Mass unfettered immigration from Third World countries is draining the nation’s social capital.
It is feeding factionalism and polarisation, as well as destroying Britain’s national sense of a common pre-political loyalty, and this populational change has introduced and celebrated the triumph of identity politics, thus creating a profoundly volatile situation.
The coming civil war, is going to initially have the qualities of a Latin American style, dirty war, characterised by chronic low level violence, but it will increasingly take on a strongly rural versus urban dynamic.
As far as the Islamist factions are concerned, these are somewhere at the beginning of phase two of civil unrest.
There are parts of British cities where there is negotiated policing, the police either don’t go there or when they go there, they prepare by consulting with local leaders, and they’re clearly already in a phase of conducting semiregular attacks on the indigenous population.
Prof. David Betz, Professor of War in the Department of War Studies at King’s College London where he heads the MA War Studies programme postulates these serious concepts in his new book – The Guarded Age: Fortification in the 21st Century, published by Polity.
The timeline for the coming civil war in Britain depends on many factors, it’s either twenty years or ten years or three years.
About 10 years ago in the context of the parliamentary dirty tricks over the implementation of the Brexit referendum many people across the country saw that there was something very critically wrong about our own society. People began to observe specifically what those machinations on the part of the British elite at that time represented was effectively elite overreach, which is a term often used in discussion regarding domestic turmoil in foreign societies, a situation in which elites essentially have exceeded the boundaries of their own legitimate capability in ways that have the tendency to undermine the broader faith in the coherence and the validity of the status quo effectively.
The basic point of the impending turmoil is that the primary threat to the security of Britain, and to the security and prosperity of Britain today is not external, but internal.
Specifically, it is the threat of civil war, and through analysis of the official statistics of the British government itself on social attudes, on mainstream academic ideas about things like social capital, societal cohesion and political stability, as well as long established theories of civil war causation, it is a certainty that civil war will occur some time in the future.
Over 100,000 foreign national convictions in just 3 years
Foreign nationals are more than three times as likely to commit sexual offences as British citizens, analysis suggests
The fact of the matter is that the country is explosively societally configured to implode
David Cameron had identified the main problem, 10 years ago, when he very clearly came out and said that multiculturalism was draining the nation’s social capital.
Multiculturism aided by mass unfettered immigration is feeding factionalism and polarisation, as well as destroying Britain’s national sense of a common pre-political loyalty. And with this in line with what subsequently has come along is the triumph of identity politics, which has produced a very profoundly volatile situation.
Nativist sentiments are increasingly manifested in a narrative of ‘downgrading’ which is one of the most powerful causes of civil conflict. The theory of ‘downgrading’ is in line with all of the incidental literature on the subject of civil unrest and war.
Nativist sentiment in terms of downgrading, means that the indigenous population feels that it is being basically downgraded. Two-tier policing, two-tier law and two-tier governmental policies are a testament to this fact of downgrading the indiginous populations.
If one wants to know what or who the indigenous population might be, you might just assume it to be that part of the population which is excluded from special dispensation under the recently pronounced sentencing guidelines.
The coming civil war is going to initially have the qualities of a Latin American style war, characterised by chronic low-level violence, and it will increasingly take on a strongly rural versus urban dynamic primarily anti status quo strategy.
The primary objectives will be to collapse the major cities through infrastructural attack , causing cascading crises leading to systemic failure and a period of mass chaos, which they hope to wait out from the relative security of the rural provinces. The plausible effectiveness of this strategy should not be dismissed.
The plan is destructively simple, it’s well reasoned, it’s practically, relatively straightforward to implement.
It’s based on established techniques that are well known and it’s aimed at targets that are effectively unguarded, and it builds upon the existence of a tenuousness of the urban condition.
The attributes of a society, which is on the precipice of civil war looks something like this:
It would possess a situation of elite overreach, as mentioned previously. It would be characterised by a collapse of trust in that society, one would see rates of polarisation, specifically a factional polarisation, which is a very dangerous form of polarisation where people are no longer disagreeing specifically over issues themselves, but they are disagreeing on the basis of what they think is the consensus view within their own identity community. In other words, a particularly virulent form of political factionalisation that is overlaid on some other social, societal faction.
There is economic pressure, which is pretty obvious because economic pressure leads to expectation gaps, particularly on the part of the youth population, which now is probably for the most part locked out of things like property ownership. The potential of things which were very reasonable, banal expectations of their parents, like home ownership, certain sorts of permanent employment, the possibility also, in fact, of building their own families are all now wholly unattainable in modern Britain. This is a very dangerous situation.
Elite overreach, in terms of the Brexit vote and the subsequent attempt to thwart it, changed a lot of people’s views about our institutions, and how inherently corrupt they are, but also the new sentencing guidelines, which essentially have completely destroyed the idea of equality before the law are also factors to be included within the malaise. Last year, the disproportionate extraordinary sentences handed out to people during the civil disorder after Southport are another example of ‘downgrading’ and ‘elite overreach’.
Due to the speed of unfettered mass immigration, Britain, especially in the cities, is a seething den of ghettos where ghettoization has taken hold of many communities. David Cameron himself mentioned these ghettoized communities living in their silos and the ‘swarm’.
There are small factions within those groups that are highly radicalised that are intent on violence. The distinction here is we already have a fairly active anti status quo violent movement within the radicalised Muslim community in Britain who can be activated and triggered at any moment. That’s why the UK has 40-50,000 people on the terror watch list and a fairly regular occurrence of terror attacks.
So on one hand we have within these factions, an identifiable, violent, extremist faction that is attempting in various ways to increase the tensions within society, to take further and greater control over the conciousness of its community and create a greater split within British society as a whole and we have the reactionist nativists on the other hand.
The government has numerously exclaimed that they’re terribly concerned about the counter phenomenon which is the natural counterposition comprised of the nativist or the ‘extreme right’.
The government is thus concerned that the seed is there, the potential is there, and they’re perfectly right to be concerned about the situation brewing. The major concern is that whereas Islamic extremism or Islamism and fundamentalism are a threat, the emerging anti status quo identity movements within the white community have the potential for mass mobilisation on account of the fact that the white Christian population is still the majority population of the country. In this sense, one needs a mass population to support a mass movement. That combination of factors, and particularly the potential for radicalisation, effectively of the majority community is extremely worrisome from a societal cohesion perspective.
The Maoist approach has three phases
The first phase is usually described as the defensive phase, or phase one is the defensive phase. It’s a defensive stance from the perspective of the insurgent actor.
During phase one, what the insurgent is doing is primarily political organisation, proselytisation, propaganda activities and getting its house in order, it is building its conscious community. It is trying to energise, to mobilise. It’s building up a structure, it’s working out its narrative, it’s creating a solid base to work from.
In phase one, the insurgent is usually not very physically active, there might be a handful of pin prick attacks here and there in order to obtain weapons or materials. Oftentimes there is an alignment in the very earliest stage between criminal groups and the insurgent group because criminals tend to have access to muscle that the political insurgents usually don’t have in the beginning.
Phase two is usually referred to as the stalemate, and that’s when attacks have begun to occur, but the insurgent forces are not superior to the government security forces.
They don’t have more muscle, but they have the potential to create no-go areas, they have stable base areas and they’re beginning to build up a military structure.
It might be a rudimentary military structure, but they’ve got a fair number of tough guys/soldiers who are reliable, reasonably well armed who can conduct operations. It’s when you start to see, ambushes on police stations, for example, or attacks on government figures, judges, lawyers, media figures, it becomes more physically active.
And the third phase is usually called the offensive. And that’s when the insurgent has built up sufficient material strength while the counterinsurgent or the government has weakened to the extent that the insurgent can contemplate actual peer on peer combat with the security forces. This is the classic Maoist model, and is more or less what happened in the Chinese Civil War and some other cases of insurgency, like Cambodia and Vietnam.
In terms of Britain, the main factions will be the urban versus rural, and specifically London is the most endangered in this scenario.
If one looks at how Britain’s energy system works, it flows from the north to the south. So our major power lines and gas lines, compression stations, all of that associated infrastructure is essentially located in rural and peri-urban areas and feeds that giant metropolis in the south, which is rather unstable at the best of the times. So you can imagine what London might be like if you switch the power off for a week or so, or a couple of weeks and you do that five or six times in a winter, switch off the electricity, the gas, you disrupt the electric, the transportation system.
Currently, the Islamic radicals are in phase two, and the nativists are in stage one. Things can change at any moment though, as the situation is very fluid.
