Jeff Randall, writing in the Telegraph, chooses to make some important points in an article about immigration and the effects thereof on our society – unfortunately he misses the main points. Once again we find a miniscule section of the population being used to sway public opinion. So 60% of 20,000 people surveyed believe that immigration has brought more disadvantages than advantages - so?
There is much unsaid in Randall’s article: there is no mention of the free movement of people within the European Union; there is no mention that the last government, wishing to show they are good ‘Europeans’, threw open our doors when they could have kept some of them shut; there is no mention of the fact that the reason for needing immigrants to do jobs that the indigenous population would not do was due to an education system that is not fit for purpose; there is no mention of the fact that said education system has been – to put it politely – ‘buggered about’ by our political class without the direct consent of those that elected said political class; and lastly there is no mention of the fact that the last government needed the immigrant’s taxes to fund the growing benefit costs of those who were unable – thanks to a ‘pp’ system of education – to achieve gainful employment.
One must now turn to the point that Randall makes: the increased costs on our education and health services that said immigration has caused. If we , as a nation, are to have social, cultural and economic upheaval forced upon us; should we, who will have to fund and endure this, not be asked if we agree? Not that that would have made the slightest difference as our political class are unable to control the flow of immigration from Member States while we ‘belong’ to the European Union; and do not ‘miss’ the use of the word ‘belong’ – but it would have been nice to have been asked.
What we see from this article, from one who we are led to believe is a ‘coruscating’ journalist, is but half the story, half the truth and encapsulates a point which begs the question: how can we rely on journalism to inform us? Has not journalism become but a means of forming public opinion; and one that conforms to the thinking of the political class on whom the journalists of today rely for their income?
This article highlights yet more decisions made, on a variety of subjects, by our political class for which we, as taxpayers, have to fund and on which we have had no direct input. This also demonstrates that political manifestos, presented to us come a general election, are not worth the paper on which they are written. In effect all such manifestos do is to allow an electorate to present a blank cheque to our political class, to subjugate us even further into becoming compliant slaves.
Where is there any sense of democracy in such a process? That the electorate continually vote for what amounts to a form of slavery can but show that our political class are succeeding in their aim to ensure the continuation of the slavery of those that fund them. This point is one that begs the question whether the electorate have lost the ability of thought and reason. If they are dissatisfied with their ‘present lot’, what for heaven’s sake is stopping them from engaging brain and looking for a more acceptable alternative? At which point, we then come back to the present education system – do we not?
I believe it was a member of the Rothschild family that said something along the lines of: I care not who governs a country, give me control of the money and I rule that country (I paraphrase). Is it not the case that it can be said that those who are able to control the education system are thus able to control the future of a country – and the future of the individual? If we are to lay blame on the parents of children, who it can be said have abrogated their responsibility as a parent in allowing the education of their children to be ‘warped’, just how many generations do we have to go back? Just who should we blame because where did this process of educational manipulation begin? With Crossland and his wish to banish grammar schools?
It is not just the subject of education that can be blamed for the demise of our nation: let us also consider subjects such as our productivity and loss of manufacturing capability; the type of society in which we now live; the state of our national defense and our armed forces; the way that those who are unelected are able to influence government policy – quangos and fake charities? Past generations – and the present who compound the problem by their continuance of the status quo – have been led by the nose in the belief that those who care not for us, but their own careers, are our ‘carers’. If ever anyone was in search of an example of a confidence trick, it is right in front of our eyes in the form of representative democracy.
It seems to me that where the future of a nation is concerned, paramount is the subject of its method of educating its future inhabitants. Why then are we content to leave such an important subject in the hands of those who perpetuate a system of unrepresntative democracy?