An enormous shitstorm has engulfed the UK over the past week or so, and it’s all about immigration. Here’s how events unfolded.
- A celebrity goes to Calais to make a video illustrating the situation in the migrant ‘Jungle’.
Pop squelcher Lily Allen went to Calais and emoted painfully, providing little background or context and not enough useful information.
When confronted with a blameless teenage migrant, who had the right to enter the UK and has now done so, she began sobbing. Prior to that she croaked out an apology “on behalf of my country”.
Simply by front-loading the report with her London-lubed feelings, crying a bit, and being literally incapable of discussing any of the hard details of the crisis, she managed to lather up a salty tide of knee-jerk emotion among the kind of viewer swayed by a baffled looking boy being not-helped by a choking luvvie.
At the same time, Allen infuriated and embarrassed a different section of the audience, who watched through their fingers as this born-rich moralizer had the gauche conceit to apologise on behalf of a nation she doesn’t represent on matters she didn’t demonstrate any proper, balanced understanding of.
Her video, far from bringing Britain together in purposeful compassion (or whatever it was she intended), either yoked out useless, weepy emotions, or infuriated more pragmatic watchers.
She strongly enhanced the feeling that Britain is divided and tetchy, and demonstrated exactly why employing right-on celebrities for anything other than supermarket openings is counter productive. Well done Lily. On to the next phase.
- Child migrants arrive in the UK from Calais to be given asylum.
The UK was to give refuge to unaccompanied, vulnerable children, an idea that has wide support. This is just the kind of immigration that most people are happy to get behind.
But then, among the migrants who stepped off the buses in Croydon were a number of adult men who had, bewilderingly, managed to pass themselves off as children. One man was identified as looking late thirties, and from the photos that seems a reasonable estimate. These adult men—and all of the first coachload of arrivals were male—will soon be placed in schools with actual children.
As the bizarre scenes in Croydon took over the media, the Daily Mail reported a British volunteer working in the Calais camp as saying:
I know there are vulnerable kids, kids with epilepsy, who are still here that have family in the UK they could be with right now. It’s a shambles. Children are not being told what they are queuing up for, they are not being given information, there is complete confusion.
However, such considerations didn’t factor in to the thinking of the rabid social justice warriors scrambling to make it known that not only was nothing unseemly happening, but that there was something dreadfully wrong with anyone who said there was.
- Reaction unfolds to the migrants’ arrival.
Imagine for a moment if Britain’s plans—for vulnerable children to be brought in to the country and given the opportunity of a new life—had actually proceeded as anticipated.
We can only speculate, but it would be churlish to assume that there’d have been anything other than goodwill and a sense that we were finally getting something right with regard to immigration.
In reality though, social media fired up rapidly with clear sighted observers who’d spotted, without difficulty, that a fast one was being pulled. They pointed out in no uncertain terms that blatant lies were being sold, clearly evidenced in the pictures of the men among the boys in Croydon.
The I’m-alright-Jack celebrity emotionalists, however, didn’t like that. Here’s what holier-than-though multi-millionaire Gary Lineker tweeted:
Notice the glaring disconnect here. There’s no mention of the crucial substance of the dispute: that some of the children are adults. And when this was put to him by another Twitter user, here was the response:
This is the wealthy, metro-leftist worldview encapsulated in a single insult. If you dissent from the official narrative and tell the truth, if you work honestly with the crystal clear evidence which is right in front of you then you are, in this case, “hideously racist and utterly heartless”, and ultimately, an “idiot”.
The Mirror ran this headline:
Gary Lineker Faces Torrent Of Abuse After Defending Child Refugees Arriving In England
The untruth which had caused the story to be a story—that some of the ‘child refugees’ weren’t children—is actually used here to attack those who pointed out that untruth.
Quickly and with a ruthless disregard for basic decency, criticism of being obviously lied to was coldly misrepresented as criticism of the plan to take in child refugees. As the car crash unfolded, outright lies have been defended with crude personal slurs.
Where does this leave us?
One side of the immigration debate—those proclaiming that we mustn’t discuss the age of the migrants—has rendered facts and truth as at best optional and at worst, by some strange twisting of reason, as emotionally debasing.
In a brick wall denial of reality, those who’d like to dismiss the age issue entirely have told stone cold lies in the face of contradictory evidence, and have deliberately slurred those who disagree with them.
They’ve also placed an unhealthy emphasis on subjective emotional reaction over clearheaded, objective analysis. And if you happen to have the ‘wrong’ emotional response, then prepare for a whipping.
One of the tragedies of this mishandled fiasco is that it could have been a genuinely unifying story. After all, helping desperate children is hardly a difficult sell.
Instead, it’s divided the country still further, and starkly demonstrated the regressive left’s zealous contempt for truth, honest reporting, and plurality of opinion.