The dam is breaking on Britain’s illegal immigration crisis — and the results could be ugly
Britain’s Labour government is in trouble: Its program of massive third-world immigration from places like Pakistan and Somalia is wildly, overwhelmingly unpopular.
But that’s not the real problem.
The real problem is that despite the best efforts of Prime Minister Keir Starmer and his leftist captive media, Britons themselves have discovered just how unpopular it is.
You might think that’s absurd — if mass immigration is unpopular, how can everyone not know it?
Everyone doesn’t know it because the government has been policing speech about immigration.
Any criticism of open borders, lax enforcement or — worst of all — immigrant crime has been punished as “racist” and “hate speech” by the Starmer regime.
The point of this isn’t to reduce racism or hate (heck, the censorship likely make that worse), but to make it harder for people to realize just how many of their fellow citizens feel the same way they do.
For years, Britain has stifled reports of immigrant rape gangs in places like Rotherham and has persecuted those who have called attention to them, even jailing some.
And as the government gives light sentences to child rapists, it’s imprisoning moms for tweets on grounds of “inciting race hatred.”
It’s all to construct and maintain something known as “ preference falsification ,” a move usually practiced by authoritarian regimes.
The trick is, you make citizens pretend that they believe what the government says, and fake their approval of what it does.
You promote marches and demonstrations and speech in favor of the government’s preferred positions, and you severely punish marches and demonstrations and speech that oppose the government’s favored positions.
You give excuses, like “stopping counterrevolutionary activity” or “fighting hate speech,” for shutting down any opposition.
You may even have informers to ferret out wrongthink and report it to the authorities, or to employers, or to third parties who will engage in extralegal (but government-supported) harassment.
If you do it right, you can have upward of 90% of your population hating you and your policies, but doing and saying nothing about them — because everyone in that 90% thinks they’re part of a tiny minority.
Resistance will seem to be futile.
This works.
Until it doesn’t.
The problem with preference falsification is that sooner or later some event or development can make people realize that what they’ve been told is popular is, in fact, very un popular.
When this happens, as Duke University scholar Timur Kuran writes in his book “Private Truths, Public Lies,” the result is a “preference cascade.”
When large swaths of the population realize their dissident views are in fact widely held, they become less afraid of the government — and less hesitant about sharing their true sentiments.
And that’s what’s happening now in Britain, after a string of cases in which migrants sexually assaulted local girls and women.
Across the United Kingdom, people — including large numbers of middle-aged and middle-class women, not the “far-right” skinheads that Starmer and his ilk claim stoke all anti-immigrant sentiment — are protesting outside the hotels where the government is housing illegal migrants, shouting “Send them home!” and “Protect our girls!”
The demonstrations in the last two weeks — featuring thousands of people carrying St. George flags, the traditional symbol of England — are too big to hide, and they’re cropping up in every corner of the nation, organized largely on Facebook and other social media.
Starmer has gotten the government-controlled media to present its spin and to black out or soft-pedal most bad news.
But news gets out in other ways.
In particular, Elon Musk’s maintenance of X as a free-speech zone has made it much harder for the ruling elites to keep people in the dark.
Now the government is scared, alternating between overweening demands and ignominious retreats.
After London police tried to ban protests outside migrant hotels, authorities walked it back with a “clarification” that the ban applied only to specific protesters.
Questionable groups of masked, thuggish “counterprotesters” have been allegedly delivered to marches in police buses — only to find themselves outnumbered and pushed back by the throng.
Sometimes preference cascades presage major political changes; other times, as in the famous case of Nicolas Ceausescu’s communist Romania, they produce violent revolution.
(One thing about preference falsification is that it often keeps the government in the dark, too — Ceausescu genuinely believed his people loved him, until shortly before he was hauled out and shot.)
The British establishment would have been better served to let its citizens debate the immigration question openly and fairly. It didn’t do so because it knew it would lose such a debate.
Instead, it foisted open borders on a nation that didn’t want them, then tried to silence opposition.
Now we’re watching as the regime’s strategy collapses.
Will it end in Starmer’s ouster — or worse, in violence?
Either way, the aftermath will be ugly.
Tags
Who is online
122 visitors

The Uk is falling apart: two tier justice, mass censorship, the covering up of rape gangs in the name of tolerance and these orwellian attempts at manipulation are prime examples.
Finally, Palestine Action will be proscribed as a terrorist organization, says Home Secretary.
Yep, in this day and age, it's pretty hard to hide information from the people. Once the boiling point is reached, reactions can explode.
If trump had lost, this is what America would look like. Permanent open borders, corrupt democratic cronies making millions “ housing” illegals while housing prices form Americans skyrocket and the government covering up crime to protect the narrative.
it is funny seeing the American progressive tactic of simply labeling all criticism as far right or racist hate speech has gone international.
A glimpse at an emotionally-based alternate reality underlying Trump support.
It’s funny watching progressives simply put their head in the sand and pretend the Biden years didn’t happen as they continue to shill for open borders, welfare for illegals and lying about them to manipulate opinion “Maryland man” etc...
I suppose so, but it seems you continue to invent an alternate reality. Basically, a strawman tactic. Who is shilling for open borders? If you are trying to imply I am a progressive (if you need a label for me, you should use SLFC independent) and that I was and do shill for open borders, you truly are playing in fantasyland.
[✘]
[✘]
Fine. Can someone please tell me what that acronym means? I googled it and posted three of things that came up. Guess that was off base for some reason.
[✘]
Socially liberal, fiscally conservative.
Sounds like a logical progressive stance. Fiscal responsibility is not incompatible with liberal politics. We, the richest nation in the world, can afford to have a strong defense, affordable healthcare, good schools and a social safety system second to none. As Bill Clinton, the last President to balance a budget, often says, "Economics is just math". Congress could balance the federal budget any time. All ot takes is the balls and will to do so. Yes, that would entail higher taxes for some. Economies do not thrive if their middle class are not spending. It is all about $ changing hands instead of being hoarded by the few. This is not Econ 101. It is more Econ 404 - Macro Economics!
Progressive ideology is normally defined to be willing to do what is considered 'right' regardless of the cost. That is why my view would not be considered progressive. My specific policy choices would align with many progressive policies, but I am deeply concerned with the lack of fiscal responsibility in the federal government.
I agree.
By all means tell us how you'd balance the budget and fund a strong defense, affordable healthcare, good schools and a social safety system second to none (not to mention paying the interest on the 37 trillion that we've already borrowed) . Can't wait to see that math.
[deleted][✘]
Thank you