Thursday 14 June 2012

The treachery of the left-leaning Hampstead liberal

On 22 March 2013, the David Goodhart article, Why we on the Left made an epic mistake on immigration, adapted from his book, The British Dream, appeared in The Daily Mail.

This said:
"Among LEFT-LEANING ‘HAMPSTEAD’ LIBERALS like me... our instinctive reaction has been that... THE ONLY DECENT POLICY IS TO THROW OPEN OUR DOORS TO ALL and that THOSE WITH DOUBTS ABOUT HOW WE RUN OUR MULTI-RACIAL SOCIETY ARE GUILTY OF PREJUDICE. And that view — ECHOED IN WHITEHALL, WESTMINSTER AND TOWN HALLS AROUND THE COUNTRY — HAS BEEN THE PREVAILING IDEOLOGY, setting the tone for the immigration debate...

FOR 30 YEARS, THE LEFT HAS BLINDED ITSELF WITH SENTIMENT ABOUT DIVERSITY. BUT WE GOT IT WRONG... PARTS OF WHITE WORKING-CLASS BRITAIN HAVE BEEN LEFT FEELING NEITHER VALUED NOR USEFUL, BELIEVING THAT THEY HAVE BEEN DISPLACED BY NEWCOMERS NOT ONLY IN THE JOB MARKET BUT ALSO IN THE NATIONAL STORY ITSELF...

One of the liberal elite’s myths is that we are a ‘mongrel nation’ that has always experienced high inflows of outsiders. But THIS ISN’T TRUE. FROM 1066 UNTIL 1950, IMMIGRATION WAS ALMOST NON-EXISTENT (EXCLUDING IRELAND) — A QUARTER OF A MILLION AT THE MOST, MAINLY HUGUENOTS AND JEWS.

Post-World War II immigration has been on a completely different scale from anything that went before. THESE DAYS, MORE PEOPLE ARRIVE ON OUR SHORES AS IMMIGRANTS IN A SINGLE YEAR THAN DID SO IN THE ENTIRE PERIOD FROM 1066 TO 1950, excluding wartime...

A net immigration of around four million foreign-born citizens since 1997 has produced easily the most dramatic demographic revolution in British history. Yet there was no general discussion in the New Labour Cabinet of the day about who Britain wanted to let in and in what numbers; no discussion about how the country could absorb them without pressure on public services...

THERE HAS BEEN A HUGE GAP BETWEEN OUR RULING ELITE’S VIEWS AND THOSE OF ORDINARY PEOPLE ON THE STREET. This was brought home to me when dining at an Oxford college and the eminent person next to me, a very senior civil servant, said: ‘WHEN I WAS AT THE TREASURY, I ARGUED FOR THE MOST OPEN DOOR POSSIBLE TO IMMIGRATION [BECAUSE] I SAW IT AS MY JOB TO MAXIMISE GLOBAL WELFARE NOT NATIONAL WELFARE.’

I was even more surprised when the notion was endorsed by another guest, ONE OF THE MOST POWERFUL TELEVISION EXECUTIVES IN THE COUNTRY. He, too, felt global welfare was paramount and that HE HAD A GREATER OBLIGATION TO SOMEONE IN BURUNDI THAN TO SOMEONE IN BIRMINGHAM."
When we take our country back, ladies and gentlemen, you can rest assured David Goodhart will be required to name the elite traitors cited above. Once named, they will be arrested, charged with treason and found guilty.

I hope I'm still around to see the sentence carried out.

More here...

1 comment:

  1. I read the DM's puff-piece for Goodhart's book and felt like slapping him around the head with a wet fish. Quoting "a very senior civil servant", or "one of the most powerful tv execs in the country" doesn't do it for me.

    The man is just someone who saw an opportunity and sold himself to sell a book. Yes, I'd smack him with a mackerel.

    ReplyDelete