Just as America was the new Britain first.
The BNP do have other issues but admittedly don't talk about them nearly as much. They are very much "1 main issue, then there's a few other bits and pieces too". Another big problem with them. But WoF, please don't equate national identity to racial purity. That's essentially saying "Anyone who thinks Britain has its own culture is a Nazi".
:
|
Okay, I'm going to ask the same thing back to you. If you consider yourself indigenous British, how many generations will it take for an immigrant to be considered equally so?
Specifically, what about a second or third generation person of Indian or Pakistani heritage? Would you consider him absolutely British, given that he's grown up in the same primary culture you have, with some familial influences?
|
I'd say it depends. On the purely hereditary view I'd say that either 2nd or 3rd generation to be born here equals British.
However, I'd consider them British if they considered themselves British. For instance, a friend of mine was born in eastern Europe and moved here a few years ago- changed his name to name himself after a historical English hero, speaks English fluently and before any other language, considers himself British now, highly patriotic for Britain (yet he's a member of the Labour party, so patriotism doesn't have to equal right wing). In my books he is 100% British, and . However I've also encountered people who, though born here, consider themselves to still be Pakistani/Indian. As such I don't think I'd consider them indigneous British as they don't consider themselves British at all.
