Skip to comments.Video Image of Britain's Colonisation
Posted on 10/08/2013 5:08:42 PM PDT by Enza Ferreri
If this is not the essence of colonialism I don't know what is.
A bunch of non-British pontificating on what the core values of Britain are or should be. We have here, on a BBC programme, one of the endless series of debates on "what is Britishness" that have been part of the UK public discourse only since the arrival on these shores of vast numbers of people belonging to the ethnic, religious and geographic groups represented by most debaters in this video (that you can see by clicking on the "Enza Ferreri Blog" link).
Can you imagine 60, 100, 200 years ago people having discussions on what Britishness was? Everybody knew what it was until mass, uncontrolled immigration from the Third World started and never stopped.
I found this comment to the video on YouTube spot on: "all because you non-whites have a British accent it doesn't make u British".
That being born and bred in this country does not provide a national identity or guarantee national loyalty, as is too often wrongly accepted, is demonstrated by an Asian man in this discussion. He openly declares that he was born and educated in Britain but nevertheless his sense of identity is precisely not having that identity, indeed he goes as far as saying that Britishness means not having an identity.
He was also very good at tying himself in (il)logical knots when he told a Hindu woman that her way of thinking was "unBritish". How can you define what is unBritish if you haven't defined "British", since in his opinion that word is tantamount to nothing?
It's disingenuous of "Professor of Poetry" Benjamin Zephaniah to say that multiculturalism has been part of Britain since the time of the ancient Celts, Picts and Romans, although that claim is a staple of the usual pro-multi-culti argument.
What he's referring to was not multiculturalism. That was war of different peoples against each other. The Celts were in Britain first, then they were conquered by the Romans. After the Romans eventually left, the Celts fought against the Angles and the Saxons, and finally retreated to Wales, Scotland and Cornwall. Then it was the turn of the Vikings to war with the Anglo-Saxons, and after them the Normans invaded and dominated England.
It was violence and invasion, and it was bloody.
Make no mistake. Current immigration levels and the imposition of multiculturalism are entirely new historical phenomena without any precedent not ony in the history of Britain but also of Europe.
It is an experiment carried out on the skin of the indigenous populations. Like all experiments, it can very badly go wrong, and there are numerous signs everywhere that it is.
And, as the TV debate in the video truthfully represents, the natives are marginalised voices in this experiment and the decisions made about it, while the ethnic (for now) minorities have a much greater weight.
This video shows the new reality of the country: invasion and colonisation.
You can’t willingly import a bunch of savages, pay them to do nothing, and not expect things to explode. And explode they will.
Title sounds like what liberals call the British Empire.
they tried paying imported savages to do nothing previously.
Eventually they decided that paying the Danegeld didn’t work, because if you ever paid the Danegeld, you never got rid of the Dane.
The people defending 'British values' in remarking that history, language, culture, architecture, and literature are the things which define Britishness are all perfectly correct, but I'd have to agree at least in part with the black guy in dreadlocks who was against including Monarchy in that list of British traits. As an American, I can only sympathize with him -- considering our American history of revolution against the British crown -- but at the same time if he doesn't like it he can go back to whatever Caribbean island his ancestors came from (or were dragged from) and live in the ganja fields.
I've personally seen the British 'Republican' anti-Monarchists handing out pretty convincing political tracts in London, but dang: They're about 238 years late to the game and on the wrong continent to boot.
The Iranian guy who essentially says that anti-Britishness is the epitome of being British ought to get tossed right out on his ear.
I will say that the Indian lady seems to know a good thing when she's got it, even if she stated it for the wrong reason of 'multiculturalism'. Heck, *anything* beats being in India.