Mass immigration: the most fundamental treason

Robert Henderson

British Prime Minster Boris Johnson  has recently  blithely announced that  millions of Hong Kongers will  be given the right to come to  Britain on visas which grant them the right to stay for five years  working, studying or whatever. At  the end of  five years  these people will be able to apply for British citizenship.

This astonishing promise  has met with precious little  condemnation in the British mainstream media  and from  British politicians, a fact which  tells you how strong a grip political correctness has on the British elite.   

Johnson estimates the number of Hong Kongers who would qualify at  three million.  That figure will  probably  not be the final  total because     

1. Those who  qualify will be allowed at some point to bring in dependants.  

2. if China treats Hong Kongers really badly any  conceivable UK government will  probably allow Hong Kongers  to come to the UK who are not  qualified  to receive for the Johnsonian  visa.

Of course, it is possible  that many  of those who  qualify for  the  visa  might  want to stay in Hong Kong despite the increasing destruction of their  freedoms by China.  But If , say, only a million came  it would  still put a tremendous burden both materially and psychologically on the British people .

To put the  full promised burden in  context net immigration to the UK  in the year ending 31st December 2019 was 270,000 . That means the Johnson promise of three million (and counting )  is  a fraction over eleven times the total increase to the UK population in  the year 2019.

Does Johnson believe  that the UK can deal with such an almighty influx? Possibly, but more plausibly  he  could be  taking a shabby gamble on a belief  that China will stop people coming   or Hong Kongers will move to other places in Asia.  If so, Johnson is being utterly reckless because  there is a serious chance that far more than a million will come

China’s ambitions

China has made its desire to dominate the world as clearly as Hitler made his ambitions known in Mein Kapmpf.   She wishes to be not a world power but the  world power.  ( Infuriatingly Western  politicians are doing just what most  European politicians did in the 1930s. They are  ignoring the threat  no matter how much evidence China provides.   )

If the situation is looked at honestly there can be no doubt  that  China is serious about swallowing  Hong Kong sooner rather than later.  If that happens the  repression Hong Konng  is likely to  suffer might well spark a wholesale  dash for  the UK.  

Whatever the Chinese government says publicly now  – that the U K is interfering in  internal  Chinese matters  by making the visa offer and will  suffer for it – – they might  privately welcome  such a development as it would at one and the same time seriously embarrass the UK and get rid of  the  Hong Kong opposition on the ground.

The  UK could even  be landed with large numbers of  criminals and the disabled if the Chinese wanted to be really cheeky and  copied a ploy of Castro  in 1980 when he agreed to Cubans leaving if they wished to then emptied Cuba’s prisons and  hospitals  and shipped thousands  of these people to the USA in what became known as the Mariel boatlift.

Mass immigration is conquest by non-military means

Mass immigration should be judged by its effects. Look around at virtually any  major Western city and you will find areas which  have been effectively colonised   by immigrants.   There is no inevitably about it as the politically correct  like to insist  by  claiming  that “we live in a globalised world”.  This surreptitious colonisation is ultimately entirely the responsibility of the politicians who permit it

As  the numbers of immigrants and their descendants increase the native population  becomes  more and more dissatisfied  and politicians turn ever more  to propagandising about the joys of diversity while  passing  laws which  criminalise dissent and place the immigrant descended groups in a de facto privileged position. (The  Tory  politician Enoch Powell’s   famous 1968 speech  quoted a comment made by one of his constituents:   “In this country in 15 or 20 years’ time the black man will have the whip hand over the white man.”  In terms of how public policy favours  ethnic and racial minorities  in the UK that prediction has come true. )

The great hypocrisy

Morally the  most  contemptible  thing about   mass immigration is that the elites which have allowed it to happen and  lauded it to the skies are under no illusion about the state of  heavily settled immigrant areas . We know this because they generally take very care to live far away  from the supposed  wondrous diversity .

Take London. The middle classes  bleat constantly about the joy of  diversity  in the capital  whilst taking flight from the joy by fleeing to very white, very English places.

Those left behind – primarily the white working class –   are left to deal with  the  “ joy. “

A form of theft

Mass immigration is  a form of theft. It robs the native population   because it creates competition for housing, healthcare, education, jobs and most fundamentally the right of  a people  to enjoy their country without having  to worry about their culture being diluted or even ultimately overthrown.

The futility of multiculturalism

 Albert Einstein is reported as saying “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results.” That is precisely  what happens when the multiculturalists  attempt to  deny reality.   They find it does not correspond with their dreams of a society comprised of multifarious minority groups  living harmoniously together . Instead of accepting human nature and its consequences they attribute  the lack of harmony to an insufficiency of social understanding and think that the answer is re-education in the ways of liberal internationalism.  

That this approach  invariably fails   is unsurprising because ironically multiculturalists   advocate  a form of living which  in practice guarantees perpetual strife by promoting the idea  that minority ethnic groups should be encouraged to maintain “their own culture”.

The reality of race and ethnicity

The  fact  that  humans  have external  racial  differences  which  are sufficiently distinct to allow  people throughout the world to  broadly categorise an individual into categories such as  white and  black , Asian and Africanis in  itself  indicative of the innate human tendency to  breed with those who are racially similar, even though for several thousands of years large human populations of different racial types have existed in close proximity. If  human beings did not have an innate preference for those who racially resemble themselves, humanity  would have bred itself  into something approaching a uniform racial type, at least in those parts of the  world  which  were not very.

The alternative explanation to an innate tendency is the truly fantastic one that Man everywhere spontaneously developed cultural barriers to breeding which had nothing to do with any innate tendency.

Trust

Any human society whether it be a small band or a huge nation state requires trust. Nothing creates trust  better than similarity.  The fact that someone looks like you in general terms and speaks your language in an accent you associate with your group provides a ready reckoner of trust. That is why both physical type and ethnicity are so important when looking at human behaviour. 

A secure territory  is integral to a successful society because without it a  the essential  trust cannot be formed.  Allow  mass immigration  and  this trust is categorically sabotaged.

The politically correct may  insist  till the cows come home that  humans are all basically the same  but  the reality is that heterogeneous societies are invariably fractious . Homogeneous societies  are not immune to discord but  it is rarely on the same all-pervading level.  

Most importantly   disputes in a homogeneous society can realistically be expected to be settled: class inequalities  can be ameliorated,  the balance between state and private enterprise  changed, tyrants can  be overthrown. 

In heterogeneous societies where each group is fighting for its own  benefit such alteration is impossible because the basis for each group is biological, that is, the group exists because of the natural tendency of humans to associate with those who most resemble them.

Treason

Consider this. If the UK  had  politicians who conspired with a foreign power to allow huge numbers of foreigners to invade  we would call it treason.   

If dissent  about   such an  invasion was suppressed we would call it treason

If a foreign power invades  though force he may  be thrown out without inviting  domestic and international opprobrium.

If invasion by mass immigration is  allowed  the situation is   entirely different for two reasons: (1) the practical difficulty of where to send them and (2)   they cannot be expelled without opprobrium.

That is why permitting mass immigration  it is the most fundamental form of treason: it is the most difficult to reverse.

Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: