« Gay rights groups attack Tories for protecting right to make "temperate criticism" of homosexuality | Main | A Tory Government would consider capping Government IT contracts at £100 million »

Comments

DC's speech was addressing the issue in a fairly carefully worded, sensible and reasonable manner. He is addressing his whole audience. He did not endorse multiculturalism.

I would have liked to see him define his points for seeing Britain as a multi-racial success. Personally where multi-racial integration has taken place I do see it as largely successful. It is the multicultural ghetto approach to race which is failing people in my view.

Posted by: Hugh Oxford | January 27, 2009 at 12:56

Then one day it hit me. Suddenly, I realised that half the people I encounter walking down the street aren't British. But nor are they visitors. Our country has been slipping through our fingers and we've hardly noticed.

What do you mean by British, Hugh? Did you look at their passports, or do you mean that they weren't white?

How does the fact there are more black people than white people in your street mean that the country is "slipping through our fingers"?

Something which has struck me following my comment above concerning the distinction between moderates and fundamentalists is the thought that if there were to be different degrees of orthodoxy in the Muslim religion - as we have with Judaism - the way forward might become much clearer. Why are there no "Reform" or "Liberal" Muslims? Can anybody shed light on this?


Posted by: Hugh Oxford | January 27, 2009 at 12:56

and I WILL fight for their right to it, and I WILL vote for ANY PARTY that assures them of it. I will NOT apologise for that.

So, you'd vote for the BNP would you? That really wouldn't surprise me.

Deborah 12.32
Sally Roberts @ 12.37

The statistics I quoted were, of course, national statistics.Approximate of course and no doubt out of date since the last census. But the point about proportions still stands. I cited national statistics since this is, after all, a national issue that national politicians can address more effectively than local ones.

I'd love to know whether you agree with my opinion or not.

Dewsbury Tory - too many in the muslim communities exploit foreign issues for various reasons - it gives many a chance to show they are the leaders and the Gaza crisis was used in a similar way. I think the muslim electorate is wising up to this and although it is happening slowly, voters now don't just go with family, village in pakistan connections etc. the PC brigade will always be around and in some cases right and you'll have to work around them. as for the local MP, get him out at the next election with a vigorous campaign.

"What do you mean by British, Hugh? Did you look at their passports, or do you mean that they weren't white?

If they were an ethnic minority then they were not British - you can't be both, it's a contradiction in terms.
If they were British they would be in the ethnic majority.

Posted by: Jon Gale | January 27, 2009 at 13:25

"What do you mean by British, Hugh? Did you look at their passports, or do you mean that they weren't white?

If they were an ethnic minority then they were not British - you can't be both, it's a contradiction in terms.
If they were British they would be in the ethnic majority.

I can't believe you are saying this.

Of course you can be British and be in an ethnic minority! Millions of British citizen are members of ethnic minorities. Are you saying only white people are "really" British?

“I think that immigration is too high, I think it needs to be limited and I think the numbers need to come down" - AGREED

"I wanted to make sure the Conservative Party would be listened to and heard as a bunch of reasonable people making a reasonable point" - AGREED

"“I think it was very important to make it clear that we believe in a multiracial Britain" - AGREED but to what extent it exists is dependent on maintaining the country as ONE CULTURE and not twisting words to change multiracial into multicultural as they are entirely different things and neither of them has ever been 'courageously put to the people'. Rather, instead, Labour has secretly divided our culture by actively promoting policies which actively seek to destroy our CHRISTIAN culture which tolerates multi-races with DIFFERENT cultures.

We believe it’s a success. - NO IT IS NOT.

We think immigration has been good for Britain in the past. - YES IT USED TO BE BUT IS NOT ANY LONGER mainly as a result of there being no control and no standard recognition that our culture is based on Christianity and we have a right to keep it that way under the ( UN Declaration of Fundamental Human Rights ) to which we are entitled without asking our flaming government to approve it.

"We think immigration will continue, but not any immigration, not all immigration, it needs to be controlled." - HEAR HEAR. So once you role back the last 11 despicable years which have attempted to throw my culture into a pile of crap rather than seeking to protect it as is my right, then it may be a worthwhile idea to make the country a democracy too, so that a legitimate complaint can be made against people who incite hatred and violence by threatening to mobilise 10,000 muslims to protest in a "Jihad" against my democratic institutions.

It might also be a good idea to rid Lords who incite such behaviour of life peerages in my democratic institutions which have a right to hear complaints about the ridding of the culture of this country by said peers.


resident leftie,

I'm saying that only anglo-saxon and celtic ethnicities are british (by virtue of hundreds of years). So in all honesty - yes.

How else would you define nationality? Geographic location? If I move to China do I become Chinese?
Culture? Would still exclude muslims, hindus, sikhs, etc. and the term should cultural minority.

If you dont like the logical implication of the term 'ethnic minority' I suggest you let your politically correct friends know.

I note Resident Leftie is a member of the Layabout Party or somesuch.

The problem with immigration currently is that there are far to many immigrants. Enoch was absolutely right here. Enoch did not preach race hatred, he did however in his inimatable outspoken style, speak of mass unrest caused by swamping, perhaps he remebered Mosleites from the 1930s encouraging this sort of thing and the "rivers of Blood" then. Current Immigration is so marked that it is as if we absorbed a holocausts worth every seven years for the last decade plus.

I speak as an immigrant myself, I had naturilastion papers cpompleted for me in 1947 after Partition under a Labour Govt went so badly wrong.

No I am not Indian or Pakistani but am an Empire son from British India. My family had a Chanel Islands UK Base and had served the Crown and East India company in India since before the 19th century from Southern Ireland. No, we are not native irish entirely, either, we are of Norman origin.

"I think you are confusing the moderates with the fundamentalists and Islam with IslaMISM "-Sally

Yorkshireman's posts do not lead me to believe that he confuses Islam with Islamism. I'm sure he knows the difference. The problem is, in some northern towns Islamism has taken root and is seriously undermining the moderate Islam community.

I think that you do not appreciate how severe this problem is already.

" I still think you should take a more pro active view and do something"-Adam

As both posts show, raising awareness of the scale of the problem is a necessary first step.

It seems to me that those who oppose multiracialim don`t really say what they want as an alternative.
Apartheid? An all white country?
Opposition to a multiracial country is nothing more than old fashioned racism.

"this is, after all, a national issue that national politicians can address more effectively than local ones." - Martin 13.16

I agree - BUT - most national politicians do not see the issues and are unaffected by them (at the moment). They, like others above, imagine the risks are being exaggerated and ignore the warnings.
Until national politicians recognise the issues and start to address them, the problems will fester and grow.

Deborah - I do understand (although not living there I cannot have as good an understanding as a resident of West Yorkshire). It was quite shocking to me to be driven through neighbourhoods around Dewsbury and Batley which really did seem alien (and I use that word carefully and advisedly)! To be honest I don't know what the complete answer is but I think one way forward is to get the moderate Muslims to stand up and dissociate themselves from their more radical brethren's way of life. Terribly difficult I know - may seem almost impossible - but it has got to be done. I certainly think that "Reform" or "Liberal" Islam (as I mentioned above) would also be a step forward. Also more courageous Muslim women coming forward to lead services (as I believe one young woman was brave enough to do, against much opposition, in Oxford).

Posted by: Jon Gale | January 27, 2009 at 13:41

resident leftie,

I'm saying that only anglo-saxon and celtic ethnicities are british (by virtue of hundreds of years). So in all honesty - yes.

How else would you define nationality? Geographic location? If I move to China do I become Chinese?
Culture? Would still exclude muslims, hindus, sikhs, etc. and the term should cultural minority.

If you dont like the logical implication of the term 'ethnic minority' I suggest you let your politically correct friends know.

I'll read this charitably and assume that your are startlingly naive, rather than a racist. Yes, of course it is possible to be black and British, or black and American, or black and French. Peoples' indentities are composed of many elements. It does not follow that someone can't be both a member of an ethnic group and British. To put it straightforwardly, if you think someone black, born in this country can't be "really" British then you are a racist.

I'll start you with some simple reading:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/feb/27/blackbritishandproud

Then, I'll ask you, is Lynford Christie British? Is Adam Afriyie?

British is a nationality, not a race.

So, you'd vote for the BNP would you? That really wouldn't surprise me.

It would surprise me. It's not something that would have crossed my mind a year ago.

Going back to the definition of British. It's a tough one. John Barnes is clearly British, though he's black and born abroad. The 5/7 bombers weren't even though they were born here.

The Germans have a term which defines their policy on German nationality: "just because a dog is born in a stable doesn't make it a horse".

I would define Britishness like I would define a duck. You know it when you see it. More importantly, you know what it isn't. It isn't wearing your pyjamas in public, speaking a foreign language, worshipping a dead, murderous paedophile and marching down the street waving placards threatening to behead people who disagree with you. No matter where you were born.

"It isn't wearing your pyjamas in public, speaking a foreign language, worshipping a dead, murderous paedophile"

Enough. That is extremely offensive - but I think you already knew that.

Don't really agree with Cameron here. I don't believe that multiracial Britain has been an unmitigated success. At best ,it's a mixed bag. But the salient point is that in large swathes of our country there are simply too many people of whatever colour or creed. The numbers coming into this country have to be brought down ver,very significantly.
Not suprised that Resident Leftie has been such a prolific contributor to this thread, Lefties always want to talk about racism to the nth degree.
Not suprised either that he holds up Brixton as a wonderful place. When I lived there briefly it was a violent, drug ridden dump where my girlfriend was mugged, twice. Perhaps he likes that sort of thing.

Enough. That is extremely offensive - but I think you already knew that.

I know it's extremely offensive but then I've always been opposed to it.

resident leftie,

And nationality is determined by ancestry and/or cultural traits.

Assume its culture. So Lynford Christie is british.

But anyone who e.g. wears a turban, headscarf, hijab, celebrates Diwali or Chinese New Year (the clue is in the name!) or speaks Punjabi, Bantu, Polish, Spanish in the home is still not british.

I'll be charitable and assume you are not stupid enough to believe national identity is as simple as a piece of paper from the Home Office.

"John Barnes is clearly British, though he's black and born abroad."

Is he, the last time I saw him on the box he was waving a Jamaican flag which I thought was pretty disrespectful to the country that had allowed his talents to flourish, given him a very high standard of living , and honoured him by selecting him for the national team. Ian Wright though was always passionate about playing for England, as such I wouldn't care to rely on John Barnes who sees 'home' as somewhere else, though it would be an honoured to stand back to back with Ian Wright.

Interesting reading above. No matter what anyone says the people who regard themselves as English have been abolished. Never mind the arguments about multiculturism. We all have to subscribe to P.C and be British. This is a small Island who has always made poeple of the world welcome when they were in need. W"e are too small to take in the world. The fact that we have tried is the cause of our problems throught out the country.Notthe immigrants themselves

Posted by: Yorkshireman, Yorkshire | January 27, 2009 at 12:53

And then our next one was Keith Vaz MP. A magnificent example of honest and probity in British politics. I'm sure, as a Labour supporter you must be really proud of Keith's "magnificent" contribution to British politics.

I missed this little gem. Attributing the behaviour of one individual to all members of a group is exactly what racism is all about.

I'm out of this thread. Sally is doing a better job than me.

"But the salient point is that in large swathes of our country there are simply too many people "

Yes, something I have bashed on about many a times on this board, for the Conservatives would side step this mine field of a debate if they pursued a population policy, then the issue of race would be neutered and instead the debate would be about sustainable population levels with a spot light shone at Labour and the Greens inconsistent polices of claiming to be green whilst environmentally destroying the country with population growth.

Thank you Leftie for that somewhat backhanded compliment! :-)

"And then our next one was Keith Vaz MP. A magnificent example of honest and probity in British politics. I'm sure, as a Labour supporter you must be really proud of Keith's "magnificent" contribution to British politics."

I think a better example of the Asian contribution to British politics would be the Conservative Party's first Asian MP, Nirj Deva - now doing a fantastic job in the European Parliament as MEP for the South East. There are also two other first-class ethnic minority Conservative MEPs - Saj Karim and Syed Kamall.

"if they pursued a population policy, then the issue of race would be neutered and instead the debate would be about sustainable population levels" Iain

And the problems in the North of England would just vanish overnight.....?
Population numbers are only part of the problem.

There is a distinct difference between multi-racial and multi-cultural. Britain is obviously multi-racial from origins when repopulation following the last ice age onwards. But it was a predominantly an aryan multi-racial mix from west Germany, Scandinavia and the Low Countries, before incursions from France, the Roman Empire and then from much of the rest of the world.

The essential character of the ethnicity of the core of Britain was settled by 1400 and since then we have generally absorbed the intake fairly well until the period following the Second World War when quite frankly I think that we completely 'lost the plot' and failed to look to the real best interests of the nation. An unholy alliance of politicians and corporations seeking a cheap labour force, coupled with relativistic left-wing social engineers polluted the thinking of the nation with alien concepts of multi-culturism with disastrous effects.

No nation can really survive multi-culturism. A nation has one core language and one core culture. Woe betide it if it thinks otherwise. We are fast losing being a proper cohesive nation and we already have a huge raft of unhappy fifth-culumnists actively chipping away at the very structure of our society, many with malice in their hearts. It is idle and silly to pretend otherwise.

It is sad to reflect that some of the most pro-multi-cultural elements in our society are white aryan relativists with an apparant hatred of all that Britain once stood for. They hate the legacy of the British Empire and are forever preferring any minority or sub-group to the vital interests of the core of our society.

Multi-culturism has been a gigantic failure and anyone who says otherwise really is a fool or a charlatan: probably both? The fact that most MPs are condemned on that score surprises me very little.

Quite right, Sally, Syed Kamall is doing a great job!

Bishops Swine, who posted further up the page, I do most whole-heartedly agree with you.

We should not be shy about our fundamental British-ness and our Christian history. It is time we celebrated our own culture!

Sorry - one more thing of general interest, and no surprise to anyone, Hugh Oxford is a BNP troll.

Posted here:
http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com/2009/01/lord-ahmed-threatens-parliament-into.html

Hugh Oxford said...

Oh my. With every day that passes, there's another news story that affirms my decision to vote BNP.

What choice do we have?
27 January 2009 09:57

Resident Leftie:
Powell was a racist

Prove it.

Thank you for reminding me once more why I support the Labout party.

Yes I agree - Lab out!
And soon.

The real solution is not to import people, but to export our system.

Noone comes here for the weather - they come because they can live in safety and security (mostly).

Hong Kong should have been a model for elewhere.

Want our way of life? fine, let us run your land, and you can have it where you are.

Reading the comments following David Cameron's view that
'multiracial Britain is a success',
it is quite clear that it is proving to be one of the most contentious issues in British politics and damaging to our social cohesion.

If the debate goes on, could we agree that prior to the New Commonwealth immigration over the last generation, Britain was not a mixture of races. We are a mixture of nationalities but not a mixture of races.

There is quite a difference.

"Want our way of life? fine, let us run your land, and you can have it where you are."

Unfortunately this was tried, it was called colonialism, and was rejected by the indigenous people who wanted to run their own lives, which is fair enough. What is perverse is that some, having turned their own countries into failed states, like Somalia, want to avail themselves of the living standards our culture and civilisation offers, yet arrogantly believe they have a right to bring their failed culture and society to this country.

restricted immigration has always worked in the UK.
The opening of the fllod gates has destroyed it, people don't intergrate and share their culture.
resentment grows due to lack of intergration and understanding on both sides.
then the blame game starts of whose fault it is.

a strong points based system is needed, any that come in and don't fit the critera should be sent away instantly.

"With certain noble exceptions (Sally being one), this thread reminds of that so many Tory grassroots supporters are repellently bigotted, disguising racism with what is in effect white nationalism. Powell was a racist and is a poster boy for the BNP and other far right parties, and if you want to jump into bed with him, you should take a close look in the mirror."

If you think the majority view expressed on here that there has simply been too much immigration is only held by Conservative "bigots", you need to get out and about and talk to some - if not most - traditional Labour supporters. And if you really want to know why people are turning to the BNP you should examine Labour's policies on immigration.

And if you don't believe me you should listen to what Margaret Hodge and even that Mary Poppins [a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down] of today's politics - Hazel Blears - have been saying.

I'm not a member of the BNP. As I said, it's just that with every passing day I become more convinced to vote for them.

It's not my fault. Really, it isn't. I didn't ask for the mess we're in, I didn't vote for it. I'm not a racist, I just want a country to live in, a free, democratic, harmonious, British Britain which puts the interests and the culture of the indigenous people first. Is that too much to ask?

Why can't the mainstream parties promise to roll back the immigration since '97? Why can't they promise to tackle the ethnic, separatist enclaves? Why can't they promise to stamp out Islam, which is rapidly confirming suspicions that it is wholly incompatible with western liberal democracy? Why can't they affirm English/Welsh/Gaelic as the only state languages?

These are simple things. They aren't extremist or racist. So why are we being failed in these elementary matters?

I see that Sally Roberts' comment about there being no English race has been chosen as "Comment of the Day".

Strange that our Conservative hero, Sir Winston Churchill, used to talk and write quite frequently about "this island race". But then, what did he know about our history and culture?

The problem is not immigration as such but the failure of many to assimilate that is the core problem.

A problem moreover caused by weak politicians pandering to political correctness.

It is not "multiracial" Britain that is a failure - it is multiCULTURAL Britain and there is a difference. - Sally.
There is a difference between Islam and IslamISM - Sally.

Those newcomers who only seem to want to talk about race are back, using phrases like "pyjamas" and "paedophile". I said yesterday that this is neo-Nazi stuff: choose an enemy within and then blame him for everything - and today's uninformed ranting underlines my point.

Then "residen leftie" pretends that such people are Conservatives (which he knows not to be the case) and judges us by their standards.

Sally Roberts, well said.
We have to distinguish between race and culture. As I posted a few days ago (on the Beat the BNP) thread, it is Labour's multiculturalism that is the problem, not a multiracial society.

The saddest part - I agree, in partwith Resident Leftie. It is a shame that some people on here still hold abhorrent, racist and quite honestly borderline fascist views, seemingly advocating some kind of national racial purity (althought it is a minority, unlike what RL seems to believe). This makes them no better than the Islamists that they (rightfully) argue against, who are a by-product of Labour's soft immigration policies and multicultural agenda. This nation fought for 6 years in order to gurantee the freedoms we enjoy today, and save the world from people who believed in the 'racial state'.

Yes, there are migrants who dont fit in, who dont make any attempt to do so. Who defy our laws and preach violence and hate. And they should be duly punished. But we should NEVER sink to their level, and preach similar hatred, as it makes us no better than them.

The Left have made criticism of any issue around this hard, labelling it 'racist', but sensible minded people can criticize it in a constructive and sensible way, (a la Dewsbury Tory, Sally Roberts, dontmakemelaugh, yorkshireman) but not to take ourselves to the level of some others.

hmmm.... my rant seems a bit long winded now, i apologise. Should have done a 'Super Blue' who sums it up perfectly.

The thread just keeps getting longer and more illuminating. It just shows how passionate some people are about immigrants, immigration, critical mass, culture clash, and integration. And of course, patriotism.

It behoves us to be careful though about the future; when the recession gets seriously bad, things might just get out of hand.

Posted by: Yorkshireman, Yorkshire | January 27, 2009 at 12:53

And then our next one was Keith Vaz MP. A magnificent example of honest and probity in British politics. I'm sure, as a Labour supporter you must be really proud of Keith's "magnificent" contribution to British politics.

I missed this little gem. Attributing the behaviour of one individual to all members of a group is exactly what racism is all about.

I'm out of this thread. Sally is doing a better job than me.

Dear Resident Leftist,

Once again that marvellous Straw man has been assembled and once again you are landing some magnificent punches on it.

How on earth is criticising the odious and corrupt Keith Vaz a racist smear on the entire asian population?. How on earth have you managed to conclude that highlighting the fact that Keith Vaz was the next Asian MP and then mocking Vaz because of some his appalling misconduct as a LABOUR MP (Note : strong emphasis on LABOUR)is somehow a racial slur on every Asian person in Britain?. Unreal.

May I suggest you go and see your doctor (mines Asian and he's very good at his job)about your obsessive compulsive disorder whereby you cannot seem to control your use of the word "racist" in public discourse regardless of the fact that no mention is made of anyones ethnic origin. I can well imagine that shopping at a supermarket must be horrible experience for people when you are there, particularly if someone asks for blackberries or black bin bags only to hear themselves being smeared for using "racist" language by the self appointed spokesperson on the english language and its use in relation to ethnic minorities - ie you!!

Sally, good point about Syed Kamall.Like Dan Hannan, excellent Euro MP.

Good comment Teck. I think there is a difference between passionate patriotism - which I believe the majority of people on here possess - and the small minority of posters who seem to be spewing hatred. And that is exactly what people like ResidentLeftie latch on to as the representative image of our party - which is damaging and wrong.

Powell was a racist

What utter nonsense. How many racists do you know that speak Urdu and have a deep admiration for Indian culture?

Superblue @ 17.36

Perhaps you could volunteer to act as the gatekeeper for this site, ensuring that only comments that conform to your (presumably liberal) form of Conservatism are published.

Adam @17.49 and 17.52
Yes it was a bit of a rant with blanket accusations of racism etc.

Surely as Conservatives you should recognise the fundamental importance of free speech in a democracy. I think the free debate here is very useful. There are many people who are conservatives or conservative voters who have concerns about immigration and multi-culturalism and they have a right to express their views even if they are more right-wing than those of the current leadership.

It is essential for leaders and policy makers to listen and to be aware of views at grass roots. Trying to impose a bland, polite discussion will do no one any good in the long run.

I hope this doesn't count as a rant. It's just that I've noticed a tendency among some centrists to condemn others' opinions rather than debating with them

Martin Wright, I apologise for the balnket nature of my earlier post. I dont like to rant but after the debates I have had over the past two days with certain individuals, it is exasperating. I consider myself a Conservative Centrist, but I respect the views of the vast majority of the Tory Right. With some people, you cant truly debate with them as they simply ignore the flaws in their arguments and attempt to rant on.

I agree that we need a proper debate, but that takes both sides recognising when they are right and wrong.

Britain has always been a multi-ethnic country, if you count Scots, Welsh, English and Irish.

The point is, British identity is about soil and culture, not blood. We are only an island race insofar as our sympathies, both severally and in unison, lie with this island.

Privacy is a great British trait and we are free to worship Allah or practice Scientology behind closed doors, as long as we do not attempt to subvert the majority culture.

The phrase 'a dog born in a stable is not a horse' is a description of racial/blood identity. It bears no relation to the multiracial but monocultural land we inhabit.

Britain has always been a multi-ethnic country, if you count Scots, Welsh, English and Irish.

The point is, British identity is about soil and culture, not blood. We are only an island race insofar as our sympathies, both severally and in unison, lie with this island.

Privacy is a great British trait and we are free to worship Allah or practice Scientology behind closed doors, as long as we do not attempt to subvert the majority culture.

The phrase 'a dog born in a stable is not a horse' is a description of racial/blood identity. It bears no relation to the multiracial but monocultural land we inhabit.

This is why I'll be voting BNP in the Euro elections. Multiracial Britain is a failure, this country is a historically WHITE country, and should always remain that way, now and forever.

The Tories sold the British people out when they refused to back Enoch Powell. Nowadays, there's no difference whatsoever between the Tories and "New" Labour.

A constructive discussion on how to achieve a harmonious and progressive society should be conducted with frankness and reasoned arguments that ultimately results in a policy from which no one should flinch.

It should also be clear that no one issue predominates over the others. So, even if at one extreme this country is pure white and 'mono-ethnic', to experience a rapid population expansion without the necessary infrastructure to cope can only spell misery for its citizens. At another extreme, if a substantial number of people whose culture is steadfastly alien are implanted in the midst of a previously homogenous country, then it would not be surprising that suspicion at least develops if not eventually becoming significant or open antagonism.

Into such scenarios, various real materials and issues can be factored in for debate – such civil concepts as respect for hospitality and reciprocation for generosity. Then, there is the concept of love of one’s country, regardless of whether it is by birth or by adoption – there must be a sense of belonging, of pride and of continuity of everything that is enduringly attractive about it.

These need to be inculcated in schools, expected of civic-minded adults and should be exhibited by those seeking settlement.

The converse, even absence, of such values would lead to a loss of a sense of belonging. For some, it is the first step on the road to emigration.

We must therefore encourage and demand social convergence.

Or face the spectre of strife.

Cameron's weasel words about the success of the oh-so-wonderful multi-racial society remind me of a self-serving treacherous coward describing a bullying thug in the positive terms the thug wishes to hear so as not to get a beating from him, egged on the latter's cheerleaders in the media.

The process of mass-colonisation from some VERY foreign parts has run along under Tory AND Labour, with the latter building upon the ruthless mindset of the former in the latest super-charged phase.

A fragmented, conflict-ridden society brings benefits for a political class with a vested interest in having problems to fix, whilst damaging continuity and settledness in ways favourable to commercial interests.

Perhaps dear dear Mrs T would have wanted the job of being 'the British' to have gone to the most effective of the groups competing for what much of the native population regard as a homeland (rather than simply a zone for economic activity)?

This is, of course, utter nonsense.

Multicultural nations (the correct term is multiracial, by the way,) are unnatural.

To have competing races and their respective belief systems and cultures occupying the homeland(s) of one indigenous and distinctive race, will inevitably give rise to the eventual annihilation of that indigenous race along with their heritage, language, belief system and culture.

It is not possible to have permanent harmony between several alien races and cultures occupying one territory, in such aforementioned circumstances. After all, human nature demands that one race and its culture and belief system dominate over all hence the sowing of the seeds of future racial, cultural and social warfare, and the assured descent into a new Dark Age.

History is littered with proven examples of this fact.

"How does the fact there are more black people than white people in your street mean that the country is "slipping through our fingers"?" Its not black persons residentlefty, its the hoards from central and eastern central Europe. Its the Ladies with black dresses with hoods and slits. Its the no-go areas and the mini-Baghdad's. It's the central area's of many of our cities. It's Reading and Slough and parts of Oxford.
Its whole great area's of British Cities that could be transplanted whole to Iraq, Iran or Pakistan. Its the militants who tell ministers of the crown that they have no right to enter " a Muslim" area. It's a million strange languages being spoken on our streets, and foreign gods worshipped by people who want no part of Britain other than the currency and the market. It's the multi-cultural school lessons whilst the traditional values are allowed to rot and ebb away. Meanwhile Britain is slipping away.


When will Cicero (18.33 today) realise the difference between nationality (an legal difference) and race (a fundamental difference)?

We have been made up of many nationalities but (in general) of one Caucasian/European race.

"Multiracial" Britain is not a success... and yeas immigration is far too high. It's about time we started returning those not legally entitled to be in the UK back to their country of origin.

Will the Conservative Party do this? I very much doubt it.

We have been made up of many nationalities but (in general) of one Caucasian/European race.

No, we are made up of one nationality (British) but of many ethnic backgrounds, from Scots to English. Granted, Caucasians are and will remain the majority. But that doesn't mean minority ethnic groups can't be British in temperament, outlook and sympathy. Of course multiculturalism stifle this.

Thanks, Adam. This is on it's fourth page, which never happens on any other subject. Some people only want to comment on racial issues and in an offensive, racialist manner.

It would be salutary to hear from the silent section of the Anglophilic, patriotic, non-WASP decent and integrated citizens in this type of debate, and given that not everyone of them is privileged to have the platform of RR Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, what public role should they be encouraged to play, if at all?

Has "positive" discrimination been mentioned, I've found, when discussing the subject of multiculturism, that this pops up frequently. Just the sort of thing that makes people of differing "culture" aspire to living side by side in perfect harmony. Some "cultures" incorporate a propensity for making money, by way of compo, from the fact that they are "different". Hey Ho!


I have voted for Labour all of my working life - never again - they have betrayed the British people of this country. If you took a look at my home town, Scunthorpe, you would see that many decent people like myself have lost their jobs, and the place, public services is saturated woth asylum seekers. We feel like strangers in our own town/country!
The local people are angry - VERY ANGRY!! - but they are not looking towards the Tories as a solution. Whenever I have been in the pub or in a queue in the post office recently, many people have expressed their intention or possibilty of voting BNP.
If the Tories truly want to appeal to the mass unrest and anger in this country then they better start putting the indigenous British first.
We, the British people, live in the real world and multiculturalsm is a nightmare for us. We were never asked about mass immigration and we never wanted it. We still don't!
Are the Tories going to represent our views or lose us to the BNP?
No more stting on the fence, Mister Cameron - are with us or not? You cannot be both!


Archie (January 28, 2009 at 00:13),

I am confident you will not be disappointed with the Conservative Party as I fully understand your feelings, and in a little way, I would like to reassure you that I increased the Conservative share of the votes in the local elections and lifted the Party from third to second place despite a strong BNP showing in a virtually White working class council estate in the East Midlands where there is a rising immigrant population.

The voters know what I stand for; they have had over 26 years to know and trust me thoroughly. Hopefully, there is a role for me beyond what I am doing at present. Like you, I am a patriot.

This is, of course, utter nonsense.

Multicultural nations (the correct term is multiracial, by the way,) are unnatural.

To have competing races and their respective belief systems and cultures occupying the homeland(s) of one indigenous and distinctive race, will inevitably give rise to the eventual annihilation of that indigenous race along with their heritage, language, belief system and culture.

It is not possible to have permanent harmony between several alien races and cultures occupying one territory, in such aforementioned circumstances. After all, human nature demands that one race and its culture and belief system dominate over all hence the sowing of the seeds of future racial, cultural and social warfare, and the assured descent into a new Dark Age.

History is littered with proven examples of this fact.

This is, of course, utter nonsense.

Multicultural nations (the correct term is multiracial, by the way,) are unnatural.

To have competing races and their respective belief systems and cultures occupying the homeland(s) of one indigenous and distinctive race, will inevitably give rise to the eventual annihilation of that indigenous race along with their heritage, language, belief system and culture.

It is not possible to have permanent harmony between several alien races and cultures occupying one territory, in such aforementioned circumstances. After all, human nature demands that one race and its culture and belief system dominate over all hence the sowing of the seeds of future racial, cultural and social warfare, and the assured descent into a new Dark Age.

History is littered with proven examples of this fact.

Ms Sally Roberts overlooks the fact that the indigenous British who have resided in the British Isles since the end of the Ice Age, are a people of white European racial origin. They are not of Arab, Indian, Mongoloid or Negro origin.

Furthermore, if according to Ms Roberts, Britain has no indigenous peoples, (England being a part of Britain, of course,) then neither does, for example, Africa, America, China or India.

1. Are these latter examples entitled to preserve and retain their ancestral homelands, ethnic homogeneity, heritages, belief systems and culture(s) or not?

2. Are they entitled to control their borders or not?

3. Are they entitled to decide whether or not they should allow themselves to be submerged by multiracialism/ multiculturalism through unfettered invasion by alien races and their cultures?

Quite obviously, careful analysis of the above questions is required before responding.

PS How could any sane person possibly enjoy finding themselves outnumbered in their own ancestral homeland by a whole myriad of racially and culturally alien peoples, let alone just one alien race and culture?

It would be a positively intimidating experience even for alien races themselves were the circumstances reversed.

Blimey, this thread is as long as the route from London to Marrakesh.

I agree with Frannie.
Multiculturalism is not anything. It is everything and nothing. Englishness, Scottishness, Welsh, Cornish, Irishness, all have their own cultural inheritances along with the right to preserve them, show them, display them and to use them, and none of it is marked by 'race' or colour or ethnicity but by interactive behaviour of a society as a whole.

This country is a Christian country yet there are mad councillors who seek to expunge my beliefs from my country by banning Santa Claus, Christmas, Pictures of Jesus Christ. I find it extremely difficult to understand why it's so difficult to find a Christmas card with a saint on it or an image of the nativity. I find it difficult to understand why my culture is so abhorrent to people yet demonstrations by Sinbad are accepted as 'normal' in my Christian country.

I find it difficult to understand why atheists and Liberals who would smash the established church in my country, don't think it's a good idea to actually bother their arse to ask me first but instead just keep harping on about how good it will be if we're all like them. ( MAD ).

I have difficulty understanding why THEY cannot follow the rule of law within the human rights act, or the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which give me and people like me, the right to preserve MY culture as what it is. I am English and I'm proud to be English and I'm not scared to say I'm English, a Christian, and that I like to associate with people who agree with me rather than people who disagree.

This is because I have a right to do this which is recognised in law, and it is not because I am racist that I seek to preserve my English culture and will defend my British culture.

I have no apology to make to want to be me, living in my country, with my culture, alongside people who think like me and want to keep it that way whether they be from London or Marrakesh.

I agree with Franie and rugfish.

A moratorium leading to longer term severe restriction on all immigration, repatriation of failed asylum seekers and illegal entrants followed by a reassertion of the Christian church seems to be the combined conclusion of the majority here.

"I find it difficult to understand why my culture is so abhorrent to people yet demonstrations by Sinbad are accepted as 'normal' in my Christian country."

Surely the British establishment do celebrate Scottish, Welsh and Irish identity, its only English identity that the British establishment seeks to eliminate.

This one can only assume is because a rise in English identity would threaten many of the troughs in which the British Establishment have their noses buried, thus the British Establishment are trying their failed policy of Empire, that of divide and rule, a policy which miserably failed from Fiji, Malaysia, Sri Lanka Uganda etc, where the British establishment left countries culturally and racially divided. Now they are, to keep in power, trying the same policy here, this time through its dressed up as 'Multiculturalism'.

PS If I remember from my history the British Empires justification to make large transfers of population was made with the claim that the local population didn't have the skills and weren't keen to work for the wages and conditions on offer. Hmmmmmm now where have I heard that argument recently to justify a large population transfer?

Most people want to have their cake and eat it. No-one (apart from a few psychos) wants to be regarded as "racist", but neither are a majority happy with the way things are turning out. I sense that about 4 out of 5 feel that immigration is excessive.

Many people might be happy to talk to a black colleague at work, but won't invite the same person to a party at the weekend. The acid test for racial integration must be whether it would make no difference if their only daughter had a child by someone of a different race, or if their family was the only exception in an 'ethnified' school or road.

Tolerance hasn't reached that stage yet, and many ethnic minorities understandably cling to their separateness while wanting to be accepted as a member of society.

It's a no-win situation in politics. If you even consider a BNP-like position of stopping immigration and you are crucified in the PC media like the BBC and stand to lose ethnic votes. Do nothing and you alienate the majority while giving the thuggish BNP a free hand.

Even if you take race/colour out of the equation, mass immigration is not sustainable in the current economic climate. The UK doesn't need another ten million people, and there is absolutely no argument for importing unemployment, increased social tensions and costs.

Labour's forced housebuilding programme has failed to consider the effects on the water supply and the roads. As the UK also faces dwindling power supply in a few years time, it would be absolute madness to bring in more people who will consume more power and push up the country's carbon footprint.

Even so, I can't see Dave even attempting to match Mrs Thatcher's "The end to immigration must be in sight". Labour knows it will trump us on this issue, even though its words will all be rhetoric.

Posted by: Iain 09:50 -

You're right of course, being English in England makes you a second class citizen where rights are concerned, and with absolutely no way to express your culture except in a football match where you'll either have a bottle smashed in your face or be arrested as a trouble maker. Indeee, we can be trouble makers I admit, it's just THEY won't let us and thus our troublemaking is only expressed at football matches instead of in parliament which should be looking to air our views more democratically without the need for beer bottles.


Posted by: Julian Melford 09:51

Personally, I do feel that some immigration is culturally enlightening, and also that economic reasons make it warranted too. However I don't think our culture should be anything other than what it is as determined by the majority and obviously by our inherited laws and beliefs which have quite obviously given us the ability to remain happy within our own borders for countless centuries despite there have been moments when that has not been wholly true politically for whatever reason. However our culture really shouldn't be tipped over like it has been as our representatives should protect it by the laws they make and by their actions. THEY DO NOT DO THIS, to their own and to our detriment despite there are Universal Agreements to do so. ( UN Charter ).

Also, as many have said or implied here, our culture has not one thing to do with the colour of a persons skin, their ethnic origin or their rights to practice whatever religion. It has everything to do with - communication, fitting in, accepting our own culture, not getting all shirty with us when we express our culture or our religious beliefs, and not making DEMANDS "to be treated differently" when in my country with the implied belief that because they came here, they wish to "integrate"......Why come otherwise if all you want to do is to be different?

It's a no-win situation in politics. If you even consider a BNP-like position of stopping immigration and you are crucified in the PC media like the BBC and stand to lose ethnic votes.

Maybe in the past that was true. But the BBC no longer controls the agenda. Forget the BBC. Promise the British people their country, freedoms and democracy back with specific manifesto policies and the BNP will be dust.

Don't, and with every passing day, the BNP will gain strength.

It's getting visceral now. When parliamentary business is held hostage by threats of Islamic violence by a Muslim peer, that's the camel's back buckling. To the dreadful shame of the Tories, they have said nothing.

The British people will try to resolve this peaceably through the ballot box. But after that?

Some misguided people believe that skin colour is of no consequence in matters relating to immigration.

I beg to differ on that point.

If an indigenous people with naturally occurring white skin become overwhelmed with brown and near-black-skinned races they will, over time, be outbred by the many invading non-white ethnicities, psychologically manipulated or even coerced into miscegenating* then very quickly, their rightful homeland will no longer be theirs since they will no longer exist.

Now, I wonder what Nigerians, Kenyans, Congolese, Dravidians, Arabs, Han Chinese and Amazonian Indians, for example, would have to say if their homelands were to be designated social engineering projects of mass multiculturalism, (in reality, multiracialism), where the inevitable outcome would be the destruction of their unique genotypes and phenotypes along with their lineages, heritages, belief systems, languages and traditions.

I am sure they'd have a lot to say about it and rightly so.

*(Conservative French President Sarkozy is actually proposing such an approach as a supposed method of solving the multiracial catastrophe his predecessors and himself have unleashed upon the native French nation which is, in fact, attempted genocide.)

Who said Conservatives were all about preserving native homelands, genotypes, lineages, heritages and so on?

Very obviously, not!

Presumably, Franie, you regret the passing of Apartheid South Africa? Most of us do not.

ResidentLefty

Can a Han Chinese become Nigerian?
(Nigerians are black Africans, not white Caucasian, Arab, Indian or Mongoloid?

Conversely, can a Nigerian become Chinese?

The answser to both examples is No.

Ms Roberts, I see you didn't quite answer my previous questions? Why not?

There is no point in attempting to avoid the issue by introducing a diversionary tactic such as the topic of Apartheid.

Since you ask, Apartheid in South Africa is alive and well as practiced by the black ANC administration against white people. Blacks, Coloureds and Asians are permitted to set up self-interest organisations, but whites are not. (Obviously, in your opinion, two wrongs make a right.)

1. If Apartheid was morally wrong when whites were practicing it, then it is also morally wrong when Blacks, Coloureds and Asians practice it. Yes/No?

2. What do you think Affirmative Action and preferential employment quotas presently operating in South Africa represent?

3. If not racial discrimination which Apartheid is by the way, what are they then?

I'm now waiting for your responses to two sets of questions outlined in two separate posts.

Franie

Skin color is completely irrelevant: is an albino african a 'white man' ? Is a well tanned englishman an indian ?

Anyone whose only national loyalty is to the UK is clearly as british as it is possible to be - regardless of any genetic composition.

The biggest bone of contention to my mind are immigrant communities who display blatant racism in their marriage practices. Insisting on youngsters having partners from what is still clearly considered their 'homeland'.

Many of the younger members of these communities consider themselves british and do not approve of these traditions - these people need to be given our full support to escape such primative and devisive practices.

The left are torn by their inconsistent dogma - they don't know whether to support and protect these foreign practices, or to support the people who are opressed by them.

Hence we have complete silence from 'womans libbers' regarding asian women locked away unable to speak english etc... while they have plenty of time to argue over equal bonuses for high flyers in the city...

Conservatives should not be so hog-tied, but speak out about injustice, even if it appears to conflict with some other 'accepted beleif'.

"It is not possible to have permanent harmony between several alien races and cultures occupying one territory, in such aforementioned circumstances. After all, human nature demands that one race and its culture and belief system dominate over all hence the sowing of the seeds of future racial, cultural and social warfare, and the assured descent into a new Dark Age."

At the risk of invoking Godwin's Law and thus bringing this thread to an end (and it HAS gone on for about five pages now I think!), I will only highlight this comment of Franie's and suggest to all that it is a stark reminder of someone else who thought the same way .... about 70 years ago...

Oh do give over lefty; you know you want to join with us. They have been so successful at brainwashing you, that you have become dependant on the PC mindset as you arbiter of morality. You know that England has been sacrificed for a few petty Euro’s. If it is racism to love your Nation and your Queen then I plead guilty as charged. Why do you love us so Left leaning one? Are you a closet National Socialist? Do you fear for our mortal souls? I fear for yours and that mush filled brain full of socialist nonsense as it is. Join with us Red-Tory’s and help build our one Nation Jerusalem. Only from a Moral class can morality be imposed, if you will not join the Party then which party will you join. Would you rather a man of spirit ruled or a self-conformed cheat, was given the keys of the treasury. In England the Queen rules and that is the bottom line of being British. Lets give the power to those who we have decided from birth will exercise our will, This royal nation this demi-paradise.

For whom is Multi Ratialism a success? God Bless immigrants one and all, but enough is enough

I came to this thread late yesterday, and spent until now trying to catch up!

The over-whelming impression that is conveyed by most of the posts, is the simmering resentment that growing at the undermining of an English identity and of English culture. Could you (even YOU resident leftie et al) imagine a Frenchman or woman permitting the denigration of Frenchness, in favour of MULTIculturalism, which WE so frequently encounter, in lots of different areas today? If you answer 'yes' to that then you are being dishonest! Come to that the same applies to an Italian!

I agree with both of Deborah's points in her post @ 13.51 yesterday.

and Teck is right @ 18.01 yesterday, when he said, 'It behoves us to be careful though about the future; when the recession gets seriously bad, things might just get out of hand.'!

I think that IS the biggest problem, and it is on a slow burn. We have gone past the time when a politician can reassure us that the system IS working, because actually, we are all (those of us who are able to 'see', or honest enough to admit the truth!), aware on a daily basis that too much political correctness and too many incomers, arriving en masse, are producing circumstances which WILL cause a breakdown in the working of society.

For instance today in the paper, there is a small article highlighting the fact that 'There are now ten schools in England without a single pupil who speaks English as his or hers first language.' And how is that fact going to be addressed by this government? They don't have the money to facillitate a large scheme of teaching English to all the different ages, yes I know that some effort is made, but it is never enough! Why? Because the 'new' people are coming in every day!

The individual politicians in this government are so busy looking after their own jobs - first and foremost, that they cannot see, or will not let themselves see, how rising unemployment, and few new jobs available, combined with the bleakness of High Streets with closed and boarded-up shops, but at the same time with ever more unfamiliar people competing for jobs, food, housing and hospital places, WILL cause more anger and unrest.

Daivd Cameron can do nothing now, and this government WILL NOT do anything now, but one can only hope that DC whenever he has the opportunity, at least makes himself aware of the 'slow burn' that is growing!!


I was born here. We lived in a tiny wiltshire town and were British. Then a large town was planted on top of us, and that was good we welcomed it. We wanted to share our Bit of the demi-paradise and we opened up our town to many. The centre of this town has only one national group living in it and it is not the children of the truely local familys that are living there. This of course is absolutly wrong its a transplanted bit of another nation living in our town centre. We wanted to share not lose forvever it seems the centre of our cultral life. Here you dare not venture into areas at night alone anymore. Here we live with a poeple who slit our throats in other places and in many conflicts. Selling England by the pound sang gabriel and still the people were confused. Is it racism to long for your Nation to be whole and happy again.

"At the risk of invoking Godwin's Law and thus bringing this thread to an end (and it HAS gone on for about five pages now I think!), I will only highlight this comment of Franie's and suggest to all that it is a stark reminder of someone else who thought the same way .... about 70 years ago" Posted by: Sally Roberts

For those who are interested in the definition of Godwin's Law, here is a link,

http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/faqs/godwin.html

The definition is not entirely clear-cut, but then anything devised and invented by Marxism are inversions of the truth anyway. In fact, the whole innane concept of it is complete jibberish.

Translated into coherent thought-process language, it simply means that if a Leftist has backed him/herself into a corner then he/she can start screaming nazi, racist, fascist, xenophobe, islamophobe and/or homophobe at any dissenter found not to be receptive to his/her Left-Wing ideological mantra hence the need to resort to this Left-Wing invented 'get-out-of-trouble' trickology (Godwin's Law), ie,

attempting the sabotage of open debate, in other words, the prevention of

Free Speech.

There are too many immigrants in this country, that's why under Labour the country is going to the dogs.

Let's hope Cameron gets elected and kicks out all the foreigners.

"Skin color is completely irrelevant: is an albino african a 'white man' ? Is a well tanned englishman an indian?"

pp for you, a link

http://skin-care.health-cares.net/albinism.php

You are merely trivilising this matter as you know fine well, your above comment is utterly asinine!

No, an Albino African is not a 'white' man

and

no, a well-tanned Englishman is not an Indian.

Your notion of refuting the significance of skin colour is the equivalent of someone asking if an Australian Aborigine is a black African which, of course, is completely inane.

"Opposition to a multiracial country is nothing more than old fashioned racism."
Posted by: Jack Stone

Would you care to make that accusation to native Africans whose homelands are presently under ongoing colonisation by Han Chinese, Koreans and Asians/Arabs from the Middle East or does your prejudice only apply to white nations who want also to preserve their homelands, lineages, heritages, belief systems, cultures and traditions in order to pass their inalienable rightful aforementioned inheritances on to their own progeny?

Well!


Ms Roberts

"Think of the French and again you have to decide whether they are Norman, Breton, Provencal or North African!"

Source quote:

Most Caucasian people who live in France are the descendants of Gallo-Romans, as well as Aquitanians (Basques), Iberians, and Ligurians in southern France, mixed with some Germanic peoples arriving at the end of the Roman Empire (such as the Franks who lent their name to the country) and some Vikings known as Normans who settled in Normandy in the 9th century.

"France" etymologically derives from the word Francia, a territory where lived the Franks, a Germanic tribe that overran Roman Gaul at the end of the Roman Empire.

Some regions knew massive migrations of Celtic people for Brittany and Germanic people for Alsatia before the existence of the Frankish kingdoms, and the languages and culture of these groups keep perpetuating until this day in more modern forms.

The native French (true French) are, therefore, overwhelmingly of ancient European origins, no different to having the various Bantu tribes of Africa migrating into one another's territories. However, nobody would declare that the Bantu peoples were not indigenous Africans in view of these migratory movements within their own continent.

"Spanish - well, at one time Spain formed part of the Islamic World."

Correction - Not all of Spain formed part of the Islamic world.

As previously stated, the ancestral population usually referred to as the old Mediterranean race, can still be traced through DNA analysis.

Source quote:

(In January 2009, a study by Capelli et al. that analysed 717 Spanish individuals found the total contribution of North African male lineages in Spain as 7.7%, with estimates ranging from 0% in Catalonia to 18.6% in Cantabria.)

Accordingly, only a minority of Spaniards (7.7%) are of North African origin.

Franie @ 16.21 - Godwin's Law, yep thats neat! And @ 17.29 - I doubt if Mr. Stone thinks that deeply!

Interesting research you have been doing, Franie - if a trifle obsessive.
As to your explanation and clarification of Godwin's Law - yes indeed interesting, but in your case I was making a clear and genuine comparison between your views and those of Adolf Hitler who like you believed in racial supremacy.

Lord Nazir Ahmed is in fact a gross hypocrite of the worst kind on this having actively engaged with "Israel Shamir" (real name Jöran Jermas) a famous and virulent Swedish anti semite of long standing. On February 23rd at a book launch hosted, in the Lords, by Lord Ahmed, Jermas proceeded to give a speech containing blatant Jew hatred of the most extreme kind.

It would seem that Lord Ahmed thinks it acceptable for extreme anti Jewish views to be given a platform in the Lords by himself but not for anti Muslim ones to be heard or given that same platform.

Sorry I forgot to post that the book launch took place on February 23rd 2005.

I hope those who are telling us how great a multicultural society is are telling us from experience!

I was born in a tough part of London & know only too well the joys having people around you who don’t speak English, look down on you because you don’t follow a religion, don’t want you dating their daughter because you’re different or influencing their son with a decadent English way!
I know what it is to be the only white man in a room & hear racial comments that have made others with me cringe!
I know what it is to go to a black guys club & then have others start on me because I shouldn’t have been there looking at their women & it was only my black friends who also stopped anything from happening to me by quickly getting me out the back way!!
In know what it is to go to a restaurant & have the menu brought to me in a language I don’t understand!
I know what it is to constantly have to watch what I say because of the people around me taking offence to things I could normally say around other friends who wouldn’t! Shall I go on?

I briefly knew a lady & her friend who did lots of charity work, lovely lady who lived in a nice part of town & because she felt privileged used to do charity work in a multicultural type charity centre, after her telling me how nice the foreign people were to her I asked her if she had ever met any of them when she wasn’t doing things for them! She said she hadn’t, I asked her to go to the area she only normally only saw from the charity window & met those people on a different basis.
I met that ladies friend the next time I was in that part of town & asked the other lady where her friend was that I knew, she almost spat her words at me when she said that her friend had some experiences after taking my advice & wouldn’t be doing charity work again!

If we are going to have a multicultural life I want to see it in EVERY city, town & village, not just left to certain area’s, after all we want everyone, who ever they are & no matter how rich they are to fully experience the multicultural life in every single way, because I’m fed up with hearing how money can keep you away from the “riff raff” but allow you to dictate what others have to experience!!!

"Interesting research you have been doing, Franie - if a trifle obsessive.
As to your explanation and clarification of Godwin's Law - yes indeed interesting, but in your case I was making a clear and genuine comparison between your views and those of Adolf Hitler who like you believed in racial supremacy."

Posted by: Sally Roberts |

Well, judging by your response, ie, the usual Marxist tendency to resort to name-calling, in this case by innuendo, I must say I've been proven correct in my assessment of what Godwin's Law really means! In other words,

the attempted silencing of Free Speech.

Like I said, it's simply a get-out-of-trouble smokescreen to enable Marxists to shout nazi, racist, xenophobe and/or homophobe, etc, etc at anyone who does not agree with their Communist world views, rather than debating these issues in a frank and honest manner.

I'm a tad disappointed with the childishness displayed by an presumably adult individual such as yourself, but perhaps I shouldn't be.

I'm going to postulate a thought on which I am far from certain in believing myself but it is which is decidely non pc but certainly not racist.
I think the dear Leader is partially right but only in that there are successes in multiracial Britain-there are also failures. My thought is maybe the difference is Class. Most middle class people associate with middle class Asian and African professionals such as Doctors, Accountants, Policemen, Teachers without any thought of race. People who socialise with us and adopt our ways do not normally attract racist hostility.(I admit there is a problem with Moslems who do not tolerate drink but to them my attitude is tough!)

I think there may be differences in the Socio Economic Groups Ds and Es- where the mainstream BNP Support comes from.

However along the line other factors come into it. A BNP Troll stranded on a desert island with nought but a rather tasty dusky maiden for company would probably re-adjust his beliefs on the "merits" of the former South African Immorality Act within a week

"Guns Germs and Steel" may be interesting reading for some here on who came from where.
Jared Diamond.
Oh, I give up.

Franie

I am sorry but you are just plain wrong - skin color is a few bases on your DNA.

Unless you beleive (and can show?) that these same bases directly impact something that controls your ability to behave as a briton then your argument is irrational.

Making an initial assesment of a stranger by their appearance (both physical and sartorial) is a rational thing to do - even if the PC brigade don't agree with it.

However, once past the 'stranger' stage an individual is an individual and should be treated as such. There is nothing to stop any human on earth becoming 'british' if they want to -- the main problem is people who come here (or were even born here) and don't want to be british...

Identities can be dual, it's true; and they can come from different sources. A Chinese who has been to a public school, for example, emerging with cut-glass tones and a passion for horse racing, is, to some degree anglicised or English. But what the left refuses to do is lend to ethnicity or race its proper significance in the mix. Our Chinese is English in culture and character, but inalienably oriental in appearance.

In order to play ethnicity down, the left suggests that the English people, for example, are mongrels - not true. They stress the complexity of identity - but only for Europeans, being happy to take Arab or Indian identities - for example - at face value and even to celebrate their peculiarity and intensity. Of such are the middle aged hippies lolling around Marakech or Bombay.

Again, it is true that idenity is not dependent on preserving the supposed purity of a blood. It does depend, however, on the long continuity through time of a society which breeds its heirs rather than lazily importing them. It also requires a willingness to enjoin some lines of exclusion. If anyone - simply anyone - can be regarded as "British", to take an example close to home, what does "British" mean? It has either no meaning or a very thin one. And if you deprive that word of its meaning, you deny to those who once felt that it defined them of their identity. Hence the white girl from Bradford who recently opined that she "came from nowhere."

To leave people in this limbo is the worst sort of psychological cruelty - and I note that it is carried out every day and cheered on by smug, argumentative gits - the sort who parade themselves through this website with a view to asserting their enormous moral superiority.

It has been proposed that to identify nation with race is "racist". Actually, this is not necessarily so. A racist, properly speaking, is one who believes in innate superiority and inferiority of different races. He may then have a motive for identifying race with nation but no logical case. Indeed, he may be quite content - let us imagine his theory - to let his supposed inferiors reside in his country the better to do his menial chores.

On the other hand a person with no conviction of racial superiority CAN identify nation with race on historic grounds or on the basis of the blood tie. This involves no necessary assertion of mastery, simply a desire to be distinct.

I don't imagine for one moment that the smug git tendency on the left will rejoice to hear that I do not identify nation with race. They won't believe me anyway. To those with open minds, however, I offer - in the place of the heartless moralism of today - the warm toleration of yesterday. In this setting individuals could develop the sort of dual identities I mentioned earlier. Whole communities could be adopted on this basis. The majority, by dint of remaining unchallenged, would be able to create this interesting duality so insincerely celebrated by the left. The absolute precondition for this benign process, however, is the unchallenged, relative vastness of the host population. The moment that is endangered then the fine webs of its identity are spun no more and the society it binds begins to fragment. Who can seriously deny that this is happening in Britain today? Or in France? Or in Holland?

The axiom should be: an indigenous people has the right to maintain its numerical preponderance and its cultural predominance by the fair means of immigration control. If this is understood as a human necessity then we Europeans may begin at last and how belatedly to apply it to our own societies.

I just wanted to add this!
I have known about prejudice from day one sort of!
I had a strange upbringing in the sense that,
My Mother, whose Mum was like Mrs Bucket but lived in a bigger house & whose husband’s farther had a flags man to take him to his three pubs, met my Dad, whose Dad had a Stall in Portobello road, & fell in love.
My granddad disowned my mum, because of who my farther was, a low life, & it was only my Nan sneaking money out of my granddads bank account that got them a deposit for their first house, & although not much, it was ok.
I never really knew my granddad because he died when I was about two & then after that my Mum was allowed back to her house & so was I & my farther.
Let’s just say that I can be as rough as they come thanks to my dad but I can also come out with delightful little quips & eat at a table with too much cutlery if the need arises thanks to my Mum.

The people I have met & made friends with over the years has been because I have wanted to & I have always given people a chance, this gained me many experiences that many of my friends never wanted to, so I can talk confidently about many different things that many others can’t.

Off to bed now :o)

The comments to this entry are closed.

#####here####

Categories

ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:
      Name:
      Email:
      Subscribe    
      Unsubscribe 

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker