This story caught my eye. It’s sounds like a surprisingly impolitc thing to say, at least from an American perspective (Blair says he is “lurching into total frankness” in his last weeks in office), but of course things are different in the UK. So, 1) what’s the real story here? Who’s right?, and 2) will there be any significant backlack/fallout from this for Blair or his legacy?
I think it would be impolitic if he was planning on relection or holding any office in the future , be it the UN or the EU.
Who is right and who is wrong will probably be judge in about a century after having looked back , his views will get traction from people who agree with him, and either condemnation or guarded comments from folks who dont want to come down one way or the other off the fence.
Otherwise if he is saying this stuff then all thats left for him is the memoirs and what ever board of directors job he lands, it probably wont even be a foot note in his legacy.
Declan
Much as I dislike giving Blair credit for anything, he is only pointing out something that we all know.
Recently there has been a spate of gun and knife incidents. Pointing out that he is aware of a disturbing trend is unlikely to do him or anyone else any harm.
Since the vast majority of the black population does not consist of young males, I doubt if they’ll take offence. If anything it is a cue for people like Trevor Phillips (head of the Commission for Racial Equality) to call for ‘something to be done about it’.
This is a Wiki article on him
He has been saying that ‘multiculturism’ is not working, I anticipate him coming out with something like ‘the gangsta sub-culture’.
For Americans, we have friction between African Blacks and West Indian Blacks, also between them and Pakistanis. The situation is a bit complicated.
I smell a world-wide, full-blown race war on the horizon. :mad:
And what would your solution be?
Pray to God while hiding somewhere.
Blair also said a few months ago that Muslim women wearing veils might not be able to contribute to British society. His version of “telling it like it is” seems to involve saying disparaging things only about minorities. Call it a coincidence if you like, but I’m not so sure.
So, the youth who actually commit these crimes- what is the racial distribution among them, and are they depraved because they’re deprived or vice versa?
Sounds like he wants a Final Solution.
My bolding. At the beginning of the recent spate of knife/gun attacks by and on teenagers, opposition politics made a lot of noise about this being an indictment on modern British society, in a tedious “it’s all going to the dogs” kind of way. Tony Blair has been PM for nigh on 10 years. If society is all going to the dogs, he’ll be largely responsible. Therefore, as he eases out of power and starts thinking about his legacy it’s in his interests to suggest alternative hypotheses - i.e. a local, restricted phenomenon among a minority of the population.
That doesn’t make him right or wrong, but I suspect that’s why he’s drawn to this explanation.
It was in fact Jack Straw, Leader of the House of Commons, who made the initial comments about veils shutting people out.
Right, but Blair backed him up.
I still think that’s an outrageous thing to say.
You don’t live in Britain.
You also don’t understand that we have, to date, had no mixing bowl
- the USA Americanizes its immigrants, we have not done so
Possibly we have been stupid, possibly we just hoped that time and evolution would work.
A tossed salad is actually a better analogy than a mixing bowl. All different ingredients but still distinct. I don’t think immigrants are as “Americanized” as is commonly believed. They all seem to retain their own culture, each contributing something unique. Their descendants are a different story; usually by the third generation, they are “Americanized.”
Yep. It’s unfortunate that the only time when politicians can really speak their mind (and, in this case, state unpleasant truths), is when they have little political power left to expend.
And?
I do understand that. I think Blair is an idiot for suggesting a Muslim woman may have nothing to contribute to society just because she’s wearing a veil. Do you think that helps matters? I am trying to refrain from judging Blair’s character because I don’t know him well enough, but I am getting the sense that he is appealing to an audience of bigots. There are some people who love to hear their leaders “tell it like it is” by criticizing minorities because they lack the guts to do it themselves.
And far be it for me to back Blair up, but he went on to say (from your link):
“It is a mark of separation and that is why it makes other people from outside the community feel uncomfortable. No-one wants to say that people don’t have the right to do it. That is to take it too far. But I think we need to confront this issue about how we integrate people properly into our society.”
Which seems pretty non-outrageous and reasonable to me.
Not everything he said there was insulting. But like I said, the implication that women in veils might have nothing to contribute to society IS. It sounds like he was asked a yes or no question on the subject.
Heh, which is precisely the problem. The journalist tried to trap him by asking a very specific closed question about a huge issue. He evaded reasonably well.
I agree, if he’d said ‘No, they have nothing to contribute’ that would have been awful. As it is, he evaded the specifics and answered the more general question, which was whether integration was actually occuring successfully.
Maybe policiticans in the states operate differently, but in the UK you never get a yes or no answer, and it’s not expected. It’s like an irritating cat and mouse game, but I guess with a purpose because the real issues are far too complex to extract soundbites - which doesn’t suit either the media or the politicians in these days of spin and headline-seeking policy.
I do, and I agree with **Marley ** (not that location should make a difference). Blair’s suggesting that there is some debate around not whether veil-wearers contribute to society more or less than the rest of us, but whether they can make any contribution at all, and his further idea that this question is somehow a difficult one is outrageous.
I tried searching for statistics broken down by race and socioeconomic status, but all the official statistics that I could find seem to go out of their way to avoid breaking it down as described. I could find this report which states: