12 5 mins 14 yrs

One story which I am surprised to see has not already been mentioned here at ATW, is the story of the leaked proposals of the left-wing think-tank, the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR). The proposals come from a report on the subject of "Britishness" and race relations, which, besides calling for a "multicultural understanding of Britishness", argues that immigrants should only be expected to learn to speak English if:

…the settled population is willing to open up national institutions and practices to newcomers and give a more inclusive cast to national narratives and symbols.

Of course, what they really mean by this is that the "settled population" (note that they cannot even bring themselves to use the word ‘native’) should be made to give up its national institutions and practices, or at least recast them in a manner that renders them completely unrecognisable, but which pleases those immigrants who are completely averse to making any effort to integrate. That this is what the IPPR wishes to do, is made abundantly obvious when one considers its proposals on this matter. Some of them, such as the claim that action should be taken to "ensure access" for non-whites to the "largely [hideously?] white" countryside are simply pointless responses to a problem that does not exist. Others, such as the proposal that the registering of a child’s birth should be replaced with a ceremony in which parents and the government agree to "work in partnership" to bring up the child smack of government interference in parental choice and responsibility, and of a rather worrying statism. But the proposal which has garnered the most attention is this one:

Christmas should be downgraded in favour of festivals from other religions to improve race relations…[the IPPR] says that because it would be hard to ‘expunge’ Christmas from the national calendar, ‘even-handedness’ means public organisations must start giving other religions equal footing.

I’d particularly point out that, from the phrasing the IPPR have used, it appears that their preferred option would be to "expunge" Christmas altogether, but that, knowing this to be impossible, they have instead opted to seek its dilution, and the dilution of the Christian heritage which it represents.

And that is the common theme running through many of the IPPR’s proposals: dilution. Dilution of our culture, dilution of our heritage, and dilution of our identity. Thus, the IPPR proposes reforming our honours system, in order to make it less "Imperial". It proposes that flags other than the Union Flag should be flown on public buildings (presumably this refers to the flags of the home countries of Britain’s major immigrant groups, such as Pakistan). And it proposes the removal of all Bishops from the House of Lords. In all of these, and most especially in the proposal to "downgrade" Christmas, we see an attempt to make British people either ashamed or ignorant of their heritage. Our national flag, our history, and our national religion will all be belittled, while the flags, heritages, and religions of the immigrant groups in our society will be given enhanced status.

What is the aim of this? Clearly, it is not to promote civic unity and loyalty to Britain. If that was the intention, then surely it would make sense to strengthen such traditional symbols of nationhood as the Union Flag, rather than to undermine them by rendering the British flag just one flag among many. No, the aim of this is to create the impression that Britain has no history, that it has no religious or cultural heritage, that it was, in fact, an uninhabited and unclaimed land until about 1948, when all the ethnic groups now inhabiting it arrived together, all with an equal claim upon it (that it is, in fact, a paradigmatic "nation of immigrants"). Thus it is hoped that the foundations for the creation of some gloriously unprecedented multicultural utopia will be set in place. The IPPR, and others who share their aims, won’t succeed in this, of course, but if they get their way in other matters then they will succeed in utterly annihilating our British way of life. Which they probably want even more than they want the multicultural utopia.

This post is a rewritten version of one which I had previously posted at my own blog.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

12 thoughts on “The Dilution of our Culture

  1. I never thought I’d be defending Britishness, but what is happening is terrible. It won’t be long until these islands are totally unrecognisable. We shouldn’t have to put up with this, no native people should in their own country.

  2. If anyone thinks that the IPPR is just a bunch of out there, extremist Left Wing nutcases, well they are:

    Labour stood accused today of using taxpayers’ money to fund policy development, as it emerged that No 10’s favourite thinktank had been paid more than £1m of government cash. The Institute of Public Policy Research (IPPR), which has close ties with New Labour and has promoted some of its more controversial ideas, has received money from across Whitehall.

    The sooner the British people realise that this government, along with most politcians, are our enemies, the sooner we can remove them in a fitting manner and install those who respect our wishes, as is our right.

  3. "it was, in fact, an uninhabited and unclaimed land until about 1948"

    hmm, that reminds me of something … now what is it?

    Personally, I thought the most chilling part (which you mention) was the birth ceremony, where the state and the parents agree to bring up the child together!

    We are in deep sh*t, people. The only thing not yet in place is a bushy moustache on our leader’s upper lip.

  4. Rise up and do what, David? I’ve stated clearly that, owing to reports and incidents typified by the subject matter of this thread, I shall be obliged to vote BNP. I see from the ATW poll that I’m not alone: I don’t think that I’m wrong either!

  5. I concur with Allan. The BNP will be getting my vote. How else can the insanity of the likes of the IPPR be resisted. What amazes me is that the BNP are shunned as being beyond the pale whilst this bunch of freaks and wierdos are handed sack loads of cash. Media access aplenty for the IPPR, remorseless negativity, if at all for the BNP.

  6. ”Rise up and do what, David?”

    That brings us back to the old religion thing doesn’t it? Wasn’t it Davids former church mates in the FPC and the DUP who on the one had condemned people for taking up arms while simultaneously preaching hate.

    The (mainly protestant) religious fundamentalist will advocate taking up arms or ‘rising up’ when they feel the state has abandoned it’s citizens.

  7. Learning English should be a seen as a benefit to the immigrants not a concession to be traded in return for anything.

    I have to say I can understand why people would be tempted to support the BNP when they read stuff like that.

    It’s up to the Tories to provide a political alternative and if they won’t do it the BNP will.

  8. Rise up and play the playhouse down. I despise the State, I think it is morally wrong and I choose to be as far from it as I can. Both Allan and GA have a point, and their opinions are as valid as anyone elses. My problem is that I have little faith in any politicians, and judging by the ATW poll, I’m not the only one who sees it that way! There is little doubt that the BNP does seem to carry appeal for those who are sickened by the mainstream political dross but I do not like politicians, I don’t trust politicians, so I am consistent in my rejection of them all.

  9. ‘I despise the State, I think it is morally wrong and I choose to be as far from it as I can.’

    David how do you choose to be as far from the state as possible. Do you use the road systems? Public transportation? Schools? Healthcare? Pay Tax? Etc.

    I am not saying you are being insincere, but how does one choose to be as far away from the state as they can?

Comments are closed.