What’s Missing from the Debate About the Refugees in Calais Who Are Eager to Go to Britain

by Guest Mon Aug 10, 2015 12:01 pm

First topic message reminder :

Although it may seem an irrelevance in almost wholly secularized Britain, the Church of England still manages to maintain a semblance of moral authority. This was on display last week after Prime Minister David Cameron spoke of a “swarm” of migrants seeking entry to Britain from refugee camps in the French port of Calais. The Right Rev. Trevor Wilmott, the Bishop of Dover, responded sternly: Cameron’s words reflected a “toxicity” in public discourse that leads us to “forget our humanity.”

While it was likely that the refugee crisis troubling Europe would wash up on British shores, the attitude of the government has proved more surprising. Historically, policy has followed public disquiet over immigration. By crafting a narrative for the public to follow, Cameron, who once worked in public relations, has presented another approach.

There have been three significant waves of immigration to Britain since the late 19th century. The first arose from a humanitarian crisis, the pogroms of Tsarist Russia. As Anthony Julius states in Trials of the Diaspora (2010), around 150,000 Jews sought sanctuary in Britain between 1880 and 1905. The second occurred after 1948, when the Labour government granted British citizenship to all living in the Commonwealth. Ministers hoped to relieve labor shortfalls caused by a declining population and the need for post-WWII rebuilding. Initially, only a few thousand males from the West Indies, India, and Pakistan immigrated each year, but numbers increased rapidly in the mid 1950s. David Kynaston writes in Modernity Britain (2014) that two factors pushed this process: the desire to reunify families and the growing affluence of 1950s Britain. Between 1956 and 1961, the number of people arriving each year rose from 46,000 to 135,000. The third wave occurred after 2004, when several former communist nations joined the European Union. Britain offered new EU citizens free movement of labor. Between 2005 and 2009, almost 700,000 workers arrived from Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and the Baltic States.

Each migratory pattern was met with virulent opposition. Julius notes the waves of anti-Semitism that accompanied Jewish refugees. Popular newspapers, music hall acts, political pamphlets, and public meetings proclaimed Jews to be a threat to the racial and public health of the nation and argued that cheap Jewish labor would lower standards of living. Kynaston shows that Commonwealth citizens faced similar discrimination; white Britons led race riots against West Indians in 1958, for example. Racist sentiment surged after the Conservative MP Enoch Powell, in a 1968 speech, claimed that immigration would lead to “rivers of blood” in British streets. Post-colonial writers like Hanif Kureshi, Zadie Smith, Monica Ali, and Andrea Levy depict the development of an institutionalized racism in regards to policing, the justice system, workplace inequality, housing, educational opportunities, popular culture, and sports. Finally, popular tabloid newspapers such as the Daily Mail, the Express and the Sun formed a popular perception that EU migrants were parasites leaching from Britain’s welfare system. This is despite the fact that EU migrants proportionally contribute more to the exchequer than native-born Britons and receive fewer benefits.

Immigration has been the lifeblood of modern Britain. At the 2012 Olympic opening ceremony, Britons rightly celebrated their multi-cultural nation. Historical memory remembers the nation’s status as a safe haven for refugees. Arriving at this juncture has proved difficult and incomplete, however.

When it comes to immigration, British governments have followed rather than led. Popular anti-Semitism led to the passing of the Aliens Act by a Liberal government in 1905. By refusing entry to the indigent, this act targeted penniless Russian Jews fleeing their homes in the face of persecution. Growing unease with migration led a Conservative government to pass the Commonwealth Immigration Act (1962). This act restricted the right of entry for unskilled workers, a category that many Commonwealth immigrants fell into. Labour governments have been no less averse to playing the race card. The Commonwealth Immigration Act (1968), limited the right to immigrate to those who had a parent or grandparent born in Britain. This was a pre-emptive strike against a potential exodus of Indians facing discrimination in Uganda and Kenya. This legislation did not affect another Kenyan minority, the descendants of British colonial settlers. Most recently, the anti-immigrant UK Independence Party has stoked popular discontent. This led in the 2015 general election to both the Conservatives and Labour promising to limit immigration. So committed were the latter to this pledge that it was emblazoned on a commemorative mug.

In reality, the “swarm” of migrants does not exist. As its EU partners regularly point out, Britain fails to take in its fair share of asylum-seekers. Just a few thousand refugees reside in the camps at Calais. By contrast, over 200,000 people applied for asylum in Germany last year. Greece and Italy remain the first port of call for the refugee ships launched daily from North Africa and the Eastern Mediterranean. By creating the perception of crisis, Cameron avoids a politically unpopular decision and asserts his authority over the EU in anticipation of the 2016 referendum on British membership.

But another issue lurks in the background. Many refugees are fleeing political violence, whether in North Africa or by the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan and ISIS in Iraq and Syria. Given that British participation in the 2001 war against the Taliban, the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and the 2010 bombing of Libya contributed greatly to this instability should Britain – and the US for that matter – take greater responsibility for its actions?

Put simply: for reasons of history, fairness, and responsibility, Britain should do more.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/160209

by Tommy Monk Tue Aug 11, 2015 8:06 pm

You hope people are asleep to the facts dodge... but I will wake them up with a loud dose of the truth!!!

by Guest Tue Aug 11, 2015 9:49 pm

You do not have any facts Tommy, just racist and xenophobic drivel.

by Tommy Monk Tue Aug 11, 2015 10:19 pm

All you have is SIXHIRB to throw around at people when you run out of legitimate answers...

by Guest Tue Aug 11, 2015 10:22 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:All you have is SIXHIRB to throw around at people when you run out of legitimate answers...

The facts we do have is yhou are completely xenophobic, racist and homophobic

SIXHIRB was invented as the worse defence going for such idiots

by Tommy Monk Tue Aug 11, 2015 10:33 pm

Shouting down legitimate opinion and arguments with accusations such as SIXHIRB shows how desperate you are And that you have no answers!!!

by Guest Tue Aug 11, 2015 11:08 pm

anyhows...reference the title of the op

"whats missing in the debate.........."

THE WORD NO

by Tommy Monk Tue Aug 11, 2015 11:12 pm

Common sense and national security are also absent...

by Irn Bru Tue Aug 11, 2015 11:37 pm

Tommy,

The answer to your question about the migrants status for those at Calais can be found here under...

Definitions: Illegal immigration or asylum seeking?

http://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/commentary/calais-and-clandestine-migration-uk-concerns-and-context

Maybe the French will just get sick of it all and solve the problem by granting all the migrants political asylum and refugee status and then grant them citiznship and issue them with EU passports.

They'll be on the boats quick as a flash and be here within the hour under freedom of movement. Smile

by Ben Reilly Tue Aug 11, 2015 11:59 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:You hope people are asleep to the facts dodge... but I will wake them up with a loud dose of the truth!!!

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:27 am

well no doubt if that horde over there is let in the wet letteuce brigade will be so proud of themselves

that will be 5000 less hospital beds available
5000 less GP places
5,000 more benefit sets to be paid out
5000 more homes "lost" to our young folks
however many school places lost
however many more jobs "lost"

how many are "claiming" to be "professionals" but have "lost their papers" and will end up in critical positions unqualified and worse than useless?

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 2:23 am

victorismyhero wrote:anyhows...reference the title of the op

"whats missing in the debate.........."

THE WORD NO

You are one person who thinks you have the right to say no, as since when did you own the whole of the UK?

Since when did you create the infrastructure for this nation?

On each answer you never did and fail everytime to remember it was made off the back of those killed and enslaved by the British.

This you easily forget, that if not for the millions made from slavery and the money stolen from India the industrial Revolution would have never gotten off the ground. This led to welath and even more so by controlling a quarter of the known world where we subjucated many native people to abject slavery. We only built some infrustructure in their nations to further speed up the import and export of goods to further enrish the UK.

All of this created what you and others were privelidged being born into. Even your own anscestors just as everyone elses were immigrants to these shores.

Like the cartoon rightly states we are humans but you create an imaginary boundary on maps to deny people a chance for a better life and use the poorest arguments born from selfishness. Geography does not or never shall be a reason to deny people help.

by Tommy Monk Wed Aug 12, 2015 7:24 am

It's a democracy dodge and overwhelming vast majority of British people are against further immigration!!!

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 7:55 am

There is no majority view to stop immigration

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 8:54 am

Cuchulain wrote:There is no majority view to stop immigration

I disagree, Cameron would never have made that swarm comment unless he thought it was what people want to hear

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 9:12 am

Nems wrote:
Cuchulain wrote:There is no majority view to stop immigration

I disagree, Cameron would never have made that swarm comment unless he thought it was what people want to hear

Based on pandering to those who are selfish?
Again the vast majority do not want immigration stopped but reduced.
Even that is also selfish.
This is what ammoys me many of our systems would cease to function without immigrants, the NHS being one where one third of doctors are foriegn. This and countless others are reliant of immigrants to function, where in some cases it is because of a poor ethos where people feel jobs are either beneath them or are not willing work for the inimum wage. Well we should have a living wage which is coming but at present it because of these wages that we continue to have growth as investors come here because it is finnacially viable to do so. The reality is this poor ethos has to change, where gone sadly are the days when people were proud of doing a hards days work, now they begrudge doing this.
There are 7 million foriegn born in this country, if they all got pissed off with all this nastiness directed towards them and all left tomnorrow this country would utterly collaspe. People need to start being thankful for the fact they increase the economy and growth of this country and keep it running, yet all they get is the most ungrateful and selfish views of those foriegn, based on a view where they were born geographically makes them wrongly think they can deny others a right to a life.

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 11:28 am

Cuchulain wrote:
Nems wrote:

I disagree, Cameron would never have made that swarm comment unless he thought it was what people want to hear

Based on pandering to those who are selfish?
Again the vast majority do not want immigration stopped but reduced.
Even that is also selfish.
This is what ammoys me many of our systems would cease to function without immigrants, the NHS being one where one third of doctors are foriegn. This and countless others are reliant of immigrants to function, where in some cases it is because of a poor ethos where people feel jobs are either beneath them or are not willing work for the inimum wage. Well we should have a living wage which is coming but at present it because of these wages that we continue to have growth as investors come here because it is finnacially viable to do so. The reality is this poor ethos has to change, where gone sadly are the days when people were proud of doing a hards days work, now they begrudge doing this.
There are 7 million foriegn born in this country,
and a sizeable proportion of those are running shops to cater for the foreign born so we wont miss them if the ALL leave....
the truth is that relatively few are in key jobs...(with perhaps the exception of the NHS)

if they all got pissed off with all this nastiness directed towards them and all left tomnorrow this country would utterly collaspe. People need to start being thankful for the fact they increase the economy and growth of this country and keep it running, yet all they get is the most ungrateful and selfish views of those foriegn, based on a view where they were born geographically makes them wrongly think they can deny others a right to a life.

well didge...as the tories will tell you we are broke....(apparantly) hence the need for their pogrom against the poor (bedroom tax etc) so pray tell me ...who's going to pay te upfront costs of those extra hosp[ital beds, GP places, school places, housing etc??? The poor and need of THIS country...again...what you going to rob next?, perhaps you could send the DSS gestapo round kicking disabled folks out of their mobility buggies and sell the buggies....or perhaps make them pay a road tax and so on?

I'm only asking...who's going to pay....and the answer ISNT "oh it can be found" I want a defined answer to the question...where is the money going to be sourced from?

how about top rate of tax to 80%?b ut of course you KNOW that wont happen either under the tories or the cowardly left......

by Raggamuffin Wed Aug 12, 2015 11:31 am

Ben_Reilly wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:You hope people are asleep to the facts dodge... but I will wake them up with a loud dose of the truth!!!

Oh it was you! I clicked on this page and a strange sound came out of my computer, and I didn't know why at first. Laughing

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 11:32 am

well it makes as much sense as most of Bens posts Razz

by Raggamuffin Wed Aug 12, 2015 11:33 am

victorismyhero wrote:well it makes as much sense as most of Bens posts

Every time I click on this page, it happens. Laughing

by Raggamuffin Wed Aug 12, 2015 11:38 am

victorismyhero wrote:
Cuchulain wrote:

Based on pandering to those who are selfish?
Again the vast majority do not want immigration stopped but reduced.
Even that is also selfish.
This is what ammoys me many of our systems would cease to function without immigrants, the NHS being one where one third of doctors are foriegn. This and countless others are reliant of immigrants to function, where in some cases it is because of a poor ethos where people feel jobs are either beneath them or are not willing work for the inimum wage. Well we should have a living wage which is coming but at present it because of these wages that we continue to have growth as investors come here because it is finnacially viable to do so. The reality is this poor ethos has to change, where gone sadly are the days when people were proud of doing a hards days work, now they begrudge doing this.
There are 7 million foriegn born in this country,
and a sizeable proportion of those are running shops to cater for the foreign born so we wont miss them if the ALL leave....
the truth is that relatively few are in key jobs...(with perhaps the exception of the NHS)

if they all got pissed off with all this nastiness directed towards them and all left tomnorrow this country would utterly collaspe. People need to start being thankful for the fact they increase the economy and growth of this country and keep it running, yet all they get is the most ungrateful and selfish views of those foriegn, based on a view where they were born geographically makes them wrongly think they can deny others a right to a life.

well didge...as the tories will tell you we are broke....(apparantly) hence the need for their pogrom against the poor (bedroom tax etc) so pray tell me ...who's going to pay te upfront costs of those extra hosp[ital beds, GP places, school places, housing etc??? The poor and need of THIS country...again...what you going to rob next?, perhaps you could send the DSS gestapo round kicking disabled folks out of their mobility buggies and sell the buggies....or perhaps make them pay a road tax and so on?

I'm only asking...who's going to pay....and the answer ISNT "oh it can be found" I want a defined answer to the question...where is the money going to be sourced from?

how about top rate of tax to 80%?b ut of course you KNOW that wont happen either under the tories or the cowardly left......

It won't happen because if someone is rich enough to pay 80% tax, they'll simply take their business/inheritance/dodgy earnings elsewhere.

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 11:40 am

victorismyhero wrote:
Cuchulain wrote:

Based on pandering to those who are selfish?
Again the vast majority do not want immigration stopped but reduced.
Even that is also selfish.
This is what ammoys me many of our systems would cease to function without immigrants, the NHS being one where one third of doctors are foriegn. This and countless others are reliant of immigrants to function, where in some cases it is because of a poor ethos where people feel jobs are either beneath them or are not willing work for the inimum wage. Well we should have a living wage which is coming but at present it because of these wages that we continue to have growth as investors come here because it is finnacially viable to do so. The reality is this poor ethos has to change, where gone sadly are the days when people were proud of doing a hards days work, now they begrudge doing this.
There are 7 million foriegn born in this country,
and a sizeable proportion of those are running shops to cater for the foreign born so we wont miss them if the ALL leave....
the truth is that relatively few are in key jobs...(with perhaps the exception of the NHS)

if they all got pissed off with all this nastiness directed towards them and all left tomnorrow this country would utterly collaspe. People need to start being thankful for the fact they increase the economy and growth of this country and keep it running, yet all they get is the most ungrateful and selfish views of those foriegn, based on a view where they were born geographically makes them wrongly think they can deny others a right to a life.

well didge...as the tories will tell you we are broke....(apparantly) hence the need for their pogrom against the poor (bedroom tax etc) so pray tell me ...who's going to pay te upfront costs of those extra hosp[ital beds, GP places, school places, housing etc??? The poor and need of THIS country...again...what you going to rob next?, perhaps you could send the DSS gestapo round kicking disabled folks out of their mobility buggies and sell the buggies....or perhaps make them pay a road tax and so on?

I'm only asking...who's going to pay....and the answer ISNT "oh it can be found" I want a defined answer to the question...where is the money going to be sourced from?

how about top rate of tax to 80%?b ut of course you KNOW that wont happen either under the tories or the cowardly left......

It would be an utter diaster as many fall within the younger category with many within work. You take away a third of doctors, nurses, carers and you will have disaters on your hands. The majority of people who use and need the health service are the elderly. That is not having a go, but a fact of life, where more people are living longer, more people are then susceptble to illness and conditions and you are basically sentencing many to a slow painful death. Not concerned about any political aspect here and it does not matter who is in power, we are on the road to recovery and this is down mainly to immigration propping up this nation where many again have the worst work ethos. Everytime its the same poor reasons given when lets have some real honesty Victor, these are not the main concerns people have over immigration its always along racial and culture lines that people have this perpetual fear society is going to change. Well I have news for you it has always changed for the better and if anyone dares to claim it has gotten worse for people, when we have far more equality and a better way of life, then they are lying.
Yeah tax the richest out of the country, not the brightest move because they would most certainly leave and why would they stay, when they can live in a country where its not going to take all the money they have in many cases worked hard for. I if you said something reasonable like 50-60% then fine many would accept that, but 80% would just see a mass exodus.

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:05 pm

so...evasion and ambiguity is the word is it ? hmmmm

the cultural aspect is a load of cobblers....to a large extent...and I dont personally give a flying fig for the "racial" aspect

an englishman is an englishman...whether he be white black or yellow with purple spots (tho i'd advise HIM to see a doctor...purple spots aint good) but od course tis is where the cultural aspect tends to have an effect.....

you simply CANNOT be an englishman if you dress in your pj's to go shopping, dress your wife in a tent, refuse to show your face (hint...a face is your stamp of honesty) and go round shouting about things that are perfectly legitimate within english (british) culture....

oh and I've got ANOTHER example of the delightful people we have residing here now

was out with my springer the other day....

when walking in a crowd he sticks close to my heel and ignores everyone else around him....he is soley focussed on me...(different when hunting...then he's a loon and will bounce all and sundry)

walked past one of our islamic bretheren...who took a crafty kick at him and yelled dirty animal....

I told him he was very very lucky......for obvious reasons I couldnt do what I SHOULD have been allowed to do and wreck his face....So I just told him my dog smelt better than him , and was entirely more sociable so go F*** a camel

thats why folks have cultural "problems " with these ........things......

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:17 pm

Never addressed a single point.

by Raggamuffin Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:22 pm

When it comes to talking about money and/or services, clearly there's a difference between someone who adds something and someone who takes something.

If taxes cannot go up, and people don't want cuts to be made, who is going to pay for the ones who only take?

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:23 pm

erm...no...YOU failed to adress any of the points i raised...as I said evasion...stop moving the goalposts to your moral arguments and attend to te practical points i have raised

of course I fully realise that the liberalist isnt concerned with practicalities just pie in the sky fluffy bunny idealism...

BUT

where you going to house them (who pays)
hospital beds
GP places
school places

etc etc etc .....

AND dont bring up rubbish about how they will become "paying members of society" that irrelevant...these are "up front costs" that need to be met NOW not in 5, 10 20, years or never.....

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:31 pm

Oh and I would dispute that society has changed for the better over the last 40-odd years...

technologically and health care wise yes...socially??? nah.....down hill all the way....

when I was a kid we used to spend time every day making sure all the elderly in the village were OK
indeed it was a legitimate reason to be absent from school, if you saw old mrs brown hadnt taken her milk in, and didnt answer the door....you called the booby and waited for him to arrive (on his bike) by this time you had missed the bus to school, so the bobby took you home and explained what a good citizen you were to your mum (so you didnt get a belt for skiveing) and you had the rest of the day off....

we kept the village clean. picking up any litter (rare) and dumping it in someone...anyones...dustbin.

all our elders werer "mr whoever" or mrs whoever or if we didnt know them ..."sir or maam"

and much much mopre that made life "civil"

so not all has been "upward progress......

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:36 pm

Nothing to do with any goal posts, your arguments are abusrd Victor and based on pure selfishness.
The country would be screwed without immigrants and functions because of them which you never addressed at all.
Its boring when you do this and come out with the same inane political nonsense which means nothing.
Seriously when is some of humanity going to evolve like the rest of us and realise its not all about ourselves but others.
Sorry Victor on this topic you always come out with very poor views that lack any validity, they are also steeped from yonder year and should be placed where they truely belong in the garbage.
When you raise some practical points they will be addressed not fear and an inane view which fails to understand the actual help immigrants do for this country.
Otherwise this debate will end very quickly
Now either go back and address my points or you don;t either way your argument is utterly poor

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:43 pm

no didge i'm nort playing your game ....YOU are the one who raised the contributions made by immigrants.....which in some cases I dont deny......as a divert from my points....

i asked several specific questions...

basically who's going to pay...

YOU are the one diverting away from what is obviously an uncomfortable area.....

and as an aside...you cant deny that society is worse in MANY respects now than 40 years ago....
better in some agreed..mainly infrastructure....but as to social interactions.....nah....peeps dont give a toss about their next door neighbour.....nor is this encouraged....BUT we HAVE to care about absolute strangers....odd that

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:49 pm

The nations pays as it has a duty and responisbility espcially when we have played a part in their plight.

So who should pay for those unemployed Victor?
You rightly want to help them based on geography and yet not others who also need this help. That is just racial garbage plain and simple because the point is when people need help and if we can we should help them.
You cannot pick and choose just because of where a person is born as it completely contradicts your views on the benefit system.

You either want to help people or you do not, you cannot decide based on geography because you then make it something that does not exist biologically.
Race.

by Raggamuffin Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:56 pm

I can't be doing with this nonsense that I should pay because I played a part in the plight of others. I have done nothing of the kind. How about asking those people how much part they played in their own plight instead?

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:57 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:I can't be doing with this nonsense that I should pay because I played a part in the plight of others. I have done nothing of the kind. How about asking those people how much part they played in their own plight instead?

Then why should any service then help you?

by Raggamuffin Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:57 pm

How about asking the leaders of those countries what part they played in the plight of the people too? Should they be absolved of responsibility on the grounds that they're "victims" too?

by Raggamuffin Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:58 pm

Cuchulain wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:I can't be doing with this nonsense that I should pay because I played a part in the plight of others. I have done nothing of the kind. How about asking those people how much part they played in their own plight instead?

Then why should any service then help you?

What service? The NHS, etc?

Well maybe because I pay taxes and NI.

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:00 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Cuchulain wrote:

Then why should any service then help you?

What service? The NHS, etc?

Well maybe because I pay taxes and NI.

Everything, your miniscule amount would not cover many things, so why sould others pay that you benefit, of which you most certainly do?

by Eilzel Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:01 pm

victorismyhero wrote:no didge i'm nort playing your game ....YOU are the one who raised the contributions made by immigrants.....which in some cases I dont deny......as a divert from my points....

i asked several specific questions...

basically who's going to pay...

YOU are the one diverting away from what is obviously an uncomfortable area.....

and as an aside...you cant deny that society is worse in MANY respects now than 40 years ago....
better in some agreed..mainly infrastructure....but as to social interactions.....nah....peeps dont give a toss about their next door neighbour.....nor is this encouraged....BUT we HAVE to care about absolute strangers....odd that

Worse in some respects, better in others.

More people are university educated now than 40 years ago (although I will concede a lot are mickey mouse degrees but not the majority).
People of different races are now treated vastly better than before.
Women are treated with respect and in almost all areas equally now to men.
Gay people no longer live in fear and their relationships are respected equally by most.
People live longer now than they did before.
More people can have two cars, foreign holidays and other such luxuries that most could not before.

Of course there are problems but by no means is society worse now than 40 years ago.

On the OP. I actually see both sides. We cannot allow all and sundry to enter the UK, that is not realistic, however bad the previous lives of those coming here. At the same time we should not just shut up shop and say no- that is cruel and irresponsible (for reasons didge has gone over extensively tbf).

What I HATE, in these debates (in the media, on Facebook and in real life- though less so for me thesedays, being the foreigner myself haha), is the dehumanizing language used.

Swarms of immigrants (like a plague of locusts?)
Floods of immigrants (who wants floods?)

They should be 'rounded up' (like cattle?) and 'shipped back' (like parcels?)

They are all described as criminals and violent...

These people have left homelands not because they wanted to (I have taught immigrants from Pakistan, they talk of their home countries with affection and cherished memories) but because for various reasons they feel forced to. It doesn't matter if its war or economic, for whatever reason their home has become a living nightmare, and it isn't always possible for even large numbers of ordinary people to make the changes they need to. And they KNOW there is a better life in faraway lands.

That doesn't mean I think we are obliged or should feel guiltily committed to take on every single person waiting in Calais to come here. That isn't practical. But for god sake these are still human beings who have done more than any of us can ever truly imagine to try and make a better life for themselves. I'm sure they aren't all perfect, but it is ridiculous to make assumptions that most are criminals.

They aren't fucking animals, they are people who have will been through shit none of us can comprehend. Fine if people want to argue against them coming to the UK, but talk about them like human beings fgs.

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:01 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:How about asking the leaders of those countries what part they played in the plight of the people too? Should they be absolved of responsibility on the grounds that they're "victims" too?

Great that one, hopw about thanking many of these countries that stepped up to help this nation when it needed that help
How about you understand also this country created an elite in many of these societies with how we corruptedly run their nations.
This is why you need to understand history and why your views fall down

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:04 pm

Eilzel wrote:
victorismyhero wrote:no didge i'm nort playing your game ....YOU are the one who raised the contributions made by immigrants.....which in some cases I dont deny......as a divert from my points....

i asked several specific questions...

basically who's going to pay...

YOU are the one diverting away from what is obviously an uncomfortable area.....

and as an aside...you cant deny that society is worse in MANY respects now than 40 years ago....
better in some agreed..mainly infrastructure....but as to social interactions.....nah....peeps dont give a toss about their next door neighbour.....nor is this encouraged....BUT we HAVE to care about absolute strangers....odd that

Worse in some respects, better in others.

More people are university educated now than 40 years ago (although I will concede a lot are mickey mouse degrees but not the majority).
People of different races are now treated vastly better than before.
Women are treated with respect and in almost all areas equally now to men.
Gay people no longer live in fear and their relationships are respected equally by most.
People live longer now than they did before.
More people can have two cars, foreign holidays and other such luxuries that most could not before.

Of course there are problems but by no means is society worse now than 40 years ago.

On the OP. I actually see both sides. We cannot allow all and sundry to enter the UK, that is not realistic, however bad the previous lives of those coming here. At the same time we should not just shut up shop and say no- that is cruel and irresponsible (for reasons didge has gone over extensively tbf).

What I HATE, in these debates (in the media, on Facebook and in real life- though less so for me thesedays, being the foreigner myself haha), is the dehumanizing language used.

Swarms of immigrants (like a plague of locusts?)
Floods of immigrants (who wants floods?)

They should be 'rounded up' (like cattle?) and 'shipped back' (like parcels?)

They are all described as criminals and violent...

These people have left homelands not because they wanted to (I have taught immigrants from Pakistan, they talk of their home countries with affection and cherished memories) but because for various reasons they feel forced to. It doesn't matter if its war or economic, for whatever reason their home has become a living nightmare, and it isn't always possible for even large numbers of ordinary people to make the changes they need to. And they KNOW there is a better life in faraway lands.

That doesn't mean I think we are obliged or should feel guiltily committed to take on every single person waiting in Calais to come here. That isn't practical. But for god sake these are still human beings who have done more than any of us can ever truly imagine to try and make a better life for themselves. I'm sure they aren't all perfect, but it is ridiculous to make assumptions that most are criminals.

They aren't fucking animals, they are people who have will been through shit none of us can comprehend. Fine if people want to argue against them coming to the UK, but talk about them like human beings fgs.

+1

I do not even expect us to take everyone in and the reality is we do not, we hardly take in compared to many other nations.
Its piss poor the UK's contribution to be honest and like you say its the language used to describe people which is a tell as to why it is always really racisl why people argue against others coming here. You have a flood of reasons but it mainly always boils down to racial reasons.

Great post

by Raggamuffin Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:08 pm

Cuchulain wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:How about asking the leaders of those countries what part they played in the plight of the people too? Should they be absolved of responsibility on the grounds that they're "victims" too?

Great that one, hopw about thanking many of these countries that stepped up to help this nation when it needed that help
How about you understand also this country created an elite in many of these societies with how we corruptedly run their nations.
This is why you need to understand history and why your views fall down

Which ones?

How about you concentrate on what's happening today instead of constantly going on about the past?

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:10 pm

oh and I dont think what other countries do is necessarily a good benchmark....

just becasue they are soft in the head doesnt mean we should follow suit Evil or Very Mad

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:11 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Cuchulain wrote:

Great that one, hopw about thanking many of these countries that stepped up to help this nation when it needed that help
How about you understand also this country created an elite in many of these societies with how we corruptedly run their nations.
This is why you need to understand history and why your views fall down

Which ones?

How about you concentrate on what's happening today instead of constantly going on about the past?

Because it is what happened in the past that has created what has happened today.
Do you not understand cause and effect?

by Eilzel Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:12 pm

I think its to do with creating bogeymen didge.

People, for very understandable reasons, don't want to see a continued influx of immigrants as we have had for 20 odd years. I get that.

But rather than debate it reasonably they have to make the 'enemy' (ie: immigrants) into something less human, because no one really wants to treat humans badly. So they talk about people like animals- faceless strangers- that way they don't have to confront the difficult moral quandaries involved.

I don't think vic is or has racist views at all, but he is removing any need to think about the difficulties of those people based on his own interests.

And yeah we actually aren't even in the top 5 of European countries in terms of immigrant intake (pretty sure Germany is top)- but again, complicated facts the anti-immigrant ranters simply ignore.

by Raggamuffin Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:14 pm

Cuchulain wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Which ones?

How about you concentrate on what's happening today instead of constantly going on about the past?

Because it is what happened in the past that has created what has happened today.
Do you not understand cause and effect?

Which countries did you mean?

Yes, I understand cause and effect. I also understand that eventually people have to stop living in the past and take responsibility for themselves. They wanted independence, and they got it, but that means they should look after themselves.

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:16 pm

Eilzel wrote:I think its to do with creating bogeymen didge.

People, for very understandable reasons, don't want to see a continued influx of immigrants as we have had for 20 odd years. I get that.

But rather than debate it reasonably they have to make the 'enemy' (ie: immigrants) into something less human, because no one really wants to treat humans badly. So they talk about people like animals- faceless strangers- that way they don't have to confront the difficult moral quandaries involved.

I don't think vic is or has racist views at all, but he is removing any need to think about the difficulties of those people based on his own interests.

And yeah we actually aren't even in the top 5 of European countries in terms of immigrant intake (pretty sure Germany is top)- but again, complicated facts the anti-immigrant ranters simply ignore.

Never claimed Victor is racist, that is not my point but the arguments are racial and based on georgraphy.
You either want to help people who need help or you do not. It should not matter where they come from.
I agree numbers have to be at a reasonable level but the wording here I find appalling and even more annoying being as I am the son of immigrants. I mean their parents helped this country and never lived here, what did they get out of it?
I just am appalled at how the view contradict on wanted to help some and then not others based on where people come from.
We have help cause some of these problems and every single person has certainly benefited from our past, which they all too quickly forget.

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:17 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Cuchulain wrote:

Because it is what happened in the past that has created what has happened today.
Do you not understand cause and effect?

Which countries did you mean?

Yes, I understand cause and effect. I also understand that eventually people have to stop living in the past and take responsibility for themselves. They wanted independence, and they got it, but that means they should look after themselves.

You understand cause and effetc?
So you understand you are in a privalidge position off nothing you did, and it was events before in the past that createed you being lucky to be born into an avantaged society?

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:18 pm

Cuchulain wrote:The nations pays as it has a duty and responisbility espcially when we have played a part in their plight.

So who should pay for those unemployed Victor?
You rightly want to help them based on geography and yet not others who also need this help. That is just racial garbage plain and simple because the point is when people need help and if we can we should help them.
You cannot pick and choose just because of where a person is born as it completely contradicts your views on the benefit system.

nope ...our own unemployed are an "internal problem", which should be adressed by an internal solution (ie collect ALL taxes due....rigidly)
these migrants are an "external problem" for which there can be no bugetry solution

You either want to help people or you do not, you cannot decide based on geography because you then make it something that does not exist biologically.
Race.

race has nothing to do with it.....geography has, but only as far as "input" into the economy has.....remeber the costs are "upfront" and therfore unfunded....

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:20 pm

victorismyhero wrote:
Cuchulain wrote:The nations pays as it has a duty and responisbility espcially when we have played a part in their plight.

So who should pay for those unemployed Victor?
You rightly want to help them based on geography and yet not others who also need this help. That is just racial garbage plain and simple because the point is when people need help and if we can we should help them.
You cannot pick and choose just because of where a person is born as it completely contradicts your views on the benefit system.

nope ...our own unemployed are an "internal problem", which should be adressed by an internal solution (ie collect ALL taxes due....rigidly)
these migrants are an "external problem" for which there can be no bugetry solution

You either want to help people or you do not, you cannot decide based on geography because you then make it something that does not exist biologically.
Race.

race has nothing to do with it.....geography has, but only as far as "input" into the economy has.....remeber the costs are "upfront" and therfore unfunded....

Geography makes it racial.
"our problem"?
Humanity is "our" problem,. not just those idenitified through an imaginary boundary.
The World is and should be "our" problem, which is why we are ruining it, because we fail to see it is "our" problem.
Imaginary lines should not decide the fate of others.

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:21 pm

I am off to luch Victor, catch you later.

by Eilzel Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:22 pm

Cuchulain wrote:
Eilzel wrote:I think its to do with creating bogeymen didge.

People, for very understandable reasons, don't want to see a continued influx of immigrants as we have had for 20 odd years. I get that.

But rather than debate it reasonably they have to make the 'enemy' (ie: immigrants) into something less human, because no one really wants to treat humans badly. So they talk about people like animals- faceless strangers- that way they don't have to confront the difficult moral quandaries involved.

I don't think vic is or has racist views at all, but he is removing any need to think about the difficulties of those people based on his own interests.

And yeah we actually aren't even in the top 5 of European countries in terms of immigrant intake (pretty sure Germany is top)- but again, complicated facts the anti-immigrant ranters simply ignore.

Never claimed Victor is racist, that is not my point but the arguments are racial and based on georgraphy.
You either want to help people who need help or you do not. It should not matter where they come from.
I agree numbers have to be at a reasonable level but the wording here I find appalling and even more annoying being as I am the son of immigrants. I mean their parents helped this country and never lived here, what did they get out of it?
I just am appalled at how the view contradict on wanted to help some and then not others based on where people come from.
We have help cause some of these problems and every single person has certainly benefited from our past, which they all too quickly forget.

The thing is (and I think it was actually Jeremy Clarkson, of all people, who mentioned this a while back), if a person came to our doorstep begging for help, and would clearly see they were in distress- most of us would do what we could to help them. But that's because we would be faced with it directly, and it would be one face we could sympathize with, a real, human, face.

When its a bunch of people, hundreds, thousands, millions- people don't tend to care so much (as Stalin said, one death is a tragedy, a million is a statistic). Send them away!...

People need a face not a number, ironically I think this is also why bands do badly in the X-Factor haha

People should think about how they would feel if they shoe was on the other foot.

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:26 pm

and as for the "other countries take more argumant

are you talking sheer numbers ...or numbers per square mile ...or numbers per gdp or what

because if its numbers per square mile then australia "should " take the lot.....

followed closely by America, canada and china..oh and russia.....

by Guest Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:28 pm

and another false argument

"the Majority " of people here havnt objected.....

well so far true...but neither have they agreed ......DONT presume on the desires of the "silent majority" and do not take silence for compliance either....

by Sponsored content