Monday, April 1, 2013

What Drives the Left's Love of Mass Immigration


Peter Hitchens, brother of the late renowned Atheist Christopher Hitchens, has become surprisingly candid about what drove the move towards mass immigration in his home country of England in the late sixties, a transition that was mirrored in the U.S. and throughout most of Europe at the time.
When I was a Revolutionary Marxist, we were all in favour of as much immigration as possible. It wasn’t because we liked immigrants, but because we didn’t like Britain. We saw immigrants – from anywhere – as allies against the staid, settled, conservative society that our country still was at the end of the Sixties. Also, we liked to feel oh, so superior to the bewildered people – usually in the poorest parts of Britain – who found their neighbourhoods suddenly transformed into supposedly ‘vibrant communities’.  If they dared to express the mildest objections, we called them bigots.
He goes on to talk about how those in the intelligentsia like him lived:
Revolutionary students didn’t come from such ‘vibrant’ areas... When we graduated and began to earn serious money, we generally headed for expensive London enclaves and became extremely choosy about where our children went to school, a choice we happily denied the urban poor, the ones we sneered at as ‘racists’. 
He explains how they were/are isolated from the effects of mass immigration from the third world.
What did we know, or care, of the great silent revolution which even then was beginning to transform the lives of the British poor? To us, it meant patriotism and tradition could always be derided as ‘racist’. And it also meant cheap servants for the rich new middle-class... It wasn’t our wages that were depressed, or our work that was priced out of the market. Immigrants didn’t do the sort of jobs we did. They were no threat to us.

And what did they do if the people spoke out against these policies?
The only threat might have come from the aggrieved British people, but we could always stifle their protests by suggesting that they were modern-day fascists.
And while Peter Hitchens has woken up and owned up to his past actions, he warns most did not.
I have felt deeply, hopelessly sorry that I did and said nothing in defence of those whose lives were turned upside down, without their ever being asked, and who were warned very clearly that, if they complained, they would be despised outcasts... But, unlike me, most of the Sixties generation still hold the views I used to hold and... they will not change.
He talks about how they embraced mass immigration from Muslim countries, even though they knew they did did not hold the same ideals.

Even back in my Trotskyist days I had begun to notice that many of the migrants from Asia were in fact not our allies. They were deeply, unshakably religious. They were socially conservative. Their attitudes towards girls and women were, in many cases, close to medieval.  
Many of them were horribly hostile to Jews, in a way which we would have condemned fiercely if anyone else had expressed it, but which we somehow managed to forgive and forget in their case...
Many of these new arrivals, though we revolutionaries welcomed them, knew and cared nothing of the great liberal causes we all supported. Or they were hostile to them.
He goes on to talk about how this unholy allegiance still exists.
Many on the Left still lie to themselves about this. George Galloway, the most Left-wing MP in Parliament, owes his seat to the support of conservative Muslims. Yet he voted in favour of same-sex marriage.

He talks about how they used the demands from some immigrant groups, while ignoring others, in order to destroy traditional value systems.

Immigrants have been used by those who wanted to transform the country. They have taken the parts of them they liked, and made much of them. They have ignored the parts they did not like. 
One of the most striking characteristics of the majority of migrants from the Caribbean is their strong, unashamed Christian faith, and their love of disciplined education. 
Yet the arrival of many such people in London was never used as a reason to say our society should become more Christian, or our schools should be better-ordered. 
At that time, the revolutionary liberals were hoping to wave goodbye to the Church, and were busy driving discipline out of the state schools. So nobody ever said ‘Let us adapt our society to the demands of these newcomers’. They had the wrong sort of demands.

Compare that to movements in America where we are told we must offer government, business, and education services in Spanish or where it is acceptable for students to stomp on the name Jesus, but that same would not be true for the name Allah or Mohammed.

Even today, as evidence mounts that mass immigration is destroying the nation's culture, "it is still possible to smear any doubters as 'racist'," Hitchens writes.

It couldn’t have been more obvious that ‘race’ wasn’t the problem. The thing that made these new residents different was culture – language, customs, attitudes, sense of humour. 
Rather than them adapting to our way of life, we were adapting to theirs. 
This wasn’t integration. It was a revolution.
Yet nobody – especially their elected representatives – would listen to them,  because they were assumed to be... motivated by some sort of unreasoning hatred.
His conclusion is perfectly transposable to American society.
I now believe that the unreasoning hatred comes almost entirely from the liberal Left. Of course, there are still people who harbour stupid racial prejudices. But most of those concerned about immigration are completely innocent of such feelings.
The screaming, spitting intolerance comes from a pampered elite who are ashamed of their own country, despise patriotism in others and feel none themselves. They long for a horrible borderless Utopia in which love of country has vanished, nannies are cheap and other people’s wages are low.
What a pity it is that there seems to be no way of turning these people out of their positions of power and influence. For if there is to be any hope of harmony in these islands, then it can only come through a great effort to bring us all together, once again, in a shared love for this, the most beautiful and blessed plot of earth on the planet. 





1 comment:

Kyle Rohde said...

Interesting, and a little scary, stuff James - great post.