White Britons retreating from minorities

[Coito ergo sum]

As opposed to African, which I generally find less attractive... now, I'll be as happy with an Uzbek, Chinese, Viet, Thai, or Northern Indian girl ... Now, if you can get me a Korean or Japanese, that would be a treat... Semites and muslims, I'd rather avoid for cultural reasons. A Georgian or Armenian would be perfect, though.

You don't find African girls attractive? Charlize Theron - hot African girl.

[cronus]

It's when they say something that I start to have second thoughts. Other than that color is irrelevant.

[Svartalf]

As opposed to African, which I generally find less attractive... now, I'll be as happy with an Uzbek, Chinese, Viet, Thai, or Northern Indian girl ... Now, if you can get me a Korean or Japanese, that would be a treat... Semites and muslims, I'd rather avoid for cultural reasons. A Georgian or Armenian would be perfect, though.

You don't find African girls attractive? Charlize Theron - hot African girl.

Duh, she's white, therefore excluded by your silly proposed law... or do you mean that I'm just barred from procreating with a French girl and can go get me an irish colleen or a Scottish lass?

[Coito ergo sum]

No, I'm implying that it is silly to reference Asian and African as "races" -- when in fact they are continents of mixed race denizens. We don't refer to whites as "European" racially. Or, "North American." Those aren't racial concepts because we don't suggest that Europe is a racially a white continent. The race is black or negroid, as opposed to white or caucasoid. Racially, the far eastern people should not be called "Asian" because that is a continental designation, not a racial one. The old reference of "oriental" made more sense, but that became "offensive" for some reason, or perhaps mongoloid would be best (divided into neo- and paleo- mongoloid).

[Svartalf]

No, I'm implying that it is silly to reference Asian and African as "races" -- when in fact they are continents of mixed race denizens. We don't refer to whites as "European" racially. Or, "North American." Those aren't racial concepts because we don't suggest that Europe is a racially a white continent. The race is black or negroid, as opposed to white or caucasoid. Racially, the far eastern people should not be called "Asian" because that is a continental designation, not a racial one. The old reference of "oriental" made more sense, but that became "offensive" for some reason, or perhaps mongoloid would be best (divided into neo- and paleo- mongoloid).

So you admit that this :

We should make a global law that nobody can procreate with someone of their same race. The whole problem would be solved in a generation or two.

was silly and meaningless prattle, okay, sorry for discussing it as if it were an issue.

[Coito ergo sum]

I thought its silly, meaningless prattle nature was evident on its face.

[Svartalf]

Actually, I should give you the Zilla tag and treat ALL your posting as silly and meaningless prattle

[charlou]

Proof of the failure of multiculturalism, and that the solution is expulsion of ethnic minorities back to their home countries because the minorities failed to live up to their end of the bargain. Better to do it now in a humane and organized manner rather than the inevitable more violent way.

Multiculturalism is a culture in itself.

I agree with avoiding violence, but not with your idea of proof and what that entails.

[Warren Dew]

Don't assume white flight when it could be simply people avoiding third world customs like honour killings and Sharia war.

White flight wasn't that much different.

[charlou]

Don't assume white flight when it could be simply people avoiding third world customs like honour killings and Sharia war. It may be the consolidation of modernity rather than the retreat of a racial society? it mentions the Ambrosia effect and it appears that tolerance is good when numbers are small so that customs are transferred preferentially for modern values.

I don't know if and, if so, how this manifests, but a point worth consideration. And, by extension, does the media invoke and/or beat up a divisive perception at every opportunity?

[JimC]

It does tend to happen here as well, perhaps not to the same extremes.

Whatever the causes are, the effects are potentially divisive, and islamic ghettos, in particular, seem to breed a very insular and fundamentalist mind-set. In Sydney, the Lakemba mosque is in the heart of a heavily Lebanese area, and is a hot-bed for jihadist preaching. In some British cities, I have read reports that heavily dominated islamic areas try to impose something like Sharia law within their borders, which is a bit of a worry. It doesn't have to be a racial thing at all - in Melbourne, the Chinese tend to congregate in certain suburbs, but the main effect is that one knows where to go for a good chinese meal!

[Coito ergo sum]

Actually, I should give you the Zilla tag and treat ALL your posting as silly and meaningless prattle

You sick bastard!

[Coito ergo sum]

Proof of the failure of multiculturalism, and that the solution is expulsion of ethnic minorities back to their home countries because the minorities failed to live up to their end of the bargain. Better to do it now in a humane and organized manner rather than the inevitable more violent way.

Multiculturalism is a culture in itself.

I agree with avoiding violence, but not with your idea of proof and what that entails.

Multiculturalism is neither a culture nor multi, nor an -ism. Discuss!

[Jason]

'Hoo are the Britons?

[Seth]

The sad thing is I'm getting the sense that this is actually true, from the changing patterns of inhabitants locally. However we've always had a bit of it here in Glasgow, used to be catholics and protestants and really most cities have it based on class, so why should ethnicity be any different?

Indeed. And one must also acknowledge that "minority" groups actually prefer, and choose to live in their own ethnic/racial/cultural/religious communities.

It's natural tribalism.

Muslims aren't being driven into ghettos, they build their own exclusive communities. The same is true of blacks, hispanics, Pakistanis, Indians and every other sort of racial or cultural group.

People are simply more comfortable living amongst their own cultural kind.

And there's absolutely nothing whatever wrong with that. The problem lies in some cultural/racial groups being unable to compete in a modern economy and therefore they alienate themselves and blame other people for not giving them "equal" opportunity.

But there are too many individuals working and living in cross-cultural, multi-ethnic societies to engender much sympathy for those who choose to segregate themselves.

You can see this in most large US cities, where there are "black areas" and "hispanic areas" and "middle eastern areas" etc.

Whatever you do, if you're white...or even just non-black, do NOT get off the Interstate in East Saint Louis. Your chances of surviving that are much lower than normal. White folks who take the wrong exit there get victimized all the time merely for being white.

Same thing happens in many ethnic/race based communities.

That's not the product of the "white majority" consigning minorities to ghettos, it's the result of minority groups CHOOSING to live with their cultural and ethnic compatriots. It's VOLUNTARY segregation, and that's not only completely lawful, it's a civil right.