Arguably the most significant feature of the media comment on this topic(21-28 January 2010) is the universal assumption by the writers that Britain is a country where the world and his wife are free to come and go provided they don’t actually break the criminal law.  What they wear is entirely up to them despite the fact that in many of the countries they come from there are very strict dress codes applied to foreigners.

There is virtually no consideration given in press comment to the feelings of native Britons, who positively do not want their country turned into a United Nations country which could be called UNland, anymore than they would want it to be a province of the United States of Europe.

People are part of the landscape, along with buildings and the countryside.

If in certain districts of English towns substantial numbers of people are habitually dressed in clothing which clearly comes from Asia, Africa or the Middle East, then irrespective of the personal qualities of the individuals wearing the clothes, the effect on the native British people is that these districts are no longer part of their homeland.  Many decent people see no difference between the morality of resisting such cultural invasion and resisting military invasion.  Somebody in the so-called “quality” press needs to understand that, even if they personally don’t care.

 Email this article