4 ms·

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/native https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/native Native quite literally means associated with birth. It does also mean something tha

by tovej 1y ago

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/native https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/native Native quite literally means associated with birth. It does also mean something that's lived somewhere since prehistoric times. If we use the first definition, then white brits and everyone else born in the UK are native. If we use the second definition then neolithic farmers with an Anatolian material culture are native. Since they were replaced there are no natives in that sense in the UK. But there is no interpretation where white brits are native and second generation immigrants aren't.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
throwawaypath 1y ago
>Native quite literally means associated with birth. Yes, and the only current ethnic group birthed in England are the English. British Asians derive their ancestry from Asia, the ethnic group is not native to, nor born from England. They're non-indigenous to the UK/Europe. You inadvertantly proved my point. QED. >If we use the first definition, then white brits and everyone else born in the UK are native. Not at all, the non-native ethnic groups are not native to the UK. Notice how only English people are listed as native to England. >If we use the second definition then neolithic farmers with an Anatolian material culture are native. As are their descendants which are the English. >Since they were replaced there are no natives in that sense in the UK. Their descendants, the native ethnic group known as English people, are native to the UK. >But there is no interpretation where white brits are native and second generation immigrants aren't. Wrong, this is the only interpretation: "The English people are an ethnic group and nation native to England, who speak the English language, a West Germanic language, and share a common ancestry, history, and culture."
- tovej 1y ago
  The English are not descended from the neolithic peoples that lived on the British isles. And second generation immigrants are also "birthed" in England (and the rest of the UK). You're just wrong on the basic facts now. But that's no surprise, you're a nazi.
  - throwawaypath 1y ago
    >The English are not descended from the neolithic peoples that lived on the British isles. Yes they are, sourced above. >And second generation immigrants are also "birthed" in England (and the rest of the UK). Immigrant ethnic groups are not birthed in England, which is why they're not considered English nor "native." Their ancestry is foreign. Foreign ethnic groups are non-indigenous to England. >You're just wrong on the basic facts now. "Your facts are wrong!" the Marxist chortled just moments after unironically claiming men can be pregnant. All of the basic facts agree with DHH and my comments. I provided sources, you have not. The facts are: only the English are native to London. >But that's no surprise, you're a nazi. But that's no surprise, you're a marxist.
    - throwawaypath 11mo ago
      Not surprised that I'm not going to get a response, that happens when people lose after being called out on their delusional claims. Would you look at this, "non-indigenous minorities" [0]. Lists all the nonnative groups to England, ethnic groups that were not "birthed" in England, nor Europe. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_in_Europe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_in_Europe
      - tovej 11mo ago
        Here's your own "source" (wikipedia) on neolithic people on the British isles. "Recent genetic studies have suggested that Britain's Neolithic population was largely replaced by a population from North Continental Europe characterised by the Bell Beaker culture around 2400 BC, associated with the Yamnaya people from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe." And you can't use the fact that wikipedia uses the term "non-indigenous" for a group to prove a point about "non-native", when what your arguing is that they mean the same. That's a circular argument, the premise is only true if the conclusion is true. There's also a category error here, whether a group belongs to non-indigenous minorities says nothing about indigenous majority, which is what you're claiming the English are. They would not be present in "non-indigenous minority" because they are not a minority. Again, you're the only one bringing up "indigenous" as a relevant concept. Something that neither DHH nor anyone else but you in this discussion is arguing about.

by tovej 1y ago

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

throwawaypath 1y ago

>Native quite literally means associated with birth. Yes, and the only current ethnic group birthed in England are the English. British Asians derive their ancestry from Asia, the ethnic group is not native to, nor born from England. They're non-indigenous to the UK/Europe. You inadvertantly proved my point. QED. >If we use the first definition, then white brits and everyone else born in the UK are native. Not at all, the non-native ethnic groups are not native to the UK. Notice how only English people are listed as native to England. >If we use the second definition then neolithic farmers with an Anatolian material culture are native. As are their descendants which are the English. >Since they were replaced there are no natives in that sense in the UK. Their descendants, the native ethnic group known as English people, are native to the UK. >But there is no interpretation where white brits are native and second generation immigrants aren't. Wrong, this is the only interpretation: "The English people are an ethnic group and nation native to England, who speak the English language, a West Germanic language, and share a common ancestry, history, and culture."

tovej 1y ago
The English are not descended from the neolithic peoples that lived on the British isles. And second generation immigrants are also "birthed" in England (and the rest of the UK). You're just wrong on the basic facts now. But that's no surprise, you're a nazi.
- throwawaypath 1y ago
  >The English are not descended from the neolithic peoples that lived on the British isles. Yes they are, sourced above. >And second generation immigrants are also "birthed" in England (and the rest of the UK). Immigrant ethnic groups are not birthed in England, which is why they're not considered English nor "native." Their ancestry is foreign. Foreign ethnic groups are non-indigenous to England. >You're just wrong on the basic facts now. "Your facts are wrong!" the Marxist chortled just moments after unironically claiming men can be pregnant. All of the basic facts agree with DHH and my comments. I provided sources, you have not. The facts are: only the English are native to London. >But that's no surprise, you're a nazi. But that's no surprise, you're a marxist.
  - throwawaypath 11mo ago
    Not surprised that I'm not going to get a response, that happens when people lose after being called out on their delusional claims. Would you look at this, "non-indigenous minorities" [0]. Lists all the nonnative groups to England, ethnic groups that were not "birthed" in England, nor Europe. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_in_Europe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_in_Europe
    - tovej 11mo ago
      Here's your own "source" (wikipedia) on neolithic people on the British isles. "Recent genetic studies have suggested that Britain's Neolithic population was largely replaced by a population from North Continental Europe characterised by the Bell Beaker culture around 2400 BC, associated with the Yamnaya people from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe." And you can't use the fact that wikipedia uses the term "non-indigenous" for a group to prove a point about "non-native", when what your arguing is that they mean the same. That's a circular argument, the premise is only true if the conclusion is true. There's also a category error here, whether a group belongs to non-indigenous minorities says nothing about indigenous majority, which is what you're claiming the English are. They would not be present in "non-indigenous minority" because they are not a minority. Again, you're the only one bringing up "indigenous" as a relevant concept. Something that neither DHH nor anyone else but you in this discussion is arguing about.