Am I wrong to think like this?

[MintPlumbing 10]

you say arrived here? from where? wouldnt that make them immigrants? Oo

 

I think you need to look at the definition of immigrant, moving from Yorkshire to Nottinghamshire wouldn't make someone an immigrant because they are not moving from one country to permanently settle in another country. The human population spread out long before any countries were established therefore most of the world humans are not the descendants of immigrants. But even if they were immigrants it's irrelevant, according to your idea everyone on earth is an immigrant therefor everyone should be allowed to live anywhere they like, its not a very practical idea.

[SevenRivers 10]

Spot on sir. What is british anyway?

 

If Britishness, our culture etc cannot be defined as is being claimed, then surely something that can't be defined really doesn't exist....clearly an absurd proposition, because whether you choose to recognise it or not, Britishness and a unique culture belonging to these islands does exist, and it doesn't need defining within a limited terms or scope to know that it exists.

 

Let's assume we don't have any unique culture. If we lack a unique culture, then where or what are we same as? Perhaps our closest neighbours, Ireland, France, Netherlands or Belgium?

 

Is our culture the same as Ireland, France, Netherlands or Belgium? Is it exactly the same as anywhere else?

 

Only the forum fools desperate to do the country down push the notion of no such thing as British culture.

[TJC1 10]

If Britishness, our culture etc cannot be defined as is being claimed, then surely something that can't be defined really doesn't exist....clearly an absurd proposition, because whether you choose to recognise it or not, Britishness and a unique culture belonging to these islands does exist, and it doesn't need defining within a limited terms or scope to know that it exists.

 

Let's assume we don't have any unique culture. If we lack a unique culture, then where or what are we same as? Perhaps our closest neighbours, Ireland, France, Netherlands or Belgium?

 

Is our culture the same as Ireland, France, Netherlands or Belgium? Is it exactly the same as anywhere else?

 

Only the forum fools desperate to do the country down push the notion of no such thing as British culture.

 

What does it mean to be british? There is not one definitive answer.

 

---------- Post added 08-08-2015 at 13:40 ----------

 

And its fluid not static. Values and culture.

[psynuk 10]

ah yes sorry, I do tend to use the terms migrant and immigrant rather interchangeably.

There is a difference between the two, but it is a dictionary/legal difference.

 

Can you explain to me why it would be a bad idea to let people live where they like?

 

I'm of the opinion that if you can justify your use of the land then the other person can move along.

But if you can't then it's not yours to deny use of to someone else.

For instance Cornwall and the justification that over 200 sq/m is titled to one family.

Without going into the common land, national park, planning debate.

However on the whole, joe blogs from Sudan or wherever wanting to live here on this island has as much right to it as I do. What with us both being human beings

I'm not saying that I'm going to donate a bedroom or help him cross the channel, because in honesty I'm not.

But on a fundamental level I believe he has as much right to be here as I do.

 

---------- Post added 08-08-2015 at 13:47 ----------

 

If Britishness, our culture etc cannot be defined as is being claimed, then surely something that can't be defined really doesn't exist...

 

At what point does a pile of sand become a heap or a hill?

[TJC1 10]

I'm with the op.

Nobody owns the land, we are people of planet earth.

[psynuk 10]

I'm not doing the country down,

 

"British people and their efforts have made this country great."

 

My question is more to do with, how to continue with that, how it might change and evolve and how it can be justified to deny others the chance to become part of it on a moral level.

[TJC1 10]

I'm not doing the country down,

 

"British people and their efforts have made this country great."

 

My question is more to do with, how to continue with that, how it might change and evolve and how it can be justified to deny others the chance to become part of it on a moral level.

 

It's a great county because of freedoms, democracy and positive immigration The question is how to integrate all these different people into a cohesive, happy society.

 

---------- Post added 08-08-2015 at 12:58 ----------

 

While keeping richness of diversity. Some shared values.

 

---------- Post added 08-08-2015 at 13:02 ----------

 

As you quite rightly pointed out, on a moral level we should not deny others the chance to be part of our nation, rather embrace the fact we have freedom if travel and reciprocate.

[SevenRivers 10]

"British people and their efforts have made this country great."

 

Lots of people made this country great, British born and foreign. Does accepting that some foreign people have made great contributions to the country mean we should abolish the borders and let anybody in?

 

In the realms of social privilege there's not much higher than being born a white male, in England, in the 20th century. Seriously, we have pretty much every advantage it's possible to have as a human being; safety,freedom,education,health,justice,peace,opportunity,so on and so forth.

 

Those privileges are extended and afforded to everybody who lives here, not just the white English male.

 

Having these advantages, a certain proportion of our race want to deny the opportunity to others, often citing the damage they'd do to the 'English culture' by way of justification.

 

Racial prejudice here, opinions relating to wanting stronger border and immigration controls are not restricted to the white English.

 

Assimilation of/by modern foreigners can only be judged once they are assimilated, surely.

 

Nope, it can be judged by lack of assimilation or how well our cultural norms are accepted by the migrants.

 

They are not invading hordes and they are still arriving in little numbers compared to the likes of the norman conquest, which saw a 150% population increase, mostly due to immigration.

 

Are you seriously suggesting we shouldn't be concerned with immigration unless a 50%+ population increase from immigration was imminent. Delusional. Population of UK is circa 65 million, so lets not concern ourselves with immigration until another 30 million people have arrived. What a joke.

 

3200 bc takes you back as far as written recorded history goes, no family tree survives to prove their ancestry to this age. But according to some, none of that matters anyway because it's about the here and now.

Correct, it is the here and now that matters, because it is us and future generations that will have to live with the consequences of what we do in the here and now.

 

Well it doesn't cut both ways, you either accept that;

'England, UK, GB,whatever' is a melting pot of past immigration and therefore is not pure and certainly not documented and that 'don't let them in' is a tad hypocritical.

 

I tell you where YOU are hypocritical here. What you're saying in effect is, if you have any foreign blood anywhere in your ancestry, you must accept a singular view that fits with YOUR opinion.

 

What you're also doing, perhaps unwittingly but none the less, is espousing the racial pure blood rhetoric or the BNP and Nazis, for what you are saying is only racial pure bloods (as you see it) may hold an opinion that contradicts yours (perhaps wanting stronger immigration policy), without being, as you see it, a hypocrite.

 

So if a BME person wants stronger border controls, the way you see it, their ethnic background invalidates their opinion, because only the pure breed white British may hold such an opinion. I can't think of much more racist than that, which does make you racist, like it or not.

 

or

You try and argue that england has some kind of distinct or identifiable heritage that isn't based solely on the landmass and it's occupants.

 

Our culture isn't in any way definable, that bag of cats has been looked at on Sheff forum before and to no useful conclusion.

Our language - mixed race, our customs-mixed race, our royalty-foreign, our ancestors - mixed race, yet our overall influence is huge.

 

"isn't definable"...only because you want to see cultural definition within your own narrow boundaries and scope. Let's assume it can't be defined, doesn't mean things can't be identified as being part of our culture, regardless of their origin.

 

Some aspects of their native culture may well survive to become part and parcel of the British 'culture'. Many will fall by the way side and be consigned to the history books. In fact any imported customs that are considered regressive are not going to make the cultural cut imo.

 

This is where danger lay, imo. What you may think of as regressive (eg FGM, forced marriage, polygamy, honour crime etc etc) does survive and is highly complecent to think that it won't, it is self evident that much of this goes on in Britain today. Now whose fault is this I wonder? Is it the fault of the right wing leaning people of this country, who would expect and demand that our cultural norms and boundaries are accepted by the incomers, or the right on progressive left, who stifle debate and criticism of migrants and cultural groups, often throwing "racism" around to close down debate.

 

If things like FGM persist in this country, it certainly isn't because we've been too hard on those communities where it happens, it is because we have not been forceful enough in insisting where our boundaries are and what we collectively find unacceptable to us.

 

There'll always be little pockets of resistance to forward motion.

But I believe that the uk has been at the forefront of 'being great' for a long time precisely because we can argue and accept the differences of the people who live here while slowly yet deliberately pruning the chaff from the wheat.

 

What, over the coming years and generations do you think will survive this English form of cultural evolution and what will be cast aside?

 

Maybe we'll continue to breed suicide bombers, resentful of our way of life because it isn't how Allah or Mohammed would have wanted us to live.

Edited August 8, 2015 by SevenRivers

[tzijlstra 11]

No, the implication was definitely people, not opinion. People with views different to yourself are considered "insignificant" to you. A despicable way to describe almost any human being. It must put you in a difficult position when on one hand, you'll do anything to defend immigrants, and on the other, many hold views that make them insignificant to you (e.g. intolerance of homosexuality).

 

That is funny, because when it comes to immigrants from outside the EU I am strongly of the opinion that as the EU we need to find a solution that stops these people travelling here.

 

The difference between you and me is that I have the EU's interest at heart and you have that of the UK at heart. But carry on thinking I am a "lefty" because that is apparently the only form of distinction that exists in your simplistic (and therefore rather insignificant) world. Unlike you I believe the biggest failure of the UK is the system that exists here, mostly because the government is too stubborn to engage with the EU proper.

[Harrystottle 10]

That is funny, because when it comes to immigrants from outside the EU I am strongly of the opinion that as the EU we need to find a solution that stops these people travelling here.

 

Yes, it has to be this way. Because atm every country (most definitely including the UK) is very happy to palm the problem off onto somebody else's country.

 

It has to be a Europe wide solution.

[Hots on 10]

I'm with the op.

Nobody owns the land, we are people of planet earth.

 

:hihi:

[buck 11]

Back in 1968 I became an emigrant on my way to Canada. I had served many years in the RN, and had found a good job in Sheffield as a Field Engineer. All the same the old Naval wanderlust chipped in and I had to try my hand at being an immigrant. The plan was for a couple of years then back home to the UK. But within a year I was a full maniacal lover of the Montreal Canadiens hockey team, then the finest men on ice. In all my years in Canada was I ever made to feel unwelcome, and I took citizenship in 1973, just in time for my bosses to ask me if I would like to spend some time in New England. I moved to Massachusetts in 1977, and have lived in New England ever since. Once again I have never been made to feel unwelcome. I know Britain is crowded for its size, but immigration done properly is good for a country. Most immigrants want to do well for their new homeland, seeing their children thrive.