[flagged]
Eh? What, precisely, about the E.U. refugee policy is just “too extreme”? Which aspect of it?
By the way, outside the hard right there’s little evidence that it was a big deal for Brexit voters, who tended to be more concerned with inter-EU migration and/or tabloid fluff (ie the EU’s sinister plot to ban kettles and jam).
Not proveable, relevant or helpful
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Happiness_Report#2019_re...
Brexit is all about English (not British) nationalism.
And you could try persuading a Welshman that Wales has been part of England for almost a thousand years now, so can they please give up any pretence at being a separate country? but you won't get far.
But England dreamed of Empire and submerged itself into Britain completely. In the wake of Scottish and Welsh nationalism and independence votes, England is emerging again. And if England isn't going to be part of its own Empire, then its not going to be part of anyone else's either.
Brexit is all about English nationalism (not British nationalism, because that's dying - except in Northern Ireland).
Sure. But where else have you lived?
I'd argue the UK both has a terrible problem with racism and xenophobia, but is also one of the least racist and xenophobic countries in the world. Both the Chancellor and the Mayor of London are brown men with Muslim roots, we had a Jewish prime minister in the 1800s, nearly 15% of the population were born abroad, and London is France's 6th biggest city.
Australia is ashamed of how racist it is.
SE Asia is blatantly racist and sees nothing wrong with that.
The USA isn't racist per se - it's just that race is a major factor in everything.
the UK is pretty non-racist as countries go.
Doesn't that make it racist per se? I mean if the only way you're going to hear your accent and see faces like yours on tv is to listen to separately maintained tv channels, then you have apartheid, defacto or otherwise. If you have congressional divisions deliberately drawn to ensure that a person of a certain race has a viable chance of getting elected, you have a dejure apartheid. The moment you have "separate but equal", you have racism. If Americans were interested in fair equal representation for all American citizens, they could do it. But they refuse. Because racism is a big factor in everything.
I have liberal friends who would be horrified at the thought that they were being racist. But they do factor race into decisions, usually trying to be positive about it.
I don't understand it. I'm fascinated by it.
Sorry, but other than inequity and bias, I have barely have a finger nail grasp of what that even means. But I am working on it.
As a Johnny foreigner, who has lived across the UK and currently is in the north east, I wholeheartedly disagree.
As to relative degrees of integration, I don't know how you'd measure it, but the UK has its own serious struggles on that front.
That is, unfortunately, still far away from everyone.
And until we live in a society that separates us from them, we will not be able to achieve that.
Rural Wales has always seemed a bit racially non-diverse with the resulting odd views that come from that.
Come to Yorkshire. Integrated is the last word I'd use to describe Bradford, Huddersfield, Dewsbury...
I wonder what the demographic of Skirtcoat Green are compared to the western part of the town. It’s my impression that the small Asian communities live in certain parts and there is not much of a mix.