qman said:

"The English invaded more than half the world"

"How many different languages do the English speak?"

What does that have to do with many people in the UK not speaking English, including herself?

Also insinuating that Britain is responsible for the extremists in Middle Eastern countries, and third world people made Britain what it is today.

What a bunch of anti-British nonsense, why would anyone that hated a country choose to live in it? Pathetic.

---

LOL at that video. I agree. What a crock of shit.

Many many native Brits speak multiple languages.

Also stating that third world immigrants are responsible for turning Britain into Great Britain. What in 40 years.



She also makes a massive generalization about the entire native population, stating that "up to this day THEY are in denial about it"

I notice how no one on the left picked up on that. Had that been an English man talking about Muslims, we would have never heard the fucking end of it.

Yet when immigrants do exactly the same thing, its accepted and over looked

airclay said:

Bigbadwooof said:

airclay said:

Bigbadwooof said:

Firstly, I didn't say 'The US', I said 'The West'. Western industrialization is the only reason their oil is worth anything! It's the only reason these countries have money at all. The only reason they can afford to buy weapons from the US.

---

I think this stance may tend to some exceptionalism. It devalues the entire mid east to subservient oil states. Negating the great empires that have existed there and playing into some orientalism in so much as doubting that arab/persian culture could have reached modern status w/o the west.

It's weird tho, we are where we are in time. Western industrialization is a thing and it did happen there first. There's no way to understand civilization otherwise. But surely I'm missing something or there's a better way to phrase this.

---

Shit, the middle east was on their way to reaching modern day technology much quicker than the West, several hundred years ago. Religion halted all progress in the middle east. No, I don't think they would have come close to owning F16's and the kind of material wealth (not money, but material goods) they enjoy without the West. Not everything is racist. Call me a culturist. Some cultures are better than others. Western culture is generally better on many fronts.

---

I'm not really trying to call you either. I agree w the premise, even more so w the idea that they wouldn't be so materialistic given the same time. I'm just a nerd and would like to find the best way to speak on or approach it.

---

viktor said:

circastes said:

Might as well tend to my thread!

German far-right makes historic gains

"NIGHTMARE for Merkel: Leader humiliated as Germany sends a crushing message in polls"

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/652280/Angela-Merkel-CDU-German-elections-defeat-regional-elections-immigration-refugee-policy

---

Man, that's scary news. Hopefully the German government will stop listening to people like Tipote and Malkuthian before the Nazis come back into power.

---

Bubbles85 said:

LOL at that video. I agree. What a crock of shit.

Many many native Brits speak multiple languages.

---

Quote:

Also stating that third world immigrants are responsible for turning Britain into Great Britain. What in 40 years.

---

No, not in 40 years immigration has been going on for longer than 40 years.

Colonialism effectively stole technology and raw materials from other country which fuelled the industrial revolution. Some of the looms that were used in Britain came directly from India and African countries. This meant that a political economy of dependence was formed. Britain could sell the products back to those peoples, having taken the means of production.

Quote:

She also makes a massive generalization about the entire native population, stating that "up to this day THEY are in denial about it"

---

WAN said:

Tipote said:

Well said as always, Malkuthian.

---

I wont take sides in this debate between you and qman but I just want to give one factual observation:  the mere presence of these foreign women seems to generate much division and disagreement among the natives (I know qman is technically not a native Brit, however I am assuming that his attitude is  representative of some Brits).  So my question is, why does Britain continue to import these third-worlders?  And the liberals and the mainstream media keep repeating over and over that these people "enrich" our societies and cultures but I just want to ask, in what ways exactly?

---

Tipote said:

WAN said:

Tipote said:

Well said as always, Malkuthian.

---

I wont take sides in this debate between you and qman but I just want to give one factual observation:  the mere presence of these foreign women seems to generate much division and disagreement among the natives (I know qman is technically not a native Brit, however I am assuming that his attitude is  representative of some Brits).  So my question is, why does Britain continue to import these third-worlders?  And the liberals and the mainstream media keep repeating over and over that these people "enrich" our societies and cultures but I just want to ask, in what ways exactly?

---

It's hard to know what is representative of the entire country but I can tell you that qman's view is not very representative at all. Bubbles view is relatively common, as is mine. My town encouraged our MP to accept refugees and there are many people in my area involved with helping the Calais Jungle. Many English, especially in London, have grown up with people from many different backgrounds, all brought up as English.

You say "import these third-worlders" like they are objects. Britain doesnt import people. Some are granted residency for work, some are given a path to citizenship, it depends entirely on the situation. In the last few years, there have been huge numbers of Nepalese (especially in the South East, where I am) because there was a campaign by British people to allow Nepalese families to become citizens because they make up a vital part of the British Armed Forces. Before, they fought and died but could not be a citizen or have residency. Now, my town has got a load of nepalese and they are fucking nice people. They have brought their cuisine, opened shops, restaurants etc etc

What ways do you think anyone might be able to enrich another country? Do you think you enrich Canada as a naturalised white supremacist asian Canadian? Or can you only enrich a place if you arent from the "third world"? People from poor countries are still people. Just because you dont know them doesnt mean they are automatically savage. That in itself is a savage way of thinking.

---

Tipote said:

Bubbles85 said:

LOL at that video. I agree. What a crock of shit.

Many many native Brits speak multiple languages.

---

LOL "many many" sounds like a big number! The British are the worst in Europe for speaking other languages.

---

Actually their not. There are other countries in Europe that speak less foreign languages than the British and even then there are still millions of Brits that do speak another language.

Quote:

Also stating that third world immigrants are responsible for turning Britain into Great Britain. What in 40 years.

---

Tipote said:

No, not in 40 years immigration has been going on for longer than 40 years.

---

Not it hasn't. Third world immigration has been taking place in Britain for just four or five decades and toward the beginning of the start of it, there were hardly any of these people in the UK. It's only in recent years (the last two decades) that these populations have soared and now they believe that they're responsible for making this country what it is today? Give me a fucking brake.

Tipote said:

Colonialism effectively stole technology and raw materials from other country which fuelled the industrial revolution. Some of the looms that were used in Britain came directly from India and African countries. This meant that a political economy of dependence was formed. Britain could sell the products back to those peoples, having taken the means of production.

---

Using foreign resources does not make Third World immigrants responsible for making Britain, Great Britain, WTF. You're basically implying that, that is the case with your comments as well

Why do kiss Third World ass so much? Its rediculous

Britain is the birth place of the industrial revolution, not the third world. Just because Britain was the world’s leading colonial power at that time and could use foreign resources to its advantage, does not mean in any way shape or form, that third world immigrants are responsible for making this country what it is today. I can't believe you're even trying to push this bull shit argument.

Britain had great deposits of its own resources like coal and iron ore, which proved essential for industrialization. This started the industrial revolution.

Quote:

She also makes a massive generalization about the entire native population, stating that "up to this day THEY are in denial about it"

---

Tipote said:

There are the generalisations when people say "muslims are all..." and there are generalisations like "Britain is in denial".
Generalisations are not the problem but there are different kinds of generalisations.

---

Its exactly the same thing. She is referring to the native population.

Quote:

The Industrial Revolution began in the United Kingdom and most of the important technological innovations were British.

---

Bubbles85 said:

Actually their not. There are other countries in Europe that speak less foreign languages than the British and even then there are still millions of Brits that do speak another language.

---

Quote:

Not it hasn't. Third world immigration has been taking place in Britain for just four or five decades and toward the beginning of the start of it, there were hardly any of these people in the UK. It's only in recent years (the last two decades) that these populations have soared and now they believe that they're responsible for making this country what it is today? Give me a fucking brake.

---

Bubbles85 said:

Tipote said:

Colonialism effectively stole technology and raw materials from other country which fuelled the industrial revolution. Some of the looms that were used in Britain came directly from India and African countries. This meant that a political economy of dependence was formed. Britain could sell the products back to those peoples, having taken the means of production.

---

Using foreign resources does not make Third World immigrants responsible for making Britain, Great Britain, WTF. You're basically implying that, that is the case with your comments as well

Why do kiss Third World ass so much? Its rediculous

---

Bubbles85 said:

Coming from a poster who comes out with the most nonsensical BS for most of his arguments, out of every member on this site

---

Tipote said:

Bubbles85 said:

Actually their not. There are other countries in Europe that speak less foreign languages than the British and even then there are still millions of Brits that do speak another language.

---

Its actually pretty funny how many mistakes you make in each and every post yet youre talking about how well Brits speak other languages..LOL you seem to struggle to speak english yourself!

Quote:

Not it hasn't. Third world immigration has been taking place in Britain for just four or five decades and toward the beginning of the start of it, there were hardly any of these people in the UK. It's only in recent years (the last two decades) that these populations have soared and now they believe that they're responsible for making this country what it is today? Give me a fucking brake.

---

Immigration in huge numbers is more of a recent thing yes, but immigration has been going on for a much longer time than that.
The point wasnt that Britain became Great Britain because of immigrants exactly, it is about colonialism being on the back of a colonised peoples. If it wasn't for their losses, Britain would never have become as rich as it did.

Bubbles85 said:

Tipote said:

Colonialism effectively stole technology and raw materials from other country which fuelled the industrial revolution. Some of the looms that were used in Britain came directly from India and African countries. This meant that a political economy of dependence was formed. Britain could sell the products back to those peoples, having taken the means of production.

---

Using foreign resources does not make Third World immigrants responsible for making Britain, Great Britain, WTF. You're basically implying that, that is the case with your comments as well

Why do kiss Third World ass so much? Its rediculous

---

Dude, learn to spell already. I know third worlders who speak english better than you.

I did not say that foreign resources made immigrants responsible for the industrial revolution. I said that colonialism, resource theft and slavery fueled the industrial revolution and ultimately the wealth of the Empire.

Quote:

Britain is the birth place of the industrial revolution, not the third world. Just because Britain was the world’s leading colonial power at that time and could use foreign resources to its advantage, does not mean in any way shape or form, that third world immigrants are responsible for making this country what it is today. I can't believe you're even trying to push this bull shit argument.

---

You keep misunderstanding the argument. Its not about immigrants, its about colonised peoples. The lady in the video said that many of the problems back in those countries are still part of the legacy of colonialism. I was working for a month in India a few years ago on a conservation project to replant the a unique ecosystem which the British had destroyed.

Quote:

Britain had great deposits of its own resources like coal and iron ore, which proved essential for industrialization. This started the industrial revolution.

---

True, the UK had the best coal in Europe.. but resource and labour theft from the colonised world made Britain, Great Britain in many ways. The wealth generated from colonialism fuelled technology and fuelled the entire Empire. That does not mean that the industrial revolution would not have happened without colonialism but it certainly helped a great deal. Importing raw materials, natural resources and exporting manufactured goods makes A LOT of money.  Cheap/Slave labour helped a great deal too.

As I said before, i think it was in the 16th century that garment technology was taken from India and other countries, and manufactured goods were sold back to them. This created an economic dependency with the Empire at the heart.

---

Quote:

in a childish attempt to try to devalue your arguments.

---

Quote:

I'm glad that we agree that Third World immigrants are not responsible for making Britain, Great Britain.

The British did that all by them selves, despite the efforts of some to try and shit all over it and try to make it look like the developed world now owes its success to the Third World.

---

Quote:

The industrial revolution would have happened regardless of foreign resources and started off the back of local resources and local technological advancements.

---

Bubbles85 said:

Dude, you make plenty of mistakes in every single one of your posts. I can count 11 in this. I'm just not petty enough to continually point them out, in a childish attempt to try to devalue your arguments.

---

Quote:

I'm glad that we agree that Third World immigrants are not responsible for making Britain, Great Britain.

---

Quote:

The British did that all by them selves, despite the efforts of some to try and shit all over it and try to make it look like the developed world now owes its success to the Third World.

---

Quote:

The industrial revolution would have happened regardless of foreign resources and started off the back of local resources and local technological advancements. End of story.

---

Quote:

The Industrial Revolution began in the United Kingdom and most of the important technological innovations were British.

---

akira_akuma said:

Quote:

in a childish attempt to try to devalue your arguments.

---

no. pointing out that you keep insisting that English be spoken, and yet, you can't speak it, isn't an childish attempt -- it's an actual fact, actually -- and to point it out isn't egregious, it's sensible, as it points out  the values of your argument.

---

I can't speak English Bit rich coming from you, when only you, your self can understand what the fuck you're chatting on about half the time.

Tip hasn't pointed out that i continually insist English be spoken. You need to follow the discussion properly, or STFU.

I've also never insisted that English be spoken properly. I was arguing in defense of the British, because the woman in that video stated that Brits do not speak other languages.

Tipote said:

Bubbles85 said:

Dude, you make plenty of mistakes in every single one of your posts. I can count 11 in this. I'm just not petty enough to continually point them out, in a childish attempt to try to devalue your arguments.

---

No.. it doesnt devalue your arguments, I dont point it out usually but it was particularly fitting since the discussion is about people learning English and Brits not knowing other languages. Feel free to point out my mistakes, where are they? I'm happy to know so that I can improve, I dont take it as devaluing my arguments. My mistakes are mistakes, you dont actually seem to know the difference between their, there and they're, and you struggle to spell despite the spell check. If you're dyslexic, then I apologise.

Quote:

I'm glad that we agree that Third World immigrants are not responsible for making Britain, Great Britain.

---

That was never the argument

Quote:

The British did that all by them selves, despite the efforts of some to try and shit all over it and try to make it look like the developed world now owes its success to the Third World.

---

No, Britain did not do it alone. Wealth from colonialism was allowed to be invested in Britain and helped revolution to take shape. Yes Britain was in a good position geographically to be in the position for revolution too.

Quote:

The industrial revolution would have happened regardless of foreign resources and started off the back of local resources and local technological advancements. End of story.

---

No, thats part of the story. You are right to an extent but the claim wasnt purely about the industrial revolution. It wasn't the industrial revolution alone that made Britain Great Britain, it was EMPIRE.. which was based on colonialism, yes..

Quote:

The Industrial Revolution began in the United Kingdom and most of the important technological innovations were British.

---

I dont think i've said anything to dispute this. I just asked.. where do you think a lot of the wealth of Great Britain came from?

---

there is a difference between communication and language.

you don't know that? learn.

see how simple to understand that was?

let's try simpler rhetoric for you:

English is fun, and i like having fun with it, usually in obscure ways, that sometimes i even experiment with knowing that no one will get it but me...and i make lots of jokes. we're talking about actually using  English properly. aside from most capitalization i do pretty well, but i do use alot of ellipses and incongruity in my statements, to be as unstately as possible. yes, "unstately"...and then i try too to not be bound by grammar restraints.

but i also try to be clear and objective sometimes, but it's usually that i'm having too much fun to care to make things straight and easy for people to comprehend. where's the fun in that?

when i make jokes at your expense...people seem to dig it most of the time. well digs at any of the right-wing around here...jeez i wish i had more ammo for the libs too, but where are the SJWs?


see? that's simple right? more pith, you say?

Quote:

Tip hasn't pointed out that i continually insist English be spoken. You need to follow the discussion properly, or STFU.

---

you're talking about non-English speaking people promoting a lack of comprehension of the English language, and multiculturalism...i'm pretty sure, considering that's what this thread and what you are all about. tell me i'm wrong. you're not talking about non-English speakers 'in your English nation' being a nuisance? that's the argument i see here alot....

Quote:

I've also never insisted that English be spoken properly. I was arguing in defense of the British, because the woman in that video stated that Brits do not speak other languages.

---

so? alot of them don't...and their part of "Europe" apparently...but not but barely.

some lady insisted that Brits speak other languages or what?

Bubbles85 said:

I'm not dyslexic and i don't make many spelling mistakes as far as I'm aware?

---

Quote:

You do make them too. Every poster does.

---

Quote:

I rush to post some times, but most of what i say is at least easy to understand.

---

Quote:

Edit. Just wanted to add, that it was the civilisation of Great Britain, the people, that are responsible for the industrial revolution and the success of the country. Not just resources.

---