A few years back I read an essay by some free market activist (whose name escapes me entirely now) about apathy and why it was every politician’s worst nightmare. They can survive hostility and, of course, they bask in adulation but lumpen public indifference is the tar-pit that will gradually delegitimise them and drag them under to irrelevance and obscurity.
A nice theory but wholly untrue. Public indifference is by far the most powerful ally of the political classes. How else can they possibly get away with such a sudden, one hundred and eighty degree volte face?
The Commission for Racial Equality (CRE) is blocking grants to ethnic minority projects that fail to promote “Britishness” and integration.
Last week, CRE chairman Trevor Phillips sparked a debate when he said the term “multiculturalism” should be scrapped.
What is all this? ‘Multiculturalism’ should be scrapped? ‘Britishness’ should be promoted? Do mine eyes deceive me or have the cultural revolutionaries at the CRE suddenly been transmogrified into blue-rinse, little Englander, prehistoric, sexist, facist, racist, Tory types? Does Mr.Phillips not appreciate that Pim Fortuyn was branded a ‘Nazi’ and subsequently assassinated for expressing precisely the same sentiments about his native Holland? Does he merit a posthumous apology now? Tempting as it is to cast myself headlong into a whirlwind of malicious, satirical glee this does say something quite serious (and altogether disturbing) about the phrenology of our society. Mr.Phillips & Co clearly believe that they sit so assuredly in the social driving seat that all they have to do is to slam the cultural gears into reverse to send the whole society careering into a sharp handbrake turn.
And they are right, in truth. For while the CRE may not be government they are most certainly a pillar of the establishment. It is they who get consulted about the nature of laws to be enacted and policies to be implemented so why should they believe anything other than that they can spin us around like tops? (Though watch out for whiplash, that’s what I say).
So yesterday we were all happily chugging down the winding lanes of MultiCulti and today we are proceeding in an orderly manner down Britishness Boulevard. For why, one might reasonably enquire. There is more than a clue:
“In the wake of what is happening globally – global events – we feel a new emphasis is needed.
Hmm…what ‘global events’ could they possibly mean? The Kyoto Treaty? The rapid industrialisation of China? The African AIDS crisis? No, I think it reasonable to posit that the ‘global event’ they are referring to is the rise of radical, violent Islamism which has gone and shoved a spanner in their previous works. Persuading everyone to ’embrace’ that was simply impossible even by the lights of the ‘NuLabour’ vanguard.
That was always the major structural weakness in the post-modernist construct. It is very easy, and even rewarding, to celebrate diversity but the feelgood factor only works so long as everyone agrees to play nicely. It only takes a few people to become incendiary for the whole damn tinder box to go up in flames.
Fawning over authentic Central Asian cuisine is fun and bedecking one’s house with African ju-ju dolls is a really neat fashion statement but the prospect of “streets running with blood like rivers” is, shall we say, a diversity too far. Let’s not got there shall we, dear.
So new situation = new history. Out with the old party line and in with the new, better party line that will be welcomed by many and resented by a few. Of course, nobody will remember that there was ever a time when the party line was any different. They will not care to. No-one will be so rude or so ingracious as to recall that, as recently as a few weeks ago, saying the things that Mr.Phillips has said could get you fired from your job or even investigated by the police. That is how it goes in a country without memories.
So now we are at war with Eastasia. We have always been at war with Eastasia.
Killer post David. Really excellent.
Joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth…..
[Luke 15:7]
It’s possible to dislike multiculti because it’s an imposition. That’s libertarian.
It’s possible to dislike multiculti because it’s impractical; one culture must always be ascendant if not exclusive, since cultural rules conflict. That’s pragmatic.
It’s possible to dislike multiculti because you reckon arabs are all raving islamist walking bombs, and wogs believe in juju. That’s parochial, at best.
Nah!
You miss the real threat. The CRE is embracing Britishness as part of the redefining of the term.
You see the new “Britishness” is to join the Euro, have the new constitution (written in Strasbourg…), give passports to all (Labour voting) immigrants.
So the new British citizens get to stand and hold up a hand and swear allegiance to the sovereign. So the Queen’s head will be on the back of British minted Euro coins. And we keep a British team for the Olympics.
Enjoy!
What a turnaround from the welcome the CRE gave to Parekh. I can’t help but feel that the outcome will be more style than substance, which would be entirely in keeping with Nu-Lab. Anyway, lots of questions arise from this blithe piece of political footwork. Here are three of the larger ones:-
1) What impact will a resultant de-emphasis on cultural relativism have on our national life?
2) What difference will assimilationism actually make to the self-identity and cultural particularity of Muslims.
3) How will the liberal-left establishment, especially academia, square this change with its marxist-egalitarian agenda.
Gustave La Joie – Very astute!
Guessworker – This is being floated because Blair is being sucked down, wriggling in fright, into the multiculti quagmire and they’ve got to figure out a way of pulling him out without any mud and slime clinging to him. Hey presto! Britain’s not really multiculti after all! His best bud Trevor Phillips says so, and he should know, because he’s black!!
So, they’re going to keep muliticulti, against he will of approximately 59m indigenous Brits, but call it something else. I know! Let’s call it integration! We’ll still let them pour in, against the will of the indigenes, and we’ll still force the native population to accept them or else – and we’ll still spend tens of millions of taxpayer pounds on extremely special programmes for them and them alone (booklets in town halls in Urdu; NHS translators in Arabic, blah blah blah), but it will be done under the name of Assimilation! See? B. Liar was listening to the public all along!
It’s all a lie. Phillips has the same authoritarian jackbooted tendencies as the massah.
I wanted to add that this is a bog too far and it won’t work this time. Michael Howard and David Davies will have recognised in thrilled disbelief that, in his panic, Blair has handed them a rod. One trusts they will employ it with vigour and skill.
I’m afraid, not for the first time with New Labour, that there is an element of cynicism in this. The CRE is being wound down, along with all the other anti-discrimination bodies ( those fighting on behalf of Women, the Disabled and so on ), and merged into an all powerful overarching anti-discrimination body – the mother of all anti-discrimination bodies. Trev wants the job.
So now he plays the broadminded, friend of everyone, reasonable, caring chappie card. He’s everybody’s friend, not just the freaks.
It’s no more complicated than that.
The startling fact is that few of his former allies seem to mind the volte face. But those who do by slagging him off and pointing out the hypocrisy play into his hands, and make him seem even more reasonable.
Brilliantly played by our Trev, all told. But it’s not for the first time. They’ve changed their mind on nuclear weaponry, privatisation, the EU, what’s another about face between friends? Just so long as they keep their jobs.
Earlier, there was dancing around the fire and singing about how warm it was.
Now there is dancing around the fire and singing about how it’s just a fire.
Soon there will be dancing around the fire and singing about how it’s not a fire.
None of the dancing makes any difference whatsoever. Sooner or later sane people will have to stand around the fire and piss it out.
For anyone who is puzzled by the background to this, go to today’s (Sunday’s) Telegraph and read Quentin Letts on news sponges. News sponges are what Labour puts out whenever they, or especially Tony Blair, are in trouble and they need to put up a big enough item to soak up the attention of the media and electorate.
Trevor Philips’s integration epiphany is a news sponge. It’s another trick. But, as I said above, this one was a big mistake because it has handed a victory to the Tories and they will ride on the wave of popular approval.
The Middle East is West Asia.
Trevor Phillips has recently been appointed the head honcho at the CRE, and one of his first acts is to announce a volte-face on policy. In these circumstances, attacking him for inconsistency is a bit unfair: he has to either continue the existing policy or change it.
Say instead what you think he should have done. What would you like to have done in his position? I rather suspect the answer is “exactly what Mr Phillips said”. If so, your “War with Eastasia” comments sound less clever.
Gee, I’m so happy you wrote “We have always been at war with Eastasia” and “Handbrake turn” and that I knew what you were talking about in both cases. Keep up the good work and live not by lies.
Mary Contrary – I think he was appointed around a year ago. After he lost his bid to be Mayor of London. Since he got in, he has been quite a busy little bee, oppressing the indigenes and extending his fiefdom from speech to thought.
He boldly defended all of Islam against a British TV talk host who had written, months previously, that in some Islamic regimes they were amputators and women haters. In Britain, we previously had something known as freedom of speech, until Herr Philips called the Metropolitan Police and reported Kilroy-Silk for a – uh, I don’t know – hate crime, maybe? – and made representations to his good buddies at the Beeb to have Mr Kilroy-Silk slung off the air. In civil law, if a libel can be proved to be true, there is no case. It is undeniably true that in many Islamic regimes, they amputate limbs for theft and bury adulterers and homosexuals in the sand up to the neck and then stone them to death. It is also undeniably true that they practice horrific genital mutilation on females.
Philips also made a pursed-lip note that if Mr Kilroy-Silk would promise to learn more about Islam and give “a substantial portion of his vast earnings” to a Muslim charity, they would say no more about it. Who Herr Philips is to direct people on their reading matter or how to deploy their private funds is something we have yet to determine, but he took to his new role like a duck to water.
The person who hadn’t learned much about Islam was Herr Philips himself, who waxed poetic about the intellectual achievements of Muslims – achievements which actually came out of India and Ancient Greece and passed through the Middle East on the way to Europe.
As I said above, this is what is known as a news sponge. It is not going to happen. It is to deflect attention from the fact that the glorious leader has not been able to climb out of the media merde over immigration and he senses the public milling around and muttering darkly. He may even hear the faint rumble of the tumbrels.
Mary,
Trevor Phillips does what Trevor Phillips does. The English are the victims no matter what. Now if I had been appointed Chairman that would been, as they say, something completely – completely – different.
Actually, it could have me. It should have been me. Everything looked great. Money was good and exes bloody brilliant. And there wasn’t much competition. The CRE people could only find me who wanted it, plus Nick Griffin and a couple of skinheads who were more pissed than Gurbux Singh. But Nick set his heart on a parish council seat in Bordesley Green instead. Then, just when I thought it was in the bag, the CRE let it slip that I would have to be a Chair. I was outraged. I don’t do Chairs. What silly bugger wants to be called a Chair?
Too bad. Now the nation will never have the benefit of a genuinely Third Way CRE, pursuing neither multicult nor Assimilation but honest-to-goodness repatriation at gunpoint. And I’ve lost my launchpad to The Top Job, when Tony goes to Yerrup. It’s back to the beer cellar, I suppose.
Verity,
Am I naive? I saw Phillip’s public agonising over the last week or three in the context of the toughening immigration policies in France, Holland and Denmark. It never occurred to me that snouts and troughs were at the root of it all. Maybe it’s a bit of both, you never know with this lot.
(Link)
Even though I regularly read British press and am very familiar with the depths of idiocy that the British multi-cultis can descend to, I was well and truly flabbergasted to read the above.
Council taxes going to support schools in Bangladesh because “British” Muslims like to take long holidays in the mother country?
Susan,
Link not working. It sounds like one for the Assimilation chopper, though, if Phillips is in any way serious.
Guessed – “You never know with this lot?”
You don’t?
Trevor Philips has been floated, if he will excuse the term and not think I accuse him of mimicking the massa’s problems with wind, as a voice of moderation – and what’s more it’s BLACK moderation – as though 59m British had been crying out mournfully for a black leader – because right now there is an urgent need to pretend someone in the Labour government speaks for indigenous Brits.
So who better to speak for people whose history on these islands goes back at least two thousand years and whose ancestors shaped this country through bloodshed and the careful, gradual husbanding of a body of law that eventually evolved into English Common Law, than an immigrant who slithered to the top echelon through the drains of socialism? Philips as a spokesperson for 59m indigenous Brits will fail to resonate, although they will grasp the committee-written “thoughts” of Philips as a cudgel.
Curious, by the way, that intelligent and motivated people, like the Jews and the Indian immigrants from E Africa never needed special programmes and little booklets written in their native languages and armies of translators and special pleaders. They just got on with the business of assimilating and achieving, as intelligent immigrants everywhere always do.
All the socialists’ mahatama-esque efforts on behalf of the uninvited and unwanted are directed at Stone Age people, who are the major source of trouble throughout the world.
Guessed, sorry, I could never get that link think down right. Here’s the opening paras:
“A city council wants to set up a school in Bangladesh so children taken out of its schools during term for extended stays abroad can continue their education.
Manchester is in talks with the government and the British Council on the scheme, the first of its kind. It could cost up to £100,000 a year, although it is unclear whether council-tax payers would foot the entire bill.
The plan is regarded by the Labour-run authority as a pragmatic bid to deal with the disruption to learning that children of Asian origin suffer when parents take them for long visits to relatives.”
From Saturday’s al-Guardian.
Sheer insanity.
A hundred thousand pounds per year is what? Two hundred thousand dollars at today’s rate or thereabouts?
I am sure elderly pensioners being squeezed out of their homes by council taxes are going to LOVE this idea.
I don’t suppose it occurs to these luuvies to simply expell the pampered little darlings for not attending school full time? Or requiring them to assimilate into British society and forget about the poverty stricken Third World hell-hole their parents or grandparents escaped from?
Un-freakin’-believable.
The people I really feel for are the elderly. They suffered through hitler’s bombs and worked their butts off to rebuild a war-destroyed economy, only to have their carefully built up resources stolen from them in their most vulnerable years by the tranzi morons. And for what?
To finance the outrageous pampering of some Abdullah-come-lately who refuses to assimilate.
I don’t understand why indigenous British people aren’t rioting in the streets right now over issues like this.
Susan – You are brilliant. I don’t understand it either.
The word “racism” is a magic bullet – but only if you allow it to be. But it’s Toneboy’s … building a constituency of immigrants to vote (they get the vote for some reason – oh! duh!) against the indigenes.
Britain was never going to be better off by inviting the Stone Age in. These people were vacuumed into Britain to displace the indigenes in jobs – yet, oh! guess what! – they never went ahead and applied for because they were busy being kowtowed to by little socialist girls in council offices who knew they would never ever have any greater power than this!!
I was at Heathrow once and standing in line to report unarrived luggage after a 12-hour flight. A burqua-clad entity forced itself to the head of the queue, unable to speak a word of English but secure in the knowledge that efforts would be made to accommodate it.
I gently tapped it on the shoulder and told it to get to the back of the queue. This was not understood by the burqu-package, but a socialist fellow passenger behind me came forward to reprimand me for insisting on my place in the queue.
“These people don’t understand the concept of queuing,” she said.
“But they understand the concept of getting on planes and getting into Britain,” I said. “Isn’t that considerably more complicated than mastering the art of queuing?
The nasty little thing in the burqua understood it had an ally and thrust its toothless jaw out at me.
Oh, it had been a long flight, the airline had lost my luggage and as the little burqua-clad incident didn’t understand English (which is why, of course, she wished to emigrate to England) I turned on the freelance multiculti pleader.
“Could you tell me,” I asked, ” why socialist women such as your charming self, always have muddy complexions, fat thighs and bad teeth?”
I was only trying to help.
Well, Susan, you know – I don’t do Chairs. The English don’t do riots, at least not very often. We tend to go on being much put upon almost indefinitely. Chamberlain had the same dea in 1938. We reached our hour of decision then and may do so again now. Or we may just carry on into the vanishing point.
To understand why we might do so one must first distinguish between England’s multi-racial composition and, say, that of France or Holland.
The French have a mountainous difficulty right now, today. No one knows the extent of the non-European population, most of it Mahgreb Moslems, of course. 10 million is perfectly possible (out of a total said to be 60 million). Some put the number at 14 million. The French media speak of 4, 5 or 6 million (figures strangely familiar to the English). But it’s out of control, anyway, with Shariah law said to be filling the vaccuum where the French State and the French people have been sufficiently excluded.
Far too late the French government is now facing the nightmare within its borders, though not facing up to it … headscarves, for heavens’ sake! The new right in France is split on the issue. Le Pen’s Party, seeking electoal rspectability, favours assimilation. Intellectuals such as Alain de Benoist analyse the issue in cultural, not racial terms and have endeavoured to use Gramsci’s ideas against the Gramscians. But events may well be moving beyond their remit, and favouring the analysis of Guillaume Faye (with which, as it happens, I have much sympathy).
Faye sees the demographic/bio-cultural crisis in France as the grounding for race war, there being no other option open to Frenchmen save to relinquish their lands and accept dominion, then extinction. He is, therefore, seeking to prepare public opinion for the gravest of decisions – and, necessarily, an extra-parliamentary decision.
No one can say with confidence that such a decision will not be taken. The French have a single, well-defined and visible opponent – no question about it. The dynamics of the situation are well set and are unlikely to be changed by anything French politicans can do. All that is required is extremis consonant with the sudden education of the public and the victory of a single idea, a single, perhaps life-preserving solution: to fight.
It is frightening. But this is what France has to look forward to because the political will to trust the people on third world immigration was lacking from the beginning. It has been the same here, of course. But we lack one singular, extraordinarily unsympathetic target against which to mobilise. And that lack could consign us to a different path, and not the path of survival. There are many voices that would urge us down that path. The tranzi ones you know well. We may hear a few of the others as a result of this comment.
Aside from them and the general, progressive zeitgeist that somewhat frothily obtains in urban areas – and to which those voices belong – there are other negatives to overcome. Prime among these is a complete lack of intellectual focus on the right. There are some seeds – Migration Watch, for example – but the debate is conducted in a typically British, restrained manner. Accordingly, it is never brutally frank. The liberating honesty and radical thinking of a Faye is conspicuously absent. On top of that we have to contend with the BNP, a perfect gift to all those who wish to see the browning of Britain. Regardless of anything it might do about its public image, the BNP is utterly compromised and a roadblock to any meaningful polarisation of opinion.
On the plus side we have the French. They have advanced further along the road and must come to the critical hour before us. Liberation movements jump national borders, after all. We also have the unfolding of the science of human difference. We have the fact that, anyway, issues of “blood and soil” go with the grain of human nature. Our human nature has not been fatefully degraded by the tranzi programme or by the RDNM notions of the fashionable classes. Lastly, we have that pure love that people ordinarily have for their countries, and that may be the most telling factor of them all.
But right now there aren’t many people writing these incendiary things. It’s a lonely occupation. The getting of optimism is no mean feat.
Verity,
You’ve just made a best friend of Charles Copeland. Nobody better on the IQ debate.
Excellent post, David. I was going to comment about the NewSpeak style redefinition of Britishness that Trevor Phillips seems to be embarking on but Gustave got there first. So instead, I’ll ask in the interests of promoting Englishness, is anyone organising a St George’s day party this year?
Guessed – Good analysis, despite the dig at me.
The thing about France is, no one is shy about saying they hate the N African immigrants. Believe me, political correctness in that respect hasn’t caught on here – but, as in England, the politicians wave away the very reasonable concerns of the electorate with lofty dismissiveness. Jacques Chirac got the shock of his life a few months ago on a state visit to Algeria. Instead of proceeding in his motorcade with kingly acknowledgements of the admiring crowds, he was greeted with violent jeering and shouts throughout his entire progression from the airport of one word: “Visas!”
So far as I know, there are no no-go areas for the police in French cities. If someone calls for help, they go. But they are met with hatred, hostily and the old code of omerta. No one saw anything. No one knows anything. If it was a girl who called the police and the neighbours find out, she will be gang raped as a punishment. The same applies to ambulancemen and fire fighters. People who are there to help them are met with abuse. I have read of them shoving small refrigerators out of windows onto firefighters. They throw potted plants and various heavy things out of the windows to hit ambulancemen.
Most of these estates – which are very nicely kept up, by the way – well-landscaped and maintained – have around a 50% indigenous population, and of course, their fear and anger are unanswered by the politicians.
Actually, until now. Guessed, you were wrong to sneer at the headscarf ban. It is a perfectly intelligent move, and it’s a brave one. And it only applies to school premises. These schoolgirls are not wearing the hijab because they want to – no matter what they’ve been trained to say. Young girls want to be like other young girls – not different and marked out. (And they want to look like the young girls they see on TV.) It is forced on them by their fathers and brothers, who don’t want boys and men “looking at” their daughters and sisters.
There was going to be a massive, angry rally in Paris with hordes of Muslims – especially young girls (accompanied by their fathers and brothers, needless to add) carrying signs that said: France is my country. The veil is my life. At its most generous, and really stretching the guesstimate, they got around 20,000. Out of a national population of six million. It is the veil that is keeping these little girls from integrating, and that is how their fathers want it. But not the mothers. There was a survey done (away from the men), and 40% of Muslim women said they approved of the ban.
That 40% are probably youngish mothers, third generation, forced to wear the veil to school themselves and aware of how separating it is. They don’t want it for their daughters. In France, no one is going to hire someone who turns up for a job interview in a hijab. They’re not even allowed to wear veils if they work in mairies or other government premises because France is a secular society. So being trained to wear a veil is what keeps these girls and women in the house and obedient. The Muslim women who have careers, or even just jobs, have modern hairstyles, they wear makeup and smart clothes. In other words, they’re integrated.
Frankly, this was a very brave move by Jacques Chirac (I know, I know, but he did it) and Jack Lange – both of whom were shocked into action by a movie about the estates called The Wild Girl. The French legislature backed them by around 98%.
Interestingly enough (if you’re still reading), this proposed law gave the green light to TV, which had kept the matter of the aggressive Muslim population firmly under the mat up until then. Suddenly, there was an outbreak of eye-popping candour, to say the least.
Another factor that will move the process forward in France is, Marine Le Pen, having taken over the party when her father, who is nevertheless still very active, retired, is softening the image of the party. If she is successful, people will no longer feel badly about voting for the party, and this will concentrate the minds of the elite at the Quai d’Orsay.
I will repeat one more time, Trevor Philips is lying. This is all to deflect attention from Blair’s struggling around in the deep poo. The word ‘multiculturalism’ is going to be replaced with ‘assimilation’. That is all. Expect nothing more. Same old, same old – unless the British, who are a very passive people – do something about it.
Anybody who really wants to know what Trevor Phillips thinks should read his speech in Amsterdam on 26 February “Is integration still possible?”
He is a very good, very personable and very effective speaker and he speaks frankly and clearly.
I am grateful to him for introducing me to Shakespeare’s thoughts on the subject of economic migrants contained in a powerful and moving speech by Thomas More to workmen fearful of competition for their jobs.. You can read his speech on (Link)Of course, Phillips’s speech contains nonsense that has to be analysed and countered but he is worth locking horns with.
Gerald Hatrup – Trevor Philips called the Metropolitan Police and reported Kilroy-Silk for writing that some Muslim regimes supported amputation and mutilated women. Even had this not been true, you can’t libel a whole religion. Further, Philips tried to get Kilroy-Silk fired from the BBC – but as Kilroy Silk owns the production company that produces his show, this proved to be a bitter disappointment. However, he managed to get the show cancelled.
He is a good buddy of Tony Blair. You are known by the company you keep. I don’t care what he said in his speech, he is a thought dictator and is burrowing away at forcing alien ways on the British.
He looks to be in his fifties. People in their fifties don’t suddenly wake up one morning with a completely different point of view. The Kilroy-Silk episode was only a couple of months ago.
Guessedworker – As you say in France at least there is some real intellectual opposition to the Islamic invasion. Besides Guillaume Faye (more here: (Link)), I’d recommend the works of Alexandre del Valle (his homepage is here: (Link)).
Verity writes:
“The Muslim women who have careers, or even just jobs, have modern hairstyles, they wear makeup and smart clothes. In other words, they’re integrated.”
That’s about 10% of all Muslim women – the smartest, and they’re also the ones who have the fewest children. Employers in the private sector don’t hire women who wear hijabs because they wear hijabs but because they’re cognitively disadvantaged, like most Muslims of Arab descent. Their cognitive disadvantages are, of course, the ultimate Islamic advantage — the female womb. And the problem is not how to remove the hijab — it’s how to remove the people that wear the hijab, or at least to prevent them from becoming a majority in the country. Remember that France’s birthrate is 2.1 per female — but probably a good third of those females are of North African or sub-Saharan origin.
Welcome to the Dysgenic Republic of France.
Sticken by unaccustomed honesty the Chair, Mr Trevor Phillips, of the CRE addresses a shocked audience of Dutch tranzis.
“Is integration still possible? The history of Britain answers this question completely. It was, through the medium of like populations from neighbouring areas. But meaningful immigration of that kind (literally one’s kin to whom one is kind) ended with the French protestant Huguenots and cannot be mimicked by third world populations with nothing but superficial historical ties to the indigenes.
“Nonetheless, the process grinds on because national politicians are in thrall to a marxist and pseudo-humanitarian agenda and have not the courage to admit their past errors or to police our borders effectively.
“Integration is how we force the process on the indegenes, whether or not they wish it or it can work. British people have accepted this travesty thusfar because we’ve managed to keep them pretty much distracted with other things and told them there is no alternative. Forget it, you are history … that sort of thing. The role of government is to do more and more of this. It’s a challenge but somehow we cope.
“I am here today to ratchet that up a few hundred degrees and claim that Newton liked black people and was himself keen to integrate them into society. Indeed, Newton was the illegitimate son of a freeman of West African origin who discovered gravity and the Golden Delicious and met Newton’s mother regularly after Vespers in the orchard …”
(Cut to end of speech for reasons of plagiaristic exhaustion)
“… The best part of it is this:
“I can hardly keep a straight face as I suggest that so-called integration works for the natives. I love putting the boot in like that. Of course, my task isn’t made any easier if they wake up and point out the obvious flaws in this. It could be risky, too. I don’t want these white buggers holding me responsible for migrants who cause problems over which they (the natives) are permitted no control. I don’t want to be blamed for all the failures that, frankly, were going on long before I got this really very tidy job. I just want to keep banging on about new Britons and old coallescing around nice, cuddly values … the Queen, Chicken Tikka Marsala, things we can all pay lip service to but flush down the pan in private. And I want to keep the welfare flowing, obviously. We need much more welfare because, in the end, welfare IS integration.
“Otherwise, by turning off the tap I have absolutely political base at all.”
Guessed – Ha ha! V good! Very well done!
Gerald Hartrup – I went to the link you provided of Philips’s speech and it was the same old multiculti clap trap dressed up in flattery, inevitability and “integration”. He is saying the same old rubbish and calling it by a new name. Cannot you see this?
Yes,
It’s worth reading Phillips’ unctious speech in full. I liked this in particular:
“[A] society in which there are twice as many African Caribbean men in jail as there are on campus has a problem; and a society in which the lifetime earnings of the average Pakistani man is £300,000 less than the average white man in the same town, with the same education, qualifications has a major problem.”
No mention, needless to say, that the ‘problem’ in question might be the high rate of genetically determined Black criminality and the genetically determined cognitive difficulties which beset both the Black and Pakistani communities. No mention of the fact that Indians and Jews are ‘over-represented’ in high-status positions by comparison with White gentiles … and that this over-representation is hardly due to ‘environmental’ reasons.
Dalrymple
Hope this link works. The divine Dalrymple has a long column in this spring’s City Journal on Islam in Europe. Makes many good points.
(Have Your Say on Multiculturalism
Some discussion on this over at (Don’t) Have Your Say — which for a change, actually seems to be allowing people to have their say. And the dislike of multiculturalism and the racism industry shown in these comments is intense.
Hello, Susan! Thanks so much for the link to Theodore Dalrymple! That article is so lucid and so full of meat that I’ll go back and read it again. It was astonishing. Clearly, yes, now that he explains it, the noise we hear from Islam is its death rattle. Unlike other religions, it has nowhere to go. I suspect that the Gramscians and Marxists intuited that, and that is the reason they forced the Islamics on civilised societies like Britain and France in such great numbers. They were a tool. Thank you again for that excellent link, Susan.
Re the Beeb, which frankly I think is hearing its own death rattle, yes, I had seen that thread over on (Don’t) Have Your Say and I suspect that, having trailed it, they were obliged to run some comments and simply didn’t get any positive ones from their point of view.
They will do what they always do when they don’t get a sufficient number of comments from stupid people; they will take the thread off the main board and relegate it to an also-ran. Just watch.
Susan – I just went back to the Beeb’s (Don’t) Have Your Say and see I was mistaken. And so were you. The comments are almost 100% positive – for Toneboy’s identifying integration and assimilation as the problem!
They are all so stupid that they have allowed themselves to be deflected, or all so clever that they are furthering … nah.
Sample: “One can only conclude that there is no more money in the multicultural pot to go round for all the greedy, whining, liberals who set up multiculturalism in the first place. A new and profitable offensive on the public purse is obviously being planned by these same greedy, whining, liberals with the twin clarion cries of assimilation and integration. I guarantee a lot of money will be spent on initiatives to keep the race advisors in clover for many years to come.
Mike, Middlesbrough”
Mike from Middlesbrough seems to be a bit more clued in than most of the posters, who are busy “welcoming” this thoughtful “new” government initiative.
Verity,
Yes, I got a laugh out of Mike from Middlesbrough’s comments. Truer words were never spoken.
It may be that most commentators have fallen for the Tonester’s “We have always been at war” sleight of hand, as you say.
Still, I regard it as positive that people are questioning the dangerous and divisive policy of “multiculturalism” at all. A year ago you would have seen a lot more of the typical “I am a citizen of the world” tranzi nonsense.
People are realizing that if you are going to have a multi-ethnic society (which is now a fait accompli in Britain and most parts of Europe), the US-style melting pot approach is far superior than the “all cultures are equal” tranzi approach.
(With the melting pot analogy, I am speaking specifically of the US “civil religion” that requires that US citizenship duties, rights and responsibilities take precedence over all other ties, be them cultural, religous, nationalist or other.)
Verity — do you participate in British expat societies in France? If by chance you run into Dalrymple there, you’ll let us know won’t you? 🙂
Susan,
Two facts of life:-
1. The average IQ of male prisoners in the UK is 85.
2. In the time of the Moghuls, Sikhs were pressed into the official faith on pain of death. Many Sikh women actually chose death for themselves and their children rather than convert. This is the kind of extreme genetic filter that, over millenia, raised the Ashkenazic average IQ to 116. Sikhs are not in that class of course. But the best of them survived in their faith. They are of superior average intelligence to Muslims.
Theodore Dalrymple’s poetic writing is hard to improve upon. But his conclusions could definitely be improved by an understanding of the heritability of IQ. He makes the classic error of assuming there to be a standard path along which human populations must advance, maturing themselves and their institutions as they go. This is simply untrue. Muslims are not treading towards the humanistic materialism that lights our world. We came by this way but our average IQ is 100. Muslim populations average about 90 to 94, except for those of sub-Saharan Africa.
So, can one subscribe in any way to Dalrymple’s novel conclusion that “the fanatics and the bombers do not represent a resurgence of unreformed, fundamentalist Islam, but its death rattle?” Well, only if one is so intensely clever and well-informed as to be able to extrapolate from the characteristics of the many Muslim populations. I can’t. You can’t. Dalrymple can’t.
Best, then, to take the beast at face value and be all the better prepared for it.
Guessedworker,
Dalrymple does mention the problem of consanguinity, which he says is present in nearly all Islamic cultures, but not in the Sikh culture.
I would hazard that consanguinity is a very significant factor. We know it causes congenital birth defects — among them mental defects, very likely.
OK, Guessworker, but I liked that “death rattle” bit.
Kissing cousins are said to have produced a certain backwardness in backwoods America, too.
Intra-race differences generally reward mate selectors. It’s well known that we find some sweat aromas more acceptable in the opposite sex than others. The most aceptable tend to demonstrate an inherent resistance to locally occurring deseases that differs from the resistance we already possess. The widest possible range of resistance is therefore available for passing on to our children.
But I guess those Muslim loving couples get a raw deal here, too.
Verity: You were 100 percent correct. The BBC didn’t like how the (Don’t) Have Your Say thread on integration was going and they have now taken it off the front page.
Guessed: Yes, I believe that most of the Southern states allow cousin marriages. But not just backwoods Americans — look at Victoria and Albert’s progeny. One hemophiliac son, numerous hemophiliac grandsons and great-grandsons, and then Prince Eddy, Duke of Clarence was sickly and widely believed to have been slightly mentally retarded.
Geore V and May of Teck were related also by blood, though not first cousins, and the Duke of Windsor was physically underdeveloped and reportedly had a malformed weenie.
I suppose it was only the stout Scots genetic contribution of Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon that saved the current round from descendening into complete gaga-ness, as Elizabeth and Phillip are also related several times over.
I believe the phrase is, “Empty lies the head that wears the crown.”
Chris Goodman writes:
The Middle East is West Asia.
Alas, that wouldn’t fit the Nineteen Eighty-Four analogy. Here’s one of the thoughts of George Orwell’s ‘Winston Smith’ character before he endured a corrective re-thinking process:
After Winston’s mental re-corrective procedure, involving rats, electrodes, and the Labour, sorry, Inner Party, this is what Winston changes his mind to:
There’s a great page about 1984, here, where you can read the whole book online.
Verity,
I didn’t get around to thanking you for your long explanation of the headscarf ban. I found it very interesting and informative. I am not, though, encouraged that a part – and possibly a large part – of “French” Muslim womanhood yearns to be free of the veil and of the most paternalistic apects of their societies and religion. Integration with western social mores does not offer a respite for white France. It only offers a respite for the cowardly politicians. It would move the French closer to the English situation but no closer to racial survival.
Integration is but a more comfortable path to oblivion. The headscarf ban is a gesture in this direction but it is still the wrong direction for me. In the end one must choose between survival into the distant future of (only) remnants of European culture or of Europeans themselves.
Susan, Verity, GW — just came across the Dalrymple article in City Journal via Arts & Letters Daily. And yes — it’s brilliant but (GW got there first) it’s over-optimistic and doesn’t consider the IQ/race dimension. In fact, that’s quite typical of Dalrymple. He’s one of those conservative ‘environmentalists’ who (for all his brilliance) seems to believe that “It’s all society’s fault” in the sense that crime and bad behaviour could be more or less eliminated if only one chucked the welfare state, privatised schools, etc. Like Melanie Phillips, he seems to shun genetics altogether, though perhaps I’m being unfair.
At any rate, talking about the ‘death rattle’ of an Islamic breeding population that is exploding non-stop seems like whistling in the dark. If the Madrid atrocity is a ‘death rattle’, I’d be quite happy if the Islamists stop rattling for some time.
Guessedworker – Actually, I agree with you. I just wrote my (long) explanation of the headscarf ban because people outside France were so dismissive – calling it intolerant, as though we should have to tolerate religious oppression as part of the rich pattern of life in the West – not understanding it took courage and also served as a warning.
I agree that assimilation of that large a chunk of alien matter that has absolutely no ties to the land, the history, the traditions, achievements and beliefs that made a country what it is, is wrong, wrong, wrong.
By the way, in reaction to Muslims here calling themselves French, the real French have started to refer to themselves as “of the soil”. I find that quite telling, because the only one who understands this feeling of quiet anger and despair is Jean Marie Le Pen.
And now we have the obscenity of Tony B. Liar twisting words to impose his insane will on the British via the transparent method of simply changing the definition of words. In other words, a straightforward, jackbooted NuLab manipulation from the Ministry of Lies – a rebranding excercise. Multiculturalism is to be “rebranded” as “integration”. To a strange mind like Tony Blair’s, words have always meant whatever he wanted them to mean. I have always thought this quite deranged.
Hey! Something’s wrong with this thread! Perry hasn’t shown up yet to tell all you commenters that you are racist hatemongers totally without a clue. Could it…could it be that he’s had a Road to Damascus experience and has seen the light? Nahhhhh….not our Perry. No Abiola Lapite, either. Strange happenings afoot, I fear…
Dan,
I don’t have a problem with “Race”, only with culture. I’d rather live next door to a brown ex-Islamic anyday than a white convert.
“Western” is a state of mind to me, not a skin color.
With reference to the 100k being spent on a school
abroad, I think it a very strange form of equality that white parents are sent to jail if their children to not attend school, yet non whites have a 100K spent to assist in thier non attendance. Such gross double standards are only going to cause anger, which is excatly what toneboy and his gang want. The last thing they want is a united public holding them accountable, such as the War protest in Hyde Park, social division is to thier advantage.