Friday, 14 December 2012

Labour's shameful lies on immigration

Today Ed Miliband will try to get Labour back into the immigration debate. In a mealy-mouthed distortion, he will apologise that Labour didn't do enough to integrate the latest wave of immigrants. He won't apologise for opening the floodgates to all-comers, to abandoning immigration controls, in a naked attempt at party-before-country gerrymandering. He won't apologise for the strains on schools, hospitals, housing and public services that have disadvantaged the poorest and least able of the pre-existing population. He won't apologise for Labour's disastrous policy of apartheid or multiculturalism that encouraged division, conflict, competition for rationed resources and discrimination all on racial grounds. In fact, Ed's twisted and distorted gob will even qualify what he means by 'integration' - not at all the same as assimilation, it seems. Ed will define integration as, er, an ability to speak English.

But worse than all of these convoluted lies and distortions that will come from Ed's crooked mouth will come the biggest lie from Labour's twisted heart - that immigration is the fault of the immigrants. The sub-text of his speech will seek to shift the blame for immigration from the Labour Party to the immigrants themselves. In this he's seeking to regain ground lost by Labour to the vile BNP and EDL, repositories of white working-class race hate. Ed's dog-whistle 'talking tough' phrases on penalties to be imposed on non-English speaking immigrants will mean little in practice but appeal to the base instincts of Labour's grass roots racists. Ed will blur the crystal-clear distinction between being opposed to uncontrolled immigration and discriminating against immigrants. It is the same error most grievously committed by Rotherham Council. Perhaps a little more RE in school would have taught these bigots that "hate the sin, love the sinner" is a tenet more widely practiced by tolerant and fair-minded Britons than Miliband would ever dare to credit. 

So let's be clear. Unbounded immigration was the fault of the Labour Party, not the fault of the immigrants. Anti-immigrationism is not the same as anti-immigrant. Multiculturalism is evil and divisive. And political parties that put their own interests above the national good and are prepared to demonise immigrants for party advantage are beneath all contempt.  

20 comments:

right_writes said...

Well Raedwald, I think it is the immigrant's fault... If one is poor and then one day you hear that a neighbour has gone over to England to do some work, and it's easy money, would you not take advantage of such an offer?

Obviously those that vote for Labour or Tory parties like sharing their stuff with immigrants, as do people who vote for EU supporting parties.

It seems to me that the real problem is that some people have a different agenda... People such as (successful) politicians, seem to operate on a theoretical basis, they consider the UK to be some sort of football club... It needs to get extra players (although we only transfer players in... never out)... It has to constantly worry about its league position as well as stuff like whether the team is gelling. They have to try to avoid "crowd trouble".

Whereas ornery folk just want to feed themselves, maintain shelter and trade goods and ideas with each other.

In short, we need new management.

DeeDee99 said...

Well said Raedwald. I don't blame individual immigrants. They saw the opportunity for a better life for themselves and their families (funded by others) and they took it.

In a year's time, hundreds of thousands of Romanians and Bulgarians are going to make the same decision.

I blame ALL of our political class for leaving the doors wide open - and the liberal Guardianista metrosexuals for demonising anyone who pointed out that uncontrolled immigration would cause social unrest.

Labour should never govern again, having deliberately set out to wreck social cohesion in the UK, or for wrecking our economy. But unfortunately as the CONs are no longer a conservative Party and are led by a man with a political death wish, they will be back in Government in 2015.

Raedwald said...

If Dubai were to offer unemployed benefits of £40k a year with a free all-expenses paid Mercedes thrown in, plus private healthcare and private education for the kids, asking little in return, allowing Brits to live in their own enclaves, would it be the fault of those from South Wales or Middlebrough who would be queuing to go? Immigrants here are no better and no worse people than ourselves, motivated by the same concerns.

Quiet_Man said...

There's nothing particularly vile about the EDL, they aren't racist having many people of all colours, races and religious persuasion amongst them. They simply oppose the (Labour inspired) Islamisation of the UK which was and is allowed to run unchecked by those in power.

BrianSJ said...

Saying it was the Labour party's fault makes it sound like a mistake. We know from Neather that it was deliberate.

Tarka the Rotter said...

A good piece, Raedwald, and I agree. Wouldn't put the EDL quite as close to the BNP and also think Labour acted deliberately in order to widen their electoral base, but otherwise I think you are spot on.

G. Tingey said...

Correct, but not entirely correct.

The Labour party was induging in corporate statism - they did what almost every guvmint since 1950 has done ...
Crawled to the less-scrupulous "big" employers, who want immigration, because it cheapens the labiur market, so they can pay crap wages to poorly-educated people.
Both main parties have perpetrated this fraud on all of us.

That does not make this most recent example any better, though, does it?

mikebravo said...

Incredibly I agree 100% with GT.
However I couldnt give a flying fu*k whether millipede apologised or not. It would only be self serving wibble dished up to fool the gullible.
What would he do about it is the real question to which the answer is sod all.

Fahrenheit211 said...

Quiet man, although I have my own personal reservations about the EDL, they do at least appear to be walking the correct, to me, line that the issue is not race, it is culture. That to me is the main difference between the BNP and the EDL.

I agree with Raedwald about multiculturalism being evil and divisive.

Regarding Islamification, I don't blame or condemn individual Muslims as many of those individuals are just as imprisoned within the fascistic world of Islam, as we in the west are threatened by said creed.

Re Ed Milliband. I think he's clutching at straws. Many people now see the labour party not as the party of the working classes but the party of the middle class left and of Islam. There are still a lot of divvys who vote for Labour in a tribal way, but this tribe will eventually succumb to apathy.

Anonymous said...

'Racialization refers to processes of the discursive production of racial identities. It signifies the extension of dehumanizing and racial meanings to a previously racially unclassified relationship, social practice, or group. Put simply, a group of people is seen as a "race", when it was not before.'

The English are an both a nation and an ethnic group. Labour's assault on our nationhood and identity was pre-planned and we will become a minority throughout our homeland by the end of this century. This is ethnocide (soft genocide).

It is unlawful under international law to interfere either politically or econimically with any ethnic group. The English became a minority people in their own capital city towards the end of the 80's. They became a minority in two other cities in the first decade of the new century.

Where I'm from in Dorset we don't have the BNP or the EDL Raedwald, but don't for one moment think those two are the extent of nationalism in 21st century England. As a former soldier I know war is coming and so I prepare - same as many other Englishhmen. I don't want my great grandchildren to be a skin colour, a despised minority.

It will be the last battle the English fight on English soil.

Steve

Anonymous said...

To a certain extent I agree with the piece and what most here are saying.

I would like to add, and remind people, that immigration relating to the European Union is a E.U. occupancy. This means our government, irrespective of party, has no say over who, or how many come here from the E.U. Nations. They are also entitled to the same rights and benefits as other E.U. Citizens. ie You and me.

I am not defending this policy or the Socialists', I am merely stating the facts as I understand them to be.

Whilst this goes someway to explain and, too a 'lesser' extent, lets-off the Socialists', it fails to explain why so many people from other countries have been allowed to settle here.

If you cannot find someone to stack your shelves for the minimum wage out of an E.U population of 500 million, then frankly, you ain't looking hard enough !

Which begs two questions:

1) Why do we need people from other non-E.U. countries ?

2) Because the government (Labour or Tory, but in this context, Labour) could have stopped these non-E.U. people entering the country, why didn't they ?

Conclusion: As Raedwald points out, it isn't the immigrants fault.Their does seem to be a plan, and it is unfolding before our very eyes.

And no amount of 'back-tracking' is going to change that.

Ian Hills said...

What a shame that you despise the biggest victims of immigration, the displaced white working class. Remember, comfortable suburbs like your own will be overrun too soon.

Raedwald said...

Ian - absolutely not. Who do you imagine " ..the strains on schools, hospitals, housing and public services that have disadvantaged the poorest and least able of the pre-existing population" refers to?

But if the displaced white working class, men and women whose courage and sacrifice saved this nation in two great wars, believe it's all the fault of immigrants rather than politicians then they're being lied to and deceived.

Anthony said...

Re "lied to and deceived" I'm not sure how this works: who is supposed to be doing the lying and deceiving? More to the point, are people in the mass really so stupid? I'm the first to agree that a distressingly high proportion of my fellow Brits do seem, frankly, somewhat thick - but all or most of them? One is reluctant to go along with such a damning conclusion.
However, evidence exhibit one is the fact that people keep on voting for the same politicians who perpetrated the mass-immigration crime against our country - in addition to many other crimes - namely, the Labour and Conservative Parties.
Who was it who defined insanity (I think) as doing the same thing over again in the face of its being pointless and wrong - ?

Anonymous said...

If 'they' came to 'escape' - why do 'they', when in Britain, seek to construct a familiar mirror version of the same technologically backwards and dystopian society they supposedly fled for a 'better and freer life'?

There is a world of difference between economic migrants seeking to work hard and a build a new life in the West.

And the others: who come here to sponge off the state and squeeze the taxpayer in myriad ways and for which they are scurrilously coached.

Many [most] peddling drugs at night and never paying tax on their 'taxi driving'. Interchangeable names and addresses, multiple identities travelling hither and thither to do God knows what.

Then returning, with those secret knowing smiles. Intoning "Allahu Akbar!"... driving by day and dropping children like Allah told them there's no tomorrow.
Plus, the police service uncaring, is it powerless, and now in some cases totally complicit. Crime, social disease; honour killings, multilations and worse - rampant in Asian areas and nothing is done the figures and numbers of criminal activity: now become a state secret.

Yes some Englishmen are a bit thick and will vote for aught bearing a rosette of crimson.

Up and down the land, there is another breed of Englishman. Stoic, hard working, forbearing and to a large degree exceptionally tolerant - saintly if you like of others.
But the racket of babel from Batley and Blackburn to Leicester and Reading, to Tower Hamlets and Goodmayes is becoming a din.

This will not end well and YES - I blame the weasel Politicians who gave praise and legislated for Multiculturalism.
Today, stoat in chief Ed Miliband showed the whole nation what a hypocritical liar he is - so no change there then, he was part of it and now he washes his hands.

cosmic said...

"Today Ed Miliband will try to get Labour back into the immigration debate"

So what's he going to do about it?

Nothing of substance.

As for what he has to say, an apology would be nice, but we won't get that either.

We'll get a vague promise to manage the problem he helped create slightly better than the idiots presently in power who sat by and watched Labour create it. Word salad.

Budgie said...

The game was given away in 2009 by Andrew Neather, a former Labour Home Office and Downing Street adviser, who revealed that mass immigration was a deliberate policy by the Left to change the social fabric of the country and to ‘rub the Right’s nose in diversity’. Simon Heffer, Mail.

So, no, Labour's policy was not to obtain cheap immigrant labour, but to destroy British culture.

Anonymous said...

Exactly. But it is now the deliberate policy of the EU to integrate nations by migration. And has been since its inception. And there is little that can be done about it while in the EU. If we leave the EU in an un-negotiated departure the end result will be trade barriers and tariff barriers. If we leave in a negotiated departure then the EU migrants will be part of the negotiations.
Another problem is that many of the non-EU migrants are well educated, and in any case are needed because of the fall in birthrate (mind you, with the departure of manufacturing to warmer climes you could as easily suggest they go back and do the same work there ?)
And since the whole shoddy lot of them are Eton/Oxford/Cambridge educated and share the same background you could almost say that they are interchangeable and not much different.

Anonymous said...

No mention by anyone of Lord Glasman (including Raedwald) yet?

How come?

It was Lord Glasman, the Labour Peer that admitted on R4 and in the press that Labour did this act deliberately to "suppress workers wages".

So it seems that GT is right when he says that this action (or indeed lack of action) is promoted to pay crap wages to ill-educated people.

Coney Island

Alieen Stewart said...

Excellent post.I want to thank you for this informative read, I really appreciate sharing this great post. Keep up your work.
Immigartion Consultant