Posted by lex, on February 10, 2010
The policy of imperial Britain was to “make the world England,” which was a more or less efficiently run place, however dreary the weather. In our more modern and informed times, we learn that Labor’s policy over the last ten years has been to “make England the world,” which comes with a bit of baggage, the world generally being a rather dangerous place full of people with strange ways of thinking.
These efforts were to socially re-engineer Britain via increased immigration, and they were at least partly employed for political purposes,according to critics:
(The) paper, which was written in 2000 at a time when immigration began to increase dramatically, said controls were contrary to its policy objectives and could lead to “social exclusion”.
Last night, the Conservatives demanded an independent inquiry into the issue. It was alleged that the document showed that Labour had overseen a deliberate open-door policy on immigration to boost multi-culturalism.
Voting trends indicate that migrants and their descendants are much more likely to vote Labour.
The existence of the draft policy paper, which was drawn up by a Cabinet Office think tank and a Home Office research unit, was disclosed last year by Andrew Neather, a former adviser to Tony Blair, Jack Straw and David Blunkett.
He alleged at the time that the sharp increase in immigration over the past 10 years was partly due to a “driving political purpose: that mass immigration was the way that the Government was going to make the UK truly multi-cultural”.
When you know – you absolutely know – that yours is the side of angels, then any kind of tactic is worth continued access to the levers of power, even if it means re-weaving the fabric of your country. Because you’re smarter than those yobs who like the land their parents handed them, what with its quaint customs. But actions have consequences.
First there, is this CBN article which chronicles London’s emergence as a terrorist training camp:
A radical Islamist can find a little bit of everything in London. Ex-jihadists, current jihadists, “wannabe” jihadists: they’re all there. So how did this happen?
During the 1980s and 1990s, British authorities granted asylum to a number of Islamic terrorists wanted in their home countries.
“All of this happened under the assumption that if you allowed these people to operate in London, if you allowed them to do whatever they wanted to do, they would not be attacking Britain,” terrorism expert Peter Neumann explained…
“The government, quite cynically, thought that whatever happened in other countries, whatever these people were plotting in other countries, was of no concern to the British government,” he added.
And then came 7 July 2005. *
What are the stiff upper lip set doing about it? According to this lurid read, nearly a quarter million Londoners have fled to the country:
(These) are the peculiar times we live in, particularly in a week when Trevor Phillips, the chairman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, has pointed out that “white flight is accelerating” as Britain becomes increasingly polarised along ethnic lines.
Following the controversy started by the Bishop of Rochester, who said that some Muslim enclaves were “no-go areas” for Christians, it all seems to suggest a country that is becoming increasingly fragmented; a patchwork of rigidly delineated little pockets of race and religion, knots of unyielding humanity who just can’t rub along with each other.
This is not a Britain many of us would care to recognise, or even want to live in, although it is true that certain sectors of the middle class are fleeing from inner London like pashmina-wrapped lemmings, desperate to escape the creeping spread of urban decay.
Warning: Worshiping at the unexamined altar of multiculturalism may have side effects.
Diversity is Strength!
(Good thing that can’t happen here.)
** Link changed 04-07-18 – Ed.