- Joined
- 9 Dec 2012
- Posts
- 1,457
Isn't that stereo typing a group.
Census 2011: fewer than half of people living in London are white
- Thread starter Ilikeitblackplease
- Start date
Isn't that stereo typing a group.
Of course it matters to the implied bias of your opinion as it determines that bias as you are forwarding your own cultural heritage, language and belief system as being the optimum homogeneous global position.......it doesn't matter other than that.
- Joined
- 9 Dec 2012
- Posts
- 1,457
the world business language is British at the moment, the most religious followers would be Islam, and some of the western laws are global so a mixture of all would be ideal.
I dont want to start mine is better than yours.
Last edited:
Changes in culture are obvious, places like London and Bradford are now pooholes, I don't want to live there. Poverty follows immigration.
Nothing in law protects culture, what are you thinking about?
I like my middle England village with its middle England culture, that's why I moved from a squalid multicultural city to live here. Confine your social experiments to places where you live please.
My thoughts exactly. You only have to walk around London to see this.
Indeed.
Objective criteria should be used to determine which cultural elements are detrimental & which are positive to human well-being & flourishing.
If a certain religion/governance type is either homophobic/racist or sexist then it should be negatively judged as a primitive & flawed culture (based off the above criteria).
Then the poverty should be addressed, also that's a massive generalisation.
Nothing stops the local culture changing obviously, but the law allows you to follow whichever culture you want - you are protected on a personal level to follow whichever culture you like.
What social experiment are you talking about?.
You clearly do think yours is better than mine (what mine is I am not sure exactly as I promote a secular agenda that allows everyone to believe what they wish and speak whatever language they want), British English isn't the business language, American English is, Islam doesn't have the most followers, the various Christian churches when counted as a single group do by a large margin, and Western Laws are largely secular in application...so if we ignore your bias and look at this objectively it would in fact be more logical to have Christianity as the World religion (it being the largest of the Abrahamic faiths and the most flexible and arguably the most tolerant in doctrine), American English should be the World Language (although on pure numbers Mandarin might have a strong case) and all laws should be secular and without religious or cultural bias.
If we advocate that sort of thing at all, which I don't.
Last edited:
Thing is, it's mostly true.
- Joined
- 9 Dec 2012
- Posts
- 1,457
I'm white other and we 'white others' come here with only one aim, get free houses, reproduce uncontrollably, destroy british culture and impose 'white other' law. You have been warned!
lol
add that to we are all terrorists.TBH it is English because of the trade and British Empire. British English/American English, in reality there is no difference. Americans teaching English is extremely common and cheap. Brits teaching English is more expensive (at least in Asia it is). I don't think it is a reflection of the differences in the language (which there are almost none), just the ease of access and cost.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Dec 2009
- Posts
- 13,052
- Location
- london
There is correlation that can be made between skin pigmentation and culture which is largely a result of the region that the different people originated and the culture that exists in that region. Human race is a tribal by nature and there is no amount of marxist multicultural brainwashing that is going to undo millennia of cultural differences.
Now they have just opened the doors to china, with 1.3 billion people and india with 1 billion people, half of which are already in east london.
if 1% of chinese immigrate to london that would be take the population from 70 million to 200 million.
Now they have just opened the doors to china, with 1.3 billion people and india with 1 billion people, half of which are already in east london.
if 1% of chinese immigrate to london that would be take the population from 70 million to 200 million.
lol
If you look at the various dialects of English, British English (BrE) and American (AmE) among them, the dialect that has the most global speakers is AmE and it's sub-dialects. To a linguist there is significant differences in both dialects and the person I was replying to referred not to English (Standard) but to British (without the actual language classification), so my reply was specified in that way....as far as global english is concerned in a practical sense the various dialects are immaterial as unlike some other languages they are all mutually intelligible. However AmE is more homogeneous than BrE and as such is the basis for a many of English for Specific Purposes programmes, including Business English or International English. This doesn't include what is the most obvious factor in using AmE as the basis for a Global Lingua Franca, which is that it is the most widely spoken dialect of English amongst native speakers.
If you were going to create a Global single language based on English then AmE would be the most obvious choice., for the purposes of the point being made at least, if not in a truly practical sense. In any case the form of English is immaterial to the religious, legal and cultural points raised by matdom which I was addressing, I was simply showing that his bias was informing his position and why that was important to consider when assessing his position (i.e his reference to the British language, rather than English).
Last edited:
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 5 Jun 2003
- Posts
- 91,805
- Location
- Falling...
The article is deceiving - this is just what people put on the census - it doesn't mean they are not white, it just means they're not necessarily English or British by birth. I'm not English by birth - I have British nationality, and I am Caucasian. I'm sure there are a lot of people like that on those statistics.
Personally, I think it's not even newsworthy - it's really not a problem what the backgrounds of people are to me,.
Personally, I think it's not even newsworthy - it's really not a problem what the backgrounds of people are to me,.
Associate
- Joined
- 6 Jun 2011
- Posts
- 2,159
- Location
- EU...
There is correlation that can be made between skin pigmentation and culture which is largely a result of the region that the different people originated and the culture that exists in that region. Human race is a tribal by nature and there is no amount of marxist multicultural brainwashing that is going to undo millennia of cultural differences.
Now they have just opened the doors to china, with 1.3 billion people and india with 1 billion people, half of which are already in east london.
if 1% of chinese immigrate to london that would be take the population from 70 million to 200 million.
What?
The population of the UK is roughly 62 million IIRC, and china is ~1.4billion. 1% of china's population is 14million people which would take our population up to 76 million.
Not that this situation is remotely plausible, I just wanted to point out the error in your maths.
Absolutely agree. My observation to Asia (briefly referenced earlier) was that the general access was to Americans which is why most speak with the American dialect. There are a smaller number that speak with a British dialect. There are a number of reasons for this; they may have had a British teacher out of luck, they paid extra to have a British teacher or they have lived in the UK.
Or we could stop importing people with no skills or money, or just because their own country goes crazy for the third time this week.
What, so my culture still exists in Bradford because there is a white guy living there? Yes he might be able to hold a tea party on his lawn if he wants to, but anything else recognisable as British culture has been wiped out. (given the issue that it is hard to define a culture when the current one has been through the blender a few times - my guide is that is you don't get Dad's Army you have a different culture)
Multiculturalism? The idea that everyone would integrate and realise we are pretty much the same anyway. Not form big ghettos and persist in the backward traditions of their home countries.
This is why nobody minds Polish people, they have the same rural heritage, the same religous background, they work, they are educated and it doesn't occur to them to blow people up because some beardy nut job says the fairy prophet says so.
Last edited: