It is understandable that the vast majority of the heavily propagandised English populace remain unaware of the continental shift in immigrant demographics and birth rates that will relegate the indigenous population of England under the age of 40 to ethnic minority status in their homeland within twenty years.
Understandable, admittedly, but if these recipients of a progressive education and 24/7 cradle-to-grave state-sponsored brainwashing could remove their liberal blinkers and gaze in horror at their surroundings through the eyes of their grandparents, then they could only have themselves to blame, because their dispossession was carried out in full view of those that would not see, and in retrospect how could there be any other outcome than gradual extinction when one considers exactly what our socialist rulers have carried out over the last few decades?
1. Identified a small yet wealthy country populated by a rapidly declining indigenous race representing less than 1% of the global population, and whose territorial homeland makes up less than 1% of global habitable area.
2. Established a welfare state with a legal requirement to provide free housing, food, education, health, translation services and pin money to those in need, with the most needy being judged on the number of children they have.
3. Thrown open the doors of this tiny country to the teeming billions of the poverty-stricken Third World, whilst making sure the multiple wives of Muslim males fully understood that the more children they produced, the bigger the house and welfare cheque they would receive from the state, even though polygamy is illegal in England.
4. Encouraged the new arrivals to take pride in the culture and religion of the Third World country they had escaped from and 'educated' them into developing an unhealthy animosity toward their host countryâ€™s imperialist and oppressive past.
5. Demonised the ancient and indigenous population as institutionally racist from the age of five and enacted 'hate' laws which are then predominately used to criminalise and silence the indigenous people who speak out against their territorial and cultural dispossession.
6. Praised multiculturalism as a positive and Islam as a religion of peace, then sat back to watch the results of their social experiment. What could possibly go wrong?
Liberal progressives residing in fine mansions on Hampstead Heath will tell you nothing could go wrong; that mass immigration is nothing other than a positive boon, an unarguable and incontrovertible truth that must be patiently and condescendingly explained to the uneducated and the unwashed, even as the Arabella Allendes and Montmorency Guevaras over-glamorise and under-pay the scurrying, forelock tugging, cute little immigrant people whose efforts in tending to the gardens, kitchen, laundry and children of the servant-owning socialist class enable the latter to do the more important things in life, such as denouncing capitalism in between producing money-making yet soul-destroying reality TV shows.
For the white working class, however, those long-forgotten stalwarts of the country who failed to play their designated role in the long-term plans of Mr Marx and Mr Engels, thereby earning the enduring hatred of the cuckolded intellectuals, it means nothing other than population replacement, or in the cruder yet more honest language of the betrayed working man rarely encountered at progressive Hampstead dinner parties, ethnic cleansing.
Is this too strong a description? Patricia Morgan of The Salisbury Review doesnâ€™t think so. In 2006 she wrote an article entitled Ethnic Cleansing in East London which focussed primarily on Tower Hamlets and the dispossession of white working class Londoners who, having survived Adolf Hitler and the Luftwaffe, subsequently failed to hold back the tidal wave of socialism and multiculturalism so avidly promoted by the British Labour Party.
Ms Morgan recounts a conversation with a left-wing friend who was slowly becoming aware of the results of socialism's warped multicultural ideology:
When one of my old Labour Party acquaintances expressed anxiety over Islamic terrorism, I asked him why he had always been so keen on getting as many immigrants here as possible. He told me that he had been 'trying to make the revolution'. So, while it had not been possible to storm Buckingham Palace and set up soviets in Westminster, you could still change the population and supplant the hated 'other'.
But as with all socialist policies, the anti-Midas touch of the liberal left duly performed as it has always performed, and the hated 'other' turned out not be the bowler-hatted bourgeoisie, but the cloth-capped working class English themselves who, with their naÃ¯ve belief in socialismâ€™s promise of a Brave New World, failed to understand that the chosen people were not white but brown, not Christian but Muslim, and not English but members of any Third World race whose culture was irredeemably at odds with that of the host culture.
Patricia Morgan goes on to describe the accelerating displacement of the indigenous East Enders, as the new arrivals from Bangladesh went straight to the head of the housing queue by dint of their family size, averaging in good Muslim tradition seven children per wife. You will note I do not say per couple, because many Muslim men in Tower Hamlets routinely have four wives each, all 'legally' supported by the British state in order that they may father up to twenty-eight children in a literal tsunami of polygamous demographic warfare imported from one-well villages in Bangladesh to the streets of our forefathers via Heathrow Terminal 1.
Frank Dobson, a Labour MP and traitor who attained ministerial rank in Tony Blairâ€™s cabinet, was on hand to astutely encourage the displacement of his partyâ€™s historical core vote. Speaking to a Bangladeshi audience in Tower Hamlets a few years ago, he encouraged them to help themselves to everything on offer from the state; nothing was too much, and no matter how much was taken, it could never fully recompense the oppressed of the non-white world for the misery and depredations they had historically suffered under the boot of the racialist-imperialist-oppressor that was Britain.
And today we live with the results of this treason and betrayal. Tower Hamlets is now called 'Banglatown' where, with the exception of a few vicars otherwise known as clerical punch bags, there are virtually no whites left, just as there are very few whites in many other areas of London where the white British population now amounts to less than 45% with over a third of all 'Londoners' born outside the UK.
If you think words such as colonisation, population replacement and ethnic cleansing are a tad too strong, just consider the white flight that in the last decade has seen 620,000 Londoners celebrate diversity by foot, train, boat and plane.
And Englandâ€™s other cities are going precisely the same way in precisely the same manner. The non-indigenous birth rate now averages an extraordinary 35% nationally, which realistically means 60-70% or more in the cities alone, thus consigning indigenous English children in Birmingham, Bradford, Oldham, London, Luton and Leicester to an ethnic minority in their own land, where up to 150 different languages are spoken in their schools; a fate awaiting English children in all our cities and towns within a decade, and the entire country before 2030.
Tracking ethnic demographics is not an exact science, but it is generally recognised that the ethnic minority population of Britain is approximately 15% which equates to around 9Â½ million out of an official population of 63 million.
However, the indigenous British population contains many old people, leaving only 50% of the population under 40 years of age, whilst the non-indigenous population tend to be much younger by dint of their higher birth rate, with 75% typically representing those aged under 40. If we use these statistics, the population under the age of 40 looks like this:
Indigenous population 2013: 27 million;
Non-indigenous population 2013: 7 million.
But the current birth rate differentials cause the indigenous population to decline by 25% per generation whilst the non-indigenous population has historically doubled per generation, with the Muslim population growing ten times faster than the rest of society. If we project this data forward to 2030, the figures for those under 40 look like this:
Indigenous population 2030: 20 million;
Non-indigenous population 2030: 14 million.
On top of this we need to take the following into account:
If we project this data forward to 2030, the figures look something like this:
Indigenous population 2030: 16 million;
Non-indigenous population 2030: 23 million.
To become an ethnic minority in your own country over just a few decades suggests that the policy of the last Labour government, as has already been revealed, was indeed to ethnically cleanse the English from their homeland, although the multiculturalists who committed this wicked act of treason and betrayal never couched it in quite such plain language, preferring instead to frame mass immigration as a means of achieving social objectives.
These figures are not hysterical, nor are they obtained from the research of paranoid periodicals. In 2007 The Guardian reported that Britain was heading toward a population of 70 million by 2031, but did not mention that the addition of an extra 10 million people whilst the indigenous population was simultaneously declining and emigrating required the importation of an awful lot more than just an extra 10 million immigrants.
Indeed, the liberals and the leftists are only too aware that the indigenous population is being ethnically cleansed. In 2000 The Guardian predicted a white minority Britain by 2100, therefore tacitly admitting acceptance of population replacement, but erring only on the time frame necessary to achieve racial cleanliness.
The card-carrying NUJ journalist who penned the article was no doubt loath to take into account the racial and cultural dispossession of his contemporaries under the age of 40, nor could he foresee the massive increase in immigration since 2000, nor indeed the unmentioned and rather curious instance of population replacement taking place in England alone â€“ Scotland and Wales having escaped the fate Scottish politicians have inflicted on the Auld Enemy.
Another fact rarely mentioned but no less pertinent is that politicians tend to lie. Only a handful of marginally honest politicians will actually admit the numbers are far higher than official figures suggest, yet they still deny any knowledge as to the real numbers of foreigners in the country.
The Independent suggested that the population could already be as high as 80 million, based on supermarket food sales, a figure borne out by the number of National Insurance cards in existence, which are essential if you wish to work or draw benefits. Former Shadow Home Secretary David Davis told us there were 76 million NI cards equating to 29 million, over and above eligible British citizens.
One only has to walk around our towns and cities to realise that population replacement is a substantive and rapidly accelerating fact. Ann Cryer, who used to be MP for Keighley, a town near Bradford, estimated that 1 million Pakistanis came to Britain over a four-year period to work, study or marry, with imported wives making up 80% of all marriages in her area, where local police chiefs described community cohesion between the indigenous and the non-indigenous tribes as â€œnerve-janglingâ€.
The anger amongst the indigenous working classes is palpable, and it is growing. As the working class EDL take to the streets stentoriously chanting â€œWe want our country back, we want our culture backâ€, and the middle class socialist students who joined the Islamist-infiltrated UAF respond with squeals of â€œNazi scum off our streetsâ€, then I see no reason to defer my prediction of European civil war by 2025.
Former Home Secretary Alan Johnson claimed that he did not lie awake at night worrying about the prospect of a 70 million British population, and that he enjoyed living in a multicultural society; but now we know this was just a lie to facilitate a far greater evil. Perhaps Mr Johnsonâ€™s attention should be drawn to the UNâ€™s definition of genocide:
Article 2: In the present convention genocide means any of the acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethical, racial or religious group, as such:
2c: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part ...
Although the UN did not really draw up their charters with the best interests of white Europeans in mind, that does not mean they can be ignored. When Bonnie Greer, a foreign, feisty feminist of colour had the effrontery to tell a visibly intimidated Nick Griffin on BBC Question Time a couple of years ago that there was no such thing as the indigenous English people, she was greeted with wild applause by the baying audience of hand-picked BBC rent-a-mob impartiality; but was she aware that her denial of a nationality and culture to whites that was afforded to all non-whites was covered by another UN Declaration?
The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples states the following:
Article 6: Every indigenous individual has a right to a nationality.
Article 8.1: Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right not to be subjected to forced assimilation or destruction of their culture.
Article 8.2: States shall provide effective mechanisms for prevention of, and redress for:
(a) Any action which has the aim or effect of depriving them of their integrity as distinct peoples, or of their cultural values or ethnic identities;
(b) Any action which has the aim or effect of dispossessing them of their lands, territories or resources;
(d) Any form of forced assimilation or integration;
(e) Any form of propaganda designed to promote or incite racial or ethnic discrimination directed against them.
Bearing in mind that the European Union wishes to import another twenty million migrants from Asia and Africa into the EU, when our children are not only rapidly approaching ethnic minority status, but are also brainwashed into accepting the dispossession of their nationality, their territory and their culture, then perhaps a Hampstead Thinker could explain to me why it is 'racist' to resist such a genocidal political policy, and why various UN declarations quoted with enormous reverence when applied to the Palestinians and various other pets of the socialist elite are deemed inapplicable when it is the indigenous English who are the genuine victims of ethnic cleansing.
But England of course is just a microcosm of what is a global phenomenon. The Third World is booming and exporting its youth bulge to the First World, bringing with it a religion and a culture unsuited to democracy and peaceful coexistence. This can only lead to catastrophe for the indigenous populations. We have seen what happened after the Islamic takeover of majority Christian Lebanon: a 15-year religious civil war that took the lives of close to 10% of the population and wounded 33% â€“ half of whom suffered from lifetime disabilities. So what exactly is the rationale behind importing Islam to the West?
Liberals tell us colonialism was evil, so why is the colonisation of white countries by non-white peoples â€“ in far greater numbers than whites were ever sent to non-white countries â€“ a matter of celebration? In 2050 the streets of Pakistani and Bangladeshi cities will be thronged with Pakistanis and Bangladeshis; there will be no white people there, just as there will be no white people on the streets of London, Luton, Paris, Rotterdam, Brussels, MalmÃ¶, etc.
To be forced into a minority within your own homeland, which is your only point of defence, is an act of criminality without precedence.