Tell that to the Irish, the Welsh, the Scots and all the people England has ruthlessly genocided during its long history.
As a matter of fact, historically speaking, the Anglo-Saxon model is a genocidal one. They did it when they settled first in what was about to become England, they have done it during middle ages, and naturally, they did the same when they discovered other lands during the Renaissance. It's all about the frontier, when you repell those who are "differents", the savages who do not speak the same language than you.
NO OTHER European power did behave the way they did. They ALWAYS ignored the locals when they decided to permanently settle somewhere. They NEVER mixed with them. And the paradox is that this total lack of ethos, this cynical yet realistic attitude allowed them to win and spread their civilization model everywhere in the world, more effectively than any other European power.
England's history is a dreadful catalogue of crimes, so what do you expect?
Biggest bunch of rubbish I've ever read in my life. The Anglo Saxons DID mix with the indigenous peoples and that’s partly why there’s so little hint of them now. If anyone should be accused of Genocide and not mixing with the people, its the Norman conquerors. As for all the celtic neighbours of England, Scotland was brought into the Union on there own accord, albeit with little other option (after failing disastrously to set up a colony in panama). Scotland had continually been a thorn in England's side by allying with the French against us and thereby invited invasion. As for Wales and Ireland, Wales refused to submit to Edward I as overlord, despite previous Welsh princes having done so. Ireland was unfortunately trampled on by everyone, nobody remembers the Scottish invasion in 1315 that basically led to an even more bloody occupation than England. As for colonial settlement, I admit in most of the White settler colonies there was little intergration. However in the easter colonies, during the rule of the East India Company it was very common for company men to take Indian wives, sometimes several. In North borneo the King was an Englishman. Sarawak was even ruled by a succession of 'White Rajas' who were Eglishman but took on the titles and customs of the peoples they ruled.
Unfortunately England has been chastised by many for simply being a lot more successful than her neighbours. Perhaps if they had become more English, they would have done better. England even successfully managed to emulgamate French and Scottish kings into a truly English culture, no wonder James I never wanted to go back and it took Charles I nearly a decade to be crowned in Scotland.
It was also the British empire that first abolished slavery and then actively used its Navy to try and destroy the slave trade. The 'land of the free' on the other hand was one of the last places to abolish slavery, even autocratic Russia managed to abolish serfdom beforehand.
Yeah, remember that British naval blockade to prevent American cotton from going to British textile mills... oh wait...
Well there was a british blockade stopping any new slaves going to the South. Well attempting to anyway, those sneaky Americans had to get their slaves someway. During the civil war, the British began importing cotton from central asia. They clearly didn't care enough about 'King Cotton' to formally reconise the south, no matter how close they were. Slavery was always the crucial crunch point.