The LPUK replies to our post about Gramscian alteration of cultures


Ian Parker-Joseph (Leader, The Libertarian Party of the UK)

(The following is a published comment on our original posting, reprinted as a formal post here, by kind permission of IP-J.)

I do not feel that you have gone far enough in your analysis, and whilst the view of history can be described in the manner your have described, you have not yet brought this up to date.

There is a much more insidious movement that underlies what we see going on around us. It is Communitarianism. It too is Fabian based, and is also determined to break down our historic and societal structures, so that it may build, right across the newly forming geo-political groupings society created and managed from the centre, and ultimately managed on a global basis.

Communitarianism is now present in the policy structure in all 3 major poltical parties in the UK, presented benignly as ‘progressive’ politics, they will dictate what communities should look like, how they should behave and what the demographics will be.

Progressive destruction always preceeds ‘progressive’ rebuilding, and all the parties have been responsible over the past 30-40 years for this happening here in the UK. Miners, fishermen, Steel, Farming are only some of the industries that have been forfieted in the name of Communitarianism.

The overall plan, to firstly destroy communities then to rebuild, not in the name of freedom for the people, under the rule of law, but in the name of controlled populations ruled BY laws, totally. Totalitarianism by any other name.

How does this happen without people knowing? Slowly, slice by slice.

Arnold Toynbee observed the lessons of history, in essence, when he said, “…all great Nations commit suicide”. We simply have to speed things along.

Here’s the plan:

1. Firstly, we must promote “Multiculturalism”. To support this, we will make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal, and that cultural differences are not important.
For instance, if any point out that drop-out rates are high for young Blacks, we respond by saying that this is entirely due to the prejudice and discrimination of the indigenous population. We refuse to countenance any other explanations.

2. The religious beliefs of immigrants must be accepted, not only as equal to, but superior to, those traditionally held in Britain. This must be done most carefully, so that liberal elements in the various churches can assist in their own downfall.

3. Encourage immigrants to settle together so that they have no need to take on the culture of the majority. Again, the key to this will be the constant promotion of ‘Diversity’ rather than ‘Unity’. When all that is left to hold us together is tolerance and pluralism we will have destroyed what is meant by being British!

4. We will encourage all immigrants to keep their own language and culture.
It will be important to ensure that we have various cultural sub-groups living in close proximity. Thereby reinforcing their differences.

5. But this isn’t all. We must make our fastest growing demographic groups the least educated. This will add a second underclass; a class unassimilated, undereducated, and antagonistic to the indigenous majority. If we can make this underclass have a 50% drop out rate from school, so much the better.

6. We will of course have to get big business and liberal foundations to give our efforts to create diversity lots of money. We will invest in ethnic identities, and establish the cult of victimology. We will persuade the minorities that their lack of success is the fault of the majority.
This will enable the development of a ‘grievance industry’, which will blame all minority failures on the indigenous population. This will keep the majority intimidated. Because they won’t want to be labelled xenophobic or racist, they will rapidly become afraid to, even question, what is happening.

7. We will constantly find reason to celebrate Diversity. ‘Diversity’ is a wonderfully seductive word, don’t you think? It stresses differences rather than commonalities. Never forget that diverse peoples, artificially thrown together, worldwide, generally end up hating each other. That is when they are not killing each other. So preach ‘Diversity’ at every opportunity!
Remember, it is against historical precedent to have a diverse, peaceful, and stable society. Remember also that in general terms, people undervalue the unity that’s needed to keep a nation together. We will take advantage of this natural Myopia.
If we are successful, and we will be, (just so long as can keep the plan hidden from the majority for long enough) we will be able to Balkanise Britain as easily as Yugoslavia.
(And now for the really good bits)

8. We will place all these subjects ‘off limits’- taboo to talk about. In the Middle Ages the threat of being called a ‘Heretic’ stopped discussion and paralysed thought. For our purposes, words such as ‘Racist’, ‘Bigot’, and ‘Xenophobe’ will serve to halt argument and conversation opposed to our plan!

9. Having established ‘Multiculturalism’, (and ‘Multilingualism’) alongside the doctrine of ‘Victimology’ we will next make it impossible to enforce our immigration laws. We will repeatedly say that as immigration has been good for Britain in the past, it must always be good. We will endeavour to ensure every immigrant (especially those with strong religious beliefs, i.e., Muslims), whilst occupying the same or overlapping geographic areas as the indigenous people, do so with minimal interbreeding. We will of course ignore the cumulative impact!

10. And finally, we will no doubt have to create one or two new political parties to facilitate this. They will serve political blind alley’s to siphon off any who question what is happening. We will help the leaders, we select, keep control, by ridiculing their organisations, whilst labelling their supporters as right wing and out of touch.
A similar approach will be adopted towards any genuinely ‘Nationalist’ organisation that showed signs of growth, for such an occurrence would be a direct danger to ‘The Plan’. So, if such a group appears, on top of labelling them racist and xenophobic, we will also launch a massive negative-publicity campaign against them. We will use the police and intelligence agencies to harass their activists, attempt to bankrupt them and, amend voting procedures to deny such a group access to political power. (Scottish voting debacle ring any bells)

Did you recognise the 10 points of the plan to destroy Britain? You should do, as this ‘Plan’ was put into operation decades ago, and the final section of the ‘Plan’ is now being actively used – against Parties such as the BNP, UKIP and occasionally many of the other hundreds of registered political parties, unions, blogs,and many individuals.

It is no small co-incidence that all the major parties now follow the same centrist policies. The One Party State, as David describes from history above is the fate that awaits us under the ‘progressive’ politics of the Conservatives, Labour, Libdems and the EU.

About these ads

2 responses to “The LPUK replies to our post about Gramscian alteration of cultures

  1. For someone to do something there must be a motive, a reason.
    Who is trashing Britain and why?
    I do not doubt that something very strange and illogical is going on and have been aware of this for several decades. I also believe that if something does not make sense it simply means one has not, as yet, got all the facts.
    If one can identify specifics regarding any issue one can sort it out, fix it, whatever. In this case to stop the destruction and remove the barriers “they” have engineered against freedom, constructive action and growth.
    If one can identify and then simply present facts, basically reveal “their” agenda, and if it is a dishonest agenda, it is thwarted . (Presentation of truth effortlessly dispells lies!)
    If one accurately and fully identifies the nature of the beast it is not hard to deal with it if one presents those facts. Okay, that takes a bit of effort.

  2. Pingback: if a Libertarian government had a “defence sec”, at least he’d look like one « The Libertarian Alliance: BLOG