|
|
Post by wapentake on Mar 8, 2024 9:41:43 GMT
The problem we have is that the majority in this country do not oppose immigration but they do oppose our political masters milling round seemingly helpless about the uncontrolled boats arriving here with no clear purpose of what any of them are going to do about this.
If you add to that the determination to make people ashamed of our history and thereby ashamed of ourselves now only fuels peoples frustrations.
The drive to glorify diversity and ignore in the process the majority is another mistake,if people are to be encouraged to integrate there’s nothing wrong in the host countries being respected and the expectation it’s laws and mores should be followed.
Instead we have people on here blanking all that out and shouting racist and bigot.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Mar 8, 2024 10:09:58 GMT
Of course nothing happened. It was a hypothetical.
But in terms of Pakistanis in Britain, I'd be willing to wager there are many more taxi drivers, kebab wallahs, unemployed deadlegs and drug dealers as there are doctors, surgeons, accountants or solicitors. If you have data which shows otherwise I'd like to see it.
That claim would apply to the British as well. I think it would apply to pretty much any country in the world. Perhaps it does, but why on earth would a rational government of any country want to add to the stock of such economically marginal people when there were already more than enough of them in the native population? Don't bring up the canard about tax receipts again, that's already been done to death. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Mar 8, 2024 10:16:31 GMT
I said that without using capitals . Yes ‘we ‘import most of them and adopt them when they enter illegally and all the while they are being cheered by the woke brigade . The same woke brigade that cheer the fact that they still come after Brexit . Why the need to start with export. Nobody exports migrants. Yes they do . The third world and Eastern Europe export millions . Are we going to have a little spat over semantics? Do you pick up on people when they call homosexuals gay or claim they have a hoover when they really have Henry? |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet on Mar 8, 2024 10:44:17 GMT
I am English and British, proud to be both but consider myself English first, British second. You talk about the English being much maligned yet you appear to be denying the existence of English nationality and identity. Again, imagine if I was to walk into your local and shout out in my English accent that there's no such nationality as Scottish. You are struggling with the concept of ethnicity. It is a very important point nowadays as the race laws mean that everyone has to be affixed an ethnic group, either willingly or unwillingly, in order for citizens to meet either public duty obligations or to avoid discrimination. It is English ethnicity that fits into this legal slot and that is the concept I am trying to get across to you. If you wish to be an English National and play sport for England that is fine no one is disputing that right, however what is in dispute is your Englishness as part of an ethnic group and you seem upset if someone questions that because of your own statement that you have Irish heritage. It is the English as an ethnic group that are much maligned and I do not for one minute question English identity it is how it is defined by many others and the intermingling with the right to represent England at sport or intercountry competition I find strange. There are several aspects to this there is legal nationality which is British, there is home nation nationality and there is ethnicity. All are different and it is the ethnic group that is, I believe, the much maligned group for several noticeable reasons , largely they are denied an existence as an ethnic group, their culture and history are denigrated and they are discriminated against in their homeland. For any other group most people would be up in arms at the injustice but for some reason it is almost as if the English ethnic group are fair game. I'm not the least bit confused about ethnicity nor have I maligned English ethnicity. I've never once disputed that I'm not 100% ethnically English. I'm just saying it doesn't make me any less culturally or nationally English. You are not 100% ethnically Scottish yet I have heard you describe yourself as Scots without qualifying it by apologetically mentioning your English ethnic heritage. I merely ask that my national identity be afforded the same respect you would expect for yours. I wonder how many of those apparently obsessed with ethnic purity have undergone an ancestry DNA test. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Mar 8, 2024 13:38:47 GMT
You are struggling with the concept of ethnicity. It is a very important point nowadays as the race laws mean that everyone has to be affixed an ethnic group, either willingly or unwillingly, in order for citizens to meet either public duty obligations or to avoid discrimination. It is English ethnicity that fits into this legal slot and that is the concept I am trying to get across to you. If you wish to be an English National and play sport for England that is fine no one is disputing that right, however what is in dispute is your Englishness as part of an ethnic group and you seem upset if someone questions that because of your own statement that you have Irish heritage. It is the English as an ethnic group that are much maligned and I do not for one minute question English identity it is how it is defined by many others and the intermingling with the right to represent England at sport or intercountry competition I find strange. There are several aspects to this there is legal nationality which is British, there is home nation nationality and there is ethnicity. All are different and it is the ethnic group that is, I believe, the much maligned group for several noticeable reasons , largely they are denied an existence as an ethnic group, their culture and history are denigrated and they are discriminated against in their homeland. For any other group most people would be up in arms at the injustice but for some reason it is almost as if the English ethnic group are fair game. I'm not the least bit confused about ethnicity nor have I maligned English ethnicity. I've never once disputed that I'm not 100% ethnically English. I'm just saying it doesn't make me any less culturally or nationally English. You are not 100% ethnically Scottish yet I have heard you describe yourself as Scots without qualifying it by apologetically mentioning your English ethnic heritage. I merely ask that my national identity be afforded the same respect you would expect for yours. I wonder how many of those apparently obsessed with ethnic purity have undergone an ancestry DNA test. I accept my mixed heritage as a possible block to any claim to Scots ethnicity but you keep missing the important point ethnicity is a process of accepting and acceptance. If I accept I am Scots and in teh main accepted as such by all other Scots then I am ethnically Scottish. My majority English heritage is never mentioned unless specifically asked or to make a point in discussion (as I did with you). If I am asked I am Scots, not Scots with English heritage and that was the point you said you were English with Irish heritage as a volunteered qualification as though that is something different. I was not the only one to notice and wonder why that was important to mention in the first instance. |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet on Mar 8, 2024 13:52:20 GMT
I'm not the least bit confused about ethnicity nor have I maligned English ethnicity. I've never once disputed that I'm not 100% ethnically English. I'm just saying it doesn't make me any less culturally or nationally English. You are not 100% ethnically Scottish yet I have heard you describe yourself as Scots without qualifying it by apologetically mentioning your English ethnic heritage. I merely ask that my national identity be afforded the same respect you would expect for yours. I wonder how many of those apparently obsessed with ethnic purity have undergone an ancestry DNA test. I accept my mixed heritage as a possible block to any claim to Scots ethnicity but you keep missing the important point ethnicity is a process of accepting and acceptance. If I accept I am Scots and in teh main accepted as such by all other Scots then I am ethnically Scottish. My majority English heritage is never mentioned unless specifically asked or to make a point in discussion (as I did with you). If I am asked I am Scots, not Scots with English heritage and that was the point you said you were English with Irish heritage as a volunteered qualification as though that is something different. I was not the only one to notice and wonder why that was important to mention in the first instance. I mentioned my Irish heritage in context that it doesn't prevent me from being English, just as your English heritage doesn't prevent you from being Scots. Agreed? |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Mar 8, 2024 17:02:06 GMT
I accept my mixed heritage as a possible block to any claim to Scots ethnicity but you keep missing the important point ethnicity is a process of accepting and acceptance. If I accept I am Scots and in teh main accepted as such by all other Scots then I am ethnically Scottish. My majority English heritage is never mentioned unless specifically asked or to make a point in discussion (as I did with you). If I am asked I am Scots, not Scots with English heritage and that was the point you said you were English with Irish heritage as a volunteered qualification as though that is something different. I was not the only one to notice and wonder why that was important to mention in the first instance. I mentioned my Irish heritage in context that it doesn't prevent me from being English, just as your English heritage doesn't prevent you from being Scots. Agreed? In context you mentioned it in a debate as regards the ethnic English and who they were and what was being put upon them and you became very confused as regards the difference between ethnicity and Nationality |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet on Mar 8, 2024 17:51:23 GMT
I mentioned my Irish heritage in context that it doesn't prevent me from being English, just as your English heritage doesn't prevent you from being Scots. Agreed? In context you mentioned it in a debate as regards the ethnic English and who they were and what was being put upon them and you became very confused as regards the difference between ethnicity and Nationality Seems it's you who is confused: "ethnicity is a process of accepting and acceptance. If I accept I am Scots and in teh main accepted as such by all other Scots then I am ethnically Scottish." Are you saying ethnicity is fluid and a matter of social acceptance? Would David Lammy be ethnically English if he was accepted as such by most other English? |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Mar 8, 2024 19:49:38 GMT
In context you mentioned it in a debate as regards the ethnic English and who they were and what was being put upon them and you became very confused as regards the difference between ethnicity and Nationality Seems it's you who is confused: "ethnicity is a process of accepting and acceptance. If I accept I am Scots and in teh main accepted as such by all other Scots then I am ethnically Scottish." Are you saying ethnicity is fluid and a matter of social acceptance? Would David Lammy be ethnically English if he was accepted as such by most other English? In part a tricky question but also highlights the point. Realistically anyone who believes they are ethnically English and is accepted as being ethnically English by the overwhelming majority of the ethnic English then realistically he is ethnically English even if his DNA has next to no English in it. That is not the view of everyone however but I have no issue with it. As regards Lammy he falls at the first hurdle, he believes he is, and actively parades, his ethnic minority status which excludes him by his own admission from the English ethnic group and we need go no further. This feeds into your point as you referred to your immigrant heritage without prompt and leaves the door open for an ethnic minority status. Of course all of this would be just so much rubbish if we did not have the race laws, but we do, and in that respect all groups are entitled to view their ethnic status and claim an identity that they alone are entitled to make and accept. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 8, 2024 20:16:55 GMT
You leaping straight in with Islam is the cause of Pakistans issues without considering other things such as its history. It's history is also caused by people. You have a mental block on this because it doesn't point blame directly at the people you prefer were targeted. It's also odd that we are in a tiny corner talking about one country. This is because you think you can make lies = truth if you keep prying into tinier and tinier details. Yes its history caused by people, but still its History affecting its present. I'm not even saying that it was the British partition of India and Pakistan that caused its troubled history. Just that its troubled history is part of the reason for its present state. Its not as simple as you would like it, where being Muslim is enough by itself. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 8, 2024 20:19:18 GMT
So, they aren't escaping then, they are migrating illegally? which makes them illegal immigrants forcing themselves on a population that not only does not need them or even want them, like the famous picture I saw the other day of the one on the bus giving the two-finger salute. You're confusing asylum seekers, refugees and immigrants again. Sigh. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 8, 2024 20:36:32 GMT
That claim would apply to the British as well. I think it would apply to pretty much any country in the world. Perhaps it does, but why on earth would a rational government of any country want to add to the stock of such economically marginal people when there were already more than enough of them in the native population? Don't bring up the canard about tax receipts again, that's already been done to death. Good idea. Ask me why and then say you know my answer but tell me not to speak of it. Does that work for you. |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Mar 8, 2024 21:20:47 GMT
So, they aren't escaping then, they are migrating illegally? which makes them illegal immigrants forcing themselves on a population that not only does not need them or even want them, like the famous picture I saw the other day of the one on the bus giving the two-finger salute. You're confusing asylum seekers, refugees and immigrants again. Sigh. In all honesty, if the Conservatives are voter less because of all the bullshit, how long do you think new labour voters are likely to hang around? |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 8, 2024 21:36:24 GMT
You're confusing asylum seekers, refugees and immigrants again. Sigh. In all honesty, if the Conservatives are voter less because of all the bullshit, how long do you think new labour voters are likely to hang around? its the blue ones in the evening. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Mar 9, 2024 7:57:00 GMT
It's history is also caused by people. You have a mental block on this because it doesn't point blame directly at the people you prefer were targeted. It's also odd that we are in a tiny corner talking about one country. This is because you think you can make lies = truth if you keep prying into tinier and tinier details. Yes its history caused by people, but still its History affecting its present. I'm not even saying that it was the British partition of India and Pakistan that caused its troubled history. Just that its troubled history is part of the reason for its present state. Its not as simple as you would like it, where being Muslim is enough by itself. I feel sure either of us could ramble self importantly about what we felt was the exact list of ultimate causes, but this is not really needed. "This society or culture produces crap outcomes" is enough of a takeaway to ascertain whether it would be wise/ risky to move millions of these people into the UK so they can pursue their culture here. Of course, if you see the interests of the UK people as having zero value and their interests as of high importance, then you would also see no need for caution. |
|
