Immigration, is it in the best interests of the British people?

OP

Well, i consider this country a nation there are things that are broadly good, and broadly bad for it. We know that some "good things" can also have a bad consequence for some people. But what matters is that the net good outweighs the bad. I never claimed that whats good for the country is good for every brit, everywhere. This is never the case. Its all about what is for the "greater good"?

Oswy, you are just trying to turn this into a race debate with your style of questioning. As it turns out the "host" population of Britain is 99% white.

So in short, to be a native brit you colour is irrelevent, but it just so happens that 99% of native brits are in fact white. Theres the crucial difference.

The point of the topic (deep breath due to repetition) is the benefit to the HOST population. Which, happens to be esentially the white population. But this is not an issue founded on race, it simply has racial results.

For me, personally i think the disadvantages of immigration outweigh the good. because i see segreated communities in areas where there previously were none. I see new faith schools where previously everyone went to the same... this is all bad for a countries unity.

I see multiculturalist propaganda wherever i go - people should be told the truth. its an experiment and nothing more. its not fact. and as i said in another thread i think a multi-racial society can work, but a multi-cultural one cannot. What is society when we do not have a uniting bond? culture is the bond. If we don't share a culture we are not in the same society. And its one society per country or you get civil wars. Allways has been. Societies want to govern themselves, not be governed.

This may sound arrogant but i think alot of this is because i am more forward looking than most and can see what this is all inevetibly leading too. Whereas others are more blinkered in their approach to this issues and only care about the benefits/problems in there here and now.

Reply 62

This may sound arrogant but i think alot of this is because i am more forward looking than most... Zebedee.

I wouldn't use 'arrogant', 'narcissistically delusional' fits you better.

So, surprise surprise, you're not a racist but it just so happens that, as you see it, the 'native', or the 'host' British people (i.e. the legitimate British) are 99% white.

But you've left 1% free, so can I take it that there are, in your opinion, some black and asian people who are truly 'native' British people?

Oswy.

Reply 63

OP

Its not an opinion, its a fact. The "host" population is defined as that that existed before immigration.

For all practical purposes immigration started in the 1950's + ethnic groups within england before that were very closely related and by now are indistinquisable from the rest of the host population.

It is YOU Oswy that is turning this into a racial issue. its not a case of how i see it, the host population. Happens to be white, just like the host population of japan is japanese and host population of Congo would be black.

I'm asking what are the benefits to the host population, not to a racial group. Gettit?

The fact that the host of (any country) or broadly homogeneous racial groups is just a coincidence. Resulting from the fact that countries tend to be ethnonations.

Reply 64

What amuses me is the way some people think that multi-culturalism is some kind of alien experiment which is not working nor cannot work.

Anyone who has studied culture will know that any modern society (even where all white) is filled with diverse culture. Men can have different cultures from women, sexual preferences can create different cultures, classes often have different cultures, as do different age groups and those living in different regions. Those who live in the city can have different cultural realities to those in the country, and there are different political cultures – Marxists don’t often live the same kinds of cultural lives as Tories, for example. Even within religions there are various cultures, Roman Catholics and Baptists all consider themselves Christians, but the lived religious culture they enjoy varies quite a bit.

So, this idea that there is a single uniform ‘British’ culture is just nonsense.

Oswy.

Reply 65

OP

Oswy

What amuses me is the way some people think that multi-culturalism is some kind of alien experiment which is not working nor cannot work.

What amuses me is your inability to challenge your faith in multiculturalism. It IS an experiement. It is being created by immigration and the effect is unknown. The hypothesis is a better and more diverse society. The conclusion is as yet unknown.

Of course people form sub-cultures. But there is a vast difference in scale. The differences between John whose a catholic socialost and Peter who is a protestanc torie are inconsequential when compared to Ahmed from Pakistan.

What happens, when you put vastly different people into a melting pot? if you put in ingredients that complement each othe ryou get a good result. if you put in ingrediants that clash you get a horrible mess. its simple.

How can a society function if one man wants "x" and another wants "y" and "x" and "y" are polar opposites? especially if neither people are in majority. It can't.

Of course societies must tolerate small differences in opinion. But societies cannot encompass all beliefs and all opinions. Sometimes people are just too different to co-exist in the same place.

You need to challenge your assumption that multiculturalism will work and think of the risk. likewise i have to take on your points that difference can sometimes be good.

Reply 66

Its not an opinion, its a fact. The "host" population is defined as that that existed before immigration. Zebedee.

Before immigration? There’s always been immigration, always!

For all practical purposes immigration started in the 1950's + ethnic groups within england before that were very closely related and by now are indistinquisable from the rest of the host population. Zebedee.

No, for your racist purposes immigration started in the 1950s – see how you always go back to ethnic groups as important in defining what the nation is? Racist.

It is YOU Oswy that is turning this into a racial issue. its not a case of how i see it, the host population. Happens to be white, just like the host population of japan is japanese and host population of Congo would be black. Zebedee.

Heh, you’re getting mixed up aren’t you – anyone with a Japanese passport is Japanese, no?

I'm asking what are the benefits to the host population, not to a racial group. Gettit? Zebedee.

No, you’re not, you’re defining the ‘hosts’ as 99% white because you don’t want the children or grandchildren of black or Asian people to be included.

The fact that the host of (any country) or broadly homogeneous racial groups is just a coincidence. Resulting from the fact that countries tend to be ethnonations. Zebedee.

Nope, immigration happens all the time, all over the world, you don’t like it because you don’t like seeing black and Asian people in your town ruining your fantasy of a 1950s strawberry and creams England.

Oswy.

Reply 67

Adam83

12

northen ireland and the balkans are really great examples of different cultures living together.

i generally agree with you zebedee

Reply 68

Zebedee

What amuses me is your inability to challenge your faith in multiculturalism. It IS an experiement. It is being created by immigration and the effect is unknown. The hypothesis is a better and more diverse society. The conclusion is as yet unknown.

Of course people form sub-cultures. But there is a vast difference in scale. The differences between John whose a catholic socialost and Peter who is a protestanc torie are inconsequential when compared to Ahmed from Pakistan.

What happens, when you put vastly different people into a melting pot? if you put in ingredients that complement each othe ryou get a good result. if you put in ingrediants that clash you get a horrible mess. its simple.

How can a society function if one man wants "x" and another wants "y" and "x" and "y" are polar opposites? especially if neither people are in majority. It can't.

Of course societies must tolerate small differences in opinion. But societies cannot encompass all beliefs and all opinions. Sometimes people are just too different to co-exist in the same place.

You need to challenge your assumption that multiculturalism will work and think of the risk. likewise i have to take on your points that difference can sometimes be good.

Zebedee,

You've pretty much ignored everything I've said about culture of course - because the variations which are very real don't fit your racist paradigm.

You only see culture in racist contexts, i.e. Asian/Muslim or White/Christian.

As I've said, there are all sorts of diverse, competing and oppositional cultural forms among your so-called 'host' British nation, let alone anything that an immigrant might bring. You just don't see it because you don't want to see it.

Oswy.

Reply 69

ForeverIsMyName

Howard

A cut and paste from "Capitalist Magazine", a journal written by and for people that have a vested interest in one thing (driving down labour costs) to the exclusion of all other considerations does not cut the mustard.

The only thing they have a vested interest in is the ideals behind a good society and economy, surely?

Howard

Because we're still debating it the court is out unless of course your declaration is the one true verdict.

I'm making an assertion, as everyone does on D+D every day. I believe that immigration benefits the British people, for the reasons I've outlined. It seems like a completely stupid idea to not let someone who wants to do well for themselves into this country if they're willing to work for a wage that British businesses are willing to pay.

Reply 70

OP

Government can steer culture in various ways. It seems as though you are advocating a more stand-off approach. Whereas i think culture can be influenced and should be influenced by the government, for the greater good.

I havn't ignored your comments on culture. I addressed that issue. My point (to counter yours) is that variations do exist within british society but the variation between that and those brought in my immigration are vastly different.

For example, can a devout muslim, who perhaps believes in shariah law and the veil live side-by side with an atheist who believes in equality between the sexes?

is it even desirable?

You oswy, consistantly ignore my points about the ghettoisation of british society. These pakistani, somali, etc groups tend to stick to their own. Its not really the fault of the british public. And surely we both agree that a fragemented society is a bad thing?

Reply 71

OP

ForeverIsMyName

The only thing they have a vested interest in is the ideals behind a good society and economy, surely?

You've assumed total capitalism results in a good society.

Reply 72

ForeverIsMyName

tehjonny

I don't see any benefits. If you can provide some for me to think about I promise I shall do :p:

. Not economics though, for every person thats say immigrants bring money and economic growth, another can say they make people born here unemployed. Probably both right too :p:

.

No, not both right. Read the article I posted on page 2.

Reply 73

For example, can a devout muslim, who perhaps believes in shariah law and the veil live side-by side with an atheist who believes in equality between the sexes?

is it even desirable? Zebedee.

How about a Roman Catholic living next to a Jew? How about an atheist living next to Born Again Evangelical Christian? How about a Radical Feminist living next to a women-should-be-homemakers Conservative? All of the above could be lonsgtanding 'host' British citizens with white faces, yet clearly with very different political/social and cultural experiences.

Face facts, our society is full of people who have differing views and cultural lives, regardless of whether they are black or Asian or white or whatever.

You seem to be angling towards the idea that society must be one in which everyone agrees, everyone eats the same food, worships the same God, wears the same clothes, has the same coloured skin. Where the freck are you going with your 'utopian' dream? You need to ask yourself this question.

Are you going to tell me you only ever eat 'British' food? It's your loss if you don't enjoy the occasional Indian curry or Chinese takeaway, how about Mexican, Thai or Greek? Are you going to live in your own cultural ghetto?

Oswy.

Reply 74

Renal

17

I'd have to say that 99% white is probably a bit of an exageration, the 2001 census puts the ethnic breakdown of the UK at over 91%, obviously that includes white immigrants. However, the remaining 9% can be (roughly, admitedly) split into those that see themselves, at least partially, as British and have integrated, at least to an extent into 'British Culture' (British Culture does exist in subtle ways, read "Watching the English" by K Fox if you are interested to know more) and those that see themselves as foreigners and have no interest in assimilating. Typically this latter group can be found in isolated enclaves in inner cities surrounded by people from the same culture, speaking the same language - essentially living separate lives from the majority of Britain.

Reply 75

D00

13

Oswy

No, for your racist purposes immigration started in the 1950s – see how you always go back to ethnic groups as important in defining what the nation is? Racist.

Haha. Stop being so politically correct, that's what I hate about you pro-multiculturalism types. Oh, and your whole beleif in multiculrualism itself.

Oswy

Heh, you’re getting mixed up aren’t you – anyone with a Japanese passport is Japanese, no?

Nationality wise? Yes. Ethnically? No.

Oswy

No, you’re not, you’re defining the ‘hosts’ as 99% white because you don’t want the children or grandchildren of black or Asian people to be included.

Before the 1950's, the UK was mostly anglo-saxon white. Why count the minority when there was only something like... 0.2% blacks/asians back then? You're being silly and politically correct.

Oswy

Nope, immigration happens all the time, all over the world, you don’t like it because you don’t like seeing black and Asian people in your town ruining your fantasy of a 1950s strawberry and creams England.

It's ok with the odd few... but Asian/black people flooding to my town I won't like... they are not part of my culture - most of them won't speak my language and they will shove their beleifs and customs into OUR faces when they should be integrating with us.

Multiculturalism is an evil concept.

Reply 76

OP

Multiculturalism is at the expense of what we allready have.

If 20% of my town are immigrants. I see that as a negative change from what i was before. With new groups of people coming in there will be a rise in crime and anti-social behavior.

Do you ever hear people say, "Tower Hamlets is so much better now, thanks to immigration". never. I think that tells you that the changes immigration brings are on the whole negative. Some positive, but overall comes out red on the balance sheet.

Do you ever hear people say, "its birmingham great, i love the diversity here, we have mosques and a great variety of food". You don't hear people say that, they say that the place has gone downhill and is more violent and feels less safe than it did before.

Tell the people of oldham that immigration is good thing. Oswy, you are just an idealist. It can be seen wherever immigration has occurred the greater the numbers the greater the problems.

Reply 77

Howard

5

Oswy

However, could you further clarify for my benefit, are there by any chance any black or asian people who you'd accept as 'native' British?

No.

Reply 78

2026