Muhammad the most popular name in the UK

[The Great Domain of Eli]

The Daily Mail.

OK, reputable citation needed.

That was the joke

[Central Asian Republics]

I'm not surprised at all, considering 27 million people are Christians in the former British colony of India.
I also don't see why people are surprised at this but not surprised when the Native Americans were forced into converting to Christianity.

[Apollinis]

I'm not surprised at all, considering 27 million people are Christians in the former British colony of India.

Christianity in India, and indeed in much of the rest of Asia, vastly predates colonialism.

That aside, it's a fair point.

[Central Asian Republics]

I'm not surprised at all, considering 27 million people are Christians in the former British colony of India.

Christianity in India, and indeed in much of the rest of Asia, vastly predates colonialism.

That aside, it's a fair point.

I failed to mention Christianity in South America because that was off topic since this is about Britain.

[Threlizdun]

It's a pretty good name. I can't say I have much issue with this.

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

Apologies for the lengthy reply, I also may not be able to respond further. Apologies.

I use these as an example, precisely because their culture no longer exists. I am more than aware of the cosmopolitan nature of the europe given the national anthem was written by a German, the national drink is from the orient, etc. The greatest degree of continuity can be seen as post-norman (and I do believe that William the Conqueror would likely be able to see a degree of continuity with 19-20th Century England), which is undoubtedly influenced by many foreign cultures. Yet there still remains this sense of an identity founded upon these things, great works of some description.

If you believe that there is no possession of culture, too what differences can you attribute different peoples? Are immigrants in possession of culture? You may not have a sense of being entrusted with culture, I however do and I am consciously aware of what needs preservation and the like. I also feel that the destruction of rural society is one of the largest causes of this as well; this is not purely a matter of immigration.

What, for the readers sake, would constitute Japanese culture? Aren't those things just as changing as they are (products of the Edo era or chinese religion) and so irrelevant as to their preservation? Why care about if anyone can make Kimonos?

Only, you say that, and yet, William of Normandy would be shocked to see that we have a house of parliament compose of people who aren't speaking bad French with names like Etienne or FitzGerald, who don't go to mass every Sunday, and that there is really no such thing as peasantry and knights galloping around raping at will. There is no doubt that there is some continuality, yes, Ulysses can be traced distantly back to Bede, in retrospect. The point is, they are always changing, and therefore, there is no point in preserving this imaginary TRUE BLUE BRITISHNESS. You may feel the need to protect something that doesn't exist, some vague thing that change to circumstances and influence, but what is there to preserve? What you seem to mistaken as "preserving" is "ossifying".

And for the reader sake, what would constitute Japanese culture- it is a breathing and living tradition that changes, the men and women of the Heian Era would not recognise the streets of the Edo Era, the denizen of which would, in turn, look to Modern Tokyo, and find this strange, cement thing, where people speak in strange neologisms, with things like "pe-pa" and "arubaito", where people in schools aren't educated in "Kanbun", and, instead, in this strange foreign language of "English". Why should we care if they abandon the Kimono in some latter date? The Chinese no longer walk around in Manchu-era clothing, we don't dress as Victorians.

The French are an awful example, given they frenchified much of Brittany (declined from 1 million to 200,000 speakers this century - additionally the most fluent are often those most demanding of independence), the Occitans (all of the Langue d'Oc are described as endangered by UNESCO and have speakers in the thousands) and the Germans (only 43% of the population speak Alsation any more after only a century). Moreover they are famously intolerant of non-french speaking residents and the general scorn for the provincial non-parisian. This goes back to 1539 at the least, as well as its expansion under the le Roi-Soleil. We generally only speak of one langue d'oil after all, and their largest enclave is of course the alien channel islands. They are by far the most monocultured nation in Europe.

Again, that is not the point, they are not monocultured by any stretch of the world, even if the French do have certain, draconian language policies (from what I understand, it is changing), it does not negate that France, itself, is still multicultural, the Basques, Breton, Alsatian, etc. do have a culture/language that can be said to be different from the culture of Paris.

The Swedes used to sterilize the Sammi and try to ban their singing. The nomadic culture is slowly dying out. I do believe that Lappland should be independant as a note.

Again, it is not the point, the point is that there is no such thing as a monocultural entity.

What was your point again? What about the Flemish settling of Pembrokeshire? The Greek settlers of India? The innumerable examples that speckle all nations histories after all. Yet all of these tend towards a mean that is assimilated either due to the small scale or due to some degree of oppression.

I'm not sure what you are addressing here, my point is rather straightforward, that no matter how much you claim otherwise, there has never been, any where, at any time, a "monocultural" nation.

As to your "small scale" example, why do you fear the Moslems so much if they are coming in small scales as well? There are already a significant population of Pakistani and Indians in Britain, or Hungarians and Poles, and we don't see everyone in these sceptered isles worshipping cows and speaking in Polish.

I'm sure the welsh appreciate the sentiment.

Many of these examples it was often through immigration, much of Australia was 'conquered' by people simply moving into previously unclaimed territory and displacing the native inhabitants. As with the Anglo-Saxons, as with the English invasions of Ireland etc. The actual deliberate attempt at removing the aboriginal population occurred far later than this, as is often the case - immigrants, traders, who once they have a the chance at control attempt to do so.

Australia isn't so much immigrated to as it was colonized. There is a big difference there, mostly in relation to power.

I care as much about the preservation of indigenous cultures, Islamic or otherwise, as my own. Perhaps this creates stagnation? I can't give the answer to that, but this is as much an emotional is is rational topic for me.

There is no "indigenous culture", Indonesia has the largest population of Moslems, and it is located as far from Mecca as one could hope.

Given that the mainland Chinese (as the Taiwanese likely are as well) are doing precisely as you describe in a form of social mobility? Why is it prestigious there to be an English speaker?

Only, they don't. Many people may learn English to conduct business, but they don't speak English regularly at home, nor do they eat with fork and knives unless they are guests. Just as many English people try to learn Chinese and eat with chopsticks to

You ignore the thrust of what I am saying; people will always dislike each other and there is no changing of that aspect of human nature. It seems prudent in that regard to pre-empt what is otherwise inevitable strife. Perhaps it may not be an immediate issue, but in a century? With a conservative estimate of an Islamic population of 15-20% in a century, surely the parallels with the Anglo-Saxons become apparent. What should the ethnic Britons have done?

Again, you want to 'preempt' any future racial tension by encouraging pettyminded xenophobia. As for the parallels, you claim they are apparent, but they really aren't.
http://www.maneyonline.com/doi/abs/10.1179/174581711X13103897378311

What is the guarantee that such a shift might not occur? Has human nature changed so much since the fall of Rome? Why do you think I might not want a demographic shift given the consequences it might create for my culture?

Again, I like to think we live in a more enlightened era, when the maxim "that man to man the world o'ver/shall brothers be for a' that" has displaced small minded, Little England-ism.

I agreed in so much that you can say the same about variations, mehmet for instance. I nevertheless queried whether this might have been included in the actual methodology. The reason I think that this might be a valid criticism is due to instances like there being no consistent anglicisations of Muammar Gaddafi.

There are many English methodology for transliterating Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, etc. There are also many names in English that are basically from the same common origin. What is the point?

[Benuty]

Muhammed was a war criminal and married a 9 year old girl so in my opinion is a pedophile and naming your son after him is bad.

Source?

Given we cannot accurately depict what Abū al-Qāsim Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAbd al-Muṭṭalib ibn Hāshim actually did historically I fail to see relevance.

That is their full name by the way.

[The Wolven League]

Muhammed was a war criminal and married a 9 year old girl so in my opinion is a pedophile and naming your son after him is bad.

Source?

Given we cannot accurately depict what Abū al-Qāsim Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAbd al-Muṭṭalib ibn Hāshim actually did historically I fail to see relevance.

That is their full name by the way.

Damned Arabic names and their length.

[Avalon]

No problem at all

[Benuty]

Oh noes, Muhammad was the number one name for baby boys in one year on one site, clearly the Islamic communist nazi caliphate will rule Britannia soon and impose sharara law on the poor Christian Britons. The world as we know it is over.

Personally I prefer this name.
Abū al-Qāsim Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAbd al-Muṭṭalib ibn Hāshim

[Benuty]

Personally? As an atheist, I couldn't really care less about a Christian culture's demise. What worries me is the risk of British culture being eroded by increasing numbers of migrants that flatly reject our values, choosing to form ghettos instead and driving a big wedge in between Britain's own populace.

It's all well for social justice warriors not even living in the UK to parrot the bog-standard statements about 'equality' and 'tolerance' when they don't have to worry about competing with hordes of foreigners for low-skilled jobs, having to pay increased taxes to compensate for benefits tourists or be unable to find a decent home to live in (because they've been taken up by migrants). Add that to two other facts: that everybody in a position of authority ever will always play the racism card when someone pulls them up about this issue, and there's a potentially huge pool of recruitment for groups like ISIS in these ghettos.

So you are glad about the non-existent destruction of something that isn't as influential as it is in the US?

[Seraven]

It's a pretty good name. I can't say I have much issue with this.

But there are people who have issues with that, unfortunately.

It's a name, a name won't destroy much.

[Talvezout]

It's a pretty good name. I can't say I have much issue with this.

A lot of Islamic traditional names, come to think of it, sound pretty cool.

[Seraven]

It's a pretty good name. I can't say I have much issue with this.

A lot of Islamic traditional names, come to think of it, sound pretty cool.

There is given name for "Lion".

It's called Osama/Oussama/Usama/Usamah.

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

A lot of Islamic traditional names, come to think of it, sound pretty cool.

There is given name for "Lion".

It's called Osama/Oussama/Usama/Usamah.

Guess there aren't going to many "Lions" for the next few generations. Just like how Hitler killed off Adolph.

[Talvezout]

A lot of Islamic traditional names, come to think of it, sound pretty cool.

There is given name for "Lion".

It's called Osama/Oussama/Usama/Usamah.

Granted, it's kinda tainted by its association with a certain bin Laden, but still, it's a pretty neat name.

[Seraven]

There is given name for "Lion".

It's called Osama/Oussama/Usama/Usamah.

Granted, it's kinda tainted by its association with a certain bin Laden, but still, it's a pretty neat name.

It is a neat name.

There is given name for "Lion".

It's called Osama/Oussama/Usama/Usamah.

Guess there aren't going to many "Lions" for the next few generations. Just like how Hitler killed off Adolph.

Hitler killed more than Bin Laden, right?

[Eastfield Lodge]

There is given name for "Lion".

It's called Osama/Oussama/Usama/Usamah.

Guess there aren't going to many "Lions" for the next few generations. Just like how Hitler killed off Adolph.

Nah, I don't envisage much change in kids being named Osama outside the West.

[Imperializt Russia]

A lot of Islamic traditional names, come to think of it, sound pretty cool.

There is given name for "Lion".

It's called Osama/Oussama/Usama/Usamah.

Explain Assad/Asad.

[Seraven]

There is given name for "Lion".

It's called Osama/Oussama/Usama/Usamah.

Explain Assad/Asad.

Turns out there are many given names for "Lion" with each names denoting some aspects from "Lion".

[Imperializt Russia]

Explain Assad/Asad.

Turns out there are many given names for "Lion" with each names denoting some aspects from "Lion".

Well, Asad Babil translates as "Lion of Babylon" which I assume would be ferocity or some similar aspect, since that's what Saddam's T-72s were called.

[Apollinis]

Turns out there are many given names for "Lion" with each names denoting some aspects from "Lion".

Well, Asad Babil translates as "Lion of Babylon" which I assume would be ferocity or some similar aspect, since that's what Saddam's T-72s were called.

The Lion of Babylon was actually a literal Babylonian motif found in the city, symbolising/denoting (this bit according to Wikipedia) either the King of Babylon or said king's power.

Saddam also had a (well-attested) massive hard-on for his particular take on Mesopotamian history, so I think "Lion of Babylon" in his case was just a deliberate effort to link his Baathist hodgepodge to said significant civilisation rather than being about a specific aspect of the lion.

[L Ron Cupboard]

According to National Statistics, Muhammed is only the most popular boys name for 2014 in the London region, not the whole of the UK. Still I imagine accurate information will be ignored in favour of just reading the thread title.

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/vsob1/bab ... -2014.html

Wonder how popular John would be if you lumped together all its variations like Jean, Jan, Sean, Johann, Evan, Ieuan, Ifan, Ian, Iain, Ivan etc.?

[Jochistan]

Multicultural is code for anti-white. Why should a historically white country be forced through "multiculturalism" and "diversity" if nations of minorities aren't required to do the same with increasingly larger White populations flooding their borders?

Because the 'historically white country' has a higher quality of life than many of the 'nations of minorities', so people always strive for the better life.

Also, I assume you have a problem with white Europeans outnumbering the Middle Eastern natives in the UAE.

No kidding? Seriously?

[Imperializt Russia]

Well, Asad Babil translates as "Lion of Babylon" which I assume would be ferocity or some similar aspect, since that's what Saddam's T-72s were called.

The Lion of Babylon was actually a literal Babylonian motif found in the city, symbolising/denoting (this bit according to Wikipedia) either the King of Babylon or said king's power.

Saddam also had a (well-attested) massive hard-on for his particular take on Mesopotamian history, so I think "Lion of Babylon" in his case was just a deliberate effort to link his Baathist hodgepodge to said significant civilisation rather than being about a specific aspect of the lion.

Didn't he think he was the reincarnation of Nebuchadnezzar?