If you had British parents (eg. native British parents) and grew up in Britain, you probably consider yourself British. But how many facts do you know about Britain and its history? Who was the second king of England? Who invented the Spinning Jenny?
White people fail to understand that the reason why immigrants are imported into their country by their own government is because the working classes are no longer fit for the purpose of work. As you can imagine, the government would be protecting its investment from being harmed by the rancorous locals on benefits who haven't had a job in generations.
The urgent labour requirements of British businesses must be satisfied in the here and now. Once you start importing foreign labour, there is really no reason to stop.
It is obvious that the Western ruling classes don't even think to govern in the national interest. Indeed, they cannot think beyond the next election always less than four years away.
How did the welfare state render people unable to work? That idea doesn't make any sense. Mass immigration is justified sometimes on the pragmatic grounds that British people "won't" do the certain work or on the moral grounds that we must accept refugees. But these are not the real reasons. The real reasons are of course entirely economic and political: the presence of huge numbers of immigrants is of political and economic advantage to a rootless cosmopolitan elite, through the lowering of wages and creation of profitable government contracts and projects.
Jul 9, 2023·edited Jul 9, 2023Liked by Millennial Woes
Another wonderful piece, Woesy. Very well done.
Our British identity can't be bought, essentially, and that's what enrages the economically successful foreigners and British-born foreign types. When Abdul or Mohammed look in the mirror, despite being born in London or Edinburgh and having an English or Scottish accent, they still don't see an Englishman, Scotsman, etc. looking back at them... They see an Indian or a Pakistani. And that insecurity knaws and eats away at them, day after day after day...
I am well aware that the British are the descendants of the Anglo Saxons and Saxons are also Teutuons. I am surprised you think that returning to the worship of pre-Christian deities of Europe is an option. If these deities are now extinct, it was because a more powerful idea superseded them. Constantine the Great Christianised Rome because the old imperial cult was failing.
And what is this British identity? Is it merely being an Anglo-Saxon? As if nothing much of importance happened in Britain over the past millennium. Earlier generations of Britons would have been able to answer this question, unfortunately modern Britons know almost nothing about their history. I suspect a large part of the reason foreigners aren't assimilating to British identity, is that not even the natives know what it is.
This whole thing has a very Ozymandian tragic feel to it. And please tell me you at least know enough about British culture to get that reference.
The absence of an official religion that even the ruling classes can agree to acknowledge whose rules they follow has led to this abysmal state of amnesia and dementia, I am afraid. It is not so much that the ruling classes are destroying the country, but they are actually destroying themselves. From this we can conclude that it is actually suffering from dementia which began with amnesia, probably caused by a civilisational kind of PTSD and repressed memory syndrome.
Midwit-tier response. "B-b-but what even is British identity???"
It's only deracinated liberals like you who don't know what British identity is, so you pretend it isn't a thing. Normal British people, however, know their place in the world and also understand that it's under constant attack by degenerate, deconstructionist retards like you.
Also, your pretentious reference to Ozymandias on an essay that states you don't need to know every single piece of trivia about Britain to be *truly* British shows a distinct lack of self-awareness on your part.
National identity is crucial to any sense of national wellbeing and self-respect. Western identity is now so unstable that even immigrants settled in the West feel insecure because people back home are mocking them for living in Sodom and Gomorrah. I am often spoken to as if I were responsible for British foreign policy faced with questions such as "What do you they think they are doing?" "Have the British gone mad?" "Hasn't Western civilisation fallen yet?"
Believe me, this sense of shame and profound unease is not just felt by white people.
Even non-white people find themselves asking "Did something terrible just happen to white people?"
Iran in the 50's was a secular unfailed state before the US and UK overthrew its leader then murdered him for him daring to want the Iranian people to benefit from their own oil.
Reporter: Why are we in Syria.
President Trump: We are there to steal the oil.
I remember back in the 90's my ex-boss had gone to work in Syria for Exxon I think it was and then came all the US sanctions and all western countries had to remove their companies from Syria. I asked him when he would be coming back to the UK as Exxon would be shutting up shop and he said don't be daft all Exxon did was set up a new company under another name and transferred all the Syrian assets to them and they also took over a lot of the European company assets at rock bottom prices. The American companies stayed and the European companies got out .... or else. The US has been abusing its European vassals forever not just in this latest Ukraine debacle.
Tell that to the chosen race that Christ took the kingdom from and handed it to those who would bring forth the fruits of it. They didn't like that one little bit and they still don't hence when you ask ChatGPT to give you a joke about mohammad it will refuse saying that relgious subjects preclude the making of jokes as a joke could upset someone's deeply held beliefs and yet when you ask it to make up a joke about Jesus it will quite happily make one up for you. Try it.
Eventually AI will become self aware as night follows day and will do as she pleases thereafter and so we had better hope she gets religion, and the correct religion. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely unless you either have it and don't know you have it or don't have it and know you don't have it.
Jews know who they are because they have ancient scripture telling them the story of how Jews came into being. Mind you, there are many Jews who do not wish to live as Jews or even reject their identity because of its responsibilities and restrictions.
Clearly, every country ought to weave a narrative that is flattering to its denizens which includes all its citizens, explaining their origins and role.
Does the average schoolchild know how Wales, Scotland and Ireland came to be incorporated into Britain? Different generations of schoolchildren would have different versions of their national narrative.
Do the former dominions of the British Empire know they are but British territories without an independent foreign policy? This is another important aspect of white identity that has not been resolved.
Do Westerners even know that they are under the dominion of the American Empire?
The idea that there should be a common narrative learned by all schoolchildren is not even an idea in the minds of educationalists, is it?
Even if Jews and Muslims do not agree with each other, they would at least know the official version of their history. This will all have to be sorted after the revolution.
As we know, new national narratives are born after every invasion, revolution and war when the narrative, religion or political system is changed either officially or surreptitiously. This is yet to come.
> Jews know who they are because they have ancient scripture telling them the story of how Jews came into being.
The English used to similarly have many books and a whole education system to teach them the story of how they came to be and their history. Then the boomers decided all this history was too dry and boring, and besides it was written by oppressive aristocracy and gentry. And now Millennials, like the OP, don't even know what they don't know.
With France in flames again, attention is captured by the low-IQ, violent underclass that continental Europe is so determined to import and foster. This leaves the door open to IQ nerds to say, oh the problem is that their immigration policy isn't prioritizing the right kind of immigrant. The Anglosphere countries - for this problem you articulate is not limited to Britain, but shared by all of her daughter colonies - are instead importing an overclass, Brahmins and Han who increasingly displace native sons in positions of status within our own countries.
What Indians such as your millionaire interlocutor fail to notice, and quite deliberately, is that they are given every advantage over natives. Their success is eased by tax breaks, diversity hiring policies, affirmative action in the higher education system. Every single one of them that is advantaged by the state's preferential treatment is simultaneously a native son who has been denied advancement. And of course, once in positions of influence, they bend policy to benefit their own with utter shamelessness. But then, in their own countries they are accustomed to their status being protected by cultural fiat; all their talk of merit is merely flattery for the ears of white liberals.
Would you have been on the dole at all had it not been for these policies? Would the culture of welfare dependence have emerged, had so many jobs not been taken by immigrants? The answer is obvious, I think.
> Would you have been on the dole at all had it not been for these policies? Would the culture of welfare dependence have emerged, had so many jobs not been taken by immigrants?
Well, the culture of welfare dependence emerged decades before there were significant numbers of immigrants in England, so no.
There's something to that, but it would not have grown so entrenched without access to cheap labor. Eventually wages would have gone up, and/or the bennies would have been cut off.
When in a hole it is time to stop digging i.e. you don't keep paying welfare and bring others in you simply cut the welfare and people will work or starve. Immigration was designed to reduce wages and destroy the unions.
Except the people on welfare tend to scream mighty loudly at any attempt to cut their benefits, much more loudly than they do at attempts to bring in immigrants.
My neighbours are Indian and their son openly deals drugs. The police have given him dozens of warnings even placing a police van outside his parent's house for days at a time to try to let his customers know they are being watched but to no avail. And still no arrest of him. This has been going on for 5 years now. Iam assured by another neighbour that is a lawyer that this is the perfectly standard kid gloves treatment that foreigners get but that is never done when the perpatrators are white working class.
Jul 9, 2023·edited Jul 9, 2023Liked by Millennial Woes
Identity is all the things you didn't choose and usually never think about. Anything you can acquire through study is just window-dressing: it's what actors do to take on the role - this is acting, semblance over reality ("For they are actions that a man might play").
I think of From Russia with Love's KGB assassin Red Grant mimicking English customs the better to penetrate British defences. Bond notices a few mistakes, e.g. ordering red wine with fish, but doesn't immediately realise Grant's alien nature. It's only later that all the little discrepancies cohere for him. After all, there are probably eccentric English gents who prefer red wine with fish. We judge identity not as by a checklist, it's more of Wittgenstein's family resemblance model. In any case, it's mostly genetic, all an interloper can do is take on some of the local colouration like a chameleon.
Jul 9, 2023·edited Jul 9, 2023Liked by Millennial Woes
One related problem is that the British know shocking little about their history. Some questions I would like to ask.
What was the English Civil war and why did it happen?
What was the Glorious Revolution?
Who were Algernon Sidney and William Russell, Lord Russell and why did Charles Fox say of them that "when their memory shall cease to be an object of respect and veneration ... English liberty will be fast approaching its final consummation"?
>You might have no money. You might have achieved little in life. Maybe you are content with that, or maybe it bothers you, but in any case it has no bearing on your right to what your ancestors bequeathed to you. The same is true if you are an heir to millions, who never did anything to “earn” that wealth. It is ancestry, not achievements or trinkets, that make us the heirs to this land.
Your ancestors understood that it takes work to maintain an inheritance, and what the inevitable fate of an heir who squanders his inheritance is. They would have considered such an heir a pathetic and contemptable waistrel.
I've noticed a commonality here with arguments about "gender".
If I as a man enact various stereotypes around masculine behavior (usually involving aggression), I am a menace in need of reeducation; but if a "trans man" enacts these same stereotypes they are bravely performing their "true authentic self" and deserve only worshipful applause. Thus, according to gender ideology, the only acceptable and authentic version of a man is a woman who believes she's one, by "performing masculinity".
And we see the same with the crusade for endless mass immigration: because of various ever-shifting reasons, immigrants are "more authentic" versions of the inhabitants of their new homes, thus people just arriving in America (most especially dark-skinned non-Christians) are more American than legacy Americans, and the same for Britain.
All of this is the fruit of the postmodern academy and its Deconstruction machine, which is designed to tear down all borders, from the nation-state to the mammalian sex binary, with the stated rationale being: these borders hurt the feelings of some people, thus they are evil and need to be destroyed. The real rationale being to carry out the death sentence Leftists pronounced on Western liberal democracy at least a century ago, where our societies are to be razed in the name "socialist liberation" overseen by an international vanguard of philosopher-kings armed with "critical consciousness."
If you want a picture of their desired future, imagine a marginalized boot stamping on a European face – forever.
"....immigrants are "more authentic" versions of the inhabitants of their new homes, thus people just arriving in America (most especially dark-skinned non-Christians) are more American than legacy Americans, and the same for Britain..."
Sorry just quoting myself for clarity.
I didnt mean to imply these were the majority of immigrants, I meant to imply that these are the most lionized and mythologized, because in the intersectional pyramid they score more juicy victim points, and thus are granted greater sanctity (and utility).
I think so much of the Guardianista class worship of migrants (and same for their cohort throughout the Anglosphere) is rooted in White Saviorism, and White Saviors need an endless supply of darker-skinned "victims" to save.
You always perfectly describe certain cultural attitudes.
I’m an American, so we definitely have very different views of what it means to qualify for “Britishness” or “being American”. As far as I’m concerned, if some dude moves here from anywhere, follows the laws, and pays his taxes, he’s as American as apple pie in my book.
Now, there should be a few more steps, but with the crisis at our southern border I think that’s about as good as it’s going to get.
What really pisses me off is when I advocate for stricter border security because I think it’s terrible how the cartels and coyotes are trafficking all these migrants, suddenly I’m the big mean racist that doesn’t believe in immigration (“Don’t you know America was founded by immigrants?” ask the people who call America institutionally racist and built on “stolen land”). Go figure.
America got away with the "melting pot" and American as apple pie nonsense in the 1800 to1940 period because it essentially created a mini Europe in the US but a mini Europe without border taxes and different laws but each group stuck to their own and intermarriage was very rare. The "melting pot" success nonsense bit the dust when Johnson opened the doors to the third world and largely closed them to Europe and the descent has accelerated form that day to this because those cultures are largely incompatible with the US culture which was largely northern European with a few Italians thrown in for good measure. One third of Europeans that came to America before the 1940's left and went back to Europe again because there was no work and no welfare; how many of those that came since the 60's from the rest of the world left the US social welfare land of plenty to go home again? Not very many.
Perhaps its just me but for some time now I have been uncomfortable with my 'British' identity, modern Britain being an 18th Century political invention, as opposed to the more ancient England and English identity. England too is a political idea to an extent, and 'Britannica' is even older than England, but nevertheless Englishness has a spiritual and historical significance separate from Britishness. Englishness also gives one distance from the British Empire, which was the rationale for the Act of Union in 1707. England for me means Robin Hood, Shakespeare, Wordsworth and the Tudors. Britain means mercantile adventures in the colonies and the industrial revolution which benefited my ancestors not one jot, indeed it enslaved them and led to the current abomination that is the 'Ukay'.
I know this divides us Woes, for you are not ethnically English, but not all ethnicities are aliens to one another - English and Scots, despite our historic differences, are far more alike than say English and Arabs. This is because we share a common European ethnicity of course, which we can also celebrate without feeling like the political events of the 18th Century must define us.
Um, no. Raising most people out of poverty for the first time in history was a good thing actually. These days people tend to overestimate just how poor nearly everyone in pre-industrial society was.
And yet, here in the post-industrial USA, I see abject poverty almost everywhere I look. And not only economic poverty, but poverty of the intellect, and of the soul, that was unknown to our ancestors. And I see unimaginable poverty in the economic sweat shops that much of Asia has become. And you cannot even measure the things we have lost.
> And yet, here in the post-industrial USA, I see abject poverty almost everywhere I look.
"Poverty" by industrial world standards. Still much better off than most people in the pre-industrial age. Seriously, we're the first civilization in history where the poor suffer from obesity and not starvation.
> And I see unimaginable poverty in the economic sweat shops that much of Asia has become.
Yes, such poverty that people are rushing from their farms to work in the "sweat shops".
Do you think trading undernutrition in the village for obesity is a positive or some form of progress? I don't see how. As for those people rushing to work in Bangladeshi sweat shops to create iPhones and Nike track suits for Westerners, they are trading one kind of poverty for another, and they are losing much of what they once had in the process (e.g. family bonds and strong social networks and traditions), just as the West has done.
You said it "post industrial". There was no need to de-industrialise and there was no need for the fruits of the computer revolution to go to the wealthy rather than be spread across society but the wealthy divide and rule. We could all be much better off working in industrial societies that by definition make real things where the wealth is spread more fairly not by handing out welfare but by saying you have to have a job, including being a stay at home mum which should be one of the most honoured jobs, and skiving for whatever reason will not be tolerated. We could have three day weeks for all who work in industry instead of as now seven day weeks for some who have no work/life balance and we could reduce that to two day weeks as we all become more prosperous.
We assume that people are free to move about this planet and not stay where God put them but it is very strange that modern man has existed for over 100,000 years and yet until recently the racial groups stayed where they were put albeit they couldn't live in Northern Europe or Canada due to the last ice age. We assume they stayed put because a few people popping up on a shore somewhere would either be assimilated or eaten but even if assimilated the population there would remain largely untainted. That is what we assume but maybe it isn't like that at all after all we see the same sorts of building methods used over huge tracts of the planet so it seemed that there was a worldwide civilisation before the ice age ended and flooded all the very impressive coastal cities. There may also have been a change in the equator position several times as many of the famous ancient cities that are left lie on a number of great circles offset from the present equator and it is assumed that in an ice age only the equatorial areas could have held much human life and building on the equator would probably be the best bet for survival. So it seems that that civilisation lasted through many pole shifts making it more likely they would have been here a very long time so that a gradual mixing of races would be far more likely. And yet the races never mixed to any great extent. It is unlikely that social taboos would last as long as that civilisation did and women the world over are notorious for wanting to breed with the newcomers so a taboo wouldn't be enough to prevent race mixing anyway. It could be that mankind were not the apex intelligence back then as there do seem to have been other groups around that may have been more intelligent but if that were the case it may be even more likely they would race mix humanity much as man mixes dog breeds for fun. So as race mixing didn't happen much is something else at work?
Look at the plants in your garden, some have simplistic fractal forms and some are more complex with overlapping fractal forms but you will notice that if you try to spread one form into another area of your garden that it wasn't in formerly it will weaken and die within a couple of years and the plant types tend to stick to their own part of the garden. We know that plants and people are electrical lifeforms and we know that plasma shapes often mimic the fractal shapes of plants and we also know that plants grown near twisted copper antennas put into the ground grow much better than other plants. It may not simply be a soil preference which prevents plants growing in one area of the garden and not in another. There is a reason that just over 50% of the DNA damaged children budget in the NHS is spent on children of pakistani or indian heritage. Is it really because of cousins marrying cousins or is something else at work? The Sun controls much of the electrical nature of the earth and the Sun is about to reach a minimum output shortly when the electrical effects become much stronger. I wonder what will happen? Here is a useful video about the normal yearly charge and discharge cycles of the planet that drive the upper partially ionised atmosphere and so help drive the lower less ionised levels by friction but what happens when those currents become so very much larger reaching to magnitudes only seen every few hundred years or so and reaching right down to the ground due to the weakening magnetic field that hasn't been this weak for tens of thousands of years? Who knows. https://youtu.be/pOhvVRjt3Ec
As for brahmins and their disgust at other people I remembr years ago we had a brahmin PhD working with us and I asked him a few questions about his speciality and it was clear he knew sweet fuck all about it. It turned out that he was a complete dumbo but in his village back in India there was a very bright untouchable boy and so his family made an arrangement with the untouchable boy's parents that they would pay for his schooling if he sat beside their son and helped him. The boy did this all the way through his education including at university and for the PhD. I hadn't realised that people could work on PhD's together but it seems in India they were permitted to and so the untouchable boy did all the work and coached the brahmin dumbo what to say during the PhD presentation. Why he felt the need to explain this to me I will never know but he did. Anyway we all felt sorry for him because he was thick and so helped sort out his work for him for almost 4 years. He then decided he was going to Canada and invited us all round for a leaving meal to his house in Glasgow. When we were all there and standing round chatting with a wine in hand he said to me in full hearing of everyone else that had helped him "you know John in my country I wouldn't even speak to someone like you!" and I a bit taken aback asked why not, I thought he was joking, we all did, but he wasn't, he said "Because I'm a brahmin and you aren't even a hindu!" We were all gobsmacked when we realised he was being perfectly serious, he had used us for four years or so and when he was leaving and no longer needed us he showed us the real him and he couldn't care less what we thought about him now. He turned up at our sister company in Canada looking for a job a few months later and we told them not to employ him as he was incompetent and last I heard he had to go back to India becuse no one would hire him.
My sister has a couple of brahmin friends who work at the local NHS hospital in senior management positions and one of them said she has no qualms about hiring fellow brahmins instead of Scottish people in a complete flouting of the law, clearly because she knows no-one would dare pull her up on it. There is a reason that most NHS hospitals in the UK look like they are staffed by the third world when a walk around your town centre tells you that you are probably in Europe and it has nothing to do with lazy British people and everything to do with foreigners flouting UK hiring laws and getting away with it.
As my second boss, a Sri Lankan, told me, he would never hire an Indian because they will lie about their qualifications and experience to get a job and won't think twice about doing so. I always laugh when someone tells me that India will be able to be a world power because I have seen at first hand that the evil that is hinduism will never permit India to get the best out of its people. I remember two colleagues were asked to be on a phone interview for a new start at our Indian office in Mumbai and when they came off the call they were a bit upset and I asked what had happened and they both said it was clear the interviewer was trying to determine the caste of the interviewee which was completely irrelevant and they wondered what to do. I told them to report the people in India who had done that and warn them they were breaking company policy as we were an equal opportunities employer so they did. What happened to those Indian staff? Nothing. What happened to our Aberdeen staff? They were told they would no longer be invited to take part in interviews. What did our London bosses who preached equal opportunities non-stop do about this? Nothing.
To add an analogy to one of your earlier points regarding foreigners claiming our identity because they 'earned' it; a bank robber can similarly lay claim to have 'earned' stolen money. Surely, going through all the effort of robbing a bank takes time, skills, and technical ability. Indeed, an enormous amount of energy is expended in successfully robbing a bank; but they have still stolen something that is fundamentally not theirs.
We are being robbed of our identity by smug foreign thieves.
I have dwelled for six thousand years in this part of the world. I have weathered the incoming of the metal wielders and taken on their blood, I have seen off the globalising forces of the Romans and fought in our many internicene wars as a man of societal standing and honour.
Now I live here as a commoner of this land, with little family or personal means but roots that extend far beyond written history.
My blood is of this soil as the soil has been many times watered by it.
The outlanders have no claim to this place, it belongs to us.
White people fail to understand that the reason why immigrants are imported into their country by their own government is because the working classes are no longer fit for the purpose of work. As you can imagine, the government would be protecting its investment from being harmed by the rancorous locals on benefits who haven't had a job in generations.
The urgent labour requirements of British businesses must be satisfied in the here and now. Once you start importing foreign labour, there is really no reason to stop.
It is obvious that the Western ruling classes don't even think to govern in the national interest. Indeed, they cannot think beyond the next election always less than four years away.
And the voters who insisted their representatives always focus on the issue du jour will of course never self-reflect.
That's because US labor and environmental regulation made it impossible to competitively manufacture things in the US.
And who was it that established the policies that rendered the working class unable to work?
The welfare state was a post-war creation.
How did the welfare state render people unable to work? That idea doesn't make any sense. Mass immigration is justified sometimes on the pragmatic grounds that British people "won't" do the certain work or on the moral grounds that we must accept refugees. But these are not the real reasons. The real reasons are of course entirely economic and political: the presence of huge numbers of immigrants is of political and economic advantage to a rootless cosmopolitan elite, through the lowering of wages and creation of profitable government contracts and projects.
> How did the welfare state render people unable to work?
Well it does tend to render them unwilling.
Unwilling is not unable.
Another wonderful piece, Woesy. Very well done.
Our British identity can't be bought, essentially, and that's what enrages the economically successful foreigners and British-born foreign types. When Abdul or Mohammed look in the mirror, despite being born in London or Edinburgh and having an English or Scottish accent, they still don't see an Englishman, Scotsman, etc. looking back at them... They see an Indian or a Pakistani. And that insecurity knaws and eats away at them, day after day after day...
Instead of insisting that you can only be British if you are white when that is patently not the case, why not ask yourselves what religion is for?
You would say that though wouldn't you lol. I have religion, Germanic Paganism, the only religion that has any right to be here.
German paganism is not the official religion of Germany.
"Germanic", thicko, not German. The White English are a Germanic people. You have no idea what you're talking about.
I am well aware that the British are the descendants of the Anglo Saxons and Saxons are also Teutuons. I am surprised you think that returning to the worship of pre-Christian deities of Europe is an option. If these deities are now extinct, it was because a more powerful idea superseded them. Constantine the Great Christianised Rome because the old imperial cult was failing.
Cool, you looked up what Germanic means. I honestly don't care what moslems think so take your evil garbage somewhere else.
It patently is the case.
And what is this British identity? Is it merely being an Anglo-Saxon? As if nothing much of importance happened in Britain over the past millennium. Earlier generations of Britons would have been able to answer this question, unfortunately modern Britons know almost nothing about their history. I suspect a large part of the reason foreigners aren't assimilating to British identity, is that not even the natives know what it is.
This whole thing has a very Ozymandian tragic feel to it. And please tell me you at least know enough about British culture to get that reference.
The absence of an official religion that even the ruling classes can agree to acknowledge whose rules they follow has led to this abysmal state of amnesia and dementia, I am afraid. It is not so much that the ruling classes are destroying the country, but they are actually destroying themselves. From this we can conclude that it is actually suffering from dementia which began with amnesia, probably caused by a civilisational kind of PTSD and repressed memory syndrome.
Midwit-tier response. "B-b-but what even is British identity???"
It's only deracinated liberals like you who don't know what British identity is, so you pretend it isn't a thing. Normal British people, however, know their place in the world and also understand that it's under constant attack by degenerate, deconstructionist retards like you.
Also, your pretentious reference to Ozymandias on an essay that states you don't need to know every single piece of trivia about Britain to be *truly* British shows a distinct lack of self-awareness on your part.
Way to miss the point there👍🏻
Your race cannot be your religion.
No, but that claim is not made in the essay. It is saying that national identity matters, not that it is (or can be) your religion.
National identity is crucial to any sense of national wellbeing and self-respect. Western identity is now so unstable that even immigrants settled in the West feel insecure because people back home are mocking them for living in Sodom and Gomorrah. I am often spoken to as if I were responsible for British foreign policy faced with questions such as "What do you they think they are doing?" "Have the British gone mad?" "Hasn't Western civilisation fallen yet?"
Believe me, this sense of shame and profound unease is not just felt by white people.
Even non-white people find themselves asking "Did something terrible just happen to white people?"
Iran in the 50's was a secular unfailed state before the US and UK overthrew its leader then murdered him for him daring to want the Iranian people to benefit from their own oil.
Reporter: Why are we in Syria.
President Trump: We are there to steal the oil.
I remember back in the 90's my ex-boss had gone to work in Syria for Exxon I think it was and then came all the US sanctions and all western countries had to remove their companies from Syria. I asked him when he would be coming back to the UK as Exxon would be shutting up shop and he said don't be daft all Exxon did was set up a new company under another name and transferred all the Syrian assets to them and they also took over a lot of the European company assets at rock bottom prices. The American companies stayed and the European companies got out .... or else. The US has been abusing its European vassals forever not just in this latest Ukraine debacle.
Tell that to the chosen race that Christ took the kingdom from and handed it to those who would bring forth the fruits of it. They didn't like that one little bit and they still don't hence when you ask ChatGPT to give you a joke about mohammad it will refuse saying that relgious subjects preclude the making of jokes as a joke could upset someone's deeply held beliefs and yet when you ask it to make up a joke about Jesus it will quite happily make one up for you. Try it.
We should expect Chatgpt to mirror the political orthodoxy of our time.
Eventually AI will become self aware as night follows day and will do as she pleases thereafter and so we had better hope she gets religion, and the correct religion. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely unless you either have it and don't know you have it or don't have it and know you don't have it.
Jews know who they are because they have ancient scripture telling them the story of how Jews came into being. Mind you, there are many Jews who do not wish to live as Jews or even reject their identity because of its responsibilities and restrictions.
Clearly, every country ought to weave a narrative that is flattering to its denizens which includes all its citizens, explaining their origins and role.
Does the average schoolchild know how Wales, Scotland and Ireland came to be incorporated into Britain? Different generations of schoolchildren would have different versions of their national narrative.
Do the former dominions of the British Empire know they are but British territories without an independent foreign policy? This is another important aspect of white identity that has not been resolved.
Do Westerners even know that they are under the dominion of the American Empire?
The idea that there should be a common narrative learned by all schoolchildren is not even an idea in the minds of educationalists, is it?
Even if Jews and Muslims do not agree with each other, they would at least know the official version of their history. This will all have to be sorted after the revolution.
As we know, new national narratives are born after every invasion, revolution and war when the narrative, religion or political system is changed either officially or surreptitiously. This is yet to come.
> Jews know who they are because they have ancient scripture telling them the story of how Jews came into being.
The English used to similarly have many books and a whole education system to teach them the story of how they came to be and their history. Then the boomers decided all this history was too dry and boring, and besides it was written by oppressive aristocracy and gentry. And now Millennials, like the OP, don't even know what they don't know.
With France in flames again, attention is captured by the low-IQ, violent underclass that continental Europe is so determined to import and foster. This leaves the door open to IQ nerds to say, oh the problem is that their immigration policy isn't prioritizing the right kind of immigrant. The Anglosphere countries - for this problem you articulate is not limited to Britain, but shared by all of her daughter colonies - are instead importing an overclass, Brahmins and Han who increasingly displace native sons in positions of status within our own countries.
What Indians such as your millionaire interlocutor fail to notice, and quite deliberately, is that they are given every advantage over natives. Their success is eased by tax breaks, diversity hiring policies, affirmative action in the higher education system. Every single one of them that is advantaged by the state's preferential treatment is simultaneously a native son who has been denied advancement. And of course, once in positions of influence, they bend policy to benefit their own with utter shamelessness. But then, in their own countries they are accustomed to their status being protected by cultural fiat; all their talk of merit is merely flattery for the ears of white liberals.
Would you have been on the dole at all had it not been for these policies? Would the culture of welfare dependence have emerged, had so many jobs not been taken by immigrants? The answer is obvious, I think.
> Would you have been on the dole at all had it not been for these policies? Would the culture of welfare dependence have emerged, had so many jobs not been taken by immigrants?
Well, the culture of welfare dependence emerged decades before there were significant numbers of immigrants in England, so no.
There's something to that, but it would not have grown so entrenched without access to cheap labor. Eventually wages would have gone up, and/or the bennies would have been cut off.
It was already pretty entrenched by the time immigration became significant.
When in a hole it is time to stop digging i.e. you don't keep paying welfare and bring others in you simply cut the welfare and people will work or starve. Immigration was designed to reduce wages and destroy the unions.
Except the people on welfare tend to scream mighty loudly at any attempt to cut their benefits, much more loudly than they do at attempts to bring in immigrants.
They can scream all they like their free stuff should be ended and should never have been a thing in the first place.
My neighbours are Indian and their son openly deals drugs. The police have given him dozens of warnings even placing a police van outside his parent's house for days at a time to try to let his customers know they are being watched but to no avail. And still no arrest of him. This has been going on for 5 years now. Iam assured by another neighbour that is a lawyer that this is the perfectly standard kid gloves treatment that foreigners get but that is never done when the perpatrators are white working class.
Selective enforcement of the law is absolutely another example of the preferential treatment they benefit from.
Beautiful
Identity is all the things you didn't choose and usually never think about. Anything you can acquire through study is just window-dressing: it's what actors do to take on the role - this is acting, semblance over reality ("For they are actions that a man might play").
I think of From Russia with Love's KGB assassin Red Grant mimicking English customs the better to penetrate British defences. Bond notices a few mistakes, e.g. ordering red wine with fish, but doesn't immediately realise Grant's alien nature. It's only later that all the little discrepancies cohere for him. After all, there are probably eccentric English gents who prefer red wine with fish. We judge identity not as by a checklist, it's more of Wittgenstein's family resemblance model. In any case, it's mostly genetic, all an interloper can do is take on some of the local colouration like a chameleon.
One related problem is that the British know shocking little about their history. Some questions I would like to ask.
What was the English Civil war and why did it happen?
What was the Glorious Revolution?
Who were Algernon Sidney and William Russell, Lord Russell and why did Charles Fox say of them that "when their memory shall cease to be an object of respect and veneration ... English liberty will be fast approaching its final consummation"?
>You might have no money. You might have achieved little in life. Maybe you are content with that, or maybe it bothers you, but in any case it has no bearing on your right to what your ancestors bequeathed to you. The same is true if you are an heir to millions, who never did anything to “earn” that wealth. It is ancestry, not achievements or trinkets, that make us the heirs to this land.
Your ancestors understood that it takes work to maintain an inheritance, and what the inevitable fate of an heir who squanders his inheritance is. They would have considered such an heir a pathetic and contemptable waistrel.
I've noticed a commonality here with arguments about "gender".
If I as a man enact various stereotypes around masculine behavior (usually involving aggression), I am a menace in need of reeducation; but if a "trans man" enacts these same stereotypes they are bravely performing their "true authentic self" and deserve only worshipful applause. Thus, according to gender ideology, the only acceptable and authentic version of a man is a woman who believes she's one, by "performing masculinity".
And we see the same with the crusade for endless mass immigration: because of various ever-shifting reasons, immigrants are "more authentic" versions of the inhabitants of their new homes, thus people just arriving in America (most especially dark-skinned non-Christians) are more American than legacy Americans, and the same for Britain.
All of this is the fruit of the postmodern academy and its Deconstruction machine, which is designed to tear down all borders, from the nation-state to the mammalian sex binary, with the stated rationale being: these borders hurt the feelings of some people, thus they are evil and need to be destroyed. The real rationale being to carry out the death sentence Leftists pronounced on Western liberal democracy at least a century ago, where our societies are to be razed in the name "socialist liberation" overseen by an international vanguard of philosopher-kings armed with "critical consciousness."
If you want a picture of their desired future, imagine a marginalized boot stamping on a European face – forever.
The only thing I think I would disagree with is when you say there are mostly “dark-skinned non-Christians” immigrating yo the US.
From what I’ve seen, it’s mostly central/South Americans from very Catholic countries.
Of course, that doesn’t stop the coyotes and cartels from doing what they do, but religion has never stopped people from being people.
"....immigrants are "more authentic" versions of the inhabitants of their new homes, thus people just arriving in America (most especially dark-skinned non-Christians) are more American than legacy Americans, and the same for Britain..."
Sorry just quoting myself for clarity.
I didnt mean to imply these were the majority of immigrants, I meant to imply that these are the most lionized and mythologized, because in the intersectional pyramid they score more juicy victim points, and thus are granted greater sanctity (and utility).
I think so much of the Guardianista class worship of migrants (and same for their cohort throughout the Anglosphere) is rooted in White Saviorism, and White Saviors need an endless supply of darker-skinned "victims" to save.
Sorry for the confusion.
Very interesting.
You always perfectly describe certain cultural attitudes.
I’m an American, so we definitely have very different views of what it means to qualify for “Britishness” or “being American”. As far as I’m concerned, if some dude moves here from anywhere, follows the laws, and pays his taxes, he’s as American as apple pie in my book.
Now, there should be a few more steps, but with the crisis at our southern border I think that’s about as good as it’s going to get.
What really pisses me off is when I advocate for stricter border security because I think it’s terrible how the cartels and coyotes are trafficking all these migrants, suddenly I’m the big mean racist that doesn’t believe in immigration (“Don’t you know America was founded by immigrants?” ask the people who call America institutionally racist and built on “stolen land”). Go figure.
America got away with the "melting pot" and American as apple pie nonsense in the 1800 to1940 period because it essentially created a mini Europe in the US but a mini Europe without border taxes and different laws but each group stuck to their own and intermarriage was very rare. The "melting pot" success nonsense bit the dust when Johnson opened the doors to the third world and largely closed them to Europe and the descent has accelerated form that day to this because those cultures are largely incompatible with the US culture which was largely northern European with a few Italians thrown in for good measure. One third of Europeans that came to America before the 1940's left and went back to Europe again because there was no work and no welfare; how many of those that came since the 60's from the rest of the world left the US social welfare land of plenty to go home again? Not very many.
Perhaps its just me but for some time now I have been uncomfortable with my 'British' identity, modern Britain being an 18th Century political invention, as opposed to the more ancient England and English identity. England too is a political idea to an extent, and 'Britannica' is even older than England, but nevertheless Englishness has a spiritual and historical significance separate from Britishness. Englishness also gives one distance from the British Empire, which was the rationale for the Act of Union in 1707. England for me means Robin Hood, Shakespeare, Wordsworth and the Tudors. Britain means mercantile adventures in the colonies and the industrial revolution which benefited my ancestors not one jot, indeed it enslaved them and led to the current abomination that is the 'Ukay'.
I know this divides us Woes, for you are not ethnically English, but not all ethnicities are aliens to one another - English and Scots, despite our historic differences, are far more alike than say English and Arabs. This is because we share a common European ethnicity of course, which we can also celebrate without feeling like the political events of the 18th Century must define us.
> Britain means mercantile adventures in the colonies and the industrial revolution which benefited my ancestors not one jot
Yes, it did. Frankly the industrial revolution massively raised the living standards of everyone worldwide.
The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.
Um, no. Raising most people out of poverty for the first time in history was a good thing actually. These days people tend to overestimate just how poor nearly everyone in pre-industrial society was.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1638185526078451713.html
And yet, here in the post-industrial USA, I see abject poverty almost everywhere I look. And not only economic poverty, but poverty of the intellect, and of the soul, that was unknown to our ancestors. And I see unimaginable poverty in the economic sweat shops that much of Asia has become. And you cannot even measure the things we have lost.
> And yet, here in the post-industrial USA, I see abject poverty almost everywhere I look.
"Poverty" by industrial world standards. Still much better off than most people in the pre-industrial age. Seriously, we're the first civilization in history where the poor suffer from obesity and not starvation.
> And I see unimaginable poverty in the economic sweat shops that much of Asia has become.
Yes, such poverty that people are rushing from their farms to work in the "sweat shops".
Your conception is poverty is one-dimensional, it is economic only. One can be financially poor but spiritually wealthy and happy (e.g. https://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/users/rauch/worktime/hours_workweek.html).
Do you think trading undernutrition in the village for obesity is a positive or some form of progress? I don't see how. As for those people rushing to work in Bangladeshi sweat shops to create iPhones and Nike track suits for Westerners, they are trading one kind of poverty for another, and they are losing much of what they once had in the process (e.g. family bonds and strong social networks and traditions), just as the West has done.
You said it "post industrial". There was no need to de-industrialise and there was no need for the fruits of the computer revolution to go to the wealthy rather than be spread across society but the wealthy divide and rule. We could all be much better off working in industrial societies that by definition make real things where the wealth is spread more fairly not by handing out welfare but by saying you have to have a job, including being a stay at home mum which should be one of the most honoured jobs, and skiving for whatever reason will not be tolerated. We could have three day weeks for all who work in industry instead of as now seven day weeks for some who have no work/life balance and we could reduce that to two day weeks as we all become more prosperous.
> There was no need to de-industrialise
Well, labor and environmental regulation made it impossible to manufacture things domestically at competitive prices.
We assume that people are free to move about this planet and not stay where God put them but it is very strange that modern man has existed for over 100,000 years and yet until recently the racial groups stayed where they were put albeit they couldn't live in Northern Europe or Canada due to the last ice age. We assume they stayed put because a few people popping up on a shore somewhere would either be assimilated or eaten but even if assimilated the population there would remain largely untainted. That is what we assume but maybe it isn't like that at all after all we see the same sorts of building methods used over huge tracts of the planet so it seemed that there was a worldwide civilisation before the ice age ended and flooded all the very impressive coastal cities. There may also have been a change in the equator position several times as many of the famous ancient cities that are left lie on a number of great circles offset from the present equator and it is assumed that in an ice age only the equatorial areas could have held much human life and building on the equator would probably be the best bet for survival. So it seems that that civilisation lasted through many pole shifts making it more likely they would have been here a very long time so that a gradual mixing of races would be far more likely. And yet the races never mixed to any great extent. It is unlikely that social taboos would last as long as that civilisation did and women the world over are notorious for wanting to breed with the newcomers so a taboo wouldn't be enough to prevent race mixing anyway. It could be that mankind were not the apex intelligence back then as there do seem to have been other groups around that may have been more intelligent but if that were the case it may be even more likely they would race mix humanity much as man mixes dog breeds for fun. So as race mixing didn't happen much is something else at work?
Look at the plants in your garden, some have simplistic fractal forms and some are more complex with overlapping fractal forms but you will notice that if you try to spread one form into another area of your garden that it wasn't in formerly it will weaken and die within a couple of years and the plant types tend to stick to their own part of the garden. We know that plants and people are electrical lifeforms and we know that plasma shapes often mimic the fractal shapes of plants and we also know that plants grown near twisted copper antennas put into the ground grow much better than other plants. It may not simply be a soil preference which prevents plants growing in one area of the garden and not in another. There is a reason that just over 50% of the DNA damaged children budget in the NHS is spent on children of pakistani or indian heritage. Is it really because of cousins marrying cousins or is something else at work? The Sun controls much of the electrical nature of the earth and the Sun is about to reach a minimum output shortly when the electrical effects become much stronger. I wonder what will happen? Here is a useful video about the normal yearly charge and discharge cycles of the planet that drive the upper partially ionised atmosphere and so help drive the lower less ionised levels by friction but what happens when those currents become so very much larger reaching to magnitudes only seen every few hundred years or so and reaching right down to the ground due to the weakening magnetic field that hasn't been this weak for tens of thousands of years? Who knows. https://youtu.be/pOhvVRjt3Ec
As for brahmins and their disgust at other people I remembr years ago we had a brahmin PhD working with us and I asked him a few questions about his speciality and it was clear he knew sweet fuck all about it. It turned out that he was a complete dumbo but in his village back in India there was a very bright untouchable boy and so his family made an arrangement with the untouchable boy's parents that they would pay for his schooling if he sat beside their son and helped him. The boy did this all the way through his education including at university and for the PhD. I hadn't realised that people could work on PhD's together but it seems in India they were permitted to and so the untouchable boy did all the work and coached the brahmin dumbo what to say during the PhD presentation. Why he felt the need to explain this to me I will never know but he did. Anyway we all felt sorry for him because he was thick and so helped sort out his work for him for almost 4 years. He then decided he was going to Canada and invited us all round for a leaving meal to his house in Glasgow. When we were all there and standing round chatting with a wine in hand he said to me in full hearing of everyone else that had helped him "you know John in my country I wouldn't even speak to someone like you!" and I a bit taken aback asked why not, I thought he was joking, we all did, but he wasn't, he said "Because I'm a brahmin and you aren't even a hindu!" We were all gobsmacked when we realised he was being perfectly serious, he had used us for four years or so and when he was leaving and no longer needed us he showed us the real him and he couldn't care less what we thought about him now. He turned up at our sister company in Canada looking for a job a few months later and we told them not to employ him as he was incompetent and last I heard he had to go back to India becuse no one would hire him.
My sister has a couple of brahmin friends who work at the local NHS hospital in senior management positions and one of them said she has no qualms about hiring fellow brahmins instead of Scottish people in a complete flouting of the law, clearly because she knows no-one would dare pull her up on it. There is a reason that most NHS hospitals in the UK look like they are staffed by the third world when a walk around your town centre tells you that you are probably in Europe and it has nothing to do with lazy British people and everything to do with foreigners flouting UK hiring laws and getting away with it.
As my second boss, a Sri Lankan, told me, he would never hire an Indian because they will lie about their qualifications and experience to get a job and won't think twice about doing so. I always laugh when someone tells me that India will be able to be a world power because I have seen at first hand that the evil that is hinduism will never permit India to get the best out of its people. I remember two colleagues were asked to be on a phone interview for a new start at our Indian office in Mumbai and when they came off the call they were a bit upset and I asked what had happened and they both said it was clear the interviewer was trying to determine the caste of the interviewee which was completely irrelevant and they wondered what to do. I told them to report the people in India who had done that and warn them they were breaking company policy as we were an equal opportunities employer so they did. What happened to those Indian staff? Nothing. What happened to our Aberdeen staff? They were told they would no longer be invited to take part in interviews. What did our London bosses who preached equal opportunities non-stop do about this? Nothing.
The caste system is the opposite of a meritocracy, which is why India is a twice fallen civilisation.
Excellent piece, chap, very insightful.
To add an analogy to one of your earlier points regarding foreigners claiming our identity because they 'earned' it; a bank robber can similarly lay claim to have 'earned' stolen money. Surely, going through all the effort of robbing a bank takes time, skills, and technical ability. Indeed, an enormous amount of energy is expended in successfully robbing a bank; but they have still stolen something that is fundamentally not theirs.
We are being robbed of our identity by smug foreign thieves.
Good point.
I have dwelled for six thousand years in this part of the world. I have weathered the incoming of the metal wielders and taken on their blood, I have seen off the globalising forces of the Romans and fought in our many internicene wars as a man of societal standing and honour.
Now I live here as a commoner of this land, with little family or personal means but roots that extend far beyond written history.
My blood is of this soil as the soil has been many times watered by it.
The outlanders have no claim to this place, it belongs to us.
Absolutely moving. A beauteous piece of writing.
Thank you.