[BretLudwig]

((And Americans need one too. Bret.))


Forty Years On: Sleepwalking Toward the Tibers Edge


From the desk of A. Millar

"Anyone who reads the British newspapers on a regular basis will have
noticed an alarming repetition. The same few stories, with minor
adjustments, seem to appear over and over again: youth violence, mass
immigration, Islamic extremism, terrorists planning attacks, compensation
and human rights for criminals, an apparent over-sensitivity to religious
minorities and an apparent lack of sensitivity to those of the majority
religion and ethnicities. Rather than telling the reader something new,
news serves only to clarify what he already suspects. Peruse readers
comments and, unsurprisingly, more and more do you find expressions of
genuine frustration and anger.

But these voices, which speak for so many, are not heard in parliament,
nor does the public seem to make any demands on politicians. A march
against war in a foreign country can amass thousands, and protests against
Chinas treatment of Tibet are frequent, but to defend ones heritage
or culture against erosion by political design, or to voice opposition to
such a scale of immigration that ones way of life is changed or
threatened, is seen as potentially dangerous €“ the first step toward
full-blown fascism. History repeats itself, yes; but history does not
repeat itself as we might expect. Today, we are obsessively fighting the
last war. Everyones enemy is a €œracist€� and a €œfascist.€� These
terms are invoked by the far-Left, Jack Straw, David Cameron, and even the
B.N.P., to describe their opponents. Yet at the same time we see an extreme
ideology spilling out from politics and becoming increasing absorbed by the
judiciary, police, schools, local councils, etc., all against the common
sense of the public. And we also see a rapidly expanding Islamic
militancy, occasionally becoming linked to public figures such as Ken
Livingstone, and, consequently, accepted by the public.

Free speech €“ which has been so horribly eroded in Britain €“ was meant
to guard against extremism and the persecution of both individuals and
larger groups because of the establishment of some dubious ideology.
Today, it would appear, that prosecutions for hate speech are based not on
what is said but who is speaking. Protests in support of al-Qaeda are
deemed free speech, as is downloading terrorist material and discussing
the validity and possibility of carrying out terrorist attacks. Similarly,
as think tanks such as the Centre for Social Cohesion and CIVITAS have
said, Britains governmental and judicial establishments have failed to
tackle honor crime, with police, councils, and teachers afraid of being
branded racist if they make any attempt.

Yet such is the extreme nature of the willingness to prosecute anyone who
might be suspected of racism against a non-White British person, that a
Downs Syndrome boy with the mental age of a 5 year old was recently
charged by the police with €œracism and assault€� after he pushed a girl
in a playground scuffle. The charge hung over he and his family for 7
months, before they received an apology from the courts. Again, after the
English Democrats party put up posters with the slogan €œsave London from
Labour's tartan taxes€� the police received complaints that this was
racist, and are currently investigating the matter. These incidences are
far from unique, but merely 2 reported in the week prior to my writing
this article.

The effect is stifling. The accusation or even the mere faint suspicion of
racism has silenced debate and even the voicing of discontent about mass
immigration, discrimination against Whites in employment by the government
or government-sponsored institutions, or the rise of Islamic extremism.
When, in 2001, Lady Thatcher said she, €œhad not heard enough
condemnation from Muslim priests,€� of the September 11 terrorist attacks
on New York and Washington D.C., her Conservative Party publicly rebuked
her. When Margaret Hodge suggested that British people had valid concerns
over housing, considering the level of immigration, her fellow Labour
M.P.s accused her of €œusing the language of the B.N.P.€� When Lady
Warsi (a Conservative M.P. and a moderate Muslim) suggested that people
had legitimate concerns over immigration she was accused of supporting the
B.N.P., and, again, when Prime Minister Gordon Brown dared to utter the
words €œBritish jobs for British workers,€� members of his Labour Party
were €œappalled€� and accused him airing a policy of the B.N.P.

With problems so glaring to the ordinary man and so thoroughly repressed
by the main political parties, Enoch Powell €“ M.P., philosopher, poet,
man of the people, and visionary €“ is being rehabilitated, and not just
here on The Brussels Journal. Simon Heffer in The Telegraph has said
recently that, €œPowell was the greatest Conservative thinker in
political life in living memory. He foresaw what were then unimaginable
tensions caused by forcibly altering the character of a country.€�
Looking at the visible characters of todays Conservative Party one
could be forgiven for thinking that Powell was the only Conservative
intellectual of our time. The Conservative Party seems to have no real
vision for the future, and no real appreciation for the past. But, in such
an oppressive atmosphere of €œpolitical correctness,€� and, indeed,
political fear, no intellectual development can occur within popular party
politics. As such, we are unlikely to see any solutions to growing problems
originating with political parties themselves. It is true, of course, that
the B.N.P. is the one party that unceasingly opposes political
correctness, €œIslamification,€� etc., but it has yet to transform
itself into an intellectual party, and remains one for which the issue of
race is central.

Today we are faced with a €œmulticulturalism€� that has eroded British
culture and the constant drumbeat of racial €œequality€� that treats
people not as human beings but mere racial blocks. As Rageh Omaar has said
in an op-ed piece on Powells so-called €œRivers of Blood€� speech for
The Daily Mail, €œInstead of multi-culturalism, we are getting
tribalisation,€� €“ a point I made some time ago here. When this is
applied to voting and politics it is especially alarming, yet Equalities
Minister Harriet Harman, has recently proposed that all-Black shortlists
of parliamentary candidates be drawn up, to increase the number of Black
and Asian M.P.s €“ a proposal rejected as €œcolonial€� by those it was
designed to promote. Likewise, the Conservative Party now has its own
Muslim Forum and the current mayor, Ken Livingstone, is supported by
Muslims 4 Ken, while his main rival, Boris Johnson, has also been careful
to let his Muslim heritage be known. Again, we have seen the B.N.P.
attacked in the last few weeks by Operation Black Vote (which aims to
promote, within government, the supposed needs of Blacks and Asians), but
on what grounds? Racial exclusivity?

We have reached a point, then, at which racially or culturally distinct
ghettos €“ the unfortunate results of long-term multiculturalism €“ are
mirrored at both lower and higher levels of government and party politics.
Moreover, if some young Muslims are surfing the net, and finding
inspiration in al-Qaeda and websites peddling Islamic radicalism, so too
do we see a similar phenomenon at government level, with, for example,
Livingstone now having gained the support of suicide bombing apologist Dr
Azzam Tamimi €“ which he has not rejected. It is remarkable to think that
not only Muslims, but Muslim extremists, are now playing an important, if
not decisive, role in British politics. Yet, it is not difficult to
imagine that Britain fifty years from now will have a political reality
not entirely unlike that of Lebanons today. We must hope that it does
not take the same sort of upheaval €“ such as Powell predicted for a
multicultural Britain €“ to get there, but such a hope seems to be
fading. Two thirds of the residents of Britain now believe immigration
will lead to violence.

The last words are Powells:

For these dangerous and divisive elements the legislation proposed in
the Race Relations Bill is the very pabulum they need to flourish. Here is
the means of showing that the immigrant communities can organize to
consolidate their members, to agitate and campaign against their fellow
citizens, and to overawe and dominate the rest with the legal weapons
which the ignorant and the ill-informed have provided. As I look ahead, I
am filled with foreboding; like the Roman, I seem to see €œthe River
Tiber foaming with much blood.€�

--
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/
More information at http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/faq.html