The recent growth in family tracing services online have revealed to many just how complex our ancestry can be. “How did I come to have 2% of Japanese DNA?” etc. Politicians and pundits of the Right are prone to refer to multi-ethnicity as something damaging to society; and to immigration as if it were a virus introduced by dangerous lefties. What is the reality?
Most parts of the world, including these islands, have experienced over centuries invasion, occupation, acquisition by peoples from far away lands, leaving chromosomes of ancestors of whom most are unaware. We are all to some extent mongrels. Demographic studies show that hardly any people in Britain are of pure ethnicity. We have bred with incomers throughout the centuries.
Island communities; orthodox Jews; interbreeding sects may strive to and occasionally exclude the DNA of others, protecting what they see as valuable characteristics. These are insignificant in number and it would be a stretch to describe their exceptionalism as anything more than insularity.
The UK is a melting pot
There are those with a political agenda who would wish to be ‘pure’ but there never was an England with a homogeneous population. By the time the country was unified it had already been home for Angles, Celts, Danes, Jutes, Norse, Romans, Saxons, Vikings and more. Since then many others have followed through invasion, empire, slave-trade, wars and refuge.
Each new influx contributed in varying degrees to the genetic melting pot. The more the variety, the further diluted have become the origins. How many South Saxons could be identified among the current population of Sussex? If the English are in any way exceptional it may even be that our diversity is of a particular richness.
Even the monarch, supposed archetype of the nation, has as much German as ‘English’ blood. Even were improbable purity of ethnicity be found to exist, the inevitable attribution to it of superiority should be abhorrent. History tells us why, in the fates of Armenians, Jews and now Palestinians.
This mixing of ethnicities strengthens society through sharing genes and cultures. New arts, foods, language and fashions bring variety, colour and opportunities for all who are exposed to them. Incomers become familiar through contact instead of demonised through imagination. Differences are in plain sight, understandable, accepted, overcome.
Why should individuals who for perfectly good reasons have come to live in a country other than that of their birth be treated by those who were already there in any way other than as new neighbours, unless malign forces are at work?
We, like other historically welcoming nations combine qualities drawn from all over the world, blended into a functioning society. The history of how this has come about, it is true, contains shameful destruction of indigenous populations by colonisers so it is ironic that indigenous DNA may be the weakest strand in such nations. England was once the New World to Scandinavians. Ethnic nationalism, always wrong, is a baseless notion for all but the most isolated of peoples.
Claiming superiority through birth place is racism
To claim superiority for one’s own clan over others is mindless racism, morally and practically wrong, destructive of social cohesion. It is inimical to politics. The racist, usually claiming unjustified ethnicity, is concerned only with their own dominance, ready to offend with no concern for others’ rights, feelings or needs. Today, here as elsewhere this infection is spreading, often seated in communities largely devoid of the very immigration it decries.
In communities which are not thriving, it suits to blame others for this. Those who should shoulder responsibility divert it onto those who cannot fight back. They can do this thanks to the ownership of mass media by puppet-masters who like to sew division and hate.
Multicultural cities like Birmingham, London, Leicester and Manchester know better, thrive and reject this simplistic and immoral notion. Though predominantly white British (74%), even Sussex’s own Brighton is diverse and welcoming to newcomers. Contrast this with the reactions to foreign newcomers of communities in more rural parts of the county which lack the lived experience of overt diversity.
We non-racists and mongrels surely remain in the majority, so why let the racist bullies win? How can someone who purports to be not merely a leader but leader for a party supposed to support the underdog and the would-be worker pander to a minority of racist bigots?
Recent political treatment of people fleeing or experiencing repression or worse demonstrates this, but sadly there is little standing up for rights and needs, nor for furthering a cohesive, fair and diverse nation.
Why will the government not apply the law to racist speech rather than peaceful protest?
When will a government even try to lead society in the enriching direction of multiculturalism with equal rights?
CLICK HERE TO DONATE TO OUR CROWDFUNDER
HELP US BECOME STRONGER SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO DELIVER POWERFUL CITIZEN JOURNALISM!
