Mass Migration is the weapon of choice of the social engineer.
At least rhetorically the Political Establishment of the European Union (EU) has finally acknowledged that their nations’ borders must be taken seriously and that the gaming of the asylum system by migrants must be stopped. Even in Germany, where the conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU) has been complicit in encouraging mass migration the situation is finally changing. Earlier this week, the CDU’s leader, Friedrich Merz set forth a proposal to the German parliament to limit migration into the country. Titled "Influx Limitation Law", the Bill demanded that Germany to tighten migration controls after a series of high-profile killings by people with immigrant backgrounds.
In the end the "Influx Limitation Law" was rejected by just 12 votes after an emotional, even hysterical debate. Despite its defeat, it looks like migration will dominate debate during the weeks leading up to Germany parliamentary election later this month. Now it is up to the electorate to show Germany’s pro-migration lobby that the people want their representatives to take their nation’s borders seriously.
Whether West Europe’s political elites will go through with breaking their addiction to mass migration remains to be seen. For well over half a century these people have embraced mass migration as a solution to many of their society’s problems. Despite public pressure for retaining control over the flow of migrants the managerial-technocratic overlords actively promoted mass migration and actively celebrated the changes that occurred in its wake.
Time and again mass migration has been advanced as a solution to Europe’s economic problems. Repeatedly, the managerial-technocratic elites declared that unless they are able to import in more migrants industry will suffer. As Larry Elliott of The Guardian stated: “migrants can make the economy grow faster;
‘and they do the jobs home-born workers are reluctant to do. Without migrant workers the care system would collapse and NHS waiting lists would be even longer than they are already[i].
Similar arguments are echoed throughout western Europe. Last November the Bertelsmann Foundation declared that ‘Germany ‘urgently needs 288,000 skilled foreign workers annually to maintain its economy[ii]
The representation of mass migration as the salvation to Europe’s economic malaise proved to be short-sighted and ultimately counter-productive. What Europe needs is to raise its level of productivity through adopting a more robust orientation towards investment in new technology, The importation of migrants has served as a self-defeating substitute for investment and technological innovation. It also distracted attention from confronting the challenge of training and re-skilling Europe’s indigenous workforce. As matters stand reliance on migration to solve Europe’s economic problem leads to the perpetuation of the continent’s low productivity and risk averse regime.
Mass migration as a weapon of social engineering
Dependence on mass migration to solve Europe’s economic malaise is bad enough; what’s even worse is the strategy of using immigration to transform Europe’s social and cultural landscape. In recent decades Europe’s cultural elites have promoted the claim that a culturally successful society is one where multiculturalism and a celebration of immigration prevails. From this standpoint a heterogenous society of different groups of migrants trumps one devoted to its national culture.
The advocacy of immigration as a weapon of social engineering was unambiguously communicated by Robin Cook, the former British Foreign Secretary in his famous Chicken Tikka Massala speech in 2001. In this speech, this Labour Politician self-consciously explained why regarded immigration as an essential instrument of political and cultural renewal.
A New Symbol of Britishness ????
Cook began his speech by stating that ‘tonight I want to celebrate Britishness’.[iii] It soon became clear, that the Britishness he went on to celebrate had nothing to do with any qualities or values that are intrinsic to Britishness. Instead, he reinterpreted Britishness as the sum total of a ‘gathering of countless different races and communities’. To ensure that everyone got his message he pointed to the popularity of Asian food amongst British consumers. He stated;
‘Chicken Tikka Massala is now a true British national dish, not only because it is the most popular, but because it is a perfect illustration of the way Britain absorbs and adapts external influences. Chicken Tikka is an Indian dish. The Massala sauce was added to satisfy the desire of British people to have their meat served in gravy’.
Cook added, that ‘coming to terms with multiculturalism as a positive force for our economy and society will have significant implications for our understanding of Britishness’.
Cook’s celebration of Chicken Tikka was explicitly oriented towards attacking those who regarded Britishness and the nation’s sovereignty as values that were important in and of themselves. For Cook Britishness possessed no inherent virtue, which is why he used the speech to also speak out against the nation opting to choose an independent course and leaving the European Union. Speaking 15 years before the Brexit Referendum, Cook stated that ‘our culture, our security, and our prosperity, are inseparable from the continent of Europe’.
Obviously, a nation defined by its preference for Chicken Tikka has little in the way of historical legacy to preserve. The main objective of Cook’s programme of social engineering was to dispossess Britain of its unique historical legacy in favour of a nation where immigrants come and go and where a popular new menu serves as its symbol.
For Cook and his colleagues one of the virtues of mass migration and multiculturalism is that it tends to weaken national identity. That is why the federalist supporters of the European Union regard multiculturalism and migration as a useful instrument for strengthening the power of Brussels. As one study supporting this project claimed ‘multiculturalism could increase support for the EU and undermine Euroscepticism[iv]. Why? Because multiculturalism inevitably diminishes the authority of national identity.
For the EU’s technocratic-managerial elites mass migration serves to undermine national consciousness and therefore assists their imperial ambition to turn their institutions into a federal state. Thankfully, opposition to mass migration has acquired unprecedented momentum throughout Europe. Finally, the pro-migrant social engineers are on the defensive. But don’t hold your breath and don’t rely on Europe’s political establishment to secure their nation’s borders. Only relentless popular pressure and the growth of sovereigntist movements can ensure that Europe learns to protect its cultural legacy and way of life.
To disregard the special status of national institutions and culture represents an invitation to a permanent war of cultures.
[i] https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/feb/04/should-the-uk-embrace-higher-net-migration-or-re-think-the-economy
[iii] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/apr/19/race.britishidentity
[iv] https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2023/02/13/why-promoting-multiculturalism-could-increase-support-for-the-eu/
I think it is racist to dismiss chicken masala as bearing a resemblance to meat balls. Watch your privilege Greg!!
My aunt (age 97) gave me a cheque for my birthday. I had to find a bank to pay it in. I took the London Overground, but things have changed since I last used it, I found myself on the Windrush Line. I have long objected to the Windrush cult, it is a brand with particular political associations, my parents and my aunt are of that generation, one of my objections to woke and identity politics is that our differences and idiosyncrasies are simplified for easy political consumption, we become political fodder. I’d be more than happy to debate my case with the Windrushites, we could even agree to disagree. Train lines have traditionally been named according to geography or monarchy, in London even our train lines are being politicised. These lines are a permanent foundation of London, carrying millions of passengers a day, a captive audience for woke propaganda, there are still some under the illusion that woke has been defeated.