This essay began as a reference comment to a relatively new Substack writer- Lady of Shallot. Her story is an important one, which draws on direct experience related to the Grooming Gang Scandal. It’s definitely well-worth a read.
Great essay! Well done. The paedophile stats are a semantic slight of hand. It’s certainly true that paedophiles are generally equally represented by race, religion, etc, but that’s because the National Crime Agency makes a division between paedophiles, who represent just under 1% of the UK male population, and those with paedophile tendencies.
If you go looking for a definition of what the distinction means you will invariably find it means something along the lines of this: ‘Refers to individuals who may experience sexual attraction to children but do not act on these urges.’ Theoretically and from a criminological perspective there is such a distinction, but that’s not what they mean in practice. In terms of how the National Crime Agency and other British institutions categorise specific crimes, a paedophile will have a pattern of targeting children below the age of puberty, whilst paedophile tendencies often refers to those who have a predilection for, and a pattern of offending against pubescent underage girls, generally between 12 and 15 years old.
Here is a 2015 article from the Independent which categorically proves this distinction in the policies of the establishment and the institutions at the time:
Here’s the thing, when sources talk about rates of paedophilia being evenly apportioned by race, religion and culture, they are invariably talking about the first group- the ‘true’ paedophiles, but the second and considerably larger group in the UK is heavily influenced by what the Left refers to as ‘social construction’, or culture. This second group varies wildly in terms of patterns of offending by race, religion, etc as this second article by the Independent shows through the best data to date on patterns of offending by ethnicity to date- the 2012 report for the Office of the Children’s Commissioner, which actually collated information from victims as to the race of their rapists:
And, of course, this is all emblematic of the sickening root in the UKs institutional culture. Because of a toxic collision between class and multiculturalism, the institutions began to believe that it was possible for a working class white girl to give consent when she was 12 to 15. Let’s call it what it really was- moral cowardice of the sort that occurs when officialdom faces the fear of accusations of racism which might threaten careers and pensions.
This is why the destruction of the careers of unsung heroes like Ann Cryer is so important culturally. Why the Left is so desperate to smear Andrew Norfolk as racist at every turn. It’s why it’s so important for them to force the likes of gender critical feminist Kathleen Stock to resign from her post at Sussex University. Yes, they want to control the narrative in the short-term, celebrate a temporary victory in the Culture War, but these individuals also serve as an example to others who might be foolish enough to be considering acting upon higher principles which might offend the sensibilities and deliberate prejudices of the highly educated social elite class. These human sacrifices are meant to serve as a warning to others- toe the line, ignore glaring problems caused by certain communities and bad actors, or else we will end your career and destroy your reputation.
The tragic thing, as we’ve so recently rediscovered with the grooming rape gang phenomenon, such tactics are devastatingly successful at silencing dissent- within the police, amongst social workers, teachers and local councillors.
On a more cautious note, I should mention that a huge portion of this problem is related to organised drug gangs- it’s what explains the hugely disproportionate percentage for Black group CSE. We need to also see religion as an excuse in many of these cases. On the one hand, one will have socially conservative Imans trying to prevent the forces of Western secularism eroding the virtue and faith of their congregations. And, if anything, preaching against the loose moral behaviour of white girls, is like waving a red flag to a bull to the perverts in an audience. On the other, it’s a well-documented formula that male abusers and rapists often project their own feelings of self-disgust, inward loathing and shame onto their victims- blaming the girl or woman for their own moral weakness and inadequacy.
I am not seeking to act as a defender of Islam on this issue. Islam made a cultural mistake when it decided that women had to cover themselves to prevent predatory male behaviour- real men learn self-control and act like gentlemen. But we have to see almost all of these men for what they are- substandard specimens within their communities and not at all representative, weak and often actively engaged in organised crime drug activity- and using religion as an excuse for their reprehensible and disgusting behaviour.
And our British culture and institutions need to take lessons from this. Covering the problem up and pretending it isn’t a very real problem hasn’t done any favours whatsoever for Muslim communities across England. For a start, police enforcement and a proper use of the criminal courts would have made the problem much smaller- perhaps cutting instances of child grooming and rape by a factor of ten. One only to look at shoplifting in progressive American cities to see exactly how important deterrence is in practice. But more than that, we can confidently state that anti-Muslim and anti-mass immigration sentiment wouldn’t be anywhere near its current levels if it hadn’t become apparent over the past decade that the British institutions had been operating a two tier justice system operating specifically in favour of Muslim offenders.
Don’t believe me? Here is a 2023 article from the Daily Mail which details exactly the types of institutional ‘right-think’ on the part of Keir Starmer and others, used to justify the conclusion that not all child sex offenders should go to prison. In the words of Cicero, ‘Cui bono?’
‘GUY ADAMS: On April 8, 2011, Keir Starmer joined some of Britain's top legal eagles at a monthly meeting of the Sentencing Council.’
My readers will find this institutionally twisted thinking shocking and appalling- symptomatic of a decaying and morally reprehensible highly educated class in the UK.
It’s even quite possible that Brexit might never have happened if the Grooming Gang Scandal hadn’t been quietly but persistently percolating away in the background influencing the decisions and voting behaviour of a sizeable portion of the UK population who had never voted before in their lives. In other words, the white working class.
Thank you so much for linking my article and for sharing yours. It was really the perfect collision of national and local government obsessed with their multiculturalism project, a protected group with tribal thinking, local authority incompetence and couldn’t give a fuckery, a police force with an established culture of cover-up and a backdrop of moral, economic and social decline. There are no words for how utterly shameful it was - be sure that it is still going on.
I'm not saying that there was never a far right in the UK- quite the contrary, I had a friend who was in SKAR (skinheads against racism). But overall, the problem was far smaller than the Left believed. Where the Left and the institutions went wrong was in believing that by turning a blind eye and covering things up, they might actually make things better for Muslim communities.
People will always find out. The truth will almost always out, unless the conspiracy involved is tight and only involves a small number of people. And when it does, the fact that those in power hid the truth, will make the problem at least 10 times worse- specifically for communities that they purported to want to protect.
If the establishment had, at any point, taken genuine action- perhaps by making examples of drug gangs associated with grooming within the Asian community, then this would be a non-story, a historical footnote, and the number of victims would have been ten times less.
We had skinhead gangs in Belfast where I grew up. They were largely affiliated with Loyalist paramilitaries and very right-wing. The issue of tribe again.
Yes, the grooming gang members I talked with were well aware that they were ‘bad Muslims’. Some even said so. They consumed large amounts of pornography, as I noted in my Substack, which featured white women so they came to see all white females as highly sexual and available.
I think we can’t talk about any of this without placing it in the context of the larger economic, moral and social decline that has plagued the West for decades now…
The Left has been chipping away at our culture, our history and the basic building blocks of stable society for decades. I went to uni in the early nineties. The Left bemoaned the fact that we were the most politically apathetic generation in memory, least prone to activism. I wear it as a badge of pride- being more interested in raves, bacchanals and women was a sign of having a life (and a personality:)).
Raj Chetty's research on social mobility is well worth a read. He followed every child in America during a specific period through the tax system. It turned out the single most important factor in upward social mobility was the percentage of fathers in a given community- especially salient for boys.
They've re-edited this 2014 article from Slate somewhat, but still kept the main conclusions of his research.
Thank you. Very interesting. Boys need fathers. The epidemic of knife crime in London is driven by so many young black men having no father or constant father figure in their life. I have sons and have taught boys and young men as a tutor. Boys generally start to separate from the mother around 7 onwards. They’ll start to push back and defy them. Then again at around 13/14, when serious hormonal changes are in over-drive, they’ll push back again. Without any correction and guidance to anchor them, they drift.
The only thing William Golding got wrong was the age. One of the reasons why the few matriarchal societies of the world actually work is because as soon as boys hit puberty, they are given over to male society for supervision and socialisation.
The other aspect is that, especially in blue collar or working class communities, fathers act as a form of unofficial social safety net for boys who don't do well at school. Without the fathers, blue collar or working class quickly becomes an underclass- this is why some working class communities are functional and others are not- it all depends on local labour participation rates, jobs and hypergamy.
A huge proportion of the disparities which relate to race actually stems from Black people being disproportionately hit by the rapid deindustrialisation of the West. People should be looking at these issues more through the lens of class, and the ways in which macroeconomic policy devastated many communities, and hit some harder than others.
Thank you. Very interesting. Boys need fathers. The epidemic of knife crime in London is driven by so many young black men having no father or constant father figure in their life. I have sons and have taught boys and young men as a tutor. Boys generally start to separate from the mother around 7 onwards. They’ll start to push back and defy them. Then again at around 13/14, when serious hormonal changes are in over-drive, they’ll push back again. Without any correction and guidance to anchor them, they drift.
"They consumed large amounts of pornography, as I noted in my Substack, which featured white women so they came to see all white females as highly sexual and available."
Perhaps there's more to it than many of us are willing to admit?
Frank Furedi wrote a very interesting essay on the rape gangs, he suggests that there is an underlying element of racial revenge involved.
Excerpt: "The sexual exploitation and abuse perpetrated by the rape gangs has little to do with the quest for sexual pleasure or even sex as such. Sexual domination serves as a medium for inflicting vengeance against white society. The refusal to publicly acknowledge that racial dimension of these crimes constitutes a betrayal of the victims. In effect the weakest and most powerless section of British society is sacrificed on the altars of multiculturalism."
Racial Vengeance Is Given A Free Pass In Grooming Gang Britain
A sociological account of the organised sexual violation, degradation and humiliation of British white girls.
On the pornography issue, I think it was Alex Phillips on the Heretics Podcast who made the point that amongst more recent waves of illegal migration, the people smugglers have been actively recruiting men to move to the West with said pornography- specifically selecting for those who want sex with mainly white women.
Andrew Gold (who runs Heretics) is now on Substack. He has 17.9K subscribers.
I would definitely agree with the revenge element. The child I supported suffered abuse that often had an element of humiliation. They put her in a cage (one of those dog crate things) and urinated on her. They did the kind of things that you’d have to go on the dark web to access.
It's also an abuse pattern for coercive control. It's a particularly egregious example, but sex traffickers often deploy sick tactics to establish control over what (to them) is essentially a product. Basically, the more they can humiliate and dominate their victims, the more they can shift their control model from the use of actual force to coercive threat- obey me, or I will put you back in the cage.
Bottom line- it means they won't need to bruise the meat to obtain obedience. Bruises might jeopardise sales. Really sick stuff, huh?
Everybody mentions the Jo Cox- but what about David Amiss? I mentioned his killer to a local community shop volunteer (obvious Labour supporter), who, by the way, mentioned Jo Cox and trotted out the line about 'kinder politics'- and suddenly it was like he wanted to breeze over the fact that the murderer was an Islamist. And what happened in parliament? They spent a week talking about mean tweets and social media!
One has to enforce the law against the small percentages, or there is always going to friction between the larger groups, regardless of fears for personal safety. reputation damage, etc. If they didn't want the darker side of the job, they shouldn't have sought public office.
That being said, I don't think there need to be some types of changes made when it comes to personal threats online- I may not like Jess Philips, but we won't have democracy if people are free to dox, threaten public servants, or wish people's children die in a fire. I generally follow the rule that I won't write anything to anyone which I wouldn't be willing to say in person.
Maybe something along the lines of a Sword of Damocles clause relating to future joint enterprise- but only for threats and comment which imply physical violence or inducing physical harms?
Yes Geary, though I think the fear runs a lot deeper than personal safety.
I can thoroughly recommend this recent research paper - it certainly illuminated, for me, a lot of what is underlying our current situation.
Intro: "The question of identity haunts us, underlying our political excesses and extremes. As individuals, in the absence of a firm identity, we become adrift. We are in need of something capable of uniting our inner selves, and our interests and endeavours with others, so that we can cooperate and compete peacefully, productively, reciprocally, and sustainably.
The modern world has increasingly understood identity as a duality between an idiosyncratic individual, and an ever-totalising collective. These two tendencies have grown simultaneously, on the one hand the worship of particularity—the exception, difference—and on the other, a growing bureaucratic state and global systems with an authoritarian bent, necessary to protect increasingly fragmented individuals from each other.
The result has been the slow but persistent erosion of intermediary identities: the family, communities, religious affiliations, clubs, and the nation—as the individual sees these intermediary identities as constraining his or her freedom. The growing collective sees these intermediary participations as impure visions of itself, competing with its own totalising identity. We are left with hopeless and lonely individuals facing an increasingly controlling and invasive state.
There is another vision of identity, reflected in many of the traditional societies of our world and its natural patterns."
Yes, this is one of the problems with collectivisation- it has an urge to perfect human nature, and in so doing generally causes huge harms by 'throwing the baby out with the bathwater'.
A while back I looked at why populism was taking off in certain parts of Germany and not in others. It all stemmed back to German Reunification and East vs. West. In addition to being a totalitarian state and running the Stasi, Germany was quite 'progressive' when it came to issues like the family. The economic and social consequences of this social engineering are still apparent today in Germany, 35 years later.
West Germans are more traditional when it comes to family structure. This in turn has huge economic consequences and has a deep impact on the degree of value individuals can impart to communities. It funny how the collective types are willing to offer far more superficial social freedoms in exchange for liberty.
A while back I looked at average hourly rates in Western Europe vs. single parenthood/two parent family rates. There was a pretty good correlation between earnings and stable family percentages. The economic health of a nation can be predicted by the extent to which it has maintained the family.
Ironically, this isn't producing the political outcomes the collectivists would want- although it might in the absence of mass migration. AfD support is strongest in East Germany. It turns out the Leftists can either have socialism or multiculturalism (as opposed to multiethnicity) but not both- when multiculturalism is present, Right Populism is chosen by the populace over Left Populism.
I agree with you David. It feels like Appeasement, otherwise why not take action, just like they would for any other group of criminals. Knowing the predilection for 'terrorist' acts across the world, appeasement, they think will reduce the risk. However, this is a slippery slope. This approach has lead directly to the rape gang issue, two tier policing, two tier judiciary and undermining the British working classes who have to face these people on a daily basis, increasing resentment and fuelling anger.
Psychopaths (Islamists?) view appeasement as weakness and stupidity; further confirmation that their victims deserve what they get. The best way to deal with them is to ensure their strategy is unsuccessful. That two tier approach; whereby the victims are ignored (or even blamed) and those standing against the abuse are unfairly persecuted is about the worst thing you can do.
I've been watching a Jordan Peterson interview with Piers Morgan Uncensored. JP has been making the exact point about sadistic psychopaths and rape. It goes to the point I often make about subpar Muslims using Islam as an excuse. There is also the drug gang component- those guys will sell anything, including children.
I am not arguing Islam is blameless- just saying it is one factor in a toxic cocktail of circumstances.
No. NO. NOO! I am going to pretend I didn't read that. It seems every time I'm about to lay down a quote, some source online argues it's misattributed!
Anyway, what I was going to say was that the most important aspect of this tragic scandal goes back to Edmund Burke:
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”
> substandard specimens within their communities and not at all representative
The Koran says that nine year olds may be married and that infidel women are quite properly used as sex slaves. You are reaching for blunt honesty Geary but I think you should go all the way. Let's tell the whole truth.
Sure, but it's wrong to define the majority by a small minority. About 21 of the world's 50 or Muslim countries have raised the age of consent (and often marriage) to 16 or 18. In Pakistan, the country from where the offenders culture came, only 3.6% of marriages are to girls under the age of 15. One of the problems stems from the fact that a large portion of the UK Pakistani British population originated from a region which is considered quite backward by Pakistan's own standards.
Where I would agree with you is that Muslim communities living in the West need to start calling out the monsters within their own communities, or, at the very least, intervene unofficially to stop this shit from happening. Predictably, in some of the court cases the families of the perpetrators actually had the gall to blame the girls.
I agree with you on the Quran and the hadiths, but one could say the same thing about Leviticus. The difference is it would be difficult to find a Christian alive today who actually acts on Leviticus.
> I agree with you on the Quran and the hadiths, but one could say the same thing about Leviticus.
That's just the point, Christianity has left the Bronze Age behind.
I have a very shocking agenda: I think it's time to end the age of Correctness. Lennon was wrong: Imaging does not work. Every civilized person genuinely wants to believe in universal equality -- of races, sexes, cultures, religions, and everything else. Me too. Alas it is not so. Islam is the religion of jihad. Yup, people are mostly people and bad people will still be bad people irrespective of being Christian and good people will still be good people irrespective of Muhammad's constant calls to war. But Islam and the West (Christianity + enlightenment + science) are incompatible and the time comes when even civilized people should screw up their courage to the point where they just say it. Yes, most Muslims are not jihadis and pedophiles, but that community will leak a constant stream of them forever -- or until the Islamic reformation, which indeed could very well happen but hasn't yet.
Yes, I get sick of people saying that 'Islam is a religion of peace'. Only 7% of all wars in human history have been caused by religion, but over half of them (4%) have been instigated by Islam. At the turn of the 20th Century, Muslims constituted only 10% of world population- yet their religion had caused more wars than all the other religions of the world combined.
That being said, it's important to note that there does seem to be a particular intersection of culture and religion at play with the Grooming Rape Gang Scandal. The Muslim component is overwhelmingly Pakistani British. By contrast, Bangladeshi British are less present in the scandal, per population, than White British.
It's a very particular and literal interpretation of certain segments of Islam. If our academics were more honest and truth-seeking it would be fascinating to find out why this particular region of Pakistan either failed to evolve out of religious darkness, or developed a particularly unhealthy version of the religion.
Most ideas systems are susceptible to memetic pathological invasion, or can contain pathological DNA which can morph into something warped and twisted. And secularism isn't immune- fascism, communism, woke, with its pathologically anti-meritocratic stance, destroying societies ability to manage complexity, and making British and Canadian people 40% poorer as a result.
If we understood how these ideas festered and took hold, we could massively reduce human harms- but as the Rape Grooming Scandal has proved, most people will look away, because they don't want to deal with potentially career ending or limiting revelations.
> yet their religion had caused more wars than all the other religions of the world combined.
Which is hardly surprising since it is explicitly a religion of conquest.
> it's important to note that there does seem to be a particular intersection of culture and religion at play
Right. Facts first, spin and explanation second. One can throw the net widely in the hopes of catching all the fish one wants to catch -- but risk bycatch -- or one can focus in on the very heart of the bait-ball -- less bycatch OTOH half of the fish you want swim away. This is not a soluble problem, one must simply be aware of it and make one's best judgement.
I might say that the problem is with Islam itself and I'd not be wrong but perhaps I throw too widely. Someone else might say it's male Pakistani Muslims from the Panjshir between the ages of 20 and 40 who have no education -- they'd not be wrong either but perhaps they throw to narrowly. The thing is to avoid spin doctoring and try to be honest -- which you are. But we should face facts. It seems to me that ISIS are merely practicing Islam as it is written. (Just as Zionists exterminating the Canaanites in Gaza are merely following in Joshua's footsteps, are they not?) Let's call a spade a fucking shovel.
> Most people will look away, because they don't want to deal with potentially career ending or limiting revelations.
Yup. There is no one, magic explanation, yet if I had to pick a single word for how we got here, it would be COWARDICE.
... or perhaps COMPLAISANCE would be better.
The Greatest Generation are now gone. If you went thru the Depression and then served in WWII you knew something about fuckups and you knew the price of civilization. I'm old enough to remember those guys. Men who spoke their minds and damn the thoughtpolice.
> Bangladeshi British are less present in the scandal, per population, than White British
Thereyago ... I might be happier if that wasn't true, but if it damned well is true then thems the facts. And perhaps one should not be surprised that Bangladesh was so determined to break from Pakistan back in the day -- nor that the latter was so brutal in suppressing the former's independence. Nasty people.
Blair opened the floodgates for votes to ‘rub the rights noses in diversity’ and render their arguments out of date. You mentioned Andrew Neather so why the silly comment on Brexit? The Muslim vote is the very reason these girls were ignored ( though Muslims will abandon Labour once their numbers are high enough to vote their own tribe in).
You're misreading my comment there. My point was that if the grooming gangs hadn't existed and hadn't had a profound impact on 50 cities and towns (and they are only the ones we know about), then it's highly likely the vote would have gone the other way. It's only a theory, and not something I've had the time to delve into too deeply or research. I'll often spitball ideas in my writing because one of the reasons why I write is to crowdsource knowledge and destruction test ideas.
My theory is this- 2012 had the report for the Children's Commissioner. It's the best raw data source we are ever likely to get, because of 'elite' curation. 2400 group CSE in 14 months equals 2000 victims in a 12 month period. 36% White, 27% Asian, 16% Black, the rest undisclosed, not able to identify, or more than one race for the rapists. Some of these will have been type 2 offenders- but the unspoken truth is that in addition to the specific issue of Pakistani Muslim grooming gangs, the UK has a huge problem with teenage girls affiliating with organised drug gangs and being statutory raped by multiple offenders over time. Of course, a lot of these cases will have been significantly less egregious than the types of sexual torture we've read about in the court records, but it's still bad and still wrong.
Many probably migrated into the sex trade as adults. One of the problems with drinking or taking drugs while your brain is still developing is that the younger you are, the far greater the risk of the habit becoming an addiction. Over 25, most people who pick up chemical habits will only be light or infrequent users. Under 18, drink and drug habits have a very high risk of becoming an addiction.
Anyway, the Asian figure equals 500 group CSE cases a year. Over 30 years, that's 15,000 cases reported. However, child rape is even worse than adult rape for not being reported- only around 10% of victims ever come forward. That makes for a plausible estimate of 150,000 victims of Pakistani Muslim rape gangs over 30 years.
The average person knows 150 people as acquaintances- not friends or family, but people for whom we know a bit of their basic life story, a favourite hairdresser, or a bloke who we know from the pub with whom we've had a fair number of amusing nights. A not insignificant percentage of the British public will know someone personally who was a victim of grooming gangs. That might have had a significant impact on the Brexit vote.
Great point about the Muslim vote and Brexit though- I was only looking at it through how the grooming scandal might change voting patterns. Obviously, I knew that most migrants voted Remain- only about a third voted to Leave- But when I'm working on a new (to me) idea, I often tend to ignore all the old ones.
Did I mention Andrew Neather? I know I have in previous threads and comments, but not on anything over the past few days. Blair and Neather did more damage to this country than any other regime in British history.
No, I don't think so. I had problems before. I tried copying and pasting direct from Google and it just gave me a generic substack page, which is bizarre. I will try and fix it a bit later. In the meantime, trying clicking on the lady of shallot part, and then navigating to her most recent posts. It should be the last thing she posted.
I tried that, too, by clicking on her posts and then the actual post, but it only gave me a photo (of the perpetrators) Maybe it's just as well I don't read it, though, because it is so utterly depressing and disturbing. I've known about this for years but have read many articles in the last week or so. I don't know is this is down to Elon Musk's comments but there has been a renewed interest in these heinous crimes. It's great to see it's finally getting some exposure in the press, and the cover-up has been exposed. At the same time, it makes me totally lose trust in the government and the institutions.
Also try navigating to the Home page and typing in the ladyofshallott string in the search section (this only seems to work from the Notes Home search box).
This is really bugging me- it's as though Substack and/or Google seem to be making it difficult to find lesser known writers on Substack.
You forgot to mention unsung heroes like Marlene Guest . Have you heard of her? Or the BNP . I wonder why? Google. And your concerned mask for the working class slips and your contempt for them is shown at the end when you say the white working class don’t vote at the end.
Well they do. They tribal vote for Labour, a party that hates them. But to be honest voting is a scam and we are governed by those who aren’t working in the best interests of the English.
Nick Griffin and Marlene Guest deserve credit specifically for being the only ones willing to broach the subject of grooming rape gangs, but that's about the only thing for which they deserve credit. Before Tony Blair et al opened the floodgates to mass migration, literally nobody had problems with the far more moderate and sensible levels of annual migration of below 50,000 a year- polling from the time shows the level of concern to be somewhere around the level of 3%- a stark difference with today, with over two-thirds of people stating that migration has been too high in the past ten years, and 50% stating it has been far too high. Obviously, the BNP gained support after Blair opened the floodgates- which does show the hypocrisy of the cosmopolitan Left- British people showed their inherent racism by being angry about millions of White Europeans moving to the UK...
The data on Brexit was quite clear. On the Remain side they managed to mobilise occasional voters who were younger and quite often students- people who tended to complain a lot about politics, engage in activism, etc- but in many elections were too lazy to vote. On the Leave side, the Cambridge Analytica horseshit is overhyped, but what Aggregate IQ did manage to do to was mobilise voters who had become completely disenfranchised with the political process- those who believed that, regardless of which party got into power, it wouldn't make much difference to them, their families and communities.
These voters were generally older. What I will agree is all the talk about Leave areas having less experience of migration is bullshit. I live in Norfolk. We've basically become a colony for people fleeing the worst effects of community displacement. I doubt 20% living in Norfolk now were born in Norfolk. A lot of Londoners and people from Essex. Second place probably goes to Northerners- although Lincolnshire is not too bad. We were a pretty conservative area already, but, apart from the rare cosmopolitans, most prevalent in North Norfolk (otherwise known as Chelsea-On-Sea) and some people in Norwich (mainly associated with the research side of the UEA), most people who had moved to Norfolk from other, metropolitan parts of the country, leaned very heavily towards Leave.
Anyway, my point still stands- the Remain campaign successfully managed to outreach to a substantial portion of the population which had become disenfranchised with the political process. Leave managed to recruit occasional voters as well- they just weren't anywhere near as successful at it. Unless you can make a convincing argument that middle class people were more disenfranchised at the time of the referendum than working class people my point stands.
I worked on the manufacturing side of one of the largest suppliers to the building trade in the UK. I worked with working class people every day. I was the first guy since the business founder who got invited to both the workers and managers Christmas parties. To be honest I don't really fit into the British class structure- my dad was American, blue collar with a big house, and an NCO who became a ship's captain in the oil business for his second career.
I agree with you on voting being a scam- particularly Brexit. Brexiteers comprised two groups- people who were concerned over what they were losing (their economic interests, their communities, their culture, etc) and people who wanted to turn Britain into a Singapore of the West. The first group had the numbers, but the second group were the elites and had all the political power.
People go on about the 1% and the billionaire class, but they aren't the people that control most Western countries- what political power they do posses is lobbying interest and from the money they've paid to the government protection racket. The real political power resides with the 10%- the people who run the universities, the almost completely middle class media, the people who run government departments- the people who think it's their job to save democracy from the voters. What's so depressing is how successful they've been at controlling everything- as well as the fact that most of them are about as useful as a chocolate fireguard. Most official government meetings involving politicians are actually scripted by the civil service. No joke- the people we've supposedly elected actually have scripts to read for the purposes of minutes and public consumption...
Thank you so much for linking my article and for sharing yours. It was really the perfect collision of national and local government obsessed with their multiculturalism project, a protected group with tribal thinking, local authority incompetence and couldn’t give a fuckery, a police force with an established culture of cover-up and a backdrop of moral, economic and social decline. There are no words for how utterly shameful it was - be sure that it is still going on.
I'm not saying that there was never a far right in the UK- quite the contrary, I had a friend who was in SKAR (skinheads against racism). But overall, the problem was far smaller than the Left believed. Where the Left and the institutions went wrong was in believing that by turning a blind eye and covering things up, they might actually make things better for Muslim communities.
People will always find out. The truth will almost always out, unless the conspiracy involved is tight and only involves a small number of people. And when it does, the fact that those in power hid the truth, will make the problem at least 10 times worse- specifically for communities that they purported to want to protect.
If the establishment had, at any point, taken genuine action- perhaps by making examples of drug gangs associated with grooming within the Asian community, then this would be a non-story, a historical footnote, and the number of victims would have been ten times less.
We had skinhead gangs in Belfast where I grew up. They were largely affiliated with Loyalist paramilitaries and very right-wing. The issue of tribe again.
Yes, the grooming gang members I talked with were well aware that they were ‘bad Muslims’. Some even said so. They consumed large amounts of pornography, as I noted in my Substack, which featured white women so they came to see all white females as highly sexual and available.
I think we can’t talk about any of this without placing it in the context of the larger economic, moral and social decline that has plagued the West for decades now…
The Left has been chipping away at our culture, our history and the basic building blocks of stable society for decades. I went to uni in the early nineties. The Left bemoaned the fact that we were the most politically apathetic generation in memory, least prone to activism. I wear it as a badge of pride- being more interested in raves, bacchanals and women was a sign of having a life (and a personality:)).
Raj Chetty's research on social mobility is well worth a read. He followed every child in America during a specific period through the tax system. It turned out the single most important factor in upward social mobility was the percentage of fathers in a given community- especially salient for boys.
They've re-edited this 2014 article from Slate somewhat, but still kept the main conclusions of his research.
https://slate.com/human-interest/2014/01/new-harvard-study-where-is-the-land-of-opportunity-finds-single-parents-are-the-key-link-to-economic-opportunity.html
Thank you. Very interesting. Boys need fathers. The epidemic of knife crime in London is driven by so many young black men having no father or constant father figure in their life. I have sons and have taught boys and young men as a tutor. Boys generally start to separate from the mother around 7 onwards. They’ll start to push back and defy them. Then again at around 13/14, when serious hormonal changes are in over-drive, they’ll push back again. Without any correction and guidance to anchor them, they drift.
The only thing William Golding got wrong was the age. One of the reasons why the few matriarchal societies of the world actually work is because as soon as boys hit puberty, they are given over to male society for supervision and socialisation.
The other aspect is that, especially in blue collar or working class communities, fathers act as a form of unofficial social safety net for boys who don't do well at school. Without the fathers, blue collar or working class quickly becomes an underclass- this is why some working class communities are functional and others are not- it all depends on local labour participation rates, jobs and hypergamy.
A huge proportion of the disparities which relate to race actually stems from Black people being disproportionately hit by the rapid deindustrialisation of the West. People should be looking at these issues more through the lens of class, and the ways in which macroeconomic policy devastated many communities, and hit some harder than others.
Thank you. Very interesting. Boys need fathers. The epidemic of knife crime in London is driven by so many young black men having no father or constant father figure in their life. I have sons and have taught boys and young men as a tutor. Boys generally start to separate from the mother around 7 onwards. They’ll start to push back and defy them. Then again at around 13/14, when serious hormonal changes are in over-drive, they’ll push back again. Without any correction and guidance to anchor them, they drift.
"They consumed large amounts of pornography, as I noted in my Substack, which featured white women so they came to see all white females as highly sexual and available."
Perhaps there's more to it than many of us are willing to admit?
Frank Furedi wrote a very interesting essay on the rape gangs, he suggests that there is an underlying element of racial revenge involved.
Excerpt: "The sexual exploitation and abuse perpetrated by the rape gangs has little to do with the quest for sexual pleasure or even sex as such. Sexual domination serves as a medium for inflicting vengeance against white society. The refusal to publicly acknowledge that racial dimension of these crimes constitutes a betrayal of the victims. In effect the weakest and most powerless section of British society is sacrificed on the altars of multiculturalism."
Racial Vengeance Is Given A Free Pass In Grooming Gang Britain
A sociological account of the organised sexual violation, degradation and humiliation of British white girls.
https://frankfuredi.substack.com/p/racial-vengeance-is-given-a-free
Yes, I read the Furedi article.
On the pornography issue, I think it was Alex Phillips on the Heretics Podcast who made the point that amongst more recent waves of illegal migration, the people smugglers have been actively recruiting men to move to the West with said pornography- specifically selecting for those who want sex with mainly white women.
Andrew Gold (who runs Heretics) is now on Substack. He has 17.9K subscribers.
I would definitely agree with the revenge element. The child I supported suffered abuse that often had an element of humiliation. They put her in a cage (one of those dog crate things) and urinated on her. They did the kind of things that you’d have to go on the dark web to access.
It's also an abuse pattern for coercive control. It's a particularly egregious example, but sex traffickers often deploy sick tactics to establish control over what (to them) is essentially a product. Basically, the more they can humiliate and dominate their victims, the more they can shift their control model from the use of actual force to coercive threat- obey me, or I will put you back in the cage.
Bottom line- it means they won't need to bruise the meat to obtain obedience. Bruises might jeopardise sales. Really sick stuff, huh?
I think the powers that be are terrified of the Islamists.
Where to from there?
Everybody mentions the Jo Cox- but what about David Amiss? I mentioned his killer to a local community shop volunteer (obvious Labour supporter), who, by the way, mentioned Jo Cox and trotted out the line about 'kinder politics'- and suddenly it was like he wanted to breeze over the fact that the murderer was an Islamist. And what happened in parliament? They spent a week talking about mean tweets and social media!
One has to enforce the law against the small percentages, or there is always going to friction between the larger groups, regardless of fears for personal safety. reputation damage, etc. If they didn't want the darker side of the job, they shouldn't have sought public office.
That being said, I don't think there need to be some types of changes made when it comes to personal threats online- I may not like Jess Philips, but we won't have democracy if people are free to dox, threaten public servants, or wish people's children die in a fire. I generally follow the rule that I won't write anything to anyone which I wouldn't be willing to say in person.
Maybe something along the lines of a Sword of Damocles clause relating to future joint enterprise- but only for threats and comment which imply physical violence or inducing physical harms?
Yes Geary, though I think the fear runs a lot deeper than personal safety.
I can thoroughly recommend this recent research paper - it certainly illuminated, for me, a lot of what is underlying our current situation.
Intro: "The question of identity haunts us, underlying our political excesses and extremes. As individuals, in the absence of a firm identity, we become adrift. We are in need of something capable of uniting our inner selves, and our interests and endeavours with others, so that we can cooperate and compete peacefully, productively, reciprocally, and sustainably.
The modern world has increasingly understood identity as a duality between an idiosyncratic individual, and an ever-totalising collective. These two tendencies have grown simultaneously, on the one hand the worship of particularity—the exception, difference—and on the other, a growing bureaucratic state and global systems with an authoritarian bent, necessary to protect increasingly fragmented individuals from each other.
The result has been the slow but persistent erosion of intermediary identities: the family, communities, religious affiliations, clubs, and the nation—as the individual sees these intermediary identities as constraining his or her freedom. The growing collective sees these intermediary participations as impure visions of itself, competing with its own totalising identity. We are left with hopeless and lonely individuals facing an increasingly controlling and invasive state.
There is another vision of identity, reflected in many of the traditional societies of our world and its natural patterns."
https://www.arcforum.com/research-papers/the-subsidiary-hierarchy
Yes, this is one of the problems with collectivisation- it has an urge to perfect human nature, and in so doing generally causes huge harms by 'throwing the baby out with the bathwater'.
A while back I looked at why populism was taking off in certain parts of Germany and not in others. It all stemmed back to German Reunification and East vs. West. In addition to being a totalitarian state and running the Stasi, Germany was quite 'progressive' when it came to issues like the family. The economic and social consequences of this social engineering are still apparent today in Germany, 35 years later.
West Germans are more traditional when it comes to family structure. This in turn has huge economic consequences and has a deep impact on the degree of value individuals can impart to communities. It funny how the collective types are willing to offer far more superficial social freedoms in exchange for liberty.
A while back I looked at average hourly rates in Western Europe vs. single parenthood/two parent family rates. There was a pretty good correlation between earnings and stable family percentages. The economic health of a nation can be predicted by the extent to which it has maintained the family.
Ironically, this isn't producing the political outcomes the collectivists would want- although it might in the absence of mass migration. AfD support is strongest in East Germany. It turns out the Leftists can either have socialism or multiculturalism (as opposed to multiethnicity) but not both- when multiculturalism is present, Right Populism is chosen by the populace over Left Populism.
I agree with you David. It feels like Appeasement, otherwise why not take action, just like they would for any other group of criminals. Knowing the predilection for 'terrorist' acts across the world, appeasement, they think will reduce the risk. However, this is a slippery slope. This approach has lead directly to the rape gang issue, two tier policing, two tier judiciary and undermining the British working classes who have to face these people on a daily basis, increasing resentment and fuelling anger.
Covering problems up always makes them worse in the long-run,
Yes Jennifer, appeasement is a very bad idea.
Psychopaths (Islamists?) view appeasement as weakness and stupidity; further confirmation that their victims deserve what they get. The best way to deal with them is to ensure their strategy is unsuccessful. That two tier approach; whereby the victims are ignored (or even blamed) and those standing against the abuse are unfairly persecuted is about the worst thing you can do.
I've been watching a Jordan Peterson interview with Piers Morgan Uncensored. JP has been making the exact point about sadistic psychopaths and rape. It goes to the point I often make about subpar Muslims using Islam as an excuse. There is also the drug gang component- those guys will sell anything, including children.
I am not arguing Islam is blameless- just saying it is one factor in a toxic cocktail of circumstances.
No. NO. NOO! I am going to pretend I didn't read that. It seems every time I'm about to lay down a quote, some source online argues it's misattributed!
Anyway, what I was going to say was that the most important aspect of this tragic scandal goes back to Edmund Burke:
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”
Take that Reuters!
> substandard specimens within their communities and not at all representative
The Koran says that nine year olds may be married and that infidel women are quite properly used as sex slaves. You are reaching for blunt honesty Geary but I think you should go all the way. Let's tell the whole truth.
Sure, but it's wrong to define the majority by a small minority. About 21 of the world's 50 or Muslim countries have raised the age of consent (and often marriage) to 16 or 18. In Pakistan, the country from where the offenders culture came, only 3.6% of marriages are to girls under the age of 15. One of the problems stems from the fact that a large portion of the UK Pakistani British population originated from a region which is considered quite backward by Pakistan's own standards.
Where I would agree with you is that Muslim communities living in the West need to start calling out the monsters within their own communities, or, at the very least, intervene unofficially to stop this shit from happening. Predictably, in some of the court cases the families of the perpetrators actually had the gall to blame the girls.
I agree with you on the Quran and the hadiths, but one could say the same thing about Leviticus. The difference is it would be difficult to find a Christian alive today who actually acts on Leviticus.
Some excellent conversation here!
> I agree with you on the Quran and the hadiths, but one could say the same thing about Leviticus.
That's just the point, Christianity has left the Bronze Age behind.
I have a very shocking agenda: I think it's time to end the age of Correctness. Lennon was wrong: Imaging does not work. Every civilized person genuinely wants to believe in universal equality -- of races, sexes, cultures, religions, and everything else. Me too. Alas it is not so. Islam is the religion of jihad. Yup, people are mostly people and bad people will still be bad people irrespective of being Christian and good people will still be good people irrespective of Muhammad's constant calls to war. But Islam and the West (Christianity + enlightenment + science) are incompatible and the time comes when even civilized people should screw up their courage to the point where they just say it. Yes, most Muslims are not jihadis and pedophiles, but that community will leak a constant stream of them forever -- or until the Islamic reformation, which indeed could very well happen but hasn't yet.
Yes, I get sick of people saying that 'Islam is a religion of peace'. Only 7% of all wars in human history have been caused by religion, but over half of them (4%) have been instigated by Islam. At the turn of the 20th Century, Muslims constituted only 10% of world population- yet their religion had caused more wars than all the other religions of the world combined.
That being said, it's important to note that there does seem to be a particular intersection of culture and religion at play with the Grooming Rape Gang Scandal. The Muslim component is overwhelmingly Pakistani British. By contrast, Bangladeshi British are less present in the scandal, per population, than White British.
It's a very particular and literal interpretation of certain segments of Islam. If our academics were more honest and truth-seeking it would be fascinating to find out why this particular region of Pakistan either failed to evolve out of religious darkness, or developed a particularly unhealthy version of the religion.
Most ideas systems are susceptible to memetic pathological invasion, or can contain pathological DNA which can morph into something warped and twisted. And secularism isn't immune- fascism, communism, woke, with its pathologically anti-meritocratic stance, destroying societies ability to manage complexity, and making British and Canadian people 40% poorer as a result.
If we understood how these ideas festered and took hold, we could massively reduce human harms- but as the Rape Grooming Scandal has proved, most people will look away, because they don't want to deal with potentially career ending or limiting revelations.
> yet their religion had caused more wars than all the other religions of the world combined.
Which is hardly surprising since it is explicitly a religion of conquest.
> it's important to note that there does seem to be a particular intersection of culture and religion at play
Right. Facts first, spin and explanation second. One can throw the net widely in the hopes of catching all the fish one wants to catch -- but risk bycatch -- or one can focus in on the very heart of the bait-ball -- less bycatch OTOH half of the fish you want swim away. This is not a soluble problem, one must simply be aware of it and make one's best judgement.
I might say that the problem is with Islam itself and I'd not be wrong but perhaps I throw too widely. Someone else might say it's male Pakistani Muslims from the Panjshir between the ages of 20 and 40 who have no education -- they'd not be wrong either but perhaps they throw to narrowly. The thing is to avoid spin doctoring and try to be honest -- which you are. But we should face facts. It seems to me that ISIS are merely practicing Islam as it is written. (Just as Zionists exterminating the Canaanites in Gaza are merely following in Joshua's footsteps, are they not?) Let's call a spade a fucking shovel.
> Most people will look away, because they don't want to deal with potentially career ending or limiting revelations.
Yup. There is no one, magic explanation, yet if I had to pick a single word for how we got here, it would be COWARDICE.
... or perhaps COMPLAISANCE would be better.
The Greatest Generation are now gone. If you went thru the Depression and then served in WWII you knew something about fuckups and you knew the price of civilization. I'm old enough to remember those guys. Men who spoke their minds and damn the thoughtpolice.
BTW ...
> Bangladeshi British are less present in the scandal, per population, than White British
Thereyago ... I might be happier if that wasn't true, but if it damned well is true then thems the facts. And perhaps one should not be surprised that Bangladesh was so determined to break from Pakistan back in the day -- nor that the latter was so brutal in suppressing the former's independence. Nasty people.
Brexit is to blame for grooming gangs ? 🤣🙄
Blair opened the floodgates for votes to ‘rub the rights noses in diversity’ and render their arguments out of date. You mentioned Andrew Neather so why the silly comment on Brexit? The Muslim vote is the very reason these girls were ignored ( though Muslims will abandon Labour once their numbers are high enough to vote their own tribe in).
You're misreading my comment there. My point was that if the grooming gangs hadn't existed and hadn't had a profound impact on 50 cities and towns (and they are only the ones we know about), then it's highly likely the vote would have gone the other way. It's only a theory, and not something I've had the time to delve into too deeply or research. I'll often spitball ideas in my writing because one of the reasons why I write is to crowdsource knowledge and destruction test ideas.
My theory is this- 2012 had the report for the Children's Commissioner. It's the best raw data source we are ever likely to get, because of 'elite' curation. 2400 group CSE in 14 months equals 2000 victims in a 12 month period. 36% White, 27% Asian, 16% Black, the rest undisclosed, not able to identify, or more than one race for the rapists. Some of these will have been type 2 offenders- but the unspoken truth is that in addition to the specific issue of Pakistani Muslim grooming gangs, the UK has a huge problem with teenage girls affiliating with organised drug gangs and being statutory raped by multiple offenders over time. Of course, a lot of these cases will have been significantly less egregious than the types of sexual torture we've read about in the court records, but it's still bad and still wrong.
Many probably migrated into the sex trade as adults. One of the problems with drinking or taking drugs while your brain is still developing is that the younger you are, the far greater the risk of the habit becoming an addiction. Over 25, most people who pick up chemical habits will only be light or infrequent users. Under 18, drink and drug habits have a very high risk of becoming an addiction.
Anyway, the Asian figure equals 500 group CSE cases a year. Over 30 years, that's 15,000 cases reported. However, child rape is even worse than adult rape for not being reported- only around 10% of victims ever come forward. That makes for a plausible estimate of 150,000 victims of Pakistani Muslim rape gangs over 30 years.
The average person knows 150 people as acquaintances- not friends or family, but people for whom we know a bit of their basic life story, a favourite hairdresser, or a bloke who we know from the pub with whom we've had a fair number of amusing nights. A not insignificant percentage of the British public will know someone personally who was a victim of grooming gangs. That might have had a significant impact on the Brexit vote.
Great point about the Muslim vote and Brexit though- I was only looking at it through how the grooming scandal might change voting patterns. Obviously, I knew that most migrants voted Remain- only about a third voted to Leave- But when I'm working on a new (to me) idea, I often tend to ignore all the old ones.
Did I mention Andrew Neather? I know I have in previous threads and comments, but not on anything over the past few days. Blair and Neather did more damage to this country than any other regime in British history.
Unfortunately, I can't open the LadyofShalott link. Do I have to subscribe to read it?
No, I don't think so. I had problems before. I tried copying and pasting direct from Google and it just gave me a generic substack page, which is bizarre. I will try and fix it a bit later. In the meantime, trying clicking on the lady of shallot part, and then navigating to her most recent posts. It should be the last thing she posted.
I tried that, too, by clicking on her posts and then the actual post, but it only gave me a photo (of the perpetrators) Maybe it's just as well I don't read it, though, because it is so utterly depressing and disturbing. I've known about this for years but have read many articles in the last week or so. I don't know is this is down to Elon Musk's comments but there has been a renewed interest in these heinous crimes. It's great to see it's finally getting some exposure in the press, and the cover-up has been exposed. At the same time, it makes me totally lose trust in the government and the institutions.
Ah, once you get to the photo of the perpetrators, you need to double left-click on that!
Unfortunately, it didn't work. Never mind.
https://substack.com/@ladyofshalott2/p-154365567
Also try navigating to the Home page and typing in the ladyofshallott string in the search section (this only seems to work from the Notes Home search box).
This is really bugging me- it's as though Substack and/or Google seem to be making it difficult to find lesser known writers on Substack.
Okay, I'll try that! Thank you
You forgot to mention unsung heroes like Marlene Guest . Have you heard of her? Or the BNP . I wonder why? Google. And your concerned mask for the working class slips and your contempt for them is shown at the end when you say the white working class don’t vote at the end.
Well they do. They tribal vote for Labour, a party that hates them. But to be honest voting is a scam and we are governed by those who aren’t working in the best interests of the English.
Nick Griffin and Marlene Guest deserve credit specifically for being the only ones willing to broach the subject of grooming rape gangs, but that's about the only thing for which they deserve credit. Before Tony Blair et al opened the floodgates to mass migration, literally nobody had problems with the far more moderate and sensible levels of annual migration of below 50,000 a year- polling from the time shows the level of concern to be somewhere around the level of 3%- a stark difference with today, with over two-thirds of people stating that migration has been too high in the past ten years, and 50% stating it has been far too high. Obviously, the BNP gained support after Blair opened the floodgates- which does show the hypocrisy of the cosmopolitan Left- British people showed their inherent racism by being angry about millions of White Europeans moving to the UK...
The data on Brexit was quite clear. On the Remain side they managed to mobilise occasional voters who were younger and quite often students- people who tended to complain a lot about politics, engage in activism, etc- but in many elections were too lazy to vote. On the Leave side, the Cambridge Analytica horseshit is overhyped, but what Aggregate IQ did manage to do to was mobilise voters who had become completely disenfranchised with the political process- those who believed that, regardless of which party got into power, it wouldn't make much difference to them, their families and communities.
These voters were generally older. What I will agree is all the talk about Leave areas having less experience of migration is bullshit. I live in Norfolk. We've basically become a colony for people fleeing the worst effects of community displacement. I doubt 20% living in Norfolk now were born in Norfolk. A lot of Londoners and people from Essex. Second place probably goes to Northerners- although Lincolnshire is not too bad. We were a pretty conservative area already, but, apart from the rare cosmopolitans, most prevalent in North Norfolk (otherwise known as Chelsea-On-Sea) and some people in Norwich (mainly associated with the research side of the UEA), most people who had moved to Norfolk from other, metropolitan parts of the country, leaned very heavily towards Leave.
Anyway, my point still stands- the Remain campaign successfully managed to outreach to a substantial portion of the population which had become disenfranchised with the political process. Leave managed to recruit occasional voters as well- they just weren't anywhere near as successful at it. Unless you can make a convincing argument that middle class people were more disenfranchised at the time of the referendum than working class people my point stands.
I worked on the manufacturing side of one of the largest suppliers to the building trade in the UK. I worked with working class people every day. I was the first guy since the business founder who got invited to both the workers and managers Christmas parties. To be honest I don't really fit into the British class structure- my dad was American, blue collar with a big house, and an NCO who became a ship's captain in the oil business for his second career.
I agree with you on voting being a scam- particularly Brexit. Brexiteers comprised two groups- people who were concerned over what they were losing (their economic interests, their communities, their culture, etc) and people who wanted to turn Britain into a Singapore of the West. The first group had the numbers, but the second group were the elites and had all the political power.
People go on about the 1% and the billionaire class, but they aren't the people that control most Western countries- what political power they do posses is lobbying interest and from the money they've paid to the government protection racket. The real political power resides with the 10%- the people who run the universities, the almost completely middle class media, the people who run government departments- the people who think it's their job to save democracy from the voters. What's so depressing is how successful they've been at controlling everything- as well as the fact that most of them are about as useful as a chocolate fireguard. Most official government meetings involving politicians are actually scripted by the civil service. No joke- the people we've supposedly elected actually have scripts to read for the purposes of minutes and public consumption...