If you'd like to republish any of my articles, you are welcome to do so. Please add a link to the original post on my blog.

Thursday, 6 November 2014

Labour's Immigration Plan Is Unravelling

London's 'melting pot'

This article is by our guest writer Cassandra.


Did you notice the shift in British 'Left-wing' orthodoxy? You might have missed it if you weren't paying attention since our 'progressive' overlords changed tact without acknowledging what they had tried to do, and what they had in fact succeeded in doing, to British society since circa 1997.

It is now apparently acceptable to criticise the open-door policy to immigration that this country has had over the last decade and more. A policy which, for the most part, it still has today. Even the leadership of the Labour party has come out of the 'bigot' closet to admit that perhaps, just maybe, the level of immigration into Britain has been a tad high. They've even gone as far as to admit responsibility for the dramatic demographic changes that many cities have undergone and, what's more, to reluctantly admit that the 'pace' of immigration has been a little too fast for some people's liking.

What the intelligentsia more broadly (not just the Labour party and their clique) has not admitted responsibility for, however, is its attempt to indoctrinate and cower people into allowing it to continue its grand project unopposed by condemning those who opposed it as 'racists', 'bigots', 'xenophobes' etc. What project is that, you ask? Why, the project, as revealed by Labour speech-writer Andrew Neather, of opening up 'the UK to mass immigration' thereby transforming the make-up of British society in order to 'rub the Right's nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date'. Opposition to that project was quelled through the dogma that opposing it automatically made one a 'racist', a 'bigot' and a 'xenophobe' – all very bad things. So bad, in fact, that there was nothing worse than to be labelled as such.

That dogma was not something that the party attempted to impose by itself. Its law-making power and control of the education system was not enough. The media were roped in to help to impose a fog of fear and silence upon society. Comedians were used to poke fun at anyone who dared to step out of line.

These tools worked together so effectively that average people came to police themselves. They came to learn, by indoctrination, what the right things to think and say about immigration were. Moreover, they imbibed all the buzz words ('racist', 'bigot' etc.) to be used against those who did not conform in order to pressure them into conforming. It didn't matter that, if pressed, most of the people using those words couldn't actually provide a clear and precise definition of their meaning, as long as they understood when to apply them - i.e. when somebody is critical of immigration -, and understood that, in applying them, they proved to themselves and their overlords that they belonged to the 'right' group. They learnt from our 'progressive' rulers that language is a weapon to be used with extreme prejudice against the enemy in order to inoculate yourself from the very same treatment that you yourself give others - thereby perpetuating the system.

So what happened? Why the change? What made the 'progressives' who sought to bully an entire society into conforming to their ideology abandon their dogma to such an extent that they now talk in the same vein as the very 'racists' and 'bigots' they once condemned?

Part of the truth is that their success, such as it has been, has been a superficial one. It was never really more than skin-deep. Of course they succeeded in creating an atmosphere wherein people felt that they had to keep their true feelings about immigration unvoiced, but they did not succeed in actually forcing people to abandon those views. There remained a silent majority who was waiting for its opportunity to express its true feelings, and that opportunity came in the form of the UK Independence Party (UKIP).

That party refused to be cowered although it was demonised (and continues to be demonised) for criticising immigration. Seeing this, the silent majority used UKIP to express its own views through the ballot box, so that the party came to speak for that silent majority. The people came to see the demonisation of themselves and their views in the demonisation of the party, and reacted accordingly by supporting it.

It is the success that UKIP has had most notably during the 2014 European elections, and more recently at the Clacton by-election, that has caused the Labour Party to begin to scurry around trying to find some way to show that it 'understands people's feelings' about immigration. It has made Labour aware not only of the failure of its grand project, but also the flimsiness of the tools with which it, and the intelligentsia that it represents, used (and continue to use) to impose its orthodoxy upon British society.

What happens when the threat of being condemned as a 'racist' and a 'bigot' is no longer an effective means of scaring people into conformity and into voting the way that you want them to? What happens when pillorying them as uncouth and absurd no longer works to turn them into passive, malleable group-thinkers? What happens is that our 'liberal' rulers get an inkling into their own weakness. They are floating in dinghy upon a sea of opinion that is diametrically opposed to their own. They are trying to keep the waves from swallowing them up, and they realise that their only weapon is flimsy. Their only weapon is words.

What happens when 'sexist' and 'homophobe' no longer calm the waves? What happens when 'islamophobe' falls on deaf ears? You may soon find out, comrades!


  1. On the other end of the issue is “Mother Theresa” May, Home Secretary, who wants to “disrupt” any “extremist” objection to open immigration and especially to the irreconcilable presence of supremacist Muslims in British society. See my column, “Freedom of Speech, Go to Hell.”

    1. It’s a cold shower for the UK’s David Cameron, who has been talking for weeks about restricting the number of Europeans allowed to enter the UK. Now, a weighty study from University College London has highlighted the positive impact of recent EU immigration to Britain. Firstly, it says that Europeans living in the UK have paid more in taxes than they received in benefits. They have therefore helped to alleviate the tax burden on British tax payers and contributing to the funding of public services for the whole country. Another, perhaps even more significant figure, is that the UK attracts the largest number of immigrants with a university education than any other EU country. The researchers found that as many as 62% of European immigrants in Britain (Italian and Spanish included) are university educated. These people represent valuable human capital that, if they had studied in the UK, would have cost the state £6.8bn (€8.6bn) in education spending.

      People coming to the UK from overseas are too often at risk of being abused by employers, gang masters and employment agencies, who may seek to take advantage of their skills, energy and willingness to work.

      Exploitation of foreign workers commonly takes place in low-paid and often casual work, within a range of sectors including construction, social care, cleaning and hospitality. Workers in these sectors are often subject to zero hours contracts and poor treatment including underpayment of wages, hazardous working conditions and long hours. Some people, and in particular some migrant workers, experience criminal levels of exploitation including bonded labour and slave-like conditions at work.

      These incidents are often reported as examples of foreigners being prepared to ‘undercut’ the wages and working conditions of native workers. But evidence borne out by the experiences of groups across the UK suggests that this is an unfair accusation – migrants want the same wage rate and fair treatment as anyone else. The cohort of low-paid and poorly treated migrant workers often work side by side with British colleagues who also face the disadvantages of a poorly regulated economy. Others, such as migrant domestic workers, are particularly vulnerable to exploitation as a result of restrictions placed upon them by the immigration rules.

      Outcomes for migrants in low-paid employment are particularly poor where they cannot rely on external support systems, including trade union representation, which would help them to stand up and challenge bad employers, or to walk away from the job. Ultimately, solutions are needed which would benefit both British and foreign workers in improving employment conditions and challenging abuse where it takes place.

  2. I understand Brits who are concerned about this mass uncontrolled migration. I do like walking about and hearing all these different languages. I hate being force fed the benefits of multi-culturalism on t.v. However, I can't help feeling that the whole world is changing and we don't have a great deal of choice except to adapt and go with the flow. We've got to start thinking 'planet' not 'island'. The world will not let us be any other way and we are part of the big wide world. There are worse things happening in other parts of the globe with bigger changes going on. Our island is changed already and we have to live with it.

    What does integrating mean? Muslims are not embracing western life’. What do we do? In their free time English go down the pubs and get smashed, do the same in clubs, sleep with random people and as a result have the highest teenage pregnancy rate in Europe. Can anybody please tell me what integration means? other then speak English!!! The Jews did their best to integrate in Germany. They even took German names! Look how far it got them. If the Muslims try to integrate, the Germans/British will complain about the ‘pollution’ of their identity once again. I wonder how many English people were saying “Multi-Culturalism does not work” when they were busy invading and taking over other people’s countries!? India, the Africa, the Americas, Australia, to name but a few. I wonder how many English people are saying “Multi Culturalism does not work” when they are busy sunning themselves in the south of Spain, speaking only English, eating in English restaurants, drinking in English bars, and complaining that not all Spaniards speak English!? Monkey see? Monkey do? And what is English culture, anyhow!? Our football teams are full of foreign players and some are owned by foreign owners, Christian Church attendance has dwindled, we love our curries (influenced by Indian food), we holiday abroad often…so I really would like somebody to define to me what is English culture, these days. If you mean by integration going down to the pub with the lads, getting drunk, picking up a few girls, and then on Sunday maybe going to church – then I’m sure that Muslims will not integrate.

    Western media and politicians have been trying their best to propagate against Muslim schools. Muslim schools are even called Osama bin Laden Academies by a Teaching Union. Only less than 10% of Muslim children attend Muslim schools while more than 90% are in state schools to be mis-educated and de-educated by non-Muslim monolingual teachers. The demand for state funded Muslim schools is in accordance with the law of the land. Muslim community is not asking for any favour. Muslim community pays all sorts of taxes and is less burden on social services. Church leaders say it is no longer "appropriate" for them to run Sacred Heart RC Primary School which has just six Christian pupils. The school in Blackburn, Lances, could be handed to the nearby Masjid-e-Tauheedul mosque.

    It is absurd to believe that Muslim schools, Imams and Masajid teach Muslim children anti-Semitic, homophobic and anti-western views. It is dangerously deceptive and misleading to address text books and discuss them out of their historical, cultural and linguistic context. It is not wrong to teach children that Jews are committing the same cruelty in Palestine what German did to them before or during Second World War. It is not wrong to teach children that anti-social behaviour, drinking, drugs, homosexuality, sex before marriage, teenage pregnancies and abortions are western values and Islam is against all such sins. This does not mean that Muslim schools teach children to hate westerners, Jews and homosexuals.

    1. Back to the caliphate Achmed.

  3. Yes, Britain has a problem with sex before marriage. Muslims have a problem with sex before puberty.