|
|
Post by happyhornet on Nov 29, 2023 21:52:09 GMT
HH asked: "You would also presumably be happy giving them the same amount of power over the indigenous population as the British had in Colonial India being as you are a believer in reciprocity?"
The last time I checked both the most powerful person in the country and the capital city were of subcontinental ancestry. Seems to me the wheel as turned full circle.
How much more do you think we will have to surrender to atone for past sins?
Everything until the ethnic whites are extinct ? Nobody has advocated that, you're being hysterical. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Nov 29, 2023 21:54:24 GMT
"So impose a blanket China style two children rule across all people in Britain and hey presto problem solved."
Such an imposition would be immediately denounced as racist as indeed was the proposal to limit child allowance to just the first two just a couple of years ago. The demographic tsunami will not be halted by such facile means given the sympathies of the ruling elite which are certainly not aligned with the interest of the native population. How could it be racist if it applies to everyone regardless of race? I don't know, you could ask the Archbishop of Canterbury he was dead set against the two-child idea. I think it had something to do with having a disparate impact on immigrants families on account of their larger than normal family size. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Nov 29, 2023 21:54:30 GMT
Everything until the ethnic whites are extinct ? Nobody has advocated that, you're being hysterical. I’m never hysterical hh. Im asking a question ..just as you do …. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Nov 29, 2023 21:55:51 GMT
HH asked: "You would also presumably be happy giving them the same amount of power over the indigenous population as the British had in Colonial India being as you are a believer in reciprocity?"
The last time I checked both the most powerful person in the country and the capital city were of subcontinental ancestry. Seems to me the wheel as turned full circle.
How much more do you think we will have to surrender to atone for past sins?
The PM and Mayor of London are British. You're right, administratively they are. But ethnically they're not. |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet on Nov 29, 2023 21:57:11 GMT
HH asked: "You would also presumably be happy giving them the same amount of power over the indigenous population as the British had in Colonial India being as you are a believer in reciprocity?"
The last time I checked both the most powerful person in the country and the capital city were of subcontinental ancestry. Seems to me the wheel as turned full circle.
How much more do you think we will have to surrender to atone for past sins?
So would you like to swap circumstances? You have a white indegenous British PM and London mayor but white indegenous British people are statistically twice as likely to be unemployed as black and asian British people? |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet on Nov 29, 2023 21:59:23 GMT
The PM and Mayor of London are British. You're right, administratively they are. But ethnically they're not. Their ethnicity is an accident of birth. What's the moral difference between objecting to the presence of someone who happened to be born asian and objecting to the presence of someone who happened to born disabled? |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet on Nov 29, 2023 22:00:14 GMT
How could it be racist if it applies to everyone regardless of race? I don't know, you could ask the Archbishop of Canterbury he was dead set against the two-child idea. I think it had something to do with having a disparate impact on immigrants families on account of their larger than normal family size. I wasn't asking him I was asking you. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Nov 29, 2023 22:01:14 GMT
You'll need to explain why you feel such circumstances might ever come about in the real world.
We have had white political leaders for several centuries now but the unemployment scenario you imagine has never come to pass as of yet. What makes you think it might?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Nov 29, 2023 22:03:55 GMT
I don't know, you could ask the Archbishop of Canterbury he was dead set against the two-child idea. I think it had something to do with having a disparate impact on immigrants families on account of their larger than normal family size. I wasn't asking him I was asking you. I'm only repeating what was reported in the media at the time.
Since you're asking for may opinion, my preference would be to eliminate all financial subsidies which might encourage ethnic rapid breeders.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Nov 29, 2023 22:04:33 GMT
What use would that be if immigration policy introduced and extra (say) 2 million people a year? What would the race of the immigrants matter if all you were concerned about was geographical inheritance? It wouldn't. The basic principle described here would apply whatever the race (black vs white) of the participants. The group that has their society invaded has their inheritance dissolved by the newly added claims. What i described and noted was the transfer of this inheritance away from their children and how a persistent rule of allowing more made that transfer recursive (ie it would likely finish with their extinction) |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 29, 2023 22:09:35 GMT
You need to read the equality act as regards positive action, www.thesun.co.uk/news/15335853/bbc-sparks-discrimination-row-minorities/"Under the Equality Act passed in 2010, positive discrimination is unlawful, but “positive action” is allowed for trainee and internships when minorities are under-represented in the industry." Your kids may be positively actioned, you maybe, but you are white so really on loser. I keep supplying proof as regards what the act says and people keep ignoring it. I will keep on trying. "Some groups of people who share a particular characteristic may suffer disadvantage connected to that characteristic, have different needs compared to others without that characteristic, or are underrepresented in certain activities. The positive action provisions in the Act[footnote 2] allow employers to take action that may involve treating one group that shares a protected characteristic more favourably than others, where this is a proportionate way to enable or encourage members of that group to: overcome or minimise a disadvantage have their different needs met participate in a particular activity This is called taking ‘positive action’." www.gov.uk/government/publications/positive-action-in-the-workplace-guidance-for-employers/positive-action-in-the-workplace#what-is-positive-actionThis not innuendo it is law.. What statistical data do you want? Ethnic minorities as a proportion of the British population are increasing and therefore the need to increase the intake now to meet the current levels is self evidently needed if diversity is supposed to reflective of the proportions in teh country. This seems like simple self evident logic Positive action isn't a legal right, it's an option at the discretion of employers, I can't claim it and neither can my kids. As to statistical data, I mean like for example according to the ONS a black people and people from the combined Bangladeshi and Pakistani ethnic grouping in Britain is twice as likely to be unemployed as a white person: www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/work-pay-and-benefits/unemployment-and-economic-inactivity/unemployment/latestRights are what one is entitled to in law if a third party decides to invoke it. If I go for a job and am equally qualified for it with AN Other ethnic minority candidate I can be legally discriminated against as the laws and the current proportionality situation exists. The ethnic minority candidate cannot. There are many reasons why people are unemployed and it is not always because they cannot get a job. Take the Bangladeshi group you referred to there are 10% of that group on disability living allowance when the white British are on 8% yet they specifically apparently came in to do the jobs that Brits would not. The ONS throw up many interesting facts but be careful what you come up with |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Nov 29, 2023 22:13:13 GMT
Yes of course, race is a second-order consideration. As a great Englishman once said: 'Numbers are of the essence'.
In that sense, too many Poles could be just as problematic as too many Pakistanis except as Patrick Buchanan once remarked:
"Imagine if the State of Virginia felt compelled to admit a million immigrants. Which do you feel would be less challenging to absorb and assimilate, a million Zulus or a million Englishmen?"
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Nov 29, 2023 22:18:40 GMT
HH asked: "You would also presumably be happy giving them the same amount of power over the indigenous population as the British had in Colonial India being as you are a believer in reciprocity?" The last time I checked both the most powerful person in the country and the capital city were of subcontinental ancestry. Seems to me the wheel as turned full circle.
How much more do you think we will have to surrender to atone for past sins?
So would you like to swap circumstances? You have a white indegenous British PM and London mayor but white indegenous British people are statistically twice as likely to be unemployed as black and asian British people?that must be their white privilege at work... |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 29, 2023 22:19:24 GMT
Not sure if I agree with the 'innate pacifist leanings'. New lands of course had not been sought for many decades. Having a PM of foreign extraction is at best a risk. Is it not the case that when white people are in government then ethnic minorities say they are not represented. Does that work both ways? That’s uncontextualised waffle. Just research or Google, out of the 200 years Britain ruled British India, how many locals were involved in the higher levels of government…? As Dan points out the power was generally sustained in the various states etc and it was not until after the Mutiny that Britain took control of Indian affairs directly through the Raj. Before then it was the EIC. The Indians spent the next 70 years telling the British to go away and when the British did they spent quite some time knocking lumps off each other. As a point of interest when the Indians were involved and advised on government they wanted to continue Suti as a cultural right. Britain being the nasty dictatorial power it was thought this was a bad idea. How many widows do you think would have burned alive in the last 200 years. |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet on Nov 29, 2023 22:22:03 GMT
You'll need to explain why you feel such circumstances might ever come about in the real world. We have had white political leaders for several centuries now but the unemployment scenario you imagine has never come to pass as of yet. What makes you think it might? It would suggest that regardless of the ethnicity of the PM ethnic minorities are disadvantaged in the job market. |
|
