quote:

---

It depends where you live. Cities are certainly multi-cultural - the last school that I taught in had about 10% 'ethnic minorities' whereas the first, rural school I worked in had about 0.1%

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RadicalWhig:
I remember being at primary school and having text books full of names like Sanjit and Mohammad. At the time I lived in a small, rural, all-white community, where names like that just didn't exist. It was a very odd experience.

---

I remember that, too. I went to a Church of England primary school in the posh part of town with very few ethnic minority pupils. If these textbooks were supposed to inculcate us with respect for our fellow-citizens then they didn't work - our reaction was "Hee hee hee! Look at that, he's called Cameljit!"

Actually there was a single non-white boy in our year, and none of us thought anything of it at all.
 

---

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
I am afraid that is so. I used a series of textbooks with titles like 'Our Muslim Friends', 'Our Sikh Friends', etc.

Grafitti from pupils added a 'Y' = 'Your Muslim Friends', as I collected them back in.
 

---

Posted by Orlando098 (# 14930) on :
 
"Multiculturalism" doesn't just mean a mix of people from a lot of different ethnic groups, or the existence of relatively large percentages of ethnic minorities. It also means the idea that it is good to encourage groups originating in other countries to continue with their ancestors' religious and cultural practices (festivals, food, dress, languages etc). I think in this sense the UK is a bit more multicultural than France, where I live, where there is more an ethos that your colour isn't a very big deal, but if you live here, and especially if you take French citizenship, then you are somewhat expected to integrate into the local culture and share certain values of the French Republic. Nothing is ever translated into other languages in French administration, religious symbols are banned in schools and now there is this burqua ban etc.
 

---

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :
 
This obviously caught my attention just at the same time as another French resident.

On the one hand, Britain shows much better integration of ethnic minorities in terms of mobility and social visibility. We've only just acquired the first non-white news anchor here in France, and students in the 'grandes écoles' (which prepare people for the kind of jobs top university graduates in the UK can expect to go to) are overwhelmingly white.

On the other hand, each time we visit the UK we are struck by what we here in France term "communitarianism": people asserting their culture virtually to the exclusion of that of their host country. Many ethnic groups seem to live alongside one another rather than mix, and the gap between them seems to be widening. I'm not sure France does much better in terms of integration, but the differences are less visible.

[ 03. August 2010, 07:45: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
 

---

Posted by daisymay (# 1480) on :
 
Definitely schools in London have got more and more mixed-race, with more and more ethnic people, more languages many of the youngsters speak and often some of their family don't manage to also understand/speak English unlike the youngsters usually.

Many schools are multicultural, but also many are very fixed on a narrow ethnic group and so the pupils and parents are still very much from their background, not "English" UK multicultural.

At New Wine camping every year, our group seems to be the most multi-cultural, with more multi-ethnic than most of the others, though there will be always plenty of different coloured people there. When I first came to London, the baptist church I went to had been one that honoured and accepted all sorts of ethnic people and was definitely multi-cultural with varying ethnicity elders/deacons unlike many churches then who didn't accept, and so that still explains why we have churches mainly full of black people.

And another place in UK is still less multi-cultural - IMO Scotland accepts Polish, Indian/Bangladeshi, Irish, but not English...
 

---

Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by daisymay:
At New Wine camping every year, our group seems to be the most multi-cultural, with more multi-ethnic than most of the others, though there will be always plenty of different coloured people there.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ricardus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by RadicalWhig:
I remember being at primary school and having text books full of names like Sanjit and Mohammad. At the time I lived in a small, rural, all-white community, where names like that just didn't exist. It was a very odd experience.

---

I remember that, too. I went to a Church of England primary school in the posh part of town with very few ethnic minority pupils. If these textbooks were supposed to inculcate us with respect for our fellow-citizens then they didn't work - our reaction was "Hee hee hee! Look at that, he's called Cameljit!"

Actually there was a single non-white boy in our year, and none of us thought anything of it at all.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by daisymay:
At New Wine camping every year, our group seems to be the most multi-cultural, with more multi-ethnic than most of the others, though there will be always plenty of different coloured people there.

---

Pace the posts about France above yours, is multi-ethnic the same thing as multicultural?

I mean, if you're all at New Wine together that would indicate to me that you're all from broadly the same culture, regardless of your ethnic backgrounds.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by daisymay:
No, definitely different "cultures" in our group - not all originally Christians, although that is a "culture" but we also come from different Christian cultures, and now mainly "Inclusive", and also with many parents still not Christians, and many of us in various Recovery. It also has to do with what different food we eat - only one vegan, and several veggies, and food cooked by people from varying places in the world... etc etc And at NW as well as elswhere, how many would accept that someone was marrying a Muslim?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Different beliefs and/or eating preferences don't of themselves make for different cultures. At least not in the sense that I've always understood "multiculturalism" to be about.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
Middle-class culture is still largely white...visit any art gallery or museum in London [and] there is a much smaller proportion of black and Asian people than in the streets outside. Even more so with theatres, whereas Opera is very exclusive.

---

quote:

---

It also means the idea that it is good to encourage groups originating in other countries to continue with their ancestors' religious and cultural practices

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Different beliefs and/or eating preferences don't of themselves make for different cultures. At least not in the sense that I've always understood "multiculturalism" to be about.

---

So what do you understand "multicultural" to mean?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
...they should become British...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RadicalWhig:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
...they should become British...

---

Define?

Also, what about the many born-n-bred UK citizens who do not regard themselves as British, or as having much loyalty to the UK - such as Scottish and Welsh nationalists? Do these have to conform too?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RadicalWhig:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
...they should become British...

---

Define?

---

quote:

---

Also, what about the many born-n-bred UK citizens who do not regard themselves as British, or as having much loyalty to the UK - such as Scottish and Welsh nationalists? Do these have to conform too?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
I'd rather we had diverse cultures as the absorption of immigrant cultures has made British culture.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
When in Britain, do as the British.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
I'd rather we had diverse cultures as the absorption of immigrant cultures has made British culture.

---

Is what we see today absorption (like oxygen being added to water), or suspension (like oil being added to water)?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
I agree with Marvin in so far as - trying to discard labels such as 'British' - there should be an effort on the part of an immigrant to adapt to and integrate into the culture of the 'host' community. His example of Brits abroad as the antithesis of this is a good one: last time I visited the Costa Blanca, I was dismayed to discover that there was an 'English Party' organised to fight the local elections there.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Most Scots that move to England tend to just integrate with the people in their new home towns, which is all I'm talking about. You don't get little Scottish enclaves where everyone wears kilts* and every shop sells haggis* and from which the occupants seldom venture, you just get people who, apart from their accent, are the same as everyone else.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
[L]ast time I visited the Costa Blanca, I was dismayed to discover that there was an 'English Party' organised to fight the local elections there.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
I agree with Marvin in so far as - trying to discard labels such as 'British' - there should be an effort on the part of an immigrant to adapt to and integrate into the culture of the 'host' community. His example of Brits abroad as the antithesis of this is a good one: last time I visited the Costa Blanca, I was dismayed to discover that there was an 'English Party' organised to fight the local elections there.

---

That's exactly the sort of thing I'm talking about. If they like the British way of life so much, they should fucking well stay here.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
I agree with Marvin in so far as - trying to discard labels such as 'British' - there should be an effort on the part of an immigrant to adapt to and integrate into the culture of the 'host' community. His example of Brits abroad as the antithesis of this is a good one: last time I visited the Costa Blanca, I was dismayed to discover that there was an 'English Party' organised to fight the local elections there.

---

That's exactly the sort of thing I'm talking about. If they like the British way of life so much, they should fucking well stay here.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican't:
You can't say to a group of people 'come and live in our country but please do carry on as you have before' and then at the same time say 'oh, but why don't you want to do the things that we do, like visit art galleries?'.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican't:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
[L]ast time I visited the Costa Blanca, I was dismayed to discover that there was an 'English Party' organised to fight the local elections there.

---

Sounds ghastly but I'm intrigued. Do they have a website? A quick internet search isn't yielding any results.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
I agree entirely. I'm not quite sure now why I made the comment I did, unless it's something to do with middle-class people being able to pontificate about multiculturalism without it directly affecting them; the working class experience it at first hand. Which is why, I suppose, that the BNP's main support is not in middle-class areas (where multiculturalism is generally accepted, from an intellectual position) and not in mixed working-class areas (where people get along together quite happily), but in more-or-less exclusively white working-class and lower-middle where Daily Mail attitudes (and worse) prevail.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
Matt: that's maybe the case with European gentile immigrants (except possibly the Irish). The Jewish community is still fairly distinctive, while at the same time wholly integrated. The Chinese community has been here in Liverpool for about 200 years but has still very much a life of its own. Caribbean, African and Asian communities have been here a long time now. Is it perhaps a matter of relative economic security (Jews are not noticeably richer or poorer than anyone else, whereas until recently the Irish were predominately poor working-class, as are most Black people and some Asian groups)?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:
We are a tiny tiny island and over well over populated in the South East of England in particular. We must bid the falsehood of ''multi culturalism' good bye and good riddance.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pegasus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:
We are a tiny tiny island and over well over populated in the South East of England in particular. We must bid the falsehood of ''multi culturalism' good bye and good riddance.

---

Multiculturalism and the (possible) overcrowding of the UK are two completely different issues. It is possible to have a small multicultural population or a very large monocultural one.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:


I make no apology for being ''racist'' if by that term, there should be a certain homogeneous make up of the majority of our race in our island. If that is the case I am 'racist' and proud of it.


Saul

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pegasus:
[Cross post. This is to Saul the Apostle, obviously]

No, it's not a matter of opinion.

Multiculturalism means encouraging diversity of ethnicity, religion and, uh, culture, and the belief that different groups can happily co-exist within a single country.

O

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RadicalWhig:
We still haven't defined what we mean by being British and "doing as the British do". Until that's nailed down, this is going nowhere.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:

That in my mind speaks of (imposed) 'multiculturalism' and it was very much imposed on us,

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:

That in my mind speaks of (imposed) 'multiculturalism' and it was very much imposed on us,

---

By whom? And what about Anglo-culturalism being imposed on India, Africa and sundry other places? It would be just deserts, except that we were in a position of power in those places; the poor Bangladeshi immigrant very much not.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sioni Sais:

quote:

---

Originally posted by RadicalWhig:
We still haven't defined what we mean by being British and "doing as the British do". Until that's nailed down, this is going nowhere.

---

We haven't and we won't, but I suspect yours is a rhetorical question. Wherever you are, some folk do and others don't: the more people you have the greater the variety. I doubt there are many activities that can be classified as either British or not British as so many things we do have come from overseas and so many others have been exported (Cricket is a fine example: I believe the majority of the world's cricketers live and play in India).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:
I am racist, in the sense that I believe that herediatry factors impinge on matters (like ability) far more than we care to accept. I do not hold certain nations in high regard for the way they are very corrupt and highly inept; having said that, we of course are far from paragons of virtue and my argument is not that we should ship all Africans back to Africa, but more lets say 'enough is enough' we live on a small island and we haven't the resource to accept 000s of yer more immigrants.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:
I am racist, in the sense that I believe that herediatry factors impinge on matters (like ability) far more than we care to accept. I do not hold certain nations in high regard for the way they are very corrupt and highly inept; having said that, we of course are far from paragons of virtue and my argument is not that we should ship all Africans back to Africa, but more lets say 'enough is enough' we live on a small island and we haven't the resource to accept 000s of yer more immigrants.

---

This is sad but not surprising. European nations are inherently xenophobic, it seems to me. The equation between "England" and "Englishness", where the latter is equated with both culture and genetics, is totally unlike anything in the Americas, where we are all immigrants and many if not most of us acknowledge it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RadicalWhig:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sioni Sais:

quote:

---

Originally posted by RadicalWhig:
We still haven't defined what we mean by being British and "doing as the British do". Until that's nailed down, this is going nowhere.

---

We haven't and we won't, but I suspect yours is a rhetorical question. Wherever you are, some folk do and others don't: the more people you have the greater the variety. I doubt there are many activities that can be classified as either British or not British as so many things we do have come from overseas and so many others have been exported (Cricket is a fine example: I believe the majority of the world's cricketers live and play in India).

---

I think that's pretty much my point. How then can you expect people to "act British" or "do as the British do", if we cannot even define the boundaries of acceptability?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
<snip>
OK, you want boundaries? My mate Rizwan who is a lawyer, speaks and dresses the same way I do, plays on my cricket team and is generally as pleasant an Englishman as I can think of? He's fine by me. Someone like Abu Hamza who calls for Sharia law in Britain, insists on speaking urdu and wearing traditional arabic dress, and refuses to spend any time with any "kafirs"? Much less so.

It's really more about integration and being prepared to live and work alongside people than it is about any partcular belief. That's why I hate the enclaves, and the enclaves are why I think multiculturalism doesn't work.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
OK, you want boundaries?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by RadicalWhig:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sioni Sais:

quote:

---

Originally posted by RadicalWhig:
We still haven't defined what we mean by being British and "doing as the British do". Until that's nailed down, this is going nowhere.

---

We haven't and we won't, but I suspect yours is a rhetorical question. Wherever you are, some folk do and others don't: the more people you have the greater the variety. I doubt there are many activities that can be classified as either British or not British as so many things we do have come from overseas and so many others have been exported (Cricket is a fine example: I believe the majority of the world's cricketers live and play in India).

---

I think that's pretty much my point. How then can you expect people to "act British" or "do as the British do", if we cannot even define the boundaries of acceptability?

---

OK, you want boundaries? My mate Rizwan who is a lawyer, speaks and dresses the same way I do, plays on my cricket team and is generally as pleasant an Englishman as I can think of? He's fine by me. Someone like Abu Hamza who calls for Sharia law in Britain, insists on speaking urdu and wearing traditional arabic dress, and refuses to spend any time with any "kafirs"? Much less so.

It's really more about integration and being prepared to live and work alongside people than it is about any partcular belief. That's why I hate the enclaves, and the enclaves are why I think multiculturalism doesn't work.

---

quote:

---

originally posted by Saul the ApostleI am a ''racist'', in the sense that I believe there ARE differences between races, unfashionable today of course, but if you look into it; blacks, whites and asians all perform 'to type' on IQ tests and in other behavioural ways; there are clear and unambiguous differences, if you care to look at not be bamboozled by the liberal elites propaganda. Thats not the whole story but it says something, at least to me; race differences do exist; so i am racist in that sense and proud to be so, not an ostrich who won't accept that there are clear differences.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:

That in my mind speaks of (imposed) 'multiculturalism' and it was very much imposed on us,

---

By whom? And what about Anglo-culturalism being imposed on India, Africa and sundry other places?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RadicalWhig:
We still haven't defined what we mean by being British and "doing as the British do". Until that's nailed down, this is going nowhere.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RadicalWhig:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
OK, you want boundaries?

---

No, I don't want boundaries, I was just trying to work out what the insistence on "acting British" would actually amount to in practice, considering how the "British" are a very diverse lot.

I do think that some sort of "test" or standard needs to be applied - but think that "civic comity" - willingness to live and work amongst others without causing a nuisance or demanding special treatment - is a better basis than "cultural conformity"...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
You totally ignored what I said. That's okay.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:
Until 60 years ago, the largest ethnic minority in our islands was the Jewish population. Now we have a veritable united nations and my central point is not that we haven't reaped what we've sown ( a colonial 'reinvasion by the 'subject' peoples)we clearly have; but that the British Isles, and more specifically, England is a small place. So I say no more immigration please; thats my point. Its 'full', we have no 'western frontier' that these teeming masses can go and settle; its better they develop their own countries.

Saul

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
I've not met Rizwan but Raja who works with me supports Man United, plays cricket (almost as badly as I ever did), dresses like me and I have to say his manners are better than most of the others in our office. Leila and Rad are Muslims, she is active in and outside 'her' community helping to get people integrated, while he is a builder. The difference is that Rizwan, Raja, Leila and Rad are all real people not news stories like Abu Hamza. For every Abu Hamza there must be at least a thousand getting on with their lives quite uncontroversially.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:

Until 60 years ago, the largest ethnic minority in our islands was the Jewish population.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:
...if you look into it; blacks, whites and asians all perform 'to type' on IQ tests and in other behavioural ways; there are clear and unambiguous differences...

---

quote:

---

Multiculturalism is overblown and overhyped. If you live in London there is no escaping it, indeed quite a few folk I know have left London because the city they knew and loved has become this multi cultural ''experiment''. Multiculturalism may not lead to ''rivers of blood'' as Enoch Powell famously said in 1968, but it has given a substantial trickle of blood and uneccesary conflict in what was once a broadly 'united' nation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RadicalWhig:
I do think that some sort of "test" or standard needs to be applied - but think that "civic comity" - willingness to live and work amongst others without causing a nuisance or demanding special treatment - is a better basis than "cultural conformity", which implies a closed culture and a very narrow view of what "acting British" means.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by RadicalWhig:
I do think that some sort of "test" or standard needs to be applied - but think that "civic comity" - willingness to live and work amongst others without causing a nuisance or demanding special treatment - is a better basis than "cultural conformity", which implies a closed culture and a very narrow view of what "acting British" means.

---

You know what? I can live with that.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by RadicalWhig:
I do think that some sort of "test" or standard needs to be applied - but think that "civic comity" - willingness to live and work amongst others without causing a nuisance or demanding special treatment - is a better basis than "cultural conformity", which implies a closed culture and a very narrow view of what "acting British" means.

---

You know what? I can live with that. One culture which adapts to accomodate new arrivals while retaining the best of its previous self is absolutely dandy. The huge popularity of non-native food styles such as indian, chinese, caribbean, american and even italian is just one example of this being done.

What I object to - all I have ever objected to - is new arrivals locking themselves away in their enclaves and refusing to either adapt or be accomodated. They may not be causing a nuisance, but they're not exactly showing a willingness to live and work amongst others are they?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Isn't it just?

---

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by RadicalWhig:
I do think that some sort of "test" or standard needs to be applied - but think that "civic comity" - willingness to live and work amongst others without causing a nuisance or demanding special treatment - is a better basis than "cultural conformity", which implies a closed culture and a very narrow view of what "acting British" means.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You know what? I can live with that. One culture which adapts to accomodate new arrivals while retaining the best of its previous self is absolutely dandy. The huge popularity of non-native food styles such as indian, chinese, caribbean, american and even italian is just one example of this being done.

What I object to - all I have ever objected to - is new arrivals locking themselves away in their enclaves and refusing to either adapt or be accomodated. They may not be causing a nuisance, but they're not exactly showing a willingness to live and work amongst others are they?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doc Tor:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Isn't it just?

---

The obvious corollary to this is: why should we hold immigrants to a higher standard than our own citizens?

---

quote:

---

What I object to - all I have ever objected to - is new arrivals locking themselves away in their enclaves and refusing to either adapt or be accomodated. They may not be causing a nuisance, but they're not exactly showing a willingness to live and work amongst others are they?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
<snip>

You make it sound like Abu Hamza was just made up by a sub-editor one evening. Are you trying to say that no such person exists, or that he's the only one?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fletcher christian:
posted by marvin

quote:

---

What I object to - all I have ever objected to - is new arrivals locking themselves away in their enclaves and refusing to either adapt or be accomodated. They may not be causing a nuisance, but they're not exactly showing a willingness to live and work amongst others are they?

---

Do you object to the old timers who have been here since time immemorial who lock themselves away in white ghettos, eat fish n chips at the weekends, whose friends are all white, who only speak english, who take Cassandra and Timothy to horse riding and cricket practice every Sunday morning, etc, etc, etc? They may not be a nuisance, but they're hardly making an effort to reach out beyond their own self imposed confines.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doc Tor:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Isn't it just?

---

The obvious corollary to this is: why should we hold immigrants to a higher standard than our own citizens?

---

If you can show me anywhere where I've said that native citizens who don't want to live alongside immigrants are in the right, I'll be shocked.

---

quote:

---

You haven't said that, but all this <they> must integrate and <they> must adapt to <our> culture (which is defined exactly nowhere and can't be defined!), which is at the heart of the monoculturalists argument puts all the expectation of change on immigrants. That's a high standard. In asking them to adapt, while the native inhabitants stand still, taking the benefits immigrants bring, is a long way from fair and reasonable. Integration is a two-way street, on which traffic going in both directions has to give way from time to time.

---

quote:

---

You can't blame people for having been born in Wales or Cornwall or small town Oxfordshire instead of Bradford or Peckham. If you live in much of the UK you probably don't have non-white friends, because there aren't many non-whites to be friends with. And I'm not sure what the problem is with people in England only speaking English.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fletcher christian:
[ You can't blame non-english speaking immigrants with only one language for being ghettoised.

---

quote:

---

I'm monocultural in the sense that I think everyone in a particular place is (ideally) part of a big conversation that results in a messy, complex but to some extent shared (or at least mutually intelligible) culture of that place. Everyone's free to disagree with where the conversation is going, but you can't opt out of it altogether and live in a bubble.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fletcher christian:

quote:

---

You can't blame people for having been born in Wales or Cornwall or small town Oxfordshire instead of Bradford or Peckham. If you live in much of the UK you probably don't have non-white friends, because there aren't many non-whites to be friends with. And I'm not sure what the problem is with people in England only speaking English.

---

No, thats part of the point I was trying to make. You can't blame non-english speaking immigrants with only one language for being ghettoised. They will naturally gravitate to places where there are shared cultural experiences and where they can get the food they need and support they seek - same as white ghettos. You can take a moral judgement from that - but I wasn't actually suggesting one. It's simply a matter of perception.

---

quote:

---

Sigh, you're using that word 'white ghettos' again. The vast majority of UK people don't conciously gravitate towards 'white ghettos'. Those are just the places they happen to live.

---

quote:

---

A minority of immigrants aren't practising multiculturalism, but are using it as a cover to maintain monoculturalism on their own patch.

---

quote:

---

But the concept of 'white flight' from the inner cities to the 'burbs is known in both the UK and the US.

---

quote:

---

But I'm not sure that approving of local monoculturalism is a good way to deal with it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:

Until 60 years ago, the largest ethnic minority in our islands was the Jewish population.

---

Never heard of the Irish?

The notion of "imposed multiculturalism" is bollocks. No-one is making you, or anyone else, speak Punjabi (or English), wear a turban (or a trilby), listen to reggae music (or morris dancing), drink wine (or rum), eat curry (or fish & chips), go to the Gudwara (or church), or do any of the other originally non-British things people might choose to do. What has been imposed on you? The whole idea is nonsense.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:
...if you look into it; blacks, whites and asians all perform 'to type' on IQ tests and in other behavioural ways; there are clear and unambiguous differences...

---

No, there aren't actually. From what you said I suspect that you know effectively nothing about population genetics at all. That's all right - its OK to be ignorant if you want to be, you could hardly be a racist of the kind you are if you weren't. Just don't try to impose your very un-British pseudo-scientific racism on the rest of us please. Or learn a little about the subject first.

quote:

---

Multiculturalism is overblown and overhyped. If you live in London there is no escaping it, indeed quite a few folk I know have left London because the city they knew and loved has become this multi cultural ''experiment''. Multiculturalism may not lead to ''rivers of blood'' as Enoch Powell famously said in 1968, but it has given a substantial trickle of blood and uneccesary conflict in what was once a broadly 'united' nation.

---

So that's why London is the safest and least violent really large city in the whole world outside Japan? And why its less violent than it was a hundred years ago (and much, much less violent than two hundred years ago)? Because the racists left? A novel theory.

---

Just because I don't subscribe to your liberal views doesn't mean its ''bollocks''. Your view could be said to be ''bollocks'' too...just yours is liberal ostrich like ''bollocks''.

I clearly made an un-liberal case for the immediate closure of borders to non EU immigrants. I hold to that view.


Imposed multi culturalism is a socially engineered experiment imposed upon us by the liberal elite. Bliar /Brown are just the latest manifestation of this 'multi culturalism'imposed upon us by our unthinking governors; no wonder working class folk vote in certain areas for the BNP! They feel powerless and disenfranchised.

We are 'getting back' what we colonised, so in one sense there is poetic justice in all of this.

Most people (whites that is) daren't say what they think of the blacks and asians that have come into our country post war. Yes, since 1950. The Irish and Welsh etc are part of the age old mix of our nation. As are the Scottish. We were an anglo saxon/celtic nation, admittedly with waves of immigrants , like the French protestants, over the years.

London safe? You're having a laugh mate! Go talk to a few older people who live in this crime ridden capital. Fear is real and tangible. Actual crime is rampant.

The UK WAS a very different country 60 years ago; very far from perfect and far from blameless in many many ways...but it was relatively white and held to a Judaeo-Christian consensus. Yes, there were pockets of blacks etc. mainly around the larger ports and cities. I saw a fair few blacks in Liverpool as a kid.

A number of people have said to me that they left London ( to find refuge in deepest Sussex) because they saw a once great city become a shadow of its former self, and one colleague said to me he left London specifically due to ''the blacks''. I found this hard to swallow in one way, yet in another way, in one generation a mega-shift in ethnicity has taken place.

The ''small country argument'' does in fact hold water and not just in terms of the ethnic thing but as a general argument. Go to France or Spain and see the ''elbow'' room people have to spread out; here in England we are crammed together in large conurbations and immigrants put pressure on health services, on education, on Police, on customs services. You may not like the argument but there are some British people who believe British jobs for British workers. I think we must say ''no more'' to non EU immigration now, and mean it.

Yes blacks/asians have contributed to the nation, no doubts there, but **ck me, I'd like to talk to a Doctor who can speak English!

I am not a fascist, but I fail to see the benefits in having more black and asian people settle our land. Yes the ''empire in reverse'' argument is valid, we went over there in the 17th 18th and 19th centuries , but I say no more. Let folk build up Ghana or Nigeria or Bangladesh etc. The gravy train is ''full'' ..............in my opinion and I do not hold to your left and / or liberal views.

I hold my views as a ''right winger'' and be proud of them.

Saul
 

---

Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :
 
Saul, whilst I have some sympathy with some of your views, you lost me earlier on in the thread when you started spouting quasi-racist Bell-Curve-like nonsense about different races having different IQ levels. You also lose me when you conflate the arguments about multiculturalism with the (yes, important, but discrete) issue about overpopulation in the UK.
 

---

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
Saul - the bollocks to which me and ken refer are not your opinions, but the facts on which you base your opinions.

When it comes down to it, you're just a common or garden, old-fashioned, salt-of-the-earth English racist. Here's hoping you haven't transferred your unwarranted prejudices to any children you might have.
 

---

Posted by Saul the Apostle (# 13808) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
Saul, whilst I have some sympathy with some of your views, you lost me earlier on in the thread when you started spouting quasi-racist Bell-Curve-like nonsense about different races having different IQ levels. You also lose me when you conflate the arguments about multiculturalism with the (yes, important, but discrete) issue about overpopulation in the UK.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
You haven't said that, but all this <they> must integrate and <they> must adapt to <our> culture (which is defined exactly nowhere and can't be defined!), which is at the heart of the monoculturalists argument puts all the expectation of change on immigrants. That's a high standard.

---

quote:

---

In asking them to adapt, while the native inhabitants stand still, taking the benefits immigrants bring, is a long way from fair and reasonable.

---

quote:

---

Integration is a two-way street, on which traffic going in both directions has to give way from time to time.

---

quote:

---

originally posted by Saul the Apostle The Irish and Welsh etc are part of the age old mix of our nation. As are the Scottish. We were an anglo saxon/celtic nation, admittedly with waves of immigrants , like the French protestants, over the years.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fletcher christian:

quote:

---

You can't blame people for having been born in Wales or Cornwall or small town Oxfordshire instead of Bradford or Peckham. If you live in much of the UK you probably don't have non-white friends, because there aren't many non-whites to be friends with. And I'm not sure what the problem is with people in England only speaking English.

---

No, thats part of the point I was trying to make. You can't blame non-english speaking immigrants with only one language for being ghettoised.

---

quote:

---

They will naturally gravitate to places where there are shared cultural experiences and where they can get the food they need and support they seek - same as white ghettos.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Migrants, on the other hand, have made a conscious choice to move to a new land. Because of that the onus is rightly on them to fit in.

---

quote:

---

And within a couple of generations, it has been clear that, without exception, the newcomers have brought a fresh dynamism, and not a little material wealth, to the host community.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yerevan:

quote:

---

And within a couple of generations, it has been clear that, without exception, the newcomers have brought a fresh dynamism, and not a little material wealth, to the host community.

---

I suspect (again writing as an immigrant) that the impact of immigration on the UK has actually been a mixed bag, with the white working classes losing out somewhat due to competition with immigrants for low-skilled jobs and cheap housing (and before I get into trouble for saying this, the big postwar wave of immigration into the UK included many relatives of mine). In some cases the 'losers' include the immigrants' home countries, who have lost their most able and educated young people to the West, and the immigrants themselves, who would probably much prefer to be at home if it wasn't for the massive economic inequality between the West and the Rest. Nor has every immigrant who has arrived in the UK been an asset 'without exception'. Some immigrants, like some people, are a bit useless. Immigration is too big and messy a phenomen for us to say that its universally Good or Bad in its impact.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:
I make no apology for being ''racist'' if by that term, there should be a certain homogeneous make up of the majority of our race in our island.

---

'Our race'? Defined how?
 

---

Posted by Yerevan (# 10383) on :
 
Jolly Jape: Fair enough, though (being the nit-picking historian that I am) its only fair to say that the Normans and just about every wave proceeding them established themselves by conquest and expropriation, which wasn't generally a net benefit to the people being conquered and expropriated
 

---

Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jolly Jape:
The idea that I was trying to convey was not that every single immigrant has brought benefit to their host community, but rather that every single migrational wave has, without exception, brought net benefit to the host community, by which opinion I stand.

---

quote:

---

If they have made the choice to move to Britain, they should also make the choice to learn the language. The two go together.

I wouldn't expect to be able to permanently move to Argentina without learning Spanish, and I certainly wouldn't expect the Argentinians to all learn English to accomodate me! Why should it be different the other way round?

---

quote:

---

Imposed multi culturalism is a socially engineered experiment imposed upon us by the liberal elite. Bliar /Brown are just the latest manifestation of this 'multi culturalism'imposed upon us by our unthinking governors

---

quote:

---

All of which could be corrected by making the learning of English backed up by an exam a condition precedent of leave to remain (I believe something along those lines is being contemplated).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yerevan:
Jolly Jape: Fair enough, though (being the nit-picking historian that I am) its only fair to say that the Normans and just about every wave proceeding them established themselves by conquest and expropriation, which wasn't generally a net benefit to the people being conquered and expropriated

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fletcher christian:
However, not all immigrants are here by choice because they think they'd like to earn enough money to own a nice house in Devon. Many are here because of economic deprivation or social circumstances (which in some instances can be quite harrowing).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fletcher christian:
It would go some of the way I'm sure, but do you send those people who can't read or write back home?

---

quote:

---

I don't think that I have ever met a single immigrant who doesn't want to integrate in some way and learn the language.

---

quote:

---

Harrowing or not, it's still their choice to come here in search of a better life. They do not have to come here. They choose to.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fletcher christian:
posted by Marvin

quote:

---

Harrowing or not, it's still their choice to come here in search of a better life. They do not have to come here. They choose to.

---

Some don't - they simply pack up and travel until they find somewhere they can settle and will accept them as an immigrant.

---

quote:

---

Some have to leave very quickly under threat of death or mutilation. They don't where they might end up - they could end up trying to learn German, or French, or English....

---

quote:

---

People fleeing from such persecution are a different matter.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fletcher christian:
posted by Saul

quote:

---

Imposed multi culturalism is a socially engineered experiment imposed upon us by the liberal elite. Bliar /Brown are just the latest manifestation of this 'multi culturalism'imposed upon us by our unthinking governors

---

I think it might be time to put your tin foil hat back in the drawer

---

quote:

---

The huge increases in migrants over the last decade were partly due to a politically motivated attempt by ministers to radically change the country and "rub the Right's nose in diversity", according to Andrew Neather, a former adviser to Tony Blair, Jack Straw and David Blunkett.

He said Labour's relaxation of controls was a deliberate plan to "open up the UK to mass migration" but that ministers were nervous and reluctant to discuss such a move publicly for fear it would alienate its "core working class vote".

As a result, the public argument for immigration concentrated instead on the economic benefits and need for more migrants.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican't:
I wish this were tin foil hat territory. Sadly it appears that it is not:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doc Tor:
And unless he's actually got draft speeches or the Cabinet minutes to back it up, this has about as much authority as hear-say evidence in court.

---

Cabinet minutes will be available in 30 years. And given that Blair's government seemed to conduct most of its business sitting around on sofas, there probably isn't much of a paper trail.
 

---

Posted by daisymay (# 1480) on :
 
Having read and read so many posts and I'm "replying" to so many, I've decided not to quote, quote, quote, but just to add my thoughts!

I wonder if learning our history and/or being multi-ethnic makes us more or less multi-cultural and more or less racist?

My family is such a mixture - Scots, Pictish, Welsh, Nepali, Viking Norwegian, Portuguese, Mongolian, Bengali, Hungarian, English, Spanish, Jewish, Dutch, Tibetan, Swiss, American, no doubt etc, that I reckon I'm probably somewhat multi-cultural.

And I have done history, about all over the world. That means I know some of what nationalities have shifted and some have moved to different part of the world and how they may have changed or remained the same.

I also behave varyingly in different circumstances, with different people - for example I'll soon be getting cards for Eid for my local Muslim friends as well as Christmas ones later. I don't wear a hijab with them, but I have when I've gone to mosques previously, and I always take off my shoes in their homes, just as I have done in Asian Christian places and still do sometimes in our CofE church. And I regularly use "Namaste" and "Shalom" with people.

I grew up in a place in Scotland that had loads of Polish men, who had come, escaped, during the war and then married local Scots, and we all took that as OK, and learned how to say and know Polish names, which I still remember - no-one was anti them.

And today I am to report to our local Community Police that quite a few beggars, women and children, from Romania, are again in our area - not because I hate them, but because they are being forced to beg by controlling men...

IMO, some of us are to some extent multi-cultural and many are not.
 

---

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican't:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doc Tor:
And unless he's actually got draft speeches or the Cabinet minutes to back it up, this has about as much authority as hear-say evidence in court.

---

Cabinet minutes will be available in 30 years. And given that Blair's government seemed to conduct most of its business sitting around on sofas, there probably isn't much of a paper trail.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doc Tor:
The columnist could well be telling the truth. Or he could be making it up. The best way to tell is to look for corroberating evidence - got any?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican't:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doc Tor:
The columnist could well be telling the truth. Or he could be making it up. The best way to tell is to look for corroberating evidence - got any?

---

Gosh, I imagine this is what it's like in Hattie Harman's Court of Public Opinion.

No, I don't. Of course I don't. But my original post responded to a claim that suggestions that immigration was used as a form of social engineering are 'tin foil hat territory'. If 'tin foil hat' means an idea that is overly paranoid, deluded and well-beyond the realms of reason (which I think it does) the mainstream press reports and the comments by Mr Neather suggest that it is not.

---

quote:

---

No, I don't. Of course I don't. But my original post responded to a claim that suggestions that immigration was used as a form of social engineering are 'tin foil hat territory'. If 'tin foil hat' means an idea that is overly paranoid, deluded and well-beyond the realms of reason (which I think it does) the mainstream press reports and the comments by Mr Neather suggest that it is not.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican't:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doc Tor:
And unless he's actually got draft speeches or the Cabinet minutes to back it up, this has about as much authority as hear-say evidence in court.

---

Cabinet minutes will be available in 30 years. And given that Blair's government seemed to conduct most of its business sitting around on sofas, there probably isn't much of a paper trail.

---

quote:

---

There is also a tendency in the discussion to confuse culture with skin pigmentation. Saul the Apostle seems worried about immigration undermining the 'Judeo-Christian' consensus, but as far as I can make out it would be in a much weaker state without influxes from black Africa and the Caribbean. (Incidentally, Saul, most inter-ethnic rivers of blood in the UK have flown as a continuing consequence of the 17th century dynastic and religious conflicts between the House of Stewart and their various opponents). Saul's remarks about intelligence, however one might take them, are beside the point. It's a question of the values individuals and groups hold rather than their IQ. Cleverness, within broad human parameters, is not obviously associated with superior social or civic virtue.

---

quote:

---

Kwesi your house of Stuart comment baffled me, what the heck are you talking about man?

However I would challenge you on the race/IQ/ability question; there does seem clear evidence of levels of ability and race difference.

---

quote:

---

It depends where you live. Cities are certainly multi-cultural - the last school that I taught in had about 10% 'ethnic minorities' whereas the first, rural school I worked in had about 0.1%

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwesi:
Saul the Apostle

quote:

---

Kwesi your house of Stuart comment baffled me, what the heck are you talking about man?

However I would challenge you on the race/IQ/ability question; there does seem clear evidence of levels of ability and race difference.

---

---

quote:

---

Kwesi your house of Stuart comment baffled me, what the heck are you talking about man?

However I would challenge you on the race/IQ/ability question; there does seem clear evidence of levels of ability and race difference.

---

Sorry about that, (previous post), I pressed the wrong button!

Saul, I wait with impatience for your Damascene experience. In the meantime let me try and reply to your latest post.

At the risk of gross over-simplification: For more than a hundred years there was a struggle between the House of Stuart (Stewart) and the English (latterly British) Parliament, William of Orange, and the House of Hanover for power in the British Isles. That dynastic struggle was reinforced by ethno-religious differences, the Stuarts being supported by Scottish Episcopalians and Irish Catholics, and their opponents by Scottish Presbyterians and Protestant sects. That conflict involved a civil war in the 1640s, a Cromwellian invasion of Ireland and Scotland, and was not resolved until the defeat of Bonnie Prince Charlie at Culloden in 1746. The outcome was the establishment of constitutional monarchy, the House of Hanover, the Union between England and Scotland (later including Ireland), and Protestant establishment in England, Scotland and Ireland. The Irish Catholics, who were the overwhelming majority in their homeland deeply resented the cultural hegemony of the Church of Ireland imposed by the British, which laid the foundations for Irish nationalism. The partition of Ireland in the 1920s into two confessionally-based states did not resolve the issue because Catholics in the north resented British rule, which they saw as colonial in character. This resentment spawned the activities of the IRA, which included acts of terrorism both in Northern Ireland and the British mainland. Irish immigration from the middle of the nineteenth century to Britain brought with it strong ethnic tensions, as Orange marches etc. testify, and did much to shape the social and political culture of urban areas such as the west of Scotland, south Lancashire, and the English Midlands. Against his ethnic rivalry, including a 'real river of blood', the Boyne, between people of white skin pigmentation, all other ethnic tensions and phobias fade into insignificance.

On your second point, I deliberately avoided a discussion about the association between intelligence and skin colour because it is not relevant to the discussion. There is no evidence that variations of intelligence are in any way related to the acceptance or otherwise of British values, however defined (racism excepted). In any case, you might want to argue that people of lesser intelligence (non-whites), hewers of wood and drawers of water, are need to undertake the tasks beneath the dignity of Caucasians. The Indian caste system provides a useful model.

In conclusion, might I observe that your belief in creationism causes you problems, because the notion of a single ancestor would suggest that human beings are to be noted more for their similarities rather than differences.
 

---

Posted by Kwesi (# 10274) on :
 

Obviously I hadn't pressed the wrong button!

 

---

Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doc Tor:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican't:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doc Tor:
The columnist could well be telling the truth. Or he could be making it up. The best way to tell is to look for corroberating evidence - got any?

---

Gosh, I imagine this is what it's like in Hattie Harman's Court of Public Opinion.

No, I don't. Of course I don't. But my original post responded to a claim that suggestions that immigration was used as a form of social engineering are 'tin foil hat territory'. If 'tin foil hat' means an idea that is overly paranoid, deluded and well-beyond the realms of reason (which I think it does) the mainstream press reports and the comments by Mr Neather suggest that it is not.

---

Now until the Second Coming is not long enough to list the overly paranoid, deluded and well beyond the realms of reason stuff the mainstream press reports... mainly because by tomorrow, they'd have come up with a fresh batch.

I suppose a stopped clock is right twice a day, but I have my doubts about the Mail, the Sun, the Express and the Mirror managing even that. The Telegraph does have some standards, granted, but the report you linked is a report of reaction to a column in another paper entirely - they make no assertion one way or another on the veracity of the original claim, just haul in a few rent-a-quotes from the usual suspects.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by smidgeon:

quote:

---

It depends where you live. Cities are certainly multi-cultural - the last school that I taught in had about 10% 'ethnic minorities' whereas the first, rural school I worked in had about 0.1%

---

I work in an inner city high school, 95% asian.

I watched the newsnight report, about merging two Oldham schools, with absolute horror. I used to work in a merged school and even six years later (when all the 'original' pupils must have moved on) pupils identified as belonging to one or other of the former schools and 'our' school was split down the middle - their choice. and that was without race issues. so don't anyone expect merging two schools to be easy.

I am sure more planning has gone into the merge than was apparent from the report. If you want white and asian pupils to get to know each other you'll have to put them to work together in pairs and small groups, not just lump them together and see if they mix. Dear me. Still, I'm sure the school must have a plan.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by smidgeon:

quote:

---

It depends where you live. Cities are certainly multi-cultural - the last school that I taught in had about 10% 'ethnic minorities' whereas the first, rural school I worked in had about 0.1%

---

i work in an inner city high school, 95% asian.

i watched the newsnight report, about merging two oldham schools, with absolute horror. i used to work in a merged school and even six years later (when all the 'original' pupils must have moved on) pupils identified as belonging to one or other of the former schools and 'our' school was split down the middle - their choice. and that was without race issues. so don't anyone expect merging two schools to be easy.

i am sure more planning has gone into the merge than was apparent from the report. if you want white and asian pupils to get to know each other you'll have to put them to work together in pairs and small groups, not just lump them together and see if they mix. dear me. still, i'm sure the school must have a plan.

---

quote:

---

And more news today, in Harrow, north-ish in London,
halal food is maybe going to be totally there in both primary and secondary schools.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwesi:
Saul the Apostle

quote:

---

Kwesi your house of Stuart comment baffled me, what the heck are you talking about man?

However I would challenge you on the race/IQ/ability question; there does seem clear evidence of levels of ability and race difference.

---

Sorry about that, (previous post), I pressed the wrong button!

Saul, I wait with impatience for your Damascene experience. In the meantime let me try and reply to your latest post.

At the risk of gross over-simplification: For more than a hundred years there was a struggle between the House of Stuart (Stewart) and the English (latterly British) Parliament, William of Orange, and the House of Hanover for power in the British Isles. That dynastic struggle was reinforced by ethno-religious differences, the Stuarts being supported by Scottish Episcopalians and Irish Catholics, and their opponents by Scottish Presbyterians and Protestant sects. That conflict involved a civil war in the 1640s, a Cromwellian invasion of Ireland and Scotland, and was not resolved until the defeat of Bonnie Prince Charlie at Culloden in 1746. The outcome was the establishment of constitutional monarchy, the House of Hanover, the Union between England and Scotland (later including Ireland), and Protestant establishment in England, Scotland and Ireland. The Irish Catholics, who were the overwhelming majority in their homeland deeply resented the cultural hegemony of the Church of Ireland imposed by the British, which laid the foundations for Irish nationalism. The partition of Ireland in the 1920s into two confessionally-based states did not resolve the issue because Catholics in the north resented British rule, which they saw as colonial in character. This resentment spawned the activities of the IRA, which included acts of terrorism both in Northern Ireland and the British mainland. Irish immigration from the middle of the nineteenth century to Britain brought with it strong ethnic tensions, as Orange marches etc. testify, and did much to shape the social and political culture of urban areas such as the west of Scotland, south Lancashire, and the English Midlands. Against his ethnic rivalry, including a 'real river of blood', the Boyne, between people of white skin pigmentation, all other ethnic tensions and phobias fade into insignificance.

On your second point, I deliberately avoided a discussion about the association between intelligence and skin colour because it is not relevant to the discussion. There is no evidence that variations of intelligence are in any way related to the acceptance or otherwise of British values, however defined (racism excepted). In any case, you might want to argue that people of lesser intelligence (non-whites), hewers of wood and drawers of water, are need to undertake the tasks beneath the dignity of Caucasians. The Indian caste system provides a useful model.

In conclusion, might I observe that your belief in creationism causes you problems, because the notion of a single ancestor would suggest that human beings are to be noted more for their similarities rather than differences.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jolly Jape:

quote:

---

originally posted by Saul the Apostle The Irish and Welsh etc are part of the age old mix of our nation. As are the Scottish. We were an anglo saxon/celtic nation, admittedly with waves of immigrants , like the French protestants, over the years.

---

..and, in rough chronological order, the Celts, the Brythonic people, the (extremely racially diverse) Romans, the Frisians, the Vikings, the Normans, the Flemmings, the Hugenots, the Russians, the Poles....

Now, what was it you were saying about being an Anglo-Saxon nation? There has always been immigration, sometimes on quite a large scale per head of native population. It has always been opposed, to a greater or lesser extent, using the arguments which you outline. And within a couple of generations, it has been clear that, without exception, the newcomers have brought a fresh dynamism, and not a little material wealth, to the host community.

All this talk about liberal elites is just plain nonsense bandied about by those who have lost the rational debate, and therfore need to resort to name-calling.

---

quote:

---

it has been clear that, without exception, the newcomers have brought a fresh dynamism, and not a little material wealth, to the host community.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Most of the European immigrants that flow into this country (and I imagine the same for Britain as well) have been lured here by the promise of what appears to be huge wages.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fletcher christian:
posted by anglicant

quote:

---

No, I don't. Of course I don't. But my original post responded to a claim that suggestions that immigration was used as a form of social engineering are 'tin foil hat territory'. If 'tin foil hat' means an idea that is overly paranoid, deluded and well-beyond the realms of reason (which I think it does) the mainstream press reports and the comments by Mr Neather suggest that it is not.

---

strange that I wouldn't think anything less of you and surprised it took you this long to show up

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Most of the European immigrants that flow into this country (and I imagine the same for Britain as well) have been lured here by the promise of what appears to be huge wages.

---

I'm not entirely confident that that should be seen as a good enough reason to migrate. Hell, on its own it wouldn't be a good enough reason for me to move to a different county, never mind a different country.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
I would trust the Telegraph to get it right more than the Grauniad. But I guess we can fling our newspaper prejudices round until the cows (cloned or otherwise) come home...The story certainly fits the New Labour MO.

---

You see? You, Anglicant and (look at your bedfellow - the self-described racist) Saul have already decided it must be true on almost no basis whatsoever, simply because it fits in with your prejudices. Tomorrow, you'll be telling other people it's a cast-iron, copper-bottomed fact: and that, comrades, is how it works.

For shame.
 

---

Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :
 
And you've decided it doesn't - because it doesn't fit with your prejudices.

For shame
 

---

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
And you've decided it doesn't - because it doesn't fit with your prejudices.

For shame

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
And you've decided it doesn't - because it doesn't fit with your prejudices.

For shame

---

Theres nout much worse than a right winger who knows they are ''correct'', but a leftie/liberal who ''knows'' everything..... beats them all hands down

Like all of these articles one can read it and make ones own mind up. The good Doctor doesn't appear to like it because it challenges his own view of the world. His zeitgeist is well and truly questioned. But thats purgatory for you!!!!

For my money I expect that Blair/Brown were quite happy having hordes of Africans/Asians and East Europeans coming into the country because to be fair, they do the shit jobs Brits. can't or more accurately won't do. Of course there is a legacy to all of this....the recession bit and life is a tad harder for all.

The liberal elite don't like any argument that gainsays the happy view they have of this little ''blessed'' isle; the nation is seriously ''broken'' and the 'liberal experiment' has foundered and failed.... yes we had a raft of legislation under Labour in the 1960s that opened the door to all sorts of bad outcomes.

I don't like being tended to be a medical Doctor who doesn't know colloquial English and speaks with an accent that makes him almost utterly undecipherable. I don't like British jobs being taken by non-British people. I don't subscribe to the happy clappy BBC type warm fuzzy inclusiveness that is the assumed norm in Hampstead and The Guardian reading world. No wonder the white working class feel so disenfranchised and betrayed.

Saul
 

---

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
And you've decided it doesn't - because it doesn't fit with your prejudices.

For shame

---

Theres nout much worse than a right winger who knows they are ''correct'', but a leftie/liberal who ''knows'' everything..... beats them all hands down

Like all of these articles one can read it and make ones own mind up. The good Doctor doesn't appear to like it because it challenges his own view of the world. His zeitgeist is well and truly questioned. But thats purgatory for you!!!!

For my money I expect that Blair/Brown were quite happy having hordes of Africans/Asians and East Europeans coming into the country because to be fair, they do the shit jobs Brits. can't or more accurately won't do. Of course there is a legacy to all of this....the recession bit and life is a tad harder for all.

The liberal elite don't like any argument that gainsays the happy view they have of this little ''blessed'' isle; the nation is seriously ''broken'' and the 'liberal experiment' has foundered and failed.... yes we had a raft of legislation under Labour in the 1960s that opened the door to all sorts of bad outcomes.

I don't like being tended to be a medical Doctor who doesn't know colloquial English and speaks with an accent that makes him almost utterly undecipherable. I don't like British jobs being taken by non-British people. I don't subscribe to the happy clappy BBC type warm fuzzy inclusiveness that is the assumed norm in Hampstead and The Guardian reading world. No wonder the white working class feel so disenfranchised and betrayed.

Saul

---

quote:

---

However, if you look at some of the heredity/ability/iq data there are (IMO) clear differences between the 3 main racial groupings of our world (black, caucasian, asian)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by theotheralig:
I work in a Junior School where one third of the pupils have English as an Additional language. There are, at the last count, twenty nationalities from all over the world but predominantly from Eastern Europe and the Indian Sub Continent.
Is my school multi-cultural and multi-ethnic? Well, many of the Eastern European children are actually ethnically Romany, but say they are Czech, Polish etc.
On a day to day level in school, we celebrate our children's cultures and faiths whatever they are and wherever they come from.
Their families, however, are tending in many cases setting up little Polands, Lithuania's etc in different parts of the city.
When we go shopping, sometimes we do not hear any English spoken, and many supermarket cashiers and the teller at my bank are Polish or Lithuanian.
So, my city is multi-national and I must say sometimes I feel like a foreigner in my own land.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwesi:
The right-wing presentation of large-scale immigration as some sort of left-wing conspiracy should not blind its believers to the activities of Conservative-led UK governments. West Indian immigration was initiated by the Conservative administration of Winston Churchill; and Enoch Powell as Minister of Health (1960-62) in the Macmillan government recruited large numbers of West Indians and West Africans to train as nurses in the NHS. The Conservative administration of Edward Heath admitted 50,000 Ugandan Asians with British passports but no other connection with the UK. Nor was there an appreciable reduction in immigration during the Thatcher-Major period. Conservative politicians in their search for votes play the immigration card but largely ignore the issue in office. My guess is that Cameron will bow to pressure from India and financially hard-pressed universities to become increasingly relaxed in the issue of visas, and industrialists (as in the past) will demand more immigrant labour as (when) the economy comes out of recession. In a capitalist society the capitalists will always trump the social conservatives in both left and right-wing administrations.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doc Tor:
*cough*

Fish and Chips. Jewish.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican't:

I'm guessing that the Huguenots were one of the largest waves of immigration between, say, 1500 and the arrival of the Empire Windrush.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:
Multiculturalism is overblown and overhyped. If you live in London there is no escaping it, indeed quite a few folk I know have left London because the city they knew and loved has become this multi cultural ''experiment''. Multiculturalism may not lead to ''rivers of blood'' as Enoch Powell famously said in 1968, but it has given a substantial trickle of blood and uneccesary conflict in what was once a broadly 'united' nation.

---

So that's why London is the safest and least violent really large city in the whole world outside Japan? And why its less violent than it was a hundred years ago (and much, much less violent than two hundred years ago)? Because the racists left? A novel theory.

---

Just because I don't subscribe to your liberal views doesn't mean its ''bollocks''. Your view could be said to be ''bollocks'' too...just yours is liberal ostrich like ''bollocks''.
[...]
London safe? You're having a laugh mate! Go talk to a few older people who live in this crime ridden capital. Fear is real and tangible. Actual crime is rampant.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:
The ''small country argument'' does in fact hold water and not just in terms of the ethnic thing but as a general argument. Go to France or Spain and see the ''elbow'' room people have to spread out; here in England we are crammed together in large conurbations and immigrants put pressure on health services, on education, on Police, on customs services.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:

I don't hold to this guys views totally, but Phillipe Rushton has done a major study of heretability IQ and race (I think the study was at Witterswand University).

My view on Rushton is that there is some degree of truth in what he has to say, but I can't accept his Darwinism and also IQ is but a ( small) part of the whole picture on achievement. However, I have found his work challenging; but with some major reservations. I feel a bit frightened that if I accept what he says I would be going down a path I'd rather not go down.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:

The piece in the Telegraph quotes an advisor to Blair and it appears that the story was suspected and corroborated by MP Frank Field and the Chairman of 'Migration Watch' .

---

quote:

---

Suffice it to say, there was a homogeneous race in the UK (broadly) up until the late 1940s - IMO and it held to Judaeo Christian principles.

---

quote:

---

However, God has created all races and we are all descended from a common ancestor, Adam and Eve and then after that Noah and his family; his family then split up and re-settled the earth over time (yes I am a creationist too!).

---

quote:

---

His Witterswand University research project is revealing IMO. Contrary to soem reports Rushton is not a racist, in the BNP or BUF understanding of the term in my view.

---

quote:

---

Not all UK citizens want more and more immigrants coming to this country. My own view is enough is enough and lets get rid of all of the illegal immigrants and have a much more robust border policy from now on.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:
Multiculturalism is overblown and overhyped. If you live in London there is no escaping it, indeed quite a few folk I know have left London because the city they knew and loved has become this multi cultural ''experiment''. Multiculturalism may not lead to ''rivers of blood'' as Enoch Powell famously said in 1968, but it has given a substantial trickle of blood and uneccesary conflict in what was once a broadly 'united' nation.

---

So that's why London is the safest and least violent really large city in the whole world outside Japan? And why its less violent than it was a hundred years ago (and much, much less violent than two hundred years ago)? Because the racists left? A novel theory.

---

Just because I don't subscribe to your liberal views doesn't mean its ''bollocks''. Your view could be said to be ''bollocks'' too...just yours is liberal ostrich like ''bollocks''.
[...]
London safe? You're having a laugh mate! Go talk to a few older people who live in this crime ridden capital. Fear is real and tangible. Actual crime is rampant.

---

I've no idea where you live, but I in fact do live in one of the parts of London that you despise and fear and that you say your friends have run away from. And I have talked to plenty of people, old and young, black and white, racist and non-racist, about this and lots of other topics. So less of your "ostrich-like" please.

And yes, in this part of inner London I see less violence on the streets or in pubs than I did twenty years ago, And rather less than I used to see in Brighton (my home town - in Sussex if you didn't know) than I did in the 1970s & 80s. And certainly much less than I met with in the north-east of England when I lived there.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:
The ''small country argument'' does in fact hold water and not just in terms of the ethnic thing but as a general argument. Go to France or Spain and see the ''elbow'' room people have to spread out; here in England we are crammed together in large conurbations and immigrants put pressure on health services, on education, on Police, on customs services.

---

There are billions of peopel in the world. Far better for all of us in general - and also for the environment - that we mostly live in dense urban areas. Also far better for all of us if as many people live in prosperous city regions - like the south-East of England - where they are more likely to have a chance of a productive job.

And increased population does not put more pressure on those public services because their usage depends on the amnount of peopel there are. If there are more people in a city they will need more teachers and doctors and what-have-you but there will also be more of them to do those jobs. Increased population puts more pressure on primary production like agriculture and mining and so on, because those depend on access to finite natural resources, but it doesn't make a long-term difference to services. And in the short term immigration actually helps because immigrants are more likely to work than long-term residents, and they tend to work in service industries that often neeed workers with internationally transferralble skills, and often pay very low wages. You cannot conistently complain both that all your doctors are foreigners and that immigrants put pressure on health services. You ought to at least choose which of those two mutually exlusive things you are worried about.

And please don't call me a "liberal" or I will have to call you a fascist. I'm a socialist, not a Liberal.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:

I don't hold to this guys views totally, but Phillipe Rushton has done a major study of heretability IQ and race (I think the study was at Witterswand University).

My view on Rushton is that there is some degree of truth in what he has to say, but I can't accept his Darwinism and also IQ is but a ( small) part of the whole picture on achievement. However, I have found his work challenging; but with some major reservations. I feel a bit frightened that if I accept what he says I would be going down a path I'd rather not go down.

---

Don't worry about that. Huge parts of his work are - I really can't think of a better word than "bollocks". He's more persuasive than most of the pseudo-scientific racists because he has done some real reasearch in psychology, and he holds down a job at a genuine university. His data is real data but he fits it into models that don't represent the real world. His population genetics is, well, crap. Most of what he writes about A lot of it is stuff that was plausible speculation before we could sequence genes but is now simply disproved, as if someone was holding on to the Green Cheese Theory of the Moon by ignoring everything discovered since the development of space travel. And some of it would have been disproved by a genuine understanding of the consequences of Darwinism and Mendelism. He could do with less Galton and Eysenck and more Fisher and Mayr.

He is, I am sorry to say, one of ours. Got his degree from the university I work at.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:

The piece in the Telegraph quotes an advisor to Blair and it appears that the story was suspected and corroborated by MP Frank Field and the Chairman of 'Migration Watch' .

---

Field lost the plot about fifteen years ago, Migration Watch is a nasty right-wing xenophobic political campaign.

Not all UK citizens want more and more immigrants coming to this country. My own view is enough is enough and lets get rid of all of the illegal immigrants and have a much more robust border policy from now on.

quote:

---

Suffice it to say, there was a homogeneous race in the UK (broadly) up until the late 1940s - IMO and it held to Judaeo Christian principles.

---

It gets less and less clear what you mean by "race". Certainly not the biological idea of a race, which is what Rushton and his cronies assume humans are divided into. How can a "race" hold to principles?

And anyway, recent immigrants to Britain are more likely to be Christians - or at least more likely to go to church which is all we have to go on - than long-term British people.

quote:

---

However, God has created all races and we are all descended from a common ancestor, Adam and Eve and then after that Noah and his family; his family then split up and re-settled the earth over time (yes I am a creationist too!).

---

An inconsistent one then. Rushton's views are quite incompatible with young-earth creationism.

quote:

---

His Witterswand University research project is revealing IMO. Contrary to soem reports Rushton is not a racist, in the BNP or BUF understanding of the term in my view.

---

He is at Western Ontario, not Wits. And his stuff on race hasn't got much to do with the university - his day job has mostly been about child psychology. When you say that this "research project" is revealing do you mean to imply that you have read it?

And its not at all clear what you mean by "racist" in that sentence.

Its cool how you are managing to go on about Matt and Marvin as "leftie/liberal" though.

---

Ken,

thank you for taking the time to reply and I accept your London experiences. Although I now live in 'deepest' Sussex, I have lived in Liverpool and Watford. Fair comment from you.

Rushton's Witterswand work was a specific piece he did using students from that establishment and I've listened to Rushton's results as given by him on You Tube. Like I said previously he's philosophically a million miles from me, so I treat his work with a degree of distance and incredulity.

I won't call you a liberal anymore

Yes I accept that many Afro-Carribeans have a deep faith and contributed their beliefs and their culture to us here in the UK. Accepted.

Interestingly I live not too far from Bognor Regis and the hot topic amongst 'British' locals are -''The Poles'' ; the term covering all the recent E.European migrants. A close friend of mine found her own liberality challenged as she lives alongside these folk who are all 'white' but nevertheless 'other' too. it really challenged her assumptions

As you may gather from my recent posts I am working out my personal views (on race)and as I reflect on some of my views, I find both an honest desire to understand what I see around me and further afield. I also see a darker side of personal judgementalism; I am sir an imperfect work in progress!

I did see overt and ignorant racism in my youth in Liverpool and I did not like it.

Saul the Apostle
 

---

Posted by Saul the Apostle (# 13808) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwesi:
Incidentally, Saul, your quotation from Kipling's Recessional (1897): 'Lesser breeds without the law', was a reference to the Germans- 'A heathen heart that puts her trust/ In reeking tube and iron shard.'

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican't:

I'm guessing that the Huguenots were one of the largest waves of immigration between, say, 1500 and the arrival of the Empire Windrush.

---

Bad guess. Hugely outnumbered by Irish (who were considered foreigners of course) also over the whole of the period from the 17th to the 19th century Hugenots were possibly outnumbered by Africans or by Jews.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

Then in the late 19th century and up to the Great War there were large numbers Germans, Russians, and Poles (many of who were by their own lights Jewish and/or Lithuanian) Most of them went on to America or Canada or South Africa later, but many stayed. Figures are hard to come by because there was no immigration control in the 19th century.

---

quote:

---

For most of this time the Irish were British subjects (Ireland having joined the Union in 1801). They were therefore not 'foreign'.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwesi:
Anglican't

quote:

---

For most of this time the Irish were British subjects (Ireland having joined the Union in 1801). They were therefore not 'foreign'.

---

I quite agree, but so, too, were the dusky people of the British Empire: Civis Britannicus Sum and all that.

---

quote:

---

The modern Irish Republic holds a rather anomalous position in Britain today

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fletcher christian:

quote:

---

The modern Irish Republic holds a rather anomalous position in Britain today

---

what does this mean?

---

quote:

---

I suppose 'sui generis' might have been better than 'anomalous'

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Myrrh:
I can vote here (British passport holder with residence in Ireland) in all elections but not for decisions re the Constitution.

I couldn't vote pro or con continuing the stance on abortion and I couldn't vote in either of the elections of agreeing or not to signing into Lisbon.

Who would be able to vote in UK on such constitutional changes?


Myrrh

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Myrrh:
Thanks Anglican't - I've just looked up the voting rights in Ireland and it's the same as you describe for UK, Irish and British citizens have reciprocity in this which is strange when you come to think of it..

We don't need passports to travel to the other's country, but some form of photographic identity has been required for a while now, not sure when this started.


Myrrh

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
Canada abandoned the Commonwealth-wide British Subject scheme by enacting the Citizenship Act, 1947. Once Canada abandoned the single-Subject law, the rest of the Commonwealth including the UK decided to enact their own nationality laws instead.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican't:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
Canada abandoned the Commonwealth-wide British Subject scheme by enacting the Citizenship Act, 1947. Once Canada abandoned the single-Subject law, the rest of the Commonwealth including the UK decided to enact their own nationality laws instead.

---

I didn't realise this was the catalyst. Was there any particular reason for this legislation?

My understanding is that until fairly recently (late 1970s / early 1980s) Australian passports would say 'British subject / Australian citizen'. Would I be right in thinking that this sort of thing disappeared earlier on in Canada (if it ever appeared at all)?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Saul, what you are spouting on these threads is essentially a racial theory that was thoroughly de-bunked back in the 70's. We've moved on a little since then (as has most of the world). If you read more modern texts on racial theory you might discover that there has been quite a significant movement in sociology that has undermined the entire concept of 'race'. You still come across old ideas being pedalled like they are brand new and irrefutable, but try educating your white ass before you come on here spouting.

Oddly enough, your name sake was right on the mark all those years ago......neither greek nor jew.......

---

Yes, but there is neither Greek nor Jew etc etc in the coming kingdom; meantime, in Paul's day (and ours) there were in fact all sorts of types of men/women/slave/free in the Empire. But its worth consideration of course and what St Paul means in practice. I think its around the kingdom now but not yet; the ''now and the not yet'' or eschatological dualism I think its called - thats from memory?

Phillipe Rushton's work has a strange fascination for me. I like history and I read a lot about the Third Reich; it both repels and attracts me at the same time. Rushton's work is a bit like that for me.

If you care to read my actual posts I'm not ''spouting'' these theories but I'm an honest enquirer who is examining his own attitudes and prejudices.

Rushton is an evolutionary Darwinist; I am an orthodox Christian who believes all men and women are made in God's image. So less of the
''spouting '' please

I still maintain a fair few British people, and that includes the ethnic minorities, DO accept the ''small island'' argument and feel enough is enough with immigration. I still maintain that view, be the immigrants educated Scandinavians, canny Romanians or enterprising Ugandans etc etc etc.

Saul the Apostle
 

---

Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on :
 
You know, Saul, there's something really frustrating about having a detailed conversation with someone about the biology of race, pointing them in the direction of modern definitive evidence, having them duck and dive to avoid dealing with that evidence, and then seeing them set out exactly the same position again without any reference to the previous detailed discussion.

I can only conclude that you really want to believe in the biological validity of race, and so won't deal with something that threatens that belief.
 

---

Posted by Kwesi (# 10274) on :
 
mdijon, your intervention is most welcome. I thoroughly agree with your comment, having been involved in this discussion with people like yourself previously. I think you might have to set out your argument again.
 

---

Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on :
 
Hey, thanks.

The argument is as Grammatica says in hell and as you and I both described on this thread.

My take on it is that if the genetic variation between races is no greater than the genetic variation between individuals within what is called a race, then race cannot be said to segregate humans in any special way. One might as well choose height, or shoe size. Of course tall people will share certain other characteristics, some as a consequence of height, others as correlates, but one can't pretend that tall people are some other special group of human beings. So with what is called race.
 

---

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Myrrh:
Thanks Anglican't - I've just looked up the voting rights in Ireland and it's the same as you describe for UK, Irish and British citizens have reciprocity in this which is strange when you come to think of it..

We don't need passports to travel to the other's country, but some form of photographic identity has been required for a while now, not sure when this started.


Myrrh

---

Nobody wanted to break up the economic union after 1922, especially since the UK was reliant on having Ireland as a steady source of cheap labour.

---

quote:

---

I often use Ali (which is excellent, as I know a number of male Muslims called Ali and also a number of white girls called Ali for short!)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Albertus:

I think, BTW, Myrrh's point about photographic ID is probably more related to the rules of shipping lines and (especially) airlines than nationality as such- I can't believe that if you cross the land border there is anyone to ask for your ID.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican't:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
Canada abandoned the Commonwealth-wide British Subject scheme by enacting the Citizenship Act, 1947. Once Canada abandoned the single-Subject law, the rest of the Commonwealth including the UK decided to enact their own nationality laws instead.

---

I didn't realise this was the catalyst. Was there any particular reason for this legislation?

My understanding is that until fairly recently (late 1970s / early 1980s) Australian passports would say 'British subject / Australian citizen'. Would I be right in thinking that this sort of thing disappeared earlier on in Canada (if it ever appeared at all)?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mdijon:
You know, Saul, there's something really frustrating about having a detailed conversation with someone about the biology of race, pointing them in the direction of modern definitive evidence, having them duck and dive to avoid dealing with that evidence, and then seeing them set out exactly the same position again without any reference to the previous detailed discussion.

I can only conclude that you really want to believe in the biological validity of race, and so won't deal with something that threatens that belief.

---

quote:

---

Phillipe Rushton's work has a strange fascination for me. I like history and I read a lot about the Third Reich; it both repels and attracts me at the same time. Rushton's work is a bit like that for me.

---

quote:

---

What some folk don't like, I am only guessing here, is my call for the UK drawbridge to be raised for immigration. I hold to that view and we've bounced that argument backwards and forwards so I won't repeat the 'small island' argument anymore.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:
see my quote:

quote:

---

Phillipe Rushton's work has a strange fascination for me. I like history and I read a lot about the Third Reich; it both repels and attracts me at the same time. Rushton's work is a bit like that for me.

---

mdijon,

Can't you live with other folk manifesting ambiguity and grey? I have been very honest about my own struggle and how I wish to work through that.

Can't you cope with that?

I was brought up to despise ''people of colour'' by off hand comments made by some of my family as a child about Asians. Blacks and Asians were somehow looked down upon by some in my close family.

Just imagine you were raised as a child in a home where Nazi ideas were accepted as a German child in the 1930s. You would suck in those views unthinkingly, wouldn't you? The WASP ascendency was encouraged and even Irish and all Roman Catholics were looked down upon too - that disdain of other denominations was the spirit of the non conformist sect in which I was brought up.

I held and still hold all sorts of prejudices, which by debate and reflection I am 'working through'. I haven't had the time to look at other psychological works, I am not an academic and have limited time. If you have an easy to read summary of the current state of play I would gladly read it.Just post a link.

What some folk don't like, I am only guessing here, is my call for the UK drawbridge to be raised for immigration. I hold to that view and we've bounced that argument backwards and forwards so I won't repeat the 'small island' argument anymore.

Saul

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:
I have been very honest about my own struggle and how I wish to work through that.

Can't you cope with that?

---

quote:

---

Some of us very much want the drawbridge scrapped and the gates permanently open. In my case for moral, political, and theological reasons.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

Its cool how you are managing to go on about Matt and Marvin as "leftie/liberal" though.

---

It's OK, ken, I get called that all the time by US fundies on Another Board™; I've learned to live with the insult
 

---

Posted by ken (# 2460) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yerevan:
Secondly, the Irish intermixed pretty fully with the local population within a generation or two, something that isn't always happening with contemporary immigrant communities.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yerevan:
Secondly, the Irish intermixed pretty fully with the local population within a generation or two, something that isn't always happening with contemporary immigrant communities.

---

Actually that does seem to be happening to the Afro-Caribbean immigration into Britain, and probably to the Chinese as well. And maybe Turks. Too early to tell yet with West Africans, though I wouldn't be surprised.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yerevan:
Although there is also an argument for keeping enough barriers to protect 'indigenous' local and national cultures from extinction, given the number of cultures we've already seen snuffed out in the past few centuries through mass migration.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yerevan:
Although there is also an argument for keeping enough barriers to protect 'indigenous' local and national cultures from extinction, given the number of cultures we've already seen snuffed out in the past few centuries through mass migration.

---

I think the Leftist view is that because we (i.e. Western Whites) were so terrible to those indigenous cultures, it's only right that our own indigenous culture should be destroyed as well.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yerevan:
Although there is also an argument for keeping enough barriers to protect 'indigenous' local and national cultures from extinction, given the number of cultures we've already seen snuffed out in the past few centuries through mass migration.

---

I think the Leftist view is that because we (i.e. Western Whites) were so terrible to those indigenous cultures, it's only right that our own indigenous culture should be destroyed as well.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yerevan:
Although there is also an argument for keeping enough barriers to protect 'indigenous' local and national cultures from extinction, given the number of cultures we've already seen snuffed out in the past few centuries through mass migration.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yerevan:
I get the impression that Muslim communities are by far the least likely to interact or integrate (possibly because Islam doesn't function easily as a minority religion?). Though I've heard it argued that there's a noticeable difference between Muslims of Indian and Pakistani origin

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yerevan:
I thought it was because UK liberals tend to see cultures as things other people have?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sioni Sais:

btw, we've been trying to identify a 'British' culture from the start of this thread and failed at every turn!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I think the Leftist view is that because we (i.e. Western Whites) were so terrible to those indigenous cultures, it's only right that our own indigenous culture should be destroyed as well.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yerevan:
Although there is also an argument for keeping enough barriers to protect 'indigenous' local and national cultures from extinction, given the number of cultures we've already seen snuffed out in the past few centuries through mass migration.

---

So you are saying that we, as the dominant culture in these exchanges, should protect them from ourselves, by refusing to allow them to choose to live near us? Thats wonderfully paternalistic!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
btw, we've been trying to identify a 'British' culture from the start of this thread and failed at every turn!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
btw, we've been trying to identify a 'British' culture from the start of this thread and failed at every turn!

---

OK. Fine. You win. Let's let any johhny-come-lately immigrant define it however they like, because we've got nothing whatsoever that makes us special. We don't have a culture. We're just apes who need to be civilised by those cultured people who live in any other country in the world, but God fucking help us if we say any of their cultures don't exist or aren't worth preserving.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
Insofar as that is happening, its not foreigners that are doing it. Its big business and capitalism. Same as is blandifying all cultural distinctions, and has been doign for centuries (Marx spotted it - its in the Communist Manifesto, honest!) If you want to protect whats distinctive about British cultures, ban Starbucks coffee and Barrat houses and motorways and telephone call centres - not immigrants.

And in what way is your culture destroyed by someone else doing things differently? Are you prevented from playing football, rugby, or cricket jsut because someone else prefers basketball or polo? Do you have to stop going to church because someone else goes to the mosque? Do you have to give up beer because they drink spicy yoghourt? What, really, is the problem?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sioni Sais:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
btw, we've been trying to identify a 'British' culture from the start of this thread and failed at every turn!

---

OK. Fine. You win. Let's let any johhny-come-lately immigrant define it however they like, because we've got nothing whatsoever that makes us special. We don't have a culture. We're just apes who need to be civilised by those cultured people who live in any other country in the world, but God fucking help us if we say any of their cultures don't exist or aren't worth preserving.

---

Y'know, I think the world will be a better place if I don't waste any more pixels replying to that.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sioni Sais:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
btw, we've been trying to identify a 'British' culture from the start of this thread and failed at every turn!

---

OK. Fine. You win. Let's let any johhny-come-lately immigrant define it however they like, because we've got nothing whatsoever that makes us special. We don't have a culture. We're just apes who need to be civilised by those cultured people who live in any other country in the world, but God fucking help us if we say any of their cultures don't exist or aren't worth preserving.

---

Y'know, I think the world will be a better place if I don't waste any more pixels replying to that.

---

Seriously? You mean to say that you're going to continue blithely posting about how there's no such thing as a British culture - which by implication says there's nothing different or good about being British - while ignoring any challenges to that position?

Because every time someone does mention something that's part of British culture, you say it's not. Cricket? Hell, lots of countries play that! Fish and Chips? Jewish! You come out with answers like these as if they're punchlines, in order to justify the drip-drip-drip watering down of anything British in the name of socialism and political correctness and giving everybody the same chances we've got, and you expect those of us who aren't as keen on that as you to just take it?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
What is British culture, then?

Just about anything we value as part of our traditions has been assimilated from other cultures. It doesn't make sense to see any culture in isolation. Just as our culture will evolve as it interacts with others, so will those cultures evolve.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
Just about anything we value as part of our traditions has been assimilated from other cultures.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
Just about anything we value as part of our traditions has been assimilated from other cultures.

---

Yes, but that doesn't mean those things are not to be valued. It doesn't mean they're not to be protected.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I think the Leftist view is that because we (i.e. Western Whites) were so terrible to those indigenous cultures, it's only right that our own indigenous culture should be destroyed as well.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
And in what way is your culture destroyed by someone else doing things differently? Are you prevented from playing football, rugby, or cricket jsut because someone else prefers basketball or polo? Do you have to stop going to church because someone else goes to the mosque? Do you have to give up beer because they drink spicy yoghourt? What, really, is the problem?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
What is British culture, then?

Just about anything we value as part of our traditions has been assimilated from other cultures.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
Just about anything we value as part of our traditions has been assimilated from other cultures.

---

Yes, but that doesn't mean those things are not to be valued. It doesn't mean they're not to be protected.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ricardus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
Just about anything we value as part of our traditions has been assimilated from other cultures.

---

Yes, but that doesn't mean those things are not to be valued. It doesn't mean they're not to be protected.

---

Yes, but they should be valued because they're good, rather than just because they're British. Real ale, English country churches, bellringing and rugby union should be protected because they're worth protecting.

Likewise, oppression of women in the name of sharia should be opposed because it's bad and evil, not because it's foreign and un-British.

I say this not because I'm a politically correct anti-British socialist, but because culture is such a slippery concept that, if problems can be restated without reference to culture, then it's best to do so.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mdijon:
There are other things that are good about British culture. The culture of education, for starters... there is an underlying cultural aspect to the education in this country that values learning, handed down from ancient times.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sioni Sais:

- Hunting with dogs. I don't think immigrants contributed to the end of foxhunting.

- Smoking in pubs. Ditto. Then again, quite a lot of recent immigrants won't have noticed this at all!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ricardus:
Yes, but they should be valued because they're good, rather than just because they're British. Real ale, English country churches, bellringing and rugby union should be protected because they're worth protecting.

Likewise, oppression of women in the name of sharia should be opposed because it's bad and evil, not because it's foreign and un-British.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Oppression of women (to use your example) is rife in some of these enclaves, yet it's seen as terribly un-PC (if not outright racist) to suggest that they should be brought more in line with the British values of gender equality and freedom of expression.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doc Tor:
What you're saying is that we're further down the road (by about a hundred years) to equality and freedom of expression than some recent immigrants. The difference is significant, I agree, but you seem able to give your own history a gloss it doesn't deserve.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Oppression of women (to use your example) is rife in some of these enclaves, yet it's seen as terribly un-PC (if not outright racist) to suggest that they should be brought more in line with the British values of gender equality and freedom of expression.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Oppression of women (to use your example) is rife in some of these enclaves, yet it's seen as terribly un-PC (if not outright racist) to suggest that they should be brought more in line with the British values of gender equality and freedom of expression.

---

By who? Where are these horrid nasty lefties who happily let Muslims rape women and hide them away in basements because it would be racist to stop them? Really?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doc Tor:

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Oppression of women (to use your example) is rife in some of these enclaves, yet it's seen as terribly un-PC (if not outright racist) to suggest that they should be brought more in line with the British values of gender equality and freedom of expression.

---

By who? Where are these horrid nasty lefties who happily let Muslims rape women and hide them away in basements because it would be racist to stop them? Really?

---

I'm with ken here - and, to be honest, if you can point to someone who actually says this, you're not pointing at a socialist.

The law applies equally to all in the land. Muslim men have been, and are, prosecuted for violence against women, in exactly the same way as Christians, agnostics, atheists and pagans. Just pointing out that a hundred years ago British women didn't even have the vote and domestic violence was even more prevalent - and acceptable - than it is today.

British values in this regard, while good, still aren't the zenith of civilisation.

---

© Ship of Fools 2016


UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0