The Diversity Illusion: What We Got Wrong About Immigration & How to Set It Right
Ed West
Language: English
Pages: 288
ISBN: B00BM23G24
Format: PDF / Kindle (mobi) / ePub
2002 - ICM Research polling for the BBC: 47 per cent of white Britons believed immigration had damaged British society (a belief shared by 22 per cent of black and Asian Britons) and 28 per cent believed it had benefited it. 2012 - YouGov polling for the Sunday Times: 11 per cent of people believe that immigration in the past decade has been 'a good thing for Britain' - 67 per cent think it has had a negative effect. Not only does a clear majority of the British public now seem to want immigration all but stopped, it has become hugely ambivalent even about multiculturalism, post-war immigration and the very idea of 'diversity'. How could this happen? In this ground-breaking analysis, Ed West investigates who is responsible for Britain's current state of affairs and why mass immigration has never been put to the vote. He uncovers mismanagement throughout a fifty-year state of denial by the British establishment on both the left and the right, and two recent governments increasing immigration for electoral advantage. Ed West compellingly argues that Britain should face up to the real impact of immigration against the mounting concerns -even on the Left -about its consequences. The picture of modern Britain he paints is a forceful warning to stop subscribing to the diversity illusion.
British Secret Projects: Jet Bombers Since 1949
A Likely Tale, Lad: Laughs & Larks Growing Up in the 1970's
Soldier Box: Why I Won't Return to the War on Terror
1815: Regency Britain in the Year of Waterloo
Giving racism and racial violence a respectable face, and became a pariah. To British ears no Christian name aside from Adolf has become so associated with one man, and with the power to stir emotions; this obscure, Biblical name became shorthand for unacceptable discourse on race. Polite society especially disliked him because, unlike other prominent opponents, he could not be accused of being a Fascist or a crank, or of lacking intellectual weight. A classics scholar with a spectacular Army.
Failings of a multi-racial state can be blamed on racism, rather than on the innate weaknesses of diverse societies. Likewise, because racism is this indefinable vice which can and does infect almost everyone, the solution to any problem of human interaction is more anti-racism measures. So if mental illness increases in diverse areas,44 it must be the fault of racism, not an instinctive human sense of discomfort with diversity. If one group does less well on average than another, it must be a.
That is a crime, and any racist incident that has nothing to do with a crime, must be ‘investigated with equal commitment’ by the police. More chilling, the report also recommended a change in the law so that where there is a prosecutable offence which involves ‘racist language’, then prosecution should be allowed for the use of such language ‘other than in a public place’. Conservative journalist and future London Mayor Boris Johnson pointed out that: ‘Not even under the law of Ceausescuâ’s.
Romania could you be prosecuted for what you said in your own kitchen.’114 The Queen’s Counsel at the Macpherson inquiry said that ‘anyone who murders for racist motives… should escape is doubly repellent’. So was the murder of Stephen Lawrence twice as repellent as an intra-racial murder? Hate crime legislation, which now includes a raft of offences such as ‘transphobia’, are justified on the grounds that such crimes create terror across a community, because of their motive. But almost any.
Anti-religion, and others going into anti-racist politics, which became the class struggle by other means. Anti-racism inherited from the radical tradition the mindset of Maximilien Robespierre, who declared that you are either entirely free or entirely a slave: ‘If you do not do all for liberty, you have done not a thing.’ You are either anti-racist or racist, and anyone who tries to question anti-racism must be racist. To believe in this idea one does not need to rationally question whether it.