It this actually happening in Britain? I'm honestly asking.
I'm American, and last visited Britain in 2010, so it's been awhile. It didn't feel that bad back then, at least the areas I visited, which included London and surrounding areas. Maybe things have changed.
Here in America, the story is a bit different because we are a larger country with lots of space. There has been huge immigration, but there are still lots of whites having families, and whites own most of the real estate, businesses, etc. If you go to a sporting goods store or a large church on the weekend, for example, it's literally like 90% white people. That doesn't reflect the demographics as a whole, I'm just observing how certain places and activities tend to remain white even if the society's demographics are changing. On the other hand, you have entire neighborhoods which are black, mexican, etc. There is real racial segregation on the ground, even if the media is constantly trying to deny it.
"You hate immigration and it is all your fault!" has enjoyed a remarkable run.
Only when immigration becomes problematic to the elite will change come. There were outlines of this in the 2024 US election. To be clear, the technological elite here still wanted infinite H1B visa workers, but that represents a shift away from an affinity for any non-white who shows up. I've seen it suggested that even the H1B demand is declining as AI ascends and the prospect of infinite empty cubicles once inhabited by Subcons becomes a phenomenon. After all, the unemployed cubicle jockey has enough intelligence to hack complex systems rather than simply eat the plebes' cats.
Is there a political rather than an economic way to intensify the pain of immigration for those who benefit rather than suffer from it? It totally escapes me, but here's hoping it exists.
Valuable and well-researched series, Colin, even if ultimately grim.
From 1964 to 1982 it was normal for more people to be leaving Britain than arriving each year. By the 1990s the effect of the contraceptive pill and Abortion Act 1967 was compounding because the second generation in the line of people who weren't born didn't exist either. By the 2010s and 2020s the third generation of that line didn't exist. Without net immigration the population of taxpayers would be shrinking year on year. That is unacceptable for any government addicted to spending.
We did have our referendum on migration; it was the Brexit one. The problem was that Farrage lied, saying leaving the EU would reduce immigration, when because of the above factors it was inevitable that EU migrants would simply be replaced with ever more non-EU migrants. We also lost cooperation with France on channel crossings. Councils controlled by Reform can't do anything about that.
Euthanasia is the next step, because older, disabled and mentally ill people who live for decades cost more than they pay in tax, and are harming government's ability to spend money on its own priorities.
Excellent research. A very systematic approach to the subject of ethnic replacement that is useful for ethnic European Whites in every country founded by ethnic Europeans.
Very valuable resource. I remember you had a video called something like "white genocide is intentional and desired" where you went over similar material. It's very important to have such articles or videos to link to people.
This series of yours has the effect of, as it were, stepping back from an Impressionistic painting and suddenly the mass of blobs & confused colours resolves into distinct patterns & shapes.
Well done and thank you for providing another thorough, well researched, reasoned, and presented analysis and essay on the subject. The policy of mass migration has seemingly been an active long-term strategic ideologically motivated. With the intention of not only replacing and genociding the native population and culture of the D-UK, but of all the West in its entirety. With the Caucasian race in its various ethnicities being the intended victims. This has only relatively recently become apparent to at least a small but ever increasing minority of people, here in the D-UK and elsewhere.
This has been championed by socialists, liberals and the elites alike.
Liberalism and democracy are inherently treasonous against the nation state and native population, wherever it is promoted and practiced. Liberalism leading to tyranny in one form or another in every instance. As Socrates and Plato both claimed "Masculine Republics give way to feminine Democracies, who give rise to tyrannies." Not that the UK was ever a democracy as such, we were a feudal state, which become a monarchy, which became a Constitution Monarchy, which seemingly has none of the advantages of a Monarchy or a Constitutional Republic, but all of the negative and detrimental effects of both. Democracy is Death to nation and state, or so it would seem. Let's not forget that the most powerful monarch in the world to date was Queen Victoria, who is the one who set about emasculating the power of the monarchy and replacing it with a passive and ineffectual Constitutional Monarchy. Which not only stood by and watched all the has occurred go on in silence, but waved it all on... Queen Elizabeth II is purported to have asked some of her leading courtiers back in the early 2000s "How long do we have?" The response was "50 years at best." The Monarchy was seemingly tacitly complicit in the replacement and genocide of its own subjects. Neither the existing political or social systems in the UK are seemingly fit for purpose, unless that purpose is our destruction. The Monarchy and existing political systems are in anyway able or willing to do what is required to not only stave off the extinction of native population and culture, but to preserve where possible and enhance where necessary anything of actual meaning, worth or value, other than to benefit themselves and the agendas that they seem to serve.
I want to be wrong, but I can't help thinking the last election strengthened the 'consent' argument. The political parties' mask was off in a way it had never been before. Yet, even with an electorally credible anti-immigration party on the ballot (Reform), 83% of those who voted did so for pro-immigration parties.
Another excellent article, anyway. The chronologically-presented data alongside the parties' duplicitous claims is chilling.
Yes and no. Don't forget the turnout was a historical low, I believe that there was only one other recorded lower turnout, which had reasons other than voter apathy and dejection, which was the main and openly acknowledged reason. A lack of real alternatives or representation for a majority of voters. Even Reform wasn't able to motivate the majority of voters to participate in the elections, most didn't bother.
The low turnout, which gave Liebore a super-majority is still hardly a popular mandate, as has been stated and acknowledged by a variety of commentators, officials and even the MSM and alternative media here and abroad.
I'm afraid Reform and Farage our not our saviours, no matter what they claim and how well intentioned their members and representatives may be. They are controlled opposition. Reform arent even set-up as a political party, but as a Ltd company with Farage and Yusuf being the two shareholders. Farage will do as he's always done. Declare victory in some self-serving and opportunistic manner and cut and run, leaving everyone else playing the fiddle on the deck of the Titanic. True representation hasn't come to the fore yet and entered into the zeitgeist of nation. The closest they I can see is of a truly nationalist and traditional political party is The Heritage Party of Scotland, who have expanded their mandate to England and possibly the rest of the D-UK. I hope that they are "the real deal" and if such is the case, I wish them "The Best of British!"
I don't draw any comfort from the low turnout. If people are disgusted with what's on offer they can turn out and spoil their vote. It doesn't take much effort. If they don't turn out at all that DOES suggest apathy.
And then there's the uncomfortable fact that 60% of the electorate was not completely disgusted with what was on offer in 2024, if one can judge by the fact that they voted.
You're missing the point of apathy and dejection and the behavioural affects that they have upon people. In effect most people are demoralised in some form or other. They know that the game is rigged, which it is. As Alexander Solzhenitsyn wrote about the politicians of the Soviet Union. "They're lying, we know that they are lying. They know that we know that they're lying and yet still they lie..." it's the same thing effectively in the UK and much of the West. Elections are rigged, the Systems are rigged any dissidents can't get traction or power and if by some chance they do somehow gain some positions of power or influence the bureaucrats and autocratics throughout the various systems will neutralise and marginalise them, so that they cannot effect any real lasting change. The system snaps back into place and reasserts itself no matter who allegedly has their hands on the levers of power, influence and authority.
Various academics, commentators and politicians for decades have stated how unfair and rigged the two party first past the post system is. Not that it's any better anywhere else!?
Reform won more votes than any single party, yet achieved the least amount of seats and therefore power and influence. The electoral ballot system is particularly biased to favour established large well funded parties with huge media coverage. Reform in part was a protest vote. Nobody believed that they could or would win many if any seats, no matter the turnout or percentage of the population that voted for them. I voted for Reform as a protest vote to upset the applecart and stick my fingers up at the establishment. I wasn't going to vote originally, as so many didn't and for the same reasons, There was no-one really representing me who would be able to gain sufficient power and influence as to be able to effect reap positive and lasting change for the native people of these islands and do what needs to be done here above and beyond all else.
Most people know this even if they can't articulate it. By voting we legitimise a dishonest, rigged and fraudulent electoral and political system which is actively hostile and detrimental to the native peoples and cultures of Great Britain and the British Isles. In effect voting is just choosing which cheek of the Ogre's arsehole gets to crush you? So why would people bother to even turn up and spoil their vote? Why bother, why waste your limited time and give them legitimacy, even if its the thinest veneer, that's all that they need and require.
It's still participating in an illegitimate, rigged game that's intentionally set against you? The only rational way to win a rigged game is by not participating in it and doing other things that objectively gain tangible benefits for you and yours.
There is of course a counter argument. By not voting you reinforce the activists, politicians and elites false views and opinions that they know best and are correct. However, this in itself is a false narrative. The activists, politicians and elites, don't care what anyone else thinks, believes or wants. They are parasites, they only care about what they perceive benefits them, and they've got no qualms or compunction in lying openly to your face, or even being honest. They hold everyone who isn't them in utmost loathing and contempt. The state and its institutions are now and have been for some decades now, the enemy of the nation, being the native people and their culture, traditions and beliefs, which the state is actively seeking to not only denigrate, marginalise and replace, but to utterly destroy and genocide. That's not an unintended consequences. It is the intention. Though not the only agenda at work. There are many some are collaborating though ultimately competing for supremacy. But that's a different part of the whole holistic multi-variant plans and agendas being implemented. Those who are successful at whatever they do know "Never put all your eggs in one basket" and they don't. More than one thing can be true at one and the same time, incompetent people can and often are malicious, as they soon realise that they're not up to responsibilities and demands of the positions that they hold and live in fear of discovery, exposure and loss of position and the consequences that this may have upon them personally. So they seek to identify others whom they may be able to collude with in order to eliminate any potential threats. Like seeks like and certain activities attract certain kinds of people whom form monopolies and cartels in order to maintian and expand wealth, privileges, power and influence and maintain them.
One thing to always keep in mind is that during any election there are many issues that are being discussed, and whilst migration may be in the minds of some, voting decisions are made for other bread and butter issues. I have seen this time and again where an individual will voice very strongly that they are against mass immigration, yet come election day cast their vote for the very part who brings in the most immigrants. Doing so because of something to do with their job, or roads, how much they get paid etc.
This is excellent research-reporting. I kind of figured about all this migration treason & plot, but to see it laid out is kind of overwhelming. You need to make a book out of this. I'll buy as many copies as I can afford if you do. I see no reason this migration treason should ever be forgot.
It this actually happening in Britain? I'm honestly asking.
I'm American, and last visited Britain in 2010, so it's been awhile. It didn't feel that bad back then, at least the areas I visited, which included London and surrounding areas. Maybe things have changed.
Here in America, the story is a bit different because we are a larger country with lots of space. There has been huge immigration, but there are still lots of whites having families, and whites own most of the real estate, businesses, etc. If you go to a sporting goods store or a large church on the weekend, for example, it's literally like 90% white people. That doesn't reflect the demographics as a whole, I'm just observing how certain places and activities tend to remain white even if the society's demographics are changing. On the other hand, you have entire neighborhoods which are black, mexican, etc. There is real racial segregation on the ground, even if the media is constantly trying to deny it.
Yes, it's really happening. Huge change since 2010, I'm afraid.
Isn't it strange that every cultural change is being pushed by a Hebrew who hates you?
https://files.catbox.moe/kmpne5.mp4
"You hate immigration and it is all your fault!" has enjoyed a remarkable run.
Only when immigration becomes problematic to the elite will change come. There were outlines of this in the 2024 US election. To be clear, the technological elite here still wanted infinite H1B visa workers, but that represents a shift away from an affinity for any non-white who shows up. I've seen it suggested that even the H1B demand is declining as AI ascends and the prospect of infinite empty cubicles once inhabited by Subcons becomes a phenomenon. After all, the unemployed cubicle jockey has enough intelligence to hack complex systems rather than simply eat the plebes' cats.
Is there a political rather than an economic way to intensify the pain of immigration for those who benefit rather than suffer from it? It totally escapes me, but here's hoping it exists.
Valuable and well-researched series, Colin, even if ultimately grim.
From 1964 to 1982 it was normal for more people to be leaving Britain than arriving each year. By the 1990s the effect of the contraceptive pill and Abortion Act 1967 was compounding because the second generation in the line of people who weren't born didn't exist either. By the 2010s and 2020s the third generation of that line didn't exist. Without net immigration the population of taxpayers would be shrinking year on year. That is unacceptable for any government addicted to spending.
We did have our referendum on migration; it was the Brexit one. The problem was that Farrage lied, saying leaving the EU would reduce immigration, when because of the above factors it was inevitable that EU migrants would simply be replaced with ever more non-EU migrants. We also lost cooperation with France on channel crossings. Councils controlled by Reform can't do anything about that.
Euthanasia is the next step, because older, disabled and mentally ill people who live for decades cost more than they pay in tax, and are harming government's ability to spend money on its own priorities.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/283287/net-migration-figures-of-the-united-kingdom-y-on-y/
Excellent research. A very systematic approach to the subject of ethnic replacement that is useful for ethnic European Whites in every country founded by ethnic Europeans.
Very valuable resource. I remember you had a video called something like "white genocide is intentional and desired" where you went over similar material. It's very important to have such articles or videos to link to people.
This series of yours has the effect of, as it were, stepping back from an Impressionistic painting and suddenly the mass of blobs & confused colours resolves into distinct patterns & shapes.
Well done and thank you for providing another thorough, well researched, reasoned, and presented analysis and essay on the subject. The policy of mass migration has seemingly been an active long-term strategic ideologically motivated. With the intention of not only replacing and genociding the native population and culture of the D-UK, but of all the West in its entirety. With the Caucasian race in its various ethnicities being the intended victims. This has only relatively recently become apparent to at least a small but ever increasing minority of people, here in the D-UK and elsewhere.
This has been championed by socialists, liberals and the elites alike.
Liberalism and democracy are inherently treasonous against the nation state and native population, wherever it is promoted and practiced. Liberalism leading to tyranny in one form or another in every instance. As Socrates and Plato both claimed "Masculine Republics give way to feminine Democracies, who give rise to tyrannies." Not that the UK was ever a democracy as such, we were a feudal state, which become a monarchy, which became a Constitution Monarchy, which seemingly has none of the advantages of a Monarchy or a Constitutional Republic, but all of the negative and detrimental effects of both. Democracy is Death to nation and state, or so it would seem. Let's not forget that the most powerful monarch in the world to date was Queen Victoria, who is the one who set about emasculating the power of the monarchy and replacing it with a passive and ineffectual Constitutional Monarchy. Which not only stood by and watched all the has occurred go on in silence, but waved it all on... Queen Elizabeth II is purported to have asked some of her leading courtiers back in the early 2000s "How long do we have?" The response was "50 years at best." The Monarchy was seemingly tacitly complicit in the replacement and genocide of its own subjects. Neither the existing political or social systems in the UK are seemingly fit for purpose, unless that purpose is our destruction. The Monarchy and existing political systems are in anyway able or willing to do what is required to not only stave off the extinction of native population and culture, but to preserve where possible and enhance where necessary anything of actual meaning, worth or value, other than to benefit themselves and the agendas that they seem to serve.
I want to be wrong, but I can't help thinking the last election strengthened the 'consent' argument. The political parties' mask was off in a way it had never been before. Yet, even with an electorally credible anti-immigration party on the ballot (Reform), 83% of those who voted did so for pro-immigration parties.
Another excellent article, anyway. The chronologically-presented data alongside the parties' duplicitous claims is chilling.
Yes and no. Don't forget the turnout was a historical low, I believe that there was only one other recorded lower turnout, which had reasons other than voter apathy and dejection, which was the main and openly acknowledged reason. A lack of real alternatives or representation for a majority of voters. Even Reform wasn't able to motivate the majority of voters to participate in the elections, most didn't bother.
The low turnout, which gave Liebore a super-majority is still hardly a popular mandate, as has been stated and acknowledged by a variety of commentators, officials and even the MSM and alternative media here and abroad.
I'm afraid Reform and Farage our not our saviours, no matter what they claim and how well intentioned their members and representatives may be. They are controlled opposition. Reform arent even set-up as a political party, but as a Ltd company with Farage and Yusuf being the two shareholders. Farage will do as he's always done. Declare victory in some self-serving and opportunistic manner and cut and run, leaving everyone else playing the fiddle on the deck of the Titanic. True representation hasn't come to the fore yet and entered into the zeitgeist of nation. The closest they I can see is of a truly nationalist and traditional political party is The Heritage Party of Scotland, who have expanded their mandate to England and possibly the rest of the D-UK. I hope that they are "the real deal" and if such is the case, I wish them "The Best of British!"
I don't draw any comfort from the low turnout. If people are disgusted with what's on offer they can turn out and spoil their vote. It doesn't take much effort. If they don't turn out at all that DOES suggest apathy.
And then there's the uncomfortable fact that 60% of the electorate was not completely disgusted with what was on offer in 2024, if one can judge by the fact that they voted.
I'm under no illusions about Reform!
You're missing the point of apathy and dejection and the behavioural affects that they have upon people. In effect most people are demoralised in some form or other. They know that the game is rigged, which it is. As Alexander Solzhenitsyn wrote about the politicians of the Soviet Union. "They're lying, we know that they are lying. They know that we know that they're lying and yet still they lie..." it's the same thing effectively in the UK and much of the West. Elections are rigged, the Systems are rigged any dissidents can't get traction or power and if by some chance they do somehow gain some positions of power or influence the bureaucrats and autocratics throughout the various systems will neutralise and marginalise them, so that they cannot effect any real lasting change. The system snaps back into place and reasserts itself no matter who allegedly has their hands on the levers of power, influence and authority.
Various academics, commentators and politicians for decades have stated how unfair and rigged the two party first past the post system is. Not that it's any better anywhere else!?
Reform won more votes than any single party, yet achieved the least amount of seats and therefore power and influence. The electoral ballot system is particularly biased to favour established large well funded parties with huge media coverage. Reform in part was a protest vote. Nobody believed that they could or would win many if any seats, no matter the turnout or percentage of the population that voted for them. I voted for Reform as a protest vote to upset the applecart and stick my fingers up at the establishment. I wasn't going to vote originally, as so many didn't and for the same reasons, There was no-one really representing me who would be able to gain sufficient power and influence as to be able to effect reap positive and lasting change for the native people of these islands and do what needs to be done here above and beyond all else.
Most people know this even if they can't articulate it. By voting we legitimise a dishonest, rigged and fraudulent electoral and political system which is actively hostile and detrimental to the native peoples and cultures of Great Britain and the British Isles. In effect voting is just choosing which cheek of the Ogre's arsehole gets to crush you? So why would people bother to even turn up and spoil their vote? Why bother, why waste your limited time and give them legitimacy, even if its the thinest veneer, that's all that they need and require.
It's still participating in an illegitimate, rigged game that's intentionally set against you? The only rational way to win a rigged game is by not participating in it and doing other things that objectively gain tangible benefits for you and yours.
There is of course a counter argument. By not voting you reinforce the activists, politicians and elites false views and opinions that they know best and are correct. However, this in itself is a false narrative. The activists, politicians and elites, don't care what anyone else thinks, believes or wants. They are parasites, they only care about what they perceive benefits them, and they've got no qualms or compunction in lying openly to your face, or even being honest. They hold everyone who isn't them in utmost loathing and contempt. The state and its institutions are now and have been for some decades now, the enemy of the nation, being the native people and their culture, traditions and beliefs, which the state is actively seeking to not only denigrate, marginalise and replace, but to utterly destroy and genocide. That's not an unintended consequences. It is the intention. Though not the only agenda at work. There are many some are collaborating though ultimately competing for supremacy. But that's a different part of the whole holistic multi-variant plans and agendas being implemented. Those who are successful at whatever they do know "Never put all your eggs in one basket" and they don't. More than one thing can be true at one and the same time, incompetent people can and often are malicious, as they soon realise that they're not up to responsibilities and demands of the positions that they hold and live in fear of discovery, exposure and loss of position and the consequences that this may have upon them personally. So they seek to identify others whom they may be able to collude with in order to eliminate any potential threats. Like seeks like and certain activities attract certain kinds of people whom form monopolies and cartels in order to maintian and expand wealth, privileges, power and influence and maintain them.
One thing to always keep in mind is that during any election there are many issues that are being discussed, and whilst migration may be in the minds of some, voting decisions are made for other bread and butter issues. I have seen this time and again where an individual will voice very strongly that they are against mass immigration, yet come election day cast their vote for the very part who brings in the most immigrants. Doing so because of something to do with their job, or roads, how much they get paid etc.
Yes, it's amazing how easily people can be distracted from something so critical.
Bread and circuses... not to mention that the convenient lie is always more readily accepted, than an inconvenient truth.
This is excellent research-reporting. I kind of figured about all this migration treason & plot, but to see it laid out is kind of overwhelming. You need to make a book out of this. I'll buy as many copies as I can afford if you do. I see no reason this migration treason should ever be forgot.