Posted on November 16, 2011

Ethnic Minority Pupils Increase by 57% in a Decade

BBC News, November 16, 2011

The number of ethnic minority pupils in England’s secondary schools rose by 57% in a decade, according to research from King’s College London.

The study by Chris Hamnett looked at the changing demographics of schools between 1999 and 2009.

In inner London, 67% of secondary pupils are from ethnic minorities, says Professor Hamnett.

Gathering such data is important for understanding the future make-up of the population, he says.

The study, from the geography department of King’s College London, reveals a “very substantial” shift in the population, which Professor Hamnett says represents an “irrevocable” change.

Changing places

The 57% increase in ethnic minority pupils contrasted with an overall secondary school population rise of 4.7%–and a slight decline in white pupils, a figure that also includes migrants from eastern Europe.

Across the country, the proportion of ethnic minority pupils has risen in a decade from 11.5% to 17%–and Professor Hamnett forecasts that it is set to rise again to 20%.

He found a pattern of an increasing proportion of ethnic minority pupils in big cities, particularly London.

“London as a whole now has an ethnic minority dominated secondary school system, akin to that of many large US cities, and the figure reaches 67% in inner London,” says Professor Hamnett.

“This is also true of a small number of other towns and cities with large ethnic minorities, notably Slough (64%), Leicester (58%), Birmingham (52%) and Luton (51%). Manchester and Bradford are not far behind with 43%.”

Professor Hamnett says that this is not about recently arrived children, these are children born in England.

And patterns of birth rates indicate that the proportion of ethnic minority pupils will increase in the next decades.

Such changes have become a lasting feature of the ethnic make-up of England’s population, he says.

But he also says it shows a picture of ethnic minority families moving out to towns and suburbs across England.

“We’re not looking at minorities being trapped or ghettoised in small areas. There’s a process of suburbanisation,” says Professor Hamnett. This was particularly the case for Asian families, he says.

Among the biggest increases were areas such as Merton, Croydon and Enfield.

New majority

There are also wide differences in the ethnic breakdowns of schools in different parts of the country.

In places such as Knowsley, Cumbria and Durham, fewer than 2% of pupils are from ethnic minorities. In Brent, Tower Hamlets and Newham in London, the figure is above 80%.

Such changes will also eventually mean “revisiting” the language of minorities and majorities, he says.

This relationship between schools and ethnicity has many sides–with wide variations in achievement between different groups. White working class boys have been identified as particular underachievers.

The relatively high performance of schools in inner London has been attributed to the impact of ambitious immigrant families.

Professor Hamnett says it is important to gather such objective data showing the population in schools–which will become the future adult population.

“Let’s have the evidence, even if it is politically difficult,” he says.

“If we’re interested in addressing inequalities in education and access to university, it’s only possible if we have gathered the data.

“Once a society stops talking about this, it’s the worst kind of self-censorship.”

12 responses to “Ethnic Minority Pupils Increase by 57% in a Decade”

  1. Anonymous says:

    For decades, the English working class youth have been hammered by government policy. First, they brought in African and Caribbean blacks who brought drugs and their crime culture with them, and were settled near poor whites. Then, after they were introduced to various drugs through that, the government started a widespread methadone program to keep them alive as vegetables, but supporting a bureaucracy all the same. When the urge to do something about it ebbed up through their blood, it was met with force. Football hooliganism came to be the last bastion of working class angst, and now that has been largely quelled. After all, as Gordon Brown put it, these white thugs represented a certain barbaric element in the English that (apparently) he expected all the enriching Diversity to mollify or completely eliminate through miscegenation. In light of the recent summer riots and the emerging story of the ten-plus year old issue of sex grooming of working class white female children, I wonder how he now feels about that idea?

    Any who advocated the policies that a stooge could see would cause these results has to be labelled a sociopathic traitor, at least. These British traitors exist unfortunately, in legions.

  2. Anonymous says:

    The so-called “irrevocable change” begins with a British clerk, rubber-stamping an entry or immigration visa and handing it to a foreigner.

    His marching orders come from the bureaucracy, which is given its mandate by the government of the day.

    Nobody can claim that irrevocable demographic change is just ‘happening’.

  3. fred says:

    The study, from the geography department of King’s College London, reveals a “very substantial” shift in the population, which Professor Hamnett says represents an “irrevocable” change.

    Why is it “irrevocable”? Because some marxist pantywaist says so? I say rip them out by the roots.

  4. Anonymous says:

    Is ideology of modern liberalism that blinding? How could one have reasonably thought this change was good for anyone? They’ve condemned future generations in western countries to third world status. And there will be no change without much more suffering, and hence a change in ideology and culture. And honestly, it doesn’t make sense how it could have succeeded, unless our population was exceptionally lazy and stupid to begin with. Ah, my rambles. We’ll never know the truth, but we know what must be done at least.

    It defies all logic, the vastly negative result must have been willing and intentional. How could it have been any other way?

  5. Kenelm Digby says:

    A cold, rational analysis of these figures and the trend lines, indicates that in a mere few generations (the middle of this century say), the White population of London will shrink to an insignificant level.

  6. Anonymous says:

    As noted above nothing is ‘irrevocable’. London as a city is, but that’s it.

    Personally? I think that unless Peak Oil gets so catastrophic that we will be on the cusp of having our civilization totally break down, nanotechnology will totally nullify any racial differences by the early 2020s.

    The old order is being swept aside either way. Either we face total breakdown or total ascendance (but who says that nanotechnology will solve our problems if our barbaric instincts remain? If we remove our human character we become little less than machines).

    The peaceful postwar order is breaking down. This was inevitable. The mistake was to balkanize the Western hemisphere, while we should’ve faced this together, then the results would have been much easier to predict.

    Now we face the prospect of inner chaos and outside chaos at the same time. Ultimately, our hand is strong. We have a lot of resources and we still have overwhelming majorities in all nations except America, where it smaller.

    We’ve ruled nations with as little as 5 % of the population. The weakness of the West is due to inner decay and cultural weakness among the European peoples. If faced with a genuine crisis, there will not be any need for education. It will be a matter of survival and the early leftist response will be crushed and people will realize what needs to be done. The problem then will be contagion, much like what the Israelis are doing (and facing).

    But that slow, steady grind will steel people’s nerves and the situation will be far more chaotic which in turn will give way to more drastic measures.

    If, however, nanotechnology continues unabated, which requires that Peak Oil is subdued, then we will be faced with existential questions: what does it mean to be human?

    Even if our civilization will be saved, we would not be able to enjoy the fruits of it; because the very definition humanity will change as our biology will give sway to AI, robotics and nanotechnology. After all, why settle for 120’ish IQ when you can have 300? Why settle for a body that can run for a few minutes at top speed when you can instead run several hours at top speed – and that top speed itself would be raised to 50 mp/h or more.

    Exactly how things will pan out is hard to predict, if not impossible. But if anyone here thinks that if, by a magic wand, the demographic winter was turned into a spring, that all problems would disappear then you are deeply wrong. Even if we had 100 % homogenous nations, we would still face peak oil vs nanotechnology/real A.I.

    We’re one the cusp of the biggest breakdown in modern history or the biggest upheaval since the steam engine (if not since fire was invented). Either way: turbulence will only increase henceforth. Say goodbye to comforting illusions.

  7. Kenelm Digby says:

    A few years ago, senior Labour Party apparatchik Andrew Neather bragged that it was the intention of Labour Party policy to “rub British noses in diversity” (his words).

    Well his boast has succeeded well beyond his wildest dreams.67% of school pupils right now are non-White.Believe you me, this will surpass 95% in a mere few decades.

    Not really a case of ‘rubbing British noses in diversity’ but drowning in a septic tank full of divesity (to continue with Neather’s charming metaphor).

  8. Krystal says:

    …any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

    (a) Killing members of the group;

    (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

    (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

    (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

    (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

    — Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Article II

  9. Anonymous says:

    I thought I’d respond to the post about nano-technology and its possible affects on Human society.

    When I was reading your post, I felt there were some interesting ideas but the notion about “nano-technology making racial differences obsolete” I had to disagree with. Also about the idea that we could be facing some kind of “technological singularity” with IQ rising to 300.

    Firstly, Human beings are very tribal and competitive. As the saying goes, “old habits die hard” and Human beings are no exception. Throughout history there have been technological advancements and new ideas. Yet the same old tribal instincts and the “us vs them” mentality has always remained. Unless we become all robots, Human beings will remain inherently the same whatever technological advance comes into being. This applies true to the early 21st century.

    Technology has made it possible to talk to people from other continents, great. But people remain rooted in tribalism. But go onto most people’s Facebook profiles and 9/10, people, of all races and cultures, stick to people of their own race and culture. Rather then being more multicultural, people only do it as a “sideshow” but then quickly retreat back to what they are familiar with.

    Secondly, remember the late 20th century, especially the 1990s? Even the early 2000s? There was this miscommon found belief that Humanity would eventually move towards a UN based “world government” and everybody would live happily ever after in a multicultural, multiethnic world. People felt due to new technology (the computer and space exploration) that there would be no more hardship, very little suffering and this “new age” was upon us.

    Already there are mass fears throughout Europe and America about whites being replaced by non-whites. The economy, rather then being prosperous, is brinking on the edge of collapse which will change the face of the West. Western Elites, once tolerated and believed, now are facing anger and hostility due to the failings of present day society. Fears of the East overtaking the West remain prevalent.

    This wasn’t supposed to happen! But it has. So my point is, nano-technology will only add to things, not be the almighty saviour. Human history will rumble on, through good times and through bad. In the 1950s and 1960s, it was common held belief we’d all be visiting hotels and restaurants on the Moon by 2010. Infact the entire opposite has happened with NASA cutting the space budget and no moon base yet in sight.

    I therefore seriously doubt there will be another “golden age” anytime soon taking into account past history. The new game, Deus Ex: Human Revolution, portrays the world in 2029 with bio-implants and a new “Renaissance” based on the technological singularity. To me, it sounds like another predicting the moon base. I think we’ll see some interesting technological innovations but nothing groundbreaking that will change society in such a huge way anytime soon. Perhaps in another 300 years then yes but progress goes fast yet slow.

    Thirdly, not all new technology is affordable to the masses and the once traditional middle class lifestyle is slipping away. If there was nano-technology to make people’s IQ’s at 300, only the elite will get access to it. It would simply become too expensive for the commoner to afford. The computer we use is affordable and accessible. But such grand changes are not. The first motor cars were limited to the elite only, with the majority using the train or riding horse and cart by the turn of the 20th century. The Western World grew immensely making a car affordable to the general public. But in the Third World, people still live pre-industrial lifestyles.

    I feel as resources tighten and poverty grows, a technological “dividing line” will start to develop, similar to how it was in the past. The Archeofuturistic conception is important here. In that thought, Western civilisation eventually trangresses into a two tier world based upon a wealthy, technocratic elite, living in hi-tech cities where as the commoners go back to the horse and cart as resources become scarcer. You have peasant villages living around hi-tech cities. I fully expect this to be the future, whether in an NWO governed society or a nationalistic one. A new “mini-feudal age” if you like.

    Fourthly, Humanity’s grudges to remain stubbornly the same and technological advances give ways to new ideas on how to compete and eventually wage warfare. The motor car gave way to the tank. The rocket to the nuclear missile. The bi-plane to stealth bombers. Even if some form of technological singularity did take place, new ways to wage war and protect “the tribe” would occur.

    To round this all off, personally I don’t expect a multi-ethic, hi-tech futuristic society. Instead I predict a breakdown of the West and a return to old ideologies when the “tolerance” caused by a good middle class consumer lifestyle disappears as a result. With more non-white ethnics in once formerly white lands, I expect to see more ethno-nationalism and the creation of ethno-states. You can see this in the once former USSR and Yugoslavia’s and the emergence of this phenomenon in post-apartheid South Africa.

    I expect a merger of some technological advance on a realistic based fashion merged with Human reality and misery. As inflation goes up, food production becomes more expensive, the dreams of a centralised state will start to vanish and a new decentralised era will start to emerge.

    We might have shiny new TVs or someone may even have a bio-mechanical arms. But ultimately, society will basically remain the same.

    Who knows? Maybe we’ve hit our peak like the Romans? Maybe a rebuild will come a century or two down the line? Maybe we’ll have a Dark Age? But I can’t see any “bright future” ahead. Not anytime soon anyway.

  10. fuzzypook says:

    Londoner’s, have a look at Detroit. That’s your future.

  11. Anonymous says:

    Things have reached such a sorry pass in London, England that in a generation or so’s time (when the non-White portion of the population will be pushing 90%), those few remaining Whites left in London will start to call such off-Whites as Lebanese, Syrians, Iranians, Turks etc as ‘brothers’ in view of the fact that in terms of genetic distance, they indeed will be ‘brothers’ compared to the vast genetic gulf that separates them from the dominant populations.

  12. rjf101 says:

    The situation is indeed dismal. But, irrevocable? No-one a half-century ago could have imagined there would be this many foreigners in Britain. If things could have changed so much in fifty years, why can’t they be reversed? With the right policies and a tremendous amount of effort from the British people, Britain can be saved.