If one looks at a map of the ancient world, one will see the names of many peoples whose cultures have long disappeared: Hittites; Phoenicians; Scythians, for example. What became of these peoples?

Could the English, Welsh or other European peoples be on the brink of disappearing like those ancient peoples – either by population replacement or loss of cultural identity? Will historians of the future study how a once-great world-leading culture destroyed itself?

Britain at the time of the Romans was occupied by various Celtic tribes, as had been much of Western Europe at one time. Our history books tell us that first the Angles, Saxons and Jutes invaded from Germany and pushed the Celts westward. Then came the Vikings from Scandinavia. While there were some migrants, it wasn’t a wholesale population displacement. The genetic stock remained for the most part the same. It was mostly a cultural and aristocratic change. Over a few centuries those who had been mostly Celts took on Anglo-Saxon language and customs and the English nation was born.

At the 2011 census the white British represented 82% of the British population. This may not suggest extinction anytime soon. Official figures which came out this year show that 14% of the population was born abroad. More strikingly, more than a third of babies born in England and Wales now have at least one parent born abroad. At this rate we are heading for a dramatic demographic change, within a few short decades.

As discussed above, national identity is a cultural rather than genetic phenomenon. Many immigrants and their descendants who have come to this country since the Second World War have become thoroughly British or have successfully integrated, while retaining pride in their family heritage. We should encourage and expect immigrants to assimilate over time.

Integration is hampered however, both by the pace and sheer number of arrivals – officially 650,000 annually – the importation of so many followers of a religion which resists assimilation and the leftist doctrine of multiculturalism, which holds that it is racist to expect immigrants to adapt to the host culture and that our national identity is something to be ashamed of.

I deliberately use the word ‘assimilate’. A harmonious nation is not one which sustains parallel cultures and opposing identities. It’s one in which people share fundamentally the same culture, identity and rules of conduct. The principle is newcomers should take on the ways of the land which they have chosen to come to, and surely were attracted by. Instead the host culture is expected to adjust to the ways of the newcomers.

Eastern European immigrants will likely assimilate more easily – though any influx which is so large as to establish a self-perpetuating diaspora will hamper assimilation. Third world immigrants are less culturally similar, so present more of a problem. Paul Collier in his book ‘Exodus’ points out that the reason why industrialised societies are wealthier than Third World ones is because they have better functioning and more co-operative cultures – but by importing large numbers of immigrants from the third world, we import those dysfunctional cultures.

The Cultural Marxists regard the lands and cities, such as pre-war Eastern Europe and India, as models of different peoples, cultures and religions living side-by-side. In fact that was the very reason why those places were inherently unstable, resulting in war and atrocities. Since World War Two they have pursued the highly irresponsible policy of installing such potential instability and conflict across Western Europe.

I have previously written articles on this site about the other side of population replacement – the collapse in the white British birth rate. These trends apply across Europe and are indeed more pronounced in some other countries.

When it comes to peoples such as the Native Americans, Tibetans and Aborigines, mass immigration of foreigners, loss of culture and population collapse is seen as a bad thing. When it comes to European peoples, the opposite view is taken – because of course we are the oppressors – so our destruction is welcomed. As white German Green politician Stefanie von Berg asserted regarding ethnic Germans becoming a minority in their country, “That is a good thing.”

While the Scots and Welsh can push their nationalism, Englishness or Britishness is seen as the oppressor culture. TV presenter Laurence Llewelyn-Bowen thinks the term ‘England’ itself is racist. On top of this we have a popular culture which encourages young people to emulate American gangsta rappers or speak in a fake West Indian accent.

We need to get a perspective before using words such as ‘genocide’, ‘tyranny’ or ‘fascism’ and not exaggerate. I have just returned from holidaying in Germany. It is harrowing to visit museums and see the pictures of people suffering the final humiliation of being stripped naked before being shot into a mass grave of smiling children who died in human experimentation. (At least Germany is honest about this. In Russia you don’t see exhibitions of GULAG atrocities. Our media doesn’t show you pictures of civilians killed in Allied bombing raids on Iraq or Syria.)

We don’t live under a full-blown police state (though we do seem to be moving in a worrying direction). Our government isn’t systematically killing people. No one is being deported to GULAGs or concentration camps.

It would seem rather extreme to describe what is happening to European peoples as genocide, wouldn’t it? The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines genocide as “the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group.” Rather than in the brutal, familiar understanding of genocide – hard genocide, we might call it – genocide could take place over an extended time with minimal violence and maximum persuasion – soft genocide.

To fulfil the above definition, destruction must be deliberate. Contributors to this site often refer to the ‘Coudenhove-Kalergi plan’. This architect of European integration notoriously stated:

“The man of the future will be of mixed race. Today’s races and classes will gradually disappear owing to the vanishing of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-Negroid race of the future, similar in its appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples with a diversity of individuals”.

Personally I’m sceptical this comment has grown into a full-blown clandestine plan, but if it had, the powers that be across Europe couldn’t be doing more than they are to accomplish it.


[Ed: This is the ninth article in the series. There are more to come which will be published here in the next days. Read Article Eight here, Seven here, Six here and Five here,  and find links to the earlier articles at the bottom of the page here.]


Print Friendly, PDF & Email