Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Births to foreign born mothers approaching one in every three Watch

    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by matthewparker34)
    And I'm one of them. Is there an issue?
    Yes

    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    Imagine hating brown people so much that you fear babies
    Foreign = brown? Ok mate :yy:

    (Original post by applesforme)
    the babies will grow up to think of themselves as british
    Some of them will,* and some of these will be somewhat right to think so,** and most of society will agree in some cases***

    * Consider the fact that many radical Islamists are, in fact, not first generation migrants; relatedly, consider the fact that many first generation migrants emigrate here with, or are eventually joined by, sexual mates vs. the problems that kids born to disparate ethno-cultures can have with finding a mate (has been explored as part of the basis for social alienation associated with extremism e.g. presumably linked to rejection by females, who tend to favour white males [irrespective of their own ethnicity])

    ** If there is an ethno-cultural basis for divided loyalty and allegiance, and there usually is (consider blood and kinship, [religious] history, heritage, and customs, tribal and civilisational affinity), then they cannot be as fully British/committed as an indigenous Brit

    *** Most folks, myself included, can conceive of someone born to foreign parents as being British; indeed many of us would extend this to foreign born kids who nevertheless spent many of their formative years here. However, many of us will never think of someone from a distinct ethno-cultural background as being as e.g. English, Welsh, or Scottish, as an indigenous national (any more than we would consider ourselves as Nigerian as a regular Nigerian dude)

    (Original post by MrDystopia)
    I don't get the 'erosion of culture' thing when you consider not everyone who is not white considers themselves foreign
    The presence of distinct ethnicities scarcely erodes culture in and of itself, it is the ethno-culture they bring to the party, and the extent to which host populations are influenced by this, that colours the picture (for the most part, for the better)

    (Original post by astutehirstute)
    What is British?
    Intend to do a thread, and perhaps also an article, on the subject of what it is to be British/Western (in wake of Trumps comments about the need to stand up for Western values). In the mean time, here’s what I had to say on the subject a few years back

    Spoiler:
    Show
    (Original post by Foo.mp3)


    I don't conceive of many foreigners as being British just because they've managed to secure citizenship/a passport etc. What the government says, out of egalitarian idealism/PCness, to help patch up the failings in the way our economy is structured, or with reference to obligations under EU/UN etc, is not the be all and end all as far as most of us Brits are concerned (even some immigrants!)..

    People who are culturally distinct from my idea of Britishness I either don't see as very British, or don't see as British full stop if they lack lineage here; none of this is to say that I do not conceive of ethnic minorities as being British however, indeed some are arguably more 'British' than I, by my own standards:

    ✔ Standard of English (primarily spoken)
    ✔ Common values (founded in the tradition of the C of E but that doesn't necessarily mean being particularly religious/spiritual)
    ✔ A sense of modesty, humility, grit, and of the spirit of good sportsmanship and fair play
    ✔ A sense of individual responsibility/accountability
    ✔ A sense of collective/communal spirit, consciousness and conscientiousness
    ✔ A sense of our history, heritage, culture and traditions
    ✔ A sense of duty unto our fellow man, and unto queen and country

    (Original post by Whiskey&Freedom)
    Sadly feminism has undermined traditional family values so much that women are not producing the babies required to maintain our culture
    This hasn't happened by accident, either (see cultural Marxism and hyperconsumerist capitalism) :flute:

    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    Feminism has uprooted things so much that going back would hurt us more
    Kids these days.. no imagination :rolleyes:

    the easier you make it to balance childcare with careers, the more children they will have
    Women want, and many seriously think, they can have it all these days, and still have strong, healthy, sustainable relationships, offspring, and family units. Reality is a little different, in most cases, and anything from a bit of a disaster to a human catastrophe in many (seen it all too frequently, and the fatherlessness stats, and outcomes, speak for themselves) :sad:

    (Original post by Crumpet1)
    This is a disastrous population graph because few tax payers are supporting many elderly and pensioners
    Again, the youth of today just gobble up NWO sociopathic propaganda like hungry hippos:mute:

    Spoiler:
    Show
    Perhaps you’ve heard of productivity gains, and automation? Also, non-EEA migrants drain the exchequer by net £15 billion p.a.

    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    Muslim immigration, while it has given us kebabs and cheap labour, also has made us trade away tonnes of our individual freedoms to protect us (partially) from it
    Sharp end of the wedge. Again, looking to the fiscal picture: estimated economic participation is around 25% for females and 50% for males. Simply no economic case for permitting non-special case (wealthy/skilled) migrants from the Muslim world. Fantastic vote winner, however, if you happen to be a hyper-sentimental/social engineering (Labour) politician, however!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by astutehirstute)
    You did try, and thanks for that.

    But where is the shared history, the shared consciousness as you put it? That is the bit I don't get?

    What connection do the children of parents who come from outside the UK have to the the British experience of the Second World War, for example? Let alone Morris Dancing??

    My parents, grandparents lived through it. They fought for this country, were bombed by the Luftwaffe, lived under food rationing. So the whole Churchill, Spitfire, DDay stuff has a bit of resonance to me, although not that much if I am honest. It is history.

    What possible relevance has it to a second generation immigrant? There is no shared history, no shared consciousness.

    What am I missing here?
    2.5 million Indian soldiers fought for the allies in WW2, including many Brit Asian children grandparents!
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by astutehirstute)
    You did try, and thanks for that.

    But where is the shared history, the shared consciousness as you put it? That is the bit I don't get?

    What connection do the children of parents who come from outside the UK have to the the British experience of the Second World War, for example? Let alone Morris Dancing??

    My parents, grandparents lived through it. They fought for this country, were bombed by the Luftwaffe, lived under food rationing. So the whole Churchill, Spitfire, DDay stuff has a bit of resonance to me, although not that much if I am honest. It is history.

    What possible relevance has it to a second generation immigrant? There is no shared history, no shared consciousness.

    What am I missing here?
    The problem with this is that kids born nowadays, regardless of ancestry, will be very unlikely to have the kind of direct link to WW2 you describe, e.g. a grandparent who can remember living through it (they'd have to be at least into their 80s - substantially older than a typical new grandparent). By the time a child born today reaches adulthood, WW2 will have all but passed from living memory, just as WW1 has.

    The children and grandchildren of immigrants will acquire their consciousness of the British experience of WW2 the same way all the other kids will - in school, in the books they read, on TV programmes (e.g. documentaries on Rememberance Day and other anniversaries), from museums and memorials, etc. In the same sense that American schoolkids grow up with a strong consciousness of slavery and the Civil War, despite the fact that the last people with a living memory of either died in the 1950s. This is the process of how historical events become institutionalised "official" national collective memories.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anarchism101)
    The children and grandchildren of immigrants will acquire their consciousness of the British experience of WW2 the same way all the other kids will - in school, in the books they read, on TV programmes (e.g. documentaries on Rememberance Day and other anniversaries), from museums and memorials, etc. In the same sense that American schoolkids grow up with a strong consciousness of slavery and the Civil War, despite the fact that the last people with a living memory of either died in the 1950s. This is the process of how historical events become institutionalised "official" national collective memories.
    We acquire consciousness and a sense of connection to these things not because we happen to occupy the same geographic location, but because it was OUR ancestors who experienced them. How is an African kid ever going to feel a sense of connection that a native Briton would to the history of these Isles, when their ancestors had absolutely no involvement in it whatsoever? You think they are going to look through the history books, see the photographs and depictions of a people who are very visibly not of their own stock and think "Oh yes, that's my ancestral history right there"? Of course they won't. They may find it superficially fascinating, much in the same way I find much of non-European history fascinating, but they will never feel a connection with it, the same way I will never feel a connection with Chinese history. It will never serve to shape their identities, or sense of place and belonging in this world. Only their own ancestral history can do that, and that is ultimately what they will seek out.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anarchism101)
    The problem with this is that kids born nowadays, regardless of ancestry, will be very unlikely to have the kind of direct link to WW2 you describe, e.g. a grandparent who can remember living through it (they'd have to be at least into their 80s - substantially older than a typical new grandparent). By the time a child born today reaches adulthood, WW2 will have all but passed from living memory, just as WW1 has.

    The children and grandchildren of immigrants will acquire their consciousness of the British experience of WW2 the same way all the other kids will - in school, in the books they read, on TV programmes (e.g. documentaries on Rememberance Day and other anniversaries), from museums and memorials, etc. In the same sense that American schoolkids grow up with a strong consciousness of slavery and the Civil War, despite the fact that the last people with a living memory of either died in the 1950s. This is the process of how historical events become institutionalised "official" national collective memories.
    You mention the American Civil War, and that provides a really interesting example of shared history, shared consciousness, strangely enough. Not in the North, where it is taught in pretty vanilla, good versus evil terms, Lincoln the greatest President, the final unification of the nation, the Emancipation Proclamation, ya de ya.

    No, the nuanced, some might say tortured viewpoint has been inculcated in the South. Everyone (apart from a lunatic fringe) is pleased to see the end of slavery, but you will find universities there pointing out that the institution was on it last legs anyway, and had already been abolished peacefully in the British Empire and even Tsarist Russia. The fact that there was a war which killed ten per cent of the Southern population to end something that probably wouldn't have outlived a decade is regretted. And they know that Southern politicians were most to blame for that.

    The antebellum South is ridiculously romanticised, and there is a collective memory, a shared consciousness of Sherman's brutal campaign just before victory, as well of course as the humiliation of Reconstruction.

    You will see monuments to Confederate War heroes, the Confederate battle flag is still iconic with huge resonance, High Schools, parks are named after Robert E Lee and JEB Stuart. Not Bedford Forrest one hopes!

    Or at least that was the case when the population remained relatively homogenised compared to the northern and western states.

    Recently there has been much immigration from both the rest of the US and Hispanic America and that shared consciousness has weakened. As you say it is not part of living memory any more. So the battle has been to rename these schools and tear down these monuments. To remove the confederate flag from State flags. To destroy that shared history, that shared consciousness as wallowing in victimhood, and of course racist.

    I can't see many analogies with the UK (except that ethnically it is the part of America which most resembles us pre WW2 excluding the descendants of slaves) but I do seem to have uncovered a small piece of evidence of a shared history, a shared consciousness being weakened by an influx of newcomers.

    You may say for the better, and you could be right in that. But when you go to the American South it still has a discrete culture, different from everywhere else. And I don't know for how much longer that will be the case.

    And in that the UK may resemble it? We may be losing our shared consciousness too? I mean we don't teach it do we? How many people on here know anything of Magna Carta, the Norman Conquest, the English Revolution? The only history anyone is taught IS. WW2, WW1, and Nazi Germany.

    We have a rich, remarkable history. For it to be shared it needs to be known. And I would argue it isn't. History isn't seriously taught in schools and is a reviled subject at university.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    While it's clear that not all of these births are a problem (a third of that 28% are white Europeans who bar the second language won't be any different) i certainly don't view it as a good thing that ~20% of those born today may be of a different ethnic or cultural background (the later especially).

    With all that being said i consider the larger threat to be the continued rise in the average birth age and lack of substantial movement in terms of the native fertility rate. I read a quite convincing account some while ago that divorce is a major factor in this, especially as time has gone on and women have become as disloyal as men.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sarahsez)
    2.5 million Indian soldiers fought for the allies in WW2, including many Brit Asian children grandparents!
    I don't think that's relevant to this thread on the grounds of WW2 being a special case however i will say that irrespective of their ethno-cultural background, anybody from any nation which is prepared to give a decade of military service should be granted citizenship. Such a show of loyalty should not only be rewarded but encouraged.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    Imagine hating brown people so much that you fear babies. Lol.

    Anyway, the number of foreign births means little with regards to diversity. Around a third of these births are European, they don't help our diversity, after a generation they are to all intents and purposes white Brits.

    Britain can't really call itself diverse until its population reflects that of humanity as a whole. 87% white is still quite homogenous. The next generation will be, what, 70% white? Still homogeneous. Whites won't lose their majority for well over a hundred years. How is that diverse?
    Sigh - nobody fears the babies you wally, the point is if Britain is having so many foreign births to what degree is its culture and tradition protected? It's a stupid question in theory if it weren't for the prevalence of stupid people shouting 'das raceest' when it's pointed out integration whilst respecting and maintaining difference is critical for a cohesive society despite the fact in most areas of life this already happens. If my friend likes coronation street but I don't, I don't call them an Eastenderphobe and go on marches proclaiming their bigotry - I say fair enough but I still don't like it so bite me, and we continue as friends respecting that difference. Similarly, Britain should maintain a liberal western individualist tradition even if that means telling people no you can't commit honour killings, demand everyone wear a Burka or be stoned, nor can you beat up on black people for the colour of their skin etc etc and not have our police scared to uphold these traditions via law (rotherham for example). Be Muslim, Sikh, Athiest, black, white, asian, etc it doesn't matter - integrating cultures is great as people learn and expand their world whilst maintaining their identity. Setting cultures against each other by stoking division and allowing special exceptions to certain groups is inevitably self destructive.

    It's not about how many people are black, white, arab, whatever. It's about culture and normality. About how people see themselves within their own national identity and they're scared that government doesn't protect their traditions as much as it does the traditions or cultures of others. A French person is as culturally different to an Englishman or Canadian as someone from Saudi Arabia, look at this extensive list of minor differences and that's just a few practical tips for driving https://h2g2.com/edited_entry/A2082863 (came to mind as I once had a hilarious discussion with a French person about the meaning of flashing your lights after a misunderstanding). The point is first white british or traditional british is as legitimate as any other form of identity and that it's hypocritical to demand the dilution of their culture to accommodate without requiring the same of others and second it demonstrates there is a problem with the amount of people we let in as demonstrated by our crumbling infrastructure, housing crisis, NHS and Police, and our huge population density compared to most of Europe. Letting people in is no bad thing. Causing detriment to everyone by not properly controlling it is.

    As is rightly argued we are not world police and do not get to change everyone elses country. But equally we should not have to shoulder the burden of their problems at manifest disadvantage. We help as many people as we are able, but should not throw our own citizens of any colour, race or creed on the fire for the purpose of good intentions. It is certainly not up to us to solve their poverty problems by allowing economic migration without safeguard or common sense in such instances. Nor is it our responsibility to save them if the problems caused by doing so are too great. The nation state, and the global system, can't survive such bleeding heart philosophy.

    (Original post by astutehirstute)

    What does "thinking themselves as British" mean, though? What is British?
    Isn't this the question. What really is the idea of British as an identity? Any discourse on this ends up rambling and uncertain which in itself is interesting.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    White natives are far too hedonistic to care about settling down and having a family. They've been indoctrinated to believe that the traditional family unit is bad and concepts like commitment and family values are restrictive and old fashioned.
    Why do we invariably see young white British harlots that are all too happy to appear on trashy TV programmes like Love Island and Naked Attraction? These days the mothers of natives even proudly praise the depraved behaviour of their offspring and are often complicit in encouraging them in such a direction.

    It demonstrates how far the abandonment of tradition and family values has allowed the rot to set in. The pursuit of pleasure with as little commitment as possible is the ultimate goal; so it is no surprise that natives see marriage and building a stable family unit as things to avoid.
    The non-natives: South Asians, East Asians and Africans in particular still hold marriage and the establishment of a robust family unit by a certain age in high regard.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GonvilleBromhead)
    Sigh - nobody fears the babies you wally, the point is if Britain is having so many foreign births to what degree is its culture and tradition protected? It's a stupid question in theory if it weren't for the prevalence of stupid people shouting 'das raceest' when it's pointed out integration whilst respecting and maintaining difference is critical for a cohesive society despite the fact in most areas of life this already happens. If my friend likes coronation street but I don't, I don't call them an Eastenderphobe and go on marches proclaiming their bigotry - I say fair enough but I still don't like it so bite me, and we continue as friends respecting that difference. Similarly, Britain should maintain a liberal western individualist tradition even if that means telling people no you can't commit honour killings, demand everyone wear a Burka or be stoned, nor can you beat up on black people for the colour of their skin etc etc and not have our police scared to uphold these traditions via law (rotherham for example). Be Muslim, Sikh, Athiest, black, white, asian, etc it doesn't matter - integrating cultures is great as people learn and expand their world whilst maintaining their identity. Setting cultures against each other by stoking division and allowing special exceptions to certain groups is inevitably self destructive.

    It's not about how many people are black, white, arab, whatever. It's about culture and normality. About how people see themselves within their own national identity and they're scared that government doesn't protect their traditions as much as it does the traditions or cultures of others. A French person is as culturally different to an Englishman or Canadian as someone from Saudi Arabia, look at this extensive list of minor differences and that's just a few practical tips for driving https://h2g2.com/edited_entry/A2082863 (came to mind as I once had a hilarious discussion with a French person about the meaning of flashing your lights after a misunderstanding). The point is first white british or traditional british is as legitimate as any other form of identity and that it's hypocritical to demand the dilution of their culture to accommodate without requiring the same of others and second it demonstrates there is a problem with the amount of people we let in as demonstrated by our crumbling infrastructure, housing crisis, NHS and Police, and our huge population density compared to most of Europe. Letting people in is no bad thing. Causing detriment to everyone by not properly controlling it is.

    As is rightly argued we are not world police and do not get to change everyone elses country. But equally we should not have to shoulder the burden of their problems at manifest disadvantage. We help as many people as we are able, but should not throw our own citizens of any colour, race or creed on the fire for the purpose of good intentions. It is certainly not up to us to solve their poverty problems by allowing economic migration without safeguard or common sense in such instances. Nor is it our responsibility to save them if the problems caused by doing so are too great. The nation state, and the global system, can't survive such bleeding heart philosophy.



    Isn't this the question. What really is the idea of British as an identity? Any discourse on this ends up rambling and uncertain which in itself is interesting.
    Very good post.

    I think we can all sense that we are living through something quite extraordinary in demographic terms. Statistics like this just confirm what we all see with our very eyes, a nation being completely transformed in one lifetime. - ours.

    We don't know what is going to be the end result of all this, but we DO know it is seismic, and irreversible.

    I find the lack of in depth discussion about it in the media very striking. It isn't a taboo subject, but doubts about the happy ending to all this are discouraged..

    Frowned upon in polite society. Diversity and multiculturalism have become a secular religion.

    Other religions have proven, are proving something of a disappointment. One hopes this doesn't too...
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Tje whites will be overun by non whites. The rise Terminatoresque is called for! The white culture & civilisation is under threat! Caucasians will no longer be a majority in their OWN country. I mourn I mourn oh I MOURN

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    There seems to be an awful lot of nostalgia about a Britain that never was on this thread. A bizarrely and ambiguously ill defined era in which everything was just great that we should hark back too.

    This thread shows that some on the political right are becoming more obsessed with identity politics than the social justice warriors are.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Crumpet1)
    An ideal population graph looks a pyramid, with many babies graduating to few old people. This is good because it shows many young peoples' taxes supporting fewer old people/pensioners.

    But most western countries' graph currently look like a coffin, with a small number of young people, widening out to the baby boom generation (who are hitting pension age) and then narrowing again to older pensioners. This is a disastrous population graph because few tax payers are supporting many elderly and pensioners

    The UK is actually quite lucky. Through our immigration programme and the comfortable birthrate (even if that is supported by a large proportion of births by first generation Brits) we have more of a column graph going on. Whilst it is not the ideal pyramid, we do have far more young tax payers in proportion to our pensioners, compared to many other countries.

    We need the birthrate to support the babyboomers who are about to be pensioners. It doesn't matter who is doing the giving birth, we need those young people for economic reasons.

    Nobody pointed out this basic truth to the racist elements in the Brexit vote, sadly.
    This poster is so mistaken.
    "An ideal population graph looks a pyramid, with many babies graduating to few old people."

    No it does not Such a graph implies a population growing exponentially, a totally unsustainable un"green" model.

    The world needs an end to population growth, which, yes, does mean an older population profile.

    "This is good because it shows many young peoples' taxes supporting fewer old people/pensioners."

    Again you are wrong. Children, just like old people, are non working dependents and often remain so well into their twenties.

    "We need the birthrate to support the babyboomers who are about to be pensioners."

    Wrong again. The only way we could use immigrants to solve this problem is if we brought in young workers without their families on work permits then send them home so that we gain the benefit of the tax paid but do not carry the burden of their dependency, either children or their own old age.

    What we really need is some blue sky thinking to adapt to living with a much older demographic profile.

    Take a look at these population graphs:
    https://www.populationpyramid.net/afghanistan/2016/
    https://www.populationpyramid.net/poland/2016/
    https://www.populationpyramid.net/united-kingdom/2016/
    https://www.populationpyramid.net/un...-america/2016/
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by applesforme)
    The mothers/parents might be foreign but the babies will grow up to think of themsleves as british...just like me and lots of other people I know.

    actually, most descendants of asian and black communities retain their third world cultures. There is no integration in many of these cases.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    There seems to be an awful lot of nostalgia about a Britain that never was on this thread. A bizarrely and ambiguously ill defined era in which everything was just great that we should hark back too.

    This thread shows that some on the political right are becoming more obsessed with identity politics than the social justice warriors are.
    Nobody is suggesting there was ever a perfect period in our history. What we are saying is, our future will likely be considerably worse for us if these radical and unprecedented demographic shifts are not halted.

    And whether you think it should or not, identity, particularly ethnic identity, does matter to people. Whites are rediscovering this and the once popular, flowery notions of, "we're all equal", "one race, the human race", "diversity is our strength", are very rapidly falling out of favour.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wōden)
    Nobody is suggesting there was ever a perfect period in our history. What we are saying is, our future will likely be considerably worse for us if these radical and unprecedented demographic shifts are not halted.

    And whether you think it should or not, identity, particularly ethnic identity, does matter to people. Whites are rediscovering this and the once popular, flowery notions of, "we're all equal", "one race, the human race", "diversity is our strength", are very rapidly falling out of favour.
    Why are we still bothered about peoples nationalities?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by astutehirstute)
    That is a cheerful thought.

    What does "thinking themselves as British" mean, though? What is British?
    Drinking copious amounts of tea even though it's not even that good, and complaining profusely about minor weather problems.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by astutehirstute)
    ...increasing steadily since the 90's.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40655563

    Is this a fantastic phenomenon, proof of the remarkable diversity in our society? A harbinger of a glorious future society in which differences in colour, creed and language will disappear?

    Or evidence of one of the most remarkable demographic changes, over a similarly short period, ever witnessed in human history? The consequences of which for social cohesion are impossible to predict?

    Or neither of these, and something else?

    Your thoughts...
    Only if the fathers aren't from the same country as the mother, else it's not doing anything to blend skin colour, creed and language as you say. Plus no social cohesion because the immigrants are choosing to stay separate.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    No more half breed kids. Dont let your teen daughters out of your house until they are married otherwise they are easy prey for the feral rodents in clubs/on tinder.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Foo.mp3)
    Yes

    Foreign = brown? Ok mate :yy:

    Some of them will,* and some of these will be somewhat right to think so,** and most of society will agree in some cases***

    * Consider the fact that many radical Islamists are, in fact, not first generation migrants; relatedly, consider the fact that many first generation migrants emigrate here with, or are eventually joined by, sexual mates vs. the problems that kids born to disparate ethno-cultures can have with finding a mate (has been explored as part of the basis for social alienation associated with extremism e.g. presumably linked to rejection by females, who tend to favour white males [irrespective of their own ethnicity])

    ** If there is an ethno-cultural basis for divided loyalty and allegiance, and there usually is (consider blood and kinship, [religious] history, heritage, and customs, tribal and civilisational affinity), then they cannot be as fully British/committed as an indigenous Brit

    *** Most folks, myself included, can conceive of someone born to foreign parents as being British; indeed many of us would extend this to foreign born kids who nevertheless spent many of their formative years here. However, many of us will never think of someone from a distinct ethno-cultural background as being as e.g. English, Welsh, or Scottish, as an indigenous national (any more than we would consider ourselves as Nigerian as a regular Nigerian dude)

    The presence of distinct ethnicities scarcely erodes culture in and of itself, it is the ethno-culture they bring to the party, and the extent to which host populations are influenced by this, that colours the picture (for the most part, for the better)

    Intend to do a thread, and perhaps also an article, on the subject of what it is to be British/Western (in wake of Trumps comments about the need to stand up for Western values). In the mean time, here’s what I had to say on the subject a few years back

    Spoiler:
    Show



    This hasn't happened by accident, either (see cultural Marxism and hyperconsumerist capitalism) :flute:

    Kids these days.. no imagination :rolleyes:

    Women want, and many seriously think, they can have it all these days, and still have strong, healthy, sustainable relationships, offspring, and family units. Reality is a little different, in most cases, and anything from a bit of a disaster to a human catastrophe in many (seen it all too frequently, and the fatherlessness stats, and outcomes, speak for themselves) :sad:

    Again, the youth of today just gobble up NWO sociopathic propaganda like hungry hippos:mute:

    Spoiler:
    Show

    Perhaps you’ve heard of productivity gains, and automation? Also, non-EEA migrants drain the exchequer by net £15 billion p.a.

    Sharp end of the wedge. Again, looking to the fiscal picture: estimated economic participation is around 25% for females and 50% for males. Simply no economic case for permitting non-special case (wealthy/skilled) migrants from the Muslim world. Fantastic vote winner, however, if you happen to be a hyper-sentimental/social engineering (Labour) politician, however!
    What's wrong with with being foreign kid? Or born to foreign parents? I'm doing just fine....
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Should Spain allow Catalonia to declare independence?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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

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