WE GOT A PROBLEM

If we had any sense, we'd smash down the Glastonbury border wall and bus in every single illegal migrant in Britain. Nothing will change until leftists experience the consequences of their opinions.

I've seen about a million versions of this tedious whataboutism. "Look! Look! White people can be horrific monsters too! Why are the usual suspects not condemning this? They must be WACIST!!" 1. Everyone did condemn this. However: 2. These monsters didn't deliberately target children of another race because they see them as subhuman. 3. The establishment didn't arrest the victims or their parents, smear them as liars or cover up their crimes "for the good of diversity". 4. Nobody reporting or commenting on these crimes was smeared as "racist" or "Islamophobic". 5. They didn't get more lenient sentences because of "cultural differences". 6. Their families and community don't condone these crimes. The outrage over the Pakistani Muslim child rape gangs isn't just about their crimes. It's about the British establishment - I don't just mean the state, I mean our society, our culture - covering up and enabling these crimes, and screaming "RACIST!" at anyone who mentioned them. The question is, why are people still making excuses, deflecting and minimising these crimes?

The reason Southport and the rape gang scandal are pivotal isn’t just because children were killed. Unlike America, Britain is a socialist country - we have a large, intrusive state and we surrender a huge amount of autonomy and resources to the state. The implicit contract is that the state will then do what’s best for us. This worked when Britain had established a homogenous, high-trust society with social codes that ensured everyone both had individual rights and contributed to the common good - whether that’s forming an orderly queue, returning a shopping trolley, or being kind to children instead of raping and killing them because your community sees them as infidel whores. Southport and the rape gang scandal reveal that this contract has been broken. The state won’t protect us. The reasons for this are even more disturbing. Britain previously suffered terrorism - the IRA killed hundreds of Brits. But the IRA were the enemies of the British state. Now the terrorists are on the same side as the state. Axel Rudakana’s reading material focuses on the oppression of black and "indigenous" people by white colonial Europeans. He declared the need for a "white genocide". Labour are beholden to far-left ideology that orders it to “abolish whiteness”, “decolonise”, and bring “social justice” to “white privilege”. To paraphrase the woke professors who celebrated girls being raped and killed in the Oct 7 attacks (and as Axel Rudakabana’s defence might posit) - what did y’all think these words meant? So the state is in the awkward position of being ideologically aligned with Axel Rudakabana. When the IRA was attacking Britain, Britain was a country. Now we’re “The Yookay” - a borderless economic zone with no national or ethnic identity. It’s a weird confluence of atheistic communism and neoliberalism. There’s no such thing as a “British” person - we’re all just interchangeable GDP generating nodes on an economist’s chart, and none of us have any claim to this country. To say we do is racist and nationalist. For decades now the state (I mean the “total state” - including the media, academia, Tories, big business and public sector establishment) has been ideologically committed to a credo that says “diversity is strength” and “multiculturalism is good”. The state has been frantically importing people who would be historically seen as not British as quickly as possible (the Muslim population of the UK almost doubled in the last decade). This worked well for a while as immigration tended to be lower numbers, higher value (eg Ugandan Asians) and more assimilable (Caribbean immigrants tended to be Christian and have similar values). But as the trickle became a torrent, we started sucking in millions of people with radically different values who formed separate communities. The idea that the children of migrants would “become British” turned out to be a lie, as second generation migrants often cling harder to identities to cope with alienation. And unlike their home countries - which usually strictly shut down any extremism - Britain is too soft, liberal and championing of multiculturalism to provide a corrective to any zealotry. Some would say the state has irresistible incentives to do this: - the Ponzi scheme of the economy can be kept going for another few years if we just import more people, any people; - the bargaining power of British workers can be broken by having an infinitely elastic labour market; - once settled, the imports will vote leftward, “curing” Britain’s resolute conservatism and maintaining the leftward lean of the establishment; - and many in the state still believe that these gang rapes and killings are just unfortunate bumps on the road to a multicultural utopia (a utopia that eludes Syria, Lebanon, the Balkans - but Britain! yes Britain will achieve it!). Meanwhile, the state protects its preferred “communities”. And the state protects itself, covering up its culpability and smearing anyone who dares peek under the veil as “far-right” or “racist”. The state’s social engineering has been obvious to some, but very effective. Even now, the left’s commentators and thought-leaders are hard at work, minimising what happened and questioning the incentives of anyone who looks at these crimes. I will undoubtedly be smeared as “far-right” for the words you’re reading right now. Getting back to the contract between citizens and state; while the state focused on protecting itself, it stripped away any structures that could have protected British girls as part of the “patriarchy” - chivalry, community spirit, politeness, natural justice - civil society was relinquished to the state, which replaced these social structures with state powers to police behaviour and speech. As the state grew in size and power, it used these laws as weapons to protect itself and attack its critics. People are now jailed in Britain for stickers or memes, or for understandable anger. Even now, Keir says the Southport killings happened not because his system brought a genocidal killer to Southport, but because of "a new type of online extremism". He’s pivoting away from the obvious to point the finger at a mythological “far-right”, a euphemism for his enemies. He’s cynically exploiting this incident to bring through rules to punish anyone who pushes back against his suicidal ideologies. He'll also clamp down on Amazon selling knives - which will be as effective at stopping terror as forcing an 80 year old woman to take off her slippers at the airport. The contract with the state is broken. The state won’t protect you or your family. In fact if the state perceives you as a threat, it will come after you. Just as the fathers of rape gang victims were targeted. Just as whistleblowers were targeted. Just as the victims themselves were targeted. If you want to see how it ends, look at Iran. In 1979 socialists marched alongside Islamists to overthrow the West-leaning Shah. Mojahedin-e-Khalq, a Marxist group, supported the Islamic leader Khomeini’s rise to power by spreading the message that he was the awaited 12th Imam returning from occultation. (It didn’t end well for the leftists btw - after the revolution, in six months close to three thousand leftists were killed by Islamists, with many more sent into exile or imprisoned). The only thing between the British far-left and their socialist utopia is the British people. So don’t expect Keir to take steps to defuse the situation. Which he could do - he could acknowledge people’s concerns, implement robust border control, ensure arrivals integrate, break down siloed cultures in Britain before they balkanise, cap migration, deport criminals. But it’s in the far-left’s interests that this gets worse.