In a recent ‘counter-protest’ against the ‘riots’ there was a man wearing a t-shirt which said, “We Are All Immigrants.”
I am going to be generous and call this a “paradox” and not a “lie”. This is because I’m a sceptic. If I were solemn, stern and severe, then I would have to say that it is a lie. We are not all immigrants.
But with language we have to be sceptical, not pedantic or solemn: and being sceptical involves being humorous, admitting a bit of mixed signals and crossed frequencies and unintended consequences and also – the grand political possibility that we may assert that something is the case when it is not the case (in one sense) although it magically becomes the case (in another sense) just because we have asserted it.
“We Are All Immigrants” is true and not true.
It is not true because we are not all immigrants. On the contrary, as Andrew Collingwood has shown in these pages, following Benjamin Schwarz, three-quarters of us – if we are descended from anyone living in the United Kingdom before, say, 1950 – have roots going back six thousand years and almost all of us have roots going back as far as the Angles and Saxons. No one knows exactly how many Vikings or Normans settled here, probably more of the former than the latter, but it is estimated that the only major ingresses of population between 1100 and 1950 were the Huguenots in the 16th Century and the Jews in the 19th and 20th Centuries, fleeing oppression. In short, historians and historical geneticists agree that Britain had until recently probably the most stable population on earth, not only for reasons to do with limited immigration but also to do with the remarkable continuity of laws and institutions that historians like Hume and Stubbs and Maitland liked to write about and considered constitutive of whatever good order we happen to enjoy.
But it is true because it is not a statement of fact but a statement of right. It exists, in the mind of the t-shirt wearing bien-pensants, as a statement of attitude, belief, aspiration. There has always been plenty of black in the Union Jack, as well as brown, yellow, green, and other assorted rainbow colours.
De facto, then, nay, we are not all immigrants, never were, bloody rubbish.
De iure, then, yea, we are all immigrants, not least because we want to show the world that we respect other cultures, are ‘open’, inclusive, diverse, etc.
Note that the first is a fact, and the second is a hope. The problem is not with the hope itself, but with the fact that the fact is obscured and even obliterated by the hope. The t-shirt-wearing ‘nice’ people believe, somehow, in their tiny factual minds, that the hope that “We Are All Immigrants” is, in fact, a fact.
What is this all about?
It is about the dread word, “solidarity”…
…as it gets mixed up with another word, “liberalism”.
Solidarity is a good old collectivist word. It means the status of “standing solid” with others. Surely a good thing. But it has been given a twist by liberalism.
Liberalism is a good old individualist word, oddly enough. It means the consciousness held by someone “standing somewhat apart from others” but it also means, “nonetheless standing in an attitude of generosity to others”.
What we have nowadays is a mixture of collectivism and individualism in this liberal solidarity. It involves a particularly generous form of standing solid with others. It means siding with the lower, the lesser, the excluded, the exploited, the subjugated. Siding with the murdered, the raped and the hated. With the poor, the lepers, the lame. The immigrants, the refugees, the decolonised. Oh, and, a bit more awkwardly, the women.
And this, in our time, has given us phenomena such as “Je suis Charlie”, #MeToo and now “We Are All Immigrants”.
The logic is: “I, a privileged member of a privileged society, acknowledge my privileges (simplified into a singular ‘privilege’), and ostentatiously and symbolically sacrifice this privilege by making political genuflections to certain (er, privileged) causes which always involve putting myself into the position of the less privileged – thus, happily, though ironically, raising my status.”
“Je suis Charlie” was relatively specific, since it concerned a single event.
#MeToo was a bit odd as it stretched from specific sympathy for those with Hollywood stories of being sexually exploited by others, to a general sympathy for everyone who might ever be exploited in this way. But notice the shape of the slogans. Not “Poor old Charlie” but Je suis Charlie. I sympathise with Charlie so much that I become Charlie. Solidarity becomes identification. Not “#HerToo” and not “#YouToo”, but “#MeToo”. #MeToo says: “Not only you are exploited: it is we women, we everyone, as well.”
And “We Are All Immigrants” generalises the point even further. Not merely is it I, Je, Me, but the collective We. Now we are no longer involved in individual identification: it is no longer a matter of willing, or hoping, or wanting. Nay, it is a matter of destiny. The t-shirt which says “We Are All Immigrants” says in full: “Sorry, you cannot argue with this. Whether you like it or not, Mr. Far-Right, and Mr. Mediocre White Male, you are like the Jamaicans who have come since the 1950s, the Poles who have come since the 2000s, the Bulgarians who have come since the 2010s, and the Syrians and Somalians who have come since the 2020s: you are a bleedin’ immigrant. And as for you, Mr. Nodogsnoblacksnoirish, you should refuse to let yourself into your own pub.”
Our slogan henceforth could be:
#Je-suis-Everyone (except those who reject this sentiment).
The tragedy of all this – the fact that I write about it in comic manner does not mean I want to suggest that it all just Wodehousian persiflage – is that what we are seeing running through our society at the moment is a great battle, or culture war, if you prefer, between the extremist grandads and the centrist dads:
- The extremist grandads are the people who – mostly out of prejudice (but sometimes out of conscious reflection) – observe that “We Are Not All Immigrants”: these are the people who base everything on this fact, and then perhaps add to this fact a hope that immigrants can be kept out, or limited somehow (for the sake of nation, tradition, culture, etc.); and
- The centrist dads are the people who are ostentatiously ‘nice’ and who therefore care not for facts, and live entirely in the hope that we can “imagine-all-the-people” lying down with lambs and lions and jackals in genial UN- and WEF- and WHO- and IPCC- and IOC-type harmony, living in a world free of Piketty-type inequalities, Fauci-type viruses and Packham-type meltdowns. These are the ones who say: “We Are All Immigrants.”
Needless to say, it is the latter who are either, if we are harsh, lying, or, if we are less harsh, stuck in a paradox. Either way, what they are saying cannot be simply true.
Dr. James Alexander is a Professor in the Department of Political Science at Bilkent University in Turkey.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Is the dam about to burst at last?
I bloody well hope so!
Or this will just be a case of another silenced Dr with proof,credentials and common sense!
The thing is and as has often been the case, this doctor is retired. Most of the people who have spoken out are in the category retired/former/ex/previously.
Exactly so.
I’m guessing that as a retired/former/ex/previously, you wouldn’t stand to lose any grants or funding for speaking out and describing what you know should be obvious.
Sadly, people who are retired/former/ex/previously are often ignored, patronised or even ridiculed because they are considered out of touch and not up to date with the zeitgeist.
I think there is a tipping point with these things where the silent majority calculate that it’s better to be on the right side of the argument. We seem to be getting close to that point now with even the BBC getting in on the act.
I do hope so.
But there have been plenty of times during the past 3 years when I have thought ‘now people will see how utterly ridiculous this all is’ and nothing changes.
I will be at the protest this Saturday in London (1pm BBC headquarters). Not sure if it will make any difference.. probably won’t be reported again.
Yes, it has been a long time coming. I remember watching the vaxx propaganda change from only for the elderly and at risk in November 2020, to pushing for everyone to get it in January 2021, to the outright coercion of the vaxi pass in October 2021 – despite the first reports of ‘break-through infections’ as early as April 2021, despite the signalling of myocarditis in young men by the Israeli and US militaries in March/April 2021, the CDC’s acknowledgement thereof in June 2021, despite deaths and serious AEs from the first shots administered, despite the Israeli admission of vaxx failure when it moved on to a 3rd shot end of July 2021, despite the overwhelming infections among the 2x vaxxed and the hospitals filling with the 2x vaxxed in November 2021, despite the ongoing unexplained excess mortality since mid-2021.
Each time I thought that would be the end of the relentless pressure and coercion, but no, the b’stards just doubled down.
We have reached the tipping point, anyone who at this point has not yet moved away from the dam deserves to go under in the deluge that is to come. The next few years will be dedicated to dealing with the fall-out of the injuries, the financial repercussions and who is going to be the fall guy.
My primary concern and belief as to where the real fight lies – to ensure this never happens again and to drill it into people’s heads that constitutions and human rights treaties that clearly, uncategorically prohibited all these actions are NEVER to be trampled upon, whatever the so-called emergency. Had they been respected, we would not be looking at the economic devastation and harmed lives that we are.
I doubt it, just further and more expensive taxpayer funded activity to sweep things under the carpet. Remember WMD, Iraq, ‘grooming gangs’ MP expenses scandal, etc
What ultimately needs to happen is widespread knowledge of the discrepancy between what the public facade of the vaccines (i.e. false claims of safety and efficacy), and the reality of what is now being discovered.
Any future roll-out en masse of a new medical technology needs to be met with a healthy dose of suspicion. And mark my words, they will try this again!
Critically, the twisted, emotive justification for vaccines – “it is morally incumbent for you to take a jab, since without one you may be killing those around you” – must be relegated to the dustbin of history.
I see no reason why any medical product could be released on to the market unless it has ten, yes 10 years of safety data behind it.
And that’s not ten years of trials, that’s ten years of SAFE data, which might of course take twenty years to obtain.
My guess is that we’ll rather shortly learn that Dr Ennos must be an antisemite, a transphobe, a climate denier, an acquaintance of a guy who once knew a guy who stood next to a guy who claimed that he once saw someone reading a book written by David Icke (or even David Irving) etc, ie, the usual reaction of the woke establishment to any kind of rational criticism: A cacophony of voices screaming Evil! Evil! Evil! using some not very well made-up pretext.
One close family member has suffered life changing damage caused by the covid vaccines.
I have a number of friends who have suffered severe illness from non covid vaccines
I have no doubt that Dr Ennos is correct in his conclusions and I am most grateful to him for the work that he has done in this area.
things are so broken here it is difficult to see a solution being possible. The whole hierarchy is complicit. If you take out the top layers, then you know you have weak middle management or they would have blown the whistle. If middle mangement is the problem, then the top layers don’t have the proper controls in place. Bad, very bad.
We do need a Great Reset – just not the one that the Davos cultists have in mind.
I wish Davis was flattened with them all in it frankly. It’s a pity the god of the old testament can’t mete out some Sodom and Gomorrah treatment there.
It would indeed be extremely unfortunate if say a missile intended for Ukraine were to find its way to Davos. Some may think that would be doing humanity a favour.
I wonder if it’s crossed Putin’s mind.
More likely to be a stray Ukrainian missile
Yep. I like Bob Moran’s version, who wouldn’t? Apart from the afforementioned…
If it was up to me I would hold not only the policymakers and agencies responsible but those actually performing the injections. The information was there for all to see but they were somehow mesmerised by groupthink. People with such poor judgment should not be allowed to practice medicine.
those policy makers incentivised people to inject and the injectors went along with it. The numbers of people complicit is getting pretty big now
An outstanding piece of work by Dr Ennos who deserves our thanks for his persistence in obtaining the data.
We genuinely are looking at a crime against humanity here. Bozo, Midazolam, Raines, Jabbit, Whitty, Valance, Van Tam are just a few names springing immediately to mind who are forever damned by the murderous onslaught they unleashed on the people of this country and indirectly the world. Fishy, Chunt and Barclay will stand in the dock with them unless they ban these poisons with immediate effect.
No excuses will suffice for the hundreds, even thousands found guilty by this damning report.
I hope they burn in hell.
Never forget. Never forgive.
Completely agree. As always 😉
Thanks Jane.
Any other product in the entire history of modern medicine would have been withdrawn by this point. Yet we still have the safe and effective crowd bleating like sheep.
We need three things to happen now. Firstly remove the legal indemnity for Pfizer etc, second sue them out of existence, third destroy every political party who pushed this agenda. Won’t happen sadly.
I must say even my wonderful father in law, who is an ill man, has stopped at jab 3 after his best friend almost died.
I would argue that these gene therapies would have been withdrawn 2 years ago once evidence of harm was detected.
First rule of medicine ‘First do no harm’!
They should never have been authorised in the first place. They are novel therapies with no long term safety data.
“They are novel therapies with no long term safety data.”
Added to which there is no Short Term safety data as the Pfisser dump has proven. As other doctors have confirmed these so-called “vaccines” are not even remotely therapeutic, they are indeed bioweapons.
I thought there was some short term safety data – wasn’t it something along the lines that the vaxx sucks and was not safe?
Actually you are correct Jane. The revealed Pfisser data has confirmed that there was nothing safe about these injections from the off.
Trouble is, people come at you with the seemingly irrefutable argument that “well, if the NHS is recommending it, it must have gone through the most rigorous of safety and efficacy assessment”. But this isn’t true, is it. Firstly the regulators are under immense pressure to pass the pharma products, being as they are primarily industry-funded. Secondly, the definition of “vaccine” was changed so that these products, which would otherwise have failed the test for Emergency Use Authorization, were placed forever into the category of “vaccines” such that they could be fast-tracked for emergency use whenever required. Thirdly, those letters you get in the post stating “it’s time for your covid jab”, are not written by medical professionals, but admin people who have received the directive from their superiors. The buck stops at the MHRA, who dictate NHS activities. So Big Pharma peddles it’s products by incentivizing the regulators, who in turn dictate the policies of the health services (NHS) concerning recommending medical products to the public. Anyone who can’t see through this will spend their lives at the mercy of the pharmaceutical industry!
Glaring safety signals are apparent indicating harm to the lymph system, the heart and to female reproduction
Last week, my neighbour told me she had breast cancer. She told me that she had a good idea what to expect next week as her treatment starts as her son’s mother in law is about a month ahead of her in the treatment for her breast cancer.
And then a couple of days later, I read in the Times that Melanie Read has breast cancer, and the elephant in the room looked at me.
Someone needs to start looking at breast cancer stats.
This an extremely worrying connection. My wife was diagnosed with breast cancer in May 2022. There has been a huge upsurge in diagnoses where we live in Thailand. Until now we put it down the the fact she had missed annual check ups for three years due to Covid, but a link to the vaccines would make perfect sense. Hopefully there will be some research done to prove if there is causation rather than correlation.
Very interesting to see the data on menstrual problems. Unfortunately the ages start at 10.
Very sadly I know of two NINE year olds – yes you read that right who have started their periods. Both have been jabbed here in Thailand.
I am seeing one of the girls mother today to encourage her to make a report to Thailands pharmaco-vigilance system.
What more can I say?
I’m sure Don Joly could
debunk this ‘anti-vax’ nonsense by simply posting a pithy tweet.
Yes he can pith off ! About as funny as piles that bloke !..
To sum up, this is what I said a couple of years ago. To the credit of the local GP’s place, they haven’t bothered me at all since then. Maybe I’m on a “black list”, or whatever, but zero communication about it at all from there. W.r.t my comment in the letter: I haven’t changed my mind yet!
I ignored the two letters I received from Jab Central and put the phone down immediately when they phoned. I then told my GP not to text and offer an appointment since it was damaging my mental health 🙂 ….. and I’ve not heard a word from either Jab Central or my GP since.
I also had two letters from that place. They did not appear to have a “no thanks” option on them, so I wrote to the local Surgery directly. I never answer unknown numbers unless they leave a proper message; too many “number withheld” junk calls here. I just had an email from the Surgery within a couple of hours after sending them my notes (as shown above), and nothing more since.
Thankyou for this. I have reported several suspected vaccine complications to the MHRA, mostly Bell’s Palsy. It is a chore, but to see something changing is quite a reward.
It has been an angry 2 years for me, but I have also noticed my colleagues’ derision turn to acceptance and even praise in a few cases.
Btw, Canada as just advised people to drink less alcohol (down to 2 glasses a week! that would soak into my tongue!)
Alcohol injuries and deaths have risen because of lockdown increased drinking.
Hold the Press:- Excuse No 15, Excess deaths have been caused by excess alcohol during the lockdowns! …result
Sadly I don’t think the mRNA gravy train/bioweapon or whatever will be stopped unless and until the MSM have a sudden fit of integrity. The bloody BBC has hypnotised too many.
It seems that insofar as the covid jab is concerned the CVS damage is mainly caused by the immune system’s response to the designer spike. We have data which proves this as per the excellent article from Dr Ennos. And, we also have evidence from various papers :- See paras. 10 and 14 :-
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027869152200206X
If that wasn’t bad enough bigpharma are intending that every human on the planet receives an mRNA jab for every “disease” which they say exists. Work is already taking place and bigpharma etc are unlikely to stop.
So, we may not have to worry about a spike in the future jabs, but what further delights await?
Look at the rest of the paper for the answer to that.
The future of humanity is at stake.
Interesting article. Thank you for sharing, I hadn’t seen that one.
I have sent this article to my MP, Chris Loder ….. and utterly useless piece of CONservative lobby fodder.
He is now ignoring my emails and I don’t expect a reply to the latest one. But he won’t be able to deny receiving the information. Adopting the Ostrich position doesn’t protect ostriches.
From personal experience, people have no knowledge of the existence of the yellow card system. Whenever I mention this, people look utterly confused. They have no clue.
Last year my daughter told me about a lot of her friends having problems with their menstrual cycles. I asked if they had reported and she did not know about the yellow card system either.
The government is hiding behind the fact it is mentioned in the leaflet handed out during vaccination.
In my view a massive level of underreporting. Would be good to do a survey.
You’re right. A good friend of mine got the vaxx some time around May 2021. Some months later we were talking on the phone (due to time differences we don’t get to speak to each other that much) and mentioned that she had just heard on the radio the day before that there was a link between the vaxx and menstrual problems. She had had severe disregulation, but had not made the link before she heard it discussed.
Another friend in Spain (she did not take the vaxx) was having lunch with 3 female friends some time autumn 2021. For whatever reason, the topic of disregulated menstruation came up and all 3 then went on to tell that they all had had quite severe disregulation for months on end, yet not one had made a link to the vaxx. When my friend mentioned the link, they apparently just shrugged their shoulders and weren’t too concerned.
I’ve heard stories that women well past menopause were menstruating again – you’d expect that to have made headlines, but no.
I met with an old friend yesterday who I haven’t seen for a year. She is a self employed HR consultant working mainly in the public sector. Fully jabbed of course. She caught Covid in September of last year. And now is having a series of debilitating throat infections and colds. I have no doubt that her immune system has been damaged by the toxic jabs, but of course we are not allowed to talk about that in polite society, so once again I was confronted with the choice of keeping an old friendship that goes back 30 years or keeping my mouth shut. I chose the latter.
I’m afraid I’ve had similar experiences, yes more than one, and have also opted for the latter.
In general if friends can’t take me speaking my mind I just drop them – there’s no point in friendship if you can’t be yourself.
Lots of my opinions I am happy to leave unsaid depending on the company but the Covid madness harmed me and my family directly and continues to do so. I won’t be silent.
I have a friend whose daughter (in her twenties) works in aged care so would have had at least four vaccinations by now. The daughter is also struck down with respiratory illness that she can’t shake.
Am I being a bit stupid but I read this as having compared the PH and MO vaccines against the AZ vaccine – if I got that right, then surely comparing against all non Covid vaccines then the safety signal would be far worse?
My thoughts too, if I’ve understood it right.
Rather like comparing a 12 bore shotgun to a regular handgun, both will kill you, but one better than the other
I guess this is just meant to be a relative comparison of the dangers of the three in light of the many issues around analysing the released data. He is not going into Steve Kirsch’s (40x+) underreporting factor speculation for example, but why he is not doing this comp against traditional vaccines instead or also requires an (better) explanation.
The conclusion I draw and which he seems to draw as well is that (leaving all factors (some mentioned) aside which might increase or lower the number of truly experienced side effects compared to the hereby reported and analysed ones):
The AZ goo had almost 3x as many as such reported serious or fatal side effects than the Pfizer or Moderna goo- and the AZ goo was quietly withdrawn from ‘the market’.
But the Pfizer and the Moderna goo had even more as such reported serious side effects than the withdrawn AZ goo in the following 4 categories and to the following extent = see tables.
IMHO, still a very useful analysis and a clear and shocking result.
Reports like this are what make The Daily Sceptic worth supporting. I do hope it is read by people in authority.
Wednesday Quiz.
Rearrange the letters of the UK’s Pharmafia Bastion, the MHRA, to make another word.
Love it😂😂😂😂😂
Congratulations to the DS for publishing this article. A little piece of history perhaps.
Not peer reviewed I guess, but can this sort of material be ignored much longer? I think not.
Technical point, if I’ve understood it properly. I thought the Moderna stab was effectively about 3 times as much mRNA – so I wonder why the adverse event signals (PRRs) are generally significantly lower?
A great piece, I do hope someone somewhere with a bit of authority and nous gets to read this and comprehend what it is saying.
I have a slight problem with certain terminology I notice being used in these types of feature…
They refer to “Safety Signals”. Isn’t that a bit misleading or is it just me? Surely the correct termonology should be “Danger Signals”. Matbe I’m just being pedantic.
https://www.ukcolumn.org/blogs/it-is-time-to-stand-up-to-those-who-contort-the-meaning-of-antisemitism
The brilliant Iain Davis over at UK Column News lending his support to Andrew Bridgen. Along the way he utterly destroys Fishy and Midazolam. And that in itself is a very, very sad indictment of the moral vacuums which these two sad specimens represent.
Very much worth reading in full.
“International Holocaust Remembrance Day –
was established by the United Nations to “honor the victims of Nazism”. Those who flagrantly abuse the intended meaning of the term antisemitism do nothing but dishonour those victims. They should be thoroughly ashamed of their conduct—but that would require some intellectual honesty and a sense of morality on their part. Do they possess either?”
The article is sort-of worth a read. But in the context of the Bridgen cause, it’s just more noise. The people who want to silence Bridgen want a noisy and emotive discussion of antisemitism and Holocaust in order to bury a discussion about the covax-injured and covax-side effects. That the accusations against Bridgen are laughable accomplishes this very nicely.
This is the line that got me:
‘…that the enormous efforts of those who have submitted Yellow Card reports of COVID-19 vaccine adverse effects have not been in vain.’
We can add this to the MHRA’s already extensive list of crimes. Even when people were brave enough to report their injuries, the MHRA found every way possible to diminish, ignore, gaslight and hide them.
These people must be dealt with. Why isn’t June Raine in prison?
How much of MHRA’s funding is from Pharma? 90%, did I hear?
Doubt it very much. They’ve come this far…
This is exactly what happens when the CEO of the MHRA arrogantly decides that the regulator will become an enabler. June Raine should be sacked but she won’t be as that would cause too many other bureaucrats to be removed as well.
Very grateful for the doctor’s publication but it needs practicing doctors to speak out not retired ones. More doctors like Steve James who challenged Savid Javid are the ones who demonstrate moral courage, fearlessness, observe the highest ethics of a practicing doctor with the result of making real change. There would have been mandatory vaccination of all NHS staff but for this hero.
This should be helpful to Andrew Bridgen in his defamation action against Matt Hancock for saying that AB’s comment was a ‘disgusting, anti-semitic, anti-vax, conspiracy theory’.
interesting (and pretty damning) article. In the interests of accuracy, there is one small error though. The article says:
“All three vaccines rely on novel technology that has never before been used in humans.”
In fact the adenovirus vector technology used by the AstraZeneca vaccine has been used before, in a vaccine for Ebola.
Sorry to be a bit dim, but could someone explain how the following statements are reconciled?
From paragraph 8 above:
‘A cursory look at the C-19VYC data indicates that the rate of reporting of serious and fatal adverse events is nearly three times higher for the adenovirus AZ vaccine (3.912 serious or fatal reaction reports per 1,000 doses) than for either of the mRNA vaccines PF or MO (1.341 and 1.344 serious or fatal reaction reports per 1,000 doses respectively).’
From paragraph 14 above:
‘It should be noted that when the analysis is conducted in the manner described, it yields minimum estimates of the strength of the safety signals because it assumes that the AZ vaccine does not increase the rate of the adverse reaction being studied.’