Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there! Sign in to have your say on this topicNew here? Join for free to post

Are all countries made up of immigrants or is this trait unique to Britain?

Announcements Posted on
    • Thread Starter
    • 36 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    A line often used by the liberal left is that because Britain suffered a couple of notable invasians a millenia or two ago we're 'a nation of immigrants' with a moral obligation to house all the dispossessed peoples of the world.

    A genuine question: do liberals extend this belief to all countries? Or is it soley reserved for Britain?

    Is it only the British who have no right to a safe and secure homeland?
    • 9 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    globalisation has no boundaries. a nation can be determined unsafe with an indigenous population.

    Please go visit a library.
    • 9 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Human history is defined by immigration, of course it's not unique to Britain. Every single human territory on the planet has been formed or drastically influenced through the interactions of successive mass movements of populations. Whether it's the Roman Empire, the early Ottoman Empire, the Nanban traders in Japan and Taiwan, the expansion of the Xhosa peoples throughout Southern Africa . . .
    • Thread Starter
    • 36 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bill_Gates)
    globalisation has no boundaries. a nation can be determined unsafe with an indigenous population.

    Please go visit a library.
    Eh? How does that answer my question?

    Please re-read the OP and attempt to answer the question properly without resorting to childish insults.
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    This question's reeks stupidity on so many levels I can't even bring myself to answer it.
    • Thread Starter
    • 36 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aphotic Cosmos)
    Human history is defined by immigration, of course it's not unique to Britain. Every single human territory on the planet has been formed or drastically influenced through the interactions of successive mass movements of populations. Whether it's the Roman Empire, the early Ottoman Empire, the Nanban traders in Japan and Taiwan, the expansion of the Xhosa peoples throughout Southern Africa . . .
    Of course, so by that logic do all nations have an obligation to open their borders and accept the practice of multiculturalism? Lefty thinking states that because we were invaded by the Italians 2000 years ago and by the French 1000 years ago we have no business stopping the inflow of immigrants that head to our shores now. I just wonder whether they extend the same attitude towards Asia and Africa.
    • Thread Starter
    • 36 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RamocitoMorales)
    This question's reeks stupidity on so many levels I can't even bring myself to answer it.
    Good, because going by your reply the answer would have been claptrap anyway.
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chefdave)
    A line often used by the liberal left is that because Britain suffered a couple of notable invasians a millenia or two ago we're 'a nation of immigrants' who has a moral obligation to house all the dispossessed peoples of the world.
    No.

    This old chestnut is trotted out time and time again.

    People like trying to pretend that because England was invaded by various nationalities around a thousand years ago, and they can be described as immigrants, therefore we are all descended from immigrants and should shut up.

    It is a nice try at an ignorant smokescreen, and I'm sure some dunderheads will accept it as a clever analogy. However, that was centuries ago when royalty murdered people they did not like and posted the heads on stakes for everyone to gawp at. Are we going to go back to those days? I dont think so.

    The immigrants these days come here expecting to be fed, housed, educated and possibly employed (but not if they can get away with it) all at our expense. They are not here for any other reason but that they have discovered we are such a soft touch that we will pay them money for being here, and they wouldn't get that in their own country of birth.

    I would have no objection to people who have already secured employment, and can read, write and speak English to a decent standard, arriving as immigrants - but even then under the proviso that if they break any laws they will immediately forfeit all right to stay here.

    However, I object to any immigrants who are here and fail to meet the above criteria.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    The gates are well and truly wide open. I don't even think there are gates anymore. People are free to waltz in with their backwards religions and customs that we want no part of.
    • 29 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    The influx of people from outside Britain over time goes far beyond 'a few notable invasions'.

    Obviously you get the Romans, you get Saxons, Angles, Jutes etc, you get the Vikings, you get the Normans, but it goes beyond that.

    For example, there has been a huge amount of movement of people between Britain and the Continent, Brittany was basically regarded as a province of Britian and had particularly strong links with Cornwall.

    Also think about the Hugenots, and prior to that, during the time of the cpunter Reformation, many Protestants moved from Catholic countries to Britain to escape persecution.

    Britain has a very long maritime history and because of that and the Empire as a result people from other countries have often made their way here.

    Prior to the larger migratory movements from the Indian sub-continent in the 20th century, people from there came to Britian. Wealthy Indian families often sent their sons to school and University here (Balliol College Oxford has a very long history of taking students from colonial countries, both Asia and Africa) and some stayed and even went into politics. (The first Asian MP was elected in 1892)

    Also, in the early days of the Raj, when mixing between British and Indians was more common and mixed marriages occured, the children of these marriages were usually sent back to Britian and brought up as British, mostly living the rest of their life there and marrying.

    In addition, the slave trade had the impact on bringing people into the country. Some of the very wealthy had black slaves or servants. And later on, when Britain outlawed the slave trade and ships of the royal navy were used to enforce the ban, slaves freed from the ships often joined the royal navy, later settling in Britain.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I wish I did A Level history ;(
    • Thread Starter
    • 36 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Historophilia)
    The influx of people from outside Britain over time goes far beyond 'a few notable invasions'.

    Obviously you get the Romans, you get Saxons, Angles, Jutes etc, you get the Vikings, you get the Normans, but it goes beyond that.

    For example, there has been a huge amount of movement of people between Britain and the Continent, Brittany was basically regarded as a province of Britian and had particularly strong links with Cornwall.

    Also think about the Hugenots, and prior to that, during the time of the cpunter Reformation, many Protestants moved from Catholic countries to Britain to escape persecution.

    Britain has a very long maritime history and because of that and the Empire as a result people from other countries have often made their way here.

    Prior to the larger migratory movements from the Indian sub-continent in the 20th century, people from there came to Britian. Wealthy Indian families often sent their sons to school and University here (Balliol College Oxford has a very long history of taking students from colonial countries, both Asia and Africa) and some stayed and even went into politics. (The first Asian MP was elected in 1892)

    Also, in the early days of the Raj, when mixing between British and Indians was more common and mixed marriages occured, the children of these marriages were usually sent back to Britian and brought up as British, mostly living the rest of their life there and marrying.

    In addition, the slave trade had the impact on bringing people into the country. Some of the very wealthy had black slaves or servants. And later on, when Britain outlawed the slave trade and ships of the royal navy were used to enforce the ban, slaves freed from the ships often joined the royal navy, later settling in Britain.
    So in your opinion are we a nation of immigrants?
    • 29 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chefdave)
    So in your opinion are we a nation of immigrants?
    Pretty much yes.

    There has been far greater movement and changes of population than many other countries.

    I haven't studied this in depth but I would hazard a guess and say that this in part due to our geographical location, an island that is very close to other countries on the continent (France, the Netherlands, Scandinavia) and our long maritime history and habit of looking outwards at the world.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    USA is made up of immigrants.
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chefdave)
    A line often used by the liberal left is that because Britain suffered a couple of notable invasians a millenia or two ago we're 'a nation of immigrants' who has a moral obligation to house all the dispossessed peoples of the world.

    A genuine question: do liberals extend this belief to all countries? Or is it soley reserved for Britain?

    Is it only the British who have no right to a safe and secure homeland?
    no, it is not reserved for Britain. If there were no immigration then the world then it wouldn't be how it is today.
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by marcusfox)
    The immigrants these days come here expecting to be fed, housed, educated and possibly employed (but not if they can get away with it) all at our expense. They are not here for any other reason but that they have discovered we are such a soft touch that we will pay them money for being here, and they wouldn't get that in their own country of birth.
    The only problem with that theory is that it is complete and total *******s. 67% of working age immigrants in this country are in employment, only marginally below the UK rate of 70%, but still well above the overall national rates of many other OECD countries, such as France, the United States, Ireland, Italy and South Korea. Please keep your ignorance to yourself; it can be contagious.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Hello, I am a muslim who's immigrated to this country. Let me just say that I also don't like immigration, I understand well how you feel - Britain may or may not be a nation of immigrants, but I can clearly see how a lot of modern immigrants today don't fit into the typical mainstream British culture and society. Aspects of which include; gothic architecture, victorian fashion, the renaissance, and so on. I can see how it's hard to see most muslims as part of this culture, and therefore I believe that the British have a right to object to immigration - countries should put their own citizens first.

    But you should realise that most immigrants come here because they envisage a nice prosperous life in Europe and apply and receive a visa. They don't know or realise that the people of the UK dislike immigrants so much. They are not migrating here to spite you. If the opportunity to move here is readily available, and your government keeps giving out more visas then the immigrants would see it as: this country accepts immigrants so why don't we just move there? People are going to keep coming so long as they're legally allowed to. They themselves aren't doing anything wrong.

    Anyway to answer your question, yes some other countries have a high proportion of immigrants. In the UAE only 19% of the population is native, the rest are expatriates. However the expatriates aren't eligible for free health-care, schooling or any benefits (unlike the UK where anyone who lives here can get free healthcare, education, benefits, etc). Also, their visas are valid for one year, so if the immigrants/ expatriates are out of work for one year they must return to their own country. Also they will not grant a visa to anyone unless they've already secured employment in the country.
    • Thread Starter
    • 36 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by naiadania)
    Hello, I am a muslim who's immigrated to this country. Let me just say that I also don't like immigration, I understand well how you feel - Britain may or may not be a nation of immigrants, but I can clearly see how a lot of modern immigrants today don't fit into the typical mainstream British culture and society. Aspects of which include; gothic architecture, victorian fashion, the renaissance, and so on. I can see how it's hard to see most muslims as part of this culture, and therefore I believe that the British have a right to object to immigration - countries should put their own citizens first.

    But you should realise that most immigrants come here because they envisage a nice prosperous life in Europe and apply and receive a visa. They don't know or realise that the people of the UK dislike immigrants so much. They are not migrating here to spite you. If the opportunity to move here is readily available, and your government keeps giving out more visas then the immigrants would see it as: this country accepts immigrants so why don't we just move there? People are going to keep coming so long as they're legally allowed to. They themselves aren't doing anything wrong.

    Anyway to answer your question, yes some other countries have a high proportion of immigrants. In the UAE only 19% of the population is native, the rest are expatriates. However the expatriates aren't eligible for free health-care, schooling or any benefits (unlike the UK where anyone who lives here can get free healthcare, education, benefits, etc). Also, their visas are valid for one year, so if the immigrants/ expatriates are out of work for one year they must return to their own country. Also they will not grant a visa to anyone unless they've already secured employment in the country.
    Hello, thank you for that thoughtful response and welcome to TSR

    As you've correctly guessed I'm quite strongly opposed to *mass* immigration however the OP wasn't really intended to be attack on immigrants such as yourself, I'm mainly asking the white British liberal left whether all countries should be opened up for state multiculturalism or whether this is something that should be solely reserved for Britain.

    Imagine if we researched a random African country and discovered that the inhabitants hadn't been there since the dawn of time, like most countries they'd be conquered in the past and the genetic makeup of the scciety had ebbed and flowed but importantly they'd been a recognisable political unit for a good few hundred years. Would their past be reason enough to flood them with immigrants of white western European stock becuase 'they're a nation of immigrants'? Because this is the logic the liberal left use to justify mass immigration into Britain today.

    I'm just trying to find out whether they're using double standards.
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Britain needs manpower
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Britain's colonial past has created immigration.

    Countries like NZ, AUS or USA are composed of immigrants from Europe who were seeking a better life.

    Countries in Asia, Africa and S.America aren't very popular destinations for immigrants.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: April 2, 2012
New on TSR

GCSE English mock revision

Revise together & check out past papers

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.