White Britons to be minority IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY by 2066

[Zaras]

Well population will increase steadily and tbh we dont want more and more people to have to feed and give power to and provide jobs for in the pretty dodgy years ahead. Must admit i hate the 1960s architecture in UK towns but the cities, *EDIT* but London and Edinburgh are just world class

They are, and there's plenty of cities not to be sneezed at either (Manchester, Liverpool, Sheffield, Bristol, just for starters), - hell, the UK has a lot of cities in general - but it also has enough material to result in two volumes of Crap Towns.

I'm not sure what that says about either how crap the UK can be at urban planning, or how much UKers love moaning about stuff.

[Kradlandia]

Doesn't matter.

[Tsaraine]

Somehow, I'm sure that all the brown Britons will keep calm and carry on, perhaps with the aid of a crumpet and tea. Citizens are citizens and British is British.

[The United Colonies of Earth]

Foreign workers will "change national identity" according to a population expert, unless the flow of immigration is dealt with.

The white British-born community (defined as English, Welsh, Scottish and Irish-born citizens) will fall to less than half of the overall population in just over 50 years.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... -2066.html

Under U.N International Law and the Genocide Convention of 1945, large scale mass immigration or the replacement of an indigenous population with a foreign population is defined as genocide.

From the dawn of Humanity in Britain it has always been white. 30, 50, 100 or more thousand years. Now we have this. This is treason and utter failure. Becoming Pakistan and Africa all at the same time is a bad idea.This is what genocide looks like.

Well, call in the UN justice authorities and ask them if they think this is as bad as, say, being officially encouraged by a foreign government to rush in masses to an island and one-sixth of an island and replace them as the majority when my hair is graying.

[Ralkovia]

We know this, that is why the European governments are idiots for having such unrestricted immigration (then again, they never were know for intelligence).

...do you have any idea how strict the immigration standards are in Denmark? Even the slightest clue? Here is what you need to qualify for permanent residence:

-Must still qualify for temporary residence
-Must be 18 or older
-Must have resided in Denmark legally for 5 years or more
-Must not have a criminal record (being sentenced to 18 months is grounds for permanent disqualification, being sentenced to less than 18 months is a temporary disqualification)
-Must not have any overdue public debts
-Must not have received benefits under the terms of the Active Social Policy Act or the Integration Act for the past three years or throughout the period your application is processed (to give you an idea, a subsidised bus card raises eyebrows and receiving social security benefits is an example of something which disqualifies you)
-Must submit a signed declaration of integration and active citizenship in Danish society
-Must pass a Danish language proficiency test set at a specific level (Prøve i Dansk 1) with at least an average score of 6 on the 13 point scale or a 02 on the 7 point scale in each of the four disciplines
-Must have held regular full-time employment and/or been enrolled in an educational programme in Denmark for at least 3 of the 5 years prior to your application
-Must be working or studying at the time you became eligible for applying for permanent residence (exceptions are made for maternity leave when an intent to work after leave expires is expressed)

Special exceptions are made for people with disabilities which directly impair one's ability to meet one of the above requirements, but the minimum legal residence of 5 years and the criminal record standards remain firm.

Refugees get special consideration as well, and can obtain permanent residence after having lived in Denmark for 8 years, having no criminal record, and after signing a declaration of integration and active citizenship in Danish society. They'll waive the requirements for public debt, receiving benefits, speaking Danish, and being employed/getting educated for refugees if (and only if) a willingness to integrate into Danish society is evident (and every detail of your residence as far back as immigration services wants to go is fair game). Only circumstances relevant to the period before you obtained refugee status count toward giving refugees such waivers, so they're not as easy to get as you might otherwise think. The funny part? A lot of the things that illustrate a "willingness to integrate" are directly related to the very things being waived! You have to have been regularly employed or participated in internships and/or municipal job-hunting services, successfully passed at least one module test in a Danish language course, you have to have not had your public assistance benefits cut or stopped because of failure to participate in municipally assigned activities, things like that.

So, let's review. You have to have lived in Denmark for at minimum 5 years, you have to have been employed (working a minimum of 30 cumulative hours a week) or in school for at least the last 3 years, you have to be employed, on maternity leave with intent to work afterward, or in school at the time you apply for permanent residence, you have to have no noteworthy criminal record, you have to have not received certain public benefits within the last 3 years and not receive them throughout your application period (continuous assistance raises eyebrows too), you have to speak Danish with at least an elementary proficiency, you can't have any outstanding public debts, and you have to sign an agreement stating you will integrate and be an active participant in Danish society. And this says absolutely nothing of the costs of temporary residence visas for five continuous years, the processing fees for your application for permanent residence, and so forth in addition to the cost of living, travel expenses, and other considerations.

Sounds pretty easy, huh? Especially for someone from Somalia. Just pack up and head north, amirite?

If I recall correctly, that was because you guys elected the most conservative government you've ever had in like 70 years. Wasn't it was started off by large numbers of Middle Eastern immigrants coming to Denmark and sitting on welfare benefits?

Then again, I'm not to savvy on Denmark's political history.

[Socialdemokraterne]

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

Those could apply, good sir, at least.

Considering that item (c) has the words "deliberately" and "calculated" in it and references an inflicted condition of life aimed at diminishing a population (read: not simply outnumbering them), I doubt that one applies. Considering no one is shouting about sterility campaigns against white citizens of the UK or limitations on the number of offspring they can legally have, (d) doesn't seem to have anything to do with anything either. So, no. These don't apply in the least.

[Nova Imperius]

Well population will increase steadily and tbh we dont want more and more people to have to feed and give power to and provide jobs for in the pretty dodgy years ahead. Must admit i hate the 1960s architecture in UK towns but the cities, *EDIT* but London and Edinburgh are just world class

They are, and there's plenty of cities not to be sneezed at either (Manchester, Liverpool, Sheffield, Bristol, just for starters), - hell, the UK has a lot of cities in general - but it also has enough material to result in two volumes of Crap Towns.

I'm not sure what that says about either how crap the UK can be at urban planning, or how much UKers love moaning about stuff.

Well to be honest its the 1960s concrete craze that messed the country up. Id still say villages, London, Edinburgh, and City Centres are in tact. Anyway i find it more interesting than the USA angular regimented look.

[Pesda]

Why do you even care? There's been immigration into and around this island for millenia.

[Socialdemokraterne]

If I recall correctly, that was because you guys elected the most conservative government you've ever had in like 70 years.

Your recollection is more or less correct. It has more to do with Dansk Folkeparti's sudden jump in size, but Venstre and Det Konservative Folkeparti didn't help any in limiting the surge in strictness.

Wasn't it was started off by large numbers of Middle Eastern immigrants coming to Denmark and sitting on welfare benefits?

If you ask Dansk Folkeparti, that's what it's all about. Check this out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmMnnazW7dM <---Original Danish Version
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlA9Tj2yGb4 <---English Version

Then again, I'm not to savvy on Denmark's political history.

That's fine. The standards have always been somewhat strict, they're just especially strict now.

[Zaras]

They are, and there's plenty of cities not to be sneezed at either (Manchester, Liverpool, Sheffield, Bristol, just for starters), - hell, the UK has a lot of cities in general - but it also has enough material to result in two volumes of Crap Towns.

I'm not sure what that says about either how crap the UK can be at urban planning, or how much UKers love moaning about stuff.

Well to be honest its the 1960s concrete craze that messed the country up. Id still say villages, London, Edinburgh, and City Centres are in tact. Anyway i find it more interesting than the USA angular regimented look.

Though I have the vague idea some cities in continental Europe still out-pretty the UK. But yeah, concrete: the architectural equivalent of a bad hangover. (I live in a red-brick part of London, just for reference. Canary Wharf is cool though.)

[Zaras]

If I recall correctly, that was because you guys elected the most conservative government you've ever had in like 70 years.

Your recollection is more or less correct. It has more to do with Dansk Folkeparti's sudden jump in size, but Venstre and Det Konservative Folkeparti didn't help any in limiting the surge in strictness.

Or in Venstre's case, trying to pander to Folkeparti voters...

[Nova Imperius]

Well to be honest its the 1960s concrete craze that messed the country up. Id still say villages, London, Edinburgh, and City Centres are in tact. Anyway i find it more interesting than the USA angular regimented look.

Though I have the vague idea some cities in continental Europe still out-pretty the UK. But yeah, concrete: the architectural equivalent of a bad hangover. (I live in a red-brick part of London, just for reference. Canary Wharf is wicked cool though.)

Well im from a village near Glasgow. So its fairly picturesque. I really love central London though. I mean obviously if you have lived there for ages it would wear off but if its just occasional visits its great. Apparently the new world capital overtaking New York

[Condunum]

About Tibet:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinicization_of_Tibet

Losing population is not a bad thing. If Great Britain had half the people it would mean less traffic problems, cleaner air, less crowds, and more resources per person. A decreasing population is a good thing. Why are countries so obsessed with trying to increase their population through immigration? It is madness. The USA is already too crowded as well. Drive in Atlanta during rush hour and you will agree.

So, your reason for claiming a city is too crowded is shitty traffic patterns? You're also arguing a strawman here. I never claimed that loss of population was a bad thing.

Take jobs others don't want. A stupid and tired argument. You mean: take jobs for a lower pay and under worse conditions versus native born people. Immigrants from poor countries equals lower wages for locals.

It's actually not a stupid argument, given that those are job that the local population will not do.

Many white native born people were picking fruit, building houses, and working in factories (without AC) in the 1930's. Why can't they do it now? Many native born people should just be kicked off welfare and they will happily take the crappy jobs.

Yeah, that was tried. One of the states, I can't remember which, practically destroyed it's illegal immigrant population. Know what happened? The vast majority of those jobs remained completely untouched, and farms reported severely underhanded fields.

The expats can petition their home govt. to change the policy. It is fair, it is about causing China to realize we are sick of them treating non-Chinese as inferior. We can play their game. Eye for an eye gains more respect than bending over and letting somebody "prove they are superior." Right now China is superior because they treat us worse than we treat them and they know it.

You're thinking with juvenile schoolyard tactics, which don't work in the real world. If China is superior because they reject immigration, and we allow it, then I don't want to live in your world. Thankfully, we don't.

White flight: A concept of whites (really anybody with money) leaving bad cities and moving to suburbs. When suburbs go bad than the wealthy people (including non-whites) also move. If cities become "no-go zones" like in Malmo or Rotterdam than the whites will flee to villages. It will create a more divided and racist culture from both sides. The Europe Civil War is coming, better get ready.

So your argument boils down to "Whites are superior"? Fabulous. There will not be a European Civil, or even cultural war. The monority of people who are severely bothered by this aren't going to be able to start a civil war. That would require groups like the EDL and BNP to have hundreds of thousands to even millions of members, which they do not.

I should say that some immigrants are OK. We all know (but some hate to admit) the countries that send the bad immigrants. I don't think British people are worried about the Japanese, Korean, or Chilean immigrants they are getting.

[/quote]
Denying immigrants based on their country is fucking retarded. You're trying to blame the citizen for something that the country they're leaving is doing.

[Socialdemokraterne]

Your recollection is more or less correct. It has more to do with Dansk Folkeparti's sudden jump in size, but Venstre and Det Konservative Folkeparti didn't help any in limiting the surge in strictness.

Or in Venstre's case, trying to pander to Folkeparti voters...

Coalitions between parties that don't cooperate with each other at least some of the time tend not to last very long, if they were ever to be considered coalitions at all.

[Ralkovia]

If I recall correctly, that was because you guys elected the most conservative government you've ever had in like 70 years.

Your recollection is more or less correct. It has more to do with Dansk Folkeparti's sudden jump in size, but Venstre and Det Konservative Folkeparti didn't help any in limiting the surge in strictness.

Wasn't it was started off by large numbers of Middle Eastern immigrants coming to Denmark and sitting on welfare benefits?

If you ask Dansk Folkeparti, that's what it's all about. Check this out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmMnnazW7dM <---Original Danish Version
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlA9Tj2yGb4 <---English Version

Then again, I'm not to savvy on Denmark's political history.

That's fine. The standards have always been somewhat strict, they're just especially strict now.

Do you guys still have super easy refugee applications?

[Xathranaar]

Your recollection is more or less correct. It has more to do with Dansk Folkeparti's sudden jump in size, but Venstre and Det Konservative Folkeparti didn't help any in limiting the surge in strictness.



If you ask Dansk Folkeparti, that's what it's all about. Check this out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmMnnazW7dM <---Original Danish Version
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlA9Tj2yGb4 <---English Version



That's fine. The standards have always been somewhat strict, they're just especially strict now.

Do you guys still have super easy refugee applications?

If any European country's refugee applications were "super easy" Kenyan refugee camps wouldn't be overflowing, would they?

[Of Nom]

this somehow fails to take into account the growing and aging population of Britain. which would 45% of 60 mil is still 24mil.

[The Diomede Islands]

If mass immigration had been given a democratic mandate and if immigrants were actually encouraged to assimilate I don't think that this would be an issue. But the problem is, we were never asked if we wanted this and the slightest criticism is deemed to be racist. Most people in Britain are opposed to this scale of immigration. The government has no right to do this.
Personally I don't think that skin colour matters. However, the indigenous Britons becoming a minority is NOT a non-issue as the majority are opposed to the immigration policies that caused this (which we never had a chance to vote on). Had we given our consent then I would not be so angered by this.
Multiculturalism is also a huge part of the problem. If the people coming here were encouraged to become part of British society rather than some Pakistani/Indian/African etc. colony in the inner cities there wouldn't be so many issues.

[Zaras]

If mass immigration had been given a democratic mandate

You don't give human rights a democratic mandate. They're human rights. They don't get put up to a vote.

and if immigrants were actually encouraged to assimilate

The UK isn't the only country that failed to actually do anything to try to accommodate immigrants. Look at the Netherlands and Germany shooting themselves in the foot over gastarbeiters.

the slightest criticism is deemed to be racist.

You live in a country with the Daily Mail, are you even suprised? IIRC, the Conservatives ran on a slogan of "It's Not Racist to Criticise Immigration" in 2005. Y'know the rule - if someone says "It's/I'm not racist...", what follows is horribly racist.

I'd like to see some reasonable objections to immigration, but so far the criticism part of the debate in many ways has been dominated by the bigoted crowd.

Most people in Britain are opposed to this scale of immigration.

That's fucking rich, and hypocritical, considering that the UK is basically 100% the result of invasions.

However, the indigenous Britons becoming a minority is NOT a non-issue

Yes it is. Who seriously cares about this except the darkie-hatin' BNP crowd?

Multiculturalism is also a huge part of the problem.

Ah, criticism of multiculturalism. A sure sign that a poster doesn't actually know anything about multiculturalism and is just parroting back tiresome Daily Mail crap instead of actually having an argument.

If the people coming here were encouraged to become part of British society rather than some Pakistani/Indian/African etc. colony

Thank you for confirming my suspicion that you're just spewing scaremongering bullshit.

[Nova Imperius]

If mass immigration had been given a democratic mandate

You don't give human rights a democratic mandate. They're human rights. They don't get put up to a vote.

and if immigrants were actually encouraged to assimilate

The UK isn't the only country that failed to actually do anything to try to accommodate immigrants. Look at the Netherlands and Germany shooting themselves in the foot over gastarbeiters.

the slightest criticism is deemed to be racist.

You live in a country with the Daily Mail, are you even suprised? IIRC, the Conservatives ran on a slogan of "It's Not Racist to Criticise Immigration" in 2005. Y'know the rule - if someone says "It's/I'm not racist...", what follows is horribly racist.

I'd like to see some reasonable objections to immigration, but so far the criticism part of the debate in many ways has been dominated by the bigoted crowd.

Most people in Britain are opposed to this scale of immigration.

That's fucking rich, and hypocritical, considering that the UK is basically 100% the result of invasions.

However, the indigenous Britons becoming a minority is NOT a non-issue

Yes it is. Who seriously cares about this except the darkie-hatin' BNP crowd?

Multiculturalism is also a huge part of the problem.

Ah, criticism of multiculturalism. A sure sign that a poster doesn't actually know anything about multiculturalism and is just parroting back tiresome Daily Mail crap instead of actually having an argument.

If the people coming here were encouraged to become part of British society rather than some Pakistani/Indian/African etc. colony

Thank you for confirming my suspicion that you're just spewing scaremongering bullshit.

Actually Zaras almost everyone i know are against multiculturalism. We seem to be amoungst the only country that allows so many people in and not try to merge them into our culture

[Of Nom]

all the two or three foreigners I know are actually very much assimilated into our culture.

[Zaras]

Actually Zaras almost everyone i know are against multiculturalism.

Ask them what multiculturalism actually is.

We seem to be amoungst the only country that allows so many people in and not try to merge them into our culture

It's gotta be a two-way street. Demanding that immigrants assimilate completely without at least making an effort to meet them halfway reeks of noxious nationalism.

Plus, *cough*america*cough*.

[Ovisterra]

all the two or three foreigners I know are actually very much assimilated into our culture.

Are they citizens?

Because referring to British citizens as "foreigners" is a problem.

[Of Nom]

all the two or three foreigners I know are actually very much assimilated into our culture.

Are they citizens?

Because referring to British citizens as "foreigners" is a problem.

I'm not sure, some are recent moves, some are not, I used that so as to distinguish,, if i'd said citizens (which most are) it wouldn't have really have made sense.

[Friede]

News just in; Black Britons, Asian Britons and LGBT Britons are ALREADY minorities IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY and have been getting on just fine!