They Must Be Barking...

During the past week, thanks perhaps to the BBC's controversial new 'WHITE' series, I've felt increasingly saddened by what white, working-class Britain has become. In my younger days of political learning, when all was not certain and everything was new, I had initially understood the working classes to be the most moral and important of all voting peoples. Get them on your side, and your sure to be in office in no time; but my views on what they currently are have changed somewhat since.

Last nights episode of 'WHITE' focused on the borough of Barking in East London, where in the 2006 elections 12 BNP councillors were elected to represent a large part of the boroughs white working class, making it the second largest party there. The story focused on the views of the working classes, and of the social struggle many consider themselves to be in. Many new residents of the borough were of African and Eastern-European origin, and had (according to long-term residents) not properly integrated.

The documentary focused also on an elderly man named Monty, who originated from Poland and had set-up a shop in the borough. He had met a younger Ugandan lady in Barking, with whom he had become friends, and the two were now living together; her acting as his carer. Monty, it was later revealed, had spent 5 years in Auschwitz, were he had been left to suffer in horrific conditions before the liberation of the camps in 1945. It was apparent that the memories of those days haunted him still, in the days when segregation had resulted in the massacre of 6 million Jews.

The story then turned to the campaigning of BNP supporters in a Barking street, where leaflets and newspapers were being handed out to white, and in one case mixed race, passers by. It struck me as sad, that the core of Labour's past working-class supporters, were now turning to a party which actively promotes community segregation, and associates with holocaust deniers. I fail to understand how the election of a racist party can improve community cohesion, and I don't really think those voters do either.

The reason, I believe, the BNP have had so much success in areas such as this in recent years is because voters feel their opinions no longer matter to the party they voted in Government. The aftermath of recently increased immigration levels, and the vast cultural changes inspired by the speeches of Roy Jenkins 30 years ago, have resulted in an 'ignored child' reaction from the working-classes. A reaction, which if ignored for even longer, could get increasingly worse. The National Socialist Party of Germany focused on the concerns of the working-classes when rising to power, largely inspired by the ethos of Communist strategies; and members of the British National Party know this all to well.

I do not see the white working class people of Barking as the sort to be agreeing with ethnic-cleansing, far from it, but rather as a misguided, misrepresented generation, who often feel alone and ignored in a Britain which they are not familiar with. Similar voting patterns can be seen in areas of Northern-England, such as Oldham and Burnley, were community segregation has led to the BNP gaining seats there; even though most ethnic communities are third and fourth generation immigrants, and are by all accounts British citizens.

The truth is that Britain is successfully multi-racial, but unsuccessfully multi-cultural, and parties like the BNP have tried to blur the two together, basically saying that race and culture go hand-in-hand. That is a lie. The notion that Britain should be a vast hub of different cultures is preposterous, it can only lead to tension, but the notion that it should be a hub of different races is not so far-fetched. Just look at Britain in the days of the Empire, when India, West Africa, and the Caribbean were all considered British, as were their peoples. It is not plausible to say that Britain should ever be, or should ever have been 'all-white'. And culturally, just go to Kenya and ask for a cup of tea, or observe the way people say 'Chop-Chop' to hurry workers into action, the cultural effects Britain has had there still today is huge.

The solving of the mistake of multi-culturalism is one of the most valuable things we could do for the country. It could prevent terrorism, and the recruiting of radical Islamic groups, and could also prevent parties like the BNP gaining seats in councils. Greater integration and cohesion could result from having a culturally common ground, and racism could be routed out all together from all communities. The sense of community we used to have in Britain could once again be implemented if we were not so separated by different cultures.

The extent of segregation can even be observed today as news of an Anglican Priest who was attacked in a 'faith-hate' incident in Tower Hamlets on Wednesday is being reported by the BBC. It has been reported that Canon Michael Ainsworth, 57, was assaulted by two Asian youths at his church, while another looked on and jeered. An attack which I suspect was probably provoked by the desire to culturally/religiously-clense the area in question. A commonality of many communities feeling as though they must defend their insular, culturally concentrated areas from outside influence. Tower Hamlets is known to have a high population of Asian Muslims and Indians, but many white communities are also doing exactly the same. Hostilities on the grounds of race and faith have increased hugely in the past few years, coming from all sides of the fence.

Overall, the BBC's 'WHITE' series is provoking debate where before there was none. I hate to sound reactionary, or indeed say that I am so impressionable as to blog on the concerns highlighted in a BBC documentary, but the truth is most people do it all the time. Newspapers, News channels, and even fellow bloggers are affected by the products of the BBC every day; whether it's the 10 o'clock News, Eastenders or Blue Peter, all seek to provoke reactionary debate. Al-Jazeera claim to be 'setting the agenda' but I have to disagree, after all the BBC are far more well-funded.

Only time will tell what Britain will become in the next few decades, and the decisions we make now are key to the well-being of our children. We can look, with optimism, for change in the way seperate communities react to eachother, but I sincerely hope most of all that white working class Britain will not fall victim to those who might want to put people like Monty back in Auschwitz. Vote BNP? They must be barking...

(Picture 1: A butcher's window in Barking.)
(Picture 2: Holocaust survivor Monty, still young at heart.)
(Picture 3: BNP campaigners on a Barking street.)

Attention Class...

With a report released this week which suggests that more and more parents are prepared to lie about their religion to get their children into top faith-schools, and the recent comments of award-winning playwright Alan Bennett against the existence of private schools, it would seem that the crusade against the class system has moved into its next phase of attack: Education. The left has, for decades, been attempting to erase our centuries old British aristocracy and middle-classes from society, and by using self-righteous reasoning almost reminiscent of that of Cromwell's they continue to succeed. The implementation of Labour's recent inheritance-tax, which can now take up to 40% of the inheritance should the figure be more than £250,000, is obviously targeted at the sons and daughters of the once social elite. Removing the possibility of continuing a family dynasty on the basis of all important 'Equal Opportunities'. The reformation of the House of Lords, which now means it will consist of 'elected-only' members has eradicated the centuries old tradition of handing down of peerages from father to son, effectively breaching a gap for even more left wing, obsessionist nobodies to fill the house. This Labour move in particular is one of several steps which I predict will occur in future years. The House of Lords (now being all elected) will firstly fill up with more people fuelled by a desire to further dismantle any remnants of the class system. The House will next be deemed by the Government to be just another House of Commons (as it is also now filled with elected members, rather than its rightful Lords), and finally a vote will be held on whether or not the House is significant enough to stay. The House (now being filled with people bent on its removal anyway) will win a vote to deem its existence unnecessary, leaving the House of Commons to be the sole decision maker, and the country, in my view, more susceptible to Dictatorship.

The removal of the class system, the aristocracy and eventually the Monarchy is a pattern which again and again can be seen in the history of many nations, most notably in those of the rest of Europe. Propagators of such acts consider what they do at the time to be righteous, and think they are ensuring the bettering of their people by doing so. As Orwell might once have privately interpreted it, a few poor people get fed up with a few rich people and decide to alleviate them from their wealth and power in the name of goodness; the poor people get a movement going (as they are a majority) and eventually do so, distributing it amongst themselves. I suppose the notion that this is in essence theft, and often cold-blooded murder, does not even enter their minds at the point of action, and seemingly it might not enter anyone's head for a good hundred years or so. The French revolution, the Russian revolution, the Chinese Revolution, all victories by the left in overthrowing centuries, sometimes millennia, old social hierarchies in favour of more 'equal' ones. Anti-establishment in Britain is by no means a new occurence, and without a doubt the acting against the ruling classes is part of our national history, whether you consider it to be treasonous or not. The difference is, that with the death of the British Empire with Winston Churchill in 1965, and the subsequent emergence of liberalism filling its void, the left has more power now over the ruling classes than it ought to. This does have some benefits however. For example the implementation of the Hunting Act 2004 has outright banned fox hunting with hounds, a sport which was, and still is today, popular amongst middle and upper class families. As a lover and great believer in the natural preservation of the countryside and wildlife of Britain, I thoroughly deplore the barbaric blood-sport; and see it as nothing more than socially accepted murder. The method by which foxes, badgers and anything else which finds itself at the mercy of such hunts are systematically ripped apart alive could never bring me any ounce of pleasure or gratification should I be responsible for its occurance. The notion that the social elite and intelligencia could be so bored as to participate in such hunts still baffles me to this day, and it disappoints me when ever I see admirable figures like Boris Johnson or Prince William advocating hunts, trail led or not. I welcomed the Labour enforced bill with open arms, after all I concluded that to be consistent as a society we might as well turn a blind eye to cock fighting, dog fighting and bear baiting as well if it brought people pleasure. The events which followed the act surprised me, it is said that because of the bill, more people than ever are now participating in illegal hunts across the country in defiance of the Government. A seemingly huge movement which defends the historic traditions and mentalities of their forefathers with action. I do not support the continuation of illegal hunts across the country but rather admire the people for taking such a strong stance against forced liberal restrictions. If only such movements would rally in response of real travesties like the reformation of the House of Lords, we might be less at threat from the left-wing office.

Getting back to Education, and the fact that parents are willing to have their children baptised to get them into top performing faith-schools doesn't surprise me at all. Being brought up a traditionalist Anglican at my first and most influential primary school, and further encouraged on by my mothers efforts to take us to a Baptist school most Sundays, I had the option (when aged 11) to attend either a top ranking CofE school or a largely secular but more local state high school. Much to my current regret I chose the latter, but the fact that I had a choice in the matter at all was down to the fact that I attended church. My final decision also shows how free thinking I had been encouraged to be as a boy, and it was taken (as I now realise) with much regard of the ultimately temporary friend base in which I was surrounded by at the time. The prospect of having to make new friends and start all over again was daunting to a weary 11 year old who had endured one school and house move already, all I could ultimately conceive of then was the coping of the 'here and now'. My mother had not purposely sent me to church for all those years just for me to turn down the opportunity when it arose, but in fact most of my friends at Sunday-school were there just for that very reason, openly admitting why they had started attending church in the first place, their motives were well known. This however did not hinder their willingness to learn at church, nor sing hymns, nor represent the church at Easter or at local community events; and they were just as much respected because of this. Their active role in the church outweighed the fact that they may have been going for ulterior motives, after all they supported what the church stood for, and those that didn't, didn't attend. The moral up-bringing of those parents' children at the church every week ensured that they learned about the Bible, the principles of British tradition, and the acceptability of behaviours in modern society; and quite frankly it did a better job at teaching those things than most parents could have done independently.

There are several arguments, I believe, for a persons right to attend church for whatever reason they deem fit; whether it be community, respectability or tradition, if not spiritual gratification. The first is that British Christianity is by no means what it used to be. In many parts of the country congregations are dying, churches are being demolished, and Christian based community traditions are becoming more and more frowned upon by secular councils. The realising of the premise that a child may only be considered for application at a top school because of his/her attendance at a church is bound to fill empty pews in and around the immediate local vicinity. The influx of young families into these places of worship means that those people are more likely to be affected by the moral obligations which are expected of church attending folk, more often than not resulting in a 'good citizenship-ness' which will consequently affect the community for the better. The second reason is that the whole basis of Christianity is to bring those who may not know about the principles of Christ into a place of its teaching. Thus an influx of people who may not have initially regarded themselves as Christian will be learning how to do so just by being at church. Alcoholics, thieves, murderers, adulterers, persecutors and all other forms of sinner have often been accepted into the church since its very conception, and so how is it logical to accept those people, yet deny entry to those who merely want the best for their children. The third and final reason in this argument is that this country is a free one, to claim that private and faith schools are elitist and un-equal, and therefore must be banned (as the playwright Alan Bennett this week proposed) would be to say that because private healthcare is only available to the rich, it is elitist and un-equal and therefore should also be banned. Or that expensive dining tables should be banned because they are only available to those rich enough to afford them, and are therefore elitist and un-equal. The basis of ones skills, experience, wealth and social merits to excel in life is something which all of society relies on to function properly. To suggest that this is somehow wrong would seem to me to be an illogical attack on behalf of people without such skills, experience, wealth or social merits, people connotative of Labours socialist core supporters.

Academic institutes such as Eton College have for centuries taught the 'crème de la crème' of British society, providing a top quality service to people who can afford to send their children there. Less grand examples of private educationary bodies continue to out perform many Government managed state schools, earning proud, attractive reputations which parents are obviously drawn to. The failings of state schools which many members of the public have noted, don't seem to be acknowledged enough by Government ministers. I suppose that if they think it's relatively okay to leave state schools in their current...state, then they should be prepared to accept that some parents aren't going to want to send their children there, shelling out up to £20,000 a year for ultimately better alternatives. Instead of talking about improving state schools to cap competition, Government supporters have edged away from its failings and attacked those privately funded bodies simply for being better at teaching, as well as simultaneously scrutinising parents for sending children there. Amongst all the carefully designed, politically correct Government talk about the problems of a society which doesn't know or care where it's children are at night, which often results in murders such as that of Garry Newlove outside his home in 2007, it seems the real criminals in the eyes of Labour are parents who care too much about their children.

In all honesty, the Government lobby at the heart of British policies should ask themselves this: 'Is it better to live in a place where parents send their children to church in an attempt to get them the best life can offer, or to live in a morally deficient society where parents don't care about where there children are, what they are doing, or whom they are with?' The irresponsible prattle of a few absent-mindees, who are given a platform in the hope that they might further de-stabilise our rich society is what repels me about our current age. It is the result of an immoral, illogical, socialist movement, which has taken too much power at the expense of the once ruling classes...

(Picture: The historic Eton College, Windsor.)