Britain’s problem, other than a complacent and entitled public sector leadership, is that nothing much works any more and lots of things that were once nice aren’t so nice now
It would be interesting to know in how many situations “where the conditions which scholars consider to be indicative of incipient civil war are present”, civil war did not, in fact, subsequently occur.
The Far Right are more likely to infiltrate the Deep State. Really? Ha ha ha. Tell me you know nothing about vetting without telling me you know nothing about vetting.
Most DV'd securocrats are full-on Centrist Dads / Mums.
Was DV'd for nearly twenty years, albeit before the Great Leap Forward.
It's nice to read a source arguing calm reason, but it's worth noting there are very real reasons why some Brits, especially the White Working Class, are growing increasingly frustrated over migration. I'm afraid to say major and more serious civil unrest may well be on the way. Back in 2016, historian Niall Ferguson gave a talk to Google Zeitgeist. It was called 'A Recipe for Populism' and is still available on YouTube. In it, he traced the history of populism in America. He found only two ingredients were required: a major economic downturn and/or stagnation driving fears of economic scarcity, and a rate of foreign-born citizens within the population above 14%.
It's worth noting that all the areas I've checked which saw unrest during the Southport Riots were areas which had experienced grooming gang scandals. Many, like Hartlepool, had also experienced recent Islamically motivated attacks on locals, with a pensioner in Hartlepool stabbed in the neck by an Islamist (Moroccan asylum seeker Ahmed Alid).
The problem is that the Home Office hasn't done its homework on Social Integration Theory. Socioeconomic sorting in relation to housing for less economically advantaged is always going to mean that one is likely to see two or more very high in-group populations living side-by-side in situations where conditions of unprecedented mass migration exist. In-group doesn't necessarily lead to out-group hostility, but any appearance of special favouritism towards one group will create vociferous out-group hostility in the other.
There can be no accusations of special favouritism in employment, even if one group enjoys the benefits of in-group preference and the other underperforms. There can be no denigration of the majority group's culture, history, or calls for compensatory justice- even though I'm not arguing for the whitewashing of history, but rather a far fairer assessment of the British Empire as a source of pride as well as shame. There can be no unequal treatment in the criminal justice system. Most inequalities in the UK's criminal justice system were due to disparate rates of crime. The only substantial structural failure in the past two decades was a tendency for people from an ethnic minority background to fail to avail themselves of the substantial discounts on sentences for pleading guilty (although Black men were failed in some instances due to the misdiagnosis of schizophrenia as psychosis, although the reverse has also been true as well).
Put simply, if one plays special favourites with one group, even if it's in a misguided attempt to correct for historical wrongs, it will always result in out-group hostility. The correct method to address historic wrongs is to engage in attempts to stamp out genuine nepotism, remove the systemic advantage through looking at the privileged access networks enjoyed by a small percentage of the majority population (and their children), and address social disadvantage using colour blind methodology which looks at social disadvantage through a universal lens, rather than a racial one. Polling shows that people are far more receptive to a social mobility approach as opposed to DEI (which most studies show stokes racial resentment and makes workplaces uncomfortable for racial minorities and LGBT individuals).
The British establishment and institutions have been doing virtually everything wrong in the cause of stoking racial tensions. As if it wasn't bad enough that they swept the grooming gangs scandal under the rug, it really doesn't help that some schools have been cancelling Easter or Halloween whilst gleefully celebrating Eid. The establishment has got the culture wrong as well as the economics.
The literature on in-group is pretty dire. It's notoriously hard to shift in-group after early childhood. The only thing known to change it is the type of camaraderie fostered by the military. Even then it doesn't overwrite the existing in-groups, it merely interjects a more powerful group loyalty bond. A recent survey showed that Brits saw immigration as the most important issue, slightly more important than the economy- which let's face it is pretty dire.
Plus, they've now admitted they were wrong on the economics. Importing large numbers of low wage migrants was always going to lead to a per person dilution of public services. The OBR's stats show that 60% of migration in the past ten years has been in the low or no skilled category, and only 4% are net contributors to the Exchequer.
Given itvtook establishment 20 years to admitto existence Pakistani male rape gangs i don't expect to live to see it accept the existence of violent revolutionary extremists either.
Homophobia is a problem that's on the rise too, for the same reason as oppression of women and girls. London has become more homophobic and it should be a concern. Incidentally I loathe using the medical term phobia for either hatred of Islam or hatred of gay people, but as they're official terms I use them.
When one side - the Islamists — is willing to die for a higher principle, and the other side is not, then things end with a whimper, not a bang. The British are utilitarian atheistic hedonists now. Nothing is worth dying for. The slim window of sentience is all that exists, and all that matters is maximum pleasure and minimizing pain. Keep British males slathered in porn, football and warm beer and they’ll remain completely docile as their culture is dismantled and their women removed.
At the moment we see a patchwork nation more clearly. We are self-sorting into our own enclaves and ghettos. Some are very pleasant, village pubs by the duckpond are busy on a Sunday and look idyllic. Other parts become migrant enclaves which may not be a problem at first, so long as there are jobs and we ignore the necessity or benefit of having a national interest, whether it is taxation, contribution based benefits, foreign policy or just a common culture. Sooner or later the patchwork starts to fray. You also fail to mention the prospect of a major financial crisis making it even harder to keep it together.
"Everyone recognises that Islamist extremists represent a tiny part of the UK’s Muslim population" I find it amusing when people argue in this bizarre way. I literally only have to find you one dude (perhaps a concerned parent in Batley) or me, who thinks it's just above 5% and your argument fails.
The UK has too many local divisions and ancient loyalties for a ‘civil’ war. Certain cities will certainly have riots and a culture outside of the region in which they are but a unified‘rebellion’ is something else. The US has exported its fears to our foreign owned press but apart from some wideeyed commentators reality rules.
It would be interesting to know in how many situations “where the conditions which scholars consider to be indicative of incipient civil war are present”, civil war did not, in fact, subsequently occur.
The Far Right are more likely to infiltrate the Deep State. Really? Ha ha ha. Tell me you know nothing about vetting without telling me you know nothing about vetting.
Most DV'd securocrats are full-on Centrist Dads / Mums.
Was DV'd for nearly twenty years, albeit before the Great Leap Forward.
It's nice to read a source arguing calm reason, but it's worth noting there are very real reasons why some Brits, especially the White Working Class, are growing increasingly frustrated over migration. I'm afraid to say major and more serious civil unrest may well be on the way. Back in 2016, historian Niall Ferguson gave a talk to Google Zeitgeist. It was called 'A Recipe for Populism' and is still available on YouTube. In it, he traced the history of populism in America. He found only two ingredients were required: a major economic downturn and/or stagnation driving fears of economic scarcity, and a rate of foreign-born citizens within the population above 14%.
It's worth noting that all the areas I've checked which saw unrest during the Southport Riots were areas which had experienced grooming gang scandals. Many, like Hartlepool, had also experienced recent Islamically motivated attacks on locals, with a pensioner in Hartlepool stabbed in the neck by an Islamist (Moroccan asylum seeker Ahmed Alid).
The problem is that the Home Office hasn't done its homework on Social Integration Theory. Socioeconomic sorting in relation to housing for less economically advantaged is always going to mean that one is likely to see two or more very high in-group populations living side-by-side in situations where conditions of unprecedented mass migration exist. In-group doesn't necessarily lead to out-group hostility, but any appearance of special favouritism towards one group will create vociferous out-group hostility in the other.
There can be no accusations of special favouritism in employment, even if one group enjoys the benefits of in-group preference and the other underperforms. There can be no denigration of the majority group's culture, history, or calls for compensatory justice- even though I'm not arguing for the whitewashing of history, but rather a far fairer assessment of the British Empire as a source of pride as well as shame. There can be no unequal treatment in the criminal justice system. Most inequalities in the UK's criminal justice system were due to disparate rates of crime. The only substantial structural failure in the past two decades was a tendency for people from an ethnic minority background to fail to avail themselves of the substantial discounts on sentences for pleading guilty (although Black men were failed in some instances due to the misdiagnosis of schizophrenia as psychosis, although the reverse has also been true as well).
Put simply, if one plays special favourites with one group, even if it's in a misguided attempt to correct for historical wrongs, it will always result in out-group hostility. The correct method to address historic wrongs is to engage in attempts to stamp out genuine nepotism, remove the systemic advantage through looking at the privileged access networks enjoyed by a small percentage of the majority population (and their children), and address social disadvantage using colour blind methodology which looks at social disadvantage through a universal lens, rather than a racial one. Polling shows that people are far more receptive to a social mobility approach as opposed to DEI (which most studies show stokes racial resentment and makes workplaces uncomfortable for racial minorities and LGBT individuals).
The British establishment and institutions have been doing virtually everything wrong in the cause of stoking racial tensions. As if it wasn't bad enough that they swept the grooming gangs scandal under the rug, it really doesn't help that some schools have been cancelling Easter or Halloween whilst gleefully celebrating Eid. The establishment has got the culture wrong as well as the economics.
The literature on in-group is pretty dire. It's notoriously hard to shift in-group after early childhood. The only thing known to change it is the type of camaraderie fostered by the military. Even then it doesn't overwrite the existing in-groups, it merely interjects a more powerful group loyalty bond. A recent survey showed that Brits saw immigration as the most important issue, slightly more important than the economy- which let's face it is pretty dire.
Plus, they've now admitted they were wrong on the economics. Importing large numbers of low wage migrants was always going to lead to a per person dilution of public services. The OBR's stats show that 60% of migration in the past ten years has been in the low or no skilled category, and only 4% are net contributors to the Exchequer.
Given itvtook establishment 20 years to admitto existence Pakistani male rape gangs i don't expect to live to see it accept the existence of violent revolutionary extremists either.
Homophobia is a problem that's on the rise too, for the same reason as oppression of women and girls. London has become more homophobic and it should be a concern. Incidentally I loathe using the medical term phobia for either hatred of Islam or hatred of gay people, but as they're official terms I use them.
When one side - the Islamists — is willing to die for a higher principle, and the other side is not, then things end with a whimper, not a bang. The British are utilitarian atheistic hedonists now. Nothing is worth dying for. The slim window of sentience is all that exists, and all that matters is maximum pleasure and minimizing pain. Keep British males slathered in porn, football and warm beer and they’ll remain completely docile as their culture is dismantled and their women removed.
At the moment we see a patchwork nation more clearly. We are self-sorting into our own enclaves and ghettos. Some are very pleasant, village pubs by the duckpond are busy on a Sunday and look idyllic. Other parts become migrant enclaves which may not be a problem at first, so long as there are jobs and we ignore the necessity or benefit of having a national interest, whether it is taxation, contribution based benefits, foreign policy or just a common culture. Sooner or later the patchwork starts to fray. You also fail to mention the prospect of a major financial crisis making it even harder to keep it together.
"Everyone recognises that Islamist extremists represent a tiny part of the UK’s Muslim population" I find it amusing when people argue in this bizarre way. I literally only have to find you one dude (perhaps a concerned parent in Batley) or me, who thinks it's just above 5% and your argument fails.
The UK has too many local divisions and ancient loyalties for a ‘civil’ war. Certain cities will certainly have riots and a culture outside of the region in which they are but a unified‘rebellion’ is something else. The US has exported its fears to our foreign owned press but apart from some wideeyed commentators reality rules.