If one looks at a map of the ancient world, one will see the names of
many peoples whose cultures have long disappeared: Hittites; Phoenicians;
Scythians, for example. What became of these peoples?
Could the English, Welsh or other European peoples be on the brink of
disappearing like those ancient peoples – either by population replacement or
loss of cultural identity? Will historians of the future study how a once-great
world-leading culture destroyed itself?
Britain at the time of the Romans was occupied by various Celtic tribes,
as had been much of Western Europe at one time. Our history books tell us that
first the Angles, Saxons and Jutes invaded from Germany and pushed the Celts
westward. Then came the Vikings from Scandinavia. While there were some
migrants, it wasn’t a wholesale population displacement. The genetic stock
remained for the most part the same. It was mostly a cultural and aristocratic
change. Over a few centuries those who had been mostly Celts took on Anglo-Saxon
language and customs and the English nation was born.
At the 2011 census the white British represented 82% of the British
population. This may not suggest extinction anytime soon. Official figures which
came out this year show that 14% of the population was born abroad. More
strikingly, more than a third of babies born in England and Wales now have at
least one parent born abroad. At this rate we are heading for a dramatic
demographic change, within a few short decades.
As discussed above, national identity is a cultural rather than genetic
phenomenon. Many immigrants and their descendants who have come to this country
since the Second World War have become thoroughly British or have successfully
integrated, while retaining pride in their family heritage. We should encourage
and expect immigrants to assimilate over time.
Integration is hampered however, both by the pace and sheer number of
arrivals – officially 650,000 annually – the importation of so many followers of
a religion which resists assimilation and the leftist doctrine of
multiculturalism, which holds that it is racist to expect immigrants to adapt to
the host culture and that our national identity is something to be ashamed
of.
I deliberately use the word ‘assimilate’. A harmonious nation is not one
which sustains parallel cultures and opposing identities. It’s one in which
people share fundamentally the same culture, identity and rules of conduct. The
principle is newcomers should take on the ways of the land which they have
chosen to come to, and surely were attracted by. Instead the host culture is
expected to adjust to the ways of the newcomers.
Eastern European immigrants will likely assimilate more easily – though
any influx which is so large as to establish a self-perpetuating diaspora will
hamper assimilation. Third world immigrants are less culturally similar, so
present more of a problem. Paul Collier in his book ‘Exodus’ points out that the
reason why industrialised societies are wealthier than Third World ones is
because they have better functioning and more co-operative cultures – but by
importing large numbers of immigrants from the third world, we import those
dysfunctional cultures.
The Cultural Marxists regard the lands and cities, such as pre-war
Eastern Europe and India, as models of different peoples, cultures and religions
living side-by-side. In fact that was the very reason why those places were
inherently unstable, resulting in war and atrocities. Since World War Two they
have pursued the highly irresponsible policy of installing such potential
instability and conflict across Western Europe.
I have previously written articles on this site about the other side of
population replacement – the collapse in the white British birth rate. These
trends apply across Europe and are indeed more pronounced in some other
countries.
When it comes to peoples such as the Native Americans, Tibetans and
Aborigines, mass immigration of foreigners, loss of culture and population
collapse is seen as a bad thing. When it comes to European peoples, the opposite
view is taken – because of course we are the oppressors – so our destruction is
welcomed. As white German Green politician Stefanie von Berg asserted regarding
ethnic Germans becoming a minority in their country, “That is a good
thing.”
While the Scots and Welsh can push their nationalism, Englishness or
Britishness is seen as the oppressor culture. TV presenter Laurence
Llewelyn-Bowen thinks the term ‘England’ itself is racist. On top of this we
have a popular culture which encourages young people to emulate American gangsta
rappers or speak in a fake West Indian accent.
We need to get a perspective before using words such as ‘genocide’,
‘tyranny’ or ‘fascism’ and not exaggerate. I have just returned from holidaying
in Germany. It is harrowing to visit museums and see the pictures of people
suffering the final humiliation of being stripped naked before being shot into a
mass grave of smiling children who died in human experimentation. (At least
Germany is honest about this. In Russia you don’t see exhibitions of GULAG
atrocities. Our media doesn’t show you pictures of civilians killed in Allied
bombing raids on Iraq or Syria.)
We don’t live under a full-blown police state (though we do seem to be
moving in a worrying direction). Our government isn’t systematically killing
people. No one is being deported to GULAGs or concentration
camps.
It would seem rather extreme to describe what is happening to European
peoples as genocide, wouldn’t it? The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines
genocide as “the
deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural
group.” Rather than in the brutal, familiar understanding of
genocide – hard genocide, we might call it – genocide could take place over an
extended time with minimal violence and maximum persuasion – soft
genocide.
To fulfil the above definition, destruction must be deliberate.
Contributors to this site often refer to the ‘Coudenhove-Kalergi plan’. This
architect of European integration notoriously stated:
“The man of the future will be of mixed race. Today’s races and classes will gradually disappear owing to the vanishing of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-Negroid race of the future, similar in its appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples with a diversity of individuals”.
Personally I’m sceptical this comment has grown into a full-blown
clandestine plan, but if it had, the powers that be across Europe couldn’t be
doing more than they are to accomplish
it
.
.
