throwaway13152

"For the vast majority of British history, Brits were only wealthy when they traded outside. The trade took various forms such as East India company,"

"stopping skilled/semi-skilled immigration. This is completely and astonishingly backwards."

britain was an emigration nation for almost 500 years, immigration had nothing to do with Britain acquiring wealth, you have this part backwards.

>Europe has always been diverse

Under what definition?

Africa has historically been much more diverse than Europe, The Greeks took over Egypt in 300BC, Romans successfully invaded Egypt and Carthage nearly 2 millennia ago, Arabs colonised the whole of north africa back in the 7th century and were heading down south at a fair rate, Europeans have been more involved in African affairs for far longer and far more often than vice versa, if it is acceptable to black-wash white characters under your rather Orwellian argument of "Europe has always been diverse" which has barely any evidence behind it especially compared to Africa or India, then it should be acceptable to white-wash or arab-wash black characters considering the massive historical European and Arab presence on the african continent dating back more than 2000 years.

>"native" Europeans don't have any special claim on their folk tales or culture

compared to Africa, India and The Middle East, Europe is one of the lesser diverse continents. under you're own argument Europeans would have a greater claim to their own folklore than Africans, Indians or Arabs to theirs. The only places with a greater claim would be East Asia, Oceania and the Americas.

Ultimately your post is just an excuse for hypocrisy.