An Open Letter To John Rees-Evans

Dear John

I am taking the time to write this because I think you may in fact be a good candidate to be the next UKIP leader in general.  What I feel however is that there may be a huge blind spot in your thinking which troubles me greatly.  To be fair to you its the same blind spot that most prospective politicians in the UK seem to also suffer from.  We never find out what politicians really think about it because its practically a taboo subject in UK politics currently.

WHAT BLIND SPOT?

The blind spot is Islam.  I conclude this from your comment:

“UKIP is the only party that doesn’t care what religion you are…”

in this video:

By the way there is nothing racist about objecting to a person’s religion as you seem to be implying by your remarks here.  I also think it is extremely unwise to allow people into our country whose stated beliefs are that they should strike terror into our hearts by smiting our necks and cutting all our fingertips off (Quran 8:12).  Even, or perhaps especially, if they are qualified doctors.

You may not feel you have time to listen to my arguments about Islam but that is part of the problem here – our politicians never do.  They are too busy talking about Brexit (rightly), immigration (rightly), “modern slavery”, transgender rights, the national debt (occasionally) and then whatever trivialities the mainstream media are fussing about today (donkeys?!?).  Islam is a grave threat to our way of life.  Islam incites its followers to commit acts of violence including terrorist attacks, murder, rape against us non-Muslims.  I explained in more detail how it does this here:

Incitement and Religion

Islam also threatens our way of life because it is not just a religion but also a supremacist political ideology – a blueprint for brutal totalitarian rule following the “beautiful example” of Mohammed.  If Muslims ever become the majority of UK citizens our democracy and freedom of speech will be doomed.  Even a large Muslim minority could spell the end of a truly free society – in fact measures proposed by the Conservative govt. have threatened this already, supposedly as a response to the threat of “extremism”.  There are already areas of the UK that are in practical terms no longer part of the UK, having their own courts and even police.  We can fully expect this trend to continue under the feeble current political establishment’s policies.

EQUALITY BEFORE THE LAW

Equality before the law has been eroded by a number of trends in recent decades, a subject I wrote about here:

The Principle of the Thing – Equality Before The Law

Do you intend to address incitement law?  Currently we have the problem that followers of religions (particularly Islam) are free to incite violence/murder/rape against the rest of us.  If the law was applied logically and consistently then mainstream Islamic preachers would be arrested for suggesting that the Koran is the unquestionable word of the only god.  The Koran incites violence, murder, terror, rape as I explained in the post linked to above.  We can never have equality before the law as long as there is one law for the religious and another for everyone else.

HOW CAN WE ADDRESS THE PROBLEM CALLED ISLAM?

CLOSE SHARIA COURTS?

You apparently have promised to close Sharia courts but you will be unable to do this except in a few isolated instances when complaints are made to the police by those affected.  Sharia courts can take place anywhere, behind closed doors.  They also often take place in areas that are practically no-go zones for the police.  Therefore any efforts you make in this direction will be futile and never amount to more than a token gesture.  You will not be able to close most of them down and it is very unwise of you to promise to do this – you are raising expectations that you cannot deliver.

BAN MINARETS AND THE CALL TO PRAYER?

This is certainly worth considering and would have some effect.  As someone reminded me today, the process of direct democracy could enable the people to bring forward a measure such as this.  By this route we could minimize the diplomatic difficulties that would be involved if our government proposed this directly.  A ban on minarets was actually implemented in Switzerland by this route.  I fully support direct democracy but we must also address voting fraud before we launch direct democracy.

CLOSE MOSQUES?

Closing mosques would have an effect on reducing Islamic influence in general because they are very visible symbols of the religion.  They embolden the preachers who encourage their followers to think Islam is going to replace our way of life.  They cause non-Muslims to leave the areas where they appear because non-Muslims feel alienated by them and there are often “parking problems” (something Gavin Boby has referred to as parking jihad – cars blocking private entrances and so forth).

Of course closing mosques would be quite an inflammatory thing to do, although certainly not nearly as inflammatory as a lot of things that go on in Muslim majority countries.  Somehow I doubt that you will want to contemplate this course of action – perhaps direct democracy could also deliver this.

Another softer approach would be to covertly encourage councils to block all future planning applications for new mosques and mosque extensions, this would be better than blithely approving the applications as seems to be the current policy.  Unfortunately due to the rate of change such measures would only likely slow the growth of Islamic influence a little.  That is not good enough, we need to reverse this trend.

https://mosqueblock.wordpress.com/2016/11/18/great-lever-mega-mosque-approved-again/

WELFARE REFORM

This is in fact the most significant area where something can easily be done right away.  I am very pleased to see UKIP wants to limit child benefit to 2 children, although I would go further all the way down to zero.  I just don’t think we should be paying people to have children that they cannot support (or cannot be bothered to support in many cases).  This policy will likely meet great resistance from the left, especially when it is implemented and the inevitable sob stories start to be published.  You need to be prepared for that, reintroducing responsibility into society is going to meet a lot of resistance I believe.

THE DEATH PENALTY FOR MOHAMMED?

Apparently you have called for the death penalty for those paedophiles who target pre-pubescent children, a suggestion which many Muslims may find offensive, as I explained here:

Mohammed and Aisha – Why It Matters

UKIP AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH

A return to a sensible degree of freedom of speech is one essential thing we must have.  I am glad to hear this seems to be high on your agenda.  Then we can talk more openly of such subjects as that awkward one I just referred to, which is never mentioned at the BBC.

PRIVATIZE THE BBC

We need to do this urgently.  The BBC is brainwashing the UK population into believing that Islam is nice when its really not, among other things.  Perhaps privatizing the BBC is another policy that can be achieved through your proposed direct democracy.

THE UKIP AND ISLAM PROBLEM

A news article seems to illustrate this problem rather starkly – a UKIP candidate is banned for making this sensible suggestion:

“Ban Islam and knock down all mosques”

http://www.oldham-chronicle.co.uk/news-features/8/news-headlines/85859/-ban-islam-candidate-kicked-out-of-ukip

Candidates should not be banned from your party for making sensible suggestions like that.  The recent leadership campaign does seem to be finally raising the question of what the contenders are referring to as “radical” Islam, a religion that is known to those of us in the know more simply as just plain ordinary Islam.

A BILL OF RIGHTS?

Another more radical way we might address these problems is by adopting an equivalent to the US constitution.  We would also have to recognize that with greater freedom comes greater danger – if we allow Islamic preachers to continue to incite violence against us then we must be able to protect ourselves, with an equivalent to the Second Amendment.  This would be a momentous change in our society that would need to be thought about long and hard.  It may become necessary in any case however due to Theresa May’s immigration policy (let them all in while pretending to be tough on immigration).

A SHORT STORY ABOUT A DONKEY AND A HORSE (OR WAS IT A BBC PRESENTER?)

Serious people do not care if you make a joke about a donkey raping a horse.  Serious people do care about the ever growing influence of Islam in the West.  Don’t worry about what BBC presenters think of you, the public at large is increasingly skeptical about everything the BBC represents, as I think was demonstrated by the Brexit vote.

SUMMARY

Please, get educated about Islam.  I’m not asking you to become the UK’s answer to Geert Wilders necessarily (its very, very dangerous to do what he is doing of course).  However we do need to care about what religions people follow, we really do.   The links to my posts above should be enough to convince you about that.

Perhaps politicians should stay out of the debate about Islam, but what they certainly should NOT do is to try to suppress that debate, as Theresa May has been doing.  Perhaps the best way forward is for greater freedom of speech and direct democracy, to allow incitement in fact.  In that case we also need to consider allowing people to defend themselves properly, as I suggested above, in case those incited decide to act.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “An Open Letter To John Rees-Evans

  1. I just want to ask, if we are to encourage our own native birth rates then how would the welfare reform on child benefit that you suggest here (to zero) be a way to do that?

    Currently, more and more women are waiting until later in life to have children and then finding they are having difficulties getting pregnant or left it too late altogether and missed their peak fertility. No secondary schools educate girls to be aware of and think about their fertility/family matters; they are only encouraged to think about career, which is coming at the expense of a family.

    Those couples that do want to get married and settle down are finding they can’t even get on the first rung of the property ladder. When the cost of living is so high, how would totally eliminating child benefit be of any help when our own native birth rates have reduced to where we can’t replace our population (an average of 1.79 children)?

    I completely understand where you are coming from. Pakistani immigrants have an average 3.82 children; Afghan immigrants have 4.25; Britain has more 4-baby families than the rest of Europe because of immigrant families.

    But if the ethnically-British are to remain the dominant ethnicity in Britain, isn’t supporting child benefit for 2 children one of the ways we can do this and one of the ways to avoid the ramifications of high Muslim immigration/Islam and our population/ethnic-replacement?

    Would completely eliminating child benefit be a deciding factor for potentially good parents with a higher-than-average IQ in procreating? Russia has seen an increase in birth rate amongst their own people, avoiding the need for high immigration, because their policies support the family and mothers. Shouldn’t the British nuclear family have our support and encouragement?

    Or have I completely misunderstood your post and you mean zero child benefit just for Muslim immigrant families, especially when they have more than one wife?

    (Please take this as a genuine question/curiosity in the interest of my own learning rather than a confrontation, as is too often seen on the internet!)
    _____
    P.S. I saw this posted as a quote on YouTube and thought I’d post it here. “European civilization was built for many generations on the institution of the family, which was considered the cornerstone of society. Because of it, Europe had a healthy, expanding population. But after WW2, the emphasis have moved from personal duty and responsibility to personal rights and entitlements. People no longer wanted to fulfill their traditional roles in society. “Me”-culture was introduced in the 60’s. First sex was divorced from child birth. Then feminism destroyed motherhood, and especially fatherhood through sky-rocketing divorce. The result: a bunch of people who care more about their own desires and needs, than society: People just don’t have children anymore, and those who do, have too few to replace the population. The market has shifted to adapt to the new social norms: incomes/expenditure ratio’s no longer makes it possible for Mom to stay at home and raise the kids. A shrinking population leads to a dying economy. If the local population will not reproduce, then they will be replaced with a culture that does. Nihilism, not immigration, is the reason for Europe’s collapse. It didn’t start in 2015, it started in 1945, or maybe even 1918.”

    Like

    • Great comment, thanks for the feedback.

      I should probably have been clearer that I am mainly thinking about the unemployed here. I don’t think the unemployed should be encouraged to have any children at all, they should be encouraged to find work. I would certainly not suggest that Muslims should be particularly targeted. For one thing it would be an expensive bureaucratic nightmare trying to keep track of who IS a Muslim and who is not, it would be fraught with difficulty and a divisive policy.

      I believe a significant part of the reason why we are seeing our nations increasingly divided is because of the welfare system. If people were forced to find work they would be far more likely to be exposed to other views and would have less time to spend reading their religious texts and socializing in their narrow religious communities. They would also be aware that participating in hostile demonstrations might negatively affect their livelihood, and therefore would be less likely to engage in confrontations like these.

      The question of whether governments can/should make policies to encourage people who ARE working to have more children is not something I have thought very deeply about, but I think its worth considering. It would need a lot of thought and would again require quite a lot of bureaucracy. Would you give these benefits if one parent was working and the other not for example? Its never as straightforward as it sounds on paper. On the whole I am inclined to think that it is governments that are responsible for a lot of the current problems and that we need a more libertarian approach to government altogether.

      The mass illegal immigration must be halted and reversed. Richard Lynn’s research on IQs in different countries strongly indicates that the average intelligence in the countries most of the migrants are coming from are a lot lower than white European average intelligence. Add to that the problem of a divisive culture and you have a real recipe for problems in the future (well we are seeing the problems already aren’t we).

      That is a good quote and I strongly agree that we have to change attitudes as well – welfare reform alone will not be enough. Currently some of the worst prevailing beliefs seem to be:

      1. White Europeans are disposable, they can be replaced.

      2. Humans are bad for the environment, having children is bad.

      3. Immigration solves all the problems of low birth rates so we don’t need to worry.

      4. All people are exactly equal, if unemployed people on council estates are having most of the children this is just as good as the educated and intelligent people having children.

      5. It doesn’t matter if white Europeans become minorities in their own countries. What could possibly go wrong?

      6. We must have high immigration because we need people to look after our aging populations.

      7. Careers are more important than children.

      All these attitudes are catastrophic of course and need to be completely debunked. We need to drain our swamps – politics, media, academia by sacking the people employed by the state who are responsible for promoting these negative values. Too many young people are being not so much educated in higher education as indoctrinated with this toxic anti-European ideology. We do urgently need some research to be done – particularly into the birth rates in different STRATAs of society.

      I also wrote on the subject of Dysgenics specifically in 3 earlier posts:

      Birth control:

      https://chaunceytinker.wordpress.com/2016/02/23/dysgenics-and-birth-control/

      Welfare:

      https://chaunceytinker.wordpress.com/2016/03/04/dysgenics-and-welfare/

      Solutions:

      https://chaunceytinker.wordpress.com/2016/03/04/dysgenics-and-solutions/

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s