The London Times` Anthony Browne Writes VDARE.COM About His Dramatic Article

From: Anthony Browne

It
was bubbling around inside my head making me toss and
turn in the small hours, and then at 4 A.M. it exploded
out in 2,500 words: a cri de coeur about what
uncontrolled immigration is doing to Britain, and the
almost ruthless determination of the pro-immigrationists
to

distort facts
,

smear
opponents
and

stifle debate.

Having researched the article for three months for a
pamphlet, the facts just poured out of my fingertips.

It
quickly became clear I am far from alone: the

Times
received more than 150 emails, an unusually high

response
, all
but one—just one!—thanking us so much for having the
honesty and courage to run the piece, and very few of
them from mad people or obvious racists. Many came from
immigrants and a few from ethnic minorities.


Reading the emails almost brought me to tears. What came
across so profoundly is the deep frustration and anger
that people feel about their loss of national identity
and the growing social fragmentation of Britain under
the weight of Third World colonization, and their utter
abandonment by the political class and most of the media
which makes any discussion of this all important issue


almost a crime
.

And
what was almost equally moving was the almost total
silence of the pro-immigrationists: hardly a squeak. It
seems they really don`t want to get involved in open,
rational debate—only in finger-pointing and
name-calling.



Britain is losing Britain
by Anthony Browne, August 07, 2002

London Times

Is immigration in Britain out
of control? Our correspondent, an immigrant`s son, says
it is — causing social tension, cultural clashes and
economic strain

A well-known commentator once told
me: “It is almost a case of the empire strikes back.”
But it`s not just the former empire, it is pretty much
the entire Third World and Eastern Europe.

About a quarter of a million people
are coming to Britain from the Third World each year: a
city the size of Cambridge every six months, an
unprecedented and sustained wave of immigration to one
of the world`s most densely crowded islands, utterly
transforming the society in which we live against the
wishes of the majority of the population, damaging
quality of life and social cohesion, exacerbating the
housing crisis and congestion, and with questionable
economic benefits.

I know knee-jerk accusations of
racism and xenophobia will be fired at me by those who
make careers out of suppressing legitimate debate, but I
am hardly anti-immigrant or anti-immigration. I am the
son of an immigrant, living with an immigrant, from such
a family of émigrés that I have virtually no relatives
in this country. I have had three serious relationships
with British Indians, to the extent of visiting
relatives in India. Most immigrants — including my
mother and partner — make a great contribution to
society. Immigration, allowing people to better their
lives where they see the best opportunity, is a great
force for good in the world.

The only political party of which I
have been a member is Labour, and the danger of giving
encouragement to the racist British National Party is a
strong reason to stay silent. But what is happening now
is so extreme and so damaging, and the determination of
pro-immigrationists to suppress debate and smear critics
so fearsome, that silence is no longer an option.

The unprecedented wave of
immigration from the poor world to Britain is leading to
huge and rapidly growing communities from almost every
Third World country. There are a million Indians, almost
700,000 Pakistanis, 260,000 Bangladeshis, up to a
million Nigerians, over 100,000 Iraqis. And numbers are

increasing rapidly
— in the past five years, while
the white population grew by 1 per cent, the Bangladeshi
community grew by 30 per cent, the black African
population by 37 per cent and the Pakistani community by
13 per cent.

The number of people allowed to
settle permanently in the UK has more than doubled in
the past few years, reaching 125,000 in 2000 — almost
all from the Third World and Eastern Europe. The number
being given British citizenship doubled to 100,000 last
year, nine out of ten of them from the Third World.

The route of entry is irrelevant.
Whether it

is usually-unfounded-and-never-get-deported asylum
,

arranged marriages
, bringing over parents,
grandparents,

children
or

fiancés
, holiday visas that mean never going home,
temporary work visas that

inevitably
lead to citizenship five years down the
line, or simply a clandestine ride in the back of a
lorry, the effect is the same. Almost all are certain to
stay. Thirteen times as many people emigrate from the
Indian subcontinent to the UK than

vice versa
, three times as many from the Caribbean
to the UK than vice versa. This net immigration, the
largest yet witnessed in Britain, is quadrupling the
rate of Britain`s population growth, taking it to the
highest levels since the 1960s.

Don`t be fooled by the immigration
celebrationists telling you that this is just history as
normal. It isn`t. Earlier waves of immigration, from the

Huguenots
to the Jews after the Second World War, to

East African Asians
in the 1970s, were one-off
events that had an ending. The populations who came and
did well for themselves were genuinely being forced out
of whence they came. We were right to welcome them.

But what is happening now is the
result of sustained migration pressure the likes of
which the world has never seen before. For the first
time, the world has huge disparities of wealth,
widespread knowledge in the poor world of how the rich
world lives and how to get there through TV and global
telecommunications, and cheap, quick worldwide
transport. It is easier for them to get here, and far
more difficult to make them leave: the revolution in

“human rights”
means that as soon as anyone gets
past passport control they are pretty much guaranteed to
stay. More than 47,000 illegal immigrants were detected
in 2000, but just 6,000 were sent home.

Economics is clearly the ultimate
motivation, because it is from the poor world that all
the record net immigration to the UK is coming. With the
rest of the developed world, Britain has pretty much
zero net immigration — almost as many people move from
the rest of the developed world to Britain as vice versa
each year. We should not delude ourselves: it is
sustained, one-way, large-scale,

economically-driven
mass immigration, with no end in
sight.

There is nothing wrong in itself
with economic migration, exercising the right to find a
better life — after all, the Europeans have been world
champions,

colonizing North America,
Australasia and parts of

South America
and

southern Africa.
But the European emigration of
earlier centuries was largely morally unacceptable
because it was not, to put it mildly, achieved with the
consent of the host populations.

Nor are the British people giving
their consent: survey after survey shows that the large
majority of British people — including around half of
ethnic minorities — think there is too much immigration
to Britain; but fear of accusations of racism and the
power of the immigration lobby mean that no mainstream
political party dare reflect public opinion.

The fact is that life for most
people in the Third World is hard, and life in the West
a fantastic dream that families are prepared to blow a
lifetime`s savings to make real in whatever way we allow
them.

The Afghan couple raided in a
mosque and now being deported are claiming asylum from a
regime that no longer exists, having traveled through
and decided that they didn`t want to stay in three other
countries en route to Britain. Life under the Taleban
was unimaginably awful, but now they would rather just
live in Britain than help to rebuild their home country.

A neighbor of mine emigrated from
Bangladesh 30 years ago, bringing over his
non-English-speaking wife. His older son has now just
brought over his second non-English- speaking wife from
Bangladesh, having divorced the first. He picked them up
while spending six months of the year on the family farm
in Bangladesh, where they have staff working for them.
They will no doubt in time also bring over husbands for
his two teenage sisters, and then they will have

rights
to bring over the spouse`s parents and
grandparents. These are all individual private acts that
in themselves are perfectly reasonable, but taken by so
many individuals they have huge public consequences.
Such powerful chain migration effects ensure that
immigration will continue relentlessly, bringing whole
communities from the Third World to Britain. Whole
villages in Bangladesh have been transplanted to whole
streets in some northern English towns: little Third
World colonies in Britain.

The Labour Government has
relentlessly encouraged this by making it easier for
recent immigrants to bring new immigrants over, and
rapidly increasing many forms of supposedly temporary
immigration, while introducing laws that ensure that
virtually no one has to leave if they don`t want to.

Its abolition of the

primary purpose rule
, meaning that it is now OK to
have an arranged marriage for the primary purpose of
emigrating to Britain, made it possible to bring in
boyfriends and girlfriends and scrapped passport exit
controls. It actively encouraged universities to recruit
tens of thousands of students from the Third World and
dramatically increased temporary work visas in the full
knowledge that many will stay.

Most notoriously among doctors, the
Government has introduced the Human Rights Act, giving
anyone who gets into Britain, whether legally or
illegally, the right to free NHS treatment for the rest
of their lives if they have a life-threatening condition
for which they can`t get treatment at home. It is no
coincidence that

African immigration
has overtaken gay sex as the
biggest cause of HIV in Britain. Any of the 28 million
HIV-positive Africans, facing inevitable death at home,
can obtain free treatment for the rest of their lives if
they can just get into Britain, and then appeal under
the Human Rights Act. The booming industry of legal aid
funded immigration lawyers who will do their paperwork
for them.

The boom in immigration has been
matched only by the determination of immigration
celebrationists to brainwash the British public into
thinking that it is all for their own good. But almost
every reason given to support this immigration is bogus.

Britain doesn`t have a declining
population — there are more births than deaths each
year; it doesn`t have a declining workforce, largely
because women`s retirement age is rising to 65 by 2020;
as recognized by every authority from the Immigration
Advisory Service to the United Nations and the European
Commission, immigration is no “fix” for an ageing
society, because immigrants grow old too; there are no
generalized labor shortages, rather unemployment of 1.5
million; importing communities who are far more likely
to claim all forms of benefit apart from pensions and
disability allowances, and who can have startlingly high
unemployment rates, does not make Britain a richer
country. It is, in fact, importing poverty.

Immigration increases the size of
the economy — how could it not? — but there is no
evidence that it increases the one measure that matters,
gross domestic product per capita. There are some
shortages of skills, but only a tiny proportion of
immigrants is plugging those gaps.

Sure, immigrants contribute more in
taxes than they consume in benefits, but that is only
because there are so many highly paid immigrants such as
American bankers and European executives paying

more than their share
. Immigrants from the Third
World — who are responsible for the entire net
immigration of a quarter of a million a year — suffer
higher unemployment and lower earnings than average and
almost certainly do not pay their way.

The only reason for this net
current immigration is not that Britain needs
immigrants, but that immigrants want Britain. It is not
even particularly good for the countries they come from.
Stealing the most energetic, entrepreneurial or educated
from the Third World is a very inefficient development
policy.

The one thing it does do is change
the face of Britain, rapidly. One child in eight is now
from an ethnic minority, rising to one in three in
London. So-called “ethnic minorities” together form a
majority in boroughs such as Brent and Newham, and in
whole neighborhoods of cities in the North you can
wander around for hours without seeing a white face, one
monoculture having replaced another. Cities such as
Coventry, Leicester and London are vying to see which
can become the first white-minority city.

The London magazine Time Out
recently interviewed a Turkish immigrant who said that
the English were now the foreigners in Stoke Newington.
This, of course, was reported as a cause of celebration:
we must celebrate diversity. We have to celebrate it,
even though for white British people celebrating
diversity basically means saying sorry. We have to
celebrate diversity, because otherwise it might rise up
and kill us: Northern Ireland, former Yugoslavia,
Israel, Rwanda, Gujarat, northern Nigeria have all
recently suffered mass deaths as a result of diversity.

The British paper Muslim News
compared Bradford with Belfast, with deeply entrenched
divisions ripping a community apart and creating wounds
that may be becoming impossible to heal. In Bradford, as
in Belfast, the communities live apart, work apart,
socialize apart and occasionally riot. Muslim peers
advise that disillusioned British Muslim youths are in
danger of being recruited to extremist organizations,
and the secret services think that around 3,000 may have
trained with al-Qaeda.

There are roughly two million
Muslims in Britain, most of them fine people, but mass
immigration is increasing the numbers rapidly before we
have learnt how to ensure that their children feel part
of wider society and reach their full potential.
Similarly, we have record levels of immigration from
Africa, even though there is a widespread problem of
young black men becoming increasingly alienated and
criminalized. It is an uncomfortable fact that we have
to face up to: mass immigration without integration
leads to social fragmentation.

Of course, it is all culturally
enriching — those restaurants! — but surveys tell us
that most Britons do not want to be culturally enriched.
It is something they have in common with most peoples. I
dare the immigration celebrationists to order the
Nigerians to accept millions of Arabs, whites, Indians
and Chinese to enrich their culture, or the Indians to
accept millions of Chinese, Africans, Arabs and whites
to enrich theirs.

It is certainly changing Britain. A
Middle Eastern immigrant, who is now passionately
British, told me: “This is not the country I came to in
1958. Britain is losing Britain in a fit of
absent-mindedness. It is utter madness what is going on,
and even many immigrants feel this.” A Lebanese family
friend who lives in Nigeria says she cannot believe that
Britain is just letting itself go. A hard-Left friend
says in frustration: “If we went to their country and
did what they are doing here, it would be totally
unacceptable.”

But we are too polite to say
anything about it, too worried about being called
racist, just too embarrassed about being British or
English or whatever it is, just wallowing too much in
post-colonial white guilt.

If there are more people wanting to
live in Britain than we can feasibly accept, then
Britain has to tell people they cannot move here. We
have to accept that people just do not have the right to
live where they want in the world, and that the people
of Britain have a right to decide who can move here.
Wanting open borders is a noble aim, but not while there
are such global imbalances in wealth that it causes
destabilizing population flows.

Obviously we should do more to help
Third World countries to become places where people want
to live rather than leave; it is unacceptable that we
sit by and watch the entirely preventable Aids holocaust
consume almost an entire continent. But the solution is
to treat people where they live, rather than the limited
number who find their way to Britain. The solution is to
help Third World economies to become more vibrant rather
than to steal their most energetic and entrepreneurial
people.

And the irony is that this wave of
immigration pressure, which will forever change the face
of Britain, will itself come to an end. As the Third
World becomes richer — as is happening in India and
China — the incentive to move here will erode. Puerto
Ricans used to move to America, until a slight rise in
wealth in Puerto Rico stemmed the flow. But by the time
that the Third World no longer wants to move to Britain,
Britain will be a foreign land.

[Anthony
Browne
is the Environment Editor of the London
Times. Contribute to
the debate via

comment@thetimes.co.uk
]

August 13, 2002