The first casualties
Within our nation there are a group of people who it is permitted, indeed almost politically correct, to despise. They are a group whom our trendiest and our most popular comedians mock, to the cheers of a modern multicultural audience and who are spoken of with contempt by politicians and social commentators.
That group is the section of the young white British working class, from sink estates and those depressing corners of the dependency culture once promoted by those same politicians who now condemn them. The one ethnic group who we are allowed to call (white) trash.
They are a group of people without a voice to speak for them, and who's own voices are only ever heard in auditorium designed to deride them. They appear as criminals on the peripheries of gritty cop shows, in documentaries about urban decay and social dependency, their words edited deliberately to make them seem more moronic and brutal even than they are, and on that other platform designed to present human failure as entertainment, the daytime TV Talk show.
They are the cannon fodder of “Tricia” and the infamous Jeremy Kyle show, that slightly more cruel British version of US TV's Jerry Springer, where observing broken lives become a blood sport, and where inadequate and broken people are metaphorically eviscerated, to amuse viewers and make them feel superior.
Such shows depend upon a regular but disposable cast of tattooed and inarticulate young men with a history of petty crime and failed relationships, together with tracksuit attired young women, Vicky Pollard clones, usually with a batch of children fathered by a selection of different men, often from a selection of different races. They are brought on stage, like lambs to the slaughter naively unaware of what is about to be done to them, and tell an unforgiving camera about their domestic disasters and dysfunctional relationships. How the viewers laugh at the “chavs”, but never with them.
Of course, such people can be mocked with impunity, they can be scorned, ridiculed and derided for they have no lobbyist or special interest groups set up to defend them and it is certainly no crime to offend them.
Even those of us who love Britain and its indigenous people, must confess to a twinge of appalled embarrassment when members of that uncouth and ill educated section of our countrymen appear before a national, and sometimes, international audience.
Yet, we must not forget who these people are, where they came from, and who it was that made them what they are. For they are, in fact victims of the same forces which are determined to destroy all of us, their destruction is merely further advanced.
There was a time when the British working class, even the poorest and least educated were a proud people with a sense of morality and family values far more rigid than those of their so called “betters”. A life of welfare dependency would have been viewed by them as shameful and to have a child out of wedlock would be a stigma, which a couple and their extended family would find hard to live down, even when, as he then usually did, the boy did the decent thing, and married the girl, something few young men, or even young women, would view as essential these days.
Perhaps the moral codes and social values were too harsh, but they kept families and communities together, unlike in the broken and dysfunctional society we now inhabit.
What was it, in a few short decades which changed such fiercely proud and moral people into the chavs, sluts and social failures who appear on the unpleasant Mr Kyle's TV show?
They became what they are because that is what society deliberately taught them to be. The levels of welfare dependency we see today is a direct result of the class warfare of the 50's, 60's and 1970's, where the demands that the rich be taxed to support the poor were never accompanied by demands for effort and responsibility on the part of the poor. As we see today, under political correctness, and its communist predecessor, the chosen victim groups are never expected to accept responsibility for their own situation. The difference is that in 2009, the white working class are no longer the chosen victims, they have ceased to be of interest to the social engineers who seek to change our society.
Those once portrayed as the noble poor, have been cast aside in favour of asylum seekers and illegal immigrants, but not before much damage was done. Worse still, as the interests of poor whites often conflict with those of the establishments new darlings, it has been necessary for the establishment to cast them in an even less deserving light.
However, their rejection by their one time champions only goes part of the way to explaining how this deprived section of our community became what it is. There were so many influences, all of them designed to change British society and all of them damaging to this particular group.
As a liberated middle class woman, I am loath to blame the sexual revolution of the 1960's and would hate to go back to a time when gay men were sent to prison and women were condemned to loveless marriages and the early deaths which so often followed the multiple pregnancies of life before the pill. However, I have the education, the background and the back-up to have enjoyed and even benefited from the greater sexual freedom of our age. The confused young women (and men) on the worst of our run down Council estates saw no such benefits, without education, such freedoms can lead to disaster.
Beyond the attitudes to sex, and possibly even more damaging was the new attitudes to discipline which have now become the holy writ of modern parenting. When our parents were children, indeed when some of you reading this were children, if a boy misbehaved he was spanked, if an older boy did so he got a good hiding, whereas if a girl did so, she would receive a ruler across her hands. This took place in schools as well as in the home, and it taught many generations before our own to respect authority and that misbehaviour had consequences.
Then all that was taken away, we were told that corporal punishment brutalises children, and as a result we have raised a more brutalised generation of children than almost any before us. An un-spanked generation has now raised to young adulthood, a group of offspring with no respect for authority, no concept of discipline or of behavioural limits.
To be fair, their behaviour and attitudes, are exactly those which our society tells them to have, all those standards and values which held families and communities together, and which made our nation great are now ridiculed and even condemned.
Read any of a number of young girls' magazines, and you will find the message that the the ultimate female ambition is to be a slut, and preferably one with a black boyfriend. White working class girls are often mocked for their revealing and sluttish clothing, but in truth these girls are wearing discount versions of the "slut chic" outfits, those ultimate role models of celebrity trash Cheryl Cole and Danielle Lloyd wear to such acclaim. What these girls wear is what the media tells them they should wear, and then condemns them as white trash when they do so.
For boys it is even worse, all the media tells them is that they are useless and guilty, which of course is what their teachers told them they were.
Many blame poor education standards for creating this lost tribe of poor failed whites at the bottom of our society, and they certainly have a point, if you read the diaries of children from previous generations, even those from very deprived backgrounds, their language and grasp of the world around was far superior to that of modern children. Yet they were far more still “children” than are youths of similar ages in this century. Children from earlier eras may have known nothing of computers and mobile phones, but it is not such skills which create a citizen, it is language and understanding your world which do that.
Apart from the standard of education, the blame lies also in what is taught, and what is not. I recall recently hearing a casual reference to the Crusades, as “a long forgotten piece of history”. Frankly, as recently as the 1970's and early 80's when I was a child, the Crusades were not long forgotten. From my days at school I know about Richard the Lionheart (or Cœur de Lion) , joining forces with Phillip of France and the Holy Roman Emperor to go on the fourth crusade, that they fought the Great Saladin or that Richard met and married Berengaria of Navarre on his way back. I know about the siege of Jerusalem (first crusade), the siege and subsequent sack of Constantinople, (fourth crusade – and an event which has, with some justice, been compared to what is happening in Europe today), I even know that King Richard's mother, Eleanor of Aquitaine participated in one the crusades (second or third) whilst still married to her first husband, the king of France.
I know so much about English history, some I admit I have researched since, (although not the crusades) but most I learnt at school, and it has stayed with me. These were not just great and exciting stories, but they were valuable parts of my education which taught me about my country and my heritage. My parent's generation, of course, were taught far more of the truth about Britain's great and glorious history, which left them, as it had left generations of Britons before them with a sense of pride in their nation, and in themselves.
No white British child is allowed to leave school today feeling proud about their history, or about their heritage.
Indeed, I was lucky that, only thirty years ago, there will still teachers at the schools I attended brave enough to tell the truth about our history. Even then, had I attended a comprehensive school on a sink estate, I doubt I would have been taught such truths.
What passes for history in our schools today comes straight from the foetid imaginations of the agenda driven, white hating enemies of our people, who are dependant for their incomes on maintaining the good will of Common Purpose. It is not in their interest to make their pupils feel good about their country or about themselves, and they will certainly not tell any truths which reveal what it was that made Britain great .
In their student's position, you and I would know we were being told lies, but how would they know that? What their teachers tell them is what the telly tells them, and their parents were taught the same lies as they are, so there is nobody to put them right.
This is a huge subject, and I have not done it justice, or done more than scratch the surface. There is a book to be written about what has been done to the poor whites in Britain. They have been assaulted on all sides and in all sorts of ways, and now their country is being taken from them. It is time for society to acknowledge the damage which has been done to them.
Let us not blame this last group of people whom it is still permissible to condemn on racial grounds, for what has been done to them, the fault is not their's, it lies with a society which decided to make them its scapegoats, and to promote other groups and races over them.
If you have no education, no money, you live in an ugly place, threatened by alien cultures, and if all around you tell you are a useless member of a race of brutes and racists, who are, in the words of Jack Straw, not worth saving, how would you behave, and would it be much different than they do?
The people of whom I speak are the first casualties of a war which most of Britain, indeed most Europeans, do not yet know they are fighting. They were our weakest flank, and they were the first to fall. They deserve our sympathy, our help and our protection, not our condemnation.
That group is the section of the young white British working class, from sink estates and those depressing corners of the dependency culture once promoted by those same politicians who now condemn them. The one ethnic group who we are allowed to call (white) trash.
They are a group of people without a voice to speak for them, and who's own voices are only ever heard in auditorium designed to deride them. They appear as criminals on the peripheries of gritty cop shows, in documentaries about urban decay and social dependency, their words edited deliberately to make them seem more moronic and brutal even than they are, and on that other platform designed to present human failure as entertainment, the daytime TV Talk show.
They are the cannon fodder of “Tricia” and the infamous Jeremy Kyle show, that slightly more cruel British version of US TV's Jerry Springer, where observing broken lives become a blood sport, and where inadequate and broken people are metaphorically eviscerated, to amuse viewers and make them feel superior.
Such shows depend upon a regular but disposable cast of tattooed and inarticulate young men with a history of petty crime and failed relationships, together with tracksuit attired young women, Vicky Pollard clones, usually with a batch of children fathered by a selection of different men, often from a selection of different races. They are brought on stage, like lambs to the slaughter naively unaware of what is about to be done to them, and tell an unforgiving camera about their domestic disasters and dysfunctional relationships. How the viewers laugh at the “chavs”, but never with them.
Of course, such people can be mocked with impunity, they can be scorned, ridiculed and derided for they have no lobbyist or special interest groups set up to defend them and it is certainly no crime to offend them.
Even those of us who love Britain and its indigenous people, must confess to a twinge of appalled embarrassment when members of that uncouth and ill educated section of our countrymen appear before a national, and sometimes, international audience.
Yet, we must not forget who these people are, where they came from, and who it was that made them what they are. For they are, in fact victims of the same forces which are determined to destroy all of us, their destruction is merely further advanced.
There was a time when the British working class, even the poorest and least educated were a proud people with a sense of morality and family values far more rigid than those of their so called “betters”. A life of welfare dependency would have been viewed by them as shameful and to have a child out of wedlock would be a stigma, which a couple and their extended family would find hard to live down, even when, as he then usually did, the boy did the decent thing, and married the girl, something few young men, or even young women, would view as essential these days.
Perhaps the moral codes and social values were too harsh, but they kept families and communities together, unlike in the broken and dysfunctional society we now inhabit.
What was it, in a few short decades which changed such fiercely proud and moral people into the chavs, sluts and social failures who appear on the unpleasant Mr Kyle's TV show?
They became what they are because that is what society deliberately taught them to be. The levels of welfare dependency we see today is a direct result of the class warfare of the 50's, 60's and 1970's, where the demands that the rich be taxed to support the poor were never accompanied by demands for effort and responsibility on the part of the poor. As we see today, under political correctness, and its communist predecessor, the chosen victim groups are never expected to accept responsibility for their own situation. The difference is that in 2009, the white working class are no longer the chosen victims, they have ceased to be of interest to the social engineers who seek to change our society.
Those once portrayed as the noble poor, have been cast aside in favour of asylum seekers and illegal immigrants, but not before much damage was done. Worse still, as the interests of poor whites often conflict with those of the establishments new darlings, it has been necessary for the establishment to cast them in an even less deserving light.
However, their rejection by their one time champions only goes part of the way to explaining how this deprived section of our community became what it is. There were so many influences, all of them designed to change British society and all of them damaging to this particular group.
As a liberated middle class woman, I am loath to blame the sexual revolution of the 1960's and would hate to go back to a time when gay men were sent to prison and women were condemned to loveless marriages and the early deaths which so often followed the multiple pregnancies of life before the pill. However, I have the education, the background and the back-up to have enjoyed and even benefited from the greater sexual freedom of our age. The confused young women (and men) on the worst of our run down Council estates saw no such benefits, without education, such freedoms can lead to disaster.
Beyond the attitudes to sex, and possibly even more damaging was the new attitudes to discipline which have now become the holy writ of modern parenting. When our parents were children, indeed when some of you reading this were children, if a boy misbehaved he was spanked, if an older boy did so he got a good hiding, whereas if a girl did so, she would receive a ruler across her hands. This took place in schools as well as in the home, and it taught many generations before our own to respect authority and that misbehaviour had consequences.
Then all that was taken away, we were told that corporal punishment brutalises children, and as a result we have raised a more brutalised generation of children than almost any before us. An un-spanked generation has now raised to young adulthood, a group of offspring with no respect for authority, no concept of discipline or of behavioural limits.
To be fair, their behaviour and attitudes, are exactly those which our society tells them to have, all those standards and values which held families and communities together, and which made our nation great are now ridiculed and even condemned.
Read any of a number of young girls' magazines, and you will find the message that the the ultimate female ambition is to be a slut, and preferably one with a black boyfriend. White working class girls are often mocked for their revealing and sluttish clothing, but in truth these girls are wearing discount versions of the "slut chic" outfits, those ultimate role models of celebrity trash Cheryl Cole and Danielle Lloyd wear to such acclaim. What these girls wear is what the media tells them they should wear, and then condemns them as white trash when they do so.
For boys it is even worse, all the media tells them is that they are useless and guilty, which of course is what their teachers told them they were.
Many blame poor education standards for creating this lost tribe of poor failed whites at the bottom of our society, and they certainly have a point, if you read the diaries of children from previous generations, even those from very deprived backgrounds, their language and grasp of the world around was far superior to that of modern children. Yet they were far more still “children” than are youths of similar ages in this century. Children from earlier eras may have known nothing of computers and mobile phones, but it is not such skills which create a citizen, it is language and understanding your world which do that.
Apart from the standard of education, the blame lies also in what is taught, and what is not. I recall recently hearing a casual reference to the Crusades, as “a long forgotten piece of history”. Frankly, as recently as the 1970's and early 80's when I was a child, the Crusades were not long forgotten. From my days at school I know about Richard the Lionheart (or Cœur de Lion) , joining forces with Phillip of France and the Holy Roman Emperor to go on the fourth crusade, that they fought the Great Saladin or that Richard met and married Berengaria of Navarre on his way back. I know about the siege of Jerusalem (first crusade), the siege and subsequent sack of Constantinople, (fourth crusade – and an event which has, with some justice, been compared to what is happening in Europe today), I even know that King Richard's mother, Eleanor of Aquitaine participated in one the crusades (second or third) whilst still married to her first husband, the king of France.
I know so much about English history, some I admit I have researched since, (although not the crusades) but most I learnt at school, and it has stayed with me. These were not just great and exciting stories, but they were valuable parts of my education which taught me about my country and my heritage. My parent's generation, of course, were taught far more of the truth about Britain's great and glorious history, which left them, as it had left generations of Britons before them with a sense of pride in their nation, and in themselves.
No white British child is allowed to leave school today feeling proud about their history, or about their heritage.
Indeed, I was lucky that, only thirty years ago, there will still teachers at the schools I attended brave enough to tell the truth about our history. Even then, had I attended a comprehensive school on a sink estate, I doubt I would have been taught such truths.
What passes for history in our schools today comes straight from the foetid imaginations of the agenda driven, white hating enemies of our people, who are dependant for their incomes on maintaining the good will of Common Purpose. It is not in their interest to make their pupils feel good about their country or about themselves, and they will certainly not tell any truths which reveal what it was that made Britain great .
In their student's position, you and I would know we were being told lies, but how would they know that? What their teachers tell them is what the telly tells them, and their parents were taught the same lies as they are, so there is nobody to put them right.
This is a huge subject, and I have not done it justice, or done more than scratch the surface. There is a book to be written about what has been done to the poor whites in Britain. They have been assaulted on all sides and in all sorts of ways, and now their country is being taken from them. It is time for society to acknowledge the damage which has been done to them.
Let us not blame this last group of people whom it is still permissible to condemn on racial grounds, for what has been done to them, the fault is not their's, it lies with a society which decided to make them its scapegoats, and to promote other groups and races over them.
If you have no education, no money, you live in an ugly place, threatened by alien cultures, and if all around you tell you are a useless member of a race of brutes and racists, who are, in the words of Jack Straw, not worth saving, how would you behave, and would it be much different than they do?
The people of whom I speak are the first casualties of a war which most of Britain, indeed most Europeans, do not yet know they are fighting. They were our weakest flank, and they were the first to fall. They deserve our sympathy, our help and our protection, not our condemnation.
