You Can Never Hate Mainstream Media and TV Channels Enough

Britain’s Channel 4 is a perfect example of that, with their current propaganda piece in support of mass immigration.

Another day, another example of mainstream media and TV channels showing how utterly contemptible, biased and malign they are.

They aren’t yet bored of being like this, so I’m not yet bored of calling them utter bastards and filthy propagandists for doing it. Or rather, no matter how predictable their crimes are, it’s still necessary to call them out.

This is just a short post about a representative example of what the mainstream media and most TV stations and channels are and how they operate. It refers to the British Channel Four, but it could just as easily refer to the BBC, or to the NPR in the US. All of these outlets are State funded operations that combine Marxist and corporate elements in a fashion Mussolini would have approved of. All of them do nothing but pump out the propaganda of Globalist regimes and progressive ideology in ways that mid 20th century dictatorships would recognise as their spiritual descendants in action.

Nowhere is this more evident, more consistently, than when it comes to mainstream media presentation of the issues surrounding mass immigration, migration, demographic change and border policies. If it’s about asylum seekers, refugees, migrants already in the West or on their way to the West, it will be subject to a liberal elite consensus of supporting what is most helpful to the migrant and most harmful to the existing citizen.

This approach is never varied from. It covers both news reporting and entertainment, and it’s especially strong in supposedly documentary or factual programming that comes within the ambit of entertainment. An entertainment based approach to a serious issue, using ‘real voices’, provides a wonderful opportunity to bury facts beneath subjective opinion and carefully controlled manipulation, particularly in ways that tug on the heartstrings or confuse feelings for evidence. This follows similar corruption of direct news reports, but adds in all the tricks and emotive devices available to an entertainment piece. The propagandist can present a fiction based on following a handful of real people, and pretend that this overwhelms a vast sea of experience and evidence to the contrary held and known by those they refuse to interview and whose views they are setting out to demean, defame or destroy.

Channel Four, it must be admitted, are the international masters of this kind of propaganda. NPR or CNN do the same thing, but should look admiringly towards Channel 4 in the same that a tennis player of middling ability should look at Novak Djokovic. In the latest display of their mastery of the most dishonest arrow in the quiver of the media propagandist, C4 and other progressive outlets are advertising the channel’s most manipulative docudrama to date. It’s a show called Go Back to Where You Came From and everything about it tells you just how detestable TV channels are, and just how much everything they deliver is designed to brainwash and indoctrinate people.

“Channel 4 has commissioned a UK version of the social experiment series “Go Back to Where You Came From,” which aims to give participants and viewers an insight into the asylum seeker experience. The series will see six Brits with varying opinions on immigration and refugees travel to dangerous locations like Mogadishu, Somalia, and Raqqa, Syria, before using real migrant routes through Africa, the Middle East, and Europe to the UK. The show’s goal is to challenge preconceptions and provoke reflection on the issue of asylum seekers.”

The series pretends to be a documentary, with the claim to authenticity, reality and truth that comes from ‘real people’ in ‘real situations’. In actuality, it is a bizarrely confected situation designed solely to demonise a sensible position on mass immigration and promote an already failed, disastrous and dangerous set of progressive assumptions and policies that have been betraying the people of western nations for decades. Everything from the title of the series-a slogan/saying that the most rabidly pro immigration advocates have been claiming is something that the rest of us say for some 70 years now-is dishonest. The premise is that a group of ‘real people’ who object to mass immigration and open borders are then whisked off to the war torn failed states of the world, to places like Syria or Libya, and then shown the awful conditions that migrants and refugees and asylum seekers are escaping.

Like me, I am sure you can see where this line of documentary entertainment is going, and just how spectacularly manipulative it is.

The series will first show ‘ordinary people’ in all their lumpen ignorance (filtering out ordinary people who might be possessed of the same views but far more convincing), carefully selecting them to be the very poorest and least articulate opponents of mass immigration one could find. The advertising for the series makes this abundantly clear. One of the chosen few is filmed declaring “people say my views are racist, but they are just common sense”. The sole reason for this quote is of course to establish the link which is at the core of progressive prejudice-it’s to put the words racist and common sense side by side, so that common sense is tainted and racism is ‘confirmed’ by its mere summoning as a word. The classic tactic of the dishonest interlocutor is to pick unconvincing advocates of the position they are seeking to destroy. British Far Left radio DJ James O’Brien has built a whole career on this kind of manipulation, constantly scouring the country for callers he can find who will argue an opposing case incredibly badly. This is what Go Back to Where You Came From is also doing.

Let’s find some not very articulate, not very smart, not very media savvy suckers, guide them towards expressing their views in an embarrassingly simple minded fashion that confirms every sneering and elite assumption about how opposing mass immigration is synonymous with racism, ignorance and stupidity, and then let’s add further to that by guiding these poor dupes through a completely fabricated, one sided set of experiences designed to confirm that every immigrant and migrant is in fact a kind of supreme embodiment of goodness that only the meanest, dumbest and most malign person could possibly reject.

The series will show the hellholes of the world and then triumphantly declare “well wouldn’t you try to escape from this?” and “what kind of monster expects women and children to live in this?”. The advertusing already makes it plain that the purpose of the series is to maximise sympathy in the most manipulative fashion for mass migration, to play every false emotive card there is solely in one direction. The suckers will be shown starving babies and struggling mothers, or bright eyed innocent children, or doctors and engineers just wanting to shape a better life away from the threat of war. We will get accounts of the hardship of travel involved in seeking a new life in Britain, and the endurance and courage it takes to do so. The representative oafish participants will of course gradually change their ignorant opposition to doing good and saving the world. They will all end up saying “I’d do exactly the same thing” and “when you see what they are fleeing, you start to understand why they are coming,”.

Of course the reality is that mass immigration is not the tale of good people trying to save their lives and evil people telling them to go back to where they came from. Mass immigration is the tale of a ruling class deciding to replace their own people. Never before in history have we seen the levels of immigration and the levels of demographic and cultural change witnessed in the West today except by means of violent conquest. No prior civilisation has ever attempted to peacefully assimilate so many, certainly not as a conscious policy choice pursued in disregard of both the wishes of the existing populace and the negative consequences that follow. Even if the example of the USA is used, of its long success in integrating different ethnicities and backgrounds, this was not an example of modern immigration policy. You can’t at one and the same time bemoan how devastating European colonialism was for native peoples in the Americas and claim today that actually much larger numbers of arrivals are an unmitigated good for European populations. You can’t at one and the same time castigate white Americans for past strict immigrant policies or treatment of immigrants, and simultaneously pretend that modern open borders have always applied. You can’t say US society is a racist white construct designed solely to protect white people, and that the US has always had a completely open border policy and this is the noblest thing about the US. Or in the case of Britain you cannot say this was an insular, colonialist, racist, xenophobic island where extreme racist attitudes to others were commonplace, AND that immigrants built Britain.

The truth is that deliberately inviting mass immigration is a modern idea, and any equivalent demographic shifts through most of human history resulted in total conquest or total societal collapse. Barbarian invasion was not beneficial to the Roman Empire. Muslim conquest was not welcomed by Persia. The Sea Peoples invasions were not considered enriching experiences by the Ancient Egyptians. The Norman invasion was not a beautiful moment welcomed by the Anglo-Saxons. Conquest means destruction, rape, murder, slaughter, hardship and suffering. Oddly, those who linger most on ancient examples of this whenever it was inflicted on others by Europeans, also insist that any amount of replacement and effective conquest can be inflicted on Europeans today and it is to their benefit. And to those who say that modern mass immigration and ancient conquest are very different things, the key difference is that nobody would have thought to tell those being raped and replaced before that what was happening was wonderful for them. Their own leaders would not have been welcoming this, but in every other way the effect of conquest, even conquest welcomed and lied about by a ruling class, is disastrous. In Britain, it was the exact same as an ancient military conquest-it meant our children and daughters being raped in vast numbers. The fact that our own middle and upper class were happy with this hardly makes it less horrific.

There has never been a betrayal on this scale, active over so many years, certainly not in the history of civilisations that still exist. For 70 years the upper and middle class have enacted mass immigration and deliberately imported millions from elsewhere into European nations. They began by saying it was necessary to compensate for those lost in World War Two, that factories would close and the economy collapse without the importation of foreign workers. That was supposed to be a temporary emergency, but even at the time was absurd-the factories had hardly been silent during either World War. It became increasingly absurd when many of those arriving were no longer workers in any fashion whatsoever. Today, we are told that public services like the NHS depend on foreign workers. One wonders why British people cannot be trained as doctors and nurses, or how Britain sustained itself for a thousand years of net zero immigration without either importing millions from abroad or having an NHS. Today, we are told our low birth rates and aging population requires the importation of foreign workers, but aren’t told exactly how boatloads of young men illegally entering the country, young men whose idea of ‘care’ is to let the woman or child they have just raped live, are going to be the nursemaids of our care homes.

None of the rational OR emotive arguments that can be made against mass immigration will be presented, nor will the facts regarding the astonishingly dangerous and unsustainable nature of modern mass immigration. We won’t be told about the children raped by Pakistani immigrants, and we won’t hear their stories or voices. But up to a million of them were victims of mass immigration. Nor will we hear from anyone or any of their family members if they were harmed in other ways by any illegal alien or asylum seekers. We won’t hear the names of immigrants who became terrorists, and we won’t be told about their crimes. We won’t be given any of the negative facts regarding such things as how many Muslims in Britain today think that those who insult Mohammed should be killed, or how many support sharia law, or how many have sympathy for terrorist organisations. We will not be told how many billions are spent on lodging illegals immigrants in expensive hotels, or how few actually do come here as valuable brain surgeons or skilled engineers.

All this will be replaced by pretending that every immigrant is a safe, decent, kind person who already shares our values, that every one has some legitimate reason to flee from their homeland, and that every one will settle, integrate, and contribute in ways of vast benefit to the rest of us. And the poor schmucks selected to participate will be led by the nose past all this until the epiphany of discovering that the ruling class, who sponsor and support their replacement and extinction, were right all along. The participants are there to present a bad argument, and then fall for a bad faith argument. We will watch them weeping in distress as they release how much the poor immigrant suffers, forget how many poor British children suffered, and suddenly convert, like some religious moment of awakening, to knowing that a Good Person is someone who loves open borders and welcomes all migrants.

It is a Good Thing that London Welcomes Everyone, as Muslim Mayor Sadiq Khan endlessly intones and spends pubic money proclaiming. It is a good thing that there are schools with no native British pupils, and it is a good thing that there are streets that resound to the muezzin’s call on which not a single white English person lives. It is a good thing that cities that were once 90%, 95% white English are now, after 70 years of this replacement, only 30 or 35% so. It is a good thing to become a minority to cultures that have long resented and despised you, and nothing bad could possibly follow from that.

That C4 should seek to present this stuff in the context of terrorism, civil disturbance, increased crime, in the context of 1 million arrivals a year and up to 1,000 people a day landing on the shores as Viking raiders once did, is of course obscene. They will break a handful of poor fools and film them emerge blinking into the lighted territory of Acceptable Opinion, and they will do it with the exact same level of honesty a Viet Cong interrogator would use on a captured US servicemen during the Vietnam War. They trot out this obscenity even as chilling testimony from Muslim rape gang victims emerges, and they do it in RESPONSE to that evidence.

See how stupid and backwards your views are? See how enlightened and sophisticated you could be, with our help? Don’t you want to be a kind person? Don’t you care about other people? Are you really a RACIST?

That is the Channel Four narrative. That is the purpose of Go Back to Where You Came From.

You can never hate the mainstream media and mainstream TV channels enough.