For a generation the British political system has largely silenced dissent against the turning upside down and obvious eventual obliteration of our people by consequence of its unrelenting immigration and claimed ‘enrichment’ and ‘diversity’ policies.
The selfishness of politicians and their ruthlessness in pursuing their own short-term career interests without a national revolt against them is one of the wonders of the age. How have they got away with it? How could obviously absurd levels of immigration which undeniably amount to population replacement be pushed out of regular discourse and been made unmentionable.
The technique has been in essence been to jump in and complete the sentences of complainants before they do so themselves with a standard repertoire of inserted dialogue which amounts to “So you hate foreigners and are prejudiced against other races”. Few could stand up to it.
The nationalist movement has been less than ingenious in finding ways round the bullying and simply engaged in headlong verbal conflict which emphasised to others that the risk of speaking out was not worth it.
UKIP – whatever you think of it – has been far more ingenious than nationalists. You may call it more evasive if you wish but the fact is that its prominence has substantially killed off the old tactics employed by the political system. The full chorus about ‘racism’ and so on was deployed against UKIP during the recent European election campaign by the entire apparatus of politicians, left-wing mobs and the major newspapers. It almost entirely bounced off.
‘Racism’ is never going to be as effective a silencer as it was. Nor is mentioning immigration ever again going to be so demonised. Both these official foxes are perhaps not shot dead but certainly gravely wounded. Simon Heffer in the Daily Mail says that it’s time the great R word was banned. Changing times!
In the world of twenty years ago we might have found great comfort and signs of possible hope for our country from defeat of the almost entirely bogus crimes of ‘racism’ and opposition to migration. If immigration had been halted then our country would be safe.
Unhappily, it’s no longer enough when so many millions have since entered Britain and are increasing in numbers so fast internally. From this elephant in the room we are required to divert our gaze. UKIP will not touch the subject. We are supposed to believe that all be well if immigration is slowed when it’s now too late for that. Even without further migration we will be overwhelmed.
At this point the official retort is to ask what one would do about it. The answer is that even if nothing can be done people are entitled to know the position they will face in future and to debate it. To what extent will growing communities from abroad coalesce into particular areas for example? What protections will a white British minority enjoy? What about resources – water, energy? What about the technological revolution in software which may make umpteen millions more redundant from the economy. The Tories are now – in the wake of UKIP’s electoral success – talking about telling people from EU countries to leave if they don’t find jobs. They won’t do it but a line has been crossed.
The purpose of the question about what one would do is, of course, to elicit something which can be presented as the proverbial cattle trucks being employed to remove people. Somehow it’s made out to be unthinkable that anyone should leave for reasons of protection of identity even if they are merely economic migrants well equipped with their own homelands to return to. However much they wish to alter our country to resemble their homelands it’s also unthinkable to refuse although a little fudging is in order.
We require a national debate about the future of Britain which does not pretend that both ancestral Britons and newcomers can both receive all they want by some magical process sold as either ‘integration’ or ‘enrichment‘. We need a debate about the fairness of what has been done to our country instead of slyly asserting some form of guilt about which the British are required to atone and which makes any objection at all unreasonable.
In the same manner in which UKIP has managed to defuse much of the poison of the ‘racism’ and ‘xenophobia’ attacks concerning immigration we need to put debate about the millions already here onto a rational basis perfectly fit for discussion.
That is not a job which UKIP is currently prepared to undertake. It’s one the nationalist movement must address. The elephant in our room can no longer be airily ignored.