It Hasn't Happened Yet

New Mercia and other inflection points before the British quagmire

In 2022, while putting together a methodology based on what I call kinship realism, I predicted when, where and how the 2024 race riots would occur. I later warned media and other contacts, assigning an effective 100% probability of race riots occurring within a five-year period, with an 80% likelihood of it happening in the summer of 2024.

Without getting technical, the methodology that allowed me to predict the race riots is based on the assumption that groups of humans tend to organise broadly along genetic lines. I built on this assumption using open-source intelligence techniques, monitoring ethnocentric sentiment by using keyword and network analysis on a weekly basis for around a year, focusing on accounts with characteristics consistent with involvement in information warfare campaigns.

Using kinship realism and my expertise gained from working in the private security industry and witnessing civil unrest and revolutions on the ground, I predict that the most likely scenario given the current trajectory is that the security situation in the mainland UK declines into a Northern Ireland-style low-intensity conflict by the mid-late 21st century.

New Informal Borders

Based on historical precedent worldwide, this situation is most likely to lead to a conflict drawn along pseudo-tribal lines. Just as rural Britain is already divided politically along genetic lines, urban residents of Britain tend to vote in ethnic blocs. Currently, this division only leads to occasional political violence, as was seen in the 2024 riots. Under the current trajectory, the generational race riots are likely to escalate in intensity, causing further segregation via the speeding up of the “white flight” process described in the UK government-commissioned 2016 Casey Report as being caused by immigration.

The movement of local peoples from the cities and arrival of historically unprecedented numbers of immigrants are highly likely to follow the pattern already seen across the USA, which has a longer comparison period for study, wherein the Great Migration of African Americans to the North following the civil rights movement led to effective evacuation of Midwestern cities by previous residents. In the USA, these large population movements “flip” a city or metro area to voting differently.

The regions around UK cities have also changed politically as the demographic transition has occurred. While there has been limited research into the future demographic composition of the UK’s regions, it is likely that some areas will become effectively devoid of substantial cohesive White British populations. The focus of successive governments on connecting Southeast England and the Midlands to London have produced large areas where the English have already been minoritised: around London, the English are already in the minority in a large contiguous area approximately the size of Northern Ireland. Based on the long-term infrastructure plans, housing policies and migration patterns, I expect the contiguous area in which the English are minoritised to expand and envelop the areas marked in red below. Within decades, it will grow from Northern Ireland-sized to Belgium-sized.

There is a question of what to call this area. The “Yookay” is a currently popular term used to describe the state of the country in general, but is also used for places outside of this geographical area. I prefer calling this entity New Mercia due to its geographical parallels with the old borders of the ancient Kingdom of Mercia.

New Mercia, the new polity forming in the United Kingdom (bordered in red)

Due to the UK’s electoral system, geographical contiguity is very important. First-past-the-post advantages populations who are concentrated in geographical areas by granting the winner of each local constituency a seat in Parliament, and the losers nothing. Being spread out is disastrous, and it is possible for parties to receive hundreds of thousands of votes nationwide but no seats, despite constituencies only having tens of thousands of voters each. The creation of New Mercia will effectively disenfranchise its minoritised English populations, but outside of the region their likely majority presence in many rural areas will lead to concentration of local political power.

A kinship realist approach would predict resistance from the English population to losing political power in the UK. Sovereignty is nominally with the Crown but is de facto with the English ethnic group. Without the English, there is no UK: the English are the country’s backbone, and are themselves historically headed by an Anglo-Norman elite. An inflection point is coming in the decades ahead when elections can be decided without paying the Englishmen and Anglo-Normans regard. Under a Parliamentary system, the future of the country will be decided by the recently-arrived voters of New Mercia.

Why It Hasn’t Happened Yet

My prediction of armed conflict is not simply an extrapolation of population projections. There are qualitative features of revolutionary movements that are not yet currently present in the UK. While I assume they will naturally emerge, this will not necessarily be the case.

The first feature currently missing is political organisation of the disenfranchised English populations. There are minor street movements with financial backing from figures connected to military organisations of the UK’s nominal allies, but little coherence. What’s missing is a capable revolutionary core seeking to exploit and shape events to suit the goal of political emancipation of the English from their impending disenfranchisement. There are some minor organisations, beset by factional infighting and showing clear signs of infiltration by the UK government, but nothing more. The modus operandi of government appears to be to sabotage such movements rather than build them up and direct them.

While frequent comparisons of such “far-right” groups to Nazis are made, they are fundamentally different in where they sit in the political hierarchy. The German Nazi Party was taken from its fledgeling form and built up by German military intelligence via its undercover agent, Adolf Hitler, working as a spy instead of demobilising after World War I. Hitler joined the Nazi Party while drawing a salary from the military, regularly reporting back to his superiors. His early speeches, including antisemitic ones, were signed off by his commanding officer in German military intelligence. The German military also directly financed the Nazi Party, paying for thousands of flyers in the early 1920s even after Hitler was off their payroll, and it continued to be supportive during the Nazis’ rise to power. It is common for activists to call for more government intervention to stop Europe’s far-right from producing another Hitler, but in modern terms, Hitler was a fed.

There is not presently an effective activist military or other organisation mobilising the British masses in such a manner. This can be seen in how activities are organised. Unlike places heavily targeted by competent political warfare operatives, there is no exploitation of anniversaries of tragedies. If you asked anyone on the street when the Manchester Arena bombing or even the Southport massacre occurred, it is highly unlikely that they would be able to tell you. This would be unthinkable in places like Hong Kong or Israel, where the dates of tragedies are seared into public consciousness. This says something of the competence of the UK’s adversaries. Even China and Russia with their formidable psychological warfare and communications capabilities have not tied tragedies to dates, exploiting the power of emotional memory. Instead, days pass and life goes on.

With limited predictability, protests are more reactive and spontaneous. This comes with significant disadvantages for protestors, who are likely to be identifiable on camera and face punishment for participation in such events. The best examples of modern protests were in Hong Kong. With a tradition of well-organised subversion, the message went out that people should all wear white on a particular date. Protest dates were spread by word of mouth, forums, in international news and even by using dedicated protest-organising dating app profiles. People came in uniform, giving anyone the ability to blend into the crowd. Soon, the uniform switched to black, a colour known to induce more aggressive behaviour in sports, and the real turmoil began. Volunteers enforced a no photography policy, constantly looking for spies, while specialist teams moved seamlessly, using umbrellas as visual cover to avoid collection of evidence as they dismantled roadside fencing and created roadblocks impeding the progress of the police. The Hong Kong protests were highly organised and professional. Without a revolutionary vanguard, either organic or supported covertly by a domestic or foreign military organisation, English protests will remain sloppy in comparison.

The second feature is the lack of a clear distinction between “us” and “them”. There is no widely used term for migrants who arrived in the UK after World War II. The word “foreigner” is too broad, and other racial epithets too specific to describe the arrival of a diverse population that, as the Casey Report said, caused white flight. Evidence from neurolinguistics implies that without the right terminology, people are slower to accurately perceive their environment, even being slower in identifying colours. With no term, let’s use “replacements” as an example, Englishmen can’t easily verbalise what has happened. There isn’t even a cat-and-mouse-style game of censorship and evasion by shifting terms and rhyming. Even the term “English” has been co-opted from its original use as an ethnonym to being anyone born within the borders of England. The term “indigenous” is attacked in state-affiliated media, dominant in the UK, and anybody using that term in public debate is likely to receive personal attacks labelling them racist, threatening their job security by effectively blacklisting them for background checks. There is also a lack of accompanying symbols that have not been co-opted by the state. Waving the England flag either identifies you as an ethnonationalist or a supporter of England’s ethnically diverse football team.

The third feature is the most important in defining the terms of the future conflict. There is no conception in the public consciousness as to why the dramatic population changes have happened in Europe since the end of World War II. This is not tied to the presence of the American military in Europe and the constant political warfare that goes with a military presence, including overt and covert psychological operations waged against nationalists in Europe by the USA. To any historian looking back on this era, it will be blindingly obvious. The populations were suddenly displaced because Western Europe was part of the American Empire at that time. Empires erode borders and typically move very large numbers of people into their occupied territories to enrich the metropole. The British did it in their American imperial possessions, and now the Americans are doing it in Britain.

Again, adversaries have done a terrible job of establishing this. Russian propaganda, generally the best in quality and targeting outside the West, focuses obsessively on NATO, which is far too technical a topic for the average person. There has been no effective effort to draw the link in the average person’s mind between mass immigration starting after World War II and Europe being occupied by the Americans since then. Saying that “the [replacements or equivalent term] came when the Americans took over” would mean very little to the average person. Instead, some discuss the famous admission by senior Labour Party figures that mass immigration was initiated by Tony Blair and his immigration minister Barbara Roche to “rub the right’s nose in diversity”, the “right” generally corresponding to the English ethnic group. Others may believe the state-affiliated media lines about Trump causing a surge in Europe’s far-right, without addressing the tacit admission that the boundaries within which Europe can decide its policies under American occupation are decided on the other side of the Atlantic.

The conception of the USA as an occupier will become important as the English come into greater conflict with the state. It is likely that the USA will prioritise its state-state relations with the UK over any solidarity with the disenfranchised English. The USA has mobilised its security apparatus to tackle the “far-right” as its greatest threat, and despite the blip during the current Trump administration is likely to revert to form and continue cracking down on nationalist movements in Europe afterwards. The USA itself is also changing rapidly demographically. Kinship realism predicts that genetic proximity of leaders influences the likelihood that they will be allies and adversaries, and soon that traditionally short genetic distance between American leaders and the English is likely to lengthen as America’s old Anglo elite go the way of the English in Britain.

The Calm Before the Stormtroopers

There is still time to avert a tragedy, or at least postpone it. Whether we like it or not, mass movements of people tend to lead to conflict. These conflicts never truly end, and instead resurge in generational expressions of grievances and, usually in the UK, race riots. It’s best to view the interactions between genetically distinct groups as a process, and riots and armed conflict as manifestations of this process that can be postponed and interrupted without changing the underlying competitive dynamics. It is likely that the deliberate introduction of very large numbers of genetically distant people into the British Isles and the consequential population movements we are currently witnessing will lead to a rise above the baseline levels of political conflict into low-intensity warfare. It is also likely that this conflict will draw American security forces further in from their current activities of monitoring and subverting European nationalists to being in direct armed conflict with them. It’s just a question of when, and it doesn’t have to happen by the mid-late 21st century. With more coherent organisation and support of an interested military, it could happen sooner, but with effective subversion by the UK and its allies, the disenfranchised English could be kept in check for much longer while their population and therefore capacity to challenge the regime collapses.

Charles Small is an open-source intelligence consultant. Get in touch for a consultation: charles@csmall.co.uk