← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · edward gibbon
Thread ID: 4448 | Posts: 15 | Started: 2003-01-14
2003-01-14 22:41 | User Profile
Some events are of such importance they should be brought up every six months or so. Mr. Powell's speech of 1968 is one such. As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding; like the Roman, I seem to see "the River Tiber foaming with much blood".
Enoch Powell - 20th of April, 1968. The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils. In seeking to do so, it encounters obstacles which are deeply rooted in human nature. One is that by the very order of things such evils are not demonstrable until they have occurred; at each stage in their onset there is room for doubt and for dispute whether they be real or imaginary. By the same token, they attract little attention in comparison with current troubles, which are both indisputable and pressing; whence the besetting temptation of all politics to concern itself with the immediate present at the expense of the future.
entire text: [url=http://www.hippy.freeserve.co.uk/rofblood.htm]http://www.hippy.freeserve.co.uk/rofblood.htm[/url]
I am aware that any sane member of this forum (excluding rban and a few others) must agree with Mr. Powell. But his words were and are of such importance they should be read to refresh the memory. Lurkers may find this especially interesting.
2003-01-15 00:28 | User Profile
Edward, Enoch had the public solidly behind him when he made his stand against mass immigration, as the polls of the time clearly demonstrated. What the establishment still regard as his crime, ultimately was a willingness to represent the public, to be a genuine democrat.
2003-01-15 03:04 | User Profile
If the elites will not allow the people a voice, does there come a time to make some true 'rivers of blood'? Not of non-whites, but of white leftists who subvert democracy.
2003-01-15 03:30 | User Profile
I am sorry, you think the current anti-white policies enforced in Britian and the US are 'dignified'? Why are you involved with this site?
2003-01-15 05:57 | User Profile
Rban is, or claims to be, a Hindu supremacist who wants the West to open its doors wide to the benefits of mass Indian immigration.
2003-01-15 08:47 | User Profile
Originally posted by Leveller@Jan 15 2003, 00:28 ** What the establishment still regard as his crime, ultimately was a willingness to represent the public, to be a genuine democrat. **
The problem in the States right now is that the same words can be said of our own Segregation Era politicians. Our establishment is trying to punish them ex post facto.
2003-01-15 21:05 | User Profile
rban (Posted on Jan 15 2003, 04:19)
**Democracy can only go so far. Sometimes it is up to the elite to fashion a just society and impart a dignity which can never come from the unwashed masses.
Pierre Trudeau, ex PM of Canada and creator of its official multiculturalism policy, boldly declared that it was incumbent upon him to create a 'just society'. **
Some sentiments are not confined to the United States. Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau wrote an essay: "Exhaustion and Fulfillment: The Ascetic in a Canoe" in 1944. ( MacLean's, Oct 9,2000, pT22-3) His contemporaries and betters with more courage and sense of duty and citizenship were fighting in Europe at that time. His gutless evasion was never held against him. Mr. Trudeau was voted Canadian of the Century by his fellow citizens. He opened Canada to the hordes of the Caribbean and other non-Europeans. For this he was lauded in the pages of the New York Times.
His just society will be a hell-hole for those living there. You should consider moving.
2003-01-16 04:03 | User Profile
Rban's distraction to the side, I repeat my question: If the elites will not allow the people a voice, does there come a time to make some true 'rivers of blood'? Not of non-whites, but of white leftists who subvert democracy.
I mean this as a question, not an implied statement. I am thinking of Britain, since we have been speaking of 'rivers of blood,' but the ethical issue is relevant to many nations.
2003-01-16 18:36 | User Profile
Edward - thank you for re-posting Powell, his words and prescience are always inspiring.
I think it is instructive to read him closely, in particular the passage about the function of statesmanship that you quote. Powell was very much an insider in the Conservative governments of the 1950s and 1960s, the period during which the groundwork was laid for Britain's present demographic catastrophe.
He knew that the coming multiracial hellhole he alluded to 1968 was entirely self-inflicted. Throughout the 1950s the Conservative government had ample time and opportunity to restrict or end immigration from the 'New' Commonwealth, but through a combination of post-imperial delusional dementia and criminal complacency did nothing. Powell was intimately aware of all this.
Consequently, the coloured population which stood at less than 30,000 in 1951 exploded to more than 600,000 by the time of the Commonwealth Immigration Act of 1962. Through ongoing chain migration and, more lately, relaxed asylum and work-permit regulations, the 2001 census figure is expected to be close to 5 million.
Contrary to received opinion, this massive demographic upheaval was not the result of an expanding economy drawing in badly needed skilled labour. At no time during the 50s and 60s was there any significant form of overseas recruiting, government-sponsored or otherwise. There was no British equivalent of the German gastarbeiter scheme. But shockingly, as the millions of unskilled third world peasants were streaming in the back door, skilled workers of native British stock were emigrating to the US and the white Commonwealth. Even more amazingly, the British government acquiesced in the provision of subsidized assisted passages for many white emigrants. The assisted passage scheme continued until the late 70s, by which time over 3 million white Britons and their families had emigrated since 1950, to be replaced almost man-for-man by mostly illiterate coloured immigrants.
Also, and with apologies to VNN for pricking their balloon, Britain's immigration disaster was not the result of any Jewish conspiracy. As Powell tells us, the fault lay entirely with the cowardly and spineless Conservative administrations of which he was, to his later shame and regret, an active participant.
Looking at Britain's situation today there is paradoxically a glimmer of hope. The situation has become so dire and the mainstream parties so venal, corrupt and inept that more and more people are becoming open to political alternatives. Friends and relatives still in Blighty, including a number who are dyed-in-the-wool Tories tell me without special prompting that they would vote BNP in the next election if there were a candidate standing in their area. I think this augers well for the nationalist movement in the UK and in Europe generally provided the nationalist parties can cleverly utilize mainstream communications channels and also present a critical mass of credible candidates in forthcoming elections.
Sadly, I don't see the same prospect for the US. With more than 1/3 of the population non-white, I believe we have passed the demographic point of no return, and absent any WN political movement that has any hope of appealing to Middle America, there are only the stark alternatives of Civil War II and the rising brown tide. But that's probably the subject for another thread ....
2003-01-16 19:54 | User Profile
rban - I'd like to see your source for the BNP 'being OK' with increased Hindu immigration to Britain.
I'll concede that of all the rainbow tribes that have descended on Britain since WW II, the Indians are the least objectionable. Could this be because the majority of them are Sikh rather than Hindu?
2003-01-16 22:35 | User Profile
Originally posted by darkeddy@Jan 16 2003, 04:03 **Rban's distraction to the side, I repeat my question: If the elites will not allow the people a voice, does there come a time to make some true 'rivers of blood'? Not of non-whites, but of white leftists who subvert democracy.
I mean this as a question, not an implied statement. I am thinking of Britain, since we have been speaking of 'rivers of blood,' but the ethical issue is relevant to many nations.**
There must be a point at which a government becomes illegitimate through its actions. In his 18th century Commentaries Blackstone denied John Lockes assertion that this was the case, because he feared its consequences. Lockes defenders noted that since the public are unlikely to destroy the existing political system unless it is genuinely intolerable, it's not a problem in practice.
I primarily blame representative democracy for the elites subversion of common law liberties and of the publics values.
2003-01-16 22:37 | User Profile
Originally posted by Ragnar@Jan 15 2003, 08:47 > Originally posted by Leveller@Jan 15 2003, 00:28 ** What the establishment still regard as his crime, ultimately was a willingness to represent the public, to be a genuine democrat. **
The problem in the States right now is that the same words can be said of our own Segregation Era politicians. Our establishment is trying to punish them ex post facto.**
Who controls the past controls the future. :(
2003-01-16 23:14 | User Profile
rban ; "Dan please get your facts straight before you post. More Sikhs in UK than Hindus? This is from The Guardian:"
See you and raise you:
Religion by ethnic group (%)
Black African Asian Indian Pakistani Bangladeshi
None 28 2 5 2 1 Hindu 1 58 32 - 2 Sikh - 19 50 - - Muslim 1 15 6 96 95 Christian 69 3 5 - 1 Other 3 3 2 2 1
Source: T. Modood, R. Berthoud, et. al., Ethnic Minorities in Britain: Diversity and Disadvantage, London: Policy Studies Institute, 1997.
here's the link, an impeccable source wouldn't you agree?
[url=http://www.irr.org.uk/statistics/population.html]http://www.irr.org.uk/statistics/population.html[/url].
2003-01-16 23:21 | User Profile
Sorry the tabbing got hosed on my last post. However the salient numbers for rban's edification are:
Religion of Indians in UK
None 5% Hindu 32% Sikh 50% Muslim 6% Xtian 5% Other 2%
Cheers
2003-02-08 15:05 | User Profile
Go to football throw a brick
Get no mercy months in nick
Riot in the ghetto red alert
The guilty are freed the innocent are hurt
ÃÂ
We've been warned of rivers of blood
See the trickle before the flood
Pretend nothing happened make no fuss
It's one law for them and one for us
ÃÂ
One law for them
One law for them
One law for them
And another law for us
One law for them
One law for them
One law for them
And another law for us
No fun no homes no jobs no use
What else is used as an excuse
Family's fighting family's looting
Then there's digs and then there's shootings
One law for them
One law for them
One law for them
And another law for us ÃÂ
One law for them
One law for them
One law for them
And another law for us
Riot's in London blame Old Bill
We've been lucky no ones killed
Violence in the streets more to follow
Freedom for the freedom fighters
One law for them
One law for them
One law for them
And another law for us
One law for them
One law for them
One law for them
And another law for us
One law for them
One law for them
One law for them
And another law for us
One law for them
One law for them
One law for them
And another law for us
One law for them
One law for them
One law for them
And another one for us
One law for them
One law for them
One law for them
And another one for us
One law for them
One law for them
One law for them
And another one for us