Former US presidential candidate Pat Buchanan, who served as an adviser to Presidents Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan, has recently warned that Britain, along with the rest of Europe, faces a "massive tide of Muslim and African immigration in the next few decades." He has said that the race riots in Burnley, Oldham and our other northern towns were harbingers of the long, hot summers that are coming to Europe.

Buchanan's book, The Death of the West, addresses the issue of immigration throughout the western world. He said that Whites could be outnumbered in London by as early as 2010. He predicts that America itself will become a Third World nation by 2050.

The West is now in a very parlous state, consisting of only ten percent of the world's population, and has rapidly declining fertility rates. It is worth remembering that there are now no all-white countries left anywhere, with the possible exception of Iceland. On the other hand there are many all-Arab, all-Black and all-Asian countries.

If the West is ‘dying’, then, it can only be the result of a mass suicide, or a death-wish. The fact is that Western countries have been subject to a rolling coup d'etat by the generation of influential élites educated at Western Universities in the late 1960s and 1970s. These people, who are now in positions of power, have wreaked cultural and racial anarchy throughout Europe.

About a generation ago, all Western countries were mono-racial, conservative (small ‘c’), moral, family minded, with well-policed borders and much more punitive legal systems than are the case now. Yet these countries were still free in the sense that philosophers understand. Further - and this is worth stressing - the West's growing post-war prosperity did not come about through mass immigration, but from technological genius and hard work.

This is not to argue that the social and racial changes that have taken place have been engineered deliberately to weaken Western societies, or to demoralise and fragment them, to make them defenceless, either from inside or from outside. But the ultimate effect of their policies has been to bring these very things about.

20th century politicians revolutionaries

European politicians in the 20th century have been revolutionaries either in practice or in theory - in the sense of breaking with historic human traditions and promoting new types of ‘social movement’ backed up by brainwashing propaganda. It started with the Bolshevik Revolution and has continued, in different guises, ever since.

Post-war liberals, however, have gone further than the communists did; the latter reorganised society along pre-existing doctrines. There is no universal law, no political philosophy or religious doctrine that says that a mixed-race society must be created for some higher good.

On the contrary, whereas communists genuinely thought that a collectivised economy could do away with the evils of capitalism, liberals, with their inherited knowledge as former colonial masters, could see with their own eyes what horrors tribal and ethnic tensions could wreak. They must have been fools if they thought that multi-racialism would not bring about similar divisions, rootlessness and needless tension in their own countries.

They were even bigger fools if they couldn't learn the political lessons of the pre-war years. The plain fact is that, regardless of the consequences, they let migrants into Europe simply because the ideological atlas had changed overnight. The doctrines of the pre-war closed states, whose élites persecuted minorities and dissidents, was reversed with a vengeance. Just like autocrats, the liberals couldn't have cared less whether their pro-immigration policies had the approval of the receiving communities or not. Radical social engineering was both a reaction to, and born of, the same revolutionary processes that gave rise to authoritarian communism.

References to the crimes of history and the pursuit of revenge against that history are common to totalitarian states. Similarly, the legacy of the British Empire must be ‘remembered’ so that it will "not obstruct the development of a new kind of nation and new kinds of national identities", wrote Catherine Hall in an educational supplement.

Creating an entirely new population

Earlier despotic systems talked about creating a new kind of man, but in the European post-war case this is taken to literal extremes - racial mixing that will ultimately, if not stopped, have the effect of totally exchanging one population for another.

In any event, people of different races living in one homeland cannot all be indigenous; hence the nature of the European nation-state has to change. People simply become citizens of a political state, a process which has been accelerated under the auspices of the EU. Immigrants possess a residency legitimacy that stems only from political power, and not from the historic communities into which they settled. Hence their own interpretations of European history emphasises colonialism - the foreign projection of that political power. This is noticeable in any TV studio discussion about multi-culturalism: people of immigrant origin have no common point of contact with the rest.

In fact, liberals have followed the communist line in more ways than one. The credo of egalitarianism, the blurring of distinctions between town and country, the concreting over of the countryside, the dumbing down of education and the disparaging of our heritage and traditions have taken place because what existed before represented an older, more traditional world - hated by the would-be revolutionaries.

Multi-racialism was merely icing on the cake. Even the problems of multi-culturalism were welcomed. Political correctness has been taken up with alacrity by intellectuals disappointed at the failure of ideologies promising a better world. Victims of society have appealed greatly to the same sort of functionary who is at home in any authoritarian state. It enables such people to set up more agencies, employing more bureaucrats, to solve the problems that they and their masters have created.

The decades-long conflict between advocates of state planning and ‘free-enterprise’ economies was, in any event, largely bogus. Both capitalism and communism were inimical to the ethnic nation-state because both put economism - i.e. either ‘economic growth’ or consumer materialism - first. They were also both internationalist in ethos. The communists wanted to export Marxism around the world, and the multi-national corporations want to do the same for a globalised free-market capitalism.

Political élites of any sort share common unpleasant characteristics. They are venal; they abuse power; they make pointless laws; they hurl abuse at their political enemies; they lack democratic instincts (virtually none of the EU structures and institutions, not to mention the single currency, have received the consent of the people of Europe). Many ‘anti-racist&#; slogans in Europe are offensively Orwellian, depending for effect on the distortion of language and even of reality. For example, on large billboard signs in German cities can be seen the face of a black man, with the description above it reading Ein Sachse - a Saxon.

Alienation and crime

The undesirable cultural effects of multi-culturalism are often glossed over, but that tendency is clearly now undermining liberalism itself. Alienation and the growth of ethnic crime is making Britain, in particular, a less pleasant place. Local councils are now having enormous problems with troublesome tenants on their housing estates - many of them alienated ethnic groups. Vandalism, low educational attainment and fractured communities are now commonplace. Peckham, according to a recent report, now has the worst housing and social problems in Europe.

If, as some have suggested, multi-culturalism has happened inadvertently, and without the indigenous people in those lands wishing for it, or if the security services or politicians are unable to halt what is happening, then there must be something inferior about ‘western values’. Indeed the politically self-destructive weirdness of liberalism encourages illegal immigrants to get to the West, like someone trying to take advantage of a rich but eccentric uncle. At the same time, many immigrants have no respect for the values of the West, which are viewed as decadent. They see communities of white peoples and their leaders who are not prepared to defend their borders, their religion or their ethno-cultural heritage.