WATCH: David Starkey hits out at mass migration
GB NEWS
風蕭蕭_Frank
以文會友
正文
Dr David Starkey: 'Mass migration has destroyed the Britain I knew’
https://www.gbnews.com/news/david-starkey-mass-migration-britain-latest-labour-tony-blair
By Ben Chapman 08/08/2024Migration surged in the years of Tony Blair
Award-winning historian Dr David Starkey has bemoaned the current state of play in Britain, claiming it has been “destroyed” by Tony Blair and New Labour.
He joined Steve Edginton on GB News to discuss the former PM’s legacy, and Starkey feels many elements of Blair’s 10-year tenure are still evident today.
Particularly migration, which surged in the Blair years after he took office in 1997.
Starkey said the policy model of immigration has destroyed the UK’s fabric as he furiously ranted about New Labour.
David Starkey hit out at Tony Blair
PA / GB NEWS
“The Britain I grew up in was the most peaceful, the most gentle, homogenous society that has ever existed”, he said.
“We did not need identity cards. We had extraordinarily low levels of crime. We had such high levels of public trust.
LATEST DEVELOPMENTS
“That has been destroyed. It has been deliberately destroyed by Tony Blair and New Labour with this absurd notion they were going to force us to become multi-ethnic for good.
“They were going to rub the noses of the whites and the dirt. We’ve got to understand that it is an act of such inconceivable national self-harm.”
Starkey is concerned that Britain, now being led by a Labour Government for the first time since the Blair years, may undergo another transition.
“Keir Starmer represents an intensely authoritarian streak”, he said.
Keir Starmer's Labour won the election with more than 400 seats POOL
“People get very confused because Starmer was a human rights lawyer. They think he’s sort of, all soft and cuddly.
“Human rights are really nice, aren’t they? But what we’ve got to remember is that the sort of human rights that Starmer represents are the rights of only minorities.
“This is the terrifying thing. Democracy has been stood on its head. Democracy means the rule of the majority.
“It’s not completely inverted to mean the protection of every exotic minority you can think of against the majority.”
David Starkey joined Steve Edginton on GB News
tarmer has been under pressure to shed light on how Labour intends on going about stopping perilous trips across the Channel made by illegal migrants.
The Prime Minister said throughout the election campaign his Government will seek to “smash the gangs”.
The previous Government’s idea to send migrants to Rwanda was scrapped within hours of Starmer taking office after he continually branded it a “gimmick”.
A new Border Security Command is set to come into force with the Government promising millions of pounds in funding.
A Home Office spokesperson said: "We all want to see an end to the dangerous small boat crossings, which are undermining border security and putting lives at risk.
"The new Government is taking steps to boost our border security, setting up a new Border Security Command which will bring together our intelligence and enforcement agencies, equipped with new counter-terror-style powers and hundreds of personnel stationed in the UK and overseas, to smash the criminal smuggling gangs making millions in profit."
英國人如何看待大衛·斯塔基 (David Starkey) 所說的“左派執意改寫曆史，將英國描繪成一個多種族、移民的國家，而我們以前從未有過如此大規模的移民”？
伊恩·塔利 (Ian Tully)
鄧迪大學曆史與政治學碩士 (1975 年畢業) 11 個月
當然，我們以前也有大規模的移民，但移民來自愛爾蘭。所有適用於後來移民的刻板印象也適用於愛爾蘭人，1603 年後早期移民到英格蘭的蘇格蘭人也遭遇了同樣的刻板印象，但規模較小。愛爾蘭人在利物浦、格拉斯哥和倫敦等大城市形成了貧民窟。與後來的移民一樣，這些移民並非完全自願，而部分原因是排斥和貧困。在兩次世界大戰期間，蘇格蘭建造市政住房時，至少有一項蓄意的種族/宗教分裂政策來安置人們。
融合遇到了與我們今天遇到的完全相同的障礙，首先是宗教。愛爾蘭人主要信奉羅馬天主教，新教和羅馬天主教都反對“通婚”，羅馬天主教尤其堅持所有孩子都必須在自己的信仰下長大。這與穆斯林和基督徒之間存在的障礙非常相似。19 世紀末，相當大規模的猶太人移民也往往存在於貧民窟，當時，他們的異國情調、意第緒語、宗族主義等都引起了人們的關注。那些繁榮起來的人搬到了郊區，但通常彼此之間距離不遠，以便靠近猶太教堂。即使是在社會最高層，即羅斯柴爾德家族，他們也遭到歧視和冷落。西印度黑人與其他人種之間的通婚率遠遠高於亞洲人與其他人種之間的通婚率，這主要是由於宗教原因。我們在許多國家看到，社區更多地是由宗教而不是種族來定義的，盡管兩者經常重疊。在馬來西亞，你不會發現很多跨種族婚姻，因為那裏很少有華裔或南印度穆斯林。
愛爾蘭移民對幾個城市的方言產生了顯著影響，特別是利物浦和格拉斯哥。沒有愛爾蘭人，利物浦就不會存在。到達幾代人之後，仍然有愛爾蘭血統的人認為自己是愛爾蘭人而不是英國人。
這兩個移民群體都是白人，這產生了影響，並至少使他們能夠逃離貧民窟，他們最終可以融入其中，盡管蘇格蘭仍然存在宗派歧視。就像 19 世紀的德國隱形移民、法國大革命的難民或早期的胡格諾派教徒一樣，他們沒有明顯的特征。隨著時間的推移，我懷疑英國的白人身份將隻是一個連續體的一部分，我們曾經將北歐膚色與地中海膚色區分開來，但現在幾乎沒有人這樣做了，很難說哪種種族的組合創造了我們在英國看到的灰白色品種。伊朗人看起來比南歐人蒼白得多。一起長大的孩子很少會這樣，而會更多地分享他們共同的東西。伯明翰等地存在的學校隔離現象將成為最大的障礙，就像蘇格蘭和北愛爾蘭的隔離學校係統一樣。
戰後移民規模確實比諾曼征服以來的任何移民都更大、更具變革性，假裝事實並非如此是無稽之談。同時，否認早期移民的影響，甚至假裝它們沒有發生也同樣愚蠢，這就像否認普金、戴利厄斯或布魯內爾等移民之子的出身，或否認德國移民查爾斯·哈萊，甚至否認鮑裏斯·約翰遜的出身。移民對我們的文化做出了不成比例的貢獻，剩下的很多東西都是從國外借鑒而來的（從亨德爾到埃爾加，英國音樂以德國模式為主）。
What do Brits think of David Starkey saying “There is a determined effort by the left to rewrite history and to portray Britain as always having been multiracial and as a nation of immigrants, when we have never had immigration at this scale before”?
Ian Tully
MA in History & Political Science, University of Dundee (Graduated 1975)11mo
We have, of course, had immigration on a large scale before, but it was from Ireland. All the same stereotypes applied to later migrants were also applied to the Irish, and on a lesser scale to earlier Scottish migrants to England after 1603. The Irish formed ghettos in major cities like Liverpool, Glasgow and London. As with later migrations these were not entirely voluntary but in part due to exclusion and poverty. When Council Housing estates were being built in the interwar years in Scotland at least there was a deliberate policy of ethnic / religious division in housing people.
Integration hit exactly the same barriers as we meet today, first and foremost religion. The Irish were mainly Roman Catholic, both the Protestant and the Roman Catholic Churches opposed “marrying out” and the Roman Catholic especially insisted that any children were raised in their Faith. Very much the same barrier that exists now between Muslims and Christians. The fairly large Jewish migration at the end of the 19th century also tended to exist in ghettos, much was made at the time of their exoticism, their Yiddish language, their clannishness etc. Those that flourished moved out to the suburbs but often still not far from one another to be close to a synagogue. Even at the highest levels of Society i.e. the Rothschilds they met with discrimination and snubs. Intermarriage between people of West Indian Black origin and others is much higher than between those of Asian origin and others largely because of religion. We see in many countries that communities are defined more by their religions than by their ethnicity, although the two often overlap. You won’t find many inter-ethnic marriages in Malaysia because there are few Chinese or South Indian Muslims.
The Irish migration had a noted effect on the dialects of several cities particularly Liverpool and Glasgow. Without the Irish Scouse would not exist. Several generations after arriving there were still people of Irish descent who thought of themselves as Irish and not English.
What made a difference, and enabled at least some escape from the ghetto was that both these migrant groups were White, they could eventually blend in, although pockets of Sectarian discrimination still linger in Scotland. Like the invisible German 19th century migrants, the refugees of the French Revolution or the earlier Huguenots they had no giveaway distinctive features. As time goes on I suspect that the Whiteness of Britain will only be part of a continuum, we once distinguished sharply between north European colouring and that of the Mediterranean but hardly anyone does any more and it is hard to tell which combination of ethnicities create the off-white varieties we have in the UK. An Iranian can look much paler than a southern European. Kids growing up together make less of such things and more of what they share. It will be the ghettoisation of schools, which exists in places like Birmingham that will be the greatest hindrance as it has been with the segregated schooling systems in Scotland and Northern Ireland.
It is certainly true that the post-War migration was on a bigger and more transformative scale than anything we had seen since the Norman Conquest and to pretend otherwise is nonsense. At the same time to deny the impact of earlier migrations, or even to pretend they didn’t happen is equally foolish, it would be to deny the origins of Pugin, Delius or Brunel for example, the sons of immigrants, or Charles Hallé a German migrant, or even Boris Johnson. Migrants have made a disproportionate contribution to our culture, and a lot of what is left was borrowed from abroad (from Handel to Elgar British music was dominated by German models).
評論
目前還沒有任何評論
登錄後才可評論.
