A Jewish Labour MP who was subjected to a ‘Soviet show trial’ by party members was last night at the centre of claims that she will be the next MP to defect from Jeremy Corbyn’s party. Just hours after Mr Corbyn claimed that there was no ‘widespread’ problem of anti-Semitism in the Party, Dame Louise Ellman was barracked by supporters of the Labour leader during a bruising meeting of her Liverpool Riverside constituency party on Friday evening.



The hard-Left activists overwhelmingly passed a motion supporting the activists who targeted fellow Liverpool MP Luciana Berger, leading a friend of Dame Louise to say: ‘Louise will not be in the party for much longer.’



Ms Berger, who is also Jewish and required a bodyguard at last year’s Labour Party Conference after receiving death threats, quit Labour on Monday saying the party was ‘institutionally anti-Semitic’ – a day after The Mail on Sunday revealed that she was on the brink of forming a breakaway movement in protest at Mr Corbyn’s failure to tackle the problem.



She was one of the seven Labour MP founders of The Independent Group.



This newspaper reported last year that Mr Corbyn and others on his staff had been heard describing Dame Louise as ‘the Honourable Member for Tel Aviv’, a claim which the Corbyn camp denied.

When I travel round this country, observing its many problems and troubles, I seldom meet anyone who says: ‘What we need here in Britain is more political correctness.’ Nor do I hear many people saying: ‘The trouble with Britain is that fashionable, liberal views do not get much of a hearing, or have much influence. What this country needs is more foreign rule, more mass immigration, more failing comprehensive schools, more broken marriages, more crime and more drugs; not to mention less Christianity, lighter punishments for criminals and less freedom of speech.’

Now that low-altruism minorities are approaching 50 percent of the US electorate, identity politics are permanently replacing ideological politics, and a Jew like Khan is never going to be elected in any district where Somalis, or Arabs, or Indians, or Chinese are the majority. And they're also increasingly unlikely to be elected in black-, white-, or Hispanic-dominated districts.



Further complicating matters is the fact that the rise of Donald Trump and American nationalism means the "hello, fellow white people" schtick is not going to work much longer, particularly now that the inordinately Jewish "conservative media" has unmasked itself as globalist rather than pro-American, and viciously opposed to any America First nationalist ideology.



So, setting up Pedro, Peng, Pasha and Prodosh to fight Paul for the benefit of Peter has, over time, put Peter in a no-win situation. If Pedro and company win, Peter is permanently excluded from power and may even be actively persecuted by the rainbow coalition he helped build. And if a newly self-interested Paul wins, he's no longer likely to listen to Peter or pay any attention to Peter's interests.



This leaves Peter with three options. Try to shut down democracy, accept the gradual decline of power, wealth, and influence, or leave.



This isn't a matter for debate, nor will crying Holocaust or engaging in philosemitic virtue-signaling make any difference here here. It's simple demographic math combined with an observation of historical group voting patterns. US whites are willing to vote outside their identity. US non-whites strongly prefer to do as the Jews do and vote their identity.

The UK appears to be about eight-to-ten years ahead of the USA, as the imported populations brought in by the political Left are now driving their Neo-Palestinian predecessors out of the very political vehicles that were empowered by bringing them in:The so-called Independent Group is a small collection of mostly Jewish former Labour Party and anti-Brexit former Tory Party members. With one or two exceptions, they are totally unelectable in their own boroughs now, which is why the "new party" is almost certainly going to cease to exist after the next election. Peter Hitchens is one of the British observers who is entirely unimpressed by The Independent Group, which can perhaps be best understood as a collection of Never-Corbyn neocons.What we are seeing play out is, I suspect, the consequence of the Jewish nation's historically nomadic nature, and it appears that instead of slowing the process down as had been widely assumed would be the case, representative democracy is speeding it up. Contra Jordan Peterson, the reason Neo-Palestinians are what he described as "over-represented in positions of authority, competence and influence" is because they are very adept at utilizing identity politics to benefit their immigrant community at the expense of their native hosts.Historically this was done through their close financial relationship with the native king and aristocracy, which in many cases was little more native than they were. But democracy, even representative democracy, also requires numbers to acquire political influence, and so in the democratic era the Jews of the diaspora have adopted a standard policy of bringing in as many immigrants as possible in order to augment their own electoral influence. However, this is a policy with a time limit, because sooner or later, the immigrant allies are no longer content to follow Neo-Palestinian leadership and seek to wield their influence directly on behalf of their own identity rather than being content with whatever crumbs they are given by the existing leadership.This development was entirely predictable, and in fact, I described its inevitability three years ago , in 2016, when Ilhan Omar, now a newly-elected Congresswoman, defeated 22-term State Representative Phyllis Khan for her seat in the Minnesota State Legislature.The end of the era of Neo-Palestinian influence in the Western democracies threaten to be uncommonly interesting times for everyone. Remember, the Holocaust was an anomaly, and it's much more common for Europe's nomads to simply move on to a new territory when the current one becomes less amenable to their traditional practices. The strategic complication, of course, is that the friendliest and most obvious destination will require the nomads of the diaspora to follow the lead of the modern Israelis by giving up their exploitative nomadic ways and transforming themselves into farmers and builders and settlers.They can do it. But will they do so? That is the question that may well shape the course of more than a few of the 21st century's wars.

Labels: history, politics, war