In your opinion, how do you define someone who is or isn’t British??

Yes it does. Being born in a different country but retaining the same genetics of your parents' ethnic group does not change your ethnicity. Also considering the growth of ethnic enclaves such as Irish, Polish, Indian areas of London mean these children would be brought up in their parents' culture, and even if they weren't in these areas their parents would bring them up with their own sense of community and common values.

Birth certificates do not come into it - passport ownership might; for example those not of a Saudi ethnic background born in Saudi Arabia are not entitled to Saudi passports or citizenship.

For example, say the son of a white Frenchman and woman, the father being in the air force, is born in Uganda and they live there,could be before or after the child reaches adulthood, and go back to France. Would the child or his parents call him/her with any sincerity Ugandan? Definitely no. Would the authorities? Possibly in terms of citizenship but not ethnicity and probably not nationality unless he/she accepted a Ugandan passport.

We're not talking about ethnicity, we're talking about national identity...

Note I never said being born in the country is required. However if you are born in a country you have automatic citizenship; you're gonna have to prove it if Saudi Arabia is a massive exception.

If the child has Ugandan citizenship then yes of course he is Ugandan. If the parents choose not to have him/her become a citizen and choose another nationality then of course no-one would say they are Ugandan.

It's really simple until you confuse ethnicity with it.

If the parents choose not to have him/her become a citizen and choose another nationality then of course no-one would say they are Ugandan.

No not anyone can be British. You would have to 1) not identify as another nationality 2) have British citizenship 3) be part of the British community/share British values.

Ancestry does not come into this whatsoever. Those children would be considered Chinese since they would have a Chinese birth certificate and be raised in the Chinese culture hence adhering to the Chinese community and values.



If you dont consider yourself British then why would you expect anyone else to? Just because you mostly speak English obviously by itself does not make you British. If you consider your identity to be Asian then whadyou know you will be perceived as Asian.

Ethnicity is a factor in national identity, just more subjectively.

Well you don't automatically get British citizenship if you were born in the UK according to gov.uk. You are also not automatically an Irish citizen if you were born on the island of Ireland.

You've completely missed the point. Nobody would call a caucasian French person Ugandan sincerely unless they were speaking in legal terms of citizenship, not nationality/ethnicity.

It's seriously not simple.

Are you daft?

Your just stating what I just said.

Muppet

Yes it does. Being born in a different country but retaining the same genetics of your parents' ethnic group does not change your ethnicity.

Birth certificates do not come into it - passport ownership might; for example those not of a Saudi ethnic background born in Saudi Arabia are not entitled to Saudi passports or citizenship.

For example, say the son of a white Frenchman and woman, the father being in the air force, is born in Uganda and they live there,could be before or after the child reaches adulthood, and go back to France. Would the child or his parents call him/her with any sincerity Ugandan? Definitely no. Would the authorities? Possibly in terms of citizenship but not ethnicity and probably not nationality unless he/she accepted a Ugandan passport.

They would be Ugandan, just white Ugandan, but only if they do not consider themselves French instead.

Exactly. Or take, for a real-world example, the former Vice-President (and briefly Acting President) of Zambia, Guy Scott. Scott is white, and was born to a Scottish father and an English mother. Nevertheless, Scott is not British/English/Scottish, he is Zambian.

Ok it's not automatic I take that back, but citizenship is required for national identity.

They would be Ugandan, just white Ugandan, but only if they do not consider themselves French instead.




You're the daft muppet that doesn't know what identity you are and expect someone else to tell you lmao

No not anyone can be British. You would have to 1) not identify as another nationality 2) have British citizenship 3) be part of the British community/share British values.

Ancestry does not come into this whatsoever. Those children would be considered Chinese since they would have a Chinese birth certificate and be raised in the Chinese culture hence adhering to the Chinese community and values.

Not really. British identity is ultimately, not particularly popular. People prefer their constituent country identities. Most people in England, Scotland and Wales say they are English, Scottish and Welsh respectively. Northern Irish Catholics mostly say they Irish, and those who don't generally say they are Northern Irish. The only part of Britain where most people regard themselves as British is the Northern Irish Protestant community.

Britain is, essentially, a multinational state, with distinct cultural minorities. For example, the Scots and Welsh languages both have more speakers than any immigrant language.

Hi all, I’m just curious about how you, in your opinion, would consider somebody who is or isn’t British?

As we all know, we are living in a more and more globalised world, with increasing mobility and transport meaning more movement between people, more immigration within the world meaning what defines a person’s nationality is becoming more complex now. A lot of people however are opposed to this globalisation, fearing loss of British cultural identity and would take the more traditional view that in order to be British is not only to born and bred in the UK, but to be primarily of British origin/have British ancestry as well. Whether we like it or not history and heritage are an important part of a persons identity.

For example take me I’m born and raised in England to Irish parents and I personally would find it quite difficult to call myself British/english given I have no British ancestry (mum is from NI however). However FWIW I actually moved to NI at 14, moving during school, still have an English accent today, and known to everyone as the “English guy” so by that token, given I don’t have an Irish accent, never played Gaelic games (Irelands no.1 sport), never learned Irish, never went to catholic schools, I don’t feel Irish and I wouldn't be accepted as properly Irish by the locals either. So I’ve come to conclusion I don’t have a proper nationality in actual fact, but not having British heritage I feel prohibits me from calling myself a true Brit.

However, I do want to make it clear that if a Black or an Asian person considers themselves British/English, I will too, I’ll consider people what they consider themselves to be, I just personally wouldn't feel comfortable being in that situation calling myself British (hence why I don't).

So who in your opinion, do consider a British person to be? (I've decided to poll this )

Mass immigration? Humans have always been moving and it is the UK that voted to join the EU in 1975 and sets the current points system immigration policy for Non-EU migrants. And how exactly is it forced social engineering. British citizens vote for their government, it's a democracy just because the majority of UK citizens do not believe in the same things as you do does not make it forced.