Seeing Nick Griffin on Question Time determined me to write the following:

In that debate he referred to the english natives of this isle as being the aboriginals of this isle, which I found an important point, the bit about telling a maori he wasn’t a maori, as being rude was actually pretty salient, the fact is British people should not be prejudiced against, in terms of claiming our own identity as a right, in case it offends recently naturalised immigrants. Also nicks claim that immigration was an experiment, and that the class group it was acted upon had no say in, is also accurate, unless you count people getting to vote in a different set of middle to upper class duffers in, once every four years as a form of democracy, personally I don’t, democracy has not really expanded in quality for the last 70 years, pretty poor considering the technological evolution in that time.

Bonnie Greer (A known beeb favourite, ethnocentric black feminist who is often hauled out of there narrow politically correct little black book to represent us on the Question Time panel) started banging on in her adopted middle class academic accent, there was no such thing as a native british person, at one point trying to assert that all humanity was african because of genetic science that informs us so evolutionarily, were all descended from tribes that left africa etc , although this does have scientific merit it has little merit to the british today, she then spouted some duff science that the only true british person was cromagnon man, who had been wiped out, or some such other witter. This was a rather lame intellectual attack on Mr Griffin, and most on the panel and in the audience seemed to lazily beat up on him. Of Course Nick laid himself open to this intellectual berate-ment by trying to assert british identity back to some crazy period of time just post ice age, which was im afraid, a pretty unsound assertion. Sadly … Though … Nick Griffin, has the will to stand up and defend his own cultural identity, he does not yet possess enough intellectual prowess to shoot down this panel of middle class and middle weight intellectual snobs arrayed around him. Which is a huge shame as actually hes carrying quite an important cultural ball for the native man, as to whether the native rather than the recent arrivals, get a chance to have a proper debate on further and future immigration, denied to us so far, whereas the usual parade of middle to upper class simpering politicos on the panel, jack straw et al, whove no loyalty to the concept of nativity or identity, are as usual prepared, to lie, kiss and please any ass in the ugly mob, that will vote to get them re-elected. and will sharp elbow any competitor to reach first place at the I’m the most hyper politically correct person in the camp, so desperate to please everyone they fail to recognise that by that “lack of stance” they actually cannot offer to please any group at all.

Bonnie though feeling more smug was being equally thick in her class based intelectual snobberistic pronouncements, and more than rude by suggesting that nick griffin needed to read some books she had read. She thinks of herself as the superior intellect, her middle grade intellectuality is mainly used as a form of class identification, and she needs to more thoroughly question the propaganda and literature she reads, and classes as defacto history or knowledge, as probably when the mainly foreign descended population of britain reads their textbooks in 40 years time the mantra will probably be that britain never had at any point a native population and that it always thrived off immigration, which would be painting an agenda rather than an accurate history. The truth can never be discerned by reading the words, of the only class that had the power to write the history. Whichever background she has, my pronouncement from her voice would be that of middle to upper class english background regardless of her skin colour, and if not she has certainly pursued to aspire into that class area with her accent, which is aimed a pitch above clarity into slight but not to overt plummyness. Which of course all immigrants on entry into this country are free to aim for whichever class group they choose, thereby being more socially mobile, whereas often the lower classes, have often been propagandised into identifying with their own class backgrounds, which can often lead to a lack of social mobility. Something the modern middle class powerfull have little conception of at all. Though the upper class feudally descended understand this concept very well as they used it to their own advantage, to obtain their feudal control in the first place, the us and them culture has often been manipulated.

Truth is this nearly all cultural nationalistic and religious identity beliefs, are a form of psychological virus, usually insinuated into a population through propaganda, by groups with agendas of population control.

And in Bonnie’s case she wore on that program a little bracelet of red gold and green ? least it appeared to be, I beleive it was ? and that in and of itself is a sign of propaganda of the psychological virus that is called african-caribbeanism (nee : afro-caribbeanism a now politically and to be truthfull semantically incorrect popular mispronunciation which to all extents and purposes became the term to represent this population group circa 1950-2008), which was in fact was a psychological nationality virus invented by the british by importing african slaves to work on plantations on those caribbean islands in turn wiping out the other psychological cultural virus that was already represented by the native population of those islands at that time, the native Taino indians, and replacing and merging that psychological virus into a new one called african caribbean culture. Throughout history cultural psychological virus’s of every shape and identity have come and gone been merged and extincted and survived. But the main populations to have been eradicated throughout history are relatively small populations by larger ones or undisturbed populations by ones that have developed immunity to the diseases, initially transmitted by the trading internationalistic cultures, in fact small island populations are more prone to this kind of extinction than others, presumably because under attack or population competition, they have fewer places to go and have cultural investment in being where there at, and have not developed immunity to disease in the way that trading nations have.

In a way the issue is the cultural and breeding war being waged by the internationalist and mobile emigrant turned immigrant populations versus the static native populations of the world. In truth there is much advantage in being mobile and moving where there is most benefit to live.

None the less the dogma that creates any cultural identity, generally only requires a couple of hundred years worth of propaganda to be fully established in a population.

Things worth noting is that in the 1940’s british self identity was kind of, at an all time high, we had a relatively large period of stability and un-invaded peace in which to affirm and truly believe in our own identity, In a way it was probably this over developed sense of security in our own self identity that probably led to our undoing immigrationally, as we were so confident of our identity I don’t think we perceived it could be so easily undone in such a short period of time. It is this period of stability and peace that really defines that sense of britishness we feel the loss of today, and that britishness which initially served as an attraction to immigrants in the first place. And this is the debate today as to how much of this identity we are prepared to give up to make the recently immigrated populations feel comfortable. In fact this debate is mainly to be considered by that part of britain known as england, because the majority of this immigration has occurred in england, and the middle and south of england in particular containing the most densely populated immigration centres, which is where the problems if any will occur.

so if we take the presumption that our culture was very strongly established in the 1940’s, to such an extent that we had sold it as a brand around the world culturally, and to our empire at that time. Now post the 1950’s we slowly devolved control of our empire to its native populations, but allot of the control we had gained in empire, had been attained by middle to upper class internationalist power mongers, offering these people around the world the concept that they were part of the british brand of empire and to a large extent had rights equal to those of native british citizens in the empire, including often the right of residence in the mother country, this promise was made by one class group, but the resulting immigrational cost in these isles was paid by another class, the common class, who though had benefited from empire did not see the major benefit, nor did realise they would be paying the cost of this empire citizenship scheme, by having to compete with immigrants on an equal footing for resources in their own land.

This has been the major problem with immigration in that it was a policy agreed on by the middle to upper classes empowered set and paid for by the lower class disenfranchised set. Secondly the first wave of empire based immigration was amplified by unforeseen decreases travel costs, and a second wave of increased immigration in the seventies, as a vain excercise to bolster our population for economic reasons , in attempt to remain a world power and mirror the americans though foolishly, in their immigrational policy’s, being that america was a country founded on immigration in the first place, whereas Britain was not. This has recently been bolstered by a third wave immigration by the open door policy from europe, which has left the native population heavily diminished in all the major urban centres. Most importantly it was our kind of immigrational policy set in the seventies that really knackered our cohesion as a culture, rather than the immigration itself, because we went for a kind of segregational multi-culturalism, whereby there was no pressure on immigrants to adhere to our cultural tenets. The fifties based immigration from the carribbean isles, at least these people wanted to join british culture and to speak the language, and had respect for the tenets and ideals of the culture they were joining.

Also our over ammicability of nature led us to over prioritise the welfare of minority populations at the expense of british majoritys sense of unity as a culture, meaning that some councils are now so representative of foreign populations that certain dense cultural population centres will print street signs in foreign languages, in the UK, which condsidering how successfully we have managed to export our language culture is really quite absurd.

For any culture it is vitally important to retain social cohesion and unity, for only by this unity does a country progress, and sadly not only have we diluted our cultural tenets, with an unchecked immigration policy, now dogmatically set in stone by a succession of unquestioning governments who have deliberately diluted any attempts to create a cohesive culture in this isle or debate on the immigration issue, by espousing a constantly propagandised media inflated mantra of over positivity toward segregative multi-culturality on the one hand, and affirming to us that british identity means so little on the other, it can be conferred by the stamp of a piece of paper in an office, to convert what 30 seconds ago was a foreign person into a british person, with all the same rights as a person who’s family has suffered hundreds of years worth of propaganda about identity being a valuable thing, and even sacrificed loss of familial life in wars etc. Worse this person who by this act becomes a british person with the same rights, does not even have to subscribe to any of this cultural propaganda themselves, and can live in almost segregational way without necessarily even bothering to even learn the language. No wonder the native poor population are tired of this, for the government cannot have it both ways, they cannot fill us with country based propaganda on the one hand, and expect us to fight for our country etc, and then other way try to replace the working poor on the other with more compliant foreigners for economic reasons on the other, who do not even have to subscribe to that same dogma ? Truth is the segregative part of multi-culturality we should never have accepted as there was no need to ? I’m sure we still would have plenty of immigrants who wished to come even as the americans did, had we made them to subscribe to our cultural propaganda and learn the language. And if they wished not to sign up to that, they could instead been under a temporary stay economic migrant basis. As the spend power of the pound back in the country of origin has been if the truth is admitted a powerfull amplifier in the migrational scenario, whether economic or asylum seeker based migration. Ultimately is is the emigrants desire for a better life that really leads them deserting the psychological virus indoctrinated in them from their origin country’s cultural propaganda, and to become an immigrant in another culture, and adopt or not, as the case maybe in britain, its cultural propaganda virus. Truth is that like virginity once youve kicked that culture virus to the curb once, I think it makes you more able to see the virus for what it is, but this cynicality about it can make you more hostile to those who hold dearly to it and remain natives, as their strength of faith in it can proportionally make you feel more of an outsider and threatened by it, thereby as an immigrant you have several paths, two being to adopt a fervent acolyte stance to your new cultural identity, or attempt to diminish the meaning in the identity of the culture you’ve joined to feel less threatened by it, Bonnie Greer probably choosing the latter on a transatlantic intellectualist snobbery ticket. Whichever way the stay at home native has kind of lost out in culture today, in the sense the powerful tend to be culturally inert international globalists.

We have also damaged our social unity as a culture, with an almost now feudal, hyper money orientated, market led for the sake of it culture of pure economics, which has also now been revealed as false economics, of a debt laden massive disparity of wealth culture, who’s main pursuit appears to be the self vanity and entertainment and consumerism. Also these successive governments have successfully managed to throw away their reigns of cultural control into private corporate hands, such that we now no longer have any way of democratically affecting the future in this country through politics.

Only the financially and feudalistically self obsessed culturally inert internationalists, have and will survive this market based cultural revolution, in which all people are replaceable with people from elsewhere, and that cultural nationalist propaganda has been disposed of. Problem is the government can no longer ask the native population to respect them, as they have not repsected the idea of nation itself, and instead have gone out of their way to prop up other foreign psychological cultural and religious virus’s instead, this is a large betrayal. As far as I’m concerned if i’m to give up my british identity, and substitute it for a foreign euro centric one, then every other fucker has to give up their addiction to their psychological cultural heritage virus’s as well. Like nuclear stand-down, it should be initiated on all sides simultaneously to prevent paranoia on all sides. ie, If I ain’t allowed my culture no-one is allowed theres either. ie no jewishness, no indian-ness no christian nothing we drop the lot together stand down and become what we truly scientifically are, ie just plain old massively flawed and fucked up human beings, who love a good psychological delusion or two for entertainment purposes, and often eat propaganda for breakfast lunch and dinner and call it history and identity and strange abstract concepts like that etc.