Why do some British citizens of Anglo-Saxon descent use the "White people are being turned into a minority" argument?
Are such persons ignorant of the fact that there are over 80% so-called 'indigenous' (that is, those who identify as Anglo-Saxon descendants etc) Britons within the Isles of the Kingdom?
According to the recent UK census, the figure stands at 85% with a further few percent identifying themselves as 'White other' and the like. This leaves remaining ethnic minorities at around 10% of the UK population.
If the White 'indigenous' majority is being turned into a minority, then should their percentage not be lower? Say, around 60% of the UK population?
Does this then mean that their 'argument' - or rather, assertion - is groundless and does not stand?
However perhaps if you look at the locations where these people who make the arguments live perhaps the statistics say something different
As of 2009, every UK region has a White British majority population. There are however seven London boroughs where White British individuals represent a minority of the overall local population (including Brent 30.9%, Ealing 45.5%, Hackney 47.1%, Harrow 47.5%, Newham 32.6%, Tower Hamlets 47.1% and Westminster 49%).
It might only be 10%, but in some areas there are such large numbers of ethnic minorities that White British really are the minority.
Plus, if immigration continues then that percentage could go up, and (I think) some of the cultures of ethnic minorities involve having large families, compared to White British families which tend to be smaller.
So yeah. Might be 10% now, but that'll go up. =(
interestingly the anglo-saxons never made a huge genetic impact on England (land of the Angles) nor Wales or Scotland. their impact was cultural as opposed to genetic. most "white british" people are the direct descendants of the ice ages settlers.
Most white people in Britain are probably not Anglo Saxon. So many invaders and immigrants have come in the years since the Anglo Saxons were around. And I never understand why having Anglo Saxon heritage is such a big badge of honour amongst white people. They weren't event he first white people in the country, they actually invaded and kicked out the Romans who in turn invaded and kicked out the Celts. In short they were just any random barbarians from that time. I don't see the French and Spanish and Italians getting excited about their Frankish or Vandal or Ostrogoth heritage.
Because white people in Britain will become a minority within the next 75-100 years. It saddens me to see how all these African and Asian immigrants have ruined British cities. Someone will say diversity is good or something now yes it has brought us increased crime rates from black gangs in London plus riots accross the country so how that is good who knows. We are also told to accept all this cultures and be welcoming why when British culture would not be accepted in countries such as Pakistan where large amounts of immigrants come from.
(Original post by sexbo)
And I never understand why having Anglo Saxon heritage is such a big badge of honour amongst white people. They weren't event he first white people in the country, they actually invaded and kicked out the Romans who in turn invaded and kicked out the Celts. In short they were just any random barbarians from that time. I don't see the French and Spanish and Italians getting excited about their Frankish or Vandal or Ostrogoth heritage.
The Romans didn't kick out the Celts, they ruled over them. During Roman Britain, most people were Celtic. With Roman influences in both culture and blood, but still mostly Celtic.
It's a bit different to other invasions from Germanic tribes because the Anglo Saxons came to completely dominate England. The people of most of southern Britain were Anglo Saxons, whether that was through replacing the population, or replacing their culture. Compare that to the Franks. They had a lot of influence on the French language, but it's still primarily based on Latin. Where as I think there's barely any Celtic influence in modern English. And most of the influence from Latin came after the Anglo Saxons converted to Christianity, and then through French when the Normans invaded.
Well, I guess their rationing in that as a whole demographic the % of ethnic white Brits is lower then right after the post-war period where it was likely 99%, whilst in some areas the % of white Brits is lower then their % of the national population.
So many of those people use 'white' as a conglomerate term like they're one homogenous group, shows these persons are so superficial they would judge someone solely on their appearance. One definition of white can extend to someone from Iran and Algeria. Even if I don't agree with their reasoning, I would be happy if all of them used proper terminology by using "white British" in their arguments. I wonder if they would be happy if, say 10000 non-white minorities in the UK who are repeat crime offenders suddenly became 10000 immigrants from mainland Europe who are repeat crime offenders. Does it make it any better?