A Place to Stand

Labour's people once upon a time

Bertolt Brecht, German communist playwright, poet etc wrote this bitter condemnation of the East German authorities following the 1953 uprising, quelled by Soviet troops.

After the uprising of the 17th June
The Secretary of the Writers Union
Had leaflets distributed in the Stalinallee
Stating that the people
Had forfeited the confidence of the government
And could win it back only
By redoubled efforts. Would it not be easier
In that case for the government
To dissolve the people
And elect another?

Sometimes life goes beyond the imitation of art. One of my rules is that when some politician says something against their interests it is true because they have no incentive to lie. A Labour nomenklaturist called Andrew Neather has gone public in London's Evening Standard to say that the Labour party deliberately decided to promote mass immigration to achieve demographic change to their political advantage - effectively to elect a new people for their benefit:

Drafts were handed out in summer 2000 only with extreme reluctance: there was a paranoia about it reaching the media.

Eventually published in January 2001, the innocuously labelled "RDS Occasional Paper no. 67", "Migration: an economic and social analysis" focused heavily on the labour market case.

But the earlier drafts I saw also included a driving political purpose: that mass immigration was the way that the Government was going to make the UK truly multicultural.

I remember coming away from some discussions with the clear sense that the policy was intended - even if this wasn't its main purpose - to rub the Right's nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date. That seemed to me to be a manoeuvre too far.

Ministers were very nervous about the whole thing. For despite Roche's keenness to make her big speech and to be upfront, there was a reluctance elsewhere in government to discuss what increased immigration would mean, above all for Labour's core white working-class vote.

Understandable since the main losers from immigration by unskilled people are those at the poorer end of society, to whom they are competition rather than cheap workers - the ones whose loyalty Labour have always relied on because they claimed the party existed to protect their class interests. The obscene lying scum who make up the Labour party decided, quite deliberately, to elect a new people on whose votes they could entirely rely (this being before they started bombing Iraq thereby alienating a lot of Moslems).

Understandably this has had some newspaper coverage

Mail on Sunday - 'Dishonest' Blair and Straw accused over secret plan for multicultural UK

Telegraph - Labour wanted mass immigration to make UK more multicultural, says former adviser

Sunday Express - LABOUR IMMIGRATION ‘PLOT’

Daily Star - MIGRANT FLOOD 'PLAN'

& on blogs here & abroad

The government has produced what used to be referred to in the Nixon era as a "non-denial denial" saying "I don't know to whom he is referring or what he is referring to, but if one wants to take the views of somebody with a political motivation, that's up to him." This has been naturally been reported by the BBC as a dismissal of a piece of news the entire organisation had decided to censor reporting of in the first place. Neather has done another article denying nothing he said but using smoke & mirrors to which I have added this comment:

Inexplicably in the list of "related articles" at the end of this there is no link to the original article. Allow me to make up for that strange omission - http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23760073-dont-listen-to-the-whingers---london-needs-immigrants.do

Anyone reading it will see that Neather, displaying all the ego one might expect from NuLabour apparatchiks, had said exactly what he is accused of saying. The minister in Parliament has issued a "non-denial denial" blaming it all on Neather having the "views of somebody with a political motivation" - as can be seen by his response here his only motivation is to support Labour which suggests the truth is, if anything, even nastier than what those in charge have decided to keep from their core voters.

Difficult to think that any self respecting member of the "white working class" will ever again wish to vote for a party that behaves with such contempt & betrayal of its people's interests.
-------------------
I have also sent a letter to most of our press which appears not to have been published. Perhaps this isn't an important story. Perhaps it is but if so there must be some other reason for not publishing reader's views.

Labels: British politics, Media