Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Albatross wrote:
What's your point?

My point is that I am British, even the BNP would probably call me British, even though I don't count myself as such and it is purely down to the vagaries of history. Anycome coming from a similar culture (i.e European) will be as British as I am and anyone from a second generation immigrant family from anywhere in the world will be as British as I am. Large parts of the population of Scotland and Wales will be in the same boat as me. In effect Britian has its own internal immigrants and has done for generations.

The only real issue with immigration is if it outstrips our public services capacity to cope. Aside from that I genuinely don't care.

Palindrome wrote:

 Albatross wrote:
What's your point?

My point is that I am British, even the BNP would probably call me British, even though I don't count myself as such and it is purely down to the vagaries of history.

All I'm getting from you is teenage angst, to be quite honest.

Anycome coming from a similar culture (i.e European) will be as British as I am

Nope. And also, why do you make that assertion? Have you ever been abroad? There are quite striking cultural differences between certain European countries. Is it simply just a skin-colour thing for you?

Because it isn't for me.

...and anyone from a second generation immigrant family from anywhere in the world will be as British as I am.

Not if they don't integrate properly. Would you describe the 7/7 bombers as being 'as British as you are'?

Immigration? I don't give a toss.

Now we're getting to it. You don't care. Well more of us do than don't, so just deal with it. The next party that offers a serious solution to our immigration problems will probably sweep the board, because this is something that concerns a lot of people. We aren't all racists, we aren't all xenophobes, we don't all read the tabloids and we don't all have an irrational fear of change. We just like our country the way it is.

 Albatross wrote:
we don't all have an irrational fear of change. We just like our country the way it is.

Awesome way to use someone elses' argument for them.

Bullockist wrote:

Australia may have space, but we don't have water, our constraints on population aren't just as visible as yours. A few years ago victoria was under 10% water in it's dams.
I don't get the whole culture shock thing. I actually prefer to have more cultures around me. After visiting a country town for a week, i love going back to the city and seeing a plethora of people. Why does having a group of people who look different/talk different in an area bother you?

It's not about physical constaints. It's about walking out of your front door and feeling like you're in a different country. Yes the people are by and large friendly enough, but they're not "my" people. You forgot what a pleasure it is to talk to people of your own culture after spending so much time amongst people who aren't. I got a culture shock at work when i moved from the lines (95% foreign) to the warehouse, where I was greeted by "alright mate" rather than "hullo" in a thick polish or indian accent. Language is such an integral part of our culture that you only realise it once you're isolated from it in your place of work or your community.

Frazzled wrote:
ok thats British specific, we all know you tried to conquer the world, just to get better supper options).

Ironically we were also fairly tolerant of other religions, especially organised ones. The government permitted missionaries in India as private citizens (an important distinction, they did not have the backing of the state) and immediately banned them after popular anger at the missionaries. Britain is already more Muslim than India was or is Christian.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Palindrome wrote:

My point is that I am British, even the BNP would probably call me British, even though I don't count myself as such and it is purely down to the vagaries of history. Anycome coming from a similar culture (i.e European) will be as British as I am and anyone from a second generation immigrant family from anywhere in the world will be as British as I am. Large parts of the population of Scotland and Wales will be in the same boat as me. In effect Britian has its own internal immigrants and has done for generations.

You can't claim that because xenophobia isn't directed against one group, that it is logically invalid against other groups.

 Albatross wrote:

And where do you get the idea that our identity has been cobbled together from the 'best bits' of other cultures?

I imagine he gets it from the fact that Britishness is a conglomeration of English, Scottish, Welsh, and Irish culture. Although I think its fair to say that English culture is the primary contributor.

 Albatross wrote:

All I'm getting from you is teenage angst, to be quite honest.

While all I am getting from you is xenophobia to be quite honest, mixed in a with a fear of change.

I have not only been abroad I have lived abroad for about 3 years all told. Have you been in the Gaidlhealtachd, do you even know what it is?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Albatross wrote:

Not if they don't integrate properly. Would you describe the 7/7 bombers as being 'as British as you are'?

And how many of them were there?

 Testify wrote:

You can't claim that because xenophobia isn't directed against one group, that it is logically invalid against other groups.

Xenophobia is always irrational (I assume by 'logically' you meant 'rationally'.) it is part of the definition of the word.

But yes, you are correct that not fearing one group does not imply that you shouldn't fear any group. However, the converse is also true. Fearing the immigration of conservative Muslims does not justify the fear of Poles.

 Albatross wrote:
We just like our country the way it is.

Thats the thing though, you can never keep it the way it is. You can try to limit immigration all you wish but the next generations 'Britishness' will be as different from ours as ours is from our parents.

 dogma wrote:

 Albatross wrote:

And where do you get the idea that our identity has been cobbled together from the 'best bits' of other cultures?

I imagine he gets it from the fact that Britishness is a conglomeration of English, Scottish, Welsh, and Irish culture. Although I think its fair to say that English culture is the primary contributor.

Britishness *is* English, Scottish, Welsh and Irish cultures. Just as American is Texan, Californian, New Englander etc.

 Testify wrote:

 dogma wrote:

 Albatross wrote:

And where do you get the idea that our identity has been cobbled together from the 'best bits' of other cultures?

I imagine he gets it from the fact that Britishness is a conglomeration of English, Scottish, Welsh, and Irish culture. Although I think its fair to say that English culture is the primary contributor.

Britishness *is* English, Scottish, Welsh and Irish cultures. Just as American is Texan, Californian, New Englander etc.

A Texan or pretty much any one else would be quite offended to be lumped in with the latter two groups listed there...

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:

 Testify wrote:

 dogma wrote:

 Albatross wrote:

And where do you get the idea that our identity has been cobbled together from the 'best bits' of other cultures?

I imagine he gets it from the fact that Britishness is a conglomeration of English, Scottish, Welsh, and Irish culture. Although I think its fair to say that English culture is the primary contributor.

Britishness *is* English, Scottish, Welsh and Irish cultures. Just as American is Texan, Californian, New Englander etc.

A Texan or pretty much any one else would be quite offended to be lumped in with the latter two groups listed there...

I thought the USA was quite big in the States?

 Testify wrote:

Britishness *is* English, Scottish, Welsh and Irish cultures. Just as American is Texan, Californian, New Englander etc.

So it is a combination of all the best bits of a series of other cultures?

 Testify wrote:

Bullockist wrote:

Australia may have space, but we don't have water, our constraints on population aren't just as visible as yours. A few years ago victoria was under 10% water in it's dams.
I don't get the whole culture shock thing. I actually prefer to have more cultures around me. After visiting a country town for a week, i love going back to the city and seeing a plethora of people. Why does having a group of people who look different/talk different in an area bother you?

It's not about physical constaints. It's about walking out of your front door and feeling like you're in a different country. Yes the people are by and large friendly enough, but they're not "my" people. You forgot what a pleasure it is to talk to people of your own culture after spending so much time amongst people who aren't. I got a culture shock at work when i moved from the lines (95% foreign) to the warehouse, where I was greeted by "alright mate" rather than "hullo" in a thick polish or indian accent. Language is such an integral part of our culture that you only realise it once you're isolated from it in your place of work or your community.

Wow, I've just found myself agreeing with Testify. The Mayans were right!

Anyways, This is very true. The Daily Mail had a wonderful article this past weekend about this very subject. We are living in (quite literally) an "unspoken apartheid". Until the language barrier is smashed by saying you MUST speak English to attend our schools, get a job here etc. then nothing is going to change. It's not racist to suggest this. It's no different from Israel where you must have a knowledge of Hebrew to become a citizen there.

 dogma wrote:

 Albatross wrote:

And where do you get the idea that our identity has been cobbled together from the 'best bits' of other cultures?

I imagine he gets it from the fact that Britishness is a conglomeration of English, Scottish, Welsh, and Irish culture. Although I think its fair to say that English culture is the primary contributor.

I'm not disagreeing with that, it's the implicit value judgement I reject. Acculturation doesn't occur by taking just 'the best bits' of other cultures, implying a conscious choice. That's not how it works.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:

 Testify wrote:

 dogma wrote:

 Albatross wrote:

And where do you get the idea that our identity has been cobbled together from the 'best bits' of other cultures?

I imagine he gets it from the fact that Britishness is a conglomeration of English, Scottish, Welsh, and Irish culture. Although I think its fair to say that English culture is the primary contributor.

Britishness *is* English, Scottish, Welsh and Irish cultures. Just as American is Texan, Californian, New Englander etc.

A Texan or pretty much any one else would be quite offended to be lumped in with the latter two groups listed there...

No I am ok with New Englanders. Many are cool. Others are just misguided. Its because of the lack of queso in their diet.

People aren't dogs or horses, but anyway talking about an ideal level of immigration -- or rather, foreign residency -- what should that be set at?

Would it be acceptable to have 10% foreign born people?

What about foreigners who are here for only a short time, such as university students and company executives?

Palindrome wrote:

 Albatross wrote:

All I'm getting from you is teenage angst, to be quite honest.

While all I am getting from you is xenophobia to be quite honest, mixed in a with a fear of change.

I have not only been abroad I have lived abroad for about 3 years all told. Have you been in the Gaidlhealtachd, do you even know what it is?

My guess would be an area of Scotland in which Gaelic is widely-spoken.

*checks wikipedia*

Yep, pretty much. How do you account for the existence of such places when most people in Britain speak English? I mean, presumably they'd have to be pretty xenophobic and frightened of change, right?

And if you think I'm xenophobic, I advise you to dig out your English textbooks and brush up on your skills a wee bit. I'm an educated man. I've lived overseas in a non-english speaking country. I have foreign friends. It might be convenient for you to paint me as an ignorant xenophobe because you lack the tools to make any other argument, but people like me typically tend to be a thorn in the side of the liberal establishment precisely because I'm not racist, I have had a liberal education, I've considered the arguments and I'm just not buying them. Culture is a site of negotiation, which means I have every right to resist cultural change. It's not based on ignorance, it's based on preference. I prefer my my country to remain the way it is because I sincerely believe that incoming cultures have nothing of much value to offer Britain in this day and age. That might sound chauvinistic, but there's a little bit of chauvinist in all of us if we're being truly honest. Take yourself, for example.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
People aren't dogs or horses, but anyway talking about an ideal level of immigration -- or rather, foreign residency -- what should that be set at?

Would it be acceptable to have 10% foreign born people?

What about foreigners who are here for only a short time, such as university students and company executives?

See, this is a discussion worth having. The truth is, I'm not sure it's a question of quotas, but of 'quality'. What does an incoming person contribute to British society? Do they speak English? Do they understand and respect British customs? Do they have special skills, and a job waiting for them in a shortage area? Do they have enough cash to support themselves? We should be asking people why they actually want to come here, specifically.

To be honest, these are probably issues that are already looked at as part of the process, but something seems to be going wrong. I put it down to EU freedom of movement laws, actually. I've witnessed them firsthand when I moved to Spain - it was ridiculously easy to migrate as an 'unskilled' (as I was at the time) worker.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
People aren't dogs or horses,

This is true. However, with technology one day we can overcome our genetic inferiority.

"You don't see them fething each other over for a god damn percentage." Ripley on Aliens vs. People.

 Albatross wrote:

Yep, pretty much. How do you account for the existence of such places when most people in Britain speak English? I mean, presumably they'd have to be pretty xenophobic and frightened of change, right?

The Gaidhealteacht is pretty much dead, mostly due to economic reasons as I have already explained. It is a relic of the UK's truly multicultural past. What I have been trying to explain to you is that there has never been such as thing as British culture and the UK mainland contains(ed) some distinct native cultures far removed from the standard 'English' one. What does it matter is these are replaced with non native cultures?

And if you think I'm xenophobic, I advise you to dig out your English textbooks and brush up on your skills a wee bit.

So why do you think that I am exuding teenage angst when I am neither a teenager nor have been showing any signs of anxiety?

.

The only discussion worth having about immigration is one on economics. Cultural dilution and all the rest is simply gak.

Palindrome wrote:

 Albatross wrote:

Yep, pretty much. How do you account for the existence of such places when most people in Britain speak English? I mean, presumably they'd have to be pretty xenophobic and frightened of change, right?

The Gaidhealteacht is pretty much dead, mostly due to economic reasons as I have already explained. It is a relic of the UK's truly multicultural past. There has never been such as thing as British culture.

And if you think I'm xenophobic, I advise you to dig out your English textbooks and brush up on your skills a wee bit.

So why do you think that I am exuding teenage angst when I am neither a teenager nor have been showing any signs of anxiety?

.

The only discussion worth having about immigration is one on economics. Cultural dilution and all the rest is simply gak.

Horse gak. If immigrants don't bring new attractive dishes for the eating, they shouldn't be let in.

 Frazzled wrote:

Horse gak. If immigrants don't bring new attractive dishes for the eating, they shouldn't be let in.

Americans should be turned back at the ports then

Palindrome wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

Horse gak. If immigrants don't bring new attractive dishes for the eating, they shouldn't be let in.

Americans should be turned back at the ports then

Mmmm... lets see :
Chicago style pizza, Canjun/Creole, Tex Mex, California fusion, Southern Style, Texas barbeque, DamnYankee (er New England) clam chowder, frankfurters, hamburgers, chocolate, Mexcan food, maple syrup, Brazilian and Argentinian cuisine, on and on and on and oh yea:

CANADIAN FREAKING BACON!

 Frazzled wrote:

CANADIAN FREAKING BACON!

The clue is in the name, very few of them are actually from the US.

Palindrome wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

CANADIAN FREAKING BACON!

The clue is in the name, very few of them are actually from the US.

You said American. Thats two continents boyo.

Frankly our cuisine crushes Britain. Your big claim to fame is...haggis.

 Frazzled wrote:

You said American. Thats two continents boyo.

Think of it was revenge for all the times that americans have called the UK 'England'.

 Frazzled wrote:

Palindrome wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

CANADIAN FREAKING BACON!

The clue is in the name, very few of them are actually from the US.

You said American. Thats two continents boyo.

Frankly our cuisine crushes Britain. Your big claim to fame is...haggis.

Your obsession with haggis will be your weakness.

Palindrome wrote:

 Albatross wrote:

Yep, pretty much. How do you account for the existence of such places when most people in Britain speak English? I mean, presumably they'd have to be pretty xenophobic and frightened of change, right?

The Gaidhealteacht is pretty much dead, mostly due to economic reasons as I have already explained. It is a relic of the UK's truly multicultural past. What I have been trying to explain to you is that there has never been such as thing as British culture and the UK mainland contains(ed) some distinct native cultures far removed from the standard 'English' one. What does it matter is these are replaced with non native cultures?

And if you think I'm xenophobic, I advise you to dig out your English textbooks and brush up on your skills a wee bit.

So why do you think that I am exuding teenage angst when I am neither a teenager nor have been showing any signs of anxiety?

.

The only discussion worth having about immigration is one on economics. Cultural dilution and all the rest is simply gak.

No, it isn't. I don't know how you have these kinds of discussions as to the importance of Culture in Britain, but in Canada we're pretty much beaten over the head with them every time we read the news. Quebec has huge culture complex, Natives have huge culture complex, really the only people who don't give a hoot about culture in Canada is the WBEC (White British/European Christians) because they are still the dominant culture in most places outside of major cities and Quebec/reserves. Having a discussion on one's culture and what one would like to preserve from it for the succeeding generations is a good discussion to have.

Frazzled wrote:

Palindrome wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

Horse gak. If immigrants don't bring new attractive dishes for the eating, they shouldn't be let in.

Americans should be turned back at the ports then

Mmmm... lets see :
Chicago style pizza, Canjun/Creole, Tex Mex, California fusion, Southern Style, Texas barbeque, DamnYankee (er New England) clam chowder, frankfurters, hamburgers, chocolate, Mexcan food, maple syrup, Brazilian and Argentinian cuisine, on and on and on and oh yea:

CANADIAN FREAKING BACON!

So called "Canadian Bacon" is actually an american invention. What you people call Canadian Bacon is just called ham here. Unless you're talking about Back Bacon or Peameal Bacon, but I have never heard nor seen of those bacons in the US, and our family friend from Houstan Texas always attempts to smuggle in some Peameal bacon when she goes back after the holidays because she has yet to find it in America.

 Frazzled wrote:

Palindrome wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

CANADIAN FREAKING BACON!

The clue is in the name, very few of them are actually from the US.

You said American. Thats two continents boyo.

Frankly our cuisine crushes Britain. Your big claim to fame is...haggis.

Not a fan of sandwiches, then? Also, the fact that you cited chocolate as a great American culinary export is laughable, not least because American chocolate tastes of arse compared to ours. There's a lot of good American food though, as long as you don't mind consuming your daily calorific allowance in one sitting...

British..chocolate...hah hah. Now if we're talking Swiss maybe, but British???

 Frazzled wrote:
British..chocolate...hah hah. Now if we're talking Swiss maybe, but British???

Frazzled, British chocolate takes American chocolate out for a boozy dinner, beds it, does terrible things to it whilst it's too drunk to complain and then never calls it again. Hershey's is especially rancid.

Bask in the wonder of it.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/8414488.stm

Anyone who has performed a chocolate taste test will know that compared with its British counterpart, American chocolate has a distinctly different flavour. To many, Hershey's chocolate has a more bitter, less creamy taste than its British equivalent, and seems to have a grittier texture.
It all comes down to what exactly chocolate is.
In the UK, chocolate must contain at least 20% cocoa solids. In the US, on the other hand, cocoa solids need only make up 10%.
A Cadbury Dairy Milk bar contains 23% cocoa solids, whereas a Hershey bar contains just 11%.