The Sixty Year Experiment.

By Caratacus

Experiments on humans, animals and plants are highly regulated in civilised nations. Experimenters are bound by rules of morality and ethics. There must be agreement by the subjects. They must be carefully afforded "informed consent", with detailed descriptions of the risks and rewards.

The experimenters have the duty of declaring vested interests. Particularly they must reveal possible personally benefit from the outcome of the experiment.

Experiments are, by convention, given a restricted time frame, for review and reassessment. If it seems that the experiment is not going to be beneficial to humans, plants or animals, that experiment must be curtailed forthwith.

********************************************************************

Since the advent of Homo sapiens, strong biological forces have inexorably separated people into their different "types" by geographical area. 

An inherent quality of biology, beyond control, has generated this distinction between humans. These separating paths have lead to the genetic, racial, biochemical and the behavioural varieties of humans. 

Progressive separation of humans also drove the divergence which has created the thousands of human languages. Most are now so distant from each other to be mutually unintelligible. People will continue to form enclaves of similar genetic and language groups.

The creation of human bio-diversity has always been inevitable.

*******************************************************

Sixty years ago, the governments of Western Europe began an experiment on their entire human population. It was, and remains, the largest biological experiment ever conducted.

This experimental design was to attempt to reverse human bio-diversity. To do that governments brought, and allow to remain as a breeding sub-set, people of different genes, races, cultures and languages into the geographical boundaries of Britain and Europe. 

The political hypothesis was to test whether the distinctions between different varieties of humans, would progressively lessen if brought into Europe. It was guessed that ultimately these varied people (and their varied cultures) would amalgamate seamlessly, to the benefit of all.

The term “integration" was conjured.

 It soon became clear that conflict was probable. Aggressive rioting between the races occurred. Integration was not going to work.

Therefore the experiment was modified to test whether intuitive human behaviour could be changed under threat of law. The native populations were ordered not to reveal that they recognised (the obvious) distinctions between the existing inhabitants and the aliens. They were ordered to curtail any discourse amongst themselves, which might emphasise these distinctions.

The term “criminal racism” was invented

Since “integration” had failed the experimental basis was changed again. Instead of integrating, could these differing groups instead function along-side one with the other?

The term "multiculturalism" was coined.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Bizarrely, in an exact parallel, multiculturalism was attempted in South Africa, in an attempt to protect the cultural and genetic homogeny of resident Europeans. The description was "separate development".

The outcome was a cascade of inflamed, ruthless and hypocritical condemnation by the continental Europeans. This attempt at self-protection by a small, minority group was destroyed by bullying.
Ironically the “anti-apartheid movement” was later going to have important destructive sequelae in Europe.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The Governments of Europe could have only one moral justification this experimentation. That was to ensure the long term safety, well-being and contentment of their populations and their progeny.What mandate did the governments have to commence this experiment, which by its very design would bring disequilibrium and so fear to European Societies?

They had none. The population was not consulted.

Instead in an unbelievable arrogance and opinionated superiority these politicians, amateur scientists that they are, forced into place this massive, irreversible, naïve, rationally indefensible and highly dangerous idea.

***********************************************************************

Synchronous with this experiment on humans was another political experiment on a massive ecological system.

This “good idea” was to play manipulator of the living and to bring the Nile Perch into Lake Victoria Nyanza. That lake had one of the most diverse fish environments on earth.
 

The perch was surreptitiously introduced in 1954, and more official introductions occurred in 1962 and 1963.
 

The end result of that experiment was to destroy the highly refined and complex ecology of the second widest body of fresh water in the world.

The experiment so altered the freshwater ecosystem of Lake Victoria that several hundred species became extinct or near extinction.  This politically engineered event was likely the largest extinction event amongst vertebrates in the 20th century
 

The impact on the local economy was the subject of the documentary Darwin's Nightmare.

********************************************************
The analogy between the past destruction of the East African ecosystem and the impending destruction of the European Civilisation should be clear. 

Both were based on “Political Good Ideas”.
 

Both were philosophically and scientifically flawed from foundation.

Both were doomed.

********************************************************

Sixty years ago, the governments of Western Europe embarked on an experiment on their entire human population. It was, and remains, the largest biological experiment ever conducted.

It breaches the most fundamental guidelines of experimentation and transgresses every component of the rules and restraints experimentation.

It has been clear, from the outset that this was not going to afford the Europeans the benefit of greater contentment and greater safety.1

Was the population, the "experimental sample", informed of this? Were they told of the hazards and potential?

The short answer is no.

Was the experiment terminated when it became clear that it was failing?

No.

But there was a parallel subplot which allowed a small group of people, the politicians, to benefit themselves greatly. Immigration has been used to buy politicians power, and bolster their tenure.

This was scientific fraud at its worst, and by its magnitude the most despicable, condemnable and outrageous travesty of a political mandate, contrary to all understandings of democracy, morality and ethics.

This blind endeavour has as much chance of success as a king ordering the retreat of the tides.

For the sake humanity, the survival of the European and God’s wondrous diversity, this experiment must be curtailed forthwith.
_____________________________________________

(1) The Empire Windrush docked in Tilbury on 21 June 1948 becoming a landmark in the history of migration to the UK. On the 22 June 1948 11 MPs wrote to the Prime Minister, Clement Attlee. The letter was signed by JD Murray, CF Grey, James Harrison, Frank Mcleavy, RWG Mackay, T Reid, Louis Tolley, TJ Brooks, JR Leslie, Percey Holman and Meredith F Titterington. They expressed concern that large numbers of "coloured" immigrants might "impair the harmony, strength and cohesion of our public and social life and to cause discord and unhappiness among all concerned."