Will Native British Become A Minority In Their Own Country?

 That's the question raised by David Ben-Basat in an op-ed published in the Jerusalem Post. He begins:

    In one of the most provocative speeches heard in the British Parliament in recent years, MP Andrew Bridgen claimed that “over the past 100 years, approximately 250,000 women and girls have been raped in Britain, with 90% of the perpetrators being Muslim.”

    His remarks triggered an immediate uproar, but also ignited a deeper debate about immigration failures, the silencing of issues in the name of political correctness, and the influence of ideologically driven minority groups on British governance.

    The harrowing revelations from Rotherham, Rochdale, Oxford and other cities – where thousands of girls were sexually exploited by organized gangs, some of Pakistani-Muslim descent – exposed a particularly dark chapter. Official reports confirmed that local authorities failed to intervene for fear of being labeled racist. This wasn’t ignorance, but institutional fear.

Fear, or a growing sign of the political clout wielded by Muslims in the UK? 

    While it is common for preppers to focus on natural disasters, disease, economic collapse, or nuclear war, when deciding how to prepare for SHTF this is not how most cultures or peoples disappeared historically. Instead, most cultures or peoples disappear because they are invaded (quickly through war or more slowly through migration) and replaced. The Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire very obviously fell to the Muslim conquests, even if it tenaciously held on to some minimal territory into the 15th Century. And whatever its other problems, one of the key issues faced by the Western Roman Empire was the migration from various outside tribes and groups. As historian Peter Heather observes:

However you line up the different factors involved, there’s no doubt that immigration played a major role in the unraveling of the western half of the Roman imperial system. By the end of the fifth century AD, from Anglo-Saxons north of the Channel to Vandals and Alans in North Africa, the vast majority of the ex-western imperial landmass was ruled by dynasts at the head of warrior groupings who had lived outside its borders when the century began. ...

While Heather thinks modern migration is not so bad because of (supposedly) positive economic benefits--including the all important purpose of obtaining new workers to support retirees on public pensions--that doesn't change the fact that one people is being replaced by another, even if the borders remain the same and the water of the metaphorical pot is only slowly being brought to a boil. 

    It is telling that a review by Dr. Thomas Patrick Burke of Heather's book on immigration and the Roman Empire points out Rome had always generally been open to immigration so long as the immigrants assimilated, including having "to disperse throughout the empire’s territory and not insist on remaining in their own groups or maintaining their own culture, but adopt Roman ways of living," but that this broke down in the 5th Century:

Armies were sent to the Middle East to counter a hostile, newly invigorated Persia, leaving the West open.  The Germanic tribes were allowed in, but once inside the empire they were not assimilated but retained their cultural and political identities, eventually combining to form armies within its borders that the Romans could no longer overcome. 

This is where the West finds itself. The "armies" may be voting blocs and protestors rather than infantry, but the result will be the same.