I'm cynically amused to find that, at long last, a British politician and Cabinet Minister is acknowledging the harm done to that country by unrestricted immigration and asylum policies.
Things took a shocking turn in the United Kingdom on Tuesday when Home Secretary Suella Braverman pronounced that "multiculturalism" has failed. For context, the UK Home Office is essentially responsible for security in the country.
In a speech that hit on many of the issues plaguing Europe related to illegal immigration, Braverman explained how a lack of assimilation has led to ruin on the continent.
BRAVERMAN: Uncontrolled immigration, inadequate integration, and a misguided dogma of multiculturalism have proven a toxic combination for Europe over the last few decades. I'm not the first to point this out. In 2010, Angela Merkel gave a speech in which she acknowledged that multiculturalism had utterly failed, and then, French President Nicolas Sarkozy and British PM David Cameron echoed similar sentiments shortly thereafter.
Multiculturism makes no demands of the incomer to integrate. It has failed because it allowed people to come to our society and live parallel lives in it. They could be in the society but not of the society, and in extreme cases, they could pursue lives aimed at undermining the stability and threatening the security of our society.
Further, the UK will now be seeking big changes to asylum regulations that have previously represented an open door.
There's more at the link.
The Bible cites Jesus as warning us: "A prophet is not without honor except in his own country, among his own relatives, and in his own house." One suspects that somewhere up there, the late Enoch Powell is nodding his head in grim agreement. In his (in)famous "Rivers Of Blood" speech on April 20, 1968, he prophetically warned of precisely such a danger in/to the United Kingdom.
Here is a decent, ordinary fellow Englishman, who in broad daylight in my own town says to me, his Member of Parliament, that the country will not be worth living in for his children. I simply do not have the right to shrug my shoulders and think about something else. What he is saying, thousands and hundreds of thousands are saying and thinking – not throughout Great Britain, perhaps, but in the areas that are already undergoing the total transformation to which there is no parallel in a thousand years of English history.
. . .
Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad. We must be mad, literally mad, as a nation to be permitting the annual inflow of some 50,000 dependents, who are for the most part the material of the future growth of the immigrant descended population. It is like watching a nation busily engaged in heaping up its own funeral pyre. So insane are we that we actually permit unmarried persons to immigrate for the purpose of founding a family with spouses and fiancées whom they have never seen.
. . .
For reasons which they could not comprehend, and in pursuance of a decision by default, on which they were never consulted, [the existing British population] found themselves made strangers in their own country.
They found their wives unable to obtain hospital beds in childbirth, their children unable to obtain school places, their homes and neighbourhoods changed beyond recognition, their plans and prospects for the future defeated; at work they found that employers hesitated to apply to the immigrant worker the standards of discipline and competence required of the native-born worker; they began to hear, as time went by, more and more voices which told them that they were now the unwanted. On top of this, they now learn that a one-way privilege is to be established by Act of Parliament; a law which cannot, and is not intended to, operate to protect them or redress their grievances, is to be enacted to give the stranger, the disgruntled and the agent provocateur the power to pillory them for their private actions.
. . .
The other dangerous delusion from which those who are wilfully or otherwise blind to realities suffer, is summed up in the word "integration." To be integrated into a population means to become for all practical purposes indistinguishable from its other members ... But to imagine that such a thing enters the heads of a great and growing majority of immigrants and their descendants is a ludicrous misconception, and a dangerous one.
We are on the verge here of a change ... we are seeing the growth of positive forces acting against integration, of vested interests in the preservation and sharpening of racial and religious differences, with a view to the exercise of actual domination, first over fellow-immigrants and then over the rest of the population.
. . .
As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding. Like the Roman, I seem to see "the River Tiber foaming with much blood".
That tragic and intractable phenomenon which we watch with horror on the other side of the Atlantic but which there is interwoven with the history and existence of the States itself, is coming upon us here by our own volition and our own neglect. Indeed, it has all but come. In numerical terms, it will be of American proportions long before the end of the century.
Only resolute and urgent action will avert it even now. Whether there will be the public will to demand and obtain that action, I do not know. All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
The full text of Mr. Powell's speech may be found here.
Powell was accused of racism, vilified, and condemned by almost all professional politicians. However, the ordinary people of Britain strongly supported him, and he won re-election with a greatly increased majority in his constituency. History, of course, has proven him to be correct - but few contemporary politicians will admit that. It's not politically correct to do so. Facts no longer matter in this Brave New World - only the ruling, approved narrative.
I'm an immigrant myself. Obviously, I have no problem with legal - I stress, legal - immigration. However, that should be accompanied by a responsibility, on the part of the immigrant(s), to assimilate into the culture and society of their new country. I've done so, and am very proud to be an American citizen. I stand for the values propagated by our Founding Fathers, and I support 100% the perspective of the late President Theodore Roosevelt on what it means to be an American.
There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism. When I refer to hyphenated Americans, I do not refer to naturalized Americans. Some of the very best Americans I have ever known were naturalized Americans, Americans born abroad. But a hyphenated American is not an American at all. This is just as true of the man who puts ‘native’ before the hyphen as of the man who puts German or Irish or English or French before the hyphen. Americanism is a matter of the spirit and of the soul. Our allegiance must be purely to the United States. We must unsparingly condemn any man who holds any other allegiance. But if he is heartily and singly loyal to this Republic, then no matter where he was born, he is just as good an American as anyone else.
The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities, an intricate knot of German-Americans, Irish-Americans, English-Americans, French-Americans, Scandinavian-Americans or Italian-Americans, each preserving its separate nationality, each at heart feeling more sympathy with Europeans of that nationality, than with the other citizens of the American Republic. The men who do not become Americans and nothing else are hyphenated Americans; and there ought to be no room for them in this country. The man who calls himself an American citizen and who yet shows by his actions that he is primarily the citizen of a foreign land, plays a thoroughly mischievous part in the life of our body politic. He has no place here; and the sooner he returns to the land to which he feels his real heart allegiance, the better it will be for every good American. There is no such thing as a hyphenated American who is a good American. The only man who is a good American is the man who is an American and nothing else.
One can only look at the current invasion of aliens across our southern border and ask whether any of them have that understanding of why they're coming here, or any intention of conforming to it. I suspect you know the answer to that as well as I do . . . but who among our politicians will come out and say it?
Where is our Enoch Powell? Where is our Theodore Roosevelt?