Showing posts with label racism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label racism. Show all posts

Thursday, 11 August 2011

Britain's liberal intelligentsia has smashed virtually every social value by Melanie Phillips


So now the chickens have well and truly come home terrifyingly to roost. The violent anarchy that has taken hold of British cities is the all-too-predictable outcome of a three-decade liberal experiment which tore up virtually every basic social value.

The married two-parent family, educational meritocracy, punishment of criminals, national identity, enforcement of the drugs laws and many more fundamental conventions were all smashed by a liberal intelligentsia hell-bent on a revolutionary transformation of society.

Those of us who warned over the years that they were playing with fire were sneered at and smeared as Right-wing nutters who wanted to turn the clock back to some mythical golden age.

Now we can see what they have brought about in the unprecedented and horrific scenes of mob violence, with homes and businesses going up in flames, and epidemic looting.

Clearly, there is some as yet unidentified direction and co-ordination behind the anarchy. But what is so notable and distressing is that, after the first day when adults were clearly involved, this mayhem has been carried out in the main by teenagers and children, some as young as eight.

The idea that they should not steal other people’s property, or beat up and rob passers-by, appears to be as weird and outlandish to them as the suggestion that they should fly to the moon.

These youths feel absolutely entitled to go ‘on the rob’ and steal whatever they want. Indeed, they are incredulous that anyone should suggest they might pass up such an opportunity.

What has been fuelling all this is not poverty, as has so predictably been claimed, but moral collapse. What we have been experiencing is a complete breakdown of civilised behaviour among children and young people straight out of William Golding’s seminal novel about childhood savagery, Lord Of The Flies.

There has been much bewildered talk about ‘feral’ children, and desperate calls upon their parents to keep them in at night and to ask them about any stolen goods they are bringing home.

As if there were responsible parents in such homes! We are not merely up against feral children, but feral parents.

Of course these parents know their children are out on the streets. Of course they see them staggering back with what they have looted. But either they are too drunk or drugged or otherwise out of it to care, or else they are helping themselves to the proceeds, too.

As David Cameron observed yesterday, there are clearly pockets of society that are not just broken, but sick.

The causes of this sickness are many and complex. But three things can be said with certainty: every one of them is the fault of the liberal intelligentsia; every one of them was instituted or exacerbated by the Labour government; and at the very heart of these problems lies the breakdown of the family.

For most of these children come from lone-mother households. And the single most crucial factor behind all this mayhem is the willed removal of the most important thing that socialises children and turns them from feral savages into civilised citizens: a father who is a fully committed member of the family unit.

Of course there are many lone parents who do a tremendous job. But we’re talking here about widespread social collapse. And there are whole areas of Britain, white as well as black, where committed fathers are a wholly unknown phenomenon.

In such areas, successive generations are being brought up only by mothers, through whose houses pass transitory males by whom these women have yet more children — and who inevitably repeat the pattern of lone and dysfunctional parenting.

The result is fatherless boys who are consumed by an existential rage and desperate emotional need, and who take out the damage done to them by lashing out from infancy at everyone around them. Such children inhabit what is effectively a different world from the rest of society. It’s a world without any boundaries or rules. A world of emotional and physical chaos.

A world where a child responds to the slightest setback or disagreement by resorting to violence. A world where the parent is unwilling or incapable of providing the loving and disciplined framework that a child needs in order to thrive.

Yet instead of lone parenthood being regarded as a tragedy for individuals, and a catastrophe for society, it has been redefined as a ‘right’.

Instead, it introduced the sexual free-for-all of ‘lifestyle choice’; claimed that the idea of the male breadwinner was a sexist anachronism; and told girls that they could, and should, go it alone as mothers.

This was the outcome of the shattering defeat of Tony Blair, in the two years or so after he came to power, at the hands of the ultra-feminists and apostles of non-judgmentalism in his Cabinet and party who were determined, above all, to destroy the traditional nuclear family.

Blair stood virtually alone against them, and lost.

One of these ultra-feminist wreckers was Harriet Harman. The other night, she was on TV preposterously suggesting that cuts in educational allowances or youth workers had something to do with young people torching and looting shops, robbing and leaving people for dead in the streets.

But Harman was one of the principal forces in the Labour government behind the promotion of lone parenthood and the marginalisation of fathers. If anyone should be blamed for bringing about the conditions which have led to these appalling scenes in our cities, it is surely Ms Harman.

And this breaking of the family was further condoned, rewarded and encouraged by the Welfare State, which conceives of need solely in terms of absence of money, and which accordingly subsidises lone parenthood and the destructive behaviour that fatherlessness brings in its train.

Welfare dependency further created the entitlement culture that the looters so egregiously display. It taught them that the world owed them a living. It taught them that their actions had no consequences. And it taught them that the world revolved around themselves.

Once, children would have been rescued from their disadvantaged backgrounds by schools which gave them not just an education but structure and purpose to their lives.

But the liberal intelligentsia destroyed that escape route, too. For its onslaught upon marriage — the bedrock institution of society — with a tax system that penalises married couples with a wife who doesn’t work, was replicated by an onslaught upon the understanding and very identity of that society. Instead of transmitting knowledge to children, teaching was deemed to be an attack upon a child’s autonomy and self-esteem.

Thus it was that teachers adopted the ‘child-centred’ approach, which expected children not only to learn for themselves but also to decide for themselves about behaviour such as sexual morality or drug-taking.

The outcome was that children were left illiterate and innumerate and unable to think. Abandoned to wander through the world without any guidance, they predictably ended up without any moral compass.

All of this was compounded still further by the disaster of multiculturalism — the doctrine which held that no culture could be considered superior to any other because that was ‘racist’.

That meant children were no longer taught about the nation in which they lived, and about its culture. So not only were they left in ignorance of their own society, but any attachment to a shared and over-arching culture was deliberately shattered.

Instead of forging social bonds, multiculturalism dissolved them — and introduced instead a primitive war of all against all, in which the strongest groups would destroy the weak.

Closely related to this was ‘victim culture’, in which all minority groups were regarded as victims of the majority. So any bad behaviour by them was excused and blamed on the majority.

In similar vein, all criminal wrongdoing was excused on the basis that the criminal couldn’t help himself, as he was the victim of circumstances such as poverty, unemployment, or as yet illusory cuts in public spending. The human rights of the criminal became seen as more important than the safety and security of his victims. Punishment became a dirty word. So the entire criminal justice system turned into a sick joke, with young hoodlums walking off with community sentences or Asbos which they held in total contempt.

Mr Cameron has declared that all those convicted of violent disorder in these riots will go to prison.

Really? Isn’t it more likely that they will end up on some community penalty which will see them taken on trips to Alton Towers to make up for their disadvantaged upbringing? This is the normal response of our sentimentalised and addle-brained criminal justice officials.

In short, what we have seen unfolding before our horrified gaze over the past four days in Britain is the true legacy of the Labour years.

The social and moral breakdown behind the riots was deliberately willed upon Britain by Left-wing politicians and other middle-class ideologues who wrap their utter contempt for the poor in the mantle of ‘progressive’ non-judgmentalism.

These are the people who — against the evidence of a mountain of empirical research — hurl execrations at anyone who suggests that lone parenthood is, in general, a catastrophe for children (and a disaster for women); who promote drug liberalisation, oppose selective education (while paying for private tutors for their own children) and call those who oppose unlimited immigration and multiculturalism ‘racists’.

And the real victims of these people ‘who know best’ are always those at the bottom of the social heap, who possess neither the money nor the social or intellectual resources to cushion them against the most catastrophic effects of such nonsense.

Britain was once an ordered society that was the envy of the world — the most civilised, the most gentle and law-abiding.

Can Broken Britain be put together again? David Cameron is commendably talking tough: but will he have the stomach for tough action?

Will he, for example, remove the incentives to girls and women to have babies outside marriage? Will he dismantle the concept of entitlement from the Welfare State? Will he vigorously enforce the drug laws? Will he end the kid-glove treatment of ‘victim groups’, and hold them to account for their behaviour in exactly the same way as everyone else?

Repairing this terrible damage also means, dare I say it, a return to the energetic transmission of Biblical morality.

Anyone heard from the Archbishop of Canterbury about the riots? Anyone care to guess what he will eventually say about them? Quite.

When church leaders stop prattling like soft-headed social workers and start preaching, once again, the moral concepts that underlie our civilisation, and when our political leaders decide to oppose the culture war that has been waged against that civilisation rather than supinely acquiescing in its destruction, then — and only then — will we start to get to grips with this terrible problem.

Until then, within the smouldering embers of our smashed and burned-out cities, we can only look upon the ruins of the Britain we have so dearly loved; the Britain that once led the world towards civilisation, but is now so tragically leading the way out.

Wednesday, 17 November 2010

Children told there is no such thing as being ‘white’

I don’t have a problem with other races or their cultures, but what I do have a problem with is not being allowed to be proud of my own.

In today’s Britain, and many other countries, it is politically incorrect be proud to be anything except white. Whites are no longer represented, crimes against whites go unreported and unpunished, and anti-white propaganda is spewed forth to our children. They are being brainwashed into believing their history and culture is something to be ashamed of. They refer to the Aryan race as being racist, Nazi and supremacist.

The word Aryan refers to the Caucasian race and originates from Sanskrit meaning honourable, respectful and noble, and originates from Hinduism in south Asia.

They tell us that we are all one race but that is not true. There are three main races: Caucasoid (white), Negroid (black), Mongoloid (asian), each determined by specific traits not only by the obvious, skin colour, but traits such as, blood analysis, body dimensions and skull size and shape as can be seen in the picture below.

Skull comparisons

And this brings me to why I am writing this article. The following video shows how teachers are demoralising and shaming white students from an early age by telling them there is no such thing as a white person, which is in my opinion racist child abuse.



Monday, 27 September 2010

250,000 children labelled as racist according to government figures


Today’s governments are forcing us to live in what they believe is a multi-cultural Eutopia, when in fact for many it is a waking nightmare. Immigration is at an all time high and in the very near future traditional British people will be phased out.

For 13 years, Labour has indoctrinated our children through schooling and they are now reaping the benefits with groups such as the UAF set up in our schools, colleges and universities to counter anyone who dares to go against the establishment’s mentality.

Or should that be lack of it?

While adults are hauled before courts on charges of racism, it is our babies, toddlers and youngsters who are now being singled out and re-programmed.

Staff in charge of pre-school children are being guided by Jane Lane’s book, ‘Young Children and Racial Justice’. The book guides nursery teachers to ‘be on alert for children using words such as ‘blackie’, ‘Paki’, ‘those people’ or ‘they smell’ and children reacting negatively to non-traditional foods by saying ‘yuk’.

Staff are also told that ‘no racist incident should be ignored. When there is a clear racist incident, it is necessary to be specific in condemning the action’ and even states that ‘babies cannot be ignored in the drive to root out prejudice’.

The National Children’s Bureau, which receives £12 million a year from government funded organisations and provides the guidance for nursery teachers and play leaders, wouldn’t look amiss in George Orwell’s ‘1984’.

Since when have babies and small children had the capability to be racist?

In recent weeks we have seen many reports of ‘racist’ incidents by children. Here are some examples:

A six-year-old called another child a ‘blackie’ during a playground game. The ‘victim’ didn’t complain but a playground supervisor did. The child was frog-marched to the office, parents contacted and the ‘crime’ logged on local authority files.

A nine-year-old girl calls another a ‘chocolate bar’. Her parents and head teacher are notified and the child is denied play time.

A girl calls a boy ‘white trash’ during a game of football and is entered into the system as a racist.

A teenage girl, who refused to sit with a group during class because they were talking in a foreign language, which she couldn’t understand, is arrested and spent three-and-a-half hours in a police cell. The teacher told her 'It's racist, you're going to get done by the police'.

A six-year-old girl is branded a racist for telling another she had chocolate on her face.

A Down Syndrome teenager, with the mental age of five, was arrested for assault and breach of the peace for pushing an Asian girl.

A nine-year-old boy was rushed to the head master and accused of being racist for saying ‘we’ve got to shoot the German army’ while playing a game with his Polish friend. The deputy head shouted at the boy and said, ‘That's racism’. The boy was forced to apologise to the whole class.

Teachers at a drama school wanting the children to focus on their racial identity and celebrate their differences were horrified when a white pupil asked whether white kids were allowed to be proud of their identity too.

In light of these reports it comes as no surprise that 250,000 three-year-olds have been labelled racist since the 2000 Race Relations Act.

The proof is there that government meddling has created this mess, they see racism where it doesn't exist, but in creating this mass racial hysteria they are playing a very dangerous game.


And it is only going to get worse.


Saturday, 7 August 2010

A conversation about race - what is racism.



The video link provided by Lex on the previous article was so good I decided to embed it here.

This video should be shown to everyone, in particular our children, so that when they are being brainwashed in schools they are already pre-armed with the truth.

And for those who say we all came from black people, this the video points out that a man and woman share more DNA than the different races.

Wednesday, 2 June 2010

The £18,000 council job you can't apply for if you are white


A council has been accused of discrimination after white people were barred from applying for two £18,000-a-year jobs.

Bristol City has created the management training posts for graduates in an effort to recruit more minority employees.

As a result the council will only accept applications from ethnic minorities for the two-year placements.

But this has prompted criticism from white graduates struggling to find work.

One jobseeker, who did not wish to be named, described the posts as 'totally racist'.

He said: 'I am a tolerant white person who has lived in Bristol for 27 years.

'I am searching for a job and stumbled across a job advertisement on Bristol City Council's website that I see as totally racist.

'I feel the job would be an excellent opportunity for me to make use of the skills and qualifications that I have acquired but, being white, I am excluded.

'Equal opportunities means giving everyone an equal chance to succeed rather than discriminating against people because of the colour of their skin.'

The two jobs are described on BCC's website as 'open to black and minority ethnic graduates' only, with applications closing on June 11.

Full story HERE

Thursday, 18 March 2010

'Indians-Only' job advert

A racism inquiry was under way last night after a firm advertised a £38,000-a-year job for someone 'preferably of Indian origin'.

The advert was placed on a popular recruitment website on behalf of a computer company based in Britain and India.

It stated: 'Minimum six years of experience in IT . . . The person should be a UK citizen with security clearance from the UK Government. Preferably of Indian origin.'

Spokesman Farhaan Majid for recruitment agency McGregor-Boyall Associates said: 'Some companies prefer to employ people of Indian origin because they are immediately available and don't mind moving.

'Often people in Britain . . . have mortgages and don't want to move.'

Full story HERE



Friday, 12 March 2010

BNP teachers will not be banned

Mr Balls said he wanted to know if the current situation struck "the right balance between allowing independent schools autonomy, operating in accordance with their ethos and values, and protecting the young people attending those schools from teachers displaying racist or intolerant views or behaviours that could be harmful".

He said there was "no place for racism in our schools" but that the report made it clear that incidences of teachers promoting racism were "extremely rare".

Mr Balls said last year he wanted this review to see if there were sufficient powers available "to keep racism and BNP activity out of schools".

British National Party leader Nick Griffin said at the time his members were victims of "political oppression".

Racist remarks

The NASUWT union, which has campaigned to have BNP members banned from schools, said it was disappointed by the review's findings.

General secretary Chris Keates said the report was "an opportunity that's been missed" to bring teachers into line with police and prison officers.

"The idea that a person who signs up to membership of the BNP can simply leave these beliefs at the school gate and behave as a 'professional' when they walk into school is risible, " said Ms Keates.

"The report is woefully inadequate and littered with contradictions."

She said too much attention was paid to the number of incidents in schools, saying "one incident is one too many".

Only six incidences of BNP membership by members of the teaching profession or governors were brought to the attention of the Department for Children, Schools and Families in six years, the report said.

It also found only nine incidents where teachers making racist remarks or holding racist materials had been referred to the General Teaching Council for England.

But the Association of School and College Leaders welcomed the findings.

Its general secretary Dr John Dunford said: "Of course people with racist views should not be working with young people in schools. However, it is much less clear that there should be a blanket regulation on the issue.

"The aim should be genuinely to challenge young people to think for themselves and to form their own opinions rather than to promote a particular ideology."

The review into independent schools will report in September.

BBC NEWS

Saturday, 27 February 2010

Black History Month? What about a WHITE HISTORY MONTH?


Take a look at this crap from the Guardian...

We write to protest at the slashing of funds for Black History Month by the London mayor (Boris Johnson criticised over slashing funding, 17 February).

In 2009 Boris Johnson praised BHM for its vital work in educating people about the "historical role and the huge contribution of African and Caribbean communities to the capital".

So why is he now cutting its funding to the bone? It is particularly ironic that this occurs in the run-up to the Olympics, with the GLA busy marketing London as a great world city.

We ask the mayor to immediately reverse this ill-judged decision and to restore BHM's funding.

Professor Barbara Taylor (Raphael Samuel History Centre, University of East London)
Dr Matt Cook (Raphael Samuel History Centre, Birkbeck, University of London)
Prof Stuart Hall (Emeritus, Open University)
Sarah Waters (writer)
Prof Catherine Hall (University College London)
Prof Alun Howkins (University of Sussex)
Prof Jerry White (Birkbeck, University of London)
Prof Cora Kaplan (Queen Mary University of London)
Prof Jane Caplan (Oxford)
Prof Norma Clarke (Kingston University)
Prof Matt Innes (Birkbeck, University of London)Dr David Feldman (Birkbeck, University of London)
Prof John Arnold (Birkbeck, University of London)
Prof Lynne Segal (Birkbeck, University of London)
Dr Anne Summers (Birkbeck, University of London)
Dr Caroline Humfres (Birkbeck, University of London)
Prof Sally Alexander (Goldsmiths, University of London)
Dr Sean Brady (Birkbeck, University of London)
Dr Serafina Cuomo (Birkbeck, University of London)
Alex Potts (University of Michigan, Ann Arbor)
Professor Andrew Hemingway (University College London)
Dr Steve Edwards (Open University)
Dr Gail Day (University of Leeds)

Seeing as our universities and schools are trying to phase out British history and it’s not politically correct to be proud to be white, why the hell should there be a Black History Month?

Someone call the EHRC.
IT’S RACIST!

Monday, 22 February 2010

Secret Labour plan to increase immigration said public's opposition was 'racist'

Ministers were accused today of drawing up secret plans to increase immigration - and branding opponents of the controversial scheme 'racist'.

A previously unseen joint Cabinet Office and Home Office report called for increases in foreign workers to meet the Government's 'economic and social objectives'. But it also stated that the public would be opposed to the shift because of 'racism' and urged ministers to try to alter public attitudes towards immigrants.

The document, which was written in July 2000 and released under the Freedom of Information Act, outlined plans for a step change in the number of both high and low skilled migrants. A draft version of the report emerged last week, but the full copy was finally released today.
In it, the authors warned: 'Policy development is constrained by public opinion and the current tone of public debate.'

'It is correct that public opinion favours relatively restrictive policies on immigration.'
Sections advising ministers to adopt a 'clear strategy for public opinion and public debate' to change views were removed from the published version.

Critics said the document showed ministers 'deliberately rode roughshod' over the public.
There was outrage last year after Andrew Neather, a former Labour speechwriter, revealed in a newspaper column that the loosening of controls in the early 2000s was part of a deliberate political agenda.

The 'immigration boom' of the last decade was engineered in part to change society by making it more multicultural, he said.

Mr Neather, who worked for Tony Blair, Jack Straw and David Blunkett and saw the early versions of the report, said senior politicians were nervous about publicising the policy because they feared public reaction.

The report states baldly that public opposition to immigration was 'closely correlated with racism'. Exposing the public to migrants would make them less hostile, it said. 'A new approach to migration policy ... would need to be not only accompanied by, but underpinned by, a clear strategy for public opinion and public debate.

'Government has tended to assume that negative public opinion on migration is a given that is beyond its control. In fact, research (and common sense) suggests that past governments have had a significant influence on public opinion...' On other issues, government has been strategic and proactive in addressing public opinion, it could do so on migration.

Andrew Neather revealed in a newspaper column that the loosening of controls in the early 2000s was part of a deliberate political agenda

'Recent research shows that anti-immigrant sentiment is closely correlated with racism rather than economic motives,' the authors wrote.

'Education and people's personal exposure to migrants make them less likely to be anti-migrant. The most negative attitudes are found among those who have relatively little direct contact with migrants, but see them as a threat.'

The report said immigration was rising sharply because of global economic forces but said it was all but pointless trying to prevent large numbers of new arrivals coming for work. It stated: 'Trying to halt or reverse market driven migration will be very difficult (perhaps impossible) and economically damaging.' Trying to stop low skilled workers was 'neither an available nor a desirable policy choice' because of 'market forces'.

The report went through numerous drafts during late 2000. One version was entitled Going with the Flow: Managing Migration in the 21st Century. But by the time it was published in early 2001, the document had become a bland endorsement of the economic benefits of immigration. Entire sections were removed, including all references to public opposition.

Instead it said: 'Social research shows that the majority consistently regards immigration as having a positive effect on British culture. This is true even for many of those who favour a more restrictive attitude to immigration controls.'

References to migration opening up 'new opportunities' for organised crime were also expunged.

The final report stated: 'There is little data specifically for migrants on such indexes of social exclusion as ... crime.'

Justice Secretary Jack Straw, who was Home Secretary from 1997 until 2001, has dismissed Mr Neather's claims, saying they were 'just untrue'.

A fortnight ago current Home Secretary Alan Johnson said the suggestion of an open door immigration policy was 'mythical'. But Sir Andrew Green, chairman of pressure group Migrationwatch UK, said: 'This report confirms that ministers deliberately rode roughshod over public opinion in adopting a policy of mass immigration.

'They concealed their real intentions in the hope that they would benefit from the immigrant vote without losing their working class supporters.

'They are now paying the price.'

Shadow home secretary Chris Grayling said: 'The Government has simply not been telling the truth about its policies on immigration. More and more evidence is now emerging to show that they deliberately planned a big jump in immigration for their own political purposes. Now they are trying to rewrite history to pretend those decisions never happened. Their conduct over all of this has been a complete disgrace.'
Daily Mail
All material published on these pages represents the personal views of the DERBY PATRIOT and should not be taken to represent any political party.