Counter-Currents
Boris Johnson visits Hong Kong in 2013 while Mayor of London
939 words
Boris Johnson led his country into separating from Europe because of uncontrolled mass immigration from Africa and the Middle East only to offer 5 million passports to the Chinese. It is unclear how many eligible Hong Kong citizens will take advantage of Johnson’s offer. The propaganda media spread a number: 300,000 applications so far (January 29, 2021).
Also unclear is whether or not Johnson consulted the English on their support for Chinese mass migration into their kingdom.
London’s calculations have a racial undertone. Hong Kong Chinese will “bring in between £2.4bn and £2.9bn to the UK by 2025.“ Modern slave trade? Is there a gender and age itemization? Why did London reject the 3.5 million Syrian refugees still waiting in Turkish border camps? Maybe because they would probably take out £2.4bn and £2.9bn off the welfare system?
Are people of color less valuable than the Chinese? That would, of course, contradict the European values of former EU Parliament president Martin Schulz, who impeccably stated that “what the migrants bring to us is more valuable than gold.“
Are we witnessing the new trade of human livestock and the emergence of a migration industry? The beneficiary capitalist class, whom Mr. Johnson and Mr. Schulz serve, operates globally and profits from migration games. It’s like playing the stock markets, but with demographics. Shorting China, longing the West. Where will the hypothetical Chinese refugees live in England? London is already 50% non-English.
Maybe London’s Muslim mayor Sadiq Khan has pluralistic ideas. He has made the City more Islamic, but less Confucian. Or the Chinese could move to second-tier Birmingham and Manchester, places not yet as diverse and tolerant as they could be.
We hear from pundits that mass migration can lead to disaster. “Open Immigration Was a Disaster for Rome” (The Wall Street Journal). “Migrants sank the Roman Empire. Now they are sinking the U.S.” (Shreveport Times). But surely that cannot be science, because the West is actually thriving, thanks to its Diversity, Inclusion, Equality (DIE) master plan.
Meanwhile, Chinese authorities in Beijing are baffled by Mr. Johnson’s resolution. China is overpopulated and has 1,400,000,000 citizens. If a UK leader was foolish enough, Beijing would immediately relocate 60 million Chinese to Brighton on the cliff by the Sea.
However, authorities suspect Johnson’s quick money grab: The capitalist elites of the West want to repatriate colonial wealth back to London. Hong Kong had served the British Empire as the Asian hub for money laundering and human trafficking (both Western and Chinese). Mr. Johnson wants to evacuate everything, part and parcel, and ship it to the Crown. That must be it.
You can buy Greg Johnson’s White Identity Politics here.
Hong Kong was returned to China in 1997, but before the hand-over, Britain made sure it held a post-colonial sway in finance, education, politics, the courts, and the media. So, while Beijing informed its people that Hong Kong has returned, the West told the world that Hong Kong was now independent.
Naturally, when Beijing and Hong Kong act sovereign, Western propagandists report this as oppression and human rights violation. Western media even concocted a biblical Exodus narrative, in which Hong Kongers flee from repressive Beijing and into the holy land: Liverpool in the North on the Left.
Allies are not happy. French President Emmanuel Macron, a former Rothschild banker, warned Boris Johnson’s government: “Half-pregnant is not a concept. What politics does Great Britain wish to choose? It cannot be the best ally of the US, the best ally of the EU and the new Singapore . . . It has to choose a model,” the French president said in an interview with the Guardian.
That was a funny and clever French double entendre. After the British settled in Malaysia in the 19th century, they flooded Singapore with Chinese migrants. British colonialists weren’t exactly going for “half-pregnant“ with Asians either.
English politics look a bit like self-sabotage. It wants to be tolerant, so no racism, please. But surely the English must see themselves as morally superior if they assume foreigners will integrate. What if your former colonial serfs — Africans, Hindus, Muslims, Chinese — secretly hate you, and wait for a reckoning?
Multiculturalism dictates that Western governments diversify their population portfolio. Just a few Africans in sports and music, Italians for authentic Pizza, Pakistani selling Queen Elizabeth memorabilia, Jews in banking, Hindus in call centers, Polish in plumbing, and Chinese in academia is not enough.
The average wealth per head in Hong Kong is $61,000. In Britain, it is only $40,000, according to the World Bank. So, Mr. Johnson is aware that importing a few million Hong Kongers would compensate Britain for possible losses inflicted by the Northern Irish ($30k) or Scots ($36k), should they leave the Union.
In the long term, however, five million Chinese in England could advance the interests of the Chinese civilization, but not the English. Just imagine the unimaginable power of the CCP, the Colonial Cocktail Party, over future parliaments.
Let us hope that Mr. Johnson’s divisive population gamble misfires, because, really, Beijing wants to expand all its trade relations.
No need for Brits to render their homeland.
Thorsten J. Pattberg, Ph.D, is a German publicist and Asia expert.
If you want to support Counter-Currents, please send us a donation by going to our Entropy page and selecting “send paid chat.” Entropy allows you to donate any amount from $3 and up. All comments will be read and discussed in the next episode of Counter-Currents Radio, which airs every weekend on DLive.
Don’t forget to sign up for the twice-monthly email Counter-Currents Newsletter for exclusive content, offers, and news.
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
20 comments
Interesting and timely piece. The UK’s Guardian newspaper, second home to immigrationist boosters, ran a piece a few days ago practically pleading with eligible Hong Kongers to ship themselves (and their dependants) to the UK before it is too late!
These undoubtedly well-educated, law abiding and hardworking people would be a unalloyed boon to the benighted Isles, the article opined, bringing urgently needed skills and capital. They might require housing, access to schools and the national health service, but the Guardian didn’t want to go into details about that.
Hong Kong is renowned not only for its high-achieving population, but also for low wages and lack of social mobility. Doubtless entrepreneurs up and down Britain are gleefully awaiting the influx (breezily estimated, as in previous migration episodes, as ‘only a few tens of thousands’) so that they may discharge their aging, expensive and lazy native workforce in favour of the cleverer, more industrious and cheaper incomers.
But do course that is not the point of this manoeuvre: the decision has been taken on high moral grounds from a sense of post-imperial noblesse oblige. But as is ever the case in these matters, the interests of the indigenous(*) British, who stand to lose yet more middle class careers to the dole, are simply disregarded.
(*) in this context an offensive, borderline racist, term, according to the UK liberal media.
They are losing not only their career paths, now and forever, but their entire country and all it ever stood for in its thousands of years of history. And the people? Oh, well. This is truly due to the incessant war against ‘Nationalism’ within all Western countries. And is it racist? You decide.
This follow up Guardian op-ed scolds Britons not to perpetuate the colonialist stereotype of viewing the incoming East Asians as being placid and industrious.
The influx will reshape Britain in ways we cannot predict the author causally opines. But that’s alright, there has been no discussion at all of these upcoming upheavals: native Britons’ interests have been simply disregarded..
Rather the only worry for this Guardian journalist is that those same deeply racist(*) Britons will hold up the Hong Kongers as paradigms in order to shame other migrant communities. Quick let’s put more legislation in place make sure that cannot happen!
I harp on this publication because it typicifes the style of the debate in which serious issues of resource scarcity and population density are addressed in the elite media, to say nothing of the ethnic and cultural integrity of the historic nations of the British Isles.
(*) Racism in Western nations must invariably be described as deep so as reinforce that it can never be extirpated.
Johnson is desperate. Russia bad. EU bad. India bad. Turkey bad. France bad. China bad. Economist and Guardian are anti-British. BBC is emasculated. Parliament is so woke. Social justice, yes Sir! So let’s evacuate 3 million Hongkongers, see how everyone feels after global media’s facepalm. Where should the Hongkongers live, in Birmingham? Do they even know that living standards are low and crime is high in England? Eeeeempire!
If we let Hong Kong fall to the CCP we’re next.
Who is ”we” ?…..Hong Kong is not part of the UK. Its part of China always had and always will be. We in the west need to focus on our own issues. The fact the UK is willing to open up the gates to thousands of Asians 300.000+ is asking for CCP Chinese infiltration. People think everyone who is a Hong Konger is pro-west, pro-uk. No they are not and many have undercover pro-Grand China vieuws, they may not agree with the CCP regime but believe in the grand-sino idenitity of being Chinese and Asian.
This needs to be constantly repeated. Hong Kongers are Chinese and fiercely loyal to their ethnic group if they can do damage to the west they will. Chinese openly spit on the west and gloat about our self destruction Hong Kongers just like all the diaspora Chinese need to be sent back.
Hong Kong is already part of China. It’s full of Chinese people, it was leased by the Imperial Court in Peking for only 99 years to Great Britain (the lease expired and was not renewed) ergo it’s China. Where the Chinese are, there is China. The Chinese in Hong Kong may be unhappy with the regime in Peking but that is their problem, not Great Britain’s or by extension, the U.S.’s problem.
Allowing all these wogs into the West will collapse Western nations but perhaps that is the long term plan. Relying upon the proven greed, short sightedness and traitorous instincts of Western elites has been proven successful for many years now. It is past time for the loathsome ruling classes in Western nations to be the ones who decamp for more diverse pastures rather than bring these diverse populations from thousands of miles away to replace Western peoples.
If you were a Honker, with China about to take over the hegemonic spot from the US, why would you leave now? Why go to the UK if you can cash in with a booming mainland?
There’s no money to be made in London like there will be in China.
This story — its subject — is so depressing I am ready to weep. It is bad enough to see Moslems flitting around Sheffield, where I stay with friends when visiting. It is just so overwhelming to learn that after getting out — finally! — of the horrid E. U. mainly because of uncontrolled immigration, and now hearing of the government wanting to give ‘placements’ to thousands of Chinese, is just so disheartening. Lovely, green England, with sheep grazing hillsides, rose-trellised cottages, and charming villages — the epitome of civilized living and beauty —
it’s heartbreaking. I have no ideas anymore of how to save the West and the Whites, when our governments ruin our intentions at every twist and turn. Mexicans now poised to overrun southern California yet again and Chinese overrunning England — God or Goddess help us!
I will not cease from Mental Fight,
Nor shall my Sword sleep in my hand,
Till we have built Jerusalem
In England’s green and pleasant Land.
Boris Johnson led his country into separating from Europe because of uncontrolled mass immigration from Africa and the Middle East
Absolutely wrong.
Yes, the Britbongs believed it was a referendum on mass immigration, but that was never on the table. Farage himself is pro mass migration, he just wants Pakistanis and Nigerians instead of the disgusting Polaks.
Because his sponsors don’t like Catholics.
‘Britbong’ is not an appropriate word to use in a white-positive forum.
The real reality there is no mass migration from the so called ”Middle East and Africa”. The mass migration patterns come from Asia, places like India, Pakistan, China, Afghanistan when speaking of migration outside of Europe. The British Asian population is growing by the decade something many people don’t talk about because there focus is always on this Middle East and African window seat. The amount of Chinese and Indians in the UK has increased tremendously. And best believe the Indians and Chinese didn’t forgot what the British did to them.
The British elite are just using ”Hong Kong” to keep an eye on China from a ”save space”. The British elite like most western elites are full of weebos who love Asian women, culture, food and chance to make millions to billions in the new age of Asia in the 21st century. The aspect of Weebonism among white males is very very out of hand and something I feel many people avoid to speak about because within the nationalist movements have themselves a deep fetish for Asian women and weak for their cultures.
Also whether people like it or not. Immigration from the Common wealth countries will always take place. The UK will always have relations with its former colonies whether its India, Nigeria, Pakistan, Malaysia, Hong Kong, Jamaica, Kenya, Singapore etc. In the past and even in the future. There is a lot of anti-East European sentiments towards the Poles, Romanians, Hungarians, Bulgarians etc due in part to cheap labour, crime, making use of the social welfare system etc.
Also whether people like it or not. Immigration from the Common wealth countries will always take place.
Nonsense. Mass immigration could be stopped cold if only the government was on our side. If I trade with an Indian exporter, I’m not obliged to give him and his family room and board.
I’d like to quote my favorite philosopher, Enoch Powell:
“We must be mad, literally mad, as a nation to be permitting the annual inflow of some 50,000 dependents, who are for the most part the material of the future growth of the immigrant-descended population. It is like watching a nation busily engaged in heaping up its own funeral pyre.”
And that was in the 70s! And it was only about 50,000 or so migrants. 50 years later, and multicultural Britain decided between a Muslim prayer and a Black Lives Matter kneel to offer passports to 5 million Hong Kong Chinese. Because we are not Confucian enough, I guess.
And that is probably just the beginnings, folks. This country is irredeemably lost.
At no point during the referendum campaign or since did anyone suggest that third world migration was a reason for Britain to leave the EU. One cannot account for what members of the public may have chosen to believe.
There has certainly been no public consultation on the Hong Kong proposal, which was not mentioned in the ‘Conservative’ election manifesto.
Britain threw off the yoke of Brussels, but they forgot about the City of London…
The Cantonese are already regretting it, as they will have to forfeit their HK passports. So no HK benefits like social security, health care, low taxes, schools for the kids. China declared it wouldn’t accept the British passports. That makes the participants de facto “stateless”. Also, I can imagine that many Chinese don’t want to emigrate. Britain is a third world country, in some of its parts, and not as rich as Hong Kong.
“The beneficiary capitalist class, whom Mr. Johnson and Mr. Schulz serve”
Uh, except that Schulz is a Jewish socialist. But nice try.
“Look, these Democrats don’t want complete government ownership of everything, only government control. That means they’re CAPITALISTS!”
That’s what communists say about Social Democrats. It’s inter-left fighting, with lies as usual.
“But they have CAPITALIST financiers!”
So did the Bolsheviks. Funny how the argument goes: if X is affiliated with Y, that means Y is actually X. Never that X is actually like Y. Even though it’s Y that comes up with all the ideas, and X simply financing the process. The financiers of communism were people like Aschberg, Jews promoting other Jews against the Whites. George Soros and other Democrat top donors, same. That they got their money from business doesn’t mean they finance leftists to promote business.
“But immigrants drive down wages!”
To prove this, the “I’m really not a leftists at all!” crows always show a graph where you see U.S. purchasing power stalling for workers, while it keeps increasing for business owners, after mass immigration started. This graph also shows something obvious that these liars never mention: That business owners’ income was increasing before immigration, and the increase doesn’t take off after immigration. It just keeps going in the same pace. In other word’s they gained nothing.
What immigration actually does in the West is give the Social Democrat parties – Democrats, Labour, les Socialistes, Social Democrats – permanent election victories. Which is the most obvious, clear-as-day benefit and the reason the leftists bring them in. The leftists are not “serve the capitalist class” as Thorsten Pattberg here claims. The votes go to the Left, not to the more business-friendly Right. Without immigrants business-friendly policies would be the order of the day.
With the Left, instead, you get permanently high minimum wages. Always a leftist dream. How does that benefit businesses? It doesn’t, it’s the opposite. They can only afford to hire people who contribute more than they cost. When the employees cost more than they contribute – they won’t be hired. But that’s no problem for the Left – the unemployed go on welfare and become a permanent voting bloc for the socialists. With plenty of time to take part in leftist protests and riots. While those who get the high minimum wage also become a voting bloc for the socialists.
The socialist parties also want high welfare, as high as possible, with as little oversight as possible. This creates leftist voters permanently addicted to other people’s money.
The socialist parties want to destroy people’s health with drugs, then to be treated by government-owned hospitals, which will cost the government, and thereby the taxpayers, enormous sums every year. This would “benefit the capitalist class?” Sure.
The Left that brought in immigration in the 1960s and onward, in the U.S. and Britain and France and elsewhere, had crazier economic ideas than today. They wanted to permanently freeze the economy by making it impossible to fire anyone. Which would mean no one could get hired, either by old or new businesses, as demand goes up and down and sometimes you have to save money, including by firing people. This Left promoted immigration. They benefitted “the capitalist class,” Pattberg? Hilarious.
The Left wants low sentencing for crime, so that the children of White people, including the rich, have to live in a hellish society. And Pattberg claims “the capitalist class” benefits from this? Trump is a “capitalist,” that slur Pattberg uses which was invented by Karl Marx and other socialists. Did Trump benefit from immigrants attacking his followers? Did Trump benefit from the government being controlled by politicians voted into place by immigrants? Did he benefit from having seen Bill Clinton and Obama elected, which could only happen with immigrant votes in California and elsewhere? Clinton got re-elected by the socialist Greenspan churning out more new money than in the entire post-war period before that combined. Which created the tech bubble and economic hardship for all. Obama got re-elected by enormous, never-before-seen spending to bribe his voters. All will suffer from this, including Trump.
And businesses, and business owners, will suffer from the enormous government control the socialists can finally install again once they are permanently in charge, despite the fact that the majority of Whites in the West having steadily turned away from them over the decades. A majority that doesn’t include Pattberg.
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Paywall Access
Lost your password?Edit your comment