Time for a national inquiry into anti-White discrimination

An easy win for Farage

Yesterday Nigel Farage joined the ranks of us Substackers by posting a lengthy essay on the topic of anti-White discrimination. The only saving grace of British politics in this Parliamentary term is the willingness of politicians to now post their own personal essays online for the public to read. Farage’s essay is a tour de force of topics that J’accuse has led the way on for the past few years including social housing, foreign doctor assaults and anti-White hiring practices. It presents a large body of evidence that anti-White discrimination is baked into the public sector and provides exhaustive references so that the reader can follow up on it.

The response has been somewhat muted given how controversial elements of the article are (Farage talks directly about demographic change and presents a chart of White British population decline). One comment from a Tory backbench MP sums up the diffident attitude well:

Mainstream politicians still feel empowered to deny the existence of anti-White as a conspiracy theory. Lisa Nandy of Labour said that Farage should take his ‘nasty hate, anger and division’ elsewhere. Al Carns denied his claim and called him a ‘race-baiter’, which is especially galling given that the Armed Forces he has made his political career upon has had several anti-White discrimination scandals. About a week ago Owen Jones weighed in calling the concept of anti-white discrimination ‘rhetoric long associated with the far-right fringe’.

Refusing to engage with the evidence whilst making arid accusations about the ‘far-right’ is precisely the tactic that Jones used when confronted with the Pakistani grooming gangs, see below:

The only reason you could sincerely believe that anti-White discrimination does not exist in Britain is that you have not availed yourself of the bulletproof evidence that it exists. Just about every public sector institution offers diversity schemes which specifically exclude White people. Anybody who has worked in a large private or public sector organisation for any amount of time will have seen EDI hiring practices up-front. Leaving employment issues to one side there is also racialised grooming gangs – if Pakistani groups were able to target White children with impunity because of ‘racial sensitivities’ that is anti-White discrimination in practice.

What you should do about anti-White discrimination is a meaningful conversation. Martin Luther King believed that we would only achieve racial harmony through redistributions from White Americans to non-Whites. That vision of reaching the Red Hills of Georgia through reparations is a coherent worldview. It is also very unpopular. People who deny anti-White discrimination exists are cowards who are unwilling to make the argument against treating people equally and hiring on merit. Whether or not anti-White discrimination exists is not a matter for debate. It is a simple statement of fact.

Grooming gangs are an instructive example of anti-White discrimination. We are now in the period, discursively, between 2011 - when Andrew Norfolk first published his work on Pakistani grooming gangs - and June of 2025 when the Casey audit said in no uncertain terms that Britain is undergoing a racialised rape atrocity which was covered up by the police because of racial sensitivities.

Since that audit was published everybody, including Keir Starmer, has been successfully cowed into accepting at the very least that the grooming gangs exist. The ugly habit of putting the phrase grooming gangs into quotation marks has disappeared. It is now a canonical truth which everyone, even Ian Hislop, must observe. The pressure that was applied on Starmer by Musk and others to be seen to take ‘some’ action on the problem did have a concrete outcome which represented forwards progress. It is a shame that bad actors then decided to hold their own fake inquiry so they could have their own branded screenshots to post on X to engagement farm.

Reform have already begun to recover their national momentum but if Farage wants to recreate the magic of 2025, when Reform were occasional polling at 34% and the Tories were brushing up against third party status he needs another high-profile controversy which underlies just how rotten the establishment he wishes to scour is. He has rightly judged that Novak and the broader issue of anti-White discrimination is the correct issue. There is an extra political benefit here that the Tories have foolishly decided to join in with denying the existence of anti-White discrimination.

In January of 2025 the Tories forced the government into voting on an inquiry by with a reasoned amendment to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools bill. My suggestion for maximum controversy is that Farage tables a similar amendment to the National Security Bill which will have both its second and third reading next Wednesday, with the justification being that national security is being jeopardised by anti-White discrimination (citing amongst other things discrimination against White applicants to Mi5, the recent race rioting, Jonathan Hall’s comments on immigration) and that a national inquiry must therefore follow.

The chance of this amendment passing is close to nil, in fact it is unlikely that the amendment will be selected by the Speaker. There may be some Parliamentary process which I am unaware of. That should not stop Farage from attempting to table it anyway. Even if a vote is not forced the fact that Farage is tampering with urgent security legislation will give thousands of apparatchiks and their retainers in the press mental breakdowns, guaranteeing that the topic of anti-White discrimination dominates next week’s news and forcing everybody from Rory Stewart to David Aaoronvitch to join anuses in dribbling bile towards him.

The more than anti-White discrimination is spoken about, the better, because the argument will always be won at the person who can simply point to publicly available information which proves its existence.