In the 1960s and 1970s powerful political movements were born that changed the country over the next 50 years. It is these changes that are behind the train stabbings and most terrorist incidents in England.
It is becoming increasingly obvious that that the nationalist/internationalist paradigm is the most viable and useful way to view and understand the dire events unfolding around us. The old models favoured by academics and pundits no longer apply. This is a very fine account of that process, and deserves to be widely read and pondered.
People who disagree with you are not your or anyone else’s enemy. Hyperbolic language about enemies, loss of culture and so on is simply poorly disguised “great replacement theory”.
As an atheist I find all religious fundamentalism difficult to understand but you are free to follow as you wish just don’t behave in ways that are threatening to those who disagree.
The USA was built on immigration, nobody but native Indians are indigenous. In the UK we we are following what has happened to all empires, the people we conquered and exploited see us as “mother country” who we have spent 50 years or more inviting to fill gaps in our labour market.
As we gave all had to learn over the last few years we can either be welcoming or we can be hostile. I prefer the hand of friendship.
On politics and economics, Trump, Farage, Badenoch offer immigration as a means of focusing our attention away from the rampant inequality caused by the greed of the rich and you seem to have bought the book.
This is not a “Great Replacement Theory”, 30-40% of the UK vote will soon be in the hands of recent migrants. There is no “Theory”, this is happening. The migrant population is very pro-Internationalism, pro-migration, very pro-Labour and is far more likely to want military rule etc. What then of “British Values”?. It is appalling that our democracy has been the object of demographic warfare.
I want to stress that the migrants are not our problem. The Internationalists who have weaponised them are our problem.
This smacks of indoctrination. You make no concrete point and simply throw out "Racist" as an insult. There is nothing racist in the article, it points out that Internationalists like you have overseen a mass migration of epic proportions that will inevitably cause unrest and crime.
The Internationalists have done this on purpose, as the text amply demonstrates. Why? Because they want the free movement of labour, goods and money across the world and desire an end to Nation States. The wealthy and powerful Internationalists have used their power to indoctrinate people such as yourself so that you think shouting "racist" is an appropriate response to the desire to have a Democratic Nation State that is united with a common set of values.
They have also changed the demographics of the country so that it is becoming Internationalist. Democracy is not viable if a faction wages demographic warfare against the rest. Surely you can see this?
Again, you are a racist. Everyone should have the right to move wherever they wish and live however they wish. One way to fight back against the billionaires is to move to somewhere you can sell your labour for a higher price, which us partly why the billionaires fund anti-migrant nonsense.
"Again, you are a racist. Everyone should have the right to move wherever they wish and live however they wish."
You have introduced a definition of racism as believing in separate Nations States. This is not widely accepted.
Consider a democratic country of a million people bordering a large, populous neighbour such as China. If people can move freely it would take very little time for the local population to be overwhelmed and the smaller country would become, culturally, part of China. Large, highly populated countries would spread out to occupy all of the surrounding land. (In fact China is dealing with the Tibetan and Uighur 'problems' by using this type of Demographic Warfare).
The end result of your proposal would be to eradicate differences between people globally. This might sound good to an 'end of history' socialist but it is just using Demographic Warfare to create a global empire.
Your policy that "Everyone should have the right to move wherever they wish and live however they wish." is an approval of colonisation. A better policy is that "every country has the right to separate development and to nurture its culture and people".
You seem to view a country as an economy rather than a place where a people raise children according to their preferred public culture.
Notice that your comment is devoid of any content except a series of condemnations, such is the power of indoctrination (it also causes emotions such as anger for no reason). You cannot quite grasp what you believe except that the Democratic Nationalists must be wrong, worse than wrong, they are fascists and racists...
You seem to have missed the word humanity, perhaps you don’t understand how broad a word that is in terms of culture, rights and responsibilities to the communities that offer shelter and nurture, freedom and fairness - that’s just for starters
You seem to be angry whereas I am hopeful that our collective humanity will find a way to recognise your desire to scapegoat the “other” is a slippery slope to the type of Christian nationalism taking root in the USA
How is opposing the destruction of the British way of life to 'scapegoat the other'?
Almost 40% of people in England and Wales who are under 45 identify as migrants. Had the migrations not been so huge we might think these new people could integrate but Manchester, Birmingham and London all have minority English populations. Who integrates with whom?
The Internationalists did this to us on purpose. They have changed the population to support Internationalism and will marginalise the English vote within a couple of decades so that they can get their way (termination of sovereignty with free movement of goods, people, money). In doing this they have totally disregarded the desire of the population to live in a society with a single public culture and a unified set of values.
Parents want their children to learn unity and English values. Instead they are learning to lose their identity. The values of a nation inspire the people. Some of your values such as being kind and tolerant are English values. Some of your values such as changing the population to support your Internationalism should be criminal offences and are simply BBC propaganda.
Sadly it is you who are the enemy, not the migrants that your faction have planted here. Somehow the migrants will have to be absorbed and integrated into a united country and further migration halted.
Excellent article - thank you.
It is becoming increasingly obvious that that the nationalist/internationalist paradigm is the most viable and useful way to view and understand the dire events unfolding around us. The old models favoured by academics and pundits no longer apply. This is a very fine account of that process, and deserves to be widely read and pondered.
🤣🤣🤣
Not one word of that hilarious wank is true.
People who disagree with you are not your or anyone else’s enemy. Hyperbolic language about enemies, loss of culture and so on is simply poorly disguised “great replacement theory”.
As an atheist I find all religious fundamentalism difficult to understand but you are free to follow as you wish just don’t behave in ways that are threatening to those who disagree.
The USA was built on immigration, nobody but native Indians are indigenous. In the UK we we are following what has happened to all empires, the people we conquered and exploited see us as “mother country” who we have spent 50 years or more inviting to fill gaps in our labour market.
As we gave all had to learn over the last few years we can either be welcoming or we can be hostile. I prefer the hand of friendship.
On politics and economics, Trump, Farage, Badenoch offer immigration as a means of focusing our attention away from the rampant inequality caused by the greed of the rich and you seem to have bought the book.
This is not a “Great Replacement Theory”, 30-40% of the UK vote will soon be in the hands of recent migrants. There is no “Theory”, this is happening. The migrant population is very pro-Internationalism, pro-migration, very pro-Labour and is far more likely to want military rule etc. What then of “British Values”?. It is appalling that our democracy has been the object of demographic warfare.
I want to stress that the migrants are not our problem. The Internationalists who have weaponised them are our problem.
Mate, loosen your tinfoil hat or something. What a load of racist drivel.
This smacks of indoctrination. You make no concrete point and simply throw out "Racist" as an insult. There is nothing racist in the article, it points out that Internationalists like you have overseen a mass migration of epic proportions that will inevitably cause unrest and crime.
The Internationalists have done this on purpose, as the text amply demonstrates. Why? Because they want the free movement of labour, goods and money across the world and desire an end to Nation States. The wealthy and powerful Internationalists have used their power to indoctrinate people such as yourself so that you think shouting "racist" is an appropriate response to the desire to have a Democratic Nation State that is united with a common set of values.
They have also changed the demographics of the country so that it is becoming Internationalist. Democracy is not viable if a faction wages demographic warfare against the rest. Surely you can see this?
Again, you are a racist. Everyone should have the right to move wherever they wish and live however they wish. One way to fight back against the billionaires is to move to somewhere you can sell your labour for a higher price, which us partly why the billionaires fund anti-migrant nonsense.
"Again, you are a racist. Everyone should have the right to move wherever they wish and live however they wish."
You have introduced a definition of racism as believing in separate Nations States. This is not widely accepted.
Consider a democratic country of a million people bordering a large, populous neighbour such as China. If people can move freely it would take very little time for the local population to be overwhelmed and the smaller country would become, culturally, part of China. Large, highly populated countries would spread out to occupy all of the surrounding land. (In fact China is dealing with the Tibetan and Uighur 'problems' by using this type of Demographic Warfare).
The end result of your proposal would be to eradicate differences between people globally. This might sound good to an 'end of history' socialist but it is just using Demographic Warfare to create a global empire.
Your policy that "Everyone should have the right to move wherever they wish and live however they wish." is an approval of colonisation. A better policy is that "every country has the right to separate development and to nurture its culture and people".
See https://therenwhere.substack.com/p/migration-is-now-colonialism
What an absolute heap of moralizing self justification for an idea totally lacking in humanity or even a basic grasp of economics.
You seem to view a country as an economy rather than a place where a people raise children according to their preferred public culture.
Notice that your comment is devoid of any content except a series of condemnations, such is the power of indoctrination (it also causes emotions such as anger for no reason). You cannot quite grasp what you believe except that the Democratic Nationalists must be wrong, worse than wrong, they are fascists and racists...
You seem to have missed the word humanity, perhaps you don’t understand how broad a word that is in terms of culture, rights and responsibilities to the communities that offer shelter and nurture, freedom and fairness - that’s just for starters
The article does not focus on asylum seekers, most of the population change is due to legal migration. Your moral high grounding is non-sequitur.
Perhaps you should ask why you immediately tried to use a moral highground argument. This is typical of indoctrination.
You seem to be angry whereas I am hopeful that our collective humanity will find a way to recognise your desire to scapegoat the “other” is a slippery slope to the type of Christian nationalism taking root in the USA
How is opposing the destruction of the British way of life to 'scapegoat the other'?
Almost 40% of people in England and Wales who are under 45 identify as migrants. Had the migrations not been so huge we might think these new people could integrate but Manchester, Birmingham and London all have minority English populations. Who integrates with whom?
The Internationalists did this to us on purpose. They have changed the population to support Internationalism and will marginalise the English vote within a couple of decades so that they can get their way (termination of sovereignty with free movement of goods, people, money). In doing this they have totally disregarded the desire of the population to live in a society with a single public culture and a unified set of values.
Parents want their children to learn unity and English values. Instead they are learning to lose their identity. The values of a nation inspire the people. Some of your values such as being kind and tolerant are English values. Some of your values such as changing the population to support your Internationalism should be criminal offences and are simply BBC propaganda.
Sadly it is you who are the enemy, not the migrants that your faction have planted here. Somehow the migrants will have to be absorbed and integrated into a united country and further migration halted.