, , , , , , , ,


Of all the possible remedies suggested to resolve the Muslim infestation of Britain (and Europe), by far the most sensible has been spoken of the least.

I am talking here about segregation, by which I mean the creation – within European countries – of Islamic and Western enclaves which prohibit non-Islamic and Muslim residence respectively.

Given that Muslim immigrants tend to concentrate in a few contiguous neighbourhoods, and rarely disperse over larger regions, such a project is actually very realisable in practical terms, even if it may be – for now – politically inconceivable. 

I have briefly touched upon this before with reference to London but the principle is strong enough to broaden out. Every country in Western Europe has been ‘enriched’ by Muslim immigration over the last twenty years, and continental problems require large principles, applicable in different settings.

The problematic issues created by Muslim residence in Europe are, in my view, primarily social ones. Even without the over-promoted issue of ‘terror’ – Muslims have proven themselves pestilential to civilised society.

Islamic migrants are well-known to harass, stalk, abuse, bully and sexually intimidate non-Muslims by force of their own nature – and even when they do try to integrate (in the fields of music, sport, comedy etc..), they fall so embarrassingly short of the national average that we are forced to bend down to meet them (recall the pathetic sitcom ‘Citizen Khan’ for evidence of this).

Surely therefore a great many problems could be solved by the creation of a political movement to segregate Western citizens from their Islamic compatriots.

“But wait!”  I know, I know…. There are areas of Britain which are already free of Muslim immigration (or free of a significant amount of it anyway). Places like Wales, Cumbria, Scotland, Cornwall, Devon, Somerset, County Durham and the like.

But  – with the greatest respect to the locals- these areas are usually economic graveyards or else backward rural expanses expendable to the modern capitalist state.

In truth, modern Britain is ruled from a few select urban bases. The most obvious of these is London. Others include Birmingham, Oxford and Manchester. All of these areas are heavily Islamised, and it is this situation which underlies Muslim power and influence. Muslims are concentrated alongside the nation’s money, talent and industry. Everyone of importance must pass through an Islamic area or store on their way to work. They cannot help but get to know and sympathise with at least some Muslims and this in turn moderates their broader outlook, like a single drop of ink gradually spreads into fabric.

What we need then, ideally, is a modern, multi-racial city from which Muslims are barred, and in which political correctness does not apply. From such a starting measure a positive-feedback process would be set in motion. As Islamic enclaves collapse and non-Islamic areas thrive, the multicultural argument itself will die.

I reside currently in London, and there is even here, the rough outline of a (potential) contiguous, exclusively Western state within the city boundaries. The connected boroughs of Kingston-Upon Thames, Richmond-Upon Thames, Wandsworth, and Kensington and Chelsea all have Muslim populations below 5%. Very few people would have to move to create the kind of unitary authority I describe.

If this kind of thinking seems radical now, it will not always be so. Ten years from now, East London will be a Muslim ocean with a tiny, financial island-district in the centre. Birmingham will resemble Pakistan, and Bradford may be in a state of civil conflict.

I know that many Anglo-Saxon nationalists view the idea of segregation as a surrender; more specifically as a surrender of land to hostile aliens. But these people must accept the reality of international law and how it would violently prohibit any attempt at mass-expulsion from England in the same way as it did from Kosovo. America is committed as a matter of principle to destroying anything resembling ‘fascism’ in the modern world, and though we might have our sympathisers in the US, the media there is – by defaut -puritanically liberal and would not ultimately object to American mobilisation against EU targets on behalf of Muslim minorities. Consequently, we must work realistically around the obstacles in our midst and find a solution which avoids civil conflict and the resulting foreign intervention.

The debate about whether Britain wants a Muslim population is dead. At least we know this much. Those still fighting on these fronts are like the apocryphal Japanese soldiers who kept armed watch on far-flung islands years after the government which sent them there had surrendered.

We must step over dead debates now and proceed towards a solution. If we as a country found the right way of dealing with this issue, there would the opposite of an outcry. There would be a roar of acclaim from our neighbouring states, all of whom face the same challenges. The first European country to deal intelligently with its Muslim problem will be the envy of the continent.