Speaking of white flight, check out this article:

The New White Flight

The research is by sociologists at the University of Manchester under Dr Ludi Simpson

Can you really trust any "research" that comes from a sociologist?

Well England is doing something right. Check out this article.


In United Kingdom, more Indians are getting the good jobs




LONDON: Indian youngsters are the most upwardly mobile in Britain today. Beating their white working class peers in the competition for well-paid jobs, 56 per cent of youngsters from Indian working class families take up professional or managerial roles once they become adults. This has emerged from a report funded by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation and released on Monday.

The reason for this success, according to the report, is the encouragement they get from parents to do well at school.

The study tracked the employment of 140,000 people in England and Wales over a span of 30 years from 1960, using data from the Office for National Statistics. It found that children of immigrants from China, the Caribbean, and Africa are also zooming past white working class youngsters.

Part of the reason why Indian youngsters have performed so well is because migrants from India, who came in the 1950s and 1960s, came from middle-class backgrounds and were forced to suffer a step down in social class and employment status, says the report’s author, Lucinda Platt of the University of Essex. That drove them to make sure their children were educated well so that they had more opportunities.

But the report showed that children of Pakistani and Bangladeshi communities are not doing as well.

“My study has shown that Indian parents set great store by good education,” said Platt. They often push to ensure their children get quality education, even at the cost of their own pleasures, and eventually reap the joy of their securing high-paying jobs.

Platt adds: “The trend also reflects that there is more room at the top in modern Britain due to a general expansion of professional and managerial roles, but social class continues to play a significant role in most people’s chances in the employment market.”

The report found that Jews and Hindus had a greater chance of upward mobility than Christians, Muslims, and Sikhs. The 2001 census had shown that one in every eight students belongs to an ethnic minority. This figure is expected to rise to about one in five by 2010.

Beating their white working class peers in the competition for well-paid jobs

More evidence that immigration works against the native population.

More evidence that immigration works against the native population.

shouldn't be the working class native population? i am open to critiques of immigration of all sorts, but let's remember that this isn't VDARE, and you should be careful to be precise in what you say, you aren't amongst a gaggle of fellow travellers. and to Pismire, ethnic boosterism is in my eyes unseemly. you may differ, but i had to make that clear as regards what i feel are the bounds of good taste. we shouldn't be surprised at directed hostility against group X when it loudly and proudly proclaims how it is winning the race against the majority.

Okay fair enough. But honestly it wasnt coming from there. I was just thinking of Paris burning, and pointing out (perhaps?) an English difference?

A large number of UK Hindus are East African exiles who were successful to begin with, so that might help explain some of the "winning".

shouldn't be the working class native population?

But you agree that it works against the interests of the working class native population?

Interesting point about the "East African exiles": presumably the Muslims among them have done well too?

But you agree that it works against the interests of the working class native population?

if you want to me to comment in the case of england, i would have to assume it was a wash for the working class, but i don't know. remember, the white working class far outnumbers the non-white working class. unlike the USofA i don't get the impression that the non-white working class is particular employed vis-a-vi the white working class (contrast with latinos vs. whites & blacks in USofA of cognate SES). the promotion of non-white indians from working to middle class is possibly a regression back to their parental home country mean after a generation of acculturation, in other words, there isn't much 'competition' with the white working class in this case because their parents might have brought a lot of social capital which couldn't be leveraged in generation 1 in the first place. getting a quantitative handle on these issues is important for me in their specific context, qualitative general assertions are the seeds upon with fruitless rhetorical debates that turn on normative differences are built. if that was too verbose and qualified for you, this weblog is not your cup of tea. if you think all immigration is negative, you shouldn't be reading this weblog for sure, because it wouldn't be around if it weren't for immigration.

and re: pismire, yes, i think the quality of the immigrants matters, i don't think it is a difference of the english vs. french policies. note that ismaili muslims from places like uganda do just as well as their hindu fellows.

presumably the Muslims among them have done well too?

yes, i understand that a disproportionate number from uganda are ismaili muslims.

presumably the Muslims among them have done well too?

Most definitely. The Ismailis have done well both in the UK and Canada.

MJ Vassanji (himself Ismaili) is a novelist who explores the East African Indian community. He is twice the winner of the Giller Prize, the Booker of Canada.

Previous reports said Sikhs were as successful as Hindus in Britain. Muslims were failing economically because of the refusal to integrate. This report suggests class difference is the cause of Muslim poverty and economic backwardness.

It seems to me that an obvious (in other words, I've not really thought too much about what I'm about to say) method of measuring integration is to look at the rate of inter-ethnic marriages (formal or common law).

The idea being that the higher the rate of marriage outside of a group, the more that group could be said to be melting into the melting pot.

Not sure how to factor religion into it though (ie not being allowed to marry outside the religion).

the sikh migration to the uk was predominantly working class.
if the predominant hindus are from east africa they were not working class.

I don't know any hard data on Sikhs in Britain, but I think they are doing OK economically. A lot of Sikhs came to work in the motor industry in the West Midlands, around Coventry and Wolverhampton. The other big concentration is in Slough, just west of London, where there is frequent (but seldom media-reported) trouble between Sikh, Hindu and Muslim youths.

iznt slough where that slut dawn tinsley lives?

Basing the integration and segregation of different ethnic groups on statistics from electoral wards is a very vague way of analysing the issue in my opinion, for although some parts of Britain might appear integrated on paper it’s hard to assess what the situation is like on a street to street basis. For example, according to this report Birmingham is becoming more integrated, but on a deeper analysis I believe you would find the contrary the case, as there was a race riot in city just over of month ago.

"It seems to me that an obvious (in other words, I've not really thought too much about what I'm about to say) method of measuring integration is to look at the rate of inter-ethnic marriages (formal or common law).
The idea being that the higher the rate of marriage outside of a group, the more that group could be said to be melting into the melting pot."

The black (mostly Caribbean)/white intermarriage rate in Britain is quite high, especially compares to the United States. I don't know about the brown/white or brown/black rates, though to the extent that many of the browns are Muslim the rate is likely to be kept down.