Originally Posted by nonthaburi

1)They're more British than you are Indian due to the fact that they were born and raised in the UK, in Rishi Sunak's case it was his grandparents who came to the UK from the Punjab via East Africa, and in Pratel's case her parents fled Uganda.

2) You only have to hear them speak to know how British they are. Your wording suggests that all indigenous British view people with different coloured skin as foreigners. This is so out of touch with reality, in my experience of the UK anyway.

Generally speaking, where you are born and bred defines you culturally.

My own children are British, but they've only spent a total of 6 weeks there in their lives. They have a British passport but in no way are they culturally British, and they themselves would admit that . English was never their first language either.

3) Your seem to want to be more Indian than a real Indian. And by that I mean someone born an bred there.

Originally Posted by Bipat

1) Alok Sharma was born and Bred in India.

2) Yes I agree ----I was pointing out the views of Poster Morpeth, that I can't be 'Indian' because I don't 'look' Indian!!

3) I consider myself as British and Indian. Both!---As OCI and as a member of an Indian family for 52 years, they don't view me as a 'foreigner', I am named on the community census.
Perhaps I could be considered as an 'adopted' Indian Certainly my Indian mother-in -law 'mothered' me (the same age as her younger daughter). She bequeathed to me her mangal Sutra my most precious possession.

Originally Posted by Expatrick

Honorary Indian, maybe!"

I also am on the community census, pay local property & community taxes, vote in local & EU elections (Hungarian MEPs) but am still not Hungarian! Honorary Hungarian (on citizenship)
possibly!

Originally Posted by Bipat

1) Alok Sharma was born and Bred in India.

2) Yes I agree ----I was pointing out the views of Poster Morpeth, that I can't be 'Indian' because I don't 'look' Indian!!

3) I consider myself as British and Indian. Both!---As OCI and as a member of an Indian family for 52 years, they don't view me as a 'foreigner', I am named on the community census.
Perhaps I could be considered as an 'adopted' Indian Certainly my Indian mother-in -law 'mothered' me (the same age as her younger daughter). She bequeathed to me her mangal Sutra my most precious possession.

Originally Posted by Bipat

My family do not see me as that!!!! I think that is the important fact. I am a member of an Indian family and have been most of my life! They do not view me as a "foreigner"!

What is my husband then? Born and Bred, OCI etc. etc. Naturalised British but "culturally"? ---(whatever that is?)
Can you not see that you can be more than one 'thing'! I am British AND Indian.

Back to the topic ---after 52 years of whatever I am and 'knowing personally' 100s of Indian people now long dead---I am capable of knowing something about the effects of the "Empire" on ordinary citizens---!!

Originally Posted by nonthaburi

1) moved to the UK at 5, so although not born in the UK, he's pretty much bred in the Uk, and again, as much as I dislike the man, due to his uselessness, not his skin colour, you've only got to hear the man speak to know he's British.

3) I think the point is that you are more British than Indian. No one's doubting your cultural connections, but they're no substitute for being born and bred in a place , no matter over how long a time period those connections are formed.

Originally Posted by nonthaburi

Your family no, but what about someone you don't know. How would your average man in the street view you ?

Not the same as them surely?

Originally Posted by Bipat

3) So my husband is Indian then?----born and bred----in spite of now being naturalised British? (First came to UK in his 30s). However, relevant to this thread born in British India!
-What are our children ? How Bred? Two were bred when OH was an Indian national, one when he was naturalised British. They have Indian surnames??? Two have Indian first names, one a universal first name.

The reality is ourselves and our family think of ourselves as belonging equally to two countries.

(Was long ago asked a very important question by Indian sister-in-law-------how do women "over-there"--- train their men to do housework???)

Originally Posted by Bipat

We are back to Morpeth's 'colour' then, the average person in the street -----nowadays both in UK and India do not really think so much about this,
It depends on behaviour and being at ease in the place and possibly gender---I find Indian women 'strangers' do not apparently see me as 'different'.

Originally Posted by Bipat

3) So my husband is Indian then?----born and bred----in spite of now being naturalised British? (First came to UK in his 30s). However, relevant to this thread born in British India!
-What are our children ? How Bred? Two were bred when OH was an Indian national, one when he was naturalised British. They have Indian surnames??? Two have Indian first names, one a universal first name.

The reality is ourselves and our family think of ourselves as belonging equally to two countries.

(Was long ago asked a very important question by Indian sister-in-law-------how do women "over-there"--- train their men to do housework???)

Originally Posted by Bipat

Morpeth as always I am unsure of the purpose of your posts!!

1) What do you think is the meaning of the words 'overseas citizen of India', I own property that you have previously complained that 'foreigners' can't., Before my husband ((Indian born and bred) decided to become British naturalised, to make travel in Europe easier, I was tax 'domiciled' as India. I am included in the census of our particular community. I have an Indian ID and benefit cards.
If India allowed full dual nationality -----what would you call me then?

You didn't answer my question above regarding the 'British' Cabinet Ministers who would be thought 'foreign' as they walked in London!! What are they?? Are the really British???

"Sought to blend in"!!!!!!! I presume you have sought to blend in with your family!!!!!

2) Yes after independence the railways and infrastructure were useful-as a 'start up'---what use before???? Indians were not allowed to use them except certain areas with permission!!!!
I have asked you this before why were the British there, if not for their own benefit ???? Statistics do not record the vast sums that were paid to Britain by the Princely States.
The 90% poverty wasn't particularly helpful!!

3) Could you explain how in your mind I can be 'patriotic' if I am a 'foreigner'???????

Originally Posted by nonthaburi

I think you've answered your own question there. He was born and bred Indian, although he now has a British passport. What does he see himself as?

Originally Posted by nonthaburi

I think you're just being disingenuous no . What would your husband's nationality have to do with how your children grew up in the UK. I'm presuming here that he didn't suddenly change into a different man overnight..

And again, what does a name have to do with anything?

And how your see yourselves, isn't necessarily a reflection on how others see you.

Originally Posted by nonthaburi

I think you're just being disingenuous no . What would your husband's nationality have to do with how your children grew up in the UK. I'm presuming here that he didn't suddenly change into a different man overnight..

And again, what does a name have to do with anything?

And how your see yourselves, isn't necessarily a reflection on how others see you.