Since 1979 UK governments have deliberately and systematically pursued policies which prioritised the speculative financial industries of London and damaged large scale manufacturing. The apotheosis of this policy was the massive transfer of money from everybody in the land to the bankers in 2008 by Gordon Brown.
There are two major results of this forty year policy. The first is that the deliberately engineered manufacturing decline has caused social and economic devastation in the UK outside South East England. The second has been an astonishing accumulation of wealth in a tiny number of hands as income inequality levels have risen to the highest disparity in all of human history, wealth centred in South East England.
This has naturally led to rising discontent among many people in many areas, despite the concentrated use of mass communication media under elite control to spread narratives to contain or divert discontent. But as unrest has continued to threaten control, a particular diversionary narrative has become dominant.
In truth, the cause of mass poverty amidst great wealth is the existence of state structures which direct economic activity to the exclusive benefit of a tiny elite of the ultra-rich. But rather than the ultra-rich who control the state structures, ordinary people are encouraged to blame their own lack of access to resources on immigrants. A false narrative is created whereby the cause of poverty is not the billions and billions monopolised by the ultra-rich, but rather that poor foreigner over there.
This is an argument of stunning intellectual paucity. It depends on a totally false narrative of an economy as a thing of fixed size. In fact, immigration is a massive driver of economic growth. If immigration really made countries poorer, then the United States would be the poorest country in the world and Germany the second poorest. That is plainly untrue. Immigration is not the cause of poverty, quite the reverse. It is only the benefit of millions of energetic new migrants that has prevented deflation in the UK these last few years.
Yet, despite being obvious nonsense, the argument sticks. The ultra-rich succeed in diverting the anger of society at inequality of resources, away from themselves and onto that poor foreigner over there.
And why does this obvious nonsense work? Because it appeals to a deep-rooted, basic, instinct of atavism. Because it appeals to a xenophobia that transcends logic and intelligence. Because it is a simple appeal to racism.
Concern about immigration is racism. A racism deliberately whipped up to divert people from their real enemies.
I can’t believe that a blog and commentators which are supposed to promote intelligent political discourse are promoting the idea that concern about immigration is racist. Has it come to this? Are people that blinded and cuckolded by poltical correctness and cultural marxism? This kind of attitude is exactly what the elite want to see – the promotion of sovereignity as being an inherently racist concept. This is utter nonsense. Racism is defined as persecution or demeaning of other races based on the idea of racial superiority. This has nothing to do with controlling the number of people in to a country. Some might base that on race, which, even if you don’t agree with them, is their right to think under freedom of speech and freedom of thought.But most do not think this – most people base it on civic sovereignity or civic patriotism.
Most countries in the so called third world are monocultural/mono racial-something I don’t seem to remember so called liberals shouting and screaming about in protest. Israel is also a complete ethnocratic regime. But hey, let’s not mention that incase the Zionist controlled media call you bad names. It’s only white European countries who are denounced as evil racist supremacists if they even dare discuss immigration issues-aided by the same corporate mainstream media. This is part of the plan to destroy indegenous European states.
And yes, I’d say most people in the world are prejudiced one way or another – this does not make them racist
“Res Diss- for example, are these ‘sensible British Muslims’ concerned enough to argue against the immigration of another generation of non English speaking spouses,”
Perhaps not argue against – but they certainly do not engage in such a practice themselves nor would they expect their children to do so. The whole idea of arranged marriages is something that is on the wane.
If by “racist” is meant one who recognises that there exist racial differences, then surely everyone is a racist, from Tony Blair who made sure his own children went to an all white school on the other side of London to Billy Bragg the socialist song writer who lives in Burton Bradstock so as to get as far away from non-whites as possible.
Because we all know that West Africans are better sprinters and jumpers than white Europeans, that East Africans are good at long distance, that East Asians (Orientals) have higher IQ than whites and larger brains than whites. These facts are not in dispute, so everyone is therefore a racist.
Just look at what happened when the Windrush generation moved to the UK,Pakistanis, Ugandan Indians, etc. every time immigration was used to pamper and forward right wing views in this country. This little Island nation is always open to the shenanigans of political intrigue,
Anything to divert from the facts of life, the dismantling of the support system of severely disabled people, the nhs and what little democracy existed.
I ca n only advise carers of very severely disabled people to ask to visit their MP’s surgery, put these people in touch with their own cruelty and deception, racism in full action.
If one wants to take notice that is.
Oh dear Craig. Idealism has blinkered you to the reality of mass migration in short timescales, and you then throw racist in, willy nilly, like the neo liberal beneficiaries of the alternative reality known as multi-culturalism.
To whitewash over the human instinct of people grouping together with fellow migrants/countrymen, ghettoization if you like, makes a mockery of those from the indigenous population who dare to worry about evident, and hypothetical results of culture clash. Unknown unknowns. Action/reaction.
Numbers and timescales are key. Take the mildest of reductionist stances, and it’s irrefutable.
Between this, and UDI, your democratic credentials could appear to some to be in question of late.
Agree totally however, on the ‘othering’ of migrants (and as ever really, the poor, to slightly different ends)as a means to deflect attention away from the robbing bastards who have kept the rest down, thus far in human history.
Their default defence strategy. Divide and rule.
And your helping them.
“Suhayl, you’re such a pathetic arse licker.” Can Speccy.
Enjoy your maple syrup muffin, Alfred. Devon is safe in my hands.
************
Mr Russell, thanks very much for your comment at 5.46pm yesterday – I do appreciate it.
Have you done any articles on Barbara Specter? This anti-semitic woman is blaming Jews for immigration. She must think the Coudenhove-Kalergi plan is some kind of Jewish plot.
Please do your duty and Expose her.
This is a curious piece. It starts with the opening premise that the masses are being held down by an elite; further, that that elite is diverting attention from its own holding down of the masses by blaming immigrants.
Rather, then, than take that to its logical conclusion and damn the elites for what they’re doing, the OP then points at the masses and sneers “Racist!” at them. It’s plainly their own, horrible, racist, fault for being diverted.
If only we could all be like the OP who is not racist and who – though, obviously, part of the masses and not at all part of the elite, no sir, no way – somehow has avoided the oppression and the false diversion to see things as they truly are. How lucky the OP is to have his eyes open, and how loathsome the masses are for being such gullible sheeple.
WHS – does this reply satisfy you. I am at the end making reference to an issue Donald Trump had when he hired Polish workers on one of his projects, when there were available American workers. Obviously, the American workers would insist on American standards and wages to do the job; Polish workers relative to their domestic currency would work ( maybe harder than their US counterparts) for less money.
The foregoing happens all over the world where migrants gravitate to countries affording better economic opportunities than their countries of birth.
Trump – as you can accept – is a member of that 1%:-
“We live in a world of chaos where strong commercial ties between clans of mutants develop violence and war to accumulate wealth and who regard liberalism as a threat to their existence.”
So true.
The Great Depression.
Glass-Steagall Act 1933 ( to regulate banking and finance – so as not to have a repeat Great Depression)
Fast forward – we deregulate and repeal Glass- Steagall.
Now – American manufacturing capital migrates to China and what then?
• Environmental standards?
• Uconions?
• Pensions?
• Workmen’s compensation?
• Etc………………
Hey – this is China – not the U.S. of A – so much greater profits at the price of loss of US manufacturing jobs – but the US consumer gets good products at cheap price.
Over now to Donald Trump:-
Where are your hats produced?
Which workers make your brand name shirts?
Why did the Polish workers come over – to provide jobs for domestic workers – duh – huh?
And the game goes on>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>and on>>>>>>>>>>and on…
Above: “Uconions?” – read – Unions.
Migration into Europe – here is an alternative perspective – read on ( click on link):-
http://www.blackagendareport.com/turkey_europe_human_trafficking
Courtenay, interesting link, thanks very much. Turkey was the Ottoman Empire, the inheritor of the Roman Empire, it was a coloniser, it was not colonised. It colonised half of Europe and nearly all Arab countries. It appears to be deploying its state violence in some of its former colonies. In its warmongering, it’s not copying Europe, in may ways it taught Europe – it was the superpower of Europe and at its height, no aspect of European foreign policy could be decided without reference to the Ottoman Empire. On a lighter note, the modern idea of organised military bands, you know, came from the otoman Empire as did much else to do with things military. It dealt in slave trafficking (white, black and everything in between) from the start. It wishes to join the EU, etc. not ‘because it wants to be white’, indeed it has become far more ‘Islamic’ (and so, presumably, ‘not-white’) over the past 15 years since the current Party has been in power. It wants to join for economic reasons, just like Romania/Bulgaria and so on and this would continue to apply regardless of the regime/system in power in Turkey. What kind of “revolution” does the author of the piece have in mind?
Suhayl,
I can’ t speak for the author ( he has to speak for himself).
I can directly express myself.
If you consider Europe from the onset of Portugal into the Congo – I fail to see where the Ottoman Empire features.
I do believe that the author of the piece has some valid points.
His perspective is challenging and that is why I posted it.
Courtenay
“I fail to see where the Ottoman Empire features.” Courtenay
yes, the author does have some valid points.
If you study the history of the C15th to late C17th centuries, you will see that the Ottoman Empire figures absolutely enormously in the politics of Europe (and the Middle East and north Africa and Russia).