Is there a
“need” for immigrants?
6 January 2013
question is investigated here on data related to Britain as a
representative example, but the results are largely applicable to other
European or Western countries.
it has been claimed that Britain “needs skilled workers”; that
“immigration is good for the economy”; that immigration
“creates jobs”; that Britain “needs immigration to
sustain the current population level,” etc. The following facts
expose the Big Immigration Lie:
It goes without saying that not all immigrants are skilled, many are
unskilled. Even skilled immigrants may have unskilled wives, children or
parents. As a result, along with the “skilled workers” there
are a high number of unskilled workers.
Many immigrants – housewives, children, students, retired persons
– are economically inactive, i.e., non-workers. This is particularly the case with immigrants who
come to Britain (and Europe) in the context of “family
reunification” and, failing to meet labour market requirements,
struggle to find work (Sutherland,
20 Jun. 2012, pp. 17-18).
the 1950s and 60s many immigrants came to Britain to take up employment. By
1997, only 12% of immigrants from the former New Commonwealth entered
Britain for work (Caldwell, p. 41).
of a total of 500,000 immigrants arriving in the UK in 2013, only 200,000
came here in search of work (Belfast
Telegraph, 28 Nov. 2013).
reports show that immigrants are more likely to be out of work than British
people (Hennessy, 2011).
follows that the proportion of skilled workers, indeed of workers in
general, to the total immigrant population is much lower than it is
Even if all immigrants were skilled (which they are not), it does not mean
that they all have the skills British economy needs. Nor is there a system
to ensure that those who come to Britain have the required skills.
Britain is short on skilled workers, this is obviously a failure of the
education system and the question must be raised as to whether this failure
is accidental or deliberate.
workers amount to between 20 and 30 per cent of the workforce in Germany
and France, but 60 per cent in the UK.
figures show that 20 per cent of London pupils in 2013 left primary
school without reaching even basic levels in reading, writing and maths
education system in Britain has been dominated by the Left (the Labour
Party and the Fabian Society) since the early 1900s, it is not unreasonable
to conclude that this catastrophic situation is the doing of the Left.
any rate, the solution is to reform the education system and train local
workers, not to import foreign ones. Governments must identify the areas
where workers are needed and then ensure that training is provided for
sufficient numbers of local workers to meet those needs.
is particularly imperative in view of the fact that, as admitted by the
head of the United Nations Forum on Migration, Peter Sutherland, shortage
of workers in the European Union is to be found at the lowest rather than
at the top skill level (Sutherland, 20 Jun. 2012, p. 13).
Saying that immigration is good for the economy implies that everything is
acceptable as long as it brings financial profit. Thus, from the outset,
this claim exposes the moral bankruptcy of the pro-immigration camp.
addition, while it may be acceptable to believe that immigration is
“good” for the economy when the economy is strong, it seems
irrational to cling on to the same belief when the economy evidently is on
a downward path or stagnant despite
a massive influx of immigrants.
to the Centre for Economics and Business Research (CEBR), the economy of
America, a country plagued by mass immigration, both legal and illegal, is
set to be overtaken by that of China, a country with very little
economic systems are not God-given; they are man-made. And if man can
create economies that depend on immigrants, he can equally well devise an
economy that does not. As no attempt is being made to do so, this suggests
an ulterior motive on the part of the authorities responsible. What these
motives are will become apparent from the evidence considered below.
Meanwhile, suffice it to note that the relentless emphasis on economic
considerations irrespective of the realities on the ground is a
long-established tactic to deflect attention from other issues.
Even assuming that immigration is “good” for the economy in
some ways, there is no doubt that it is bad in other ways. For example,
illegal immigrants do not pay taxes. Most immigrants send money back home,
exporting capital that should be reinvested in British economy, not taken
out of the country, etc.
If immigration creates new jobs, then the more immigration there is the
more new jobs are created. But the more new jobs are created, the greater
becomes the need for immigration. It follows that instead of resolving
anything, immigration creates an inescapable vicious circle, a situation
which critics have (not unreasonably) described as an “addiction to
As admitted by a number of political leaders, including pro-immigration
ones like Labour Party leader Ed Miliband, immigration brings not only
benefits but also costs
(Miliband, 2012). Particularly important in the current economic situation
is the loss of employment caused to the indigenous population by mass
immigration, especially from outside the EU. As conceded by the Migration
Advisory Committee, one hundred additional non-EU immigrants result in a
“reduction in employment of 23 native workers” (MAC, 2012).
is one of the causes behind the rise in crime levels. For example,
religion-motivated terrorism, honour killings,
forced marriage, child marriage, polygamy, genital mutilation, are
culture-specific crimes that are directly linkable to the immigrant
Importing people from abroad is an irrational and perverse approach to
demographic problems. To maintain Britain’s current population level,
all that is needed is for British couples to have more children and
government policies in this regard to be introduced.
Nobody knows how many illegal immigrants there are in Britain. Estimates
range between 250,000 (Migration Watch UK) and 500,000 (Home Office), with
some sources giving an upper limit of 1 million (UK Border Force, Sky2, 10 Jun.
2012). As it is not known who they are or what they are doing in Britain,
nothing definite can be said on their effect on British economy and
culture. However, we do know that a significant number of the illegal
immigrants who have been tracked down by the authorities are small-time criminals, terrorists or fraudsters. There is no reason
to believe that those who are still at large are any better. They certainly
do not pay taxes and if any of them are in employment they take away jobs
from people who are here legally, including indigenous Britons. It is
reasonable to assume, therefore, that the overall impact of illegal
immigration on British society is negative.
The truth is that immigration serves the interests of corrupt employers who
are looking for cheap labour and would rather pay low wages to immigrants
than pay decent wages to British workers. Inevitably, this results in lower
living standards for the indigenous population (Lilley, 2006). Indeed, as a
number of studies have shown, mass immigration has pushed wages down (The Economist, 30 Jun. 2012) while
the cost of living has gone up.
of Commons Library figures (adjusted for inflation) show that in 2013 wages were down 5.5 per cent since the mass immigration peak of 2010 (“UK
wages decline among worst in Europe,” BBC News, 11 Aug. 2013). Even in traditional immigration
countries like America, salaries have decreased for the first time on record, despite or because
of unprecedented mass immigration
As rising living costs and declining
wages cannot be good for the majority of the population, it becomes obvious
that “good for the economy” really means good for vested
a study by the London Chamber of Commerce has revealed that half of firms
in London (which has one of the highest percentages of immigrants) employ
immigrant workers and believe that immigration is “positive for the
capital’s economy” i.e., for
themselves (Watts, 2013).
In the long term, the constant
influx of immigrants results in the gradual replacement of the local
population with foreigners. Again, as it cannot be in the interests of the
local population to be replaced, it becomes clear that mass immigration
serves the agenda of vested interests.
Significantly, immigration serves the interests of left-wing financial
groups. A typical example is the Rothschild banking family who have been
supporters of left-wing policies for much of their history, a number of
them having served as Liberal MPs. Lord Nathan Rothschild, a
Liberal-turned-Liberal-Unionist, was president and financial supporter of
the Socialist London School of Economics (LSE), while his grandson Victor
Rothschild was a Labour peer. The Rothschilds also have a proven record of
support for immigration. Lord Rothschild, for example, believed that
Britain should be a haven for immigrants and opposed the Alien Act 1905
which introduced immigration controls (Ferguson, pp. 277-8).
Rothschilds’ support for immigration has been shared by other leading
figures from the financial world, in particular, those with close
connections to the City of London. For example, the governor of the Bank of
England, Sir Mervyn King, is on record as
suggesting that cheap foreign labour helps keep wages down and fill
“skills shortages” (Eaglesham & Daneshkhu, 2004).
Digby Jones, director-general of the
Confederation of British Industry (CBI) which was created by Shell, BP,
Ford and associated interests, has declared that a cap on immigration would
reduce the “flexibility” of the British labour market (Financial Times, 4 May 2005).
Baroness Jo Valentine, head of the City lobby group London First, has
repeatedly spoken out against Conservative plans to curb immigration and prioritise British employees, forcing David
Cameron’s coalition government to rethink its policies by claiming
that they would sacrifice the “huge advantages” of
“global talent” attracted by Britain (Boxell
& Parker, 2010; Valentine, 2012).
the London First management team includes the likes of Rob McIvor, formerly
of Rockefeller-controlled Citigroup and Rothschild-associated Barclays, and
Phillip Dilley, chairman of the Arup Group and
councillor of Imperial College, a creation of the Fabian Society and its
financial backers. Valentine herself is a former manager of Baring Brothers
(London’s oldest merchant bank and one-time leader of the
City’s financial establishment) and founder of the pro-immigrant
Central London Partnership (CLP) which set up the Central London Taskforce
for the 2012 Olympic Games, a strongly pro-immigrant project.
key advocate of immigration is UN Migration Forum boss Peter Sutherland,
who also serves as chairman of Goldman Sachs International, the European
arm of the US banking giant which is a dominant element in the City (Sutherland, 15 Jun. 2012; Sutherland, 20 Jun. 2012; Wheeler, 2012).
most revealing of all is the stand of the established money power organs,
the Financial Times (FT) and The Economist, themselves. The FT, which is owned by the Lazard-associated Pearson, has long
pronounced itself in favour of immigration (Shlaes,
2001), while The Economist,
co-owned by the Rothschilds, has claimed that restricting the number of
talented immigrants damages the City’s prospects (The Economist, 7 Jan. 2012) and has
published an open letter of invitation to immigrants from Bulgaria and Romania
(21 Dec. 2013).
The Economist’s invitation to immigrants
media outlets claiming to oppose immigration, e.g., the Daily Mail, directly or indirectly encourage
the same trend. For example, raising the alarm over “millions of
Bulgarians and Romanians” is not only factually incorrect –
these countries have small and declining populations (the whole population
of Bulgaria is smaller than that of London) – but is misleading the
public by deflecting attention from the massive influx of immigrants from
outside the European Community (Africa, South Asia, China, Latin America).
Above all, immigration serves the interests of left-wing political elites operating
in close collaboration with the above financial interests and using the
immigrant community to advance their own agendas, for example, to make British society more multicultural (Green, 2010) or to win votes
is it just Labour politicians who are pro-immigration. Nick Clegg, the
Liberal Democrat Deputy Prime Minister, has attacked Conservative plans to
cap immigration from the EU on the grounds that it would be a “disaster” for the economy and, in
particular, for the City of London (i.e., the international financial interests dominating the City) (Swinford, 2013).
Again, this shows that instead of
representing the electorate, our political leaders really represent vested
Clearly, there is an unbridgeable and
ever-widening gap between ordinary Britons, over 70 per cent of whom believe that there are too many immigrants in the country (Ipsos MORI,
4 Aug. 2011) and the political leadership who thinks there are too few.
Immigration has also enjoyed strong support from universities and other
educational and academic institutions dominated by left-wing ideologies and
having close links to the same financial and political interests. Such
institutions have a large proportion of immigrant students on whom they
depend for income (e.g., the London School of Economics), are run by
immigrants (e.g., the Oxford Martin School) and generally pursue
subversive, left-wing agendas involving systematic promotion of immigrants
should be noted in this connection that, although foreign students are said
by pro-immigration interests to return to their countries of origin once they
have graduated from British universities like the LSE, we have it on the
authority of LSE chairman Peter Sutherland himself that many of them
actually stay on (Sutherland, 20 Jun. 2012, p. 16).
The activities of the above interests
have led to the creation of an immigrant-centred society in which the
indigenous population is increasingly marginalised, excluded and gradually
replaced with immigrants in many parts of the country. Official figures show that Britain’s
immigrant population has already reached 20 per cent of the total and is
estimated to become a majority in the next few decades (Coleman, 2010; Silverman, 2013).
Two things become
obvious from the above facts:
1. A combination
of greed for profit and power and aberrant left-wing ideologies have turned
large sections of the Establishment (business, banking, finance, politics,
education, academia, etc.) into an increasingly malignant and hostile
entity acting against the interests of the British public.
2. As normal
democratic procedures are no longer working, ordinary Britons can only
re-assert themselves through a popular anti-Establishment mass movement
aimed at putting democracy back into the system and restoring the rule of
truth, order and justice.
The Oxford Martin School
The Migration Observatory
Belfast Telegraph, “‘Massive gap’ in
immigration target,” 29 Nov. 2013.
Boxell, James & Parker, George,
“Fears force immigration cap rethink,” Financial Times, 25 Jun. 2010
Caldwell, Christopher, Reflections
on the Revolution in Europe, London, 2009.
David, “When Britain becomes “majority minority””, Prospect, 17 Nov. 2010.
“20% of London pupils leave primary school unable to read or
count,” Evening Standard,
12 Dec. 2013.
Eaglesham, Jean & Daneshkhu,
Scheherazade, “Number of immigrants soars past forecasts,” Financial Times, 11 Nov. 2004.
Economist, “Global finance: Save the
City,” 7 Jan. 2012.
Economist, “Hello, world,” 30 Jun.
Economist, “You’re welcome: An open
letter to the citizens of Bulgaria and Romania,” 21 Dec. 2013.
Ferguson, Niall, The House of Rothschild, Vol. 2, New
York, NY, 2000.
Financial Times, “Figuring out role of migrant
workers,” 4 May 2005.
Andrew, “Paying the price for a decade of deception,” Daily Mail Online, 12 Feb. 2010.
Hennessy, Patrick, “Labour’s cover-up on
immigration to be laid bare,” Sunday
Telegraph, 25 Sept. 2011.
Lilley, Peter, “More Workers, Lower Living
Standards,” Sunday Telegraph,
27 Aug. 2006.
Advisory Committee, “Analysis of the Impacts of Migration,”
Ed, “Immigration brings costs as well as benefits,” Evening Standard, 22 Jun. 2012.
Sue, “Lost in administration: Scandal over illegal immigrants hidden
among 37,000 files of foreigners appealing to stay in Britain,” Daily Mail, 15 Oct 2011.
Sanburn, Josh, “5 Most Surprising Findings From the 2010
Census,” Time, 20. Dec.
Shlaes, Amity, “The right must learn the comfort of the
strangers: Conservatives are falling into the same trap as Republicans by
railing against immigration, not supporting growth,” Financial Times, 10 Apr. 2001.
Silverman, Rosa, “White Britons ‘will be
minority’ by 2066, says professor,” Daily Telegraph, 2 May 2013.
Peter, “A Constructive Attitude to Migration is a Moral Issue,”
Address to the International Eucharistic Congress, Dublin, 15 Jun. 2012.
Peter in Select Committee
on the European Union, House of Lords, “Inquiry on Global Approach to
Migration and Mobility, Evidence Session No. 1, Wednesday 20 June 2012,
11.25 am, Witness: Mr Peter Sutherland, QQ
1-34”, uncorrected transcript, published 22 June 2012.
Swinford, Steven, “Theresa May’s
EU migrant cap is ‘one-eyed’ and illegal, suggests Nick
Clegg,” Daily Telegraph, 16
Jo, “Skilled migrant in senior finance post,” Financial Times, 27 Nov. 2012.
Joseph, “Clegg says May’s ‘illegal’ plan to cap EU
migrants would hit City,” Evening
Standard, 16 Dec. 2013.
Ed, “How the Government pays Muslims to vote Labour,” Daily Telegraph, 17 March 2009.
Wheeler, Brian, “EU should ‘undermine national
homogeneity’ says UN migration chief,” BBC News, 21 Jun. 2012.
’Revolt on the Right’: UKIP and the Fabian
Crimea, Ukraine and the Anglo-American New World Order
Nelson Mandela: “President of the World” or
Diversity is Not a Catholic Value
it’s Saturday, it’s the Germans again – or why the Mail has lost the plot
a British revolution
Do white people have a future in South Africa?
Is there a
“need” for immigrants?
The Labour Party, a puppet of the Fabian Society
The truth about the Labour Party
truth about the Fabian Society
The Milner-Fabian Conspiracy against humanity
Socialism’s prescient critics
The Politically Incorrect Guide to Socialism
Britain divided by Islam, survey finds
The Real Churchill
The last days of a white world
A Webb of Lies
Socialism and Incentives
Ratiu, Ioan, The Milner-Fabian Conspiracy: How an international elite is taking
over and destroying Europe, America and the World, Richmond, 2012.
Quigley, Carroll, The Anglo-American Establishment: From
Rhodes to Cliveden, GSG & Associates, San
Pedro, CA, 1981.
Martin, Rose, Fabian
Freeway: High Road to Socialism in the U.S.A., Chicago,
Eric D., The Fabian Socialist
Contribution to the Communist Advance, Melbourne, 1964.
Dorril, Stephen, MI6: Fifty Years of Special Operations, London, 2001.
Horowitz, David &
Poe, Richard, The Shadow Party: How
George Soros, Hillary Clinton and Sixties Radicals seized control of the
Democratic Party, Nashville, TN, 2006.
Ye’or, Bat, Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis, Madison, NJ,
Bawer, Bruce, While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam Is Destroying The West From
Within, New York, NY, 2006.
et al., The Black Book of Communism:
Crimes, Terror, Repression, Engl. translation, Cambridge, MA and
Williamson, Kevin, The Politically Incorrect Guide to
Socialism, Washington, DC,
Hitchens, Peter, The Abolition of Britain: From Winston Churchill to Princess Diana,
Knight, Nigel, Churchill: The Greatest Briton Unmasked,
Newton Abbot, Devon, 2008.
Docherty, Gerry & MacGregor, James, Hidden
History: The Secret Origins of the First World War, Edinburgh, 2013.