Just overhearing a work conversation my wife is having.
An unreported and unappreciated thing about immigrants working in the NHS is this:
Immigrants, especially those who are training, are less likely to have dependents with them in the UK. A side effect of this is that a disproportionate amount of antisocial and out of hours shifts are done by these people. Sure, NHS trusts have done various things over the years to address skills shortages during these shifts, but on the whole, this still remains the case.
Immigrants workers in the NHS are also more likely to be accommodated in hospital bedrooms (what would previously have been more the preserve of student nurses etc). So, again, they are more likely to do antisocial hours as they are living closer to the workplace.
Whether all this fair or not is another matter. But less immigrants working in the NHS, the more nights UK born staff would have to be away from home.
Great example Dazh. "Go first, be positive" - seems like great life advice to me (I need to do more of that, the social 'going first' bit)
When inclusion in cycling came up often a couple of years back there was plenty of good stuff about how the best thing is for the dominant or main group to go first towards the smaller group - proactively invite and welcome those on the outside in rather than expect outsiders to come to the group asking. Perhaps too much of UK culture expects newcomers to integrate while the newcomers are waiting to be invited in. Seems right that it feels nicer to be invited than to have to ask - at work, socially, culturally.
We need to be careful with the NHS staffing point. It's all true, and I agree, but... in the short term there are currently lots of recruitment freezes going on (some of that is down to recent pay rises, some to do with reorganisation), so lots of people are going to be finishing their education and not finding places quickly/easily in the NHS. We absolutely still need trained staff to come here, but you're about to hear lots of anecdotes about newly trained UK staff not being able to get jobs, and that being misattributed to immigrants working in the NHS. Just watch out for that.
The only country in Europe with a average female fertility rate above 2 is Hungary and they provide lots of support to mothers and families in general.
Not so, it's currently 1.38 and the last time it was above 2 was 1979. Hungary has had long term cost of living problem and throwing money at childcare has done very little to change that. The Hungarian government is known for its "child care propaganda" but the aid is highly selective concerning only heterosexual married high earning couples.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Data:Hungary_TFR.tab
Ugh, never read the comments in a community Facebook post about a local councillor joining Reform. Would rather not see migrants crossing the channel described as "animals".
Guess the admins of that group will be getting a lot of reports
Maybe you nan should go knock on their doors and introduce herself?
If you'd fully read my post you'd see that was half my point. She didn't do that where perhaps she should have. But the onus shouldn't only be on the famously mobile septuagenarian demographic to be walking around the community introducing themselves. Any suggestions why none of the incomers knocked on her door?
Any suggestions why none of the incomers knocked on her door?
There's six pages of suggestions right here.
If you'd just fled a warzone, been temporary placed in a shit hotel with an angry mob outside who'd rather see it empty than have you in it, then moved to an established community of flag-shaggers where the lead story on most newspapers is how welcome you aren't, do you suppose the first thing you'd do is go knocking door-to-door to make sure everyone knows where you live?
If you'd fully read my post you'd see that was half my point.
If you'd fully read daz's post you'd see that was only half of his. It takes two people to not talk to each other.
Yeah but if I already made a point, it's seems odd that someone else quotes my post and makes the same point as if I didn't. I was just making sure dazh is aware I'm not looking at this from just one side.
There's six pages of suggestions right here.
If you'd just fled a warzone, been temporary placed in a shit hotel with an angry mob outside who'd rather see it empty than have you in it, then moved to an established community of flag-shaggers...
is relevant to current affairs, not to the economic migrants moving to and buying houses in an area of Sheffield during the 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s.
... a time in our history when, of course, overt racism was famously unheard of and having darkies moving in next door was considered cause for celebration.
The drivers for migration may have evolved over the years, but we've been resentful of it for as long as I can remember. If you make it very clear that people aren't welcome then it shouldn't come as a massive shock to you when they don't feel welcome.
I've just been perma-banned from r/uk personal finance.
I'm not going to share what I said in reply to the below, I'll leave that to your imagination.
What I will say, is, it's not people in boats causing the cost of living crisis...
It's not people earning £80-100k and wondering about child benefit either.
If you make it very clear that people aren't welcome then it shouldn't come as a massive shock to you when they don't feel welcome.
And this comes back to my original point. Sure, some white British have made it clear that others aren't welcome. But what about the other way round? The ones that I'm assuming kerley and others have alluded to as not being willing to integrate. Two sides of the same coin, but only half the coin is racist.
There has been a missing man around our local area for the last week. Sadly a body has now been found and his family informed. The man in question was in his 40s but had learning difficulties and he was also of Muslim heritage.
Had this happened pre-2016 I would have estimated that less than 0.5% of the comments on FB would have been out of order. I would also think the person/people responsible would be at least spoken to. Fast forward to 2025 and I would say 2-3% of the comments are bang out of order. The various village/town/police groups were taking down offensive ones, but not quick enough to stop some being visible to the casual observer. I would reckon the ones stupid enough to post on a police page might get a message back, but the rest won't.
This is pretty much solely due to the legitimisation of these views that have been pandered to (leading or following) by our politicians and it started in earnest with the Leave campaign of 2016. The number of people now willing to post this stuff is because of a feeling of safety in numbers and a creeping normalisation of prejudiced views. All the way from a poster and odd comment in 2016 to Reform being ahead in the polls. Same faces at the helm, ratcheting up the prejudice and calling it 'legitimate concerns'.
Anyone with an objective view of politics of the last decade knows how we got here and what the catalyst was.
Two sides of the same coin, but only half the coin is racist.
Was your gran discriminated, harassed or disadvantaged due to her race? No she wasn’t, so she wasn’t the victim of racism.
There has been a missing man around our local area for the last week. Sadly a body has now been found and his family informed. The man in question was in his 40s but had learning difficulties and he was also of Muslim heritage.
Had this happened pre-2016 I would have estimated that less than 0.5% of the comments on FB would have been out of order. I would also think the person/people responsible would be at least spoken to. Fast forward to 2025 and I would say 2-3% of the comments are bang out of order. The various village/town/police groups were taking down offensive ones, but not quick enough to stop some being visible to the casual observer. I would reckon the ones stupid enough to post on a police page might get a message back, but the rest won't.
This is pretty much solely due to the legitimisation of these views that have been pandered to (leading or following) by our politicians and it started in earnest with the Leave campaign of 2016. The number of people now willing to post this stuff is because of a feeling of safety in numbers and a creeping normalisation of prejudiced views. All the way from a poster and odd comment in 2016 to Reform being ahead in the polls. Same faces at the helm, ratcheting up the prejudice and calling it 'legitimate concerns'.
Anyone with an objective view of politics of the last decade knows how we got here and what the catalyst was.
I couldn't agree more. But there is also another 'element' that has contributed to this.
The absolute fumble successive governments have made of quite hot topics around race.
The group-based sexual exploitation issue being one prime example. The absolutely dog shit attempt at gaslighting the public, the subsequent report essentially validating what people already thought has given racists another reason to bang their drum and groups like Reform and all their associated ilk a political gift.
Even in the face of the Casey review some are still trying to downplay it's significance as if that is going to somehow mean the racists will shrug their shoulders and go 'oh, we were wrong'.
The next petrol bomb to the fire at some point in the future likely will be the outcome from Labours islamaphobia redefinition consultation. Done behind closed doors, with no transparency. I mean what negative attention could that possibly bring?
It's like the point you made earlier in the thread in how they should the PM should have addressed the flag issue, but instead they seem to choose this dismissive, or downright avoidant approach that is petrol to an already out of control fire.
Was your gran discriminated, harassed or disadvantaged due to her race? No she wasn’t, so she wasn’t the victim of racism.
There's a strong argument that because some white people may have made the migrants feel unwelcome that they decided to exclude all white people from their interactions. I imagine if a white person did that to a different ethic group they'd be called racist.
This is my whole point. There's no separation in a lot of people's minds between genuine concerns and flag-shagging xenophobia. White people just need to sit down, shut up and integrate when demographics change, and if they question why it's a prelude to the usual "racism" conversation ender. Other groups get a pass because to question why they don't integrate is a prelude to the usual "racism" conversation ender.
White people just need to sit down, shut up and integrate when demographics change, and if they question why it's a prelude to the usual "racism" conversation ender
I think it extraordinarily difficult to argue that white people in the UK can be the victims of racism in anything vaguely approaching the same way as black and brown can be.
As a white person living in a very multicultural area, and someone who very often finds themselves in situations where I am very much an ethnic minority, quite often in a minority of just one, I can assure you that I very rarely if ever feel like a victim of racism.
I have absolutely no doubt that if I was black my experience of racism in the UK would have been very different. And I am equally sure that I wouldn't have had to rely on the experiences of "my gran" to make the point.
This ridiculous claim that all people can experience an equal level of racism in the UK is totally absurd, but it is shamefully used by white supremacists, and also zionists, and is currently being successfully used to drive out Diane Abbott, a woman who has faced racism on a daily basis throughout her life, out of the Labour Party.
Because they are a bit thick and easily led.
/thread
(with reference to the title)
And I am equally sure that I wouldn't have had to rely on the experiences of "my gran" to make the point.
It's a fairly standard technique when having a conversation, using examples to allow others to empathise with a point you're making.
But I understand now. Only first hand account are allowed, and your experience is applicable to all white people.
Got it 👍🏼
White people just need to sit down, shut up and integrate when demographics change, and if they question why it's a prelude to the usual "racism" conversation ender
I think it extraordinarily difficult to argue that white people in the UK can be the victims of racism in anything vaguely approaching the same way as black and brown can be.
As a white person living in a very multicultural area, and someone who very often finds themselves in situations where I am very much an ethnic minority, quite often in a minority of just one, I can assure you that I very rarely if ever feel like a victim of racism.
I have absolutely no doubt that if I was black my experience of racism in the UK would have been very different. And I am equally sure that I wouldn't have had to rely on the experiences of "my gran" to make the point.
This ridiculous claim that all people can experience an equal level of racism in the UK is totally absurd, but it is shamefully used by white supremacists, and also zionists, and is currently being successfully used to drive out Diane Abbott, a woman who has faced racism on a daily basis throughout her life, out of the Labour Party.
Agreed
I used to live in a country where the vast majority of people were black. I am white (although with dark skin and a black beard I often got mistaken for a Latino). I used to get occasional aggressive interactions from black locals who made reference to my colour or mistook me for an American. I didn’t feel like or consider that I was the victim of racism and I don’t think I would draw parallels with racism or discrimination shown to people of colour here in the UK.
Why, because there is a power relationship at play, a whole history of discrimination and exploitation and because for every difficult interaction I experienced myriad interactions where I was favoured and received better treatment because I was white. My experience was fundamentally different to that of black and Asian people in the UK.
Interestingly, when living in Latin America, beyond the odd gringo comment (the sentiment implied with the term can vary from pejorative to endearment with most usage falling around neutral) I never once got any hassle for being an immigrant. Unfortunately, in the Dominican Republic, other non white immigrants did experience discrimination. I know the term is hated and is even becoming toxic, but white privilege is very much real.
Sorry, double post
This ridiculous claim that all people can experience an equal level of racism in the UK
Please find that statement in this thread. Specifically the equal level part.
Sure, some white British have made it clear that others aren't welcome. But what about the other way round? The ones that I'm assuming kerley and others have alluded to as not being willing to integrate. Two sides of the same coin, but only half the coin is racist.
What about it?
Your argument only works if there is parity, if both parties are equitable. This is not the case. When did you last hear of someone being beaten up or worse for the crime of being white? The last white person I remember being killed for looking different was Sophie Lancaster (and that was by a group of white kids). How often do you see Islam First barricade themselves outside a hotel full of white people, waving hysterical placards which scream "save our children!"
Does it work the other way around? Of course it does, regular readers will recall that I spent most of my life living in an area where being white was increasingly the ethnic minority so I've experienced both sides of your coin first hand. I've seen racist behaviour from Asians and it is exactly that - racism - and should be called out as such. But they're statistically insignificant incidents compared to the constant, often coordinated vitriol running in the opposite direction.
There's no separation in a lot of people's minds between genuine concerns and flag-shagging xenophobia.
Define "genuine concerns." Do you mean concerns which are genuine to those concerned, or concerns which actually have some sort validity in reality? There was a caller on LBC the other week who rang in to complain about all the free cars the asylum seekers were being given, would you consider that a genuine concern? It was genuine enough to her that she felt the need to phone in to a national radio station about it.
White people just need to sit down, shut up and integrate when demographics change, and if they question why it's a prelude to the usual "racism" conversation ender. Other groups get a pass because to question why they don't integrate is a prelude to the usual "racism" conversation ender.
This is nonsense, no-one is saying this. I don't know what else to add here, sorry. Another "genuine concern" perhaps?"
And I am equally sure that I wouldn't have had to rely on the experiences of "my gran" to make the point.
It's a fairly standard technique when having a conversation, using examples to allow others to empathise with a point you're making.
But I understand now. Only first hand account are allowed, and your experience is applicable to all white people.
Got it 👍🏼
I am of course assuming that you are of similar ethnicity as your gran, ie white British, so why use the example of your your gran?
After all a black or brown person in the UK is unlikely to need to use the example of their grandparents to provide examples of unacceptable behaviour towards black and brown people.
As kilo has pointed out, your gran wasn't discriminated, harassed or disadvantaged, at least not from what you say.
This ridiculous claim that all people can experience an equal level of racism in the UK
Please find that statement in this thread. Specifically the equal level part.
Maybe read more carefully and fully what I wrote and what it was in response to ?
The very first paragraph of my post :
I think it extraordinarily difficult to argue that white people in the UK can be the victims of racism in anything vaguely approaching the same way as black and brown can be.
So I am referring to "anything vaguely approaching the same way as black and brown" are treated. And it was in response to this comment by TheFlyingOx:
Two sides of the same coin, but only half the coin is racist.
His gran's experience does represent one of the two sides of the same coin. It is not even vaguely approaching the same thing as the racism that black and brown people experience.
Any reasonable person can see that but this sort of shite is still used by white supremacists to claim that they are the victims of anti-white racism, and by zionists who claim that Jews in the UK experience the same or similar levels of racism as a black woman such as Diane Abbott.
It is precisely this sort of nonsensical bollocks which is being used to kick Diane Abbott out of the Labour Party.
How often do you see Islam First barricade themselves outside a hotel full of white people, waving hysterical placards which scream "save our children!"
I seem to remember pretty much exactly that on numerous occasions, just need to switch "hotel" for "school that dared to teach something that hardline muslims disagree with". See Batley, Birmingham, London, etc.
Genuine concerns are just that, and this thread is a shining example of why it's impossible to raise them. Any suggestion that anybody white is suffering in any way of leads to the kind of response seen on this thread. Whether it's dismissing the experience of "my Gran" (she was an actual person "Ernie", no need for the inverted commas) - I wasn't even claiming she was victim of racism, just giving a counterpoint to Edukator's mother's experience to show this lack of integration might not be for the reasons he gave. Deliberate use of one person's comically of-the-mark understanding of affairs (refugee car free-for-all) to suggest there's no such thing as a genuine concern - seems a bit Motte & Bailey to me. If I don't respond then its implied that your example is clearly what I was getting at. If I do respond then it was an extreme example and I'm a fool for taking it seriously. How about actual genuine concerns? I'm sure the parents of the aforementioned schools have some.
It's exactly what I meant when I said this place will never foster a serious discussion on the topic, because many of you are terrified of entertaining the idea that the rising tensions might not be entirely the fault of The White Brit.
Meanwhile, on Facebook:
Would these be considered "genuine concerns"?
His gran's experience does represent one of the two sides of the same coin. It is not even vaguely approaching the same thing as the racism that black and brown people experience.
Still potentially racist, and either way wherever it sits on the spectrum of minor to major it still has an impact on people and wider society.
"Two sides of the same coin" is very clearly suggesting a balanced equality. There is no evidence that FlyOx's gran was discriminated, harassed or disadvantaged, in the way that black and brown people the UK often are.
Yes Jews face racism in the UK, no it isn't the same as the racism that someone like Diane Abbott faces. Yes she is right to point it out. No Keir Starmer is wrong to remove the Labour whip for her saying so. HTH
I seem to remember pretty much exactly that on numerous occasions, just need to switch "hotel" for "school that dared to teach something that hardline muslims disagree with". See Batley, Birmingham, London, etc.
I had to refresh my memory on the Batley case. The hardline Muslims - a group calling itself the Muslim Action Forum - were accusing the school of blasphemy. Specifically, a lesson supposed to be about free speech used a depiction of Mohammed wearing a turban (no, me neither) and carrying a bomb. I wonder idly how the other side of that particular coin might look, how our proud white patriots would have reacted if a school was using Terrorist Jesus as a lesson example.
The Guardian concludes "That three years on [reported in 2024], the Batley teacher should still be in hiding is an indictment of our institutions and of their failure to robustly challenge intolerance, whether coming from Muslims or directed towards them. If there is one lesson we should learn from this mess, it is that opposing anti-Muslim bigotry and challenging restrictions on blasphemy necessarily go hand in hand."
The incident lead to the Khan Review - "Threats to Social Cohesion And Democratic Resilience: A New Strategic Approach" - and there's a comprehensive overview here should you want the Cliff Notes rather than reading all 150 pages of the report (I haven't).
Genuine concerns are just that,
That's a non-answer. "Genuine" is objective whereas "concern" is subjective. Would you consider vaccine hesitancy to be a genuine concern?
To paraphrase Dara O'Brian, "the threat of zombies is at an all-time low, but the fear of zombies could be incredibly high."
and this thread is a shining example of why it's impossible to raise them.
Yet here you are, raising them. A dichotomy indeed.
People may not agree with you but that's hardly the same thing now, is it. Keep it honest.
Any suggestion that anybody white is suffering in any way of leads to the kind of response seen on this thread.
What leads to "the kind of response seen on this thread" is making sweeping claims about an entire demographic without a shred of evidence (eg, I had to go hunting for the Batley story based on what you "seem to remember," and London is not exactly the narrowest of search terms so I didn't bother looking any further). What leads to "the kind of response seen on this thread" is people waving Save Our Children" banners because out of the 100,000 per annum asylum seekers we're told are all middle-aged men, one of them turned out to be a sex offender.
Deliberate use of one person's comically of-the-mark understanding of affairs (refugee car free-for-all) to suggest there's no such thing as a genuine concern - seems a bit Motte & Bailey to me.
I don't know what you're implying by "deliberate" here, would you prefer I used examples by accident? I cited Angry Car Woman simply because it's the one I listened to most recently, I can probably dig out the link if you don't believe me. Or I'm sure there's plenty of other people making shit up to be concerned about should you care to look.
If I do respond then it was an extreme example and I'm a fool for taking it seriously.
Well, no. The sensible thing to do would be to take these ephemerally defined "concerns" seriously, look at them objectively and then act appropriately.
many of you are terrified of entertaining the idea that the rising tensions might not be entirely the fault of The White Brit.
Again, this is nonsense for reasons as already explained. Absolutely no-one is saying this, claiming that all immigrants / asylum seekers / brown people / Eastern Europeans / Muslims etc etc are all (to coin a phrase) whiter than white would be an absolutely ludicrous stance to take.
As for racism, I'm well aware of what that is having spent much of my younger years having to deal with it. Being mixed race growing up in the south of England and spending some time in the care system I know it intimately, not by some proxy association that you wear like badge of honour because some of your friends are {insert race here}.
I seem to remember pretty much exactly that on numerous occasions, just need to switch "hotel" for "school that dared to teach something that hardline muslims disagree with". See Batley, Birmingham, London, etc.
I had to refresh my memory on the Batley case. The hardline Muslims - a group calling itself the Muslim Action Forum - were accusing the school of blasphemy. Specifically, a lesson supposed to be about free speech used a depiction of Mohammed wearing a turban (no, me neither) and carrying a bomb. I wonder idly how the other side of that particular coin might look, how our proud white patriots would have reacted if a school was using Terrorist Jesus as a lesson example.
The Guardian concludes "That three years on [reported in 2024], the Batley teacher should still be in hiding is an indictment of our institutions and of their failure to robustly challenge intolerance, whether coming from Muslims or directed towards them. If there is one lesson we should learn from this mess, it is that opposing anti-Muslim bigotry and challenging restrictions on blasphemy necessarily go hand in hand."
The incident lead to the Khan Review - "Threats to Social Cohesion And Democratic Resilience: A New Strategic Approach" - and there's a comprehensive overview here should you want the Cliff Notes rather than reading all 150 pages of the report (I haven't).
Genuine concerns are just that,
That's a non-answer. "Genuine" is objective whereas "concern" is subjective. Would you consider vaccine hesitancy to be a genuine concern?
To paraphrase Dara O'Brian, "the threat of zombies is at an all-time low, but the fear of zombies could be incredibly high."
and this thread is a shining example of why it's impossible to raise them.
Yet here you are, raising them. A dichotomy indeed.
People may not agree with you but that's hardly the same thing now, is it. Keep it honest.
Any suggestion that anybody white is suffering in any way of leads to the kind of response seen on this thread.
What leads to "the kind of response seen on this thread" is making sweeping claims about an entire demographic without a shred of evidence (eg, I had to go hunting for the Batley story based on what you "seem to remember," and London is not exactly the narrowest of search terms so I didn't bother looking any further). What leads to "the kind of response seen on this thread" is people waving Save Our Children" banners because out of the 100,000 per annum asylum seekers we're told are all middle-aged men, one of them turned out to be a sex offender.
Deliberate use of one person's comically of-the-mark understanding of affairs (refugee car free-for-all) to suggest there's no such thing as a genuine concern - seems a bit Motte & Bailey to me.
I don't know what you're implying by "deliberate" here, would you prefer I used examples by accident? I cited Angry Car Woman simply because it's the one I listened to most recently, I can probably dig out the link if you don't believe me. Or I'm sure there's plenty of other people making shit up to be concerned about should you care to look.
If I do respond then it was an extreme example and I'm a fool for taking it seriously.
Well, no. The sensible thing to do would be to take these ephemerally defined "concerns" seriously, look at them objectively and then act appropriately.
many of you are terrified of entertaining the idea that the rising tensions might not be entirely the fault of The White Brit.
Again, this is nonsense for reasons as already explained. Absolutely no-one is saying this, claiming that all immigrants / asylum seekers / brown people / Eastern Europeans / Muslims etc etc are all (to coin a phrase) whiter than white would be an absolutely ludicrous stance to take.
The sad thing is Cougar is you've explained yourself and your issue with the posts in a way that our glorious leaders do not. I wonder if they actually engaged with the points in a similar manner, used evidence and transparency, it could/might take some of the oxygen out of the wider debate.
I'd also like to see politicians correcting journos as well instead of deflecting back to 'when that party was in power' etc.
Definitely isn't helped when politicians simple avoid, obfuscate or downright lie.
This is not the case. When did you last hear of someone being beaten up or worse for the crime of being white?
SWMBO used to work with a guy, white British, who got battered to a bloody mess in Bristol for being the wrong sort of white British, by white British people.
How would you know that as a mixed race person ?
Because my mother as a white women, as imperfect as she was experienced it from within my father's family and wider social circle.
Took me quite a few years to learn what 'gora' meant when they talked about her, the constant snide comments or open hostility about her skin colour, all in my presence.
She suffered horrifically at the hands of her extended family all because she was white, so don't kid yourself it's rare or isn't of the same severity.
I have plenty of other anecdotes, across my time in the Army I've seen racism directed at all manner of people from all manner of people.
Some of the worst has been brown on brown. It's just the grifters that have convinced the world it can only be one way and incomparable in impact and severity. Which is an absolute untruth.
Edit: and don't post this for sympathy or one-upmanship, it's just a sad fact But I'm mostly over it.
Likewise I don't feel the need to create a 'brownperson' sock puppet account or some other bullshit stunt to 'win', I couldn't care less what people on the internet think of me.
I work on the basis that I'm the thickest person in any room (which is usually an actual fact) I walk into and try to consider others POV regardless of if I agree. But there are a couple of things I will not be lectured on and one of them is ****ing racism.
But there are some here who are the most self-righteous, arrogant ideologues I've ever met (and I've met the ****ing Taliban) who deliberately make discourse and discussion difficult and hide their own soft bigotry in ambiguity.
Yet 700,000 managed it legally last year so it can’t be that hard to arrive legally as these people have shown
But the problem is 700,000 is a *lot* of people, and the UK just can't cope
The other problem is that those applying legally almost certainly don't _have_ to come, they have chosen to come. The people we really should be letting in are the ones who absolutely have to flee their homes for whatever reason, but I have no idea how easy it is for a Sudanese or a Somali or an Iraqi to apply for a visa before they set off to, but I'm guessing quite difficult, hence the vast majority of those we should be letting in are 'illegal' , whilst most of those arriving from countries with nothing to fear at home can do so legally. It's mad.
Ukraine is probably the exception, with large numbers of genuine refugees arriving legally.
And yet with 700,000 arrivals the government still goes out of its way to make it difficult for 1,500 ghurkas to come, what's another 1,500 but mostly those guys have definitely earned the right to come!
No one has to come here illegally. Those fearing persecution are of course welcome but none have come directly from the county they were persecuted in. The fact that 700,000 were accepted, quite frankly a mind boggling number, but it shows that once in a safe country then you can apply through the uk embassy.
People would also be more accepting if there was any evidence to show how many people who arrived illegally were refused permission to stay and then how long it took to deport them. If it was shown that process worked in a timely manner it would go along way to help change minds
Those fearing persecution are of course welcome but none have come directly from the county they were persecuted in.
Of course they haven’t since France, the Netherlands, Ireland and our other neighbors are not in the grip of murderous lunatics. For now anyway. So by your logic Turkey, Iran, ****stan etc should take all the refugees and us none. Does that seem reasonable to you?
For now anyway. So by your logic Turkey, Iran, ****stan etc should take all the refugees and us none. Does that seem reasonable to you?
No. But they could apply to enter the uk legally from there. As I have said 700,000 others have managed it. You have also chosen to ignore that many are arriving who are not coming from anywhere close to a war zone. They are lots of safe countries around the world closer than the UK and culturally more similar
But they could apply to enter the uk legally from there.
That would be ideal. How possible is that right now though?
As I have said 700,000 others have managed it.
There’s that number again. What’s it got to do with refugees and/or asylum seekers?
none have come directly from the county they were persecuted in
That’s just a quirk of geography. The UK has had an impact across the globe, but shares a border with very few countries.
That's a non-answer. "Genuine" is objective whereas "concern" is subjective. Would you consider vaccine hesitancy to be a genuine concern?
It's absolutely an answer. You've hinted that you'd you know what both "genuine" and "concern" mean, so I'm puzzled why you need to be spoon-fed the meaning of "genuine concern". I guess vaccine hesitancy may well be a genuine concern to some people. I'd hope anyone responding to that concern would do so by explaining the theory of vaccines, the years of testing that are needed to ensure safety, and the alternative timeline we'd be living on if Edward Jenner hadn't been as curious. Not "you're just an ill-informed conspiracy theorist". Just as when "Ethel from Medway" who can no longer get a GP appointment any sooner than a month away and questions why, because "it wasn't like this 20 years ago" and she can see/read reports of migrants jumping the queue, I'd hope someone explains that chronic underfunding is the overwhelming reason there aren't enough GP appointments, and that it makes sense to see recent migrants ASAP to ensure that nobody is bringing a potentially harmful disease/condition into the country, that is actually in the interest of public health overall for them to be seen sooner rather than later. Not "she's just another wrinkly old racist who refuses to accept change".
Instead you're pretending I think free cars for immigrants is a genuine concern - and I do believe you that a real person called into a real show about it - as if "genuine concerns" is a code for racist rabble rousing. That's what I mean by "deliberate". You choose an unhinged thing that someone has an issue with and use that as an example of a "genuine concern" when it clearly wouldn't be to any sensible person, to make "genuine concerns" sound like something vacuous. And again, this may be a genuine concern to that lady, but is the best way to allay those concerns calling her a racist, or is it explaining that it's with almost 100% certainty that she's got the wrong end of the stick "and here's why"?
Yet here you are, raising them. A dichotomy indeed.
People may not agree with you but that's hardly the same thing now, is it. Keep it honest.
Ok my bad. I should have included "without being dismissed as racist" at the end.
Here's a few examples:
"Most people who are against immigration are not racist."
Got a source for this claim? My personal experience does not bear this out.
Someone said earlier that the less interaction/exposure people have with "foreigners" the more likely they are to be racist - sorry, excuse me, "opposed to immigration." I think that's largely true.
"people’s opinions would change. That’s what I’m saying."
In which direction? You appear to be saying "it's alright for you lot, but you wouldn't like it if you had a darkie next door." That's really not what you mean, is it?
SWMBO used to work with a guy, white British, who got battered to a bloody mess in Bristol for being the wrong sort of white British, by white British people.
It almost happened to me too, the only difference being I'm really good at running away.
Took me quite a few years to learn what 'gora' meant when they talked about her, the constant snide comments or open hostility about her skin colour, all in my presence.
One advantage of living in the area I did and having friends of Pa- Indian Subcontinent descent was that I got taught a handful of words such as that one. Being able to pick out "white bastard" from across the room is a surprisingly useful skill.
Those fearing persecution are of course welcome
Are they?
Are you sure?
but none have come directly from the county they were persecuted in.
That would be quite difficult unless they were all crossing in small TARDISes.
The fact is that most asylum seekers do come directly from their home country, only not to here. The number who make it as far as Britain is a very small percentage.
The fact that 700,000 were accepted,
The fact that you keep trotting out this figure despite being told many times that it is a lie misrepresentation at best suggests to me that "facts" aren't something you should be lecturing others over.
People would also be more accepting if there was any evidence to show how many people who arrived illegally were refused permission to stay and then how long it took to deport them. If it was shown that process worked in a timely manner it would go along way to help change minds
Would they?
Are you sure?
In any case, this data is readily available, should people care to look. But given that every answer I've just provided in this post has already been given at least on this very thread, your own unwillingness to read and review your viewpoint does not give me faith in the "people" to whom you refer.
One advantage of living in the area I did and having friends of Pa- Indian Subcontinent descent was that I got taught a handful of words such as that one. Being able to pick out "white bastard" from across the room is a surprisingly useful skill.
I can imagine, sadly I didn't have much of a relationship with the extended family so didn't get that level of insight.
I learned from a young age to keep myself to myself and ended up spending more time with my mothers side of the family.
They were far from normal and not without their dislike of my father and their own racist tendancies. Usually 'them lot' themed comments, nothing overtly pejorative.
Quite confusing growing up as a lad I can tell you. But they weren't hostile to me so that was a bonus.
The tipping point for all this in the UK was the Leave campaign of 2016. There'd never been a campaign like it in terms of overt racism. Never.
In the states it was Trump v1.0.
No two mainstream political campaigns by large parties or factions had been run remotely like that before.
Legitimising prejudice in such an overt and open way has led us to where we are now. Nothing will ever convince me otherwise nor will it convince reasonable people otherwise. The adjective 'Brexity' will continue to mean exactly what it means now, for another ten years or so.
100%, but,
i don't think the referendum / brexit was the cause (I know that's not what you're suggesting) but rather a catalyst. We'd spent years becoming more progressive as a country, people learning that it's not generally acceptable to display prejudice. However, what we naively thought had gone away or was at least in sharp decline hadn't at all, it was merely dormant.
Brexit legitimised the vocalising of an "us vs them" narrative, it returned a safety in numbers back to those with 1970s attitudes. The far Right extending out anti-Europe sentiment to encompass all foreigners isn't so much a giant leap as a small step which we all should have seen coming.
However, what we naively thought had gone away or was at least in sharp decline hadn't at all, it was merely dormant.
More or less my take. Except rather than dormant, it was out of sight to some. The progression of UK society being to some degree illusory, with those who felt required to shut up being left ever further adrift.
That's still happening, and looks all set to continue for a good while yet.
The tipping point for all this in the UK was the Leave campaign of 2016. There'd never been a campaign like it in terms of overt racism.
It really wasn't, believing it was is in itself falling into the trap of British exceptionalism and ignoring the reality that the same changes have been happening across Europe. It is a result of growing financial inequality and the easy dead cat of racism especially focussing on Islamophobia tied to the wealthy being in control of politics and new and old media.
There are many factors but IMO the aims of the oligarchy, Russia and Israel have largely aligned (while each have their own personal reasons) have created a massive propaganda onslaught, Brexit is just a noticeable victory in a much larger campaign of misinformation and lies. Unfortunately Islamic terrorism has been an absolute gift for these factions who have used and abused it too make all our lives far worse under the guise of protecting freedom.
