Cultural Diversity In Your Town/Village/Whatever

[topcat(The most tip top)]

For my local postcode area

White:2256 (90%)
White: Scottish:1353 (54%)
White: Other British:379 (15%)
White: Irish:107 (4%)
White: Gypsy/Traveller:7 (0%)
White: Polish:74 (3%)
White: Other White:336 (13%)
Mixed or multiple ethnic groups:23 (1%)
Asian, Asian Scottish or Asian British:183 (7%)
Asian, Asian Scottish or Asian British: Pakistani, Pakistani Scottish or Pakistani British:21 (1%)
Asian, Asian Scottish or Asian British: Indian, Indian Scottish or Indian British:48 (2%)
Asian, Asian Scottish or Asian British: Bangladeshi, Bangladeshi Scottish or Bangladeshi British:1 (0%)
Asian, Asian Scottish or Asian British: Chinese, Chinese Scottish or Chinese British:79 (3%)
Asian, Asian Scottish or Asian British: Other Asian:34 (1%)
African:29 (1%)
African: African, African Scottish or African British:28 (1%)
African: Other African:1 (0%)
Caribbean or Black:16 (1%)
Caribbean or Black: Caribbean, Caribbean Scottish or Caribbean British:10 (0%)
Caribbean or Black: Black, Black Scottish or Black British:2 (0%)
Caribbean or Black: Other Caribbean or Black:4 (0%)
Other ethnic groups:8 (0%)
Other ethnic groups: Arab, Arab Scottish or Arab British:3 (0%)
Other ethnic groups: Other ethnic group:5 (0%)
 

 

[TheProgressiveLiberal]

11 hours ago, coprolite said:

 

 
It's because ignorance breeds fear. If you have never met a normal respectable romanian that is in the UK to work then it's easier to believe that they have all come to steal your children while excessively using the NHS and doing terrorism.

Any alternative explanation that you are about to advance is going to be contrarian trolling. Feel free to enlighten us with your deep thinking though.

 

1. The white vote is what matters when judging. You can't say that West Virginia voted for Trump more than Texas and make a point. White people in Texas voted more for Trump than white people in West Virginia. White people in Virginia or Nevada voted more by a lot for Trump than white people in Michigan or Wisconsin. Virginia and Nevada went Clinton because of the amount of minorities, not because white people are more comfortable with diversity.

2. Internal demographic changes matter. Left wing government + diversity means that the white working class leaves. California has 2 million less white people than it did 25 years ago. You can't just say that white people in California love diversity because they slightly voted against Trump. You have to figure in that a high percentage of the people who would have voted for Trump left because of the consequences of diversity plus left wing policies pushed them out.

3. Most of the states with the most pro-Clinton white vote are overwhelmingly white states. Think Oregon and Vermont.

I'm sure these things apply somewhat to Brexit. Why was Scotland one of the most overwhelming anti-Brexit places? There's almost no immigrants there. I'd wager lots of the London voters who would have supported Brexit have left the city over the past few decades.

I personally was open borders just based off the non-sense I was told by the media until I actually lived in San Antonio, Texas. I even ignored all the people I would meet from high immigrant areas who would tell me about the issues it caused. Seeing it first hand and actually listening to people explain their issues once I dropped the ideology made me reconsider and look into the issue to actually educate myself.

 

[TheProgressiveLiberal]

7 hours ago, welshbairn said:

There's no accounting for people who believe the Daily Express. The fewer interactions people have with other races/cultures, the more they hate/fear them. That would indicate that a lot of prejudice is based on unfamiliarity and ignorance rather than knowledge.

Do you have any numbers to back this up? Or are you just repeating something that makes your worldview make sense, but with no evidence to back it up?

[hk blues]

13 hours ago, TheProgressiveLiberal said:

Do you have any numbers to back this up? Or are you just repeating something that makes your worldview make sense, but with no evidence to back it up?

What evidence do you need to accept that a lot of prejudice is based on unfamiliarity and ignorance rather than knowledge? Don't you think it is?

[TheProgressiveLiberal]

12 minutes ago, hk blues said:

What evidence do you need to accept that a lot of prejudice is based on unfamiliarity and ignorance rather than knowledge? Don't you think it is?

No. I think prejudice (in the neutral sense of the word) is just as likely based on personal experience or knowledge.

That doesn't mean that it's ok to mistreat individuals, or make mass assumptions about an individual person. But it does mean that you can make judgements based on whether you want millions of people from a certain place to move into your country or whether you want your country in a political union with a certain other place. If the US is supposed to be a proposition nation based around the US Constitution and it's supposedly universal values why can't I take a peek at the polling of Asians on free speech issues.

 

[coprolite]

1. The white vote is what matters when judging. You can't say that West Virginia voted for Trump more than Texas and make a point. White people in Texas voted more for Trump than white people in West Virginia. White people in Virginia or Nevada voted more by a lot for Trump than white people in Michigan or Wisconsin. Virginia and Nevada went Clinton because of the amount of minorities, not because white people are more comfortable with diversity.
2. Internal demographic changes matter. Left wing government + diversity means that the white working class leaves. California has 2 million less white people than it did 25 years ago. You can't just say that white people in California love diversity because they slightly voted against Trump. You have to figure in that a high percentage of the people who would have voted for Trump left because of the consequences of diversity plus left wing policies pushed them out.
3. Most of the states with the most pro-Clinton white vote are overwhelmingly white states. Think Oregon and Vermont.
I'm sure these things apply somewhat to Brexit. Why was Scotland one of the most overwhelming anti-Brexit places? There's almost no immigrants there. I'd wager lots of the London voters who would have supported Brexit have left the city over the past few decades.
I personally was open borders just based off the non-sense I was told by the media until I actually lived in San Antonio, Texas. I even ignored all the people I would meet from high immigrant areas who would tell me about the issues it caused. Seeing it first hand and actually listening to people explain their issues once I dropped the ideology made me reconsider and look into the issue to actually educate myself.
 

Ok. Apologies for pre judging your views. That is more thoughtful and stats based than i expected.

Still reactionary balls though.

in your explanation non-white = not American. And your explanation for not wanting immigration is based on not liking a place with immigrants.

I also live in an area with huge numbers of immigrants. There are problems. There are also thriving multicultural communities.

I can see your statistical point that immigrant populations are likely to influence the pro immigration vote. I would be interested to see whether any of the studies quoted control for this.

[TheProgressiveLiberal]

11 minutes ago, coprolite said:

 

Ok. Apologies for pre judging your views. That is more thoughtful and stats based than i expected.

Still reactionary balls though.

in your explanation non-white = not American. And your explanation for not wanting immigration is based on not liking a place with immigrants.

I also live in an area with huge numbers of immigrants. There are problems. There are also thriving multicultural communities.

I can see your statistical point that immigrant populations are likely to influence the pro immigration vote. I would be interested to see whether any of the studies quoted control for this.

 

I don't mean that non-white = non-American.

It's just that obviously the previously dominant population is going to have a different view of increasing diversity than minority groups. If I were to move to a majority Chinese city, I'd probably be most comfortable in Hong Kong or Singapore. As a minority I'd prefer diversity over being in a monocultural Chinese city. That doesn't mean I'd expect people in more traditionally Chinese cities to want their home town to become as diverse as those two cities.

[D.A.F.C]

Living in Edinburgh it's roughly ...
8% good guys
92% arseholes

Wow it's improved then.

[D.A.F.C]

Mass immigration/diversity can lead to ghetto or group situations that cause greater problems. This hasn't happened in Scotland thankfully but it could do in the future possibly. Most of my early experiences of ethnic groups in a 99% white area involved highly respected Asians like doctors or dentists or nice people in a local takeaway who also had kids at my school. There was one black kid at high school who played in the rugby team and was left well alone.

It must have been tough being 1/2000 kids but he was just treated normally as far as I could tell.

Major immigration causes situations like the ghettos in Paris or Belgium which leads to poverty bitterness hate and division which imo led to terrorist attacks. Unfortunately racist groups and the pc brigade use this to suit their agendas and it makes it something that is almost impossible to talk about without someone throwing labels at you.

 

 

 

 

[The OP]

1 hour ago, D.A.F.C said:

Major immigration causes situations like the ghettos in Paris or Belgium which leads to poverty bitterness hate and division which imo led to terrorist attacks. Unfortunately racist groups and the pc brigade use this to suit their agendas and it makes it something that is almost impossible to talk about without someone throwing labels at you.

 

 

 

 

France needed mass immigration from its former colonies to fill labour shortages but put them in Castlemilk/Easterhouse/Drumchapel style housing estates on the periphery of the city. These people would be hit hardest by rising levels of unemployment and they are often treated as second class citizens. 

Social policy creates ghettoisation and when people on the sink estates have other distinguishing factors than just income (such as race or religion) it follows that levels of resentment about the situation would be greater. France finding lots of foreign looking poor people troublesome now doesn’t negate the fact that France brought them in because France needed them at one point.

[ford prefect]

Paisley obviously has a mix of cultures being a reasonably big town. One incident that sticks out was in my primary school a character in a maths book got shaded in with the words Mark Walters written next to it. Teachers launched an investigation. We got banned from playing football until the perpetrators owned up. #paisley2021

[hk blues]

3 hours ago, TheProgressiveLiberal said:

No. I think prejudice (in the neutral sense of the word) is just as likely based on personal experience or knowledge.

That doesn't mean that it's ok to mistreat individuals, or make mass assumptions about an individual person. But it does mean that you can make judgements based on whether you want millions of people from a certain place to move into your country or whether you want your country in a political union with a certain other place. If the US is supposed to be a proposition nation based around the US Constitution and it's supposedly universal values why can't I take a peek at the polling of Asians on free speech issues.

 

As usual, you're too busy trying to sound clever to actually read what people are writing rather than what you think they are writing.

The poster said a lot of prejudice is based on ignorance and unfamiliarity. He did not say most / all / the majority. He did not quantify it in any way hence my question to you. By your own admission, based on your wording, you think it's about 50/50. That may or may not be more than the poster thinks - who knows?

By the way, what does "prejudice (in the neutral sense of the word)" even mean?

 

[D.A.F.C]

France needed mass immigration from its former colonies to fill labour shortages but put them in Castlemilk/Easterhouse/Drumchapel style housing estates on the periphery of the city. These people would be hit hardest by rising levels of unemployment and they are often treated as second class citizens. 
Social policy creates ghettoisation and when people on the sink estates have other distinguishing factors than just income (such as race or religion) it follows that levels of resentment about the situation would be greater. France finding lots of foreign looking poor people troublesome now doesn’t negate the fact that France brought them in because France needed them at one point.

Yep but their government failed to talk about it and just blame them as scapegoats.

[bob the tank]

The seething hateballs must love that census search facility  [emoji38] 
More than double the national average of Poles in our area, apparently, and three times the average of 'Asians'. Alloa's definitely become significantly more diverse in the past twenty years, as evidenced by the fact that we had our very own rally against 'immigrants' earlier in the year. Massive turnout, with similar numbers to the one below.

Three was large Polish population in Clackmannanshire after WW2. I went to school with several 1st generation Polish/Scots, as well as Norwegians, Germans and other Europeans. And that was just Sauchie.

[TheProgressiveLiberal]

4 hours ago, hk blues said:

As usual, you're too busy trying to sound clever to actually read what people are writing rather than what you think they are writing.

The poster said a lot of prejudice is based on ignorance and unfamiliarity. He did not say most / all / the majority. He did not quantify it in any way hence my question to you. By your own admission, based on your wording, you think it's about 50/50. That may or may not be more than the poster thinks - who knows?

By the way, what does "prejudice (in the neutral sense of the word)" even mean?

 

Meaning not as a synonym for racism, as it's often used. Literally just prejudging. This is often based on experience rather than ignorance and it's a natural way humans behave. We prejudge based on previous interactions with people who have certain characteristics. Say vegans, or metalheads.

[TheProgressiveLiberal]

6 hours ago, The OP said:

France needed mass immigration from its former colonies to fill labour shortages but put them in Castlemilk/Easterhouse/Drumchapel style housing estates on the periphery of the city. These people would be hit hardest by rising levels of unemployment and they are often treated as second class citizens. 

Social policy creates ghettoisation and when people on the sink estates have other distinguishing factors than just income (such as race or religion) it follows that levels of resentment about the situation would be greater. France finding lots of foreign looking poor people troublesome now doesn’t negate the fact that France brought them in because France needed them at one point.

Immigrants can ghettoize themselves without government policy regarding public housing, as the US experience shows. If we look at how they behave when left to their own devices, the ghetto model seems to be preferred, especially among the lower class type of immigrant, to a one immigrant a block model. That's how they naturally group.

[The OP]

1 minute ago, TheProgressiveLiberal said:

Immigrants can ghettoize themselves without government policy regarding public housing, as the US experience shows. If we look at how they behave when left to their own devices, the ghetto model seems to be preferred, especially among the lower class type of immigrant, to a one immigrant a block model. That's how they naturally group.

If immigrants stop facing widespread institutional prejudice they move out of their ghettoes.  The US experience shows this too, with inter alia the Germans, Eastern European Jews, Polish, Irish and Italians largely leaving their ghettoes. In France banlieue residents still face institutional prejudice and so they tend to be stuck in the banlieue. 

[TheProgressiveLiberal]

25 minutes ago, The OP said:

If immigrants stop facing widespread institutional prejudice they move out of their ghettoes.  The US experience shows this too, with inter alia the Germans, Eastern European Jews, Polish, Irish and Italians largely leaving their ghettoes. In France banlieue residents still face institutional prejudice and so they tend to be stuck in the banlieue. 

Bit of a chicken or egg, but maybe they stop facing widespread prejudice when they assimilate to the dominant culture and can easily move within it. 

[tree house tam]

My next door neighbour is Lithuanian, braw lad but he hates football. In fact now I think about it he's a c**t.

[bob the tank]

Immigrants can ghettoize themselves without government policy regarding public housing, as the US experience shows. If we look at how they behave when left to their own devices, the ghetto model seems to be preferred, especially among the lower class type of immigrant, to a one immigrant a block model. That's how they naturally group.

 

What ghetto do you live in Swampy? Is there a "Scottish" ghetto for you, Craig Ferguson and Groundskeeper Willie?