out of the EU and the European Convention on Human Rights. "

--Even if the Times' journalist did write it reeking of the condescension of a member of the fourth estate having the unpleasant duty of actually talking to the tweedy British natives.

Notwithstanding the BNP promo, there is a lot that's plain mendacious in the article:

The Times uses scare quotes around the "grooming" of young white girls, disputes the number of "thousands"; scare quotes around "Paki poison." - selling heroin to primarily whites.

Why doesn't the Times editorially weigh in on these comments if they are lies? Does the Times know the real truth? Are scare quotes a rebuttal? Shouldn't they, the MSM, be investigating these phenomena?

The Times calls Griffin paranoid for his warnings against Moslems; slyly deriding his warnings that "It’s a takeover attempt,” and "it will end — literally — in civil war."


In the same article, the journalist relays the concerns
of a disgruntled populace back to his elite paymasters in London. The tweedy native are, apparently, concerned about "no-go areas".

What's a no-go? No mention. It just glides into the paper. Is a no-go area a section of an enriched city where it's not safe for white Britons to go - either at night or in broad daylight?

The Times seems to subscribe to the notion of no-go areas - merely by the use of the word without explanation. It hardly disputes that they exist.

So who creates these no-go areas for white Britons? Are they the same areas, and caused by those same people that Griffin refers to when he says "it's a takeover attempt."

The juxtaposition of elite acceptance of "no-go" areas at the same time the derision of Griffin's "paranoid" assertions of them, is too rich.

So Nick Griffin is a paranoid for talking about these issues.

"He is a shameless populist." Why should he have shame for speaking about a truth YOU have been sweeping under the rug for 30 years?

"A Gallup poll this week suggested that 81 per cent of London-Muslims were “loyal to Britain” And only a miniscule fraction blow themselves up on London Transport, so WTF!?

Maybe they've just got the gumption to keep their mouths shut when Gallup comes calling.

I can go on and on. Sorry.

"In public Griffin appears personable and plausible. Talking in his car, he verges on the paranoid."

This actually is cognitive dissonance induced by the likes of the Times. The media gives the impression that everything is hunky dory in multicultural Britain: that Kris Donald was never flayed alive; that Charlene Downes was never butchered and eaten in Kebabs; that whites are the predominant perpetrators of racially motivated crimes - rather than their victim; that the police never downplay white victims in favor of minority criminals.

Yet every day Griffin is confronted by Britain's grim reality because he's the only one honest enough to take a look. It's not paranoia it's coming to grips with that reality. The false hypothesis - the dissonance -is the media's view of a happy, multicultural paradise. That's what can't be reconciled with what Griffin sees in North England almost on a daily basis.

If he just got with the program - the elite program for destroying Britain's ethnic identity - he could live out his life as a nice "personable", albeit useless, politician.

On and on and on.

togo said...

"A Gallup poll this week suggested that 81 per cent of London-Muslims were “loyal to Britain” compared with just 45 per cent of nonMuslims"

Maybe it is because they(Muslims) realize that the government and other elites are more amenable to Muslims than they are to the indigenous British and the historical British nation. In other words, it is a vote of confidence in Multiculturalism, Political Correctness, Cultural Marxism and denigration of the indigenous British and other whites.

Anonymous said...

and offer existing immigrants money to return home...

It is existing law of the land.....1971 Immigration Act Section 29

Anonymous said...

I like the Times' deliberate mention of "Telegraph" reader. I wonder if he would have mentioned the Sun; I suspect the same report in the Guardian would have done.

Guessedworker said...

John is a star, and I often lament that I can't persuade him to blog at MR. It's not for want of trying on my part, or for want of encouragement to that end from other parties.

Laban, I would be interested to your view of how your own opinions about "The Existential Question" have changed over the last two years. I started blogging in 2004, have learned a lot from others but pretty well stood my ideological ground. I believe that all over Europe the popular view is shifting, and that will not cease. Have you observed the same effect? Have you moved rightward yourself?

Anonymous said...

Posted at the Times this morning but not displayed:

“Nick Griffin ... one of the most hated men in the country”. When and where was that poll published?

You attribute comments to Griffin, which are many years old. Do you do the same for John Reid, a former Communist Party member, now in a capitalist government or Anthony Blair, formerly in the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament and now with his finger on the nuclear button?

The grooming of young white, black and Hindu girls was reported on at length by BBC Radio Five and Channel Four and there are ongoing court cases now; you do not give sufficient weight to this.

There have been recent polls that forty per cent of young Muslims wish to live under Sharia Law, which you do not report. Why selectively report polls which only give a partial view?

Emergence of no-go areas? No-go for who? Why not report on the Home Office statistics on who the victims are? For example

Trevor Phillips has recently stated that these BNP people should be treated as “less than human”;

Why not take him along with you to your next BNP visit and see him justify this?

Anonymous said...

I NEVER buy The Times. I only read it online.

As far as I can see most journalists write for other journalist of the same political beliefs.

Maybe if a few newspapers went out of business, the Times and The Mirror are particularly vulnerable, we would get journalism that actually reflected the views of of the British people.

Anonymous said...

Trevor Phillips has recently stated that these BNP people should be treated as “less than human”;

Julius Streicher would be proud of his friend from Guyana

Laban said...

Alex - I've removed that uncalled for and IMHO offensive comment. I see a fair few commenters on your blog with whom I disagree, but I try not to get personal with them - or anyone.

'We are so few, enemies so many, the cause so great, that we cannot afford to weaken each other in any way' as Churchill said. My father is also an immigrant, who spoke with a strong foreign accent to the end of his days (not necessarily an advantage on a rough north-eastern council estate).

I do wonder about your lot sometimes. Interventions like that are counterproductive in a number of ways. As Mussolini said (probably quoting Talleyrand) "worse than a crime, it's a blunder !"

First, here I am, trying to reach out to people who are just starting to have doubts about the direction in which we're headed (IMHO an extremely dangerous one) - and comments like that seem designed to put decent people off coming here. If I was posting at MR I'd probably be muttering about Special Branch/Searchlight plants by now.

Secondly, the sad thing is that if it all goes REALLY pearshaped you won't need to do any recruiting here. If serious division/disorder occurs force of circumstance will provide all the recruits you need. I'm trying to bear witness and warning with what little time remains.

Anonymous said...

What do you mean Laban, what little time remains?
How much, 5,10, 15, 50?
And what do you think is gonna happen?
I think full on European civil war is not impossible but, the age structure is totally different from 80 years ago so that makes it far less likely than before.