Colonisation – fact or fiction?

The crime of noticing

In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

Recently, billionaire Sir James Ratcliffe triggered outrage amongst the Westminster political class when he claimed that Britain is being “colonised”. Predictably, he was denounced as “racist”. Agents of the industrial censorship complex have examined ways to make him retract his statement. What has been surprising though, is that politicians, media outlets and talking heads of all stripes and flavours were so quick to denounce him.

Establishment figures have looked into ways to punish Sir James for his comments. The less imaginative, among them Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer (no surprise there!), demanded that Ratcliffe apologise for his remarks. The more imaginative linked Ratcliffe’s part-ownership of Manchester United Football Club to suggest that he has breached Rule E3.1 of the Football Association (FA) to not act in a “manner which is improper or brings the game into disrepute.”

It was imaginative because Rule 3.1 was introduced to prevent players abusing referees. On the other hand, in a street mugging the best weapon is the one that is within reach.

In the midst of all of this outrage, no one addressed whether his comment was accurate or justified. This is my take.

What is colonisation?

Dictionary definitions vary, but this colonisation definition from Merriam-Webster is a starting point:

Is it true to say that certain areas in the UK have been colonised?

Prospect magazine published ground-breaking population projections in 2010 that suggested the combination of low indigenous fertility and high immigration meant that the “White British” ethnic group were likely become a minority in Britain in 2065 or thereabouts.

Since that 2010 projection, the outcome was more pronounced because net migration has been higher than the assumptions in the Prospect model. A straight-line extrapolation of Census data from 1991 to 2021 shows that white British will be a minority shortly after 2060, with Asian being the next largest ethnic group with 17.4%.

In itself the ethnic group classification is somewhat meaningless since the real question is the extent to which any group assimilates “British values.” For the avoidance of doubt, I am definitely not an ethno-nationalist and I do not believe that a person has to have a particular ethnicity to subscribe to British values.

As such, this trend should be a concern only if the ethnic groups that are displacing the White-British category pursue their own cultures within the UK. Movements in population numbers by ethnic group over the ten years between the 2011 census and the 2021 census show a fall of around ¾ million in the White-British category and significant growth in White-other, African, Pakastani, Indian etc.

Large scale immigration also creates an increase in the share of certain religions including Islam and Hinduism. The ONS data shows the following change in religious groups from 2001 to 2021 and I have extrapolated the trend for illustrative purposes only. In other words, the chart below is not a prediction:

The chart reveals that by far the biggest change is the increase in the “No Religion” category (+8.0 million over ten years) with the contemporaneous fall in those identifying as Christian (-5.7 million over ten years). Immigration from Pakistan and Bangladesh is consistent with a 1.1 million increase in the numbers identifying as Muslim, and immigration from India is consistent with an increase in 0.2 million identifying as Hindu.

As one might expect, we have seen a corresponding increase in the number of places of worship from these religions. For instance, there now an estimated 2,000 Islamic places of worship in the UK. There has been a demand for Sharia law courts and there are an estimated 85 such courts operating in the UK. It is reasonable to expect that these numbers would increase.

Back in 2009, our fake-Conservative hero Boris Johnson, then Mayor of London, was asked about sharia courts and he replied “I think there may be cases where religious based arbitration services can be of use to people and to communities and they may not always be a bad thing.” He went on to mumble something about the importance of English justice, but the clear message was that he was prepared to tolerate the operation of sharia law in London.

Which country do you identify with?

Perhaps the most important indicator is a new category in the ONS survey which asks people about which countries they identify with. There are three main categories:

• British identity only

• Other identity and at least one UK identity

• Other identity only

Worryingly, 9.7% of respondents did not identify with the UK at all, equating to what the ONS optimistically defines as “only” 5.8 million respondents. The largest areas with people who do not identify with Britain are Birmingham, Newham, Manchester and Brent. Tower Hamlets is a good example of colonisation where the largest ethnic group is Asian (44.4%), the largest religious group is Muslim (40.0%) and a full 26.5% do not identify with the UK. The photo shows people praying on a road in Tower Hamlets in October 2025, this is a deliberate show of strength since Islamic guidance tells believers to worship inside Mosques wherever possible. This is certainly possible in Tower Hamlets and this event is therefore staged for the cameras.

The economic case

There are those who would push the colonisation issue aside and who would opine that mass immigration is an economic necessity. Unfortunately, the economic case for mass immigration also doesn’t hold water.

While limited and skilled immigration can bring economic benefits, the mass levels of legal and illegal immigration have created a drain on the public purse. It is simply a fact that, on aggregate, ethnic minorities receive more in government benefits than they pay in taxes. This is shown in the ONS chart below as a positive net position (benefits received minuses taxes paid).

Verdict

Sir James Ratcliffe’s statement is accurate. The demographic make-up of the U.K. is changing rapidly and significantly with a large reduction in the White-British ethnic group at the same time as there is an increase in White – Other (mainly East Europeans) and Asians. The current trends imply that White-British will become a minority sometime around 2060.

As the Asian population increases, so has the prevalence of Islam and Britain now has around 2,000 masjids and prayer rooms. Several Islamic NGOs have clearly stated that their objective is not to adjust to British customs, but rather to introduce Islamic values to Britain. Indeed the Karimia Institute (which bizarrely receives funding from the Home Office) spells this out explicitly: “we believe that British citizens can benefit from these [Islamic] values”

Our leaders are traitors

It is clear that the entire political class either bought into multiculturalism or did nothing to prevent it. It is reasonable to expect that they will do nothing to protect British values. This is not a Left-Right issue because while the Left proposed open borders (and view those who oppose open borders as “fascists”) the fake-Conservatives promised to oppose it and then actually accelerated immigration.

As I discussed in a previous note, in addition to government actions and inactions, there is a network of oligarch and taxpayer-funded NGOs that facilitate (mainly illegal) immigration and prevent deportations.

Sir John Glubb wrote that mass immigration indicated the end of empire (see “the age of decadence” in his Fate of Empires paper). The age of decadence was characterised by (amongst other things) an influx of foreigners, an increasing welfare state and a weakening of religion. The more conspiratorially minded would be inclined to believe that this cycle is completely engineered, but Glubb’s suggestion is that empires have an inherent cycle that lasts around 250 years from the age of pioneers to the age of decadence.

In terms of the current political class that is implementing these open borders policies, benign explanations would be:

• an altruistic desire to help others without considering the costs or disruption to the indigenous population

• a desire to maintain GDP growth, whilst ignoring the fact that per capita GDP is falling.

Less benign explanations could be that ethnic minorities have a much higher propensity to vote for Labour than the rest of the population which provides a positive incentive for Labour to increase immigration. This of course doesn’t explain why the fake-Conservatives also pursued this policy. Whatever the case, a society weakened by multiculturalism is easier to control, especially if horizontal conflicts can be engineered between ethnic groups so that slaves fight slaves instead of fighting the slave masters.

In such circumstances, one wonders if the political class loves or hates the British way of life.

If you appreciate the work that we are doing to expose the truth, as far as we can discern it, and dispel the endless lies and propaganda then it would be great if you could switch to a paid subscription, or at least a one-off donation via Buy-me-a-coffee. Substack seems to be squeezing dissidents, all of whom appear to have seen a significant decline in income from the end of October 2025 for no apparent reason. I want to be able to share research insights with readers whilst keeping my head above water. Funding options are available via Patreon (Patreon.com/ThinkingSlow) and Buy Me A Coffee (https://buymeacoffee.com/thinkingslow).

Many thanks

Alex

(thanks again to Mark Halliday Sutherland for reviewing and editing).

Alex Kriel is by training a physicist and was one of the first people to highlight the flawed nature of the Imperial COVID model. He spent his career in consultancy and fund management including a long stint in Russia. His last job was in one of the world’s largest pension funds where he handled corporate governance issues and shareholder voting over a portfolio of 2,300 equity investments. He is a founder of the Thinking Coalition which comprises a group of citizens who are concerned about government overreach and are developing practical solutions to protect inalienable individual liberties (www.thinkingcoalition.org). He does not support Manchester United.