Historically speaking how multicultural was Victorian age Europe?

>mentions regency period
>thread is about Victorians

>The black population of Victorian Britain was so small that those living outside of larger trading ports were isolated from the black population. Abolition of slavery in 1833, effectively ended the period of small-scale black immigration to London and Britain.

>Funny thing was, there existed the same sorts of objections to this "multiculturalism" that exist towards multiculturalism in the present-day.

wtf, I love paki rape gangs now!

>the guy asking the question is the one offering proof

Same thing who cares

>the utter incompetence of the police to stop a child-grooming gang is the fault of an immigration policy and not the result of deeper/broader more systemic set of issues within the british government in the post-cold-war-era.

at most it's showing that the immigrants can assimilate into the pastime of the British elite.
so there's that

>>the utter incompetence of the police to stop a child-grooming gang is the fault of an immigration policy

stop being retarded user. This cucked immigration policy and the atmosphere of PC police is a direct cause of this kowtowing to backwards islamic culture out of fear of being labelled a racist

But the British elite has always been white. So pakistanis and Indians would be a shocking change.

The elite in Britain are 97% White.

>imlplying statutory rape is a pastime of the british elite

One of those famous rapists was knighted

No, he's implying that regular rape is a pastime of the British elite.

Which is, of course, true.

You're going to need a source for that.

They put their dicks into the heads of dead pigs why does sexual abuse seem strange?

>Victorian age Europe
Such a thing didn't exist user, it's strictly a British concept.
And if by multicultural you mean multiracial, then the answer is: inexistant. A black person in Berlin or Paris would have been traeted as an animal. (and actually they were)

Sir James Wilson Vincent Savile, OBE, KCSG

I wouldn't go that far, I'm sure there were some free blacks in some port cities in the UK.

Of course there were. There were Indians too, for the obvious reason. It was quite rare though.

Yeah. I can't remember the exact wording, but there is some clause in British law that as soon as you breath English air you are a free man.

Who is Jimmy Savile?

BBC Rapist. Not part of the British aristocracy though, as far as I'm aware.

>some
Yeah, curiosities.

It was very multicultural, but the cultures were almost all different kinds of whites.

The current racial monoculture among whites didn't emerge until after the World Wars.

there would have been a few indians, chinese, mena etc who were merchants and sailors
there would have been a few freed negroes
of course, similar points apply to the last 3,000 years of british history
what the likes of the bbc and their leftist friends don't acknowledge is that one swallow does not a summer make, and there is a difference between the mulatto offspring of a slave-owning toff being press-ganged into the navy, and there being a culturally distinct population of thousands of negroes in every uk city

britain consists of three nations whose native inhabitants speak four languages
sadly diversity of the european kind is anathema to most people in this country, and is only acceptable if served with a side order of mohammedanism and plantain

ironically, this very diversity testifies to the issues mass migration poses, in spite of 'mixing of the blood'
the last fifty years of genetic testing has proven that the english, scots and welsh are mostly of similar anglo-saxon heritage, though it was in england that the culture of those peoples best took root
thus, 1,500 years after they arrived on these shores we have three culturally-distinct nations

Jesus was semetic, he is pretty much always depicted as being semetic, dark hair, dark eyes. The only time he is depicted as not semetic is by dark age Europeans who had never seen a semetic person.

Something like this?

>The current racial monoculture among whites didn't emerge until after the World Wars.

racial monoculture is an american meme

They actually had a pretty visible presence in London.

An Indian Briton, Dadabhai Naoroji, stood for election to parliament for the Liberal Party in 1886. Pablo Fanque is one Black man who got success through running a famous Victorian circus

>Black man who got success through running a famous Victorian circus
See Until early 20th century, black people were displayed in human zoos in European capitals... Guess why.

Uh no. That hard core nigger hating racism is mostly an American construct. A response to slavery more than the cause of it. Blacks in Europe and contemporary Victorian England were treated more or less the same as whites as long as they were culturally assimilated.

It was WAY more about your social class than race (a combination of manners/etiquette, education, social connections, wealth, and family heritage). Alexandre Dumas was half-black but never faced any sort significant racial discrimination because he was born into the upper class.

Now, there's an argument about class mobility for those with the temperament but not the wealth, connections, and family name to draw on, but that's another discussion.

Often more than today, especially east of Berlin.

You are missing my point. In the UK Disdain and Blacks had presnce and small communities.

>Blacks in Europe and contemporary Victorian England were treated more or less the same as whites as long as they were culturally assimilated.

Blacks in those areas faced heavy discrimination. ESPECIALLY during the days of scientific racism.

Alexandre Dumas father protected him from that shit. Class doesn't remove discrimination it just negates it to a degree that it still is pretty easy to spot.

'tis.

You are missing my point. In the UK Indians and Blacks had presence and small communities. I wasn't talking about all of Europe (Even then many nations educated it's colonial peoples in it's schools abroad in many notable cases)

>Blacks in Europe and contemporary Victorian England were treated more or less the same as whites as long as they were culturally assimilated.

Blacks in those areas faced heavy discrimination. ESPECIALLY during the days of scientific racism where everyone caught onto it and all the toxic beliefs about certain folks.

Alexandre Dumas father protected him from that shit (And the famous author was actually a 1/4 black). Class doesn't remove discrimination it just negates it to a degree that it still is pretty easy to spot. Sammy Davis Jr. didn't really face racism when he was with his father up until he went on his own and BAM he got the same treatment as any other negro.

Alexandre Dumas father, Thomas Dugas had to leave Haiti for France (where in France slavery is illegal) because he was a mullato born in slave plantation days Haiti. When Thomas went for the military his dad only let him on the condition he use his slave mothers name to not tarnish the family name.

When he was a young man,while he was accompanying an elegant (white) lady to the theater , an officer decided that it would be good fun to insult the black aristocrat. First, he pretended to mistake the young man of colour for the lady's lackey. Then, after an affray, he forced Thomas to kneel in front of him and ask for pardon. Alexandre was mocked for his colour

It wasn't. The idea that diversity was of value, or that all cultures were equal didn't exist. Nations had leaders who would not entertain some nonsense of pluralism. And foreigners residing in those lands were expected to abide by its laws. When people talk about the past being multicultural they are equivocating. Multiculturalism as this idea that if we threw all cultures into a blender we would get something good is very recent.

Race as we modernly know it is a legitimate social construct.

>And foreigners residing in those lands were expected to abide by its laws.

and they did not give a fuck what you did otherwise. That's the part people always omit user

>and they did not give a fuck what you did otherwise

Would depend on the state. Also the scope of laws back then was different. As in insulting the state religion, or evangelizing a foreign one could get you killed. Pretty anathema to multiculturalism.

There are no illegitimate social constructs. Law, being social infrastructure is one amongst many, so legitimacy is rather a contest for hegemony over law rather than an inherent quality.

Also Victorian England tolerated many cultures, to the extent of only systematically destroying a few, and only the cottagers and Irish rural poor in the metropole.

more so than today, considering the multitude of European cultures, and the fact regional and local cultures (especially languages) were more defined than any national one

>when a work of fiction claims to be historical while accusing historical works of being fictional

!! now THIS is shilling !!

the BBC is beyond parody

> That scene was paid for by the taxpayer
> Part and parcel etc. etc.
Gentle reminder that London is finished.

liveleak.com/view?i=5d0_1456604842

>shitskin goes on TV and spews this shit even quoting Ghadaffi
>meanwhile Brits get arrested over twitter comments
I'm not even mad anymore

About the same as Washington DC and Paris. Don't really get the focus on London.

Are you not paying attention to what is the news, literally right now ?

amerigoblins claim it's not happening to them.

>That hard core nigger hating racism is mostly an American construct.
America please, not everything revolves around your country. I could spam the thread with examples of absolute racism in colonial Europe. Black people were considered as dumb troublesome animals, they were a rarity, like servants in families coming back from colonies in the best cases. It would have been a shock and a source of worry to see a black walking in the streets in expensive clothes like in OPs picture.
Read Tintin in the Congo to have an idea of the mood, and keep in mind it was written in 1931...

To be fair, one of the prevailing contemporary theories behind Jack the Ripper was that he must've been some seedy Jewish immigrant considering that Whitechapel was full of them at the time. Four of the seven chief police suspects were Eastern European immigrants who had shady pasts to say the least.

>A black person in Berlin or Paris would have been traeted as an animal

Like Alexandre Dumas?

London already had hundreds of blacks living there in the late 18th century. The only thing that happened to them that can be construed as 'racist' was the initiative to repatriate them to Sierra Leone, and even that's doubtful as a sole motivation. A century later there probably would've been hundreds living in London as well, though too few and unprominent to be regarded as anything important. European immigrants would've been more numerous and regarded as more of a threat; either as insidious criminals (muh Jewish white slavers) or deranged radicals (fucking Marx to name an example).

WE

>Like Alexandre Dumas?
Alexandre Dumas was not at all considered as a "nigger", what do you think, he's a noble whom one grand mother was a slave, wtf.

As for London, I can't say honestly, but I doubt there was many black people in suit and top hat.

>Historically speaking how multicultural was Victorian age Europe?

It wasn't at all and nothing you see on British tv nowadays is historically accurate, it’s all rife with politically correct Twitter driven historical revisionism.

The showrunner for Doctor Who for example, has flat-out stated that he will _purposely_ cast non-Europeans regardless of the historical setting.

are you serious? Britain has the most Saudi/Middle Eastern millionaires/billionaires outside of the middle east

>Lancelot.jpg
AYO WHERE GUINEVERE AT

>Funny thing was, there existed the same sorts of objections to this "multiculturalism" that exist towards multiculturalism in the present-day.

Funny thing, people prefer to live amongst people like themselves. The further apart 2 cultures are the less likely they are to coexist.

Multiculturalism today is a complete failure and everyone who has a clue knows it but it goes against the current narrative and is dangerous to say publicly without hurting your career, connections etc

>inter-european multiculturalism is in any way comparable to modern multiculti
Medieval europeans were the same race, generally same religion, similar cultures . Imo the litmus test for if peoples are compatible is if you can raise one child up in another ethnic group and it being completely indiscernible from any other member when he is an adult. This was the case for most all europeans back then and still is.

There were plenty of black people and other ethnic minorities in London in the 19th century and earlier, you are just being ignorant.

nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/blackhistory/intro/intro.htm

>Plenty

Nowhere near enough to anything that could be called multicultural or diverse even

>another racist thread

Liverpool and London had large(for the times) black communities. However when it comes to multicultural, complaints have been made by Londoners that its too multicultural since Elizabethen times when continental protestants arrived in big groups and were settled. Dutch, French, Flemish and Spaniards were all disliked because they were seen to refuse to adapt to local customs, keeping their own.

People complain about outsiders. Multiculture is a utopian goal that creates more problems than it solves, like communism.

The dutch were driven from the town they settled in back to Essex because of complaints, not seen that in modern Britain. On the other side there was a group of jews in east london at the time who had their own streets and community, they had been there with their entirely alien culture since the 1200s and no one cared, they even survived every expulsion, not being asked to move an inch.

You are adding your political opinions to what happened in the past to ensure at least in your own mind you were right all along. I have 20-30 books on London history so its somethin i actually know about having read maybe 5-10,000 pages of information on it.

WHEN WILL THE BEADY EYED BRITS APOLOGIZE FOR THE CRIMES THEY HAVE COMMITTED AGAINST THE DUTCH PEOPLE

#ORANGELIVESMATTER

Super diverse, tons of Ethnic Welsh, Anglos, Saxons, Scots and Irish

Multicultural in today's sense? Not very. In London and other important trading ports there would probably be areas with large foreign population. For example medieval and early-modern England had a sizable (for the time) Flemish population and German and Dutch traders were quite active in England.

19th century London would probably have less then 5% of the population be foreign, but there would probably be neighborhoods of majority foreigners. Mostly Europeans, maybe some Turkish or Indian traders, but very few sub-saharan africans, and definitely not many asians considering that China, Korea and Japan weren't that keen on foreigners at the time

But they don't count because they're all the same skin colour!!!111!

The scene in question is from a fair. Even if Victorian age Europe wasn't as multicultural as today, it would make sense that those with ethnic backgrounds would work in city fairs as attractions. So the scene is pretty historically accurate.

>burn down their fleet
>humiliate them in multiple wars
>invade them and topple their government

Guys, why dont they like us?

Yea the US needed to drone more of them

Those weren't carnies, those were citizens dressed up rfor a day on the town, and not one but two black beefeaters.

There was a ton of Chinese in Liverpool

They play old king billy sat on the wall and have LARP lodges dedicated to him, I think that's enough

The episode that webm is from is Regency-era, not Victorian.

>same race
>same culture
>same religion
>medieval europe
How about a no. You had bloody holy wars in Slavic and German lands and rebellions.You had the huge Frankish empire that integrated people through Christianity. People didn't identify as some sort of pan-european race during those times (even today to certain degrees). So long as you were Christian it was all fine. When Germanics invaded, they converted to Christianity and everything was fine because of it. Then they formed new cosmopolitan cultures/ethnicities over centuries of mixing under foreign rule despite the initial civil unrest and incompatibilities. Even before under the Roman Empire were people becoming increasingly multi-cultural/mixed.

I do know that by the 1930s there were decent-sized black communities, almost entirely in port cities. Britain was in this odd place where it was discrimantory and racist but insisted it wasn't.

>Alexandre Dumas was not at all considered as a "nigger", what do you think, he's a noble whom one grand mother was a slave, wtf.
So class mattered more than race and he wasn't just treated like an animal like the other user said.

>As for London, I can't say honestly
There were black people in London, but probably one of the smallest immigrant communities.

>but I doubt there was many black people in suit and top hat.
Eh, they probably would've wore top hats and shitty suits to ape the fashion of the well-off, like many other lower class people did, but they certainly wouldn't have dressed as wealthy as Dr. Who wants to pretend.