I often see the right say things like, “It’s not immigration—it’s colonisation, it’s an invasion.” The left will also play into this theme as well and will publish books about the Windrush immigrants with titles like Black Pioneers. However, it’s wrong to say immigration is colonisation or an invasion and it’s a mistake to conceptualise it in this way (especially for your own psychological health).
Colonists are independent self-supporting people—perhaps they’re not the highest status people in their societies, but they’re not slouches. They’re second sons of aristocrats and journeyman tailors and so on—they’re not the total riff-raff. When they arrive in places like America and Australia they pretty much self-support; they’re not parasitic on the state (the state is thousands of miles away). They remake the environment to suit them (even as it influences them).
Immigrants to the West are drawn by the welfare state. They are not self-reliant, independent pioneers—they are parasitic; and no post-war immigrants have had any social or economic value for the West—they have been pure drain. There has been no “invasion” and no “colonisation”—Westerners are not, as an Italian MSI poster had in the 1970s, the “Red Indians”. Immigrants are here to facilitate inter-elite competition in the West, to be used by one elite faction against another—they are dependent puppets on the elite factions that use immigrants to garnish their status (to demonstrate that they are high-status cosmopolitans).
If the NHS were to be abolished tomorrow you would see a huge migrant outflow from Britain. The left actually uses the NHS as a propaganda point for immigration because about 1/3 of the staff are foreign—of course, that is predicated on the idea that the NHS actually makes you well (it doesn’t). How the NHS works: my mother was a nurse in the 1970s and the ward loo rolls used to go missing all the time—why? Because the staff just helped themselves to “free” loo roll (why not?). It’s all like that—all state enterprises are like that. The NHS exists more to bring immigrants to Britain than it does to make people well; it’s a huge monument to international socialism—and if you’ve ever seen an NHS hospital you know what that’s like (ugly, grey, crumbling, perverted).
So this is not colonisation. “They’re not sending their best”. No—the domestic elites in Pakistan or Uganda stay where they are, they have it pretty nice. The only people who come are the dregs, to serve as status-plebs for the decadent Western elite groups. It’s not colonisation—Westerners are not in the same position as “the Red Indians”; and it’s dangerous to play victim that way because the Indians lost—it’s predicated on the idea someone will swoop down and rescue you, as if you’re an endangered giant panda (nobody will—you’re looking for state intervention to help “the whites”). You have to save yourself—and people who talk about “invasion” just want to control you with fear, to induce dependency in another way. What invasion? When was the British Army last defeated? Let’s call it what it is, if we actually want to solve the problem.
The situation is much better than if we were actually colonised. If we shut off the economic tap there would be an immediate reverse flow—the immigrants are a dependent group, just like when a white woman adopts a black baby as some status demonstration. Bottom line: the West has not been “invaded” or “colonised”—it could turn the situation round tomorrow, whereas Sitting Bull couldn’t. What we have a problem with is decadent elites who use immigrants to garnish their status—and you’ll realise that’s true when you see Jeremy Corbyn at an “anti-racism” rally and it’s a sea of white faces (i.e. a sea of the decadent).