The recent Queen’s Speech to Parliament contained a good deal of crowd-pleasing ‘populist’ proposals. Tougher penalties for serious criminals and for foreign criminals who sneak back into the country are in the mixture, along with much trailed items such as ‘more bobbies on the beat’, improved transport in the north of England and more besides. How much of this, if any, will ever turn into legislation is anyone’s guess, but it is reasonable to suppose that if Boris can get his freshly announced Brexit deal through Parliament – a big ‘if’ – he will win the imminently expected general election quite comfortably, if only because of the weakness and vulnerability of the Labour opposition. Then presumably we will see some of these proposals become law.
For nationalists the primary concern will be the proposed changes to immigration law post-Brexit. Here it may be worth reflecting for a moment on the Conservative Party’s relationship with this particularly difficult subject – difficult for them. The difficulty arises from the way in which the Conservative Party has always tried to ride two horses at the same time, or perhaps three horses; one horse is the popular, patriotic vote demanding restrictions on immigration, another is the business vote demanding easy access to international trade, money and labour, while the third (which may be identical with the second) is the socially liberal vote. Trying to keep a balance on three horses at the same time may explain why the Conservative’s line on immigration restriction has always been slow, partial and grudging. It was not until the general election of 1959 – eleven years after mass third world immigration began with Windrush – that the Party’s election manifesto promised the introduction of restrictions on immigration from the Commonwealth, which resulted in the inadequate Commonwealth Immigration Act of 1962. Further legislation followed over the years, always tightening up the controls (although never enough). Until now.
Now, for the first time since 1959, we have a Conservative government which has no interest in reducing numbers and which explicitly refuses to “play the numbers game”. This is hardly a surprise since the Prime Minister has often expressed his support for mass immigration, and when you consider the origins of the leading members of the cabinet, why should he not? He himself is a quarter Turkish, his Foreign Secretary is half Jewish, his Chancellor of the Exchequer is a Pakistani, his Home Secretary is an Indian, his First Secretary to the Treasury (Rishi Sunak) is another Indian, his Immigration Minister (Seema Kennedy) is an Iranian while the co-Chairman of the Tory Party, James Cleverley, is a black man. These people may be patriots, but their patriotism is for a very different kind of country from that loved by most of us. For us, this country is our ethnic homeland; here we have deep roots of ancestry, history and belonging. For them, with their roots elsewhere, the value of our country is as a place where people from anywhere can prosper.
Thus it is that we are to have a new policy designed for those people from anywhere. This is the so-called points-based system, intended to replace unrestricted immigration from Europe with “almost unrestricted immigration from everywhere” to quote Migrationwatch. Migrationwatch has also pointed out that it will give satisfaction to many Remainers that the principal reason why so many voted Leave in the referendum – reducing immigration – should “be reduced to rags”.
Giving that satisfaction to Remainers is how Boris proposes to heal the divisions in society that Brexit has caused. We are all familiar with the unceasing allegations of “xenophobia” and “racism” levelled at Leave voters, so we are told that Boris will counter those allegations – “by taking seriously the concerns of many Remainers that Brexit is about being anti-migrant and illiberal, snarling at foreigners…..so the Prime Minister would have to move, pretty quickly, with a credible and rational plan. There would be a new migration regime making it far easier for skilled Americans, Indians and others to come here. Perhaps his most radical ambition is to offer amnesty to illegal immigrants. He’d like those who have lived here for several years to be welcomed….he thinks that with enough imagination and effort his ‘global Britain’ can be an agenda for uniting the country….Michael Gove thinks the same, Priti Patel has similar sympathies. Dominic Raab talks about implementing ‘a Brexit for Remainers’”.
The quote above is from Fraser Nelson, Boris’ successor as editor of the Spectator; he can be assumed to know the mind of the Prime Minister and much of the above reads like the transcript of an interview. The liberalisation has already begun. Overseas students are to be able to remain in the country for two years after graduation, rather than four months as previously, to help them find a graduate level job which will entitle them to remain permanently; this change is at the urging of the university sector which has found applications from Indian students tailing off, and the reason for that tailing-off is that other countries allow them to remain long enough to obtain residence – now we are to do the same. You may also have heard of Priti Patel’s “vindaloo visas” – visas to be available not just for curry chefs but for every kind of takeaway! Mrs. May (I’m regretting her already) always held that since most Indian restaurants are actually Bangladeshi and young Bangladeshis in Britain have a very high rate of unemployment, the restaurants had a ready source of labour; no more.
So perhaps we should look to Labour for a better immigration policy? I’m sure you already know what we can expect from the party of Diane Abbott and Dawn Butler! But if not, here’s a few snippets from the immigration policy adopted by the recent Labour party conference: freedom of movement to be retained for EU countries and extended to (unspecified) others, detention centres abolished, “hostile environment” abolished, no future immigration policy which includes caps on numbers or targets, no assessment of an immigrant’s suitability based on income or usefulness to employers, the right to vote to be extended to all foreign residents. In other words we’re to be openly stripped of our country.
I haven’t had the heart to examine the Lib Dem policy but I doubt if it’s more than a marginal improvement on Labour’s farrago, and their Green Party allies want to abolish the Home Office and replace it with a “Ministry of Sanctuary”!
But at least Nigel Farage has now broken the silence which has prevailed since the referendum with this: “we don’t have the infrastructure to deal with a population that is rising by half a million every single year, and 80% of that is down to immigration or the birth of children who directly come from first generation migrants. Labour has now with that second betrayal opened a massive electoral flank, and I promise you as the Brexit Party we are going to be in those Labour heartlands pointing out that there have been two betrayals”. This is obviously Farage’s ploy to outflank not only Labour but also the Tories.
All pretty depressing, but all is not lost! Only last week the website ‘inews’ published a piece by Yasmin Alibhai-Brown headlined “Racists are the real threat among us”. She warns of “thugs who want to take control, forcibly repatriate migrants, most of all Muslims, and turn Britain into a White heartland …” they [police, right-wing politicians, journalists] … indulge racist movements while viciously maligning and punishing environmental activists … many other deadly groups operating in the UK today are serious about this race war and their appeal grows exponentially … with so many friends in high places, the haters become emboldened … mainstream politicians in several EU countries now see the perils posed by the 21st century fascist revival … the current Tory cabal prefers to kiss and cuddle such populism they … surrender to extreme nationalists … when things get hard – as they absolutely will – many more true Brits will turn to fascism. And the powerful will roll over, become collaborators. You have been warned.”
Gosh, Yasmin has fallen through the looking glass and arrived in Wonderland! Can she possibly believe such tosh, the very reverse of the world as we see it? And if she does believe it, has she taken leave of her senses or could she possibly be on to something? Yasmin lives in a Left/Liberal bubble which renders her incapable of seeing the world that we see, but perhaps we too live in a bubble and can’t see the growing threat which so frightens the Left because we are inside that threat, part of it! Let us hope so.
by Frederick Dixon © 2015
# # # #
JOIN WESTERN SPRING
Western Spring is not just a website. We are a community of people dedicated to achieving the Six Prerequisites and thereby acquiring the wherewithal needed to win political power and through that secure the future survival, proliferation and advancement of the British people and other White peoples of European descent, wherever they may live. Please join us:
[contact-form-7 404 "Not Found"]# # # #
Stefan
- Edit
I see also Doreen Lawrence is of the opinion that the Grenfell Tower disaster was racist, I don’t suppose she will be called out on this illogical POV.
The LFB don’t turn up at fires & say “There’s mainly Black people in this building, so we will leave them inside”.
There was a plan already in place based on the building not the people, this was due to restricted access & may apply to other buildings too.
In retrospect the plan was wrong, that was caused by the addition of unsuitable cladding.
I assume the rule is now evacuate & then fight the fire.
I watched a three part documentary on the murder of Stephen Lawrence & the New Cross fire was mentioned & the impression was left, that it was a racist mass murder & there was a lot of sometimes violent protests at the time but the current thinking is this was not a racist incident at all.
But apologies, there are none.
Stefan
- Edit
This discusses the clip I saw on C4 but unsurprisingly the interview is now hard to find, I guess when they realised what was said they pulled it, when people criticised the logic of what was said.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNVM6KWbexs
Stefan
- Edit
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/grenfell-tower-fire-one-year-one-kensington-a8397276.html
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/18/firefighters-worry-being-stitched-up-by-grenfell-inquiry
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/10/16/london-fire-chief-admits-stay-put-advice-not-suitable-grenfell/
Stefan
- Edit
Let’s be honest, virtually everything we hear including this latest deal, is just random noise, none of it will be delivered, there isn’t the political support for it.
It is reminiscent of Phil Spector’s wall of sound but it is not a hit with me.
There’s a theory that if Boris can be forced out & replaced with a more centrist one nation Tory, then no deal will definitely be off the table & then it will be a case of blocking any deal that is proposed, therefore we remain in the EU.
But have the EU had enough & won’t grant any further extension?
Or will yet another finest quality batch of Euro fudge come along to kick the can further down the road?
Will we now get a General Election in November or will more excuses be made to paralyse the functioning of Government into the new year?
I think both Labour & the Liberals realise they won’t win & the nightmare scenario is Boris with a majority doing Hulk impressions.
Because the whole liberal project is getting to a fragile stage, then any opposition needs to be dampened down, that smouldering needs to be prevented from becoming a full blown wildfire.
Do the liberal elite actually understand why people voted for Brexit, that it isn’t just about leaving the EU?
Some commentators, I think, quite correctly understand that if Brexit is thwarted, that it will unleash even more resentment against the liberal elite.
Either way it goes the extremists on one side or the other, probably will turn nasty over what happens.
Some sort of civil disobedience is likely.
But let us understand that if we leave without a deal, there will be years of negotiating treaties & the EU will make every attempt to claw back every advantage they can.
We will need competent & determined people on our side to ensure the best outcome for us but do such people exist & will they be allowed anywhere near this?
Max Musson
- Edit
It is difficult to see how this affair is going to finally play out. I suspect that the Remainers will attach an amendment to the agreement that Boris has negotiated, requiring a second confirmatory referendum before it can become law, and then the propaganda machine of the EU will go into overdrive in order to secure a majority in favour of remaining within the EU. This is what the EU have done successfully on previous occasions with other recalcitrant member states.
Stefan
- Edit
Quite possibly so but there will be quite a few folk who won’t believe in democracy anymore & oppose the inevitable further moves to integrate us further into Europe.
I think the EU will put the handcuffs on us given half a chance, to prevent a repeat of this fiasco.
Maybe people will be more ready to vote outside the mainstream or emulate Hong Kong in future?
As the EU is PR then we can vote for an awkward squad to go the Brussels & be disruptive, maybe join forces with other malcontents.
I would favour getting rid of the Houses of Parliament as they would serve no further purpose.
They don’t want to be Sovereign & want to give power & responsibility up, so reward them appropriately.
Max Musson
- Edit
The Lisbon Treaty that came into effect some years ago, proposed measures that would eventually lead to the parliaments of the member states becoming moribund. This has been a long-term aim of the EU as a prerequisite for abolishing those national governments, and once those national governments have been abolished, no member state, no member nation, would ever again have a constitutional means of withdrawing from the EU. Therefore we must oppose the abolition of our Parliament at Westminster, it is the key to achieving our eventual freedom and self-determination by peaceful and constitutional means. Without a national parliament, the only way to exit the EU would be for the people of the member state concerned to make a unilateral declaration of independence and fight their way out in a war of liberation, and this is another reason why the EU are so keen to merge the armed forces of the members states into a single entity under their control, not ours.
Alec Suchi
- Edit
As a point of optimism we need to recall the monolithic structure of the USSR which dictated policies from the centre and had ruthlessly suppressed popular dissent in Hungary in 1956, Czechoslovakia in 1968 and Poland in 1981. Yet despite the appearance of it being invincible it came to an end by 1991. This was because the communist ideology is abstract based on class solidarity or in fact its eventual surpassing, and never appealed to to deep loyalties of country and its people.
Thus as a parallel, even if the UK becomes further entangled in the EU integration programme, the whole edifice could collapse for the same reasons as for the USSR. The structure becomes too remote and wouldn’t command that deep rooted loyalty given to nation states and its racially homogenous people.
Furthermore the Visegrad countries may chose to leave rather than accept migration from the 3rd world and countries like Greece may break free also, so that the whole EU project is undermined. In this context “Brexit”, although important, does not constitute an immediate existential dilemma.
We await developments with interest.
Richard Edmonds
- Edit
“We await developments with interest:”
They are not long in coming: Today’s news:
BoJo wants a ballot box for Christmas…,but mean Corbyn says, “Shan’t give it to him.”
Stefan
- Edit
I think Mr Corbyn is aware of the adage “Be careful what you wish for as it may become true”.
Stefan
- Edit
I take your point Max but I don’t think it will quite come to “fight(ing) their way out in a war of liberation”.
I think as Alec says that it will collapse & we will need to set up a new English National Assembly based on PR to manage our affairs of state in a chaotic situation.
I have no further belief that we will get anything from the existing HoP set up.
For us it is moribund.
I will vote for the Brexit Party in the forthcoming GE, which looks like being in 2020 now. I was hoping for GE next month.
If the GE fails to deliver anything, I will not vote in UK elections anymore, unless there is some sort of radical change, such as PR.
However I will vote in the EU elections as they are PR & I will go for an anti EU candidate who will be a nuisance & help erode the EU from within.
Alec Suchi
- Edit
Very good article, Frederick.It is quite clear that the main parties are both unwilling and incapable of controlling immigration from the Third World. The Labour Party has abandoned its traditional white working class support who unfortunately remains stubbornly loyal to it, but for how long? Instead the party furthers the interests of the immigrant and has become a vehicle for sections of the middle classes generally employed in the public sector, such as the teaching profession, academia, the council and civil service.Many of these are driven by a perverse vision to supplant a traditional patriotic society with that of a leftist dystopia.
The Conservative Party has traditionally presented itself as a patriotic party but has never discharged this stance in any meaningful manner. In fact it was during the Heath government of 1970-74 that a large group of Indians from Uganda were allowed to settle in Britain and then in the early days of Mrs Thatcher, large numbers of the Boat People from Vietnam were also allowed admission.The Conservatives have always placed the need of business above that of the racial identity of the country and has always been in favour of allowing a cheap labour pool to enter the country.
Unfortunately the benefits of leaving the EU, (which is important in itself and assuming it was a meaningful departure), will all be lost as a result of European labour being replaced by that of the Third World and with such harmful long term consequences to our racial and cultural identity.
If UKIP survives following our leaving the EU and the ending of the Brexit Party, it may be able to function as a traditional patriotic party and gain significant electoral support in the long run, but not as a racial- nationalist party.
It remains to be seen if a legitimate successor to the NF and BNP will emerge in the near to medium term, which will prove electorally significant.
frederick dixon
- Edit
Thank you for your comment Alec. You say “the Conservative Party has traditionally presented itself as a patriotic party but has never discharged this stance in any meaningful manner”. Very true. It’s worth noting that the narrative has changed since the referendum – then it was “there is too much immigration and Brexit will help us to control it
Stephen
- Edit
When I last visited the UK in 1981 with my English wife i told her that I feared that in 50 years Britain would no longer be a white country, but a coffee coloured one. Thirty years down the line I see, in all walks of life, from parliamentarians to policemen, that my fears are very, very real.
Max Musson
- Edit
For the larger towns and cities that is true, however there are large swathes of Britain that are still 99% White.