Sunday, March 24, 2013

Mass Immigration Disaster - Progressive Political Apologists Claim It Was An Accident

The Saturday Essay by 'progressive' do gooder, David Goodhart, in the Daily Mail is the latest in a series of speeches and musings by the remote ruling elite, admitting that mass immigration may have been an error.

This essay follows hot on the heels of Red Ed Miliband's admission that the Labour Party's immigration policy may have been misguided and Nick's Clegg's admission that his Lib Dem party's long standing policy on amnesty for illegals is now suddenly wrong.

At the time of writing, Conservative Ministers, MEP'S and Honourable Members worried about their imminent annihilation in the coming European Elections, are urging their leader 'Call Me Dave' Cameron to make a major speech on the follies of mass immigration.

The sad thing about this sudden outpouring of faux concern and speech making, is that they think the people don't know what they are up to. The people are well aware that if there were no election looming and UKIP were not gaining ground, there would be no concern, no speeches and no sham essays.

Since Prime Minister Edward Heath sacked his Shadow Cabinet member Enoch Powell for warning about the economic burden of mass immigration, it has been obvious that transforming Great Britain into a multi-cultural society has been a long planned cross party policy. Powell's sacking and his subsequent hounding out of office gave an indication that the government and the craven Establishment would adopt a zero tolerance to dissent, no matter how small.

This zero tolerance is still in evidence today by the smearing of anyone, including law abiding ladies from Rochdale, who dare to raise the question of mass immigration or multi-culturalism. Politicians and the Establishment are determined to socially engineer the multi-cultural country that their 'progressive' ideology demands, with or without the consent of the British people and in this case it is most definitely without their consent.

The patronising arrogance of this 'progressive' elite renders them incapable of understanding the hopes, aspirations or wishes of the majority of the people. They are under the delusion that they are always right and that they know what is best for the British people.

As is always the case, these elitists are immune from the consequences of the ideology that they force on other people.

Perhaps if they were made to leave their exclusively white havens in Hamptsead and forced to live in the ghettos they have created in Mosside, Manchester or Broadwater Farm, Tottenham, or the monocultural cesspits in Bradford, Leicester, Bristol, Wolverhampton, Rochdale, Rotherham etc. ad nauseum, they wouldn't be so keen on mass immigration.

The self confessed 'left leaning Hampstead liberal' David Goodhart is one such patronising elitist who championed mass immigration as a vehicle for social engineering, together with the imposition of a multi-cultural dystopia on the the people, and for the simple reason that he knows best.

This so called essay, like Cleggs speech, is a carefully crafted piece of propaganda designed to give the impression that a)  a multicultural society is already here so get used to it, b) in many places the diverse communities are living in peace and harmony c) Britain is a livelier and more dynamic country and d) mistakes were made but the mass immigration policy is the right one but perhaps it happened a tad too fast.

David Goodhart condescended to come down from planet Progressive and spent 18 months touring the country in order to reach his pro multi-cultural conclusions. Those who have spent decades living with the appalling consequences of mass immigration and who have reached very different conclusions are routinely dismissed as inward looking little Englanders and racists.

He states that the race lobby, of which he is a member, "have been slow to recognise that strong collective identities are legitimate for majorities as well as minorities, for white as well as black".

Goodhart also states that "existing citizens must have special rights over non citizens. Immigration must be managed with their interests in mind". If anyone outside of his elite circle said this they would, without a doubt, be smeared as racists.

He thinks that by pretending to sympathise with the majority who are against mass immigration and multi-culturalism, that he can spike the guns of UKIP on behalf of his political masters. The polls indicate that the defection away from the legacy parties is strong and irrevocable so his 18 months travelling among the plebs will be in vain.

Goodhart goes on to state the shocking fact that more immigrants arrive on British shores in a single year than arrived in the whole period from 1066 to 1950. As he well knows, this was a deliberate, well planned policy but he is trying to absolve his 'progressive' friends from blame by claiming it was an 'accident'.

In 1948 the government gave the right to Empire and Commonwealth citizens the to live and work in Great Britain and to their horror hundred of thousands turned up unexpectedly. They tried this line again with the Eastern Europeans in 1997 when a projected influx of 16,000 turned into 1.5 million.

According to Goodhart, by the time of the next census in 2021 the non white population will have trebled to 20% and white Britons will be a minority by 2066. He correctly states that in some towns and cities this is already the case.

He claims there was no discussion in the 'New' Labour Cabinet about this influx or about the pressure this would put on public services. As a magazine editor and Financial Times correspondent, how would he know what was discussed in the Cabinet? Not even senior government Ministers knew what Blair was discussing with his secretive inner circle.

The arrogance of these people is on full display as Goodhart goes on to admit that they, including him, are deep into "a huge social experiment" and to give it a chance of working we must slow down.

Who gave the political class, and people such has Goodhart, permission to be indulging in social experimentation with the well being of the British people?  They don't have the right to alter peoples lives for the worse without their consent. The people are not guinea pigs in some kind of 'progressive' laboratory.

Goodhart States that "the whole post war process of immigration has been badly managed". He also states that the importation of people from the Indian subcontinent to the soon to close textile mills
"was a poor piece of social engineering". He then tests the credulity of the reader by trying to claim that "no one really engineered it. It just happened".

This is the second time in this so called essay that Goodhart tries to convince his readers that the mass immigration disaster was an accident and that the government was not to blame.

As Goodhart well knows, mass immigration and its disastrous consequences didn't "just happen". He admits himself that senior people were following a secret pre-planned agenda which had different priorities from those of the British people.

"There has been a huge gap between our ruling elite's views and those of the ordinary people on the street".  No kidding Goodhart. Among normal people this is known as 'stating the bleeding obvious'.

As we all do occasionally, Goodhart was dining at an Oxford college when an eminent person next to him, 'a very senior civil servant' said that "when I was at the Treasury, I argued for the most open door possible to immigration because I saw it as my job to maximise global welfare not national welfare". He doesn't name this 'very senior civil servant' who should be made to explain his views to the British people. Its the people's money that he's giving away after all.

Another guest, one of the most powerful television executives in the country held similar views. "He, too, felt global welfare was paramount and that he had a greater obligation to someone in Burundi that to someone in Birmingham". Goodhart fails to mention who this powerful television executive was, so that he can be held accountable for his views, especially if the television company was the publicly funded BBC.

This demonstrates, even to apologists such as Goodhart, that mass immigration and the creation of a multi-cultural society was no accident. Rather it was planned by a secretive powerful elite who excluded the British people and transformed their country, using their money and without their consent.

I could carry on fisking this excuse for an essay but the pubs are open and there are better things in life than reading a piece of propaganda that attempts to absolve the current political leadership of any blame for their disastrous policy of mass immigration and cultural replacement.

As the mood of the nation swings away from the legacy political parties and their 'progressive'  ideology, the British people can expect a lot more of this pseudo intellectual nonsense from all corners of the Establishment as they try to reverse the tide of change.

Hopefully the momentum toward a free and prosperous Great Britain will be unstoppable right up to the next election cycle where the current political order will get the kicking that they thoroughly deserve.


  1. Strange how, all of a sudden, they are getting the message. Anybody would think that they have a reason for doing so! But then again, I admit to being a bit of a cynic!

    1. Anyone would think there's an election looming and they are losing ground to UKIP.

  2. I read the same article too but did not see it as an apology. Intentional or not by the author, I saw it as a blatant demonstration of government incompetence by way of "head in the sand" approach over serveral decades.
    The conclusion taken from this article, that far from absolving those governments of blame, only seeks to reinforce the fact that this country is in dire need a completely new government in the form of UKIP, who will put the interest of the law abiding hard working British and Foreign nationals first. The 3 main parties are indistiguishable from each other over many policies including immigration.
    Far more interesting for entertainment on saturday than reading the atrocious Daily Mail was watching the UKIP Spring conference.
    I really do think things are looking good for them over the next few years before the next general election. IMS

    1. My interpretation was that the political elite are trying to distance themselves from the awful effects of their social engineering because they are losing support to UKIP

      Goodhart has been commissioned to make excuses and absolve the elite of any blame. I'm not buying it.

      I am saving watching UKIP'S conference until I have some quality time.

    2. Actually, it does not demonstrate government incompetence, quite the opposite.They have engineered the situation and have got away with it. No riots (from the Brits) no assinations, and still the vast majority vote for the liblabcon party. They must be laughing their bollox off.

    3. I agree, its not incompetence, it is a long planned policy of socially engineering a multi-cultural society.

      The people have been brow beaten by smear and intimidation.

      The British people have become supine and gutless and yes, the ruling class are laughing their nuts off.

  3. Put every member of the LibLabCon, Antifa, Royals, journalists, bureaucrats, councillors with all the Muslims and Africans inside the M25 and build a massive fence around it with armed guards at the gates.

    Let them get to know their diversity a little closer to hand. Just think how enriched they will be.

    1. One of the problems is that the people who are implementing this multi-culti disaster don't have to live with it.

      This Goodhart chap has nothing to say about the Muslim paedophile gangs sexually abusing under age white girls.

      Thats all part of living in peace and harmony or cultural enrichment I suppose.

      The guy is an apologist for the elite who will not stop their agenda of ethinic cleansing.

    2. You forgot the greens, Sean. They could blanket any spare space with windmills and freeze to death.

  4. what bugs me more than anything is that the politicians of all three main parties keep harping on about immigrants from outside Europe not the ones from inside Europe ,forgive me but am i missing something here , i always thought that anyone coming into the UK is an immigrant......sorry some just reminded me that we no longer have any borders..........

    1. You and everyone else is right, everyone coming into the UK is an immigrant.

      The politcians disagree because to them Europe is a country in its own right and we are all citizens of it.

      The end of the nation states was the European project from the start.

      'Ever closer union' to a superstate has arrived.