Reporting on the ethnicity of births only began in 2005. But looking at the trend - 80% white and 75% white British in 2005 to 75% white and 66% white British in 2011 - suggests that around 15% of births were non-European when Blair became prime minister, and massive demographic change was already guaranteed without intervention.
I think the reason why 1997 has become the de facto point of return is because the newly-arisen alliance of immigration restrictionism has only just bridged the gap to the Britpoppers. Their frame of mind has to operate on the basis that they just want to go back to when Britain was Bloody Brilliant (ie: the mid-90s). To go all the way back to 1948 is just something they can't contend with.
Those of us of a younger generation have no qualms about correctly pointing to the disasters of post-war immigration.
Perhaps more generally, 'turn the clock back to 1997' is a lot more acceptable to the Britpopper Cameronite Dad than 1945/49.
That's acceptable and moderate like John Major and something you can stick your head above the parapet and support. Perhaps Orr/Lowe cognisant of this.
Similarly, a right wing govt coming to power in Germany or especially France would be much more influential than Trump on the upper middle class... gives them all permission to start noticing things
After mostly black and mixed race men had rioted and burned down Victorian buildings in Toxteth in 1981 Michael Heseltine felt the need to visit the city and newspaper headlines light heartedly spoke of him wanting to be "minister for Merseyside".
While in late 1985 when the English police force were still basking in the high praise from the Tories and their media acolytes for their role in the defeat of the striking coalminers PC Keith Blakelock was hacked to death by a mostly black mob in Tottenham. The then local MP Bernie Grant said that" we gave the police a bloody good hiding" .Subsequently claimed to be misquoted but there was no doubting his true sentiment.
“Comparing Jewish to Irish immigration, we can see that it took a far smaller influx to prompt government action.”
The fact that Ireland was part of the United Kingdom surely had something to do with that?
The fact that the Windrush passengers were able to disembark in 1948 before the 1948 Act came into force (in 1949) suggests that the Act did not give people any rights to settle here that they had not previously had.
Does the importance of the 1948 Act lie in the creation of Commonwealth citizenship, which meant that citizens of India and Pakistan could continue to emigrate to Britain even after those countries became republics (in 1947 and 1956 respectively) and their inhabitants ceased to be British subjects???
Only skim read but how many people are able to remember that Pakistani youths rioting on the streets in Bradford in 2001 (before 9/11) were wearing t-shirts donning Osma Bin Laden's face on it? The policies and politicians that created this situation should have a special place in hell reserved for them. Brian Walden was right - his belief system trumped the evidence right in front of him. The persistent incompatibility comes down to cultural and behavioural systems.
Most interesting and thoughtful article. I am surprised that Rupert Lowe. of all people, should have subscribed to the 1997 date as significant. Clearly, the roots of the problem go farther back. Still, Lenin's question is apposite: what is to be done? I suspect, very little. Bit late in the day...😇
He's an older man and relatively recently radicalised... especially when you consider be grew up in the Cotswolds and spent much of his working life there (plus Soton and the nice parts of central London).
Whether there is racial strife or not is less interesting than the demographic fact that the English will be consigned to the dustbin of history in little more than a generation. No humanities graduate cared and most of the middle classes conspired by condemning anyone who did care as racist.
Just one picture, of gross immigration (not the 'net' sleight of hand to compare apples and oranges) since the 1920s might have saved a thousand (or two) words?
If immigration is beneficial, how do you explain the issues this article raises such as immigrants forming enclaves rather than mixing with the wider population, conflict between natives and immigrants and opposition to immigration
Reporting on the ethnicity of births only began in 2005. But looking at the trend - 80% white and 75% white British in 2005 to 75% white and 66% white British in 2011 - suggests that around 15% of births were non-European when Blair became prime minister, and massive demographic change was already guaranteed without intervention.
I think the reason why 1997 has become the de facto point of return is because the newly-arisen alliance of immigration restrictionism has only just bridged the gap to the Britpoppers. Their frame of mind has to operate on the basis that they just want to go back to when Britain was Bloody Brilliant (ie: the mid-90s). To go all the way back to 1948 is just something they can't contend with.
Those of us of a younger generation have no qualms about correctly pointing to the disasters of post-war immigration.
Perhaps more generally, 'turn the clock back to 1997' is a lot more acceptable to the Britpopper Cameronite Dad than 1945/49.
That's acceptable and moderate like John Major and something you can stick your head above the parapet and support. Perhaps Orr/Lowe cognisant of this.
Similarly, a right wing govt coming to power in Germany or especially France would be much more influential than Trump on the upper middle class... gives them all permission to start noticing things
After mostly black and mixed race men had rioted and burned down Victorian buildings in Toxteth in 1981 Michael Heseltine felt the need to visit the city and newspaper headlines light heartedly spoke of him wanting to be "minister for Merseyside".
While in late 1985 when the English police force were still basking in the high praise from the Tories and their media acolytes for their role in the defeat of the striking coalminers PC Keith Blakelock was hacked to death by a mostly black mob in Tottenham. The then local MP Bernie Grant said that" we gave the police a bloody good hiding" .Subsequently claimed to be misquoted but there was no doubting his true sentiment.
“Comparing Jewish to Irish immigration, we can see that it took a far smaller influx to prompt government action.”
The fact that Ireland was part of the United Kingdom surely had something to do with that?
The fact that the Windrush passengers were able to disembark in 1948 before the 1948 Act came into force (in 1949) suggests that the Act did not give people any rights to settle here that they had not previously had.
Does the importance of the 1948 Act lie in the creation of Commonwealth citizenship, which meant that citizens of India and Pakistan could continue to emigrate to Britain even after those countries became republics (in 1947 and 1956 respectively) and their inhabitants ceased to be British subjects???
This is a reasonable point; see Footnote 1 that acknowledges this point on Irish versus Jewish immigration.
Only skim read but how many people are able to remember that Pakistani youths rioting on the streets in Bradford in 2001 (before 9/11) were wearing t-shirts donning Osma Bin Laden's face on it? The policies and politicians that created this situation should have a special place in hell reserved for them. Brian Walden was right - his belief system trumped the evidence right in front of him. The persistent incompatibility comes down to cultural and behavioural systems.
Most interesting and thoughtful article. I am surprised that Rupert Lowe. of all people, should have subscribed to the 1997 date as significant. Clearly, the roots of the problem go farther back. Still, Lenin's question is apposite: what is to be done? I suspect, very little. Bit late in the day...😇
He's an older man and relatively recently radicalised... especially when you consider be grew up in the Cotswolds and spent much of his working life there (plus Soton and the nice parts of central London).
Whether there is racial strife or not is less interesting than the demographic fact that the English will be consigned to the dustbin of history in little more than a generation. No humanities graduate cared and most of the middle classes conspired by condemning anyone who did care as racist.
See
https://therenwhere.substack.com/p/the-destruction-of-britain
Lenin predicted that Capitalism would suck in labour from across the World and America would be the prime example.
Just one picture, of gross immigration (not the 'net' sleight of hand to compare apples and oranges) since the 1920s might have saved a thousand (or two) words?
If immigration is beneficial, how do you explain the issues this article raises such as immigrants forming enclaves rather than mixing with the wider population, conflict between natives and immigrants and opposition to immigration
Great article. But despite the odd race riot, pre-1997 Britain (particularly London) was more British.