X Close

Can the Tories stop mass migration? Empty rhetoric is designed to deceive voters

The debate over 'small boats' is a proxy (BEN STANSALL/AFP via Getty Images)

The debate over 'small boats' is a proxy (BEN STANSALL/AFP via Getty Images)


August 10, 2023   7 mins

During a recent holiday in the East of England, I followed a sign through a farm gate offering raspberries for sale. It turned out to be a table in an empty farm outbuilding, with punnets of raspberries, a weighing scale, and an old ice-cream box full of loose change.

If you live at the periphery of a large English city, you’d be forgiven for thinking that no one does honesty boxes anymore. Even where I live, at the outer edge of the capital’s blast radius, a relatively high-trust English society is on its way to a markedly more Londonesque state of atomisation. A little town that until just recently recorded a handful of crimes every year now has county-lines graffiti in its alleyways, a persistent shoplifting problem and, as of late, a bevy of hard-eyed young women who hang about in the market square and get into men’s cars. Local police, if they ever put in an appearance, seem either unable or unwilling to do anything.

Why my town and not one in Norfolk? What is the difference between these two areas, such that in one the default is to trust strangers, and in the other to view them with increasing suspicion? The most obvious answer is also an uncomfortable one by modern moral standards: population turnover. While rural Norfolk doesn’t change very fast, my town has more or less doubled in size in a decade, largely swelled by people forced out by the capital’s ever-intensifying competition for housing.

I’m not suggesting no one should ever move house. But when a lot of people do in a short period of time, how does it affect the social fabric? A stable and tight-knit community isn’t sufficient to deliver high levels of interpersonal trust, but it’s probably necessary. A fluctuating community, by contrast, with a large proportion of individuals who don’t (or don’t yet) have longstanding ties to the area and one another, is unlikely to be one in which people leave their doors unlocked, or sell raspberries via honesty box.

Why is London pricing families out at this rate? It’s not just that the capital’s outsized cultural and economic draw sucks in workers from all over the country. Our national birth rate is well below replacement, and has been since 1973. But Britain’s population is still growing rapidly: it is just that 60% of this growth is via immigration, which has increased Britain’s foreign-born resident population from 4.6 million in 2001 to 10 million in 2021.

Almost a third of that immigration has been into the capital, which is now the most ethnically diverse part of Britain. In respectable society, this is framed as a feature rather than a bug: the Mayor of London, for example, is fond of telling us that “Diversity is our strength”. The consensus across government, media, NGOs and the urban educated classes is that ongoing high immigration is good, and anyone who disagrees is morally beyond the pale. And for beneficiaries of the resulting economic growth, this must seem self-evident. London is wealthier than my town, which is wealthier than rural Norfolk. Who gives a stuff about honesty boxes?

Quite a few people, as it turns out. Many who recall growing up in more stable communities dislike the sense of lower social cohesion that research shows accompanies rapid social turnover. From this perspective, it may be tempting to ask: who is the our in “Diversity is our strength”? But to the extent that population turnover is driven by immigration, expressing disquiet is to court moral untouchability. Excluded from polite discourse, then, views curdle online into paranoid narratives in which the issue is not social trust but race animus. In this view, mass immigration is a malign conspiracy by elites to abolish the native population: the so-called “Great Replacement”.

The truth, however, is both more banal, and more dispiriting. The so-called “Great Replacement” describes a dynamic that has some basis in fact, in the sense that the native-born proportion of the population really is declining relative to immigrants, and this is happening with active support from the political class. It’s just that this isn’t an elite conspiracy: we’re all implicated.

Overall, internet conspiracists notwithstanding, Britain remains one of the least racist countries in the world. I’m willing to bet most average Brits approach assimilating strangers in much the same way as my town does: if you pitch in and seem nice, you’re welcome. The ethnic makeup of local schools is roughly in line with the national average, and while social trust has declined as the town has grown, this hasn’t come with obvious racial tensions.

But this is what “assimilation” looks like. “Diversity”, on the other hand, is the kind of segregation you get when the pace of demographic change is too rapid for newcomers to assimilate. And a majority of Brits, despite being broadly welcoming to strangers, do indeed think this is the case.

Perhaps the most high-profile proxy for the tensions this produces is the debate over “small boats”. This smouldering political bin-fire ignited again this week, as asylum seekers were photographed boarding the Bibby Stockholm, a floating accommodation barge commissioned to house them. Furious responses ranged from horror at this “floating concentration camp” to local fury at its unwanted presence.

This is only the latest episode in an ongoing public psychodrama over Channel migrants, whose main plot now concerns the Tories’ Illegal Migration Act, a bill that aims to grant the Government power to immediately deport migrants arriving illegally by small boat, either to their home state or to Rwanda (or perhaps Ascension Island). This bill is fiercely opposed by NGOs and progressive politicians, and supported by more than half of British citizens.

Numerically speaking, however, both the bill and the issue it addresses are sideshows. The number of migrants entering Britain by small boat — 45,755 in 2022 — may seem high. But relative to 2022’s overall net migration figure of 606,000, this is a small number: around 7.5%. In turn, though, these comparative figures explain why the small boats debate occasions so much sound and fury: it is a proxy for the growing perception that, regardless of what the electorate wants, the political class has no interest in controlling migration of any kind, whether legal or otherwise.

A key reason for the Brexit result, especially among working-class voters, was a desire to return control over immigration to Britain’s elected government. The expectation was that politicians would then respond to the popular wish for a reduction in numbers. But despite our Home Secretary’s hardline posturing on asylum seekers, her hints at exiting the European Convention on Human Rights, or the moral outrage this all engenders from progressives, events since indicate that the Tories have zero desire to do this.

Quite the opposite. Even while posturing on asylum seekers, the Government opened new asylum routes, liberalised student visas, scrapped foreign recruitment restrictions, and amended the list of “shortage occupations” eligible for simplified visa applications to include hospitality and construction workers. In other words, having won two general elections with a promise to deliver Brexit — a promise heard as a tacit pledge to protect British workers from foreign competition — the Tories appear as committed as the administration they succeeded, and the EU they campaigned to leave, to doing the exact opposite.

In London, the result is a pressure on housing that has been escalating for my entire adult life. Even young urban graduates, a group long associated with high openness and liberal views, are beginning to make the connection. Why, they ask, is the country’s most expensive real estate housing its “least productive” residents? Why should the unemployed get social housing in central London, while young working graduates queue for house viewings and languish in mouldy Zone 6 bedsits? Should those on benefits be pressured to move to Middlesbrough?

Perhaps it’s unsurprising that those who have grown up in a world of waning social trust, and graduated into cut-throat resource competition, should be giving the London housing debate an increasingly Darwinist edge. A prudent social democrat might read such sentiments as a warning signal. For while it’s clearly possible to justify large-scale immigration on progressive grounds, a wealth of studies shows that mass immigration undermines social solidarity, which in turn reduces public support for generous welfare policies.

But in practice, progressives only ever argue for more, faster. And even the Tories just offer empty pledges, plus controversial but largely symbolic gestures such as the Rwanda plan.

So, is mass immigration a sinister elite conspiracy? Not really. The Tories are indeed profoundly two-faced on the issue, while Labour are enthusiastic accelerationists. Yet this is simply the consequence of Britain’s structural reliance, for both the economy and the welfare state, on continued economic growth. In practice, in a low-productivity economy such as Britain’s, this means population growth. And since Britain’s native population has been below replacement for decades, leaders must either level with the electorate about the need to trim our sails, or else grow the economy (i.e. the population) by other means.

In other words, the so-called “Great Replacement” is really the Great Contraception, seen from the other end of the telescope. And the only way to avert it would either be to reverse the Great Contraception — a policy which, even in considerably less liberal polities such as Hungary, has had mixed success so far — or face the social and political blowback from a painful economic adjustment.

Would such an adjustment be worth it? Perhaps for a leader such as Viktor OrbĂĄn, whose nation has a robust public consensus at both elite and popular levels on the importance of national identity. But in a post-imperial Britain deeply ambivalent about its history and identity? I doubt anyone but a hardline restrictionist would continue supporting such a brutal trade-off once the cuts really started to bite. And from the perspective of a political class that never needed honesty-box culture anyway, and whose peer group largely views cultural conservatism as low-status, the proposal would surely seem absurd: a repugnantly parochial breach of their duty to keep the economy growing, in the interests of national wellbeing.

Faced with both demographic decline and a need for growth, then, our leaders are hopelessly addicted to the growth-like economic effect of continued mass immigration. We can expect them to continue chasing this high, whatever they say, while praying that symbolically punitive proposals directed at Channel migrants will be enough to mollify any mutinous sections of the electorate. No doubt the hope is that the chickens of housing scarcity, angry young graduates, deteriorating social trust, faltering quality of life, and mounting nativist resentment will come home to roost on someone else’s watch.

At the core of the gulf between elite and popular views on immigration lies the intractable problem of the Great Lack of Self-Replacement. Responding to this, what looks from one perspective like the political class tearing up the social contract looks from our leaders’ perspective like upholding it. And the tragedy is that both views are true.


Mary Harrington is a contributing editor at UnHerd.

moveincircles

Join the discussion


Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber


To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.

Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.

Subscribe
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

112 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
t slothrop
t slothrop
11 months ago

I (American) recently had the chance to visit London for several weeks. I absolutely loved everything about it – the history, the culture, I found the people kind and interesting. Better than any large American city, including NYC, by an order of magnitude IMO.
But I also had a sense that there was nothing ‘anchoring’ the people to one another other than the advantages they experienced by working in London or the experiences they as individuals had access to by living in London – their affiliation to London was what London does for them, not what they could do for London. Yes, there was plenty of activism (ESG, NetZero, etc.) but not tied to a culture or place.
To put it another way, I sensed that, if China were to invade London tomorrow, about a third would be ready to die for queen and country, about a fifth would cheer on the Chinese, and the remainder would hope there was as little collateral damage to their daily lives as possible while they waited out the conflict. Maybe this is unfair and certainly based on limited exposure, but this article reminded and reinforced my impression.
Would be happy to hear from the natives that this is not the case…

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
11 months ago
Reply to  t slothrop

I lived in London 20 years ago and it was exactly the same, just without the ESG and Net Zero. People just go about their daily lives and don’t interact with anyone else. There is a clear difference between “loving London” and feeling rooted there. It was very easy to feel lonely in the big city.
When I went home to the Yorkshire countryside (helloooo, honesty boxes!), it used to scare me to death when people yelled “good morning!” across the road at me, as is their wont there – just being friendly. In London, people yelling across the road at you without any reason is your signal to run, run, run like the wind.

Last edited 11 months ago by Katharine Eyre
Phil Mac
Phil Mac
11 months ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

An amusing anecdote; about 40 years ago my Mum & her sister (lifetime Liverpudlians) went to London for the day. Classic stuff, see Buckingham Palace, etc.
She got back & told me it was lovely but she didn’t like the people because when she started chatting to someone at a bus stop they didn’t respond. “They’re all so unfriendly” was her verdict. The idea of strangers not chatting was odd to her.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
11 months ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

Ha ha, very true. After living in London for a few years, I was up in York for a weekend. Going to the early train, someone said hello to me on the pavement. It freaked me out, before I realised how much London had changed me. I still love London, mind

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
11 months ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

Yes, I can definitely relate. After I’d been in London for 2 years, several of my Yorkshire friends said I’d “gone all Southern”. After 20 years in Vienna, I’ve probably “gone all European” or “gone all German”. Yorkshire folk are quite particular when it comes to belongingness. Some might think it narrow-minded. I think it’s being proud of who you are. I love Yorkshire and am right proud to be a Yorkshire lass. Aye up, love!

Last edited 11 months ago by Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
11 months ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

Yes, I can definitely relate. After I’d been in London for 2 years, several of my Yorkshire friends said I’d “gone all Southern”. After 20 years in Vienna, I’ve probably “gone all European” or “gone all German”. Yorkshire folk are quite particular when it comes to belongingness. Some might think it narrow-minded. I think it’s being proud of who you are. I love Yorkshire and am right proud to be a Yorkshire lass. Aye up, love!

Last edited 11 months ago by Katharine Eyre
Phil Mac
Phil Mac
11 months ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

An amusing anecdote; about 40 years ago my Mum & her sister (lifetime Liverpudlians) went to London for the day. Classic stuff, see Buckingham Palace, etc.
She got back & told me it was lovely but she didn’t like the people because when she started chatting to someone at a bus stop they didn’t respond. “They’re all so unfriendly” was her verdict. The idea of strangers not chatting was odd to her.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
11 months ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

Ha ha, very true. After living in London for a few years, I was up in York for a weekend. Going to the early train, someone said hello to me on the pavement. It freaked me out, before I realised how much London had changed me. I still love London, mind

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
11 months ago
Reply to  t slothrop

A third is about right, given London’s racial makeup.

Even in warfare at the sharp end, one finds that about a third of the PBI* are very aggressive, proactive fighters, a third not quite so enthusiastic and will only leave the trench under duress, and the other third would rather hide in the bottom of the trench or ideally ‘leg it’ completely.

(*Poor Bloody Infantry.)

William Shaw
William Shaw
11 months ago
Reply to  t slothrop

During any invasion, the majority of men are usually slaughtered and the majority of the women are assimilated.
So based on historical data I’d estimate that half would fight to the death and half wouldn’t care.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
11 months ago
Reply to  t slothrop

We lived in London in the mid-1990’s for a few years. It was lovely. We have returned annually ever since and have watched it change dramatically. London is clearly a multicultural city. That said, it’s not very British anymore! If you really want to experience British life you must go outside of London. Get in a car and travel about
.lots of great things to see and experience OUTSIDE of London. We’re off to East Anglia this Fall.

Last edited 11 months ago by Cathy Carron
Brian Villanueva
Brian Villanueva
11 months ago
Reply to  t slothrop

Ironically, your percentages are pretty close to those of the American revolution. About 1/4 were the American George. About 1/3rd were for the English George (at least loosely). And the rest just wanted to get the conflict over so they could make money — and they weren’t even Dutch (who were, in the late 18th century, the world’s best ignoring all conflicts so they could focus on just making bank.).

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
11 months ago
Reply to  t slothrop

I lived in London 20 years ago and it was exactly the same, just without the ESG and Net Zero. People just go about their daily lives and don’t interact with anyone else. There is a clear difference between “loving London” and feeling rooted there. It was very easy to feel lonely in the big city.
When I went home to the Yorkshire countryside (helloooo, honesty boxes!), it used to scare me to death when people yelled “good morning!” across the road at me, as is their wont there – just being friendly. In London, people yelling across the road at you without any reason is your signal to run, run, run like the wind.

Last edited 11 months ago by Katharine Eyre
Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
11 months ago
Reply to  t slothrop

A third is about right, given London’s racial makeup.

Even in warfare at the sharp end, one finds that about a third of the PBI* are very aggressive, proactive fighters, a third not quite so enthusiastic and will only leave the trench under duress, and the other third would rather hide in the bottom of the trench or ideally ‘leg it’ completely.

(*Poor Bloody Infantry.)

William Shaw
William Shaw
11 months ago
Reply to  t slothrop

During any invasion, the majority of men are usually slaughtered and the majority of the women are assimilated.
So based on historical data I’d estimate that half would fight to the death and half wouldn’t care.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
11 months ago
Reply to  t slothrop

We lived in London in the mid-1990’s for a few years. It was lovely. We have returned annually ever since and have watched it change dramatically. London is clearly a multicultural city. That said, it’s not very British anymore! If you really want to experience British life you must go outside of London. Get in a car and travel about
.lots of great things to see and experience OUTSIDE of London. We’re off to East Anglia this Fall.

Last edited 11 months ago by Cathy Carron
Brian Villanueva
Brian Villanueva
11 months ago
Reply to  t slothrop

Ironically, your percentages are pretty close to those of the American revolution. About 1/4 were the American George. About 1/3rd were for the English George (at least loosely). And the rest just wanted to get the conflict over so they could make money — and they weren’t even Dutch (who were, in the late 18th century, the world’s best ignoring all conflicts so they could focus on just making bank.).

t slothrop
t slothrop
11 months ago

I (American) recently had the chance to visit London for several weeks. I absolutely loved everything about it – the history, the culture, I found the people kind and interesting. Better than any large American city, including NYC, by an order of magnitude IMO.
But I also had a sense that there was nothing ‘anchoring’ the people to one another other than the advantages they experienced by working in London or the experiences they as individuals had access to by living in London – their affiliation to London was what London does for them, not what they could do for London. Yes, there was plenty of activism (ESG, NetZero, etc.) but not tied to a culture or place.
To put it another way, I sensed that, if China were to invade London tomorrow, about a third would be ready to die for queen and country, about a fifth would cheer on the Chinese, and the remainder would hope there was as little collateral damage to their daily lives as possible while they waited out the conflict. Maybe this is unfair and certainly based on limited exposure, but this article reminded and reinforced my impression.
Would be happy to hear from the natives that this is not the case…

Right-Wing Hippie
Right-Wing Hippie
11 months ago

From this perspective, it may be tempting to ask: who is the our in “Diversity is our strength”?
The elites. Diversity is the elites’ strength. Divide and rule.

Walter Marvell
Walter Marvell
11 months ago

Mary is pulling punches here. First – we have become a low producitivity economy because of 30 years of mass immigration and uncontrolled free movement of people from the EU, not the other way round. Second – the madness of 1.2 million annual inflows in 2023 when the job devouring A.I revolution has arrived will be seen by historians as a primary factor in our societal collapse. We do not need workers for factories anymore. We do not do factories. We make grads for the public sector and NHS. These supposed armies of war blasted lawyers and doctors escaping the Hell of France on small boats will join the vast chaotic black market, further straining our already bust welfare budgets. 75m will trip the future NHS into certain collapse. Third – mass uncontrolled and unplanned immigration began as an avowed Blairite/progressive strategy to change the UK from a white Toryish nation state into a modern mixed EU multicultural Statelet. It did so without the consent of the people. They and subsequent New Order Elites like the Fake Tories also could even not be bothered to quantify the inflow – so we have the infrastructure of houses roads schools hospitals and reservoirs for 60m – and a groaning population of 70m. We are already crashing under the pressure. It also bequeathed an Islamist insurgent problem on top of all the the ugly convulsive changes listed. A tragedy when as noted the people of the UK had made multi ethnic living work. Their reward? To be branded racists anyway This HAS all has been driven by the greedy corrupt London Progressive Elite who knowingly enriched themselves by rigging the No Build property market and pretended we were ‘growing’ GDP – until they succumbed to degrowth Net Zero zealotry and now do not care about enterprise and national prosperity at all. Brexit saw the provinces of UK revolt as one against a class regional and national scandal that would make French Aristos facing the guilotine blanche. But it made no difference as the Progressives have all accumulated all the levers of actual power beyond the dusty impotent Parliament. Conspiracy? Not an Illuminati one, no. Greed just led them and us deeper and deeper into the Pit. An outrage? Yes. And if not sinister, what?

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
11 months ago
Reply to  Walter Marvell

An excellent eulogy, I thank you.

Dustin Needle
Dustin Needle
11 months ago
Reply to  Walter Marvell

Blair and fellow post-Maastricht politicians have realised that national consensus, indeed democracy generally, can be by-passed through international treaties and ‘open democracy’ funding of media and lawyers.

Honesty boxes are the least of our problems.

Jane H
Jane H
11 months ago
Reply to  Dustin Needle

The biggest threat to democracy is when countries, almost 200 currently including the UK, sign the Global Pandemic Treaty in 2024 allowing the World Health Organisation legally binding authority to dictate policy on a global scale. Sovereignty will be respected unless and here’s the killer, the policy decisions of an individual country endanger the health and well being of that country. Game, set and match to global elites.

Chipoko
Chipoko
11 months ago
Reply to  Dustin Needle

‘Lawyers’ – especially the unelected and unaccountable judiciary that consistently undermines parliamentary authority and well-heeled human rights lawyers from whose KC ranks those same judges are appointed.

Jane H
Jane H
11 months ago
Reply to  Dustin Needle

The biggest threat to democracy is when countries, almost 200 currently including the UK, sign the Global Pandemic Treaty in 2024 allowing the World Health Organisation legally binding authority to dictate policy on a global scale. Sovereignty will be respected unless and here’s the killer, the policy decisions of an individual country endanger the health and well being of that country. Game, set and match to global elites.

Chipoko
Chipoko
11 months ago
Reply to  Dustin Needle

‘Lawyers’ – especially the unelected and unaccountable judiciary that consistently undermines parliamentary authority and well-heeled human rights lawyers from whose KC ranks those same judges are appointed.

Jon Kilpatrick
Jon Kilpatrick
11 months ago
Reply to  Walter Marvell

Brilliant assessment. Thank you. Also, my gratitude to UnHerd for introducing me to and providing a platform for Mary Harrington. Well done!

John L Murphy
John L Murphy
11 months ago
Reply to  Walter Marvell

As a relevant aside, I believe Douglas Murray’s book a few years ago crunched some numbers to show real data about net losses in demographic and financial terms. He noted that nobody ‘in charge’ had those figures on hand.

Walter Marvell
Walter Marvell
11 months ago
Reply to  John L Murphy

True. I do not enjoy being Cassandra of day. Murray was way ahead in warning of the New Order”s silent revolution and the insidious way in which State Omerta has been reinforced by our cowardly captured Academia who also lied about and distorted data on the actual costs-benefits of uncontrolled unplanned for mass largely low wage migration. Their terror of being accused of racism and discrimination, the crude bludgeon the Left & the compliant evangelist BBC have used to ‘cleanse’ public debate – has long since worked its Orwellian magic. The real data will stay buried in the Gosplan Ministries forever..and another million will come in. As in the Soviet Union, there is now a yawning chasm between the privileged permanent Zil Lane Elite Class and an impoverished people denied truth true freedoms and genuine political mandate. We are trapped now in systemic declinism. It is now fully fledged moral decay. Traumazone UK.

Walter Marvell
Walter Marvell
11 months ago
Reply to  John L Murphy

True. I do not enjoy being Cassandra of day. Murray was way ahead in warning of the New Order”s silent revolution and the insidious way in which State Omerta has been reinforced by our cowardly captured Academia who also lied about and distorted data on the actual costs-benefits of uncontrolled unplanned for mass largely low wage migration. Their terror of being accused of racism and discrimination, the crude bludgeon the Left & the compliant evangelist BBC have used to ‘cleanse’ public debate – has long since worked its Orwellian magic. The real data will stay buried in the Gosplan Ministries forever..and another million will come in. As in the Soviet Union, there is now a yawning chasm between the privileged permanent Zil Lane Elite Class and an impoverished people denied truth true freedoms and genuine political mandate. We are trapped now in systemic declinism. It is now fully fledged moral decay. Traumazone UK.

Chipoko
Chipoko
11 months ago
Reply to  Walter Marvell

“… mass uncontrolled and unplanned immigration began as an avowed Blairite/progressive strategy to change the UK from a white Toryish nation state into a modern mixed EU multicultural Statelet. It did so without the consent of the people.”
Thank you for your brilliant summary of what is wrong with the UK and why. You are correct to identify Tony Blair as the architect of the great multi-cultural drive, imposed with the aid of the punitive Diversity, Inclusion & Equality [DIE] agenda. In the late 2000s I clearly remember reading a leading article in the Sunday Times in which Tony Blair, when Gordon Brown had succeeded him as Prime Minister, was interviewed about his immigration policy. Blair openly confessed to having introduced an undeclared policy of admitting into the UK any persons arriving at the border seeking permanent residence, provided they were non-White. Covert instructions to this effect were issued from the PM’s office to this effect. When asked why he said it was permanently to change Britain from being an egregious ‘monochrome’ society and culture. Earlier this year, the BBC gleefully reported that sometime between 2030 and 2050 the white population of the UK would become a minority (as has long been the case in its capital city)! Tony Blair imposed, without electoral mandate two hugely damaging policies on the British people: [1] ethnic ‘diversity’ and dilution of the ethnic native population; and [2] committing the UK to an unjustified war with Iraq on the basis of a falsehood, the violent consequences of which will continue to rain terror upon us for decades to come.
The New Order Elites (the ‘Woking Class’, as I call them), like Blair, are shielded from the consequences of their pernicious, subversive actions by virtue of their wealth and power. The ‘Little People’ (as David Cameron disdainfully referred to them/us – the ethnic Brits who’ve been politically bludgeoned into disavowing their heritage, disliking their culture and national character and confessing their guilt for historical and current racism, ‘climate change’, misogyny, homophobia and all the other social ‘injustices’ that form the basis of Woke ideology) are left powerless to resist their cultural dismantling in the face of authoritarian government that increasingly permits the attrition of free speech, in spite of purporting to value this cornerstone of our diminishing democracy.

Andrew Fisher
Andrew Fisher
11 months ago
Reply to  Chipoko

If you are going to make claims, cite the source. I very much doubt that Blair said any such thing, and as we were then part of the EU, most of the migration was from EU, white countries. Net immigration is now about three times what it was at its height under New Labour governments..

Chipoko
Chipoko
11 months ago
Reply to  Andrew Fisher

Sunday Times (UK) – as cited!

Chipoko
Chipoko
11 months ago
Reply to  Andrew Fisher

Sunday Times (UK) – as cited!

Andrew Fisher
Andrew Fisher
11 months ago
Reply to  Chipoko

If you are going to make claims, cite the source. I very much doubt that Blair said any such thing, and as we were then part of the EU, most of the migration was from EU, white countries. Net immigration is now about three times what it was at its height under New Labour governments..

Bob Rowlands
Bob Rowlands
11 months ago
Reply to  Walter Marvell

A very eloquent and well argued assessment thank you. I’m increasing reading about Mr T B has effectively changed the fabric of the UK into indeed a world statelet to feed the large corporate machine. The elites have succeeded on so many levels while Jo Public looks on aghast

Andrew Fisher
Andrew Fisher
11 months ago
Reply to  Walter Marvell

Something in what you say but you ignore low paid jobs. We have 5 million people on out of work benefits. What about care homes, the NHS – a huge number of non British staff. My mother had a number of home carers – all very nice, only one British person among them.

And British low productivity has been a recognised problem for decades, it isn’t a recent phenomenon.

Last edited 11 months ago by Andrew Fisher
Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
11 months ago
Reply to  Walter Marvell

An excellent eulogy, I thank you.

Dustin Needle
Dustin Needle
11 months ago
Reply to  Walter Marvell

Blair and fellow post-Maastricht politicians have realised that national consensus, indeed democracy generally, can be by-passed through international treaties and ‘open democracy’ funding of media and lawyers.

Honesty boxes are the least of our problems.

Jon Kilpatrick
Jon Kilpatrick
11 months ago
Reply to  Walter Marvell

Brilliant assessment. Thank you. Also, my gratitude to UnHerd for introducing me to and providing a platform for Mary Harrington. Well done!

John L Murphy
John L Murphy
11 months ago
Reply to  Walter Marvell

As a relevant aside, I believe Douglas Murray’s book a few years ago crunched some numbers to show real data about net losses in demographic and financial terms. He noted that nobody ‘in charge’ had those figures on hand.

Chipoko
Chipoko
11 months ago
Reply to  Walter Marvell

“… mass uncontrolled and unplanned immigration began as an avowed Blairite/progressive strategy to change the UK from a white Toryish nation state into a modern mixed EU multicultural Statelet. It did so without the consent of the people.”
Thank you for your brilliant summary of what is wrong with the UK and why. You are correct to identify Tony Blair as the architect of the great multi-cultural drive, imposed with the aid of the punitive Diversity, Inclusion & Equality [DIE] agenda. In the late 2000s I clearly remember reading a leading article in the Sunday Times in which Tony Blair, when Gordon Brown had succeeded him as Prime Minister, was interviewed about his immigration policy. Blair openly confessed to having introduced an undeclared policy of admitting into the UK any persons arriving at the border seeking permanent residence, provided they were non-White. Covert instructions to this effect were issued from the PM’s office to this effect. When asked why he said it was permanently to change Britain from being an egregious ‘monochrome’ society and culture. Earlier this year, the BBC gleefully reported that sometime between 2030 and 2050 the white population of the UK would become a minority (as has long been the case in its capital city)! Tony Blair imposed, without electoral mandate two hugely damaging policies on the British people: [1] ethnic ‘diversity’ and dilution of the ethnic native population; and [2] committing the UK to an unjustified war with Iraq on the basis of a falsehood, the violent consequences of which will continue to rain terror upon us for decades to come.
The New Order Elites (the ‘Woking Class’, as I call them), like Blair, are shielded from the consequences of their pernicious, subversive actions by virtue of their wealth and power. The ‘Little People’ (as David Cameron disdainfully referred to them/us – the ethnic Brits who’ve been politically bludgeoned into disavowing their heritage, disliking their culture and national character and confessing their guilt for historical and current racism, ‘climate change’, misogyny, homophobia and all the other social ‘injustices’ that form the basis of Woke ideology) are left powerless to resist their cultural dismantling in the face of authoritarian government that increasingly permits the attrition of free speech, in spite of purporting to value this cornerstone of our diminishing democracy.

Bob Rowlands
Bob Rowlands
11 months ago
Reply to  Walter Marvell

A very eloquent and well argued assessment thank you. I’m increasing reading about Mr T B has effectively changed the fabric of the UK into indeed a world statelet to feed the large corporate machine. The elites have succeeded on so many levels while Jo Public looks on aghast

Andrew Fisher
Andrew Fisher
11 months ago
Reply to  Walter Marvell

Something in what you say but you ignore low paid jobs. We have 5 million people on out of work benefits. What about care homes, the NHS – a huge number of non British staff. My mother had a number of home carers – all very nice, only one British person among them.

And British low productivity has been a recognised problem for decades, it isn’t a recent phenomenon.

Last edited 11 months ago by Andrew Fisher
Peter Kwasi-Modo
Peter Kwasi-Modo
11 months ago

Right on, Right-Wing Hippie!. Any unelected institution stuffed with the elite will do their darndest to prevent immigration control. This applies not just to the ECHR, but also the House of Lords, the UK judiciary and the UK Senior Civil Service. Unless a government has the you-know-whats to take on ALL such institutions then the answer to the question in the title Ms Harrington’s article must be negative.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
11 months ago

Diversity is not strength – in fact, studies have shown that the more homogenous a society is, the more stable it is as well. Read Peter Thiel’s, ‘The Diversity Myth’.

Walter Marvell
Walter Marvell
11 months ago

Mary is pulling punches here. First – we have become a low producitivity economy because of 30 years of mass immigration and uncontrolled free movement of people from the EU, not the other way round. Second – the madness of 1.2 million annual inflows in 2023 when the job devouring A.I revolution has arrived will be seen by historians as a primary factor in our societal collapse. We do not need workers for factories anymore. We do not do factories. We make grads for the public sector and NHS. These supposed armies of war blasted lawyers and doctors escaping the Hell of France on small boats will join the vast chaotic black market, further straining our already bust welfare budgets. 75m will trip the future NHS into certain collapse. Third – mass uncontrolled and unplanned immigration began as an avowed Blairite/progressive strategy to change the UK from a white Toryish nation state into a modern mixed EU multicultural Statelet. It did so without the consent of the people. They and subsequent New Order Elites like the Fake Tories also could even not be bothered to quantify the inflow – so we have the infrastructure of houses roads schools hospitals and reservoirs for 60m – and a groaning population of 70m. We are already crashing under the pressure. It also bequeathed an Islamist insurgent problem on top of all the the ugly convulsive changes listed. A tragedy when as noted the people of the UK had made multi ethnic living work. Their reward? To be branded racists anyway This HAS all has been driven by the greedy corrupt London Progressive Elite who knowingly enriched themselves by rigging the No Build property market and pretended we were ‘growing’ GDP – until they succumbed to degrowth Net Zero zealotry and now do not care about enterprise and national prosperity at all. Brexit saw the provinces of UK revolt as one against a class regional and national scandal that would make French Aristos facing the guilotine blanche. But it made no difference as the Progressives have all accumulated all the levers of actual power beyond the dusty impotent Parliament. Conspiracy? Not an Illuminati one, no. Greed just led them and us deeper and deeper into the Pit. An outrage? Yes. And if not sinister, what?

Peter Kwasi-Modo
Peter Kwasi-Modo
11 months ago

Right on, Right-Wing Hippie!. Any unelected institution stuffed with the elite will do their darndest to prevent immigration control. This applies not just to the ECHR, but also the House of Lords, the UK judiciary and the UK Senior Civil Service. Unless a government has the you-know-whats to take on ALL such institutions then the answer to the question in the title Ms Harrington’s article must be negative.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
11 months ago

Diversity is not strength – in fact, studies have shown that the more homogenous a society is, the more stable it is as well. Read Peter Thiel’s, ‘The Diversity Myth’.

Right-Wing Hippie
Right-Wing Hippie
11 months ago

From this perspective, it may be tempting to ask: who is the our in “Diversity is our strength”?
The elites. Diversity is the elites’ strength. Divide and rule.

Peter Kwasi-Modo
Peter Kwasi-Modo
11 months ago

Many thanks to Mary Harrington for yet another top-notch article. I have just one micro-quibble. In an article that discusses how the social fabric is affected by population turnover, the migration statistic quoted was net migration, i.e. 606,000. Just giving the net figure under-estimates turnover. Last year, about 600,000 left the UK and long-term immigration was 1,200,000. Even though many of the emigrants were not UK “natives”, population churn is better described statistically by quoting these two numbers, i.e. outward and inward migration, rather than quoting the single net figure.

Ian Barton
Ian Barton
11 months ago

Absolutely. It is well understood that “pace of change” is the key issue, and that cannot be understood without both of these numbers.

Ian Barton
Ian Barton
11 months ago

Absolutely. It is well understood that “pace of change” is the key issue, and that cannot be understood without both of these numbers.

Peter Kwasi-Modo
Peter Kwasi-Modo
11 months ago

Many thanks to Mary Harrington for yet another top-notch article. I have just one micro-quibble. In an article that discusses how the social fabric is affected by population turnover, the migration statistic quoted was net migration, i.e. 606,000. Just giving the net figure under-estimates turnover. Last year, about 600,000 left the UK and long-term immigration was 1,200,000. Even though many of the emigrants were not UK “natives”, population churn is better described statistically by quoting these two numbers, i.e. outward and inward migration, rather than quoting the single net figure.

Simon Neale
Simon Neale
11 months ago

A fluctuating community, by contrast, with a large proportion of individuals who don’t (or don’t yet) have longstanding ties to the area and one another, is unlikely to be one in which people leave their doors unlocked, or sell raspberries via honesty box.

One of the problems is that a lot of people actually prefer that type of fluctuating community. Immigrants themselves do, of course, because they don’t stand out and it normalises their position. In particular, illegal immigrants probably feel safer among the lawless clutter of central London than being the only obvious newcomers to a white monocultural village. And anyone working in a low-skill occupation knows that a fluctuating population needs basic goods and services.
And large chunks of our indigenous population think that fluctuating communities are to be welcomed. Some find living in them or visiting them interesting and “vibrant” after what they consider to be a boring suburban or rural upbringing. Often students and young people are like tourists in these types of areas, enjoying the edginess and chaos for a short time before realising that getting your bedsit broken into or being stared at and harassed by strangers is not a sensible lifestyle choice. More importantly, swathes of wealthy British people are happy to welcome high levels of immigration, providing they don’t have to live in those areas affected. Again, it’s partly economic (get your car cleaned and coffee served on your trips into town…buy that exotic North African spice that your friends have trouble getting…) and partly virtue-signalling. They want to be seen as being broad-minded and compassionate, and also desperately fear being thought of as prejudiced. So they speak up – and vote – for appalling levels and types of social change, secure in the knowledge that their affluence will cushion them from the bad effects.
One glimmer of hope is the potential rebellion of young urban graduates mentioned in the article. A lot more need to organise, and join parties like Reform, and speak out.
The alternative is a future of increasing suspicion, crime, racism, and massive overcrowding. If any other society were subjected to what is happening to the UK, it would be called colonialism or invasion.

Anthony Roe
Anthony Roe
11 months ago
Reply to  Simon Neale

If my children and their friends, all urban graduates, are anything to go by, they are still fully invested in magical thinking. No amount of reasoning, appeals to common sense or self interest can deflect them as they enter their 4th decade in bed-sitter land or mortgage misery.
I blame Toy-Story.

Last edited 11 months ago by Anthony Roe
v easter
v easter
11 months ago
Reply to  Simon Neale

Selling raspberries via an honesty box in rural Norfolk has never been much of an earner. Being Norfolk “born and bred” as we say, means I struggle to recognise the idyllic rural Norfolk visitors and second home owners insist they have found. I assume it’s some variation of Never,Never Land.

When I was young you caught the Fenman (trains had names in those days) and took your Alevels down to London to seek your fortune ASAP. London was a magnet for provincial/rural youngsters.Some stayed and some took their newly acquired skills back home….either way London was a winner and so was Norfolk .Living and working in London was a right of passage for many and our capital city played a unifying link with the towns and villages we came from.
But that is no longer the case since mass immigration opened London’s opportunities to the world . In doing so it lost its role as the benefactor of provincial d**k Whittingtons and gave us Diversity instead. 

ben arnulfssen
ben arnulfssen
11 months ago
Reply to  Simon Neale

One of the saddest aspects of late middle age was watching my good wife suffer the progressive erosion of her Progressive delusions, and retreat into all-encompassing denial as she was increasingly brought into contact with the actual reality of Blairite educational and imigration policies.

Katalin Kish
Katalin Kish
11 months ago
Reply to  Simon Neale

secure in the knowledge that their affluence will cushion them from the bad effects.

Indeed.

Australia imported entire African tribes from refugee camps celebrating their way of life, ignoring the uncomfortable fact that African tribal way of life is the cause of endless conflict, stagnation, and endless famine, as Africa’s population grew from about 300 million 60 years ago to over 1.4 billion (1) without much productivity growth.

The African tribes Australia imported are encouraged to preserve and live their culture, which, like all other non-white cultures is deemed to be superior to what built, what makes the Australia function as a country capable of importing tens of thousands of uneducated, unskilled and traumatised refugees in the first place.

As a former refugee from Europe wanting to pay forward the trust and kindness of strangers I received decades ago, I accepted a young Sudanese man as a housemate in 2015 without doing any background checks. Having him and his frequently visiting girlfriend in my life gave me a welcome distraction from a stalker ex-coworker’s crimes, because I could make an obvious, tangible difference to their lives simply by sharing knowledge and experience.

In return I was welcomed as a guest to some of the tribal events that framed their lives. This was a real honour.

The frequency of these events and the number of participants however made it clear that it would be difficult for tribe members to hold down full-time employment, while fulfilling tribal obligations. I also saw first-hand children roaming around with other children as soon as they could walk without any adult supervision, including whether children were eating or not, while all the adults were sharing food and chatting without looking around to check on the children. This gave me some clues how those skeletal toddlers in advertisements for donations for decades and decades may end up sitting in the dust all by themselves.

More than a year after accepting this young couple into my house and life I learned that the man was homeless prior, even though he was driving a BMW. His girlfriend, being the only university-educated member at the time of their tribe, was in a prestigious, but low-paying job. They both had high-end electronic devices I could not afford. The girl told me with a big smile that the BMW her boyfriend was driving was her birthday present to him. The meaning of this glaring incongruence between their likely financial means and the goods they possessed dawned on me alongside the likely meaning of strange behaviours exhibited by the numerous cousins and siblings visiting the house.

After almost three years I had to ask them to leave as it became obvious, I was expected to remain a provider and carer for them even though they both worked by then and ongoing crimes against me by the stalker ex-coworker robbed me of my ability to earn a salary. They knew of the stalker nightmare as occasionally they were also affected by the stalker’s crimes.

I stopped following the ABC (Australia’s equivalent of the BBC) after a gushing celebration of a Sudanese family of 35 children – of one father. The children were born to five (seven?) wives in a refugee camp.

The consequences of the above are predictable, but those whose voice is heard in Australia are protected from the bad effects thanks to their affluence – and their influence – indeed. Mentioning Sudanese crime is taboo of course, and so is the practical advice that resisting a mugging may be taken as an insult by the mugger, whose 40 or more relatives and friends will then show up at your house to teach you and your family/neighbours a lesson. Look up the name Dur Bidong.


(1) https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/africa-population/

Last edited 11 months ago by Katalin Kish
Anthony Roe
Anthony Roe
11 months ago
Reply to  Simon Neale

If my children and their friends, all urban graduates, are anything to go by, they are still fully invested in magical thinking. No amount of reasoning, appeals to common sense or self interest can deflect them as they enter their 4th decade in bed-sitter land or mortgage misery.
I blame Toy-Story.

Last edited 11 months ago by Anthony Roe
v easter
v easter
11 months ago
Reply to  Simon Neale

Selling raspberries via an honesty box in rural Norfolk has never been much of an earner. Being Norfolk “born and bred” as we say, means I struggle to recognise the idyllic rural Norfolk visitors and second home owners insist they have found. I assume it’s some variation of Never,Never Land.

When I was young you caught the Fenman (trains had names in those days) and took your Alevels down to London to seek your fortune ASAP. London was a magnet for provincial/rural youngsters.Some stayed and some took their newly acquired skills back home….either way London was a winner and so was Norfolk .Living and working in London was a right of passage for many and our capital city played a unifying link with the towns and villages we came from.
But that is no longer the case since mass immigration opened London’s opportunities to the world . In doing so it lost its role as the benefactor of provincial d**k Whittingtons and gave us Diversity instead. 

ben arnulfssen
ben arnulfssen
11 months ago
Reply to  Simon Neale

One of the saddest aspects of late middle age was watching my good wife suffer the progressive erosion of her Progressive delusions, and retreat into all-encompassing denial as she was increasingly brought into contact with the actual reality of Blairite educational and imigration policies.

Katalin Kish
Katalin Kish
11 months ago
Reply to  Simon Neale

secure in the knowledge that their affluence will cushion them from the bad effects.

Indeed.

Australia imported entire African tribes from refugee camps celebrating their way of life, ignoring the uncomfortable fact that African tribal way of life is the cause of endless conflict, stagnation, and endless famine, as Africa’s population grew from about 300 million 60 years ago to over 1.4 billion (1) without much productivity growth.

The African tribes Australia imported are encouraged to preserve and live their culture, which, like all other non-white cultures is deemed to be superior to what built, what makes the Australia function as a country capable of importing tens of thousands of uneducated, unskilled and traumatised refugees in the first place.

As a former refugee from Europe wanting to pay forward the trust and kindness of strangers I received decades ago, I accepted a young Sudanese man as a housemate in 2015 without doing any background checks. Having him and his frequently visiting girlfriend in my life gave me a welcome distraction from a stalker ex-coworker’s crimes, because I could make an obvious, tangible difference to their lives simply by sharing knowledge and experience.

In return I was welcomed as a guest to some of the tribal events that framed their lives. This was a real honour.

The frequency of these events and the number of participants however made it clear that it would be difficult for tribe members to hold down full-time employment, while fulfilling tribal obligations. I also saw first-hand children roaming around with other children as soon as they could walk without any adult supervision, including whether children were eating or not, while all the adults were sharing food and chatting without looking around to check on the children. This gave me some clues how those skeletal toddlers in advertisements for donations for decades and decades may end up sitting in the dust all by themselves.

More than a year after accepting this young couple into my house and life I learned that the man was homeless prior, even though he was driving a BMW. His girlfriend, being the only university-educated member at the time of their tribe, was in a prestigious, but low-paying job. They both had high-end electronic devices I could not afford. The girl told me with a big smile that the BMW her boyfriend was driving was her birthday present to him. The meaning of this glaring incongruence between their likely financial means and the goods they possessed dawned on me alongside the likely meaning of strange behaviours exhibited by the numerous cousins and siblings visiting the house.

After almost three years I had to ask them to leave as it became obvious, I was expected to remain a provider and carer for them even though they both worked by then and ongoing crimes against me by the stalker ex-coworker robbed me of my ability to earn a salary. They knew of the stalker nightmare as occasionally they were also affected by the stalker’s crimes.

I stopped following the ABC (Australia’s equivalent of the BBC) after a gushing celebration of a Sudanese family of 35 children – of one father. The children were born to five (seven?) wives in a refugee camp.

The consequences of the above are predictable, but those whose voice is heard in Australia are protected from the bad effects thanks to their affluence – and their influence – indeed. Mentioning Sudanese crime is taboo of course, and so is the practical advice that resisting a mugging may be taken as an insult by the mugger, whose 40 or more relatives and friends will then show up at your house to teach you and your family/neighbours a lesson. Look up the name Dur Bidong.


(1) https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/africa-population/

Last edited 11 months ago by Katalin Kish
Simon Neale
Simon Neale
11 months ago

A fluctuating community, by contrast, with a large proportion of individuals who don’t (or don’t yet) have longstanding ties to the area and one another, is unlikely to be one in which people leave their doors unlocked, or sell raspberries via honesty box.

One of the problems is that a lot of people actually prefer that type of fluctuating community. Immigrants themselves do, of course, because they don’t stand out and it normalises their position. In particular, illegal immigrants probably feel safer among the lawless clutter of central London than being the only obvious newcomers to a white monocultural village. And anyone working in a low-skill occupation knows that a fluctuating population needs basic goods and services.
And large chunks of our indigenous population think that fluctuating communities are to be welcomed. Some find living in them or visiting them interesting and “vibrant” after what they consider to be a boring suburban or rural upbringing. Often students and young people are like tourists in these types of areas, enjoying the edginess and chaos for a short time before realising that getting your bedsit broken into or being stared at and harassed by strangers is not a sensible lifestyle choice. More importantly, swathes of wealthy British people are happy to welcome high levels of immigration, providing they don’t have to live in those areas affected. Again, it’s partly economic (get your car cleaned and coffee served on your trips into town…buy that exotic North African spice that your friends have trouble getting…) and partly virtue-signalling. They want to be seen as being broad-minded and compassionate, and also desperately fear being thought of as prejudiced. So they speak up – and vote – for appalling levels and types of social change, secure in the knowledge that their affluence will cushion them from the bad effects.
One glimmer of hope is the potential rebellion of young urban graduates mentioned in the article. A lot more need to organise, and join parties like Reform, and speak out.
The alternative is a future of increasing suspicion, crime, racism, and massive overcrowding. If any other society were subjected to what is happening to the UK, it would be called colonialism or invasion.

Clara B
Clara B
11 months ago

Interesting article, Mary. I honestly think most people have no understanding of the longer-term impacts of migration on social cohesion and the dangers large-scale migration (of people from different cultures) presents. I’ve taught HE students for years and, in that time, have taught 1000’s of students, a sig. proportion with recent migration histories. The vast majority will never earn enough to pay their way; most will end up working in the care system, hospitality industries or similar (important work, to be fair, but low paid which can only be sustained by in work benefits). Most are isolated from mainstream British society and have virtually no knowledge of, or interest in, British history or traditions. They mix with their own and perpetuate the cultures of their home countries (usually low trust societies) in a different political and economic context. And their numbers are growing, and keep growing, and if anyone questions this they are shot down as racists. No time for assimilation, no time to develop a love of this country or an understanding of the hardships our ancestors endured to build this country. A lot of my students have mental health issues (arising, I think, from a growing realisation that they will never amount to much in our uber-competitive society – many migrate with the most incredible expectations of what’ll they’ll achieve and are shocked to find out, for instance, that a first degree usually confers no special advantages). It’s a social cohesion nightmare, frankly. And it will only get worse.

Walter Marvell
Walter Marvell
11 months ago
Reply to  Clara B

What a valuable sad and insightful post. So many of the darker outcomes of the crude zealous unthinking Magical Progressive Credo have converged here – to diastrous effect. First – the total obliteration of teaching and educational standards in order to permit the impossible social engineering 50% Grad target to be achieved. To under educate, then despatch children to poor greedy sub standard universities, then load them (or the State if non payers) with heavy debt is by any standards an abomination. The failures to assimilate are similarly cynical irrational and not accidental. The now deranged State Equality credos exhalt all non British cultures and actively denounces our own culture and values (oh those forgetable grubby old things like free speech, tolerance, democracy) as raycist imperialist and toxic. The charge sheet against the Progressive/EU/multicultural State (1992 to present) is so damning one wonders how the New Order Elite who sustain in and profit from it can ever sleep. Shame on them all.

Nicola Zahorak
Nicola Zahorak
11 months ago
Reply to  Clara B

Very good point on immigration and social cohesion. Where I live in Hungary., there’s a very strong feeling of social cohesion and high trust. Also, more space. The impact of mass immigration on population is also a concern. The effects of overpopulation on one’s quality of life are not to be underestimated. Whenever I visit my home town in the U.K, I am stunned by the overcrowding, and continuous traffic jams – and this is a town in the West Country, not London. It creates social tension and competition for resources. Slow, controlled immigration is fine, but the current level is unsustainable.

Last edited 11 months ago by Nicola Zahorak
anthony henderson
anthony henderson
11 months ago
Reply to  Nicola Zahorak

Are there may British and Western Europeans that have ‘migrated’ to Hungary that you know of?

Nicola Zahorak
Nicola Zahorak
11 months ago

Not that many where I live (a village in Western Hungary) but I know there are a lot in the capital. I’ve been here a while (I married a Hungarian) but when I first came here, in the nineties, most of the ex-pats and Westerners I met were here temporarily (to teach English, etc..) and left long ago. However, nowadays I am meeting more and more Hungarians who have returned home, with their foreign spouses (German, Dutch, Canadian, etc..) so there does seem to be a trend.

Nicola Zahorak
Nicola Zahorak
11 months ago

Not that many where I live (a village in Western Hungary) but I know there are a lot in the capital. I’ve been here a while (I married a Hungarian) but when I first came here, in the nineties, most of the ex-pats and Westerners I met were here temporarily (to teach English, etc..) and left long ago. However, nowadays I am meeting more and more Hungarians who have returned home, with their foreign spouses (German, Dutch, Canadian, etc..) so there does seem to be a trend.

anthony henderson
anthony henderson
11 months ago
Reply to  Nicola Zahorak

Are there may British and Western Europeans that have ‘migrated’ to Hungary that you know of?

Walter Marvell
Walter Marvell
11 months ago
Reply to  Clara B

What a valuable sad and insightful post. So many of the darker outcomes of the crude zealous unthinking Magical Progressive Credo have converged here – to diastrous effect. First – the total obliteration of teaching and educational standards in order to permit the impossible social engineering 50% Grad target to be achieved. To under educate, then despatch children to poor greedy sub standard universities, then load them (or the State if non payers) with heavy debt is by any standards an abomination. The failures to assimilate are similarly cynical irrational and not accidental. The now deranged State Equality credos exhalt all non British cultures and actively denounces our own culture and values (oh those forgetable grubby old things like free speech, tolerance, democracy) as raycist imperialist and toxic. The charge sheet against the Progressive/EU/multicultural State (1992 to present) is so damning one wonders how the New Order Elite who sustain in and profit from it can ever sleep. Shame on them all.

Nicola Zahorak
Nicola Zahorak
11 months ago
Reply to  Clara B

Very good point on immigration and social cohesion. Where I live in Hungary., there’s a very strong feeling of social cohesion and high trust. Also, more space. The impact of mass immigration on population is also a concern. The effects of overpopulation on one’s quality of life are not to be underestimated. Whenever I visit my home town in the U.K, I am stunned by the overcrowding, and continuous traffic jams – and this is a town in the West Country, not London. It creates social tension and competition for resources. Slow, controlled immigration is fine, but the current level is unsustainable.

Last edited 11 months ago by Nicola Zahorak
Clara B
Clara B
11 months ago

Interesting article, Mary. I honestly think most people have no understanding of the longer-term impacts of migration on social cohesion and the dangers large-scale migration (of people from different cultures) presents. I’ve taught HE students for years and, in that time, have taught 1000’s of students, a sig. proportion with recent migration histories. The vast majority will never earn enough to pay their way; most will end up working in the care system, hospitality industries or similar (important work, to be fair, but low paid which can only be sustained by in work benefits). Most are isolated from mainstream British society and have virtually no knowledge of, or interest in, British history or traditions. They mix with their own and perpetuate the cultures of their home countries (usually low trust societies) in a different political and economic context. And their numbers are growing, and keep growing, and if anyone questions this they are shot down as racists. No time for assimilation, no time to develop a love of this country or an understanding of the hardships our ancestors endured to build this country. A lot of my students have mental health issues (arising, I think, from a growing realisation that they will never amount to much in our uber-competitive society – many migrate with the most incredible expectations of what’ll they’ll achieve and are shocked to find out, for instance, that a first degree usually confers no special advantages). It’s a social cohesion nightmare, frankly. And it will only get worse.

Andrew R
Andrew R
11 months ago

Another fine piece of writing from Mary, this is what an honest conversation about a difficult subject looks like.

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
11 months ago
Reply to  Andrew R

Fully agree.

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
11 months ago
Reply to  Andrew R

Fully agree.

Andrew R
Andrew R
11 months ago

Another fine piece of writing from Mary, this is what an honest conversation about a difficult subject looks like.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
11 months ago

To address the caption question:
“Can the Tories stop mass migration?”.

No, not a chance in hell! This whole charade is one of the most deceitful episodes ever visited of the British people. It will inevitably result, sooner or later, in a brutal civil war, the like of which we have not seen for several centuries.

D Glover
D Glover
11 months ago

I used to think so, but the Manchester Arena bombing changed my mind. This was an atrocity so bad that it could have been the detonator.
Not only was the death toll high, but it had a high proportion of very young girls. That wasn’t a miscalculation; it was a design feature. Young girls are the audience for Arianne Grande.
So did it trigger the backlash? No, the good people of Manchester stood on the pavement looking gloomy, holding candles and singing ‘Don’t look back in anger’
At that point I realised that the civil war just will not happen.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
11 months ago
Reply to  D Glover

Give it time, it always works in the end, if you try hard enough.

Marie Jones
Marie Jones
11 months ago
Reply to  D Glover

I am a Mancunian, living in the city centre, within 5 minutes walk of the arena. I heard the explosion.
Walking round the city early the following morning was a weird experience. There were literally dozens of black-clad police officers with balaclavas and machine guns patrolling the streets in pairs, and a few people walking round as if in shock.
Yes, people did come together to listen to speeches and poems and to join in the singing, but the whole thing felt manipulated to me. As the days went on, piles of flowers, balloons, photographs of the victims and various messages started to appear and people appeared tranquilised in some way, staring at the flowers. I began to wonder if the council was pumping gaseous valium into the air somehow!
Children were blown to pieces, by a lunatic who was trying to enforce Shariah law on to the people of a nation which had welcomed his family. I thought, ‘If I can’t look back in anger now, when can I?’ I don’t mean anger at individual Muslims, I mean anger at the ignorance, arrogance and indifference of a political class which has allowed this to happen.
I’m inclined to think the police officers with machine guns were not looking for more terrorists, but rather there to keep ordinary people in order.

D Glover
D Glover
11 months ago
Reply to  Marie Jones

Thank you for that post.

Terry Davies
Terry Davies
11 months ago
Reply to  Marie Jones

A very sobering post…..

Katalin Kish
Katalin Kish
11 months ago
Reply to  Marie Jones

Yes. Those guns and Victoria Police’s (Australia) riotgear are in use to keep populations subdued. Victoria Police fired rubber bullets at peaceful protesters against unreasonable Covid lockdowns in the heart of Melbourne. Many protesters were pushing strollers with their babies in them.

Victoria Police arrested elderly ladies sitting down on park benches to catch their breath during their lawful daily exercises outdoors, and a pregnant mum in front of her toddlers in her own home during Covid lockdowns also.

It took me a long time living with the ongoing, devastating crimes (1) of a stalker ex-coworker and his many accomplices who joined in for the free fun to be had in Melbourne, Australia to understand how was it possible that the stalker, whose cringe-worthy cowardice and incompetence were unmissable at work is such a fearless criminal. Law-enforcement appeases perpetrators, especially violent ones, who have shown what they are capable of already. Forcing victims into silent submission is part of appeasement. I never even dated the stalker.


(1) Look up my name for details.

As a former refugee turned e-commerce world-champion MBA workaholic being reduced to surviving crime-to-crime by a failed at everything IT Helpdesk Assistant stalker whom I never even dated,

Victoria Police’s attempts to terrorise me into silence, including forcing me to fight at court as an accused criminal in an admitted silencing attempt, trying to entrap me at least twice for good measure and showing off participating in the stalker’s crimes against me in broad daylight, while they forced me to fight at court as an accused criminal

have resulted in me losing all ability to fear, gave me possibly the most important dignity of purpose I could have.
See my public interest disclosures about Australia’s absurd crime reality via every possible platform. My self-representation cut the court-case short BTW. Hint: prosecutors bluff.
#ididnotstaysilent

D Glover
D Glover
11 months ago
Reply to  Marie Jones

Thank you for that post.

Terry Davies
Terry Davies
11 months ago
Reply to  Marie Jones

A very sobering post…..

Katalin Kish
Katalin Kish
11 months ago
Reply to  Marie Jones

Yes. Those guns and Victoria Police’s (Australia) riotgear are in use to keep populations subdued. Victoria Police fired rubber bullets at peaceful protesters against unreasonable Covid lockdowns in the heart of Melbourne. Many protesters were pushing strollers with their babies in them.

Victoria Police arrested elderly ladies sitting down on park benches to catch their breath during their lawful daily exercises outdoors, and a pregnant mum in front of her toddlers in her own home during Covid lockdowns also.

It took me a long time living with the ongoing, devastating crimes (1) of a stalker ex-coworker and his many accomplices who joined in for the free fun to be had in Melbourne, Australia to understand how was it possible that the stalker, whose cringe-worthy cowardice and incompetence were unmissable at work is such a fearless criminal. Law-enforcement appeases perpetrators, especially violent ones, who have shown what they are capable of already. Forcing victims into silent submission is part of appeasement. I never even dated the stalker.


(1) Look up my name for details.

As a former refugee turned e-commerce world-champion MBA workaholic being reduced to surviving crime-to-crime by a failed at everything IT Helpdesk Assistant stalker whom I never even dated,

Victoria Police’s attempts to terrorise me into silence, including forcing me to fight at court as an accused criminal in an admitted silencing attempt, trying to entrap me at least twice for good measure and showing off participating in the stalker’s crimes against me in broad daylight, while they forced me to fight at court as an accused criminal

have resulted in me losing all ability to fear, gave me possibly the most important dignity of purpose I could have.
See my public interest disclosures about Australia’s absurd crime reality via every possible platform. My self-representation cut the court-case short BTW. Hint: prosecutors bluff.
#ididnotstaysilent

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
11 months ago
Reply to  D Glover

Give it time, it always works in the end, if you try hard enough.

Marie Jones
Marie Jones
11 months ago
Reply to  D Glover

I am a Mancunian, living in the city centre, within 5 minutes walk of the arena. I heard the explosion.
Walking round the city early the following morning was a weird experience. There were literally dozens of black-clad police officers with balaclavas and machine guns patrolling the streets in pairs, and a few people walking round as if in shock.
Yes, people did come together to listen to speeches and poems and to join in the singing, but the whole thing felt manipulated to me. As the days went on, piles of flowers, balloons, photographs of the victims and various messages started to appear and people appeared tranquilised in some way, staring at the flowers. I began to wonder if the council was pumping gaseous valium into the air somehow!
Children were blown to pieces, by a lunatic who was trying to enforce Shariah law on to the people of a nation which had welcomed his family. I thought, ‘If I can’t look back in anger now, when can I?’ I don’t mean anger at individual Muslims, I mean anger at the ignorance, arrogance and indifference of a political class which has allowed this to happen.
I’m inclined to think the police officers with machine guns were not looking for more terrorists, but rather there to keep ordinary people in order.

Katalin Kish
Katalin Kish
11 months ago

Charles Stanhope:

There won’t be a civil war.

The descendants of people whose sacrifice resulted in Western civilisation as it was a few decades ago know that violence breeds more violence, and they are too soft to fight.

Australians for one can be walked all over without any risk of resistance, people vote back the likes of Daniel Andrews in ‘danslides’ in spite of their catastrophic failings, callous cynicism displayed openly.

In Australia crime and corruption are so risk-free, there is no need to hide what people do.

Crime witnesses and victims who try to stop crimes are terrorised into silent oblivion. Since crimes never investigated = crimes never happened, Australia’s crime statistics are both fabulous and completely false.

I am still shocked being forced to learn Australia’s population being a fair game in an endless open season while our taxes are paying the hunters. I am shocked, because living in Australia is a hard-earned privilege for me. I am fighting against this absurd reality, but I couldn’t be more alone. People stay clear of me and my fight as if I carried rabies or worse. I am ill-suited to fight, but someone has to, and I am someone – alone or not. I am fighting against Australia’s absurd crime reality, Australia never having had functional law-enforcement.

People in Australia have always lived with police being our worst criminals (1), police having neither duty of care nor accountability while having both, a monopoly on what is a crime and a vested interest in keeping crime statistics down, meaning that police officers do nothing, when witnesses try to report a double abduction, public gang-rape, torture and murder over several days (2), police do nothing, when a hitch-hiker narrowly escaping a serial killer makes a frantic report of what he experienced (3).

No one will ever know how many people Ivan MILAT murdered after the witness statement of Paul Onion was ignored. There must be dozens, if not hundreds of stories like these in the news, many times more than that not recorded anywhere, because the victims don’t matter to anyone important. Reading any of these stories increases my own trauma – look up my name for ongoing, devastating crimes that are completely risk-free for the criminals and will never show up in any statistics. Police doing nothing when someone tries to report a crime punishable by 10 years in jail/worse in Australia is actually better, than what I have experienced since 2009. Crimes committed in a leafy suburb of million $ homes in Melbourne, Australia. Clare O’Neil MP, Australia’s Minister for Cyber Security and Home Affairs has been the MP for my electorate since 2013.

#ididnotstaysilent

(1) “Victoria Police Corruption”, Raymond T. Hoser, Kotabi, 1999. ISBN 0-9586769-6-8
“Victoria Police Corruption”, Raymond T. Hoser, Kotabi, 2000. ISBN 0-9586769-7-6
(2) https://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/the-murder-victims-seen-by-many-but-helped-by-none/news-story/deea91936b2c70ff9570544c27f32f5c
(3) https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-48346543

Last edited 11 months ago by Katalin Kish
D Glover
D Glover
11 months ago

I used to think so, but the Manchester Arena bombing changed my mind. This was an atrocity so bad that it could have been the detonator.
Not only was the death toll high, but it had a high proportion of very young girls. That wasn’t a miscalculation; it was a design feature. Young girls are the audience for Arianne Grande.
So did it trigger the backlash? No, the good people of Manchester stood on the pavement looking gloomy, holding candles and singing ‘Don’t look back in anger’
At that point I realised that the civil war just will not happen.

Katalin Kish
Katalin Kish
11 months ago

Charles Stanhope:

There won’t be a civil war.

The descendants of people whose sacrifice resulted in Western civilisation as it was a few decades ago know that violence breeds more violence, and they are too soft to fight.

Australians for one can be walked all over without any risk of resistance, people vote back the likes of Daniel Andrews in ‘danslides’ in spite of their catastrophic failings, callous cynicism displayed openly.

In Australia crime and corruption are so risk-free, there is no need to hide what people do.

Crime witnesses and victims who try to stop crimes are terrorised into silent oblivion. Since crimes never investigated = crimes never happened, Australia’s crime statistics are both fabulous and completely false.

I am still shocked being forced to learn Australia’s population being a fair game in an endless open season while our taxes are paying the hunters. I am shocked, because living in Australia is a hard-earned privilege for me. I am fighting against this absurd reality, but I couldn’t be more alone. People stay clear of me and my fight as if I carried rabies or worse. I am ill-suited to fight, but someone has to, and I am someone – alone or not. I am fighting against Australia’s absurd crime reality, Australia never having had functional law-enforcement.

People in Australia have always lived with police being our worst criminals (1), police having neither duty of care nor accountability while having both, a monopoly on what is a crime and a vested interest in keeping crime statistics down, meaning that police officers do nothing, when witnesses try to report a double abduction, public gang-rape, torture and murder over several days (2), police do nothing, when a hitch-hiker narrowly escaping a serial killer makes a frantic report of what he experienced (3).

No one will ever know how many people Ivan MILAT murdered after the witness statement of Paul Onion was ignored. There must be dozens, if not hundreds of stories like these in the news, many times more than that not recorded anywhere, because the victims don’t matter to anyone important. Reading any of these stories increases my own trauma – look up my name for ongoing, devastating crimes that are completely risk-free for the criminals and will never show up in any statistics. Police doing nothing when someone tries to report a crime punishable by 10 years in jail/worse in Australia is actually better, than what I have experienced since 2009. Crimes committed in a leafy suburb of million $ homes in Melbourne, Australia. Clare O’Neil MP, Australia’s Minister for Cyber Security and Home Affairs has been the MP for my electorate since 2013.

#ididnotstaysilent

(1) “Victoria Police Corruption”, Raymond T. Hoser, Kotabi, 1999. ISBN 0-9586769-6-8
“Victoria Police Corruption”, Raymond T. Hoser, Kotabi, 2000. ISBN 0-9586769-7-6
(2) https://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/the-murder-victims-seen-by-many-but-helped-by-none/news-story/deea91936b2c70ff9570544c27f32f5c
(3) https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-48346543

Last edited 11 months ago by Katalin Kish
Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
11 months ago

To address the caption question:
“Can the Tories stop mass migration?”.

No, not a chance in hell! This whole charade is one of the most deceitful episodes ever visited of the British people. It will inevitably result, sooner or later, in a brutal civil war, the like of which we have not seen for several centuries.

D Glover
D Glover
11 months ago

If you buy an item and it proves to be not as described, you can return it for a full refund.
Successive Tory leaders have promised to cut immigration to the ‘tens of thousands’ and have then done the opposite. Cameron, May, Johnson; they are all guilty.
You can’t have a refund on your vote when the elected politician is proven to have lied. I regret having voted Tory at the last election, but there is no recompense. This seems to be a serious flaw in democracy. How can you choose a politician to vote for if his actions are the opposite of his promises?

D Glover
D Glover
11 months ago

If you buy an item and it proves to be not as described, you can return it for a full refund.
Successive Tory leaders have promised to cut immigration to the ‘tens of thousands’ and have then done the opposite. Cameron, May, Johnson; they are all guilty.
You can’t have a refund on your vote when the elected politician is proven to have lied. I regret having voted Tory at the last election, but there is no recompense. This seems to be a serious flaw in democracy. How can you choose a politician to vote for if his actions are the opposite of his promises?

William Cameron
William Cameron
11 months ago

Immigration does not increase net GDP. It increases gross GDP a bit. But the cost of immigrants in increased public service costs far out weighs their economic contribution or tax contribution.
No one does the total sums. They just see GDP going up and wrongly think thats a plus. They omit the ÂŁ12,500 a head their public services cost of each immigrant. And if an immigrants has a wife and two kids thats ÂŁ50,000 they need to be adding to the economy just to cover their own costs. And the worker probably would like a wage too. So unless he is adding around ÂŁ80,000 him and his family represent a huge loss on the UK balance sheet. But no one does these total sums. They just look at the small amount of tax paid and gdp increase and say – quite wrongly- net addition. It isnt its a thumping loss.
If we instead measured GDP per capita as the metric immigration would be stopped in a heartbeat.

Last edited 11 months ago by William Cameron
William Cameron
William Cameron
11 months ago

Immigration does not increase net GDP. It increases gross GDP a bit. But the cost of immigrants in increased public service costs far out weighs their economic contribution or tax contribution.
No one does the total sums. They just see GDP going up and wrongly think thats a plus. They omit the ÂŁ12,500 a head their public services cost of each immigrant. And if an immigrants has a wife and two kids thats ÂŁ50,000 they need to be adding to the economy just to cover their own costs. And the worker probably would like a wage too. So unless he is adding around ÂŁ80,000 him and his family represent a huge loss on the UK balance sheet. But no one does these total sums. They just look at the small amount of tax paid and gdp increase and say – quite wrongly- net addition. It isnt its a thumping loss.
If we instead measured GDP per capita as the metric immigration would be stopped in a heartbeat.

Last edited 11 months ago by William Cameron
Mark Turner
Mark Turner
11 months ago

The sad thing is that while reassuringly, there are a significant number of people awake or awakening to what is happening and its long term consequences for our culture, way of life and economic wellbeing, the problem is two fold: Firstly, there is NO political solution to the issue, no party waiting in the wings to be elected, nor will there the be, the PR system and the civil service & institutions captured by the blob will see to that…….secondly, even if we could stop all immigration dead , tomorrow, it is already too late, the damage is done, these people are now here in such large numbers, that the only way we can sort it out is mass deportation. The societal & economic breakdown that would ensue if ( and we can only dream!) that kind of uprising and coup, (for that is what it would take to change things)….were to happen, would also ruin the country. We can only sit back and watch as our once great country unravels and sinks into the pit of multicultural dsytopia that these traiterous politicians have led us to………I despair of what awaits my two young sons in the future……..so sad…..

james goater
james goater
11 months ago
Reply to  Mark Turner

Completely concur. Every one of your words rings true.

james goater
james goater
11 months ago
Reply to  Mark Turner

Completely concur. Every one of your words rings true.

Mark Turner
Mark Turner
11 months ago

The sad thing is that while reassuringly, there are a significant number of people awake or awakening to what is happening and its long term consequences for our culture, way of life and economic wellbeing, the problem is two fold: Firstly, there is NO political solution to the issue, no party waiting in the wings to be elected, nor will there the be, the PR system and the civil service & institutions captured by the blob will see to that…….secondly, even if we could stop all immigration dead , tomorrow, it is already too late, the damage is done, these people are now here in such large numbers, that the only way we can sort it out is mass deportation. The societal & economic breakdown that would ensue if ( and we can only dream!) that kind of uprising and coup, (for that is what it would take to change things)….were to happen, would also ruin the country. We can only sit back and watch as our once great country unravels and sinks into the pit of multicultural dsytopia that these traiterous politicians have led us to………I despair of what awaits my two young sons in the future……..so sad…..

Jonathan N
Jonathan N
11 months ago

Beautifully written – I love the little flourishes such as “political bin fire”.

“Growth” in this context means the crude gross number. Per capita “growth” arising from the importation of millions of low-skilled workers will actually be “decline”, and will be felt as more and more people chase inadequate public services and amenities. But as Mary says, our leaders hope the real pinch will come on someone else’s watch.

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
11 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan N

My favourite was “the capital’s blast radius”.

Peter B
Peter B
11 months ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

She’s used that at least once before. I suspect she originated it. My favourite too.

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
11 months ago
Reply to  Peter B

You just can’t beat a neat turn of phrase. It is a skill that I appreciate hugely in others. If you are a person so committed to the good use of language that you build smart turns of phrase, wordplays or just beautifully written sentences into your everyday communications (WhatsApp messages, business emails) then you will have my instant attention and respect.
People who write rubbish like “I hope this email finds you well…” on the other hand…

Last edited 11 months ago by Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
11 months ago
Reply to  Peter B

You just can’t beat a neat turn of phrase. It is a skill that I appreciate hugely in others. If you are a person so committed to the good use of language that you build smart turns of phrase, wordplays or just beautifully written sentences into your everyday communications (WhatsApp messages, business emails) then you will have my instant attention and respect.
People who write rubbish like “I hope this email finds you well…” on the other hand…

Last edited 11 months ago by Katharine Eyre
Peter B
Peter B
11 months ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

She’s used that at least once before. I suspect she originated it. My favourite too.

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
11 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan N

My favourite was “the capital’s blast radius”.

Jonathan N
Jonathan N
11 months ago

Beautifully written – I love the little flourishes such as “political bin fire”.

“Growth” in this context means the crude gross number. Per capita “growth” arising from the importation of millions of low-skilled workers will actually be “decline”, and will be felt as more and more people chase inadequate public services and amenities. But as Mary says, our leaders hope the real pinch will come on someone else’s watch.

Ewen Mac
Ewen Mac
11 months ago

Excellent article. David Davis (as Brexit Secretary) did actually admit that immigration after Brexit wouldn’t go down, and that sometimes it would go up. He only said it once and he was probably being indiscreet after an excellent “long lunch,” but it seems nobody heard it. On the other hand Johnson said “Taking Back Control” several thousand times and people thought that meant ‘lower immigration.’
Will there come a tipping point where honesty enters this debate? And people might not be fobbed-off with slogans or shut down with accusations of bigotry? It’s very difficult to see where that might come from in the current political landscape.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
11 months ago
Reply to  Ewen Mac

“And people might not be fobbed-off with slogans or shut down with accusations of bigotry?”
The new secular religions are built on mass consumption of sloganeering chyme (“I believe her” / “Take back control” / “Black lives matter”, etc.), our new rosaries; and knee-jerk accusations of heresy for dissenters, so you’re out of luck on either of those.

Ewen Mac
Ewen Mac
11 months ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

Except religions (secular or otherwise) undergo schisms and when some “believers” realise they got duped by a meaningless slogan, the nature of the debate changes. Whether it births a more or less productive debate, remains to be seen.

Ewen Mac
Ewen Mac
11 months ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

Except religions (secular or otherwise) undergo schisms and when some “believers” realise they got duped by a meaningless slogan, the nature of the debate changes. Whether it births a more or less productive debate, remains to be seen.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
11 months ago
Reply to  Ewen Mac

“And people might not be fobbed-off with slogans or shut down with accusations of bigotry?”
The new secular religions are built on mass consumption of sloganeering chyme (“I believe her” / “Take back control” / “Black lives matter”, etc.), our new rosaries; and knee-jerk accusations of heresy for dissenters, so you’re out of luck on either of those.

Ewen Mac
Ewen Mac
11 months ago

Excellent article. David Davis (as Brexit Secretary) did actually admit that immigration after Brexit wouldn’t go down, and that sometimes it would go up. He only said it once and he was probably being indiscreet after an excellent “long lunch,” but it seems nobody heard it. On the other hand Johnson said “Taking Back Control” several thousand times and people thought that meant ‘lower immigration.’
Will there come a tipping point where honesty enters this debate? And people might not be fobbed-off with slogans or shut down with accusations of bigotry? It’s very difficult to see where that might come from in the current political landscape.

ben arnulfssen
ben arnulfssen
11 months ago

It isn’t population TURNOVER but population INFLUX. it isn’t that it is TOO FAST to assimilate, but that this influx consists of hostile alien cultures with NO INTENTION of assimilating.

The Tories know almost this and are not interested in the least.

They have been saying one thing while doing the diametric opposite for many years. The only remaining question is whether it is particularly intended to deceive, any more; or just fill up the media with a defined narrative, to exclude dissent or debate.

From what I can see, a significant segment of the population are deep in denial. They won’t accept the truth even as the rioters set their house afire.

ben arnulfssen
ben arnulfssen
11 months ago

It isn’t population TURNOVER but population INFLUX. it isn’t that it is TOO FAST to assimilate, but that this influx consists of hostile alien cultures with NO INTENTION of assimilating.

The Tories know almost this and are not interested in the least.

They have been saying one thing while doing the diametric opposite for many years. The only remaining question is whether it is particularly intended to deceive, any more; or just fill up the media with a defined narrative, to exclude dissent or debate.

From what I can see, a significant segment of the population are deep in denial. They won’t accept the truth even as the rioters set their house afire.

Kirk Susong
Kirk Susong
11 months ago

“At the core of the gulf between elite and popular views on immigration lies the intractable problem of the Great Lack of Self-Replacement. Responding to this, what looks from one perspective like the political class tearing up the social contract looks from our leaders’ perspective like upholding it. And the tragedy is that both views are true.”
Mrs. Harrington again gives an insightful, polished essay that goes to the heart of complex issues. But I do offer a further thought on her conclusion – if the political class thinks it is ‘upholding the social contract’ by ensuring the immigration necessary to pay for the welfare state, and the electoral majority thinks they are ‘tearing up the social contract’ by ensuring immigration continues at a pace that can’t be effectively assimilated, so that the ‘core of the gulf’ is a lack of native-born babies…. then the real question is whether the welfare state is or is not the essential defining feature of Britishness in the post-war era. (Bevan should be co-equal with Churchill in the modern pantheon.)
I find this to be painfully ironic. A country that has lost its zeal for civilizational evangelism… that has lost the economic dynamism and flexibility that made its industrial might… that has lost the naval presence that defined its foreign relations identity for centuries… instead now defines itself by bad environmental policy, the rusty hulk that is the NHS, and a self-image of itself as ‘making amends’ for all its (supposed) bad deeds.
What this suggests to me is that Britain is in for years more decline, not only until people realize that Britain needs a coherent cultural self-identity built on pride in its remarkable history and accomplishments (beyond defeating Nazis), but also until people realize that “the problem with spending someone else’s money is that eventually you run out of it” (pace Mrs. Thatcher). And that these problems are intertwined – for centuries the UK once was proud that its unique, homogeneous social fabric was more ‘liberal’ (i.e., free from govt interference) than its continental neighbors. Where is that enthusiasm for free speech, property rights, deregulation, etc. now? You can get arrested for silently praying on the sidewalk, your home is not your own but the Planning Consultant’s, and your business creeps along under a blanket of red tape.
The problem for the UK is that the entire spectrum of political thought has migrated so far to the left – towards collectivism, statism, anything antithetical to the whole panoply of Victorian bourgeois values – that there is no meaningful voice testifying to the reasons for the UK’s former success and the path how to get back there.

Last edited 11 months ago by Kirk Susong
Walter Marvell
Walter Marvell
11 months ago
Reply to  Kirk Susong

Yes indeed. It is not just that left wing/progressive thought holds sway in heads – the mind virus. Their Way has been baked since 92/97 into a brand new system of governance (the shift of power away from Executive & National State into the hands of a permanent unelected Alliance of supreme judges Quangocrats, grubby Devolutionaries) which is wholly immune to democratic change. It is Soviet like now. There is a ruling Elite CCP/Blob. The Blairite/EU Progressive Revolution has bequeathed us unmandated State laws, meerily pumping out authoritarian diktats on economic life, health policy & more. It has promoted through a captured evangelical State Media plus the entire corrupted educational system a poisonous leftist culture of greviance victimhood and entitlement 24/7 for 30 plus years. We must accept that we have lost the battle. We are Kulaks. The Brexit counter revolution by the people was just a phantom they have successfully snuffed out like a Peasants Revolt. Thats History. Accelerating decline and a fearful payback for these multiple grevious assaults on our society is our destiny now.

Chris Lizotte
Chris Lizotte
11 months ago
Reply to  Kirk Susong

“the naval presence that defined its foreign relations identity for centuries.”

Wow. Just wow. That has to be the most disgusting euphemism I’ve ever heard for centuries of bloody conquest.

But then, I would expect such revisionist hack drivel from someone who finds this essay, which could have been replaced with “rivers of blood” repeated 75 times, “insightful and polished.”

Kirk Susong
Kirk Susong
11 months ago
Reply to  Chris Lizotte

Ooh, fun – I’ll try to come up with a more disgusting euphemism next time. “Great force for civilizational advancement”… or “noblest advocate of global social progress”… or something – I’ll work on it.
I wonder if your “rivers of blood” includes the blood of British soldiers and sailors dying in Africa to end slavery?

Chris Lizotte
Chris Lizotte
11 months ago
Reply to  Kirk Susong

No, those are delusions, not euphemisms. Which, given your sanctimonious martyr complex (“British soldiers and sailors dying in Africa to end slavery”; give me a single break), seems about right.

Chris Lizotte
Chris Lizotte
11 months ago
Reply to  Kirk Susong

No, those are delusions, not euphemisms. Which, given your sanctimonious martyr complex (“British soldiers and sailors dying in Africa to end slavery”; give me a single break), seems about right.

Kirk Susong
Kirk Susong
11 months ago
Reply to  Chris Lizotte

Ooh, fun – I’ll try to come up with a more disgusting euphemism next time. “Great force for civilizational advancement”… or “noblest advocate of global social progress”… or something – I’ll work on it.
I wonder if your “rivers of blood” includes the blood of British soldiers and sailors dying in Africa to end slavery?

Walter Marvell
Walter Marvell
11 months ago
Reply to  Kirk Susong

Yes indeed. It is not just that left wing/progressive thought holds sway in heads – the mind virus. Their Way has been baked since 92/97 into a brand new system of governance (the shift of power away from Executive & National State into the hands of a permanent unelected Alliance of supreme judges Quangocrats, grubby Devolutionaries) which is wholly immune to democratic change. It is Soviet like now. There is a ruling Elite CCP/Blob. The Blairite/EU Progressive Revolution has bequeathed us unmandated State laws, meerily pumping out authoritarian diktats on economic life, health policy & more. It has promoted through a captured evangelical State Media plus the entire corrupted educational system a poisonous leftist culture of greviance victimhood and entitlement 24/7 for 30 plus years. We must accept that we have lost the battle. We are Kulaks. The Brexit counter revolution by the people was just a phantom they have successfully snuffed out like a Peasants Revolt. Thats History. Accelerating decline and a fearful payback for these multiple grevious assaults on our society is our destiny now.

Chris Lizotte
Chris Lizotte
11 months ago
Reply to  Kirk Susong

“the naval presence that defined its foreign relations identity for centuries.”

Wow. Just wow. That has to be the most disgusting euphemism I’ve ever heard for centuries of bloody conquest.

But then, I would expect such revisionist hack drivel from someone who finds this essay, which could have been replaced with “rivers of blood” repeated 75 times, “insightful and polished.”

Kirk Susong
Kirk Susong
11 months ago

“At the core of the gulf between elite and popular views on immigration lies the intractable problem of the Great Lack of Self-Replacement. Responding to this, what looks from one perspective like the political class tearing up the social contract looks from our leaders’ perspective like upholding it. And the tragedy is that both views are true.”
Mrs. Harrington again gives an insightful, polished essay that goes to the heart of complex issues. But I do offer a further thought on her conclusion – if the political class thinks it is ‘upholding the social contract’ by ensuring the immigration necessary to pay for the welfare state, and the electoral majority thinks they are ‘tearing up the social contract’ by ensuring immigration continues at a pace that can’t be effectively assimilated, so that the ‘core of the gulf’ is a lack of native-born babies…. then the real question is whether the welfare state is or is not the essential defining feature of Britishness in the post-war era. (Bevan should be co-equal with Churchill in the modern pantheon.)
I find this to be painfully ironic. A country that has lost its zeal for civilizational evangelism… that has lost the economic dynamism and flexibility that made its industrial might… that has lost the naval presence that defined its foreign relations identity for centuries… instead now defines itself by bad environmental policy, the rusty hulk that is the NHS, and a self-image of itself as ‘making amends’ for all its (supposed) bad deeds.
What this suggests to me is that Britain is in for years more decline, not only until people realize that Britain needs a coherent cultural self-identity built on pride in its remarkable history and accomplishments (beyond defeating Nazis), but also until people realize that “the problem with spending someone else’s money is that eventually you run out of it” (pace Mrs. Thatcher). And that these problems are intertwined – for centuries the UK once was proud that its unique, homogeneous social fabric was more ‘liberal’ (i.e., free from govt interference) than its continental neighbors. Where is that enthusiasm for free speech, property rights, deregulation, etc. now? You can get arrested for silently praying on the sidewalk, your home is not your own but the Planning Consultant’s, and your business creeps along under a blanket of red tape.
The problem for the UK is that the entire spectrum of political thought has migrated so far to the left – towards collectivism, statism, anything antithetical to the whole panoply of Victorian bourgeois values – that there is no meaningful voice testifying to the reasons for the UK’s former success and the path how to get back there.

Last edited 11 months ago by Kirk Susong
Michael W
Michael W
11 months ago

People really need to recognise the significance of how utterly reprehensible the Tory betrayal on immigration is. They have ran for the last 4 elections on reducing immigration and convinced many that by giving them power by leaving the EU, they would cut immigration. But instead they have tripled the infamous levels set by Labour, which people still seem to be more angry about.
This betrayal makes Nick Clegg’s backtrack on tuition fees seem like nothing. That destroyed the party for several elections and the same should be done to the Tories but there must be no recovery for these scoundrels, a party that actually wants to conserve what’s left of the old Britain must replace them.

Michael W
Michael W
11 months ago

People really need to recognise the significance of how utterly reprehensible the Tory betrayal on immigration is. They have ran for the last 4 elections on reducing immigration and convinced many that by giving them power by leaving the EU, they would cut immigration. But instead they have tripled the infamous levels set by Labour, which people still seem to be more angry about.
This betrayal makes Nick Clegg’s backtrack on tuition fees seem like nothing. That destroyed the party for several elections and the same should be done to the Tories but there must be no recovery for these scoundrels, a party that actually wants to conserve what’s left of the old Britain must replace them.

Paul Ten
Paul Ten
11 months ago

I echo the point made elsewhere about the statement that ‘a low productivity economy requires population growth.’ I think the causal relationship is not one way, but there is a feedback loop between the two things. There is no doubt that the availability of a large pool of cheap labour inhibits productivity growth. I was party to this for several years in the 2000’s when I was involved in ‘offshoring’, mainly to India, of IT work. It is a chronically inefficient and unproductive way of delivering projects, but. given the difference in cost and working conditions, commercially irresistible. This was enabled, but not driven, by government policy.
So we now see this writ large across the country. Importing people avoids all that tiresome business of training and developing staff, and capital investment. But it creates a dynamic of its own and underpins new business sectors. I doubt my town would have so many coffee shops on the high street, or there would be so many delivery companies for online shopping, if they weren’t fed by the pool of cheap labour. Perhaps the most benign outcome is that things will settle to a new equilibrium. As Indian software engineers and Polish builders become more prosperous at home, and overcrowded Britain becomes less attractive, the sugar rush of net immigration will abate. Hopefully there is enough muscle memory in the country, private and public sectors, to invest in productivity and quality improvement again. I think there probably is.

Paul Ten
Paul Ten
11 months ago

I echo the point made elsewhere about the statement that ‘a low productivity economy requires population growth.’ I think the causal relationship is not one way, but there is a feedback loop between the two things. There is no doubt that the availability of a large pool of cheap labour inhibits productivity growth. I was party to this for several years in the 2000’s when I was involved in ‘offshoring’, mainly to India, of IT work. It is a chronically inefficient and unproductive way of delivering projects, but. given the difference in cost and working conditions, commercially irresistible. This was enabled, but not driven, by government policy.
So we now see this writ large across the country. Importing people avoids all that tiresome business of training and developing staff, and capital investment. But it creates a dynamic of its own and underpins new business sectors. I doubt my town would have so many coffee shops on the high street, or there would be so many delivery companies for online shopping, if they weren’t fed by the pool of cheap labour. Perhaps the most benign outcome is that things will settle to a new equilibrium. As Indian software engineers and Polish builders become more prosperous at home, and overcrowded Britain becomes less attractive, the sugar rush of net immigration will abate. Hopefully there is enough muscle memory in the country, private and public sectors, to invest in productivity and quality improvement again. I think there probably is.

Peter Stephenson
Peter Stephenson
11 months ago

GBNews should reveal & drive home to viewers the Ponzi scheme, like heroin addiction, which excessive welfare makes of our economy, forcing our decision makers to keep taking the medicine or face electoral slaughter.

Peter Stephenson
Peter Stephenson
11 months ago

GBNews should reveal & drive home to viewers the Ponzi scheme, like heroin addiction, which excessive welfare makes of our economy, forcing our decision makers to keep taking the medicine or face electoral slaughter.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
11 months ago

Excellent article.
More shagging needed.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
11 months ago

Excellent article.
More shagging needed.

Christopher Barclay
Christopher Barclay
11 months ago

Most politicians’ instinct would be to steal from an honesty box.

Christopher Barclay
Christopher Barclay
11 months ago

Most politicians’ instinct would be to steal from an honesty box.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
11 months ago

Mass immigration fundamentally destabilizes the host countries. Study after study has shown the more diverse a society is the less cohesive it is. Look at America, the country is falling apart. Notice that this has occurred as the USA has become more diverse. These facts will likely make many feel uncomfortable. But they are facts and ones we need to accept.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
11 months ago

Mass immigration fundamentally destabilizes the host countries. Study after study has shown the more diverse a society is the less cohesive it is. Look at America, the country is falling apart. Notice that this has occurred as the USA has become more diverse. These facts will likely make many feel uncomfortable. But they are facts and ones we need to accept.

Dumetrius
Dumetrius
11 months ago

What would be the result if government aimed at becoming a high-productivity economy, or at least at raising productivity a fraction ?

Agreed tho, the warning signs are accumulating. There’s too many to write them all off as a bad-hair day.

What they’ll coalesce into, and which part of the social wall will collapse under their weight, I don’t know.

Dumetrius
Dumetrius
11 months ago

What would be the result if government aimed at becoming a high-productivity economy, or at least at raising productivity a fraction ?

Agreed tho, the warning signs are accumulating. There’s too many to write them all off as a bad-hair day.

What they’ll coalesce into, and which part of the social wall will collapse under their weight, I don’t know.

Mona Malnorowski
Mona Malnorowski
11 months ago

“I’m willing to bet most average Brits approach assimilating strangers in much the same way as my town does: if you pitch in and seem nice, you’re welcome.”
This is the sentence that stood out as I was reading through Mary’s article. While this is not central to the matters discussed, I am also willing to bet that it’s true, and that any discussion of the challenges of immigration would do well to assume that this is the default position for the overwhelming majority of the population, not frothing racism or advocacy of an open-borders free-for-all.
I’d agree with some of the other commenters here that the article, even-handed and well expressed as it is, doesn’t offer much in the way of solutions. It may be very naive of me to say so, I know, but wouldn’t solutions (and votes, even) be easier to come by for our Glorious Leadership if they at least bear this rather basic viewpoint in mind?

Mona Malnorowski
Mona Malnorowski
11 months ago

“I’m willing to bet most average Brits approach assimilating strangers in much the same way as my town does: if you pitch in and seem nice, you’re welcome.”
This is the sentence that stood out as I was reading through Mary’s article. While this is not central to the matters discussed, I am also willing to bet that it’s true, and that any discussion of the challenges of immigration would do well to assume that this is the default position for the overwhelming majority of the population, not frothing racism or advocacy of an open-borders free-for-all.
I’d agree with some of the other commenters here that the article, even-handed and well expressed as it is, doesn’t offer much in the way of solutions. It may be very naive of me to say so, I know, but wouldn’t solutions (and votes, even) be easier to come by for our Glorious Leadership if they at least bear this rather basic viewpoint in mind?

Matt M
Matt M
11 months ago

I think it can be done but it requires a long-term plan (which probably means it won’t happen). It would require:

1.Limiting immigration numbers
2.Careful selection of immigrants
3.Changing 18+ education funding to align training with our Shortage Occupation needs (essentially stopping all but the brightest from going to university)
4.Incentivising firms to automate to reduce manpower needs
5.Ending cheap borrowing to kill off “zombie companies” that only survive by employing cheap labour

Eventually the economy would adjust to the lower immigrant numbers.

In the long term we do need more babies. Here I like the idea of building a new generation of council houses and renting them well below market rate exclusively to married couples under 35. Once they have their first baby, they get the right to buy the house again at a big discount. The sale would fund a replacement house to perpetuate the scheme.

Would it work? Would people settle down more quickly and get down to the business of raising kids if there was a cheap home available for those that did? I think it is possible.

Matt M
Matt M
11 months ago

I think it can be done but it requires a long-term plan (which probably means it won’t happen). It would require:

1.Limiting immigration numbers
2.Careful selection of immigrants
3.Changing 18+ education funding to align training with our Shortage Occupation needs (essentially stopping all but the brightest from going to university)
4.Incentivising firms to automate to reduce manpower needs
5.Ending cheap borrowing to kill off “zombie companies” that only survive by employing cheap labour

Eventually the economy would adjust to the lower immigrant numbers.

In the long term we do need more babies. Here I like the idea of building a new generation of council houses and renting them well below market rate exclusively to married couples under 35. Once they have their first baby, they get the right to buy the house again at a big discount. The sale would fund a replacement house to perpetuate the scheme.

Would it work? Would people settle down more quickly and get down to the business of raising kids if there was a cheap home available for those that did? I think it is possible.

Howard Gleave
Howard Gleave
11 months ago

The strapline answers the headline. The fake Tories have no intention of restricting immigration. They are in hock to big business. Big business is hooked on immigration. They both view the British population merely as economic units. There is no notion of nationhood or conservatism as a pact between generations past present and future. I won’t be voting for them.

D Glover
D Glover
11 months ago
Reply to  Howard Gleave

I fully deserve the answer ‘none of your business’ but may I be so bold as to ask who you will ï»żvote for?

D Glover
D Glover
11 months ago
Reply to  Howard Gleave

I fully deserve the answer ‘none of your business’ but may I be so bold as to ask who you will ï»żvote for?

Howard Gleave
Howard Gleave
11 months ago

The strapline answers the headline. The fake Tories have no intention of restricting immigration. They are in hock to big business. Big business is hooked on immigration. They both view the British population merely as economic units. There is no notion of nationhood or conservatism as a pact between generations past present and future. I won’t be voting for them.

Phil Mac
Phil Mac
11 months ago

I still hope for the day when someone in power connects the infinite supply of a low-cost resource (labour) with a disincentive for productivity growth, and calling for productivity while opening the doors is just a touch illogical.
I reckon I grasped this when I was about 15 in my O level economics class.

John Galt Was Correct
John Galt Was Correct
11 months ago
Reply to  Phil Mac

Might happen when anyone in government has anything more than a PPE degree.

John Galt Was Correct
John Galt Was Correct
11 months ago
Reply to  Phil Mac

Might happen when anyone in government has anything more than a PPE degree.

Phil Mac
Phil Mac
11 months ago

I still hope for the day when someone in power connects the infinite supply of a low-cost resource (labour) with a disincentive for productivity growth, and calling for productivity while opening the doors is just a touch illogical.
I reckon I grasped this when I was about 15 in my O level economics class.

Dougie Undersub
Dougie Undersub
11 months ago

There’s no point having a policy to protect British workers when too many Britons don’t want to work. There were 1.03 million vacancies in June 23.
And the question is not can the Tories, or anyone else, stop mass migration. It’s does anyone want to.

Kirk Susong
Kirk Susong
11 months ago

” too many Britons don’t want to work. There were 1.03 million vacancies in June 23.”
Which is why the welfare state being central to the self-conception of modern Britain, is an essential feature of contemporary Britain’s slow, sad decline.

ben arnulfssen
ben arnulfssen
11 months ago

Define those vacancies, and you will see why. There are whole segments of the “employment spectrum” which simply do not pay a living wage. Nor do they offer the necessary minimum of security to incentivise people to move off Benefits – which though meagre, are defined in terms of security and a minimum viable income.

The benefit system is highly complex. Claims are difficult to establish and easily lost. For the sizeable section of the population with no worthwhile prospect of earning a decent living through their (minimal to non-existent) skills, and families to provide for, applying for vacancies of this sort is an irrational action offering no worthwhile outcome.

Kirk Susong
Kirk Susong
11 months ago

” too many Britons don’t want to work. There were 1.03 million vacancies in June 23.”
Which is why the welfare state being central to the self-conception of modern Britain, is an essential feature of contemporary Britain’s slow, sad decline.

ben arnulfssen
ben arnulfssen
11 months ago

Define those vacancies, and you will see why. There are whole segments of the “employment spectrum” which simply do not pay a living wage. Nor do they offer the necessary minimum of security to incentivise people to move off Benefits – which though meagre, are defined in terms of security and a minimum viable income.

The benefit system is highly complex. Claims are difficult to establish and easily lost. For the sizeable section of the population with no worthwhile prospect of earning a decent living through their (minimal to non-existent) skills, and families to provide for, applying for vacancies of this sort is an irrational action offering no worthwhile outcome.

Dougie Undersub
Dougie Undersub
11 months ago

There’s no point having a policy to protect British workers when too many Britons don’t want to work. There were 1.03 million vacancies in June 23.
And the question is not can the Tories, or anyone else, stop mass migration. It’s does anyone want to.

Ian Cooper
Ian Cooper
11 months ago

Good article.. But why does anyone buy the progressive diversity prattle when around the world ethnic diversity is a major source of civil conflict.: eg. The Balkans, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen. Ethiopia. Mozambique, Sri Lanka, Myanmar etc. etc. Oh, it didn’t work very well in Northern Ireland and now Scotland wants out; white, mostly Protestant and did well out of Empire. If they don’t want integration, why should anyone else? So why import diversity – disunity. And why not face population decline? The current farce is primarily to benefit our useless elites.

Ian Cooper
Ian Cooper
11 months ago

Good article.. But why does anyone buy the progressive diversity prattle when around the world ethnic diversity is a major source of civil conflict.: eg. The Balkans, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen. Ethiopia. Mozambique, Sri Lanka, Myanmar etc. etc. Oh, it didn’t work very well in Northern Ireland and now Scotland wants out; white, mostly Protestant and did well out of Empire. If they don’t want integration, why should anyone else? So why import diversity – disunity. And why not face population decline? The current farce is primarily to benefit our useless elites.

John Stevens
John Stevens
11 months ago

People (especially the “working class”) did not vote for Brexit to “return control of immigration to Britain’s elected government”. This is elitist Brexiteer spin. They did so to dramatically lower (or even stop altogether) net immigration, which since Brexit Britain’s elected government has utterly failed to do, allowing net immigration to reach record levels and from sources which are generally more difficult to integrate than were EU citizens. The new post-Brexit immigration system is leading to very significantly greater numbers seeking permanent settlement in the UK than did EU Freedom of Movement (the vast majority of whose beneficiaries ended up returning to their host country. The Brexit promises on immigration were a lie and all the problems raised by this article which flow from mass immigration have been made much more serious because of it. Only when this is recognised can there be a serious debate upon the matter.

Matt M
Matt M
11 months ago
Reply to  John Stevens

When we were in the EU we had no control over immigration numbers as we had an open border to 400k EU citizens. We had an average of 400k net immigrants every year both EU and non-EU (totalling an 8M population increase since 2003 with below replacement child bearing).

Now we are out we have the ability to enforce any cap on legal immigration numbers we choose. This is a massive step forward. We haven’t yet had a government prepared to prioritise this but we will. Either Sunak will do it or Starmer or the Tory leader who replaces him. But it will happen.

Of course we will also have to leave the ECHR jurisdiction too to stop the flow of illegal immigrants. I suspect that might be the main theme of the next general election.

Matt M
Matt M
11 months ago
Reply to  John Stevens

When we were in the EU we had no control over immigration numbers as we had an open border to 400k EU citizens. We had an average of 400k net immigrants every year both EU and non-EU (totalling an 8M population increase since 2003 with below replacement child bearing).

Now we are out we have the ability to enforce any cap on legal immigration numbers we choose. This is a massive step forward. We haven’t yet had a government prepared to prioritise this but we will. Either Sunak will do it or Starmer or the Tory leader who replaces him. But it will happen.

Of course we will also have to leave the ECHR jurisdiction too to stop the flow of illegal immigrants. I suspect that might be the main theme of the next general election.

John Stevens
John Stevens
11 months ago

People (especially the “working class”) did not vote for Brexit to “return control of immigration to Britain’s elected government”. This is elitist Brexiteer spin. They did so to dramatically lower (or even stop altogether) net immigration, which since Brexit Britain’s elected government has utterly failed to do, allowing net immigration to reach record levels and from sources which are generally more difficult to integrate than were EU citizens. The new post-Brexit immigration system is leading to very significantly greater numbers seeking permanent settlement in the UK than did EU Freedom of Movement (the vast majority of whose beneficiaries ended up returning to their host country. The Brexit promises on immigration were a lie and all the problems raised by this article which flow from mass immigration have been made much more serious because of it. Only when this is recognised can there be a serious debate upon the matter.

Brian Villanueva
Brian Villanueva
11 months ago

“Can the Tories stop mass migration?”
The better question is “do the Tories want to stop mass migration?”

And the answer appears to be “no”.

Brian Villanueva
Brian Villanueva
11 months ago

“Can the Tories stop mass migration?”
The better question is “do the Tories want to stop mass migration?”

And the answer appears to be “no”.

Douglas Redmayne
Douglas Redmayne
11 months ago

The author mentions, yet again, contraception ( although she has refrained from mentioning abortion). If the rate of native reproduction is to be increased then it can only be done by cash incentives and homes, preferably distributed only to those whose children are likely to be more productive to society in the long run. Restricting contraception and abortion on is election losing reactionary politics that will not achieve its aims.

D Glover
D Glover
11 months ago

preferably distributed only to those whose children are likely to be more productive to society in the long run

There is no way on earth that any politician would dare to articulate that policy. Even if he did, I wouldn’t believe him.

Peter B
Peter B
11 months ago

Not strictly true. Many countries have tax systems which favour families with children – and the more children you have, the less tax you pay. France is a case in point. Not saying we should copy everything the French do, but it proves that there are other approaches possible.

D Glover
D Glover
11 months ago

preferably distributed only to those whose children are likely to be more productive to society in the long run

There is no way on earth that any politician would dare to articulate that policy. Even if he did, I wouldn’t believe him.

Peter B
Peter B
11 months ago

Not strictly true. Many countries have tax systems which favour families with children – and the more children you have, the less tax you pay. France is a case in point. Not saying we should copy everything the French do, but it proves that there are other approaches possible.

Douglas Redmayne
Douglas Redmayne
11 months ago

The author mentions, yet again, contraception ( although she has refrained from mentioning abortion). If the rate of native reproduction is to be increased then it can only be done by cash incentives and homes, preferably distributed only to those whose children are likely to be more productive to society in the long run. Restricting contraception and abortion on is election losing reactionary politics that will not achieve its aims.

Ian Barton
Ian Barton
11 months ago

The headline should really state “Will 
” rather than “Can..”

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
11 months ago
Reply to  Ian Barton

Indeed, but the answer would be the same, a resounding NO!

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
11 months ago
Reply to  Ian Barton

Indeed, but the answer would be the same, a resounding NO!

Ian Barton
Ian Barton
11 months ago

The headline should really state “Will 
” rather than “Can..”

Adrian Smith
Adrian Smith
11 months ago

The Tory’s answer to the problem may seem two faced and weak, however the “progressive” alternative is a sure fire disaster.
The problem we face is that, due to a number of factors, we have an ageing population and insufficient organic production of working age productive adults to support it. Just focusing on raw numbers of net migrants gives a skewed picture, trying to keep out the unproductive, illegal ones whilst allowing in productive adults legally does make a lot more sense than just simply “progressively” opening the floodgates to all and sundry.

Peter B
Peter B
11 months ago
Reply to  Adrian Smith

People need to save for their own retirement and stop hoping that younger generations will pay for them. That’s the only way out. Countries that are doing really well – like Singapore – have taken this seriously and have proper pension saving *funds* – they don’t just hope that current taxation will come to the rescue. Relying on ever increasing population is nothing more than a Ponzi scheme.

Adrian Smith
Adrian Smith
11 months ago
Reply to  Peter B

Not saying I disagree with you, but it needed to have been done decades ago to have any effect now. Mandatory workplace pension schemes are in place now. However the public sector, which still provides quite generous schemes, albeit less generous than they used to be, will always be a ponzi scheme reliant on there being enough productive tax paying adults to pay for those who are no longer productive.
Then there is the problem of what to do about all the unproductive working age adults who pay no tax and don’t save for the future. Letting more of them arrive by boat and if not caught slip away into the black economy and if caught to claim asylum is definitely not the answer, but saying that is offensive to the “progressives” and it seems highly likely parties cloaking themselves in progressive dogma will win the next election either individually or worse as a coalition where those that got the least votes have a disproportionately loud voice.

Mark Turner
Mark Turner
11 months ago
Reply to  Peter B

The problem is that as soon as you start saving, investing etc, the government will find new taxes and new ways to steal it back from you…never mind you already paid tax on it at source. Look at the incoming plans to milk anyone who has been careful enough to invest in property or save their money……..robbing scum, the lot of them and all to pay for this tide of detritus they have invited into our country…..

Adrian Smith
Adrian Smith
11 months ago
Reply to  Peter B

Not saying I disagree with you, but it needed to have been done decades ago to have any effect now. Mandatory workplace pension schemes are in place now. However the public sector, which still provides quite generous schemes, albeit less generous than they used to be, will always be a ponzi scheme reliant on there being enough productive tax paying adults to pay for those who are no longer productive.
Then there is the problem of what to do about all the unproductive working age adults who pay no tax and don’t save for the future. Letting more of them arrive by boat and if not caught slip away into the black economy and if caught to claim asylum is definitely not the answer, but saying that is offensive to the “progressives” and it seems highly likely parties cloaking themselves in progressive dogma will win the next election either individually or worse as a coalition where those that got the least votes have a disproportionately loud voice.

Mark Turner
Mark Turner
11 months ago
Reply to  Peter B

The problem is that as soon as you start saving, investing etc, the government will find new taxes and new ways to steal it back from you…never mind you already paid tax on it at source. Look at the incoming plans to milk anyone who has been careful enough to invest in property or save their money……..robbing scum, the lot of them and all to pay for this tide of detritus they have invited into our country…..

Peter B
Peter B
11 months ago
Reply to  Adrian Smith

People need to save for their own retirement and stop hoping that younger generations will pay for them. That’s the only way out. Countries that are doing really well – like Singapore – have taken this seriously and have proper pension saving *funds* – they don’t just hope that current taxation will come to the rescue. Relying on ever increasing population is nothing more than a Ponzi scheme.

Adrian Smith
Adrian Smith
11 months ago

The Tory’s answer to the problem may seem two faced and weak, however the “progressive” alternative is a sure fire disaster.
The problem we face is that, due to a number of factors, we have an ageing population and insufficient organic production of working age productive adults to support it. Just focusing on raw numbers of net migrants gives a skewed picture, trying to keep out the unproductive, illegal ones whilst allowing in productive adults legally does make a lot more sense than just simply “progressively” opening the floodgates to all and sundry.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
11 months ago

“clearly possible to justify large-scale immigration on progressive grounds”
I have no idea what that means.
Ask a dozen “progressives” on what being progressive is and you will get a dozen answers.

Last edited 11 months ago by UnHerd Reader
Adrian Smith
Adrian Smith
11 months ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

It means not doing or saying anything that could lead to you being called a fascist, racist, bigot, homophobe, transphobe or any other sort of ist, phobe or anything else that could mark you as a bad person in the eyes of the “righteous”.
The fact that it is not progressive at all but part of a dangerous drift towards neo Marxist totalitarianism – the Orwellian nightmare come true, would be really rather funny if it were not so likely to end up killing as many people as original Marxism did. The parallels between cloaking yourself in the “progressive” dogma and visibly carrying Mao’s little red book are truly frightening.

Adrian Smith
Adrian Smith
11 months ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

It means not doing or saying anything that could lead to you being called a fascist, racist, bigot, homophobe, transphobe or any other sort of ist, phobe or anything else that could mark you as a bad person in the eyes of the “righteous”.
The fact that it is not progressive at all but part of a dangerous drift towards neo Marxist totalitarianism – the Orwellian nightmare come true, would be really rather funny if it were not so likely to end up killing as many people as original Marxism did. The parallels between cloaking yourself in the “progressive” dogma and visibly carrying Mao’s little red book are truly frightening.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
11 months ago

“clearly possible to justify large-scale immigration on progressive grounds”
I have no idea what that means.
Ask a dozen “progressives” on what being progressive is and you will get a dozen answers.

Last edited 11 months ago by UnHerd Reader
Martin Terrell
Martin Terrell
11 months ago

Excellent analysis, as we would expect of course. One added note of cynicism I would add is that a low-trust society has advantages for those in charge. They can enjoy the better and safer areas for themselves, while the plebs fight among themselves or stay indoors out of sight.

Martin Terrell
Martin Terrell
11 months ago

Excellent analysis, as we would expect of course. One added note of cynicism I would add is that a low-trust society has advantages for those in charge. They can enjoy the better and safer areas for themselves, while the plebs fight among themselves or stay indoors out of sight.

Jonathan Smith
Jonathan Smith
11 months ago

The title words need re-arranging ‘The Tories can not stop mass migration’.

I’m glad Mary H has contributed her voice to this but I’ve heard most of these points articulated ad nauseam with the exception of the contraception spice thrown ĂŹn for good measure.

Those who govern know these arguments, but given the opprobrium heaped on those making them either fight shy, pussyfoot around or think the benefits outweigh the disadvantages.

Jonathan Smith
Jonathan Smith
11 months ago

The title words need re-arranging ‘The Tories can not stop mass migration’.

I’m glad Mary H has contributed her voice to this but I’ve heard most of these points articulated ad nauseam with the exception of the contraception spice thrown ĂŹn for good measure.

Those who govern know these arguments, but given the opprobrium heaped on those making them either fight shy, pussyfoot around or think the benefits outweigh the disadvantages.

j watson
j watson
11 months ago

Author continues her general theme of describing a problem, some perspectives on cause but characterised by absence of practical policy response which also covers honesty about trade offs that may be required. The absence of the latter one might contend is why we are where we are. She thus potentially falls into same populist trap Braverman et al does too in that it’s all about the slogan or narrative and not about how we really solve this. Albeit her narrative much preferable to that of the Home Sec.
Let’s assume vast majority concur that net migration is too high and too unplanned. Yes they’ll be a few who disagree and might even promulgate almost open borders, but they are in truth a tiny minority. They are not the cause of the problem, although a useful scapegoat for some.
The issue is we lack a proper honest discourse about trade offs. Our politicians are too scared that we can’t handle the trade offs, and they might be right. Author refers to ‘Britain’s structural reliance’ and recognises these aren’t easily or quickly addressed. So the ‘can gets kicked down the road’. We see the reluctance to really engage in the trade offs in many UnHerd articles and comments too, so reflective of the challenge.
Changing the structural weaknesses undoubtedly a long term challenge, but one wonders if we do enough to assimilate that migration we will need for now and for some time. Is there a case that the British public might support as well as benefit from a more formal citizenship process for migrants? Our population is inevitably going to evolve, but we can do more to ensure the best of our values permeate and are retained. That though also needs a much more honest discussion about what these values are but for what it’s worth I think most of us would welcome that discussion.

Last edited 11 months ago by j watson
Andrew R
Andrew R
11 months ago
Reply to  j watson

Your practical solution is to say a lot without offering anything, just throw in the cliche of “honest discourse”. This is an honest discussion but it’s not the one you want to hear.

The Left: If we allow everyone who wants to come here in, they’ll no longer have a reason to come here.

j watson
j watson
11 months ago
Reply to  Andrew R

Four additional practical things I’d do: i) ID cards – reduce the illegal overstays etc ii) national investment fund employers can bid against to improve productivity if result is reduction in migrant need iii) resource Immigration service properly so we can get the backlog down iv) much harsher fines for employers using illegal workers
There is more, and underpinning much of this I would press for a Citizenship two stage process.
I’d be clear all these will take a bit of time and we’ve made a right mess of things by fixating on Boats and Brexit BS, but that now we’ll get properly focused on the structural problems and how our island accommodates what is going to be an essential amount of immigration for years to come.
How’s that?
Your turn.

Last edited 11 months ago by j watson
Andrew R
Andrew R
11 months ago
Reply to  j watson

That’s better.

Andrew R
Andrew R
11 months ago
Reply to  j watson

It’s still unstainable

j watson
j watson
11 months ago
Reply to  Andrew R

Depends what level and how honest we are with public about trade offs. Consistently demonstrating incompetency certainly makes the current approach unsustainable.

j watson
j watson
11 months ago
Reply to  Andrew R

Depends what level and how honest we are with public about trade offs. Consistently demonstrating incompetency certainly makes the current approach unsustainable.

Phil Mac
Phil Mac
11 months ago
Reply to  j watson

Oh for Gods sake, a national investment fund? Yeah, that’ll work (not).
How about close off labour supply, let the price rise, unproductive employers go broke, productive ones win because they did smart business things. Free Market Capitalism produces the outcomes, you just need to stop frigging it with excessive welfare and open doors.

Kirk Susong
Kirk Susong
11 months ago
Reply to  Phil Mac

Hear hear! I am always befuddled by people talking about the ‘complications’ of immigration. Those are people who do not believe the free market is actually the most glorious wealth-generating and conditions-improving device in the history of the world. It may well be that whatever low paying job businesses want to fill via immigration is simply uneconomic. Those businesses will have to train better, retain better, etc. And the good businesses will make their owners rich and their customers happy, and the bad businesses will die and their employees will lose their jobs.
As for the supposed practical difficulties of controlling immigration… for Heaven’s sake the UK is an island country! People aren’t walking across a thousand-mile long desert border. They are coming on boats and planes, through heavily monitored ports of entry. It would be very easy to cut off immigration – all you have to do is actually want it. There’s the rub.

Kirk Susong
Kirk Susong
11 months ago
Reply to  Phil Mac

Hear hear! I am always befuddled by people talking about the ‘complications’ of immigration. Those are people who do not believe the free market is actually the most glorious wealth-generating and conditions-improving device in the history of the world. It may well be that whatever low paying job businesses want to fill via immigration is simply uneconomic. Those businesses will have to train better, retain better, etc. And the good businesses will make their owners rich and their customers happy, and the bad businesses will die and their employees will lose their jobs.
As for the supposed practical difficulties of controlling immigration… for Heaven’s sake the UK is an island country! People aren’t walking across a thousand-mile long desert border. They are coming on boats and planes, through heavily monitored ports of entry. It would be very easy to cut off immigration – all you have to do is actually want it. There’s the rub.

Andrew R
Andrew R
11 months ago
Reply to  j watson

That’s better.

Andrew R
Andrew R
11 months ago
Reply to  j watson

It’s still unstainable

Phil Mac
Phil Mac
11 months ago