And that post is a perfect example of the irrational reasoning I hear all the time from brexit supporters that, whether intentional or not, comes over as xenophobic and borderline racist. Not to mention just wrong.
Sorry, I have a lot of respect for your posts in general and you are ofc fully entitled to your opinion, but we clearly have opposite viewsthat's fine, I won't go further as I don't want to start an angry argument on this thread
Corky34 (18-03-2019)
Don't conflate the racist nonsense ramblings from Oilsheikh and his fellow racists. I'm surprised that he didn't start the post with "I'm not a racist but"Originally Posted by Spud1
And that post is a perfect example of the irrational reasoning I hear all the time from brexit supporters that, whether intentional or not, comes over as xenophobic and borderline racist. Not to mention just wrong.
Sorry, I have a lot of respect for your posts in general and you are ofc fully entitled to your opinion, but we clearly have opposite views
There are quite a few brexit voters that did so not because of Xenophobia and racism but because of a genuine dislike of the legal arrangements with the EU. e.g. Laws which are not in our interest which we as a country would never introduce but are forced upon us by the EU. Wherever you stand on the law thing does not matter - the point I am trying to make is simply that it's not a case of Brexiteers=racists
Some brexiteers are. Some are not.
Some remainers are. Some are not.
It's not fair on those who voted for brexit not out of hate but because of other more legitimate reasons to lump them together with the racists. It's guilt by association.
Example: PeterB on this very board. I've seen no suggestion his support for Brext is anything other than for honourable reasons.
"In a perfect world... spammers would get caught, go to jail, and share a cell with many men who have enlarged their penises, taken Viagra and are looking for a new relationship."
Yeah I know don't worry
Thank you.
Having just spent a couple of periods in hospital since the New Year, I am very grateful to the nurses and consultants - many of which are from Eastern European nations - who treated and cared for me during those stays.
And as for criminals - we have a long history of UK criminals fleeing to Europe - particularly the south of Spain over the years. Which is why I hope that pragmatism about the sharing of intelligence for security and investigating criminal activity will prevail post brexit.
Wearing my admin hat... While I know that some posts may be somewhat outrageous in their content, would everyone please remember the HEXUS ethos that it is OK to attack the ideas, but please try to avoid personal attacks etc.
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
Been helped or just 'Like' a post? Use the Thanks button!
My broadband speed - 750 Meganibbles/minute
g8ina (17-03-2019),Saracen999 (18-03-2019)
Typical remainer blindfolded attitude.
I state what are the alarming issues and I am now a racist, eh ? So, tell me , am I chatting bs ?
It is amazing how fast people leap toward accusations of Racism. OilSheikh mentioned a number of what he perceived to be problems with immigrants from Eastern Europe who would likely be of the same race as the majority of England. So this anti-immigration opinion, right or wrong though it may be, certainly isn't a racist one. It may be Xenophobic, although I don't think that's particularly likely.
This is a problem which has become common in internet debate. Any statement about the negatives of immigration (and there are some real negatives, to go with the positives) immediately faces accusations of racism. Throwing insults isn't a good way to debate.
Jonj1611 (18-03-2019),peterb (18-03-2019),Saracen999 (18-03-2019)
While I understand, and even agree with, much of the logic behind that, I part company with you on several points."British democracy" is a rather strange thing in itself - and if you look at how our system works (and has done for many, many years now), it's already well and truly broken. In the confines of our current system though, we elect representitives to make the tough decisions for us, in the best interests of our country, specifically to avoid situations like this when the general public are well and truly split with no clear majority for a decision either way (you can argue the 2-3% thing as much as you like, but practically the country is split and leave or remain, people will be pissed). That system already isn't "democracy" as many would understand or like it, and thats before you even get into the mess of our electoral system that supports it.
The very fact the referrendum was positioned in the way it was has been really damaging and has left the government tied in knots, as they know Brexit is a huge risk and that it is likely to be initially hugely damaging to the UK, but they can't not try and follow through with the result as-is given the promises that were made, even if it's actually their job to make the correct & best decision for the country, which historically would be to remain given the general propensity to avoid risk in large government decisons in the past. (no one knows for sure if leaving the EU will be a good or bad thing, whichever way you voted - anyone who says they do is making it up).
I am clearly a remainer and have never heard of a logical, rational and non-angry argument for leaving the EU, but I also don't want a second referrendum. Personally I want the governement to do their job and act in the best interests of our country, which is what we employ them for, rather than all this pandering to a rather pointless vote. That would be to abandon this and remain....With a little luck and 2-3 weeks of policy making this whole disaster could be undone. Sadly the majority of our MPs are too spineless to do it, thinking of their own careers rather than their jobs (a strong concept in many ways
tl;dr - I believe that the truly "British Democratic" thing to do is to ignore the referrendum and remain tihe EU. Thats not the same as the by-the-book "democractic" thing to do, which would be to leave based on a slim margin of a public vote
First, that ignoring the referendum and letting politicians decide is sonehow any form of democracy.
For a start, we are in this situation because politicians, in our current political sgstem, got us i to it. That's why there was a referendum.
Cameron was scared witless by the results of the last EU electionsm in which UKIP beat both Labour and Tories and took first place. I sonehow doubt that this was out of any inherent fondness for either UKIP of Mr. Farage but it was a very clear vote by a very large number of people against the line that more or less the entire political establishment have been making for decades, which is to be in the EU. Fact is, a very large proportion of the electorate don't agree.
This is not about whether it's a majority or not, but about whether, under our current political system, it was enough to whittle away Tory majorities in sufficient seats to let Milliband's Labour in. Sure, UKIP may have taken some seats, but Cameron's primary concern was splitting the traditional Tory vote and letting Labour in .... and hence nding his run as PM and the Tories brief run in power, albeit coalition power.
Which brings me to Dave's insurance policy - coalition. He banked on being able to promise a referendum, secure that his LD cialition partners wouks veto it. Trouble is, he had the misfortune to actually win outright and couldn't avoid calling the referebdum for real .... not expecting to lose it.
So .... rather than in the interests of the country, big Dave actually gambled with Brexit for the sake of naked political advantage of hus career and the party.
And that is the system you want to trust to act in the country's best interests?
As far as I'm concerned, politicians simply cannot be trusted to do that, because they're politicians.
Second, the convention is we hold referendums to matters to important to leave to politicians, and that generally is on matters of major constitutional change .... like the AV vote, or Scottish IndyRef.
Given the scale of the groundswell against the EU, as clearly evidenced by UKIP foming first in EU elections, it would be very dangerous to simply keep ignoring it. When governments decide that they, the elites, know better than the people, is when resentment builds, turns yo anger and before you kniw it you have .... well, look at France .... annoy and ignore the people for long enough and you have months of Gillies Jeune protests (which seem to be getting nastier) at the low end, and the French Revolution and those same elites ending up in tbe firm embrace of Mme Guillotine at the high end.
Next, you want "best interests" of the country? What is the definition of "best interests".... and who gets to either define it or measure jt?
Much of the remainer arguments is about trade, GDP, "prosperity". But a large chunk of Brexit argument is that, while that is obviously very important, it is not the only thing that is important. If it were the only thing, then that argument says it'd be fine living under Stalin's Soviet regime, or Hitler's Third Reich, or Kim's Northe Korean regime, or even ISIS, provided they get GDP up. i don't believe anyone thinks that.
Third, you say nobody knows for sure if leaving is a goid or bad thing. Agreed, but by the same logic, nobidy knows for sure if remaining in the EU would be a good or bad thing, especially as the EU is not a fixed entity locked into it's current state. It is, and always has been, an evolving project so staying in being good means understanding what it's evolving into, and approving of it. And I certainly don't approve of it.
Finally, I read and couldn't believe
Please don't tell me you think that would undo this mess? The genie is out of the bottle and political shennanigans in parliament are not not going to fix that.....
With a little luck and 2-3 weeks of policy making this whole disaster could be undone.
That sort of rank contempt by MPs for the people the political equivalent of jamming the release valve on a pressure cooker closed and turning the heat to maximum.
It is also a prime example of why there is a divide between remainers and brexiters if you think ignoring the referendum and gerrymandering a result fixes things. It's been several hundred years since this country has had a civil war, but that stands a decent chance of starting another one, and certainly would put paid to any lingering respect for the political class for a very large number of people, to the point of it being an existential threat to tgat system because it will be seen as the arrogant political manouvring of that elite that it would be. Batten down the hatches.
The brexit divide is not going away any time soon, regardless of the outcome, but just ignoring the referendum result .... well, that's lighting the blue touch paper.
I can tell you one reason Brexit supporters are sensitive about equating EU-scepticism to racism. It's because for, oh, about 20 years or more, if you raise ANY argunents against the EU, you get called a litany of names, ranging from "little englander" to xenophobic to racist.Yeah I know don't worry
It has LONG been used as a way to denigrate such views and to intimidate and shut down those holding them.
For instance (and on another forum) several years ago I had a discussion about whether tge UK shoukd joun tbe Eurozone. I said, right now snd for tbe foreseeable future, no. I then explained why not. I compared the structural differences (then) between, for instance, the housing sector in the UK and Gernany. The logic centred around comparative scales of rental and ownership (hence, mortgaged) and the degree of impact of base rate changes on each sector. Then, I pointed out the nature of economies to run in cycles, and some of the reasons why, and of the very different magnitude and duration of those cycles in different countries, in large part because of different underlying economic structures.
Now, for any single currency to work you needxa single central bank setting interest rates. Unless those countries all have economi cycles harmonised at least in duration, and synchronised over tge long term, then any interest rate rise for the needs of a country at one point in tbeir cycle will be at best dmagjng, and potentially the exact worst thing, for others. I also pointed out that the size of a rise of cut in rates impacts differently, nit least depending on those housing market structures, because large amounts of mortgages makes base rate (and therefore retail rates) impact with a far higher magnitude on individuals and therefore on spending ahd consumer confidence and consumer demand.
The upshot is that any given rate change that's right for, say, Germany may well be the wrong size of change, or even in the wrong direction, for the UK, or Greece or .... etc.
And the response to a rational and extensive economic argument? I was called all those above names, and more, as well as being told I just wanted tbe Queen's head on coins.
I can't express how little I care what head is on currency. It can be Miss Piggy or Kermit for all I care.
And the really offendive thing about being called a racist is that just about anything you csn say in your defence is promptly turned against you, like "I have good friends that are < insert choice of race>.
Try it. See how well that works.
One of the things I like most about arguments on forums is you have, really, no idea who you are arguing with. You can't be prejuduced by age, gender, race, nationality, sexual preference social class (if it still exists or matters), accent education, occupation, religion or sense of fashion or style, because, unless you know someone personally, you don't know any of those things. So they cannot influence your perception of someone.
You can't even rely on what you think you know of someone based on what they've said about themselves because it might be :-
a) not true, or
b) true but musleading.
Which is why I loathe calling people racist (etc) unless they have done or said something overtly and directly racist.
For instance :-
- I am against huge levels of Eastern European immigration.
But I'm against huge levels of ANY immigration, in tbe short term. Why? Because it csuses structural problems. Any large scale popukation increase risks overloading stretched resources, like housing, schools, etc, if it's too high in volume over too short a period.
I am NOT against Eastern European immigrants, or any others for that matter, and this scale snd timescale applies regardless of where the immigrants come from, let alone race. It's about the operation of policy, and our ability to cope. For instance, if you have 8 million immigrants but only built 1 million places to live, you are going to stress the housing market. And if doesn't matter what race those 8 million are, they still all need housing, etc.
And yes, by a funny coincidence, one of my best friends is a completely different race to me, and my nephew's wife is Eastern European, a British citizen and a highly qualified NHS nurse. And a really nice girl.
But by the logjc of those that didn't seem to understand economic cycles or the mechanisms of interest rates, having a mate of a different race and saying so no doubt makes me racist, because I support controlled immigration according to national needs and ability to cope, not EU freedom of movement.
True but when brexit voters fail to call out Xenophobia and racism some people naturally assume those views are shared by the entire group, I'm not saying it's right but that's what guilt by association is, it's a fallacy but unfortunately lots of people are susceptible to them.
How you can say that with a straight face when only a few posts ago you said "please don't bring up biased stats from the govt or some other so-called independent body" is beyond laughable.
Good old B3ta:
Jonj1611 (18-03-2019)
Wait, what?
How the hell is it my respinsibility, as a Brexiteer, to "call out" racist or Xenophobic posts, and failingvto do so is somehow evidence of supporting or agreeing with them?
By that logic, any Muslim that failed to condemn 9/11 must be a terrorist or, at least, a sympathiser. Any Irish person that failed to condemn IRA terrorism must be a sympathiser, and anyone that failed to condemn protestant extremist violence must be a sympathiser, so by extension, anyone failing to condemn either must be a sympathuser with violent extremists on both sides, at the same time.
I think it's self-evident that there are some anti-semites in the Labour party, but does that make anyone failing to condemn it from the rooftops anti-Semitic, too?
No, no and no.
Of course, in that latter case there are those in a position of authority and responsibility that, because of their position, could and probably should be far more active and vocal.
But there are quite a few members even on here who are firm Corbyn supporters. Are they required to immediately condemn anyone, here or eksewhere, that says or is revealed to have said something anti-Semitic for fear of being accused of being anti-Semitic simply because they didn't?
Again, no, no and no.
I've outlined above by objections, and some of the reasons, for EU freedom of movement policy. It's not about the race of immigrants, or non-EU immigrants at all. It's not even about being anti-immigration. It's about how many over a specified period, what the needs of the country are and our ability to cope.
It's also about a level playing field between EU and non-EU potential applicants. If we need, for instance, ICU nurses but don't need plumbers, I'm in favour of ICU nurses coming but not plumbers, regardless of either their respective races OR EU status. I'd rather have an Indian ICU nurse than an EU plumber, but if our needs were reversed and we needed plumbers but not ICU nurses, then my priority between those two would reverse too.
The point is, we have limited infrastructure and ability to cope with unlimited numbers of immigrants, especially over a short period which restricts our ability to expand the infrastructure. Given limited ability to cope, a Brexiteer will want immigration policy on numbers and origins to be set here, not in Brussels and according to UK needs not EU policy. And I certainly object to EU nationals with skills we don't need being given priority over surgeons, nurses or software engineers we do need simply because the EU national is an EU national and the surgeon or software engineer isn't.
That is, I would suggest, exactly the opposite of racism because my support is based on our needs, and the immgrant's skills and expertise, regardless of race, nationality, gender, religion, sexual orientation, etc, NOT bias against otherwise qualified individuals merely because they aren't EU citizens.
In fact, maybe Europhiles are racist because they discriminate against, for instance, Indian surgeons or software engineers in favour of EU nationals of whatever skills (or none) who, of course, are predominantly white?
See, how do you like it?
I have NO obligation to condemn every racist nut that happens to support Brexit when they say something racist, because I'm not their keeper, and not responsible for what they say any more than every Muslim on the planet is responsible for ISIS executions simply because they don't keep condemning it every time.
Put it this way - if I don't condemn something, it is NOT in any way, shape or form mean I agree with it, not least because I have been called a racist xenophobe myself, so many times, for having the temerity to be Eurosceptic, even on an issue like whether to join the Euro, a subject which has naff-all to do with racism.
This kind of labelling, insulting, denigrating has been used to pressure, silence or bully eurosceptics for so long, usually with no justification and without being called out for the nasty practice that it is that I no longer pay any attention to those levelling the accusation ... meaning I may well miss occasions when it's a valid accusation.
It has, far too often, been used as a weapon, and is exactly the same mentality that meant gays hid in the closet for so long, fearing the reaction of society, loss of job, and so on, or used by bullies accusing single and/or slightly eccentric women of being witches when a couple of local cows died. It is the witch-hunt mentality and guilt by failing to condemn it is equally as bad. It's positively dystopian
Last edited by Saracen999; 18-03-2019 at 01:55 PM.
Jonj1611 (18-03-2019)
Was pondering this morning what on earth the current crop of politicians would do if the deal gets voted down, an extension is rejected and we leave on the 29th with no deal and in rougher circumstances that had we bothered to make better arrangements. Will they even know what to do with themselves? And indeed, might we face a massive shake-up of the MPs owing to a frustrated, disappointed...fuming mad...electorate? I do think there are probably a good number of MPs who simply can't conceive of a UK outside of EU membership. Not just MP's either.
If you saw the short snippet of a Brexit question asked of Roger Daltrey, "How are you going to tour in Europe?" He wasn't best chuffed with the question. What kind of journalist asks that? Someone who has never lived outside the EU and has never for one consider any other existence, that's who. Someone for whom Brexit might well represent a going out into uncharted waters - there be monsters!
I wonder just how any politicians might be of the same limited mindset.
No trees were harmed in the creation of this message. However, many electrons were displaced and terribly inconvenienced.
Interesting updates, thanks for the detailed posts...I will endevour to reply back when i get chance as there are some interesting debates to be had here
Just one specific point I feel I need to mention - there seems to be an assumption that many if not all of the points OilSheikh has raised are *because* of immigration, or are specifically those ethnic groups...that is somethign I would argue strongly against, and is the sole reason that I call out such comments are racist/xenophobic.
They are all issues within our society which have existed for many years, and its all too easy to try and blame them on a particular group of people who are seen as "different". They are not unique to those from eastern europe in any way. I see for example far more issues with African gangs in the north west, and beggers/drug pushers are pretty much all white british in central manchester. Benefits is a completely ill informed point to try and make - it's much harder for migrants to obtain benefits that many people think, and there is certainly no "favouritsim" when ti comes ot housing etc which again, many people think.
Of the issues where they may be a valid point (e.g. the Romanian begging gangs) leaving the EU won't affect this - they are already illegal migrants under the current system. There may be a few other legitimate points and I don't have time to respond to each of them...but I simply refute the argument that A) they are all caused by mass migration and B) that leaving the EU would solve this problem.
There is significantly more to this discussion of need, and why that alone isn't a good reason for immigration. There is a critical shortage of Nurses, both in the UK and USA. But there are some significant differences. In the UK, and ICU Nurse is typically around 'Band 6' and starts at about GBP27K/Year. In the US, an ICU nurse starts over twice that, and can easily make over 100K. At this point people are immediately leaping to the whole 'The US has terrible private healthcare' etc. To which I say, yes. No dispute on that. But a private company is always pushing to pay the minimum market wage, while in the UK the RCN Union provides an additional upward push on salary. Now one difference is the scope of practice that makes nursing a more complex job, with a lot more training, in the US. This adds another limitation on the number of qualified nurses available.
The point is, this is a 'labour market' nurses have skilled labour, which they are selling. Where that supply is limited, the cost goes up. When nursing pay more, more people are motivated to pursue that profession. It's basic economics. So if the UK can import foreign nurses, importing cheap labour from overseas (Which may be of a quality that is just as good), what that does is undercut the British nurses, and provide a downward pressure on their salary. At that point, it's no surprise that nurses should seek to limit immigration. It's not automatically racism, or a question of the level of skill of immigrant workers, but simply the fact that they are undercutting the industry. The same goes for many other skilled professions.
The US has a significant (illegal) immigration problem, but it's stuck in a quagmire of allegations of racism and demands for wall building. Changing the debate into an economic one is the path toward actual change, although neither political party wants that.
I wasn't referring to you specifically, sorry that that's how it came across.
I meant it in the general sense, in the same way that someone associating themselves with Labour or the Conservatives should call out Islamophobia or anti-Semites as otherwise some people use guilt by association, i did say it's a logical fallacy and that I wasn't saying it's right but unfortunately people do use fallacies.
IMO, and i mean this as politely as i can, i think you maybe being a little overly defensive, i can understand why as guilt by association is probably one of the most commonly used forms of attack and it gets tiring constantly having to explain things to unreasonable and/or illogical people, especially when they've basically just insulted you and there's not enough time to explain why such thinking is wrong, however it wasn't directed at you, or anyone, specifically.
Calling out racist or Xenophobic comments, again in the general, is basically a shortcut of a shortcut, it's basically saying "yea they don't speak for us" before some ass claims they do just because you (in the general sense) have something else in common.
Last edited by Corky34; 18-03-2019 at 05:38 PM.
Unless I misread that, and it was a bit hurried, it might be a valud argument re: the US but isn't what I was talking about. US versus UK NHS health care is interesting and IMHO not as simple as many make out, but for UK immigration purposes, US ICU nurses currently are at a disadvantage in the UK due to EU rules on freedom of movement. So, suppose Brexit has happened and we're trying to recruit ICU nurses - qualified US nurses then have a better chance to come here if they wish, but for pay reasons, they may well not wish to.
My point was that Brexit puts immigration policy into UK hands, for UK government, accirding to UK needs, and isn't racist, so supporting Brexit on immigration is not necessarily racist either, but that doesn't preclude people that are racist supporting Brexit.
As was said earlier, there are racists that support and oppose Brexit, but because Brexit supporters are racist does not mean Brexit supporters are racist. That is a similar logical fallacy to saying some Scots have red hair, so all red heads are Scottish.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
