[flat_zoo]

[flagged]

[sgentle]

As I said, the Wikipedia article is what the words "native Brits" links to.

Here's the article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_in_London

Here's what the article says:

> In 2011, it was reported for the first time that White British people had become a minority within the city

How could you possibly come to the conclusion that it's not about race? Do you think he linked to the wrong article by accident?

[throwawaypath]

>How could you possibly come to the conclusion that it's not about race?

It has nothing to do with race, everything to do with ethnicity. Austrians are racially White, but are not native to London.

There's nothing wrong with promoting or protecting the interests of native or indigenous people over those of immigrants or foreigners. The only "Brits" native to Great Britain are White Brits.

[epakai]

His specific words were "it's no longer full of native Brits" with a link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_in_London

Then he goes on to point out more than sixty percent of the city were "native Brits" in 2000, but that number corresponds to the White British categorization.

Ergo he's conflating White British with native British.

He also said "A statistic as evident as day when you walk the streets of London now." Maybe he is extremely observant, but I don't think that follows unless he is talking about skin color.