Should the British flag feature the Welsh Dragon?

[NovaCourier]

Since Wales was part of England when the Union flag (Union jack when it's at sea) was created in 1606, and wasn't changed when the Kingdom of Great Britain (now the UK) was formed in 1707, Wales has never really had a spot on the flag.

I think we should include it, because 1, the Welsh do exist and would probably appreciate it, and 2, it looks awesome.

Yes.

No. (Why?)

[purplepoppy]

The crosses represent the saints George and Andrew. It would be better to add the black cross of St david rather than the dragon. The welsh also like having the dragon as being uniquely theirs.
Besides have you ever seen a kid try and draw the welsh dragon? Add to that the fact 90% can't get the lines on the union flag right and you've got a lot of traumatised art teachers.

On the other hand it would stop all those people who fly the union flag upside down

[purplepoppy]

We did have a petition to give the dragon a penis but it didn't get much support https://petitions.senedd.wales/petitions/244907

[NovaCourier]

Oh dear... 🤦‍♂️

This is why, as an Englishman, I love Wales.

[TacosRAwesome]

Yes dragons are cool. More flags should have dragons or sharks or alligators.

[NamerOfStars]

When I rule the world, countries are going to have to put some damn EFFORT into their flags; the old "three colored stripes" ain't going to cut it any more. The UK's okay on that front, but dragons are like garlic bread: they generally improve what they're added to. I was going to say "English nationalists would probably then insist on putting in Saint George to face the dragon down", but that'd be pretty cool, too.

[NovaCourier]

Adding St George to flag is a bit redundant considering that the flag is made from the the St George Cross and the Saltires of St Andrew and St Patrick. Wales is missing a symbol and the St David Cross isn't entirely practical as the space is taken already, so the dragon seems like the obvious choice.

[NamerOfStars]

It'd be more a matter of nationalism; of "We're England, and the most important part of this country", and given that George is most famous for fighting a dragon...

[OddBeMe]

Wow, never heard of this. Looks game of thrones-ish. Like it.

[Stoner710]

Not sure, I really only studied British history 1800s forward I know a little about the kings and queens prior. But really king Henry VIII forward. Maybe have it been flown in the Welsh lands ( I don’t know if that’s a correct term) maybe at the capital to signify unity of the UK. Maybe fly 3 different flags I don't know

[Sandeeppingping]

I mean the way the UK is going all you'll soon get is a change of name from Britain to Britistan and a crescent 🌙 in the middle instead of that dragon

[NovaCourier]

Not really. Muslims make up less than 6% of the UK's population. Also while the birth rate of first generation muslim immigrants is higher than that of the native population, it drops in the following generations.

Christianity has experienced a decline, as we're in a transitional period between the old religions of today, which will be replaced by new religions in the future. Islam is simply further behind here, probably because it didn't emerge until Christianity was already centuries old. It simply hasn't reached its decline stage yet, but it will.

As a rule of thumb, a smaller culture within a country will almost always assimilate into the larger culture, especially if conquest is involved. The Mongols who settled in occupied China assimilated into Chinese culture. The Greeks who settled in the old Persian Empire assimilated into Persian and other local cultures.

The UK does need to improve on integrating immigrants, which would make assimilating them easier and would reduce the drawbacks of immigration while retaining its benefits. Immigration is complicated like anything else. There is no silver bullet for this issue.

[Sandeeppingping]

I hope so man, because that's actually not a rule of thumb, in Lebanon the Muslim minority turned majority didn't assimilate to the once majority turned minority Christians, then war and blood unfolded with a Muslim victory now they make up around 75% of the country, same goes for Iran, I could name a few more if I think enough, what I'm trying to say is that the world has never seen a mentality such as the Islamic one, look at good old Yugoslavia, Bosnia full of Muslims who didn't want to be part of Serbia anymore, just a month ago near lake Garda in Italy a bunch (around 2000) north African men (18 19 20 year olds) went to lake garda and started harassing the people there and telling them that this isn't Italy this is Africa... That is not assimilation that is demographic replacement, scary demographic replacement...

I also don't agree about the birth rates thing, Christians don't care enough that's why they have low birth rates, look at Hindus in India, they're poor af yet they're still bringing 5M children per minute just because their religion said so, same goes for the Chinese without enforced law they'd be pumping out 10M child per second, Muslims are the exact same way there is no decline there never was I don't believe there'll ever be one

I also think that greeks that went to the Persian empire were more likely to be much more, how do i say this, less aggressive to the average muslim, as well as the fact that I believe it'd be easier for a Mongolian to assimilate to the chinese because they're so similar, it's like an Argentinian assimilating to cuba yet would never assimilate to the USA (that's che Guevara for ya)

And I understand they're only 6%, I'm not talking about this year nor 10 years from now, but more than that when they're still having high birth rates and we're at our lowest birth rates, this is where the uk realizes they should've listened to enoch powell

[NovaCourier]

When you talk about Lebanon, are you referring to the Arab conquest of the Levant in 638 CE/AD? If so, I should explain something. The mostly Christian population of the Levant had been the frontline of a very long and costly war between the Byzantines and the Sassnids. They were extremely heavily taxed and had witnessed power plays at home and diseases. In conditions like that, massive religious and political changes are not unheard of.

Under Arab rule, the population was taxed a lot less and the occupiers were surprisingly tolerant of the local Christians, even employing Christian wood workers to build a navy. Much of this applies to the people in the Sassnid Empire as well. When populations that have endured decades of poor living standards are sick of the status quo, they tend to make radical changes, like changing religions for example. Or as a more modern example, voting for unusual political candidates. Donald Trump being the quintessential example. The American people have suffered worsening hardships for years, and Trump was very unusual, having no political background, and instead being a TV personality and businessman.

It was the same thing for the Christians in the Levant. Islam was a new and quite novel religion at the time and seemed to bring something new to the mix. Throw in far lower taxes and viola! You have a mass conversion. Also, Arabia had about twice the population of the Levant and Mesopotamia combined at the time, so the Muslims were not a minority.

As for the former Yugoslavia, the region is a total melting pot with so many different ethnicities that all hate each other. The large Muslim population in Bosnia is largely due to the Ottomans, which is old news at this stage. Nothing can really be done about that. By the way, the Muslim majority parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina have a fertility rate of only about 1.5. Far below the replacement level of 2 and lower than the UK.

[NovaCourier]

Also, as for the part about India and China, yes there are a huge number of children being born, but this is mainly because the population is already so massive already. The people having those children for the past 30 years were born between the 1960s and 1980s, which was the era of the highest population growth in history. However, the raw numbers are misleading. Fertility rate offers a much more accurate picture.

India's fertility rate has gone from 5.91 children per woman in 1960 to 2.2 today. China's has gone from 6.38 in 1966 to 1.7 now. In fact China's fertility rate hasn't been above 1.7 for almost 30 years.

As for Muslim countries, their population growth has slowed too.

Saudi Arabia: 7.31 in 1974. 2.28 in 2019.
United Arab Emirates: 6.93 in 1960. 1.39 in 2019.
Iran: 6.52 in 1982. 2.15 in 2019.
Turkey: 6.37 in 1960. 2.06 in 2019.
Jordan: 8.06 in 1965. 2.69 in 2019.
Lebanon: 5.74 in 1960. 2.08 in 2019.

Honestly, mate. You're worrying about something that you really don't need to worry about. I hope I've put your mind at rest. Maybe you'll sleep a little easier now.

[Sandeeppingping]

Well I hope so man if those statistics are accurate then there is nothing to worry about

[NovaCourier]

By all, means research this for yourself. In fact, I encourage it. You get groups of migrants who are A-holes like the example you cited from Italy, but you get many natives who are A-holes as well. Do you have the source for that, by the way? It'd be interesting to look in to that.

The best thing to is to help the countries that have the most emigrants to Europe, most of which are former European colonies, to develop quickly and improve quality of life for their populations. This way, fewer of them will immigrate to Europe, which avoids a lot of problems, namely anti-immigration backlash and the rise in hate crimes that tends to result from large waves of immigration.

In any case, with such large populations in these countries, imagine the potential in them, if those countries develop. More people means more people to improve humanity. They might develop new farming methods, environmentally friendly manufacturing methods, cure diseases and cancers, you name it. They might even contribute to human longevity research, which is especially valuable for Europe, due to its low birth rate, which is causing an aging crisis. That puts a lot of strain on the remaining young population to provide for the growing inactive elderly population. By increasing the human healthspan (the part of your life in which you aren't highly vulnerable to disease) from about 65 to, say 85, that greatly reduces the problems caused by aging, which is good news for a Europe that is taking fewer young immigrants. The fact is, it's beneficial to you personally if people thousands of miles away can live better lives.

[Chazmatazz269]

If UK citizens are as nuckin’ futz about flags as US citizens are, i recommend leaving well enough alone. Ell oh ell!
It does look kool though.

[NovaCourier]

Maybe nucking futs, but we do like our flag.

[Guy__]

All the occult flags have deeper meanings. This is nonsense.

[EnglishEuropean]

Yes probably. In fact remove the Scotland and Northern Ireland bits and rename the UK the United States of Brexit.

[NovaCourier]

Come now. Even if you hate Brexit, don't be such a defeatist!

[EnglishEuropean]

Okay in reality Scottish independence is a long way off. Irish reunification, maybe not. Notice that Sinn Fein now holds most seats in the Northern Ireland assembly.

[NovaCourier]

Britain has its lows and highs. It's having a low. You just need to wait.

[Smegskull]

No it's a bit to complicated a shape and colour mixes poorly. I think filling the white in green on the bottom half would be fair though.

[ChrisMaster69]

Nope not at all

[Guy13]

Get out of yesteryear….