Our Lord, J.C.

[Idaho]

You completely missed the bit where I said "for a certain value of British", or perhaps it just doesn't fit your pre-conceived notions of who I am.

Corbyn is a Republican who joined the Privy Council but failed to actually meet the Queen because he was "busy" - just another example of how he is "British-hating", from a certain perspective. This is, at his core, a man who openly despises parts of the British political settlement and British traditions, you are entitled to think those particular traditions are unimportant but others are equally entitled to be offended.

Cameron's speech can be miss-interpreted, yes, it is even written to be misinterpreted, which betrays a certain cynicism, but at the same time Cameron's opponents have misinterpreted it in exactly the same way as some of the people in that conference hall did - and were likely meant to.

What Cameron ACTUALLY said was that Bin Laden's death was not a tragedy and it was not comparable to 9/11 - Corbyn has said it was a tragedy and made the direct comparison to 9/11.

Beskar then posted something titled "Lies vs Laws" when, in fact, Cameron never lied.

So - how dare you call me "repugnant" for seeing Corbyn as anti-British, given that you have so little regard for our institutions that you refuse to vote OR run for office. Presumably you agree with the Shadow Chancellor and "Insurrection" otherwise known as "direct action" is a legitimate alternative to the ballot box in this country.

I surely hope not.

This country is a work in progress. It is a different place to what it was 10, 25, 50, 100 or 500 years ago. It will be different again in another 50 years. Conservatives believe that the country should be stuck in some half remembered/half made up past. I hope that it is totally different in 50 years. Unrecognisable even.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

This country is a work in progress. It is a different place to what it was 10, 25, 50, 100 or 500 years ago. It will be different again in another 50 years. Conservatives believe that the country should be stuck in some half remembered/half made up past. I hope that it is totally different in 50 years. Unrecognisable even.

No, Conservative believe in the natural development of society, and sometimes in applying the breaks when change is traumatic - this has been the case since at least Disraeli. What Conservatives do not believe in is change for the sake of change. It's not quite fair to say that this is what the Left believes but I think it is fair to say they believe the country MUST ALWAYS change.

That's rather what you said.

I grew up in a small hamlet and went to school in a small town called Torrington, you may have been there. On balance it's a nice place but since the glove-making industry collapsed it's had very little going for it and this has got worse since the dairy closed and the meat-packing plant burned down. Even so, I don't think the down needs to change - it doesn't need 50 Muslim immigrant families transplanted in to upset the 99.9% white and nominally Christian population, for example, that would just make everyone unhappy - including the transplanted. What it could do with is some money pumped into the hospital and some form of local industry to give people jobs.

To suggest the country is unrecognisable in 50 years is to say that you want me to have no recognisable country to live in - I'll be 78 and if I can't still go to the pub for a decent pint of ale or go to the Cathedral for carols at Christmas what am I going to do as I slip into my dotage?

[Brenus]

"I know you can type proper English, start using it instead of making yourself harder to understand with all these non-sequiters." What did you fail to understand?

[Idaho]

No, Conservative believe in the natural development of society, and sometimes in applying the breaks when change is traumatic - this has been the case since at least Disraeli. What Conservatives do not believe in is change for the sake of change. It's not quite fair to say that this is what the Left believes but I think it is fair to say they believe the country MUST ALWAYS change.

That's rather what you said.

I grew up in a small hamlet and went to school in a small town called Torrington, you may have been there. On balance it's a nice place but since the glove-making industry collapsed it's had very little going for it and this has got worse since the dairy closed and the meat-packing plant burned down. Even so, I don't think the down needs to change - it doesn't need 50 Muslim immigrant families transplanted in to upset the 99.9% white and nominally Christian population, for example, that would just make everyone unhappy - including the transplanted. What it could do with is some money pumped into the hospital and some form of local industry to give people jobs.

To suggest the country is unrecognisable in 50 years is to say that you want me to have no recognisable country to live in - I'll be 78 and if I can't still go to the pub for a decent pint of ale or go to the Cathedral for carols at Christmas what am I going to do as I slip into my dotage?

It MUST always change. It is in the very nature of society to do so. Perhaps there have been times where a government had tried to hold society in stasis - Tokugawa shogunate maybe - but even that created a society vastly different to the one it started with. And societies held in stasis tend to have great pent up stresses that can produce catastrophic results - Iraq is a good example.

There is no reason why there would be an Islamic ghetto in Torrington (yes I do know it). As with all ukip support, the greatest anxiety about the influx of foreigners are in areas with the least incidence of such influxes. Places where new immigrants frequently come are largely relaxed about such things. Why is that?

[rory_20_uk]

It MUST always change. It is in the very nature of society to do so. Perhaps there have been times where a government had tried to hold society in stasis - Tokugawa shogunate maybe - but even that created a society vastly different to the one it started with. And societies held in stasis tend to have great pent up stresses that can produce catastrophic results - Iraq is a good example.

There is no reason why there would be an Islamic ghetto in Torrington (yes I do know it). As with all ukip support, the greatest anxiety about the influx of foreigners are in areas with the least incidence of such influxes. Places where new immigrants frequently come are largely relaxed about such things. Why is that?

Using Iraq as an example is inherently flawed as we do not know without the stasis the problems would not have occurred earlier - is it that the stasis that made them hate each other or their hatred was only kept in check by the stasis? I don't know, but given that Sunnis refer to Shi'ia as apostates doesn't bode well.

I have no problem with a system similar to Australia in place where the numbers and the quality are both assessed. I have no problem with economic migrants as long as we are clear when they are no longer required they return to origin - similar to expats elsewhere in the world.

I do have a problem when we have families in the UK who are British who view the UK as "the enemy" (heard described on the Right Wing BBC Radio 4).

The last case is when people don't want to integrate - a key part of change that both the hosts as well as the immigrants change and meld together and generally this occurs over time, and yes generally quite well.

Are we alone in thinking a massive influx of persons is not desirable? Erm, no - almost all countries on the planet share this outlook.

[Gilrandir]

I do have a problem when we have families in the UK who are British who view the UK as "the enemy" (heard described on the Right Wing BBC Radio 4).

This is not a problem. The problem will start (as it did in Ukraine) when they will call for a foreign leader to bring in his army.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

It MUST always change. It is in the very nature of society to do so. Perhaps there have been times where a government had tried to hold society in stasis - Tokugawa shogunate maybe - but even that created a society vastly different to the one it started with. And societies held in stasis tend to have great pent up stresses that can produce catastrophic results - Iraq is a good example.

There's a difference between holding something in stasis and forcing change - one example of forcing a change would be Iraq. We not only removed Saddam we completely obliterated the State and tried to rebuild it.

There is no reason why there would be an Islamic ghetto in Torrington (yes I do know it). As with all ukip support, the greatest anxiety about the influx of foreigners are in areas with the least incidence of such influxes. Places where new immigrants frequently come are largely relaxed about such things. Why is that?

Funny, my sister's English teacher - from Portsmouth - once told her class it was easier to be racist in Torrington because everybody is white and English. I don't think there's really anyone who is anti-immigrant in Torrington, though the one Muslim family we had that moved in left after a year because they couldn't fit in. Torrington hasn't really change much in the last fifty years vs how much it has changed in the last five since they opened a Lidl.

The perspective that society "must" change is a modern one, something that has been true for the last two hundred years but prior to that change was so slow it usually could not be measured in one lifetime.

[Idaho]

As you know, in Exeter, lots of the taxi drivers are Afghans. I asked one why he liked living in Exeter. "Nice schools, near the seaside, a good place for families" was his answer. Exactly the same reason I moved here. He didn't do it to initiate global jihad any more than I moved here to convert the populous to humanist anarcho-syndicalism.

The issue I have with stating that people need to conform and fit in - is that *I* don't want to conform and fit in. I want to exist with my own culture and values. Not those of the Tory, curtain twitching majority in this country.

[rory_20_uk]

Bless! You do fit in. You really do.

I know you think your views are oh so extreme and edgy but I view you as completely fitting in.

You speak English, you follow the laws of the country, your dress is within the wide social norms - I'm sure I could go on for some time.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

As you know, in Exeter, lots of the taxi drivers are Afghans. I asked one why he liked living in Exeter. "Nice schools, near the seaside, a good place for families" was his answer. Exactly the same reason I moved here. He didn't do it to initiate global jihad any more than I moved here to convert the populous to humanist anarcho-syndicalism.

The issue I have with stating that people need to conform and fit in - is that *I* don't want to conform and fit in. I want to exist with my own culture and values. Not those of the Tory, curtain twitching majority in this country.

And yet, you moved here for the same reason as any anyone else would - and so did the Afghan taxi driver. So he's well integrated and so are you.

[Idaho]

I'm not edgy or extreme. Never have been. I just reject a standardised concept of Englishness.