Time for UKIP to address Third World immigration


By D. J. Webb

I agreed with Dr Gabb on his doubts over whether Brexit would suddenly lead to a transformation in the British elite in a libertarian direction. I suspect we will find out that all the laws and regulations blamed on Brussels are still strongly supported by the bureaucracy in Whitehall. One of the packages of measures identified that could save billions a year is the Climate Change package of EU regulation. But who believes that no-one in Whitehall will argue we need to carry on implementing such regulations? I believe Brexit *could* be handled well and produce a positive economic result. But there is a strong possibility some of our new advantages will be squandered.

A more pressing concern is immigration. UKIP made what appeared to me to be a tactical point that free immigration from the EU was “discriminatory” in that doctors from Bangladesh did not have the same access to the UK as doctors from Poland. Good grief! As a tactical point, it was one of the worst points to make. I don’t think any country needs immigration to survive as such, given the right policy measures at home, but given that we have encouraged large-scale long-term unemployment (which leaves us scrambling for low-skilled labour in care homes and elsewhere) and that we encourage graduates into easy degrees, instead of more challenging Medicine, Dentistry and the like, it is quite possible that gaps in the labour market will be identified by an independent UK government. Such gaps are policy failures at home. But they should always be filled by migrants more likely to integrate: the Poles and not the Bangladeshis, please!

Migration Watch previously pointed out that EU migration was a positive financial benefit, although the overall figure was low, adding £4bn a year to the economy. Non-EU migration was a negative, subtracting £118bn. You don’t have to be a genius to work out which migration stream should be addressed on a priority basis. It makes no sense to encourage the development of communities associated with crime, terrorism and a refusal to integrate. Let no-one claim that as “most Muslims are not terrorists”, this justifies the creation of unassimilated Muslim communities, which are the medium in which the small extremist minority flourishes. I do not seek to smear majorities of any community. But in the end, this is our country, and non-assimilated communities are an absurd result of UK government policy, even without high crime rates (eg in the Jamaican community) and the risk of terrorism (in the Pakistani community).

UKIP has succeeded by associating the EU issue (a wonkish issue) with immigration (a visceral issue). The party should focus now on issues like political correctness and immigration, and oppose family reunification visas and the refugee racket as a priority. No-one who supported Brexit wants to see Somali refugees and Pakistani doctors flooding in, or spouses and family members coming in from the Indian subcontinent. This is not down to colour prejudice at all. Some of our cities are in danger of becoming majority-ethnic, and it is time to say we have done our bit immigration-wise and pull up the drawbridge. But, for pity’s sake, if we need migrants, take them from Poland, Slovakia and Lithuania. We need to start defending England’s right to be English, and that means migrants who we can assimilate. Even after Brexit, we will continue to co-operate with European neighbours.

Finally, Cameron should go now. He lied and lied and lied, and suborned the civil service to issue unlawful mendacious propaganda. I would like to see him go today.

Advertisements

14 comments

  • Enoch's Eyebrow

    You hateful hater, Mr Webb. It is plain that your time in the Revolutionary Communist Party did not teach you that greatest of all political truths: that we are all one under the skin. Thank G-d that GCHQ, the NSA and Unit 8200 have you and Dr Gabb under close surveillance with the rest of the haters. Freedom of speech depends on open borders, particularly to the Third World.

    • Whatever you do, don’t sign up for Dr Gabb’s mailing list (known at GCHQ as the ‘Gabb List’), and don’t, under any circumstances, sign-up for David Davis’ War Secretary Circular. These will assuredly get you on a government computer somewhere, followed by a swift visit from the local police community support officer, with offers of a ‘friendly visit from our local liaison’ and ‘expressions of concern’ that you might be ‘radicalised’ by ‘libertarian tracts’.

      • Enoch's Eyebrow

        Whatever you do, don’t sign up for Dr Gabb’s mailing list (known at GCHQ as the ‘Gabb List’)

        It’ll turn into the Grabb List if necessary. But the L.A. will have to become explicitly pro-white for our elite to consider moving from surveillance to arrest and prosecution. You can tell what frightens the Jehovah’s Witnesses by the energy they put into suppressing it. See Dr Gabb’s comments at the obnoxious hate-site VDARE:

        For over a year now, I have been writing for VDARE.com about the British National Party (BNP), the main British/ white nationalist organization in the United Kingdom. The essence of my reports: the BNP faces a wall of media bias and legal and administrative persecution that put its survival in doubt.

        http://www.vdare.com/articles/john-stuart-mill-the-bnp-and-the-uks-dying-democracy

  • Oops!! Nasty.
    I jut happen to prefer England as it was, I picture in my mind all those WRAF plotters during WW2.

    I too am sick of hearing that immigration is good for “the economy” while parts of England turn totally alien. People who have no concept of Englishness or of our Bil of Rights or Magna Carta are hardly an asset.

    In fact I think UKIP is suspect. Immigration is such a huge issue that any party genuinely wanting to stop immigration would enlist the help of the native population by repealing or promising to repeal all anti-discrimination acts. These Acts were designed to shut us up originally and prevent our reejction of the invasion. UKIP is viciously anti-discrimination. Work that one out. I am not allowed on this site to say who was behind the Race Acts but the evidence is there..

    Discrimination, for all you libertarians is the basis of freedom, is it not? So to allow people in on a “points” system, irrespective of where they come from solves nothing except for the business community. i.e “money”
    UKIP is a fully=fledged political party and therefore is as much part of the Marxist revolutionary spectrum against the English constitution as all the other parties. I have offered via my e-mail to send a full explanation, but no one is interested. So be it.

    • I believe Farage has spoken out against anti discrimination laws before.

  • Indeed, EU migration pales by comparison as a problem. At least other Europeans are more bio culturally compatible. The real risk, though, is whether Turkey is admitted and whether countries like Germany would dump their ‘refugees’ on other EU countries through issuing them EU passports.

    • I’d add that UKIP has previously entertained taking migration as low as 50k pa on a points based system. Their rhetoric strikes me as just that – an attempt to connect a wonkish issue to a real economic and social issue, whilst not appearing ‘racist’. As for EU migration, hasn’t MigrationWatch since concluded it has a very small, possibly negative impact? But you’re right, it’s not the real issue for now.

  • I agree with the author’s overall sentiment, and I strongly support him in what appears to be his opposition to non-white immigration to Britain.

    But I can’t help disagreeing with some of his detailed views:

    1. In my view, we don’t need organised immigration at all, whether from the Continent or anywhere else. I have seen no evidence whatsoever that some sort of organised programme of migration to Britain is needed, whether as a points system or at the other end of the scale, some kind of quasi-open border system, or whatever. Where is the evidence for this need?

    2. I am all for organic migration involving settlement by small numbers of assimiliable individuals, as well as all forms of temporary migration down to cultural exchange, university courses, gap years, short-stay tourism, etc. I would never propose that Britain be isolationist in any sense or that we become some sort of autarky, however some common-sense needs to be applied in the matter. Britain is not, and never has been, a nation of immigrants – but we are a nation built on waves of settlement (an important distinction). There can be no objection to white Europeans who wish to settle here, as long as we allow for modern realities and accept that the movement must be more organic than in the ancient past. But what we have at the moment is something very different and rather obnoxious: an intentionalist programme of revolutionary migration designed to permanently change British society. My premise here is that any objections to this sort of migration of non-whites also apply (perhaps to a different extent and in a different sense, as the resultant problems differ) to white Europeans.

    3. I accept that eastern European migrants are preferable to, say, Indian migrants. Not that I have anything against Indians or any other non-whites, or for that matter, Poles or Hungarians, or really any nationality, race or ethnicity per se. But I wish to see my civilisation preserved. That civilisation is European, but it is also British. Non-British whites, especially from outside north-western Europe (but from that area as well), bring with them their own issues and problems. We are not Slavs and while I accept that Slavs are almost-identical genetically, the cultural differences are very considerable and should not be underestimated in their effects. It’s not much of an argument, in my view, to say we should allow Poles because they are ‘better’ than non-whites. I don’t think we generally should.

    4. My view is that if we have genuine skills shortages (I am sceptical about this, but let’s assume we do), then we should fix this using our own resources, of which we have plenty. We are perfectly capable of providing for ourselves (though again, I emphasise, I am not proposing autarky or isolationism). We have lots of bright youngsters who can learn trades or train in medicine, or whatever, but who are being discouraged or even denied these opportunities due to this fetish for foreigners.

    5. White European migrants, especially from north-western Europe, are welcome here if it’s on an individual basis involving cross-national marriages and relationships and other naturally evolved connections at a personal level, and as long as the numbers are small and allow for organic change only. This accounts for north-western Europe. It’s not going to be revolutionary numbers if most of the migrants are German, Danish, French, Norweigian, etc. Caution is needed in regard to other white ethnies.

    • Well said.

      I’m sick and tired of being told how much we depend on immigrants. If we do, it is only because our politicians have engineered the situation for their own reasons.

      I understand, for example, that applications to our medical schools vastly exceed the (very limited) number of places each year. Why is this, when we have such an urgent need of doctors, dentists and nurses? Our brightest graduates often have difficulty finding a suitable career – as a father of four children, all of whom have good degrees, I know this to be the case. Yes, of course it’s cheaper to rob some third-world country of their resources than to train our own people, but economics is far from being the main reason for doing this.

  • I was having a little discussion about this the other day.

    The person I was conversing with was, by all accounts, a liberal. It was not the right time nor situation to enter into a slanging match, but it was somewhat infuriating not to get into a bit of forceful debate about it.

    Their position was that, as usual, we need immigrants to do the jobs our ‘lazy, smoking, beer swilling layabouts’ will not do – and that immigration is an overall boost to the economy. As pointed out in this article, it is very dependent upon what kinds of immigrants we are talking about!

    It was recently discovered, yet again, that many of these people are being paid less than indigenous people would expect to be paid. Builders, tradesmen such as plumbers, electricians, were being paid less than £40 per day for their services.

    Some were found picking fruit on farms for barely the minimum wage – not much more than some system-players in this country seem to manage to get out of the state.

    The first point I would have made is that, by far, it is the “white British” who are proportionally the most employed in this country. The irony is that it is immigrants and descendants of immigrants, particularly from Pakistan, Somalia, etc, are not employed and are in many cases unemployable.

    So are we needing immigrants to do the work that past waves of immigrants and their offspring now refuse to do?!

    The second point is, how is a man supposed to pay for his house, his mortgage, his car, children, as a tradesman, for less than £40 a day – when pitted against people who live in caravans, or in flats, with no children, several to a room?

    Why should we, as a people and as a nation, encourage this “liberal” attitude that thinks it is okay for wages and conditions of working to ever slip down to the lowest common denominator?

    The people picking the fruit may well be needed…… but who in their right mind, who is English or British of other original extraction, currently on a welfare system they can “manage” on, head out at 6:00am every morning to kneel and bend back-breakingly long hours through polytunnels to pick strawberries for equal to – or less – than they get anyway?

    These immigrants will not be picking fruit forever. They are often skilled people finding any work they can, or they may have college educations, degrees.

    The “liberals” are employing a slave class of workers to do the dirty jobs – and when it is pointed out that these people won’t do those jobs forever, they simply say “well, when they move on and get better jobs, more immigrants can come to replace them” !!!

    They couldn’t give a rats ass about how this country ends up under this endless cycle of immigration. Whereas I do.

    Furthermore, whilst there are indeed an element of feckless lob-lolls who waste away on welfare, who are stupid, uneducated, unqualified and have too much of an attitude problem to get a job – what the “liberals” are essentially saying is a big “fuck you” to the underclass they themselves have created and nurtured.

    They pour scorn upon them. They do not see the failed industries that created them, the liberal school policies that failed to educate and train them, the failed liberal societal experiments that gave them the attitude problems and effrontery to languish on welfare.

    You don’t “fix” these people and their ills by simply importing a whole new population. There is something WRONG with the system and that needs fixing. If that means mechanising fruit picking, then so be it. If it means higher prices for strawberries, but less overall taxes for welfare, then so be it.

    There has to be a readjustment. It may be painful, but any nation which has to rely on endless immigration is a FAILURE and has a governing class who are addicted to failure, or covering up their own incompetence with it.

    Time and time again we hear about the NHS staff figures – but it ought to be a source of shame, not pride. And why are things so strained that we “need” all these extra staff? – Because we are creating another five more Birmingham’s worth of people via immigration itself!

    It is a circular argument that never deals with our problems.

  • Lot of sense there, CB.

    As I said previously, very little of this is about economics. What it is really about is the fact that the ‘elites’ (let’s not be too specific) simply wish to replace the people of this country – whom they despise. Yes, I know such a statement is likely to have the men in white coats sent for, but let me assure you that a little research in the right direction and that fact will stand out as clearly as a bulldog’s whatsits.

    No doubt individual employers will generally make the decisions about whom they employ on economic grounds, but the conditions that dictate their actions will largely be created higher up the pecking order. Take fruit picking, for example, which is often cited as something that the British don’t want to do. When I was a lad, many years ago now, I lived in a fruit growing area, where vast quantities of fruit were grown. Everything from cherries to raspberries, strawberries, blackcurrants, apples, etc. Most of it was picked by local people. As a child I earned most of my pocket money picking fruit after school, at weekends and during the summer holidays. Many of my school friends did too, as did most of the ladies in the village – except for the better-off ones, that is. We didn’t get paid a fortune, but it was a useful source of income for all concerned.

    What happens now? Well, little of that for a start. I still live in a rural area, and not too far away there are several strawberry farms where enormous quantities are grown. How much is picked by local people? None, in fact all of the fruit is picked by Eastern Europeans. In fact the market town nearby has been completely taken over by them – and, no, I don’t live in Lincolnshire or anywhere near it.

    Why don’t the locals ‘want’ to pick the fruit? Well, in fact many do, but they are essentially prevented from doing so. Not only do the farmers not want to know about employing locals – I rang one of them up some years ago, when one of my youngsters was a student and looking for a summer job, and they simply weren’t interested. The farmers like the ‘captive’ workforce they’ve got on tap living in sheds on their land, who will often work for less than the minimum wage. Leaving that aside, there are other reasons why the locals are prevented from taking these jobs. And that is that they are ‘prevented’ from doing so by the Benefit System. In the 1950s, when I was a lad, pretty well all the men around had jobs, and their wives were free to earn a little money when and where they could.

    Amongst that socio-economic group these days unemployment is rife, the jobs they did have largely disappeared and very many have to rely on benefits to sustain themselves. I’m not an expert on how all this works, but I believe that when people become unemployed they have to wait some time for rent – and particularly mortgage interest – to be paid. Furthermore, I understand that there are short-term and long-term benefit rates. So, imagine that you been unemployed for some time and getting your rent and mortgage interest paid, etc, and along comes one of these little jobs like fruit picking or shelf-stacking in Tescos. What should you do?

    Here you are, just surviving on the dole. Not luxuries, but you’re surviving. You have a social conscience, so you take the job. Fruit picking is seasonal, so after a short while you’re back at the dole office, but not back to where you left off but back to square one. Long-term rate lost, mortgage interest lost. So who would risk that other than an idiot?

    It doesn’t have to be like that of course, there are other ways of doing it. We could scrap the Benefit System and go for a Citizen’s Income, where everyone gets a flat-rate income as a right – an income which would probably need to be set somewhere around subsistence level. That basic income would be paid irrespective of other income – that would provide an incentive to earn extra , unlike the present system which does the exact opposite.

    That’s just one thing that could be done, there are others of course. Problem is that this would solve a problem that – for reasons given earlier – the PTB don’t want to solve.

    • Thanks for your specific insight and your thoughts in the rest of the reply. I am not so sure about the Citizens Income though.

      I may be being somewhat idealistic and a dreamer here, but everything seems to be so cock-eyed these days. Everything is out of kilter.

      If in our example food needs to be more expensive, to pay for labour and to prevent flooding of our market with imported produce, then should it not be the case that other aspects of society are just adjusted to keep an equilibrium?

      A nation which depends on ever more cheap labour and endless waves of immigration to “get by” is one which is a disaster and a failure, in my opinion.

      A nation which cannot be self sufficient in all ways it can be, and who leaves its ‘failures’ on the scrap heap of scorn and ridicule, in favour of replacing them, well, it is just a bit monstrous to me – and the kinds of “liberals” who sneer and snort at what ought to be the ingredients of their political “cause”, in favour of welcoming aliens into this country, well, they are just traitorous and two faced.

      I was watching a BBC news clip about fruit pickers, strawberries in this case, and how they were all Bulgarian and Romanian. It showed them in back breaking posture, neither crawling or stood up, hunting for ripe strawberries and picking them into crates they moved along the floor.

      It would be hard work, for sure. A day of that would not be fun, months of it as a main job would be a nightmare. But if that is what had to be done, it would have to be done.

      However, the first thing that crossed my mind, is how ridiculous it was that they had all these poly tunnels with them growing all over the floor, when they could be grown on an elevated level that is ergonomically more suitable.

      The second thing that crossed my mind was, how absurd it is in modern times to be relying on manual labour to do this task. What do other countries do, to get around this problem?

      A quick search reveals a case from Japan. They have mechanised their strawberry picking. It picks them day and night, whilst the farmers sleep. http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/09/26/business/latest-robot-can-pick-strawberry-fields-forever/#.V3AIHqLYBZA

      The also grow them at an elevated level, so that farmers can make light work of sorting out any strays. The Japanese, therefore are much more prepared to tackle their problems with technology than to rely on cheap labour.

      Another quick search found a case for McDonalds in America, who are seeking to open a fully robot staffed burger outlet. http://newsexaminer.net/food/mcdonalds-to-open-restaurant-run-by-robots/

      I don’t know what the status is of those restaurants, but the technology is there to do it – and, one presumes, a whole host of other laborious jobs that a low skilled and labour intensive.

      Why are we, and Europe, importing all these people to do low skilled jobs that should be being mechanised? What are we going to do with all these people when the day arrives that mechanisation is the way forward?

      Whether it is “hand car washes” (another model that has increased in recent years with immigrant labourers, often illegals), or fruit picking, or burger making, they are **low productivity** jobs and make for a low productivity economy.

      We could instead be hiring and training design engineers, sheet metal workers, electricians, computer and robotic engineers, to make, sell, distribute fruit picking machinery, automated car washes, fast food robots……which would be **high productivity** and not saddle us with mass immigration and the subsequent frictions and future demographic disaster.

      I can only suspect that the system is rigged to create a never ending flow of debt-slaves. Poor, uneducated, minimum wage, zero-hour contract, loan and debt paying serfs, to generate fiat money and financial debt on which the banking system relies. A population that “goes through the motions” to survive, worrying about losing their even most deadbeat jobs, being undercut, therefore being compliant to ever poorer conditions and wages. People who won’t rock the boat.

      • The Japanese example is highly relevant, they have a demographic ‘problem’ similar to ours. However, as you rightly said, they have chosen technology as a solution – no mass immigration in Japan. We could, of course, go down a similar route. Well, we could, except for one thing.

        Unlike Japan, Britain – and all the other ‘white’ nations, for that matter – is controlled by people who have no intention of solving anything. I repeat, the plan is population replacement. No such plan exists for Japan, or China, or India, etc. Only for the white nations of this world. I know most people would see this as a mad conspiracy theory, but that is their problem not mine. For it is only a matter of time before even the dullest of the great unwashed will wake up to what is happening. Of course, by then it will be too late – it almost is now.

        Mass immigration has sod-all to do with jobs, and what people will or won’t do. It is a deliberate policy being carried out by those who wish to destroy us and our country, and has been for decades.

        • I actually agree, but I know we are somewhat limited from expressing such theories and naming the nature of those who tend to be disproportionate in their influence, on this site – for reasons I can somewhat appreciate and understand.

          I have mellowed my own position on this in the last 6 months or so though. Maybe I am just too jaded and have lost the will to fight it (them), but I have come to consider that although there are these people doing these things on purpose (for whatever mixed combination of reasons), the vast majority of people in this country – particularly those of that nature – simply do not care about us.

          It is greed, self interest, indoctrination, indifference, pulling things along and dragging things down. For sure, there are orchestrator people behind it, but it also grows its own legs – which is why it is all encompassing and embedded.

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