British Politics

Dissolving Identity to Destroy the West: The Leftist War on Identity, Nationality and Biology

/59 Comments/in , /by

Emma Raducanu, the female winner of the 2021 US Tennis Open, is half-Romanian and half-Chinese. She was born in Canada and raised in London. She’s definitely a fine athlete, a skilful tennis-player, and an attractive and charming young woman. But here’s something she definitely isn’t: British. And it’s precisely because she isn’t British that lots of other people who aren’t British either have been eager to pretend that she is British and to celebrate her victory.

A strongly ethnocentric Jew

By celebrating Raducanu, they were really celebrating themselves. After all, narcissism is an essential part of leftism. Sathnam Sanghera, an Indian journalist at the London Times, peddled an obvious falsehood: “Half Romanian, half Chinese. Born in Canada, brought up in the UK. Immigration enriches us, and always has ….” Tell that to the White working-class girls of Rotherham and many other places. But who cares about them? Certainly not Sathnam Sanghera. Another Indian, the actor Adil Ray, tweeted: “Emma Raducanu the immigrant from a Romanian, Chinese, Canadian family grand slams the haters. This is the Britain we love.” No, it’s the Britain you love to destroy. And the Jewish comedian David Schneider showed off his comic skill with: “Bloody immigrants! Coming over here, making it from qualifying to win the US Open without dropping a set.”

The anti-White and anti-British Jewish comedian David Schneider

Like Sanghera and Ray, Schneider is not interested in Raducanu as an individual or as a fine sportswoman. No, he sees her merely as a tool for the dilution — and ultimate destruction — of Britishness. He’s a perfect example of the central Jewish role in the war on White identity. Jews hate and feel envy for Whites, Christianity and Western civilization. They feel unsafe in strong White nations with clear identities, because they stand out. That’s why they invented lying propaganda like “nation of immigrants” and “Diversity is Our Strength.” David Schneider seeks to deny ethnic and national identity to Whites while himself being a strongly ethnocentric Jew. According to the Jewish Chronicle, he “studied for a PhD in Yiddish drama at Oxford” and “even performed a Yiddish comedy routine for Jewish Book Week.” He’s written a play about the Moscow State Yiddish Theatre and how its performers fell victim to Stalin’s “absolutely random and brutal” purges. Many millions of people suffered and died under Stalin, but Schneider is concerned about the small minority of them who were Jews.

Which is fine. He’s Jewish and naturally enough he puts Jews first. I don’t object to that. But I do object to strongly ethnocentric Jews like Schneider having any power or influence in White nations. He should be in Israel, not Britain. He isn’t British and his hostility towards White British goyim was apparent long before his unfunny comments on Emma Raducanu’s victory. Like Nick Cohen, another ugly and anti-White non-British Jew, he has never stopped condemning and campaigning against Brexit. He doesn’t want Britain to be independent and in control of its own destiny.

Brexit didn’t go far enough

And in fact I half-agree with him. I don’t want Britain to be like that either. But that doesn’t mean I want Britain back in the European Union. No, for me Brexit didn’t go far enough. I want Scexit and Wexit too. That is, I want Scotland and Wales to become independent nations, free of both European and English domination. But I want an independent Scotland and Wales only if leftist nation-wreckers like the Scottish National Party (SNP) and Plaid Cymru aren’t in charge. They pretend to be nationalist parties, but they would, in typical leftist fashion, destroy what they claim to care about most. The SNP and Plaid Cymru would open the borders of Scotland and Wales to the Third World, flooding the true White Scottish and Welsh with hostile and violent outsiders.

But I can heartily agree with one of their central arguments for independence: that Britishness isn’t a genuine identity and the United Kingdom isn’t a genuine nation. No, it’s an unnatural and unhealthy union of nations. Scotland, Wales and Ireland were “united” with England by conquest and force. And if Scotland and Wales became independent, I think relations between the Scots, Welsh and English would improve. It’s partly because the United Kingdom is indeed an “artificial construct” that leftists have been able to argue successfully for the Britishness of outsiders like Emma Raducanu.

Lying propaganda from Germany: Blacks and other non-Germans are described as “typical Germans”

But she isn’t British in any true sense, as her own Twitter biography openly attests: “london|toronto|shenyang|bucharest.” London is merely where she happened to end up with her Romanian father and Chinese mother after she was born in Toronto. If she’d stayed in Canada and won the US Open, Canadian leftists would undoubtedly have been celebrating her as wholly and authentically Canadian. But Canada is like Britain: it’s another unnatural union, another artificial construct. And so leftists there find it easy to dilute national identity as they move towards their ultimate aim of abolishing White nations. To counter that leftist subversion, I would like Francophone Quebec to become independent of the Anglophone provinces. But that isn’t going to happen soon. Scottish and Welsh independence aren’t going to happen soon either. After all, Britain has a Conservative government and the Conservative party is firmly opposed to what it calls the “break-up” of the Union.

Tory party? No, Torah party!

But “Conservative party” is an Orwellian name, proclaiming one thing while really standing for its opposite. Just as the modern Labour party hates the working-class, the modern Conservative party hates deep-rooted tradition and loves nation-wrecking globalism. That isn’t surprising, because it’s a thoroughly kosher party, funded and controlled by Jews to serve Jewish interests rather than those of British Whites. The former Conservative prime minister David Cameron once joked that “There are so many Jews at the top of Britain’s Conservative party, that it should be known as the Torah party rather than the Tory party.” He also said that “My values are Jewish values.” Cameron is part-Jewish. So is Boris Johnson, the current Tory prime minister. He’s also part-Turkish. Meanwhile, the other three most important posts in government are held by the Indian Hindu Rishi Sunak, who is Chancellor, the Indian Hindu Priti Patel, who is Home Secretary, and the Jew Dominic Raab, who is Foreign Secretary (or he was when I began writing this article).

None of those four is British and only Johnson has any genuine White ancestry. None of them should have power and influence in a White nation, but that’s precisely why they’re at the top of government. They were put there by Jews to serve Jewish interests, because Jews and their money control the Tory party. Here’s a very interesting fact. Since the year 2000, at least six very rich Jews have served as Treasurer of the Conservative Party: Ehud Sheleg (the current Treasurer), Sir Mick Davis (the previous one), Stanley Fink, Sir Stanley Kalms, Richard Harrington and Howard Leigh. I find that a very interesting fact. You probably do too. But the mainstream media in Britain don’t seem to find it interesting. After all, any mainstream journalist who dared mention it — let alone draw any conclusions from it — would first be deafened by shrieks of outrage, then driven into obscurity and poverty.

Typical English Rosenfeld

In other words, Jews enjoy what I’ve previously called “Booty Without Scrutiny.” They obviously control the not-at-all Conservative government, just as they controlled the previous Labour government. But nobody is allowed to say so or ask whether Jewish control is a good thing. The only acceptable response to Jews in modern Britain is the goy grovel. And all Tory goyim know this: Michael Farmer, who was Tory Treasurer from 2011 to 2015, became “Christian deputy chair of The Council for Christians and Jews in 2016.” In other words, he grovels before Jews (and may be part-Jewish or crypto-Jewish, like many apparent goyim in public life). But Jewish control of the Conservative party extends far beyond the post of Treasurer. A disproportionate number of Tory chairmen have been Jewish, like Andrew Feldman and Grant Shapps. And when the race-realist Dominic Cummings was forced out of BoJo’s government, he was replaced as Chief of Staff by a Jew called Dan Rosenfeld. The leftist New Statesman has called Rosenfeld the “anti-Cummings,” because where Cummings despised and tried to reform the incompetent and heavily leftist Civil Service, Rosenfeld was once part of it, working for both Labour and Conservative ministers. He will never seek to end either the incompetence of the Civil Service or its leftism.

Dan Rosenfeld, Jewish swamp-creature

Rosenfeld is, in fact, what Americans would call a “swamp-creature,” thoroughly at home in the anti-White, anti-Christian and anti-Western swamp of the Deep State, which combines government bureaucracy, the intelligence services, and globalist banking and capitalism. The swamp  bubbles, squelches and stinks on both sides of the Atlantic. After leaving the Civil Service, Rosenfeld spent five years at the Bank of America, then worked as “global head of corporate clients” for a little-known organization called Hakluyt, a “private intelligence agency founded by former MI6 officers.” MI6 is the overseas arm of Britain’s intelligence services and, like the CIA in America, is best described as a government-run crime-syndicate. After working with bankers and spooks, Jewish Dan Rosenfeld became Chief of Staff for Boris Johnson, just as Jewish Ron Klain became Chief of Staff for Joe Biden.

Feminists ignore a horrific femicide

Rosenfeld is no more British than Ron Klain is American. He has always been a strongly ethnocentric Jew, proudly stating that Judaism is “central to his life.” In his youth he belonged to RSY-Netzer, a Jewish youth movement, and he recently served as chair of World Jewish Relief, a charity that works hard to transfer money from goyim to Jews. Now that he’s BoJo’s Chief of Staff, will Rosenfeld work impartially and honestly to serve all the people of Britain? Unlike David Schneider’s comedy, that question should definitely raise a laugh. Rosenfeld will work to serve Jewish interests, which entails that he will work against White and Christian interests.

But there’s an interesting media connection in Rosenfeld’s life. His Jewish wife Jessica is the daughter of Alex Brummer, a senior journalist at the Daily Mail. That newspaper is far from being White nationalist, but it’s one of the dwindling number of mainstream sources that declines to censor or ignore inconvenient facts in the way leftists want them to be censored or ignored. For example, there’s recently been a disturbing news story in Britain about a “controlling and jealous” husband, one Damien Simmons, who murdered his estranged wife, Denise Keane-Simmons, by dousing her with gasoline and setting her on fire. Before that, he’d stalked her and subjected her to revenge porn. You’d expect Britain’s feminists to be all over this horrific murder and the “toxic masculinity” that inspired it, particularly because Denise Keane-Simmons was Black and an immigrant from Trinidad and Tobago. That should make her particularly worthy of solidarity and mourning from the Sisterhood.

A remarkable immigrant whom leftists aren’t interested in: the brutal and sadistic wife-incinerator Damien Simmons and his victim

But it didn’t. Alas, Damien Simmons is also Black and from Trinidad and Tobago, so his toxic masculinity has not been “interrogated” by the fierce and fearless feminists at the Guardian. But the Daily Mail covered the story in detail. The Guardian doesn’t seem to have mentioned it at all. And on the same day that the Mail celebrated Emma Raducanu’s remarkable achievement in the US Open, it covered another remarkable story of immigrant achievement that will never appear in the Guardian or be hailed by narcissistic leftists on Twitter. On September 12, 2021, the Mail serialized part of a book by Colin Sutton, the senior policeman who caught perhaps the most prolific rapist in British history.

Another remarkable immigrant

But the rapist wasn’t remarkable only for the extent of his crimes: he was remarkable also for the age of his victims. The Black Jamaican Delroy Easton Grant was a gerontophile who sexually assaulted “hundreds of elderly [White] victims in their own homes over two decades.” Many of those Whites — Grant attacked both women and men — will have died prematurely from their physical and psychological injuries. All of them paid a horrible and unnecessary price for the non-White immigration so beloved of the left and the hostile elite.

Another remarkable immigrant whom leftists aren’t interested in: the mass gerontophile rapist Delroy Easton Grant

Unlike St Stephen Lawrence, the victim of an extremely rare White-on-Black murder, the prolific gerontophile rapist Delroy Easton Grant is almost unknown among the British public. The Guardian and other leftist outlets would be happy for him to be completely unknown. After all, his horrific crimes destroy the leftist lie about how “immigration enriches us, and always has done.” So does the horrific murder committed by the wife-incinerator Damien Simmons, because Blacks and other non-Whites commit crimes of violence at much higher rates than Whites. That’s why leftists do their best to turn non-Whites like Grant and Simmons into meteor-malefactors, who flash through the headlines and then disappear forever from public consciousness.

First dissolve nationality, then biology

In other words, what begins as a leftist lie about “enrichment by immigration” ends in horrific suffering for women, whose welfare the left claim to care about passionately. The leftist lie states that immigrants can be “just as British” as Whites whose ancestry on these islands stretches back millennia. No, they can’t. The Romanian-Chinese Emma Raducanu isn’t British and nor are the Jew Dan Rosenfeld and the Black Delroy Easton Grant.

Leftist lies about nationality lead directly and inevitably to leftist lies about biological sex. But no, sexually perverted men like the Israeli Jew Jonathan Yaniv are not women and are not lesbians. Borders between races, religions and sexes are good things. They protect the weak and prevent the strong being weakened. That’s why leftists want to destroy those borders. Leftists don’t serve the Good, the Beautiful and the True: they serve the Evil, the Ugly and the Lie. They want chaos and crime in Western nations, because they want to rule the ruins.

Blacks Bless the Benighted West: The Sacred Central Principle of Modern Western Politics and Culture

/18 Comments/in , /by

Two views on non-Whites are permitted in the modern West. The first view is leftist and rules the media, academia, law, education, government bureaucracy, big business, sports and all leftist parties. It states: “Non-Whites are a limitless blessing and whites are cruelly oppressing them.” The second view is cuckservative and states: “Non-Whites are a limitless blessing and whites no longer oppress them as cruelly as they once did.”

Whitey in the Woodpile: The eleven members of the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities

It was the second, cuckservative view that was laid out for the people of Brave New Britain in the recently published report by the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities (CRED). But the cuckservative conclusions of CRED were no surprise. After all, Britain has a cuckservative government and it appointed the commissioners who wrote the report. The part-Jewish, part-Turkish prime minister Boris Johnson and his fellow Friends of Israel knew what they wanted and the commissioners have duly supplied it: “We no longer see a Britain where the system is deliberately rigged against ethnic minorities. … The Commission believes that if [our] recommendations are implemented, it will give a further burst of momentum to the story of our country’s progress to a successful multicultural community — a beacon to the rest of Europe and the world.”

Shred the CRED

Yes, the report claims that Britain, with its rape-gangs, suicide-bombers and acid-throwers, will serve as a beacon to European nations like Hungary and Poland, which don’t have rape-gangs, suicide-bombers or acid-throwers because they haven’t been enriched by non-White immigration. But just as predictable as the fatuities of the report has been the response of Britain’s cuckservatives and leftists. Cuckservatives have warmly welcomed the report and leftists have loudly condemned it. The report was variously described in the Guardian as “disturbing,” “nonsensical,” “deeply cynical,” “egregious,” “poisonously patronising,” “historically illiterate,” “insulting to our intelligence,” and, of course, “divisive.”

All smiles and happy collaboration: typically leftist propaganda on a typically cuckservative report

For leftists, it is always “divisive” when someone disagrees with them. But BoJo & Co. were careful to avoid one potential complaint from the left: they followed a strict leftist rule by ensuring that the Commissioners were almost all non-White. And so it was that the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities was itself a glaring — and entirely unaddressed — example of a “Race and Ethnic Disparity.” In a country that is still about 80% White, the Commissioners had to be 90% non-White because it is non-Whites who decide how wonderful non-Whites are and how much of a blessing mass immigration has been. The White majority doesn’t get a vote on that.

“Heroic” murderers, rapists and pimps

And never has had a vote. After all, if Whites had been allowed to vote on whether Britain should allow mass immigration by non-Whites, they would overwhelmingly have voted “No.” And don’t take just my word for it: the treasonous leftist politician Roy Hattersley, a former deputy leader of the Labour party, proudly announced in 2013 that he had refused to support “what a clear majority of my constituents, and most of the country, undoubtedly wanted [in 1964] — the repatriation of all Commonwealth immigrants.” The CRED report did not discuss this sensible White resistance to non-White immigration, except in so far as White resistance cast a literally “heroic” light on non-Whites. On page 7 of the report, we meet one of the giants of contemporary literature:

[Black] Poet and activist Linton Kwesi Johnson describes the early mass Black presence in the UK as having 2 phases or eras. The first was the 1950s Windrush arrival from the Caribbean, this he called the ‘heroic’ period, when literally doors were closed in the faces of the new Black settlers who heroically battled in the face of adversity. [Note clumsy prose and punctuation.] The children of those settlers … who came of age in the 1970s and 1980s he calls the ‘rebel’ generation, this featured running battles with police and a breakdown in community relations, which continues to have a negative legacy. [More clumsy prose.] The spirit of rebellion continued last summer during the Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests. This was a revolt that engulfed the world. We have to acknowledge the spirit of BLM was the original trigger for our report. (Report by Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities, March 2021)

The talentless and unintelligent Linton Kwesi Johnson

“Poet and activist” Linton Kwesi Johnson (born 1952 in Jamaica) didn’t mention that the “Black settlers” also “heroically battled” to raise the abysmally low rates of murder, rape, robbery, pimping and anti-social noise in stale, pale 1950s and ’60s Britain. Or that they battled on behalf of the predatory Jewish landlord Peter Rachman (1919–62), who would install violent and noisy Blacks to drive White tenants out of houses he wanted to buy or convert into flats. But Johnson’s omissions aren’t surprising. Here is a sample of the patois poetry that has won him acclaim and honours for decades:

Inglan is a Bitch

W’en mi jus’ come to Landan toun
Mi use to work pan di andahgroun
But workin’ pan di andahgroun
Yu don’t get fi know your way around.

Inglan is a bitch
Dere’s no escapin it
Inglan is a bitch
Dere’s no runnin’ whey fram it.

Mi get a lickle jab in a bih ’otell
An’ awftah a while, mi woz doin’ quite well
Dem staat mi aaf as a dish-washah
But w’en mi tek a stack, mi noh tun clack-watchah.

Inglan is a bitch
Dere’s no escapin it
Inglan is a bitch
No baddah try fi hide fram it. (Inglan is a Bitch)

Linton Kwesi Johnson is, of course, a leftist and will not agree with the report’s findings. But talentless and unintelligent Blacks like him had to appear before the Commission because negrolatry is an essential part of minority worship in general. Blacks are the most harmful, obnoxious, unintelligent, unattractive and unproductive of all minorities. In other words, they are the group that least resembles Whites, which is precisely why the hostile Jewish elite selected Blacks for transformation into the archetypal saintly victims of White oppression. As Kevin MacDonald has documented, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) in America was run and funded not by Blacks, but by Jews. In Britain, the Jewish lawyer Anthony Lester (1936–2020) proudly described how he brought the American model of minority worship to Britain:

In Search of Something Better: Anthony Lester recalls the creation of the Commission for Racial Equality

In 1964, on my return from witnessing the “Long Hot Summer” of civil rights action in the American South, I helped found CARD (the Campaign Against Racial Discrimination). We campaigned for effective legislation to combat racism in Britain. The first measure — the Race Relations Act 1965 — was hopelessly narrow and lacked teeth, so we fought for something better. When CARD was taken over by militant extremists, in December 1967, Jim Rose [another Jewish lawyer] and I founded the Runnymede Trust to combat racial prejudice and promote policies for overcoming racial discrimination and disadvantage. Labour’s second measure, the Race Relations Act 1968, was broader in scope but still lacked teeth. So again we campaigned for something better. (Catalyst magazine, 20th November 2006)

Anthony Lester, Baron of Bullshit

By “better,” Lester meant “better for invading non-Whites, worse for native Whites.” He was praised in his Guardian obituary as “the author of the groundbreaking legislation on racial and gender equality introduced in Britain by Harold Wilson’s Labour government in the 1970s.” Alas, the obituary also noted “a sad coda to his career,” arising “from a complaint by the author and charity worker Jasvinder Sanghera, who waived her right to anonymity to assert that in 2006 she had been subjected to sexual harassment by Lester and … offered a peerage in exchange for sexual favours.”

No mention of Muslim rape-gangs

Lester, who became a Baron in 1993, strenuously denied the accusations, but it was yet another example of how Jews have been vastly over-represented among those accused of sexual predation in recent years. This “Race and Ethnic Disparity” was definitely not examined in the CRED report, which also declined to examine any other kind of “Disparity” about those who commit crime and those who are its victims. For example, the report did not investigate the statistical anomalies whereby non-Whites murder and rape Whites at higher absolute rates than vice versa. And so the hard-working Muslim rape-gangs of Rotherham and many other British towns and cities were not mentioned in the report. In fact, the word “rape” appears only in a footnote on page 146. There was no discussion, therefore, of that remarkable representative of the heroic Black settlement of Britain, the mass gerontophile rapist Delroy Easton Grant, who may have sexually assaulted hundreds of elderly White women after his arrival here from Jamaica.

Heroic Black rapist Delroy Easton Grant

Grant certainly caused the premature death of some of those women, but he wasn’t a deliberate murderer like the Black rapist Leroy Campbell, who raped and murdered a White nurse, Lisa Skidmore, after previously serving a so-called “life-sentence” for rape and other offences. The judge who gave him a second (and perhaps genuine) life-sentence said this: “Miss Skidmore had to suffer the pain and terror of being raped by someone in her own home before she died. This was a sustained incident lasting over two hours. There was a significant degree of planning that went into the commission of these grotesque offences. Your actions on that day have had a most dramatic effect on a number of people.”

Meteor malefactors

But the Black genius for vicious crime is by no means confined to rape and murder. For example, three enterprising young Blacks were jailed in 2018 for a “‘shocking’ spree of brutal robberies … across London” in which they had sprayed “acid and alkali” into the faces of their victims. The three young Blacks did not express remorse for their crimes, probably because they didn’t feel any. Black psychopathy and its probable genetic roots were something else that the CRED report did not discuss.

Heroic Black rapist-murderer Leroy Campbell

But that’s unsurprising. High-achieving Blacks like Delroy Grant, Leroy Campbell and the acid-throwers of London are not celebrated in Brave New Britain. They are what you might call meteor malefactors, whose misdeeds flash across the headlines and then vanish forever. But Black criminals have been having “a most dramatic effect” on the White majority ever since Blacks began arriving here in the 1950s against the clearly expressed opposition of the White majority. The CRED report did not discuss this prolonged Black predation on Whites or undertake the admittedly herculean task of estimating how many Whites have been murdered, raped, beaten and otherwise harmed by Blacks during the heroic Black settlement and subsequent Black rebellions.

A cuckservative and her controllers: Priti Patel with convicted Jewish fraudster Sir Gerald Ronson and
Jewish Board of Deputies leader Marie van der Zyl

But the Commission wasn’t set up by the cuckservative government to investigate the harm done to Whites by Blacks. As I pointed out at the beginning, both leftists and cuckservatives are agreed on the sacred central principle of politics and culture: that Blacks Bless the Benighted West. Leftists and cuckservatives merely disagree about whether Whites are as evil and oppressive towards non-Whites as they used to be. Cuckservatives don’t think Whites are, but Whites are still forbidden to have any say on how wonderful Blacks in particular are.

That’s why the Commission itself was headed by a Black, Dr Tony Sewell, who thereby gave the whole proceedings that essential glow of Numinous Negritude. At least, he did so in cuckservative and libertarian eyes. To leftists, however, Sewell is a “coconut” (brown on the outside, white on the inside), “race traitor” and “house negro” working for Whitey. How dare Sewell suggest that Britain was not “institutionally racist” and that minorities could achieve success by their own efforts despite White racism?

Crushing the left, ending the racism racket

The Marxist libertarian Brendan O’Neill hastened to the defence of Sewell and other non-Whites behind the report, condemning the “identitarian bigots” who were accusing Sewell and others of betraying their own kind. O’Neill threw up his hands in horror at “the racial conformism outrageously demanded by sections of the left” and spoke darkly of “the rise of a kind of woke racism.” In other words, he was firing the most powerful weapon in the cuckservative and libtard armoury: the deadly and devastating argument that leftists are the real racists. Well, people like O’Neill think it’s a devastating argument. Of course, they’ve been using it for decades and it’s never had the slightest effect, but they remain eternally optimistic that with just one or two more repetitions it will crush the left and end the “racism racket.”

It won’t, of course. Nor will this cuckservative report by the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities. One big reason for that was noted by Commissioners themselves: “We recognise that building a confident, successful multi-ethnic society is a huge and difficult endeavour.” In fact, it’s an impossible endeavour, but even if it were merely “huge and difficult,” one glaring question would remain unaddressed. Why did Britain need to become a “multi-ethnic society”? What was lacking in the land of Shakespeare, Newton, Milton, Darwin, Watt, Hume and many other giants of art, science and philosophy before it became “multi-ethnic”? What overwhelming advantages has Britain gained by importing huge numbers of illiberal tribalists with low average IQs from corrupt, violent and intellectually void countries like Pakistan, Jamaica and Somalia?

No action by cuckservatives

No advantages whatsoever, that I can see. But I and many others can plainly see the huge disadvantages of mass immigration from the Third World. They include suicide bombing, rape-gangs, honour killings, female genital mutilation, inbreeding, exotic diseases, censorship, political corruption and the massive transfer of White taxes to subsidize unproductive but fast-breeding non-Whites. And thanks to imported non-White pathologies — and the hard work of Jewish activists like Anthony Lester — ever-harshening laws have been passed to restrict the free speech and free association of British Whites, even as an immoral and voyeuristic surveillance state pries ever more closely into their private lives.

The Report by the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities is not going to mitigate any of those pathologies, let alone end them. As I pointed out at the beginning, the leftist view of race relations — “Blacks are Saints, Whites are Demons” — rules the media, academia, law, education, government bureaucracy, big business, sports and all leftist parties. This cuckservative government isn’t going to make any attempt to change that. For example, Tamara Finkelstein, a high-flying Jewish bureaucrat who is the “Joint Senior Sponsor of the Civil Service Jewish Network,” has supported Black Lives Matter (BLM) on an official government Twitter account and issued the stirring call to “fight racism.” Have she and similar promoters of “far-left identity politics” been reprimanded in any way? Not in the slightest. After all, Tamara is the sister of the high-flying Conservative peer Daniel Finkelstein and her commitment to “anti-racism” is almost certainly the same as his.

Like sister, like brother: the anti-White Jews Tamara and Daniel Finkelstein

And it was the so-called Conservative prime minister Theresa May who added “Stephen Lawrence Day” to Britain’s religious calendar. The day honours Britain’s new patron saint, a Black teenager who died after being stabbed twice by a gang of “white racists” in 1993. It was a very rare and unusual crime, because Blacks are overwhelmingly murdered by other Blacks, not by Whites. Blacks also murder Whites much more often than the reverse. But none of that matters to the martyr cult of St Stephen Lawrence, which endlessly repeats the lie that Whites are an ominous and ever-present threat to non-Whites and their welfare.

Martyr vs Meteor Murders: Stephen Lawrence is eternally remembered as the
far more numerous White victims of non-Whites are forgotten

Will the so-called Conservative prime minister Boris Johnson remove Stephen Lawrence Day from the calendar? Of course not. Nor will Johnson or any other cuckservative criticize the Stephen Lawrence Research Centre, which is working to further demonize Whites and sanctify non-Whites at De Montfort University in the ancient British city of Leicester:

The Stephen Lawrence Research Centre aims to drive forward conversations that will shape and influence how we think about race and social justice. It intends to honour the enduring legacy of Stephen Lawrence’s life and his family’s ongoing pursuit of justice by asking new questions, debating critical issues, raising awareness, and advocating to bring about positive change. …

National Stephen Lawrence Day 22 April

The 22 April 2018 marked the 25th anniversary of the senseless murder of Stephen Lawrence, a young man who had a bright future ahead of him.

At the memorial service to celebrate his life, the former Prime Minister, Theresa May, announced the annual national commemoration of Stephen Lawrence Day which is to be held each year on 22 April.

Schools and their communities are invited to use the memory of Stephen’s life and legacy as an opportunity to empower young people in their care to live their best life. Find out how to get involved. …

Stephen Lawrence Research Centre news and events

An evening with Baroness Doreen Lawrence: Bringing Legacy to Leicester

Ahead of Stephen Lawrence Day, 22 April, Baroness Lawrence will be joined by [the Trotskyist race-baiter] Imran Khan QC [Queen’s Counsel], educators, students and community leaders for a discussion on how Stephen’s legacy is inspiring a change for good across the nation. (Propaganda and mendacity issued by the Stephen Lawrence Research Centre)

Martyr’s mother: Black Baroness Doreen Lawrence

Baroness Doreen Lawrence is the martyr’s mother, an utterly undistinguished and intellectually void Jamaican woman who has been lavishly honoured and celebrated by Brave New Britain, and is treated as the fount of all wisdom on matters of race and racism. The Guardian was delighted to report that Baroness Lawrence, who was ennobled by the treasonous shabbos-goy Tony Blair, has joined the “Shred the CRED” campaign. She has condemned the recent report for “giving racists the green light.” That’s how she expresses her gratitude for cuckservative pandering and Theresa May’s creation of Stephen Lawrence Day.

Kriss Donald and Mary-Ann Leneghan, long-forgotten White victims of horrific racist murders

In complete contrast to the saintly Doreen Lawrence, White mothers who have lost children to racially motivated murder, often in far worse ways, are never honoured or celebrated in Brave New Britain, and are never consulted on matters of race and racism. There is no “Kriss Donald Research Centre” to honour the White Scottish teenager who was kidnapped, repeatedly stabbed, and incinerated by Pakistani Muslims in 2004. And there is no “Mary-Ann Leneghan Research Centre” to honour the White English teenager who was raped, tortured and repeatedly stabbed by five Blacks and an Albanian Muslim “asylum-seeker” in 2005.

Britain is a Land of Lies

Kriss Donald and Mary-Ann Leneghan were the victims of meteor murder. The horrible details of their prolonged and agonizing deaths flashed through the British media and then vanished forever, because no mainstream institution in Brave New Britain is interested in the truth about mass immigration from the Third World. Blacks and other non-Whites are not a blessing to Britain. They are a curse imported against the will of the White majority by the hostile Jewish elite and its treasonous gentile collaborators. The overwhelmingly non-White Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities could never admit this. It has no more interest in the truth about non-Whites than the cuckservative government who appointed it.

Like all other Western nations, Britain is a Land of Lies where liars rule, minority-worship is mandatory throughout public life, and non-Whites impose huge and growing costs on the White majority. And what should we do in the face of the lies, ugliness and evil currently rampant in the West? I think Vox Day’s advice is good. We should devote ourselves ever more firmly to what the great Catholic writer Hilaire Belloc called the “indissoluble Trinity of Truth, Beauty and Goodness.”

Hate-Filled Hindu: Priti Patel is Sycophantic to Jews, Psychopathic to Whites

/34 Comments/in , /by

Shakespeare got it wrong. “There’s no art to find the mind’s construction in the face,” says King Duncan in Macbeth (c. 1606), meaning that psychology can’t be read from physiognomy. But Shakespeare never saw Priti Patel, the British-born Indian Hindu who currently serves as Home Secretary. When you look at Patel’, do you see gentleness, humility and good-nature? I doubt it:

The pernicious punim of Priti Patel, high-T fem-pol

No, Priti Patel looks like what she is: a nasty piece of work. As I said in “A Shameless Shabbos-Shiksa,” she’s a high-T fem-pol, that is, a female politician with typically elevated levels of testosterone. She’s aggressive, ambitious and entirely without principle or loyalty to the country of her birth. That makes her an ideal shabbos-shiksa, or gentile servant, for Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI), which the Jewish Chronicle described as “the biggest lobbying group in Westminster” (i.e., British politics). Lord Polak, CFI’s very powerful but little-known chief, steered Patel to a long series of secret meetings with important Israeli politicians. That definite conspiracy was finally exposed in 2017 and Patel lost her job as International Development Secretary in Theresa May’s government of grovelling goys.

Working for Jewish interests

What happened at the meetings? Only Patel and her Jewish puppet-masters know, but she certainly wasn’t conspiring with Jews to benefit British Whites. After the scandal broke, she should have been prosecuted as an agent of a foreign power and permanently excluded from politics. But that isn’t how things work in Brave New Britain. Instead, Patel bounced back to a much bigger and better job in Boris Johnson’s government of grovelling goys, in which the very powerful but little-known treasurer is the Israeli plutocrat Ehud Sheleg. Patel is now Home Secretary, supposedly overseeing law, immigration and border security for Britain, in reality working for Jewish interests as she has always done. And now she’s back at the centre of another scandal, this time about her obnoxious behaviour towards White civil servants. An official report found that she had broken the ministerial code of conduct by bullying staff and should therefore resign for the second time from the cabinet.

However, Boris Johnson decided that the rules needn’t apply to his fellow Friend of Israel, and Patel is still there. There are rumours that she’ll lose her post soon for incompetence, but obnoxiousness was not a problem. After all, she’s not been obnoxious to the only people who matter in Brave New Britain: the tiny Jewish minority that funds and controls the Conservative Party and that wields hugely disproportionate influence in the media and academia. Patel has risen to high office by being sycophantic to Jews and psychopathic to Whites.

Death-goddess Kali with White men’s heads

And she may well be a full psychopath, like a disproportionate number of politicians and of the lawyers who are massively over-represented in Western politics. For example, Patel has a psychopathic indifference to truth. She knows from the inside that Jews have controlled the Conservative government under Johnson, May, and Cameron just as they previously controlled the Labour government under Blair and Brown. That’s why she had so many secret meetings with Israeli politicians. But she would instantly condemn anyone who named and opposed the very Jewish control that she has so carefully allied herself with and worked to strengthen. Indeed, she would be happy to imprison anyone telling the truth about Jewish control. Psychopaths don’t care about truth or morality: they care about power. And some psychopaths like to exercise power in sadistic ways, as Patel did when she shouted and swore at her White staff. Which brings me to another image from Brave New Britain:

Death-goddess Kali with White men’s heads

That painting, called Housewives With Steak Knives (1985), is a “self-portrait … as the multi-armed Hindu Goddess Kali” by Sutapa Biswas, another Indian Hindu currently enriching Brave New Britain. Do you think the painting shows hostility towards White men? I do and I would link the psychology of Sutapa Biswas, as revealed in her painting, to the psychology of Priti Patel, as revealed in her behaviour towards White civil servants. Of course, no mainstream commentator in Britain would dare suggest that Patel’s Hinduism and Indian genetics have played any role in her obnoxious behaviour. But here at the Occidental Observer, the Home of Hate, I’m suggesting exactly that.

Pernicious parallels

After all, a very similar scandal has happened before. In 1998, a female Hindu lawyer called Kamlesh Bahl was appointed Deputy Vice President of the Law Society and was expected to rise swiftly to become its President. But Bahl was dismissed in 1999 after accusations that she was a power-crazed bully who terrorized and humiliated her White staff in just the way that Priti Patel is accused of doing.

And just as Patel got her big job despite being known to have bullied staff in her previous ministries, Bahl got her big job despite being known to have bullied staff when she was head of the Equal Opportunities Commission. Like Patel, Bahl had non-White privilege. And to round off the parallels, Bahl denied that she had done anything wrong just as Patel has done. I don’t think these parallels are coincidental. Like Kamlesh Bahl, Priti Patel is a hate-filled alien invader whose genetics and psychology are rooted in India, not in Britain.

Don’t accept immigrants from India

India is a fascinating and complex region in all manner of ways, from religion to genetics (as I acknowledged in my discussion of the Parsi Indian Freddie Mercury). But one thing is certain amid all that complexity: India is a very bad place for any Western nation to accept immigrants from. Its culture is both hugely corrupt and horrendously cruel, as one of England’s greatest writers saw long ago. Rudyard Kipling (1865–1936) was born in India and recorded life there with sharp insight and understanding. Leftists call him a racist; I call him a realist. You can see some of his realism about India in the short-story collection Plain Tales from the Hills (1888). One of the stories, with the ironic title “Beyond the Pale,” begins with these lines: “A man should, whatever happens, keep to his own caste, race and breed. Let the White go to the White and the Black to the Black. Then, whatever trouble falls is in the ordinary course of things — neither sudden, alien, nor unexpected.”

Leftists would call that racist; I call it realist. And I think it applies to the trouble caused by Priti Patel and Kamlesh Bahl. Kipling would have been horrified to see mass immigration from India into the West. And rightly so. His story “Beyond the Pale” is about a love-affair between a White British man called Trejago and a Brown Indian widow called Bisesa. At first Trejago sees some of the beauty and charm of India. Then, following a quarrel with his brown-skinned lover, he sees a little of the horror:

A week, and then three weeks, passed without a sign from Bisesa. Trejago, thinking that the rupture had lasted quite long enough, went down to Amir Nath’s Gully for the fifth time in the three weeks, hoping that his rap at the sill of the shifting grating would be answered. He was not disappointed.

There was a young moon, and one stream of light fell down into Amir Nath’s Gully, and struck the grating, which was drawn away as he knocked. From the black dark, Bisesa held out her arms into the moonlight. Both hands had been cut off at the wrists, and the stumps were nearly healed.

Then, as Bisesa bowed her head between her arms and sobbed, some one in the room grunted like a wild beast, and something sharp — knife, sword or spear — thrust at Trejago in his boorka. The stroke missed his body, but cut into one of the muscles of the groin, and he limped slightly from the wound for the rest of his days. (“Beyond the Pale”)

“Genius” is an over-used word, but I’m happy to apply it to Rudyard Kipling. His ability to understand the multitudinous realities of India was matched by his ability to describe those realities. He didn’t portray Whites as inexcusable sinners or non-Whites as immaculate saints. Instead, he was a realist, which is why he’s now called a racist. But I can see no hate or malice in his stories about brown-skinned Indians. Indeed, “The Story of Muhammad Din,” about the life and death of a tiny Muslim boy, must be one of the most moving and compassionate stories ever written – and without the insincerity and sentimentality that accompany leftist minority-worship.

Leftism mandates blindness to reality

But although Kipling could sympathize with brown-skinned Indians and recognize their full humanity, that did not make him think that Indians and Whites are the same under the skin (or that White Germans and White Brits are the same). Like Charles Dickens, another literary genius, Kipling did not allow his enormous powers of sympathy to blind him to reality. But modern leftism mandates blindness to reality. That’s why the leftist Guardian can report that “India remains the most unsafe country for women in the world, with a woman raped every 20 minutes,” while simultaneously supporting unlimited immigration from India. This would ensure that India’s vibrant rape-culture found new settings, just as Pakistan’s rape-culture has been successfully transplanted to Britain.

In short, the Guardian claims to oppose rape while supporting the non-White immigration that massively increases rape. Its readers and journalists don’t recognize the contradiction. Thanks to minority-worship, leftists apply the Orwellian principle of crimestop, which “means the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they are inimical to [minority-worship], and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction.”

Racism is realism

And although British leftists have condemned Priti Patel and her bullying, none of them would acknowledge that she is yet another example of the harm done by mass immigration. As an Indian Hindu and shabbos-shiksa, Priti Patel supports the highly ethnocentric governments of Israel and India while working against the legitimate ethnic interests of Britain’s fast-shrinking White majority. Patel is bad for Britain, like the part-Jewish, part-Turkish prime minister Boris Johnson and like her fellow Indian Hindu Rishi Sunak, who came to the post of Chancellor from Goldman Sachs and the highly Jewish and globalist world of banking.

It is not racist to say that these aliens are bad for Britain: it is realist. Or rather, racism is realism. It is both rational and realistic to understand that race is a valid scientific concept and has huge consequences for politics, culture and criminality. Rudyard Kipling understand those obvious truths and Rudyard Kipling would have been entirely unsurprised by Muslim rape-gangs and the malign behaviour of the Indian Hindus Priti Patel and Kamlesh Bahl. But the West is no longer governed by the thinking of far-sighted White geniuses like Kipling and Dickens. Instead, the West is governed by the thinking of subversive Jewish charlatans like Karl Marx and Franz Boas.

Priti Patel pleads for power at Conservative Friends of Israel

And that’s why Britain has a hate-filled Hindu called Priti Patel at the top of government. Her sadistic behaviour towards her White staff is a portent of what will happen right across the West as Whites lose control to their non-White enrichers. Patel is bad for Britain and doesn’t belong here, which is precisely why, in true psychopathic fashion, she sniffed out and bowed before the hidden centre of power in her party: Conservative Friends of Israel. And Jews were delighted to recruit her as a shabbos-shiksa. They know that outsiders like Patel have no loyalty to or concern for British Whites.

But you won’t see anyone in the mainstream media speak these obvious truths. After all, this is Brave New Britain, where it’s against the law to speak the truth about Jewish control and minority malice. And who oversees the law in Brave New Britain? You’ve seen her pernicious punim already in this article: it’s Priti Patel, Home Secretary, Friend of Israel and Foe of Whites.

Labour’s Shame: How The British Labour Party Betrayed Its Founding Principles

/14 Comments/in , /by

The newly published report on anti-Semitism in the British Labour party couldn’t be more damning. The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) spoke to dozens of witnesses as it investigated how Labour had repeatedly and remorselessly betrayed Britain’s Jewish community. Once the party had been their natural home; now it had become their sworn enemy.

Weeping with shame

Denis MacShane, the former Labour MP for the Yorkshire town of Rotherham, wept with shame as he stood before the EHRC and confessed that he had worked for decades on behalf of rich and powerful Christians in far-off London while ignoring the powerless working-class Jewish girls being raped, prostituted and murdered by vicious Christian gangs in his own constituency. “As a staunch socialist and life-long feminist, I was elected to defend the interests of working-class Jewish girls above all others,” Denis sobbed. “And I betrayed that sacred trust.”

Racked with remorse: Denis MacShane

Other witnesses from Rotherham revealed that the Labour council there had deliberately suppressed details of Jewish suffering at Christian hands for fear of upsetting “community relations,” while Sarah Champion, MacShane’s successor as MP for Rotherham, described how she had been thrown out of the Shadow Cabinet by Jeremy Corbyn for speaking out against the Christian rape-gangs in defence of her working-class Jewish constituents.

Labour was founded to defend Jews

Another Labour MP, Ann Cryer, said that the horrific abuse of Jewish girls by Christian gangs elsewhere in Britain had been ignored since the 1980s by Labour-controlled institutions and by Britain’s most powerful Labour-supporting newspaper. “I couldn’t get The Guardian interested,” she recalled sadly. “Its reporters seemed paralysed by political correctness.” The veteran Labourite Roy Hattersley made another shame-filled confession, revealing that, during his decades in parliament, he had always refused to act on his Jewish constituents’ clearly expressed opposition to mass immigration by bigoted and violent Christians from the Third World.

Those are only a few examples of the horrific anti-Semitism uncovered by the EHRC as it probed the foul and fetid depths of Labour’s betrayal of the Jewish community. Under Tony Blair, the Labour government had ignored the rape and murder of Jews even as it opened the borders to mass immigration that destroyed the livelihood of Jews, caused crime to flourish, and forced Jews to flee their traditional districts. The EHRC report concluded with these ringing words: “The very name of the Labour party — from the Hebrew Laab, ‘Serve,’ and Ow’r, ‘the Jews’ — proclaims its founding commitment to work tirelessly for the Jewish community. Labour has betrayed its very reason for existence by allowing the Jewish community to suffer for so long and in so many ways.”

Back to reality

Well, that isn’t what the EHRC report into anti-Semitism really said, of course. Jews in Britain haven’t been suffering any of the things I described above. No rape, murder, beatings, impoverishment and ethnic cleansing for them. Instead, the Labour party inflicted all those things on the White working-class. In reality, the MP Denis MacShane worked for Jews in far-off London while ignoring the rape and murder of White girls by Muslim gangs in his Yorkshire constituency. Mass immigration has impoverished and ethnically cleansed the White working-class, not Jews. The Jewish peer Lord Glasman served in Blair’s government and witnessed what he called “a terrible situation where a Labour government was hostile to the English working-class.”

The rich Jewish lawyer Rebecca Hilsenrath

The rich (and homosexual) Jewish lawyer David Isaac

The Labour party is still hostile. And the Equality and Human Rights Commission doesn’t care in the slightest. After all, the EHRC is headed by two rich Jewish lawyers, Rebecca Hilsenrath and David Isaac. The EHRC works against White interests, not for them. That’s why it ignored the genuine crimes committed by Labour against the White working-class and focused on threats to Jewish interests. Inter alia, the real EHRC report exposed and attacked Labour anti-Semites who “referenced conspiracies about … Jewish power and control” or “accused British Jews of greater loyalty to Israel than Britain.”

Friends of Israel in very high places

What are rape and murder compared to horrific truth-crimes like those? For example, it should be utterly unacceptable that a national newspaper in Britain could openly proclaim that Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI) is “the biggest lobbying group in Westminster, holding lunches for 700 guests, making countless Downing Street visits, and developing contacts throughout Israel and the Middle East.” That’s shamelessly feeding conspiracy theories about “Jewish power and control” and about how Jews have “greater loyalty to Israel than Britain.”

Lord Polack at Conservative Friends of Israel

Which national newspaper said that about Conservative Friends of Israel? It was the Jewish Chronicle, the same newspaper that has just issued a special edition in celebration of the EHRC report into Labour’s anti-Semitism. The Chronicle described CFI like that during a scandal about how the CFI’s shadiest and most powerful official, the Jewish Lord Polack, had guided the Conservative politician Priti Patel to secret and unminuted meetings with Israeli politicians on Israeli, British and American soil.

The most pro-Israel war-criminal in British history

If a shady lobbyist called Mahmoud Rafsanjani or Dmitri Bogdanov had guided Priti Patel to secret and unminuted meetings with Iranian or Russian politicians, the Jewish Chronicle would have been thundering about conspiracies and demanding Patel’s resignation. But it’s fine when Jews do the same underhanded things for Israel’s benefit. And it was also fine when Tony Blair’s Labour government, funded and controlled by Jews like Lord Levy, betrayed the White working-class whom Labour was founded to serve. Blair is a war-criminal who has always worked for Israel, bankers, big business and the military-industrial complex, not for the working-class. That’s why he’s now worth more than £100m and why the Israeli newspaper Haaretz said that Blair is “generally regarded as the most pro-Israel prime minister in British history.” Marie van der Zyl, head of the Jewish Board of Deputies, has recently “praised Mr Blair as a ‘true friend’ of the Jewish community.” In other words, Blair followed Jewish orders, so it didn’t matter that he was a dedicated enemy of Labour’s traditional supporters in the White working-class.

Then the dim narcissist Blair left office and in time the dim Marxist Jeremy Corbyn became Labour leader. Corbyn opposed Blair’s mass-killing in the Middle East and has never wanted to be a millionaire. In other words, he wasn’t prepared to follow Jewish orders for financial reward. And that’s why he was relentlessly demonized as an anti-Semite and has now been suspended from the Labour party. He refused to grovel in contrition when the EHCR report was published. I think he was right not to grovel. But Jeremy Corbyn wouldn’t be ashamed if the EHRC published a truthful report into Labour’s genuine and decades-old crimes against the White working-class. As I’ve said before, Labour is better regarded as a criminal conspiracy than as a political party. Under pro-war, pro-plutocracy Blair, it conspired against the White working-class on behalf of Jews. Under anti-war, anti-plutocracy Corbyn, it conspired against the White working-class on behalf of Muslims, Blacks and other alien invaders.

Pro-Black bureaucrats and anti-White Jews

George Orwell wrote the following in Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949): “Even the names of the four Ministries [in his fictional dystopia] exhibit a sort of impudence in their deliberate reversal of the facts. The Ministry of Peace concerns itself with war, the Ministry of Truth with lies, the Ministry of Love with torture and the Ministry of Plenty with starvation.”

In real 21st-century Britain, the Labour party concerns itself with attacking the working-class. And the Civil Service, overseen by a so-called Conservative government, concerns itself with working against civilization and for barbarism, as a recent article by a pseudonymous journalist has revealed:

On 3 June [2020], Jonathan Slater, Permanent Secretary of the Department for Education, responded to the DEFRA [Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs] Permanent Secretary Tamara Finkelstein’s call to “fight racism” by tweeting the Black Lives Matter hashtag and declaring his quest to “tackle the whiteness of Senior Whitehall” (both these Whitehall heads are white, incidentally). …

Our supposedly impartial civil service is institutionalising far-left identity politics. It has fallen prey to networks of entryist activists like Project Race who, like BLM [Black Lives Matter], are adept at disguising neo-Marxist ideas as kind-hearted truisms. The influence that senior civil servants have granted these activists stops junior civil servants speaking against them, which in turn allows senior civil servants to broadcast patently absurd or partisan views with total impunity. One junior civil servant has described to me a non-stop, daily bombardment of “anti-racist” activism at work since the BLM protests began. Because no-one questions it openly, the woke browbeating continues as if it were no more controversial than a stationery audit. The evidence above is only the tip of the iceberg, but it’s already wedged deep into the ship’s hull. It remains a mystery why Captain Boris [Johnson] [and] First Officer [Michael] Gove … haven’t sounded a vigorous alarm about any of this. (The BLM takeover of Whitehall: Why don’t ministers care about the politics of their civil servants?, The Critic, 18th August 2020)

That article should be read by all intelligent Whites in Britain, before they begin fighting back against the hostile elite that intends to destroy them. Alas, it won’t be. It was written under the pseudonym of “Justin Elderman” by someone (possibly Jewish) who rightly fears that using his real name would harm his career and perhaps even his physical well-being. And look again at the question raised by Mr Elderman: “Why don’t ministers care about the politics of their civil servants?” He didn’t answer the question, but he had given his readers a big clue here:

On 3 June [2020], Jonathan Slater, Permanent Secretary of the Department for Education, responded to the DEFRA [Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs] Permanent Secretary Tamara Finkelstein’s call to “fight racism” by tweeting the Black Lives Matter hashtag and declaring his quest to “tackle the whiteness of Senior Whitehall” (both these Whitehall heads are white, incidentally). (The BLM takeover of Whitehall)

Tamara Finkelstein works for Jews

I don’t think Tamara Finkelstein regards herself as “white” any more than her brother Daniel Finkelstein does. No, both of them regard themselves as Jewish, not as White. The powerful bureaucrat Tamara Finkelstein proudly states that she is “Joint Senior Sponsor of the Civil Service Jewish Network” in her Twitter profile, while the powerful politician Daniel Finkelstein is a Vice President of the Jewish Leadership Council and has waxed lyrical in the Jewish Chronicle about “That mysterious sense of Jewish connection,” which ensures that “most of my best friends are Jewish.”

Anti-White activists Tamara and Daniel Finkelstein

Daniel Finkelstein is a senior figure in the so-called Conservative government that is ignoring the anti-White activism of senior bureaucrats like his sister Tamara Finkelstein, a BLM-supporting “Race Champion” in the Civil Service. Finkelstein himself belonged to the leftist Social Democratic Party in his youth. Then he joined the Tories in 1990 and began campaigning to “modernize” the party — that is, to turn it into something that worked solely for Jewish interests, having abandoned its conservative principles and the historic White Christian nation of Britain.

White Lives Don’t Matter

In 2020, the “modernization” is complete. The not-at-all Conservative party is thoroughly Finkelsteined. It has a Jewish treasurer, Ehud Sheleg, an Israeli plutocrat who openly admits that he makes “my homeland” of Israel his first concern. And all the most important posts in the government are held by kosher-certified Friends of Israel: the part-Jewish, part-Turkish prime minister Boris Johnson; the fully Jewish foreign secretary Dominic Raab; the Indian-Hindu chancellor Rishi Sunak; and the Indian-Hindu home secretary Priti Patel. These not-at-all Conservatives have done nothing as anti-White activism sweeps the Civil Service. But can you imagine what they would do if senior bureaucrats began a campaign against Israel in support of Palestinians? They would respond instantly, banning the anti-Israel campaign and sternly rebuking bureaucrats for breaking their strict code of political impartiality.

As it is, the Tories are doing nothing, because Jewish interests are not being challenged by anti-White activism and Black Lives Matter. On the contrary, Jewish interests are being strengthened. As Kevin MacDonald has described, BLM and Antifa are footsoldiers in what can be called a “Jewish coup” against the historic White nation of America. The same applies in Britain. But don’t expect the Equality and Human Rights Commission to take any action when Whites and their interests are harmed. In Brave New Britain, White Lives Don’t Matter.

Unexamined, Unquestioned, Unchallenged: Jewish Power in Brave New Britain

/35 Comments/in , /by

Ehud Sheleg. Who is he? CFI. What is that? The vast majority of people in Brave New Britain still don’t have a clue, because the mainstream media completely ignored these very interesting and important questions during the just-ended general election.

The biggest lobbying group in British politics

But this is the Occidental Observer, the Home of Hate, and we think that interesting and important questions deserve answers. Sir Ehud Sheleg (born 1955) is the Israeli Jew and possible “binary options” fraudster who is currently Treasurer of the Conservative Party. He succeeded Sir Mick Davis, a Jew from South Africa, in 2019 and has openly admitted in the Jewish Chronicle that he puts Israel’s interests above those of any other country. And CFI? That’s Conservative Friends of Israel, described in the same Jewish Chronicle as “the biggest lobbying group in Westminster [i.e., British politics].”

The Goy Grovel: Sajid Javid, Priti Patel and Boris Johnson perform at CFI

CFI, under the control of another undeservedly obscure Jew called Lord Polak, was responsible for shepherding a female Hindu politician called Priti Patel to a series of secret and unminuted meetings with Israeli politicians in 2017 (and probably long before that too). Patel had to resign her post in Theresa May’s government because of her off-the-record pandering to a foreign government, but don’t worry: she bounced back to an even bigger and better post when Boris Johnson replaced May in 2019. Yes, the four most important people in British politics — part-Jewish Boris Johnson as Prime Minister, Pakistani Muslim Sajid Javid as Chancellor, Indian Hindu Priti Patel as Home Secretary, and Jewish Dominic Raab as Foreign Secretary — are all devout Friends of Israel. Read more

Jeremy’s Jackboots: Even More Jewish Hysteria about Jeremy Corbyn and the British Labour Party

/53 Comments/in , /by

“Gobsmacked” is a good English word that’s gaining ground in America, I’ve read. If it’s not familiar to you, it means “very surprised or otherwise affected,” like someone who has been unexpectedly smacked in the gob, or mouth. I’ve recently been gobsmacked not once but twice by a Scottish journalist called Stephen Daisley.

Corbyn’s a monster, Blair’s a mensch

My first gobsmacking from Daisley came when I read this article by him in the cuckservative Spectator:

A vote for Labour is a vote for anti-semitism

The Labour party (1900 – 2015) is dead. It died the day a majority of members, £3 and otherwise, voted to make their leader a man already plainly drenched in the moral sewage of anti-Semitism. The Labour party (2015 – ) is Corbyn’s party and if the famous centrists are working to preserve any party, it is that one. They might eventually salvage something out of it — Corbynism without Corbyn — but they will remain culpable for his actions until then.

Every vote for Labour is a vote for Corbyn. Every leaflet delivered is a two-fingered salute to British Jews. Every door knocked is a declaration: this is who I am and this is my tribe. You can campaign for Labour and vote for Labour without being an anti-Semite but in doing either you announce that you have reached an accommodation with anti-Semitism. Colluding in the organisation of politics against the Jews is worth it to get the railways renationalised.

The Labour party is going to fail the anti-Semitism test and the country might too. (A vote for Labour is a vote for anti-semitism, The Spectator, 29th October 2019)

As you can see, Daisley thinks that Jeremy Corbyn (often nicknamed Jezza) killed the Labour party by becoming its leader in 2015. Obviously, then, Daisley also thinks that Labour was alive and well under the leadership of Tony Blair. You remember Blair, don’t you? He’s the devious narcissist who lied the UK into a disastrous war in Iraq that killed huge numbers of innocent people and that directly led to the rise of the head-choppers and sex-slavers of Islamic State. Blair also nefariously opened Britain’s borders to migrants not just from Eastern Europe, who undercut the wages of Labour’s traditional supporters in the White working-class, but also from the Third World, who set about raping and sexually enslaving the daughters of those traditional Labour supporters.

Porcine punims

Having left office after these crimes, Blair began piling up a vast fortune (now possibly well north of £100 million) as he was rewarded by the greedy and amoral globalists for whom he had worked so hard as prime minister. Jeremy Corbyn resolutely opposed Blair’s Iraq disaster and is not interested in money or material possessions. Yet it’s Corbyn, not Blair, who’s “drenched” in “moral sewage,” and it’s Corbyn, not Blair, who “killed” the Labour party – according to Stephen Daisley. And this brings me to the second gobsmacking I’ve received from Daisley. I looked for photographs of him and found these:

The porcine punim of Stephen Daisley

The porcine punim again

I have never seen a more porcine and less trustworthy punim (which is Yiddish for “face”). And I doubt I ever will. Daisley looks as though he’s in training to play the role of the giant slug-like villain Jabba the Hutt in a remake of one of those old Star Wars movies. But I’m glad Daisley looks like that, because it means his punim is as repulsive as his ideology. I’m no fan of Jeremy Corbyn, believe me. But clearly he’s a far less immoral person than Tony Blair and has been responsible for far less evil in the world. Corbyn opposes war and the military-industrial complex. Blair supports war and has grown rich by working for the military-industrial complex. Read more

Anything to Stop Brexit: Churlish Attacks on a Noble Book

/15 Comments/in , /by

Jacob Rees-Mogg, The Victorians ( W.H.Allen, 2019)

The author of this 440-page study of twelve “Titans who forged Britain” is a well-known right-wing conservative statesman, currently Leader of the House of Commons in the Boris Johnson Conservative government in the United Kingdom. Noted for his very traditional manner of self-presentation and his strong support for Brexit, Rees-Mogg was educated at Eton College and then read History at Trinity College, Oxford, after which he proceeded to a very successful career in finance before taking up his parliamentary career. He is a Catholic with six children and hails from Somerset in south-west England. The publication of this book was timed to coincide with the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of Queen Victoria.

Upon its appearance in May it was greeted with extraordinary hostility in some quarters. Dominic Sandbook described it as abysmal and soul-destroying. Writing in The Sunday Times he stated: “The book is terrible, so bad, so boring, so mind-bogglingly banal that if it had been written by anyone else it would never have been published.” In The Observer Kim Wagner wrote: “The book really belongs in the celebrity autobiography section of the bookstore. At best it can be seen as a curious artefact of the kind of sentimental jingoism and empire-nostalgia currently afflicting our country.” He called it “a sentimental vision of the past as the author wishes it had been,” resembling a series of “half-remembered anecdotes from a Boy’s Own story, or perhaps tales told by his nanny.”

In The Guardian Andrew Rawnsley commented that, while Rees-Mogg “claims an ambition to restore the reputation of this vivid period of history, all he achieves with this awful book is to make a shipwreck of his own pretensions as they are repeatedly dashed on the rocks of his incoherent thoughts before sinking under the dead weight of his lifeless language. … The only purpose of this dreadful pulp is to demonstrate why Britain’s past is no more safe in Jacob Rees-Mogg’s hands than its future.” A. N. Wilson in The Times wrote that the author’s effort was “anathema to anyone with an ounce of historical, or simply common, sense” and described the book as “a dozen clumsily written pompous schoolboy compositions” which amounted to “yet another bit of self-promotion by a highly motivated modern politician.” Also in The Guardian Kathryn Hughes commented: “In Parliament, Rees-Mogg is often referred to as ‘the honourable member for the 18th Century’, a nod to those funny clothes he wears, along with pretending not to know the name of any modern pop songs. What a shame, then, that he has not absorbed any of the intellectual and creative elegance that flourished during that period.” Simon Heffer in The Telegraph opined: “I find it hard to believe Rees-Mogg actually wrote this book or, if someone wrote it for him, allowed it to be published under his name. It is a complete turkey. … Parts of this appear to have been written by a baboon.”

Jacob Rees-Mogg 

Probably the most devastating assault of all came from master historian Richard J. Evans, famous ever since his role in the High Court defeat of David Irving’s defamation case against Deborah Lipstadt. In NewStatesmanAmerica he wrote: “To say that this is a selective reading of Victorian attitudes would be an understatement of huge proportions. … This is the view from inside the Westminster bubble. …The working class is entirely absent from this book, except as an object of upper-class philanthropy and the benevolence of politicians. … Rees Mogg’s perceptions are myopically rooted in the past. … The Victorians is written … in a plodding, laborious and barely readable style, completely lacking in humour, sophistication or polish as well as in every other literary quality. … The accolades distributed to Rees-Mogg’s subjects are framed in clichés that no half-way intelligent or discerning writer would dream of handing out. … Patriotic, enthusiastic and celebratory, The Victorians is the kind of history that Michael Gove, as education secretary, wanted to be promoted in the national history curriculum for schools, until he was forced to withdraw his proposals after a deluge of criticism and ridicule from the entire history profession. … This kind of colonial nostalgia exerts a baleful influence over the minds of Brexiteers today, who view the prospect of a ‘global Britain’, illusory though it is, as a kind of resurrection of the imperial glories of the Victorian era. … Rees-Mogg picks out of his source material only those aspects of his subjects’ lives that help him grind his political axe. … The Victorians is hopelessly inadequate as history, but it’s also too badly written, too pompous and too cliché-ridden in every sense to serve its real purpose as providing any kind of historical justification for Brexit. What’s most striking about the book is its naivety and simple-mindedness – qualities shared by the Brexiteers in full measure as they declare that nothing could be easier than leaving the EU.”

It is plain that this book has been met in many influential quarters with that “unmeasured vituperation” that John Stuart Mill noted of some political writing in his own time. The sort of malicious invective and sweeping exaggerations listed above clearly do much to de-authorise the writers’ attempted demolition, even if some of their observations may be true and some of their judgments may have merit. It’s time to consider the text itself to see what the real truth about it is. Read more