Blackrook
Diamond Member
- Jun 20, 2014
- 21,213
- 10,864
- 1,255
People have been moving to the British Isles for thousands of years, each new group joining and inter-marrying with those who are already there. Where do you draw the line? 2000 years back? 1000 years back? 500 years back? And what about people of mixed ancestry? What about people who have a father with ancestors dating back 1000 years, and an immigrant mother?The British people are white. Immigrants from eastern Europe might be white but they aren't British. They are immigrants from eastern Europe.So this is really about skin color? You're British if you're white? What about immigrants from Eastern Europe?For sure it wasn't muslims and Africans.So you have to be Anglo-Saxon? Do Normans get into the village? Normans haven't been in Britain for thousands of years, so maybe they don't count. Even Anglo-Saxons came from somewhere else. I think the Celts were in Britain first.Unlike the United States, Britian isn't an idea. Being British isn't a matter of citizenship. They are a distinct people. Britian was not built by immigrants. Immigration into Britian is a fairly recent concept. The criteria would be bloodlines that are thousands of years old.How will they decide who's really British? What is the criteria?
It's amazing that this is so incomprehensible. Only the British people are British. Only Italian people are Italian. Only French people are French.
But what really gets me is the notion that a person's worth depends on his racial ancestry. Where did you get that notion?