Far-right response to Southport Outrage And Ongoing Violent Disorder

[story]

It is utterly meaningless. Here's a list of things and people I've seen described as 'woke': not being able to debate politely, graphs, vegetarianism, tofu, Gary Lineker, Gareth Southgate, taking an interest in history, men talking about emotions, men taking good care of their health, assertiveness training for women, Around the World In 80 Days, black people on TV in general, England kits. I could go on.

Also, Spymaster is starting to remind me of the right-wing trolls we had on the political forum on the Hole site, who just signed up to play with liberals and didn't actually care about Hole, they just wanted a debate and people to argue with. I'm relatively new here but I get the impression this is what you guys are dealing with? He's here because he wants to find people to argue with and maybe poke the lefties a bit?

His other name is cunty Si, so...

 

[lengualo]

I'm not going to check your numbers as you've clearly put some work in there, so happy to take it all at face value.

What do you think UK immigration policy should be? Give us some figures.

1. Students
Students shouldn't be counted in immigration figures because they are a largely closed, temporary, eco-system for which the students or their parents are investing large amounts of money, and for which our universities depend. The Tory attack on foreign students has left universities strugging, some facing potential bankruptcy, because nationalised students do not bring in enough money for them to operate on an internationally competitive level. Currently we have some of the best universities in the world, and a British degree no matter which university it is from, carries weight internationally. Its highly desirable to study here and our immigration policy is damaging it.

Its important to consider that research follows academics - universities being the largest part. Competitiveness also exists on an international rather than national stage. It is such a huge part of why powerful countries are powerful. Look at them all, they all have highly prestigious university systems of international acclaim that attract international student bodies who pay massive amounts of money for the privilege to study here. A portion of those students then obtain employment here and become an asset to our country. There is no negative to them, so any attack on them is born out of racism.


2. Work Visas
This is complicated because you have two groups of people. The flexible in-demand list, and then those who are hired by industry which requires a higher level degree (postgrad). This is largely a supply and demand relationship and the main amount of work that needs to be done is to tackle exploitation of foreign labour. If that is tackled then the rest is simply supply and demand. I think any work visa should be attached to a mandatory like-for-like salary - which is supposed to be the case but there are loopholes for exploitation.

So, I'd separate them into two groups, the non-in-demand list should be lowered on its entry requirements to a 2-1 or 1st level degree rather than postgraduate because that was added for reasons that aren't particularly great. The in-demand list should be made much stricter to both fight exploitation and a driving down of wages in the argi and care sectors. THAT latter one is a problem.


3. Couples/Family Visas
Needs a complete revision because its discriminatory. It should be based on a relationship being demonstrably real and nothing more. Such a small number that its neither here nor there though.


4. Aslylum
Reintroduce safe routes so that people can arrive without using the small boats, and then process applications based on genuine need. This includes whether the asylum seeker has existing connections here or are the best English speaking country for them to travel to if that is their first or second language.


People get way too hung up on numbers and less where there are actual failings. E.g. exploitation and damaging of labour markets which are less related to numbers but more about how industry is using foreign labour in low income fields.

 

[Sue]

So for anyone interested in the word woke and its usage, this is a good listen:

BBC Radio 4 - Woke: The Journey of a Word - Available now

Available episodes of Woke: The Journey of a Word

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Pickman's model]

1. Students
Students shouldn't be counted in immigration figures because they are a largely closed, temporary, eco-system for which the students or their parents are investing large amounts of money, and for which our universities depend. The Tory attack on foreign students has left universities strugging, some facing potential bankruptcy, because nationalised students do not bring in enough money for them to operate on an internationally competitive level. Currently we have some of the best universities in the world, and a British degree no matter which university it is from, carries weight internationally. Its highly desirable to study here and our immigration policy is damaging it.

Its important to consider that research follows academics - universities being the largest part. Competitiveness also exists on an international rather than national stage. It is such a huge part of why powerful countries are powerful. Look at them all, they all have highly prestigious university systems of international acclaim that attract international student bodies who pay massive amounts of money for the privilege to study here. A portion of those students then obtain employment here and become an asset to our country. There is no negative to them, so any attack on them is born out of racism.


2. Work Visas
This is complicated because you have two groups of people. The flexible in-demand list, and then those who are hired by industry which requires a higher level degree (postgrad). This is largely a supply and demand relationship and the main amount of work that needs to be done is to tackle exploitation of foreign labour. If that is tackled then the rest is simply supply and demand. I think any work visa should be attached to a mandatory like-for-like salary - which is supposed to be the case but there are loopholes for exploitation.

So, I'd separate them into two groups, the non-in-demand list should be lowered on its entry requirements to a 2-1 or 1st level degree rather than postgraduate because that was added for reasons that aren't particularly great. The in-demand list should be made much stricter to both fight exploitation and a driving down of wages in the argi and care sectors. THAT latter one is a problem.


3. Couples/Family Visas
Needs a complete revision because its discriminatory. It should be based on a relationship being demonstrably real and nothing more. Such a small number that its neither here nor there though.


4. Aslylum
Reintroduce safe routes so that people can arrive without using the small boats, and then process applications based on genuine need. This includes whether the asylum seeker has existing connections here or are the best English speaking country for them to travel to if that is their first or second language.


People get way too hung up on numbers and less where there are actual failings. E.g. exploitation and damaging of labour markets which are less related to numbers but more about how industry is using foreign labour in low income fields.

although the tory party sought to privatise students, no one before you has suggested nationalising them

 

[Spymaster]

1. Students
Students shouldn't be counted in immigration figures because they are a largely closed, temporary, eco-system for which the students or their parents are investing large amounts of money, and for which our universities depend. The Tory attack on foreign students has left universities strugging, some facing potential bankruptcy, because nationalised students do not bring in enough money for them to operate on an internationally competitive level. Currently we have some of the best universities in the world, and a British degree no matter which university it is from, carries weight internationally. Its highly desirable to study here and our immigration policy is damaging it.

Its important to consider that research follows academics - universities being the largest part. Competitiveness also exists on an international rather than national stage. It is such a huge part of why powerful countries are powerful. Look at them all, they all have highly prestigious university systems of international acclaim that attract international student bodies who pay massive amounts of money for the privilege to study here. A portion of those students then obtain employment here and become an asset to our country. There is no negative to them, so any attack on them is born out of racism.


2. Work Visas
This is complicated because you have two groups of people. The flexible in-demand list, and then those who are hired by industry which requires a higher level degree (postgrad). This is largely a supply and demand relationship and the main amount of work that needs to be done is to tackle exploitation of foreign labour. If that is tackled then the rest is simply supply and demand. I think any work visa should be attached to a mandatory like-for-like salary - which is supposed to be the case but there are loopholes for exploitation.

So, I'd separate them into two groups, the non-in-demand list should be lowered on its entry requirements to a 2-1 or 1st level degree rather than postgraduate because that was added for reasons that aren't particularly great. The in-demand list should be made much stricter to both fight exploitation and a driving down of wages in the argi and care sectors. THAT latter one is a problem.


3. Couples/Family Visas
Needs a complete revision because its discriminatory. It should be based on a relationship being demonstrably real and nothing more. Such a small number that its neither here nor there though.


4. Aslylum
Reintroduce safe routes so that people can arrive without using the small boats, and then process applications based on genuine need. This includes whether the asylum seeker has existing connections here or are the best English speaking country for them to travel to if that is their first or second language.


People get way too hung up on numbers and less where there are actual failings. E.g. exploitation and damaging of labour markets which are less related to numbers but more about how industry is using foreign labour in low income fields.

Excellent, thanks.

Now would you accept that people whose views differ to those to some degree may not necessarily be far-right, or even particularly right-wing?

 

[two sheds]

"Wokeness" is only there because Mojo put it into the first post I responded to (#459).

but you've used it approvingly here and on other threads

Same answer. On another thread this morning one poster chastised another for using the word "moron" as being intellectually disablist. Personally, I think that's woke bollocks and modern life is littered with similar examples. People who laugh at such silliness are not necessarily far right.

Mojo didn't use the phrase "woke bollocks" for example

 

[Spymaster]

but you've used it approvingly here and on other threads



Mojo didn't use the phrase "woke bollocks" for example

I co-opted it for the sake of brevity.

I'm happy to use any other term of your preference that means the same thing.

 

[lengualo]

although the tory party sought to privatise students, no one before you has suggested nationalising them

Was supposed to be national >.<

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

You can debate the use of the word moron, but ultimately no-one is actually calling anyone using it 'far right' and no-one is out smashing up the streets because someone objected to them doing it are they. It's an irrelevance except in as far as it's a neat example of how 'woke' is handy in using a petty edge case to blur together a whole load of more toxic stuff.

 

[Silas Loom]

I co-opted it for the sake of brevity.

It was only resting in your vocabulary?

 

[lengualo]

Excellent, thanks.

Now would you accept that people whose views differ to those to some degree may not necessarily be far-right, or even particularly right-wing?

It depends on what they think. I would debate them.

I have had perfectly reasonable debates with people who want to see changes to immigration who I don't consider far right fascists. I've even had people who want to close our borders shift closer to what I wrote above.

 

[Larry O'Hara]

Mr perception of Southport, having visited quite a lot of times as it's an easy train ride from here, is that it's absolutely not your typical decaying seaside / northern town - it's reasonably affluent on the whole, generally attractive, much more successful high street than many. It's not Blackpool or Morecambe. It is also very white compared to some other parts of Merseyside.

I agree having been there a few times

 

[Spymaster]

It depends on what they think. I would debate them.

I have had perfectly reasonable debates with people who want to see changes to immigration who I don't consider far right fascists. I've even had people who want to close our borders shift closer to what I wrote above.

Probably because most of what you've put there is perfectly reasonable. It's not even particularly left-wing. The point is that what some people on here (not Mojo, in this instance) consider to be right-wing, or far-right, simply isn't; and to suggest it is, is a manifestation of their own intolerance.

 

[lengualo]

Probably because most of what you've put there is perfectly reasonable. It's not even particularly left-wing. The point is that what some people on here (not Mojo, in this instance) consider to be right-wing, or far-right, simply isn't; and to suggest it is, is a manifestation of their own intolerance.

No, it isnt that left wing. Thats my idea of a minimum for fair system, and if implemented would be transformative vs what we have right now and is considerably further to the left than your average reform voter. My larger point though, is if a fair and reasonable "centristy" system would be progressive vs what we have now then what is all this talk about immigration concerns about?

The main point of contention I can think of is exploitation of the labour market, but thats its own question and isn't related explicitly to numbers but rather labour practices. Labour practices are more of an internal/domestic issue that affect everyone who is in that market. As is investment in infrastructure.

 

[BigMoaner]

there is no reason at all why immigration numbers cannot be discussed in a democratic way without calling people racist when it's not even accurate. just as the same opposing immigration on teh grounds of race is unnaceptable.

infact democratic, nonracialised language, divorced from all this "losing our identity" bollocks, i.e. a nonracist debate, about immigration is extremely healthy i would say for any western capitalist democracy.

this is far more likely to succeed in creating peacful socities than "open borders or you're a racist".

bceause the over throw of globalised capitalism is likely not round the corner, until then i would say immigration should be based on rational choices regarding employment, growing the work force to help the economy, etc, which actually tends towards openish borders anyway, from what i can work out. but i have no idea really, but freedom of movement around the globe is well, freerer than not, and we all like a bit of freedom init. they talk about the free market but not so much about freedom of movement, and still not seen a convincing arguement can be made for both existing.

 

[two sheds]

I co-opted it for the sake of brevity.

I'm happy to use any other term of your preference that means the same thing.

How about 'respectful' or 'polite'? Then instead of uber-woke that you favour elsewhere we could say 'uber-respectful' or 'uber-polite'.

 

[Spymaster]

How about 'respectful' or 'polite'? Then instead of uber-woke that you favour elsewhere we could say 'uber-respectful' or 'uber-polite'.

Nah. It lacks disdain for those who engage in the extremes of this behaviour.

 

[lengualo]

there is no reason at all why immigration numbers cannot be discussed in a democratic way without calling people racist when it's not even accurate. just as the same opposing immigration on teh grounds of race is unnaceptable.

infact democratic, nonracialised language, divorced from all this "losing our identity" bollocks, i.e. a nonracist debate, about immigration is extremely healthy i would say for any western capitalist democracy.

this is far more likely to succeed in creating peacful socities than "open borders or you're a racist".

bceause the over throw of globalised capitalism is likely not round the corner, until then i would say immigration should be based on rational choices regarding employment, growing the work force to help the economy, etc.

We don't even have that right now though.

We've attacked international students leading to damage our university system, and attempted to scapecoat a group of people who are paying large sums of money to be here as if they are parasitic.

We have restricted couples and family visas to the well off, creating a situation where the wealthy can have a foreign born partner but the working class cannot. Our no-work rules are also derrogatory, requiring the foreign born partner to be dependent upon their British partner - which is dangerous. The current rules less than tackle sham marriages actually play into them - for rich people who want a bloody foreign "maid" type crap. They basically allow that demographic but make it harder for everyone else.


We have upped the work visa requirements to specific industries who are in dire need and raised the education threshold for everything else to Masters/PHD level, which favours wealthy white people in countries like the USA, Australia, and NZ, and helps to starve qualitative talent employment. It should just be a well qualifying degree (2-1 or 1st). Provided they have to pay people the going rate there should be no other requirements attached because the visa sponsorship itself makes a national best candidate desirable.


We closed formal routes for asylum seekers and then started moaning about small boats. Like, what were they expecting to happen?


None of these are rational choices, they're ideological and our right wing want to go harder still and consider it soft.

 

[two sheds]

Nah. It lacks disdain for those who engage in the extremes of this behaviour.

'too polite'

 

[Spymaster]

'too polite'

PC gone mad.

 

[emanymton]

PC gone mad.

Health and safety gone mad.

 

[Dystopiary]

bceause the over throw of globalised capitalism is likely not round the corner, until then i would say immigration should be based on rational choices regarding employment, growing the work force to help the economy, etc, which actually tends towards openish borders anyway, from what i can work out. but i have no idea really, but freedom of movement around the globe is well, freerer than not, and we all like a bit of freedom init. they talk about the free market but not so much about freedom of movement, and still not seen a convincing arguement can be made for both existing.

As climate change gets worse, millions of people are going to be emigrating; more parts of the world will become uninhabitable.

There is substantial evidence indicating that the environmental impacts of climate change will lead to large-scale human mobility and displacement in the future. Estimates suggest that between 50 million31 and 250 million32 people could be affected by 2050, rising to 630 million by 210020. The World Bank projects that by 2050, 216 million across different regions, including North Africa (19 million), Sub-Saharan Africa (86 million), South Asia (40 million), LAC (17 million), Eastern Europe and Central Asia (5 million), and East Asia and the Pacific (49 million), will be impacted by climate change33.

Climate-induced migration in the Global South: an in depth analysis - npj Climate Action

 

[Serge Forward]

Yes but the stockporters have been getting a bad rep too recently

Stopfordians actually.

 

[Septimus Rufiji]

and we're definitely not Mancs

 

[Pickman's model]

and we're definitely not Mancs

manchester breathes a sigh of relief

 

[two sheds]

PC gone mad.

politeness gone maaaaaaaaaaaad

 

[ddraig]

any chance of less bantz/in jokes please?

Violent Southport protests reveal far-right organising tactics

Online influencers, rather than formal leaders, are mobilising the extreme right on the streets.

www.bbc.co.uk

While there are people who describe themselves as EDL supporters, the organisation ceased to exist in any formal sense after its founder, Stephen Yaxley-Lennon - who uses the alias Tommy Robinson - focused on spreading his message on social media platforms, where he has a sizeable following.

But its core ideas - in particular an opposition to illegal immigration, mixed with indiscriminate and racist claims about Muslims - are very much alive, and loudly and widely spread among sympathisers online.

Thrown into this mix are tropes from conspiracy theories that “elites” are somehow covering up the truth - including the abuse of British children.

An influencer on X associated with Yaxley-Lennon, who posts under the name of “Lord Simon”, was among the first to publicly call for nationwide protests. His account promoted false claims that the alleged Southport attacker had been an asylum seeker, recently arrived in the UK by boat. His video has been viewed over a million times.

“We have to hit the streets. We have to make a huge impact all around the country. Every city needs to go up everywhere,” he said.

 

[Pickman's model]

any chance of less bantz/in jokes please?

Violent Southport protests reveal far-right organising tactics

Online influencers, rather than formal leaders, are mobilising the extreme right on the streets.

www.bbc.co.uk

No mention of moscow's involvement there. And your 'cunts gonna cunt' from 90 mins ago, how was that not bantz and an in joke?

 

[Karl Masks]

Support for the authorities removing British passports from those with dual citizenship is a very bad idea, even for people we hate. If they did it to TR/SYL, they'd sure as shit do it to people on the left. I'm disappointed to see so many people in favour of it.

By that logic the government might as well do nothing.

 

[Agrippa57]

This guy is brilliant. Quite restored my faith. It's probably quite a long listen But worth it. What a gem.

lbc caller darren - Google Search