Read on Twitter
1. Aside from a few oddballs no one actually cares whether there is such a thing as an âindigenous Britâ or not but if you are going to make the argument that there is no such thing you need to follow through with your logic.......
2. & also make the argument that the idea that a people are indigenous to a piece of land is a nonsense for everyone outside of Africa, from which we homo Sapiens originally emerged, & that includes Aussie Aborigineâs, Kiwi Maories. & lapland Sami people.......
3. But the people who make the argument that there is no such thing as an indigenous Brit never follow through with their logic in this way. What are we to conclude about such arguments therefore?
4. We can conclude that the person making the argument is expressing a political & ideological value-laden preference for immigration & diversity maximalism
5. But trying to cloak this value-laden political & ideological preference in the neutral language of science.
6. So, in conclusion, its a fundamentally dishonest & disingenuous argument & this is why it gets peopleâs backs up. Not bc ppl care about whether there is such a thing as an indigenous Brit or not - if you are born/raised in this country youâre British irrespective of your DNA
7. But bc you are trying to elevate your own personal ideological preferences - which should always be subject to discussion & debate - above the realm of politics where you are not allowed to discuss & debate in any meaningful sense.
8. Ppl know this even if they struggle to articulate why they object to these kinds of arguments. I have a personal preference for diversity-gradualism & immigration restrictionism bc Im convinced thats the only way to maintain high levels of support for wealth redistribution
9. Ive been convinced of that ever since I read âThe British Dreamâ by David Goodhart & I wrote up my own take on this argument in this blog https://link.medium.com/4UUhgCVbgcb
10. I dont need & dont want to create a pseudo-historical myth of âBritishnessâ in order to bolster my argument.
11. I have a personal political preference for a robust welfare state & wealth redistribution to fund it. My argument therefore is pragmatic, this is how I believe you maintain high levels of public support for these things based on my reading on the subject matter.
12. You can disagree with that Goodhartian argument of mine if you want, that is your right, but at least its honest. The argument that diversity/immigration maximalism is inevitable/a law of history is not honest. Is BS basically.