[engrishdegree]

The lie spun by the left to excuse mass immigration and multiculturalism is that Britian, or more specifically England is an immigrant nation. However it is a fallacy to describe a nation that has had the same cultural and ethnic indentity, for well over 1000 years as an immigrant. Indeed in 731 AD the English monk Bede completed his great work:

"the Ecclesiastical History of the English people".

That is 1281 years ago! Bede wrote a history of the English people, over 1000 years ago. Now does that sound like something an immigrant would do? write a history of a people, that supposedly did not really exist. So people who identify themselves culturally and ethnically as English have existed for well over a millenium. Indeed geneticists contend that 80% of the people who live in Great Britain have the same genetic make up as the paleolithic hunter gatherers who arrived here 15,000 years ago.



On the 13th September 2007 the United Nations 'Declaration On The Rights Of Indigenous Peoples' was adopted by the UN General Assembly.

Of particular interest are the following solemn proclamations, that:


“Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right not to be subject to forced assimilation or destruction of their culture.” [Article 8(1)];

“Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right to belong to an indigenous community or nation, in accordance with the traditions and customs of the community or nation concerned … no discrimination of any kind may arise from the exercise of such a right” [Article 9];

“Indigenous peoples have the right to own, use, develop and control the lands, territories and resources that they possess by reason of traditional ownership or other traditional occupation or use, as well as those which they have otherwise acquired.” [Article 26(1)]





So shouldn't New Labour's policy of forced assimilation, mass immigration, multiculturalism and social engineering, have been illegal under international law.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...r-adviser.html

[FDR]

(Original post by engrishdegree)
“Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right not to be subject to forced assimilation or destruction of their culture.” [Article 8(1)];

Firstly, is there a clear definition of what constitutes as British culture? Only then can it be determined whether their is any supposed destruction of this culture. Secondly, there is, and never has been any force used by anyone, or any body to force assimilation.

“Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right to belong to an indigenous community or nation, in accordance with the traditions and customs of the community or nation concerned … no discrimination of any kind may arise from the exercise of such a right” [Article 9];

I can't see any problems in the UK regarding this.

“Indigenous peoples have the right to own, use, develop and control the lands, territories and resources that they possess by reason of traditional ownership or other traditional occupation or use, as well as those which they have otherwise acquired.” [Article 26(1)]

When you see the government forcibly taking land that rightfully belongs to someone and giving it to someone else, let me know.

Such Laws are written with peoples such as Aborigines in mind, who are at threat from Land seizures (e.g by mining companies), not Brits who may decide to sell their home to a pakistani family etc.

[engrishdegree]

(Original post by FDR)
Firstly, is there a clear definition of what constitutes as British culture?

See that question identifies the problem, I'm not talking about British culture, I'm talking specifically about English culture, England. English people are not a politically represented, protected or even an acknowledged national grouping. Which is why it has been so easy to impose multiculturalism and mass immigration specifically on England. Scotland and Wales have been screened from it because of their devolved governmental structure and stronger national identity

[Maker]

(Original post by engrishdegree)
See that question identifies the problem, I'm not talking about British culture, I'm talking specifically about English culture, England. English people are not a politically represented, protected or even an acknowledged national grouping. Which is why it has been so easy to impose multiculturalism and mass immigration specifically on England. Scotland and Wales have been screened from it because of their devolved governmental structure and stronger national identity

Its a pity there is no cure for people who are paranoid and delusional.

[chrisawhitmore]

There wasn't actually a single country called England in 731AD. (The first 'King of the English' was Aethelstan in 924AD, though Alfred the Great was 'King of the Anglo-Saxons') What Bede referred to as the 'gentis Anglorum' is only modernised as English people. It would be better translated as the Angles of Britain, who were themselves immigrants from Angeln or Anglia, an area of Germany near the border with Denmark. The Celts, with whom the Anglo-Saxons fought bitterly to carve out territory, were the actual British natives (probably). This is in fact a great example of how immigrants come to be viewed as English.

[Maker]

Bede was obviously following a foreign religion when he wrote his work.

[Gridiron-Gangster]

(Original post by engrishdegree)
The lie spun by the left to excuse mass immigration and multiculturalism is that Britian, or more specifically England is an immigrant nation. However it is a fallacy to describe a nation that has had the same cultural and ethnic indentity, for well over 1000 years as an immigrant. Indeed in 731 AD the English monk Bede completed his great work:

"the Ecclesiastical History of the English people".

That is 1281 years ago! Bede wrote a history of the English people, over 1000 years ago. Now does that sound like something an immigrant would do? write a history of a people, that supposedly did not really exist. So people who identify themselves culturally and ethnically as English have existed for well over a millenium. Indeed geneticists contend that 80% of the people who live in Great Britain have the same genetic make up as the paleolithic hunter gatherers who arrived here 15,000 years ago.



On the 13th September 2007 the United Nations 'Declaration On The Rights Of Indigenous Peoples' was adopted by the UN General Assembly.

Of particular interest are the following solemn proclamations, that:


“Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right not to be subject to forced assimilation or destruction of their culture.” [Article 8(1)];

“Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right to belong to an indigenous community or nation, in accordance with the traditions and customs of the community or nation concerned … no discrimination of any kind may arise from the exercise of such a right” [Article 9];

“Indigenous peoples have the right to own, use, develop and control the lands, territories and resources that they possess by reason of traditional ownership or other traditional occupation or use, as well as those which they have otherwise acquired.” [Article 26(1)]





So shouldn't New Labour's policy of forced assimilation, mass immigration, multiculturalism and social engineering, have been illegal under international law.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...r-adviser.html

Dumbass

[Kibalchich]

(Original post by engrishdegree)
The lie spun by the left to excuse mass immigration and multiculturalism is that Britian, or more specifically England is an immigrant nation. However it is a fallacy to describe a nation that has had the same cultural and ethnic indentity, for well over 1000 years as an immigrant. Indeed in 731 AD the English monk Bede completed his great work:

"the Ecclesiastical History of the English people".

That is 1281 years ago! Bede wrote a history of the English people, over 1000 years ago. Now does that sound like something an immigrant would do? write a history of a people, that supposedly did not really exist. So people who identify themselves culturally and ethnically as English have existed for well over a millenium. Indeed geneticists contend that 80% of the people who live in Great Britain have the same genetic make up as the paleolithic hunter gatherers who arrived here 15,000 years ago.



On the 13th September 2007 the United Nations 'Declaration On The Rights Of Indigenous Peoples' was adopted by the UN General Assembly.

Of particular interest are the following solemn proclamations, that:


“Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right not to be subject to forced assimilation or destruction of their culture.” [Article 8(1)];

“Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right to belong to an indigenous community or nation, in accordance with the traditions and customs of the community or nation concerned … no discrimination of any kind may arise from the exercise of such a right” [Article 9];

“Indigenous peoples have the right to own, use, develop and control the lands, territories and resources that they possess by reason of traditional ownership or other traditional occupation or use, as well as those which they have otherwise acquired.” [Article 26(1)]





So shouldn't New Labour's policy of forced assimilation, mass immigration, multiculturalism and social engineering, have been illegal under international law.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...r-adviser.html

you should read some history books

[MaceyThe]

The truth is that we are more "native" than the Maori people of New Zealand, and with modern genetic testing, it has been established that FOR MOST WHITE ENGLISH PEOPLE IN THE UK TODAY, THEIR ANCESTORS ARRIVED IN BRITAIN THOUSANDS OF YEARS AGO.

For anyone interested in the facts:

[FrigidSymphony]

Pretty ironic to become an Empire and then complain about multiculturalism.

[Gridiron-Gangster]

Well infact the Silures were here long before the Saxons and the Romans and they were describes as a warlike tribe with dark skin and curly hair and originating from Africa hence anyone lighter than an African is essentially an invader in the UK meaning all of us except the Afro-Carribean population should get on the next boat out of Britain. But seeing as there ain't any boats big enough and even then nowhere near enough boats to accommodate us all, we've all been granted a reprieve and we're here to stay.

If it pisses off the far-right nutcases then I'm all for mass immigration and I'll even let them sleep in my house, eat my food, take my money heck even my family. As long as the BNP keep squiriming hehehehehehe

[chefdave]

Those that whoop and cheer at the prospect of a multicultural England are the exact same people that bang on about the inalienable rights of indigenous peoples elsewhere in the world, so what they're really asking for is the subjugation of white people and the elevation of their brown and black counterparts.

The quicker this racist viewpoint is clamped down upon the better imo; racial discrimination doesn't become 'positive' when it's aimed at whites. It's still racism.

[Gridiron-Gangster]

England is a far better place due to multiculturalism. Imagine if we all we had to eat for the rest of our lives was black pudding and fish and chips? Bland as bland can be. Also we're a global and international community engaging in trade with all countries of the world and all the major corporations of the world have offices here. By isolating ourselves we'd lose out on that and be living in a crap hole I mean look at North Korea?

[chefdave]

(Original post by Gridiron-Gangster)
England is a far better place due to multiculturalism. Imagine if we all we had to eat for the rest of our lives was black pudding and fish and chips? Bland as bland can be. Also we're a global and international community engaging in trade with all countries of the world and all the major corporations of the world have offices here. By isolating ourselves we'd lose out on that and be living in a crap hole I mean look at North Korea?

You're confusing trade with porous borders, it's entirely possible to be a global trading nation and protect your indigenous culture at the same time. Just look at South Korea for example.

[chefdave]

(Original post by FrigidSymphony)
Pretty ironic to become an Empire and then complain about multiculturalism.

Why?

We ran those countries, we didn't attempt to ethnically cleanse the indigenous inhabitants out of existance.

[Kibalchich]

(Original post by chefdave)
Why?

We ran those countries, we didn't attempt to ethnically cleanse the indigenous inhabitants out of existance.

*splutter*

[Gridiron-Gangster]

(Original post by chefdave)
You're confusing trade with porous borders, it's entirely possible to be a global trading nation and protect your indigenous culture at the same time. Just look at South Korea for example.

Last time I checked Korean wasn't such a widespread language hence it was unnlikely to be swamped with immigrants oh and on top of that there seems to be a stronger work ethic in South Korea where people are to buy working and sutdying hard to give themselves a good life rather than some people in some other countries who resort to internet forums to moan and groan about how miserable their lives are because of immigrants stealin their jobs when in the first place you shouldn't have dropped out of school at 16 or spent your years drinking bottles of cheap cider when you should have been studying instead. Oh dear. right back at you twerp.

[Gridiron-Gangster]

(Original post by chefdave)
Why?

We ran those countries, we didn't attempt to ethnically cleanse the indigenous inhabitants out of existance.

No you did the next best thing, you raided and plundered their resources to give yourselves a ffancy lifestyle. LOL not really something to be proud of is it? bow wow!

[Snagprophet]

I think rather than 'native English' we should be thinking it more like 'Native Northern Europeans' because that covers a bigger area. Aboriginal Australians weren't limited to a small area of Australia. I think it's ridiculous to talk about native people from such a small area. Yes, include Wales and Scotland here, the supposed 'Celtic nations', one of which was reaching out to Norway (Germanic) about common ancestry. I'm sorry, it's nonsense. Scotland is as much Germanic as England is, hence names such as 'Meekison'. Talking about these specific civilisations means nothing racially. We're all, as in whites, Native European. Even if you're part French there is no racial difference.

[Tudball]

(Original post by FrigidSymphony)
Pretty ironic to become an Empire and then complain about multiculturalism.

There needs to be a disassociation of past and present in these discussions.
The architects of the British Empire are piles of dust now. We shouldn't be paralysed from criticising our social situation because the behaviour of a bygone era.