When it comes to the present Scottish independence parties, all roads lead to an unwanted and unpopular campaign for mass immigration from the third world.
The Oxford University Migration Observatory has recently conducted a major survey, asking Scottish people what they think about immigration to Scotland, and other details like foreign students or skilled immigrants.
The survey shows that the majority of Scots want lower levels of immigration, with 58% of the more than 2,000 people taking that position, which is lower than whole of Britain, where 75% of people want less immigrants.
The Scottish National Party (SNP), which is pushing for independence from the UK, is not the only party that calls for open borders – all the Scottish main opposition parties support this policy of the SNP’s independence plan.
Scotland’s education secretary, Michael Russell, said Scottish politicians did not want to acknowledge immigration concerns, like the UK government has, where the debate was “being driven by UKIP and by a nasty xenophobia“.
UKIP, or UK independence party, wants to stop White immigration from Europe by leaving the EU, and instead allow non-White immigrants from ex-colonial countries; the SNP however wants both kinds, which probably makes it the only nationalist party in Europe that doesn’t care who lives in their nation, just as long as they pretend to be Scottish.
Professor Christina Boswell, a professor of politics at the University of Edinburgh, says open border immigration policies don’t win the majority of votes.
“Even if at the moment the SNP, [Liberal Democrats], and Labour are largely supportive of a more liberal approach, in the event of independence, actually the temptation to break ranks and criticise and tap into public concerns about immigration would be quite high.”
“It is really quite easy and quite tempting for political parties to tap into those political concerns about immigration and try to mobilise support on the basis of an anti-immigrant position, or at least of a less liberal position on immigration.”
“You don’t win votes by adopting a liberal progressive labour migration policy and, in fact, the Labour government in the UK has found that in the past few years and it has obviously had to backtrack on its more expansive policy of the early-2000s.”
The majority of Scotland’s immigrants been non-Whites from places like India and Pakistan, but more recently White people from places like Poland have been entering.
One explanation for the less concern over immigration may be due to the fact that 7% of Scotland is foreign-born, compared to 14% foreign-born in the rest of UK. Also, Scotland is over 90% White, whereas England and Wales, combined, are 86% White with nearly 1 out of 5 people being non-White.
Robert Wright, a professor of economics at the University of Strathclyde, believes “the difference between Scotland and the UK really boils down to the fact there has been less immigration in Scotland than the UK”
“So the fact I think there is more tolerance here is because there has been less of it. That does not mean there will be tolerance in the future when there is more immigration, so this will be a hurdle we have to jump later.”
“Xenophobia” is just a codeword for not having opened borders. ONLY White countries and White people are called “Xenophobic” because that’s the point – according to anti-Whites, all these millions of non-White immigrants are supposed to pour into any White country in order to make it less White.
However, when this kind of policy is reversed, and say thousands of Whites flood into Brazil and the government attempts to ‘assimilate’ (mix) them in an attempt to make Brazil, ‘less Brown’, suddenly, anti-Whites have some kind of a problem with that.
That scenario actually happened, but anti-Whites like to use that example as a justification so they can do the same thing to White people – White genocide. How does that make sense to them?
Don’t fall for the anti-White’s lies – ‘Xenophobia’ is just a codeword for ‘opposing White genocide’.