Search This Blog

Tuesday, 28 December 2010

A Blog for British Nationalism: More about multiculturalism

More about Multiculturalism 

Whatever we are told by the mass media, there is nothing wrong with wanting Britain to remain an ethnically British country. Wanting to live in a country with your racial brethren is as natural as wanting to live in a home with your own family, and no amount of multiracial propaganda is going to change that. In the last ten years, approximately 600,000 White people have left multiracial London for somewhere Whiter. The simple truth is that different races do not wish to live together – they never have done; they never will do.

There are probably a few individuals who would be perfectly happy if they were the only white person left in the whole country – but the majority do not feel that way. After Enoch Powell gave his famous 'Rivers of Blood' speech on immigration and race in 1968, 74% of the population agreed with his views – yet he was still removed from Heath’s shadow cabinet. Politicians have transformed our country against the wishes of the people. We were never asked whether we wanted to turn Britain into a multiracial country, and if we had been asked, we would have said no.

In London, one in four schoolchildren do not speak English as their first language. ‘Red Ken’ may be saying that this is what makes London such a great city, but who wants to send their child to a school filled with asylum seekers who cannot even speak English? Certainly not the wealthy middle class ‘liberals’ who, despite paying lip service to the idea of multiculturalism, almost always live as far away from our ‘vibrant’ and ‘enriched’ inner cities as possible. Invariably, those who lecture us all on the meaning and significance of race and the ‘benefits’ of multiculturalism are those who live furthest away from those multicultural parts of the country on which they lavish so much praise.

‘Race means nothing’

There are some who claim that race doesn't even exist, and that ‘skin colour is the only difference’. I have very little interest in science (and don’t consider scientific arguments for racial awareness to be the most effective), so I won't go into detail about racial differences here, but it's a fact that a DNA test can identify someone's race quite easily.

If there aren't average differences between the races, what explains Black athletic success? Why do Aborigine Australians generally have the best eyesight even when bought up in westernised homes? Why is it that Blacks have higher levels or testosterone? Why are Black babies born an average of one week earlier than white babies? Why do Black people have quicker reflexes? Why do Blacks have larger sex organs? Why are Black people at a much higher risk at getting AIDS? Why do Black children reach puberty earlier? Why is it that Black children start walking at 11 months, white children at 12 months, Orientals 13 months? Why is it that different races react differently to alcohol? Why have personality tests consistently found that Orientals are more cautious and less aggressive than other races? Why is the Black illegitimacy rate so high? Why is it, for example, that individuals whose ancestors evolved in South Asia but who were themselves born in the UK have a 40% higher risk of coronary heart disease and diabetes than do whites? Why is it that Oriental Asians have an average IQ of 106, Whites of 100, Southern Asians of slightly less than Whites, and Blacks of less than 88 in Britain? (See Race, Behavior and Evolution by J.P. Rushton)


It is claimed that our football team would be much worse if not for our Black players. This is probably true - although we never seem to win anything anyway, and the one time that we have won something (1966) we had an all-White team. But I think it’s ironic that those who say that having black players improve our football team - surely an admission that black people have a genetic advantage in competitive sports such as football - are often the same type of people who claim that race doesn’t even exist. And why is it that multiculturalists always point out the racial composition of our sports team if it is multiracial, but are silent if it is not?

To be honest, I dislike the fact that Black people can represent my country in sport. It's not that I dislike Blacks or anyone else, but what is the point in a national team if we are represented by people who clearly aren’t English? Although, I can assure any Searchlight readers that I have no problem with David Beckham or Wayne Rooney being in the team!


Another argument for non-White immigration is that we now – thanks to ‘diversity’ - have many different types of restaurants. But it’s not much of a consolation when you consider that Whites will be a minority in Britain within my lifetime. If Tony Blair was to say 'Yes, we are going to flood Britain with asylum seekers, but don’t worry because you might get a few new restaurants if you’re lucky', nobody would welcome it. That’s why, when politicians talk about immigration, they usually tell us about the ‘need for control’, rather than explain why they’ve already bought in millions of people from the third world, and why they intend to continue to do so (albeit with some sort of ‘control’ to prevent the natives waking up and realising what’s really going on). Even Ken Livingstone wouldn’t consider getting an authentic Indian restaurant in every town a government priority. Anyway, we had Indian restaurants in Victorian times, and our population wasn't very ‘diverse’ back then. And surely we’ve got enough restaurants already; we don't need any more, thank you.

Problems with ‘diversity’

Mono-racial nations, such as Iceland (which is 98% Icelandic), do not have the problems that we have. They don't have racist attacks, they don't have race riots or suicide bombings, they don't need positive discrimination, they don't need a Commission for Racial Equality, they don’t need their lottery money to be spent on projects promoting 'diversity' in hope of getting the races to get along with each other, they don't need anti-free speech race-hate laws, they don't need ID cards to stop illegal immigration and diffuse the terrorist threat, because they have a homogeneous population. 'Diversity' is not a strength of Britain, but homogeneity is certainly a strength of Iceland.

One last point: Given that Asian and African nations are far poorer than we are, and need far more help than we do, if immigrants are really doing such wonderful things for Britain, as the advocates of white dispossession (or 'multiculturalism', as they call it) insist they are, wouldn’t it be better if they would all return to their native lands and do wonderful things for their own people? Africa needs doctors and teachers far more desperately than we do, yet it is often so-called 'anti-racists' who are suggesting that we should have the right to steal them. I believe that all people should strive to improve their own country rather that emigrating to find an easier life.