Immigration is a topic never far from the public consciousness, and this is especially true of England. Banalities aside, I have never discussed it at length before for reasons that will become clear. However, the publishing of an article in Prospect Magazine by controversial Oxford Professor David Coleman has provoked a fascinating response.
The subject of immigration itself is bizarre and unique among all others of our time. A prime example of this is the obsession with the notion of the replacement of the English people in their own land. In spite of the fact that it has been a fascination of the past decade in a mainstream media dominated by white leftists (see these BBC articles on the ‘fall in numbers of English White Britons‘ and ‘White Britons despair and fear‘), any group or individual that voices an opposition is universally decried. It is as if we, as English people, are encouraged to observe wholesale changes in the fabric of the nation – in far more than a demographic sense- and yet stand by and merely comment on it.
Enter Professor Coleman. An interesting character – as one would have to be to serve the dual master of one of the world’s leading academic institutions and also a member of the Galton Institute – he is no stranger to eliciting some extreme reactions to his views. His article for Prospect appears to include the claims that by 2066, white Britons will be made a ‘minority in their own country’. Unusually, as you will have noticed if you clicked on the aforementioned link, the article was posted/printed in the vast majority of Britain’s newspapers, ranging from The Sun to The Mail to The Telegraph.
Perhaps it was so widely reported because there is merely an acceptance of the shift in the population. But perhaps the broadness of the reprinting of this information is indicative of an acceptance of the implications of such a shift in the population. The latter is far more likely.
The Englishman, then, is faced with realities that it is his duty, as has been the way throughout the thousand-year history of our nation, to confront.
Primarily, of course, this enormous growth of population presents logistical difficulties the likes of which we have probably never before had to consider in peacetime. Alastair Palmer of the Telegraph recently wrote a superb article on the matter of immigration in which he expounds this notion. On a report by Migration Watch UK (a think-tank/pressure group that Professor Coleman helped found) on the cost of schooling in future, Palmer notes that
“… over the next decade, more than a million additional school places will be needed for the children of immigrants and that the cost of providing them will be at least £100 billion. (For comparison, Britain’s fiscal deficit last year was £155 billion.)”
Such absolutely staggering financial figures are coupled with a figure from Professor Coleman’s article in which he notes that immigration is a factor in
“… adding the population of the Netherlands by 2050… if recent trends in migration, fertility and survival continue.”
It is by no means exaggerating to suggest that any nation the size of Britain would most certainly think twice about adding such a huge number to its population in such a short time. I have written already in this blog of the pronounced hardship of those who are unable to find affordable housing – or housing they can afford – in towns in which their families have lived for centuries. This is in addition to those who are unable to use the property ladder to break the cycle of low aspiration in which they find themselves, and the middle class graduates saddled with huge debt and unemployment (a case soon to worsen). Invariably, there will be tension among groups already in existence in our society for resources that will become fewer and further between- this is without factoring in public service cuts.
Perhaps the most disconcerting notion that was featured in the reports was Professor Coleman observation that
“the transition to a ‘majority minority’ population, whenever it happens, would represent an enormous change to national identity – cultural, political, economic and religious.”
While we have made our own bed in disavowing and dismantling our cultural heritage in this country over the last 65 years (a case most eloquently and forcefully stated by Peter Hitchens in his stunning polemic The Abolition of Britain), if these predictions are to be believed, we stand on the cusp of discarding vast swathes of our culture either to appease various sections of the community or through lack of interest. Thus, we stand on the verge of becoming culturally bankrupt, even before these predictions have come to fruition. Whilst we live in an information and technology society that compels us to reassess our skills and knowledge by new standards as they come to light, it is not reasonable to assume that all members of our society will so objectively – or graciously – reassess the very fabric of their being.
Tension abounds on all the aforementioned aspects of the new reality that the mainstream is suddenly accepting. Palmer warns of the danger of the compromising of the education system and its ability to aid assimilation:
“If the education system breaks down because it cannot accommodate [the children of immigrants], their chances of integrating collapse at the first hurdle, with potentially dire consequences.”
That leads us to what I consider to be the most significant aspect of Professor Coleman’s article.
“In Britain, judging by the opposition to high immigration reported in opinion polls over recent years, it seems likely that such developments would be unwelcome.”
This ominous warning formed the final paragraph in the vast majority of articles surmising the original Prospect article. And yet, predicably… silence.
Warnings of the repercussions of these choices – and make no mistake, there has been active decision and agreement in this situation – have previously been met with consternation, ridicule and outrage. It will be interesting to gauge the longer-term reaction to the onslaught of news reports of this ilk.
I realise that it is not reasonable to assume that we can compete in a world economy as we have now without immigration: that is without question. However, it is the continued volume of people entering the country that is the present problem. Logistically, besides all else, it is a nightmarish scenario that we are faced with. Other matters come attached with this, and as we have seen, we can derive little solace from those either. It is an ideological battle that we find ourselves in, but it carries with it practical concerns. If we are unable to bring an end to the unrealistic numbers of people entering the country, then the changes outlined are likely to come to fruition.
The potential consequences of this have been made very clear.
We in our day ought well to guard, as highly to honour, the parent stem of England, and its royal talisman; for we know not what branches yet that wonderful tree will have the power to put forth.
The danger is not always violence and force; them we have withstood before and can again.
The peril can also be indifference and humbug, which might squander the accumulated wealth of tradition and devalue our sacred symbolism to achieve some cheap compromise or some evanescent purpose.