Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Laika)
    It's Laika dammit. As in the Russian dog sent to space. Or the Arcade Fire song which is where I took it from. If it will spare a 10 page argument, I take back my comments against Howard, lets just get back to defining British culture. Anyone got any offerings?
    OK then. Fish and chips.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    I have already defined British culture.


    lets try this:


    Does the country known as the UK have a culture at present?

    Answer - yes.

    Ergo - THAT is British culture. Ie the culture of Britian as it is.

    its not tough.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    OK then. Fish and chips.


    (Original post by Lawz-)
    I have already defined British culture.


    lets try this:


    Does the country known as the UK have a culture at present?

    Answer - yes.

    Ergo - THAT is British culture. Ie the culture of Britian as it is.

    its not tough.
    Are you retarded? What components make up the current British culture? Is that more clear?

    The landmass now comprising the United Kingdom had a long history of immigration from mainland Europe, from the Beaker people of the 3rd millennium BC, to the waves of invasions by the Roman Empire and the Anglo-Saxons and Normans. Immigration by people outside Europe began on a small scale from the Colonies in the 19th century, before increasing to unprecedented levels from the mid-20th century to the present day.

    The history of immigration to the United Kingdom is, essentially, the history of the development of the United Kingdom itself. However, recent scientific investigations have shown that the genetic (as opposed to cultural) influence of pre-20th-century immigration on Britain has been rather small, marked by continuity rather than change. The Oxford archaeologist David Miles states that 80% of the genetic makeup of white Britons come from probably "just a few thousand" nomadic tribesmen who arrived 12,000 years ago, at the end of the Ice Age. Later waves of immigration were too small to have significantly affected the genetic homogeneity of the existing population
    Discuss.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Laika)



    Are you retarded? What components make up the current British culture? Is that more clear?


    Discuss.
    Yes yes ... you caught me ... I'm missing a chromosone you complete waste of sperm. :rolleyes:

    Im not doing your damn empirical research for you ... you want people to sit here and list all the components of British culture? Jesus... what idiocy.

    Most of the time people make the comment - What IS british culture as another way of saying - there is no such thing as British culture - so to want to protect is from immigration makes no sense...

    my point is there is very much a British culture.

    You want to know what it is ?
    go the **** outside and see for yourself.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cottonmouth)
    Everyone is shying away from the challenge of defining British culture in theri own words.
    No, I've done that.

    Its the same old trick
    Pick a card any card (why do I suspect you will pick the race card?)

    - go and find a dictionary, or people are giving the dictionary definitions, or sayinf things about "fuzzy feelings"
    And peoples definitions, feelings, and dictionary definitions are not good enough for you?
    What exactly are you waiting for?

    Until someone can construct a post that gives us a bit more info on what British culture is, then we have no choice but to assume other things are meant when they talk about not wanting immigration.
    Assume what you want, it appears that no matter what anyone says here you've made your mind up anyway, and will find a way to twist the facts to meet your hang up.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lawz-)

    Im not doing your damn empirical research for you ... you want people to sit here and list all the components of British culture? Jesus... what idiocy.

    Most of the time people make the comment - What IS british culture as another way of saying - there is no such thing as British culture - so to want to protect is from immigration makes no sense...

    my point is there is very much a British culture.

    You want to know what it is ?
    go the **** outside and see for yourself.
    All I'm saying is that it's just a bizarre way to descrive what British culture is. Of course Britain has its own unique culture, there's no debate about that. But before we can determine if we are losing any kind of cultural identity we need to be able to define what that culture is. otherwise it's just a baseless claim to say we're losing culture due to immigration.

    Basically (in my opinion) there are no fixed attributes to culture. Culture evolves and changes to reflect the time period and location of a given society. British culture now is different to that of the 90s, the 80s etc. To say we're 'losing' culture because of immigration is to suggest that there are some fixed, timeless attributes to 'britishness' and is to deny the constantly evolving nature of culture. So in order to say whether we are losing anything, we must determine what attributes there are to 'British culture', that is, a consistent culture that is not constantly changing due to general social trends.

    For example, is Britian today exactly the same as it was 20 years ago? 30 years? 10? This country is always changing culturally. Do you attribute the difference between 1900 Britain and 2000 Britain to immigration? If not, then why for this particular time period?

    I just think without explaining what you mean by culture, you can't claim immigration is destroying it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lawz-)
    Im not doing your damn empirical research for you ... you want people to sit here and list all the components of British culture?
    I've made the point time and time again, including backed up by a dictionary definition, which nicely agreed with me, that culture is the sum total of everything, thoughts and actions of the people, through out the history of the nation.
    For some reason unless we can turn that everything into one simple object, or thing, like fish and chips, then certain parties claim there is no culture, even though by the very defenition of culture, if there was none then that also means that there has never been anything, thought or action, in Britain, through out history, and therefore none of us exist, and this forum does not exist, and the internet it's on does not exist, which means they couldn't have made the posts stating that there is no culture, that they have done.
    So their mere posting that there is no culture is a contradiction of the fact.
    :rolleyes:
    It seems to be quite a common practice, if we can argue long enough about how many angels we can get to tap dance on a pin head, we won't have enough time to discuss the actual topic at hand.
    Fact A: There is a British culture
    Fact B: Immigration affects that culture
    This brings us to the real question, is that affect positive, or negative?
    This is what we should be discussing, but you watch, as soon as this post is up there that question will be totally ignored and people will return to asking about how many angels they can get to tap dance on a pin head again.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Laika)
    All I'm saying is that it's just a bizarre way to descrive what British culture is. Of course Britain has its own unique culture, there's no debate about that. But before we can determine if we are losing any kind of cultural identity we need to be able to define what that culture is. otherwise it's just a baseless claim to say we're losing culture due to immigration.

    Basically (in my opinion) there are no fixed attributes to culture. Culture evolves and changes to reflect the time period and location of a given society. British culture now is different to that of the 90s, the 80s etc. To say we're 'losing' culture because of immigration is to suggest that there are some fixed, timeless attributes to 'britishness' and is to deny the constantly evolving nature of culture. So in order to say whether we are losing anything, we must determine what attributes there are to 'British culture', that is, a consistent culture that is not constantly changing due to general social trends.

    I just think without explaining what you mean by culture, you can't claim immigration is destroying it.
    Indeed. And another interesting thing i noted from that site is how many visual aspects of Britain they included that make up its culture. It talked a whole lot about architecture, art. It talked about the arts in general, music, theatre. It talked about historic people, who made scientific, artistic, wonderful contributions. It talked about housing arrangement. Laika, how can immigrants change any of that? Do they possess time machines to wipe away all of that stuff? Are they coming off the boats with bulldozers to knock down all of the buildings? How are immigrants able to take away the things that are alreayd here, and already revered by people?

    That is what i was getting at earlier when talking about others people's own insecurities about their British feelings, Lawz.You yourself said it isnt about your own feelings, its about your surroundings. Well, the surroundings, are British culture, aren't they? As you keep saying, the here and now is British culture. History is also British culute, and no amount of immigration can erase that.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cottonmouth)
    History is also British culute, and no amount of immigration can erase that.
    You sure of that?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Laika)
    All I'm saying is that it's just a bizarre way to descrive what British culture is.


    Its a tautology. Its not at all strange.

    (Original post by Laika)
    Of course
    (Original post by Laika)
    Britain has its own unique culture, there's no debate about that.


    That would be news to many on here.

    (Original post by Laika)
    But before we can determine if we are losing any kind of cultural identity we need to be able to define what that culture is. otherwise it's just a baseless claim to say we're losing culture due to immigration.


    Not really. All you need to determine is - IS the culture changing? If it is, then the OLD culture is being lost.

    (Original post by Laika)
    Basically (in my opinion) there are no fixed attributes to culture.


    So there is no such thing as Cherokee culture for instance? And that never got destroyed by US colonialists?

    (Original post by Laika)
    Culture evolves and changes to reflect the time period and location of a given society. British culture now is different to that of the 90s, the 80s etc.


    Yes.

    (Original post by Laika)
    To say we're 'losing' culture because of immigration is to suggest that there are some fixed, timeless attributes to 'britishness' and is to deny the constantly evolving nature of culture.


    It is to do nothing of the sort.

    To say - "british culture as defined at 2:56pm13/4/06 is what currently exists", and that "in 20 years time, much of this cultural status quo could be destroyed" is completely obvious and logically sound.

    No one is saying that culture is timeless. What they are saying is that the CURRENT state of the culture as defined is a timeless definition that can be compared with what happens in the future. That it evolves is irrelevant to whether or not the culture at any one time is destroyed later on.

    (Original post by Laika)
    So in order to say whether we are losing anything, we must determine what attributes there are to 'British culture', that is, a consistent culture that is not constantly changing due to general social trends.


    No. Again - that it is changing is not preclude one from saying that what exists at present may be altered beyond all recognition.

    (Original post by Laika)
    I just think without explaining what you mean by culture, you can't claim immigration is destroying it.


    You dont need to list things. You simply say in 20 years - will the culture be very different from what it is RIGHT NOW, and will immigration make that more likely. If the answer is yes, then immigration contributes to the destruction fo the current cultural status quo.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    I've made the point time and time again, including backed up by a dictionary definition, which nicely agreed with me, that culture is the sum total of everything, thoughts and actions of the people, through out the history of the nation.
    For some reason unless we can turn that everything into one simple object, or thing, like fish and chips, then certain parties claim there is no culture, even though by the very defenition of culture, if there was none then that also means that there has never been anything, thought or action, in Britain, through out history, and therefore none of us exist, and this forum does not exist, and the internet it's on does not exist, which means they couldn't have made the posts stating that there is no culture, that they have done.
    So their mere posting that there is no culture is a contradiction of the fact.
    :rolleyes:
    It seems to be quite a common practice, if we can argue long enough about how many angels we can get to tap dance on a pin head, we won't have enough time to discuss the actual topic at hand.
    Fact A: There is a British culture
    Fact B: Immigration affects that culture
    This brings us to the real question, is that affect positive, or negative?
    This is what we should be discussing, but you watch, as soon as this post is up there that question will be totally ignored and people will return to asking about how many angels they can get to tap dance on a pin head again.
    Exactly.

    Im not about to start poitning to Tandori chicken, beefeaters and tea and shouting THAT! THAT is BRITISH CULTURE!

    FFS... look - culture is EVERYTHING in this country - the ethnicity, the language, the food, the TV, the plays, the books, the architecture... Im not about to spend the next 4 years of my life listing things for you to grasp that simple 2 line concept.

    Sufficed to say that immigration changes such things, and increases, generaly teh speed of such change. For someone who likes things the way they are, immigration thus, to SOME extent is a bad thing.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cottonmouth)
    Indeed. And another interesting thing i noted from that site is how many visual aspects of Britain they included that make up its culture. It talked a whole lot about architecture, art. It talked about the arts in general, music, theatre. It talked about historic people, who made scientific, artistic, wonderful contributions. It talked about housing arrangement. Laika, how can immigrants change any of that? Do they possess time machines to wipe away all of that stuff? Are they coming off the boats with bulldozers to knock down all of the buildings? How are immigrants able to take away the things that are alreayd here, and already revered by people?
    Example, to build an inner city mosque, you have to knock down old buildings.

    There is one example of exactly how old architecture can be removed by immigrants, and the landscape of the nation changed.
    No, they don't come of boats with bulldozers, but they do knock down buildings, and build new ones to replace them, don't they?

    That is what i was getting at earlier when talking about others people's own insecurities about their British feelings, Lawz.You yourself said it isnt about your own feelings, its about your surroundings. Well, the surroundings, are British culture, aren't they? As you keep saying, the here and now is British culture. History is also British culute, and no amount of immigration can erase that.
    Compare your grandads history book with your own, history is very much changed, by immigration and political agendas.
    Both examples you gave are very poor, and we can see, on a nearly daily basis, examples of how in fact you are wrong.
    The question is, is that a good thing, or a bad thing?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    I've made the point time and time again, including backed up by a dictionary definition, which nicely agreed with me, that culture is the sum total of everything, thoughts and actions of the people, through out the history of the nation.
    Too vague. How about patterns of though, social and moral values, traditions, language, art, music, politics? Would this be a fairly suitable definition or is it 'so simplistic it's borderline moronic'. 'The total sum of everything' is far too vague, you could attach to that any meaning you want and use it to justify your own argument.

    It seems to be quite a common practice, if we can argue long enough about how many angels we can get to tap dance on a pin head, we won't have enough time to discuss the actual topic at hand.
    Fact A: There is a British culture
    Fact B: Immigration affects that culture
    This brings us to the real question, is that affect positive, or negative?
    This is what we should be discussing, but you watch, as soon as this post is up there that question will be totally ignored and people will return to asking about how many angels they can get to tap dance on a pin head again.
    Not so simple. Surely we should also be questioning the extent to which immigration affects British culture. Obviously it does to an extent. Foreign cuisines, music and art etc. But does this occur to the extent that it eradicates the existing British culture or does it merely add to and enrich the growing tapestry of British culture?

    To ask whether the effect is positive or negative is irrelevant. That will be merely relative to each individuals perception and opinion of the foreign culture. The real question, as I have said, is

    1. Are those old British values eroded by new values brought about by immigration?

    2. And does modern day immigration contribute significantly at all to British culture, in an age when everything is globalised anyway?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cottonmouth)
    architecture,
    art.
    music,
    theatre.
    housing

    how can immigrants change any of that?


    :confused:

    Ummm... are you sure you are making this point?

    Of COURSE immigration changes architecture, brings in new influences for NEW buildings...

    if you don’t think it affects art, have a look at Theo Van Gough. I’m pretty sure you will begin to see less films in NED hat address touchy Islamic issues...

    its ludicrous to contend that immigration has NO effect on the above. to be honest I don’t think you could possibly be saying that - so please clarify.

    (Original post by cottonmouth)
    Lawz.You yourself said it isnt about your own feelings, its about your surroundings.


    let me just stop you right there. Surroundings dont just include the cathedral in your town, they include what shops and eateries are in your street, what films show at your local cinema, what languages you hear around you, etc etc...

    (Original post by cottonmouth)
    Well, the surroundings, are British culture, aren't they? As you keep saying, the here and now is British culture.


    What's your point? That our environment is unchanged by immigration?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lawz)
    You dont need to list things. You simply say in 20 years - will the culture be very different from what it is RIGHT NOW, and will immigration make that more likely. If the answer is yes, then immigration contributes to the destruction fo the current cultural status quo.
    Ok, you seem to be adopting a slightly different tone to the other argument. Basically you're saying that culture is constantly changing, immigration contributes in part to that (amongst many other things) and it can thus be inferred that immigration is partly responsible for Britain the way it is today being lost. Am I correct?

    I then ask you, why should immigration be singled out as a prime cause in that change? If culture is constantly changing and people wishing to preserve our present culture do so purely out of personal fondness for Britian circa 2006, then why should other causes of cultural change also not be targeted? Should we also not be saying 'No-one produce any more art, literature or music, for we wish to preserve the current cultural status of Britain.' 'No more film or other media must be imported in order to preserve the culture of current Britain'. Why single out immigration?

    Furthermore I direct you to point 2 of my previous post, does modern day immigration really play a significant role in changing culture when access to globalised cultures is so easy in the modern world?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lawz-)
    Sufficed to say that immigration changes such things, and increases, generaly teh speed of such change. For someone who likes things the way they are, immigration thus, to SOME extent is a bad thing.
    Exactly, that is the bottom line, immigration affects culture.
    Now good and bad are subjective terms in this case, what is good, what is bad, but it's clear that the more immigration the greater and faster the change, so the next question is, are the majority of people in the nation happy with the current speed and direction of change?
    If they are then we can assign the label good, to immigration, if they are not then we can assign some degree of "badness" to immigration.
    IMO, based on my experiances, I would suggest that the majority of people would prefer a slower speed of change, and more control over the direction, and therefore it would be a majority view that immigration is harmful to the culture of this nation.
    I read an interesting article by someone the other week about Toronto, Canada, where something like 1 million people have left their homes in the last ten years, because of the changing demographics of their city, and the effect it has had on the culture.
    I think if 1 million people feel displaced from a city then surely that is a bad thing.
    I'll try and dig the article up.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Laika)

    I then ask you, why should immigration be singled out as a prime cause in that change? If culture is constantly changing and people wishing to preserve our present culture do so purely out of personal fondness for Britian circa 2006, then why should other causes of cultural change also not be targeted? Should we also not be saying 'No-one produce any more art, literature or music, for we wish to preserve the current cultural status of Britain.' 'No more film or other media must be imported in order to preserve the culture of current Britain'. Why single out immigration?
    Cultural changes from within Britain constitute the extension and progression of British culture. Immigration involves the introduction of very foreign ( in the alien sense) concepts to our existing culture. It can thus be argued that immigration causes the removal of, rather than the progression of, British culture.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Laika)
    Too vague. How about patterns of though, social and moral values, traditions, language, art, music, politics?
    Getting there, certainly a lot better than "fish and chips"
    :p:


    Not so simple. Surely we should also be questioning the extent to which immigration affects British culture. Obviously it does to an extent. Foreign cuisines, music and art etc. But does this occur to the extent that it eradicates the existing British culture or does it merely add to and enrich the growing tapestry of British culture?
    Well of course it displaces to a certain degree.
    If we must stick with food (no wonder the world is so obese, listen to us all!) then think of meal times.
    How many meals do you have a day?
    If you have 3 meals a day, and 3 choices on the menu, and you had to have a different choice each meal, you would have each choice once.
    If you then add a further 3 choices, yes you have a greater choice, but if you can only eat 3 meals a day, then on any given day there are only 3 meals you can't eat, and three that are not eaten.
    If one, or more, of the not eaten meals is one from the original menu it's been displaced, it's lost some of it's value, and is on the path to being eradicated.
    Now some might argue that is through choice, but there are a number of variables that can take that choice out of your hands.
    If 3 of those meals never get chosen, then the menu will eventually return to 3 choices, and if they do not include the original 3 choices then something has been lost.
    yes?
    Think shops.
    What, according to a recent survey, is the shop that the great British public least like?
    Answer, Tescos.
    Now, what is the shop that sells more goods than any other shop?
    Answer, Tescos.
    Listen to the old ladies sitting on the bench at the bus stop with their Tesco shopping bags, they will be telling each other about how much they dislike Tescos, and much prefered Mr Lamb the butcher, when his shop used to be on the high street.
    Preference does not come into it though, there are other variables, and therefore Mr Lamb vanished, and Tescos conquered the world.
    The same is true with food, and other cultural things.
    It doesn't just come down to preference, there are other factors that come into play, and with a finite market place, either in retail, wholesale, or just finite space in a city, for building etc., if we have one thing come in, something else has to be displaced, and moved out.
    This is the affect that immigration, and for that matter globalisation, as well, has on our lives.
    We might prefer the original menu, but because of other factors, be forced to chose from a completely different menu that we do not like as much.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Laika)
    Ok, you seem to be adopting a slightly different tone to the other argument.
    I am doing NO such thing. I have been saying the same thing the whole time - indeed - do a search - youll see I have been saying it since before you joined TSR.

    (Original post by Laika)
    Basically you're saying that culture is constantly changing, immigration contributes in part to that (amongst many other things) and it can thus be inferred that immigration is partly responsible for Britain the way it is today being lost. Am I correct?
    Yes.

    (Original post by Laika)
    I then ask you, why should immigration be singled out as a prime cause in that change
    Should it? I dont know. Im notgiving you what I Want to happen. Capice?

    But ill give you an answer:

    a) It is capable of being controlled.

    b) It can be a VERY large component of change. As your posts actually confirm. Eg - "Considerable contributions to British culture have been made over the last half-century by immigrants from the Indian Subcontinent and the West Indies."

    c) Who says its singled out?

    d) Because immigrants often have different moral core concepts. These are highly important aspects of our culture.


    (Original post by Laika)
    If culture is constantly changing and people wishing to preserve our present culture do so purely out of personal fondness for Britian circa 2006, then why should other causes of cultural change also not be targeted?
    See above.

    (Original post by Laika)
    Should we also not be saying 'No-one produce any more art, literature or music, for we wish to preserve the current cultural status of Britain.' 'No more film or other media must be imported in order to preserve the culture of current Britain'. Why single out immigration?
    See above.

    (Original post by Laika)
    Furthermore I direct you to point 2 of my previous post, does modern day immigration really play a significant role in changing culture when access to globalised cultures is so easy in the modern world?
    Either it does or it doesnt.

    You cant claim it doesnt and then post this:

    Again in support of your argument:

    "Considerable contributions to British culture have been made over the last half-century by immigrants from the Indian Subcontinent and the West Indies."
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by poltroon)
    Cultural changes from within Britain constitute the extension and progression of British culture. Immigration involves the introduction of very foreign ( in the alien sense) concepts to our existing culture. It can thus be argued that immigration causes the removal of, rather than the progression of, British culture.
    Good point. So in order for British culture to maintain it's Britishness, it's not that it must remain constant, but that change must come about from within Britain itself and not from outside influences? The only problem with this argument is that it contradicts itself in some sense, in that modern Britain is a culture woven from so many different cultures and histories, as is the nature of British history and colonisation.

    It would be slightly hypocritical to claim now that immigration should not play a role in forming the culture of Britain, when historically immigration has been a big factor in forming our culture. I suppose that this argument rests on the belief that our current culture is preferable to any other, as Lawz has said and we wish to preserve it's current state. Surely though, the influence of outside cultures is irreversible now due to the nature of globalisation and the world community, not due to immigration alone.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 25, 2006

1,328

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.