Tommy Robinson

[Dunning1874]

18 hours ago, vikingTON said:

Can you explain specifically how mainstream parties appeasing racism caused the May 2001 urban riots? For example, which mainstream parties "appeased" the targeting of the south Asian community in Bradford at that time? 

The idea that UK mainstream politics can be characterised as a race-baiting culture politics over the past 50 years is unhinged, quite frankly. The idea of multiculturalism and the significant transformations in that period have rarely been more smoothly embraced by any comparable society and with no greater degree of cross-party consensus. 

I'm not saying that there hasn't been *any* racism within UK mainstream political culture, but to argue that it is a significant factor in current events is short on evidence. 

I agree with some of this, but also think that it's entirely credible to point to Labour's rhetoric on immigration from 1997 - and the escalation of it over the 27 years since that election as the Tories and Labour incessantly tried to outflank each other - as a causal factor here. Obviously no mainstream party is going to explicitly race bait by tying 'we must control immigration' to either skin colour or religion in a wholesale denunciation of multiculturalism that would appease those trying to burn down mosques, but it's still fed into those attitudes.

In 1997 only 3% of the population thought immigration was a key political issue. You can obviously make the argument that the parties/governments have danced to the changing tune of media and public opinion rather than leading it themselves over that time, but Labour were doing this long before the accession of several states to the EU in 2004 that saw a substantial increase in legal immigration to the uproar of the tabloids. They introduced detention centres and the voucher system for asylum seekers as it would "discourage fraudulent claims" in 1999 - the UK wasn't in top 10 in Europe for the number of asylum claims but Blair pledged to halve the number coming in while Blunkett said the children of asylum seekers were "swamping" schools. With further asylum acts they removed the right to work from asylum seekers who were waiting for their claims to be ruled on and then the right to benefits from those appealing having a claim denied, all while the government themselves were using the same language to describe immigrants and especially asylum seekers as the Sun and Daily Mail - scroungers, cheats, flooding, swamping, invading.

It's possible to argue that a growth of anti-immigration sentiment, and an outpouring of explicit racism against anyone who isn't white regardless of how many generations they've spent in the UK which invariably follows it, was going to develop over the last 25-30 years no matter what stance mainstream parties took, but we can't say for sure that it would be the case if we had a party of government willing to speak up in defence of immigrants and try to fight against that sentiment, because we've never had one.

Labour believed they could make themselves the natural party of government by outflanking the Tories to the right on some issues in the 00s while staying to their left economically, it blew up in their face and their solution when they found themselves in opposition again was to fight the following election with "controls on immigration" mugs. Then the Tories moved ever further rightward on immigration throughout their time in office: the hostile environment, the go home vans, Windrush all coming before we even got to Prime Ministers who described Muslim women as "letterboxes", came up with the Rwanda policy or made "Stop The Boats" their central campaign slogan.

Now Labour are back in government again and there are literal pogroms taking place, one of them an arson attack on a hotel housing asylum seekers which a Labour MP stood in Parliament and named days before the pogrom, demanding her constituents "get their hotel back". There has been no condemnation of that MP from any member of the government, who were themselves campaigning just over a month ago on the message that the previous government had "lost control of our borders" and are now showing a curious reluctance to name Islamophobia as a factor in their denunciations of people trying to murder Muslims, having faced accusations over several years from their own elected representatives that the party is institutionally Islamophobic.

Edited August 6 by Dunning1874

[itzdrk]

2 hours ago, itzdrk said:

I feel like it wont ever take place, they'll never cancel it though so you'll get the usual 8 fash c***s sheepishly hanging about.  

Sounds like I may be both wrong and right.

Something fashy happening tomorrow night. 

Edited August 6 by itzdrk

[welshbairn]

 

[MazzyStar]

46 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

 

I doubt Rory Stewart knew anything about Maysan and Dhi Qar in Iraq, but that didn’t stop him becoming Deputy Governor there. 

[Nkomo-A-Gogo]

17 hours ago, Sherrif John Bunnell said:

Two more members of the Master Race sent down.

 

[The Golden God]

Not sure if this has already been posted. They’re so insane bunch over there. 

[Ya Bezzer!]

5 hours ago, Billy Jean King said:

Total fake news yet again. There are no trains to Sunderland from Glasgow, it requires at least two changes so no way a train from Glasgow could "pull in" to that shit hole, absolute shit stirring nonsense 

Well for a start you can do it with one change.

Secondly is it possible the journalist in question just saw loads of people with Glaswegian accents getting off a train and didn't check the train timetable?

I mean you seem to be calling a senior journalist (Mark Easton) at the BBC a liar based on not much.

I'm not on X or I'd ask him to clarify the statement. 

[itzdrk]

4 hours ago, Salt n Vinegar said:

There is, of course, another aspect to the "protests" that might be getting held in Scotland. I suppose it's conceivable that the "Pro-UK" shower might relish a chance to have a pop at the almost 50% of the population here that seem to favour Scottish independence.

If the Pro-UK "protestors" kick off, ironically it might result in an attitude switch that they might not like.

Edit to add - A "Pro-UK" march in Scotland, to me, has a completely different vibe to one elsewhere in the UK.

It's not a unionist demo.  

[itzdrk]

1 hour ago, itzdrk said:

Sounds like I may be both wrong and right.

Something fashy happening tomorrow night. 

A hotel in Ibrox is the target.  

[Shotgun]

8 hours ago, Leith Green said:

And there are some who say "we cant just label these people as thick".

Yes, yes we f**king can.

Hillary Clinton called their US cousins "deplorables'. That was almost 8 years ago and it's STILL being used as a stick with which to beat liberals. I've been told many times, on here and elsewhere, (Johnathan Pie, I'm looking at you) that the reason for Trump's popularity is that the left used unkind words to describe the far right. We aren't listening to them, we should respect their opinions, and we should rise above the hateful invective they spew at us. Bullshit.

5 hours ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

Sitting back and doing nothing isn't an option.

Exactly. You don't fight Fascism with kindness and understanding.

[welshbairn]

14 minutes ago, itzdrk said:

A hotel in Ibrox is the target.  

If you have evidence of this I hope you're going to grass. Even if it's just rumours.

[Granny Danger]

39 minutes ago, The Golden God said:

Not sure if this has already been posted. They’re so insane bunch over there. 

Beyond comprehension.  

[coprolite]

5 hours ago, Michael W said:

The MSM pouncing on parties deemed 'soft on immigration', by which they mean numbers, is shooting fish in a barrel; it's at a record level and there's no point pretending otherwise.

The Tories are responsible for much of it. 'Stop the boats' was the mantra, but they did absolutely nothing that might try and address the issue beyond the sacred Rwanda plan which 1) would've only seen a low percentage of arrivals sent there, 2) was a thoroughly abhorrent policy and 3) as a result of point (1), it wasn't going to work anyway. £700m(!) spent o to send three people there, one of whom immediately f**ked off. The Rwandans must be pissing themselves laughing at that nice little earner. A complete and utter gimmick. 

Anyway, back to the Tories - saying you are going to do something and then continuing to do absolutely nothing is laying the groundwork for the conditions that we have been seen. All it needed was a triggering action and one which displayed some of the hallmarks of a terrorist attack set it off. We managed to avoid this sort of thing after 7/7, Westminster Bridge and the Manchester Arena bombings, for example, so there has clearly been some sort of mentality shift, probably a fair bit of it being radicalisation through social media echo chambers. 

A sensible discussion about Immigration is about as likely as one involving the NHS, i.e impossible. You'll have a subset demanding no immigration at all, some of them currently doing so very violently and another that won't acknowledge net immigration of 600k a year cannot be sustained indefinitely. Any number mentioned of more than 20,000 will have elements of the press going f**king mental no doubt as well, further destructing any such debate. Positions have become far too entrenched on an ideological basis. A sensible discussion is certainly not going to come off the back of rioting, lest it triggers more violent responses. 

We would also have to have a highly uncomfortable conversation (for some) as to why so many people just left the UK workforce during covid, creating some of the conditions that led to such high subsequent immigration levels. Some of them will have retired because they could, but the elephant in the room is how many of them decided they would just leave the UK? I would wager that a pretty significant chunk might've been EU nationals, for whom the pandemic disrupting their livlihood made it unattractive or unviable to stay in the UK. We have already forgotten the crippling labour shortages as we came out of the pandemic, which should be remembered in the context of high immigration levels. 

There are two not unrelated factors that mean that net migration below that level might be the unsustainable option. 

Demographics.

We have an ageing population. This means we need people to perform services for older people which don't always require high skills. Developing countries have young populations who need jobs and don't always have a lot of skills.  There are about 2bn people in the former empire across Africa and mainly South Asia. Because they'll often have some English, they're likely to come here if they come to Europe. 

600,000 people a year is 1% of Britain's population, and significant. It's 3% of 1% (0.03%) of anglophone(ish) developing countries'. 

A tiny % change in their appetite for emigration will have a massive impact on the flow of people, whatever some dipshit in Hartlepool wants. 

Economics

In the broader sense-access to resources. 

We protect our agricultural sector so the third world can't use their comparative advantage in food production for their maximum benefit. 

The financial system and commodities sector take value from developing economies (through interest or just exploitative pricing) to accumulate capital wealth in the rich world. 

Many parts of the develping world bear disproportionately the cost of the development of the rich world, directly through outsourced dirty industries or indirectly through climate change. 

People in the developing world lack resources and the opportunities to get those resources. There are massive push factors driving emigration. 

The developed world has those resources and opportunities. There are massive pull factors driving immigration. 

The Economic situation is very largely Britain's doing, although we tagged the US in about a century ago.

Our imperial system of extraction that determines the routes that people follow. They're just following the wealth of their nations here. 

[Freedom Farter]

42 minutes ago, MazzyStar said:

I doubt Rory Stewart knew anything about Maysan and Dhi Qar in Iraq, but that didn’t stop him becoming Deputy Governor there. 

Stewart will never admit that the racial identity of the plebs is a reflection of his establishment imperialism.

[Billy Jean King]

36 minutes ago, Ya Bezzer! said:

Well for a start you can do it with one change.

Secondly is it possible the journalist in question just saw loads of people with Glaswegian accents getting off a train and didn't check the train timetable?

I mean you seem to be calling a senior journalist (Mark Easton) at the BBC a liar based on not much.

I'm not on X or I'd ask him to clarify the statement. 

He quite clearly said coming off a train from Glasgow,  bullshit regardless of the reasons. At best it's very lazy journalism at worst shit stirring. 

[Sergeant Wilson]

5 hours ago, Jives Miguel said:

The c**t in the England shirt already been caught and charged. Superb. Can't wait til every thick mouth breather from this video is behind bars. They will all be SHITTING themselves right now waiting on a knock at the door 

 

Silly cookie.

[Stevie Kirk]

49 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

Beyond comprehension.  

I know. That Rangers body warmer was at least two sizes too big for the boy. 

[Venti]

1 hour ago, The Golden God said:

Not sure if this has already been posted. They’re so insane bunch over there. 

Futile task sadly for the nice guy trying to reason with them.

Zero empathy & hatred fuelled.

[Rugster]

1 hour ago, welshbairn said:

If you have evidence of this I hope you're going to grass. Even if it's just rumours.

I thought it was the beginning of a poem. 

[Melanius Mullarkey]

2 hours ago, The Golden God said:

Not sure if this has already been posted. They’re so insane bunch over there. 

 

1 hour ago, itzdrk said:

A hotel in Ibrox is the target.  

Maybe it’s the building this boy is standing outside.