Roger Scruton has penned a characteristically brilliant article on the Rotherham madness (“British Police Ignored 1,400 Cases Of Pakistani Muslim Gangs Raping And Abusing Children In Rotherham“). He traces the hyper-political correctness apparent in Rotherham to the Stephen Lawrence case which was a watershed event resulting in the complete victory of the anti-White left in the UK (see Tobias Langdon’s article on the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry).
Fifteen years ago, when these crimes [in Rotherham] were just beginning, the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry into the conduct of the British police was made by Sir William Macpherson a High Court judge. The immediate occasion had been a murder in which the victim was black, the perpetrators white, and the behaviour of the investigating police lax and possibly prejudiced. The report accused the police – not just those involved in the case, but the entire police force of the country – of ‘institutionalised racism’. This piece of sociological newspeak was, at the time, very popular with leftist sociologists. For it made an accusation which could not be refuted by anyone who had the misfortune to be accused of it. …
Police more concerned with political correctness than crime
The result of this has been that police forces lean over backwards to avoid the accusation of racism, while social workers will hesitate to intervene in any case in which they could be accused of discriminating against ethnic minorities. Matters are made worse by the rise of militant Islam, which has added to the old crime of racism the new crime of ‘Islamophobia’. No social worker today will risk being accused of this crime. In Rotherham a social worker would be mad, and a police officer barely less so, to set out to investigate cases of suspected sexual abuse, when the perpetrators are Asian Muslims and the victims ethnically English. …
Unfortunately Political Correctness causes people not merely to disguise their beliefs but to refuse to act on them, to accuse others who confess to them, and in general to go along with policies that have been forced on the British people by minority groups of activists [e.g., Dr. Richard Stone in the Macpherson Inquiry]. The intention of the activists is to disrupt and dismantle the old forms of social order. They believe that our society is not just racist, but far too comfortable, far too unequal, far too bound up with fuddy-duddy old ways that are experienced by people at the bottom of society – the working classes, the immigrants, the homeless, the illegals – as oppressive and demeaning. They enthusiastically propagate the doctrines of political correctness as a way of taking revenge on a social order from which they feel alienated. [my emphasis]
Ordinary people are so intimidated by this that they repeat the doctrines, like religious mantras which they hope will keep them safe in hostile territory. Hence people in Britain have accepted without resistance the huge transformations that have been inflicted on them over the last thirty years, largely by activists working through the Labour Party. They have accepted immigration policies that have filled our cities with disaffected Muslims, many of whom have now gone to fight against us in Syria and Iraq. They have accepted the growth of Islamic schools in which children are taught to prepare themselves for jihad against the surrounding social order. They have accepted the constant denigration of their country, its institutions and its inherited religion, for the simple reason that these things are theirs and therefore tainted with forbidden loyalties.
And when the truth is expressed at last, nobody is fired, no arrests are made, and the elected Police and Communities Commissioner for Rotherham, although forced to resign from the Labour Party, refuses to resign from his job. After a few weeks all will have been swept under the carpet, and the work of destruction can resume.
As in the U.S. and throughout the West, this is a top-down revolution carried out originally at the highest levels of society (e.g., Judge Macpherson’s court) by hostile elites motivated by hatred of traditional Western societies. Although their rhetoric always promises a Utopian future free of ethnic strife and complete equality for all, it is motivated first and foremost by hatred and desire for revenge against the traditional peoples and cultures of the West. It is, as Scruton phrases it, “a way of taking revenge on a social order from which they feel alienated.”
Here the burden for explaining these transformations has been to document the critical importance (necessary condition) of the rise of Jews as a hostile elite alienated from traditional social orders of the West (here).
A revolution motivated by hatred does not bode well for the peoples who are being displaced and rendered powerless — the indigenous White populations of the West that are the target of this hatred. Rotherham is only a small foreboding of what the future will bring when Whites become a minority in the societies they created and dominated for hundreds, and in the case of Europe, many thousands of years.