Whenever I hear politicians discuss people, it is usually in the context of money. We are either a burden on the state or a source of income for them to spend, give away and waste. In listening to the debate around immigration, I hear its advocates trumpet the incomers’ contribution to the wealth of this country but what is dismissed are all the attendant issues that such an influx can bring to the host country.

That we need foreign help at all is a condemnation of this country’s education system and highlights its endemic lethargy. We should be training and teaching our people the skills to fulfill our own needs, while simultaneously instilling in them a sense of personal and national pride. Upon attaining their qualifications, we should make it worthwhile for them to stay so that we have less need to look abroad for talented people who clearly should be in their own, often poorer, home countries improving life there. Yet government is prepared to ignore this to gain a quick, cheap fix to a long-term problem.

Being open to mass immigration and unfettered asylum applicants brings all manner of potentially unwanted and incompatible attitudinal, criminal, cultural, dietary, educational, ethical, health, hygiene, ideological, linguistic, moral, personal, political, religious and social side-effects.

When considering the discontent and concern relating to this topic, I would characterize it thus: Imagine you take someone into your home. You give him the spare room and make him comfortable. His command of English is modest, you do not speak his language but it is you who is made to feel inadequate. Your guest doesn’t eat breakfast when you do, nor does he eat the same food, but it causes you problems to serve that meal twice before a busy day so, to help him, you change your time and add his menu. Soon he complains the light in his room is too bright, so you change to a lower powered bulb. Not long after he grumbles that, being over the lounge, the noise of your television is disturbing him as he tries to get to sleep. You turn the volume down but that doesn’t work for your sensitive guest so you swap his room for that of your youngest child, much to its resentment. All is well for a while but now the early morning sun is causing problems. You put up thicker curtains, which solves that issue. However, still not content, he expresses a dislike for the wallpaper on the stairway and says it gives him nightmares. Oh, and by the way, he doesn’t like the way the furniture is set out in the lounge – and so it goes on.

The more accommodating you are, the more he abuses your good nature. Consequently the situation becomes strained and you eventually feel like a stranger in your own home. The point is this – should anyone endure such person? I think not. Thus, after making the necessary adjustments to this metaphor, simply scale it up then home becomes Britain and that person could stand for one of a number of communities now found in this country. Labour ruthlessly promoted multi-culturism as a tool of division and to create a client voter base. Worse still, it now seems the needs and wishes of minorities (who often stubbornly retain their culture) are treated as superior to those of the indigenous population. It’s a perversion of how things should be. But what do our politicians care? After all, it is not they, in their cosseted world, who encounter most of the consequences of their policies.

We are a long established, settled and stable country with an extensive, rich history and culture but I sense we have reached a crossroads, not just in the UK but also the wider western world. Students of classical history will know of the dilemma faced by Valens in AD376. Thousands of people, mostly Goths who were fleeing from the Huns, crossed the Danube and sought admission to the empire. Hoping they would become farmers and integrate with Roman society, the Emperor allowed them to settle. However, they became disaffected; skirmishes broke out and then full-scale resistance ensued. The attempt to deal with the revolt resulted in the Battle of Adrianopole (Hadrianopolis), which was a disaster. Valens was killed, along with generals, the core of the army and many administrators. The Goths became emboldened.

Whilst external threats contributed to the fall of the Roman Empire in the west, its greatest enemies were internal: moral and political decay; lack of a strong centre. As I look at our impotent leaders, examine their vacuous rhetoric and despair at the trivial nature of what they deem significant, I despair.

I believe three evils currently blight this country: Apathy, which crushes ambition; Regulation, which hinders achievement; Submission, which prevents independence.

If we are not to falter and want to avoid simply becoming a footnote in history then hard, brave choices now need to be made. First is to get our nation back. Out of the EU and free of their stifling restraint, we will flourish while it flounders. The next tasks will be to rebuild effective trustworthy governance, create a cohesive national identity, have clear aims and chart a firm course. I sense UKIP is the only party with the backbone and vision to do this.

Photo by Robert Bruce Murray III // Sort Of Natural

Print Friendly, PDF & Email