|
|
Post by happyhornet on Mar 9, 2024 8:04:50 GMT
Seems it's you who is confused: "ethnicity is a process of accepting and acceptance. If I accept I am Scots and in teh main accepted as such by all other Scots then I am ethnically Scottish." Are you saying ethnicity is fluid and a matter of social acceptance? Would David Lammy be ethnically English if he was accepted as such by most other English? In part a tricky question but also highlights the point. Realistically anyone who believes they are ethnically English and is accepted as being ethnically English by the overwhelming majority of the ethnic English then realistically he is ethnically English even if his DNA has next to no English in it. That is not the view of everyone however but I have no issue with it. As regards Lammy he falls at the first hurdle, he believes he is, and actively parades, his ethnic minority status which excludes him by his own admission from the English ethnic group and we need go no further. This feeds into your point as you referred to your immigrant heritage without prompt and leaves the door open for an ethnic minority status. Of course all of this would be just so much rubbish if we did not have the race laws, but we do, and in that respect all groups are entitled to view their ethnic status and claim an identity that they alone are entitled to make and accept. This is getting more bizarre, so ethnic minority status is like Voldemort and only appears when you say its name? Being as you've declared your English ethnic heritage doesn't this disqualify you from Scots ethnic identity by your own rules? |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 9, 2024 8:31:22 GMT
Yes its history caused by people, but still its History affecting its present. I'm not even saying that it was the British partition of India and Pakistan that caused its troubled history. Just that its troubled history is part of the reason for its present state. Its not as simple as you would like it, where being Muslim is enough by itself. I feel sure either of us could ramble self importantly about what we felt was the exact list of ultimate causes, but this is not really needed. "This society or culture produces crap outcomes" is enough of a takeaway to ascertain whether it would be wise/ risky to move millions of these people into the UK so they can pursue their culture here. Of course, if you see the interests of the UK people as having zero value and their interests as of high importance, then you would also see no need for caution. It does matter in this context where you claim the shit outcomes are because the people are shit. Or that that history makes the people shit. That if you invite them here they would wish to bring those downsides from their history with them. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 9, 2024 8:33:05 GMT
In part a tricky question but also highlights the point. Realistically anyone who believes they are ethnically English and is accepted as being ethnically English by the overwhelming majority of the ethnic English then realistically he is ethnically English even if his DNA has next to no English in it. That is not the view of everyone however but I have no issue with it. As regards Lammy he falls at the first hurdle, he believes he is, and actively parades, his ethnic minority status which excludes him by his own admission from the English ethnic group and we need go no further. This feeds into your point as you referred to your immigrant heritage without prompt and leaves the door open for an ethnic minority status. Of course all of this would be just so much rubbish if we did not have the race laws, but we do, and in that respect all groups are entitled to view their ethnic status and claim an identity that they alone are entitled to make and accept. This is getting more bizarre, so ethnic minority status is like Voldemort and only appears when you say its name? Being as you've declared your English ethnic heritage doesn't this disqualify you from Scots ethnic identity by your own rules? Sounds more like "Your not from the villarge you don't belong here" |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Mar 9, 2024 8:39:39 GMT
I feel sure either of us could ramble self importantly about what we felt was the exact list of ultimate causes, but this is not really needed. "This society or culture produces crap outcomes" is enough of a takeaway to ascertain whether it would be wise/ risky to move millions of these people into the UK so they can pursue their culture here. Of course, if you see the interests of the UK people as having zero value and their interests as of high importance, then you would also see no need for caution. That if you invite them here they would wish to bring those downsides from their history with them. It's not bringing t he bad outcomes themselves - nobody can bring crap outcomes themselves with them simply by moving into the UK (that's ludicrous). They bring the bad attitudes and culture that cause bad outcomes. If you consider the UK public's interests to have zero importance then you need not bother yourself with this reality. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 9, 2024 9:01:30 GMT
That if you invite them here they would wish to bring those downsides from their history with them. It's not bringing t he bad outcomes themselves - nobody can bring crap outcomes themselves with them simply by moving into the UK (that's ludicrous). They bring the bad attitudes and culture that cause bad outcomes. If you consider the UK public's interests to have zero importance then you need not bother yourself with this reality. Ok so you move it back a step. They bring bad attitudes? Because of where they come from? I disagree, most of those I work with are polite, funny and friendly. Culturally the only downside I have seen in heavily Muslim areas is that shop assistants don't tend to strike up conversation with you, which feels a bit strange. But then as I have ADHD and tend to talk too much. That makes me no good for the country either. That some Muslims feel we are against them is because we are. Our bigotry causes theirs. Back in my twenties Pakistani bashing was considered a good night out by some. What us snowflakes are trying to do is kill the bigotry that drives these attitudes. It was achieved with the Scots then the Irish, then the Jews, next its the Muslims. You are running out of people to blame for the state of your country. Soon there will be only your own attitudes and actions. Hopefully when you wake up to that the country will finally start to improve. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Mar 9, 2024 9:18:55 GMT
It's not bringing t he bad outcomes themselves - nobody can bring crap outcomes themselves with them simply by moving into the UK (that's ludicrous). They bring the bad attitudes and culture that cause bad outcomes. If you consider the UK public's interests to have zero importance then you need not bother yourself with this reality. Ok so you move it back a step. They bring bad attitudes? Because of where they come from? I disagree, most of those I work with are polite, funny and friendly. I didn't move anything a back a step, it is what I was saying from the start . I talked from the start about the culture and attitudes are causing bad outcomes and how the culture and attitudes are brought into the uk with the people. I also suspect you didn't really misunderstand me - i was pretty explicit and repeated the point several times. As for your anecdote, it's pretty useless. You are not qualified to fully understand the details of the link between a society's exact formulation and its exact outcomes (nobody is). All that can really be said with confidence is that society A persistently tends to have far better outcomes than society B. We can speculate and create theories, but any theory is going to be pretty hard (likely impossible) to test rigorously. For instance - (just taking your example) - polite, funny and friendly sounds great, but it is quite likely that it isn't enough to make a functioning society. Polite funny and friendly are also the qualities required by any proficient con-man. If you could apply a modicum of intellectual humility, you would see that what i have presented to you is almost a truism. Truism - a proposition that states nothing beyond what is implied by any of its terms. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Mar 9, 2024 9:33:50 GMT
Perhaps it does, but why on earth would a rational government of any country want to add to the stock of such economically marginal people when there were already more than enough of them in the native population? Don't bring up the canard about tax receipts again, that's already been done to death. Good idea. Ask me why and then say you know my answer but tell me not to speak of it. Does that work for you. You're exading the underlying fundamental issue here. These people (Muslim immigrants) are unnecessary and unwanted and are not, as you claim 'invited'. They invite themselves.
You offered the counter-claim earlier that it is worthwhile importing the dross (mini-cab drivers, kebab wallahs etc) because we also have the benefit of a very few professionals amongst the throng. You mentioned doctors in particular. The NHS has 133,000 doctors of which around 5,000 (3.8%) originated in Muslim countries - not just Pakistan, but also Egypt, Nigeria etc.
That doesn't seem a very attractive RoI for taking in a a Muslim population of four to five million.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2024 10:01:31 GMT
It's not bringing t he bad outcomes themselves - nobody can bring crap outcomes themselves with them simply by moving into the UK (that's ludicrous). They bring the bad attitudes and culture that cause bad outcomes. If you consider the UK public's interests to have zero importance then you need not bother yourself with this reality. Ok so you move it back a step. They bring bad attitudes? Because of where they come from? I disagree, most of those I work with are polite, funny and friendly. Culturally the only downside I have seen in heavily Muslim areas is that shop assistants don't tend to strike up conversation with you, which feels a bit strange. But then as I have ADHD and tend to talk too much. That makes me no good for the country either. That some Muslims feel we are against them is because we are. Our bigotry causes theirs. Back in my twenties Pakistani bashing was considered a good night out by some. What us snowflakes are trying to do is kill the bigotry that drives these attitudes. It was achieved with the Scots then the Irish, then the Jews, next its the Muslims. You are running out of people to blame for the state of your country. Soon there will be only your own attitudes and actions. Hopefully when you wake up to that the country will finally start to improve. You want to kill off those you disagree with whilst proclaiming you're a snowflake against the bigots, which appears to be restricted to England and Wales (the Brexit nations). |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet on Mar 9, 2024 10:17:36 GMT
It's not bringing t he bad outcomes themselves - nobody can bring crap outcomes themselves with them simply by moving into the UK (that's ludicrous). They bring the bad attitudes and culture that cause bad outcomes. If you consider the UK public's interests to have zero importance then you need not bother yourself with this reality. Ok so you move it back a step. They bring bad attitudes? Because of where they come from? I disagree, most of those I work with are polite, funny and friendly. Culturally the only downside I have seen in heavily Muslim areas is that shop assistants don't tend to strike up conversation with you, which feels a bit strange. But then as I have ADHD and tend to talk too much. That makes me no good for the country either. That some Muslims feel we are against them is because we are. Our bigotry causes theirs. Back in my twenties Pakistani bashing was considered a good night out by some. What us snowflakes are trying to do is kill the bigotry that drives these attitudes. It was achieved with the Scots then the Irish, then the Jews, next its the Muslims. You are running out of people to blame for the state of your country. Soon there will be only your own attitudes and actions. Hopefully when you wake up to that the country will finally start to improve. "But then as I have ADHD and tend to talk too much. That makes me no good for the country either" I'm autistic, depending on who you ask I'm either too quiet or never stop talking, you can't win. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 9, 2024 10:32:19 GMT
Ok so you move it back a step. They bring bad attitudes? Because of where they come from? I disagree, most of those I work with are polite, funny and friendly. The step back I was referring to was the moving back from the direct "They wish to repeat Pakistan here" to the "They can't help but repeat Pakistan here" Which cultures and bad attitudes do Pakistanis bring to the UK and having arrived here wish to continue. I have not seen these and it seems to me I have a lot more interaction with them than you do. I think you assume these things and look for evidence that supports your view because of your implicit bigotry. Its better than your assumptions. They are also qualities found quite abundantly in Caucasians. The disfunction of society IMO is down to people like you. The very ones who made up stories about Jews being grabbing, Irish being thick and dishonest, even Scots being incapable of civilisation. Though out history people like you have existed claiming society is being ruined by those "others" the "not us" Every time it has been proved untrue. That the others whether they be Muslims or French are just the same as us, just as kind just as greedy. I am certain you think its true. Just as I'm certain the Irish got their name of being thick because the only jobs they could get were digging ditches because of bigotry. That when that changed so miraculously the Irish stopped being thick. You are the problem, not the solution. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Mar 9, 2024 11:05:15 GMT
Zany, You did it again. You have Inverted-attribution so the post can't sensibly be replied to Like i said, you or I aren't capable of deducing what mix exactly is needed and in what proportions. All we know is that one society has significantly crappier outcomes than another. If you then move large numbers of people from the latter to the former, then you will also be moving the attitudes, beliefs (culture) that cause that crappiness |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2024 11:15:00 GMT
Zany, You did it again. You have Inverted-attribution so the post can't sensibly be replied to Like i said, you or I aren't capable of deducing what mix exactly is needed and in what proportions. All we know is that one society has significantly crappier outcomes than another. If you then move large numbers of people from the latter to the former, then you will also be moving the attitudes, beliefs (culture) that cause that crappiness It's funny, though, despite all of this going on in the country there isn't a single person on here who can explain it rationally without posting a load of insane crap. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Mar 9, 2024 11:22:20 GMT
Zany, You did it again. You have Inverted-attribution so the post can't sensibly be replied to Like i said, you or I aren't capable of deducing what mix exactly is needed and in what proportions. All we know is that one society has significantly crappier outcomes than another. If you then move large numbers of people from the latter to the former, then you will also be moving the attitudes, beliefs (culture) that cause that crappiness It's funny, though, despite all of this going on in the country there isn't a single person on here who can explain it rationally without posting a load of insane crap. It's pretty hard to rationalise without (at least) resorting to dismissing the interests of people subject to the inward migration. Why, for instance, do any substantial amount of this? Why are the people whose interest you would dismiss so unimportant? |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Mar 9, 2024 11:27:02 GMT
In part a tricky question but also highlights the point. Realistically anyone who believes they are ethnically English and is accepted as being ethnically English by the overwhelming majority of the ethnic English then realistically he is ethnically English even if his DNA has next to no English in it. That is not the view of everyone however but I have no issue with it. As regards Lammy he falls at the first hurdle, he believes he is, and actively parades, his ethnic minority status which excludes him by his own admission from the English ethnic group and we need go no further. This feeds into your point as you referred to your immigrant heritage without prompt and leaves the door open for an ethnic minority status. Of course all of this would be just so much rubbish if we did not have the race laws, but we do, and in that respect all groups are entitled to view their ethnic status and claim an identity that they alone are entitled to make and accept. This is getting more bizarre, so ethnic minority status is like Voldemort and only appears when you say its name? Being as you've declared your English ethnic heritage doesn't this disqualify you from Scots ethnic identity by your own rules? Then your beef is with the Law Lords who interpreted the meaning of race relations laws in that respect. It is the result of desperately seeking a law that will meet the needs one wishes but have outcomes that are to say the least confusing. You have National Origins that are different from English National origins, that is not your fault nor is it mine. I know not your name but if someone saw your name and said I do not employ any Irish then you would have a case in law as regards your National Origins. The bizarre nature of the laws and the definitions of ethnicity are a result of trying to cover all bases in law. I have the same capability in Scotland if someone said to me I do not employ any English. These differences are a part of the race laws |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Mar 9, 2024 11:28:51 GMT
Zany clearly places the interest of those he considers to have been 'invited' well above that of the people with local ancestry.
He's never been able to offer a coherent reason though why he does so.
|
|
