- CRITTER TALK
- MOVIE-TV-BOOK REVIEWS
- NEWS I FIND INTERESTING
Facts are not racist. New Delhi is in India and populated by Indian people. Brasilia is in Brazil and, guess what? Most of the people living there are Brazilians.
How about Sofia? Is it racist to say Sofia is populated mainly by Bulgarians?
Now some cities across the globe are not populated predominantly by, for want of a better description, the currently indigenous people of the country.
I say ‘currently’ as, historically, there aren’t that many truly indigenous people around. The native Americans, the Australian Aborigines and so forth are, as far as I know, along with a few others.
Most of us, in Britain, are actually descended – if we go far back enough – from Romans, Danes, French and, oh dear, Germans.
Our Royal Family is particularly German, having found it prudent to change their surname to Windsor from the Germanic Saxe Coburg when WWI kicked off.
Over several decades, London, in particular, has been a popular destination for immigrants from pretty much everywhere. As a result, the demographics of London in 2019 are :
59.8% White 18.5% Asian 13.3% Black 5% Mixed race 3.4% Other
Given that the 59.8% White includes all Europeans, including a particularly high number of Eastern Europeans, in 2011, 45% of the population of London were actually indigenous – in other words, English, Scottish or Welsh.
Therefore, as a matter of fact, London, in terms of demographics, is not an ‘English city’ in the sense that a huge majority of people living in it are ethnically British through several decades of descent. An increasing number are ethnically from elsewhere on the planet, whether immediately or from first to around third or fourth generation descent.
John Cleese has explained – mainly for the benefit of the offended generation – that his Twitter post was not racist, but rather cultural.
He was pointing out that London is no longer, culturally, primarily British.
It isn’t. That is not racist, it is a demographic fact.
He then went on to say that he prefers English culture on the quite reasonable grounds that he is English. He also points out that he prefers it to, say, a culture that supports the genital mutilation of women – a problem that seemingly reoccurs in the London area time and again.
“I suspect I should apologize for my affection for the Englishness of my upbringing,” he wrote, responding to one Twitter user, who told him she “can’t stand Englishness”.
“But in some ways I found it calmer, more polite, more humorous, less tabloid, and less money-oriented than the one that is replacing it.”
The offended generation have gone to war with Cleese. London Mayor Sadiq Khan leading the charge – no surprise there then.
The British Liberal left, who tend to make up the vast majority of the offended generation, clearly just don’t get it do they?
Stifling debate on poorly controlled immigration or the failure of some immigrant groups to adequately assimilate into British society is divisive. It drives such debate ‘underground’. It feeds on the hungry far right desire to cause further hatred and division.
John Cleese chose to state the obvious, for some reason, on his Twitter account. He neither incited hatred nor violence against anybody. He simply pointed out a known fact, and opined that he preferred London as a predominantly English cultural city.
Well? He would wouldn’t he? He is English. And the problem is?
He is entitled to his opinion and to express it. The offended generation think otherwise.
The offended generation are the ones who will increase intolerance and hatred, simply by attacking and attempting to stifle even the most mundane comments that they don’t approve of.
I’ve changed their name to SOG’s. The Stupid Offended Generation.