![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
(No. No, they didn't.)
So, I'm not going to have a giant thing over Nick Griffin's appearance on PMQT (except to say I think the debate over whether BBC should have invited him is a bit stupid, as I posted before. It's not the BBC giving him validity, it's the British electorate - if you want a democratic country, you've got to accept that you're not always going to like what people decide), but I'd just like to say:
WTF is with the concept of "indigenous" as relating to Britain? That word displays such a breathtaking ignorance of this island's history that it's almost flabbergasting.
Firstly, of course, current research tends to favour the idea of human life having originated in Africa and then emigrating outwards to populate the rest of the world. Which means that Britain and, in fact, the rest of the world, doesn't have an indigenous population.
Secondly, get a fucking clue. Almost every country in northern Europe has invaded Britain, settled there, and influenced its genetic stock. The fucking Romans invaded Britain. And after the military invasions finished, there has still been wave after wave of immigration into this country, and I'm not just talking about the West Indies in the 50s, for example, but, say, Huguenots in the C17th.
Talking about "indigenous" Britons is bullshit. And Nick Griffin is an educated man, so I suspect he knows it's bullshit, which makes him a fucking demagogue, and a racist one to boot. But it's not like any of this is news.
ETA: Yes, in the course of this post I have used a fairly narrow definition of "indigenous".
So, I'm not going to have a giant thing over Nick Griffin's appearance on PMQT (except to say I think the debate over whether BBC should have invited him is a bit stupid, as I posted before. It's not the BBC giving him validity, it's the British electorate - if you want a democratic country, you've got to accept that you're not always going to like what people decide), but I'd just like to say:
WTF is with the concept of "indigenous" as relating to Britain? That word displays such a breathtaking ignorance of this island's history that it's almost flabbergasting.
Firstly, of course, current research tends to favour the idea of human life having originated in Africa and then emigrating outwards to populate the rest of the world. Which means that Britain and, in fact, the rest of the world, doesn't have an indigenous population.
Secondly, get a fucking clue. Almost every country in northern Europe has invaded Britain, settled there, and influenced its genetic stock. The fucking Romans invaded Britain. And after the military invasions finished, there has still been wave after wave of immigration into this country, and I'm not just talking about the West Indies in the 50s, for example, but, say, Huguenots in the C17th.
Talking about "indigenous" Britons is bullshit. And Nick Griffin is an educated man, so I suspect he knows it's bullshit, which makes him a fucking demagogue, and a racist one to boot. But it's not like any of this is news.
ETA: Yes, in the course of this post I have used a fairly narrow definition of "indigenous".
no subject
Date: 2009-10-23 11:23 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-23 11:31 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-23 11:38 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-23 12:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-23 12:34 pm (UTC)