Barring dramatic inflection of trajectory, it will take few terms before the US Supreme Court coaxes a prohibition on hate speech from a bashful Constitution. Then I suppose my life as an at-large criminal blogger will be concluded.
Aside from the quality decline in roommates, one of the things I will mourn at that time is the failure to have ever visited London. There was never cause in business, nor quite enough appeal in pleasure to motivate the trip.
And now the city has lost its allure entirely. Of course I mean that strictly from a financial standpoint, which is all that motivates rational homo economus. London simply doesn’t offer competitive pricing to see Pakistanis, when a top-5 hotel in Karachi can be had for $78/night. Listen to me closely: money is all that matters.
I’ve been reflecting warmly on that position recently. Motivated in part by this piece that asks wherefore art thou? of London’s white people.
Something quite remarkable happened in London in the first decade of the new millennium. The number of white British people in the capital fell by 620,000 – equivalent to the entire population of Glasgow moving out.
The consequence, as revealed by the latest census, is that white Brits are now in a minority in London, making up just 45% of its residents.
I still can’t quite viscerally absorb the enormity of that question. Not posed in regard to Luanda, itself another husk of civilization’s receding molts, but actually London England. Where did the white people in London go? The article casts about, almost comically, for mascara to pretty the corpse’s face.
…what emerges is a much more positive story than some headlines would make you think.
Always look on the bright side of your dispossession. What side is that? The side that gets you 💵PAID💷, MF-er.
The years between the last two censuses have witnessed significant cultural change in London, particularly in the outer boroughs. Some white British may have moved because their neighbourhood has been culturally transformed, the tea rooms and restaurants replaced by takeaway chicken shops and halal supermarkets serving the new arrivals.
But there is also a story here of white working class families that escaped from the slums and bombed-out East End in the middle of the last century, found new opportunities in London’s outer boroughs and then, in the past decade – often having prospered from the housing boom and the capital’s economic growth – cashed in their assets and bought themselves that little cottage in the countryside or by the sea.
It is a story of aspiration.
It is a story of success.
Contra the English approach, there are some countries that heavily restrict or disincentivize foreign land ownership (e.g. Mexico and Greece), or ban it outright (Thailand). I wonder if those countries do that to inhibit their citizens’ success stories? That might be one theory. Another possibly being that a nation’s finite physical habitat should be one of its less liberally ladled resources.
And what is being ladled in lauded London is England’s irreplaceable national capital that has been accumulated with meticulous stewardship over centuries. Restrictions on foreign sales are designed precisely to prevent this profligate “cashing in of assets” that only autists believe are theirs alone. The absence of which resulting in enriched individuals and a homeless people.
Similar thoughts came to mind during a recent brief Internet debate. The body of which being little more than a wall of Dunning-Kruger–possibly even on the part of my opponent.
Though what struck me particularly was a confident assertion that businessmen are bound by zero moral obligations to anything beyond the accumulation of wealth. Now my general sentiment is that people like this are what ocean bottoms were designed to collect. A man in blind pursuit of rolling coins can create many moving hazards for his neighbors. That he considers their welfare to be beneath notice is a trait every sociopath shares.
As prior precedent, it undoubtedly required a singular focus on monetary amorality for plantation owners to decorate our cotton fields with some six hundred thousand Africans. No doubt today’s imported chicken helots represent the modern incarnation of zero morality business.
Though this position is largely uncontroversial among many–perhaps most–in the merchant-class. And that is why any people who don’t intend to cash-out of Earth must give grave contemplation to installing a robust set of restrictions that temper men from burying their country while they are digging for gold. This concept doesn’t really range far beyond common sense, though public officials tend to suffer a deficit of that when gazing at large checks.
And so Londoners have cashed out their country, as I crash in Karachi. It’s a mutual story of success.