The American feminist author and London-based journalist Lionel Shriver disappointed a few Guardian readers today with a classic rant against the Mexican invasion.

“I am obsessed with immigration,” she said.  She obviously meant it.  She railed against “the disappearing ink” of US immigration law, and ended:-

I was bemused to read this week that Mexico has an accelerating immigration problem. Many of the South and Central Americans teeming across its border with Guatemala are heading for the US. But a fair number are staying on in Mexico, where they take “the jobs Mexicans don’t want”. So many Mexicans have left for more lucrative jobs in el Norte that only the Guatemalans will pick mangoes in the baking sun for a few lousy pesos.

Furthermore, foreigners ploughing into Mexico are subject to the same fierce local resentment that brought outraged Mexicans out on America’s streets in April. The coordinator of the government-funded humanitarian organisation Grupo Beta declared, “This society does not see migrants as human beings, it sees them as criminals.” I was startled to learn that Mexico’s immigration law is far more stringent than America’s, even more stringent than the harsher laws now in limbo in the US Congress, over which Mexican president Vicente Fox has been so alarmed.

This is what I mean about double standards. The very same national populations that blithely regard the US as an extension of their own backyard get very stroppy indeed when foreigners start regarding their own countries with the same presumption.

Admittedly, this is a double standard in which American mythology has been complicit. Forever talking up the “melting pot” and our proud tradition as a “nation of immigrants”, US politicians can’t sabre-rattle over stricter immigration policies without sounding like hypocrites. The rest of the world doesn’t believe the US has the right to police its own borders; raised on all that “huddled masses yearning to be free” folderol, Americans don’t either. In short, the US has been helplessly victimised by its own bullshit.

READ MORE...

E-mail to this blog received today from Matt Heaton of our hosting company.

Dear Bluehost.com Customer,

Today we experienced several MAJOR distributed denial of service attacks against our network. We regret that you experienced some downtime today. We have worked diligently today to further protect our network from these types of attacks. The attack today came from MANY different computers at the same time. This makes it difficult to block and resolve the issue.

Please know that we are working as hard and efficiently as we can to make sure interruptions are brief and rare.

We add our apologies for any connection difficulties you may have experienced over the last 24 hours or so.

By current standards the Rt Hon Hazel Blears, the Chair of the Labour Party and Minister Without Portfolio at the Cabinet Office, is a bit of a high-flier.  She has few enemies in the Party and may well prosper in the coming Brown era despite her championing by Tony Blair.

Given this, one might think that some analytical ability must reside between her ears - but not on the evidence of her speech a week ago to the Labour Party’s ethnic minority taskforce (ironically, in white-minority Leicester).  As reported today by BBC News, her subject matter was the success of the BNP in May’s local government elections.

I did my bit of analysis on that here and included a prediction of how Labour would react:-

So then, it will have to be not a change of philosophy in any way but a plethora of carefully contrived, sticking-plaster policy proposals - social housing investment, fake public consultation, even more fake community cohesion initiatives ...  They will be palliatives, yes, and they will not survive close inspection.  But they may slow the climb insomuch as in working class areas the BNP campaigns heavily on housing for asylum seekers and other forms of official favouritism which rile white hackles.

So, six weeks downstream what have we actually got from our rising starlet.

READ MORE...

The cleavage between right- and left-liberalism can be summed up in a word: choice.  When people are encouraged to make their own choices they somehow never make the ones that the social engineers require.

School choice ‘means classroom ghettos’

Giving consumers choice in public services - and particularly in schools - is causing acute risks to racial equality.

That, at least, is the view of the Commission for Racial Equality which warns that Tony Blair’s commitment to increasing choice undermines that other current political mantra of increasing integration.

Indeed, it’s feared that choice will encourage racial segregation in an already highly segregated country.

This report was a special feature on BBC 1 evening news.  Mark Easton examined the educational divide in Blackburn, where ...

22% of the population come from ethnic minorities but 90% of non-white primary school children go to overwhelmingly non-white schools - up from 60% in just six years.

In secondary schools too, segregation is increasing.

Twenty-five years ago Pleckgate High School was predominantly white.

Today, 30% of pupils are white and the latest intake is 20% white.

“It is the parental choice that is having the main impact,” says head teacher Robin Campbell.

“How do you resolve that? We are then into the realms of social engineering and I don’t think that would work in any borough

READ MORE...

BBC News Reports that:

Jewish communities across the UK are holding a year of commemorations to mark the 350th anniversary of the “readmission” of Jews to England.

The events of 1656 are popularly regarded as a watershed and, more widely, an important step in the development of a multicultural nation…

Oliver Cromwell had agreed, or at the very least turned a blind eye, to the return of some Jews who were also allowed to practise their faith openly in the UK.

More like he had agreed to turn a blind eye to the immigration despite the will of his people expressed by their representatives.

Sound familiar?

Historically groups with “incorrect” ideas stuck in the midst of hostile populations have often turned to esosotic symbols as means of displaying their group allegiance to those “in the know”, while staying under the radar of the crowd.

Americans repulsed by the changes to America since the advent of political uber-liberalism in the 1960’s, and in particular the 1965 Immigration Act, have at least one highly suitable symbol which they could use: the 49 star American flag. It was used from 1959 to 1960 after Alaska was made a state, and because of the way the stars are offset, look almost identical to the 50 star flag.

It would be a mistake, I think, to believe that if we could return to 1960, that everything would be fine; the civilizational crisis that we face is much more fundamental. However for those in the US who want to express solidarity with others in the “resistance” without making a big wave, this might be a good cryptic way to do so.

ONE of Britain’s most senior military strategists has warned that western civilisation faces a threat on a par with the barbarian invasions that destroyed the Roman empire.

In an apocalyptic vision of security dangers, Rear Admiral Chris Parry said future migrations would be comparable to the Goths and Vandals while north African “barbary” pirates could be attacking yachts and beaches in the Mediterranean within 10 years.

Europe, including Britain, could be undermined by large immigrant groups with little allegiance to their host countries — a “reverse colonisation” as Parry described it.  These groups would stay connected to their homelands by the internet and cheap flights.  The idea of assimilation was becoming redundant, he said.

The warnings by Parry of what could threaten Britain over the next 30 years were delivered to senior officers and industry experts at a conference last week.

From a Sunday Times article headed, “Beware: the new goths are coming”.

I recall John Keegan writing many years ago that the British Army was one of the very few institutions remaining in this country imbued with a high moral ethos.  That analysis is borne out here, I think, for the rest of the armed forces by Rear Admiral Parry.

His warnings were contained in a speech delivered last week to the Royal United Services Institute in, of course, always vibrant and equal Central London.  He “heads the development, concepts and doctrine centre, set up in 1998 and based at Shrivenham, Wiltshire.  It has more than 50 staff and is being expanded to include extra analysts.”  It is tasked with blue skies thinking ... skies in which, self-evidently, there aren’t many politically correct boundaries.

He seems to have arrived at his model of social cataclysm in the West because he was asked to determine how global warming will impact on the future defence of the realm.  That’s a nice, wide doorway to all the immigration issues with which MR readers are familiar, and to his credit Parry walked through.

Of course there are shortcomings with the scope of his analysis.  He has to stop at the boundary of his remit, and merely commend the same politicians who have done all they can to pursue cultural and racial Marxism to somehow attend to the cataclysmic consequences.  A blue skies political thinker might have concluded that the feeble, selfish men who populate the green benches of the Commons (or, indeed, the rather comfortable-looking blue chairs of the House of Representatives) are thorough-going creatures of the liberal zeitgeist, and will never be capable of the moral stand that the times require.

The logical extention of Parry’s thinking takes us into what governance is likely as the gap between the official fantasies of advanced liberalism and reality yawns.  Leviathan is one dark possibility, and a military mind should really be sufficiently interested in that to explore his employer’s role therein.  But the recovery of native ethnocentrism, and its political expression, also constitute a possibility, if one that not even Rear Admiral Parry can mention in polite society yet.

A persistent problem for the global theocracy is the fact that people just won’t behave themselves—they keep committing the mortal sin of preferring their own kind no matter how much they are indoctrinated, cajoled, threatened, punished and even bombed for doing so.  There are quite a number of faithful vectors who are doing their part to move where they aren’t welcome with government protection but overall, things just aren’t going fast enough for the theocracy and in some places they are positively at a stand-still.  For example, US segregation metrics have not changed substantially since the Fair Housing Act went into effect January 1, 1970.  Academics have been studying this puzzling phenomenon attempting to model it and determine how better compliance with the canons of the theocracy can be achieved.  They hoped to find factors such as income disparity, rather than racial preference driving the persistence of neighborhood segregation but much to their dismay, income simply isn’t a driver of segregation in the best computer models; neighborhood racial preference is.  Moreover, “right wing extremist” parties are starting to get people, especially young people, in droves over issues like immigration and if they ally with Muslim terrorists a firestorm could consume civilization. What, oh, what to do?  I have a suggestion for them:  Give up—you’re fighting mother nature and theocrats just don’t win against her, particularly theocrats who are rank amateurs compared the the Muslim clerics.  Better to make her work for you via microstates.  Here’s how.

READ MORE...