I wasn't saying that no one was Speaking in English. Certainly by the end of the 15th Century it had clearly becomes the second language and Henry V was the first who could write in English (he died in 1422)

Was I exaggerating, just a little, but the point is still valid. This unified culture of Olde England never existed and has always been in a state of flux.

I tip my hat at you recognizing the point.

Of course culture changes, the reverse was never suggested.

If you read my points I refer to allegiance to an shared identity, for example English. For you to muse that this is mythical is clearly nonsense as most people on earth aspire to an identity and believe in one.

No one claims that humour doesn't exist because people laugh at different things. Identity is a human construct so to deny it isn't only pointless but moot.

Edited by Stirlingsays (02 Oct 2016 5.42pm)

You write well and your post is well thought out so it deserves a reply.....though obviously we differ....apart from that damn Irish connection.

As an island or indeed like most countries we have always had immigration. This as a reality isn't an issue for most. The problem is the rate of immigration and the affect it has on community cohesion, service infrastructure, housing, job/wages and all the rest of it.

The issue is the rate and who is coming in and their attitudes to Western/British culture in terms of genuinely integrating with it.

Where I would disagree with you is the idea that allegiance isn't a problem. It is....the massive bloating of our national security budget proves it quite painfully. Obviously allegiance is more of an issue for some sections of society than it is for others.

We have Irish regiments in the British Army along with Scottish and Welsh ones. We have the Gurkhas past and present and we had Indian regiments in the past. Clearly identities are able to exist in multiple planes. I am English, British (for now at least), European, Western.

The more distant and insular the incoming culture the more problematical for both parties integration is. With large numbers in a compressed time this has caused much cohesion issues and I think you miss this with your reasons for Brexit.

British citizens changing to an IS identity.....while it is an obvious minority shows us the difficulties in this area.

Your point about the traitors from the Cambridge toffs is a good point as it complicates what allegiance is. But ultimately they represent that stand of elitist left wing thought that negates allegiance in favour of political conscience.

Traitors in my book.

Edited by Stirlingsays (02 Oct 2016 6.24pm)

[Link]

"The repeal of the 1972 Act will not take effect until the UK leaves the EU under Article 50.
It will be contained in a "Great Repeal Bill", promised in the next Queen's Speech, which will also enshrine all existing EU law into British law."

This is something positive. The successful EU-directives re:environment (cleaner beaches, etc) and anti-pollution laws, for example, will have to be kept unless they are individually repealed later on. Environment Agency still loses on the grants side of things though unless the government makes up the difference which I doubt they will.

Edited by Kermit8 (02 Oct 2016 4.35pm)

Agreed,though perhaps not nearly as many as the hard Brexiteers might wish/think,though I suspect attacking EU-inspired employee rights will be near the top of the wish list.

Of course,the likely deal in return for decent EU market access will be compliance with all/most EU directives,in which case little will change except we won't have a seat at the table anymore