In today’s Orwellian Europe, to tell the truth is a crime

According to the great George Orwell, whose classic dystopian tale 1984 was recently revealed to have been the best-selling post-WWII novel in the UK, “In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act”.

Paradoxically, this is a truth so profound that the quote’s actual existence may in itself actually be a complete and total lie, which just goes to prove that Orwell was right after all, even though he apparently never actually said this … sort of.

I had always previously considered Orwell’s alleged aphorism to have been a warning. I didn’t realise most of his modern-day readers were actually European politicians and judges who had considered it an excellent piece of advice for how best to go about forbidding the public to tell the unvarnished truth about what mass immigration from culturally incompatible lands abroad has done to their increasingly ruined continent.

Many non-European immigrants into Europe are perfectly law-abiding and, on an individual basis, do no harm. The Muslims who run my local garage just want to sell me petrol, not petrol-bombs. But, collectively, figures do demonstrate that relative non-European immigrant rates of violent crime of various kinds really are higher than those of the white natives, and, as such, the current wave of millions upon millions of migrants represents a huge collective civilisational problem.

Yet this plain truth is apparently now unspeakable: or, at least, if you do dare speak it, you are now at risk of potential prosecution.

Dutch cowardice

Just before Christmas, a Dutch TV presenter and lawyer named Raisa Blommestijn was found guilty by a court in the Netherlands of noticing something extremely obvious about a viral video of a man being set upon by a gang of other men, who beat and kicked him to a pulp, before hurling him onto railway tracks: the victim was white European, and all the perpetrators were black immigrants.

When black people in America noticed something very similar about the racial profile of the black criminal Rodney King being beaten by a group of white policeman over in LA back in 1991, it caused mass riots. In 2024 Holland, all it caused was a direct legal order for Blommestijn to stop telling the truth immediately.

Blommestijn had observantly posted the following on social media: Yet another white man beaten up on the street by a group of Negroid primates. How many more defenceless whites must become victims? Probably countless: the open borders elite imports these people in droves, with all the consequences that entails.”

Perhaps it was unwise to call them “Negroid primates”, although if the racial profiles of criminals and victim here had been reversed, I sincerely doubt anyone would have been prosecuted for calling the white hoodlums beating up a black man “Neanderthal white knuckle-draggers”. Yet everything else in Blommestijn’s post was either factually correct, or at least a matter of valid political opinion.

Nonetheless, for the court concerned, Blommestijn had “incited intolerance” and committed an act of “group insult” by pitting “two groups of people against each other based on their different skin colours, portraying white people as victims of people with darker skin colours.” But how else would it have been possible to interpret such footage? It was clearly a group of black men, beating up a white man. You can’t unsee it; that’s literally what it is!

As Blommestijn observed, it wasn’t just her who was being prosecuted there that day, but “everyone who shares my view has been convicted with me”. Or, to put it another way, everyone who commits the crime of actually telling the demonstrable truth about what is currently going on.

 

icon

Join Mercator today for free and get our latest news and analysis

Buck internet censorship and get the news you may not get anywhere else, delivered right to your inbox. It's free and your info is safe with us, we will never share or sell your personal data.

The camera ever lies

Perhaps the next step in this whole trend is to begin prosecuting CCTV cameras themselves for “racism” after they carelessly capture politically problematic evidence of the “wrong kind of offenders” doing bad things too. This has actually sort of already happened, over in Belgium.

Vlaams Belang is a Flemish nationalist party – i.e., automatically “Far-Right” in the eyes of many mainstream commentators – whose central offices in Brussels were attacked in November by a Far-Left “anti-fascist” mob. So “anti-fascist” were they, in fact, that they began acting like classic 1930s SA street-thugs by trying to break down the building’s doors and set it on fire.

When white people in Britain did the precise same thing to asylum hotels recently, the nation’s left-wing Labour government labelled them all as “Far-Right” neo-Nazis, and began imprisoning them. In Belgium, when the Far-Left acted similarly, the main police response was to attempt to prosecute the allegedly “Far-Right” victims of Vlaams Belang instead.

Astonishingly, the problem was that Vlaams’ CCTV security-cameras had captured the rioters red-handed, thereby proving beyond all doubt what had just happened, just like with the awkwardly clear footage of black men beating up a white man so very “illegally” commented on over in Holland by Raisa Blommestijn.

However, as some of such footage was captured on the public street outside Vlaams” attacked offices, as opposed to on its grounds per se, and the criminals concerned had not given prior legal permission for their images to be recorded in such a fashion, this was all deemed to be a potential breach of their privacy! This is a peculiar new kind of Orwellian surveillance state, in which the mass CCTV footage is intended to be captured only so that the police can then deliberately ignore it.

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Ineptly Kept Secrets

But how much longer can such attempts to conceal increasingly obvious truths really go on for? Not too much longer, hopefully, as the majority of the general public have already long since cottoned on to the fact that they are being systematically lied to. Take this month’s latest resurgence of outrage over the UK’s grooming gang scandal, in which thousands of white working-class girls were raped, tortured and abused by gangs of Pakistani men in depressed former industrial towns across the nation, most notably Rotherham and Telford.

In early January, it emerged the UK Labour Party had officially adopted a definition of “Islamophobia” which specifically placed the phrase “grooming gangs” in inverted commas, as if to suggest they were mere myths, before warning that they were merely a modern-day incarnation of false “age-old stereotypes” linking Islam with “sexual profligacy and paedophilia”, which placed Muslims at risk of suffering “hate-crimes”.

The real ethno-religious hate-crimes here were committed by the imported Pakistani men against the native little white girls, however, a self-evident fact many commentators could see only too plainly; even the charity Tell Mama, which monitors actual anti-Muslim hate-crimes, criticised Labour’s thinking, calling for “greater understanding of why there has been a concentration of men of Pakistani heritage in these gangs.”

Counterproductively, so annoyed have many people now become by the pathetic attempts to cover all this up with Orwellian abuses of language that, ironically, they have indeed compliantly abandoned use of the phrase “grooming gangs”, just as the Labour Party suggested … and begun ostentatiously using even blunter and more inflammatory (yet true!) labels for such groups instead.

Deeming the very term “grooming gangs” to be a mere emollient euphemism intended to downplay the true levels of brown-on-white savagery involved, larger and larger numbers of dissident commentators in the UK are now increasingly using variants of the rather more explicit term “Pakistani Muslim child-rape gangs”, just to spite their would-be censors.

And such critics aren’t all evil Far-Right neo-Nazis, either. One of them is J.K. Rowling, whose best-known literary work is not Mein Kampf, but Harry Potter, who asked “why call them ‘grooming gangs’? It’s like calling those who stab people to death ‘knife owners’.”

How very pleasing this sudden pandemic of truth-speaking all is. Turns out that sometimes, if the lie is big enough, in the end the uncomfortable truth just can’t be swept under the magic carpet any more, no matter how much our rulers may want it to be.

Maybe Orwell’s that ends well after all? 


Forward this to your friends!


Steven Tucker is a UK-based writer with over ten books to his name. His latest, “Hitler’s and Stalin’s Misuse of Science”, comparing the woke pseudoscience of today to the totalitarian pseudoscience of the past, was released in 2023.

Image credit: Bigstock  


 

Showing 4 reactions

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
  • Steven Meyer
    commented 2025-01-17 13:30:52 +1100
    Anon Emouse,

    You’re almost right. It was a bus rather than a garbage truck. See:

    Why Is My Bus Trying To Turn Me Gay?
    https://dailysceptic.org/2024/09/12/why-is-my-bus-trying-to-turn-me-gay/

    Tucker does seem to have an obsession with gays.

    And now I need to get something off my chest.

    To the LGBTQIA+ community.

    I don’t care about your pronoun preferences. Honest, I don’t. If your preferred pronouns are “foo” and “bar” I shall oblige. And I shall be first in line to defend your right to have the pronouns of your choice.

    I also don’t care about your sexual preferences. To put it bluntly I don’t care who you have sex with, how you have sex, when you have sex or whether you have any sex at all.

    I’m as bored with the details of your sex lives as I’m sure you would be with the details of mine. Tell someone who cares.

    Provided you’re an adult, I also don’t care what operations you undergo or what sort of hormones you inject yourself with. Lead your lives the way you want.

    If anyone want to discriminate against you in the workplace or because of the way you dress I’ll be first in line to defend your rights.

    If you’re a drag queen I’ll defend your rights against people who demonise you.

    But no, if you have a “Y” chromosome you should not be allowed to compete with “XX” women in sports. You do have an unfair advantage. By all means organise sports for “XY” women.

    The UCI has banned trans women who transitioned after puberty from competing in women’s cycling events. I think it’s a step in the right direction.

    And now we come to children. If puberty blockers or any sort of hormone treatments for gender dysphoria are to be used at all it, should be only as a very last resort and with the agreement of an expert medical practitioner who has no financial interests in the case and no connection with a business providing these treatments. There should always be a “cooling off” period before commencement of such treatments.

    And please stop already with trying to constantly make yourself the centre of attention. Just because you have uncommon sexual orientations does not make you especially interesting. The world does not revolve around you.

    And a note to “Dem Dolts” – ie the dolts of the Democratic Party.

    Stop giving so much air time to LGBTQIA+ issues. By all means stand up for LGBQTIA+ folk when they suffer discrimination. But give at least equal time to, for example, children born into poverty regardless of race, colour, ethnicity and sexual orientation.

    When you speak to people on the left these days, you get the impression that all that matters is pronouns. In my youth we used to call this sort of thinking burying yours heads up a certain rear passage. in your own body. Since this is supposed to be a family friendly site I shall not be more explicit.
  • Anon Emouse
    commented 2025-01-16 22:00:21 +1100
    Steven,

    Aren’t you the bloke that freaked out because he saw a rainbow on a garbage truck? Seems like in your Europe you’d want to outlaw pride flags…that seems Orwellian, too 😂
  • mrscracker
    Goodness gracious.
    Can’t we have a conversation about immigration without bringing outdated , unscientific 19th century "race " into it?
    There’s absolutely no such thing as “race”.
    There are different cultures though and whether it’s a wise thing to bring large numbers of immigrants from dissimilar cultures into another culture is a separate discussion.
  • Steven Tucker
    published this page in The Latest 2025-01-15 15:36:56 +1100