It might take a while, but that which is intolerable will ultimately not be tolerated. Again, I think the rape case report and recent Muslim violence has created awareness, but opponents need to articulate a policy demand.
Thanks for a thoughtful summary of some hard issues. I don’t foresee significant conflict, just a steady decline and self aggregation into enclaves. The majority, or at least a majority of the influential and prosperous will see no problem, other than from the ‘far right.’ Managed media, surveillance and law enforcement will quash any serious problems quickly but a token ‘far right’ presence will be permitted to justify the containment. Over time we become more divided, less trusting, cynical and weary, regarding the state with fear and loathing on account of its brutality and its incompetence. A mix of Eastern Europe under communist rule mixed with Norhern Ireland. I suppose it could be worse.
FYI the report was an unofficial report organized by Rupert Lowe.
Note that the UK government now wants to ban social media anonymity, and possibly VPNs. They seem to be moving to a USSR/GDR model. Canada moving in the same direction.
The plan seems to be to freeze a social stasis into place. But the Boomers won’t be around forever and you can’t resist social trends forever. What comes after?
The other thing is that British people expect the state to provide. There is going to be a point where it can’t provide for all.
I think the most likely civil conflict is if a right wing government is elected. Real conflict takes a certain equality of resources that currently doesn’t exist.
Remember that the British government would not grant actual UK passports to Hong Kong residents desiring them in the years before the 1997 retrocession of Hong Kong to the Peoples Republic of China. The government of Britain actively tried to keep Hong Kongers, some of the most productive people on the planet, from moving to the UK. But that same government has swung the doors wide open for "refugees" from Africa and the Islamic world. Hmmnnn. Sudan gained independence from UK administration in 1956 - full independence. So, an individual would have to be about 71 years old to even have been an infant in arms in Sudan under British colonial rule. You've got to kind of wonder about the "refugee" status claims. The UK has no reason to be granting that to Sudanese. For that matter, Pakistan became independent from the UK in 1949.
The UK as a surveillance state (and it is the most heavily surveilled place in the world, exceeding even China, and that's saying a lot), can get away with a very thin line of coppers, most of them NOT armed police, only because the general population still treats the Bobbies with a modicum of respect. When that respect is gone, conditions may change (towards the violent end) far faster than most expect possible. If guns are not available, (and it is anyone's guess how many are hidden away in the British Isles, albeit illegally,) it's fire and the sword, and the UK is awash in literal swords, many of which have blood stained histories of their own. And there is still a strong archery tradition there as well. Bodkin points were developed well over a millennia ago to penetrate armor, and even modern aramid fabric "cut proof" and "bullet proof" vests can be penetrated fairly easily by a bodkin pointed arrow. (Solid plate Level IV rifle armor is a different story of course.) But in a street fight between a Chinese box cutter or a kitchen knife and a Sheffield steel sword, it doesn't take Polymarket to predict the probable winner. Point is, guns are not the be all and end all - willingness to take up even traditional arms and kill is what makes the difference. It's one thing for grown men to abuse teenage girls. It's a far different thing to face a pissed off armed group of men intent on ending your life.
Nor does it take a majority to win a civil war. In fact, a solid three percent willing to take up arms and drive the points home has proven successful more often than not. Sad times. I fear the bloodshed has only just begun.
Good post, as usual. I guess I'm less optimistic than you are; I really don't see how any of this can be resolved without bloodshed. But I hope I'm wrong and you're right. Ugly, ugly, ugly.
Britain already has Islamic enclaves with Muslim majority councils. Birthrates will ensure these expand. Demographics alone say Anglo-Norman-Britain is already toast.
For the white majority, the next 100 years will look very similar to the last 70: gradual decline within which it's still possible to have a family and a halfway decent existence. As long as that's maintained, there will be no large uprising. Conflict will be localized as Muslim enclaves expand into white areas, a process which will be managed by London (ie: the state will forcibly move white Britons out of areas that have been partially Islamo-gentrified already) and denied/ignored by the BBC.
Then 1 day the British Parliament will elect a Muslim PM and it's all over, but everyone who understands what has been lost will be long since dead. Viola, revolution with limited bloodshed.
Want to know what it's like to live through? Read The Final Pagan Generation by Edward Watts. It's long, but chronicles the 80 years from AD 320-400 in Rome, the transition from pagan temples to Christian churches.
It might take a while, but that which is intolerable will ultimately not be tolerated. Again, I think the rape case report and recent Muslim violence has created awareness, but opponents need to articulate a policy demand.
Thanks for a thoughtful summary of some hard issues. I don’t foresee significant conflict, just a steady decline and self aggregation into enclaves. The majority, or at least a majority of the influential and prosperous will see no problem, other than from the ‘far right.’ Managed media, surveillance and law enforcement will quash any serious problems quickly but a token ‘far right’ presence will be permitted to justify the containment. Over time we become more divided, less trusting, cynical and weary, regarding the state with fear and loathing on account of its brutality and its incompetence. A mix of Eastern Europe under communist rule mixed with Norhern Ireland. I suppose it could be worse.
FYI the report was an unofficial report organized by Rupert Lowe.
Note that the UK government now wants to ban social media anonymity, and possibly VPNs. They seem to be moving to a USSR/GDR model. Canada moving in the same direction.
The plan seems to be to freeze a social stasis into place. But the Boomers won’t be around forever and you can’t resist social trends forever. What comes after?
The other thing is that British people expect the state to provide. There is going to be a point where it can’t provide for all.
I think the most likely civil conflict is if a right wing government is elected. Real conflict takes a certain equality of resources that currently doesn’t exist.
Remember that the British government would not grant actual UK passports to Hong Kong residents desiring them in the years before the 1997 retrocession of Hong Kong to the Peoples Republic of China. The government of Britain actively tried to keep Hong Kongers, some of the most productive people on the planet, from moving to the UK. But that same government has swung the doors wide open for "refugees" from Africa and the Islamic world. Hmmnnn. Sudan gained independence from UK administration in 1956 - full independence. So, an individual would have to be about 71 years old to even have been an infant in arms in Sudan under British colonial rule. You've got to kind of wonder about the "refugee" status claims. The UK has no reason to be granting that to Sudanese. For that matter, Pakistan became independent from the UK in 1949.
The UK as a surveillance state (and it is the most heavily surveilled place in the world, exceeding even China, and that's saying a lot), can get away with a very thin line of coppers, most of them NOT armed police, only because the general population still treats the Bobbies with a modicum of respect. When that respect is gone, conditions may change (towards the violent end) far faster than most expect possible. If guns are not available, (and it is anyone's guess how many are hidden away in the British Isles, albeit illegally,) it's fire and the sword, and the UK is awash in literal swords, many of which have blood stained histories of their own. And there is still a strong archery tradition there as well. Bodkin points were developed well over a millennia ago to penetrate armor, and even modern aramid fabric "cut proof" and "bullet proof" vests can be penetrated fairly easily by a bodkin pointed arrow. (Solid plate Level IV rifle armor is a different story of course.) But in a street fight between a Chinese box cutter or a kitchen knife and a Sheffield steel sword, it doesn't take Polymarket to predict the probable winner. Point is, guns are not the be all and end all - willingness to take up even traditional arms and kill is what makes the difference. It's one thing for grown men to abuse teenage girls. It's a far different thing to face a pissed off armed group of men intent on ending your life.
Nor does it take a majority to win a civil war. In fact, a solid three percent willing to take up arms and drive the points home has proven successful more often than not. Sad times. I fear the bloodshed has only just begun.
Arrows v body armor: https://youtube.com/shorts/5UCMSmzKHX0
Let's not give Antifa any ideas.
Good post, as usual. I guess I'm less optimistic than you are; I really don't see how any of this can be resolved without bloodshed. But I hope I'm wrong and you're right. Ugly, ugly, ugly.
Britain already has Islamic enclaves with Muslim majority councils. Birthrates will ensure these expand. Demographics alone say Anglo-Norman-Britain is already toast.
For the white majority, the next 100 years will look very similar to the last 70: gradual decline within which it's still possible to have a family and a halfway decent existence. As long as that's maintained, there will be no large uprising. Conflict will be localized as Muslim enclaves expand into white areas, a process which will be managed by London (ie: the state will forcibly move white Britons out of areas that have been partially Islamo-gentrified already) and denied/ignored by the BBC.
Then 1 day the British Parliament will elect a Muslim PM and it's all over, but everyone who understands what has been lost will be long since dead. Viola, revolution with limited bloodshed.
Want to know what it's like to live through? Read The Final Pagan Generation by Edward Watts. It's long, but chronicles the 80 years from AD 320-400 in Rome, the transition from pagan temples to Christian churches.
That's just about as a depressing thought as a bloody civil war. Buh-by, Britannia.