Monday, 29 July 2013

Introducing Liberty GB





The chairman of Liberty GB (Great Britain), Paul Weston, was formerly a member of the UK Independence Party (UKIP). He resigned in 2010 ‘when it became apparent that UKIP would not confront the Islamic issue’, which he considered ‘to be the greatest threat to Britain since Nazism and communism’. Weston then went on to set up Liberty GB in early March, 2013.

Liberty GB states that it is addressing issues which the established British parties (i.e., the Conservatives, Labour and the Liberal Democrats) aren’t addressing. Indeed it is addressing one specific issue, the clear and present danger of rising Islam in the UK, which not even UKIP dare tackle lest it is demonised even more than it already is. Fair enough, it could be said that all new parties, and even old ones, say they are ‘addressing issues untouched by the established parties’. In the end, then, all punters can do is see if that’s indeed the case when it comes to Liberty GB. 
 
Paul Weston: Chairman of Liberty GB
I would say that the handful of issues which Liberty GB addresses, and which the established parties most certainly aren’t addressing, includes Islam, (mass) immigration, the EU and ‘the hijacking of traditional British culture and institutions by well-organised left-wing “progressives”’. Strictly speaking, far-right (or Nazi/fascist) parties do tackle immigration. However, they do so from a strictly racial perspective. Indeed the Far Right even sees the rise of Islam, believe it or not, in strictly racial terms too. Liberty GB, on the other hand, confronts the nature of Islam itself, rather than simply focussing on the legions of terrorists, militants and Islamists who, according to the many experts on Islam and Islamic theology in the Conservative and Labour parties, all ‘distort Islam’.




The Left and the liberal Left like to pretend that any strong position on immigration is all about ‘racism’, ‘chauvinism’ and ‘bigotry’ (the latter two being simply expressions of racism). Those three words are often no more than political jargon used to silence debate. Nonetheless, according to Liberty GB, its stance on immigration, or at least on mass immigration, has nothing to do with race, bigotry or chauvinism. It’s all to do with the following – amongst other – things:

“Lack of public housing (at least 20% of public housing in London is occupied by non-British nationals), intense competition for jobs, services stretched to breaking point, schools where English is a minority language, rising crime – these changes caused hundreds of thousands of British people to take flight, and as a result many long-established communities have disappeared without trace.”

Above and beyond all that, it’s also the case that ‘many towns and cities changed beyond recognition’ and within them there has occurred the phenomenon of ‘foreign enclaves, some so hostile to outsiders that even the police fear to tread there’.

It has been made clear in recent years that mass immigration was never all – or even mainly – about providing the UK with ‘much-needed labour’ or ‘skilled workers’. Instead, mass immigration has been a massive piece of social engineering (or a social experiment) carried out by politicians with specific ideological and social ends in mind. This was especially the case under the (New) Labour Party (1997-2010) whose true mass immigration policy, kept secret from the electorate, was designed to ‘rub the noses of the Right’ in an excess of multiculturalism; as members of that party have recently admitted to the press. The Labour Party believed, both then and probably still today, that much of the UK was ‘hideously white’ (to quote The Guardian newspaper) and therefore it wanted to do something drastic about that oh-so-terrible situation. Hence mass immigration – year after year after year. To be precise, that’s over three million new immigrants (mainly Muslim) in just nine years (between 2001 and 2010).

Liberty GB, in response to all this, has argued that it was never just a case of the multiple cultures ‘flooding Britain’ as part of a Labour, and then Tory, experiment in massive social change and the importation of cheap labour (e.g., cheap ‘nannies’, cleaners or even servants for the elite of both the Labour and Conservative Parties). It was the case that once the multitudes of immigrants were here, various and many leftist and left-liberal organisations got to work on instituting ‘politically correct laws to give preferential treatment to minorities’ and then ‘levelling charges of “racism” to stifle debate’ as well as using ‘the school curriculum to indoctrinate children’.




Of course Liberty GB will need to tell the public why heightened levels of political patriotism or nationalism will be a good thing for the United Kingdom. For example, it will need to tell the voters why mass immigration and multiculturalism are problematic when it comes to the fostering of British patriotism. Liberty GB itself says:

“For any society to be successful it needs cohesion, a shared sense of identity to bind it together. The more people have in common the better they tend to get along. That's only common sense. We need to reunite our country by reasserting the British way of life and insisting that immigrants assimilate into it. We need to safeguard our own British values such as freedom of speech, the rule of British law, equality for women and protection of homosexuals from intimidation by fanatics.”

Liberty GB will also need concrete polices to rectify all these massive problems. Some of its present polices include ‘putting a halt on immigration for at least five years with strict controls thereafter’; ‘shutting down any faith school that promotes extremism or division, or fails to teach the curriculum in the spirit it is meant’; the ‘instilling a sense of national pride by teaching children of all backgrounds history centred upon Britain’s outstanding achievements in science, technology, art, literature, sport, exploration and every other area of civilisation’; and the ‘reform [of] the BBC to end its left-wing multicultural bias’.





The European Union (EU) has immense control over the British Government and, indeed, over the British people. The EU interferes in numerous spheres of our lives – from the public to the very private. Even though the EU is largely an unelected body (apart from the MEPs who often have little connection to the home country and certainly not to the British electorate), much of the UK’s ‘hate legislation’ (the brainchild of the Council of Europe and which emanates from Brussels and Strasbourg) is an attempt to silence all criticism of Islam under the pretence that all such criticism is ‘racist’. 

Precisely because of this situation, Liberty GB has said that it will introduce a US-style First Amendment which will guarantee free speech. But before that it will separate the UK entirely from the EU – the place largely responsible for denying British people free speech in the first place.

The EU is also the home and prime propagator of the Human Rights Act (also the brainchild of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg). Liberty GB will abolish the Human Rights Act primarily because it has benefitted so many foreign criminals; including known and proven terrorists. The Human Rights Act, it must be added, is also a means by which leftist lawyers (who’ve taken over large parts of this particular Gramscian ‘institution’ – the Law) chip away at the ‘capitalist system’, who will use any device, including defending Islamic terrorists, to destabilise and attack it.




As an openly (as it were) patriotic party, Liberty GB will of course put a premium on defence. The party tells us that defence spending reached a peak during the mid-1980s when the budget was 5.1% of national GDP. This was the era, of course, when the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact allies were a genuine threat to the UK and to the Western world generally. The Iron Curtain fell in 1989 and tensions relaxed a little. 


Nonetheless, new threats and eventualities have arisen since that time. Today there is also a larger threat from Islamic terrorism. Despite that, Liberty GB pledges not to send troops to fight other people’s conflicts (this can’t but help save the country money in the long run too). Nonetheless, not all foreign conflicts are necessarily other people’s conflicts. In these rare cases, Liberty GB has said that ‘British forces must never again be sent into combat situations understrength or inadequately equipped’. In addition, Liberty GB has said that it will improve pay, conditions and housing for all armed forces personnel, as well as set up an ‘Ex-forces Charter’ which would guarantee quality of care to all former armed service personnel in health, housing and employment.

Conclusion

The current situation in the UK is pretty dire in at least certain respects; and not only when it comes to the rise of Islam and the numerous threats it poses - and has already posed - to our country. The issues which have so far been largely untouched by the mainstream British parties (including mass immigration) remain untouched.  As I said earlier, other parties are dealing with mass immigration and militant Islam, but they are all ‘far right’ in nature and see everything in terms of race. As for UKIP, it is certainly facing the problem that is the European Union (EU) but is silent on the nature and threat of rising Islam. 

In the end, British voters will have to decide for themselves who to support and vote for.

No comments:

Post a Comment