Majorityrights Central > Category: Awakenings

A Guardian thread I was patronising today threw up a very premature but always interesting question from a serial CiF commenter and (I think) BNP member:-

skimmer

13 Mar 09, 9:02pm (about 2 hours ago)

Cookfield

Could you please lay out a working model for fair and humane repatriation with regard to this issue. I don’t think this has ever been done before on CiF. I think it is time to debate this because of the approaching conditions.

( I used to get censored for suggesting a relationship between gobalism- immigration and pending economic collapse, and, why we should be digging our back gardens up- that was a while before any of the current economic chaos began - seems quite relevant now, just as some form of repatriation will become when they fully grasp the situation that is developing.)

A few moments later he spoiled things a little with this rider:-

skimmer

13 Mar 09, 9:14pm (about 2 hours ago)

Also, can someone please suggest how we can start ot reassure, further integrate and begin reward those groups who have settled here and made a positive contribution to this country. Their last images of our country are certainly not going to be through the closing tailgates of Hercules transport planes.

Of course, it’s too early for working models.  The data required to build a model to include political matters such as possible strategies, and budgetary matters such the number of movements involved, the costs of those movements, available finance, social cost reductions, and so on, is nowhere near assessible on the spur of the moment!  To put such a model together will surely take a Commission sitting for many months and comprising the most competent political strategists, demographers, Treasury auditors and foreign affairs specialists available.

So, given my profound limitations, this was what I could say to Skimmer:-

READ MORE...

Simon Darby posted this interesting piece of film on his website.  We all saw the little notch of al Muhajiroun members taking the opportunity to protest the presence of British soldiers in Muslim lands.  It would, in my view, have been perfectly legitimate had these Muslim soldiers not been present in our land.  Their presence on the streets of Luton, however, was quickly resolved by those who came down to applaud the Royal Anglians - a denouement, as Simon Darby points out, not shown to the nation by the BBC.  Can’t imagine why.

by exPF

The biggest psychological revolution I see whites undergoing is this: a revoking of their trust. What Putnam observed statistically I observe anecdotally: the collapse of trust in newly diversified societies.

I experienced the transition from high-trust to low-trust when I moved from the all-white setting of my youth to a diversified international school. In my early teens I welcomed the non-white world with all the psychological disarmament a young kid could respectably muster. When one considers that this imperative had been insinuated into every television program I watched growing up, and the alternative viewpoint never even given so much as a respectful hearing, its clear: I was born to play this role.

So the gates were opened and my young sensibility thrown into a variegated world with literally no prior knowledge. That prior cultural knowledge about human groups had after all been declared the source of all immorality. We lived in a society which gleefully depicted murder, adultery and licentiousness on television, so all the old commandments were pretty much up for grabs; except that newly minted 11th commandment: Thou shalt love wogs as thyself.

Nobody told me that my world of familial love and kindness, more-or-less good manners, of joking with one another, trusting one another, being silly and having fun together … nobody told me that this world only extended so far. Its one thing to leave the house and be exposed to “the real world”, i.e. the white world of strangers, colleagues and acquaintances. I suppose that can be rough - you might get swindled, or get in a bar-fight. Mostly though, people will be indifferent, well-bred people will be largely affable to you.

Holy hell, contrast that with exposure to the non-white world! Of actually living with minorities in large numbers! Where every male who shows the wog resistance is marked for corporal punishment! Where every environment, everywhere, is fraught with some kind of ‘tension’. Where every slightly attractive white female becomes a target and prize of conquest.

READ MORE...

JWH has a post up about the apparent awakening of Peter Frost.  He is an anthropologist whose work we have featured in the past, and for which he garnered a certain degree of respect.  Now, it seems that, to quote JWH, “he has wised up”.

I can’t find the original post in which the following statement by Peter Frost was published, so I am quoting direct from JWH’s post:-

I used to consider myself an anti-racist. I even once sat on the board of directors of an anti-racist organization. Today, I have trouble recognizing myself in what this belief-system has become.

Why did I identify with anti-racism? I saw it as a means to defend non-European peoples who had become politically and demographically marginalized, often to the brink of extinction. This was, and still is, the case with Canada’s First Nations, but it’s also the case with many other peoples, including some that are oppressed by governments in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. As an anthropologist in particular, I saw anti-racism as a moral duty.

I don’t believe in conspiracy theories. But I do believe that ideologies can be exploited to serve new ends. In this case, anti-racism has gradually become an instrument of political disenfranchisement and demographic replacement – in a word, the very thing it used to combat.

This gradual change has turned what was once an ideology of the Left into an ideology of the Right. Anti-racism now serves the interests of a corporate globalist elite for whom the free flow of labor dovetails with their belief in the free flow of capital and trade. For these people, it doesn’t matter that their ideology will destroy long-existing cultures and populations. They don’t even feel guilty about what they’re doing. Anti-racism gives them a clean conscience.

So, is this a person who has really undergone a damascene conversion, and whom we might now expect to join the ranks of the fighters for European survival?

Let’s see.

READ MORE...

Today the Telegraph and the Daily Mail both carried a turning-worm story about a government study into attitudes by ethnicity towards the country generally and public services in particular.  The interesting finding is that the attitudes of “whites” - a group which may or may not be synonimous to the English - and of all non-whites are growing divergent.

This is good.  This is the beginning of a zeitgeist of rejection.  No doubt it is influenced by the current poor economic outlook. But minds are made-up and attitudes will only harden.  Labour and the Conservatives issue their regulation calls for unity, but it is a total waste of breath.

From the Mail:-

One third of whites claim they are victims of racism A growing number of white people believe they are the victims of racial prejudice in Britain, official research has found.

Almost one in three - 29 per cent - said they now expected to be treated worse than other races by key public services.

And the number of whites claiming to have been refused a job or discriminated against at work for reasons of race has doubled in the last five years, according to the Government study.

Seven per cent believed they had failed to win a promotion because of their race, up from three per cent in 2003.

Three per cent alleged they had been turned down for a job for the same reason, up from one per cent.

In addition, the study reveals that most ethnic minorities living in Britain feel stronger ties to the nation than whites.

One in six white Britons feel only a slight sense of belonging to the nation.

Whites also now feel less able than other ethnic groups to influence decisions affecting their local area and the country as a whole.

For example, 41 per cent of black African, 36 per cent of Bangladeshi and 35 per cent of Indian people feel they have a say in decisions affecting Britain, compared to 19 per cent of white people.

The survey of 15,000 people - ordered by Communities Secretary Hazel Blears - is likely to prompt a fierce debate about the disillusionment of the white majority.

The Tories blame Labour’s race relations strategy.

Tory communities spokesman Baroness Warsi said: ‘It’s no wonder more people feel there is an increase in racism when Labour’s multicultural industry is forever talking up what divides us rather than concentrating on what unites us.’

The research found that overall, whites are more likely than those from ethnic minorities to believe that racial prejudice and discrimination is getting worse.

Fifty-eight per cent said they believe there was more racial prejudice now than five years ago, compared to 44 per cent who were interviewed in 2001.

The figure for ethnic minority communities has hardly changed, at 32 per cent.

The survey found that 29 per cent of white people expect to be treated worse than other groups by at least one of eight public services, including the police, prisons, courts, Crown Prosecution service, probation service, local housing organisations, schools or GPs.

Whites identified council housing departments or housing associations as the most likely to discriminate against them.

The proportion of members of ethnic minority groups who expected to face discrimination from one of the eight bodies fell from 38 per cent in 2001 to 34 per cent.

But it remains higher than for white people in many categories, particularly the police.

Tory MP Greg Hands, a member of the Commons communities and local government select committee, said: ‘It’s a dangerous phenomenon if any part of the population feels they are being systematically discriminated against.’

Overall, 84 per cent of people felt they belonged strongly to the country, including 45 per cent who said they belonged very strongly.

However, nine out of ten Pakistani and Indian people said they felt a strong sense of belonging, compared to 84 per cent of whites.

Do you remember what it was like as a sleepyhead when you came into contact with free thinking for the first time?  Was it a taste of a new freedom - what “PF”, in describing an encounter with life’s most forbidden truth, once poeticised as “the delicious pleasures of racism”?  Or was it perhaps more constrained and personal ... more a fascination with some question particular to you and your life experience?

What made you push on past the barriers of artificial disapprobation?  What made you feel you might belong in this bracing new intellectual environment, instead of being mechanically repelled by it?

These are important questions for every site-owner, every forum poster, every blogger and commenter like us because, whatever our specialism, we are all in the business of outreach, all trying to communicate our ideas and create some beneficial response.  It’s an uneven battle, of course.  We are fighting against a zeitgeist of self-destruction that stretches wall-to-wall across the Western world, and is reinforced constantly through every available mainstream medium (not that all of it works).

Getting our message out, whether it’s one of political analysis, immigration, race-realism, the JQ, the global elite, or even what might pompously be called the meta-theory that sometimes appears here, is a labour of love.  We want to succeed.  We want to ... have to touch the minds of our sleeping compatriots.

So presentation plainly matters.

READ MORE...

This is a tale of two newspaper articles.  One is a Philip Johnston piece run in yesterday’s Telegraph, reporting on the upcoming report by the House of Lords economic affairs committee into the true economic benefits of foreign workers in Britain.  The other is a Tim Hames piece in The Times, reporting on the stone-cold certainty of a first seat for the BNP on the London Assembly when Londoners go to the polls on May 1st.

The articles themselves were pretty fair.  Philip Johnston has form for bravery on the Great Existential Question.  Tim Hames hasn’t, but he only managed one reference to Fascism.

You can read the articles if you wish.  But my purpose here is not to draw your attention to them, but to their threads.

Both are long for right-wing rags (the Guardian crowd love the sound of their own typing).  Thusfar the Telegraph has reached well over 200 comments, the Times well over 100.  Here are a few examples, among many, of sound thinking.

From the Telegraph:-

“Even putting economics aside, who the hell are you to judge who is and isn’t worthy of a better standard of living, just for having the misfortune of being born in a different country? Why is a British citizen’s well-being so much more important than a Pole’s? Does carrying a British passport somehow make you more worthy? I smell a racist.”  sp0rk in New York

the government is elected by the people of the nation to represent the interests of the nation, that’s really rather simple and fundamental to the way politics work.

We do not owe anyone else anything, if immigration is in the interests of a nation then that’s fine, it becomes a contract of mutual benefit between state and migrant. No nation on earth works anything like you seem to want it to be, nor should it. Why should a migrant hold any nation to ransome and “demand” anything? What use would a illiterate peasant farmer from a 3rd world nation be to a post-industrial, information economy? Yes, no doubt his living standards would improve dramatically, but what do we get out of it having paid for those increased living standards? We already have millions of natives and immigrants, who are effectively unemployable and will be kept on benefits until they die. How would you suggest Western society would function if this numbered billions, which given the practical upshot of your “thinking”, it would be? As a British citizen I cannot unilaterally turn-up and demand to live anywhere other than in the EU by mutual governmental consent, so why should someone else?

How do you expect any nation, even the US to fund equal lifestyles and opportunities for the entire 6 billion around the globe? That’s before you get to the imperialistic tone of “global responsibility”, which I understand is deeply unfashionable these days.

If you smell racism, may I suggest an appointment at your local, ear, nose and throat clinic might be of benefit?
Posted by Peter B on March 31, 2008 8:01 AM

The main aim of uncontrolled immigration is to destabilise the indigenous population economically, politically and psychologically. People can then be afraid for their jobs, their standard of living and their security. In this situation it is imagined that the population will then have to rely more heavily on the state to provide, indeed it is the state that has caused the situation to exist. Problem - reaction - solution. Hegel couldn’t have done it better. Reports and criticism are just fleabites to the government, they scratch and then move on to the next agenda.
Posted by Michele, Saumur, France on March 31, 2008 9:18 AM

Since God chose Israel as his chosen people…how come he is not accused of racism…

Racism is an invention of racists to further their own undeserved interests…and its been working really well for fifty years.
Posted by Hugh E Torrance on March 31, 2008 9:32 AM

Repatriate about ten million immigrants especially those on benefits or who cannot speak English. Then we would no longer have crowded roads and trains, no heavy demands on electriciy and so no need for the blight of wind farms, no need for three million new homes or for “eco new towns” (which is a misleading term anyway) all eating up our countryside. Then England would become English again and most of our problems would be solved.
Posted by Arnold on March 31, 2008 10:00 AM

READ MORE...

My name is Joel ... joel godfrey on your site.  I am a city boy aged thirty-four, a product of the inner-city schools, a product of lower income neighborhoods, black and white, and a product of a failed vision of this world.  The reason I’m writing this article today is not because I hate anyone, and it’s not because I want to control those that hate me.  The reason I’m writing about my awakening to racial reality is because I can see people that look like myself living in negative ways, destroying themselves, destroying their heritage and destroying their right to live in their own homeland.  The self-destruction I see in European American society, and in European society too, is the reason why I am with you on this site today.

I was not always like this.  I was not always given to views that are labeled “intolerant” by the oblivious crowd-thinkers of my country.  But today I have an alternative to that crowd-thinking, because sites such as this are willing to speak the truth.

How, you might ask, did I get here?

READ MORE...