Many attribute this approach to greed. I attribute it to a marginal revenue model.
When in George Orwell—social conservative, Little Englander, intellectual cosmopolitan—hopefully envisioned an English socialist revolution, he assured his readers and himself that such a mere political event, like all such past convulsions, would prove no more than a surface disturbance.
Rather, by its very nature—by its inherent logic, and by the ideology, aspirations, and world-historical forces from which it springs and to which it gives expression—it perforce obliterates that culture.
This essay attempts, in an admittedly eccentric way, to support that sweeping assertion. Academic studies on specialized aspects of this subject abound, but no synthetic analysis and comprehensive history has yet been published.
Successes and Failures of Post-war Immigration. Still, the first steps must be to define terms, and to place the argument in some historical context. The overwhelming weight of mass immigration has fallen on England, where fully 90 percent of immigrants to Britain have settled.
Because the British state has determined policies toward mass immigration, and because nearly all official figures and studies put immigration in a British context, in discussing policy and politics, I do the same. Because of that easy hegemony, the English have in many circumstances felt comfortable espousing a British identity when, strictly speaking, they mean an English one.
Anyone examining the impact of mass immigration on Britain who is at all attendant to right thinking opinion may well wonder what all the fuss is about.
Indeed, in a process that can best be described as Orwellian, advocates of mass immigration and multiculturalism in contemporary Britain have pushed a mantra that, by virtue of insistent repetition, has settled into common knowledge, slackly intoned by politicians, government ministers, and Guardian opinion writers and lazily slotted into White Papers, government leaflets, and advocacy group reports.
To buttress this article of faith, the bien pensant trot out Jute and Pict clan folk, Angle and Celt settlers, Roman legionnaires, and Norman barons in a know-it-all fashion to silence doubters.
That this idea is so dependent on population movements in the dim reaches of prehistory reveals both its weakness and its irrelevance: The tiny number of Roman and Norman conquerors were the thinnest veneer over the native population and have left virtually no genetic trace.
A final influx of Angles, Saxons, Frisians, and the like—which brought no more thanpeople over a period of several centuries—essentially completed the genetic mix. Thus, the evidence demonstrates the striking fact that, genetically, the population of Great Britain has been essentially frozen in time and place since at least the Dark Ages—indeed, settlement patterns from that period emerge clearly on contemporary genetic maps.
The idea of an English kingdom and of an English nation with its own land dates to the s. The nation has been at least partially politically unified since the Anglo-Saxon kings and fully and permanently so since the Conquest. Since then, the English have shared the experience of living together on an unconquered island.
Without doubt, the Normans enhanced and altered English culture—especially its architecture, the vocabulary of its language, and the manners and mores of the elite. But the Conquest was the last foreign admixture imposed on English culture.
For nearly the next thousand years, that culture would be left to itself to evolve in itself and to adopt foreign cultural influences wholly on its own terms.
From even before the Conquest, the social, economic, and family lives of the English have been secured, sustained, and shaped by a system of common law, a system always understood to be peculiarly their own.
William the Conqueror was accepted as sovereign because he vowed to uphold English law. Rooted, sedimentary, and organic—not devised and enacted—the common law worked its way into the English mentality. It established within the English a keen and jealous sense of the protections it afforded to the individual, and it engendered that distinguishing English attitude that has combined a veneration for proper authority with a hostility to, and disdain for, power.
But equally important is the profound way it shaped English social life, in both the wide and narrow sense of that term.Bloemy @ybthebest. THREAD: Remember Jonathan de Guzman? Played for Feyenoord, multiple other clubs, a while at Swansea, and was then bought by Napoli in after a fantastic World Cup with the.
Latest environmental news, features and updates. Pictures, video and more. The FIFA World Cup was the 21st FIFA World Cup, an international football tournament contested by the men's national teams of the member associations of FIFA once every four years.
It took place in Russia from 14 June to 15 July It was the first World Cup to be held in Eastern Europe, and the 11th time that it had been held in Europe. At an estimated cost of over $ billion, it.
Hindi Short Story “Jese ko Tesa”, “जैसे को तैसा” Hindi Laghu Katha for Class 9, Class 10 and Class Hindi Short Story “Lalchi Kutta”, “लालची कुत्ता” Hindi Laghu Katha for . The latest Technology news, reviews & opinion from The Age covering IT, Mobile, Internet, Social, Industrial & Research Technology and Science.
The culture of England is defined by the idiosyncratic cultural norms of England and the English people.. Owing to England's influential position within the United Kingdom it can sometimes be difficult to differentiate English culture from the culture of the United Kingdom as a whole.
However, since Anglo-Saxon times, England has had its own .