http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=wjEIP6otc4Y&feature=related

Nothing to do with the subject, but, it is a lot better than talking to BNP shite, is it not?

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=zqx5j-FuqeI&feature=related

That is what it is all about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bg6cpjBQdww

“What we need is a great big melting pot”..

C’mon, you two at the back, yeah you, stop standing around looking like wet arsed drips, join in…

“Big enough, big enough to take the world and all it’s got”…

Oh well, we really do need a weekend open thread…

“Lets have, as Rumbold (I think) said upthread, lots more inter-”racial” marriages – the sooner a shitty little inconsequntial accident of nature (skin colour) is made irrelevant beyond the point of total irrelevance the better.

I did not say that, but I completly agree with the idea.

*****************************

A post of Morgoths’ that I agree 100% with. Well said that man!

And, indeed, well said Morgoth.

Agreed completely, on this particular occasion. Morgoth gets a free orange juice from me, or as I like to call it, a “Virgin Screwdriver”.

Well, yeah. Seeing as one is a self-identified organisation with a set agenda and the other isn’t. Fairly obvious, isn’t it?

And, indeed, well said Morgoth.

A post of Morgoths’ that I agree 100% with. Well said that man!

Survival? Kelly Holmes (to take one example) is 100, no, a million times the Briton than Nick Griffen could ever hope to be. And the future of this country is assured with shining eggs like her about.

Lets have, as Rumbold (I think) said upthread, lots more inter-”racial” marriages – the sooner a shitty little inconsequntial accident of nature (skin colour) is made irrelevant beyond the point of total irrelevance the better.

The BNP are nasty little collectivist thugs, just like their brothers-in-arms the SWP et al, no matter how much of a veneer you try to put on it, Lee Barnes.

However, a greater degree of diversity within a group (and humans ARE a single group in the macro sense of being members of the same species, although you can also apply this in the national, regional and/or “tribal” sense) does increase the ability of the group to successfully deal with a wider variety of situations due to the different strengths, experiences and viewpoints that each subgroup brings on-board, and also reduces the risks associated with excessively uniform linear thinking and homogeneous negative traits & beliefs.

To me the fact that the naturalised immigrants are almost always the most vocal enemies of free speech and the advocates for an open door policy on immigration is itself the most powerful rebuttal of the idea that they have become ‘assimilated’.

This is not the case. Many of them want tighter immigration controls. In 2005 when Michael Howard made immigration the main theme of the Tory party election campaign a poll carried out by BBC’s Asian Network radio station showed that 60% of them felt there were too many immigrants in Britain:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/vote_2005/frontpage/4514245.stm

Clearly there are people who vote BNP because they feel the other parties are failing them. White working class boys do worse in than any other racial group. The UK is one of the worst countries for social mobility in the developed world: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/06/26/nsocial126.xml

I think the government needs to address the bread and butter issues affecting the white working class like housing, education and social mobility. I’m glad some of the media (BBC in particular) has been giving coverage to this.

THE MEDIA LIE AS THE PRIMARY ROLE OF THE MEDIA IS TO PIMP OUT AND GET ELECTED THE POLITICAL PARTIES THEY OWN.

Rubbish. Different papers have different political affiliations but ultimately the people decide on who gets elected.

Oxford University has indeed invited some colourful controversial and comical characters in the past and I’m sure the tradition will continue.

Amongst other academic qualifications I actually have a degree in biomedical science from a redbrick university affiliated with one of the UK’s top medical research institutions, and am therefore fully aware of the science involved. I was using the “hybrid vigour” example as an analogy for the benefits of cultural and social diversity, not “breeding”.

However, I’m sure many other people here will appreciate the genetics primer, so thank you for your input.

Let there be a gene that exists in two versions, A and a; each individual has two copies of this gene. Therefore, an individual could be AA, aa or Aa. Let the beneficial genotype be Aa. If one crosses AA with aa, all first generation hybrids will be Aa. If the first generation hybrids breed among themselves at random, the ratio AA:Aa:aa = 1:2:1, i.e., the desired genotype is present among only half the second generation hybrids. It is for this reason that corn farmers would maintain the original parental stocks and cross them to obtain hybrid vigor, but not allow the hybrids to reproduce among themselves. Obviously, among humans this is not applicable. The example considered here is a single-gene case, but if hybrid vigor is applicable to interracial breeding among humans with respect to multiple genes, then it should be clear that it will be drastically reduced among second and subsequent generation hybrids.

You are not addressing the questions and confusing it all with ‘this and that’.