Originally Posted by Northumbrian:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the word 'Britain' derive from the Roman province of Britannia, so in effect they did create a British identity?

They may have named the island Britannia, but the people were here beforehand. The Romans didn't create the indigenous British people who went on to become a nation. Indeed, the Romans eventually left. Unlike the Normans there is no significant evidence of them interbreeding.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Gregory Lauder-Frost:
Well, everyone's perception of extreme is different. What is your solution for traitors? I suspect there are many members in the UKIP who differ in their views on a variety of subjects. But it seems to me that all objective policies will founder until we regain our national sovereignty.

I did suggest placing a creaking gibbet on every hilltop but I kind of went off the rails after Tom seemed to find it amusing.
[Rep]

If English history is examined what emerges is far from complimentary.

After the Romans went off the place went down hill until the Vikings came, and later the Normans brought a bit of life into the place.

Once again it took people from the Mainland to get the indigenous though by now mongrel population of the British Isles out of their mud huts and living a bit more than simply a hand to mouth existence.

It wasn’t until the Privateers, or more properly licensed thieves and murderers brought wealth in from The New World, that things improved and later the colonists who created the very thing that so many chinless wonders who now scream so hysterically against joining, a multinational state, who caused what would otherwise have remained an inconsequential set of Islands to be the principle state of a United States of Britain and incorporating India, much of Africa, the Far East, and so on, and as a result a dominant world power.

Achieved it should be noted not by anything beyond a ruthless disregard for what was actually other peoples property and an intent to get what could be got.

Today the Empire is long gone, we’re desperately in debt with no hope of repaying it, and we’re once again an inconsequential set of Islands, though now without the means to dominate anything and hopelessly overpopulated into the bargain.

Strange that given our history of succeeding as a part of the United States of Britain that was actually what we called our empire, people can’t see that even being a member of such a system is infinitely better than trying to fend on ones own, especially when one has NOTHING to fend with.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by The Bear:
If English history is examined what emerges is far from complimentary.

Unfortunately you don't appear to have examined it very closely.

Originally Posted by :
Once again it took people from the Mainland to get the indigenous though by now mongrel population of the British Isles out of their mud huts and living a bit more than simply a hand to mouth existence.

In what way were the peoples of these islands any more 'mongrel' than, say the 'Romans' or the Iberians, and exactly when did our ancestors live in mud huts?

Originally Posted by :
It wasn’t until the Privateers, or more properly licensed thieves and murderers brought wealth in from The New World, that things improved and later the colonists who created the very thing that so many chinless wonders who now scream so hysterically against joining, a multinational state, who caused what would otherwise have remained an inconsequential set of Islands to be the principle state of a United States of Britain and incorporating India, much of Africa, the Far East, and so on, and as a result a dominant world power.

Wouldn't you say that the Dutch did this even better than we did, and they didn't even live on an an inconsequential set of islands?

Originally Posted by :
Achieved it should be noted not by anything beyond a ruthless disregard for what was actually other peoples property and an intent to get what could be got.

While meanwhile, on the civilised Continent, we had the Spanish and Portuguese Inquisitions, The Massacre of St Bartholemew's Day, the suppression of the Netherlands Revolt, and later the 30 Years War, etc, etc...

Originally Posted by :
Today the Empire is long gone, we’re desperately in debt with no hope of repaying it, and we’re once again an inconsequential set of Islands,

Okay, so who are the successful people we should be emulating?

Originally Posted by :
hopelessly overpopulated into the bargain.

Now there I do agree with you.

Originally Posted by :
Strange that given our history of succeeding as a part of the United States of Britain that was actually what we called our empire, people can’t see that even being a member of such a system is infinitely better than trying to fend on ones own, especially when one has NOTHING to fend with.

Bullsh*t
[Rep]

Good grief The Bear has come out with some incredible utterances on this forum, but denying the existence of the Celts and the Anglo-Saxons and their culture takes the biscuit!:-)
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Gregory Lauder-Frost:
Not quite. There was a population here prior to their arrival.

They created the concept of a British form of administration.
Bit like there was a population in Australia prior to the arrival of the British, but they didn't create an Australian administrative concept.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Northumbrian:
They created the concept of a British form of administration.
Bit like there was a population in Australia prior to the arrival of the British, but they didn't create an Australian administrative concept.

An administration does not make a nation. Rather the other way round. I think you'd be hard pressed to demonstrate a mass of surviving administration in this country which is continuous from Roman times.
[Rep]

I believe it would be impossible to justify any claim that beyond a tiny minority of people in Britain today could provide links to Roman Britain, and those that could would also find so much inbreeding that it would amaze them.

It could also account for more than a few of the so called eccentricities that in other circumstances would be given the correct name, mental instability.

Funny how those so keen to trace ancestral roots to times in the distant past seem so unwilling to accept the mud grubbing hand to mouth lives lived by their ancestors during the so called “Dark Ages” and beyond.

The other amusing thing is the arrogant assumption that they even know with any degree of absolute certainty who there natural father REALLY was short of having a DNA est performed!

For any one of us the probability of the man we THINK was our father is always short of one, look back over even a half dozen generations and the probability of the man we THINK was our natural great grand grand grand father being who we think is rather low!

In any case what matters is Britain today. Britain is a truly Multi Ethnic nation and all the better for it.

It’s here, it’s now, and there’s NOTHING that those who don’t like the situation can do about it, and a good thing too.
[Rep]

[quote=The Bear;533713]: "In any case what matters is Britain today. Britain is a truly Multi Ethnic nation and all the better for it."

That is rubbish and only someone who does not read the daily newspapers or have a full knowledge of the state of Britain today would make such a crass statement as "better for it". Why is it that people permit political dogmas to over-ride common sense?

According to the 2001 Census return 91% of the population were "White" (presumably that means Caucasians) so really we may be down but we're not out yet.

In 1970 at the Westminster Central hall there was a packed "Halt Immigration Now" public meeting. In the 1980s Harvey Proctor, then a Conservative Party MP, publicly called for the repatriation of at least 50,000 immigrants a year from Britain. Its not as though people have not been saying nothing for decades. We seem to be plagued by the head-in-the-sand brigade.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by :
If English history is examined what emerges is far from complimentary.

After the Romans went off the place went down hill until the Vikings came, and later the Normans brought a bit of life into the place.

Evidently Bear you know very little about the so called Dark Ages. That is a shame because although it was an incredibly brutal period (which hampered progress) it was one of of new discovery and learning as well.

Such fantastic pieces of art and literature such as the Lindisfarne Gospel, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle and Bedes History of the English people are examples of culture and art surviving in the most uncertain of times.
Many of the basics of English common law where created during the Anglo-Saxon period as well as our systems of land division.
The Dark Ages saw the exploration of Iceland and Greenland as well as potential settlements in Vinland by the Norse.
As the Dark Ages came to a close Norman engineering and archtitecture was coming into its own and laid the base for the fantastic cathedrals and castles we now see in England.

Ea of dune
[Rep]