England wants to leave


By D. J. Webb

The poll above is fascinating. (Note: the above image is from The Sun, but the data are from the British Election Study polling report in mid-May 2016.) The “white” voters are split 41.8% in favour of leaving the EU and 41.9% in favour of staying. This difference is not relevant in statistical terms. “White” voters include many people of non-English backgrounds, including the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish, and those people from other European countries who will have a vote. Although most EU citizens will not be allowed to vote, all Irish, Maltese and Cypriot citizens will have the vote — probably reflecting historical connections to the UK that pre-date the EU — and many citizens of Poland et al have already taken out UK citizenship and so will have the vote too.

I’m interesting in the English, and the English alone. I found Sadiq Khan’s claim to be English offensive — and deliberately so. There is nothing wrong with being of Pakistani extraction, but claiming to be English is an open attempt to dislodge the English nation from its ancestral homeland. He is not English. Furthermore, the United Kingdom worked on the basis that the Celtic fringe “bandwaggoned” with England. To find that England voted to leave but the Celtic fringe managed to keep us in — this could only happen if England votes by a very small margin to leave — would be poisonous for the Union. To be honest, the vote should be being held in England and among English (white Anglo-Saxon) people only: this is our country, and we should decide, and if the Scottish and Welsh don’t like the result, they can dissolve the Union. Such questions must be decided in England.

If “white” voters — in the absurd colour classifications preferred by the élite – are 41.8% in favour of leaving, I presume that English people are much more likely than that to prefer to leave, and probably support leaving the EU by a small majority. Funny that no poll has ever sought to show the views of Englishmen. The issue has the potential to split the country along ethnic lines, with ethnic minorities and the Celtic Fringe queueing up to keep us in the EU. UKIP should take a much clearer English nationalist line, and consider not running candidates in Celtic and ethnic-minority areas.

If the considered, settled will of the Scots was to have a Parliament, then it is clear the settled will of the English is to leave the EU. To override the English has got to be wrong. On all constitutional questions, minorities must join with us or go and do their own thing, either in independent Scotland or by re-emigration elsewhere.

[Please note: this article does not constitute advice on how to vote in a referendum.]

Advertisements

17 comments

  • [quote]”If “white” voters — in the absurd colour classifications preferred by the élite – are 41.8% in favour of leaving, I presume that English people are much more likely than that to prefer to leave, and probably support leaving the EU by a small majority.”[unquote]

    I think this is right. You correctly pick up on the problem with the ‘white’ classification, a reason why I am not overly-enthused about white nationalism. It’s becoming clear that white people cannot vote as a bloc as there are important ethnic divisions. The ‘white melting pot’ idea of the post-1870 USA and the original Schumaniste EU doesn’t work. The differences between the different white nationalities, even regional differences within nations – some of which cross national boundaries (e.g. Celts) – are too great for integration to work. I’m coming round to the view that white internationalism is just another back door to mixed-racialism and works by weakening ethnic solidarity within countries.

    Having said that, you mention the Irish. I think they are a special case. In my opinion, the Irish are a British ethnicity and assimiliable with the English. Until adoption of the Euro, Ireland was only technically a foreign country, its currency was pegged to ours and there was free movement between the two states. Its citizens are not aliens in the sense we would apply to other nationalities. And the relationship with the Celtic nations within the UK is all the closer. Thus Britain (and the British Isles) presents a complication, and for that reason I can’t go the full distance and agree that the vote should be English only. I would like to keep these islands together politically.

    • How lovely. We’re a special case! You’ve even decided that we are in fact a British ethnicity.

      You’re fantastically wrong. I’ll say no more in case my mad Irish blood gets the better of me.

      • Well if you’re not going to say any more, then I won’t know why I’m ‘fantastically wrong’.

        You are manifestly a British ethnicity. I am assuming of course that ‘Irish’ means white and native to the British Isles. The reality is that your country, and the rest of the UK for that matter, is a satellite of England. Hence the phrase ‘special case’.

        I won’t go further and suggest you have ‘special needs’, though judging by the way you argue, that might be true too.

        • First you decide I am British, now you’re calling me retarded. Christ.

          • Do we get to decide what ethnicity we are? As a free choice? I think not. It’s not a retail expedition where we can pick and choose. Even a republican state cannot formally renounce the essentials of its people’s ethnicity. ‘British’ is a meta-ethnicity, and the idea of the Irish as British is not new, even if it is outrageous to neo-Marxist Irish Republicans. Personally, I don’t understand why there is a controversy about it, but there is, and there is even a mischievous name for the Irish, ‘West Britons’, used in both Britain and Ireland, that alludes to the hair-trigger tendency among some Irish when encountering the idea. The fact is that the Republic only came into being in 1949, formed out of a British dominion. Your history is not just shared with ours or tied to ours. We have a common history. You don’t get to deny essential facts about who Irish people are by simply wishing it were not true or by trying to wash away history.

            The Irish are genetically indistinguishable from the British, and the two peoples are in fact one and interrelated; the Irish speak English, even in their own Parliament and courts; you have a legal system based on common law, and you more or less mimic the judicial system and legal profession of England & Wales; you have little or no border controls with your senior neighbour, and even during the height of the Troubles, most of the border was only nominally manned; you have practical citizenship rights in Britain and can even come here to vote (and vice versa); you can also serve in Britain’s armed forces, if you want to; and the two countries are culturally indistinguishable from the British and visitors to Ireland will note that Irish society it ‘feels’ British.

            That’s what I actually mean by the phrase ‘special case’. It is a bone fide special relationship, and is a possible exception to the proposition that a ‘white melting pot’ can’t work. The Irish are not regarded as aliens, even if they are technically foreign. It’s ‘special’ in the sense of being exceptional. The British-Irish sibling relationship is not a model for cross-national political integration because the relationship has its roots in a common history and a shared linguistic and cultural meta-identity. I appreciate there are significant and important differences between the constituent nations of the British Isles, and also that the Irish aspire to project their own discrete identity as well, but there is also a shared understanding among those of us who are native to these islands that we are all ‘British’ (more loosely-speaking in the case of the Irish).

            You may disagree with me, but you do not enjoy a monopoly of wisdom on the question just because you’re Irish, and my view is based on reasoned observation and evidence. Girly name-calling and mock outrage doesn’t quite cut it as a response.

            What I can accept is that some Irish people will not feel very British, and of course you are not at all British in the civic sense and I don’t mean to suggest you are.

            • Oh, it’s a meta-ethnicity misunderstood by neo-Marxist Irish Republicans! Why didn’t you say? Girly name-calling is not on, that’s why you talked about my “special needs”. Thanks for explaining “West Brits” (which you call West Britons for some reason, though no one uses that term.)

              “The Irish are genetically indistinguishable from the British.” Citation needed.

              “but there is also a shared understanding among those of us who are native to these islands that we are all ‘British’ (more loosely-speaking in the case of the Irish).”
              Tell you what, come over here and ask 1000 random Irish people if they are British. You’ll get 1000 identical answers. But what would they know? Whitewashers of history lamely trying to project their own discrete identity!

              I never claimed to be wise, nor am I particularly “outraged”, believe it or not.

              Culturally indistinguishable we are not.

              • The correct form of the expression is West Britons, just as I stated it above. It can be shortened to West Brits. It originated in an eponymous limerick written in 1800 by an Irishman who was sympathetic to the Act of Union of that year. The original import of the term was positive in that it was felt that all Irish people are part of Britain and can be regarded ethnically as West Britons. It was later twisted into a derogatory slur for any Irish person perceived to be too Anglophile or Anglocentric in his attitudes.

                It is my belief that the formal separation of Ireland from the rest of Britain wasn’t primarily motivated by nationalism, but by political ideas and ideology. I think the IRA was a neo-Marxist organisation from the start and its ‘republicanism’ was only tokenistically nationalist. I suspect a deeper investigation into the origins of modern Irish nationalism (i.e. from the late Victorian period onwards) would reveal the involvement of subversive foreign influences. On the other hand, it could be that what underscores the cleave is ancient rivalry between the two main indigenous ethnic groups on these islands – Celts and Saxons – and that what we see today is this rivalry played out in the form of proxy allegiances based on class and petty national rivalry. The two views are not necessarily mutually incompatible.

                As for the genetic interrelationship, I think this is common knowledge, especially as it pertains to the Scottish and Irish. I realise that the ancestral origins of white civic Scots are vastly diverse, but essentially the Irish and a large section of Scots are the same people under different flags with different names, having diverged and become two different tribes. Also, thanks to the Industrial Revolution, many (maybe most) English people have some Irish or Ulster Scots ancestry, myself included.

                I just can’t regard an Irish person as even a ‘foreigner’, still less an alien. The very idea is strange even to contemplate. I’ve visited Ireland a number of times and it feels very British. It essentially is Britain by another name.

                However I’m not denying there is a distinct Celtic identity and I’m not denying that there is a discrete Irish identity either. Far from it.

                • “It essentially is Britain by another name.”

                  Another ridiculous assertion.

                  • Not an argument.

      • “I’m coming round to the view that white internationalism is just another back door to mixed-racialism and works by weakening ethnic solidarity within countries.”

        It makes sense to the extent that one wishes to prevent caucasians, as a whole, from becoming minorities in their own country. It doesn’t when it turns into super-states, such as the EU, which end up, as you say, turning into mixed racialism through the backdoor.

  • Whichever way the result goes (and the gatekeepers intend to make sure, by hook, crook or whatever other means may prove necessary, that Remain wins) there will be a lot of very angry people on the losing side, who will feel they have been shafted by the system. Even more so, if the result turns out to be close.

    Maybe, in the longer term, this might be a good thing for liberty?

    • I do not think so. this is because the “gatekeepers” have all the guns, tasers, police cells, courts and prisons, and also direct the main-stream-media what to say about all things.

  • This country’s demographics are warped, unfortunately, due to imported voters, which is Labour’s strategy playing out as intended. Alas, too many young whites, too, are brainwashed at lefty-“liberal” indoctrination centres, aka “universities”.

    • Yes, I’ve noticed too that the Remain are now surging ahead in the polls (if you believe the polls, that is). A comfortable vote for Remain will not be a good outcome.

      • I must confess, I don’t believe in them very much. The Leave side is reliant on the assumption that its own voters are more passionate and committed to the issue and will come out in greater numbers to vote, plus it is hoping the undecideds come in its favour. All that said, I am still pessimistic about how this vote is going to turn out.

  • Anyway, excellent piece, and I agree wholeheartedly. Sturgeon wants to threaten secession? Well, let her!

    I say this with the view that Scotland is a lovely place, with a very proud people (something the English would do well to learn from), but who unfortunately place too much trust in the SNP and its harpy queen. Perhaps the end of terminating the union justifies the abhorrent means in their minds? …but she would then have them re-join a far less accountable union, i.e. the EU.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s