Oh Look, An Election is Coming 21


A difficult local election campaign is underway. Oh look! Cameron is making an anti-immigrant speech. What a coincidence! And is it not heartening to see this robustly liberal response from the Lib Dems:

“We use different language. But we all work in government to strike a balance to ensure Britain has a system people have confidence in.”

Cringe. Actually I do not disagree that those seeking standard immigration routes to this country should speak the language, but why English? Why not Welsh or Gaelic? Of course you cannot apply this to asylum seekers – a language test is not a sensible way to decide if someone should be tortured to death or not. In fact, I am willing to bet the effect on the ground of any of this will be limited. The core Tory is a visceral racist, and Cameron is simply engaging in a tribal bonding ritual to motivate them into the polling booths.


21 thoughts on “Oh Look, An Election is Coming

  • JimmyGiro

    "The core Tory is a visceral racist, and Cameron is simply engaging in a tribal bonding ritual to motivate them into the polling booths."

    How unlike the SNP, who somebody, not so far from here, supports openly.

    • Duncan_McFarlan

      The SNP are against imprisoning asylum seekers and for giving immigrants a warm welcome in Scotland – unlike the Conservatives who talk about the "dangers" of "socially engineered" "multi-culturalism" – as if Britain or any other country has ever been anything but multicultural, with all kinds of different cultures, ethnic groups, languages, religions and customs. The English Civil War (which involved the whole of Britain) was as much about religion – Calvinism, Puritanism, Anglicanism, Catholicism – as anything.

      The real social engineering is to pretend that countries have one culture, one set of beliefs, one religious view, which everyone shares. That has never, ever, been the case. The only way it could be the case is through a fascist or stalinist state enforcing absolute uniformity.

      The SNP have also made it clear that they consider anyone who wants to spend the rest of their life in Scotland welcome here – very much including English people. They couldn't be further from the Conservatives on immigration.

      • CanSpeccy

        "as if Britain or any other country has ever been anything but multicultural, with all kinds of different cultures, ethnic groups, languages, religions and customs."

        Are you kidding? Or is your conception of history restricted to the last 25 years?

        As far as I recall from my childhood in Devon, the only language anyone spoke was Devon, as in "you'm be a flipping idjit, if you think there be Russians and Chinese and curry eating Indians in our village." And we'd have been fair mazed at the suggestion that there'd be Muzlims or Buddists livin' in those there parts. "

        When I was eight, I was taken to the Festival of Britain (London 1951) and at on epoint my mother remarked "look, there's a black man". I looked, and sure enough, there was a man who was black. The reason for pointing him out, was simply the novelty of it, since, I doubt my mother had seen a black person before, and certainly I had not.

        • Duncan_McFarlan

          Right so you're fine with the viking invasions and the Angle, Saxon, Jute, Roman and Belgae ones because they were all white, but if people come here to avoid torture or death and have free speech or in order to get a job that pays enough to let them and their family to be sure they'll eat properly every day and they look different that's unacceptable.

          Being black by the way does not make someone of a different culture – it makes them a different race or skin colour. Most black people in Britain talk English with an English or Scottish or Welsh accent and have more in common in terms of culture with most white British people than they have differences from them.

          • Alfred Burdett

            If you cannot stick to the point, what is the point of talking? You made ludicrous and false claims and fail now to address the challenge to your veracity.

            The Viking, incidentally, who may have numbered a tens of thousands altogether, converted to Christianity. That was part of the deal they made with the local ruler, Alfred and others, as a condition of settlement.

            I guess you're working up to your usual response when baffled, of calling me a racist.

            Actually, I find your comments no more nonsensical than Craig's who opposes globalist wars in a feeble and lukewarm way while advocating the destruction of the British nation, a fundamentally globalist position.

            What no one here seems to understand is that there is a reall argument and pouring out the usual Liberal bromides and cliches explains nothing.

            Here is what the argument is about.

          • Duncan_McFarlan

            What false claims? Are you telling me all viking settlers, raiders and invaders over hundreds of years were Christians? That they all spoke English when they settled here? That Romans and Angles and Saxons and Jutes did?

            Even when every British person was a Christian, during the English Civil War, they were not all the one religion or culture – they were a mixture of Puritans, Calvinists, Anglicans, Catholics and others and fought one another over what would be the official state religion as much as over whether the King or parliament was sovereign.

            You can't tell the difference between skin colour and culture, nor between immigration and genocide (which, on any definition, does not include immigration in which the native people a) remain the majority and b) are not being forced to give up their language, identity or culture), nor between cultures changing and influencing each other (as they always have) and them being "destroyed".

            You think everyone in a country must share the same culture, language and religion or else there's something terribly wrong – in fact it's the norm for there to be lots of different cultures, languages and religions co-existing and influencing one another. It doesn't destroy any of them. They all change and influence one another over time.

      • JimmyGiro

        "The SNP have also made it clear that they consider anyone who wants to spend the rest of their life in Scotland welcome here – very much including English people."

        If you're that inclusive Duncan, why not call yourselves the British National Party?

        • Duncan_McFarlan

          I'm not in the SNP. It's just ludicrous comparing the SNP's attitude to the English to the Conservative party's attitude to immigrants. There are some Scottish nationalists who are out and out bigots and racists – i've even read letters to Scottish newspapers by people claiming we shouldn't allow immigration as it would dilute out supposedly superior genetic make up, but they have no influence in the SNP.

  • ingo

    fact is, unless we provide voters with credible alternatives to this shower, they would not know what a principled position looks like. I'm standing as an Independent, what about anybody else? I vouch for the only principled choice in the AV paint ball scoring exhibition by the NO/YES campaigns, which to spoil you ballot paper.
    Do not worry about such 'radicalism' , the rules say that your spoiled vote has to be counted like any other.
    What will be more important to the Lib Dems, making a stand on the NHS, stand up for their Conference piosition, or whinging about the loss of the AV vote? soon. My bet is that they'll go apeshit of AV, it might well be the last straw that binds this unholy coalition together, we shall see.

  • ingo

    thanks Craig, but there are others who also stand against the grain. In Thetford all Labour councillors standing as Independents, all the rage, the main parties falling over each other to be vogue. The localism bill, granting more powers to like minded groups of all sorts, will either fall or be shafted on the issue of incineration, now a massive local/ national campaign that is growing. http:ukwin.org.uk
    and as well here, the local EDP line. Incineration is the lazy option negating recycling, a sop to business irresponsible use of resources, the lack of onus that is granted to producers. Cambridgeshire can recycle 71% of its rubbish, so could other councils, BUT… http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/environment/update_we

  • Deep green puddock.

    I am not the first person to realise that immigration is political poison. If I was a politician I think I would try to avoid it like the plague but the unfortunate reality is that it is impossible to clear ones feet of the issue.
    I notice Vince Cable sounding off about Cameron's 'folly'; this cringe to the BNP wing of the Tory party. But his concern was mostly about the adverse effects on the UK's economic prospects if immigration is inhibited.

    Wandering around Wall street last week( as one does) was interesting. Of course mostly tourists, but there were also the besuited workers, easily identified by their purposeful activity, hopping into intimidating buildings with serious security. What was noticeable was that they were 1.Young 2. Multinational. (Chinese, Japanese, Indian , African and typical white).
    I am guessing slightly, but my hunch is that if you have serious technical abilities there are now virtually no barriers. Multi-national corporations are now definitively ' non- racist' provided you have something to offer such as an insight into instant, computer assisted market activity algorithms. No doubt that changes at the other end of the scale, when the same corporations seem to exclusively favour Mexicans to do their cleaning and chauffeuring). And therein lies the growing reality.

    Immigrants are desirable if they are 'special' , either because they are very talented, or because they will both 'adapt' (i.e. not complain about social iniquities such as poor healthcare, or slum living conditions) and take the jobs that the established populations will not take willingly because the jobs are low paid, and because the people are partially protected by accrued social benefits, savings, and family networks. Thus immigration props up the profitability of service companies and (slowly?) marginalises and undermines established population groups by bringing down wages. (not sure about actual figures here but these might be interesting).
    We also see that many immigrants have residual, or acquire/develop elements of social cohesion, which help to offset the social disadvantages but also lead to them setting up parallel, usually black economies, or relatively impenetrable parallel political groupings, or parallel organised crime groups. The potential for conflict is considerable.
    The other unfortunate effect of the immigration, especially from the EU is that they are 'self selecting' and are often the smart, industrious, energetic, healthy young people, (if not super talented), who are prepared to slip in under their true competence level and thus undercut decent entry level jobs for the indigenous youth who are therefore more likely to drift into anti-social behaviour, or dysfunctional ideas and thinking patterns. They are often poorly educated and the inane simplistic rhetoric of fascistic ideology has an instant resonance, with half truths of justice or correction of imagined slights by the 'political system' .
    It is quite clear where this painfully corrosive and or explosive social mix leads.

    We need to really be very alert when someone like Cameron starts to court with this toxic constituency.

    I personally want to steer well clear of racism and any association with racist groups but I cannot see how this unregulated, (dishonestly politicised in all quarters) process can proceed without growing anger and conflict . We need real leadership and inspiration in this difficult situation.
    Cameron is just not fit for purpose- he is really a pitiful lightweight- and so is the Cleggite coalition. Unfortunately, so is the Labour party. There is just no credible, political movement or initiative at all, in the country.
    I sense very dangerous times.

  • somebody

    Cable earlier today criticized Cameron's stance. (my earlier post on this has not appeared) Now he is rowing back. Typical.

    They pretend they shun immigrants but they love them. Wages drop and profits rise. And having brown and black folk? Who else could they demonise? Who would Straw otherwise stigmatise for wearing a niqab and not being able to see into her eyes?

    They are revolting,

  • Alfred Burdett

    How can Britain have a system [of mass immigration] that people have confidence in" when it is an established fact that two thirds of the population are opposed to mass immigration?

    Whether immigrants speak English, or some useless celtic fringe language, is beside the point.

    The issue that the pathetic lib-lefties cannot grasp or will not admit is that (a) Britain is supposedly a democracy, and (b) most people in Britain think that Britain should be run in the interest of the British people, which means keeping out a mass of immigrants to what is a very crowded country with a severe unemployment and underemployment problem.

    So the only policy that the British public will have confidence in is one that ends mass immigration, period. That the Lib-left howl "racist" when anyone points this out, does not alter the fact that they are (a) anti-democratic in their basic ideology, and (b) in bed with the globalists and Anglo-American imperialists intent on creating a universal system in which the British people have no privileged place in their own country.

      • Alfred Burdett

        What's with the beer?

        Last I was in Ireland, Guinness had more head than body. The stuff there serving in this film looks as weak as water.

        And in those days, plenty of people spoke the native tongue, at least in County Clare and Galway. Some could speak no other.

    • evgueni

      Right on about the we-know-best attitudes of the ideologues. Actually they all believe that – Tory and Labour, too. But in the case of immigration they are afraid of an imaginary beast. Just look at what is happening in Switzerland – an actual democracy. To get citizenship is tough unless you are a child growing up there, but to get leave to remain and work is no harder than elsewhere. Employers only need to demonstrate that a Swiss person is not available for the job and an Ausweis is issued promptly. I should add also that it is illegal to pay a foreign worker less than a Swiss national for the same job. The result is 40%-ish non-Swiss residents in Zurich, 50%-ish in Geneva and several anti-immigration referenda have failed to change the policy radically. In fact non-residents have been granted local political rights in some places – they can vote in the referenda at the local level.

Comments are closed.