By Party Chairman, Dr Jim Lewthwaite
The first priority of any government should be the protection of its citizens against external enemies and internal crime and disorder. This Labour shambles does neither because it is afraid of its own backbenchers, who in turn fear that their wafer-thin majorities are vulnerable to defections from the previously “safe” Pakistani Muslim bloc.
As ethnonationalists, we should never tire of pointing out that this situation, of vulnerability to blackmail by alien invaders aided and abetted by cowards, traitors, renegades, and collaborators from within our own kith and kin, would never have happened if we had been listened to, let alone prevailed, in the immediate post-war years when large-scale Third World immigration took off. Britain would have remained a high-trust, cohesive, homogeneous nation (not a mere society), proud of its identity, history, and traditions, and respected by friend and foe alike.
Failing that, proper arrangements could have been made to ensure that guest workers conformed to the host and not the other way around. First, by selecting guest workers for compatibility (European, Christian, slow-life strategy, high-IQ ethnic groups rather than open doors), excluding the unsuitable even if they were from the Commonwealth and possibly familiar with our language. In other words, they would have been more likely to be from New Zealand than the New Hebrides or Papua New Guinea.
Secondly, full proficiency in English would be a condition of admission, even on a work visa. The NHS, the courts, and local councils waste millions on translators and interpreters, which is known to be a racket; the Greens would not have been allowed to put out divisive propaganda in Urdu and Bengali to exploit tensions among South Asians as they did recently.
Thirdly, migration should not lead inevitably to an eventual right to settle, still less to full citizenship. The latter should be bestowed on the basis of jus sanguinis rather than jus soli, since the Channel no longer deters invaders. This sensible policy of putting bloodline before birthplace is still the rule in, for instance, India; which is why I, although born there, am a British, rather than an Indian, citizen. Indeed, the Athenians of the classical era had a category of resident alien, “metoichos” (one who dwells with us), distinct from citizens and slaves. Such a class of limited civic rights might usefully be revived, at least as a transitional step, as full remigration appears to be no more than a mirage at present.
Fourthly, ethnic groups with known tendencies towards paranoid schizophrenia and aggression (e.g., Valdo Calocane, the Nottingham triple killer) should be excluded, ideally as a group, or at least as individuals after case-by-case vetting. To do otherwise is to play Russian (Afghan, Ethiopian, Congolese) Roulette with the lives of Britons. A Polish woman politician suggested recently that MPs should at least be charged with complicity. It would, as Dr. Johnson observed, concentrate their minds wonderfully.
Fifthly, when all attempts at exclusion of disproportionately offending groups failed, as they have, then measures should have been taken to limit the damage, even if contrary to our traditions (e.g., Common Law or unarmed policing). Every country that is as diverse as ours has an armed, militarised police, such as the Gendarmerie, Carabinieri, Guardia Civil, State Troopers, or SWAT teams. The absence of such resources for the Defence of the Realm goes a long way towards explaining the police’s reluctance to prosecute Pakistani Muslim grooming gangs: it is not just a fear of being called “racist,” but a much more physical threat, that of being unable to withstand violent rioters. Here in Bradford, we recall that the West Yorkshire Constabulary had to appeal to other forces to suppress the petrol-bomb-throwing mobs rioting in 2001.
Why are the police so reluctant to prosecute grooming gangs or hate preachers, or the Labour government to proscribe the Muslim Brotherhood and the IRGC, or to sequester the latest Ayatollah’s London property portfolio? The banal answer is fear of being called “racist,” but this does not explain the abject cowardice of the Establishment. What they really fear is rioting, insurrection, and ultimately a Civil War.
As I have argued all my adult life, this may not even start as a Black-on-White race war or a “Muslim v. The Rest of the World” jihad; tensions among South Asians on national/ethnic or communal/religious fault lines, or between Asian shopkeepers and Afro-Caribbean shoplifters, could light the fuse. In Britain, alone among “enriched” West European countries, let alone the USA, we have no tradition of an armed, militarised police to back up the “civilian” force. Why no Gendarmerie, Carabinieri, Guardia Civil, State Troopers, or SWAT teams? Because we didn’t need them in our relatively peaceful and orderly, self-and community-policed, piously rather than fanatically religious island.
Bad things happened elsewhere, abroad. But as Maynard Keynes retorted, “When the facts change, I change [my mind]. “We need to change our minds. Our Establishment has already decided that discretion is the better part of valour and has hauled aloft the white flag. The necessary increases in spending on Defence and Policing could be met by cuts in the bloated welfare budget, but Labour marginal “lobby fodder” fear the revenge of the workshy as much as the ethnics.
Current petrol and oil prices drive home the need for Energy Security, as we (Brit Dems) have long argued, but “Red Ed,” the tone-deaf ukulele-abuser, won’t drop Net Zero and exploit the reserves under our feet. High energy prices make our industries uncompetitive, our cost of living torturous, and growth impossible; but Red Ed is an implacable ideologue. Even the Unions have had enough.
Follow us and share our content on these social media platforms using the links below:
X (formerly known as Twitter): @BritishDems
Promoted by the British Democrats, PO Box 11028, Loughborough, LE12 7YL.
No Comments