[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Paul Joseph Watson: Bournemouth 1980 Vs 2025

FDA Revokes Emergency Authorization For COVID-19 Vaccines

NATO’s Worst Nightmare Is Happening Right Now in Ukraine - Odessa is Next To Fall?

Why do men lose it when their chicky-poo dies?

Christopher Caldwell: How Immigration Is Erasing Whites, Christians, and the Middle Class

SSRI Connection? Another Trans Shooter, Another Massacre – And They Erased His Video

Something 1/2 THE SIZE of the SUN has Entered our Solar System, and We Have NO CLUE What it is...

Massive Property Tax Fraud Exposed - $5.1 Trillion Bond Scam Will Crash System

Israel Sold American Weapons to Azerbaijan to Kill Armenian Christians

Daily MEMES YouTube Hates | YouTube is Fighting ME all the Way | Making ME Remove Memes | Part 188

New fear unlocked while stuck in highway traffic - Indian truck driver on his phone smashes into

RFK Jr. says the largest tech companies will permit Americans to access their personal health data

I just researched this, and it’s true—MUST SEE!!

Savage invader is disturbed that English people exist in an area he thought had been conquered

Jackson Hole's Parting Advice: Accept Even More Migrants To Offset Demographic Collapse, Or Else

Ecuador Angered! China-built Massive Dam is Tofu-Dreg, Ecuador Demands $400 Million Compensation

UK economy on brink of collapse (Needs IMF Bailout)

How Red Light Unlocks Your Body’s Hidden Fat-Burning Switch

The Mar-a-Lago Accord Confirmed: Miran Brings Trump's Reset To The Fed ($8,000 Gold)

This taboo sex act could save your relationship, expert insists: ‘Catalyst for conversations’

LA Police Bust Burglary Crew Suspected In 92 Residential Heists

Top 10 Jobs AI is Going to Wipe Out

It’s REALLY Happening! The Australian Continent Is Drifting Towards Asia

Broken Germany Discovers BRUTAL Reality

Nuclear War, Trump's New $500 dollar note: Armstrong says gold is going much higher

Scientists unlock 30-year mystery: Rare micronutrient holds key to brain health and cancer defense

City of Fort Wayne proposing changes to food, alcohol requirements for Riverfront Liquor Licenses

Cash Jordan: Migrant MOB BLOCKS Whitehouse… Demands ‘11 Million Illegals’ Stay

Not much going on that I can find today

In Britain, they are secretly preparing for mass deaths


Resistance
See other Resistance Articles

Title: Nick Griffin defends BNP leaflet that says black and Asian Britons 'do not exist'
Source: Daily Mail
URL Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art ... black-Asian-Britons-exist.html
Published: Apr 23, 2009
Author: Daily Mail Reporter
Post Date: 2009-04-24 00:32:46 by X-15
Keywords: None
Views: 1227
Comments: 88

British National Party chairman Nick Griffin spoke today of a 'bloodless genocide' as he defended a party leaflet which says that black Britons and Asian Britons 'do not exist'.

The BNP leader was referring to the party's Language And Concepts Discipline Manual, which says the term used should be 'racial foreigners'.

Mr Griffin said to call such people British was a sort of 'bloodless genocide' because it denied indigenous people their own identity.

The leaflet was leaked to an anti-fascist group.

Commenting on the leaflet's content, Mr Griffin told The Report on Radio 4 that although 'in civic terms they are British, British also has a meaning as an ethnic description'.

'These people are 'black residents' of the UK etc, and are no more British than an Englishman living in Hong Kong is Chinese,' he said.

'Collectively, foreign residents of other races should be referred to as 'racial foreigners', a non-pejorative term... The key in such matters is above all to maintain necessary distinctions while avoiding provocation and insult.'

The manual describes the BNP's 'ultimate aim' as the 'lawful, humane and voluntary repatriation of the resident foreigners of the UK'.

'We don't subscribe to the politically correct fiction that just because they happen to be born in Britain, a Pakistani is a Briton. They're not. They remain of Pakistani stock,' he added.

'You can't say that especially large numbers of people can come from the rest of the world and assume an English identity without denying the English their own identity, and I would say that's wrong.

'In a very subtle way, it's a sort of bloodless genocide.' The Archbishop of York has branded Mr Griffin's comments as being 'beyond belief'. Dr John Sentamu, who was born in Uganda and is a vocal supporter of making today - St George's Day - a public holiday to promote English unity, said it was not up to the BNP to define Englishness.

He said: 'You don't have to be a member of the BNP to be clearly English, and it is quite a mistake to suggest that everybody who wants to affirm Englishness affirms that narrow thinking.

'This "bloodless genocide"? I think that is just language which is beyond belief.'

Mr Griffin is standing in the European Parliament elections in June as a candidate for the North West.


Poster Comment:

"A Pakistani that moves to England is no more an Englishman than an Englishman who moves to Hong Kong is Chinese. This is a fact. But, of course, liberals are often shocked, surprised, and angered by the facts." "You can be sure that nearly all 1.3 billion Chinese consider Britons living in Hong Kong to be foreigners."

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 57.

#5. To: X-15 (#0)

The BNP are infamous for marginalizing themselves. Fortunately not many take their crap seriously.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2009-04-24   8:05:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: Ferret Mike (#5) (Edited)

How can white, native British people marginalize themselves by advocating for themselves as a group and a race?? Besides, aren't you an advocate for native identity?? Or do you exclude white people from self-affirmation??

Every time there's an election, they gain more seats on local town/city councils and in parliament, sounds like a grass-roots movement to me.

X-15  posted on  2009-04-24   10:54:25 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: X-15 (#6)

Color or ethnic background do not disqualify anyone from being a good citizen in Britian. Besides, bigotry of others is never pride, it is weakness and ignorance.

That is the point I make.

Your spin is your concern, not mine.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2009-04-25   21:34:38 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: Ferret Mike (#9)

But they're racially not "Britons," on that we can agree, right?

Deasy  posted on  2009-04-25   21:35:58 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: Deasy (#10)

Nope. If they are born there, they are Britons. Just as Afrikaners born in South African are Africans and deserve citizenry there.

I also strongly take exception to Robert Mugabe's seizing of white African farmland in Zimbabwe.

In 1452, Pope Nicholas V issued to King Alfonso V of Portugal the bull Romanus Pontifex, declaring war against all non-Christians throughout the world, and specifically sanctioned and promoted the conquest, colonization, and exploitation of non-Christian nations and their territories.

Indigenous people in this hemisphere were denied sovereignty and rights you would not stand to see done to northern European ethnic people.

I have no love nor sympathy with the fascist BNP. They only seek to divide to try to and conquer.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2009-04-25   21:48:48 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: Ferret Mike (#12) (Edited)

Do you accept the concept of an indigenous Briton? I'm talking about people whose ancestors were Britons, rather than those who just happen to find themselves citizens of the British empire. I think we may be using the word differently here.

Deasy  posted on  2009-04-25   21:50:26 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: Deasy (#13)

Yep, I do. Just as whites, Indians and blacks formed composite tribes like the Seminole and Lumbee Indians using the willingness of historically indigenous people to accept others of other ethnic background and race into the fold, I accept the notion that all who are born in Great Briton are Britons.

We as colonists and Americans should have done much the same with Indians and those who's ancestors came from Africa. Manifest Destiny and the Doctrine of Discovery were an abomination.

People who are dedicated to being good citizens and who care about their country's future should never be stigmatized for their race or ethnic background.

It is fine to have pride for one's background, but the simple truth is, despite who was where historically, time and the world marches on.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2009-04-25   21:58:32 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: Ferret Mike (#14)

It is fine to have pride for one's background, but the simple truth is, despite who was where historically, time and the world marches on.

Manifest Destiny as you put it, interfered with the fate of certain native tribes here. I trust that you recognize their rights to exist, and lament the pains that the westward march of our empire brought them.

Deasy  posted on  2009-04-25   22:01:00 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: Deasy (#15)

March of our empire, I am amused. That is not how I discribe that.

But, you knew that, yes?

Ferret Mike  posted on  2009-04-25   22:03:59 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: Ferret Mike (#16) (Edited)

How do you describe the necessary conditions for the genocide we committed against the American Indians if not as the westward march of our empire?

Deasy  posted on  2009-04-25   22:10:27 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: Deasy (#17)

I don't see how you mean the word "necessary." I see nothing "necessary" about how things went down.

Certainly if Christianity had indeed been a merciful and benevolent entity, nothing like what happened would of happened.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2009-04-26   4:15:54 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: Ferret Mike (#18)

I don't see how you mean the word "necessary." I see nothing "necessary" about how things went down.

In order to displace and reduce the native populations, the American empire had to be present.

But I haven't been able to engage your response on the main question I'm asking here: do you accept that there is a native, indigenous Briton population living in the British isles that has a right to its territory and racial identity? From what you've posted, I see that you ought to have great sympathy for non-white native populations who have faced displacement, and invading populations from other races and cultures.

The plight of the native Briton is due to the actions of the British empire, which has chosen to displace its native peoples and import foreigners who out breed and compete with them for resources. There is little difference between the British empire's behavior toward its own indigenous populations and how it treated the Eskimo and Inuit peoples in Canada.

The last thing you would want for the Eskimo people would be to have their racial identity stolen from them. I just can't imagine you calling French and British immigrants to Canada "honorific Eskimos" because they took Commonwealth of Canada citizenship.

Deasy  posted on  2009-04-26   8:18:41 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: Ferret Mike, bluegrass, robnoel (#20)

As far as I am concerned, you engender no dialog or desire to converse in using this tired vehicle to try to bait.

freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/re...rtNum=99569&Disp=110#C110

On the other hand, Mike refuses to clarify his refusal to consider the native rights of the indigenous Britons. Are they a people? Can they not define who they are without interference from outsiders? It seems to me that a people who are deprived the right to define themselves have been deprived of all ethnic rights. Where is the ADL when it comes to the plight of the native Briton?

Deasy  posted on  2009-05-02   13:00:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: Deasy (#21)

Ask the ADL, not me. As for who are native peoples in the Americas, all born here are. Learning about how native cultures are distroyed and decimated does not deal with the truth that all living in the Americas deserve rights and freedoms.

As for trying to compare England which has an intact and vibrant culture that has never been destroyed and say that of the Iroquois Confederation, or any other group destroyed by the invasion of Europeans, that is just so much apples and oranges. You do not have a point.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2009-05-02   13:37:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: Ferret Mike, Deasy (#25)

You do not have a point.

Incorrect. Either all people are 'allowed' to form political groups based on genetics or none are. End of story.

bluegrass  posted on  2009-05-02   13:42:20 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: bluegrass (#27)

Israel is an Apartheid regime that does not promote nor respect human rights, we should cut them off, for starters.

End of the story of the point to your baitfest.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2009-05-02   13:46:07 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: Ferret Mike (#28)

This discussion is about the rights of the Britons, not the Israelis.

Deasy  posted on  2009-05-02   13:48:06 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#31. To: Deasy (#30)

And like us, Britons came in all colors, ethnic origin, shapes, sizes, aqges and conditions. So? You confuse discussions concerning historical mistreatment of peoples, not about anything topical.

The Scottish people are moving toward independence politically, the Welsh and others conquered and controlled by the English will never be so lucky as they or the Irish. So it goes.

One of the important lessons of the history of oppression is not to use race or ethnic origin to make wedge issues with. Your point emanates from the sort of racism and intolerance that destroyed so many other cultures, nothing more.

The culture of England is just fine, and people of color do not endanger it, and never will. People of color who have assimilated into English culture are English.

You still do not have a noteworthy point.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2009-05-02   14:04:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#32. To: Ferret Mike (#31)

Your point emanates from the sort of racism and intolerance that destroyed so many other cultures, nothing more.

I'd say yours does. Although I admit that ethnicities are always in a state of flux, I recognize that they exist. You seem to think that because they change over long periods of time that at any moment they have no intrinsic value. That's a hollow argument. The only uniform "culture of England" is the empire's. In my view, you're arguing on behalf of the right of empires to trample individual groups. You seem to be saying that universalism trumps identity. Don't you see the tyranny lurking in such a position?

Deasy  posted on  2009-05-02   14:09:09 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: Deasy (#32)

I am Irish ethnic and have no love of the Empire and historic British hegemony, I see your position as one trampling individual rights, that is entirely what point I make in regards to yours'.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2009-05-02   14:18:09 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#34. To: Ferret Mike (#33)

You can't have it both ways. You can't simultaneously claim to be defending individual rights while dismissing the individual's right to define his own ethnic identity. And I don't know what "no love of the Empire" means in this context. You just indicated a universalist view of "English culture," irrespective of the individual ethnic groups that have been assimilated by force into the shapeless "British" nationality. Your views would be welcome in Northern Ireland or London, but would be rejected by nationalists in Scotland, Wales, and Ireland.

Deasy  posted on  2009-05-02   14:26:36 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#35. To: Deasy (#34)

Except I have never dismissed the value of ethnic identity.

I reject the mindset of the fascist BNP, a party that rejects assimilated, functioning citizens as being English based on color or ethnic origin.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2009-05-02   14:33:45 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: Ferret Mike (#35)

Except I have never dismissed the value of ethnic identity.

But you have. You claim that the Briton may not claim his own identity as sacrosanct. You blur the identities of British with the Briton, which is emblematic of ethnic cleansing. Because most people have been trained to dislike the BNP, you expect others to accept your arguments using guilt by association. But in this debate, you can't win with these techniques. You either accept the ethnic right of the Briton to exclude non-whites from their self-identified ethnic group, or you don't. You don't, and therefore you side with the British empire over its conquests. After all, non-white British citizens are products of empire.

Deasy  posted on  2009-05-02   14:38:40 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#37. To: Deasy (#36)

You are wrong. Any group forming an association to celebrate and enjoy their ethnic heritage should indeed be left alone.

My point is is that this should not be extended to exclude those not of that heritage from citizenship in the same country as they do.

I do not agree that any group in any country should have more rights of citizenship than another.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2009-05-02   15:15:00 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#38. To: Ferret Mike (#37) (Edited)

You're deflecting. My argument, even if it's not exactly what Griffin has been saying, is that the Briton has an ethnic identity, even if the British do not.

Deasy  posted on  2009-05-02   15:22:16 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: Deasy (#38)

Actually, you are wrong. I've lived in Europe, I know the mindset. The one that asks say someone whose grandparents are from Pakistan where they are from and ignores them when they say they are from England.

And then says, "Oh, you are from Pakistan" when hearing where their ancestors are from.

And I am also aware of the argument that kept say people from Hong Kong from immigrating to England instead of say Vancouver, B.C. Canada when the lease on that city expired. And I know what Paki-bashing is, and what the opinions of the people who do that sort of thing are.

I do not like racism and bigotry based on ethnic origin. That is something that will never change. As for the game of leveraging citizen status as was and is done by the residual British Empire, I just found that plain dumb and without merit.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2009-05-02   15:36:55 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: Ferret Mike (#39)

I understand your perspective. But I continue to find it contradictory. You just can't have it both ways. You can't claim to be an anti-racist while saying that people who want to preserve the British isles for their own native peoples are bad. You're an anti-Briton bigot.

Deasy  posted on  2009-05-02   15:44:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#41. To: Deasy (#40)

You want to put the tooth paste back in the tube. Great Britain is for her people, regardless of color or ethnic origin.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2009-05-02   15:47:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#42. To: Ferret Mike (#41)

So damn those Britons, eh? They're crushed under the wheels of empire.

Deasy  posted on  2009-05-02   15:48:35 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#43. To: Deasy (#42)

Britons come in all colours and ethnic origin. So, who said 'damn them?'

Not me.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2009-05-02   15:50:00 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#44. To: Ferret Mike (#43)

You object to Britons claiming their own identity. That's a condemnation if I've ever heard one. You object to Britons making territorial claims to their own traditional homelands. That will lead to erosion and eventual eradication of them as an ethnic group, again a form of condemnation. You want to be racially blind, but in doing so, you've become an anti-Briton racist.

Deasy  posted on  2009-05-02   15:54:24 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#45. To: Deasy (#44)

Racism enslaves those who most actively promote it. By opposing it, I support the rights of both the primary culprits every bit as much as that of the target of it.

As for race mixing, I support it and have actually done it. With *GASP* a black woman. In fact for that matter, I am of Irish and Puerto Rican ethnic background in any event. This is no big thing, and it does not kill ethnic identity.

Resort to meaningless name calling if you wish, I just do not care.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2009-05-02   16:04:38 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#46. To: Ferret Mike (#45)

Like your view that mass migrations should be encouraged, despite your contrary claim that ethnic groups are to be respected and honored, you seem to subscribe to another false dilemma. There's nothing inherently racist about one group of people wishing to preserve their territorial boundaries along basic ethnic and racial lines. It's natural. History is full of stories of migration, conflict, and reassembling of ethnic groups. The mere fact that one group wishes to remain intact in the face of daunting odds does not make them evil, or "enslaved to a concept." Again, your anti-Briton views are coming through very clearly here. The ethnic population shifts underway in the British isles are dramatic. They're profound. And they will obliterate entire subgroups of people within a few centuries if not checked. Refusing to admit that the native peoples on the British islands would have a natural right to preserve their claims to territory, language, and tradition is racist in and of itself.

You and your mixed background should complement, not threaten any racial group. However, if as you're arguing here, entire territories are reorganized along entirely different ethnic lines, that is a tragedy. Again, you presume another false dilemma: you're suggesting that a few tourists, immigrants, asylum seekers, and "race mixers" (your term) are the same as millions and millions of the same in a very confined area.

Just as Griffin argues, you're advocating the ethnic obliteration of the Britons, because any failure to slow the tides of immigration over the next few centuries will lead to exactly that.

I realize that polemics make for quick and simple talking points, but you have to keep some perspective here. No one on this thread is condemning your ethnic background simply because we recognize the Briton right to claim their own ethnicity and their own territory. You needn't fear deportation or racial discrimination because of another group's desire to preserve its rights. Apparently, majority claims to ethnicity threaten you. That's weak.

Deasy  posted on  2009-05-02   17:15:59 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#47. To: Deasy (#46)

England is one of the most densely populated countries in Europe, and only 10 percent are non-white. The population is made up of and descended from, immigrants who have arrived over millennia. The principal waves of migration have been in 600 BC and were Celts.

The country has seen the arrival of many types of people for a long time and is in no danger of being swallowed up and destroyed by anyone. You sound hysterical and unrealistic from my point of view.

Your tempest in a teapot is just not my hurricane.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2009-05-02   17:35:50 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#48. To: Ferret Mike (#47) (Edited)

Your tempest in a teapot is just not my hurricane.

Oh yes it is. You're the one saying that nothing important is happening, and that everyone who objects to the status quo is evil. You're arguing for the continued ethnic overwhelming of several groups of people who have already been overwhelmed by the empire they inhabit.

Besides, your "everyone's an immigrant in the British isles" argument is even more disingenuous than the same concept being used to justify amnesty in America today. There, at least, people have been in the territories they still inhabit for thousands of years. In fact, the groups remaining at the periphery of England itself were backed into their countries by ethnic pressures of a similar sort, brought on in part by the Roman empire's expansion and Europe's reaction to it. As someone with Irish blood, you should remember your own history much better than you do. Your own people had fled the same kinds of changes you are now attempting to justify.

From my perspective, you're on the vanguard of massive racial change in the west, and you just want everyone to be like you. When people object, not to your ethnicity, but your demands that they accept your fate for their children's children, you cry foul. That's an ironic sort of xenophobia if you ask me.

Don't ask us to accept your holier than thou, reverse racism. No thank you.

Deasy  posted on  2009-05-02   18:01:58 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#49. To: Deasy (#48)

Yeah, my people left during a potato famine. You know, one of those little things the English did nothing to about to help keep people from starving in? I know Irish history, and that doesn't make me love he English of the 1500s and 1600s all too well, but so it goes.

I also know that if the French had won the French and Indian War against the British this continent would of been far better off. I know about the opium trade, and all the conquest and exploitation of the world by the British, and know that they are lucky to have the good karma of people from other lands and cultures integrating with them and helping to build a better Great Britain.

I just want everyone to realize how important all humanity is and how much we all have in common with one another. From my perspective your view is myopic and fraught with irrational and unfounded fear.

But in any event, thanks for sharing your views on this. Just because we disagree on this, that does not mean I don't feel you do not have a right to your opinion.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2009-05-02   20:37:46 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#50. To: Ferret Mike (#49) (Edited)

From my perspective your view is myopic and fraught with irrational and unfounded fear.

What fear have I expressed? My willingness to defend those who would protect their native lands is driven by sympathy, not fear. It is you who has expressed fear of people who value their territorial sovereignty, and their ethnicity. Somehow this sentiment represents a threat to you, although you have not articulated just how these things could bring you harm. Since you use the word "racist" so easily, I can only assume that you have faced discrimination on account of your mixed heritage. I deplore such attitudes, and I want no part of them. On the contrary, love for one's ethnicity should be a positive thing. By the same token, you can't very well condemn those who would preserve their heritage for what they feel convinced is best for themselves. To do otherwise is to reject individual liberty, for in full freedom, it is only the individual who can define who he is and is not. On a related note, if diversity is the goal, then let those of us who are unique remain such as long as our energies permit. We should respect and honor your unique heritage, as well. And I do.

Part of the problem here is a set of false assumptions. A commitment to one's heritage need not be accompanied by hate or distrust for others. It's not racist to honor one's own people. And having an ethnic identity does not preclude respect for those who don't have any, or those of other ethnicities. Griffin's point is that the Briton is the one who should decide who he is, and no one else. South Indians and Africans from the former British colonies can never be what Britons and their modern day descendants are. To suggest such is beyond ridiculous. To say that a resistance to declaring all comers as 'Britons' is hateful is to ignore the disrespect for the native Britons involved, which is itself hateful. You can't have it both ways, as I've said before: you can't say you're not a racist and condemn those who would protect their territory, language, and identity.

It's like saying that a native American was racist for suggesting that whites could never be Indians just because they visit the tribe's reservation. Races exist, even if they are always changing. Cultures exist, even if they are always changing. To define a race or a culture is to make distinctions. Only in a world where words make no sense could you say that anything goes.

Deasy  posted on  2009-05-02   21:05:53 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#51. To: Deasy (#50)

The Doctrine of Discovery "It's like saying that a native American was racist for suggesting that whites could never be Indians just because they visit the tribe's reservation. Races exist, even if they are always changing. Cultures exist, even if they are always changing. To define a race or a culture is to make distinctions. Only in a world where words make no sense could you say that anything goes."

Amusing, as much of the conquest of the Americas was done using the Doctrine of Discovery as a guide on how to take over.

Native Americans were never allowed to join our cultures until their cultures were gutted or destroyed, and they were always expected to assume a complete adoption of Western Civilization completely.

They on the other hand, were always willing to respect the humanity of others to a greater degree. Groups like the Lumbee and Seminole Indians were made up of white, red and black people who generally lived in remote places where the intolerance and abhorrence of this sort of thing in our culture could not easily reach out and destroy them.

Now, the Irish have generally been the target of English racism on the home front for about 800 years. Racism and lack of cultural respect has been a major part of the mix that has helped grow British imperialism.

None of this hatred and cultural hegemony has created anything positive nor enduring. The empire is a shadow of what it was, and Ireland is mostly free and independent again.

English cultural heritage and everyday life is not endangered by the presence of new people who have emmigrated there. In fact, despite being a nation of islands, new people have enriched and added to English culture and society for as long as people have lived there.

With all due respect, it is the differences in race and not being from a part of Western Civilization that engenders the racism and intoleration that fuels the BNP, and is why the BNP will always be a splinter group of hate mongers who go nowhere politically.

I respect the English for building a society that allows people from other cultures to blend in. It shows that in that respect, the U.U. and our 'melting pot' ways has been a positive influence on our old imperialist masters.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2009-05-03   14:29:37 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#52. To: Ferret Mike (#51)

The empire is a shadow of what it was, and Ireland is mostly free and independent again.

I would dispute that. Look at the Irish economy after it rejected the EU's constitution. How long before international economic pressure makes Ireland cave into pressure to join the larger economic empire? The British empire is not gone, far from it. Mankind never gets tired of building larger and larger political structures. Tyranny lurks inside any political machinery. You know that. In the name of fraternity, the EU has become a force for evil.

The so-called doctrine of discovery is no different from living standard improving and employment-driven migration today. I say that people will do whatever it takes to make a better life for themselves and their children, including taking things that aren't theirs. When the rightful owner (or resident) of a place loses the ability to resist, migration becomes invasion and defeat of the former occupants. This is a fact of history, and it will not change in the future. We haven't had any sort of "end of history" yet!

I respect the English for building a society that allows people from other cultures to blend in.
Every ideal has its limits. No one on this thread is saying that migration, intercultural exchanges, and ethnic dialog are bad in and of themselves.

If you respect the rights of native peoples, you will respect their desire to preserve their own territory, period. White native peoples have the right to their own homelands, as much as Native Americans. It's really no different. Of course there will be exceptions, and of course there will be good and bad results. Crime in the west has certainly gotten worse since the days after WWII when it was decided that open immigration should be the norm. Cultural exchanges can become liabilities when implemented on a massive scale, and enforced by government policy.

I've noticed you accusing several people of bigotry and hate. These are name calling tactics that you say are unhelpful in debate, and I'm calling you on it. I don't respect that tactic on your part. It's not useful in the discussion at all. We're talking about issues here, not necessarily the BNP and its other motivations. Issues are the only things worth discussing.

Deasy  posted on  2009-05-03   14:49:51 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#53. To: Deasy (#52)

You obviously do not know the Doctrine of Discovery very well, or you would not say that the Doctrine of Discovery no different from living standard improving and employment-driven migration today.

Now, as far as your contention that saying people might have a bigotted or hateful position or opinion, that is a far cry from an attack on the person; it is a labelling of an aspect of an opinion or thinking. Now, if I called someone directly a hateful moron that is a bigoted piece if shit, that would be a personal insult and would not add to any discussion on an issue.

I criticize opinions and thinking, not the people. I am not a perfect human, fortunately, no one is. But I have been a forum poster all over the Internet since the early 1990s, and I know how to do this with no personal attacks as you contend I am doing.

To the contrary, I have been the recipient of many a very personal insult and attack here more aimed at me then my world view or belief system in here, and did nothing to warrant that behavior by those doing this.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2009-05-03   15:25:56 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#54. To: Ferret Mike (#53)

You obviously do not know the Doctrine of Discovery very well, or you would not say that the Doctrine of Discovery no different from living standard improving and employment-driven migration today.

I'm just saying that people make up all kinds of excuses and justifications for migrating to other places and taking things by force. Mass migration into traditionally white homelands, abetted by those possessed by false noblesse oblige, is no different. I'd do the same thing if I could. It's just a fact that the entire planet would like to live in the developed countries if they could. You wouldn't limit them, or balk at limiting them at this point. I would, and other native westerners are anything but hateful simply for calling for immigration limits.

What are you afraid of?

Deasy  posted on  2009-05-03   15:30:41 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#55. To: Deasy (#54)

When I was on Saipan, learned that the Spanish in conquering the Marianas killed all male Chimorros. But the culture, and language is largely intact.

The Japanese invaded and colonized it imperialistically, then we Americans took the place from them.

On Guam, an American possession, we tortured Chimorros to force them to assume the sort of government we like. We also refused to return a single hectare of land to the people who lost it due to siezure by the Japanese.

Sadly, this example is typical of how much of the world has worked in human history.

Thus I consider a moderate amount of emmigration into England to be a tempest in a teapot, and likely to produce far more good then bad. In fact, I faiil to see why you are so afraid, because nothing has happened in terms of population influx that endangers the culture there at all.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2009-05-03   15:39:41 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#56. To: Ferret Mike (#55)

You feign an equal amount of concern for whites and non-whites, yet here you are talking about how tragic is is for third world human beings to lose their lives and homelands, but ridiculing whites who want to preserve their territories.

I get it.

Deasy  posted on  2009-05-03   15:42:25 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#57. To: Deasy (#56)

Nope, you don't. England is in no danger of losing it's culture. And people are people, no one is better than anyone else merely for a triviality such as race.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2009-05-03   15:46:37 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 57.

#58. To: Ferret Mike (#57)

Did it ever occur to you that by the time real trouble starts from migration, it's too late to complain? You're saying things are fine. People who live in these places disagree. Maybe you should let them decide for themselves instead of calling them names.

Deasy  posted on  2009-05-03 15:48:24 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#61. To: Ferret Mike, Deasy, all (#57)

Immigration 'out of control and harming our culture'

Article from:Yorkshire Post

Article date:January 15, 2007

Call for EU to give us back power over our borders

Lizzie Murphy

THE influx of immigrants into Britain is damaging its culture and corroding community relations, a damning new survey warns.

Exclusively revealed by the Yorkshire Post, the YouGov poll of more than 1,000 people across the region shows that politicians have lost voters' trust on immigration and an overwhelming number believe the recent rush of foreigners is having a detrimental effect on our already overcrowded country.

MPs say the survey, commissioned by the Speakout Campaign, which is calling for a referendum on returning key powers from Brussels to Britain, shows the strength of feeling in the region and should be "an absolute wake-up call" to politicians.

An alarming 72 per cent of the 1,225 people surveyed think Britain is losing its identity, while 72 per cent believe current levels of immigration are making community relations more difficult.

The poll comes a week after the Yorkshire Post revealed more than 35,860 immigrants had been given national insurance numbers to work in the region in 12 months, with the largest number coming from Poland.

The YouGov poll found only 24 per cent agree the recent arrival of immigrants from Eastern Europe has helped Britain's economy to grow.

Although most people (58 per cent) believe many immigrants have contributed positively to the quality of life in Britain, 57 per cent said immigrants keep wages low and make it harder for Britain's unemployed and unskilled to find work.

An overwhelming 89 per cent said Britain should be able to control who comes in from new EU member states, including Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, Bulgaria and Hungary.

Seventy two per cent said a referendum should be held to scrap the principle of free movement and restore Britain's control of its own borders.

The Government was criticised for not listening to people on the issue of immigration by 66 per cent of people and just one per cent believe the Government's statistics on immigration from eastern European countries are accurate and tell the full story.

Just 16 per cent believe the Conservatives are listening to people on immigration. Sixty two per cent said they would like the Tories to

take a tougher stance on the issue.

John Yates, director of Speakout, which is backed by Yorkshire business tycoon Paul Sykes, said: "The politicians told us that between 5,000 and 13,000 immigrants would come.

"The Yorkshire Post, to its great credit, revealed last week that 35,000 had signed up to work in this county alone - and that figure

doesn't include the many thousands who have not bothered to register, who are working in the black economy or just claiming benefits."

He added: "John Reid says he is getting tough on immigration, but the truth is there is nothing that the Home Secretary can do to stop people from the former communist bloc countries coming to Britain.

"We have handed over control of our borders to Brussels and are paying the price. It is time the politicians gave the people a referendum on returning these powers from Brussels to Britain."

Philip Davies, Conservative MP for Shipley, said politicians now needed to wake up to the reality of immigration.

"It shows the strength of feeling that is out there," he said. "For lots of people this is of overriding importance because of the impact it has had on social cohesion.

"It has had an impact on public services, on housing, education, and we are having to build more schools as a result. This survey should be an absolute wake-up call to politicians."

Patrick Mercer, Shadow Home Office Minister and MP for Newark and Retford, said: "If you talk to both Britons and immigrants they all express great concerns about the level of immigration and the level of control you have to impose on immigration in the future.

"We must have quotas and on top of that we must have effective border controls."

Disgusted  posted on  2009-05-03 16:09:11 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 57.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]