In my second entry examining what I have chosen to call the endless assault on English culture, I shall focus on a recent news story of note. It is, perhaps, no coincidence that both this story, and the previous one, are to do with multiculturalism. The following is a story that received a little coverage in the old media, such as in The Times, but has largely slipped under the radar in a media sphere presently obsessed with any slight movement that David Cameron makes to break away from the socialism of Labour (such as the non-issue that was ‘Milkgate’).
In spite of the fact that the Marxist New Labour government is now (mercifully) out of power, its wickedness and flagrant social engineering continues apace. A prime example of this is the unprecedented social experiment going on in Oldham’s schools, a topic being covered admirably by the BBC’s Newsnight programme. Those who are unfamiliar with the topic would be best served by watching the original report on the BBC website, but the gist is that Breeze Hill School, with 94% Asian or black pupils, and Counthill, with a 93% white pupil base, will be merged to form a new school in a predominantly white area that borders the Asian areas of Clarksfield and Glodwick.
The remarks of the white citizens of Oldham are another plaintive cry from the shattered white communities across the country that have been ravaged by years of Government mismanagement and forced multiculturalism. As was predicted by so many commentators long before Labour’s open-door influx, racial division, fear and inhibited freedom of movement are a reality in our country:
“You should feel you can go to any area of the town you live in and feel safe, but that’s not the way it is,” … Jean says with regret. “In Oldham there isn’t a community any more, it’s like it’s split in two.”
So. What is the chosen solution to attempt to rectify the situation? Combine one school that is 90% White and another that is 90% Asian! Of course! What an inspired idea! [Sarcasm ends]
What kind of ‘blue sky thinking’ provoked the idea that the way to end resentment was to foist this patently flawed ‘solution’ upon both communities? What better way to foster a sense of resentment than to force the combination of two schools without consultation? And also, what actually guarantees the fact that parents on both sides of the divide will send their child to the local school if they can help it? How will this serve to actually change attitudes?
What’s more, as is typical in such areas, no critical work has been done to actually break down the reasons behind the tensions themselves. When asked by the BBC about problems of racism that could arise as a result of the school’s merger, young Hifsa states that:
“There are a lot of white people who are quite racist – they don’t like us Asians,” the Year 7 pupil says.
“My friends think they’re going to be racist towards them because they’re Asian and they just don’t like them.”
Asked whether the prejudice works both ways, she says: “Yeah, they don’t like us, so then we won’t like them.”
Whilst she is only young, and fails to accept that there will be anti-white racism that is not necessarily solely due to antagonism, she is entirely blameless for such a response. She cannot know the reasons why lingering resentment plagues communities in the North of England. Why not? Because discussions have never been allowed. New Labour regarded and branded anyone who questioned their immigration policies as a ‘racist’ or a ‘bigot‘, never once thinking to ask their core white working-class constituents what the effects of the wider breaking up of their ancient communities, the dearth of jobs and the impact of mass immigration were on their lives. Seeing the kinds of cultural imposition that the religions of new communities can create, and finding themselves on the outside of a new, strong, and most importantly of all, insular community that had no need for dialogue or interaction with (and did not understand) its white counterpart would only logically create tension, a lack of understanding and resentment.
But because such facts have never been accepted by the political hierarchy, and never fully understood or recognised by the communities involved, violence, fear, hatred and aggression have prospered. And for as long as they are not accepted, Hannah and Hifsa cannot be friends.
Politically speaking, the matter is squarely placed in the realms of achingly obvious New Labour cliché. The new institution will be ‘the Waterhead Academy’ and its sponsor (generally an oblique figure whose ilk has of late appeared as a ubiqitous figure in education) has resorted to the typical emotion of the dedicated leftist social engineer, and ‘is hopeful’ of success. It seems to be only David Lack, the outgoing headteacher of one of the schools to be merged, who poses the question
“… to suddenly bring them together in one school when you know there’s been the racial tension that there’s been in Oldham – it could pay off… but do you experiment with children?”
Whilst this is plausibly- and at its best- an effort to try to bring balance to the reckless and wanton imbalance created in our society by Labour in its thirteen years in power, it is unquestionably an effort to build bridges in the wrong places. What is interesting is the concern among the authorities that:
“Oldham’s schools are among the most segregated in the country, and the town’s local authority fears another generation of white and Asian young people are growing up without any real relationship with each other.”
Pray tell, on which precise grounds are the two communities supposed to foster this ‘real relationship’? Proximity is vastly insufficient in this context: two communities from different cultural backgrounds, different nations and of different positions on religion are – at present, at least- hardly best-placed to search in vain for similarities. A serious, meaningful and comprehensive dialogue – one that might not solve problems- between the white, black and Asian communities must take place before any real progress can be made.
Perhaps the Oldham administration secretly hope that the town’s white residents will cede their history, culture and values for the betterment of the multi-culti agenda, as David James Smith, Lewes’ least popular resident, patently hopes.