Attacks on Muslims and Poles continue to escalate but it’s spreading to pretty much all ethnic minorities now, with several reported incidents against blacks and south Asians. Oh and gay people: a crowd in Covent Garden on Tuesday night was heard chanting “First we’ll get the Poles out, then the gays!”. Yes, “the gays” need to go back to Gayland where they came from.
“Rate of influx”, my arse.
Blimey! Is The Daily Express only 10p these days? That might be cheaper than Andrex…
Of course, this has never ever happened before and is entirely the fault of the 17.4m who voted to leave the EU.
That’s absolutely preposterous. The warning was if you and others call people racist as a disingenuous tactic, in time, it will be a worthless tactic. The well worn and overplayed “that’s racist11!!!1” card is less effective because of it’s dishonest misuse.
Racism obviously exists. But inaccurate use of the term is not, in the long term, productive.
/points a gun at GIGObuster
Gimme the phrase and back away slowly. Do it. NOW.
Of course, everything is fine and the bigoted national campaign using bigot’s slogans to communicate bigoted ideas had no effect on bigots whatsoever.
As one Twitter wag put it: you can’t be sure that every Brexiteer is a racist, but you can be sure that every racist is a Brexiteer.
Of course, in much the same way that false accusations of rape reduce the effectiveness of real rape claims. The problems lies in where one thinks the ratio of real-to-false accusations lies. In both cases, the people most keenly complaining about false accusations tend to overstate their incidence by a significant factor. The fact that people not directly affected by discrimination are less likely to notice it or consider it significant is not in itself proof that the issue is “overplayed”.
And in the case of the Brexit campaign, the issue was certainly not imagined or manufactured.
And the fact that these behaviours have exploded in the past week is entirely coincidental. Nothing to see here…
Yeah, it’s not like Farage is demanding the repeal of race discrimination laws or anything.
Did you read the article?
I guess we’ll just have to see the thing. I expect the rate for the advertising slots has just gone up!
Yes.
“In that documentary he was talking about scrapping equalities legislation, now he’s talking about reframing employment legislation; they are two entirely different things”
Except, of course, when it comes to employment equality legislation, when they are pretty much the same thing. Can an employer lawfully prefer the white applicant over the black, on account of his race? No. Why not? Because the Equality Act 2010 forbids it. There’s a bit of a clue in the name.
Brexit was fueled by irrational xenophobia, not real economic grievances
I don’t think anyone disputes that racists voted for Brexit, but declaring that immigrants were the primary reason for Leave is a step not shown.
Yeah, I don’t think it’s quite as simple as “immigrants coming over here, taking our jobs”, although that was part of it. According to Ashcroft Polls (run by a maverick Conservative politician, but generally considered reputable and impartial), the top issue for Leavers was the ability of the UK to make its own decisions. Immigration was second, and third was expansion of the EU’s powers and membership. (Although it seems to me that that third part is to some extent a restatement of the first two, so I’m not sure I understand the question.)
I’m not sure how reliable such a poll would be. I would imagine that, if asked by a stranger, it would feel more comfortable to say one didn’t like foreigners telling one what to do, rather than saying one didn’t want foreigners in one’s country.
I think that falls under whether Ashcroft is a reputable poll or not. You are right that the form of the question can affect the answer. The data about what questions were asked is in this PDF: http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/How-the-UK-voted-Full-tables-1.pdf
Not an easy document to read, but I don’t get the impression that particularly loaded questions were what was asked.
It is often used that way. That’s a fact.
Obviously that rhetoric and activity is clearly “bigoted”
But I find it interesting that so many people on your side like to conflate virtually all cases of animus towards the other with bigotry.
Two Pakistani immigrants move to the UK (Let’s assume I was a citizen there), one an atheist, who more or less has the same value set I do, believes in freedom of speech and expression (to an even greater extent than the ultra gag order UK tolerates), who does not demand from society and those who do not think like he does he be granted a special right of freedom from offense. The other a devout muslim, who holds social views I find abhorrent towards women and gays and general free expression. When religion is discussed, he demands that his beliefs and ideas about the world be respected, that the constraints HE observes as a religious muslim ought to be the same constraints non muslims around him.
These two men are both brown skinned, both Pakistani, both from vastly different cultures, but one I have zero problem with. Why? Ideas. The notion that I should EVER be chained to the ground like so many of YOU want to be and pretend that I should have no differential respect and attitudes towards idea sets I encounter in the world is absurd (and no, religious belief is NOT different from an idea set, sorry, you WON’T get special treatment from me).
But not all muslims are like that Salvor?
I know that! I am happy and glad to have people that are not that way, the people who buy into and go along with the larger common culture and don’t actively have beliefs and attitudes that go AGAINST the larger culture. But here is the rub, while most British Muslims are not Anjem Choudary class 7th century class muslims, there are not nearly enough Tarek Fatah/Irshad Manji/Majid Nawas muslims either.
Importing tens of thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of muslims from around the world randomly, like say, though a refugee crisis would yield a higher percentage of people who have views closer to Anjem (which again, I find to be an enemy of modern civilization), this would have GREATER negative social and societal impacts than importing the same number of Hindus or Buddhists or atheists.
That is my assertion based off observations and reading. In the same way one might give greater scrutiny to a virulent strain of the flu to make sure to minimize the damage, it makes perfect sense to me to have greater scrutiny towards muslims, not because they tend to have darker skin, or come from different non white cultures, but because they are the population that is infected with the religious memeplex known as Islam, where the collections of beliefs and attitudes that waft out from that tend to be more destructive to the sort of liberally minded and free thinking / free expression societies I care about.
IF you don’t actually give a damn about that last part, and are more concerned with ones own personal fantasies about my or others supposed hatred of brown people being the primary or only animus or increased wariness towards certain groups, then I guess there is no problem with having unchecked muslim immigration. But unlike you, I don’t belief all ideas/beliefs are interchangeable, I don’t believe a thousand devout muslims will integrate just as well as a thousand devout buddhists. If I am wrong about that, so be it, but this is an empirical question.
If the actual answer turned out to be that the muslim population was no more likely to be hostile to liberal society than any other group, that there was not an increase in social conservatism and hostility towards gays, my animus towards the beliefs would wane. I would still find them silly, but not dangerous to a functioning society I want to live in.
So I’m supposed to draw from this that you’re alright with a religious test for immigrants, correct?
“Excuse me, are you a fundamentalist Muslim or are your views more moderate?”
Yeah, right.
So, let’s get this straight; In your imagination people were saying one thing when they mean’t another.
I think there should be a second referendum, because Walken After Midnight’s imagination is telling him that people were voting ‘Leave’ for the wrong reasons.
Let’s keep on holding referendums until Walken After Midnight is happy with the result and Arsenal get to the Quarter- Finals of the Champions League.
That’d be what I call real democracy.