Posters stuck to every surface around campus: ‘Refugee crisis – open the borders’. It is a talk by the Socialist Workers, and I am interested in hearing the argument, who attends and how they respond. I sit near the back, where I can scribble notes inconspicuously. Having braced myself for an hour of ideological provocation, I find a sparsely populated event that would change few minds. Yet it also emphasised the lateness of the hour for social conservatives to rescue our country from emerging strife.

Twenty three attended, mostly white middle-class, some being members of the students’ socialist society. Jane Kelly of this website observes that the hard Left is disproportionately drawing young women, and here they outnumbered the four males. The speaker, Mark Thomas, sits at a desk festooned with flyers for demonstrations against Islamophobia. Introducing himself as an anti-racist, Thomas begins his delivery. It is a breathless monologue for twenty minutes, unscripted and zealously forthright. Much of the argument is within reason, and the need to solve the refugee problem is undeniable. He takes no prisoners in his assault on the powers-that-be and the nasty elements of society: Blairite Labour MPs, the Daily Mail, the toxic atmosphere of the EU vote, the Royal Navy (for ‘blockading the Mediterranean’), Trump’s rhetoric, and the horrific response by governments across Europe. Shame on them. Simultaneously, Jeremy Corbyn is closing the Labour Party conference with a compassionate message: we have responsibility for the poor and displaced, and there should be no limits to who comes to our shores.

Time for questions. Silence, so I go first. ‘Surveys consistently show upwards of 70 per cent of the British public are concerned by uncontrolled immigration. Obviously you don’t agree with them, but would you ever see a level as too high – what if 1 million come per year, or 5 million?’ Before the speaker answers, further questions are sought, and I am surprised to find doubts similar to mine. A German student explains that integration is becoming impossible in her county – the number is overwhelming. An Indian man remarks that Britain is understandably more welcoming to some countries than others – India is fine, but Pakistan is ‘backward’.

This is not going well for the organisers, so society members take over, stridently rebutting the points made by us lesser mortals. The Jungle in Calais has two thousand unaccompanied children, who have made a dangerous crossing through many countries to get there. Asking why fleeing refugees, rather than claiming asylum in the first safe country, continue their expedition unnecessarily, I am told that these people have a right to live in Britain. Troubled by comments about nationhood, a white English woman dismisses the concept of patriotism as contrived identity, manipulated by governments. She does not feel British – she is part of an international family.

Then Thomas gets into his stride. He starts on patriotism – what is Britishness? There is no reason to be proud of a vile imperial past, or of a country that arms itself with nuclear weapons while failing to build houses. Despite his Thames estuary accent, he identifies himself as Irish (‘one of 7.4 million; we take your jobs and do them very well.’) The Left ironically abhors British pride, but attaches itself to the assumed virtue of other nations. My initial question is not directly answered, but unmistakably the speaker would let them all come. The explanation for this is in the underlying motives of the hard Left, which has now hijacked the Labour Party.

Astute readers of this website excepted, the likes of Thomas are naively underestimated. They display compassion for the vulnerable, and therefore, however unrealistic their policies, must be well-meaning. But Thomas revealed the real drive of his political fervour: nothing less than revolution. To the far Left, every crisis is an opportunity to bring down the established order. It did not happen after the global economic shock of 2008, but the migrant crisis presents much greater prospects of destruction. Immigrant masses are the storm-troopers, and no bullets need be fired for the system to be overturned. Meanwhile, the danger of terrorism is cast as a racist trope. Thomas condemned the Prevent scheme, which the National Union of Students has persistently misrepresented as oppression of Muslims, with their slogan ‘students not suspects’ and crass denials of ‘so-called Islamic extremism’ (meanwhile, the NUS promotes compulsory sex consent workshops that portray all male students as potential rapists).

With the dramatic pace of demographic change, perhaps Thomas and the Corbynistas are winning the war. So what if Labour are behind in the polls? The conservative mainstream is steadily being overcome by the combined force of the incoming masses and a surge of radical socialism in the younger generation. To them, British culture is boring and bigoted. It is not an exaggeration to attribute the mission of Momentum, the Socialist Workers Party and their ilk to an intense loathing of their country and its traditions. This is the real hate crime.

(Image: Funk Dooby)


  1. Democracy must be suspended, and left wing politics totally outlawed. Anyone associated with this parasitical, treacherous mentality must be liquidated.

    • ha ha you jest of course, as that kind of tyranny is a feature of the left and not the right, as well we know, …..

        • Whilst I agree entirely that left thinking has almost fatally corrupted western civilization and that it will continue to do so and must be halted, it was the word ‘liquidated’ that set alarm bells ringing? I hope I misunderstood what you meant by that term.

          • You didn’t misunderstand, you did prove that you are not entirely committed to eradicating enemies of this state. You must be viewed as a potential threat.

  2. Perhaps those who believe that patriotism should be offered the opportunity instead of being bound by Sharia law. Universities could then ban booze and cannabis, and all would be well with the world.

  3. How well I remember the socialist workers party from my university days. The lecturers, a bit clueless but ‘right on and trying to ‘get down ‘ with the students. These particular lecturers would not be capable of a real job in the outside world, but their ideas are given a vigorous airing in the halls of academia!
    Social conservatives among the young could take a leaf out of the USA and successful college movement for young conservative women. I have tried to post a link to their organisation a few times but it has been rejected as spam. If I had the funds I would gladly support setting up a sister organisation at UK universities for young women. It is called ‘enlightened women’ but has an org at the end if you wish to search it and I can avoid being rejected as spam!

  4. You make two main points which are contrary to the “progressive” narrative, one of which I agree with completely and the second which I think barks up the wrong tree.

    Firstly, I concur that the Left’s approval or disapproval of things depends entirely on whether they deem these things to be injurious to the status quo (Leftist approval) or supportive of it (Leftist disapproval). Nothing else matters to this cult. The blatant intellectual dishonesty with which they pretend to be motivated in their approval/disapproval by the things themselves is just part of the process for the Left – a process in which the Left considers itself to be at war with those with whom it disagrees, thereby “legitimising” any methods which might enhance the prospect of winning.

    On the other hand I don’t think you are correct in identifying the Left’s hatred for our country and its traditions as being the prime cause of the stance that it takes. There is, indeed, a powerful emotional element which drives the Left’s attitudes towards its fellow citizens, but, for me, the prime mover is love of the self, not hatred of the other. Leftism is based in malignant narcissism which starts in not being helped to deal appropriately with the hurts and frustrations of adolescence and frequently becomes in individuals so deeply entrenched that their whole lives become determined by it. To themselves, of course, they rationalise and self-deceive – they convince themselves that what they are doing is all about helping other people, but the reality is that it is not.

    • Criticism of the “progressive narrative” is almost always rejected, by, let’s say, Polly Toynbee and her comrades, as mere wickedness rather than a reasoned difference of opinion.

      This is an insufferable imposture by so-called lefty “intellectuals”.

      • I think the thing is that, at heart, Leftists are troubled and insecure, and that the principal reason behind them holding their political views as indisputable certainties is not because they have been shown to be intellectually indestructible, but because even the possibility that they might be wrong is mentally too devastating for Leftists to allow into their minds.

        • “… because even the possibility that they might be wrong is mentally too devastating for Leftists to allow into their minds.”

          Well that would account for the BBC’s ‘reporting’ on the Rotherham rapes, and non-investigation of it spreading throughout England.

          Possibly the Left are like that because they never learned that recognising being wrong was an opportunity to improve; think of the different losing chess-players, those who try to identify their own weaknesses and adjust, and those others who throw the board & pieces to the ground.

          The real danger of ideology meeting unconforming reality is that the ideologues refuse to accept there is a failure in the ideology, and so instead look for someone to blame and hurt.

          • Yes, I go along with this. I think also that we should embrace the possibility that some people do not have childhoods/adolescences which lend themselves to the development of the precious combination of reality, self-confidence and humility which are three of the key breeding grounds for a constructive social existence. Such people have never received the encouragement to develop agreeableness and respect for others as default behaviours. Very often people become what they become involuntarily, because they have never been allowed the scope to envisage other options.

    • I agree – Leftism has a very narcissistic streak about it – in fact it is textbook narcissism.

      A grandiose sense of self-importance – preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited power – they believe they are special and unique and can only be understood by other special people – they require excessive admiration – they have a sense of entitlement – they will take advantage of others to achieve their own ends – they lack any empathy whatsoever and are often envious of others and believe that others are envious of them – they also have a tendency to display an arrogant attitude and haughty behaviour.

      I’m not saying that there are no individual conservative narcissists out there – there most probably are – but as a collective political movement the modern-day Left (and I include the Left’s ecological wing of radical environmentalism too) does suffer from an extreme form of narcissistic personality disorder.

      • Yes, I agree, And you might as well put in the mix their unrestricted use of Machiavellianism in seeking to achieve their goals. Aren’t these three characteristics – Machiavellianism, narcissism and psychopathy – bracketed together to form a malevolence known as the Dark Triad?

    • I agree with this. Unfortunately, for society at large, PC perpetuates further hurt and anguish (children growing up without fathers as just one of many examples) so the whole thing becomes an ever growing social catastrophe. A snowball of hurt rolling down the PC mountain side growing ever larger and ever faster…..

      • Good read. I too have become more and more “political” as a result of the sheer damage wrought by “PC” (as you rightly point out a series of Marxist heresies rolled together to account for the absence of an actual proletarian revolution) and I have to say the observed naivetés of the right(or liberal or even “centre”). Which mean a comparatively small segment of society is seeing through the revolution. Characteristically for the young Momentum is just those folk impatient that “the long march through the institutions” seems to take so long. My hope is their impatience and clamour might wake up the liberal elites to the dangers so well advanced. There are after all few PR/Consultant/Media etc. jobs in a revolution and all the Chelsea Tractors etc. may go up in flames!

      • A snowball of hurt comprised of special snowflakes, one assumes?

        As the above article reveals, the hardcore lefties don’t actually care about “the vulnerable” – at least no more than you or I do. For example, by seeking to welcome unlimited numbers of refugees they hope to foment a crisis and create the conditions needed for their incoherent revolutionary goals. Pretty despicable, isn’t it? But the end always justifies the means as far as these cretins are concerned. They simply don’t care whose faces get stamped on by the jackboot of their ideology along the way.

  5. The right to wander at will across Europe and demand entry to whichever country takes a person’s fancy seems to trump the right of that country to control to whom it allows access.

  6. ‘the need to solve the refugee problem is undeniable’

    Oh yes it is.

    They are Muslims yet Arab states do deny the refugee problem.

    Rather, they see, admitting thousands of mainly Africans into their lands as a cause of unrest and trouble.

    Deny that!

  7. The hatred of England by lefty “intellectuals” has been remarked on for many years. For those who haven’t read it before, here’s an observation by George Orwell written about 70 years ago:

    “England is perhaps the only great country whose intellectuals are ashamed of their own nationality. In left-wing circles it is always felt that there is something slightly disgraceful in being an Englishman and that it is a duty to snigger at every English institution, from horse racing to suet puddings. It is a strange fact, but it is unquestionably true that almost any English intellectual would feel more ashamed of standing to attention during God save the King, than of stealing from the poor box.”

    Roger Scruton has written about “oikophobia” which is an aversion to hearth and home. This is a curious “phobia” to which many lefty intellectuals are prone.

      • Yes, it does. Paul Weston is right. Adequately understood, lefty hatred has political and social objectives.

    • ” … but it is unquestionably true that almost any English intellectual would feel more ashamed of standing to attention during God save the King, than of stealing from the poor box.”

      I think the Left feel entitled to steal from the poor box.

      And especially from taxes and the TV licence fee, where the taking of money is backed up with the possibility of State force.

      There is no denying it, the Left prefers people be oppressed.

      • Worse, the Left NEEDS people to feel oppressed, so the Left works hard to make sure they ARE unsuccessful AND feel unsuccessful. The Left is deliberately destructive and evil.

  8. The Left never loved the foreigners it swamped the country with. But it saw in them a means of undermining Britain, British society, and our values.

    Mass immigration has been a catastrophe, social, economic, and cultural. It must end, and never be allowed to happen again. And for all those foreigners already here, there must be a clear message about the primacy of our language, culture and values – If they expect to remain in Britain, then a visible commitment to being British is required. And that goes for that mirthless comic, Mr Thomas too.

  9. The Open Borders mob are anarchists. They don’t want open borders because they are lovely, decent, compassionate people. Rather, they want to destroy the West the only way they know how now the “workers” are too affluent to bring about revolution.

    Third-worlders, as far removed as possible from British culture in ideological terms (Muslims) are just pawns to be used by the Left to bring about social and economic collapse.

    This is pretty well documented by the likes of Gramsci, Adorno, Lukacs, Marcuse etc, and I believe it was Karl Marx himself, who stated the necessity of social collapse in order to then “stand astride the wreckage a colossus.”

    Gyorgy Lukacs (Frankfurt School) stated the following: “I saw the revolutionary destruction of society as the one and only solution. A worldwide overturning of values cannot take place without the annihilation of the old values and the creation of new ones by the revolutionaries.”

    Needless to say, what Lukacs is describing here is essentially the basic principle of Political Correctness, a tool formulated by the 1930s Communist International to subvert the West.

    Well done Mr McCrae for drawing attention to the hateful ideology masquerading as faux compassion for everyone in the world except native Europeans.

    • Exactly so. The point isn’t that people know the theoretical underpinnings, but that they pursue the policies. The Cameroons and many on the “right” have cheerfully marched in step as they take up causes that cumulatively undermine the very “institutions” ( such as marriage and family ties) that they hold dear. A simple example is the apparently obvious virtue in supporting women who are fearful of their partners. In doing so the current Gov.(as with previous ones) pour money into organisations which use a good part of the millions to fund campaigns to end “patriarchy” . Even a bit of effort would reveal this and other such “own goals” as such ideologues are never reticent about their objectives! I frequently despair at the naiveté. There never was “a bonfire of the Quangos” and so irrespective of Momentum the Gov. happily hands out money to all sort of groups dedicated to the demise of “the west”. Sometimes its like a comedy sketch as some earnest minister signals their virtue and hands over the “cheque” to an organisation that a quick “google” would reveal hates everything and anyone Conservative and conservative. The revolution is happening as institutions crumble and crack.

    • Great comment! Globalist progressives play their postmodern “defender of the oppressed” card to elicit support from those who really care about the oppressed but are misinformed thanks to gov/media progressive propaganda. All progressives really want for the poor is to use them as pawns and cannon fodder in their war against Western civilization!

    • The passport of “Ed” Vulliamy should be confiscated and burned by the public hangman. If that isn’t an adequate punishment for his bleating about being ashamed to be British, I have other severities to suggest.

      • Update: Having studied Mr Vulliamy’s photograph on the Graunie site, I’m pleased to inform this blog that his hair is escaping from his head.

  10. ‘They display compassion for the vulnerable, and therefore, however unrealistic their policies, must be well-meaning.’

    They may display compassion for the vulnerable but that’s exactly where it ends – in reality their public parade of compassion for the defenseless in society is just a symptom of their self-absorbed narcissistic attitude. The vulnerable white working-class girls of Rotherham were ignored for years by the local Labour run council so as not to offend the local Pakistani community – here was a prime example of the exploitative nature of the narcissistic Left who would rather sacrifice the innocent lives of under-age white working class girls than to accept that there was something seriously wrong with their warped ideological beliefs – this is one section of society the Left do not display any compassion for – the equally vulnerable and yet patriotic and socially-conservative white working-class – for whom the Left loathe with a passion (see: Emily Thornberry).

  11. When you accept the basic premise of the left – you have already lost the argument. The only question remaining is how much of what they want are you going to give them.

    “Much of the argument is within reason, and the need to solve the refugee problem is undeniable.”

    I couldn’t disagree more. There is no reason good enough to destroy your own nation and culture for the benefit of outsiders. The “refugee problem” only exists because globalist leaders want to bring them to the West. They WANT the rape, the murders, the sharia – because they intend to use the chaos it creates to further their own agenda.

    Even if we dismiss the fact that the vast majority of these so-called refugees are military age males, the point is that we don’t owe them anything – much less our willing assistance in taking over western nations.

    If our leaders really wanted to help genuine refugees, we are fully capable of creating safe areas in the Middle East. But that isn’t the plan is it? It’s time to start asking yourself what is the real purpose.

    • In his defense your last Para was Cameron’s policy. and Gov. policy apart from a small number of refugees he caved in about (“disabled and child”)

    • > I couldn’t disagree more. There is no reason good enough to destroy your own nation and culture for the benefit of outsiders. The “refugee problem” only exists because globalist leaders want to bring them to the West. They WANT the rape, the murders, the sharia – because they intend to use the chaos it creates to further their own agenda.

      I think you are right. Although I think the main aim is increase pressure on state services such as health, education, welfare. Essentially the Cloward–Piven strategy .

  12. “Troubled by comments about nationhood, a white English woman dismisses the concept of patriotism as contrived identity, manipulated by governments. She does not feel British – she is part of an international family.”

    The claim by this woman denies the natural bonds of kith and kin. By this argument, my wife and children should be of no greater importance to me than random house mates.

    Of course, an ever increasing number of people in society do treat their families like random house mates, and dump them whenever they become inconvenient. Bonds of loyalty are being eroded at every level.

  13. “The Left ironically abhors British pride, but attaches itself to the assumed virtue of other nations”.


  14. The Royal Navy is “blockading the Mediterranean”? That’s news to me…..the last I heard they and other European navies were acting as a free ferry service for anyone who cared to paddle a few yards off the Lybian coast….

Comments are closed.