Comments

You have commented 375 times on Rantburg.

Your Name

Your e-mail (optional)

Website (optional)

	My Original Nic Pic-a-Nic Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Foto

Submit your comments on this article

Britain

Send Them All Paki-ing

2025-10-09

[TakiMag] Suffering from the worst approval ratings for the nation’s leader since numbers were invented, Britain’s malfunctioning android of a prime minister, Sir Keir Starmer, went into last week’s Labour Party conference staring glassy-eyed into the political abyss. Other polls showed that, if a General Election were held tomorrow, the start-up anti-immigration Reform UK Party of Nigel Farage would win an outright majority with 373 MPs, while Starmer’s pro-immigration left-wing Labour Party would gain under 100, its weakest result ever.

Desperate for salvation, the Keir-bot’s cogs whirred into gear, pumping out the following defective computation: To put voters off Farage, he would claim Nigel’s proposed restrictive new immigration policies were racist. What Sir Keir did not realize is that this is precisely what rather a large proportion of fed-up voters actually want!

RIPE FOR REFORM
All the main established parties in Britain pretend they want to stop mass immigration, but they clearly don’t, because they’ve spent the past thirty years actively encouraging it. Then, once the immigrants have been here for five or so years, they qualify to apply for something called Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR), which is a bit like what the British themselves once claimed from the Aboriginal authorities over in late-18th-century Australia, and look how well that turned out for the native boomerang botherers.

Now the Aborigines to be colonized are all white, however, providing Sir Keir’s Labour Party with what they naively presume will be a perpetual subservient left-wing client vote, and what the supposedly right-wing pseudo-Conservatives (currently led by a Nigerian, previously by an Indian, before that by a rotting green lettuce, and not long beforehand by a blond albino Turk) fondly imagine will be a perpetual source of cheap labor for the economy. Farage therefore wishes to modify and abolish many aspects of ILR, hopefully leading to the mass deportation of hundreds of thousands of alien settlers.

Speaking to the BBC, Starmer described Reform’s scheme as both "a racist policy" and "immoral":

"It’s one thing to say we’re going to remove illegal migrants, people who have no right to be here, I’m up for that. [No, he isn’t, this is a total lie.] It’s a completely different thing to say we’re going to reach in to people who are lawfully here and start removing them. They are our neighbors, they’re people who work in our economy, they’re part of who we are. It will rip this country apart."

I don’t know if he’s noticed at all, but the country is already being "ripped apart" by these very same people’s mass unwanted presence here, hence all the intermittent riots, etc. Yet Sir Keir’s chosen line is that it is somehow fundamentally "un-British" to want Britain to remain British.

Earlier in September, following a 150,000-strong "Unite the Kingdom" anti-immigration rally in London, at which marchers had carried British and English flags, the PM had shown his clear disapproval, explaining with typical inversion of the truth that, rather than representing England or the English people as such, the Cross of St. George actually represented "our diverse country," as in one that was full of Pakistanis, Nigerians, Syrians, Afghans, Indians, Martians, etc. So, by waving the flag in the name of the ethnic English, the ethnic English marchers were only using it as a symbol of "division," he said.

"Britain is a nation proudly built on tolerance, diversity, and respect," Sir Keir continued—except for tolerance and respect of those who don’t want any "diversity" here at all, of course.

PATRIOT GAMES
The idea of calling Reform UK racist because it wishes to act in accordance with the wishes and rational interests of native white British people for once, like British political parties are supposed to do, was clearly a predecided PR line for speakers at the Labour Party conference to have to adopt, given the number of other Cabinet members who made reference to a curiously identical notion before the party faithful. Most notable was this week’s current Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood, who, as her name suggests, is a Pakistani Muslim who just happens to have been born here, like a dog in a stable or a pig in a hospital.

Asked whether she agreed with her boss’ assertion that Farage’s policy on ILR was racist, Mahmood, as a believer in "a greater Britain, not a littler England," argued that in fact Farage’s plan was "worse than racist" because, technically speaking, the policy would apply to white immigrants as well as non-white ones, thus giving handy cover allowing Nigel to argue it wasn’t racist at all. It is just that, as there have been far more non-white incomers allowed into the country and given undeserved leave to remain over recent decades than white ones, in practice it would mostly mean booting people of her own ethnicity back home to Islamabad, not arranging a mass prison ship back to Melbourne for fully assimilated white Australians named Bruce and Sheila.

This, she said, would have "sent a very clear signal to every racist in the land that those who have made their homes in this country, have come from other places, might one day have their status ripped off [away from them]." Yes, that’s certainly what I was hoping for myself.

Just as Keir Starmer had arbitrarily redefined the Cross of St. George and the Union Jack as somehow being symbols of black Jamaicans and brown Arabs, so Mahmood sought to equally spuriously redefine patriotism as a deep and abiding love for other people coming into your country and ruthlessly occupying it from outside:

"Patriotism, a force for good, is turning into something smaller. Something more like ethnonationalism, which struggles to accept that someone who looks like me, and has a faith like mine, can truly be English or British."

It seems a little inconsistent for a Pakistani to object to ethnonationalism. If Pakistanis repudiate the very concept so much, then how come they decided to violently split apart from India once the subcontinent finally gained independence from London in 1947, while millions on either side of the racial divide went about systematically beating, raping, burning, robbing, displacing, and killing one another on an industrial scale?
It gets even better

Posted by:Grom the Affective

#2 comments); ?>werwer

Posted by: Abu Uluque 2025-10-09 12:39

#1 comments); ?>werwer

Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2025-10-09 10:19

00:00