The following is the unedited version of an exposé currently featured
in the 34th revised edition of Malleus
Maleficus, The Moonshine Memorandum. If you wish to report intrusiveness, racism or inaccuracies, please email
MalleusMaleficus@aol.com To make a formal complaint under IPSO rules
please contact IPSO directly at ipso.co.uk .
A new law is operating in Britain today. The good people of Albion
whisper only amongst
themselves, their heads tucked down in the knowledge of their own innate depravity – a terrible if alleged racism that, like the Original Sin, may be deplored but cannot be undone. Like the endangered white-headed duck,[1] they have all but submitted to the ruddy foreign invaders who proudly hold the stage. The cult of cowardly murder has its public apologists. And if there is a reason why at such times one feels like a person without a land, it is undoubtedly because at some point in the not-too-distant past we have ceased to be the defeaters of invincible Armadas, the ‘pugnacious and unconquerable bulldog race’. For rarely in the history of conquests can a surreptitious invasion have been more potentially threatening than that which was able to reach Anglo-Saxon genius and, we can scarcely doubt, part of the essential repertoire of Western cultural thinking, at its base in the sheltered English countryside.
themselves, their heads tucked down in the knowledge of their own innate depravity – a terrible if alleged racism that, like the Original Sin, may be deplored but cannot be undone. Like the endangered white-headed duck,[1] they have all but submitted to the ruddy foreign invaders who proudly hold the stage. The cult of cowardly murder has its public apologists. And if there is a reason why at such times one feels like a person without a land, it is undoubtedly because at some point in the not-too-distant past we have ceased to be the defeaters of invincible Armadas, the ‘pugnacious and unconquerable bulldog race’. For rarely in the history of conquests can a surreptitious invasion have been more potentially threatening than that which was able to reach Anglo-Saxon genius and, we can scarcely doubt, part of the essential repertoire of Western cultural thinking, at its base in the sheltered English countryside.
No
longer is this nation defined by the language and culture of its people alone. For whatever your view of it, a generation of immigrants has since contrived to present us with the ultimate absurdity: an
entire hemisphere held to ransom by racial confusion, cultural contradictions, ethnic
appeasement, colonial guilt and collective panic. Racism has been elevated to
the status of an international crisis. Spurious accusations of bigotry and
prejudice have lifted the lid on the highly divisive left-liberal race-relations industry, where a lynch-mob mentality fostered by a handful of
vindictive individuals holds the key to turning the green fields of England
into the mutually antagonistic clutch of ethnic ghettos whose only area of
agreement is racial paranoia and
loathing of the indigenes.
“Many of our (distinctly un-diverse) elite
political and media classes simply refuse to acknowledge the truth of
this”, says Trevor Phillips[2], former head of the
equalities commission. As indeed, integration cuts both ways. And yet, the
intimation “un-diverse” is an absurdity
given that this nation is being swamped
by the biggest wave of ill will since a tsunami scoured the east-coast of
Japan. Or, more to the point, by the impositions on your God-given freedom of
association. Indeed, these impositions
come at us daily now. They take the form of the progressively demented
strictures on language and expression seen in English institutions of learning,
that twisted, adolescent bureaucracy of terror, whose acolytes like to test the
limits of their freedom by being as abusive as possible to Jews and Englishmen alike – or, more perversely
even, the multiculturalists who feel an
obsessive compulsive need to self-censor, or to brand anyone averse to jihad an “Islamophobe.” To say nothing of the
self-censorship of the aforesaid “elite political and media classes”, who seem
all but prepared to sacrifice the freedom that
lies at the very roots of an English conception of individual liberty for a deal with the immigrant lobby as a political client group that defines itself in opposition to the liberal values of the West. And none more so than Sajid Javid, the communities secretary, who received the blunt reply that "Just speaking English will go a long way towards securing more opportunities,"[3] when he referred to "Our excluded" (sic) and "the need to feel more British." For I think it is fair to claim that the 'Excluded' beg to differ. Nearly half of them said they did not want to "integrate with non-Muslims in all aspects of life", preferring some separation in "schooling and laws". For the painful truth is that the British public is being every day put more at the mercy of her immigrants. And I say this with no malice whatsoever, but a nation's immigration policy should serve the physical foundation of an indigenous nation rather than accommodate tribal cultures that are often contemptuous of Western liberal values.
And here we come to the heart of the matter: Freedom of expression in the UK - with no First
Amendment security - is in a state of unprecedented disparagement, dragging the Mother of Nations from an historically pioneering enlightenment to a brainless PC-dictatorship. Or let me put it another way, you and I appear to be a lot more vulnerable to the charge of being, well, white, than we were barely a generation ago. Which is why it remains a bitter irony of the migratory movement as a whole that in granting no less than the freedom to live by the Enlightenment of which contemporary liberal democracy is the heir, the indigenous hosts have gradually been denying this
very freedom to themselves. For
on the critical matter of individual liberty
- the supreme protection invented by the English people against the
tyranny of the state - they have all but
suspended the social contract that has been evolved in the seventeenth century
by Hobbes and Locke. For here’s the question: who is being discriminated against now?
British society has been undergoing wrenching social changes. Indeed, it has taken this nation a long time to realize that they are a people who have lost their identity. Brexit, it has been said, was carried in large part by the so-called "left-behind" living in neglected communities, by people, in other words, who have lost ‘the country within themselves’ and can no longer regain it without. For the increasingly obvious truth is, that the modern democratic system has evolved into a them-and-us society, into two mutually destructive halves at the opposite ends of human civilization, each competing for the right to pursue their own diminishing fragments of happiness.
lies at the very roots of an English conception of individual liberty for a deal with the immigrant lobby as a political client group that defines itself in opposition to the liberal values of the West. And none more so than Sajid Javid, the communities secretary, who received the blunt reply that "Just speaking English will go a long way towards securing more opportunities,"[3] when he referred to "Our excluded" (sic) and "the need to feel more British." For I think it is fair to claim that the 'Excluded' beg to differ. Nearly half of them said they did not want to "integrate with non-Muslims in all aspects of life", preferring some separation in "schooling and laws". For the painful truth is that the British public is being every day put more at the mercy of her immigrants. And I say this with no malice whatsoever, but a nation's immigration policy should serve the physical foundation of an indigenous nation rather than accommodate tribal cultures that are often contemptuous of Western liberal values.
And here we come to the heart of the matter: Freedom of expression in the UK - with no First
Amendment security - is in a state of unprecedented disparagement, dragging the Mother of Nations from an historically pioneering enlightenment to a brainless PC-dictatorship. Or let me put it another way, you and I appear to be a lot more vulnerable to the charge of being, well, white, than we were barely a generation ago. Which is why it remains a bitter irony of the migratory movement as a whole that in granting no less than the freedom to live by the Enlightenment of which contemporary liberal democracy is the heir, the indigenous hosts have gradually been denying this
No one speaks English, and everything is broken and my strength is soaking away.... |
British society has been undergoing wrenching social changes. Indeed, it has taken this nation a long time to realize that they are a people who have lost their identity. Brexit, it has been said, was carried in large part by the so-called "left-behind" living in neglected communities, by people, in other words, who have lost ‘the country within themselves’ and can no longer regain it without. For the increasingly obvious truth is, that the modern democratic system has evolved into a them-and-us society, into two mutually destructive halves at the opposite ends of human civilization, each competing for the right to pursue their own diminishing fragments of happiness.
[1]
“The English are dying.
The English are declining and they are declining fast.” – in the words of an
African immigrant. Ben Judah, This Is
London: Life and Death in the World City. Picador.
[2] An Inconvenient
Truth. The Sunday Times Magazine. April 10, 2016.
[3] Pauline Royston: Letters to the Editor. The Sunday Times
01.01.17
-------------------------------------------------------
Malleus Maleficus is an advocate of English liberal democracy, and the anonymous author of an
historiographic apology of the British Empire.
No comments:
Post a Comment