Scroll through certain corners of the internet and you’ll find no shortage of self-styled “defenders of Britain” sounding the alarm about Muslim immigrants. The tone is familiar: the country is under threat, its identity is being erased, and only the loudest voices on social media are brave enough to tell the truth.

But if this sounds new, it shouldn’t. Britain has lived through this kind of moral panic before.

Four hundred years ago, the supposed threat came from Catholics. In the aftermath of the Reformation, English Protestants convinced themselves that Catholics were a shadowy internal enemy—agents of foreign powers, plotting to overturn the nation from within. Political tensions and a handful of real conspiracies gave fuel to a fear far larger than the facts, and pamphlets of the time dripped with righteous certainty that the country was on the brink.

Today, the pamphlets have been replaced by memes, but the pattern is strikingly similar. Islamophobic corners of social media frame Muslim immigrants not as ordinary people building lives here, but as part of a coordinated “invasion”. The claims are just as dramatic, and just as thinly supported. The focus is not on lived reality but on the thrill of outrage, amplified by algorithms and tribalism.

What both eras show is that Britain’s greatest religious panics have rarely been about theology. They have been about social change, uncertainty, and the fear of losing control. When people feel destabilised—by war, economic hardship, or simply rapid change—they look for someone to blame. In the 17th century, it was Catholics. Today, it is often Muslims. The target shifts; the anxiety remains.

And yet history also shows something else: these panics pass. Over time, British Catholics became part of the fabric of national life. The same, quietly and steadily, is happening with Britain’s Muslim communities. People work together, live alongside one another, raise families, and share neighbourhoods. The everyday reality of coexistence always outlives the noise of those who insist that the sky is falling.

Panic has a short lifespan. Society does not. And each time Britain survives a wave of fear, it learns again what should be obvious: that ordinary people, whatever their faith, are rarely the threat they are made out to be.

On 12/11/2025 at 6:14 PM, JimCM said:

it learns again what should be obvious: that ordinary people, whatever their faith, are rarely the threat they are made out to be.

 

But what if you are wrong? What if this group has malign intent? You lack a sense of tragedy. If you are wrong, there is no restart. England only gets one life.

 

What if Pakistanis from parts of Pakistan- the North West Frontiers- widely regarded even within Pakistan as backward and savage lands, don't turn into beautiful liberal citizens? What if they prioritise their imperialist religion above the nation?

 

What if they don't care to learn about King Arthur? What if, cold and starving, rather than admire the ancient wooden townhouses of Stratford-upon-Avon, they burn them down as firewood? 

 

And what is a Britain without the British? The IQ average scores have dropped as more and more immigrants arrive. The Chicago economist Garrett Jones has demonstrated that if you import the third world you become the third world. This is not a moral panic; it is brutal statistical reality. The main attraction of the UK will vanish if migrants take it over. And in the end they will leave it as a mess. 

 

In the Netherlands, they have estimated that each third world migrant costs over their lifetime $750,000. This cost of welfare immigrants is plainly unsustainable. Again, nothing to do with panics, but brutal accounting. 

 

Denmark dealt with this 10 years ago. It's a lesson that delicate liberals were slow to learn because reality was kept away from them. But with Somalian men 60 times more likely to rape than the indigenous Anglo Saxon population, at least over the topic of safety, even liberals are grasping that this needs to stop. And be reversed.

 

We applaud Muslims who live decent lives. There is no hatred for them. But there is an enormous landmass elsewhere specifically for their failed experiment of a Muslim utopia. 

 

The moderate solution is mass deportation. And the British will pay your repatriation costs and a healthy lump sum so that you may create your paradise on earth far away.

 

And with a lovely national boundary between us, we can feel comfortable with walking our streets. And when we wish to visit you, we'll check the latest FCO warnings on the dangers you and your country present, and we'll hire a guide and stay close to the tour bus.

On 12/11/2025 at 12:14 PM, JimCM said:

Scroll through certain corners of the internet and you’ll find no shortage of self-styled “defenders of Britain” sounding the alarm about Muslim immigrants. The tone is familiar: the country is under threat, its identity is being erased, and only the loudest voices on social media are brave enough to tell the truth.

But if this sounds new, it shouldn’t. Britain has lived through this kind of moral panic before.

Four hundred years ago, the supposed threat came from Catholics. In the aftermath of the Reformation, English Protestants convinced themselves that Catholics were a shadowy internal enemy—agents of foreign powers, plotting to overturn the nation from within. Political tensions and a handful of real conspiracies gave fuel to a fear far larger than the facts, and pamphlets of the time dripped with righteous certainty that the country was on the brink.

Today, the pamphlets have been replaced by memes, but the pattern is strikingly similar. Islamophobic corners of social media frame Muslim immigrants not as ordinary people building lives here, but as part of a coordinated “invasion”. The claims are just as dramatic, and just as thinly supported. The focus is not on lived reality but on the thrill of outrage, amplified by algorithms and tribalism.

What both eras show is that Britain’s greatest religious panics have rarely been about theology. They have been about social change, uncertainty, and the fear of losing control. When people feel destabilised—by war, economic hardship, or simply rapid change—they look for someone to blame. In the 17th century, it was Catholics. Today, it is often Muslims. The target shifts; the anxiety remains.

And yet history also shows something else: these panics pass. Over time, British Catholics became part of the fabric of national life. The same, quietly and steadily, is happening with Britain’s Muslim communities. People work together, live alongside one another, raise families, and share neighbourhoods. The everyday reality of coexistence always outlives the noise of those who insist that the sky is falling.

Panic has a short lifespan. Society does not. And each time Britain survives a wave of fear, it learns again what should be obvious: that ordinary people, whatever their faith, are rarely the threat they are made out to be.

Another interesting aspect is that those 'defenders of Britain' often recall and miss the glory of the British empire, while most Muslim presence is an indirect consequence of the empire (ex. Immigrants from Pakistan).

 

2 hours ago, candide said:

Another interesting aspect is that those 'defenders of Britain' often recall and miss the glory of the British empire, while most Muslim presence is an indirect consequence of the empire (ex. Immigrants from Pakistan).

 

A 20 year old documentary, where you hear just the same old arguments, but talking about different kinds of immigrants.

 

 

You know things aren't going to end well with the Manleys of Kent....Her dad's old Offie was now a Chinese Take Away.  She wasn't too pleased to learn Mongol hoardes featured in her past. Gary Bushell, Sun columnist, finds out he's 8% African, likely from an event in the last 5-6 generations. Takes it quite well.

 

The Founder of the Steadfast Trust, who mourn the death of King Harold, and mark the genocide of the Anglo Saxons by the Normans, (1066 meant Grown Zero, Ethnic Cleansing for her) was told she had a lot of Ukrainian/Georgian/Armenian, but also had a typical profile of a Romani. She tried to sue the show.

 

Some people had different definitions of what it is to be "English". For some, you need to demonstrate a lineage of 1000 years  (about 40 generations).  That  particular individual found out she was mostly not English, with substantial Middle Easter/Indian roots, which she used to explain why she tanned quite well. She took it well to be told her roots were probably Turkey/the Balkans.

 

Essex man was ok with 12 generations as proof of being English. He was pretty sure no descendant of England  and Arsenal legend Ian Wright could never be considered English. When confronted with being 60% not Northern European, he toned that down to 3-4 generations. Looked a bit shocked.

 

Leicester man (trainee squadee) defined Englishness about how much you contribute to society and shared values. He had ambitions to join the army, and defined the English Soldier through TESTICLES (teamwork enthusiasm stamina initiative courage loyalty excellence sense-of-humour). That's probably a very reasonable view. Magnus Magnusson had a name as least English as you could suppose,  but as a kid, I had no clue where he was from. And actually, it didn't really matter. He influenced my view of the world. Leicester man was really pleased to learn genetically he was typically Russian-Ukrainian.

 

 

I know my (maternal) lineage about 15-20  generations, but after that, it runs out of steam. Genetically, one test shows me,  like Lord Tebbit, to have a fairly boring background; 47% English (mostly East Midlands), 49%  Irish (mostly Munster), 4% Franco-German and a smidgen of Viking (Iceland 1%). My paternal background only goes back to about 1780, because London (London drew a lot of people looking for work, my surname is strongly associated with the North East). Given my oldest London ancestor was a retired British soldier, I was rather hoping for something a bit more interesting; a soldier born in the Empire perhaps. But no. Those results aren't really comparable to the TV show; in the source I used, I am being compared to the known ancestry of other living people submitting samples, which will skew things a little.

 

Other databases are based on more ancient samples, so you are compared to signatures identified at archeological sites. In those, I have links to a bronze age site in Befordshire, but also ancient Rome, as well as the shores of the Black Sea. 

 

Society does change. My values are not the same as my late father; similar, but not the same. And the same would be true for him and his father. My grandfather achieved adulthood during the Great Depression. My father's formative years included the death of his mother when he was a young teenager, and then National Service, turned into regular service. My formative years were affected by his choice of job (army,  so I was mostly outside of the UK in MEA/APAC),

 

The change in British (English) society is most profound when I look at my mother's side.  I can take it back to the 1500s. That could done, relatively easily, because for 500 years, her family basically didn't move from the same village, and they  didn't change job much either. On my dads side, on London, its a history of working in crap jobs in South London then crap jobs in the East End. That changed dramatically with the First and, more so, the Second World War. Huge changes in society. My Great Grandfather was born in a Workhouse, to a 17 year old chamber maid. He joined the Dragoons aged 14 to get away from his step dad. He served in Egypt, France (first and last cavalry charges) and Ireland. At the end of it he was grateful to get a job labouring at the new iron works in his home town. His sons got jobs there. War came along, and one son became  a Royal Marine, and turned that into a career, saw the world. My Grandfather was in a protected profession (boilermaker) and had to be content with Home Guard, as a young man. Postwar, became head of the town's Civil Defence (Cold War stuff). His daughter, my mum, joined up at16, as an army nurse. Me, PhD, Director within a Plc. 4 generations from Workhouse to Boardroom (or nearly). Thats not a complement to the opportunities British society offered. Its damming. 500 years of farm workers and leather scrapers, then the upper classes get killed off, and now they need us.

 

I can only reflect that my ancesters from before 1900 were just as capable as me, but were denied opportunity. When my Grandparents went to War, they were told they were defending British (English) values, and if necessary, dying for those values. But some of those values weren't worth defending, and they didn't survive. That generation established new values. We no longer dof caps and accept our place in society. 

 

I recommend everyone who can, research your family history. Uncover the lost brother, the family scandals. For most people of a working class background, you will feel just a bit communist, in the sense of put them up agaisnt the wall, and shoot them. I identify as a Thatcherite, in the sense of a follower of a Grocer's Daughter who has to fight against lack of opportunity and prejudice.  Rather that than the son of a rich man, who had the opportinity but squandered it in life (Jeremy Corbyn, politically mediocre, nothing more than a bolshie council leader, who benefited from a private education).

10 hours ago, Roadsternut said:

 

 

A 20 year old documentary, where you hear just the same old arguments, but talking about different kinds of immigrants.

 

 

You know things aren't going to end well with the Manleys of Kent....Her dad's old Offie was now a Chinese Take Away.  She wasn't too pleased to learn Mongol hoardes featured in her past. Gary Bushell, Sun columnist, finds out he's 8% African, likely from an event in the last 5-6 generations. Takes it quite well.

 

The Founder of the Steadfast Trust, who mourn the death of King Harold, and mark the genocide of the Anglo Saxons by the Normans, (1066 meant Grown Zero, Ethnic Cleansing for her) was told she had a lot of Ukrainian/Georgian/Armenian, but also had a typical profile of a Romani. She tried to sue the show.

 

Some people had different definitions of what it is to be "English". For some, you need to demonstrate a lineage of 1000 years  (about 40 generations).  That  particular individual found out she was mostly not English, with substantial Middle Easter/Indian roots, which she used to explain why she tanned quite well. She took it well to be told her roots were probably Turkey/the Balkans.

 

Essex man was ok with 12 generations as proof of being English. He was pretty sure no descendant of England  and Arsenal legend Ian Wright could never be considered English. When confronted with being 60% not Northern European, he toned that down to 3-4 generations. Looked a bit shocked.

 

Leicester man (trainee squadee) defined Englishness about how much you contribute to society and shared values. He had ambitions to join the army, and defined the English Soldier through TESTICLES (teamwork enthusiasm stamina initiative courage loyalty excellence sense-of-humour). That's probably a very reasonable view. Magnus Magnusson had a name as least English as you could suppose,  but as a kid, I had no clue where he was from. And actually, it didn't really matter. He influenced my view of the world. Leicester man was really pleased to learn genetically he was typically Russian-Ukrainian.

 

 

I know my (maternal) lineage about 15-20  generations, but after that, it runs out of steam. Genetically, one test shows me,  like Lord Tebbit, to have a fairly boring background; 47% English (mostly East Midlands), 49%  Irish (mostly Munster), 4% Franco-German and a smidgen of Viking (Iceland 1%). My paternal background only goes back to about 1780, because London (London drew a lot of people looking for work, my surname is strongly associated with the North East). Given my oldest London ancestor was a retired British soldier, I was rather hoping for something a bit more interesting; a soldier born in the Empire perhaps. But no. Those results aren't really comparable to the TV show; in the source I used, I am being compared to the known ancestry of other living people submitting samples, which will skew things a little.

 

Other databases are based on more ancient samples, so you are compared to signatures identified at archeological sites. In those, I have links to a bronze age site in Befordshire, but also ancient Rome, as well as the shores of the Black Sea. 

 

Society does change. My values are not the same as my late father; similar, but not the same. And the same would be true for him and his father. My grandfather achieved adulthood during the Great Depression. My father's formative years included the death of his mother when he was a young teenager, and then National Service, turned into regular service. My formative years were affected by his choice of job (army,  so I was mostly outside of the UK in MEA/APAC),

 

The change in British (English) society is most profound when I look at my mother's side.  I can take it back to the 1500s. That could done, relatively easily, because for 500 years, her family basically didn't move from the same village, and they  didn't change job much either. On my dads side, on London, its a history of working in crap jobs in South London then crap jobs in the East End. That changed dramatically with the First and, more so, the Second World War. Huge changes in society. My Great Grandfather was born in a Workhouse, to a 17 year old chamber maid. He joined the Dragoons aged 14 to get away from his step dad. He served in Egypt, France (first and last cavalry charges) and Ireland. At the end of it he was grateful to get a job labouring at the new iron works in his home town. His sons got jobs there. War came along, and one son became  a Royal Marine, and turned that into a career, saw the world. My Grandfather was in a protected profession (boilermaker) and had to be content with Home Guard, as a young man. Postwar, became head of the town's Civil Defence (Cold War stuff). His daughter, my mum, joined up at16, as an army nurse. Me, PhD, Director within a Plc. 4 generations from Workhouse to Boardroom (or nearly). Thats not a complement to the opportunities British society offered. Its damming. 500 years of farm workers and leather scrapers, then the upper classes get killed off, and now they need us.

 

I can only reflect that my ancesters from before 1900 were just as capable as me, but were denied opportunity. When my Grandparents went to War, they were told they were defending British (English) values, and if necessary, dying for those values. But some of those values weren't worth defending, and they didn't survive. That generation established new values. We no longer dof caps and accept our place in society. 

 

I recommend everyone who can, research your family history. Uncover the lost brother, the family scandals. For most people of a working class background, you will feel just a bit communist, in the sense of put them up agaisnt the wall, and shoot them. I identify as a Thatcherite, in the sense of a follower of a Grocer's Daughter who has to fight against lack of opportunity and prejudice.  Rather that than the son of a rich man, who had the opportinity but squandered it in life (Jeremy Corbyn, politically mediocre, nothing more than a bolshie council leader, who benefited from a private education).

 

Thanks for posting. An entertaining and interesting watch.

 

I actually liked Mrs Manley's reaction:

 

'How do you feel about the fact that you might be related to the warlord, Genkis Khan?' (paraphrased).

 

'Delighted'😂

Ya all keep telling yourself all is A-ok. Not to worry happened before, they are assimilating, (not) . Ya all aint fooling no-one. 

The historical precedents from other countries of Moslems and Christians living "side by side" is not promising, not promising at all. It looks more to me like a fault line in every country the two religions exist, particularly in Moslem majority countries where Christian populations are often persecuted. One of the reasons is the strict religious and cultural bar for Moslems marrying non-Moslems or, heaven forbid, converting, meaning the societies don't mingle or assimilate. There are many other reasons including the strong ties to the mother country. This is well demonstrated by British Pakistanis for example.

 

The most likely result is a strong anti-immigrant movement amongst the indigenous white Christian populace. This has begun in many Western countries.

 

We'll see.

On 12/11/2025 at 6:14 PM, JimCM said:

Scroll through certain corners of the internet and you’ll find no shortage of self-styled “defenders of Britain” sounding the alarm about Muslim immigrants. The tone is familiar: the country is under threat, its identity is being erased, and only the loudest voices on social media are brave enough to tell the truth.

Why pick on Britain, the whole white world is under attack from Islam.

And I say let them have it .......... The whole worthless west!

 

I don't live there, it's not my problem.

On 12/11/2025 at 6:14 PM, JimCM said:

 whatever their faith, are rarely the threat they are made out to be.

A few Muslims in a city assimilate or at least can't organise a big enough collective to be a threat.

 

5% of a city becomes islamic you now have Muslim child rape gangs. Rotherham.

On 12/11/2025 at 6:14 PM, JimCM said:

Scroll through certain corners of the internet and you’ll find no shortage of self-styled “defenders of Britain” sounding the alarm about Muslim immigrants. The tone is familiar: the country is under threat, its identity is being erased, and only the loudest voices on social media are brave enough to tell the truth.

But if this sounds new, it shouldn’t. Britain has lived through this kind of moral panic before.

Four hundred years ago, the supposed threat came from Catholics. In the aftermath of the Reformation, English Protestants convinced themselves that Catholics were a shadowy internal enemy—agents of foreign powers, plotting to overturn the nation from within. Political tensions and a handful of real conspiracies gave fuel to a fear far larger than the facts, and pamphlets of the time dripped with righteous certainty that the country was on the brink.

Today, the pamphlets have been replaced by memes, but the pattern is strikingly similar. Islamophobic corners of social media frame Muslim immigrants not as ordinary people building lives here, but as part of a coordinated “invasion”. The claims are just as dramatic, and just as thinly supported. The focus is not on lived reality but on the thrill of outrage, amplified by algorithms and tribalism.

What both eras show is that Britain’s greatest religious panics have rarely been about theology. They have been about social change, uncertainty, and the fear of losing control. When people feel destabilised—by war, economic hardship, or simply rapid change—they look for someone to blame. In the 17th century, it was Catholics. Today, it is often Muslims. The target shifts; the anxiety remains.

And yet history also shows something else: these panics pass. Over time, British Catholics became part of the fabric of national life. The same, quietly and steadily, is happening with Britain’s Muslim communities. People work together, live alongside one another, raise families, and share neighbourhoods. The everyday reality of coexistence always outlives the noise of those who insist that the sky is falling.

Panic has a short lifespan. Society does not. And each time Britain survives a wave of fear, it learns again what should be obvious: that ordinary people, whatever their faith, are rarely the threat they are made out to be.

Compare the demographics of society today to then, their concerns about Roman Catholicism were justified. Just fewer Bible believing Protestants about to notice or care. 

We were warned ,when Enoch Powell made his "Rivers of blood" speech

back on the 20 th April 1968, and look what's happened now .looks like

he was right., the UK is a small Island ,can only take so many ,

 

regards worgeordie

45 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Why pick on Britain, the whole white world is under attack from Islam.

And I say let them have it .......... The whole worthless west!

 

I don't live there, it's not my problem.

Good job what you don't like is paying you a pension, and more though, isn't it, why don't you tell them to keep it................................😂

Oh my, so sad to the the islamization of England. Next it will be the incorporation of Sharia Law and permission to marry 9 year olds. Then permission to marry goats and camels. Things are really looking up for England.  

46 minutes ago, transam said:

Good job what you don't like is paying you a pension, and more though, isn't it, why don't you tell them to keep it................................😂

Got my 10 pounds Xmas bonus today ......... Thanks Sir Kier!

1 minute ago, BritManToo said:

Got my 10 pounds Xmas bonus today ......... Thanks Sir Kier!

I have no doubt, and not strange, that you slag off the country you have been defrauding.....🤗

5 minutes ago, transam said:

I have no doubt, and not strange, that you slag off the country you have been defrauding.....🤗

Give it a rest roid junkie.

Britain's well rid of you and your ilk.

2 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Give it a rest roid junkie.

You don't like replies with facts.......?   🤫

 

What on earth is a roid junkie..........🤔

Just now, transam said:

You don't like replies with facts.......?   🤫

I don't like replies from mentally ill stalkers.

Just now, BritManToo said:

I don't like replies from mentally ill stalkers.

Nor would I..........

Just now, transam said:

Nor would I..........

So stop doing it.

Just now, BritManToo said:

So stop doing it.

I don't defraud pensions..............🥴..........😳