Suella Braverman a disgrace to humanity

The problem I have is that Reform is both regressive and hypocritical.
You cannot try and use traditional concepts of nation state to your advantage, but simultaneously take donations from crypto currency billionaires.

The nation state as we knew it in the last century, including the control it had, has declined, significantly due to globalisation.

You have to redefine yourself successfully in the 21st century, not look back to the last century. It is just not going to work, as the modern world is navigating the decline of the powers of the nation state, the rise of superpowers and globalisation, the lack of control over moneys, the new modern warfare etc…

OK I did not put anything offensive just mentioned one of the supposedly banned words.

@quantumbutterfly - mentioned NATION STATES.
The decline of the nation state is very very real and the harping back to concepts of nation state based on ethnicity is not going to work in the 21 century, in my opinion.
You have to redefine yourself as a “country” in the 21st century. I really don’t see the point at harping back to the 18th century on ancestry in the 21 century.
It is an increasingly globalised world, modern war far has changed, nation states have lost control over capital and people. That is the world we find ourselves in. You cannot just ignore it.

You don't get to decide. You may want that to happen but it doesn’t make it true or mean it is going to happen. I am not going to throw away my ancestry to suit globalists and migrants who have rocked up on our shores in the last 70 years.

What is the difference between a nation state and a country in your view?

I think the level of power @quantumbutterfly - the country still has borders etc, but the concept of “nation” and this whole thing about sharing a common culture harping back 100 years etc clearly is not going to work in the 21st century.
There is also a current very very clear generational divide. Which I am more worried about than the decline of the nation state.

Well quite

Realistically though, the world really is a more and more global place and people are becoming more and more mixed because of it. And humanity has to look at the bits that unify them - let’s say a respect for rule of law and democracy - and not the bits that divide them. That is if you want to be a successful country in the 21st century.

I have no issue with people identifying by ethnicity, but when a country starts making policy based on ethnicity and colour, you're in deep trouble.

When you travel, do you notice and appreciate the differences in language and culture between countries? Would you prefer that they were homogenous? Would you like China to be more like Japan, or Africa to be more like Europe, or vice versa?
We give and take influences from all over but still retain an essence of what was there originally surely.

“When you travel, do you notice and appreciate the differences in language and culture between countries? Would you prefer that they were homogenous? Would you like China to be more like Japan, or Africa to be more like Europe, or vice versa?
We give and take influences from all over but still retain an essence of what was there originally surely.”

@quantumbutterfly - I think I have been noticing rapid change more than anything else to be honest. Especially in countries like India or China. I have noticed how teens everywhere seem to follow similar fashion and consume similar content. Obviously languages will remain different and nobody can change history.

However, my 4 DC grew up in London in a very mixed and international environment so I really do not think their generation of London kids is going to recognise any type of quinessentially English stereotypes that Reform intends to thrust upon them. It is just not on their radar, considered totally out of date and unfashionable. It is a bit like they grin and bear it when some of their grandparents start harping on about racist notions.

I think we need to build a country for the future, not the past I am afraid. And my kids have grown up hearing about how wronged the Windrush generation was and catching the Windrush line regularly so they aren’t going to be reacting well to anyone telling them exactly who is English and who is not and what genes define it and exactly how many years you are meant to be looking back (whether 70, 200, 300 or a 1000). It is frankly ridiculous. Honestly I think they would be pretty angry if anyone suggested someone with a Windrush grandparent who came over to serve the Welfare State last century is somehow not entitled to feel as fully English or not, as they choose.

No one is telling your kids or anyone exactly who is English and who is not and what genes define it or how many years you are meant to go back.

What Suella Braverman said on Question Time is: “I’ve always considered myself British, of Asian ethnicity, and that’s never been something that I would question. Of course I’m not English. I’m not an English person – I am of Asian origin.”

Notice the words she used - she considers herself to be British of Asian ethnicity rather than English.

If you kids grew up in a very mixed and international environment in London, I expect they are worldly enough to recognise that it's ok for people to self identify as British or Asian or English - up to them!

@Twiglets1 - I don’t agree. My kids and their friends grew up in ENGLAND. Not Scotland, not Wales and not NI. So they feel English, most of them and in fact they probably mostly feel like Londoners anyway.
There is no need to make this massive distinction between British and English. It is nonsense.

What? That doesn’t make sense to me. I’m English, but surely if you’re Welsh, Scottish or N Irish there’s a massive distinction. No wonder they get pissed off.

In your opinion.

In fact I also grew up in a multicultural part of London and attended a comprehensive school with people from different ethnicities. Perhaps not that wildly different from your children's schools. But I consider myself English as well as British.

Just because someone has a different opinion or sense of self identity than you it doesn't make them wrong. Let alone a "disgrace to humanity" re the allegation against Ms Braverman.

But it’s personal and not every woman will feel the same way. It’s madness to vilify anyone over this.

I've heard it all now. Having English ancestry is unfashionable. We really are in a lot of trouble as a country. Whether you like it or not there are a group of people called the English (We reside in the Shires now). We are happy for people to live here and JOIN in with us and be culturally English but you cannot deny us our ethnicity hth.

I don’t like Braverman, but no need for all this over egged hyperbole. She just expressed a view, that probably won’t be implemented. 🤷‍♀️

We are happy for people to live here and JOIN in with us and be culturally English but you cannot deny us our ethnicity hth.

You're allowed to be English. Of course you are. But this para of your does suggest that people can only come over here if they abandon their own culture to be English. I hope that isn't what you meant.

The Windrush is a stream that runs through Bourton on the Water, not too far from Hawkestone brewery. It's very olde English.

Nice combo of old & new England.don't ya think.

No @Kingfisherfree10 - it is the English stereotypes and imposing them on others that are out of fashion!
Maybe Reform need to get out there and actually canvas some young people and ask them what they think!
A lot of the kids I am talking about have a lot of different influences and are actively choosing to feel English. Given the falling birthrate, we should be grateful not the opposite. And they aren’t denying anyone their “ancestry”.

But why should she?

If you interviewed someone from Taipei they might say they are not Chinese. We don’t expect them to add “…though others in my situation might feel Chinese and that is valid.”

We don’t expect JKR to add “…though others of course think it’s not their biology that makes them a woman, and that is valid.”

It just feels unnecessary.

It’s good if politicians give their views plainly without hedging.

The problem with this discussion is no one is able to tell me when one becomes ethnically English.

If the definition of being ethnically English is sharing a common historical origin in England, Cultural traditions and customs, speaking the English language and a shared national history and identity.

How many generations do have to be able to trace back in England?

How many traditions and customs do you need to follow?

It's all a bit silly in my opinion. It's one thing people ought to decide for themselves. But my issue with Suella take on it is, it very much feels like a dog whistle to all the racists out there who do believe you can't be Ethnically English if you're not white.

Suella or anyone are free to answer as they like but it’d be interesting if they countered back to FB or anyone who does that BBC type targeting with ‘why did you ask me not the male, white politician next to me?’

That’s the deal with any ethnicity though. They always have blurred edges. Same with languages. We don’t say English isn’t a language just because we can’t pinpoint the year it became one.

Also the idea that you can’t be ethnically English if you are black isn’t a racist one. It’s just a consequence of what ethnically means.

I can’t be ethnically Khmer, Twi or Sephardi. Could you be?

I think someone of any race can be English. We just use one word to mean two different things.