Welcome Mr smith, please include a supportive link in future. C.A.

If a white Englishman, whose ancestry on this Sceptered Isle goes back hundreds if not thousands of years, is British. And if a Muslim, who arrived from Somalia three years ago, is British. And if a Pakistani family, who don’t speak English and live in a closed-off enclave in Bradford, are British. And if Buddhist, Hindu, Sikh, this and that, from the world over, are British… what is the meaning of the word?

It doesn’t mean anything other than: lives in the UK and has been given some documentation.

We’ve seen the news stories. Made up example: “British man carries out knife rampage on a train in Berlin…” We don’t need to read any further. We know the perpetrator is most probably not English, Welsh, Scots or Irish.

The word British describes a person the way “I can’t believe it’s not butter” describes a traditional dairy product. More often than not these days, it seems to suggest the opposite of what is implied.

Anybody who questions the suitability of David Lammy to hold the highest offices of state will often hear the retort, “but he was the first black British man to do a masters at Harvard!” Talk about damning by faint praise, but putting that to one side, isn’t he Ghanaian? And that’s where his history and identity really lie, and why he calls for our country to send his country “reparations”.

Another example, one of very many these days, who have one foot in and one foot out. Multiple citizenships and passports, privileged above the actual natives of this country. If there is a future war and we must fight to the death to save what is ours, will these people be joining us on the battlefield? On the opposing sides perhaps, going by the way so many of them seem to think and behave. At best, they’ll scurry off to the safety of the other country until things have died down.

And yet, they are British, just as much as you or I! Although some prefer to signify their special status. “Pakistani-British” or “British-Pakistani” … two things that don’t really correspond, like an animal describing itself as a pig-horse, and where the British part only really refers to their preferred source of income.

It is worth nothing that, in the case of Muslims, the available evidence suggests that the younger people – the second and third generation immigrants – become more conservatively Islamic than their parents who first came here. That tells us something about the success, and possibility, of integration really. It is only ever possible in rare cases when a person is really determined and commits himself to the process, over a long period of time. And he will need something strong and attractive to direct his efforts at. And yet, we are to believe, with silly labels disguising naive and idiotic dreaming, that we can just absorb millions of foreigners over short spans of time and it’ll all work out fine. Because… British!

And so we see that this word has become something quite meaningless and even disgusting. It is fake. At least when it referred to those genuinely from the British Isles, it was at least sensible and carried sufficient value that it could usefully describe a person abroad. A term of convenience in effect, encompassing similar things. But when it basically means “literally anybody as long as they’ve fancied coming here and been given a piece of paper”, then it has become a joke.

I never refer to myself as British. I am English and I am from England. I am not Welsh or Scottish, and I certainly am not Indian and never will be. Interestingly, the new comers never like to use the word “English” when describing themselves. Because it carries a deeper meaning relating to ethnicity and identity. It is why the England flag attracts so much fear and hatred from the far left filth who run our country now. They hate us and what we are. They prefer to diminish us and any reference to our identity and history. Ethnic cleansing in effect, but in slow motion.

By way of stark contrast, in the civilized European nation of Finland, to be a Finn is to have an ethnicity on that basis alone. Finnish is classed as an ethnicity and recorded as such in their official statistics. Moreover, you cannot become a Finnish citizen unless at least one of your parents is a Finn in the ethnic sense. Doesn’t this way of doing things ring more true, make more sense? Where citizenship has a more exclusive basis referencing the country and the people who make it what it really is?

It acts as quite the contrast to what is going on here in England. It tells us something of the truly hateful way the indigenous people have been, and are being, treated. And yet, in the most Orwellian fashion and an example of gaslighting on a mass scale, to even mention this will be met with calls of racism, cancellation and imprisonment. What kind of insanity is that? We have somehow sleep walked into this monstrous tyranny, overseen by demented, horrible psychopaths. Facilitated, to some extent, by the fact that we had this pseudo multi-ethnic nation to begin with: Great Britain.

I don’t suppose it is the fault of a word that it has been captured and twisted by the filthy cretins who run or influence things here. But to me, “British” is now in the same devious stable as “liberal”, “multiculturalism”, “diversity”. It is a trick wielded by our enemies. I reject it, along with all the other words and expressions used as weapons by the Left. “Racism” being another one; doesn’t really mean anything and is used to scare and suppress people. I ignore it completely and assume the person using it is either being cynical or is a bit thick.

I am English, and this is England.

And I demand reparations on behalf of my people for the thankless historic burden they have laboured under in creating the modern world.

Nominated by Winston Smith.