The article mentions a walk along the south bank and the writers observation of of an “example of an area of London that has been occupied by foreign people?”
Yeah, tourists, bonehead.
The 40% is a fabrication as well, it’s 45% “white british” with another 175,000 white Irish, one million “white other” and a mixture of British asian, british carribean and british africans. Or do they not count as British if their skin colour is other than white?
In Britain, like all of Europe, if you are not white—you are definitely an immigrant, first, second, or at most third generation. Unlike in the USA, non-whites don’t go back to much earlier than WWII. Might you be a citizen? Yes, and in that sense you’d be British. In about the same sense that 1/2 Kenyan Obama is a red-blooded American.
Foreign roots, culture, and race actually do happen to go hand and hand in Europe in a way they never have in America—that’s just a fact, and its not xenophobic or racist to admit that.
“The 40% is a fabrication as well, it’s 45% “white british”...”
The 45% white British includes Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish (who have their own national capital cities, Cardiff, Edinburgh and Belfast). Take away 5% to account for that and you are left with 40% white English people. The other 60% are NOT white and therefore NOT racially English, or they are foreign.
60% of the resident population of London is NOT ENGLISH, and their birth rates are a lot higher than the English, so eventually the English will be over-run by sheer weight of numbers. Ethnically cleansed because we were too “nice” to complain!