The Winston we need right now
After the humiliating boarding up of Winston Churchill’s statue on Parliament Square, the ordinary people of Britain look on in despair at what is happening to their country. A Tory landslide a few months ago seemed to have stopped the cultural Marxists in their tracks. But now we see the reality: the Conservatives are great at winning elections, but impotent in enacting conservatism. The establishment and all of our institutions are infected with cultural Marxism. It’s not only Covid-19 we are fighting, but the virus of woke ideology.
Black Lives Matter, as a campaign, would be fine by me if it was genuinely seeking to improve conditions for poorer black communities in Britain. But it isn’t. The activism we have witnessed in the last two weeks, spurred by a single incident of police brutality 4000 miles away in Minneapolis, has revealed a sinister, subversive force. The BLM website blatantly urges the fall not only of statues of eighteenth-century merchants and military heroes, but of capitalism and the structures of a civilised state. It wants to abolish the police.
How exciting this is for the BBC, left-wing politicians and the commentariat. Universities have devoted themselves to the cause (while continuing to invest in China, where our cheap clothes are made in slave labour camps). Most worrying has been the lack of reaction from the supposedly Conservative government. Where’s Boris? He and his cabinet seem to have gone AWOL. New Tory MPs are keeping their thoughts to themselves. As our cherished national monuments are desecrated by BLM and Antifa thugs, our representatives are too scared to raise their heads over the parapet.
This appeasement to a sudden and unwanted Cultural Revolution contrasts sharply with the robust response by a statesman down under, appropriately named Winston.
Winston Peters is deputy prime minister of New Zealand, a country that has become increasingly woke, as characterised by its leader Jacinda Ardern. Kiwis did not actually vote for Ardern, the Labour leader, as PM. She rose to the top in 2017 after the National Party was unable to sustain a coalition with Peters’ NZ First party. A controversial Maori populist, Peters was the queen maker, but he has been an antidote to Ardern’s identity politics, ensuring that New Zealand has not become a woke dystopia.
After a statue of Captain James Cook was vandalised in Gisborne, and that of Captain John Hamilton was removed from the city named after him, Peters confronted the BLM protests as they gained momentum in New Zealand. He described the demand to remove statues as a ‘wave of idiocy’.
‘Woke New Zealanders feel the need to mimic mindless actions imported from overseas’, Peters stated. ‘A self-confident country would never succumb to obliterating symbols of their history, whether they be good or bad or simply gone out of fashion’.
Peters exclaimed: ‘The idea that statues of Captain Cook, the greatest maritime explorer of his age, be pulled down because of the history that followed him is disgraceful’. A great orator, Peters came to his rumbustious conclusion: –
‘The woke generation are the equivalent of a person with no long-term memory, stumbling around in the present without any signposts to guide them. If a person, like a country, doesn’t know where they have come from, they have no way of knowing where they are going’.
The woke generation tell older people to ‘educate themselves’, but Peters turned on those who want to erase history and begin at Year Zero: ‘Grow up and read a book’. With race-baiting ascendant and thuggery given free rein, we need our own Winston right now. For as Burke warned long ago: ‘all it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing’.
Universities: a desert for the white working class
A ‘classless society’ was the meritocratic mission of Tony Blair and neoliberal New Labour, and the baton was taken on by Tory moderniser David Cameron. Yet the white working class remains a distinct entity, despite disappearing off the radar of political parties and public institutions. While equality and diversity are emphasised at every turn, social class is conveniently overlooked.
In my university, I rarely meet anyone of this large but neglected segment of the British populace. A report by the Office for Students showed that within the lower socio-economic brackets, black and Asian people are more than twice as likely as their white counterparts to attend university. In the admission figures for 2017, 4315 per 10000 poorer school-leavers of Asian background went to university, 4310 black pupils, and merely 2121 white working class.
The denizens of the wrong side of the tracks in campus cities such as Cambridge and York are kept out of sight, out of mind. Beyond the citadels of the intelligentsia lie sprawling council estates inhabited by uncultured plebs who live on junk food and probably voted for Brexit.
Apparently it is socially acceptable to blame the white working class for lacking the work ethic or intellect of ambitious and disciplined families of African and Asian heritage. Yet it would be abhorrent to attribute underachievement in any other ethnic group to laziness or stupidity. This is like the past excuse that girls had no interest in academic pursuits.
A level playing field is a fallacy. Middle-class pupils work hard to get into a chosen university, but they get plenty of coaching at home. Dual-earning professional couples know which strings to pull. As in Michael Young’s dystopian vision of meritocracy, a self-serving, privileged social stratum replicates itself. Whereas in the past a university degree was attained by a minority, today there is a line drawn across the middle of society, with a cultural segregation of haves and have-nots.
To be fair to universities, this problem begins earlier. Schools may not be overtly prejudiced against white working-class pupils, but the schism in British society, conceptualised by David Goodhart as traditional ‘Somewheres’ and liberal ‘Anywheres’, is bound to cause bias. Teachers are graduates who have been through the ideological mill of university, which inculcates notions of white privilege and righting historical wrongs. Socially conservative or patriotic views from home are quashed by progressive values: ‘Johnny, we don’t say things like that’.
Belatedly, universities have decided that class counts. However, the white working class are not given specific attention. Teenagers of Somali and Bangladeshi origin in the East End deserve support, but do poorer white youngsters of the sprawling council estates on the outskirts of London. The social justice concept of intersectionality is not applied to the white working class, who have little virtue-signalling worth to the middle-class establishment.
It is not only access that must change. The university is not a welcoming environment for a young man of conventional working-class perspective. He will be hectored about the ‘patriarchy’ by middle-class white women, oblivious to his social adversity. Campaigns against sexual harassment on campus always depict white males. And the university-endorsed campaign to ‘decolonise the curriculum’ is an affront to his national identity. Despite the obsession with racism, traditionally-minded white men are insulted as ‘gammon’ (mostly by middle-class whites). .
In many ways, missing university is advantageous. Young people who go straight into employment are able to earn a living without the burden of student debt. But all young people should have opportunities in higher education. Sadly, the polytechnics that imparted knowledge and skills to working-class school-leavers were converted into unremarkable universities. Instead of training plumbers and mechanics, these concrete edifices now produce graduates in media studies.
Russell Group universities continue to expand, with an increasing influx of foreign students. You will hear more Mandarin than Cockney, Scouse or Geordie in the canteen. Do the Ivory Towers have any sense of responsibility to educate the white working class, or is this the lowest of their priorities? In the aftermath of the Covid-19 pandemic, our academic institutions should abandon globalist hubris and focus on their more humble role as British universities.
Conspiracy Theorists Go Where Mainstream Media Fear To Tread
Niall McCrae is a regular writer on social and political affairs for Salisbury Review, Politicalite, Gateway Pundit and Bruges Group websites. He is the author of three books: The Moon and Madness (2011), Echoes from the Corridors (with Peter Nolan, 2016) and the forthcoming Moralitis: a Cultural Virus (with Robert Oulds, 2020).
Lockdown, arguably, has contributed to mortality from the coronavirus pandemic rather than reduced it, by sending young people back to family homes from suspended study or work, and by extended families in poorer ethnic communities infecting each other in overcrowded flats. Similarly, the attempt by politicians, social media companies and broadcasters to silence conspiracy theories is counterproductive. The more authoritarian and secretive the state, the more speculation about ulterior motives or hidden agendas.
Conspiracy theorists weave strands of disparate detail together to make a patchwork. But use of the philosophical tool of Occam’s razor, whereby only the most straightforward explanation is accepted, could rip this apart. Outlandish beliefs about JFK, Princess Diana or the Twin Towers are not necessarily wrong, but the burden of proof is with the speculators.
The notion of the New World Order may be deconstructed, but many of its fragments are entirely factual. One can disregard the message of David Icke but be impressed by his encyclopaedic knowledge. The facts remain, however far-fetched the theory. So too with Covid-19. Here are key pieces of information, scarcely reported in mainstream media, from which a jigsaw may be made: –
- ‘Wet markets’, where bats and other live animals are sold for human consumption, exist throughout the Far East. Was it mere coincidence that the virus started in Wuhan, a city with a research institute heavily involved in viral research on bats?
- Shi Zhengli, a prominent researcher at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (known as ‘Bat Woman’) has co-authored several papers on coronaviruses created in the laboratory. These synthetic viruses demonstrate bat-to-human transmission, sometimes with monkeys as a conduit.
- In nature, zoonotic transmission occurs unpredictably (e.g. SARS in 2003): was the purpose of the research in Wuhan to control this process?
- Leading virologists have expressed concern about this research: Simon Wain-Hobson of the Pasteur Institute in Paris warned: ‘If the virus escaped, nobody could predict the trajectory’. The US National Institute of Health collaborated with Wuhan Institute of Virology, but withdrew in 2014 due to safety concerns.
- The source of Covid-19 was reported as a horseshoe bat, presumably through human contact at the Huanan seafood market. Yet no bats are sold at this wet market, according to a scientific paper by South China University of Technology researchers (now removed).
- Wuhan Institute of Virology gets its supply of horseshoe bats from caves 900 miles away in Yunnan province.
- Covid-19 is highly similar to a bat coronavirus previously discovered by the Nanjing Military Research Institute. Molecular biologist Judy A Mikowitz doubts whether Covid-19 was transmitted directly from bats: ‘I certainly believe that the 100% amino acid similarity says it can’t possibly be a natural mutation. It almost certainly is a recombination event that was laboratory driven’.
- ‘Patient Zero’ could be research graduate Huang Yanking, whose papers were mysteriously removed from Wuhan Institute’ of Virology website.
- The Huanan marketplace was closed on 1st January and disinfected. But a study in the Lancet showed that of 41 early cases, 17 had no history of exposure to this market.
- China initially tried to cover up the virus, detaining a doctor who raised the alert, threatening whistleblowers, and denying human-to-human transmission for weeks after this was apparent.
- Wuhan was locked down on 23rd January, with road, rail and river links closed, yet the airport remained open for international flights.
- WHO failed to declare a public health emergency until 30th January, when the disease had already spread to other countries. Tedros, its chief, met President Xi on 29th January and delivered a sycophantic speech on his handling of the outbreak. For many years China has been gaining power over United Nations agencies.
- With Chinese support, WHO advised that borders should remain open, with no restriction on flights (although when the outbreak declined in China, all flights from overseas were stopped).
- China exploited Western liberal sensitivities about racism, deflecting attention away from its culpability for the pandemic. It sponsored the ‘Hug a Chinese’ stunts in Italy, the initial epicentre of the virus in Europe.
- Flights continued to British airports from Covid-19 hotspots throughout the outbreak, even after a curfew imposed on citizens, who were told ‘Stay at home, protect the NHS, save lives’. Why did this not apply to potential virus spreaders from abroad?
- Few deaths occurred in other parts of China, despite cases having been reported in most regions. Why did the disease not spread there, as it did in Europe and USA?
- Lockdown was enforced by most countries, informed by the Wuhan response, but without evidence that it was necessary or that it saves lives. With Chinese businesses back up and running, the West faces economic carnage.
China could bolster its power following Covid-19. Huawei could profit from lowering of opposition to its controversial 5G technology, which Western governments insisted was vital for emergency services. Chinese manufacturers of surveillance systems (including Hikvision) will do well. We should also consider the globalist elite who could benefit from the pandemic, such as Bill Gates with his vaccination crusade, and all who are working towards a cashless society (thus enabling global control of citizens).
Will we be locked down forever?