White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
White british births are now only 56% of total. No wonder the tpries are in trouble jeez. Bunch of m.r.ns
Wonder where this statistic is from? Because of the various changes (at least 10) to the Immigration Acts in the past 30 years, it would be difficult to look at a baby and decide if it is British or not. You would have to know the precise status of the parents and whether they were British automatically, or were working towards Citizenship or has ILR. All I can assume is that when asked the question, an answer is given which may or may not be legally sound.
Anyway good to see there are more 'British' births as the UK will be needing them. All you need is love, or in Musk's case a test tube.
What is this I keep hearing about Musk and IVF? Is he sex phobic??
I mean, I’m straight myself so can’t comment with 100% accuracy, but a visual inspection, combined with listening to his crap, would suggest the only way he could attract a woman would be to target a small minority through his cash.
It's a bit difficult to know how else Reeves could have responded, if she was never told anything about the complaint at the time and the bank decided not to take any action about the complaint. The claim about what the "initial stage" of the investigation found - that Reeves "appeared" to have broken the rules - seems to come from a single unidentified source. Isn't it a bit strange that this source, supposedly with "direct knowledge of the probe", couldn't tell the BBC anything about its final outcome, or even whether any conclusion was reached?
It is strange that this anonymous hit job is being pushed by the BBC. I'd expect it of the Mail or Telegraph.
There must be someone fairly senior in the BBC who is pushing this story. They should be named as well as the anonymous source.
If I were Reeves, I would treat it with total disdain.
Going after reporters for reporting things you don’t like?
Have you considered a job at the Trump Whitehouse?
I'm not a Reeves supporter and dislike many of her policies.
But this stinks.
I don't think the leaker is a rival in the Labour Party. It's too much of a coincidence as they would also have to have worked with Reeves in HBOS 15 years ago.
It is more likely that it is a hard core Tory who did work alongside Reeves and has come out with this story, anonymously and unsubstantiated, in order to harm Labour.
Others on here have then made up narratives to support their preferred story of "a thief in cabinet".
The odd thing is that the BBC has lowered its standards by running with this.
I suspect, but don't know, that the BBC reporters concerned think that they are Bob Woodwards. Pathetic.
I see the BBC is on the defensive on this. "However, the BBC has not reported that the case reached a formal conclusion, or that there was disciplinary action."
Not sure it stinks any more than any other politics. Dobbing in Johnson for his parties during lockdown?
The only important questions are, were the allegations true and, if they were, were they serious enough to make the targets position untenable?
In the case of Johnson this seems to be a clear yes to both questions.
In the case of Reeves, I have seen it posted on here and reported in the Times, without apparent challenge, that the whistleblower's claims were found to be substantially true, even if it didn't get to disciplinary action because she left.
So the only question that really then matters is whether they were serious enough to merit removing Reeves from her current position.
I don't know the answer to that one. It is more politics and public mood than a fact based decision.
But to claim it 'stinks' seems to be excusing any sort of bad behaviour no matter how severe simply on the grounds that you don't like whistleblowers.
We don't know that there was bad behaviour.
All we really know is that there is someone with a grudge against Reeves and/or the Labour Party and has made an unsubstantiated claim about events 15 years ago, and this has been taken up by the BBC.
The BBC has spoken to 20 people and seen the report from the preliminary investigation.
It’s not an “unsubstantiated claim”
It wasn't the report from the preliminary investigation. It was the whistle blower's original complaint that the BBC saw.
What did these 20 people say? "Sorry. I don't remember anything about this". Could be anything.
I think you're looking at this in the wrong way, if you're analysing what's been said critically to try to work out what evidence there is.
We're past all that these days. All that matters is how often you can get something in front of people's eyeballs, and what percentage of people will believe it if you get it in front of their eyeballs that often.
Not to say, of course, that the people who are lapping this up because they hate Rachel Reeves wouldn't be caterwauling to high heaven about how unjust it all was, if it was being said about a Tory politician.
It's a bit difficult to know how else Reeves could have responded, if she was never told anything about the complaint at the time and the bank decided not to take any action about the complaint. The claim about what the "initial stage" of the investigation found - that Reeves "appeared" to have broken the rules - seems to come from a single unidentified source. Isn't it a bit strange that this source, supposedly with "direct knowledge of the probe", couldn't tell the BBC anything about its final outcome, or even whether any conclusion was reached?
It is strange that this anonymous hit job is being pushed by the BBC. I'd expect it of the Mail or Telegraph.
There must be someone fairly senior in the BBC who is pushing this story. They should be named as well as the anonymous source.
If I were Reeves, I would treat it with total disdain.
Going after reporters for reporting things you don’t like?
Have you considered a job at the Trump Whitehouse?
I'm not a Reeves supporter and dislike many of her policies.
But this stinks.
I don't think the leaker is a rival in the Labour Party. It's too much of a coincidence as they would also have to have worked with Reeves in HBOS 15 years ago.
It is more likely that it is a hard core Tory who did work alongside Reeves and has come out with this story, anonymously and unsubstantiated, in order to harm Labour.
Others on here have then made up narratives to support their preferred story of "a thief in cabinet".
The odd thing is that the BBC has lowered its standards by running with this.
I suspect, but don't know, that the BBC reporters concerned think that they are Bob Woodwards. Pathetic.
I see the BBC is on the defensive on this. "However, the BBC has not reported that the case reached a formal conclusion, or that there was disciplinary action."
Not sure it stinks any more than any other politics. Dobbing in Johnson for his parties during lockdown?
The only important questions are, were the allegations true and, if they were, were they serious enough to make the targets position untenable?
In the case of Johnson this seems to be a clear yes to both questions.
In the case of Reeves, I have seen it posted on here and reported in the Times, without apparent challenge, that the whistleblower's claims were found to be substantially true, even if it didn't get to disciplinary action because she left.
So the only question that really then matters is whether they were serious enough to merit removing Reeves from her current position.
I don't know the answer to that one. It is more politics and public mood than a fact based decision.
But to claim it 'stinks' seems to be excusing any sort of bad behaviour no matter how severe simply on the grounds that you don't like whistleblowers.
We don't know that there was bad behaviour.
All we really know is that there is someone with a grudge against Reeves and/or the Labour Party and has made an unsubstantiated claim about events 15 years ago, and this has been taken up by the BBC.
The BBC has spoken to 20 people and seen the report from the preliminary investigation.
It’s not an “unsubstantiated claim”
It wasn't the report from the preliminary investigation. It was the whistle blower's original complaint that the BBC saw.
What did these 20 people say? "Sorry. I don't remember anything about this". Could be anything.
I think you're looking at this in the wrong way, if you're analysing what's been said critically to try to work out what evidence there is.
We're past all that these days. All that matters is how often you can get something in front of people's eyeballs, and what percentage of people will believe it if you get it in front of their eyeballs that often.
Not to say, of course, that the people who are lapping this up because they hate Rachel Reeves wouldn't be caterwauling to high heaven about how unjust it all was, if it was being said about a Tory politician.
Perhaps we might expect it from the Mail, but to have it come from the BBC is bizarre.
There’s definitely a underlying weirdness to the story.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
And a huge number of British citizens are non-white, often for several generations. It doesn't make their babies non-British. Take both current and previous Tory leaders for example.
If we are back to only white babies being valid then we are getting into a very bad place.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
The real problem, for social cohesion, is that the numbers are not evenly distributed.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
And a huge number of British citizens are non-white, often for several generations. It doesn't make their babies non-British. Take both current and previous Tory leaders for example.
If we are back to only white babies being valid then we are getting into a very bad place.
It sounds like Leon thinks non-white people should be reduced, but also white Irish people should be reduced, which has been tried with some success in British history.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
White british births are now only 56% of total. No wonder the tpries are in trouble jeez. Bunch of m.r.ns
Wonder where this statistic is from? Because of the various changes (at least 10) to the Immigration Acts in the past 30 years, it would be difficult to look at a baby and decide if it is British or not. You would have to know the precise status of the parents and whether they were British automatically, or were working towards Citizenship or has ILR. All I can assume is that when asked the question, an answer is given which may or may not be legally sound.
Anyway good to see there are more 'British' births as the UK will be needing them. All you need is love, or in Musk's case a test tube.
What is this I keep hearing about Musk and IVF? Is he sex phobic??
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
And a huge number of British citizens are non-white, often for several generations. It doesn't make their babies non-British. Take both current and previous Tory leaders for example.
If we are back to only white babies being valid then we are getting into a very bad place.
The same is true about the idea of drawing a line with everyone categorised on either the white side or the non-white side. It is utterly repulsive and it is basically the pencil test even if genetic or some other means are used.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
White british births are now only 56% of total. No wonder the tpries are in trouble jeez. Bunch of m.r.ns
Wonder where this statistic is from? Because of the various changes (at least 10) to the Immigration Acts in the past 30 years, it would be difficult to look at a baby and decide if it is British or not. You would have to know the precise status of the parents and whether they were British automatically, or were working towards Citizenship or has ILR. All I can assume is that when asked the question, an answer is given which may or may not be legally sound.
Anyway good to see there are more 'British' births as the UK will be needing them. All you need is love, or in Musk's case a test tube.
What is this I keep hearing about Musk and IVF? Is he sex phobic??
I mean, I’m straight myself so can’t comment with 100% accuracy, but a visual inspection, combined with listening to his crap, would suggest the only way he could attract a woman would be to target a small minority through his cash.
All he needs is one. Like the IRA, he only has to be lucky once.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
White british births are now only 56% of total. No wonder the tpries are in trouble jeez. Bunch of m.r.ns
Wonder where this statistic is from? Because of the various changes (at least 10) to the Immigration Acts in the past 30 years, it would be difficult to look at a baby and decide if it is British or not. You would have to know the precise status of the parents and whether they were British automatically, or were working towards Citizenship or has ILR. All I can assume is that when asked the question, an answer is given which may or may not be legally sound.
Anyway good to see there are more 'British' births as the UK will be needing them. All you need is love, or in Musk's case a test tube.
What is this I keep hearing about Musk and IVF? Is he sex phobic??
I mean, I’m straight myself so can’t comment with 100% accuracy, but a visual inspection, combined with listening to his crap, would suggest the only way he could attract a woman would be to target a small minority through his cash.
All he needs is one. Like the IRA, he only has to be lucky once.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
White british births are now only 56% of total. No wonder the tpries are in trouble jeez. Bunch of m.r.ns
Wonder where this statistic is from? Because of the various changes (at least 10) to the Immigration Acts in the past 30 years, it would be difficult to look at a baby and decide if it is British or not. You would have to know the precise status of the parents and whether they were British automatically, or were working towards Citizenship or has ILR. All I can assume is that when asked the question, an answer is given which may or may not be legally sound.
Anyway good to see there are more 'British' births as the UK will be needing them. All you need is love, or in Musk's case a test tube.
What is this I keep hearing about Musk and IVF? Is he sex phobic??
I mean, I’m straight myself so can’t comment with 100% accuracy, but a visual inspection, combined with listening to his crap, would suggest the only way he could attract a woman would be to target a small minority through his cash.
All he needs is one. Like the IRA, he only has to be lucky once.
People who are the richest man in the world don't tend to struggle to attract potential partners.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
And a huge number of British citizens are non-white, often for several generations. It doesn't make their babies non-British. Take both current and previous Tory leaders for example.
If we are back to only white babies being valid then we are getting into a very bad place.
Your last line is an attempt to veto Leon’s argument, and potentially have him banned (again).
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
What proportion of whiteness is required in a baby's ancestry for them to be classed as white? Or do you have to use a colour chart?
Probably self identification, as used by the Home Office and the rest of HMG
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
No, it’s not Britain, as I understand it
in the end a country is its culture and civilization and language and shared collective memory, what it feels itself to be
Mountains and landscapes and rivers and mighty forests are all great, but they do not make a nation. A nation is its people, and for them to prosper, or even exist, some crucial things must be shared
A Britain that is, say, 25% Muslim and 25% Hindu and 25% “other” and the white British - self identified - as the remaining quarter, is not the Britain I know and love. It might be great (I doubt it) it might be a disaster, it doesn’t even matter, it would not be the Britain I grew up in, nothing like it, and I find that deeply sad. And that is where we are heading on these numbers
That’s what I feel. Personally. And yet for some reason saying this is virtually a cancellable offence whereas for any other nation in earth it would be obvious common sense. Would the Saudis allow themselves to become a religious/ethnic minority in their own country? The Afghans? The Poles? The Russians? Anyone??
I’ve just been to the gym, and the rules are the rules
“Gin after gym, except before quim”
To the gin!
PB really would be better off without your alcoholic drivel.
I’m just about to have my first drink, actually
Cheers, mon vieux
Quim for me, if there’s some going. It’s been soooooo long. 🥺
And I started drinking hours before you on my day off.
Hey - watching this Arsenal team trying to create an opening is like watching a St Bernard try to tighten a screw using a Maggot, they are so mid table on this performance Arsenal won’t even make top 4. 😆
Gin After Gym, Except Before Quim
… is actually a rule invented by my then wife, the 21 year old Corbynite beauty (now a 29 year old raging Farageiste!)
She noticed that after the gym I got a surge of testosterone, and she didn’t want me wasting it on the Hendricks, she wanted it for herself, to be pleasured thereby. However, if she was not in the mood for sex (rare, but it happened) then I was allowed to go straight to the bottle, after my workout
GIN AFTER GYM, EXCEPT BEFORE QUIM
She was very wise for one so young
As I am skipping the stews tonight, I am having a G&T in Invite, on soi 8, feel free to join
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
In the time my kids have been at junior school (2017-present), the school has gone from 95% white British to slightly under 50%. The scale of change has been absolutely astonishing. Now, in my middle class suburb, you don't really notice it at first sight, because most immigrants who can afford to live here are necessarily pretty well integrated, dress western, and are largely able to speak English somewhere between well and perfectly. But still, in what 15 years ago was an almost monolithically white suburb, my daughter is in a class in which 40% do not speak English as a first language.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
And a huge number of British citizens are non-white, often for several generations. It doesn't make their babies non-British. Take both current and previous Tory leaders for example.
If we are back to only white babies being valid then we are getting into a very bad place.
Your last line is an attempt to veto Leon’s argument, and potentially have him banned (again).
Of course, that’s what they do, They cannot argue the point, so they just nudge @TheScreamingEagles into banning me
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
And a huge number of British citizens are non-white, often for several generations. It doesn't make their babies non-British. Take both current and previous Tory leaders for example.
If we are back to only white babies being valid then we are getting into a very bad place.
It sounds like Leon thinks non-white people should be reduced, but also white Irish people should be reduced, which has been tried with some success in British history.
I'm only three-eighths Irish so hopefully I can avoid the cull.
I think we pretty much have Reeves' number now. Not an economist or particularly interested, probably not a great complaints department head or particularly interested. Not averse to a bit of playing the system for personal or career gain. Not one who thinks much about 'the little people' who don't expense their electricity bills or their champagne. Arch politician. No worse than 90% of them, but not in the 10% of good ones either. No loss to the Cabinet, but there's not much on the horizon to suggest anyone else would be better.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
I think most British people don't care about race, but they do care about values and culture, and extreme forms of religion.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
No, it’s not Britain, as I understand it
in the end a country is its culture and civilization and language and shared collective memory, what it feels itself to be
Mountains and landscapes and rivers and mighty forests are all great, but they do not make a nation. A nation is its people, and for them to prosper, or even exist, some crucial things must be shared
A Britain that is, say, 25% Muslim and 25% Hindu and 25% “other” and the white British - self identified - as the remaining quarter, is not the Britain I know and love. It might be great (I doubt it) it might be a disaster, it doesn’t even matter, it would not be the Britain I grew up in, nothing like it, and I find that deeply sad. And that is where we are heading on these numbers
That’s what I feel. Personally. And yet for some reason saying this is virtually a cancellable offence whereas for any other nation in earth it would be obvious common sense. Would the Saudis allow themselves to become a religious/ethnic minority in their own country? The Afghans? The Poles? The Russians? Anyone??
The first country you reach for is Saudi, where about 40% of the population are non-citizens. In Qatar it's around 90%.
If British should mean white, then non-white people shouldn't be considered British. A statement implies its contrapositive. There's also the assumption that it's okay to classify every person as either white or non-white.
Your position seems to be straight out of chapter 3 of volume 2 of Mein Kampf.
It's a bit difficult to know how else Reeves could have responded, if she was never told anything about the complaint at the time and the bank decided not to take any action about the complaint. The claim about what the "initial stage" of the investigation found - that Reeves "appeared" to have broken the rules - seems to come from a single unidentified source. Isn't it a bit strange that this source, supposedly with "direct knowledge of the probe", couldn't tell the BBC anything about its final outcome, or even whether any conclusion was reached?
It is strange that this anonymous hit job is being pushed by the BBC. I'd expect it of the Mail or Telegraph.
There must be someone fairly senior in the BBC who is pushing this story. They should be named as well as the anonymous source.
If I were Reeves, I would treat it with total disdain.
As a voter, why shouldn't I treat her with total disdain?
That's indeed your right. But would it represent any change from how you treated her at the last election ?
Now I'd have better reason...
(To be fair, I waited to see how she performed in office before treating her with the now deserved total disdain. The dodgy CV makes little difference when set beside her actual job performance.)
I wasn't trying to argue your opinion of her. Just pointing out that, until the next election, it doesn't really matter.
Until then, Starmer, and the markets will be the judge.
As one was saying about the grave error American leaders are making by behaving like a gang of drunk fascist thugs. The slow pivot to the very problematic but more reliable China begins.
We often feed off scraps when trying to parse the dry-as-a-bone Chinese MFA readouts
But this from the Wang-Kallas meeting yesterday is super interesting
"China supports all efforts conducive to peace and supports Europe's important role in the peace talks process."
Add this to Wang's comments yesterday in Q&A at MSC
"Some have been saying China is attempting to change the order... Now we don't see much talk of that because now there is a country that is withdrawing from international treaties and orgs, I think in Europe you can feel chills almost every day."
Beijing working the margins here - as fully expected.
With US coming here with a v harsh msg China's offer to work within the current system - however trite - all of a sudden looks more appealing
The US shows no willingness to include Europe in Ukraine peace talks, China take the opposite tack
I think we pretty much have Reeves' number now. ...
As if you weren't 100% sure that you had her number all along.
No, I haven't liked her policies, I then felt a bit sorry for her, but she has been quite sphinx-like as a personality. I feel now we have her measure - it you disagree with anything I write, feel free to share.
Will DOGE axe the IRS workers investigating tech bro squillionaires and New York property developers?
Musk has just fathered another child you know. Shes pretty hot too. To the victor the spoils the losers lose their cushy public sector job and work at maccyds.
If memory serves, Musk prefers to impregnate his baby mammas via artificial insemination, and he has used this technique for all his children (except for the first one which died). He is rather strange.
So he's a hopeless fucker?
I don't know why he does it. I can speculate but I haven't read an explanation that was sourced from him. If anybody on PB can so source, that would help.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
No, it’s not Britain, as I understand it
in the end a country is its culture and civilization and language and shared collective memory, what it feels itself to be
Mountains and landscapes and rivers and mighty forests are all great, but they do not make a nation. A nation is its people, and for them to prosper, or even exist, some crucial things must be shared
A Britain that is, say, 25% Muslim and 25% Hindu and 25% “other” and the white British - self identified - as the remaining quarter, is not the Britain I know and love. It might be great (I doubt it) it might be a disaster, it doesn’t even matter, it would not be the Britain I grew up in, nothing like it, and I find that deeply sad. And that is where we are heading on these numbers
That’s what I feel. Personally. And yet for some reason saying this is virtually a cancellable offence whereas for any other nation in earth it would be obvious common sense. Would the Saudis allow themselves to become a religious/ethnic minority in their own country? The Afghans? The Poles? The Russians? Anyone??
The first country you reach for is Saudi, where about 40% of the population are non-citizens. In Qatar it's around 90%.
If British should mean white, then non-white people shouldn't be considered British. A statement implies its contrapositive. There's also the assumption that it's okay to classify every person as either white or non-white.
Your position seems to be straight out of chapter 3 of volume 2 of Mein Kampf.
Yes, of course, quietly requesting that my own country retains some semblance of the ethnic and cultural identity it has had for 1500 years makes me a “Nazi” equivalent to “Hitler”
You know what? This madness is gonna end badly for you guys. Don’t say you weren’t warned
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
No, it’s not Britain, as I understand it
in the end a country is its culture and civilization and language and shared collective memory, what it feels itself to be
Mountains and landscapes and rivers and mighty forests are all great, but they do not make a nation. A nation is its people, and for them to prosper, or even exist, some crucial things must be shared
A Britain that is, say, 25% Muslim and 25% Hindu and 25% “other” and the white British - self identified - as the remaining quarter, is not the Britain I know and love. It might be great (I doubt it) it might be a disaster, it doesn’t even matter, it would not be the Britain I grew up in, nothing like it, and I find that deeply sad. And that is where we are heading on these numbers
That’s what I feel. Personally. And yet for some reason saying this is virtually a cancellable offence whereas for any other nation in earth it would be obvious common sense. Would the Saudis allow themselves to become a religious/ethnic minority in their own country? The Afghans? The Poles? The Russians? Anyone??
I wonder whether say the NU10k would be willing to exchange the entire current British population for an equal number of foreigners if they thought it would, as a possibility, lead to a 5% increase in GDP.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
No, it’s not Britain, as I understand it
in the end a country is its culture and civilization and language and shared collective memory, what it feels itself to be
Mountains and landscapes and rivers and mighty forests are all great, but they do not make a nation. A nation is its people, and for them to prosper, or even exist, some crucial things must be shared
A Britain that is, say, 25% Muslim and 25% Hindu and 25% “other” and the white British - self identified - as the remaining quarter, is not the Britain I know and love. It might be great (I doubt it) it might be a disaster, it doesn’t even matter, it would not be the Britain I grew up in, nothing like it, and I find that deeply sad. And that is where we are heading on these numbers
That’s what I feel. Personally. And yet for some reason saying this is virtually a cancellable offence whereas for any other nation in earth it would be obvious common sense. Would the Saudis allow themselves to become a religious/ethnic minority in their own country? The Afghans? The Poles? The Russians? Anyone??
I wonder whether say the NU10k would be willing to exchange the entire current British population for an equal number of foreigners if they thought it would, as a possibility, lead to a 5% increase in GDP.
A good question. And on recent evidence (the last 30 years, governed by Labour and Tories alike) the answer is YES
Those 150 year old social security claimants are apparently real people - the age was reportedly a COBOL error, as the tech kids were unfamiliar with the ole code.
The thing that is really telling about this is not that these "geniuses" didn't know about the data types of the various versions of the different COBOL standards, it's that they jumped to the explanation of fraud rather than thinking "why does the same date in 1875 keep appearing?" A mildly intelligent person with access to a search engine ought to be able to figure it out. The DOGE boys appear to be overconfident and not all that clever.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
In the time my kids have been at junior school (2017-present), the school has gone from 95% white British to slightly under 50%. The scale of change has been absolutely astonishing. Now, in my middle class suburb, you don't really notice it at first sight, because most immigrants who can afford to live here are necessarily pretty well integrated, dress western, and are largely able to speak English somewhere between well and perfectly. But still, in what 15 years ago was an almost monolithically white suburb, my daughter is in a class in which 40% do not speak English as a first language.
I work in one of Britain's most multicultural cities, in one of the most ethnically diverse employment sectors. I am one of only 10 % of my department that is white British. It really doesn't bother me at all, and I am proud to have signed off several as a referee for British citizenship. Their homes and futures are here and they are extremely welcome. If they are Muslim, Hindu, Orthodox or whatever then that is fine too. It's an ancient British tradition to not make windows into men's or women's souls.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
I think most British people don't care about race, but they do care about values and culture, and extreme forms of religion.
I agree, mostly.
Someone posted upthread that the last two Tory leaders had not been “White British”, and I had to think for a moment who they were referring to.
However, race and culture are decently correlated.
We lack an acceptable way of talking about this. Legitimate cultural concerns without morally unacceptable concepts of racial inferiority.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
No, it’s not Britain, as I understand it
in the end a country is its culture and civilization and language and shared collective memory, what it feels itself to be
Mountains and landscapes and rivers and mighty forests are all great, but they do not make a nation. A nation is its people, and for them to prosper, or even exist, some crucial things must be shared
A Britain that is, say, 25% Muslim and 25% Hindu and 25% “other” and the white British - self identified - as the remaining quarter, is not the Britain I know and love. It might be great (I doubt it) it might be a disaster, it doesn’t even matter, it would not be the Britain I grew up in, nothing like it, and I find that deeply sad. And that is where we are heading on these numbers
That’s what I feel. Personally. And yet for some reason saying this is virtually a cancellable offence whereas for any other nation in earth it would be obvious common sense. Would the Saudis allow themselves to become a religious/ethnic minority in their own country? The Afghans? The Poles? The Russians? Anyone??
The first country you reach for is Saudi, where about 40% of the population are non-citizens. In Qatar it's around 90%.
If British should mean white, then non-white people shouldn't be considered British. A statement implies its contrapositive. There's also the assumption that it's okay to classify every person as either white or non-white.
Your position seems to be straight out of chapter 3 of volume 2 of Mein Kampf.
Yes, of course, quietly requesting that my own country retains some semblance of the ethnic and cultural identity it has had for 1500 years makes me a “Nazi” equivalent to “Hitler”
You know what? This madness is gonna end badly for you guys. Don’t say you weren’t warned
There's no need to bridle or issue warnings. That chapter in Mein Kampf advocates a setup where the population is divided into citizens (ethnic Germans), subjects (people of other ethnicities who are allowed to live in Germany but who aren't what Germany is all about), and foreigners (citizens of foreign states).
I'm not saying you are "equivalent" to Hitler. I'm saying that your position regarding what makes a nation and what a country's citizenship policy should be is the same as what Hitler advocates in that chapter of Mein Kampf. It is. Am I being unfair?
If that were already considered by almost everyone to be "the natural way of things" and "how things have always been", there'd have been no need for Hitler to advocate it.
The chapter is about 1000 words long. What do you disagree with in it?
As one was saying about the grave error American leaders are making by behaving like a gang of drunk fascist thugs. The slow pivot to the very problematic but more reliable China begins.
We often feed off scraps when trying to parse the dry-as-a-bone Chinese MFA readouts
But this from the Wang-Kallas meeting yesterday is super interesting
"China supports all efforts conducive to peace and supports Europe's important role in the peace talks process."
Add this to Wang's comments yesterday in Q&A at MSC
"Some have been saying China is attempting to change the order... Now we don't see much talk of that because now there is a country that is withdrawing from international treaties and orgs, I think in Europe you can feel chills almost every day."
Beijing working the margins here - as fully expected.
With US coming here with a v harsh msg China's offer to work within the current system - however trite - all of a sudden looks more appealing
The US shows no willingness to include Europe in Ukraine peace talks, China take the opposite tack
Europe should be very very careful in dealing with China as a rebound fling now America has gone rogue. They are masters at manipulating the hopes and fears of vulnerable countries to inveigle their way into a position of power and create dependency.
None of the 3 big powers (if Russia counts as one) can be trusted. But China is the smartest.
As for Trump and his cabinet, I wonder if we are all misreading those comments about Ukraine as giving away concessions to Russia before the negotiations begin. No. That assumes Trump is negotiating with Russia on behalf of Ukraine. I think he is at least partly doing the opposite: negotiating with Ukraine and Europe on behalf of Putin. We are the enemy, Putin is the ally.
I think we pretty much have Reeves' number now. ...
As if you weren't 100% sure that you had her number all along.
No, I haven't liked her policies, I then felt a bit sorry for her, but she has been quite sphinx-like as a personality. I feel now we have her measure - it you disagree with anything I write, feel free to share.
I just doubt your acceptance of the allegations would be quite as unquestioning if she were on your side of the political spectrum.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
No, it’s not Britain, as I understand it
in the end a country is its culture and civilization and language and shared collective memory, what it feels itself to be
Mountains and landscapes and rivers and mighty forests are all great, but they do not make a nation. A nation is its people, and for them to prosper, or even exist, some crucial things must be shared
A Britain that is, say, 25% Muslim and 25% Hindu and 25% “other” and the white British - self identified - as the remaining quarter, is not the Britain I know and love. It might be great (I doubt it) it might be a disaster, it doesn’t even matter, it would not be the Britain I grew up in, nothing like it, and I find that deeply sad. And that is where we are heading on these numbers
That’s what I feel. Personally. And yet for some reason saying this is virtually a cancellable offence whereas for any other nation in earth it would be obvious common sense. Would the Saudis allow themselves to become a religious/ethnic minority in their own country? The Afghans? The Poles? The Russians? Anyone??
I wonder whether say the NU10k would be willing to exchange the entire current British population for an equal number of foreigners if they thought it would, as a possibility, lead to a 5% increase in GDP.
A good question. And on recent evidence (the last 30 years, governed by Labour and Tories alike) the answer is YES
It would also allow for elections to be dispensed with.
A self-perpetuating inner party of NU10k with an immigrant prole workforce.
But do you know that he's wrong about Tommy Robinson? Because if he is right, this sounds like cruel and unusual punishment. It is also counter-productive for the Woke UK State, as it makes him more of a martyr
We only have Robinson's word for it. It's worth reading the Community Notes on his tweet.
I agree it will make him more of a martyr for some. But how many? I'm guessing 10-25% of Reform supporters? So 3-7% of voters? Politically I think Robinson as a martyr is good for the Tories as it damages Reform. I think Farage will continue to distance himself and his party from Robinson to continue to appeal to more moderate voters, which he needs.
But what do I know! I'm continually confounded.
No of conversations with people i have now who say they want a dictatorship is incredible.
Well if most of your conversations are with EDL members not that surprising!
Hows your dei hire Kemi doing.
I admire your inclusivity in insulting absolutely everyone on this board.
"Shark bites off tourist’s hands as she tries to take selfie on Caribbean beach It is understood the 55-year-old had one of her arms amputated below the wrist and the other half way up her forearm"
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
No, it’s not Britain, as I understand it
in the end a country is its culture and civilization and language and shared collective memory, what it feels itself to be
Mountains and landscapes and rivers and mighty forests are all great, but they do not make a nation. A nation is its people, and for them to prosper, or even exist, some crucial things must be shared
A Britain that is, say, 25% Muslim and 25% Hindu and 25% “other” and the white British - self identified - as the remaining quarter, is not the Britain I know and love. It might be great (I doubt it) it might be a disaster, it doesn’t even matter, it would not be the Britain I grew up in, nothing like it, and I find that deeply sad. And that is where we are heading on these numbers
That’s what I feel. Personally. And yet for some reason saying this is virtually a cancellable offence whereas for any other nation in earth it would be obvious common sense. Would the Saudis allow themselves to become a religious/ethnic minority in their own country? The Afghans? The Poles? The Russians? Anyone??
I wonder whether say the NU10k would be willing to exchange the entire current British population for an equal number of foreigners if they thought it would, as a possibility, lead to a 5% increase in GDP.
As long as it was a 5% increase in their collective personal GDP. They won’t care about the rest of us.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
No, it’s not Britain, as I understand it
in the end a country is its culture and civilization and language and shared collective memory, what it feels itself to be
Mountains and landscapes and rivers and mighty forests are all great, but they do not make a nation. A nation is its people, and for them to prosper, or even exist, some crucial things must be shared
A Britain that is, say, 25% Muslim and 25% Hindu and 25% “other” and the white British - self identified - as the remaining quarter, is not the Britain I know and love. It might be great (I doubt it) it might be a disaster, it doesn’t even matter, it would not be the Britain I grew up in, nothing like it, and I find that deeply sad. And that is where we are heading on these numbers
That’s what I feel. Personally. And yet for some reason saying this is virtually a cancellable offence whereas for any other nation in earth it would be obvious common sense. Would the Saudis allow themselves to become a religious/ethnic minority in their own country? The Afghans? The Poles? The Russians? Anyone??
The first country you reach for is Saudi, where about 40% of the population are non-citizens. In Qatar it's around 90%.
If British should mean white, then non-white people shouldn't be considered British. A statement implies its contrapositive. There's also the assumption that it's okay to classify every person as either white or non-white.
Your position seems to be straight out of chapter 3 of volume 2 of Mein Kampf.
Yes, of course, quietly requesting that my own country retains some semblance of the ethnic and cultural identity it has had for 1500 years makes me a “Nazi” equivalent to “Hitler”
You know what? This madness is gonna end badly for you guys. Don’t say you weren’t warned
There's no need to bridle or issue warnings. That chapter in Mein Kampf advocates a setup where the population is divided into citizens (ethnic Germans), subjects (people of other ethnicities who are allowed to live in Germany but who aren't what Germany is all about), and foreigners (citizens of foreign states).
I'm not saying you are "equivalent" to Hitler. I'm saying that your position regarding what makes a nation and what a country's citizenship policy should be is the same as what Hitler advocates in that chapter of Mein Kampf. It is. Am I being unfair?
If that were already considered by almost everyone to be "the natural way of things" and "how things have always been", there'd have been no need for Hitler to advocate it.
The chapter is about 1000 words long. What do you disagree with in it?
Olaf Scholz has accused VP Vance of unacceptable interference in the German elections.
I wonder if his intervention will have an effect similar to Barack "back of the queue" Obama had in our Referendum?
I can imagine many Germans would love to give Donald Trump the one-fingered salute.... Musk's salute being somewhat out of fashion there now as it can get you six months inside.
Vance told them that they should legalise it, same way his admin legalised gunmen storming the legislature to annul a democratic vote.
His admin didn't legalise gunmen storming the legislature to annul a democratic vote.
Someone mimicing my comment name? Remarkable change in several Canadian Opinion polls seems to be cementing. Liberals within single figures of the Conservatives, as close as only 4% behind, in which case with the current drop off of the NDP and the Bloq would probably give them minority government again. Trump seems to be the prime responsibility in all this.
As one was saying about the grave error American leaders are making by behaving like a gang of drunk fascist thugs. The slow pivot to the very problematic but more reliable China begins.
We often feed off scraps when trying to parse the dry-as-a-bone Chinese MFA readouts
But this from the Wang-Kallas meeting yesterday is super interesting
"China supports all efforts conducive to peace and supports Europe's important role in the peace talks process."
Add this to Wang's comments yesterday in Q&A at MSC
"Some have been saying China is attempting to change the order... Now we don't see much talk of that because now there is a country that is withdrawing from international treaties and orgs, I think in Europe you can feel chills almost every day."
Beijing working the margins here - as fully expected.
With US coming here with a v harsh msg China's offer to work within the current system - however trite - all of a sudden looks more appealing
The US shows no willingness to include Europe in Ukraine peace talks, China take the opposite tack
Europe should be very very careful in dealing with China as a rebound fling now America has gone rogue. They are masters at manipulating the hopes and fears of vulnerable countries to inveigle their way into a position of power and create dependency.
None of the 3 big powers (if Russia counts as one) can be trusted. But China is the smartest.
As for Trump and his cabinet, I wonder if we are all misreading those comments about Ukraine as giving away concessions to Russia before the negotiations begin. No. That assumes Trump is negotiating with Russia on behalf of Ukraine. I think he is at least partly doing the opposite: negotiating with Ukraine and Europe on behalf of Putin. We are the enemy, Putin is the ally.
I think any hope of a reasonably normal relationship with the American government ended with Vance's despicable Munich speech and the knowledge of what is going on domestically. Both the ludicrous hypocrisy of it and that one can no longer treat American institutions, and thus America, as reliable partners. It's an open question whether there will be anything recognisable left, in whatever way the current madness ends.
I agree on China, you have to sup with a long spoon. Russia isn't a great power. It's just a dangerously significant rogue state.
In the case of China, quite obviously there's issues. But it maybe a case of building a relationship based on 'mind your own business and do business' with a more arms length partner who isn't going to try and bully you with threats or openly promote the radicalised far right in your own backyard (even if have form at trying more surreptitious influence).
Quite obviously we'd rather be siding with America 1865-2024 (inc. Trump's first term), but that America's now gone.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
And a huge number of British citizens are non-white, often for several generations. It doesn't make their babies non-British. Take both current and previous Tory leaders for example.
If we are back to only white babies being valid then we are getting into a very bad place.
It sounds like Leon thinks non-white people should be reduced, but also white Irish people should be reduced, which has been tried with some success in British history.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
No, it’s not Britain, as I understand it
in the end a country is its culture and civilization and language and shared collective memory, what it feels itself to be
Mountains and landscapes and rivers and mighty forests are all great, but they do not make a nation. A nation is its people, and for them to prosper, or even exist, some crucial things must be shared
A Britain that is, say, 25% Muslim and 25% Hindu and 25% “other” and the white British - self identified - as the remaining quarter, is not the Britain I know and love. It might be great (I doubt it) it might be a disaster, it doesn’t even matter, it would not be the Britain I grew up in, nothing like it, and I find that deeply sad. And that is where we are heading on these numbers
That’s what I feel. Personally. And yet for some reason saying this is virtually a cancellable offence whereas for any other nation in earth it would be obvious common sense. Would the Saudis allow themselves to become a religious/ethnic minority in their own country? The Afghans? The Poles? The Russians? Anyone??
I wonder whether say the NU10k would be willing to exchange the entire current British population for an equal number of foreigners if they thought it would, as a possibility, lead to a 5% increase in GDP.
A good question. And on recent evidence (the last 30 years, governed by Labour and Tories alike) the answer is YES
It would also allow for elections to be dispensed with.
A self-perpetuating inner party of NU10k with an immigrant prole workforce.
Indeed. Look at the NU10K reaction to Brexit
Their reaction? "Ugh, cancel it. Anull democracy. Revote or revoke"
They are awful
Congrats to @Malmesbury btw (I think it was he/she?) for successfully creating a new PBism. "NU10K" is clever and useful
French President Emmanuel Macron has invited European leaders for an emergency summit in Paris tomorrow (Sunday) to respond to Donald Trump's plans for Ukraine, Polish Foreign Minister Sikorski reveals. Sikorski welcomes the move. Presume UK will be included but no detail.
Someone mimicing my comment name? Remarkable change in several Canadian Opinion polls seems to be cementing. Liberals within single figures of the Conservatives, as close as only 4% behind, in which case with the current drop off of the NDP and the Bloq would probably give them minority government again. Trump seems to be the prime responsibility in all this.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
No, it’s not Britain, as I understand it
in the end a country is its culture and civilization and language and shared collective memory, what it feels itself to be
Mountains and landscapes and rivers and mighty forests are all great, but they do not make a nation. A nation is its people, and for them to prosper, or even exist, some crucial things must be shared
A Britain that is, say, 25% Muslim and 25% Hindu and 25% “other” and the white British - self identified - as the remaining quarter, is not the Britain I know and love. It might be great (I doubt it) it might be a disaster, it doesn’t even matter, it would not be the Britain I grew up in, nothing like it, and I find that deeply sad. And that is where we are heading on these numbers
That’s what I feel. Personally. And yet for some reason saying this is virtually a cancellable offence whereas for any other nation in earth it would be obvious common sense. Would the Saudis allow themselves to become a religious/ethnic minority in their own country? The Afghans? The Poles? The Russians? Anyone??
The first country you reach for is Saudi, where about 40% of the population are non-citizens. In Qatar it's around 90%.
If British should mean white, then non-white people shouldn't be considered British. A statement implies its contrapositive. There's also the assumption that it's okay to classify every person as either white or non-white.
Your position seems to be straight out of chapter 3 of volume 2 of Mein Kampf.
Yes, of course, quietly requesting that my own country retains some semblance of the ethnic and cultural identity it has had for 1500 years makes me a “Nazi” equivalent to “Hitler”
You know what? This madness is gonna end badly for you guys. Don’t say you weren’t warned
I'm quite amused that you think this country has had in any way a singular ethnic and cultural identity since the Romans left. As though the Anglo-Saxons, Normans, and all the other mixing done over the centuries had not caused a radical evolution of that identity. (French-born) Henry II would barely recognise Victoria's England (or probably understand her language...)
As one was saying about the grave error American leaders are making by behaving like a gang of drunk fascist thugs. The slow pivot to the very problematic but more reliable China begins.
We often feed off scraps when trying to parse the dry-as-a-bone Chinese MFA readouts
But this from the Wang-Kallas meeting yesterday is super interesting
"China supports all efforts conducive to peace and supports Europe's important role in the peace talks process."
Add this to Wang's comments yesterday in Q&A at MSC
"Some have been saying China is attempting to change the order... Now we don't see much talk of that because now there is a country that is withdrawing from international treaties and orgs, I think in Europe you can feel chills almost every day."
Beijing working the margins here - as fully expected.
With US coming here with a v harsh msg China's offer to work within the current system - however trite - all of a sudden looks more appealing
The US shows no willingness to include Europe in Ukraine peace talks, China take the opposite tack
Europe should be very very careful in dealing with China as a rebound fling now America has gone rogue. They are masters at manipulating the hopes and fears of vulnerable countries to inveigle their way into a position of power and create dependency.
None of the 3 big powers (if Russia counts as one) can be trusted. But China is the smartest.
As for Trump and his cabinet, I wonder if we are all misreading those comments about Ukraine as giving away concessions to Russia before the negotiations begin. No. That assumes Trump is negotiating with Russia on behalf of Ukraine. I think he is at least partly doing the opposite: negotiating with Ukraine and Europe on behalf of Putin. We are the enemy, Putin is the ally.
I think any hope of a reasonably normal relationship with the American government ended with Vance's despicable Munich speech and the knowledge of what is going on domestically. Both the ludicrous hypocrisy of it and that one can no longer treat American institutions, and thus America, as reliable partners. It's an open question whether there will be anything recognisable left, in whatever way the current madness ends.
I agree on China, you have to sup with a long spoon. Russia isn't a great power. It's just a dangerously significant rogue state.
In the case of China, quite obviously there's issues. But it maybe a case of building a relationship based on 'mind your own business and do business' with a more arms length partner who isn't going to try and bully you with threats or openly promote the radicalised far right in your own backyard (even if have form at trying more surreptitious influence).
Quite obviously we'd rather be siding with America 1865-2024 (inc. Trump's first term), but that America's now gone.
The period 1865-2024 includes countless events that are more problematic, on any rational assessment, than JD Vance's Munich speech.
People who wrongly thought that Trump's political career was over all seem to be losing their minds at the moment.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
No, it’s not Britain, as I understand it
in the end a country is its culture and civilization and language and shared collective memory, what it feels itself to be
Mountains and landscapes and rivers and mighty forests are all great, but they do not make a nation. A nation is its people, and for them to prosper, or even exist, some crucial things must be shared
A Britain that is, say, 25% Muslim and 25% Hindu and 25% “other” and the white British - self identified - as the remaining quarter, is not the Britain I know and love. It might be great (I doubt it) it might be a disaster, it doesn’t even matter, it would not be the Britain I grew up in, nothing like it, and I find that deeply sad. And that is where we are heading on these numbers
That’s what I feel. Personally. And yet for some reason saying this is virtually a cancellable offence whereas for any other nation in earth it would be obvious common sense. Would the Saudis allow themselves to become a religious/ethnic minority in their own country? The Afghans? The Poles? The Russians? Anyone??
The first country you reach for is Saudi, where about 40% of the population are non-citizens. In Qatar it's around 90%.
If British should mean white, then non-white people shouldn't be considered British. A statement implies its contrapositive. There's also the assumption that it's okay to classify every person as either white or non-white.
Your position seems to be straight out of chapter 3 of volume 2 of Mein Kampf.
Yes, of course, quietly requesting that my own country retains some semblance of the ethnic and cultural identity it has had for 1500 years makes me a “Nazi” equivalent to “Hitler”
1500 years?
OK - we see from that that you are keen on the "Anglo-Saxons". But you need to think about the dates a bit more closely. The Anglo-Saxons were non-Christian 1500 years ago.
Or maybe it's just "My Anglo-Saxon, right or wrong"?
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
No, it’s not Britain, as I understand it
in the end a country is its culture and civilization and language and shared collective memory, what it feels itself to be
Mountains and landscapes and rivers and mighty forests are all great, but they do not make a nation. A nation is its people, and for them to prosper, or even exist, some crucial things must be shared
A Britain that is, say, 25% Muslim and 25% Hindu and 25% “other” and the white British - self identified - as the remaining quarter, is not the Britain I know and love. It might be great (I doubt it) it might be a disaster, it doesn’t even matter, it would not be the Britain I grew up in, nothing like it, and I find that deeply sad. And that is where we are heading on these numbers
That’s what I feel. Personally. And yet for some reason saying this is virtually a cancellable offence whereas for any other nation in earth it would be obvious common sense. Would the Saudis allow themselves to become a religious/ethnic minority in their own country? The Afghans? The Poles? The Russians? Anyone??
The first country you reach for is Saudi, where about 40% of the population are non-citizens. In Qatar it's around 90%.
If British should mean white, then non-white people shouldn't be considered British. A statement implies its contrapositive. There's also the assumption that it's okay to classify every person as either white or non-white.
Your position seems to be straight out of chapter 3 of volume 2 of Mein Kampf.
Yes, of course, quietly requesting that my own country retains some semblance of the ethnic and cultural identity it has had for 1500 years makes me a “Nazi” equivalent to “Hitler”
You know what? This madness is gonna end badly for you guys. Don’t say you weren’t warned
There's no need to bridle or issue warnings. That chapter in Mein Kampf advocates a setup where the population is divided into citizens (ethnic Germans), subjects (people of other ethnicities who are allowed to live in Germany but who aren't what Germany is all about), and foreigners (citizens of foreign states).
I'm not saying you are "equivalent" to Hitler. I'm saying that your position regarding what makes a nation and what a country's citizenship policy should be is the same as what Hitler advocates in that chapter of Mein Kampf. It is. Am I being unfair?
If that were already considered by almost everyone to be "the natural way of things" and "how things have always been", there'd have been no need for Hitler to advocate it.
The chapter is about 1000 words long. What do you disagree with in it?
Hitler considered that Germans of Jewish, Polish, Sorbish, Wendish, and gypsy origin were untermenschen despite being indistinguishable from “Aryans.”
Those who are encouraging the racists in order to get at one race (usually, but not always, Muslims) should realise that the racists they are emboldening will, if given power, not stop at that one race.
Those who are encouraging the racists in order to get at one race (usually, but not always, Muslims) should realise that the racists they are emboldening will, if given power, not stop at that one race.
Just caught up with JD Vance's speech in Munich, which is genuinely an interesting one. Leaving aside some objections - a complete disrespect for the law and a question of whether the Trump administration genuinely promotes free speech - we end up with a philosophical conundrum. If Trump and autocracy are the inevitable product of free speech, what is wrong with free speech, which on its face should be a good thing?
As one was saying about the grave error American leaders are making by behaving like a gang of drunk fascist thugs. The slow pivot to the very problematic but more reliable China begins.
We often feed off scraps when trying to parse the dry-as-a-bone Chinese MFA readouts
But this from the Wang-Kallas meeting yesterday is super interesting
"China supports all efforts conducive to peace and supports Europe's important role in the peace talks process."
Add this to Wang's comments yesterday in Q&A at MSC
"Some have been saying China is attempting to change the order... Now we don't see much talk of that because now there is a country that is withdrawing from international treaties and orgs, I think in Europe you can feel chills almost every day."
Beijing working the margins here - as fully expected.
With US coming here with a v harsh msg China's offer to work within the current system - however trite - all of a sudden looks more appealing
The US shows no willingness to include Europe in Ukraine peace talks, China take the opposite tack
Europe should be very very careful in dealing with China as a rebound fling now America has gone rogue. They are masters at manipulating the hopes and fears of vulnerable countries to inveigle their way into a position of power and create dependency.
None of the 3 big powers (if Russia counts as one) can be trusted. But China is the smartest.
As for Trump and his cabinet, I wonder if we are all misreading those comments about Ukraine as giving away concessions to Russia before the negotiations begin. No. That assumes Trump is negotiating with Russia on behalf of Ukraine. I think he is at least partly doing the opposite: negotiating with Ukraine and Europe on behalf of Putin. We are the enemy, Putin is the ally.
I think any hope of a reasonably normal relationship with the American government ended with Vance's despicable Munich speech and the knowledge of what is going on domestically. Both the ludicrous hypocrisy of it and that one can no longer treat American institutions, and thus America, as reliable partners. It's an open question whether there will be anything recognisable left, in whatever way the current madness ends.
I agree on China, you have to sup with a long spoon. Russia isn't a great power. It's just a dangerously significant rogue state.
In the case of China, quite obviously there's issues. But it maybe a case of building a relationship based on 'mind your own business and do business' with a more arms length partner who isn't going to try and bully you with threats or openly promote the radicalised far right in your own backyard (even if have form at trying more surreptitious influence).
Quite obviously we'd rather be siding with America 1865-2024 (inc. Trump's first term), but that America's now gone.
You seem to prefer China over the US at this time.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
No, it’s not Britain, as I understand it
in the end a country is its culture and civilization and language and shared collective memory, what it feels itself to be
Mountains and landscapes and rivers and mighty forests are all great, but they do not make a nation. A nation is its people, and for them to prosper, or even exist, some crucial things must be shared
A Britain that is, say, 25% Muslim and 25% Hindu and 25% “other” and the white British - self identified - as the remaining quarter, is not the Britain I know and love. It might be great (I doubt it) it might be a disaster, it doesn’t even matter, it would not be the Britain I grew up in, nothing like it, and I find that deeply sad. And that is where we are heading on these numbers
That’s what I feel. Personally. And yet for some reason saying this is virtually a cancellable offence whereas for any other nation in earth it would be obvious common sense. Would the Saudis allow themselves to become a religious/ethnic minority in their own country? The Afghans? The Poles? The Russians? Anyone??
The first country you reach for is Saudi, where about 40% of the population are non-citizens. In Qatar it's around 90%.
If British should mean white, then non-white people shouldn't be considered British. A statement implies its contrapositive. There's also the assumption that it's okay to classify every person as either white or non-white.
Your position seems to be straight out of chapter 3 of volume 2 of Mein Kampf.
Yes, of course, quietly requesting that my own country retains some semblance of the ethnic and cultural identity it has had for 1500 years makes me a “Nazi” equivalent to “Hitler”
You know what? This madness is gonna end badly for you guys. Don’t say you weren’t warned
There's no need to bridle or issue warnings. That chapter in Mein Kampf advocates a setup where the population is divided into citizens (ethnic Germans), subjects (people of other ethnicities who are allowed to live in Germany but who aren't what Germany is all about), and foreigners (citizens of foreign states).
I'm not saying you are "equivalent" to Hitler. I'm saying that your position regarding what makes a nation and what a country's citizenship policy should be is the same as what Hitler advocates in that chapter of Mein Kampf. It is. Am I being unfair?
If that were already considered by almost everyone to be "the natural way of things" and "how things have always been", there'd have been no need for Hitler to advocate it.
The chapter is about 1000 words long. What do you disagree with in it?
Hitler considered that Germans of Jewish, Polish, Sorbish, Wendish, and gypsy origin were untermenschen despite being indistinguishable from “Aryans.”
Those who are encouraging the racists in order to get at one race (usually, but not always, Muslims) should realise that the racists they are emboldening will, if given power, not stop at that one race.
Top risks as seen by the public in the 🇬🇧 UK, by party:
🔵 Conservatives 1. Russia 2. Iran 3. Cyber attacks
🔴 Labour 1. Russia 2. Climate change 3. Cyber attacks
🟣 Reform UK 1. Change to my country's culture 2. Radical Islamist terror 3. Mass migration
Who is right?
Labour.
And yet Labour big names like Wes Streeting and Jess Phillips stand to lose their seats as a result of the issues that Reform voters are concerned about.
"Does America need Europe as a market - yes. But as an ally - I don't know.
"For the answer to be yes Europe needs a single voice - not a dozen different ones.”
“Some in Europe might be frustrated with Brussels but let's be clear - if not Brussels then Moscow. It's your decision."
We know which the Brexiteers prefer...
I concur with Zelensky's assessment of the threat, but not with his proposed remedy. Brussels is sclerotic and the nations of Europe and the EU are too diverse in interests to speak as one. What is chiefly lacking is the discipline to defend our values or even the will to do so. Much easier to keep going the way we're now comfortably used to.
It seems to me only a matter of time before European nations are taken over, whether by Russia, China, or Islam. Or maybe even the US.
Trump will support NATO countries who not only increase defence spending, but buy the military from him
The security of Europe is going to need cooperation across the EU, UK and others but I just do not see a European army as a realistic proposition not least because there are so many differences between individual EU states
I can understand Trump and the US case that far too many NATO members have expected a free lunch funded from the US and they have to contribute much more to the costs
In that situation we should do our best to source weapons which are not produced in the US. Trump has madd it extremely clear his America is not a reliable ally. We need to rebuild our own manufacturing capacity.
Maybe but that will take years and buying US military including fighter jets is the only option in the meantime
Also what is going to happen with AUKUS ?
It's not the only option, though the F35 offers capabilities others don't.
But the urgent items - missiles of all kinds; artillery rounds; armoured vehicles etc - can be made in Europe/UK. And if we are to spend 3.5% of GDP on defence, we and Europe must develop domestic capability in everything.
European countries need to drop the requirement that the manufacturer’s country must give permission to use the weaponry if we are to build a mutually beneficial pan European arms industry.
There is no point loading up on German tanks and then finding that the German government won’t let us use them in some situation. Imagine buying Spanish missiles and then they veto us using them if the Falklands kicks off because they want to use the situation to their advantage re Gibraltar.
Whilst it’s hard to trust Trump’s America our nearer neighbours aren’t necessarily any more reliable either.
I believe the rules are that *you* can use them for whatever you want, but you can’t sell or give to a third country without permission
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
I think most British people don't care about race, but they do care about values and culture, and extreme forms of religion.
I agree, mostly.
Someone posted upthread that the last two Tory leaders had not been “White British”, and I had to think for a moment who they were referring to.
However, race and culture are decently correlated.
We lack an acceptable way of talking about this. Legitimate cultural concerns without morally unacceptable concepts of racial inferiority.
I think I disagree with you. As I have repeated many times on here before, one of the most English men I ever met was an Indian born in Uganda whose family came to Britain when he was a child as part of the Amin exodus. There is simply no way you would ever have known he was not white English from what he said or wrote. I consider him one of my greatest friends from my time at work. Sadly he suffered severe brain damage in a car accident a few years ago.
But I genuinely believe, based on more than 50 years of friendships and associations, that being culturally British/English has nothing at all to do with race.
I've not been following the Reeves story and can't summon any real interest in doing so. It would only be interesting if she were to depart and the successor implemented significant changes in policy, but that's not happening.
British economic policy, irrespective of who's nominally in charge of it, revolves around the increasingly heavy taxation of businesses and earnings in a futile attempt to keep pace with the unsustainable demand for benefits, coupled with the ramping of asset prices and the preferential tax treatment of the mountains of unearned wealth accumulated as a result. A stifling of social mobility, decay of the public realm, and all of the available money being progressively transferred to rent seekers and asset rich older people, is the result.
This isn't going to change under Labour and it still wouldn't change if we got the Liberal Democrats or Reform next. Too many vested interests. All too difficult. We are stuck.
At 76 it isn't a comfortable reflection, but in earlier centuries things like pandemics or even epidemics wiped out a lot of the aged and unhealthy, thus keeping the population profile somewhat more balanced.
I'm extremely grateful to be living in our own times with painkillers and antibiotics and all the rest, but it seems clear we can't just keep going with what someone described as a Ponzi scheme.
Good morning, everyone.
Hello Anne.
We oughtn't to keep going with things as they are, but we will because the people who need to be told to make do with a bit less are too numerous and too loud to be defied.
Middle class retirees with big expensive houses paid their taxes, and now expect younger people to inflation proof their living standards. Telling them that they need to contribute more to, for example, expanding the navy and keeping children out of poverty - and that the result of this is it's out with cruises round the Amalfi Coast, in with a long weekend in the Lake District, and their offspring will only get 80% of the house when they die rather than the whole lot - simply won't wash.
One can be too pessimistic, as well as too starry-eyed about human nature.
It's easy to assume that people in rich world countries are so stupid, and so selfish, that they would gladly see their own nations destroyed, so long as they kept their own assets, for a time. But, that may not be the case. People can be that stupid and selfish, but they may also be persuaded to step up to the mark.
Until the effort is made, we won't know.
Theresa May says hi.
She sprung it on the voters in the middle of an election. One needs to make the case for reform, over a period of time.
When Wes Streeting, on BBC, said something like 'we'll get a non-politico to have a good look and make recommendations' he was slated by the interviewer. Sounds a sensible way of proceeding to me.
Although surely everyone's had time to have a good think by now.
Streeting is a do-nothing. He's deliberately booted any kind of decision on social care beyond the next election by commissioning a useless three year long review that he can then spend more time pretending to read and consider, putting off any actual reform conveniently until after the Government had to write a manifesto spelling out how much it'll cost and where the money is meant to come from.
Whether this is because he wants to avoid carrying the can for incredibly unpopular decisions, or because he knows that
Reeves simply won't countenance paying for any of it, I don't know.
It’s because he wants to be prime minister
Sounds like as valid a theory as any. You don't get to be Prime Minister by asking the rich olds and the heirs for anything.
It’s really a specific case of your “carrying the can” theory TBF
There really is something in air. Four years from now the U.K. could well be embedded into a European community it can live with, and which everyone but the extremes of the old referendum debate approve of. In a way, this is grounds for optimism. We recognise hard truths and move on. Europe gives us slightly special treatment (sensible broad equivalence rather than dynamic alignment) because we help underwrite its security.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
No, it’s not Britain, as I understand it
in the end a country is its culture and civilization and language and shared collective memory, what it feels itself to be
Mountains and landscapes and rivers and mighty forests are all great, but they do not make a nation. A nation is its people, and for them to prosper, or even exist, some crucial things must be shared
A Britain that is, say, 25% Muslim and 25% Hindu and 25% “other” and the white British - self identified - as the remaining quarter, is not the Britain I know and love. It might be great (I doubt it) it might be a disaster, it doesn’t even matter, it would not be the Britain I grew up in, nothing like it, and I find that deeply sad. And that is where we are heading on these numbers
That’s what I feel. Personally. And yet for some reason saying this is virtually a cancellable offence whereas for any other nation in earth it would be obvious common sense. Would the Saudis allow themselves to become a religious/ethnic minority in their own country? The Afghans? The Poles? The Russians? Anyone??
The first country you reach for is Saudi, where about 40% of the population are non-citizens. In Qatar it's around 90%.
If British should mean white, then non-white people shouldn't be considered British. A statement implies its contrapositive. There's also the assumption that it's okay to classify every person as either white or non-white.
Your position seems to be straight out of chapter 3 of volume 2 of Mein Kampf.
Yes, of course, quietly requesting that my own country retains some semblance of the ethnic and cultural identity it has had for 1500 years makes me a “Nazi” equivalent to “Hitler”
You know what? This madness is gonna end badly for you guys. Don’t say you weren’t warned
There's no need to bridle or issue warnings. That chapter in Mein Kampf advocates a setup where the population is divided into citizens (ethnic Germans), subjects (people of other ethnicities who are allowed to live in Germany but who aren't what Germany is all about), and foreigners (citizens of foreign states).
I'm not saying you are "equivalent" to Hitler. I'm saying that your position regarding what makes a nation and what a country's citizenship policy should be is the same as what Hitler advocates in that chapter of Mein Kampf. It is. Am I being unfair?
If that were already considered by almost everyone to be "the natural way of things" and "how things have always been", there'd have been no need for Hitler to advocate it.
The chapter is about 1000 words long. What do you disagree with in it?
Hitler considered that Germans of Jewish, Polish, Sorbish, Wendish, and gypsy origin were untermenschen despite being indistinguishable from “Aryans.”
Those who are encouraging the racists in order to get at one race (usually, but not always, Muslims) should realise that the racists they are emboldening will, if given power, not stop at that one race.
It's a bit difficult to know how else Reeves could have responded, if she was never told anything about the complaint at the time and the bank decided not to take any action about the complaint. The claim about what the "initial stage" of the investigation found - that Reeves "appeared" to have broken the rules - seems to come from a single unidentified source. Isn't it a bit strange that this source, supposedly with "direct knowledge of the probe", couldn't tell the BBC anything about its final outcome, or even whether any conclusion was reached?
It is strange that this anonymous hit job is being pushed by the BBC. I'd expect it of the Mail or Telegraph.
There must be someone fairly senior in the BBC who is pushing this story. They should be named as well as the anonymous source.
If I were Reeves, I would treat it with total disdain.
Going after reporters for reporting things you don’t like?
Have you considered a job at the Trump Whitehouse?
I'm not a Reeves supporter and dislike many of her policies.
But this stinks.
I don't think the leaker is a rival in the Labour Party. It's too much of a coincidence as they would also have to have worked with Reeves in HBOS 15 years ago.
It is more likely that it is a hard core Tory who did work alongside Reeves and has come out with this story, anonymously and unsubstantiated, in order to harm Labour.
Others on here have then made up narratives to support their preferred story of "a thief in cabinet".
The odd thing is that the BBC has lowered its standards by running with this.
I suspect, but don't know, that the BBC reporters concerned think that they are Bob Woodwards. Pathetic.
I see the BBC is on the defensive on this. "However, the BBC has not reported that the case reached a formal conclusion, or that there was disciplinary action."
Not sure it stinks any more than any other politics. Dobbing in Johnson for his parties during lockdown?
The only important questions are, were the allegations true and, if they were, were they serious enough to make the targets position untenable?
In the case of Johnson this seems to be a clear yes to both questions.
In the case of Reeves, I have seen it posted on here and reported in the Times, without apparent challenge, that the whistleblower's claims were found to be substantially true, even if it didn't get to disciplinary action because she left.
So the only question that really then matters is whether they were serious enough to merit removing Reeves from her current position.
I don't know the answer to that one. It is more politics and public mood than a fact based decision.
But to claim it 'stinks' seems to be excusing any sort of bad behaviour no matter how severe simply on the grounds that you don't like whistleblowers.
We don't know that there was bad behaviour.
All we really know is that there is someone with a grudge against Reeves and/or the Labour Party and has made an unsubstantiated claim about events 15 years ago, and this has been taken up by the BBC.
The BBC has spoken to 20 people and seen the report from the preliminary investigation.
It’s not an “unsubstantiated claim”
It wasn't the report from the preliminary investigation. It was the whistle blower's original complaint that the BBC saw.
What did these 20 people say? "Sorry. I don't remember anything about this". Could be anything.
They wouldn’t have published without corroboration. That doesn’t mean she is guilty, but the fact pattern suggests that it was serious enough that there was an investigation (which companies are reluctant to do) and that people remembered it
In the general panic flap over Trump there's not been much discussion yet of what an opportunity this could be for China. Xi has a working relationship with both sides in Ukraine. Is there any possibility that he could engineer a land for peace deal which the Ukrainians will hate but would at least allow the surviving four-fifths of the country to keep its independence and permanently escape the Kremlin sphere?
Washington is certainly doing a remarkable job of making what is in many respects a very problematic Beijing look like it might be a more reliable partner.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
I think most British people don't care about race, but they do care about values and culture, and extreme forms of religion.
I agree, mostly.
Someone posted upthread that the last two Tory leaders had not been “White British”, and I had to think for a moment who they were referring to.
However, race and culture are decently correlated.
We lack an acceptable way of talking about this. Legitimate cultural concerns without morally unacceptable concepts of racial inferiority.
I think I disagree with you. As I have repeated many times on here before, one of the most English men I ever met was an Indian born in Uganda whose family came to Britain when he was a child as part of the Amin exodus. There is simply no way you would ever have known he was not white English from what he said or wrote. I consider him one of my greatest friends from my time at work. Sadly he suffered severe brain damage in a car accident a few years ago.
But I genuinely believe, based on more than 50 years of friendships and associations, that being culturally British/English has nothing at all to do with race.
I am sorry to hear about your friend. As it happens my grandmother was half Indian, born in Chennai (ie, Madras), which of course makes me 1/8.
I agree that being British has nothing to do with race, and it’s one of the best things about British identity that it can be adopted flexibly.
However, the issue is not individuals. The issue is aggregate, mass and rapid cultural change.
As one was saying about the grave error American leaders are making by behaving like a gang of drunk fascist thugs. The slow pivot to the very problematic but more reliable China begins.
We often feed off scraps when trying to parse the dry-as-a-bone Chinese MFA readouts
But this from the Wang-Kallas meeting yesterday is super interesting
"China supports all efforts conducive to peace and supports Europe's important role in the peace talks process."
Add this to Wang's comments yesterday in Q&A at MSC
"Some have been saying China is attempting to change the order... Now we don't see much talk of that because now there is a country that is withdrawing from international treaties and orgs, I think in Europe you can feel chills almost every day."
Beijing working the margins here - as fully expected.
With US coming here with a v harsh msg China's offer to work within the current system - however trite - all of a sudden looks more appealing
The US shows no willingness to include Europe in Ukraine peace talks, China take the opposite tack
Europe should be very very careful in dealing with China as a rebound fling now America has gone rogue. They are masters at manipulating the hopes and fears of vulnerable countries to inveigle their way into a position of power and create dependency.
None of the 3 big powers (if Russia counts as one) can be trusted. But China is the smartest.
As for Trump and his cabinet, I wonder if we are all misreading those comments about Ukraine as giving away concessions to Russia before the negotiations begin. No. That assumes Trump is negotiating with Russia on behalf of Ukraine. I think he is at least partly doing the opposite: negotiating with Ukraine and Europe on behalf of Putin. We are the enemy, Putin is the ally.
I think any hope of a reasonably normal relationship with the American government ended with Vance's despicable Munich speech and the knowledge of what is going on domestically. Both the ludicrous hypocrisy of it and that one can no longer treat American institutions, and thus America, as reliable partners. It's an open question whether there will be anything recognisable left, in whatever way the current madness ends.
I agree on China, you have to sup with a long spoon. Russia isn't a great power. It's just a dangerously significant rogue state.
In the case of China, quite obviously there's issues. But it maybe a case of building a relationship based on 'mind your own business and do business' with a more arms length partner who isn't going to try and bully you with threats or openly promote the radicalised far right in your own backyard (even if have form at trying more surreptitious influence).
Quite obviously we'd rather be siding with America 1865-2024 (inc. Trump's first term), but that America's now gone.
The period 1865-2024 includes countless events that are more problematic, on any rational assessment, than JD Vance's Munich speech.
People who wrongly thought that Trump's political career was over all seem to be losing their minds at the moment.
It did. It included isolationism, reconstruction, and so on. OK let's say 1945 or 1917 then, I was trying to capture the fact that at home the Republic as we knew it is probably over if you look at what's happening domestically with the dismantling of American institutions in ways that are quite obviously unconstitutional - in a way that goes way beyond "Vance was mean to Europe and America won't help defend us as once they did".
Musk etc are trying to in effect remake it as Curtis Yarvin's dream of a right-wing, nationalist monarchy with tech oligarchs helping run the show. That's not going to be a reliable partner for democratic, free Europe if it works - and isn't now given its VP will go to Germany and actively promote the successors to the Nazis there. It's end of the Republic start of Empire stuff - or that's often the stated aim of those doing or whose theories inspired it. Thiel et al are often open about what they believe, and it ain't in democracy and internationalism.
Of course if it doesn't work - the US could well descend into chaos and not be reliable anyway, remarkably quickly.
If Trump and autocracy are the inevitable product of free speech
They are not
They are the inevitable product of disinformation
I think they are the inevitable product of neglect and scorn.
The American public have been so poorly served by their political leaders for so long that it was remarkably easy for a shyster like Trump with a modicum of native cunning to take advantage of them. The mistake most people make is thinking that this is all about Trump. It is not. Had it not been him it would have been someone equally as dishonest. This is all about a failure of the American social and gvernmental systems over many years. An inevitable failure I would suggest since the system exists to serve the corporations and the rich rather than the 'Average Joe' as the Americans like to term him.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
No, it’s not Britain, as I understand it
in the end a country is its culture and civilization and language and shared collective memory, what it feels itself to be
Mountains and landscapes and rivers and mighty forests are all great, but they do not make a nation. A nation is its people, and for them to prosper, or even exist, some crucial things must be shared
A Britain that is, say, 25% Muslim and 25% Hindu and 25% “other” and the white British - self identified - as the remaining quarter, is not the Britain I know and love. It might be great (I doubt it) it might be a disaster, it doesn’t even matter, it would not be the Britain I grew up in, nothing like it, and I find that deeply sad. And that is where we are heading on these numbers
That’s what I feel. Personally. And yet for some reason saying this is virtually a cancellable offence whereas for any other nation in earth it would be obvious common sense. Would the Saudis allow themselves to become a religious/ethnic minority in their own country? The Afghans? The Poles? The Russians? Anyone??
The first country you reach for is Saudi, where about 40% of the population are non-citizens. In Qatar it's around 90%.
If British should mean white, then non-white people shouldn't be considered British. A statement implies its contrapositive. There's also the assumption that it's okay to classify every person as either white or non-white.
Your position seems to be straight out of chapter 3 of volume 2 of Mein Kampf.
Yes, of course, quietly requesting that my own country retains some semblance of the ethnic and cultural identity it has had for 1500 years makes me a “Nazi” equivalent to “Hitler”
You know what? This madness is gonna end badly for you guys. Don’t say you weren’t warned
There's no need to bridle or issue warnings. That chapter in Mein Kampf advocates a setup where the population is divided into citizens (ethnic Germans), subjects (people of other ethnicities who are allowed to live in Germany but who aren't what Germany is all about), and foreigners (citizens of foreign states).
I'm not saying you are "equivalent" to Hitler. I'm saying that your position regarding what makes a nation and what a country's citizenship policy should be is the same as what Hitler advocates in that chapter of Mein Kampf. It is. Am I being unfair?
If that were already considered by almost everyone to be "the natural way of things" and "how things have always been", there'd have been no need for Hitler to advocate it.
The chapter is about 1000 words long. What do you disagree with in it?
Hitler considered that Germans of Jewish, Polish, Sorbish, Wendish, and gypsy origin were untermenschen despite being indistinguishable from “Aryans.”
Why don't you read that chapter and learn something new about what Hitler advocated in 1925 on issues of nation, citizenship, and "race" - because there it is, in 1000 words, and it's very clear, and I am saying it's essentially the same as what Leon is advocating now wrt "white babies" and Britain as a white country.
There's one reference to Jews in that chapter, and there are no references whatsoever to "Aryans" or "ubermenschen" and "untermenschen" The chapter isn't about Jews versus Aryans, FFS. Maybe actually read what Hitler wrote before you call the comparison I'm drawing "inept". I'm particularly drawing attention to the notion of non-citizen "subjects".
As one was saying about the grave error American leaders are making by behaving like a gang of drunk fascist thugs. The slow pivot to the very problematic but more reliable China begins.
We often feed off scraps when trying to parse the dry-as-a-bone Chinese MFA readouts
But this from the Wang-Kallas meeting yesterday is super interesting
"China supports all efforts conducive to peace and supports Europe's important role in the peace talks process."
Add this to Wang's comments yesterday in Q&A at MSC
"Some have been saying China is attempting to change the order... Now we don't see much talk of that because now there is a country that is withdrawing from international treaties and orgs, I think in Europe you can feel chills almost every day."
Beijing working the margins here - as fully expected.
With US coming here with a v harsh msg China's offer to work within the current system - however trite - all of a sudden looks more appealing
The US shows no willingness to include Europe in Ukraine peace talks, China take the opposite tack
Europe should be very very careful in dealing with China as a rebound fling now America has gone rogue. They are masters at manipulating the hopes and fears of vulnerable countries to inveigle their way into a position of power and create dependency.
None of the 3 big powers (if Russia counts as one) can be trusted. But China is the smartest.
As for Trump and his cabinet, I wonder if we are all misreading those comments about Ukraine as giving away concessions to Russia before the negotiations begin. No. That assumes Trump is negotiating with Russia on behalf of Ukraine. I think he is at least partly doing the opposite: negotiating with Ukraine and Europe on behalf of Putin. We are the enemy, Putin is the ally.
I think any hope of a reasonably normal relationship with the American government ended with Vance's despicable Munich speech and the knowledge of what is going on domestically. Both the ludicrous hypocrisy of it and that one can no longer treat American institutions, and thus America, as reliable partners. It's an open question whether there will be anything recognisable left, in whatever way the current madness ends.
I agree on China, you have to sup with a long spoon. Russia isn't a great power. It's just a dangerously significant rogue state.
In the case of China, quite obviously there's issues. But it maybe a case of building a relationship based on 'mind your own business and do business' with a more arms length partner who isn't going to try and bully you with threats or openly promote the radicalised far right in your own backyard (even if have form at trying more surreptitious influence).
Quite obviously we'd rather be siding with America 1865-2024 (inc. Trump's first term), but that America's now gone.
You seem to prefer China over the US at this time.
It's not necessary to prefer one or the other, but China isn't the one ripping up treaties, imposing tarrifs on allies and threatening to annex territory.
Key to doing business is finding a partner that can keep its word. America can not be relied on.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
No, it’s not Britain, as I understand it
in the end a country is its culture and civilization and language and shared collective memory, what it feels itself to be
Mountains and landscapes and rivers and mighty forests are all great, but they do not make a nation. A nation is its people, and for them to prosper, or even exist, some crucial things must be shared
A Britain that is, say, 25% Muslim and 25% Hindu and 25% “other” and the white British - self identified - as the remaining quarter, is not the Britain I know and love. It might be great (I doubt it) it might be a disaster, it doesn’t even matter, it would not be the Britain I grew up in, nothing like it, and I find that deeply sad. And that is where we are heading on these numbers
That’s what I feel. Personally. And yet for some reason saying this is virtually a cancellable offence whereas for any other nation in earth it would be obvious common sense. Would the Saudis allow themselves to become a religious/ethnic minority in their own country? The Afghans? The Poles? The Russians? Anyone??
The first country you reach for is Saudi, where about 40% of the population are non-citizens. In Qatar it's around 90%.
If British should mean white, then non-white people shouldn't be considered British. A statement implies its contrapositive. There's also the assumption that it's okay to classify every person as either white or non-white.
Your position seems to be straight out of chapter 3 of volume 2 of Mein Kampf.
Yes, of course, quietly requesting that my own country retains some semblance of the ethnic and cultural identity it has had for 1500 years makes me a “Nazi” equivalent to “Hitler”
You know what? This madness is gonna end badly for you guys. Don’t say you weren’t warned
There's no need to bridle or issue warnings. That chapter in Mein Kampf advocates a setup where the population is divided into citizens (ethnic Germans), subjects (people of other ethnicities who are allowed to live in Germany but who aren't what Germany is all about), and foreigners (citizens of foreign states).
I'm not saying you are "equivalent" to Hitler. I'm saying that your position regarding what makes a nation and what a country's citizenship policy should be is the same as what Hitler advocates in that chapter of Mein Kampf. It is. Am I being unfair?
If that were already considered by almost everyone to be "the natural way of things" and "how things have always been", there'd have been no need for Hitler to advocate it.
The chapter is about 1000 words long. What do you disagree with in it?
Hitler considered that Germans of Jewish, Polish, Sorbish, Wendish, and gypsy origin were untermenschen despite being indistinguishable from “Aryans.”
Those who are encouraging the racists in order to get at one race (usually, but not always, Muslims) should realise that the racists they are emboldening will, if given power, not stop at that one race.
Is anyone here “encouraging the racists”?
Anyone who replies to a post from that Leon, perhaps?
It's a bit difficult to know how else Reeves could have responded, if she was never told anything about the complaint at the time and the bank decided not to take any action about the complaint. The claim about what the "initial stage" of the investigation found - that Reeves "appeared" to have broken the rules - seems to come from a single unidentified source. Isn't it a bit strange that this source, supposedly with "direct knowledge of the probe", couldn't tell the BBC anything about its final outcome, or even whether any conclusion was reached?
It is strange that this anonymous hit job is being pushed by the BBC. I'd expect it of the Mail or Telegraph.
There must be someone fairly senior in the BBC who is pushing this story. They should be named as well as the anonymous source.
If I were Reeves, I would treat it with total disdain.
Going after reporters for reporting things you don’t like?
Have you considered a job at the Trump Whitehouse?
I'm not a Reeves supporter and dislike many of her policies.
But this stinks.
I don't think the leaker is a rival in the Labour Party. It's too much of a coincidence as they would also have to have worked with Reeves in HBOS 15 years ago.
It is more likely that it is a hard core Tory who did work alongside Reeves and has come out with this story, anonymously and unsubstantiated, in order to harm Labour.
Others on here have then made up narratives to support their preferred story of "a thief in cabinet".
The odd thing is that the BBC has lowered its standards by running with this.
I suspect, but don't know, that the BBC reporters concerned think that they are Bob Woodwards. Pathetic.
I see the BBC is on the defensive on this. "However, the BBC has not reported that the case reached a formal conclusion, or that there was disciplinary action."
Not sure it stinks any more than any other politics. Dobbing in Johnson for his parties during lockdown?
The only important questions are, were the allegations true and, if they were, were they serious enough to make the targets position untenable?
In the case of Johnson this seems to be a clear yes to both questions.
In the case of Reeves, I have seen it posted on here and reported in the Times, without apparent challenge, that the whistleblower's claims were found to be substantially true, even if it didn't get to disciplinary action because she left.
So the only question that really then matters is whether they were serious enough to merit removing Reeves from her current position.
I don't know the answer to that one. It is more politics and public mood than a fact based decision.
But to claim it 'stinks' seems to be excusing any sort of bad behaviour no matter how severe simply on the grounds that you don't like whistleblowers.
We don't know that there was bad behaviour.
All we really know is that there is someone with a grudge against Reeves and/or the Labour Party and has made an unsubstantiated claim about events 15 years ago, and this has been taken up by the BBC.
The BBC has spoken to 20 people and seen the report from the preliminary investigation.
It’s not an “unsubstantiated claim”
It wasn't the report from the preliminary investigation. It was the whistle blower's original complaint that the BBC saw.
What did these 20 people say? "Sorry. I don't remember anything about this". Could be anything.
They wouldn’t have published without corroboration. That doesn’t mean she is guilty, but the fact pattern suggests that it was serious enough that there was an investigation (which companies are reluctant to do) and that people remembered it
Corroboration of what? Pattern of what? A complaint was made. I think that’s all we can say.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
No, it’s not Britain, as I understand it
in the end a country is its culture and civilization and language and shared collective memory, what it feels itself to be
Mountains and landscapes and rivers and mighty forests are all great, but they do not make a nation. A nation is its people, and for them to prosper, or even exist, some crucial things must be shared
A Britain that is, say, 25% Muslim and 25% Hindu and 25% “other” and the white British - self identified - as the remaining quarter, is not the Britain I know and love. It might be great (I doubt it) it might be a disaster, it doesn’t even matter, it would not be the Britain I grew up in, nothing like it, and I find that deeply sad. And that is where we are heading on these numbers
That’s what I feel. Personally. And yet for some reason saying this is virtually a cancellable offence whereas for any other nation in earth it would be obvious common sense. Would the Saudis allow themselves to become a religious/ethnic minority in their own country? The Afghans? The Poles? The Russians? Anyone??
The first country you reach for is Saudi, where about 40% of the population are non-citizens. In Qatar it's around 90%.
If British should mean white, then non-white people shouldn't be considered British. A statement implies its contrapositive. There's also the assumption that it's okay to classify every person as either white or non-white.
Your position seems to be straight out of chapter 3 of volume 2 of Mein Kampf.
Yes, of course, quietly requesting that my own country retains some semblance of the ethnic and cultural identity it has had for 1500 years makes me a “Nazi” equivalent to “Hitler”
You know what? This madness is gonna end badly for you guys. Don’t say you weren’t warned
There's no need to bridle or issue warnings. That chapter in Mein Kampf advocates a setup where the population is divided into citizens (ethnic Germans), subjects (people of other ethnicities who are allowed to live in Germany but who aren't what Germany is all about), and foreigners (citizens of foreign states).
I'm not saying you are "equivalent" to Hitler. I'm saying that your position regarding what makes a nation and what a country's citizenship policy should be is the same as what Hitler advocates in that chapter of Mein Kampf. It is. Am I being unfair?
If that were already considered by almost everyone to be "the natural way of things" and "how things have always been", there'd have been no need for Hitler to advocate it.
The chapter is about 1000 words long. What do you disagree with in it?
Hitler considered that Germans of Jewish, Polish, Sorbish, Wendish, and gypsy origin were untermenschen despite being indistinguishable from “Aryans.”
Those who are encouraging the racists in order to get at one race (usually, but not always, Muslims) should realise that the racists they are emboldening will, if given power, not stop at that one race.
Is anyone here “encouraging the racists”?
Anyone who replies to a post from that Leon, perhaps?
Well that’s me, I replied to him.
Based on years of reading Leon’s oeuvre, I think he has a clear sympathy for fascists, and he has a nauseating interest in race science.
However the point he is making here is primarily about what he sees as regrettable and perhaps unstoppable societal change.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
No, it’s not Britain, as I understand it
in the end a country is its culture and civilization and language and shared collective memory, what it feels itself to be
Mountains and landscapes and rivers and mighty forests are all great, but they do not make a nation. A nation is its people, and for them to prosper, or even exist, some crucial things must be shared
A Britain that is, say, 25% Muslim and 25% Hindu and 25% “other” and the white British - self identified - as the remaining quarter, is not the Britain I know and love. It might be great (I doubt it) it might be a disaster, it doesn’t even matter, it would not be the Britain I grew up in, nothing like it, and I find that deeply sad. And that is where we are heading on these numbers
That’s what I feel. Personally. And yet for some reason saying this is virtually a cancellable offence whereas for any other nation in earth it would be obvious common sense. Would the Saudis allow themselves to become a religious/ethnic minority in their own country? The Afghans? The Poles? The Russians? Anyone??
The first country you reach for is Saudi, where about 40% of the population are non-citizens. In Qatar it's around 90%.
If British should mean white, then non-white people shouldn't be considered British. A statement implies its contrapositive. There's also the assumption that it's okay to classify every person as either white or non-white.
Your position seems to be straight out of chapter 3 of volume 2 of Mein Kampf.
Yes, of course, quietly requesting that my own country retains some semblance of the ethnic and cultural identity it has had for 1500 years makes me a “Nazi” equivalent to “Hitler”
You know what? This madness is gonna end badly for you guys. Don’t say you weren’t warned
There's no need to bridle or issue warnings. That chapter in Mein Kampf advocates a setup where the population is divided into citizens (ethnic Germans), subjects (people of other ethnicities who are allowed to live in Germany but who aren't what Germany is all about), and foreigners (citizens of foreign states).
I'm not saying you are "equivalent" to Hitler. I'm saying that your position regarding what makes a nation and what a country's citizenship policy should be is the same as what Hitler advocates in that chapter of Mein Kampf. It is. Am I being unfair?
If that were already considered by almost everyone to be "the natural way of things" and "how things have always been", there'd have been no need for Hitler to advocate it.
The chapter is about 1000 words long. What do you disagree with in it?
Hitler considered that Germans of Jewish, Polish, Sorbish, Wendish, and gypsy origin were untermenschen despite being indistinguishable from “Aryans.”
Why don't you read that chapter and learn something new about what Hitler advocated in 1925 on issues of nation, citizenship, and "race" - because there it is, in 1000 words, and it's very clear, and I am saying it's essentially the same as what Leon is advocating now wrt "white babies" and Britain as a white country.
There's one reference to Jews in that chapter, and there are no references whatsoever to "Aryans" or "ubermenschen" and "untermenschen" The chapter isn't about Jews versus Aryans, FFS. Maybe actually read what Hitler wrote before you call the comparison I'm drawing "inept". I'm particularly drawing attention to the notion of non-citizen "subjects".
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
I think most British people don't care about race, but they do care about values and culture, and extreme forms of religion.
I agree, mostly.
Someone posted upthread that the last two Tory leaders had not been “White British”, and I had to think for a moment who they were referring to.
However, race and culture are decently correlated.
We lack an acceptable way of talking about this. Legitimate cultural concerns without morally unacceptable concepts of racial inferiority.
I think I disagree with you. As I have repeated many times on here before, one of the most English men I ever met was an Indian born in Uganda whose family came to Britain when he was a child as part of the Amin exodus. There is simply no way you would ever have known he was not white English from what he said or wrote. I consider him one of my greatest friends from my time at work. Sadly he suffered severe brain damage in a car accident a few years ago.
But I genuinely believe, based on more than 50 years of friendships and associations, that being culturally British/English has nothing at all to do with race.
I am sorry to hear about your friend. As it happens my grandmother was half Indian, born in Chennai (ie, Madras), which of course makes me 1/8.
I agree that being British has nothing to do with race, and it’s one of the best things about British identity that it can be adopted flexibly.
However, the issue is not individuals. The issue is aggregate, mass and rapid cultural change.
This comes back to the failure of our systems and particularly, for want of a better term 'multiculturalism'. Had we followed the Norwegian system of insisting that all new long term settlers adopt Norwegian language and custom, then I think our immigration experience and attitudes would have been very different. As it is we have left it to the individual and, at some point, adopted the idea that advocating British/English culture equates with racism.
As one was saying about the grave error American leaders are making by behaving like a gang of drunk fascist thugs. The slow pivot to the very problematic but more reliable China begins.
We often feed off scraps when trying to parse the dry-as-a-bone Chinese MFA readouts
But this from the Wang-Kallas meeting yesterday is super interesting
"China supports all efforts conducive to peace and supports Europe's important role in the peace talks process."
Add this to Wang's comments yesterday in Q&A at MSC
"Some have been saying China is attempting to change the order... Now we don't see much talk of that because now there is a country that is withdrawing from international treaties and orgs, I think in Europe you can feel chills almost every day."
Beijing working the margins here - as fully expected.
With US coming here with a v harsh msg China's offer to work within the current system - however trite - all of a sudden looks more appealing
The US shows no willingness to include Europe in Ukraine peace talks, China take the opposite tack
Europe should be very very careful in dealing with China as a rebound fling now America has gone rogue. They are masters at manipulating the hopes and fears of vulnerable countries to inveigle their way into a position of power and create dependency.
None of the 3 big powers (if Russia counts as one) can be trusted. But China is the smartest.
As for Trump and his cabinet, I wonder if we are all misreading those comments about Ukraine as giving away concessions to Russia before the negotiations begin. No. That assumes Trump is negotiating with Russia on behalf of Ukraine. I think he is at least partly doing the opposite: negotiating with Ukraine and Europe on behalf of Putin. We are the enemy, Putin is the ally.
I think any hope of a reasonably normal relationship with the American government ended with Vance's despicable Munich speech and the knowledge of what is going on domestically. Both the ludicrous hypocrisy of it and that one can no longer treat American institutions, and thus America, as reliable partners. It's an open question whether there will be anything recognisable left, in whatever way the current madness ends.
I agree on China, you have to sup with a long spoon. Russia isn't a great power. It's just a dangerously significant rogue state.
In the case of China, quite obviously there's issues. But it maybe a case of building a relationship based on 'mind your own business and do business' with a more arms length partner who isn't going to try and bully you with threats or openly promote the radicalised far right in your own backyard (even if have form at trying more surreptitious influence).
Quite obviously we'd rather be siding with America 1865-2024 (inc. Trump's first term), but that America's now gone.
You seem to prefer China over the US at this time.
It's not necessary to prefer one or the other, but China isn't the one ripping up treaties, imposing tarrifs on allies and threatening to annex territory.
Key to doing business is finding a partner that can keep its word. America can not be relied on.
China's behaviour over Hong Kong isn't really a good advert, though.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
I think most British people don't care about race, but they do care about values and culture, and extreme forms of religion.
I agree, mostly.
Someone posted upthread that the last two Tory leaders had not been “White British”, and I had to think for a moment who they were referring to.
However, race and culture are decently correlated.
We lack an acceptable way of talking about this. Legitimate cultural concerns without morally unacceptable concepts of racial inferiority.
I think I disagree with you. As I have repeated many times on here before, one of the most English men I ever met was an Indian born in Uganda whose family came to Britain when he was a child as part of the Amin exodus. There is simply no way you would ever have known he was not white English from what he said or wrote. I consider him one of my greatest friends from my time at work. Sadly he suffered severe brain damage in a car accident a few years ago.
But I genuinely believe, based on more than 50 years of friendships and associations, that being culturally British/English has nothing at all to do with race.
I am sorry to hear about your friend. As it happens my grandmother was half Indian, born in Chennai (ie, Madras), which of course makes me 1/8.
I agree that being British has nothing to do with race, and it’s one of the best things about British identity that it can be adopted flexibly.
However, the issue is not individuals. The issue is aggregate, mass and rapid cultural change.
This comes back to the failure of our systems and particularly, for want of a better term 'multiculturalism'. Had we followed the Norwegian system of insisting that all new long term settlers adopt Norwegian language and custom, then I think our immigration experience and attitudes would have been very different. As it is we have left it to the individual and, at some point, adopted the idea that advocating British/English culture equates with racism.
For me, the issue has really only come about in the last ten years. I think up until then the British experience with immigrants and migration was v mostly positive.
And what you are proposing has a significant cost.
Also, very much most migrants speak English already. Which presumably is not true of Norwegian bound migrants.
It's a bit difficult to know how else Reeves could have responded, if she was never told anything about the complaint at the time and the bank decided not to take any action about the complaint. The claim about what the "initial stage" of the investigation found - that Reeves "appeared" to have broken the rules - seems to come from a single unidentified source. Isn't it a bit strange that this source, supposedly with "direct knowledge of the probe", couldn't tell the BBC anything about its final outcome, or even whether any conclusion was reached?
It is strange that this anonymous hit job is being pushed by the BBC. I'd expect it of the Mail or Telegraph.
There must be someone fairly senior in the BBC who is pushing this story. They should be named as well as the anonymous source.
If I were Reeves, I would treat it with total disdain.
Going after reporters for reporting things you don’t like?
Have you considered a job at the Trump Whitehouse?
I'm not a Reeves supporter and dislike many of her policies.
But this stinks.
I don't think the leaker is a rival in the Labour Party. It's too much of a coincidence as they would also have to have worked with Reeves in HBOS 15 years ago.
It is more likely that it is a hard core Tory who did work alongside Reeves and has come out with this story, anonymously and unsubstantiated, in order to harm Labour.
Others on here have then made up narratives to support their preferred story of "a thief in cabinet".
The odd thing is that the BBC has lowered its standards by running with this.
I suspect, but don't know, that the BBC reporters concerned think that they are Bob Woodwards. Pathetic.
I see the BBC is on the defensive on this. "However, the BBC has not reported that the case reached a formal conclusion, or that there was disciplinary action."
Not sure it stinks any more than any other politics. Dobbing in Johnson for his parties during lockdown?
The only important questions are, were the allegations true and, if they were, were they serious enough to make the targets position untenable?
In the case of Johnson this seems to be a clear yes to both questions.
In the case of Reeves, I have seen it posted on here and reported in the Times, without apparent challenge, that the whistleblower's claims were found to be substantially true, even if it didn't get to disciplinary action because she left.
So the only question that really then matters is whether they were serious enough to merit removing Reeves from her current position.
I don't know the answer to that one. It is more politics and public mood than a fact based decision.
But to claim it 'stinks' seems to be excusing any sort of bad behaviour no matter how severe simply on the grounds that you don't like whistleblowers.
We don't know that there was bad behaviour.
All we really know is that there is someone with a grudge against Reeves and/or the Labour Party and has made an unsubstantiated claim about events 15 years ago, and this has been taken up by the BBC.
The BBC has spoken to 20 people and seen the report from the preliminary investigation.
It’s not an “unsubstantiated claim”
It wasn't the report from the preliminary investigation. It was the whistle blower's original complaint that the BBC saw.
What did these 20 people say? "Sorry. I don't remember anything about this". Could be anything.
They wouldn’t have published without corroboration. That doesn’t mean she is guilty, but the fact pattern suggests that it was serious enough that there was an investigation (which companies are reluctant to do) and that people remembered it
The trouble is that there seems to be increasingly a feeling that if anyone makes any kind of allegation against anyone, there is almost a presumption that the allegation is true until it is proved to be false. That's not what I was led to believe when I first learned about the rule of law in the dim and distant past.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
I think most British people don't care about race, but they do care about values and culture, and extreme forms of religion.
I agree, mostly.
Someone posted upthread that the last two Tory leaders had not been “White British”, and I had to think for a moment who they were referring to.
However, race and culture are decently correlated.
We lack an acceptable way of talking about this. Legitimate cultural concerns without morally unacceptable concepts of racial inferiority.
I think I disagree with you. As I have repeated many times on here before, one of the most English men I ever met was an Indian born in Uganda whose family came to Britain when he was a child as part of the Amin exodus. There is simply no way you would ever have known he was not white English from what he said or wrote. I consider him one of my greatest friends from my time at work. Sadly he suffered severe brain damage in a car accident a few years ago.
But I genuinely believe, based on more than 50 years of friendships and associations, that being culturally British/English has nothing at all to do with race.
I am sorry to hear about your friend. As it happens my grandmother was half Indian, born in Chennai (ie, Madras), which of course makes me 1/8.
I agree that being British has nothing to do with race, and it’s one of the best things about British identity that it can be adopted flexibly.
However, the issue is not individuals. The issue is aggregate, mass and rapid cultural change.
Cultural change is not new.
I am the same ethnicity as my parents, grandparents and sons, but we have very different cultures.
I didn't really have any contact with anyone non-white until I went to Medical School in South London. At first it seemed quite alien, but over time it became normality and I cringe now at some of my attitudes to race, religion or homosexuality, though these were fairly mainstream in the Eighties.
It's the same now. It's no coincidence that the strongest Reform polling is in those parts of the country where there are fewest immigrants. It is fear of otherness.
As one was saying about the grave error American leaders are making by behaving like a gang of drunk fascist thugs. The slow pivot to the very problematic but more reliable China begins.
We often feed off scraps when trying to parse the dry-as-a-bone Chinese MFA readouts
But this from the Wang-Kallas meeting yesterday is super interesting
"China supports all efforts conducive to peace and supports Europe's important role in the peace talks process."
Add this to Wang's comments yesterday in Q&A at MSC
"Some have been saying China is attempting to change the order... Now we don't see much talk of that because now there is a country that is withdrawing from international treaties and orgs, I think in Europe you can feel chills almost every day."
Beijing working the margins here - as fully expected.
With US coming here with a v harsh msg China's offer to work within the current system - however trite - all of a sudden looks more appealing
The US shows no willingness to include Europe in Ukraine peace talks, China take the opposite tack
Europe should be very very careful in dealing with China as a rebound fling now America has gone rogue. They are masters at manipulating the hopes and fears of vulnerable countries to inveigle their way into a position of power and create dependency.
None of the 3 big powers (if Russia counts as one) can be trusted. But China is the smartest.
As for Trump and his cabinet, I wonder if we are all misreading those comments about Ukraine as giving away concessions to Russia before the negotiations begin. No. That assumes Trump is negotiating with Russia on behalf of Ukraine. I think he is at least partly doing the opposite: negotiating with Ukraine and Europe on behalf of Putin. We are the enemy, Putin is the ally.
I think any hope of a reasonably normal relationship with the American government ended with Vance's despicable Munich speech and the knowledge of what is going on domestically. Both the ludicrous hypocrisy of it and that one can no longer treat American institutions, and thus America, as reliable partners. It's an open question whether there will be anything recognisable left, in whatever way the current madness ends.
I agree on China, you have to sup with a long spoon. Russia isn't a great power. It's just a dangerously significant rogue state.
In the case of China, quite obviously there's issues. But it maybe a case of building a relationship based on 'mind your own business and do business' with a more arms length partner who isn't going to try and bully you with threats or openly promote the radicalised far right in your own backyard (even if have form at trying more surreptitious influence).
Quite obviously we'd rather be siding with America 1865-2024 (inc. Trump's first term), but that America's now gone.
You seem to prefer China over the US at this time.
It's not necessary to prefer one or the other, but China isn't the one ripping up treaties, imposing tarrifs on allies and threatening to annex territory.
Key to doing business is finding a partner that can keep its word. America can not be relied on.
This is detached from reality. Has China respected the Joint Declaration or the sovereignty of Philippine waters? Is China not committed to annexing Taiwan? Does China not use a range of policies designed to subsidise its own exporters?
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
I think most British people don't care about race, but they do care about values and culture, and extreme forms of religion.
I agree, mostly.
Someone posted upthread that the last two Tory leaders had not been “White British”, and I had to think for a moment who they were referring to.
However, race and culture are decently correlated.
We lack an acceptable way of talking about this. Legitimate cultural concerns without morally unacceptable concepts of racial inferiority.
I think I disagree with you. As I have repeated many times on here before, one of the most English men I ever met was an Indian born in Uganda whose family came to Britain when he was a child as part of the Amin exodus. There is simply no way you would ever have known he was not white English from what he said or wrote. I consider him one of my greatest friends from my time at work. Sadly he suffered severe brain damage in a car accident a few years ago.
But I genuinely believe, based on more than 50 years of friendships and associations, that being culturally British/English has nothing at all to do with race.
I am sorry to hear about your friend. As it happens my grandmother was half Indian, born in Chennai (ie, Madras), which of course makes me 1/8.
I agree that being British has nothing to do with race, and it’s one of the best things about British identity that it can be adopted flexibly.
However, the issue is not individuals. The issue is aggregate, mass and rapid cultural change.
This comes back to the failure of our systems and particularly, for want of a better term 'multiculturalism'. Had we followed the Norwegian system of insisting that all new long term settlers adopt Norwegian language and custom, then I think our immigration experience and attitudes would have been very different. As it is we have left it to the individual and, at some point, adopted the idea that advocating British/English culture equates with racism.
For me, the issue has really only come about in the last ten years. I think up until then the British experience with immigrants and migration was v mostly positive.
And what you are proposing has a significant cost.
Also, very much most migrants speak English already. Which presumably is not true of Norwegian bound migrants.
Fair point. But the other part that I don't mention is the refusal of the Norwegians to allow High Migrant Concentration Areas* to develop by insisting that new immigrants settle and work in areas designated by the Government for the first few years. This is good for both sections of the community as it not only prevents HMCAs but also means there are practically no areas of Norway that do not have a settled migrant population which then becomes the norm.
* I use this term in place of 'ghettos' as I would have used previously as there is a clear negative connotation to the term ghetto which is not what I am trying to imply.
White british births will likely be a minority by 2030. And apparently now Tommy Robinson is being mistreated in jail.
Unlikely given over 80% of the population is still white
Er, if you project the numbers then it is extremely likely that white British births will be the minority by 2030, if they are only 56% now. That’s just math
I checked the figures on the ONS website, for births where ethnicity is recorded. The number of white babies in 2022 was 412,000 out of 585,000, or 70.7%.
So maybe white BRITISH is the discrepancy? Or is the original claim bollocks?
A huge number of white people have European or Irish ancestry. Since 2000, the categories of ethnic groups have also expanded enormously.
There’s also a growing number of mixed-race children, too.
I just checked. I think the stat is legit. It is a catastrophe in the making, and very very sad
It’s one reason I travel so much, to be brutally honest. I can’t bear to see what is happening to my country. it’s like leaving a friend with some terminal cancer, better to have the memory of what was, than see what is
And before everyone has conniptions, I favour immigration. You need it to keep genetic variety and cultural dynamism. in moderation it is a really GOOD thing. But we are far beyond “moderation” now
I think you are being a little extreme. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
I think most British people don't care about race, but they do care about values and culture, and extreme forms of religion.
I agree, mostly.
Someone posted upthread that the last two Tory leaders had not been “White British”, and I had to think for a moment who they were referring to.
However, race and culture are decently correlated.
We lack an acceptable way of talking about this. Legitimate cultural concerns without morally unacceptable concepts of racial inferiority.
I think I disagree with you. As I have repeated many times on here before, one of the most English men I ever met was an Indian born in Uganda whose family came to Britain when he was a child as part of the Amin exodus. There is simply no way you would ever have known he was not white English from what he said or wrote. I consider him one of my greatest friends from my time at work. Sadly he suffered severe brain damage in a car accident a few years ago.
But I genuinely believe, based on more than 50 years of friendships and associations, that being culturally British/English has nothing at all to do with race.
I am sorry to hear about your friend. As it happens my grandmother was half Indian, born in Chennai (ie, Madras), which of course makes me 1/8.
I agree that being British has nothing to do with race, and it’s one of the best things about British identity that it can be adopted flexibly.
However, the issue is not individuals. The issue is aggregate, mass and rapid cultural change.
Cultural change is not new.
I am the same ethnicity as my parents, grandparents and sons, but we have very different cultures.
I didn't really have any contact with anyone non-white until I went to Medical School in South London. At first it seemed quite alien, but over time it became normality and I cringe now at some of my attitudes to race, religion or homosexuality, though these were fairly mainstream in the Eighties.
It's the same now. It's no coincidence that the strongest Reform polling is in those parts of the country where there are fewest immigrants. It is fear of otherness.
I lived in Hackney, when I was in the UK. And the country I grew up in was born multi-cultural. I would never vote Reform.
But as a fellow liberal, don’t you worry as I do about the rise of avowedly Islamic political parties in the UK?
It's a bit difficult to know how else Reeves could have responded, if she was never told anything about the complaint at the time and the bank decided not to take any action about the complaint. The claim about what the "initial stage" of the investigation found - that Reeves "appeared" to have broken the rules - seems to come from a single unidentified source. Isn't it a bit strange that this source, supposedly with "direct knowledge of the probe", couldn't tell the BBC anything about its final outcome, or even whether any conclusion was reached?
It is strange that this anonymous hit job is being pushed by the BBC. I'd expect it of the Mail or Telegraph.
There must be someone fairly senior in the BBC who is pushing this story. They should be named as well as the anonymous source.
If I were Reeves, I would treat it with total disdain.
Going after reporters for reporting things you don’t like?
Have you considered a job at the Trump Whitehouse?
I'm not a Reeves supporter and dislike many of her policies.
But this stinks.
I don't think the leaker is a rival in the Labour Party. It's too much of a coincidence as they would also have to have worked with Reeves in HBOS 15 years ago.
It is more likely that it is a hard core Tory who did work alongside Reeves and has come out with this story, anonymously and unsubstantiated, in order to harm Labour.
Others on here have then made up narratives to support their preferred story of "a thief in cabinet".
The odd thing is that the BBC has lowered its standards by running with this.
I suspect, but don't know, that the BBC reporters concerned think that they are Bob Woodwards. Pathetic.
I see the BBC is on the defensive on this. "However, the BBC has not reported that the case reached a formal conclusion, or that there was disciplinary action."
Not sure it stinks any more than any other politics. Dobbing in Johnson for his parties during lockdown?
The only important questions are, were the allegations true and, if they were, were they serious enough to make the targets position untenable?
In the case of Johnson this seems to be a clear yes to both questions.
In the case of Reeves, I have seen it posted on here and reported in the Times, without apparent challenge, that the whistleblower's claims were found to be substantially true, even if it didn't get to disciplinary action because she left.
So the only question that really then matters is whether they were serious enough to merit removing Reeves from her current position.
I don't know the answer to that one. It is more politics and public mood than a fact based decision.
But to claim it 'stinks' seems to be excusing any sort of bad behaviour no matter how severe simply on the grounds that you don't like whistleblowers.
We don't know that there was bad behaviour.
All we really know is that there is someone with a grudge against Reeves and/or the Labour Party and has made an unsubstantiated claim about events 15 years ago, and this has been taken up by the BBC.
The BBC has spoken to 20 people and seen the report from the preliminary investigation.
It’s not an “unsubstantiated claim”
It wasn't the report from the preliminary investigation. It was the whistle blower's original complaint that the BBC saw.
What did these 20 people say? "Sorry. I don't remember anything about this". Could be anything.
They wouldn’t have published without corroboration. That doesn’t mean she is guilty, but the fact pattern suggests that it was serious enough that there was an investigation (which companies are reluctant to do) and that people remembered it
The trouble is that there seems to be increasingly a feeling that if anyone makes any kind of allegation against anyone, there is almost a presumption that the allegation is true until it is proved to be false. That's not what I was led to believe when I first learned about the rule of law in the dim and distant past.
You're thinking about most criminal law, which generally has the presumption of innocence. (Actually not even all criminal law has the presumption of innocence - in some cases, such as unexplained wealth orders, where the government usually failed to prove its case, rather than upping its game, it reversed the burden of proof, sort of like a five-year-old who can't win fairly.
But civil law has just requires balance of probability - in order words, a 51% likelihood is sufficient. And that's a more logical standard for the court of public opinion. In a criminal trial, the state has the ability to force people to testify, demand evidence, interrogate for hours, etc. and usually has much greater resources than the losers who end up in the dock, so it is right that they are held to a higher standard.
And in the case of Reeves, given the evidence, and her complete lack of any persuasive explanation, I think that the 51% threshold has been more than met.
Comments
We're past all that these days. All that matters is how often you can get something in front of people's eyeballs, and what percentage of people will believe it if you get it in front of their eyeballs that often.
Not to say, of course, that the people who are lapping this up because they hate Rachel Reeves wouldn't be caterwauling to high heaven about how unjust it all was, if it was being said about a Tory politician.
There’s definitely a underlying weirdness to the story.
If we are back to only white babies being valid then we are getting into a very bad place.
https://x.com/thehumanoidhub/status/1829577272820736060?s=61&t=GGp3Vs1t1kTWDiyA-odnZg
So, they will do this
But I do understand where you are coming from.
Is Britain still Britain if it “White British” is no longer the majority? Or if Muslims were, say, 25% of the population?
Britain, thankfully, has never been a “blood and soil” type country, and the word British is also mercifully flexible. But nevertheless, there are surely limits beyond which many of the cultural assumptions one takes for granted simply dissolve, with commensurate implications for society and politics.
I just think an “investigation” should have some, you know, facts.
in the end a country is its culture and civilization and language and shared collective memory, what it feels itself to be
Mountains and landscapes and rivers and mighty forests are all great, but they do not make a nation. A nation is its people, and for them to prosper, or even exist, some crucial things must be shared
A Britain that is, say, 25% Muslim and 25% Hindu and 25% “other” and the white British - self identified - as the remaining quarter, is not the Britain I know and love. It might be great (I doubt it) it might be a disaster, it doesn’t even matter, it would not be the Britain I grew up in, nothing like it, and I find that deeply sad. And that is where we are heading on these numbers
That’s what I feel. Personally. And yet for some reason saying this is virtually a cancellable offence whereas for any other nation in earth it would be obvious common sense. Would the Saudis allow themselves to become a religious/ethnic minority in their own country? The Afghans? The Poles? The Russians? Anyone??
Now, in my middle class suburb, you don't really notice it at first sight, because most immigrants who can afford to live here are necessarily pretty well integrated, dress western, and are largely able to speak English somewhere between well and perfectly. But still, in what 15 years ago was an almost monolithically white suburb, my daughter is in a class in which 40% do not speak English as a first language.
Whatevs
If British should mean white, then non-white people shouldn't be considered British. A statement implies its contrapositive. There's also the assumption that it's okay to classify every person as either white or non-white.
Your position seems to be straight out of chapter 3 of volume 2 of Mein Kampf.
Just pointing out that, until the next election, it doesn't really matter.
Until then, Starmer, and the markets will be the judge.
We often feed off scraps when trying to parse the dry-as-a-bone Chinese MFA readouts
But this from the Wang-Kallas meeting yesterday is super interesting
"China supports all efforts conducive to peace and supports Europe's important role in the peace talks process."
Add this to Wang's comments yesterday in Q&A at MSC
"Some have been saying China is attempting to change the order... Now we don't see much talk of that because now there is a country that is withdrawing from international treaties and orgs, I think in Europe you can feel chills almost every day."
Beijing working the margins here - as fully expected.
With US coming here with a v harsh msg China's offer to work within the current system - however trite - all of a sudden looks more appealing
The US shows no willingness to include Europe in Ukraine peace talks, China take the opposite tack
https://bsky.app/profile/fbermingham.bsky.social/post/3li7g4fdag22w
You know what? This madness is gonna end badly for you guys. Don’t say you weren’t warned
All happy campers today, I see!
Someone posted upthread that the last two Tory leaders had not been “White British”, and I had to think for a moment who they were referring to.
However, race and culture are decently correlated.
We lack an acceptable way of talking about this.
Legitimate cultural concerns without morally unacceptable concepts of racial inferiority.
I'm not saying you are "equivalent" to Hitler. I'm saying that your position regarding what makes a nation and what a country's citizenship policy should be is the same as what Hitler advocates in that chapter of Mein Kampf. It is. Am I being unfair?
If that were already considered by almost everyone to be "the natural way of things" and "how things have always been", there'd have been no need for Hitler to advocate it.
The chapter is about 1000 words long. What do you disagree with in it?
https://mondopolitico.com/library/meinkampf/v2c3.htm
None of the 3 big powers (if Russia counts as one) can be trusted. But China is the smartest.
As for Trump and his cabinet, I wonder if we are all misreading those comments about Ukraine as giving away concessions to Russia before the negotiations begin. No. That assumes Trump is negotiating with Russia on behalf of Ukraine. I think he is at least partly doing the opposite: negotiating with Ukraine and Europe on behalf of Putin. We are the enemy, Putin is the ally.
A self-perpetuating inner party of NU10k with an immigrant prole workforce.
But general purpose robots are, economically, still quite some ways off.
"Shark bites off tourist’s hands as she tries to take selfie on Caribbean beach
It is understood the 55-year-old had one of her arms amputated below the wrist and the other half way up her forearm"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/news/2025/02/14/shark-bites-off-tourist-hands-turks-and-caicos-beach/
Hitler considered that Germans of Jewish, Polish, Sorbish, Wendish, and gypsy origin were untermenschen despite being indistinguishable from “Aryans.”
They pardoned the illegality.
Remarkable change in several Canadian Opinion polls seems to be cementing. Liberals within single figures of the Conservatives, as close as only 4% behind, in which case with the current drop off of the NDP and the Bloq would probably give them minority government again.
Trump seems to be the prime responsibility in all this.
I agree on China, you have to sup with a long spoon. Russia isn't a great power. It's just a dangerously significant rogue state.
In the case of China, quite obviously there's issues. But it maybe a case of building a relationship based on 'mind your own business and do business' with a more arms length partner who isn't going to try and bully you with threats or openly promote the radicalised far right in your own backyard (even if have form at trying more surreptitious influence).
Quite obviously we'd rather be siding with America 1865-2024 (inc. Trump's first term), but that America's now gone.
Their reaction? "Ugh, cancel it. Anull democracy. Revote or revoke"
They are awful
Congrats to @Malmesbury btw (I think it was he/she?) for successfully creating a new PBism. "NU10K" is clever and useful
French President Emmanuel Macron has invited European leaders for an emergency summit in Paris tomorrow (Sunday) to respond to Donald Trump's plans for Ukraine, Polish Foreign Minister Sikorski reveals. Sikorski welcomes the move. Presume UK will be included but no detail.
People who wrongly thought that Trump's political career was over all seem to be losing their minds at the moment.
Top risks as seen by the public in the 🇬🇧 UK, by party:
🔵 Conservatives
1. Russia
2. Iran
3. Cyber attacks
🔴 Labour
1. Russia
2. Climate change
3. Cyber attacks
🟣 Reform UK
1. Change to my country's culture
2. Radical Islamist terror
3. Mass migration
Who is right?
OK - we see from that that you are keen on the "Anglo-Saxons". But you need to think about the dates a bit more closely. The Anglo-Saxons were non-Christian 1500 years ago.
Or maybe it's just "My Anglo-Saxon, right or wrong"?
Con 178
RefUK 175
Lab 174
LD 57
SNP 37
Grn 4
PC 2
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_vipoll_20250207.html
One to ponder...
They are the inevitable product of disinformation
But I genuinely believe, based on more than 50 years of friendships and associations, that being culturally British/English has nothing at all to do with race.
Trump can call the Gulf of Mexico whatever he likes.
He has banned the AP for pointing out this is meaningless bullshit. That's not free speech.
In the general panic flap over Trump there's not been much discussion yet of what an opportunity this could be for China. Xi has a working relationship with both sides in Ukraine. Is there any possibility that he could engineer a land for peace deal which the Ukrainians will hate but would at least allow the surviving four-fifths of the country to keep its independence and permanently escape the Kremlin sphere?
Washington is certainly doing a remarkable job of making what is in many respects a very problematic Beijing look like it might be a more reliable partner.
As it happens my grandmother was half Indian, born in Chennai (ie, Madras), which of course makes me 1/8.
I agree that being British has nothing to do with race, and it’s one of the best things about British identity that it can be adopted flexibly.
However, the issue is not individuals.
The issue is aggregate, mass and rapid cultural change.
Musk etc are trying to in effect remake it as Curtis Yarvin's dream of a right-wing, nationalist monarchy with tech oligarchs helping run the show. That's not going to be a reliable partner for democratic, free Europe if it works - and isn't now given its VP will go to Germany and actively promote the successors to the Nazis there. It's end of the Republic start of Empire stuff - or that's often the stated aim of those doing or whose theories inspired it. Thiel et al are often open about what they believe, and it ain't in democracy and internationalism.
Of course if it doesn't work - the US could well descend into chaos and not be reliable anyway, remarkably quickly.
The American public have been so poorly served by their political leaders for so long that it was remarkably easy for a shyster like Trump with a modicum of native cunning to take advantage of them. The mistake most people make is thinking that this is all about Trump. It is not. Had it not been him it would have been someone equally as dishonest. This is all about a failure of the American social and gvernmental systems over many years. An inevitable failure I would suggest since the system exists to serve the corporations and the rich rather than the 'Average Joe' as the Americans like to term him.
There's one reference to Jews in that chapter, and there are no references whatsoever to "Aryans" or "ubermenschen" and "untermenschen" The chapter isn't about Jews versus Aryans, FFS. Maybe actually read what Hitler wrote before you call the comparison I'm drawing "inept". I'm particularly drawing attention to the notion of non-citizen "subjects".
Perhaps I need to emphasise the date: 1925.
Key to doing business is finding a partner that can keep its word. America can not be relied on.
A complaint was made. I think that’s all we can say.
Based on years of reading Leon’s oeuvre, I think he has a clear sympathy for fascists, and he has a nauseating interest in race science.
However the point he is making here is primarily about what he sees as regrettable and perhaps unstoppable societal change.
Please go away.
And what you are proposing has a significant cost.
Also, very much most migrants speak English already.
Which presumably is not true of Norwegian bound migrants.
I am the same ethnicity as my parents, grandparents and sons, but we have very different cultures.
I didn't really have any contact with anyone non-white until I went to Medical School in South London. At first it seemed quite alien, but over time it became normality and I cringe now at some of my attitudes to race, religion or homosexuality, though these were fairly mainstream in the Eighties.
It's the same now. It's no coincidence that the strongest Reform polling is in those parts of the country where there are fewest immigrants. It is fear of otherness.
* I use this term in place of 'ghettos' as I would have used previously as there is a clear negative connotation to the term ghetto which is not what I am trying to imply.
And the country I grew up in was born multi-cultural.
I would never vote Reform.
But as a fellow liberal, don’t you worry as I do about the rise of avowedly Islamic political parties in the UK?
I'm still furious at those English bastards using a silly name like 'Snowdon' for our mountain.
But civil law has just requires balance of probability - in order words, a 51% likelihood is sufficient. And that's a more logical standard for the court of public opinion. In a criminal trial, the state has the ability to force people to testify, demand evidence, interrogate for hours, etc. and usually has much greater resources than the losers who end up in the dock, so it is right that they are held to a higher standard.
And in the case of Reeves, given the evidence, and her complete lack of any persuasive explanation, I think that the 51% threshold has been more than met.