What Is Racism In England?

The 'racist' double standard: how The English are made to feel guilty and "hateful" for loving their own Country, people and culture.

There is surely no nation in the world that holds "racism" in greater horror than do the English. Compared to other kinds of offences, it is thought to be somehow more reprehensible. The press and public have become so used to tales of murder, rape, robbery, and arson that any but the most spectacular crimes are shrugged off as part of the inevitable texture of British life. "Racism" is never shrugged off. Racism is, indeed, the national obsession. Universities and schools are on full alert for it, newspapers and politicians denounce it, churches preach against it, England is said to be racked with it, but just what is racism?

Dictionaries are not much help in understanding what is meant by the word. They usually define it as the belief that one's own ethnic stock is superior to others, or as the belief that culture and behaviour are rooted in race. When the English speak of racism they mean a great deal more than this. Nevertheless, the dictionary definition of racism is a clue to understanding what the English do mean.

Today, one of the favourite slogans that define the asymmetric quality of English racism is "celebration of diversity." It has begun to dawn on a few people that "diversity" is always achieved at the expense of the English, and never the other way around. Only when the English have been reduced to a minority has "diversity" been achieved.

Let us put it bluntly: To "celebrate" or "embrace" diversity, as we are so often asked to do, is no different from deploring an excess of Whites, remember the director general of the BBC ‘ The BBC is Hideously white’. In fact, the entire nation is thought to suffer from an excess of white people. Our current immigration policies are structured so that approximately 90 percent of our annual legal immigrants are non-white. The illegal immigrants that enter the country every year are virtually all non-white. It would be racist not to be grateful for this laudable contribution to "diversity." It is, of course, only White nations that are called upon to practice this kind of "diversity." It is almost criminal to imagine a nation of any other race countenancing blatant dispossession of this kind.

What if England was pouring its poorest, least educated citizens across in to India? Could anyone be fooled into thinking that India was being "culturally enriched?" What if one of the Indian states were losing its majority population to poor English whites who demanded that schools be taught in English, who insisted on celebrating April the 23^rd, Easter and Christmas, who demanded the right to vote even if they weren't citizens, who clamoured for "affirmative action" in jobs and schooling?

Would India  - or any other non-white nation - tolerate this kind of cultural and demographic depredation? Of course not. Yet Englanders are supposed to look upon the flood of Arabs, Far Eastern, Africans and Asians entering their country as a priceless cultural gift. They are supposed to "celebrate" their own loss of influence, their own dwindling numbers, their own dispossession, for to do otherwise would be hopelessly racist.

There is another curious asymmetry about English racism. When non- Whites advance their own racial purposes, no one ever accuses them of "hating" another group. Immigrants can join "civil rights" groups and can be activists without fear of being branded as bigots and hate mongers. They can agitate openly for racial preferences that can come only at the expense of English. They can demand preferential treatment of all kinds without anyone ever suggesting that they are "anti-white."

Here, then is the final, baffling inconsistency about English race relations. All non-whites are allowed to prefer the company of their own kind, to think of themselves as groups with interests distinct from those of the whole, and to work openly for group advantage. None of this is thought to be racist. At the same time, The English must also champion the racial interests of non-whites. They must sacrifice their own future on the altar of "diversity" and co-operate in their own dispossession. They are to encourage, even to subsidise, the displacement of an English people and culture by alien peoples and cultures. To put it in the simplest possible terms, English people are cheerfully to slaughter their own society, to commit racial and cultural suicide. To refuse to do so would be racism.

Of course, the entire non-white enterprise in England is perfectly natural and healthy. Nothing could be more natural than to love one's people and to hope that it should flourish.  Arabs, Asians, Africans and others are doubtless astonished to discover that simply by setting foot in the England they are entitled to welfare preferences over native-born English, but can they be blamed for accepting them? Is it surprising that they should want their languages, their cultures, their brothers and sisters to take possession and put their mark indelibly on the land? If the once-great people of a once-great nation is bent upon self-destruction and is prepared to hand over land and power to whomever shows up and asks for it, why should the immigrants complain?

No, it is the English enterprise in England that is unnatural, unhealthy, and without historical precedent. English peoples have let themselves be convinced that it is racist merely to object to dispossession, much less to work for their own interests. Never in the history of the world has a dominant people thrown open the gates to strangers, and poured out its wealth to foreigners. Never before have a people been fooled into thinking that there was virtue or nobility in surrendering its heritage, and giving away to others its place in history. Of all the races in England, only the English have been tricked into thinking that a preference for one's own kind is racism. Only the English are ever told that a love for their own people is somehow "hatred" of others.

What the English are being asked to do is therefore utterly unnatural. They are being asked to devote themselves to the interests of other races and to ignore the interests of their own. This is like asking a man to forsake his own children and love the children of his neighbours, since to do otherwise would be "racist."

What then, is "racism?" It is considerably more than any dictionary is likely to say. It is any opposition by the English to official policies of racial preference for non-whites. It is any preference by the English for their own people and culture. It is any resistance by the English to the idea of becoming a minority people. It is any unwillingness to be pushed aside. It is, in short, any of the normal aspirations of people-hood that have defined nations since the beginning of history - but only so long as the aspirations are those of English.