I have now. Very interesting report that presents the facts of the situation with little or no value judgement. I have absolutely no idea why you'd think it was "rubbish" unless you dispute the findings of the 2011 census.
You literally cannot pick up a newspaper these days without someone discussing these kind of issues. And always, but always, articles with a particular slant on it start with a comment along the lines of "liberal freedoms being used to silence the writer". It's quite astonishing how many journalists and commentators in the national press use their articles to tell us how they're being silenced.
My guess is that it's you that is reluctant to talk about this openly because you're a little bit afraid of what you might find yourself saying. You're projecting your fears about your own character and creating a big liberal "boogieman" to make yourself feel better.
Being honest with yourself and the rest of us would be a start.
1) Sorry little or no value judgement? Did you read the article:
In favour of "his judgement":
"and what emerges is a much more positive story than some headlines would make you think."
"I think the evidence suggests it is also about working class aspiration and economic success."
"the dream of escaping to the country became a reality for tens of thousands of urban white Britons. But did they leave willingly or were they forced to move?"
"often having prospered from the housing boom and the capital's economic growth - cashed in their assets and bought themselves that little cottage in the countryside or by the sea."
"It is a story of aspiration. It is a story of success."
Taking in other factors:
"Some white British may have moved because their neighbourhood has been culturally transformed, the tea rooms and restaurants replaced by takeaway chicken shops and halal supermarkets serving the new arrivals."
But of course that hasn't even bothered to be investigated. Yet you shall see from the comments below from Londoners that they've left because they're neighbourhoods have been rapidly changing. Some comments have even said that they've moved because their son/daughters school barely has any English-speaking children in it.
Whatever you want to label it, the vast majority of people feel intimidated if they are surrounded by people of another culture. That's not saying that that culture is bad or that ours is superior, but it is DIFFERENT. The fact that this premise does not even get probed by the article is hardly impartial?
2) I was referring to POLITICS, not the press. The press are actually one of the few places that do discuss this, and whilst I don't agree entirely with the way they do it, I am glad that they do do it. If you were discuss this in certain workplaces, then you would be sacked. It never gets discussed in Politics, particularly in the arenas of the House Of Commons. Yes there are a few more important issues like the Economy, however it is quite clear from the British public that they see this as a VERY important issue and I don't think the Politicians represent that. I think the three main parties in particular like to keep quiet over the issue, and like has been mentioned, I doubt they few politicians actually live in areas that are effected (and if it is in their constituency then they live "richer" areas due to their salary.
3) Well what more can I say:
POINT 1: I think the real problem is the EXTENT and PACE of all this. I am not against people moving to another country and as you will probably remind me it has been happening ever since humans first walked. However I don't like the EXTENT - I think that with a population of 70 million already which has been rapidly accelerating I think we need to start trying to get that figure down. Secondly, pace: let's not forget that it was only in the late 1950s that the first wave of immigration happened. This recent wave (let's say 1997 or 2001-2011) has been much greater. Essentially you are seeing these huge changes in ONE generation and I think it would be better for the country to see them in THREE or FOUR generations (the way to do that would be caps)
POINT 2: As a nation we need to compete economically with other nations. It is a basic premise of the way our world currently is. It is all relative: if one man gets richer than one man gets poorer. It seems very harsh, but get away from Utopian visions, and it is fact. To what extent are migrants really helping Britain economically? I can see Britain as a currently in the long term getting poorer and I do see this as one of the contributing factors. The effects this is having on schools, NHS and welfare must not be understated.
POINT 3: Again label me a racist if you want, but I see different opinions concerning different "groups" (shall I say) forming. Again this is part of human nature. Let's just say that there have been certain groups that, how can I put this, are less inclined to "mingle" with the rest of us. There has been one group that have been ascribed certain characteristics: "that we are superior (because of our faith)", "that you cannot marry out of the religion", "that we don't want to be governed or enforced in the same way as the rest of the country" right the way through to (unbelievably) "this is our patch" and "we have our own laws, we don't abide by British ones" to even "we aim to fundamentally change British values". No surprises that group I am referring to, but I don't believe people with these beliefs should be allowed to settle in the United Kingdom as I believe they go against our core ones.
To what extent (if at all) will these threats or headlines or whatever you want to call them be taken to - I guess only time will truly tell. But I can tell you one thing: the men making the decisions over these issues will be DEAD before they find out.
POINT 4: This is not quite as widespread or indeed as natural as you think. When you look at the world as a whole then there are remarkably few areas (or countries or cities) that this is really happening. Obviously the prime example is the United States (which to be fair as always been a melting pot for a very long time now), but really you are looking at certain cities in Western Europe and Australia and a few other countries. Again don't misunderstand me: I'm not saying that migration isn't happening in Russia, China, Japan, India, Africa, Eastern Europe, Middle East and South America: I'm saying it is not happening to the same extent.
Hence this is why I consider this an experiment for Britain. But because it is quite revolutionally and new (in the same way 1917 USSR was a new experiment in the world), with really only the United States as any kind of example (though a different one), I do fear what repercussions this can all have. Repercussions that are unknown at the moment.
this country has been multicultural for thousands of years.
if you don't want GB to be multicultural, what should our'culture' consist of? How would you set about maing it fir your vision?
Why can't/whenisn't it talked about?
Pretty much answered in above post I hope.
Poles don't usually marry their illiterate, monolingual cousin from their father's village though.
The problem with the whole first generation, second generation, third generation model is that it doesn't allow for marriage patterns that differ from the European norm.
Yes of course, issues like this need to be looked at. Again it is all about the whole "wanting to mingle" in my opinion. I know I would (and my parents would) be happy to marry into any race or religion but it does seem like a lot of people moving to the UK don't hold those views.
The problem with multiculturalism is, in my opinion, that it has been imposed on the white working class by middle class liberal lefties, who have have effectively told many (and lets face it, mainly asian) immigrants that their culture and way of life is just as "valid" in post industrial Britain as it is in pre-industrial Kashmir or rural Pakistan.
Obviously the fact that south asians are "black" has had a bearing on their assimilation, but much more important is the fact that they were implicitly told that they didn't have to learn english, that street signs and leaflets were printed for them, that accomodations have been made for behaviours which are unacceptable in modern society.
By contrast, eastern european immigrants after WWII were left to get on with it, and get on with it they did and assimilated seamlessly into society.
Everyone on here knows my political stance so I don't think I can be accused of racism, unlike many young islamists who can be and are.
I think you've hit the nail on the head with the first phrase: "imposed".
the poles and ukranians in Leeds and Bradford maintain their culture very much.
The people who settled in the UK after ww2 were and are white, from an industrialise European country, with their religion catered for. Thosee industries; mining, steel, engineering and so on were replicated in both countries. They established their own clubs and social structures which still exist. Their way of life was similar to the country they came from
Asians came from the other side of the world, from an entirely different way of life, believing in an entirely alien way of living, in a climate they weren't accustomed to, and they were of a different skin colour and ate entirely different food.
when wasn't the UK multicultural?
What should the UK's culture consist of?
I believe British culture should change at a slower pace (more akin to the cultures of other countries) than it is doing now.
I believe that those moving to Britain should expect to abide by fundamental British principles and values
I believe that those moving to Britain should expect to genuinely contribute something towards the country (particularly economically), to a greater extent even then many who are already here
I believe that those moving to Britain should have a good grasp of English
I believe that those moving to Britain should not be entitled to the same state benefits that British people enjoy until a certain period
I believe that those that have recently moved to Britain and commit crimes should have their permission to settle revoked
I believe Britain as a country should look towards ways of slowly lowering our overall population
Or quite simply, if that is too much to enforce: limit the overall number of migrants allowed to settle in Britain by creating a low, annual, unmovable quota.
Edited by ShotgunGold, 21 February 2013 - 09:10 PM.