Is the liberal hive-mind in Britain about to shift its thinking on mass immigration? Maybe it is. If so, it’s a very encouraging sign that elites are at least having difficulty defending their program of displacement of the White population. Here are two important buzzes from the Queen Bee, a.k.a. The Guardian:
Most glaring was Labour’s fear of a resurgence of union power. They didn’t want people banding together to insist on higher pay and better conditions. A steady supply of people for whom just working in Britain offered higher pay and better conditions than they would otherwise expect served to reduce cohesion in the workforce, making common purpose harder to achieve. It’s easy to see why this was not a perceived benefit of immigration that Labour was keen to advertise, or even explicitly acknowledge within the party. … “Better at being Tory than the Tories” was not a vote-winning slogan. Yet it was true. The City of London, its wants pandered to, was becoming the largest, most important financial centre in the world, even as the divide between rich and poor, north and south, haves and have-nots was widening. Britain had become so divided that consequences incredibly damaging to one group of people were fantastically advantageous to others. And anything that was advantageous to the wealthy was unchallengeable, as long as taxes were rolling in. (If Labour want to start apologising, it shouldn’t be over economic migration, The Guardian, 15th November 2013)
The lightning rod to force public discussion of these changes is the resentment felt by the majority over Brussels’ diktat of the impossibility of halting the free flow of people within Europe. Ukip [the UK Independence Party] does well not because people are bothered about Europe per se, but because Nigel Farage [the Ukip leader] can correctly say that if the UK left the EU it could take back control of immigration. The centre and left have an aversion to discussing the democratic deficit inherent in the denial of the majority’s desire for stricter immigration control. They also ignore the justified and familiar call that “we were never asked” whether permanent, large-scale migration within the EU was what “we” wanted. … Immigration, though usually good for the migrants concerned, is a bosses’ charter. Those with the upper hand range from owners of big food processing, care or hospitality companies to those in the middle classes cooing about how polite, hardworking and reasonably priced the eastern European workers are. (Europe is falling out of love with open borders, The Guardian, 20th November 2013)
The Guardian has spent decades cheering mass immigration and condemning all opposition as ignorant, stupid and racist. Now it’s starting to admit the truth: that immigration is a societal poison administered by a treasonous and anti-democratic elite. But that elite isn’t interested just in enriching itself at the majority’s expense. High-IQ White immigrants from Poland are good for bosses’ profits. What use are low-IQ non-White immigrants from Pakistan, Nigeria and Somalia? They’re good only for making the UK more like the Third World. The Guardian should object to that, because the Third World is a bad place for women and gays. It doesn’t object, because it’s still in thrall to liberal deceit and hypocrisy about race.
That may change, but in the meantime we’ve just seen a familiar sequence of events in the British media: 1) A White speaks the truth about non-Whites; 2) Non-Whites shriek that they are “offended”; 3) The White issues a grovelling apology:
A senior cabinet minister has apologised for claiming corruption in Britain’s Pakistani community is “endemic”. Dominic Grieve QC [Queen’s Counsel], the Attorney General [Britain’s chief lawyer], said sorry after pointing to a “favour culture” among Pakistanis – remarks which were quickly branded “offensive”. He told Saturday’s Daily Telegraph that corruption was a growing problem “because we have minority communities in this country which come from backgrounds where corruption is endemic”.
But just hours later Mr Grieve backtracked and issued an apology. In a statement he said: “If I gave the impression that there is a particular problem in the Pakistani community, I was wrong… I believe the Pakistani community has enriched this country a great deal… I’m sorry if I have caused any offence.” (Attorney General forced to apologise after saying corruption is “endemic” in Britain’s Pakistani community, The Daily Mail, 24th November 2013)
If murder, rape, drug-dealing, electoral fraud and tax-evasion count as enrichment, then yes indeed, “the Pakistani community has enriched this country a great deal.” Pakistanis have also introduced vast quantities of anti-Semitism to the UK (see here). But they’re not prejudiced about copying the ancient tradition of self-righteous gasbaggery:
The Tories have relentlessly caricatured Britain’s Pakistani community as Islamist extremists, child abusers, corrupt, and slave masters, while at the same time claiming to welcome ethnic minority participation within local and national politics. … Racism, like a deadly virus, mutates from one generation to the next while its justification continues to resonate for an elite still flourishing from the slavery that built Britain’s global wealth and influence. Lest we forget in 1964, Tory MP, Peter Griffiths fought to win Smethwick, a parliamentary seat in the Midlands, with the slogan: “If you want a nigger for a neighbour, vote Labour.” (Dominic Grieve demonises British Pakistanis – we must all fight back, The New Statesman, 24th November 2013)
Thus spake the “former Conservative councillor” Imran Khan. Further down the page there’s a link to an article by Mehdi Hasan, another self-righteous Pakistani. Alas, Hasan doesn’t seem to have got the memo about not demonizing ethnic enrichers:
Now that’s vibrant.