British or not British?

1. 62

   Silverspeederposted 10 years ago

   (A comment by Richard Littlejohn {journalist} Daily Mail)
   
   A corner of a foreign field that is forever 'British'...
   
   Four ‘Britons’ have been killed fighting for Al Qaeda in Syria. So no surprises there, then.
   
   Wherever there is jidhadist terrorism, you can be sure that ‘Britons’ will be found on the front line.
   
   They won’t be fighting for Britain, mind you, or alongside any of this country’s allies. In Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, you name it, they’ll be on the side of our enemies.
   
   In Syria, we haven’t got a dog in the fight and thankfully the Commons voted against getting involved. But MI5 still estimates that as many as 300 ‘Britons’ have travelled out there to join the battle.
   
   That all depends, I suppose, on what you mean by ‘Britons’.
   
   It’s a fact that many of these jihadists were born here and radicalised in universities and extremist mosques.
   
   
   But a large proportion weren’t. They are foreign-born individuals who have been given British passports over the past few years, no questions asked.
   
   Under Labour, the government recklessly conferred citizenship on tens of thousands of people who not only had no previous connection with this country but actually hate our freedoms and traditions and have no intention of becoming ‘British’.
   
   Yet when they are blown up or arrested fighting for our enemies, we are asked to accept that they are as ‘British’ as the rest of us.
   
   Even if they haven’t got passports, they are embraced as British ‘residents’, like the celebrated Gitmo detainee Binman Mohamed, who only lived here for a couple of years and was actually ‘resident’ in Afghanistan when he had his collar felt.
   
   After David Blunkett’s outburst last week, Left-wing papers have started referring sympathetically to Roma gipsies in Sheffield as ‘British Roma’ or ‘Britain’s Roma’. They’re not ‘British Roma’, they’re mostly Slovakian Roma. Almost all the 200,000 to 300,000 Roma living here are from Eastern Europe.
   
   Spain doesn’t count British gangsters living on the Costa del Crime as ‘Spanish’. So why do we try to pretend that everyone who manages to set foot in this country is automatically ‘British’?
   ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   
   Are we British because we were born in the country or because we serve the country?
   
   How do others feel about those who have no love for the country they have chosen to make their home?

   replyreport
   1. 60

      John Holdenposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      How do you know that people who have chosen to live in Britain don't love the country?

      replyreport
      1. 62

         Silverspeederposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         I am sure the vast majority do John.
         
         I am also sure there are many who don't, even some who were born here.
         
         
         Everyday in my work environment I meet people from many countries and through many conversations with these people I have been able to build up a picture of what others think of Britain and the British, everything ranging from "the best country with the most generous and tolerant people in the world" to " I hate your country with a passion".
         And as I said the majority like where they have come to live, mostly those who have come to accept the differences and embrace them. My Iranian friend believes the freedom this country has afforded him makes it the greatest country in the world (he also lived in the US for a time too), he is genuinely surprised that others don't agree with him.
         
         We don't have to read right or left wing news papers to form an opinion on how others see us, we just have to live in the communities they chose to settle into.

         replyreport
   2. 61

      Josakposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Patriotism means different things to different people and there is no correct view on who is or isn't a patriot to their native or adopted nation.
      
      And you know what sometimes fighting your own nation is the best expression of patriotism, only the fool thinks blind obedience or faith is patriotism. Whether that applies here is a matter of opinion but in the sweeping generalized sense any citizen is most definitely a person of the nation they are a citizen of...
      
      The idea that immigrants have to love everything about their adopted nation is ridiculous btw, indeed it's a bad thing by and large, innovation and change only occur through the robust exchange of ideas including new ones from abroad.

      replyreport
      1. 62

         Silverspeederposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         I agree about patriotism, if someone has no patriotic feeling towards the country of their birth why should they have it for they country they chose to live in? I am sure many do though.
         
         I believe patriotism is about loving ones country not the government of that country.
         
         Innovation and change should always be brought about by consensus and all immigrants should accept that it is the only way things can change.

         replyreport
      2. 96

         wildernessposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         Not sure that even the terrorists wrapped in dynamite and heading for a subway entrance would consider themselves "patriots".  There is no possible way of equating killing people that have nothing to do with government plans as caring for the country.
         
         If they killed politicians, maybe, under the theory that the country would be better off without those people.  But not simple citizens in a subway or church.  Those people are not doing their country harm, are not driving it down the wrong road, and no sane person would claim they are.
         
         Of course, there IS that "sane" qualifier there...

         replyreport
   3. 82

      Don Wposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Asked by who?
      And who is "us"? 
      And what does being British mean?

      replyreport
      1. 62

         Silverspeederposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         By the architects of free for all immigration
         
         The Majority
         
         Being British means understand what being British is. Its the same as Being American or German or Spanish etc, its about understanding the traditions and culture and why they are important as  a nations identity.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            John Holdenposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            Who are they?
            The capitalists wanting plenty of cheap labour?

            replyreport
            1. 62

               Silverspeederposted 10 years agoin reply to this

               There are many sides to that coin John. We could say it was the Labour party (who have apologised for their policy) or the bleeding heart liberals who think we should just let anyone in, the humanitarians who think the same and the Eurobureaucrats  who see it as a convenient way to pass the buck (Euro). All of who have their excuses for supporting the mass immigration we have endured over the last 20yrs.

               replyreport
         2. 82

            Don Wposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            The right for Europeans to live and move freely within the members states of the EU comes from a 2004 EU directive that merges all the previous directives on movement and migration with the EU. Those are dated between 1964 and 1993. So various governments of all the member states where the architects of freedom of movement within the EU, not the UK government, and not one political party. Non Europeans cannot live or move freely within the members states of the EU. In what way is that free for all immigration?
            
            I don't understand "us" is in terms of the majority. What makes you part of the majority?
            
            If someone who was born and raised in the U.S. understood the traditions and culture of Britain, would that make them British?

            replyreport
            1. 62

               Silverspeederposted 10 years agoin reply to this

               Yes it was politicians who made the directive and obviously they had no idea of the impact it would make on the UK.
               
               As from the standpoint of the majority is now not in favour of mass immigration.
               
               If they came to settle in Britain and embraced them it surely would.

               replyreport
               1. 82

                  Don Wposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                  And if someone was born and raised in Britain, fully understood the culture and traditions, yet rejected those cultures and traditions? Are they still British?
                  
                  Others have pointed out that British culture is made up of cultural influences from across the globe, brought to Britain by invaders, her imperial conquests, and migrants. You might say that external influences are integral to British culture. What is British culture if not a collection of cultures and traditions from a multitude of different sources, all mixed into one?

                  replyreport
2. 84

   psycheskinnerposted 10 years ago

   British citizens are British.  And I would be amazed they their are not at least a few with very creed and committing every crime that exists in every country.
   
   Britain has always been diverse so to me, understanding Britain means understanding that it has always had open borders.  Celts, Saxons, Romans, Greeks, Europeans... this is the great British tradition: immigration, emigration and change.
   
   If Britain had been a closed house, it would now be culturally and politically trivial--not one of the highest profile and disproportionately influential nations in the world.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      John Holdenposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      +1

      replyreport
   2. 62

      Silverspeederposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Not always, I know many with dual nationality who have a British passport for convenience. British is a state of mind as well as a flag of convenience then.
      
      Its interesting to see how you have lumped together invaders and immigrants. this would suggest that the British, French, Germans etc were just immigrants in the countries they invaded.
      
      There is a difference between a controlled entrance and a free for all open house, now we are seeing the results of the free for all open house.
      There is nothing wrong with someone coming here to enjoy what we have, the problem is when they seek to change everything we have because they don't like it.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         John Holdenposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         The vast majority of British people are the descendants of invaders.

         replyreport
         1. 62

            Silverspeederposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            So does that make a difference then? So the native Indians should have no say in their country because of the immigrants that have taken over America?

            replyreport
            1. 60

               John Holdenposted 10 years agoin reply to this

               I was specifically referring to
               
               "Its interesting to see how you have lumped together invaders and immigrants. this would suggest that the British, French, Germans etc were just immigrants in the countries they invaded."

               replyreport
               1. 62

                  Silverspeederposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                  If we believe that we all came from one man/woman (evolution or creation) then all countries are the result of invasion.

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     John Holdenposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                     To invade a country that country first has to exist. Do we really believe that primitive man recognised the area that he lived in as a country?

                     replyreport
                     1. 62

                        Silverspeederposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                        Everything has a start John, there has always been fights over land or do you believe everyone was a socialist in the early years of mankind?

                        replyreport
                        1. 60

                           John Holdenposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                           And how exactly do you know there have always been fights over land?
                           
                           All indications are that early man lived in a more socialist manner than anybody does now.

                           replyreport