This is put as a discussion piece rather than as dogma.
There are those who think about their ethnicity and nationhood and those who don’t.
Those who don’t are usually content with a couple of pints, the football, the great god shopping or whatever but not socio-political questions. This is especially so in good times. People tend to be more expansive and tolerant in those times.
It is, however, possible and probable that, faced with a dilemma from outside, people do start thinking on these things and enough people in these islands are at that stage where they think we have an issue today.
It starts at the hip pocket and the ability to earn enough to live, if not in comfort, then at least above the breadline. And naturally, as happens in every nation which feels itself poorer than before, the mood becomes more insular and we start to examine whom we are and who should be allowed here.
Where is here? [1st tier]
In our case, it’s not difficult because we are a series of islands cut off from the mainland, Calais and the like historically notwithstanding. Though borders change on the continent, ours do not, we are us and Gaul is Gaul.
So we look inwards at two basic peoples – the more original Celts/Britons/whatever you want to call them and the Anglo-Saxons/Jutes/whatever and that’s basically it.
Sure, there were others, in small percentages, who came to stay and they had children but the main ethnicities over so long are the ones mentioned. Nor do all the islands belong to the Celts/Britons/whatever because the Anglo-Saxons and Jutes have been here a long time and more self-east is their direction.
Sure, there are also the ancient divisions of Northumbria/Mercia/Wessex etc. but that’s more a romantic past, even for Yorkshire. It’s a workable arrangement for us to be part of a Britain. The further south-east you go, the more English, the further north or west, the less British. There’s no need to delve any further because that’s what we are.
Some people will bring up niceties such as we’re part African, part evolutionary baboon but these are largely spurious these days in day to day affairs.
Brit-indigenous dependencies [2nd tier]
Those, like the Falklands and Gibraltar, who own themselves and/or are populated by Brits.
The Inner Commonwealth [3rd tier]
Owing to our interference outside these shores, certain colonies were set up by this people of two strands [Anglo-Saxon and Briton].
Those colonies were Australia and New Zealand who did have ethnically different indigenous populations but for better or worse, we were the ones who populated those colonies over the centuries.
They are 3rd tier British because they were populated largely by Brits.
The Inner Commonwealth [4th tier]
There were two others with a more complicated composition. South Africa is native/British/Boer. Canada is British/French/native.
Canada is more a third special member of Britain but South Africa has moved away from that, to be a native run land. However, there is still a strong British population in that land. So, 4th tier is proper for these.
The U.S.A. [5th tier]
Populated by Brits and speaking a weird dialect of English, they can be counted ethnically part of us though politically separate, of course. I’d never go to war with the U.S.A. because they are us in a mutated [improved?] form.
All the other ethnicities where we politically but not ethnically took over for some time [6th tier]
India,Pakistan, Nigeria – these nations are under his heading. They’re not us, though the current or former Commonwealth tag should confer some consideration from us, some rights of protection/aid within their own land but no natural right to stay and work here, any more than any other nation such as Russia or Italy.
Cap on eligibility
And that’s that. No other country has any claim, faux Lisbon Treaty notwithstanding. Certainly not Eastern European nations. Welcome as visitors, yes, but that’s it. Just as we are welcome visitors over there for up to three months.
Obviously there are two major objections to the above today in realpolitik:
1. The massive influx from non ethnically indigenous peoples due to the Big 3 parties but particularly Labour;
2. The rapidly growing populations from these whilst in this country.
The reality above creates a special 7th tier, not part of tiers 1-6.
In here are Pakistanis, Indians, Muslims, Poles. If they stay and have a family, then all are bound by our common law whilst here [or if they wish to be bound by Sharia Law, they are free to leave in order to do that somewhere else].
These people are no different, in the eyes of the host nation, to what I was in Russia. Kept there by a Russian perception that I was useful to them and living as a Russian, I had the option to take Russian citizenship, something which would have been strengthened by marriage to an ethnic Russian.
Points systems are good and I’d get points for Russian parentage or grandparentage, for speaking Russian, knowledge of Russian past and present, marriage to a Russian and years of legal residence in the country. That’s as it should be.
On top of that, there are ethnicities that have always been trouble within a nation – the Russians have theirs, we have ours. These are people who are not indigenous and always live, ghetto-like, within their own conclaves, don’t learn the language etc, are not interested in the host except as parasites. Or worse – try to impose their minority culture on the rest of the nation. The Muslims are in this category.
These people would be naturally weeded out by the points system or else they’d knuckle down and become part of our nation, adopting our ways. Those who quite clearly refuse are deported. The interview for this would be in English, minus translator, one-on-one, so every immigrant would know it’s wise to learn English a.s.a.p. after arrival.
If you feel that is harsh, I applied the same to myself in Russia. I was brought in after 12 years and expected to converse with authorities in their language. Simple logic. I could put my case also in Russian. I don’t see the issue.
So that’s that.
Strange rumblings up north
Scotland might go independent, as Southern Ireland did and our default position would be friendly, as towards a neighbour.
However, if they turned hostile towards us [aligning with France, Bonny Prince Charlie like, just as the Irish aligned with Nazi Germany] then we’d need to train missiles on Scotland, wouldn’t we? Build a new wall along the accepted border. It would be sad but that’s in the Scots’ hands now. If they want more Cullodens in the future, then so be it.
Ditto with Kernow. No need to be churlish and not call it by its chosen name. If it sees itself as a semi-independent conclave within the UK, then fine but if it sees itself as entirely separate, free to ally with our enemies, then up goes the wall along our side of the Tamar and our gunboats would deal with any incursion into our territory. Their choice which status they’d like.
The Tier 1 non-British [in their heads]
If the two peoples in these isles had a clear vision of their history, if there was a tier system and a points system of naturalization from outside, if UKBA actually did its job properly, then there’d be the start of getting out of this mess we are in.
Not going to call them quislings, as that is emotive and doesn’t aid the discussion but I mean those of Tier 1 who don’t value their nation and see themselves as part of an EU Superstate – these are an issue. There are many of these and Clegg is their HighPriest. They’re really a worry, these people, as they’d allow our land to be taken over by anyone, yet being Tier 1, there’s not a lot that can be done.
They confuse welcoming new arrivals who plan to fit in with open slather for everyone, including the worst elements of other nations whom those nations are delighted to see the back of. We can be warm and friendly people, inviting people of skill in to help this nation but that doesn’t mean we offer them our daughters to despoil as some sort of gift.
Nor would they want it, I believe. I believe most inward movers to our islands want to do what’s necessary to fit in with our way of life. Our gaff, our rules. Yet our PTB seem to have this penchant for bringing in the worst types. That Roma welcomed by an MP at the gate some weeks back is a case in point.
I don’t think anyone in Tier 1 [loyal to Britain and non-loyal to Britain] wants a state of hostility except for the PTB. But certain ethnicities do create it [Rigby story]. And if they create it, we, the people, will stonewall them. It’s just logical. So, in a well ordered society with clear parameters, as in this post, there’d be very little conflict, no need for a UKIP and no need for a debate such as last evening’s.