The situation in Britain and most of the West is very bad and getting worse by the day. A political solution still exists but so does the very real possibility of cancelled elections in Britain, Germany and France in 2029. If this happens, we will be left with no other option than to physically fight against the tyrannical establishment.

Even if the elections take place, and political parties like France’s Rassemblement National, Germany’s AfD, and our very own Restore Britain come to power, there is a high probability of religious war in those countries resulting from a violent hard left / Islamic pushback against attempted large-scale deportation/remigration. If this happens, we will be forced to fight in a horrific scenario similar to the civil wars in 1970s Lebanon and 1990s Yugoslavia.

The idea we will have to fight is difficult to accept for the majority of people, but when you look around at what has been done to us over the last few decades, and where this can only logically lead, it becomes very difficult to argue against a near inevitable confrontation between Western Civilisation and the Red-Green Alliance - AKA the Neo-Communist Left and Islam.

This Red-Green Alliance presents a far greater threat to Western civilisation than Charlemagne, Napoleon, Kaiser Wilhelm, Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin combined – simply because it means not only the end of economic systems and similar European cultures, but the obliteration of the European people as a race, culture, and civilisational entity. Never forget, the Communists and Islam erase the past completely when they seize power.

If we lose the coming confrontation, we won’t just lose a battle or a war, we will lose everything; our territory, our history, our traditions, our freedom, our religion, and of course our very lives. We will lose our entire civilisation formed over literally thousands of years, and we could lose this by the time English babies born today reach secondary school age.

In 1910, finely dressed aristocratic Russian ladies sipped tea from China cups in St Petersburg’s Art Nouveaux Café Yar. Such scenes were replicated in Berlin, Paris and London. And then came 1914 and WWI, followed by the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia and the subsequent massacre of millions. At much the same time the Islamic Ottoman/Turks massacred close to two million Greeks, Armenians and Assyrians.

Soon after that came WWII followed by Mao, Pol Pot and Asian Communism. Everything changed from the heady days of Café Yar on a sunny summer morning in 1910. Western civilisation was rocked to its foundations. Hundreds of millions of people perished in the most horrific manner imaginable. The Red-Green Alliance in the West of today is rooted in very recent monumental violence.

England/Britain in 2026 feels very much like early 1914, and just as then, the inhabitants of the modern liberal West cannot really imagine what is coming their way. We suffer from the Illusion of Permanence, as Samuel Huntington termed it in his book the Clash of Civilisations. Tomorrow will be little different to today, ditto next week and next month, but what of next year or the next five years? Hinge point in history events have always happened and will always happen. I believe we stand before a historical hinge point today and everything will soon explode into unimaginable horrors.

More and more people are becoming aware of this. Non-political friends of mine tell me of the chilling atmosphere that greets them in England when they return from abroad. Friends of mine who escaped totalitarian Communist countries tell me the feeling of unease, of constantly being watched, the fear of interaction with State functionaries be they policemen or university professors is JUST as they once felt in Communist Prague or Warsaw. We have sleep-walked into something very dark in the once free West.

All our great Institutions of the State have been captured and subverted by the hard-left in a successful attempt to undermine and destroy the foundations of Western civilisation, including the gleeful destruction of the very people responsible for building it who have now become a de-facto and de-jure second class and persecuted citizenry in their ancient homeland, ascribed as guilty of global oppression, historical evil and literal Original Sin and thus unworthy of continued racial existence in our brave new multicultural world.

We have a revolutionary hard-left political Traitor Class across much of the West, intent on increasingly authoritarian control. These same politicians actively appear to want a boots on the ground war against Russia, which means WWIII. We have a fifty million and exponentially growing Islamic demographic in Europe which makes no secret of its cruel, theocratic ambition.

We have a native demographic catastrophe which combined with surreal levels of immigration / invasion amounts to a credible ethnocide, running alongside a probable army of 250,000 young males of fighting-age imported into Britain from African/Islamic backgrounds who now outnumber frontline British soldiers by 10:1 and who are housed strategically across the country, with some thousands in the barracks of Ministry of Defence sites.

Any one, just a solitary single one of those instances I just mentioned could lead to civil war or religious war. But they number eight in total, not just one. Combined they amount to our eradication or our survival via resistance. Whichever path we choose, we are clearly not going to be sipping tea out of China cups in London’s Café Royal circa 2035.

The following quote is from A E Houseman on the dawn of WWI – replace the issues he mentions with the eight mentioned above and you will understand how I feel. Quote:

“Europe is a powder keg. The Germans are gripped by fervent nationalism, the British feel afraid of German expansion….the French still remember the bitter defeat of 1870. Germany enters into a pact with the Austro-Hungarian Empire, but that empire is being torn apart by ethnic tensions and it will take just one spark to ignite a European war on an unimaginable scale.”

If we are to survive as a civilisation, it seems we will have to fight. As of today, that would be an impossibility. Unlike America we have no First or Second Amendment, by which I mean no freedom of speech or the right to bear arms. That said, we must accept the reality of war in order to prepare for it - and prepare for it we must. Our days of peace are rapidly drawing to a close even as our DEI captured military and King sit on their hands and do nothing. No one is coming to save us. Only we can do that, as the bloody course of British history will affirm.

When Francis Fukuyama wrote The End of History and the Last Man in 1993, it was to argue that Western liberal democracy and free market economics meant an end to warfare within the west, and by default, the end of history.

Fukuyama was drawing on Winston Churchill, who stated: “The history of man is war”, thus allowing Fukuyama to propose that a future consisting of perpetual peace meant an end to history itself, history being simply a narrative of warfare, conquest and re-conquest, rather than which queen succeeded which king and on which date.

This idea that warfare within the West is now a thing of the past seems to be shared by an overwhelming section of Western people, reared as they are on a diet of enlightened tolerance and historical ignorance.

In 1990 it would have been relatively difficult to argue with Fukuyama’s prophecy. The West, excluding the inevitable frictions that came with the breakup of the Soviet Union, was clearly not going to engage in the type of politics that led to the two world wars, whilst the demise of Communism meant an end to the global proxy wars between Russia and America.

What Fukuyama failed to realise, however, was that the ingredient for yet another “war to end all wars” was already in place. The cultural clashes between fascism, communism and liberal democracies had simply been replaced with another culture that would inevitably clash with the Western host cultures — Islam.

Wars do not simply spring out of nowhere. Although the causes may be relatively complicated, they require only a few very basic ingredients which when blended together, placed in a pressure cooker on gas level 5, and left to boil unattended, can have only one result.

The first of these, self-evidently, is an enemy, without which a chef cannot even begin to prepare his feast gastronomique. Some may argue that Islam is not our enemy; such an entity being radical Islam, a relatively small component of Islam overall. Possibly so, but this rather misses the point that Western liberal democracy is Islam’s enemy, as they tell us over and over again, through word and deed.

The death and destruction wrought throughout the West in recent years is not because Islam, in some childlike, well-intentioned yet misguided way, wishes to assimilate with us, it is because Islam wishes to take us over. We, obviously, do not wish to be taken over, so we must be prepared to resist an enemy, or be prepared to submit to an enemy, the point being that there is, with absolute certainty, an enemy.

The fact that it is radical Islam as opposed to moderate Islam is immaterial. In WWII Germany was our enemy, not the Nazis, just as Islam is our enemy today and not radical Islam. I am sorry to have to say this, but war entails polarisation of differing races/religions; the pieties of multiculturalism are reserved only for times of peace.

The second ingredient for war is anger and resentment amongst a unified mass majority. Despite the breadth of difference between Christian, post-Christian, Jew, agnostic, atheist, male, female, homosexual and heterosexual, the common thread that unites the people of the liberal West is no longer what we are, but what we are not. We are not Islamic, and — voluntarily — never will be.

And we are getting angrier by the day as we watch the television news, read the newspapers and listen to Islamic rhetoric calling for the overthrow of the West; a call apparently supported by our ruling elites who choose to clamp down on their indigenous people who dare to complain, rather than the perpetrators themselves.

Despite the best efforts of the vast state-funded race relations industry, the glaring evidence suggests one stark, unpalatable fact; Islam and the liberal West are incompatible. The utopian multiculturalist view that we can all get along is belied by the fact that as Islam keeps on trying to blow us up, so “Islamophobia” continues, quite naturally, to grow.

When police chiefs speak of “heightened racial tensions” (and in the case of France “low-level civil war”) they speak volumes about our current predicament. When Islam moves into an area and the indigenous inhabitants move out, this too speaks volumes. We do not — indeed apparently cannot — co-exist, a parlous state of affairs even whilst Westerners have the means and the territory to move away, but what happens when that escape route is removed?

Unfortunately, the birth rate differentials coupled with massive Muslim immigration and growing indigenous emigration suggest that this escape route is only temporary. Many European cities are on the brink of Muslim majorities already; within the next twenty years this will only escalate with increasing rapidity. At some point in the not-too-distant future, Europeans will have nowhere left to run.

Just as Islam is intransigently opposed to Western liberal democracy, so Western liberal democracy is intransigently opposed to Islam. The West in the case of “within borders” religious conflict is a demographic juggernaut compared to Islam today, but this can change very quickly as I argued in part 1 of a recent article. Within twenty years we will see two juggernauts of equal size, travelling in opposite directions on the same side of the road with the all too obvious result: collision circa 2025 or earlier, depending on their speed.

And it is as simple as that. Western Europe in 1990 did not have the ingredients necessary to bring about another war, but in 2007 we have the only ingredients necessary to ensure it. Two intransigent enemies, one demographically shrinking, the other demographically — and literally — exploding, both sides drawing their lines in the sand, and of course the simmering anger, fear and resentment that comes with such a scenario.

This situation reminds me of A. E. Housman’s words, describing the year 1914:

“Europe is a powder keg. The Germans are gripped by fervent nationalism, the British feel afraid of German expansion….the French still remember the bitter defeat of 1870. Germany enters a pact with the Austro-Hungarian Empire, but that empire is being torn apart by ethnic tensions, and it will take just one spark to ignite a European war on an unimaginable scale…”

Plus ça change plus c’est la meme chose, as they once said over a game of chess and chain-lit gauloises in the avant garde cafes of the Paris banlieus. History repeats itself; a fact not lost on the realists of the “right” but lost in the fluffy mists of time to the liberal/left.

Perhaps a more recent quote might jolt them from their multicultural reverie, taken from Alastair Finlan’s book The Collapse of Yugoslavia 1991-1999 which details the civil war that killed 250,000 people, the majority of whom were civilians, out of a population of 10 million.

In 1991, almost overnight, an ethnically diverse region that had enjoyed decades of peaceful coexistence descended into bitter hatred and chaos. Communities fractured along lines of ethnic and religious affiliation and the resulting fighting was deeply personal, resulting in brutality, rape, torture, genocide and ethnic cleansing.

Yugoslavia was a small country, and the death toll would have been much higher were in not for the intervention of external forces. Continental Europe has close to half a billion inhabitants. Should war start, there is no way on earth that any external force can stop it. And it need not be constrained to Europe; would a nuclear-armed Pakistan sit idly by? Will Iran or Syria possess a nuclear capability, and would they use it against Israel? Would America then become involved? Would our need for oil necessitate the invasion of the Middle East? How would Turkey respond to that?

Unlike the First World War, given our nuclear weapons, this really could be the war to end to all wars.

Such an apocalyptic scenario should give the liberal/left pause for thought. Is such a possibility really worth this peculiar multicultural experiment of forcing two disparate cultures together, in a perverse attempt to prove history (and present-day reality around the non-Western world) wrong?

Even the most vacuous multiculturalist would have to admit that religious war is a possibility, but what percentage chance would he admit to? Suppose it was only 1% — is that a risk worth taking? My only question to him would be “would you fly on a passenger jet that had a 1% chance of crashing, and if you would not, why do you think it acceptable that your children will inherit Armageddon based on a statistical chance of death that you yourself would not take?”

The completely unknown Serbian, Gavrilo Princip, provided the spark that ignited the First World War when he assassinated the Archduke Franz Ferdinand in the little-known town of Sarajevo on June 28th, 1914.

In the Europe of 2007, the ingredients for the Third World War are in place, save for Islamic demographics, an issue rapidly being addressed. What will be the 21st century Sarajevo spark?

The West is made up of countries built around one basic and incredibly important political ethos — they are all Liberal Democracies. Unfortunately, these countries also share a more recent political ideology which has come to be known as multiculturalism, a word invented in the latter half of the 20th century to enforce our toleration — indeed celebration — of all faiths, cultures and races.

Multiculturalism sits at the pinnacle of Political Correctness (another expression invented in the late 20th century) and is promoted in the post-Christian West with a religious fervour. Multiculturalism trumps all in the PC world. The working class, the homosexual, women in general but particularly so feminist women — all bow before a political and ideological supremacy invented to favour a foreign race and a foreign religion.

This peculiar attitude has been adopted by our ruling classes who are obsessed with atoning for the perceived sins of historical oppression carried out in the name of Christianity and the colonisation of non-white countries. The West now finds itself in the position where multiculturalism is the driving ideology behind pretty much everything — the law, education, employment and correct thinking. Those who do not think correctly are called racists, the ultimate heretical sin in PC terms.

So where does Islam fit into the liberal/left’s brave new PC world of non-prejudice, non-discrimination, tolerance for the “other” and respect for all races and religions? Is it unreasonable to suggest the core tenets of Islam’s political/religious ideology make it intractably and unarguably impossible for Islam to peacefully adapt to life in multicultural societies?

The answer to this question represents the most important issue of the 21st century. If Islam is capable of living alongside Christians, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, atheists, feminists, homosexuals, adulterers, beer-drinkers, short-skirted women, admirers of free speech and democracy, and perhaps even Justin Bieber, then the West is capable of living in peace as it has done so for close to the last seventy years.

If, on the other hand, all the above are impossible for Islam to peacefully co-exist alongside, then the multicultural West is heading for the showdown of all showdowns with monocultural Islam. Given the huge demographic growth of Islam within the West and the 1.6 billion Muslims without the West, such a showdown has the potential to cause World War III.

This is why Islam is the most important issue of our times. The liberal/left, with their professed love of multiculturalism and moral relativism, should really be the ones most concerned about the negative aspects of Islam, but they have essentially gone AWOL on the subject. This does not, sadly, come as a surprise. If Islam is indeed a monocultural and supremacist ideology, then the liberal/left would have to stand against it. They would then lose their perceived moral mantle and become “racists”… so they choose to either ignore Islam, or — in the case of the BBC types — to actively excuse it.

The evidence suggesting Islam is monocultural is overwhelming. The history of Islamic conquest and its subsequent physical and ideological supremacy over the defeated people is there for all to see, if they can be bothered to read a history book. The Koran itself is a monocultural and supremacist tome which calls for the death, conversion (reversion) or acceptance of a second-class status for all non-Muslims.

So vehement is the animosity shown by monocultural Islam toward all other cultures and religions that entire geographical regions have been physically broken up. In 1947 the partition of India was a direct result of Islamic monoculturalism, as was the partition only recently of Sudan, albeit after the deaths of close to half a million non-Muslim Africans.

If Muslim women become involved with non-Muslim men then such is the shame of monocultural Islam they must be killed in the name of “honour.” This does not sound particularly multicultural or tolerant to me; does it to you? Left/liberal lovers of multiculturalism should really try dating a Muslim girl in Tower Hamlets or Malmö. Ask her family to join you both for a drink in the pub, better still, her three brothers by themselves….how long do you think you would live? Hopefully not long enough to impregnate her if you really cared for her longevity….

The list of examples affirming the total inability of monocultural Islam to respect and live amongst multicultural non-Muslim societies is far too long to go into here, but one thing is very clear — Islam is as monocultural as monocultural gets, and worse still, is a supremacist ideology to boot.

Which is why we find ourselves in the political nightmare that is the 21st century West. Our foolish insistence that multiculturalism is a positive boon to our countries means one thing and one thing only in the face of a resurgent and monocultural Islam — extinction circa 2050 at the worst, or victory after countless horrors and death at the best.

What a tragic irony this is. The liberal/left will not like life in a monoculturally Islamic West. That they should actively seek to bring about a decidedly illiberal monoculture as a direct and inevitable consequence of their belief in multiculturalism is one of the more baffling aspects as to the workings of the liberal mind.

Perhaps someone such as Nick Lowles, the erstwhile co-ordinator of Hope not Hate, might care to weigh in on the subject? Mr Lowles celebrates Britain’s multicultural society, but surely he cannot argue that Islam is anything other than monocultural? Over to you Nick — how exactly can you reconcile your admiration of multicultural Britain alongside your defence of monocultural Islam?

I doubt Mr Lowles will take up the challenge, not least because logically speaking he is simply unable to. The fact is, the Lowleses of this world don’t actually care one jot about multiculturalism .What they really care about is utilising mass immigration and monocultural Islam as the twin siege guns of revolutionary warfare. Lowles naïvely believes that from the shattered countries and societies monocultural Islam must inevitably bring about will rise a new Socialist/Communist world order.

I’m not sure that such people fully recognise what they are unleashing. The Communist Iranian backers of Ayatollah Khomeini against the Shah of Iran only realised what they had done when they were sentenced to death, but it certainly explains the otherwise inexplicable support of hard-left multiculturalists for the all too obviously unassimilable, dangerous and supremacist monoculture that is Islam.

This article was first published in 2012 at the Gates of Vienna website.

A recent Daily Telegraph article detailed the closure of Peterborough’s sole Hindu Temple and its planned conversion into a mosque. Local Hindus are very upset about this but have little clout within Peterborough Council, which is dominated by Islam.

The DT article is broadly sympathetic with the poor old Hindus but fails to forensically delve into the matter for the reason, one supposes, of not wishing to alienate Islam. Hence this article y’ere.

Peterborough Council (Labour) is controlled by Islamic fundamentalists led by Dr Shabina Qayyum, who is affiliated with the British Islamic Medical Association… which is affiliated with the Muslim Council of Britain… which is affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) an organisation proscribed as a terror group in many countries, including some hard-line Islamic States.

The mosques in Peterborough appear to come under the umbrella of an Islamic charity called the United Kingdom Islamic Mission (UKIM) which is heavily influenced by Jamaat-e-Islami, a major Islamist movement founded by Abul A’la Maududi in 1960s Pakistan. Maududi’s ideology was itself inspired by the Muslim Brotherhood’s Hassan al-Banna. UKIM served as Jamaat-e-Islami’s de facto British arm.

Council leader Shabina Qayyum is typical of all Muslim councillors across poor old Britain. She talks a great deal about “communities” and “community representation” but cares only about advancing Islam in Peterborough, just as she cares only about advancing Islam within the NHS. The British Islamic Medical Association seems uninterested in matters medical and speaks (screams, actually) about Islamophobia, the wickedness of Prevent (counter-terrorism body) and the need for more, more, more Muslims in the NHS.

I had a short interview with Andrew Neil in 2016, during which he suggested I was a loathsome fascist for stating Muslims should not be allowed to hold public office in England. I explained my reasoning behind this, which was they were all Islamic activists rather than political Con/Lab/Lib activists. What I didn’t mention at the time was the obvious reality of their activism revolving around the ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood, which holds great sway not just within local councils and the NHS but across the entire civil service and the Labour party as well. Recent events in England suggest the MB also exerts a great deal of power over the police, judiciary and Crown Prosecution Service too.

Islam is monocultural. Islam cares only the advancement of Islam. This becomes very easy to do in Western multicultural societies which refuse to recognise not all cultures are equal – or indeed peaceful. The Hindus in Peterborough are only too aware of this. It is not just old whitey who is persecuted by expansionist Islam in the West.

I have been writing about this stuff for two decades and now find it very boring. When I started, it was to sound a warning whilst there was still time for said warning to be heard and acted upon. That time is over. Fundamentalist Islam is here to stay, and it will only grow in power from here-on.

Looking through my article archive, I noticed one written in 2012 titled “Multicultural Defenders of Monocultural Islam” which deserves a re-read today. I will post it after this article goes up and then link to it here.

The Prophet Muhammad began public life as a preacher in Mecca but was routinely ignored and mocked for thirteen years. He began his second life as a warlord/bandit after moving to Medina where he oversaw the beheading of around 700-900 men of the Jewish Banu Qurayza tribe. The women and children were taken as slaves and sex-slaves. This is where Islam became, in Winston Churchill’s words:

“A religion of blood and war.”

Muhammad owned a sword called “Cleaver of Vertebrae.” He stated the sword was key to heaven and hell and that he had been: “Made victorious through terror.” His core command, or Islam’s Golden Rule, was clear:

“I have been ordered to fight all men until they testify there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his messenger.”

This became the operating system of Islam which divides the world into Dar al-Islam (territory which has submitted to Islam) and the Dar al-Harb, the House of War (territory awaiting Islamic conquest and submission.) Every Western country is by definition in the House of War and must be targeted until it submits. The word “Islam” itself means submission.

Lies and deception known as taqiyya are also allowed under Islamic jurisprudence, provided they further Islamic ambition and take place in the House of War. Abrogation is also crucial to Islamic war. Abrogation means the peaceful, earlier Koranic verses are negated by the later violent verses.

To motivate fighters, Muhammad offered powerful incentives: those killed in battle receive instant martyrdom, entry to paradise and 72 virgins. Survivors of battles take 80% of the plunder – property, wealth, slaves and sex-slaves (Muhammad took 20%) These rewards remove the fear of death in battle and incentivise a desire for constant war.

From the 7th century Islamic armies exploded out of Arabia and built an empire larger than Rome’s. They conquered and destroyed ancient civilisations: Buddhist Afghanistan, Zoroastrian Persia, Christian Egypt and the Judeo/Christian Holy Land. The European territory of the Byzantine Holy Roman Empire itself came under attack and in 1453 Constantinople fell, after which the Hagia Sophia, Christendom’s largest and greatest church, was turned into a mosque. With every Islamic conquest came civilian massacres, slavery and sex-slavery

Between the 8th and 19th centuries Islamic forces repeatedly invaded Europe, reaching Tours in France (732) and besieging Vienna twice (1529 and 1683). Large parts of Europe were conquered including present day Spain, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria and the Balkans. In the 20th century the Ottoman jihad fatwa preceded the massacre of over a million Armenians, Greeks and Assyrians. These atrocities happened just a decade before the birth of my parents. This is not ancient history. Between 1979 and 2025 at least half-a-million people have been killed by Islamic terrorists worldwide. As I say, this is not ancient history.

Estimates of total deaths from 1,400 years of Islamic conquest and jihad range from tens-of-millions to over two-hundred million, especially in India and Africa. Civilian massacres, slavery, sex-slavery and rape utilised as weapons of Islamic war persist today in countries such as Nigeria, Sudan, Israel, India and Iran, and already happen to a lesser degree in Western Europe and the Anglosphere.

Populations conquered by Islam face three choices: death, conversion to Islam, or dhimmi status – second-class existence with the jizya tax paid “while humbled,” under the humiliating rules of the Pact of Umar - where Dhimmis could be harshly treated and infidel female children raped without consequence for the rapists. Native Brits should understand this with regard to the last few decades where rape has been systematically used as a weapon of war within the House of War that is Britain.

Modern jihadists explicitly frame mass immigration as Hijrah — the same strategic migration Muhammad used to launch conquest from Mecca to Medina. As one UK-based jihadist adviser so truthfully stated:

“One of the goals of immigration is the revival of the duty of jihad and enforcement of power over the infidels. Immigration and jihad go together.”

Today the results are visible both globally and within the West: relentless attacks on Christians and Jews, terror plots, grooming gangs, church burnings, and assaults on clergy - all carried out amidst a growing clamour for more Islamic political power and the censorship of criticism from us.

Once Islam takes power, previous civilisations are erased. Churches become mosques. Statues are destroyed. The history of entire civilisations is air-brushed out of existence. Christians have already lost the birthplace of Jesus with nary a murmur of protest from our Christian leaders.

Not all Muslims follow the literal Islamic doctrine, but vastly more do than followed Nazism or Communism. Historically, the peaceful majority consistently yields to the violent minority. Literal Islam is supremacist: the ummah is superior; non-Muslims are inferior kaffirs. It shares with historical Nazism the same attitudes toward empire, total war, women, homosexuals, Jews, and racial/religious hierarchy.

The founder of Islam was a warlord. Islamic scripture is the most complete and enduring blueprint for rewarded and incentivised war, conquest, and supremacist rule in recorded history. If a new movement were founded on its core texts and Muhammad’s example today it would be immediately proscribed as a terrorist organisation and its founders imprisoned.

In terms of religion, Islam is not a private faith. It is Din – a total, all-encompassing system governing law, politics, war, family, economics, and society with no separation between mosque and state. To describe Islam as a religion is completely inaccurate but if we are forced to use the term, name me another faith that screams God is great! - Allahu Akbar! - whilst engaged in the slaughter, maiming and rape of civilian innocents. Islam is the absolute antithesis of a “religion of peace” and is indeed The Religion of Blood and War - as so accurately stated by Winston Churchill.

1. Mass immigration/multiculturalism is undemocratic. A survey carried out in 1970’s Britain showed 90% of the population was against mass immigration, which at the time was not quite as “mass” as it is now. Recent surveys, although no longer as high as 90% (a testament perhaps to the power of forty years incessant drip-feed propaganda), still suggest the majorities in Western countries are against further immigration, yet Western governments everywhere have disallowed a referendum on this important issue whilst increasingly flooding their countries with anti-Western, unassimilable immigrants.

2. Race and minority status are relative. To be a Pakistani minority in Britain is all well and good, but there are one hundred and sixty million Pakistanis in Pakistan, and they therefore outnumber the British by one hundred million people. One cannot, in a reasonable world, come from such large a group and claim the ethnic spoils available by dint of minority status in a different country simply because one chose to leave one’s country of origin. This argument holds equally for Africans and Muslim Arabs.

3. White Europeans internationally are a global minority themselves, making up only fifteen percent of the world’s population, and declining. In the case of continental Europe, the EU Institute for Security Studies predicts that by 2025 white Europeans will make up only six percent of the global population.

4. Ethnic colonisation and ethnic political advancement operate only in countries with white European majorities. Whites who historically built bases in foreign climes were deemed guilty of colonisation and subsequently expelled. No non-white country today makes special exceptions for white minorities. Indeed, those parts of the world where whites have a final scrabbling toehold actively discriminate against them to the point of ethnic cleansing. Witness Zimbabwe and South Africa.

5. Multi-religious countries have a history of internal violence, the outcomes of which tend toward a reversion to mono-religion after bloody civil wars. When India was partitioned in 1947 seven million Muslims moved from India to Pakistan whilst a similar number of Hindus and Sikhs moved in the opposite direction, seeking safety in a religious majority. Whilst partition stopped a full-scale civil war, some half a million people were killed (some Indian sources cite a much higher death toll.)Europe has had centuries of Protestant/Catholic religious wars, so to introduce into its peaceful midst the fanatical religion of Islam is an act of breathtaking irresponsibility.

6. Multicultural societies have present day tribal conflict. The UN currently has sixty thousand peacekeepers engaged in fifteen peace missions around the world. These are not cross border wars; they are internal, inter-tribal/religious conflicts. Only Western elites, be they Labour or Republican, could suppose that by liberating Iraq from Saddam Hussein the Shias, Sunnis and Kurds would all kiss and make up. The chaos in Iraq is multiculturalism in the form of religious tribalism — without the benefit of a ruthless dictator to hold it together — exposed in its stark reality.

7. The white proponents of multiculturalism are hypocrites. They are in the main, middle class suburban or rural dwellers of majority white enclaves. One peculiarity of white liberals is whilst they embrace the ethnic colonisation of the West they are repulsed by the history of white colonisation in the East, thereby showing their political views have less to do with colonisation per se and more to do with a hatred of Western civilisation. Trying to find a working class man in a gritty and diverse part of town who supports this peculiar ideology is akin to discovering a conservative at the BBC or a democrat in church. Put simply, Western liberal feminists and homosexuals, who for reasons known only to themselves support multiculturalism, do not choose to live in Riyadh yet hold up Islamic culture as equally valid.

8. The non-white proponents of multiculturalism are hypocrites. The Middle East is monocultural, as is Pakistan and India. The idea that Europeans in Saudi Arabia can be flogged for practicing Christianity whilst Saudi money is financing thousands of radical mosques throughout Europe is perhaps the best example of multiculturalism’s rank hypocrisy.

9. Multiculturalism’s belief that all cultures and races are equal is simply not true. Their evolutionary capacity for equality may well be so, but when the Romans left Britain the indigenous Brits forgot all about aqueducts, under-floor heating, and immediately sank into the dark ages. If white Europeans became extinct next Friday the entire world would similarly revert to the dark ages. The world flocks to the West; there is no reciprocity as would be the case if we were truly equal.

10. Multiculturalism breeds resentment. If we are all equal, as it supposes, then the only reason many non-whites fail to become CEO’s of multinational firms is perceived to be a consequence of white oppression rather than an innate lack of ability. Breeding resentment of course was always foremost in the mind of the culture wars liberal.

11. Multiculturalism brings with it an increase in violent crime committed at a ratio vastly out of proportion to the ethnic numbers. This also leads to an increase in low-level crime, which the police simply have no time to handle as they are too busy writing reports and recommendations in triplicate over the latest gang rape or racial murder.

12. Multiculturalism promotes dishonesty. Were the true facts of rape, murder and violence honestly reported, it is possible that even the docile, TV-addicted Brits might rise up. The facts are not reported, however; censorship or self-censorship of the press and media lead to a road travelled upon in the last century only by totalitarian states.

13. Multiculturalism leads to propaganda and brainwashing. It is no coincidence the majority of our young today display a conformity of politically correct thought diametrically opposed to that of their grandparents. In order to make a suicidally unnatural ideology acceptable it is necessary to resort to the indoctrination of children, so the history of Islamic conquest and the subjugation of the defeated peoples is hidden from view in the liberal establishment’s educational curriculum. Again, this has more to do with totalitarian dictatorships than democratic states, although having said that, it is very definitely a first whereby the state works to dispossess its own ethnic majority.

14. Multiculturalism leads to greater government controls. In the wake of Islamic terrorism in Britain the government has passed various control and anti-terrorism orders. In the main they have been used against terrorist suspects but they are also utilised against the indigenous population when the government does not like what it hears or sees. One example out of many is the televised manhandling and detaining of an eighty two year old heckler, Walter Wolfgang, under anti-terrorism laws during the 2005 Labour party conference. Similarly, the EU’s European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia, whilst purportedly seeking to criminalize genuine racism also suggests that criticism of the EU could be termed xenophobic! We no longer have freedom of speech and this type of restriction is liable to intensify as the ethnic numbers and ensuing tensions increase, until eventually control will by necessity be on a par with Tito’s Yugoslavia or Saddam’s Iraq.

15. Multiculturalism, if history repeats itself, will lead to a probable — rather than a possible — civil war. There are some three hundred and forty million ageing and demographically declining white Europeans in Western Europe and some twenty million Muslims whose reproductive proclivity will give them, varying from country to country, a numerical advantage amongst the traditional fighting ages of sixteen to thirty year olds within the next twenty to forty years. Mark Steyn in “America Alone” suggests Islamic youth makes up forty five percent of total French city youth today. If the forty percent of Islamic youth mean what they say with regard to wanting Sharia law and if Western youth has really absorbed the appeasing indoctrination of multiculturalism then the scope for bloodshed and carnage amongst hundreds of millions of peoples is something not even the veterans of WWII can begin to imagine. If Albania, Bosnia, Macedonia and Turkey became involved the number of European Muslims today amounts to approximately one hundred million.

16. Multiculturalism promotes a brain drain from Western nations. According to the Conservative Monday Club, one in two native Brits would emigrate if financially able to do so. They cited crime, education and overcrowding as the reasons but true to politically correct form never mentioned Islam or multiculturalism — only the consequences thereof. Young middle-class professionals with children are also bailing out of Europe in unprecedented droves. As this escalates, the tax base will have to rise to support Europe’s welfare states, thereby driving further taxpayers abroad until Europe will eventually consist of an embittered white underclass and a simmering ethnic population, both competing for dwindling resources.

17. Multiculturalism is responsible for the reintroduction to the West of tuberculosis, cholera and malaria, diseases previously thought eradicated. In Britain no medical checks are carried out on immigrants.

18. Multiculturalism has brought the British National Health Service to its knees. The cost of anti-viral drugs used to treat HIV sufferers is some twenty five thousand pounds per year and, as a great many sub-Saharan Africans have the misfortune to suffer from this virus, it is unsurprising they move heaven and earth to bring themselves and their infected families to Britain to benefit from free medical aid. Disapproving of this may sound inhumane but economic reality leads to a health service for its own or no service for the world

19. Defenders of multiculturalism point out that the British health service would collapse without immigrant nurses and doctors. This may well be true but to import them from poor countries, which stumped up the money to train them in order to tend their own populations is an act of extreme illiberalism.

20. Multiculturalism leads to a lack of cohesion. A successful nation is made from the bottom up. Individuals form families, then communities, towns, cities, and lastly the Nation State. Cohesive countries tend to be monocultural, acting in the best interests of the group. The West today is being balkanised and tribalised and, should we need to come together at some future point to defeat, say, an Islamic France, it is unlikely our Muslim communities would fight on our side.

21. Multiculturalism is responsible for the reintroduction of slavery, euphemistically entitled “people trafficking”. Britain’s massage parlours generate close to a billion pounds per year from the enforced prostitution of five thousand predominately East European and Asian teenaged children smuggled in by Albanian and Turkish gangs.

22. Multiculturalism is a betrayal of our fathers and grandfathers who fought and died to preserve their countries and cultures. Many ex-servicemen I have spoken to tell me with great sadness that multicultural Britain was not worth their sacrifice or the deaths of their comrades. Indeed it is a double betrayal: young children today may well have to face submission or war in the coming decades.

23. The Jewish Holocaust was an act Western Europeans vowed would never happen again. But multi-racialism/multi-religion is responsible for present day holocausts. The Islamic Janjaweed militias have killed one million non-Muslim Sudanese Africans over the last decade. Does one million dead not count as a holocaust?

24. Multiculturalism betrays the low-income white child. Some schools in the poorer parts of London speak thirty different languages, hardly a place for poor white children to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. The result is low-income white children are now at the very bottom of education league tables.

25. Multiculturalism restricts the freedom of both children and adults. I know many parents who refuse to let their children travel into central London and undertake said journeys themselves only if absolutely necessary. This is hardly surprising. Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller, Director General of MI5 claims British secret services have thwarted five full-scale attacks since the July 2005 tube bombings and are actively tracking two hundred groups consisting of one thousand six-hundred people. She admits these are only the ones they know about, and is concerned that one hundred thousand “British” citizens sympathise with terrorist suicide bombers. Well, yes — so she should and so should we.

26. Multiculturalism leads to a reduction of standards in our quota driven-institutions. To take one example, entry requirements for the British police now consist of zero academic qualifications whilst minor criminal convictions are overlooked if the applicant is of the right colour.

27. Multiculturalism is a drain on the taxpayer. There are literally thousands upon thousands of diversity officers, equality officers and race awareness officers, all funded directly by the state.

28. Multiculturalism claims all faiths are equally valid yet in practice it is distinctly anti-Christian, anti-Semitic and pro-Islamic. It is thus partially responsible for the cleansing of Christianity from continental Europe and is totally responsible for the rise in anti-Semitism, particularly in France, which Israel now deems unsafe for Jews.

29. Multiculturalism is totalitarian. It brooks no opposition from its detractors and carries out campaigns against perceived heretics with a viciousness previously unknown in Western politics. The vitriolic campaign waged against the British headmaster Ray Honeyford during the 1980’s is a case in point. That his proposal of Muslim assimilation has now been vindicated is not to suppose he will receive compensation or apology. The irony, if irony is not too weak a word, is that multiculturalism, in its promotion of Islam, seeks to elevate the one single culture and religion with an avowed ambition of mono-cultural global dominance.

30. Finally, multiculturalism is treason. Not legally, I grant you, but technically, how can this not be so? If it is indeed the case that the West is undergoing a slow-motion, unarmed invasion then any government that both condones the invasion and criminalizes those that oppose it must surely be guilty of treason. When the ancient treason laws were written it never occurred to the original drafters that any country would be foolish enough to open its doors to an Islamic Trojan horse, but we in the 21st century West are that foolish; we have opened the doors and the treason laws need urgent redrafting.

In conclusion, although this essay is entitled “Multiculturalism — Merits and Debits” I cannot in all honesty think of any merits important enough to outweigh the negatives above. That mass immigration from the third world is of supposed economic benefit is one, but Sir Andrew Green, chairman of Migration Watch UK debunks this proposal, whilst a liking of curry simply doesn’t cut the ideological mustard.

This two part article was first published in 2007.

Part One is Here.

Until very recently British politicians and journalists were forever eulogizing the merits of a multicultural society. They told us how enriching it was and why we should celebrate our vibrant diversity hitherto unavailable in the racially stale and homogenous West. However, despite these outpourings of praise verging on the messianic I have yet to hear any of them elaborate on the concrete positives of multiculturalism. Just one instance would suffice, but multiculturalism’s adherents prefer to praise in the general rather than the specific. As such they are just words with no meaning and no intention of meaning, other perhaps than that of deliberate subterfuge.

After the July 2005 bombings of London’s transport system two lone voices miraculously came to the fore to gently propose multiculturalism as preached in the UK was more divisive than inclusive. Fortunately, these voices belonged to non-white immigrants and were thus listened to and reported on rather than shouted down with the inevitable charge of racism. Trevor Philips, the Lenin-admiring Guyanese chairman of the Commission for Racial Equality suggested we were sleepwalking toward segregation, whilst Dr. John Sentamu, the Ugandan Archbishop of York, alerted the native British to the dangers of losing their culture.

If we are to genuinely hold an intense debate on multiculturalism, then it must be warts and all. Hiding behind a wall of well-intentioned words is of little use when our lives are under threat every time we board a bus or train. There are many muttered criticisms of multiculturalism, yet even now these negatives are never allowed to see the light of day. These criticisms are real words about real effects and as such transgress the idealistic and unrealistic worldview held by our liberal elites.

The first issue to look at is what does multiculturalism actually mean? It is a word of such obtuse generalisation one has to assume it is merely camouflage for an underlying agenda. It is also a word that was unknown a few decades ago, only coming to prominence with the simultaneous rise to political power of sections of the liberally inclined baby-boom generation.

Academia and media-led definitions of multiculturalism insist all races and cultures are equal and immigration enriches us culturally and economically. It further insists that given an atmosphere of mutual tolerance and respect, differing races and religions will benefit one another when intermingled within the same territory. This is the prevailing and generally accepted definition across the West.

However, this is not the way it is taught in our schools, nor disseminated by our media. Indigenous children are indoctrinated into believing Western civilisation is guilty of historical and present-day inequality and oppression — in short, brainwashed into shame about their race and culture. Conversely, ethnic children are encouraged to take pride in their own race and culture and to feel victimised by the majority white society they live amongst. This version of multiculturalism is force-fed with a fervour almost religious in its intensity, despite it being a recipe for Balkanisation and resentment rather than assimilation.

Multiculturalism in not some type of fixed entity; it is constantly evolving and means different things to different people. For example, to the 1960’s cultural revolutionaries and their ideological progeny, multiculturalism is simply a tool with which to bash Western civilisation. The white working class had become too affluent to be used as political pawns; ergo, import a new, “oppressed” revolutionary power base. It is not coincidental that multiculturalism’s white activists are politically of the hard left who deliberately divide Western countries along imported racial and religious fault lines.

To the naïve white liberal, multiculturalism means a happy-clappy utopian world without borders, where all races and all religions live together in peace and tranquillity. That this runs counter to historical precedent, current reality, and the law of nature is of little interest to its proponents, thereby exposing them as either astonishingly uneducated or wilfully ignorant. In short, they are Lenin’s Useful Idiots.

To the incoming third-worlder the white abasement ideology of multiculturalism is viewed as a weakness prevalent in the governments of the native countries. Not only are they welcomed and subsidised, they are also encouraged to keep their own identities and cultures and are the recipients of state-legislated privileges not available to the native whites. It is thus an ideology used to advance their ethnic group self-interest over and above that of the native group. I can only assume their private discussions must revolve around disbelief and astonishment that any race or culture could prostrate themselves before an aggressor in such a grotesque and defeatist manner.

To the white natives who wishes to preserve their historical homeland, tradition and culture, multiculturalism takes on a more disturbing aspect. Demographers predict we will become a minority in our own countries at various points this century, many before 2050. This means we are being territorially dispossessed as each and every year we cede a little more physical ground to the incomers.

When one race invades the homeland of another race it does so in order to acquire territory and to impose its own political ideology and culture. Conversely, the invaded group resists in order to preserve his race, his territory and his culture, not simply because he is a racist and dislikes the skin colour of the invader. Or at least that is historically how things were. The people of the West today are ceding territory, tradition, culture and political power and do so in the face of evolutionary imminent minority status whilst the incomer makes no pretence of his intentions in his avowal of Islamic mono-cultural superiority.

Multiculturalism, when viewed through the conservative prism of racial reality rather than the liberal prism of a multiracial and multi-religious utopia can lead to only one logical conclusion; Western countries are in the process of unopposed invasion and are submitting in their entirety. Multiculturalism as practiced in the West today is an ideology of territorial and political aggression by the anti-Western invader and the submissive ideology of state sanctioned white European appeasement.

Democratic societies require balance if they are to remain democratic. Multicultural societies have drawbacks and if we are not to slowly slide into dictatorship or civil war, then the following negative points must somehow be balanced by the positives of multi-racial, multi-religious societies.

Part 1 of a 2 part article. To be continued.

This article is from my Gates of Vienna archive written between 2007 and today. I am in the process of republishing all of them on Substack. They provide a “diarised” observation of Western civilisational collapse and to my mind represent the most comprehensive collection of writing describing the very real war waged against the West by the Marxist/Islamic Alliance. Much of what I predicted twenty years-ago has already come to pass or is close to it. I am republishing the articles in chronological order. The best/most relevant articles will be published as a book later this year.

Imagine the scene. You are sitting on a bus with nineteen fellow adults at 4pm during school term time. Your journey is suddenly interrupted by the noisy arrival of nine teenage products of our utopian/dystopian comprehensive schooling system. They shriek, they swear and they spit. They eat crisps and throw the empty packets to the floor, drink coke and allow the subsequently discarded cans to roll up and down the aisle and between your feet.

One of them, a fifteen-year-old called Wayne turns up his ghetto blaster as a girl, covered in cheap gold jewellery, her hair scraped back, decorative rings adorning various parts of her overweight multi-pierced anatomy grinds herself into his lap, her lip-sticked mouth a knowing grin, her mascaraed eyes aflutter.

She is fourteen years old. She knows all about sex; thrice hetero, bi and gay varieties; she learned that at primary school. She goes by the name of Shazza and lost her virginity to Wayne’s brother Dwayne at the age of twelve.

Shazza also knows about abortions, at least she knows they are her right in the event that Wayne, the Epsilon-Semi-Moron she is presently gyrating upon, fails to use the state-subsidised condoms handed out in assembly and “Knock Her Up”. Should the wayward Wayne impregnate her, and should she not take up her inalienable right to abort Wayne’s epsilon offspring, she also knows her right to a free council flat as yet another ruined single mum teenager.

Shazza, Wayne and their gang all know about these things, and others, such as how evil the British Empire was and how we perpetrated and condoned the evils of slavery. Sadly though, the name Wilberforce will only elicit a vacant, bovine look or a glottal-stopped enquiry into which club he plays for.

There are some things however that she does not know. She has no concept of the notions of honour, patriotism, duty, obligation, deference and civility. She can barely read, spell, add up or multiply in her head. She has no knowledge of her culture, the history of her country or the history of the institutions that make up and form the community she grew up in. No knowledge of music, art, language or literature.

She is the same as the rest of her friends. Today, on board the number twelve bus they are simply representing their school (motto: Striving For Excellence In The Community). In later years they will represent Britain as her tattooed, alcohol-fuelled ambassadors in the Dantesque clubs and bars of Ibiza, Faliraki and Torremolinos.

They are the sub-race; their future lives will consist of eking out a low wage, semi-criminal, state-subsidised existence on the periphery of civilisation. They are the death rattle in the dying convulsions of a once proud educational system in a once proud nation.

Obscene as they are, the truly ultimate obscenity is they are the cold-blooded, calculated, consciously planned end product of the liberal/lefts tightly controlled forty-five-year experiment in Socialist Social Engineering. The British comprehensive inner-city school version of “Give me the boy and I will give you the Wayne”.

There is of course one other thing Shazza, Wayne and their friends know; you and the other nineteen adults on the bus are frightened of them. They know this because nobody has asked them to turn down the music, stop swearing, or pick up their litter. Would you?

© Paul Weston 2007

This article is from my Gates of Vienna archive written between 2007 and today. I am in the process of republishing all of them on Substack. They provide a “diarised” observation of Western civilisational collapse and to my mind represent the most comprehensive collection of writing describing the very real war waged against the West by the Marxist/Islamic Alliance. Much of what I predicted twenty years-ago has already come to pass or is close to it. I am republishing (here) the articles in chronological order. The best/most relevant articles will be published as a book later this year.

The article below was written in 2007.

When future historians look back at what was once Great Britain, they would do well to note the events of January 15th-22nd 2007.

In a quite extraordinary week, the people of Britain were given several clear indications of where their country was going, yet these indications were resolutely ignored by the media, the people and the government.

The TV Company, Channel Four, was at the forefront of the news, but for all the wrong reasons. In one programme they bought the nation’s attention to the sheer bigotry, intolerance and racialism of one section of our community, which was subsequently endlessly debated by the media and deemed worthy of such importance that even Gordon Brown and Tony Blair were sucked into the national breast beating.

This programme was “Big Brother” which for those mercifully unaware is a reality TV show charting the ignorance, pathology and hysteria of social degenerates locked together in a house for the viewing delectation of British people of ALL social backgrounds.

Last week’s programmes focussed on the unpleasantness with which an English girl and her friends treated an educated Indian actress. By mimicking her accent and calling her “that Indian” so a continental political rift ensued between Britain and India, smoothed over by the intervention of the aforementioned Blair and Brown. By the end of the week this unedifying spectacle attracted over 9 million viewers.

In another Channel Four programme, “Undercover Mosques” an intrepid journalist with a hidden camera put his life quite literally on the line and bought us news from various Mosques around the country. This news, essentially, was that homosexuals should be killed, paedophilia condoned, women as second-class citizens beaten — as should girls who do not wear the hijab, and lastly, Islam must take over the UK and run it under Sharia law whilst waging Jihad against the infidels.

To rub salt into the wound it transpired that some organisations calling for all the above have been singled out and praised by Tony Blair and the British police as role models for their inter-faith and multicultural activities. Perhaps this is why our politicised police, so keen to prosecute the BNP’s Nick Griffen for accusing Islam of being wicked, have done NOTHING in the face of Islamic calls for murder and conquest.

The viewing figures for this highly important programme were between 1 to 1.5 million people. Given the pre-release advertising and the importance that UK Muslims would put on such a programme it is probable that the vast majority of viewers were not of the race and faith singled out for extinction, but the Muslims themselves. Indigenous Brits may have numbered in the low thousands.

For the first time in this Country the mainstream population was given information previously only available to the tiny minority of people with sufficient interest and intelligence to seek it out via “right-wing” websites or books conspicuous by their absence in Waterstones.

I always thought that if the general population knew what I knew, then the political scene would change. I was sadly mistaken, and not just about the population at large. What should have triggered outrage was ignored by all, including the so-called highbrow newspapers. The Guardian refused to even mention it, whilst the rest of the British media were interested in one thing and one thing only, Big Brother.

“Undercover Mosques” is perhaps the most important programme to have been made in the UK since the invention of the television. It is not the time to detail the transcript here, but it was chilling, terrifying stuff. That the British, in their entirety, ignored it in favour of the appalling and degrading Big Brother, possibly the worst programme ever made is cause for concern, yet could the pathologically suicidal British fall any lower? Well yes, they could.

There were two other stories in the papers this week, both related to the European Union. The first was that the British Parliament would nod through a watered-down version of the EU constitution without, as previously stated, a referendum. The second was that Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, was intending to re-introduce said constitution despite the previous no vote from the Dutch and French. It would appear obvious that the EU Socialist Super State will be inflicted upon us undemocratically. Should we care about this or is Big Brother still uppermost on the warped, adolescent minds at the BBC? Both stories, of course, went unmentioned by the TV media.

Angela Merkel was an East-German Communist. Whilst at the Karl Marx University in Leipzig she was Secretary for Agitation and Propaganda in the Community youth wing. She will find this in keeping with the unelected EU Commissioners where ex-Communists make up seven of their twenty-seven members, including its current President, José Manuel Durão Barroso, once one of the leaders of the underground Maoist MRPP (Reorganising Movement of the Proletariat Party).

Vladimr Bukovsky is on record as stating that Communism never died and is now being inflicted incrementally on the West via the European Union. Do the British know anything of Bukovsky, or indeed of Communism? No, they do not, the BBC et al refuse to talk to him, after all, as an imprisoned and tortured dissident what does he REALLY know about Communism in comparison to the utopian, idealistic British liberal elites who run our government, media, civil service, police and educational institutions.

Do the British in fact know anything, absolutely anything of any significance at all anymore or is the limit of their thought process set at the bar of Big Brother? We also learned this week that a pass mark of 18% is all that is necessary to gain a C grade exam pass. 50% of our schoolchildren leave school without attaining this in English and Maths, yet 100% of them know everything about TV “celebrities” who can barely speak their native language.

And so we ignore the ideology of one movement who state they wish to eradicate us and another which killed close to 100 million people, whilst we embrace the ideology of celebrity, ignorance and pathology.

From my viewpoint, and I say this with great sadness, we deserve all that we get, which barring a revolution will be one of the following.

An Islamic State.

A Totalitarian Socialist State within the European Union.

A Failed State — after the economic collapse of the EU — caused by bureaucracy, an illiterate and innumerate workforce and unopposable competition from the East.

Revolution — in the event the British revolt before these scenarios unfold there will be carnage and civil war, possibly even European war. This is the least probable. We sit slack-jawed and glassy-eyed on our draylon sofas, worshipping at the Altar of television dressed in polypropylene casual wear, remote in one hand, chips in the other. We have all the Soma we need to insulate ourselves from reality.

So, this week we have been shown our choices, and we have chosen the path that 50 years of progressive education, Communist subversion, mass immigration and media brainwashing has pre-chosen for us. Much as we may wish to continue shopping on credit cards, watching reality TV shows and imbibing drugs and alcohol, I am afraid it is no longer up to us.

This was the week Britain died from infantilism, liberalism, ignorance and decadence, manifesting themselves in our utter indifference to our survival. We deserve to go, just as future Arnold Toynbee’s will relate.

There are currently three huge stories the MSM refuses to cover.

1) The court case in the Netherlands involving Bill Gates, Albert Bourla (head honcho of Pfizer) and Mark Rutte (ex-Dutch PM and current NATO head honcho) which revolves around accusations of Crimes Against Humanity - specifically dead and maimed Covid “vaccine” jabbed. In June 2025 the lead lawyer for the prosecution, Arno van Kessel, was arrested by armed counter-terrorism police in front of his family and thrown into a maximum-security prison (terrorist wing) where he was kept, manacled, without charge, for eight months. Arno van Kessel has now been stripped of his legal licence and reportedly suffers from PTSD and physical ailments due to his unlawful incarceration. Global MSM interest? Zero.

2) The current court case re Kweir Starmer and his Ukrainian twink arsonists is not subject to a D-Notice, but no MSM journalists are present in court. They could be there, but they choose not to be. The twinks might represent (via blackmail) a National Security issue re a sitting British Prime Minister involved in a non-boots on the ground war against Russia which might heat up and become WWIII. This has huge implications re outright war and/or nuclear war. UK MSM interest? Zero.

3) Ex-FBI head honcho James Comey was recently arrested and indicted for encouraging the assassination of sitting US President Donald Trump. UK MSM interest? Zero. This is surreally, breathtakingly perverse and bizarre.

I appreciate the British MSM is controlled by leftist revolutionaries, but there is more to this than politics alone. Large sums of money must also be involved to buy their otherwise inexplicable silence. Hence their thoroughly deserved soubriquet of Whore Media.

I watched video footage yesterday showing Afro-Islamic men of fighting age swarming into Spain from Morocco. The video is here. Some say the numbers involved are in the millions, and we know once within Spain they will ripple out to Germany, France, Ireland and Britain. We are witnessing a genuine invasion.

In 2012 I gave a warning speech in America about Europe, mass immigration and Islam. Youtube took it down and the original data is sadly lost, but the transcript of the speech is below.

Speech by Paul Weston

New York City

23 February, 2012

What I really want to talk about tonight is to warn America not to go down the same Islamic road that Europe finds itself on, particularly so Britain which is almost on the point of no return — or perhaps no peaceful return. Samuel Huntingdon was not necessarily writing about Britain when he penned his prescient book “The Clash of Civilisations”, but one particular theme he raised very much applies to my poor old country where he refers to the dying of civilisations and the lack of concern amongst their native people, due to what he terms the “Illusion of Permanency.”

No one in Britain expects tomorrow to be very different from today. No one really expects things to be particularly different this time next year, or the year after that. People find it inconceivable that the future could possibly be radically different to the recent past, but certain things have happened in Britain over the last 50 years that will make the next 50 years a period of total and utter transformation.

The reason for this is very simple, mass immigration and Muslim demographics. Now, when I talk about the illusion of permanency, this illusion is easy to maintain when the vast majority of the British people are racially as they have been for hundreds and hundreds of years, or when the Muslim presence in Britain amounted to just a few tens-of-thousands, as was the case in 1960. But that is no longer the situation.

Tony Blair’s Labour government opened the doors to mass immigration, with the express intention of destroying our traditional culture, which was so hated by the Left wing. The cat was let out of the bag by Blair’s speechwriter, a Mr Andrew Neather, who said they wanted “to change the cultural face of Britain and to rub the noses of the right wing in “diversity.”

Well, the left has been very successful, which is hardly surprising. Britain is a very small country, it makes up less than 1% of the worlds habitable land mass and contains just 1% of the world population. It also has a no questions asked welfare state, which enables immigrants to live far better lives than in their former countries. When such a comparatively rich, generous and tiny country invites the impoverished billions from the third world to enter, then it can only expect to be swamped. Which indeed it has been.

Sam Solomon’s book about Islamic immigration into the West and Jihad, called the Trojan Horse, describes the jihadist ideology behind mass Muslim migration. The liberal/left denounce it of course, but the Islamists are well aware of the effectiveness of infiltration. Abu Baseer, is a London based spiritual adviser to Ansar ul-Islam, a jihadist organisation. He had this to say about Islamic immigration to the West. Quote:

“One of the goals of immigration is the revival of the duty of jihad and enforcement of power over the infidels. Immigration and jihad go together. One is the consequence of the other and dependent upon it. The continuance of the one is dependent upon the continuance of the other.”

Or how about Col Gaddafi, who stated:

“We have 50 million Muslims in Europe, there are signs that Allah will grant Islam victory in Europe — without swords, without guns, without conquests. The 50 million Muslims of Europe will turn it into a Muslim continent within a few decades.”

Such honest and forthright statements of intent go over the heads of the leftist politicians though. Former Labour Minister Tony Benn recently said:

“This diversity provides a delightful snapshot of life in multicultural Britain. “The world today is such a small place which makes us lucky to have so many people from different backgrounds in the UK. Multicultural Britain is now here to stay so it’s great that we’re now finally learning to live alongside each other.”

This naiveté is astonishing, bordering on the criminal; although not all on the liberal left suffer from such infantile delusions. Patricia Morgan, who writes for Roger Scruton’s Salisbury Review, recounts the words of a leftist friend who was experiencing misgivings about flooding Britain with Muslims. Quote:

“When one of my old Labour Party acquaintances expressed anxiety over Islamic terrorism, I asked him why he had always been so keen on getting as many immigrants here as possible. He told me that he had been ‘trying to make the revolution’. So, while it had not been possible to storm Buckingham Palace and set up Soviets in Westminster, you could still change the population and supplant the hated ‘other’.”

Change the population….what a wicked and treacherous notion this is. And sadly, the left has succeeded. Our population has already been changed. If we want to look to our future, then we only need look at our primary schools.

In London, white children now account for only 20%, and I’ll say that again, only 20% of the school population. And England’s other city schools are going precisely the same way in precisely the same manner. The non-indigenous birth rate now averages an extraordinary 35% nationally, which realistically means 70-80% in the cities alone, thus consigning indigenous English children in Birmingham, Bradford, Oldham, Luton, Leicester and Slough to an ethnic minority in their own land – a fate awaiting English children in all our cities within a decade, and the entire country before 2030.

The fact that this has been accomplished deliberately, in order to further leftist revolutionary ideology, can only be termed as treason. During Tony Blair’s government the British Embassy in Pakistan handed out booklets outlining why Muslims should emigrate to Britain, and the chief official in Britain charged with monitoring visa applications, one Linda Costelloe-Baker, told a House of Commons select committee that her department was “under intense political pressure to hit immigration productivity targets” and that around 15% of the annual 2 million visas issued were approved because it was “easier to let them in than reject applications.” Over the term of the labour government, this 15% amounted to millions of immigrants who should not be in Britain at all

Exact population figures in Britain are hard to come by. The authorities maintain the total number is around 60 million, but no one really knows. The Independent newspaper suggested the population could already be as high as 77 million based on supermarket food sales, a figure borne out by the 76 million National Insurance cards in existence which are essential if you wish to work or draw benefits. In other words, some 16-17 million people are unaccounted for.

Clearly, not all immigrants are Muslims, but they make up a sizeable proportion and their high birth rate which averages 4 children per mother — you will note I did not say per couple because Muslim males can claim welfare payments and housing costs for up to 4 wives and unlimited children even though polygamy is illegal in Britain — so this, coupled with uncontrolled immigration, has essentially doubled their population every decade since 1960 when there were only some 80,000 Muslims in Britain. By 1990 this figure had grown to 1 million and by 2000 to just under 2 million. A recent study estimated there are now around 3-4 million Muslims in Britain, although this figure is very much open to debate and is quite likely far, far higher.

This is why the next 25 years will be nothing like the last 25 years. When the Muslim population doubled from 100,000 to 200,000 the only people really affected were the native British living in the emerging Muslim enclaves. But when the 3 million of today become six million by 2020, become 12 million, become 24 million then everyone is affected because at that point we will have lost our country.

And it gets worse. The indigenous British have at the most 1.5 children per couple, which means the generation born today is 25% smaller than their parent’s generation. The population pyramids of most European countries are upside down, by which I mean there are more elderly people than there are young. Amongst the Muslim demographic however, the population pyramids are the right way up with the young greatly outnumbering the old.

If we look at the population of Great Britain under the age of 40 it is as follows:

Indigenous Population 2012: 25.5 million

Non-Indigenous Population 2012: 6.75 million

If we project the figures for those aged under 40 forward to 2030, taking into account our declining population and the expanding Muslim demographic — and 2030 is just 18 years from now – we find ourselves facing a catastrophe:

Indigenous Population 2030: 19 million

Non-Indigenous Population 2030: 13.5 million

But it gets worse again. On top of this we need to take into account that some 250,000 native Brits sick to death of the state of multicultural Britain emigrate every year, and if third world immigration continues as it is, the figures will be as follows:

Indigenous Population 2030: 15 million

Non-Indigenous Population 2030: 23.5 million

The liberal left will sneer at this. So what? they will say. This does not mean a thing, it is just multiculturalism in action and something we should celebrate unless you a bigot and a racist. But suppose they are wrong. Suppose indoctrinated young Islamic males do not share the liberal left’s fluffy views on multiculturalism and would prefer instead to enact a rather more brutal form of Islamic mono-culturalism?

I use the younger population figures for two reasons. The first is to show our immediate demographic future. The second is to draw attention to the fact that the 18-40 year old demographic is of military fighting age. It doesn’t matter if young Islamic males are outnumbered today by grey haired, ancient Brits; the only thing that matters is they (Muslim males) will very soon outnumber our young indigenous potential defenders.

Is this right-wing hysteria? Right-wing paranoia? Of course not. People grounded in reality and knowledge understand the history of man is war. The left-wing, immersed in naive sentimentality, fantasy and ignorance, think the future of man is peace, no matter that conflict has always been driven by racial, religious and territorial ambition.

Already, we see this racial and religious division everywhere. Surveys suggest 40% of British Muslims wish to live under Sharia law. There are constant news items about the radicalisation of young Muslim males in Britain. We saw the rejoicing in the streets of England after the mass murder on 9/11. Constant news about thwarted terrorist attacks coming on top of the London transport suicide bombings that killed 52 and maimed 700, constant news about Mosques selling literature calling for the overthrow of Britain’s democracy, the murder of British Jews and homosexuals, the subjugation of the non-Muslim infidel and the desire to install a global Islamic caliphate.

And this is today. What will we see in the decades to come, when Muslims become a majority in the all important age group of 18-40? We only have to look around the world today to see the answer. Let me take just one example, Lebanon, which used to be a majority Christian country. As the Islamic demographic grew, so did their demand for control, which in 1975 triggered a 15 year religious civil war taking the lives of close to 10% of the population and wounding 33% — half of whom suffered from lifetime disabilities. The entire Christian leadership was exiled, murdered or jailed.

Is this our future? Britain’s security services will not be able to hold back Islamic terrorist attacks forever, and when the next one gets through I fully expect to see indigenous British hot-heads take revenge by murdering a Muslim somewhere in Britain or by torching a Mosque. And so will start the long slide into civil war; tit-for-tat atrocities becoming progressively more vicious before the entire country goes the way of Lebanon, or more recently Yugoslavia, which also fractured along tribal and religious fault-lines.

This view of future Armageddon will be sneered at by the liberal left, who continue to bombard us with the lie that Islam is a religion of peace, despite all historical evidence against this fantastical notion. But Islam is not a religion of peace; it is a political, social and structural order of supremacy and imperialism. Islam in its most fundamental form is the gravest threat we have have faced; far graver than Hitler, Stalin or Napoleon.

So, what can we do about this in Britain? Even talking about the subject is to be immediately branded a racist or an Islamophobe, both of which now constitute thought crimes which lead to prison sentences. The government and the media are out to demonise any person who talks about the very real problems we face, and in the interest of short term election cycles our politicians are content to sweep our longer term inevitable catastrophes under the carpet.

But it is too important to ignore. The very lives of our children are dependent on our action today, and there is little to be seen on the horizon that provides an answer. The liberal/left politicians are happy with the short term situation, because mass immigration provides them with mass votes and revolutionary foot-soldiers.

We did not make the colossal sacrifices between 1939-1945 in order to submit meekly, a bare few decades later, to yet another undemocratic ideology redolent of Nazism. We are not going to let this happen, we’re simply not. We are the awakening majority and for the sake of not just ourselves, but our children and grandchildren, we cannot allow Islam to take any further control of Great Britain.

America has some advantages over us. Your First Amendment guarantees free speech. Your Second Amendment allows you to bear arms. You have fewer Muslims than Britain statistically, and most importantly you have faith. Christianity is still a force to be reckoned with here. In Britain, the left triumphed in undermining religion some years ago and the defeat of Christianity as a driving force in Britain has removed a considerable obstacle to Islam.

I hope, I desperately hope we are not yet too far gone, even if Mark Steyn has already written us off. I will close by asking Americans to keep a close eye on what is happening to Europe and Britain and call a halt today, immediately, right now, of any further demographic or ideological growth of Islam in the Land of the Free. I implore you not to make the same foolish mistakes our naive or treacherous European politicians have made.

I am going to fight for Britain, but there is no guarantee Britain and Europe can be saved. And if we go, and America goes shortly thereafter, then so goes Western Civilisation — the most humane, moral and decent civilisation in the history of mankind — to be replaced by Islam, the most barbaric, illiberal and totalitarian force of pathological cruelty that can only take the Western world back to the dark ages. So please America, don’t let what has happened to Britain happen to you. Watch, appraise, listen and learn.

Finbar Sullivan was stabbled to death recently in Primrose Hill, London. Two men have been arrested and charged, both are black. Finbar’s father is a left/liberal who has no time for racism. He got most upset about large numbers of online comments from ghastly racists suggesting blacks and knife crime are somewhat of a problem. In his own words:

“It doesn't matter where Finbar's killer comes from, his colour, race, creed. It's nothing to do with that. It's a class thing, and it's been created by the government.If I hear anything to the contrary I'm going to really go to town with them, because Fin above all was proud to be a Londoner, proud of this multiracial, wonderful place we are."

I have been writing about this suicidal empathy/ liberal lunacy for years now, so rather than pen a new article today I will simply repost one I wrote in 2016 following the rape and murder of young woman in Germany, with particular reference to her father’s liberal reaction.

One of the more disturbing aspects of left-wing politics is the outright refusal by its followers to accept that we on the “right” don’t wish to commit collective suicide alongside them. No matter how much older and wiser I become, I will never understand the civilizational death wish of the Left. But not understanding it doesn’t mean I can ignore it. I am involved in their suicide because they have made me involved. And whilst it is suicide for them, it is very much murder for me and all those like me.

Take the horrifying case of the naïve and brainwashed Maria Ladenburger, raped and murdered by a “child” Muslim migrant in Freiburg, Germany. She was a medical student who altruistically went out of her way to help migrants in a refugee centre. Her father is Dr Clemens Ladenburger, a senior lawyer within the EU Kommissar class. I’m sure he constantly extolled the virtues of multiculturalism to his innocent daughter, in line with the tragically oxymoronic motto of the EU, “United in Diversity.”

The trouble is, we’re not really united in diversity, are we Herr Ladenburger? In fact, we are very much disunited by it, what with them a-raping and a-murdering us at every opportunity, insh’allah! But I doubt poor Maria feared Islam. Her knowledge of this 7th-century supremacist ideology would have been gleaned from a liberal angle only. She would have been unaware of expressions such as Mohammed’s “I have been made victorious through terror.” Words she had been trained to associate with Islam would only include “Islamophobia”, “racism”, “xenophobia”, “inequality”, “Palestine”, “oppressed”, “refugee”, “victim”, etc.

And now she is dead. One day we might all end up prematurely dead as well. Western governments tell their people the self-same lies Papa Ladenburger told his daughter. We have nothing to fear, they earnestly yet disingenuously preach. If you are fearful, you are mentally unwell. You are suffering from a phobia. Islam is a religion of peace. Those who refuse to accept this lie are fascists, racists and Nazis.

Poor Maria never wanted to be thought of as a Nazi. There are many people like her. None of them want to know the truth, because having accepted the truth they could no longer be liberals and would be labelled racists by their ex-friends! So they live a lie that will one day force them to submit to Islam. They are effectively committing suicide, and if they oppose those who do understand what is happening, then they become complicit in our murder as well.

An Afghan migrant murdered Maria, but it was her father who handed her to the Afghan migrant. Ergo, Papa Ladenburger was complicit in her murder, just as the political Traitor Class across the West is complicit in our future murder if it turns out Islam isn’t a religion of peace at all, and is actually the religion of blood and war as Winston Churchill stated.

The parents of Maria Ladenburger asked mourners to send money to refugee charities rather than flowers to the funeral of their raped and murdered daughter.. No matter what terrible things happen as a result of their insane beliefs, nothing seems to deviate the liberal mind from collective suicide.

The behaviour of the Ladenburger family is one small reflection of the behaviour of the entire West’s Traitor Class. They don’t mind committing collective suicide as a race, nation, people and culture because they seem to hate everything they themselves stand for in what they see as an unfair world. They view everything in black and white. They see an undeserving oppressor class (themselves) which can be exterminated without remorse, and they see an ever-deserving oppressed class whose members can do no wrong, and who can only throw off their chains of oppression after the oppressor class is extinct.

This is very much a mental illness. The driving instinct of humans is that of survival. To embrace your demise is a form of insanity. When suicidal Western elites insist those who do not wish to commit suicide must – simply must — accept the circumstances that can only lead to our cultural and racial eradication, then the Western elites become complicit in our murder. Just as Papa Ladenburger is complicit in the rape and murder of his daughter.

Unfortunately for us, stopping our future murder is proving to be very difficult. It is now a crime to wish to racially and culturally survive in the liberal West. Or at least a crime if you speak out about it. I wish to survive. I am threatened by resurgent Islam. I believe Islam to be a backward, savage, dangerous political ideology which imperils my future survival because of the murderous and supremacist edicts within the Koran and Hadiths.

Am I still allowed to say that, Prime Minister May? Am I allowed to wish to survive and remain outside the confines of a prison cell?

I recently wrote about the revolutionary Left’s planned subversion of Britain and the West which can only lead to civilisational collapse, but I didn’t touch on their ace in the pack which is mass immigration from the least ideologically Western countries our Traitor Class could find.

A lot of people talk about the Anti-White ethos which currently holds the whip-hand over all our institutions - which many feel arises from a genuine hatred of whites. I don’t believe this is the case. The colour of our skin is unimportant from a revolutionary Communist viewpoint intent on collapsing the West and ushering in Communist rule.

What is important though is the simple reality that the Christian, or even the post-Christian Capitalist West, was never going to willingly accede to Communist rule because the Westerners were, by and large, too educated, too comfortable, too affluent and too Conservative. Ergo, we had to be replaced – a la Bertolt Brecht - for those reasons alone. It just so happens we are white, but that is not why we are being replaced.

There is an interesting distinction between Communist subverted Britain and countries like Poland, Czechia, Slovakia etc which overthrew Communist rule in 1989. These nations refused to sign up to the UN Migration Compact and EU driven relocation quota. They built border fences and maintained strict asylum policies. Public opinion and political consensus across left and right prioritised ethnic and cultural homogeneity.

Having lived under real, practised communism, they developed a cultural immune system that instantly recognised multiculturalism, open borders and native self-hatred as the subversive Communism it most assuredly is.

Post 1989 Western Europe took the opposite path. The UK, France, Germany and Sweden now have Muslim populations of 6–10 % and rising, with birth shares disproportionately higher due to elevated fertility and earlier childbearing. White British births hover near or below 50%. Multiculti Britain is becoming an ever-increasingly unpleasant place to live, and we see this in Poles, Czechs etc who came here decades ago getting the hell out today and returning to their homelands – which are now racial, cultural, spiritual and economic utopias compared to subverted and broken Britain.

The racial and cultutal obliteration of Britain and the West is unprecedented, and by that I mean what is happening to us has never happened before in human history. The betrayal is a unique event. No previous civilisation at the apex of its wealth, technological achievement and military supremacy has chosen to accelerate its own demographic replacement through mass immigration from culturally dissimilar regions while simultaneously constructing an institutional apparatus that pathologizes via Critical Race Theory and DEI its own historic native majority.

Earlier demographic shifts—the 7th–8th century Islamic Arab conquests of the Persian and Byzantine Empires, Islamic Ottoman advances in the Balkans, Germanic migrations into the late Roman Empire—occurred under conditions of military victory or imperial decline. The conquered or weakened host societies did not enact subversive propaganda and laws that treated their own founding identity as the root problem to be self-hated and displaced. Nor did they grant incoming groups “protected class” status under equality legislation. The modern Western case is unique in that it features a prosperous host society demonising its own traditions and people as the moral justification for “change.” A far more accurate description would be genocide.

Equally striking is the total absence of any such racial role-reversal. No non-White majority country in Asia, Africa or the Middle East is importing large numbers of White Westerners while passing laws that grant them protected status and critique the native population as inherently evil and oppressive. The flow is unidirectional: into the West, never the other way around.

The post-1989 divergence therefore reveals a profound irony. The eastern/central half of Europe that suffered decades of communist rule now acts as the civilisational preservative. The western half that thought it lived in freedom - even as it suffered decades of Communist subversion - is now approacing racial/religious confrontation/war or civilisational collapse and erasure.

In human terms this epochal hinge-point in history moment is happening at a slow yet seemingly irreversible speed. In evolutionary or civilisational terms it is happening in the blink of an eye. History offers no precedent for this surreal situation, but history does indeed offer warnings.

I recently joined Rupert Lowe’s Restore Britain party and did so the moment I heard the party’s spokesman, Charlie Downes, describe the party as counterrevolutionary. If Britain ever needed a counterrevolution, it is now — and it is long overdue.

For decades, Britain has endured a subtle but relentless revolution from the Left that has subverted and destroyed the country I was born into. I have lived through this revolution and believe it can only be reversed through deliberate counter-revolutionary politics.

Nothing works in Britain anymore. Everything has been subverted and broken. Nothing feels sustainable. This social destruction traces back to the late 1960s when Marxist revolutionary György Lukács declared:

“I saw the revolutionary destruction of society as the one and only solution. A worldwide overturning of values cannot take place without the annihilation of the old values and the creation of new ones by the revolutionaries.”

This mindset fuelled the revolutionary Left’s “Long March Through the Institutions” across the West. 1970s Student radicals chanted “Hey hey, ho ho, Western civ (civilisation) has got to go.”

Over time, those same radicals — now in positions of power — captured Britain’s key institutions: politics, the civil service, education, media, police, judiciary, and more. They gained control over every institution of command, control, and the dissemination propaganda.

The media labels this hard-left revolution “woke,” which sounds relatively harmless. Earlier it was called political correctness, before that cultural Marxism, before that cultural terrorism, and before that Critical Theory which originated in the Soviet Union.

Critical Theory was designed to subvert and cripple from within the Christian, capitalist Western countries beyond the reach of Soviet tanks. The Soviet Communists really did want to build a global/international Soviet Republic incorporating Western Europe.

In the 1930s Moscow’s Communist Internation (Comintern) stated they must: “Fight by all available means, including armed force, for the overthrow of the international bourgeoisie for the creation of an international Soviet republic.” Their weapon of choice was subversion AKA Critical Theory.

Critical Theory — or woke ideology — is the systematic destructive criticism of Western culture. It attacks the family, masculinity, morality, motherhood, tradition, sexual restraint, loyalty, patriotism, nationhood, heredity, ethnocentrism, conservatism, Christianity and free market economics.

At the same time, it endlessly repeats accusations of alleged Western evils: racism, sexism, colonialism, patriarchy, whiteness, nationalism, homophobia, fascism, xenophobia, and imperialism.

The challenge for Western revolutionaries was that while the “New Communist Man” queued for basics in Russia, British workers were queueing for beer in Ibiza. The working class showed little interest in revolution, so the strategists turned to marginalised groups — black immigrants, feminists, homosexuals, the asocial, and the alienated. The more grievances, the better.

All were encouraged to feel oppressed and to direct anger at the perceived oppressor. The alienated and asocial proved especially useful. Their personal anger, often rooted in troubled backgrounds, could be channelled into violent protest movements. Today we see this in groups like Antifa — the mentally troubled foot-soldiers of the revolution.

The next step was to expand the anger, alienation, and division. Revolutionaries worked to make the abnormal normal, the normal abnormal, the natural unnatural, and the unnatural natural. They deliberately debauched and perverted society, creating a social sickness driven by hatred and division.

And just look at what they have done. Just look at Britain in 2026. Mental and physical illness have soared. Birth rates have collapsed. Testosterone levels and sperm counts have plummeted. Divorce rates, obesity, diabetes, autism, ADHD, anxiety, and fear have all risen sharply. Society is fractured along lines of gender identity, race, religion, and politics. Imported populations and native alienated groups often harbour visceral hatred toward those unlike themselves.

All of this division has been engineered in the name of leftist revolutionary ideology. It is profoundly wicked and immoral. Yet Lenin dismissed conventional morality, declaring: “Morality is that which drives the revolution.” But without morality a civilisation cannot survive.

We now survey the wreckage of a once glorious and proud nation deliberately destroyed by an engineered revolution of hate and division where the alleged oppressor is, of course, the Christian, white, married, heterosexual male — the very group that built the foundations and erected the props of Western civilisation over twenty centuries.

How much longer can we survive? Not long, in civilisational terms and this does not even account for the existential threat of resurgent Islam in the West. We stand at a hinge point in history, comparable to the Bolshevik Revolution, or the eve of WWI.

To survive, every institution captured by the destructive Left must be recaptured. We do not have the luxury of the decades the revolutionaries enjoyed. In education, to take just one example, the apolitical tweedy old buffers with their pipes and leather elbow patches were gradually pushed aside by radicalised young teachers over decades, but we don’t have decades to turn this around. We have only a few years, if that.

The Institutions must be retaken, and the revolutionaries expelled. In figurative terms, the left-wing revolutionaries must be smashed, destroyed, chased out, and permanently banished from politics, the civil service, media, police, academia, the military, and the judiciary. Can Rupert Lowe and Restore Britain achieve this? I do not know for certain, but I do know he is the only prominent political figure who has openly stated he wants to.

Restore Britain represents our last realistic chance of civilisational survival. Restoring something damaged means cutting out the rust, removing the corruption, and discarding what is broken. A wrecked car cannot simply be “reformed” — it must be restored. A cancer cannot be reformed; it must be cut out. A revolution cannot be reformed; it must be met with counter-revolution.

Rupert Lowe is a counter-revolutionary, Reform’s Nigel Farage is not. In fact, he is as far away from being one as is humanly possible and has no intention whatsoever of confronting the destroyers. If he wins the 2029 election, Britain is finished.

If you are serious about saving our country join the counter-revolution, join Restore Britain. There is no other viable option, and time is running out far faster than most people realise. The 2029 election may be the last chance for a demographically dying Britain to reverse course via the political process.

Failure could leave us facing a future resembling the horrors of 1970s Lebanon or 1990s Yugoslavia. The situation is deadly serious and civilisational in scale. For the sake of your children and grandchildren, I urge you to join Restore Britain.

The United Arab Emirates recently reported it will no longer allow UAE students to study at British universities because of the radicalisation they were likely to undergo via off-shoots of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Daily Telegraph recently reported 27 British universities were rallying behind Ayatollah Khamenei’s Islamic regime.

MSM outlets in Britain used to regularly publish articles about the Islamisation of British universities but seldom do in our strange new times. I wrote an article about this in 2012 which I reproduce below. One can only assume the Islamisation is much worse today than it was close to a decade-and-a-half ago. 2012 article as follows:

The British once built glorious structures in our varied colonies and did so in order to project imperial power architecturally. But after we retreated within our own borders and invited in the Third World we in turn are now subjected to foreign statements of imperial power. This is very apparent in the ancient university city of Oxford, home to the massive Oxford Islamic Centre.

This building occupies the majority of its three-acre site and appears to have been constructed slap-bang in the middle of the colleges’ sports fields. The dreaming spires of Oxford have some serious competition here — the architectural projection of Islamic supremacy simply has to be seen to believed (go to Google maps and enter “Kings Mill Lane, Oxford.” The lane serves as the northern border of the site).

The Oxford Islamic Centre gained Royal approval recently, a landmark event celebrated by Prince Charles, a noted admirer of Islam who is apparently impervious to the reality of Islam’s core tenets. The Islamic centre, built at a cost of some £75 million, was funded by a number of hard-line Islamic states, most notably Saudi Arabia.

Between 1995 and 2008, eight universities — Oxford, Cambridge, Durham, University College London, the LSE, Exeter, Dundee and City accepted more than £235 million from Muslim rulers and those closely connected to them.

The donors tell us the Islamic Centres of British Universities merely want to promote an understanding of Islam, but Prof Anthony Glees, a man who has studied the rise of Islamic extremism in our universities, suggests their real agenda is rather different. He argues they promote an extreme ideology and act as a form of propaganda for the Wahhabist strain of Islam within universities. They push, he says, “the wrong sort of education by the wrong sort of people, funded by the wrong sorts of donor”.

If this is true, why on earth are we allowing these Islamic centres to be built and why on earth are we allowing the construction costs (and one assumes the associated backhanders) to be funded by people and states linked to supremacism and terrorism?

Saudi Arabia has spent around 90 billion petrodollars funding the growth of hard-line Wahhabist ideology in the West, yet Saudi Arabia is also a country that bans crosses, Bibles and any Christian teaching within its borders. Our much-vaunted multicultural tolerance seems to be just a one way street to oblivion. Or, to put it more bluntly, we are being played for Dhimmi fools.

Fifteen of the nineteen 9/11 terrorists were Saudi nationals, and Hilary Clinton has since stated Saudi Arabia is the single biggest financial contributor behind the rise of Islamic extremism. In the politically correct newspeak so beloved of our recent political leaders she said: “it has been an ongoing challenge to persuade Saudi officials to treat terrorist financing emanating from Saudi Arabia as a strategic priority”.

In 2007, the Guardian reported that a survey conducted by the Policy Exchange think-tank found extremist literature in a quarter of the one hundred mosques and Islamic institutions it visited, including London Central Mosque in Regent’s Park, which is funded by Saudi Arabia. The literature advocated violent jihad, murdering gay people and stoning adulterers, with most of this hateful, homophobic and seditious material produced by agencies closely linked to the Saudi regime.

Britain’s Muslim schools are also being slowly taken over by hard-line Saudi Wahhabist ideology. According to the Daily Telegraph, 68% of Muslim schools investigated were linked to Islamic fundamentalists, and this does not take into account the 2,000 madrassas around the country which are attended by some 80% of Muslim schoolchildren outside school hours. The madrassas teach the Koran in Arabic, along with the usual hateful Islamic propaganda about “wicked” Western society and Jews.

By the time Muslim children enter university, they have already been taught to hate their host culture with a passion, so it should come as no surprise that a study of five years of lectures on politics at the Middle Eastern Centre at St Antony’s College, Oxford, found 70% were “implacably hostile“ to the West and Israel, nor that 30% of people convicted for al-Qaida-associated terrorist offences in the UK had attended a British university or institution of higher education.

Think-tanks have highlighted a succession of extremist speakers invited to deliver lectures unopposed at university Islamic societies, including University College London (UCL). Westminster University recently elected students with links to the extremist group Hizb ut-Tahrir as president and vice-president of the student union.

In 2011, secret files obtained by The Daily Telegraph and WikiLeaks disclosed that at least 35 terrorists held at Guantánamo Bay were indoctrinated by extremists in Britain. The leaked documents, written by senior US military commanders, illustrated how Britain has effectively become a crucible of Islamic terrorism over the course of two decades.

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, president of University College London’s Islamic Society between 2006 and 2007, tried to blow up a flight to Detroit on Christmas Day 2009 by ingeniously designing a pair of exploding underpants. Whether this was actually possible is something wiser minds are pondering, but the intention to cause mass murder via novelty underwear was certainly foremost in engineering student Umar Farouk’s propagandised mind.

Killing in the name of Islam is rather popular amongst “British” students. In 2008 a YouGov poll found 33% of Muslim students in Britain believed killing someone in the name of religion to be justifiable. This was exhibited recently at a conference held by the Atheism, Secularism and Humanism Society at Queen Mary University in London, when a follower of the Religion of Peace threatened to kill various debaters if they dared to mention Mohammed.

The Independent reported it thus: “The same man then began filming the faces of Society members in the foyer and threatening to hunt them down if anything was said about Muhammad, he added that he knew where they lived and would murder them and their families…on leaving the building, he joined a large group of men, seemingly there to support him. We were told by security to stay in the Lecture Theatre for our own safety.”

Queen Mary’s has no plans to hold another conference on themes Islamic. They have submitted before the religion of Islam — just as intended. The word “Islam” translated from Arabic to English actually means “submission” — a practice avidly carried out by British University Chancellors who turn a blind eye to such Islamic shenanigans along with the British police, who apparently provided “reassurance” to the debating society but lacked a certain amount of courageous get-up-and-go when it came to actually finding and arresting the bearded gentlemen who made the death threats.

The British government has also submitted before Islam. The rather lightweight Home Secretary Theresa May (who also doubles up as Minister for Women and Equality…) stated some forty British universities have been radicalised. Ms May said: “I think for too long there’s been complacency around universities. I don’t think they have been sufficiently willing to recognise what can be happening on their campuses and the radicalisation that can take place. I think there is more that universities can do.”

The British government has at least tried to something about this, despite their utter uselessness being so all-encompassing as to be almost endearing. Under their new “Prevent” strategy our clueless leaders promised to spend more on identifying threats in prisons, universities and the health service…and to ensure no more cash was given “to organisations that hold extremist views or support terrorist-related activity of any kind”.

Not a bad notion really. The public funding of people and organisations wishing to kill us smacks of foolishness at the very highest level, but the British government is made up of the usual half-witted suspects when it comes to recognising the danger posed by the Religion of Peace. No one should be shocked to discover Theresa May admitting to the Guardian: “the money from the £63 million anti-extremism budget has been given to groups that promote hardline beliefs.”

Such is the derisory state of tragi-comic, Dhimmified Britain. Hard-line Islamic States that outlaw Christianity in their own countries are allowed to pour hundreds of millions of pounds into Britain in order to promote supremacy, jihad, terrorism, homophobia, misogyny and anti-Semitism.

University Chancellors look the other way because they are either afraid or have handsomely benefitted financially. The British police look the other way as well, through fear of being called names and the British government financially rewards the extremists through fear and/or criminal incompetence.

Unless things drastically change in the very near future, I think it safe to say Britain is on the point of no return. Accelerating Muslim demographics, blatant Islamic fundamentalist propaganda and a supine indigenous population guarantee our imminent destruction. All the powers of the State seem to work with those who wish us harm and against those who wish to expose Islam for what it really is.

Better late than never – I’m weighing in on the GB News interview between Restore Britain’s spokesman Charlie Downes and presenter Nana Akua, with particular reference to her aggressively asking Charlie if she is English. By posing that question, she’s essentially saying the English don’t exist as a distinct people. Nana Akua is clearly not English – she’s African, from the Ashanti tribe in Ghana. She cannot be English in the ethnic sense. It would mean anyone from the world’s 8 billion people could claim to be English... which means England and the English cease to exist as a unique nation and people.

Nana Akua enjoys a luxury Charlie doesn’t have: dual identities. She has her African tribal roots plus her adopted English/British identity. But for Charlie, a young Englishman in his early twenties, there’s no such fallback. He cannot move to Ghana and claim membership of the Ashanti tribe. He could try, but they would just laugh at him. And they would be right to laugh. Charlie can no more be part of the Ashanti tribe than Nana Akua can be part of the English tribe. Only a heavily propagandised fantasist could believe either is remotely possible. He is clearly English. His sole identity is English and when this tribal reality is undermined by people like Nana Akua it becomes a direct racial attack on the English people and England itself.

Charlie could live to 2080. His children will see the 22nd century. What will England look like then? We already see the epochal trends. The 2021 Census showed only 3 million native British males aged 20-30 – a number likely down to around 2.5 million now, with hundreds-of-thousands emigrating every year, mostly from Charlie’s demographic. Meanwhile, over 4 million migrants have arrived since 2021 alone, and the majority are young Afro-Islamic males aged 20-30.

Native British births have also dropped sharply – now just half of total births and projected to fall below 25% by 2040. This is terrifying. It is happening at evolutionary warp-speed and is accelerating exponentially. It is nothing other than complete racial, cultural and civilisational erasure previously seen only after shattering military defeat and never in times of peace. Until today, that is.

Does Nana Akua, a casually self-proclaimed Brit, truly feel this threat of civilisational erasure that Charlie knows is real? No, she does not, because she’s neither English nor British and has no ancestral roots in ancient England. Whatever happens to England and the English is of little importance to her. If an Islamic regime took over England in 2035 akin to Iran’s 1979 Islamic revolution she’d likely fly back to Ghana, her true homeland. Charlie can’t. England is his ancient homeland. If he loses England, he has nowhere else to go.

The English have the moral and ethical right to remain the majority people and culture in our historic homeland. But that right is rapidly vanishing. If we hold fast to our present suicidal course, Charlie will become a racial minority living under an Islamic government in England well before his fortieth birthday.

When Nana Akua questions Charlie’s English identity, she’s promoting what amounts to genocide. Without English identity and unity there can be no resistance to this genocide. The Crusades were unified by Christianity. Our resistance today in post muscular Christian England centres simply and only on being English – our last line of defence against racial and cultural oblivion.

That’s why Restore Britain matters. It’s the only credible party offering a genuine solution. I’m now a member. If you want England and Britain to survive, you have to back Rupert Lowe and back Restore Britain. If they don’t win in 2029 there may be no peaceful democratic way out of this nightmare

The demographic clock is hyper-ticking and speeding up. Act now. Whilst there is still time. Become a member of Restore Britain - for your children, your grandchildren, and your very civilisation.

Like many of us, I didn’t know much about Greenland until Trump mentioned he wouldn’t mind a spot of it. The legacy media has since performed exactly as expected in their ravening hyena-ish encirclement of The Donald as they denounce his imperialism in their barking, snarling and salivating bloodlust.

But Greenland, as it turns out, is rather important to America in both geo-political and national defence terms. Why so? Because it sits smack bang in the middle of Russia and America as the crow flies - or more pertinently as an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) flies. See piccy below unashamedly stolen from the ghastly Daily Telegraph this morning.

Looking at a conventional map, this seems an unlikely route but as any pilot will tell you, the shortest route to anywhere by air is as far away from the equator as possible and as close to the poles as possible. This is all to do with earth’s largest and smallest circumferences.

Greenland’s location in the North Atlantic/Arctic places it squarely on the shortest great-circle route between North America and Eurasia, which makes it vitally important for ballistic missile early warning. Every second counts when it comes to incoming ICBMs. The legacy media has made no reference to this of course.

Until fairly recently there would have been no need to do so. The USA already operates a key ballistic missile early warning radar at Pituffik Space Base in northwest Greenland, which acts as a northern sentinel for North American aerospace security - or “hemispheric security” as Trump puts it.

In addition to this Greenland is a NATO member, courtesy of its status as an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark. But there, as they say, is the rub. Trump and various senior political and military bods have shown no reticence in their attitude toward the Europe of today and tomorrow. They genuinely believe Europe is falling to a Red-Green (Communist-Islamic) Alliance, which in both political and demographic terms is becoming increasingly difficult to argue against.

Denmark is governed by the Social Democrat (SD) party in coalition with various others including the Green Left Socialist People’s Party and The Red-Green Alliance Party (yes, seriously…). The SD Party itself sits under the umbrella of the Party of European Socialists.

Socialists don’t like Trump. NATO and Trump seem to be falling out. There is no guarantee Denmark 2050 would not be part of an Islamic-Communist governed European Union. Russia and China make no secret of their territorial ambitions viz the arctic. None of this bodes well for the future of American defence.

Enoch Powell once stated: “The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils” which is something I wholeheartedly agree with. The preventable evils in the Arctic/Greenland scenario are self-evident.

American Presidents don’t have the luxury of putting virtue before national defence. So even though the chances of nuclear war are very low today (but not as low as they were a mere few years ago) it is still incumbent upon a responsible President to account for low-probability but catastrophic scenarios like nuclear conflict or shifts in allied reliability that could expose vulnerabilities in ICBM defence.

Far too many people think there will be no serious consequences to the multicultural lunacy enveloping Western Europe. Such people are shortsighted idiots or ideological zealots. Trump is much wiser and vastly more pragmatic. His view is essentially this: “America should secure its northern flank now, because we cannot be certain what Europe will look like in 2050.”

Ain’t that a fact, Donald, ain’t that an absolute fact.

We find ourselves in a catastrophic dilemma. We have, at great expense as a country, gifted properties to poor people from the third world whose main qualification for subsidised housing is based entirely on their possession of minimal saleable skills coupled with at least four children – thus leapfrogging their way to the front of the social housing queue.

The Grenfell Tower tragedy seems to have quietly slipped into Britain’s historical past. The immediate aftermath certainly excited many scribblers within the liberal media, but as some of the issues raised were hugely embarrassing to both the government and the BBC, so the Grenfell inferno was consigned to Orwell’s Memory Hole.

One of the main embarrassments was the inability of the establishment to actually establish how many poor unfortunates had died and how many had survived. This was because large numbers of the Grenfell inhabitants were ethnic minorities of dubious paperwork. Some were legal migrants, some illegal. Many were unknown to the authorities despite being in receipt of government welfare. The numbers of inhabitants seemed markedly out of proportion to the number of flats. Flats were let and sub-let and then sub-sub-let before falling off the state radar and entering such murky depths as only to be detected by sonar.

Grenfell Tower, in point of fact, serves as a microcosm of modern, progressive Britain with regard to controlled immigration and controlled welfare. By which I mean there is no control at all. If the British state is unable to track the state financed inhabitants of a single building, how on earth can it track the gargantuan numbers of people entering porous Britain? The answer of course is it cannot, and it really is high time we stopped believing a single thing the government tells us about migrant numbers and national population figures.

Social housing has become a huge issue for our politicians, albeit for quite the wrong reasons. We need more and more subsidised housing we are told, in order to satisfy the demand of a cheerfully ever-expanding population. This sounds quite healthy from a demographic point of view, until one discovers the native British constitute a rapidly declining population whilst the migrant population is exponentially exploding.

This disastrous demographic disparity is clearly visible in London, where according to Migration Watch the majority of children born are the progeny of foreign born parents. This ethnic minority majority becomes even larger when the number of children born to first and second generation immigrants is factored in.

One inevitable consequence of the rise in foreign numbers is the inevitable demand they subsequently make on the long suffering native British tax-payer. We are told immigration is a cultural and economic boon to frowsty, pale old England, but this is a lie easily evidenced in the clamour by foreigners for subsidised housing. According to the Muslim Council of Britain¹ almost one third of British Muslims live in social housing and it is the Muslim community which is growing far faster than any other migrant demographic.

Perversely, even as the numbers seeking social housing increased by 60% since 1997, the number of social housing units actually declined by half a million² between 1997-2007 and has since declined even further. The higher percentages of ethnic groups seeking social housing are as follows: Nigerians 29% Bangladeshis 41% and Somalians 80%. Needless to say, all these groups represent high unemployment statistics and average at least four children per couple.

The government predicts Britain will have to build five million new homes³ over the next two decades in order to house newly arrived migrants and the children of historical migrants. They don’t couch it in quite those terms of course, but that is what it amounts to. All the new build houses you see going up in rural areas are not for immigrants per se, but they are for native Brits fleeing the multicultural cities, after which their houses and flats are then taken over by new arrivals from Somalia and Eritrea.

London is a most peculiar place these days, home to the global rich and the third world poor, but no longer home to many native British blue or white collar workers, unless they had the good fortune to buy a property before the insane price rise frenzy made England’s capital city off limits to England’s young. And whilst London is the most extreme example of an ever growing housing demand and supply issue, much of the rest of the country is following suit.

Here we come to the crux of this article which is - as it so often is in my depressing ramblings - about the end of Western civilisation. But how can housing or social housing possibly exacerbate the fall of the West I hear you cry! Well, here’s how: In 1997 Tony Blair opened Britain’s doors to the world’s poor, and in they jolly well came. But Tony neglected to build more social housing in which to ensconce them, thus manufacturing a screeching demand on the one hand whilst simultaneously failing to satisfy it on the other.

Clever Tony knew exactly what would happen, and proceeded to buy as many houses as he possibly could, safe in the knowledge the prices could only go one way, which they duly did. Between 1997 and 2017 house prices tripled. This is where the ubiquitous end of Western civilisation comes into play. Over the last fifteen years, home ownership fell from 60% to 35% among 25-34 year-olds - the key child-bearing demographic.

No responsible young native adults want to think about starting a family before they can securely house them. And as they could not afford to buy a house they delayed procreation, but the longer they delayed procreation the faster and higher and dizzier rose the house prices until finally they disappeared over the financial horizon along with the non-existent pitter patter of tiny feet within non-existent walls.

This is not to say there is a dearth of pitter pattering tiny feet in Britain. Quite the opposite is the case. The pitter pattering has now swelled to an ominous rumble in the multicultural cities; a rumble even the most half-witted of half-witted rural liberals has starting to notice.

We find ourselves in a catastrophic dilemma. We have, at great expense as a country, gifted properties to poor people from the third world whose main qualification for subsidised housing is based entirely on their possession of minimal saleable skills coupled with at least four children – thus leapfrogging their way to the front of the social housing queue.

And while they remorselessly advance demographically, our young native generation who should in turn be providing Britain’s next generation, find themselves too poor and too exhausted to do so, working all the hours God sent in order to pay their rent and taxes – taxes which are then spent on housing, feeding, educating and medicaiding foreigners who are having children. Lots and lots of children. Huge numbers of children, many of whom will grow up with little appreciation of their good fortune and will quite probably harbour a certain antipathy toward the infidels and kafirs whose hard work, sacrifice and altruism will merit scant thanks or appreciation by the New British as they contemplate the dawning of the Anglo-Caliphate.

What strange times we live in. Perhaps they are Epochal End Times, but this is something we have yet to find out. All we can do today is to highlight the absolute insanity in encouraging our childless native adults to flog themselves near to death in order to pay for the housing and children of an imported demographic which regards this country with envious eyes and slowly and surely draw their plans against us.

This article was first published at The Salisbury Review in 2018

¹ http://www.mcb.org.uk/muslimstatistics/

² https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/236

³ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/12032152/new-homes-housing-crisis-migrants.html

Almost twenty years ago now, or “twenty sod-bollocking years ago” as Mark Steyn would put it, I started writing articles which mapped out in real time our inexorable slide toward civilisational ending catastrophe. In 2007 I predicted our demographic collapse would rapidly intensify over the next two decades. The figures I projected have now come true in 2025 - and will become far worse at an ever-accelerating rate.

Can the democratic process solve our impending slide into near extinction? It could, theoretically, but I have a horrible feeling our survival as a people and civilisation can only be assured by stout Kentish Yeomen rather than sharp suited Kentish Farages’.

For example, what will Farage do about the following, if and when he becomes PM? Between 1997 and 2025 approximately 18 million migrants came to Britain, the majority of them aged 20-30. They joined an existing 12 million earlier migrants and their second and third generations born here, the majority of whom are also young. A further 5 million more migrants are expected to enter Britain over the next 5-7 years. The majority of them young. Total today - 30 million. Total by 2032 - 35 million.

How many young white British aged 20-30 actually exist on this sceptred Isle? Answer, just 5 million, or 67% of the purported total population in that age demographic. This percentage is dropping fast via a combination of young white British emigration and below replacement level birth rates - which lead to a halving of tomorrows generation.

We see this in glaring reality through the astonishing decline in white British birth rates, which as recently as 1997 stood at approximately 94% of total births. By 2020 this had dropped to 68%, by 2021 to 67%, 2022 to 66%, 2023 to 55%, 2024 to 51% and are projected to fall ever-further and ever-faster to just 25% somewhere between 2035-2040. If we look at the current 50% non-white British birth rate it is instructive to note the bulk of it is driven by the average Muslim birth rate of 3.5 which also explains why our share is set to drop below 25% circa 2035.

Why such a sudden and accelerating drop, particularly over the last couple of years? Answer, Britain saw a massive rise in gross immigration over the last four years, amounting to an astonishing 4 million, mostly young and, to put it brutally bluntly, of breeding/fighting-age. The last four years also saw an exodus of close to 1 million white British, mostly young and also of breeding/fighting age. And remember, the total number of white British aged 20-30 according to the 2021 Census was only 5 million, so with a 1 million exodus between 2021 and 2025 this number is now just 4 million.

Once the tipping point is reached, everything accelerates massively. This is akin to the Hemingway character replying “gradually, then suddenly” to the question of how he went bankrupt. It took decades for the Muslim birth rate to rise from 1% of total births in 1970s Britain to close to 20% today. But having breached the tipping point, it doesn’t take long to hit 40% and then 80% - especially so when the white British demographic is rapidly disappearing.

Put simply, a Muslim couple will have (on average) 3.5 children before the mother is 21, whilst a white British couple will have just 1 when the mother is in her mid-thirties. Fast forward 42 years (assuming birth rates and motherhood ages remain the same) and 100 Muslim couples produce 350 children and 1,255 grandchildren. The 100 white couples will produce just 50 children over the same 42-year period and zero grandchildren. When the grandchildren do finally arrive in 70 years’ time there will be only 25 of them……

The demographic tipping point I warned about almost twenty years ago has arrived and will now get very much worse at an ever-increasing rate via the compound interest effect of below replacement level births (ours) and well above replacement level births (theirs.) A full 34% of births in Britain in 2023 involved parents both born outside Britain.

I will close with a brief summary: 18 million migrants arrived since 1997 to join an existing 12 million. This combined 30 million will see the addition of a further 5 million over the next few years. The majority of this 35 million non-British demographic are young. 1 million native Brits recently left Britain, thereby reducing their number from 5 million to 4 million. A further 1 million or more are likely to leave over the next 5 years. The white British birth rate was 94% in 1997, approximately 50% in 2025, and a projected 25% within the next two decades.

This is a racial / civilisational ending catastrophe. The data I quoted about immigration uses gross figures, not net, but they ARE true government figures. 18 million migrants really have arrived over the last couple of decades. The lower net immigration figures take into account migrants who subsequently went home again, so it might not be as bad as I portray, but a succession of British governments have no idea how many migrants subsequently left. Quite literally they have no idea at all.

Witness politicians like Rupert Lowe asking such questions of Home Office officials who splutter, stammer, tell him they don’t have the data to hand; or the dog I ate it; or they left it on the bus, etc. So splitting hairs about the exact numbers is a complete waste of time. The figures are so huge it makes little difference if they are XYZ percentage smaller. Even at the lowest “net immigration level” they are civilisational ending, and let us not forget there are many credible people claiming an extra 20 million exist in Britain. Just look around our towns and cities and you know this is very likely the case.

So….. what do you intend to do about this demographic apocalypse, Mr Farage? I appreciate your thoughts on tax and other such things, but I cannot help but feel your talking about mundane political issues in the face of our imminent racial/civilisational collapse is akin to Belgian politicians talking about tax in 1939 whilst completely ignoring the Panzer tanks rolling through the Ardennes Forest en-route to Belgian Political HQ.

I would also ask the same question re “what they intend to do about this” of King Charles, supreme military commander and sworn defender of the realm, along with his three military chiefs: General Sir Gwyn Jenkins, Royal Navy. Air Chief Marshal Harvey Smyth, Royal Air Force. General Sir Charles Roland Vincent Walker, British army. And if they have no plans at all, are they not bona-fide traitors betraying the sacrifice of every British soldier, sailor and airman who died defending the realm over the last 1,500 years?

Support PW via Substack subscription or https://buymeacoffee.com/paulweston

Dear readers, the following provides a brief background about me, this Substack account, and why I am doing what I am doing.

We are living through the surreal first moment in two millennia when the entire Western edifice (its people, laws, liberties, art, science, democracy, humour, music - everything that took twenty centuries of blood and genius to build) could be dismantled within just one-quarter of the lifespan of a single generation. In terms of reality and logic this is inevitable and unarguable, courtesy of mass immigration and the “positive/negative compound interest effect” on birth rates (theirs compared to ours) combined with the most uncompromising political-theological movement (Islam) the world has ever produced.

Between 2007 and 2018 I wrote countless articles, mainly for the Gates of Vienna site in America, and a handful for Roger Scruton’s Salisbury Review and Kathy Gyngell’s TCW site in Britain. My writing concentrated on Islam, the hard-left, liberalism, socialist / communist subversion, feminism, the Long March Through The Institutions, racial/religious breakdown and potential European civil-war in the vein of 1990s Yugoslavia (in 2007 I predicted this could happen across Western Europe somewhere between 2025-2030) immigration, Globalism, demographics, birth rate disparities, the subversion of the police / education / judiciary etc and I predicted/argued that unless stopped they would, combined, lead to the utter destruction of Western Civilisation somewhere between 2030-2040.

I had pretty much forgotten all about these dusty old articles to be honest, but a recent conversation with an old acquaintance persuaded me to take another look after he told me he thought I was quite mad fifteen years ago but now realises I was simply fifteen years ahead of the game. He then told me ALL his previously apolitical friends who once considered me a far-right fascist are now quietly muttering about the obvious destruction of Britain and what on earth could be done to halt it.

So…. After re-reading a number of my semi-forgotten earliest articles I realised they collectively and presciently charted the destruction of Britain written in real time between 2007 and today. They outlined why it is happening; how it is happening; who initially planned it and when. They outlined who is/are currently implementing it, and what the only logical outcome can be – which is the end of Western civilisation long before 2050.

I was also struck by the accuracy of my predicted (back in 2007) demographic figures and the concomitant rise of Islam. I have read tens-of-thousands of articles over the years, and hundreds of political books, but I have yet to read anything as concisely all-encompassing with regard to the destruction of Britain and its institutions as just twenty to twenty-five cherry-picked articles from my archive would serve if presented collectively as a book – with the addition of newly written opening and closing chapters.

My intention then is to re-publish approximately fifty of my historical articles on this Substack account, opening with the twenty most pertinent/important which will make up the bulk of a new book. I appreciate I lack the elegant writing style of Douglas Murray or the brilliance, wisdom and wit of Mark Steyn, but in my defence Steyn wrote mostly about North America, whilst Murray’s sophisticated verbiage was not written for the average man/woman in the street (the principle victims of the assault on the West) nor were they all-encompassing, and nor were they as concise.

The whole point of such a book is that if widely read it could change the political direction of Britain. It would make the unarguable point that what the left is doing - and has been doing for decades – amounts to a racial crime against humanity, and a revolutionary assault on gentle England and the English that amounts to treason and a criminal betrayal. In short, it would enable ordinary people to rise up unhampered by the accusations of “racist” and “fascist” used against us by genuine fascists and very real genocidal racists of an anti-white / anti-Western Civilisation variety.

This is why I am re-posting my old articles, and this is why I am collating a number of then into a book.

About me: I am 62 years old now. I got involved in writing and politics in my forties. In 2013 I set up the political party Liberty GB which ran for a few years before being disbanded in 2018. It was too early, really. Most people were blissfully unaware of the coming horrors, and I saw little point in the futility of banging my head repeatedly against a stubborn wall of ignorant resistance.

That said, it was not a total waste of time. I became known in American political circles and twice toured the USA and Canada speaking at relatively high-profile conferences, including CPAC in 2016. I met and maintained contact with a number of important people there, some of them close to Musk and Trump today.

I was interviewed on multiple occasions by the BBC and Sky News in Britain. Sadly, 99% of these interviews never saw the light of day, simply because I demolished the opposition. One of the rare times an interview actually made it onto the telly-box was one with Andrew Neil’s Daily Politics in 2015/2016 which can be viewed here.

I was involved with Tommy Robinson over the years, speaking at a few EDL rallies and co-leading Pegida UK with him. We got on famously. Both of us have a wild side and recognised it in each other immediately. Unlike most middle-class types, my entire adult life was spent amongst working-class men. Fresh out of school I became a professional oil-rig diver specialising in sub-sea pipeline welding. After that I became involved in property and mixed exclusively with builders. It was only after I married that I experienced the horrors of middle-class dinner parties…..

Assuming the book is successful, I want to use it as a springboard into a revitalised political-(ish) career. I don’t believe Nigel Farage’s Reform will be Britain’s Salvation Party, but nor do I have any intention of starting Liberty GB.2

Advance UK is the only other viable option, but Ben Habib is not going to win the next election, and the one after that may well be too late for democratic politics anyway. I will try to join Advance UK though, but only after the book is published. If I am rebuffed as “too right-wing” it would mean Advance UK is not Britain’s Salvation Party either. On that issue, we must wait and see.

To be brutally honest, I don’t fully believe Britain can be saved via the political process. The country might well be too far-gone for that already, let alone in another two election cycles. The crude reality of the matter is that only 5 million white British aged 20-30 exist in England and Wales, and 18 million (gross immigration, not NET) arrived between 1997 and 2025 (mostly aged 20-30) to join an existing 12 million first, second and third generation migrants already here and mostly young.

In addition to this, the white British birth rate was 94% in 1997 and will dip below 50% next year, before falling below 25% somewhere between 2035-2040. And…. on top of this a further 5 million migrants, mostly aged 20-30 are scheduled to arrive over the next five to seven years. And…. close to 1 million white British legged it abroad over the last five years, mostly young, thus reducing their 5 million number in 2021 to 4 million by 2025. How, pray tell, does a politician in a suit peacefully redress such a Demographic Apocalypse?

This leads me, in a roundabout manner, to my previous references about being middle-class. Britain needs someone who can talk on equal terms with British Colonels and Brigadiers. Someone with sufficient gravitas/credibility as to be taken seriously by senior American politicians and people like Joe Rogan and Elon Musk. Someone who is also equally at ease amongst the British working-class, but most importantly, and I cannot stress this enough hence my repeating it, someone who can talk with British Colonels and Brigadiers. Britain is doomed without the support of America and without the support of senior – but not TOO senior – officers within the British military.

Please note I am NOT calling for a violent counter-revolution at this point in time. That said, it is a matter of crucial urgency we start to organise now, because it will be impossible to organise AFTER a possible Globalist coup in the future. Be advised Keir Starmer, the UN, EU, WHO, World Bank, NATO, IMF already have the legislative framework in place for tyrannical control in the event of a genuine - or engineered - “Complex Global Shock” event such as a pandemic…. or even (this is in their own words) something as innocuous as resistance to the Sustainable Development Goals set out in UN Agenda 2030. And even without such an extreme scenario, the incoming digital surveillance, financial de-banking, geofencing, biometric ID wallets, and central-bank digital currency will make future resistance and organisation an impossibility. This has to be organised NOW.

I don’t want to be the someone involved in battling to save Britain, but reality is reality and much as I would like to see a younger someone-else, or indeed an any-aged someone-else step up and try to organise what must be done, I have yet to see that someone. Ergo, I am prepared to be that someone. Such a person needs a number of qualities, which I appear to have. In addition, I am divorced and single, my parents are dead, as tragically is my son. I mention this only because of the dangerous reality in going against the Globalist system – which is best suited to a man with no living family.

I currently live a modest life and could see out my days in moderately comfortable surroundings. All of the above though requires money. Not huge amounts in the beginning, but huge amounts will be necessary in the near future. Hence my desire to become involved with Musk who, I suspect, shares my exact views about poor old Britain’s future and its probable only salvation.

Please share this message far and wide. Subscribe to this Substack account. If you were thinking of leaving your property to the Battersea Dog’s Home…. don’t. Leave it to me instead.

You can donate via the Substack mechanism, or via my https://buymeacoffee.com/paulweston account. You can donate directly to my bank account below – for a while, at least…. This is not a call for beer money; it is a call for the future of Britain. Please answer the call.

Payments within the UK:

Paul Martin Laurence Weston

Account Number: 23-14-70

Sort Code: 94296756

IBAN: GB30 TRWI 2314 7094 2967 56

Payments from outside the UK:

Paul Martin Laurence Weston

Swift/BIC: TRWIGB2LXXX

Iban: GB30 TRWI 2314 7094 2967 56