The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Andrew Joyce Archive
The Petty Successes of Multiculturalism
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

I very much enjoyed Tobias Langdon’s thoughts on “The Leftist War on Identity, Nationality and Biology.” Of particular interest were Langdon’s comments on Emma Raducanu, a mixed-race (Chinese-Romanian) tennis player who won the US Open and who has been lauded and celebrated, in Britain and elsewhere, as the best of British multiculturalism, if not the best of a new, superior kind of mixed-race human. Tobias rightly pointed out that the basic problem is that Raducanu isn’t British, and “it’s precisely because she isn’t British that lots of other people who aren’t British either have been eager to pretend that she is British and to celebrate her victory.” In the following essay, I want to adopt a slightly different approach to the celebration of Raducanu, exploring not only the hypocrisy and blindspots of multiculturalists, which are only too well known, but also the tensions within liberalism on this very subject. One of the most sober and sensible comments on the Raducanu episode, for example, was made by multiculturalist Sunder Katwala, of British Future, a “thinktank that promotes debate about immigration and integration.” Katwala “warned people with liberal views on immigration against using her as a “gotcha” argument,” and stressed that cases like Raducanu are “exceptional stories.” I’d argue that they are also, in the final analysis, petty successes trotted out in carefully styled propaganda to mask a multitude of multicultural sins.

Bread and Circuses

As explored in a fascinating book by Patrick Brantlinger, the phrase ‘Bread and Circuses’ has long been associated with theories that have treated mass culture as either a symptom or a cause of social decadence. It’s also true, however, that ‘Bread and Circuses’ is perhaps the finest phrase for encapsulating the marketed appeal of multiculturalism. What better way to describe the fixation on cuisine and sports that sum up in toto the alleged “contributions” of ethnic diversity to European society? Exotic food and sporting spectacles are societal luxuries whose importance is directly correlated to the development of what Spengler called “the world-city,” in which men live in nothing but an “artificial footing.”[1]O. Spengler, The Decline of the West: Volume II: Perspectives of World History (London: Arktos, 2021), 125-6. And the celebrations accompanying Emma Raducanu, insofar as they moved beyond her victory in a tennis match and suggested broader social importance, are nothing if not artificial. It’s perfectly clear that Raducanu’s win at the US Open will have no impact on the lives of average Britons, except perhaps to further brainwash them into believing that this tennis player, by some form of socio-political alchemy, embodies all that they should aspire to. Meridian Magazine, for example, argues that:

[Raducanu’s] victory and meteoric rise into superstardom cannot, or rather should not, be viewed in isolation, as a sole, personal success but as a symbolic victory for British diversity in the face of the xenophobia that remains rooted in shadowy sections of British society. In fact, Raducanu’s victory may help transform British society for the better, in a way far beyond the control of her racket. Raducanu is emblematic of a global citizen.

Although Tobias Langdon has rightly pointed out that much of the celebration around Raducanu has come from ethnic minorities, it’s also very clear that many younger Whites, groomed from birth to be “global citizens” and now coming of age, are some of the most active and prominent purveyors of this garbage. The Meridian Magazine piece, for example, was written by a young English female college student, who further displays her thorough indoctrination by suggesting that

given both the cultural richness of Raducanu’s roots and her expertise on the court, we are fortunate to hail her victory as a British one. Not unlike 2021’s esteemed England football squad, which also champions British diversity with just three players from the squad (Pickford, Shaw, and Stones) having exclusively English roots, Raducanu’s case is serving as a reminder that our diversity and multiculturalism is what strengthens us. It allows us to take centre stage—or court—and draw upon a multitude of experiences that ultimately place us, both as individuals and as a society, in an advantageous position. And this, therefore, is a beacon of positivity against the darkness of xenophobia. [emphasis added]


This is a very short paragraph that manages to include a wealth of puzzling contradictions. The first sentence suggests that a nation should be proud of winners it merely adopts. Raducanu arrived in Britain aged two, which is very young and confirms a British contribution to her training [we also know, however, that Raducanu received training at the sports academy in Shenyang, her mother’s home town], but claiming her success as a British one is not fundamentally different in a biological sense from the Arab oil states and their practice of hiring what have been termed “sports mercenaries.” Kenyan runners and Bulgarian weightlifters, for example, have been granted citizenship in countries like Qatar to compete internationally in pursuit of medals and international victories that would otherwise elude these nations. While portrayed as cynical and crass, these Arab states are arguably more authentic in protecting their citizenship laws, given that these laws are incredibly rigid and are based on the concern “that foreigners might have an adverse influence on [the region’s] dynastic political system and conservative culture based on deep-rooted tribal values that are already considered under threat.” These states are happy to hand a passport to a handful of elite athletes, and for a specific purpose, but not to masses of “enriching” migrants. In other words, the oil states are happy to exploit the multicultural nationality game insofar as it relates to sports alone. They are not foolish enough to believe that a victory on a sports field will enrich their society or culture.

The West, on the other hand, celebrates its sporting mercenaries while indulging the idea that sports victories or exotic recipes are genuine reflections of a functioning and enriched society. This jarring contradiction is best exemplified in reactions to Nigel Farage’s offer of congratulations to Raducanu. Farage was heavily criticized as a hypocrite because of past statements he had made to the effect that Romanian crime statistics in Britain were “eye-watering,” and had added: “I was asked a question if a group of Romanian men moved in next to you, would you be concerned. If you lived in London, I think you would be.”

For liberals and offended ethnic minorities Farage’s two actions are contradictory, and yet they shouldn’t be. It’s perfectly possible to offer congratulations on an individual sporting victory without accepting that it dramatically alters known social conditions. The website Police Professional, for example, reports that

The lifting of employment restrictions by the European Union (EU) has seen a massive spike in crime statistics in the UK. Arrests of suspected Romanian criminals more than doubled when the eastern European nationals were first allowed to work in Britain. Transitional controls were imposed by member states on Romania and its neighbour Bulgaria, considered the poor relations of the bloc, when they joined the EU in 2007. Their rights to work and claim benefits were restricted for their first seven years of membership until January 1, 2014. At the end of 2013, the number of Romanians arrested stood at 7,383. That figure rocketed to 17,398 in 2014 with 18,127 Romanians arrested in England and Wales last year — a rise of 145 per cent in just two years.

I’d say this is eye-watering and, as Farage argued, a cause for concern. The added elephant in the room is of course the difference between more economically successful and capable ethnic Romanian nationals and masses of more socially problematic Roma gypsies, who are responsible for most of the “Romanian” crime statistics. I’ve seen no evidence that Emma Raducanu’s father is of Roma gypsy descent, and in fact she seems to have enjoyed an upper middle-class upbringing filled with a “hectic lifestyle of ballet, horse riding, swimming and go-karting.” In short, Nigel Farage is not a hypocrite, and his two actions are not contradictory.

Georgina Lawton, writing for the Guardian, has argued that “Raducanu is living proof of the way a country that celebrates cultural difference can succeed.” No, she isn’t. She’s living proof that a young woman of Euro-Asian parentage can do well academically and become extremely proficient at tennis. This wouldn’t surprise even the most hardened racialist. The fact of the matter is that, in the context of “good news,” Liberals and their allies want us to take an individual story and expand it to group level (“successful ethnic athlete = successful multiethnic culture”), while in the context of bad news they want us to take a group story and reduce it to individuals (“negative group crime statistics shouldn’t be acknowledged because we’re all individuals”). In other words, ethnicity can only be considered at group level if it leads to praise. This is the fundamental contradiction of multiculturalism, and it stands in stark contrast to the position of so-called “racists” who adopt a truly holistic view of race and the individual that is without any such contradictions — I can praise a Ugandan sprinter without believing 200,000 Ugandans will make life in my home nation considerably better.

The Discomfort of Success and the Question of “Contributions”

Another uncomfortable question raised by the Raducanu episode is the issue of immigrant “contributions” to the host society. Sunder Katwala, of British Future, worries that stories like that of Raducanu “give a popular image of the positive contribution of migration and integration, and that has a positive element, as long as it’s not overplayed.” Another representative of a British multiculturalist group is concerned that “valuing immigrants and refugees in the UK is sort of predicated on being successful and giving back a contribution rather than just being human.” Both comments reveal a further contradiction of multiculturalism; that despite talk of oppression and discrimination, some ethnic minorities are significantly and stubbornly more successful than others. The school grades of Asians, for example, remain light years ahead of those of Africans, and the gap in statistics for expulsions and suspensions from schools is equally cavernous. These facts are a brutal rejoinder to claims of oppressive Whiteness, and they are the reason why all celebrations of successful immigrants occur against a much greater shadow of failure, welfare dependance, social degradation, and crime. Success it seems, can be a burden too much to bear for the unsuccessful. In this context, it is hardly surprising to find a quote like that above, where a shamed and uneasy multiculturalist appeals for immigrants to be celebrated simply, and ridiculously, for “being human.”

Further, some immigrant “contributions” are questionable even on their own terms. Take, for example, Derek Taylor’s 2013 “Thank you for your business”: The Jewish Contribution to the British Economy, a quite shameless panegyric to the Jewish penchant for wealth accumulation. Tucked in among ridiculous tales of Jews inventing jigsaw puzzles [they didn’t; the first jigsaw puzzle was invented by London mapmaker John Spilsbury in the 1760s], and postcards [they didn’t; the first picture postcard is credited to Theodore Hook, an English Man of Letters], are very light references to their more solidly documented role in the development of British pornography and gambling. It was Richard ‘Dirty Des’ Desmond, the son of Latvian and Ukrainian Jews, who first introduced mass-produced pornography into Britain, and who ‘pioneered’ “the first pornographic channel available on satellite television in the UK.” He also “ran a premium rate phone sex company until 1988 when he sold the business after British Telecom raised concerns about the content.” That’s quite a contribution. Equally impressive is the Jewish contribution to gambling everywhere, not least Britain and the United States. I was amused recently to read an essay on Jews and gambling that admitted that Jews were pre-eminent in the development of American gambling. The piece claimed “the Jewish appetite for [sports gambling] (and probably for wagering of all kinds) remains mysterious.”[2]E. Mendelsohn (ed), Jews and the Sporting Life: Studies in Contemporary Jewry Vol. XXIII (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), 64. I’ve approached this sentence from multiple angles, but can’t find the mystery in Jews engaging in risk to find profit without labor. Nothing, in fact, would seem more matter of fact. It’s certainly matter of fact in Britain, where Liam O’Brien has pointed out that

all of the ‘Big Three’ bookmakers have had a significant Jewish input. Coral was founded by Joe Coral from a Polish-Jewish background while Ladbrokes, originally a company catering for the upper classes only became a major company under the stewardship of Max Parker and his nephew Cyril Stein whose family were of Russian-Jewish origin. Stein was a major philanthropist for numerous Jewish and Israeli causes throughout his career. [This is a good example of using vice to facilitate large-scale transfer of wealth from Gentile to Jewish communities.] William Hill acquired a significant Jewish connection when it bought the more than 600 shops of Stanley Racing owned by Lord Steinburg.[3]L. O’Brien, What’s the SP? (eBook Partnership, 2014).

The tension at the heart of such immigrant “contributions” is explored admirably by the website, which appears to have adopted, and I must say perfected, an approach I employed back in 2015-16 through a subtle and satirical Twitter account named “Skype Directory.” At the heart of the approach is the contradiction of multiculturalism — that multiculturalism will celebrate the “contributions” it feels are worthy of celebration while hiding “contributions” it feels might be regarded negatively. What Skype Directory did, and what Jewish Contributions do, is to highlight the shadow behind the fanfare, or to do a kind of double-take at the other side of those things claimed as Jewish successes or achievements. When Jewish magazines, for example, claim that Jews brought America to the tipping point on gay marriage, the approach dictates that such a claim be highlighted and presented in its own right. The same can be said for the Jewish “contribution” to transgenderism, feminism, abortion, etc. While these may be celebrated liberal values, you can be sure that Jews would only welcome a spotlight on their role in certain very limited circumstances. If the “celebration” of their role became a little too loud, you can be sure that such applause would not be welcome. Joe Biden learned this back in 2013 when Jewish activists were offended when he praised Jewish power and influence:

Joe Biden should know the ground rules by now. You can praise the contributions of individual Jews. It’s totally permissible to wax eloquent on the accomplishments of Sigmund Freud, Jonas Salk, or Albert Einstein—perhaps even implying that humanity would never have come on these ideas and thus be infinitely poorer for it. … You can even praise the Jewish community’s role in enacting public policy on which there is a broad consensus, such as the Civil Rights movement.

But you can’t imply that Jews have real power and have used it to push America in directions most Americans don’t want to go or obviously conflict with the legitimate interests of other groups—particularly Whites. … [Biden]: “I bet you 85 percent of those changes, whether it’s in Hollywood or social media are a consequence of Jewish leaders in the industry. The influence is immense, the influence is immense. And, I might add, it is all to the good.”

And if Jews are in some way shamed or fearful regarding wider awareness of their “contribution,” what is the true nature of that contribution after all?

The Success of Multiculturalism?

It’s really quite strange that a tennis match has been used to demonstrate that diversity is our strength rather than, say, government data on crime and social cohesion. It’s in the latter that we find a true, broad, and far-reaching multicultural contribution. In Britain, Black men are apparently 5.4 times more likely than White men to be arrested for drug offences, and young Black men were 10.5 times more likely than young White men to be arrested for robbery. That’s quite a contribution. There’s also a contribution to weapons-based violent crime:

When compared to 2014, an increase in prosecutions was seen across all ethnic groups, apart from those categorised as White, which saw a decrease of 2% in prosecutions. In 2018, ethnic minority groups were overrepresented for prosecutions of possession of weapons offences, accounting for 30% of all prosecutions in this category. Of all prosecutions for possession of weapons offences, “possession of an article with a blade or point” made up 59% of prosecutions. The Metropolitan police force (London) area accounted for 66% of all Black defendants prosecuted for this offence, compared with 14% for White defendants.

Blacks, Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, and those of mixed-race have also been found to consume welfare payments in astonishing numbers relative to their share of the population. Another contribution! This is to say nothing of the growing agitation for the removal of historical monuments said to offend the sensibilities of these people. Ethnically motivated iconoclasm is unquestionably a contribution.

These things, we should remember, like Raducanu’s tennis victory, “allow us to take centre stage—or court—and draw upon a multitude of experiences that ultimately place us, both as individuals and as a society, in an advantageous position.” I don’t know about you, but I’m having trouble seeing just how advantageous my position is. Maybe I just need to celebrate these people for being “simply human.” Maybe I need to live in one of Spenger’s “World-cities.” Maybe I need to throw myself into being a “global citizen.” Or maybe, just maybe, these multicultural “successes” are nothing but bread and circuses for the ignorant and the willfully corrupt.


[1] O. Spengler, The Decline of the West: Volume II: Perspectives of World History (London: Arktos, 2021), 125-6.

[2] E. Mendelsohn (ed), Jews and the Sporting Life: Studies in Contemporary Jewry Vol. XXIII (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), 64.

[3] L. O’Brien, What’s the SP? (eBook Partnership, 2014).

(Republished from The Occidental Observer by permission of author or representative)
Hide 25 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Mulegino1 says:

    The Jews agitate for and fetishize multiculturalism since it is destructive of the unitary vital principle necessary for the maintenance of a healthy and thriving society or culture. Multiculturalism causes the deviation of what Cardinal Newman (in a totally different context) deems the “chronic vigor” and “power of assimilation” necessary for the salutary growth and flourishing of a healthy nation or people into a metastasis of cancerous Babel. It fulfills the one categorical precondition: it is good for the Jews.

    • Agree: Automatic Slim
  2. On the subject of why multiculturalism is being pushed, I offer this: it is good for Jews, and those who imitate Jews, specifically those who aspire to live in the rentier class.

    Jews began dispersing out of Eastern Europe in quantity about 130 years ago. The first ones established the beachheads, and summoned their tribe to follow. Taking a page from their ancestors, they pooled their resources to advance their group, in city after city.

    Within a hundred years, they had built a parallel society, sitting on real estate that was acquired during the years of low immigration. The 1965 Immigration Act in the USA and the blossoming of multicultural immigration in Australia, Canada, and Europe made sudden millionaires out of Jews who closed their bakeries and tailor shops and leveraged their properties to cash in on the surge of wealth of the late 20th century.

    An added bonus of diverse immigration is that cities are the usual landing point for ethnic immigrants. Whites such as Hungarians, Poles, Ukrainians, Czechs or Dutch would bypass the cities , but ethnics tended to huddle in urban enclaves. Many a slum lord made his fortune buying and renting out sub-standard apartments to the wretched of the world.

    The Jews are some of the more successful at this because they pooled money and legal expertise to corner a scarce resource (urban property). Asian and Middle Easterners are the upstarts in this game, but are far behind. For example, you don’t see many big Chinese-owned property companies.

    When Jews drop big money to make bundled political donations, or give generously to the ADL, they nearly always made that money from rentier wealth that would not have been possible without multicultural mass immigration.

  3. Altai says:

    Another uncomfortable question raised by the Raducanu episode is the issue of immigrant “contributions” to the host society.

    Due to the taboo of the issue on the left, the discussion of the benefits of immigrants to their host societies has often revolved around right wing and libertarian obsessions about welfare states and taxes.

    The argument being that some immigrants are net benefits and some net drains. But really, just about any immigrant is a net drain. If you replaced the head of a major bank in some country with an immigrant, then somebody might make the argument that the immigrant is a net benefit since he pays more in taxes than he takes in public money. But this is deeply autistic (But what isn’t modern Western economics and particularly libertarian economics?) as this person isn’t doing something that wouldn’t otherwise be done just with the added burden of another person reducing per capita resources, housing and wealth.

    The question should be, do immigrants increase per capita welfare? And the answer is no for 99.9% of them. They come to do work that could either be done by natives given training or not done at all.

    There is almost no immigrant who brings, attracts or generates wealth that would outweigh what they take up in resources.

    And talk of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ immigrants just opens the door to ignoring this entirely and ultimately a legitimisation of the idea of immigrants saving or helping natives. They don’t. Nobody leaves their home to make life better for somebody else (Except altruistic Westerners) they come to get some of the pie, they don’t think to themselves “I’ll make more money for these people than I’ll make for myself!”.

    Additionally talk of white immigrants being a boon or not a problem is foolish. (As is the tip-toeing around how different and unpopular Eastern Europeans are in the West) Racial endogamy tends to create a situation where the line between the original native population and it’s standing as the native population is maintained, their distinction and sense of nativeness is maintained as is the possibility of them organising themselves politically. Inviting immigrants en masse who won’t practice endogamy from the natives opens a can of worms about peoples ‘immigrant granny’. See the USA in 2020 where the idea of an ‘American’ ethnicity is now gone and whose white population contains many individuals with emotional ties to immigration and who spout on about ‘a nation of immigrants’.

    Once you go from George Washington being an ‘American’ with a capital A to being ‘white’, you’ve already lost. Ditto with Britain.

    • Replies: @Dani
  4. Anon[103] • Disclaimer says:

    Multiculturalism and diversity has put an effective end to England and Englishmen. They are no more. England is now an island of witless, gutless cretins.

    Ian Thomas is an example of the modern Englishman. Thomas is White and a mouthpiece for the English branch of BLM.

    Recently, in a taxpayer-funded advertisement on behalf of Black History Month, Thomas claimed that White people are: “Genetically defective descendants of albino mutants”:

    Lovely stuff. Just think if a prominent Indian personality publically said that Indian people are “Genetically defective descendants of negroised mutants”.

    He’d only say it once in India. And if he did not immediately leave India upon saying it, his cake-hole would not be capable of ever uttering anything again. I imagine his teeth would be so badly beaten in by patriotic Indians that the pathologist would have to pick them out of his rectum to identify him.

    But what might happen to the Englishman, Thomas? How will this witless POS be punished? Well, he won’t be punished. In England, he can denigrate and insult the White natives, and then at will walk the streets with his woke chest puffed out.

    The English White natives have been emasculated of the guts to deal with him, or even push back on him. Just like the cretinous cowards hadn’t the guts to deal with the “Asian” rape gangs that have spent the last 3 decades raping their daughters and sisters. And they are still at it, according to many reports.

    To learn a bit more about Ian Thomas, I checked his online profile. His mindset is interesting; the witless buffoon informs visitors to his public online profiles that he’s a “He/Him”.

    Who’d have ever correctly guessed this middle-aged English POS was male by looking at his photograph!?!?

    If you want to experience what multiculturalism, diversity and wokeness does to a First World country, you just need to pay a cursory visit to England.

    Try a short stay in cesspit London: Negros are treated like Sacred Cows in this loser city. It’s actually dangerous to use the sidewalks in London. Blacks don’t like to ride their (most likely stolen) bicycles on the streets. They much prefer the sidewalks. They find the sidewalks are preferable when they cycle to sell their drugs, and when returning home after committing their daily series of muggings and shoplifting.

    I kid you not, you could be on the sidewalk of London’s premier shopping street, Bond St, with your children in tow, when suddenly, out of nowhere, a Negro or two or three would come around the corner on a bicycle with their hooded heads down, pedaling like drug crazed lunatics.

    It’s an effort to keep out of the way of these drug-addled criminal idiots as they pedal furiously along sidewalks across London, and in many other English cities. The cretinous English natives don’t object, they just scurry away with their lame heads down.

    The British Negros get a thrill out of cycling on the sidewalks rather than on the streets. They’re defying authority, cocking-a-snook to Whitey.


    The younger Negros also use the experience to practice the art of grabbing purses and phones. As they approach unawares pedestrians, they’ll suddenly swerve towards them and gauge their reactions. This is the way the young ones practice the timing and learning of how to successfully grab a phone or purse from unsuspecting pedestrians.

    The English police make absolutely no attempt to drive these Black vermin off their sidewalks. It’s very obvious in England that Black “Human Rights” gives the British Negros the status of Sacred Cows.

    On top of this, English police, particularly in London, are probably kept too busy raping and murdering women and covering this up, to be too concerned with Negros using stolen bicycles and mopeds to hunt and scavenge like hyenas along the sidewalks of their cities.

    Then there’s the Palace Theater in London, where the English “upper class” (such as Thomas, I presume) go to be entertained. For about 5 years, up to the time when England locked down with Sars CoV-2 in March 2020, just outside the main entrance of this theater, about twenty meters along the street, there would be a regular gang of Blacks doing what they do best, hawking drugs.

    Just spitting distance from the Palace Theater and the crème de la crème of English society, Black drug dealers very openly peddled drugs to junkies. And when the junkies had gotten their supplies, the drug dealers would then begin to aggressively hawk their wares to ordinary passers-by, sometimes getting highly aggressive if they were refused.

    I was familiar with this area for a number of years, and during this time the Negro drug dealers remained unmolested by London’s finest.

    Human Rights, no doubt, protected the Negros. But to hell with any rights that an ordinary visitor to this area might expect. In fact, I would not be in any way surprised if the POS British government actually gave their drug dealing Negros furlough payments to make up for their loss of profits when the Covid-19 lockdown drove them off the streets – the modern Ashkenazi English are actually very capable of ordering this type of stratospheric stupidity.

    On many occassions on a High Street (the English call their main shopping streets by this name) in another London borough I witnessed Negros openly hawking drugs at all hours of the day and night.

    Once in broad daylight in high summer as I exited a subway I was accosted by a vicious looking Negro trying to sell drugs to me. I quite quickly rebuffed him, and as I walked away he and his 4 or 5 henchmen began to loudly hurl insults after me.

    When the police legitimise their drug dealing and criminal enterprises, the British Negros feel the public have an obligation to buy from them. The brain with no facility for abstract thought simply does not reason rationally.

    He and his gang of henchmen had absolutely no fear that the police might be called. And if a White did call the “English” police, there’d be a chance that slobbering police officers from one of the many ethnic demographics would show up. And then, disregarding all evidence, take the side of the Negro drug dealer and his cronies when they accused the White of having been racist to them.

    I could write a book on cesspit England and the disgusting spectacle of the Black demographic being sucked-up to and cosseted no matter what vile crimes they commit.

    Types of vile crime that the Black demographic commit in London: White old age pensioner went to a park in front of his home and asked a gang of Negro trash to lower the volume of their jet-engine decibel music. He got shot dead for his troubles.

    And when this happened, the BBC and dirt-rag Guardian might well have run a week-long series of programmes and articles showing the White English natives how systemic racism was solely responsible for the Negros murdering this old defenseless man. And the White English cretins would most likely and eagerly suck up every word.

    A couple of years ago, China issued warnings to its citizens, telling them not to visit England. And that if they couldn’t avoid going, they were to be constantly aware while there of wandering into no-go zones. And to be on guard against getting violently attacked, stabbed or robbed by the ubiquitoue British Negros.

    This warning was very much needed and correct. And China still issues this warning to its citizens when they travel to broken and cesspit England.

    I rolled on the floor laughing when the English media found out that China was issuing this warning. The righteous English media went into a frenzy, making demands that China apologize.

    The English prick journalists that called for this apology could probably have looked out their windows as they typed it and seen Negros in the act of committing crimes against tourists.

    Ian Thomas is a perfect example of what the modern English man is, and of the utter cesspit hell-hole that England and the English are today. Today it’s a stain on the earth, and truth be known, it always was.”

    The Ashkenazi have ruled England since the loser Cromwell invited them back to it in the seventeenth century. Cromwell, the Religious Puritan, invited a sect of Satan worshipers to his and his country’s bosom because he was stuck for money. It seems Cromwell’s God was OK with devil worshipers filling his financial coffers.

    And the English think that they are so clever, and their history so great. When they actually were nothing but the puppets of devil worshipers. The Ashkenazi are nearing their end and all they are going to leave of England is a putrid empty shell.

    I’ll mention another disgusting cowardly act I personally witnessed from police in a London park.

    For a period of time I used to walk through this park as a shortcut. On quite a few occasions as I passed through it there would be a collection of Negros gathered in a particular corner of it clearly cooking up Class A drugs — their use of a naked flame to prepare or fry the drugs was very obvious.

    A colleague had warned me that he had been accosted in this park in the middle of the day by a crazed Negro demanding money. The Negro threated to attack him when he refused to give him money. Negro’s have a real hang-up about being “disrespected”. Thus, whenever I entered this park I kept my eyes wide open.

    One particular day as I went through this park I noticed the Negro druggies were in their usual corner with naked flames clearly visible. I then noticed that three London police officers had walked into the park from the opposite direction.

    Expecting they might have something to say to the Negro drug users, I delayed (rubber necking). I sat on a bench and fiddled with my phone so as to look busy. The three London police officers approached the gang of drug users and had what seemed like a very civil how-do-you-do type chat with them. And then walked away.

    The Black druggies remained in place with their Bunsen burners fired up. It really was as if the three police officers had simply checked if the Negros needed anything. A welfare check, as it were!?!?

    But then the police officers did something I could hardly believe. As they walked away from the gang of Negro drug users, they spotted a White man who had ducked behind a hedge, which ran alongside a wall, to obviously relieve himself.

    Between the hedge and the wall, in this filthy little park, hardly anyone would have seen him. It wasn’t a Class A crime. No people had been offended. But the police officers – who had just practically assured the drug imbibing Negros that they had nothing to worry about – gave this White man a loud, vitriolic and very public dressing down for (supposedly) having peed behind a hedge. By the way, the three police officers were Whites.

    They spent about 15 minutes publicly berating this White man for the suspicion of having gone behind a hedge to urinate. And this just a few seconds after encouraging and legally endorsing the vilest crime committing scum that have ever been bred.

    One of the police officers was female, but a female that probably uses the he / him pronouns. It was clear from hearing her speak, and her body language, that she was pure ill-bred trailer trash. A middle-aged colleague with her also came across as an utter buffoon.

    Some normal police officers who are ordered to ignore Negros in the commission of crimes, might manage to adjust their moral compass and obey.

    But what vile trash are the police officers who not only follow illegal orders to ignore Negro crimes. But who will – within seconds of having skulked away from a gang of Black criminals in the perpetration of a Class A drug crime – publicly mock, abuse and berate a person suspected of having peed behind a bush in a park which was almost deserted, save for the drug using Negros.

    Peeing behind a bush, a misdemeanour if ever there was one.

    The answer to this is that the globalist Cabal have stuffed London’s police with the type of immoral and low intelligence trash who’ll eagerly follow orders to crush and walk on their own race.

    The UK is in the process of building two super prisons, and has plans to build two more in the very near future. How strange that after decades of prison overcrowding, that the UK government has now suddenly embarked on the construction of 4 gigantic super prisons.

    If the Ashkenazi clown Boris and his latest knob-sucker, Carrie-Antoinette, decide to order Sars CoV-2 vaccine refuseniks into these high-tech prisons, I suspect the vast majority of British police are of the type that will unquestionably carry out these orders.

    Of course, the entire Western world is in the same boat. The US, though, might survive. The rural police forces have not been reconditioned to serve the Cabal. And in those cities where police forces have been overrun with Globalist serving sycophants, the fired police officers will still process firearms. Many, I believe, will use their training and expertise in the right direction if a rebellion occurs.

    There’s no doubt a rebellion will occur soon in the US. How violent it will be is the only question. When it begins in the US, citizens in the UK and Western Europe should heed it as a warning bell. The Cabal are aware that if an uprising kicks-off in America, it will very soon spread to Europe.

    It is historical and genetic that similar provenanced communities take lead from each other. That in the face of a unified threat they will act in concert with each other.

    When it kicks-off in the US, the Cabal in the UK, Europe, Canada and Australia are going to clamp down very hard on anyone they perceive to be rebellious, nationalistic or patriotic. For them, the first indicator of a rebellious person will be their refusal to take a poisonous “vaccine”.

    Hence the recent burst of constructing super prisons in the US, Australia and the UK.

    I wish you all well, and hope we communicate thirty years from now in the type of world which the bible promises us if we hold fast against evil.

    The words of American Founding Father Thomas Paine:

    If ye love wealth better than liberty
    The tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom
    Go home from us in peace
    We ask not your counsels or your arms
    Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you
    May your chains set lightly upon you
    And may posterity forget that you were our countrymen

    • Thanks: BlackFlag, Automatic Slim
    • Replies: @Ed Case
  5. Since the time the Rothschilds recognized that great wealth could be made in times of crisis it also became obvious to these same people that great change or great agendas could be implemented in times of crisis.

    And so after WW2 the great agenda of the destruction of the white race was implemented called “multiculturalism” this attack was never put to a vote…never wanted, and now it is nearing its completion of making whites a minority in their own countries.

    One of the greatest champion of his people with one of the greatest speeches said it best.

  6. I’ve always asked the simple question:

    If multiculturalism is so beneficial and positive, why does it need to be created artificially and enforced by law?

  7. Trinity says:

    Europe and America were always multicultural when they were MOSTLY ALL WHITE. Whites are the most diverse people on the planet. Multiculturalism is okay if it is DIFFERENT WHITE CULTURES, while multiracial SOCIETIES don’t work because they never have. Comprende?

    Cue: Refugee by Tom Petty And The Heartbreakers.

    • Agree: Mulegino1, mc23
    • Replies: @Mulegino1
  8. Mulegino1 says:

    Excellent comment.

    European diversity was real, and Europe was multicultural in the most positive sense.

    “Multicultural” in today’s woke lexicon is little more than the embrace of degenerate counter-cultural concepts and indiscriminate mixing.

    America was never conceived authentically as a creedal nation or nation of immigrants; it was a nation of settlers and pioneers. Originally an overwhelmingly Protestant nation, America’s virile and foundational Christian culture was vigorous enough to assimilate Christian Europeans of all backgrounds into a separate national identity. This was not accomplished via the acceptance of a merely creedal formula- but by means of a commonality of interests by people of the same general racial, spiritual, and cultural provenance. America’s true vocation was to provide a free homeland as a refuge for Christian Europeans. The real crucible that made the American nation was the conquest of the continent for a free, strong and disciplined people.

    Other groups, such as the Chinese, and some of the freed Africans did play an important ancillary role, but there was never any question of assimilation or “Americanization.”

    It was Jews like Emma Lazarus and Israel Zangwill who invented the myth of the melting pot and the idea that the US was to be a dumping place for the world’s refuse.

    The historical and unalterable American identity is Christian and European. It can never be anything else, any more than the Russian identity could cease to be Orthodox, or the Chinese Confucian. It will either reassert itself or the nation will die.

    • Agree: Trinity
  9. Raducanu is an example of “personalization.” One of the really effective tricks of immigration-stuffing is to conflate “immigrants” with “immigration.” Individual immigrants, god knows, might be fine people, that one over there, that one there, the guy across the street who drives a truck. But they are not “immigration.” A deluge of wonderful people is still a deluge. It still drowns everything, pure as the water may be.

    So they’re always in-your-facing the individuals, this immigrant and that immigrant did this and that, how could you possibly hate these exemplar epitomes of rectitude? And most people go, sure, I can’t hate decent people. I like decent people. I wish I knew more descent people instead of the rebrobates I mostly know.

    And then they got ya.

    Because most people have a terrible time discriminating between the general and the particular.

    Immigration and its overall, general, statistical, societal deleterious effects vs. one particularly smashing bird who lives in a mansion, rides to the hounds, speaks all plummy, goes to private school and is quite cute, too.

    And there lies the rub in the ointment.

    • Replies: @MarkU
  10. People confuse multiculturalism with multiracial, totally different, multiculturalism allows you to move to another nation and practice…in peace, your own culture and belief system without ever having to participate in the native culture…its divisive by nature.

    Could you imagine a white American culture been allowed to develop and grow in the heart of China, where you only practice you own culture, your own festivals with no need to participate in Chinese culture.

    If other cultures wouldn’t allow it why do we have to?

    And if we are a democracy….why weren’t we asked if we wanted it?

    But if we were asked it wouldn’t of happened, so we weren’t asked.

    So by definition we are not a democracy, because major decisions never go to the public for endorsement or rejection.

  11. MarkU says:

    Good points well made (I would have omitted the concluding mixed metaphor though)

  12. TG says:

    Many interesting points.

    But in my opinion, the real issues is quite simple:

    The rich love money, and the easiest way for the rich to get even richer, is through cheap labor. And the easiest way to get cheap labor, is for there to be 100 desperate people competing for each job.

    So in some places you have ‘pro-natalist’ policies aimed at pushing the population up rapidly enough to crush workers and further enrich the elites, like we had recently in Mexico.

    When that isn’t possible, you import the surplus population of societies were people will breed like cattle, and drive wages down and rents and profits up that way. This is ongoing in Western Europe and the United States, but it’s happening all over: the Ivory Coast, South Africa, and Turkey, are just a few recent examples of massive immigration being used to crush the working class.

    The Western Europeans are importing all these third world refugees for one primary reason: to drive wages and living standards down for the many, and rents and profits up for the few. They are inly importing a ‘diverse’ population because, right now, there just aren’t enough desperately poor whites available to make a significant difference.

    I mean, the immigration policies are aimed at one thing and one thing only: to jam in as many warm bodies as quickly as possible. It’s not that the elites really care about importing rapists and gang members etc., it’s just that separating the wheat from the chaff would take time, and cut the flow, and the cheap labor must flow above all other priorities.

    But saying that you are opening the borders because you want to crush workers doesn’t sound so good, so put lipstick on the pig and say it’s about “multiculturalism” and “diversity.” Make the debate all about being pro- or anti-immigrant, and avoid talking about the real issue, which is forced population growth.

    I mean, if you came home and found that the government had let 50 random strangers live in your house permanently, maybe these people are scum and you don’t like them – but maybe the primary issue is that the government has let 50 random strangers live in your house permanently. Don’t get sidetracked on the peripheral issue of whether these 50 people are or are not in some sense good people.

    It is always a mistake to use the terminology of the enemy. We are not really fighting ‘multiculturalism’. We are fighting the rich treating us like cattle, we are fighting the rich telling us how many children we should have and cancelling our joint decisions if they don’t like it, we are fighting forced population growth.

    • Replies: @Trinity
    , @RJ Macready
  13. Trinity says:

    This isn’t about class it is about race. Nonwhite nations are not experiencing this, only White nations. Identifying this as a class struggle is akin to saying the perpetrator is (((The Deep State.))) Pure Tucker Carlson horse dookie aka too afraid to identify the REAL CULPRIT malarkey. Or this gem, “the democrats and liberal policies” destroyed our inner cities. haha. That one is classic. NOPE, Jews destroyed our inner cities and used Blacks to do the grunt work.

    • Replies: @Thomasina
    , @sher singh
  14. “In other words, ethnicity can only be considered at group level if it leads to praise.”

    The only “principle” of Leftism is the non-principle of “Who/Whom.”

  15. It’s a strange strange world we live in, Master Black.

  16. Thomasina says:

    “This isn’t about class it is about race.”

    No, it IS about class. The Ruling Elite are operating a milking machine. As long as the money keeps flowing up to them, they could care less what race anybody is. They’re not living around them; you are. And they’re not paying for them; you are. The only question they ask is: “Can they be milked?”

    But race does come in handy for the Ruling Elite. By keeping the masses fighting, they ensure their position. And the immigrants are happy because they’re milking too. The only people unhappy are the “milked”.

    “Nonwhite nations are not experiencing this, only White nations.”

    Not yet, but their time will come. Pressure WILL be applied eventually.

    “NOPE, Jews destroyed our inner cities and used Blacks to do the grunt work.”

    Yes, they did, but Jews are a huge part of the Ruling Elite. Think of the money to be made (as beavertales said above) when you destroy cities, destroy property values, and then buy them up cheaply.

    Their plan is to milk the world. No nations, no borders. Just a tube running from you to them.

  17. sher singh [AKA "Jatt Aryaa"] says:

    Gulf Arab nations are 80% foreigner
    South Korea imports a large chunk of brides

    Race matters but doesn’t fill the fridge
    Domestic non whites enemy, foreign RW ally


  18. Britain’s multiculturalism comes from the Saxons, Jutes, Angles, and then subsequently Norman invasion. Multiple cultures right there. Throw in the Catholicism thing and add a few French dudes for color and you have yourself a whole heaping helping of Diversity that of course is not the right kind of multicultural diversity for the Wokesters.

  19. Ed Case says:

    Peeing behind a bush, a misdemeanour if ever there was one.

    Apart from the obvious, pissing on the ground in public attracts feral cats which do a shit there.
    That shit attracts rats and mice, before you can say Winston Churchill, there’s a serious health problem in that park, so humans give it a miss.

  20. I see another multicultural success story in the U.K with Ali Harbi Ali accused of killing MP David Amess, as Enoch Powell said about the multicultural policy at the time , “madness.”

  21. Dani says:

    You said:
    “Additionally talk of white immigrants being a boon or not a problem is foolish. (As is the tip-toeing around how different and unpopular Eastern Europeans are in the West)”
    I’ve followed a British man’s channel for a while and from time to time have picked up on a few skirmishes among the subscribers regarding this very thing but I have yet to get to the root of it. I have seen some back and forth with Brits and Poles, always male, and it always seems to focus around employment/employment opportunity, but the context they are arguing within is, literally, foreign to me. My reason for asking is personal curiosity. as an American who is of Polish and Ukrainian background. I have never been to Europe.
    I have heard very positive things, as well, but these things tend to be from older people (Baby Boomer and even my parents “Silent” generations), speaking of Poles who ended up staying in Britain after WW2 and they speak of the nice community they created for themselves with no “government handouts”.
    It just makes me feel disheartened to hear certain things, especially now. Maybe this is even part of the problem – does not our altruistic tendency lend itself to our own race? I hate to see in-fighting with white people and over the course of the past 6 or 7 years that I’ve been active in many communities with lots of good people, I still see way too much of this and from people I expect better from. It is almost always over things that are meaningless and better left in the past.
    I get a distinct impression in some instances that there are those Western Europeans (I don’t believe I have ever spoken with a Northern European) who will bend over backwards for a non-white while at the same time discriminating against Eastern Europeans. I am wanting to understand why this is. In any event, this kind of thing needs to stop. On a subconscious level, there is probably even an element of scapegoating since nobody has a problem with anybody, including other whites, bashing white people. Maybe it is easy to let off some steam and pent up frustration and blinding rage, towards your own race, since there will be zero backlash.

    • Replies: @Ian Smith
  22. Ian Smith says:

    It could be that, since they can’t say anything bad about blacks and browns, they vent their frustration on Poles and Romanians.

  23. “It’s perfectly clear that Raducanu’s win at the US Open will have no impact on the lives of average Britons”

    You mean if a true Brit had won the US Open it would somehow have impacted the lives of avergae britons? LMAO What a retarded fuckin article. Nationalism is a mental disorder and there is no “our” people. In this day and age, the economy is all that matters and should, nothing else. Goal should be wealth creation. To hell with religion or patriotism or whatever is vogue in conservative circles nowadays.

  24. @TG

    and are they doing anything wrong? I own my organization/company-the profits should matter more than anything else. If the fucking Government demands I adhere to their rules the least I can demand is wealth to hell with anything else, least of all moral mumbo jumbo. The purpose of life should be to reach the top-nothing else matters, that’s what the Jews are doing, and apparently even the Chinese even though on the face they holler on about nationalism and the greater picture. Money runs the world, not some bullshit vague concept such as love of their land and ancestors or worse-religion and faith. Faster AI assembly lines become commonplace all of these farmers and soldiers can be put to sleep-they are the Untermensch. A low IQ specimen. Besides the future of humanity is Mars.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Andrew Joyce Comments via RSS
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
Shouldn't they recuse themselves when dealing with the Middle East?