> That was then. Now, I wouldn't dream of it. London is no longer the city I was infatuated with in the late '90s and early 2000s. Chiefly because it's no longer full of native Brits.

I couldn't understand this bit. Why does a Dane care about the ethnic makeup of London ? Is London worse off than the 90s and early 2000s ? He doesn't leave much to charitable interpretation…

That post is just plain racism.

But why does a Dane care about the ethnic makeup of London ?

Same reason I might care about the ethnic makeup of Japan. I like some aspects of Japanese culture and I would hate to see it disappear due to cultural homogenization.

I don't want to guess too wildly, but I suspect you also support the rights of indigenous peoples to practice their culture in the former British colonies like Canada or Australia? Why is the idea of wiping out British culture in 2025 OK, but the historical destruction of indigenous cultures - as in Canada's residential schools - treated as a grave injustice similar to genocide?

I don't think you should care about the ethnic makeup of Japan.

Why in the world do you think you are in a position to decide what is good?

What is this non-sequitur? White people in Britain still have the right to practice their culture as they see fit. You can eat all the beans on toast you want, even if your neighbor is eating curry.

From the same article.

> Recently, a projection that Danes would be a minority in their own country by 2096 caused an enormous stir in Denmark.

I can totally understand this point btw. What I don't understand is

> London is no longer the city I was infatuated with in the late '90s and early 2000s. Chiefly because it's no longer full of native Brits.

Can you tell me how has London changed for the worse from '90s and early 2000s to today for a Dane to lose interest in it ?

> I don't want to guess too wildly.

Please don't. I am a brown dude from a Third World country. I do follow DHH's blog.

All cultures evolve. Most of them disappear. They leave influencew behind as they meld. Any modern culture will be recorded very precisely.

You can't tell if someone is "native British" by looking at them. There's records of non-white British citizens with voting rights back to 1749. Are those people's great-great * whatever grandchildren not British if every generation has lived in Britain because you don't think they "look British"?

Britain is not and never has been a single ethnic state. It's very hard to not consider someone a racist who thinks so.

Tommy Robinson, as supported in this post, was a member of the BNP. The BNP, until 1997, had a policy of forcibly removing all non-white people (including citizens) from the UK. After 1997 (and when Robinson was a member) they moved to a policy of "financially encouraging" non-white people to leave the UK.

If you are a member of a party who believes in treating citizens differently based on the colour of their skin: you are a racist.

If you think you can identify British citizenship based on the colour of a person's skin: you are a racist.

I don't really like throwing the "racist" word around but this is literally as simple as the definition gets.

The hubris on display in this article is wild, even for DHH. As a Brit, he's got no idea what he's on about. The bit about "the boats" is just a complete misunderstanding of the facts.

If one is not from a country, has no family from that country, and has never lived there - one shouldn't have much of an opinion about what's going on there. To then assume those opinions could be even remotely correct is an arrogance of an astounding proportion.