Public support for new Brexit referendum revealed

[StayinThailand2much]

On 8/14/2023 at 11:08 PM, candide said:

But

"46 per cent of people said there should be a referendum in the next 10 years, while 36 per cent of people said there should not."

 

And also

"Six in ten (62 per cent) believe Brexit has been more of a failure than a success, and a majority (55 per cent) say we were wrong to vote to leave in the first place."

A bit confusing; 55 per cent regret Brexit, another 7 per cent think it was bad, but 'never mind', but only 46 per cent say there should be a new referendum in the foreseeable future... Do the remaining 16 per cent (62 - 46) just want to 'carry on', no matter what?

[david555]

2 hours ago, transam said:

It was a people's vote, the people voted to leave, so get over it.....????

And better stick to it ...... as i dont see U.K. accepting the Euro instead of the Pound ????

It is " done and dusted " ..... best to keep it so as it is now !

[transam]

1 minute ago, david555 said:

And better stick to it ...... as i dont see U.K. accepting the Euro instead of the Pound ????

It is " done and dusted " ..... best to keep it so as it is now !

Absolutely..............

[OneMoreFarang]

Did anyone ask the people in the EU if they want that the UK joins?

 

 

[RayC]

30 minutes ago, nauseus said:

"Appear to hold the belief which appears common amongst Brexiters"! Well, from that, it appears to me that you appear to have no idea what I believe. 

You believe that the EU acted belligerently during the Brexit  negotiations. You stated this.  I think that you are mistaken. What's your point?

30 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

However, I will agree that neither party had a plan, mainly because those in power believed that a no vote was forthcoming. Initially, elements of the UK Gov foolishly expected to get far more from the EU than was going to be given from the more belligerent elements within the EU.

I didn't say that the EU didn't have a plan. Actually, I think the opposite. The EU negotiators were well prepared and had a clear idea of what they were willing to consider and at what price. 

 

If ever a picture painted a story it was the attached. One side prepared, the other ...

 

30 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

Then again, there are no exit plans or arrangements set out in the Treaty of Lisbon, anyway.

It's unreasonable to expect that there would be. The 27 member states are all unique. There would need be 28 unique individual plans. For example, Hungary is probably going to be almost completely indifferent to anything to do with the Common Fisheries policy. On the other hand, it will be of major import to e.g. France and Spain 

[candide]

22 minutes ago, RayC said:

I didn't say that the EU didn't have a plan. Actually, I think the opposite. The EU negotiators were well prepared and had a clear idea of what they were willing to consider and at what price. 

 

If ever a picture painted a story it was the attached. One side prepared, the other ...

The "unprepared" side (UK politicians and staff) had been involved for decades in EU negotiations with other countries. It had been not only confronted to the EU doctrine on that matter, but also contributed to its design. So it is worse than being only "unprepared".

[RayC]

1 hour ago, Woof999 said:

If the EU was reasonable then the majority of the UK voters wouldn't have voted to leave in the first place.

Your conclusion doesn't follow from the premise. Firstly, the majority of the public in the other 27 EU member states prefer to remain in the bloc. Secondly, the majority decision is necessarily the best decision.

 

1 hour ago, Woof999 said:

The EU is far from perfect, but it's benefits outweigh the negatives.

I agree.

 

1 hour ago, Woof999 said:

The one thing I don't get about the EU is the willingness for it's members to allow their national identities to be slowly yet surely eroded.

Is that really the case? People, societies and cultures change. Just as our parents' had trouble understanding some of our pastimes and views, we now find ourselves shaking our heads at some of our kids' activities.

 

In any event, how much have national identities really changed? I travel to Belgium and France fairly regularly and wouldn't mistake either for the other. All my opinion of course.

 

1 hour ago, Woof999 said:

 

If the EU's remit remained closer to that of the former EEC and less that of a singular republic that seeks to control all aspects of all member states then it would have had far more UK support.

Imo this is myth. It is undeniable that the amount of regulation has increased but the EU - and the rest of the world - is more interconnected than it was 50 years ago. Moreover, if the Single Market is function as efficiently as possible then it requires a 'level playing field', and this inevitably, requires more legislation.

[Woof999]

11 minutes ago, RayC said:

Firstly, the majority of the public in the other 27 EU member states prefer to remain in the bloc.

As I wrote, I would have voted to remain, but I would still have strong reservations about what I would perceive as the negative.

 

12 minutes ago, RayC said:

Secondly, the majority decision is necessarily the best decision.

I would word that as "the majority decision is necessary". With the EU you're either in for everything or you're not. This will tie in more with an answer to one of your other points below. It is only the best decision because there is little other choice.

 

12 minutes ago, RayC said:

Is that really the case? People, societies and cultures change. Just as our parents' had trouble understanding some of our pastimes and views, we now find ourselves shaking our heads at some of our kids' activities.

 

In any event, how much have national identities really changed? I travel to Belgium and France fairly regularly and wouldn't mistake either for the other. All my opinion of course.

 

12 minutes ago, RayC said:

Imo this is myth. It is undeniable that the amount of regulation has increased but the EU - and the rest of the world - is more interconnected than it was 50 years ago. Moreover, if the Single Market is function as efficiently as possible then it requires a 'level playing field', and this inevitably, requires more legislation.

The EU's purpose is far more than just a single market (in terms of a single trading market). The EEC already had that covered. A single market does not require unified immigration policies. The UK had already gone down that path of no return with immigration, most recently from the policies of the Labour party under Blair and Brown. The dream of creating a multi-cultural society was a disaster in the making right from the start and was, IMHO, done solely for political reasons rather than anything to do with bringing some Great back into GB.

 

We (the whole human race) do not mix well with others of (even slightly) differing views, religions, beliefs, habits, even dress sense. Britain was not becoming a multi-cultural society, it was becoming a small geography forcing differing societies to live even closer together than they were previously, without addressing much of what makes those societies different or why they are different. Those societies still do not particularly mix and they often do not tolerate. They don't even want to mix.

 

Power breeds corruption. It is human nature and it will not change. Those in power in Brussels will naturally seek more power. Whether the result is better for the bloc is not the driving force of those decisions. I am a strong believer that most choosing a career in politics are doing so for their own good, not the greater good. Perhaps I'm just getting more and more cynical as I get older.

 

If the EU was solely about a single market then there was no real need for the EU. As mentioned before, a single market already existed. The EU's end game is a single republic with any meaningful power residing in a single federal government. You cannot have a single republic without losing much if not all of your national identity. This I am 100% against. The US tried it starting 250 years ago or so. The US is more divided now than at pretty much any other point in it's history. I can foresee the same for the EU. More and more unity breeding more and more division.

 

The Euro was a logical decision. For the UK it was a bridge too far and, with due respect to the other founding members, the UK was allowed to keep the £. What if the next step was a single language? I can see that coming. What will that language be?

 

I can't see the UK returning to the EU in my lifetime. I hope I am wrong. There is too much bitterness. The UK (again IMHO) made a mistake. The EU will not allow the UK to undo that mistake without taking a huge Euro of flesh.

[puck2]

3 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Did anyone ask the people in the EU if they want that the UK joins?

 

 

The EU would not like to give the UK a "cherry picking" as before. The UK wouldn't get the same preferences as before, I guess. The UK would get the same conditions as all "new" members. All would depend on negotiations.

 

 

[RayC]

5 hours ago, Woof999 said:

 

I would word that as "the majority decision is necessary".

Apologies in my previous post there was a rather important omission. The  sentence in question should have read "The majority decision is NOT necessarily the right decision".

 

5 hours ago, Woof999 said:

 

With the EU you're either in for everything or you're not....It is only the best decision because there is little other choice.

Agreed. Member states can't 'cherry pick' which EU legislation they want to adopt. The bloc could not function if that were the case.

 

Does EU legislation lead to the most optimal outcome? I imagine that the answer is 'Rarely if ever'. Does EU legislation lead to the best compromise outcome for 27 diverse nations? Hopefully, the answer is 'Yes more often than not'.

 

5 hours ago, Woof999 said:

 

The EU's purpose is far more than just a single market (in terms of a single trading market).

Agreed.

 

5 hours ago, Woof999 said:

The EEC already had that covered.

Disagree. The EEC had little to say about standards and regulations.

 

5 hours ago, Woof999 said:

A single market does not require unified immigration policies.

Perhaps not when it comes to immigration from non-member states, but it does require freedom of movement of labour and capital within the bloc.

 

5 hours ago, Woof999 said:

The UK had already gone down that path of no return with immigration, most recently from the policies of the Labour party under Blair and Brown. The dream of creating a multi-cultural society was a disaster in the making right from the start and was, IMHO, done solely for political reasons rather than anything to do with bringing some Great back into GB.

That's a much bigger question than Brexit. 

 

5 hours ago, Woof999 said:

We (the whole human race) do not mix well with others of (even slightly) differing views, religions, beliefs, habits, even dress sense.

See above although I disagree with your premise.

 

5 hours ago, Woof999 said:

Britain was not becoming a multi-cultural society, it was becoming a small geography forcing differing societies to live even closer together than they were previously, without addressing much of what makes those societies different or why they are different. Those societies still do not particularly mix and they often do not tolerate. They don't even want to mix.

Once again, I disagree with your assertion but, again, this topic is much wider in scope than Brexit.

 

5 hours ago, Woof999 said:

Power breeds corruption. It is human nature and it will not change. Those in power in Brussels will naturally seek more power. Whether the result is better for the bloc is not the driving force of those decisions. I am a strong believer that most choosing a career in politics are doing so for their own good, not the greater good. Perhaps I'm just getting more and more cynical as I get older.

Power breeds corruption in some individuals, not all. There are those in powerful positions everywhere (including Brussels) who seek to strengthen their position for mainly egotistical reasons. There are other individuals who operate mainly for altruistic purposes.

 

5 hours ago, Woof999 said:

 

If the EU was solely about a single market then there was no real need for the EU.

Disagree completely.

 

As I stated previously, the greater the commonality in standards and regulations - and as much of a 'level playing field' as possible - the more integrated, efficient and fairer the 'Single Market' will be.

 

5 hours ago, Woof999 said:

As mentioned before, a single market already existed.

A Common market existed. A Single Market did not. It is an important distinction.

 

5 hours ago, Woof999 said:

The EU's end game is a single republic with any meaningful power residing in a single federal government.

For some individuals and groups this is no doubt true but it is not the prevailing view and has very limited support within the member states themselves therefore, I doubt that this will happen anytime soon if ever.

 

5 hours ago, Woof999 said:

 

You cannot have a single republic without losing much if not all of your national identity.

Well, I suppose by definition if a nation ceases to exist then it cannot have  a national identity. 

 

5 hours ago, Woof999 said:

This I am 100% against. The US tried it starting 250 years ago or so. The US is more divided now than at pretty much any other point in it's history. I can foresee the same for the EU. More and more unity breeding more and more division.

 I don't follow developments in the US as closely as I should but there certainly appears to be division. However, haven't there always been differences in values, norms and culture at a regional - if not state level - within the US, while at the same time the 50 states possessing a set of common core values, norms and culture? Moreover, I don't hear anything about individual states wanting to leave the union.

 

Having said all that, I don't really understand what relevance this has for the EU/ Europe?

 

5 hours ago, Woof999 said:

 

The Euro was a logical decision.

Agreed.

 

5 hours ago, Woof999 said:

For the UK it was a bridge too far

Agreed

 

5 hours ago, Woof999 said:

and, with due respect to the other founding members, the UK was allowed to keep the £.

I don't understand your point? 

 

5 hours ago, Woof999 said:

What if the next step was a single language? I can see that coming. What will that language be?

Really? How do you jump from a common currency to concluding that a common language will follow?

 

5 hours ago, Woof999 said:

I can't see the UK returning to the EU in my lifetime.

I guess that depends on how long you live for????. Hopefully, you will have a long life.

 

5 hours ago, Woof999 said:

I hope I am wrong.

So do I.

 

5 hours ago, Woof999 said:

There is too much bitterness.

Undoubtedly there is a lot of bitterness and division in the UK at the moment.

 

5 hours ago, Woof999 said:

The UK (again IMHO) made a mistake.

I agree.

 

5 hours ago, Woof999 said:

The EU will not allow the UK to undo that mistake without taking a huge Euro of flesh.

Imo the EU will almost certainly not allow the UK to rejoin on the same favourable terms which it had when it left.

[Sing_Sling]

12 hours ago, transam said:

Not the EU Oliver Twist countries, what one are you from......?  

You'll have to write in clear English to make sense.

[Sing_Sling]

11 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Did anyone ask the people in the EU if they want that the UK joins?

 

The resounding answer: Non, merçi, nein danke, no gracias, no grazie, ne dankje etc . . .  It'd be like allowing the neighbourhood vagant into the house

 

11 hours ago, david555 said:

And better stick to it ...... as i dont see U.K. accepting the Euro instead of the Pound ????

 

Yes, because that's what was most important and makes the - umm - intelligentsia happy - qed.

 

11 hours ago, transam said:

Absolutely..............

 

[SunnyinBangrak]

Keep having referenda until the globalists get their way. They only had 3 so far, hardly excessive

[transam]

2 hours ago, Sing_Sling said:

You'll have to write in clear English to make sense.

I did, but if you don't understand it, well, that's funny.............????

[Sing_Sling]

On 8/29/2023 at 12:15 AM, Woof999 said:

If the EU was reasonable then the majority of the UK voters wouldn't have voted to leave in the first place.

???? ???? ???? said with the logic of a five-year old

 

On 8/29/2023 at 2:40 PM, transam said:

I did, but if you don't understand it, well, that's funny.............????

Oh dear . . . keep trying.

[transam]

31 minutes ago, Sing_Sling said:

???? ???? ???? said with the logic of a five-year old

 

Oh dear . . . keep trying.

Pointless in your case.............????

[Sing_Sling]

On 8/30/2023 at 9:01 PM, transam said:

Pointless in your case.............????

Exactly, I have progressed from arguing like a five-year old many years ago.  You should try it. 

So, Brexit was a success, eh . . .  Pictures, moving ines, for you:
 

 

[transam]

14 minutes ago, Sing_Sling said:

Exactly, I have progressed from arguing like a five-year old many years ago.  You should try it. 

So, Brexit was a success, eh . . .  Pictures, moving ines, for you:
 

 

Glad to hear it, will be good for you, but me, don't think I am in the 5 year old bracket now....????

 

Brexit has not been completed yet, as far as I am a where, though I don't keep track of it now, though you smarting folk don't seem to have moved on yet.

 

As for the video, not interested, there have always been folk at the poor end, should see how folk lived when I was a kid.....

 

The two in your vid cover don't look destitute to me, one is even smiling..☺️

[Chomper Higgot]

On 8/28/2023 at 10:11 PM, Woof999 said:

As I wrote, I would have voted to remain, but I would still have strong reservations about what I would perceive as the negative.

 

I would word that as "the majority decision is necessary". With the EU you're either in for everything or you're not. This will tie in more with an answer to one of your other points below. It is only the best decision because there is little other choice.

 

 

The EU's purpose is far more than just a single market (in terms of a single trading market). The EEC already had that covered. A single market does not require unified immigration policies. The UK had already gone down that path of no return with immigration, most recently from the policies of the Labour party under Blair and Brown. The dream of creating a multi-cultural society was a disaster in the making right from the start and was, IMHO, done solely for political reasons rather than anything to do with bringing some Great back into GB.

 

We (the whole human race) do not mix well with others of (even slightly) differing views, religions, beliefs, habits, even dress sense. Britain was not becoming a multi-cultural society, it was becoming a small geography forcing differing societies to live even closer together than they were previously, without addressing much of what makes those societies different or why they are different. Those societies still do not particularly mix and they often do not tolerate. They don't even want to mix.

 

Power breeds corruption. It is human nature and it will not change. Those in power in Brussels will naturally seek more power. Whether the result is better for the bloc is not the driving force of those decisions. I am a strong believer that most choosing a career in politics are doing so for their own good, not the greater good. Perhaps I'm just getting more and more cynical as I get older.

 

If the EU was solely about a single market then there was no real need for the EU. As mentioned before, a single market already existed. The EU's end game is a single republic with any meaningful power residing in a single federal government. You cannot have a single republic without losing much if not all of your national identity. This I am 100% against. The US tried it starting 250 years ago or so. The US is more divided now than at pretty much any other point in it's history. I can foresee the same for the EU. More and more unity breeding more and more division.

 

The Euro was a logical decision. For the UK it was a bridge too far and, with due respect to the other founding members, the UK was allowed to keep the £. What if the next step was a single language? I can see that coming. What will that language be?

 

I can't see the UK returning to the EU in my lifetime. I hope I am wrong. There is too much bitterness. The UK (again IMHO) made a mistake. The EU will not allow the UK to undo that mistake without taking a huge Euro of flesh.

There was no ‘dream of creating a multi cultural society’.

 

The UK is a multi cultural society and has been for decades before the EU appeared.

 

 

[Woof999]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The UK is a multi cultural society and has been for decades before the EU appeared.

In a small geography within the country perhaps, but it was more multi-origin (my own term) rather than multi cultural.

 

Where I grew up there were a few Chinese, Indian and Pakistani immigrants. Apart from their skin colour being darker and most of them having stereotypical businesses (newsagents on a street corner or a take away) they lived their lives very similarly to me or anyone else that I knew. They were and continue to be as British as me.

 

Sure there were other areas that were very different, but this was not the norm. I would go to school and all I would hear is the same language in the same accent without exception.

 

A few years ago I collected my child from the same school that I used to attend. The majority of parents were speaking a foreign language and the few that spoke English were heavily accented. Multi cultural Britain today is significantly different than it was just a few decades ago, in my opinion.

[JonnyF]

On 8/28/2023 at 10:11 PM, Woof999 said:

As I wrote, I would have voted to remain, but I would still have strong reservations about what I would perceive as the negative.

 

I would word that as "the majority decision is necessary". With the EU you're either in for everything or you're not. This will tie in more with an answer to one of your other points below. It is only the best decision because there is little other choice.

 

 

The EU's purpose is far more than just a single market (in terms of a single trading market). The EEC already had that covered. A single market does not require unified immigration policies. The UK had already gone down that path of no return with immigration, most recently from the policies of the Labour party under Blair and Brown. The dream of creating a multi-cultural society was a disaster in the making right from the start and was, IMHO, done solely for political reasons rather than anything to do with bringing some Great back into GB.

 

We (the whole human race) do not mix well with others of (even slightly) differing views, religions, beliefs, habits, even dress sense. Britain was not becoming a multi-cultural society, it was becoming a small geography forcing differing societies to live even closer together than they were previously, without addressing much of what makes those societies different or why they are different. Those societies still do not particularly mix and they often do not tolerate. They don't even want to mix.

 

Power breeds corruption. It is human nature and it will not change. Those in power in Brussels will naturally seek more power. Whether the result is better for the bloc is not the driving force of those decisions. I am a strong believer that most choosing a career in politics are doing so for their own good, not the greater good. Perhaps I'm just getting more and more cynical as I get older.

 

If the EU was solely about a single market then there was no real need for the EU. As mentioned before, a single market already existed. The EU's end game is a single republic with any meaningful power residing in a single federal government. You cannot have a single republic without losing much if not all of your national identity. This I am 100% against. The US tried it starting 250 years ago or so. The US is more divided now than at pretty much any other point in it's history. I can foresee the same for the EU. More and more unity breeding more and more division.

 

The Euro was a logical decision. For the UK it was a bridge too far and, with due respect to the other founding members, the UK was allowed to keep the £. What if the next step was a single language? I can see that coming. What will that language be?

 

I can't see the UK returning to the EU in my lifetime. I hope I am wrong. There is too much bitterness. The UK (again IMHO) made a mistake. The EU will not allow the UK to undo that mistake without taking a huge Euro of flesh.

Good post. I agree with much of it but not the last paragraph. It was not a mistake, it was the correct decision.

 

But there is zero chance of us returning. The EU would indeed want a huge Euro of flesh to "punish" the UK for leaving in the first place. This would mean ditching the pound and getting a worse deal than we had before (which wasn't very good hence us leaving). This would never work as it would create huge resentment and bitterness, and as soon as we rejoined there would be an immediate campaign to leave again, and that is the last thing the EU wants.

 

So it's better for the Europhiles to just accept they lost and move on. In the meantime, the UK's next step should be to leave the ECHR. We can't have the UK's parliament being over-ruled by appointed judges in Strasbourg. It's anti-democratic.

 

Meanwhile the truth about the strength of UK economy is starting to leak out following all the lies during and even after Project Fear. 

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-66680188

 

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

3 minutes ago, Woof999 said:

In a small geography within the country perhaps, but it was more multi-origin (my own term) rather than multi cultural.

 

Where I grew up there were a few Chinese, Indian and Pakistani immigrants. Apart from their skin colour being darker and most of them having stereotypical businesses (newsagents on a street corner or a take away) they lived their lives very similarly to me or anyone else that I knew. They were and continue to be as British as me.

 

Sure there were other areas that were very different, but this was not the norm. I would go to school and all I would hear is the same language in the same accent without exception.

 

A few years ago I collected my child from the same school that I used to attend. The majority of parents were speaking a foreign language and the few that spoke English were heavily accented. Multi cultural Britain today is significantly different than it was just a few decades ago, in my opinion.

Immigrant communities have existed in the UK for centuries and have always spoken their own languages.

 

I was at a BBQ party last week, most of the twenty people attending were speaking Thai.

 

There’s nothing new in any of this.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

3 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Good post. I agree with much of it but not the last paragraph. It was not a mistake, it was the correct decision.

 

But there is zero chance of us returning. The EU would indeed want a huge Euro of flesh to "punish" the UK for leaving in the first place. This would mean ditching the pound and getting a worse deal than we had before (which wasn't very good hence us leaving). This would never work as it would create huge resentment and bitterness, and as soon as we rejoined there would be an immediate campaign to leave again, and that is the last thing the EU wants.

 

So it's better for the Europhiles to just accept they lost and move on. In the meantime, the UK's next step should be to leave the ECHR. We can't have the UK's parliament being over-ruled by appointed judges in Strasbourg. It's anti-democratic.

 

Meanwhile the truth about the strength of UK economy is starting to leak out following all the lies during and even after Project Fear. 

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-66680188

 

 

 

There’s no such thing as ‘zero chance’.

 

Your unsupported assertions of EU ‘punishing’ the UK is noted.

 

 

[JonnyF]

7 minutes ago, Woof999 said:

A few years ago I collected my child from the same school that I used to attend. The majority of parents were speaking a foreign language and the few that spoke English were heavily accented. Multi cultural Britain today is significantly different than it was just a few decades ago, in my opinion.

Anecdotal, yet as is so often the case, backed up by the figures.

 

In areas like London the trend is amplified.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_Kingdom#Ethnicity

 

 

Britain is by far more mutli-cultural now than before. Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing depends on your view of multi-culturalism but if the UK and the US are anything to go by, it's far from the sunlit uplands that Guardian readers would have us believe it is.

[JonnyF]

5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

There’s no such thing as ‘zero chance’.

 

Your unsupported assertions of EU ‘punishing’ the UK is noted.

 

 

No comment on the strength of the UK economy? Did you miss the link? ????

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-66680188

 

I seem to remember you were one of the biggest proponents of Project Fear. Would you like to admit the UK is performing better far, far than you predicted? (that's a rhetorical question BTW ????). 

 

Must be irritating to have been so wrong.

[youreavinalaff]

9 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Immigrant communities have existed in the UK for centuries and have always spoken their own languages.

 

I was at a BBQ party last week, most of the twenty people attending were speaking Thai.

 

There’s nothing new in any of this.

 

 

Unsubstantiated claims. Using personal experiences to prove a point. 

 

I thought doing so was against popular opinion. Oh well. Live and learn.

[JonnyF]

15 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Immigrant communities have existed in the UK for centuries and have always spoken their own languages.

 

I was at a BBQ party last week, most of the twenty people attending were speaking Thai.

 

There’s nothing new in any of this.

 

 

Well that settles the argument then. 

 

If you went to a party with some Thai friends (following your time in Thailand) then that settles all debate (assuming you didn't just make it up to prove a point of course). ????

 

Personal anecdotes are SOOOO reliable.

[positivevibes]

UK would be better off joining ASEAN!

 

Could be renamed ASEAUKN

[Woof999]

39 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Immigrant communities have existed in the UK for centuries and have always spoken their own languages.

 

I was at a BBQ party last week, most of the twenty people attending were speaking Thai.

 

There’s nothing new in any of this.

 

 

Did you live in the UK 30 years ago, 40, 50? If you did, whereabouts? If you cannot see a massive difference over that time then something is wrong (perhaps with me, but I don't think so).

 

On the wider topic, multi culturalism, to me, is much more than just differing cultures living within a closer proximity. It is about those differing cultures integrating, accepting, empathising, sharing and many other "ings". I've rarely seen that happen and I'm really not surprised. To directly push for it, force it through with laws and criticism of any opposition is, IMHO a huge mistake. That is the main reason that I wasn't oh so bothered about leaving the EU (although again I think it was a mistake). The UK's position on immigration and multi culturalism is now more in its own domain, so any blame also lies there.

 

We have no chance when the aliens finally arrive. We typically can't tolerate the same species from a few hundred miles away. How do you think we'll react to a different species from a few hundred light years away...?

[Chomper Higgot]

36 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

Unsubstantiated claims. Using personal experiences to prove a point. 

 

I thought doing so was against popular opinion. Oh well. Live and learn.

Here’s a link for you, enjoy:

 

https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2018/08/how-second-world-war-made-britain-multicultural