The new gulf in British politics

by Mike Newland

For a generation, the great gulf in British politics has not been left or right. Neither determined the fundamental of our future existence as a people.

The great divide has, in fact, been immigration with the entire political establishment and a servile media determined to remove the subject from public debate versus a vilified fringe of British nationalists and a terrified minority of the populace muttering in private.

Any thinking person could perceive that a self-serving commitment of the system to mass immigration would mean the eventual end of us as a people and a way of life. Thus, until fairly recently, the media treated immigration as an unmentionable subject. Any debate might have unfortunate consequences. People might begin to think that there were serious issues and consequences. Worse, they might perceive extensive underlying discontent and begin to talk among themselves. Debate was closed down – as we all now know – by the use of an ‘r’ word.

Inevitably, larger and larger parts of the country have become effectively places where a Briton is now a foreigner when he walks his own streets. London in particular is no longer in any real sense a British city. Debate can no longer be contained and it has exploded even into the crony mainstream press.

This has not happened because of UKIP or the BNP before it collapsed. They are effects not causes. It was inevitable that a convenient official taboo against voicing the realities could not be maintained indefinitely. The system has relied on the fact that even if immigration broke out from a prison of censorship voters would get more of it however they voted and be forced to accept it.

The Westminster elite imagined that fringe movements would be unable to gain sufficient traction to dislodge them. The official media could easily undermine intruders. It has in the past.

But the chorus of dissatisfaction has now grown to the point where the big parties can no longer rely even on their own tribal voters. The fact that the current main contender outside the magic circle of power, UKIP, has no serious plan to save our people is obvious. A five year halt to migration has now been replaced by the farcical 50,000 net immigration policy as UKIP continues to attempt to be everything to everyone.

But UKIP can certainly sabotage the plans of the big parties who are threshing around wondering which of them might be the bigger losers as the latest intruders fail to perform to the official script and stutter to a halt.

Immigration has escaped from its political cage and it can’t be put back. But a new gulf has opened up in British politics with once again the entire system united in a determination to keep a second beast in its cage.

Once again the taboo rotates around an ‘r’ word. But it’s not ‘racism’ any more – that gambit is of decreasing value.

The new ‘r’ word is ‘repatriation’ and the outlines of the battle were made clear last week when newly elected UKIP MP Mark Reckless made some later disputed comments interpreted as meaning that EU citizens who had already migrated to Britain by the time of any Brexit should leave.

Suppose UKIP and public pressure succeeded in forcing Britain out of the EU. Nigel Farage claims that he will give us our country back. But if no one then leaves we will all find that nothing has changed. When we walk down many of our streets we will still be foreigners.

The ghastly fact is that our homeland can only be regained if very large numbers of those who have moved here return to their own homelands. No one thinks it wrong that those here on work permits should be asked to leave when their permissions expire. Why would it be wrong to ask those from Europe who are citizens of other countries and who came here under a political arrangement to do likewise when that arrangement ends – at least over a period of time?

The system is now digging in against any thought of anyone leaving just as it tried to censor any thought of people being prevented from migrating here. We will be told that asking people to return to countries they often or regularly visit due to family connections – commonly by coach from Victoria Coach Station – is akin to deportation by cattle truck.

If no one leaves then the British people must consign themselves to slow extinction and prepare for minority status along the highway. They will have to make up their minds – and soon.

Every effort will be made to dissuade Britons from debating their plight – and the sole solution to it – by the use of the latest ‘r‘ word.

13 thoughts on “The new gulf in British politics

  1. Spot on Mike, the mass immigration of the last 50 years is illegal in my honest opinion for the simple fact that it has been imposed on us by the criminal LibLabCon without consensus. To change the demographic on such a scale requires the consent of the people being disenfranchised. Therefore, requiring people to leave should the majority of indigenous Britons choose that course of action to protect our heritage in our ancestral homeland is right and just.

    Anyone in doubt about the criminal nature of LibLabCon only need to focus on their financial fraud, sex abuse scandals and illegal wars.

  2. Even if all immigration was to abruptly cease as of now, we could only ever expect this to be a temporary stay as long as the existing political establishment remain in power, in one form or another. The end game would ultimately be as predictable as it is now. The newer “r” word therefore, has to become normalised in the public domain, in free speech and discussion. We have too many false asylum seekers / refugees / illegal immigrants to allow this to vanish from public debate.

    If we did leave the EU it would not in most cases, be unreasonable to expect people who came here to work under a political or contractual arrangement to return home at the end of their legitimate stay. I would contend that the genuine workers among them would be more than accepting of this, in the knowledge that they would be welcomed back as visitors and friends in the future. All rhetorical references to cattle trucks and the like have no validity in the first place.

  3. Nationalists have for years advocated that a policy of sensibly managed repatriation would have to be implemented to undo much of the damage done due to mass immigration.

    We have had to endure ridicule along with verbal and even physical abuse and so isn’t it satisfying to see establishment figures sweating as that which was to them once the unthinkable now starts to become the inevitable.

    Of course, to sensible citizens repatriation is a viable option. Once our generous benefits system grinds to a halt (as it is starting to) the writing will be on the wall for many “economic migrants”. Then this Nation becomes a less attractive place to live. The turning point will be the social unrest that will follow. This is the scenario that the establishment really fears.

    It will not come from the indigenous Britons many of whom are now so brainwashed let’s be honest that if the beheading of a serving soldier on a British street in broad daylight fails to shock them into action then nothing will.

    No the backlash will come from the immigrant communities themselves who will realise that the writing is on the wall. Just how the establishment deals with this remains to be seen but one thing is for sure – interesting times ahead and a very good time to be a Nationalist.

  4. Farage has just said on television that no one will have to leave.

    By the time of any Brexit there will be millions more. Indeed, Farage is effectively telling people to come here even faster while you still can.

    Anyone who expects salvation from the UKIP direction is dreaming.

  5. Will Ukip find a leader once Farage steps down? Who can and will put Britons first. That is of course if they win enough seats to make a difference ,

    Do not hold your breath folks. Just keep pressing on.

  6. The fact is if we do not withdraw from the European Union there will be no repatriation! Even Farage stated that “We have to get rid of all the illegal immigrants”.

    The liberal estimate is that 1 In 30 of our population are here illegally: that issue alone has widespread support amongst our people and will not be achieved unless we withdraw from the European Union.

    The new ‘r’ word is on the agenda, the point is it can only be implemented when we are an independent nation.

  7. Now we are told that a new “garden town” of 13,000 homes is to be inflicted upon the Oxfordshire landscape at Bicester. I think we all know the cause of the need for all this new accommodation.

  8. The powers want to close down debate on repatriation just like they closed down debate on immigration.

    Be it noted that if anyone complains about debating the subject then the answer to them is simple. Cameron has said he wants people repatriated who don’t find work. He may not mean it and was forced into it by political pressure but if he can discuss repatriation why should anyone else not do so?

    1. Cameron can bring up repatriations because the organ of mass influencing in Western Society, the mass media, is on the side of the two party system.

      While we view ‘anti-racism’ in the West to be wooden in it’s language and rigid in what appears to be religious behavior it is actually very flexibly through the organs of mass media. David Cameron can talk about repatriation, refer to Islamic extremism as a disease, tell Poles to “get out of my country” etc and the Telegraph, Spectator, Express etc will write articles in support, the BBC will present it as normal and the leftist press will use it as an attempt to make the two parties appear ideological opposites when in practice their policies have a cigarette paper between them. It’s not necessarily the rhetoric but who is saying the rhetoric.

      However when a Nationalist mentions repatriation expect the same Telegraph, Spectator, Mail and Express to go into UAF, anti-fa attack.

      As the mainstream media does not go full scale attack when Cameron says it then it presents to the general public, unconsciously, that he has validity in making those points. A recent example of this hypocrisy is with Nigel Farage when he spoke of a Islamic 5th column in the West then the Daily Mail has the headline:
      “Farage cannot divide us: Fury at ‘sickening’ attempt by Ukip to use Paris shootings to score political points on multiculturalism”

      Cameron is non PC: Good on Cameron, giving it to the lefties, stop us from becoming a foreign country
      Farage is non PC: Sickening points scoring, fringe, far right, disturbing, shocking etc

      The way of mass media in the West means that Cameron has to make some ‘hardline’ rhetoric to inoculate anti-immigration voters from going towards UKIP or the Nationalist parties. By extension the Daily Mail and Daily Express also have to support ‘hardline’ rhetoric as long as the person saying it is Conservative, or to save face amongst it’s readership, UKIP.

Leave a Reply