The most likely candidates are places like Bradford and Birmingham, which are still - according to wikipedia - 60%+ white british, that's without even considering british asian or other people born in and native to the UK.
Again, sorry, I can't find any sources to support your facts here, maybe I looked in a different place to you, so perhaps you could share your sources?
I’m not taking sides on the wider argument here, but I think it’s you who should check your sources? Copy pasting direct from wikipedia:
> The city of Bradford is 45.8% White according to the latest 2021 census data, with the White British population being 40.5%. 45.3% of the city's population is Asian, primarily from the Pakistani community
The difference we're seeing in numbers here is because the centres of cities are historically have a higher number of immigrants.
Fortunately, ONS did a specific report on "Bradford", which is the source for the wikipedia page I cited. The source link was broken on wiki, here it is though:
"In the latest census, around 437,800 Bradford residents said they were born in England. This represented 80.1% of the local population."
I chose Bradford because it's locally referred to (pejoratively, not by me) as "Bradistan". But despite that, according to ONS, 30% cite Muslim as their religion, which is more than "no religion" at 28%, but still lower than Christianity, at 34%
I encourage you to go check the sources for your sources, like I should have done (and you forced me to). If you look at this debate with an open mind, I believe you will find the majority of us rightly don't feel represented by the statement "Brits are legitimately fed up with immigration" any more. My bias' are that I'll almost always be pro immigration, within reason, but I completely recognise there have been times over the past 10 years where I've felt that position has been legitimately hard to defend. Now is not one of those times
The real issue is that every single time someone or something suggests immigration is a problem in the UK, it can trivially be reframed as an inequality issue.
To get back to the original topic, I think beneficiaries of inequality - like certain big tech players - are strongly motivated to keep the general public blaming anyone other than them for the problems caused by inequality.
edit: I just understood the census page a bit more, it's a generic report by area. You can put Birmingham in there too. It says basically the same: the overwhelming majority of residents are UK born and Christian or of no religion. Yes this is changing, slowly, like the world and populations change, slowly - not at a new or concerning rate.
The times are clearly changing, as they always do. Are you saying that it is “natural and sensible” to be racist and xenophobic? Perhaps it is. But perhaps we can do better.
Yes it is natural to prefer your own ethnicity and culture, which has existed for thousands of years. It is okay to say you want it to survive.
Japan, Korea, China, all have a strong preference for preserving their culture and ethnicity. Japan is 99% ethnic Japanese and has strict immigration laws. Yet they are also tolerant to outsiders who are visitors and we respect their right to govern themselves. I don’t think anyone regards the Japanese as a hateful people, yet by your definition they are indeed “racist” and “xenophobic”.
If the choice is to see your people replaced or be labeled “phobic”, then the obvious choice is to just accept the label and fight for your people.
It's natural to be a bit racist an xenophobic internally. We're all animals at the end of the day who are motivated to protect our in groups and people like us.
The same way as it's natural to have strong feelings of wanting to inflict pain and suffering on someone who's done wrong to us or people we care about.
Choosing not to do these harmful but natural things is called "being civil". Nobody has to be civil, but a civil society is that way because it makes uncomfortable consequences on people who aren't civil.
It is not sensible to be xenophobic and racist in a civil society unless you consider harming others and inviting uncomfortable consequences on yourself as sensible.
But you don't have to pretend. You can choose to be outwardly racist and xenophobic if you want, it just doesn't seem very sensible.
Maybe native Brits should make more babies? Or maybe the powers that be should enact changes to make native baby-making more compelling? Dunno what to tell you. Without immigration, the wheels fall off completely.
>Without immigration, the wheels fall off completely.
Do you recall the criticism that a blind commitment to economic growth at all costs is a social pathology that (among other adverse effects) prevents us from addressing climate change?
