I wrote this some time ago for MyT. I have seen nothing since to suggest a change of view.
1. The decision to permit unrestricted immigration of low-skilled, poorly educated immigrants from a culture that is entirely different from our own, sharing none, or almost none of the values of 20th century western society and with no forethought or preparation as to how these people were to be integrated into UK life was a huge mistake.
2. The mistake was compounded by the politically correct and completely mis-guided requirement that the indigenous people of this country should undergo a transformation of their own way of life in order to accommodate the incomers.
3. Political pusillanimity and short-term thinking, (must stay in power at all costs,) has prevented any solution that would limit the number of immigrants to a level that could be coped with, or that would limit the ghettoisation of our major cities with the effect that there are now significant areas of this country where antipathy to the general social norms is more common than not.
The result is the gradual and ongoing dhimmification of the indigenous population by politicians and over-zealous bureaucrats and lawyers, especially of the human rights breed, which leads to the social backlash exemplified by the rise in support for ‘extremist’ parties.
Conclusion. We need to impose strict limits on further immigration, apply the law equally to all sections of society, make Muslim citizens face up to their civil duties as well as enjoying their civil rights, and cease diluting our own principles in deference to a failed theory of multi-culturalism.
(If you read German, there is an interesting discussion of this subject in Der Spiegel entitled, ‘Mekka Deutschland, die stille Islamisierung.’)
There is also an account here of the history and development of immigration into the United Kingdom, (which, in effect, means England, though this fact is hidden in the numbers.)
Boadicea's Chariot 
Agreed.
If the Welsh and Scots had any sense they would redig Offa’s Dyke and rebuild Hadrian Wall.
Nowhere near as many problems in the USA which forces integration. Which is why they don’t want to come here so much, plus no handouts or free medicine. No free eduction for the children of illegals. Makes a place so less attractive.
Having to work and pay one’s way? Not likely!
Ah, much better, Bravo. Why didn’t you say this in the first place?
“Conclusion. We need to impose strict limits on further immigration, apply the law equally to all sections of society, make Muslim citizens face up to their civil duties as well as enjoying their civil rights, and cease diluting our own principles in deference to a failed theory of multi-culturalism.”
If you could replace Muslims with immigrants, in your above conclusion, then we may have a basis for discussion. Or if not, then is your post intended to say that immigrants who follow Islam may have particular problems with integration? Or is this because they are the majority, or perceived as “extremists”?
I don’t agree completely with your reasoning for arriving at your conclusion, but back later.
Thanks for the interesting post and link, Bravo. I’ll read the Spiegel article later. German has the same problems as Britain. It strikes me that Cameron could make some large savings very quickly with one or two steps when he’s in No 10. One would be to put an immediate stop on immigration for a certain length of time. Two would be to stop all payments to “asylum-seekers” at once and three would be to stop taxpayer-funded legal aid for appeals against deportation. Such appeals would have to be made from the home country. Suspension of the much abused “yooman rights” act would mean deportations could be speedily carried out – BA may have some spare planes shortly. Once we have cleared out the illegal immigrants, then we can have a clear look at what to do next, saving some money all the while. I suspect cutting off the financial handouts would start a rush out of the country anyway. We have to make drastic savings and charity should begin at home. Then we can have a look at communities that do not integrate. There are quite a few people with dual nationality. Germany does not permit this and this causes a problem with the Turkish immigrant community. They cannot acquire German nationality unless they give up their Turkish citizenship. But if they do that, then they cannot inherit property in Turkey. Of course it is Germany that is expected to change its law to suit the immigrants.
Sheona: I think we have a long history of welcoming genuine asylum seekers and I think this should continue regardless.
Bravo22c, interesting blog and thanks for the link.
Also, interesting stuff in said link. Possibly slightly inconclusive, not totally supportive of the fact that we are racing to hell in a handcart and even capable of being used on either sides of the argument, in my opinion.
For example, one quote from your link:-
‘The five largest foreign-born populations were from India (639,000), Poland (526,000), Pakistan (436,000), Ireland (424,000), and Germany (293,000)’.
That’ll be me then, in re the Hun invasion. Born in Hamburg, West Germany, of British parents who were over there at the time, serving their country (the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland, for the avoidance of doubt). Please forgive me for coming over here and diluting the stock?
Aren’t statistics wonderful things?
Yes, Araminta, you’ve made this point before and this time I put quotation marks round the word “asylum-seekers”, because I was referring to the non-genuine ones.
Araminta. Why should I replace ‘muslims’ with ‘immigrants,’ in the conclusion? The references to ‘dhimmification’ and the Der Spiegel article should have made it clear where I think the problem lies. For the avoidance of all doubt, I think it is the ill-educated, backward muslim immigrants who are the main cause of the problems we face with immigration. Hindus and Sikhs, Chinese, Polish and Germans, are not to be seen on the streets demanding that their personal beliefs receive special treatment, or that special accomodationis made for them.
JM. That is tendentious nonsense. My children, also the children of parents who were serving their country, were born in Berlin, Hamburg and Hong Kong, respectively as, like you, the British off-spring of British parents.
Ah, thank you for clarifying this distinction, Sheona. I rather thought that might be the case.
Bravo, a fine word ‘tendentious’, but it’s not nonsense. I am included in the statistics as foreign-born as are your children.
OK: I rather thought that you may have been making just that point, Bravo. I was just asking for clarification.
Do you not think that these “special accommodations” may be the fault of the PC policies of our present Socialist government. I suggest that many Muslims do not want, never mind demand special treatment? Perhaps indeed, the current regime is partly responsible for this lack of integration?
“For the avoidance of all doubt, I think it is the ill-educated, backward muslim immigrants who are the main cause of the problems we face with immigration”
Is not this the case with the majority of immigrants although not all by any means.
This can be rectified surely, by education although it may take a generation. It is complicated perhaps by the labelling of all Muslims as terrorists, or extremists.
Yes, one should be aware that such do exist, it would be foolish to ignore this, but I would argue that the majority are not.
If you feel tempted at this point to quote the Koran, Bravo, I will not return. 🙂
Araminta. >Do you not think that these “special accommodations” may be the fault of the PC policies of our present Socialist government.I suggest that many Muslims do not want, never mind demand special treatment? This can be rectified surely, by education although it may take a generation. Is not this the case with the majority of immigrants although not all by any means.<
No. See my previous answer. (#7)
Yes indeed, Araminta, the current government is much to blame. Having given in to certain demands for special treatment has of course only encouraged more demands.
On the other hand, Bravo is absolutely correct. Why should the British taxpayer fund education for an illiterate immigrant, illiterate even in his own language? These people have totally unrealistic expectations, presumably fostered by TV programmes and films. This is very much the case in France, where immigrants from North Africa have seen the glamorous appartments with lots of modern appliances on TV programmes and adverts and then get a horrendous shock when they end up in a cramped appartment somewhere in the “banlieue” without the money to buy any fancy goods.
I read an article recently about an Afghan lad who wanted to get to Britain to become a doctor. He was barely literate and had not even completed his secondary education, yet he was convinced he could become a doctor in Britain. Totally unrealistic expectations. This is why I suggested in a previous post that money paid to people traffickers would be better spent on a decent education at home so that would-be immigrants have something to offer another country.
“No? See my previous answer. (#7)”
Good way of closing a debate, Bravo.
PS:
Oh right, Bravo. So, Muslims are destined to remain to remain ill-educated and backward? Moreover, you seem to be suggesting that they are incapable of benefiting from an education.
Are you aware, Araminta, that Pakistan is suffering from a surfeit of unemployable young men? Thos boys sent to madrassahs learn to recite the Koran while rocking rhythmically back and forward but not enough other things to fit them for jobs in Pakistan’s business or commercial world. They are thus ready fodder for terrorist recruiters, resentful as they are that the modern world has no place for them.
My reply to your comment was specificaly aimed at your question: >This can be rectified surely, by education although it may take a generation. Is not this the case with the majority of immigrants although not all by any means.<
Who is to be educated? The muslims who segregate themselves from the community? How then, is education to be applied? How is a muslim schoolgirl, forced to wear a discriminating form of dress, to be empowered to change her circumstances, should she so wish.? How should a muslim boy, seeing such discrimination applied, and accepted, to begin to understand that such discrimination is wrong? How are young muslim women, restricted by the bounds of an out-moded culture and segregated and hidden from wider society under an all-enveloping black sack to be given the same opportunities as their peers of other cultural flavour? How are the benefits of education to overcome these obstacles?
You proposed education as an answer to a problem, my reply was to that proposal, not to raise any thought that a muslim child is any less capable of benefitting from an education than any other child.
Thanks for your responses, Sheona and Bravo. I have to go now, but I will revisit.
The other question, Bravo, is why should British taxpayers be paying to do this? As a former middle school governor, I am aware of the casual manner in which some parents treat the education of their children. Pupils would suddenly disappear from school without warning and some other pupil would explain that so-and-so had gone off to Pakistan (it always seemed to be that destination) and no one knew when the child would be back. Six weeks or more later, the pupil would return, having missed some essentials like long division and even less competent in English. And of course it was the poor teacher who was supposed to help the child catch up, when the parents should have been paying for private tuition. Why should anyone else care if the parents set so little store by education, probably because they themselves are uneducated.
I do not see how we can get even 1 genuine asylum seeker in the UK.
They should seek asylum at the first border they cross having escaped persecution. Not cross multiple borders.
Thanks Sheona, yes I think that is a factor too, but my point was that some demands were not “demanded” and are considered by some of the Muslims here to be as ridiculous as we think them to be. I doubt that any Muslim has demanded that Christmas, for instance, should be “ low key” or a secular holiday, but that is certainly one example of this nonsense.
If the immigrant is here legally and is of school age, I think it reasonable to expect that he be educated at the expense of the British Taxpayer. How else is a child supposed to grow up to be a hopefully productive member of our community and learn about our culture?
Hence my point about education being part of the solution of integration. Unrealistic expectations are not just the province of the immigrant. Our education system at the moment and the dependency culture we live in seems to be doing good job of producing quite a few of those who hold unrealistic expectations”
I take your point though about the wrong impression given about realities in their chosen destinations, but one of the reasons that immigrants leave their country of birth is the lack of prospects and education for their children.
Bravo: you are presuming, I think, that all Muslims segregate themselves from their host communities in your comment #15. I doubt this to be the case.
I believe you can find examples of suspicion and problems with the integration of any group of immigrants, and particularly in times of economic downturns and shortage of employment, housing and so forth. It happened with the West Indian immigrants and the Jews for example.
As a general observation though, you may be right in singling out the Muslims perceived difficulties with integrating into their host communities. It may be due to numbers, the association of their religion with extremists or with the general hysteria associated with the War on Terror and the oft repeated threat to the world of so called Militant Islam. Islam is the new scapegoat.
I have covered some of the issues you mention in my comment to Sheona.
It may also be due to other factors, might it not? Or is it all the fault of the host community? Nothing to do with insisting on special treatment and exceptions of the kind I have mentioned? Well, that’s alright then, isnt it 😉
‘So called’ militant islam. Is it wrong then, to asssume that the terrorist organisations calling themselves jihadists are, in fact, muslims? Is it a only coincidence that the terrorist organisations operating in China, the Phillipines, Parts of Indonesia, Pakistan, India, Chechnya, Georgia, Azerbaijan, the North Caucasus, the United States, Europe, North Africa, Nigeria… call themselves muslims? Are they having us on? Are they not either muslim, or terrorists?
I would say that if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it is very likely to be a duck, rather than a goat of any sort.
PS. Missed a point. For the record. I do regard islam as the enemy within. The tenets of this backward and oppressive faith have no place in a modern, Western society.
Bravo, I could construct an argument that Roman Catholics are just as out of date in a modern Western society, condoning the abuse of women and children by their priests and outlawing sensible ways of combatting HIV.
Janus, you could indeed, and you would get not much argument from me.
Starting another argument? I told you, not on my posts. Byeeeeee.