10 THINGS THEY DON’T WANT ANYONE TO KNOW

The Left would rather you didn’t hear a lot of things that until very recently were well known. They also don’t want you to know that there are truths that are inconvenient. They don’t want you to know many things because it would interfere with their building of the new Britain, the sunshine state of the future where racial prejudice is dead and we all live together in peace and harmony. The information you can’t get any more is wide and varied. Here are a few choice nuggets you won’t see cropping up in The Independent, on T4 or in a school textbook:
R—ists can be nice people too. Yep, it’s true. They can be the nicest people in the whole world. A million old ladies could testify to it for starters. Of course you have to accurately define a r-ist first so the shock of this statement doesn’t seem too much. If you define one as a hate-filled, evil, irrational, possibly violent, deeply ignorant person, then it is an oxymoronic statement. But if you define one as, well, a natural state to be, then it isn’t too bad. By natural state, I mean a human being who prefers the company of those like him; who likes to see justice and fairness in all walks of life (eg those who use the NHS have paid for it, as opposed to those who haven’t contributed a penny). Nowadays the assumption is if you say a single word that is r-ist you are Satan’s spawn. This is not the case. All sorts of other things come into play when assessing a person’s character. True, a r-ist may be a nasty person, but then probably would have been a nasty person anyway. And it’s action not speech that, particularly in this instance, is the most important factor. A perfectly civil person can have views that favour immigration controls, or not wish to sit on a train and be the only white person there. This is perfectly natural. The Left seek to suppress and deny natural feelings. That person could even have several black friends. How many thirtysomething London liberals tussle with themselves over this! ‘I can't say or even think anything against immigration’ they whisper to themselves. They curtail their own thought processes; they stultify their own intellect and curiosity. This is the result of the growth of the PC thought police.
Of the many people who have at one time enrolled in the BNP or the NF only a very small percentage are of the type of person that the media likes to portray. They are not necessarily skinheads or thugs. Many are perfectly normal, perhaps frustrated, perhaps romantic people who feel let down by the big political parties – Keith Joseph said as much in the ’70s. To demonise them displays a very narrow minded view of human nature.
Most races do not get on particularly well with each other. By listening to the liberal media you’d get the view that all other races except the British (actually, the English) are paragons of virtue and fairness, with not an ounce of prejudice. In anything, the reverse is more likely to be true. London’s melting pot is not a happy one. It’s a generalisation, but the Africans don’t like the Afro-Caribbeans, they also don’t like the Muslims, the Muslims don’t like the blacks either, and they don’t like the Sikhs or Hindus. The Turks don’t like the Greeks. The East Europeans don’t like the blacks, the blacks aren’t too keen back (even Tony Benn mentions this in his latest Diaries). And so on. London is a long way from that portrayed in the 1948 film London Belongs To Me or 1949’s Passport To Pimlico.
Next myth to be exploded: we have evolved socially in spite of rather than because of immigration. I touched on this before, but it’s worth repeating. In the last 50 years attitudes in Britain have changed to many things: class, abortion, homosexuality, women, the church. Generally speaking they have become more enlightened and are to be welcomed. If not one immigrant had entered our country in that time, it would have been exactly the same. Ah, but what about race, you might cry – surely we wouldn’t be as ‘progressive’ in our thoughts about that? Perhaps not. Perhaps we would have moved at a slightly slower pace in realising that not all other races were totally uncivilised. But even if we hadn’t - what harm would it have done? Because there’d be no foreigners here to be offended! The Independent wouldn’t be able to ram it down our throats every day how beastly we are to foreigners – because no one would care. We’re getting hypothetical – they are here, but if r-ism has been dampened, then it has in many cases been replaced by a more pernicious form of existence.
One of the benefits of immigration is said to be the wealth and variety of cuisine we now enjoy. And it is true, this is one of the major plus points of the inflow – we eat better now than we did. But much of this would have happened anyway. When Marks & Spencer’s food section was growing like wildfire in the ’80s, blessed by Mrs Thatcher, it was demand led. People were richer and becoming more adventurous. And so foodstuffs we had never tried before were imported for our delectation. Mass immigration has given us a little more, but it is the market that gave us most, and if not one immigrant had come here, our palates would still have expanded as much as our wallets have.
It is necessary for the Left to denigrate those who do not see things their way, particularly if they are extremely intelligent, and particularly if they are dead. So no wonder Enoch Powell gets a hard time from them. Read Simon Heffer’s biography of him, Like The Roman, to get a true idea of the man who was a professor of Greek at 21, went from being a private to a brigadier, could speak several languages fluently including Urdu, was a poet, biblical scholar, economist, cabinet minister and prophet. He spoke his mind with bravery and alacrity. He was simply one of the cleverest men ever born in Britain. Most of what he predicted has come true, not just on immigration. In economics and on the issue of Europe he was years ahead of anyone else. The Left love to portray him as a swivel-eyed fascist, but that cannot be squared with his voting in favour of the legalisation of homosexuality, his opposition to nuclear arms, his speaking out against the ill treatment of blacks in war-time or his assistance in helping a Pakistani family stay in Britain. (‘Hypocrite!’ you may cry, but as Enoch said, it’s all about the numbers.) He is not to blame for the demonization of immigration as a subject because of his ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech. In the years leading up to it he delivered many very similar speeches. The ‘notorious’, much-quoted passage was originally delivered in Latin, not English. It was only in the copy for the press that it was translated into English; this was the only thing Powell regretted about the speech. Powell was one of the most splendid politicians we have ever produced, with a brain the size of a planet. When the Left next rubbish him, learn about him, learn how much he knew, and wonder whether anything this erudite man uttered could not have truth in it.
Black people are not white people in different skin. Some years ago this statement would have been ridiculously obvious. You would have been laughed out of England for saying the opposite. Yet the media would have you believe this. Again, I’m not making claims for any sort of superiority, just that races and people are different. A few years back, Comrade Livingstone was behind an ad campaign that had white people computer-generated to have black skin and features, and vice versa. To anyone with a spark of individual thinking it was insulting to the intelligence. Sadly, individual thinking is not ubiquitous. If what the Left claimed was true then why would countries develop at different rates? Why does Britain have many thousand times greater GDP than African countries? Why do black people excel at certain sports? Why are there so many black footballers? And so few black chess players? Why were Shakespeare, Freud, Einstein, Brunel, Wilde, Darwin, Bernard Shaw, Orwell all white? This area of discussion is not one to go into now. But when anyone attempts to shed light on it, like Professor James Watson did, they are shot down by those who protesteth too much. All we need note now is that the world is full of varied and fascinating folk.
If you say you dislike a certain black person you may well be branded the R word. Yet you may very much like another black person. But don’t think that’ll be enough to get you out of jail. On the whole though, you may find certain characteristics of some ethnics not to your liking. Perhaps you may be an Englishman brought up on the virtues of being humble, being reserved, keeping to the law, being self-effacing. And you may look around and see that, for instance, black rappers tend to be anything other than these things. It’s a tricky one, it’s a fine line – do you dislike a person because of their characteristics, or just dislike them? At what point do the characteristics define the man? Philosophers may have to continue to argue this sort of thing out (Am I me? Or is my brain me?) and again, we just have to note that there are people we don’t care for because of their behaviour. They could be black, white or sky-blue pink. But a race difference is the biggest natural difference we have between humans, even more so than sex or age.
There are little things the Left don’t want you to know either. Like how many policemen it takes to keep the peace (or not) at the Notting Hill Carnival every year. They’d certainly prefer you not to know the cost of these policemen at the annual keep-the-pan-lid-on-the -boiling-water celebration. Then there are bigger things like: Britain was a nicer place without racial division, ghettos, kids with guns, drug-dealing, drive-by shootings, knifings, Islamic terrorism and honour killings. A bald statement, and of course some of these things went on before 1948, but there can be little dispute that the situation on the streets is more restless and uneasy than it was in the years before mass immigration took hold. Watch films from the ’40s and ’50s and ’60s, talk to older people (older people have not been as strangled by the speech clampdown as the rest of us, and although their views are generally demonised by the media – on certain subjects – they can give invaluable insights into bygone days), read reminiscences of, say, the East End by honest authors, trawl the internet for pertinent information. Good luck.