Questions for IWCA

[butchersapron]

Six pages of drivel.

Post #2



My inner troll instinct never let's me down.

Leave off, everyone had him pegged from post#1 on the boards as a whole -the one on republicanism - if they had any sense anyway.

 

[nino_savatte]

Shit! Just missed him!

 

[ViolentPanda]

That last bit was edited in - he wants banned.

That or he's puling the "plastic hardman" bit, implying that he's a big bad crim.

 

[jannerboyuk]

That or he's puling the "plastic hardman" bit, implying that he's a big bad crim.

Either way some great entertainment. Now P&P can get back to the erudite and enlightening discussion we usually enjoy.

 

[JoePolitix]

Yeah and the government could have given the billions to me or left it to Blairs pet dog. Wern't going to do any of those things in a month of Sundays. If you want to call Craft a bigot just do it - don't be so shy. The IWCA are racists innit?

Well the essence of Crafts article was "the coucil are giving all the money to the asians" and the "council are racist against white people". These sort of statements are likely to cause resentment and sow divisions - the very divisions that Craft falsely claims to oppose in his caracature of multi-culturalism.

 

[jannerboyuk]

Well the essence of Crafts article was "the coucil are giving all the money to the asians" and the "council are racist against white people". These sort of statements are likely to cause resentment and sow divisions - the very divisions that Craft falsely claims to oppose in his caracature of multi-culturalism.

So is the IWCA racist or not? Where does Craft say "the coucil are giving all the money to the asians" and the "council are racist against white people". because as far as i can see that is a clear case of libel.

 

[butchersapron]

Well the essence of Crafts article was "the coucil are giving all the money to the asians" and the "council are racist against white people". These sort of statements are likely to cause resentment and sow divisions - the very divisions that Craft falsely claims to oppose in his caracature of multi-culturalism.

No, that wasn't the essence of the article at all. That's a less than accurate or even serious reading of it - and at the same time you're moaning about characitures. No, if you want to do this, start another thread. You'll getting nothing on this one. You might even look in the archives for extensive discussion on this question.

I understand that new ideas are hard to grasp at first, but we'll stand by you.

 

[jannerboyuk]

No, that wasn't the essence of the article at all. That's a less than accurate or even serious reading of it - and at the same time you're moaning about characitures. No, if you want to do this, start another thread. You'll getting nothing on this one. You might even look in the archives for extensive discussion on this question.

I understand that new ideas are hard to grasp at first, but we'll stand by you.

"He ain't heavy, he's my brother!!"

 

[JoePolitix]

So is the IWCA racist or not? Where does Craft say "the coucil are giving all the money to the asians" and the "council are racist against white people". because as far as i can see that is a clear case of libel.

"Backed the Blackbird Leys Street Warden strategy to prioritise the tackling of ‘racism’ (‘especially hidden racism’) at the expense of the obvious class-A drug dealing problem which was the main concern of residents. This was explained simply because the government had decreed that ‘anti-racism is the main tenet of the street warden project - whether or not racism exists as a problem in the area’. (The implication being that the white working class of the area are ‘inherently racist’ even though no proof exists to enforce this assumption – an assumption which is probably itself racist)"

 

[sihhi]

"Backed the Blackbird Leys Street Warden strategy to prioritise the tackling of ‘racism’ (‘especially hidden racism’) at the expense of the obvious class-A drug dealing problem which was the main concern of residents. This was explained simply because the government had decreed that ‘anti-racism is the main tenet of the street warden project - whether or not racism exists as a problem in the area’. (The implication being that the white working class of the area are ‘inherently racist’ even though no proof exists to enforce this assumption – an assumption which is probably itself racist)"

I'd agree with everything written there except the last word- the council's attitude isn't probably racist (from my distant vantage point but comparing it with Haringey and Hackney council) it's classist more likely.
Working-class people are expected to be basically racist in the eyes of middle-class bureaucrats because of their class prejudice.

 

[JoePolitix]

No, that wasn't the essence of the article at all. That's a less than accurate or even serious reading of it - and at the same time you're moaning about characitures. No, if you want to do this, start another thread. You'll getting nothing on this one. You might even look in the archives for extensive discussion on this question.

I understand that new ideas are hard to grasp at first, but we'll stand by you.

Yeah yeah there's nothing new about these type of ideas. Trevor Phillips, Kenan Mailik, Polly Toynby the rightwing media etc espouse them all the time. I get them - I just disagree with them Mr Patronising.

 

[JoePolitix]

I'd agree with everything written there except the last word- the council's attitude isn't probably racist (from my distant vantage point but comparing it with Haringey and Hackney council) it's classist more likely.
Working-class people are expected to be basically racist in the eyes of middle-class bureaucrats because of their class prejudice.

Maybe but I provided the quote to illustrate that the article does claim that the council are racist against white people. Janner claimed that it was a libel to say so.

 

[butchersapron]

Yeah yeah there's nothing new about these type of ideas. Trevor Phillips, Kenan Mailik, Polly Toynby the rightwing media etc espouse them all the time. I get them - I just disagree with them Mr Patronising.

I'm really not so sure that you do comrade. Not when you attempt to smear them as crudely racist.

 

[audiotech]

Leave off, everyone had him pegged from post#1 on the boards as a whole -the one on republicanism - if they had any sense anyway.

So why the engagement with him by some?

 

[audiotech]

Surely it must be annoying, what with it going off every time you read one of your own posts?

My posts are erudite and to the point, unlike some rambling woffle on here.

Nighty night.

 

[JoePolitix]

I'm really not so sure that you do comrade. Not when you attempt to smear them as crudely racist.

Maybe I just don't accept bigoted arguements even when they're repackaged with an independant working class spin on them.

What do you think of Crafts crude smear of the government describing them as crudely racist against *white people*? Surely you don't agree?

 

[butchersapron]

So why the engagement with him by some?

For a laugh?

 

[audiotech]

For a laugh?

Yes, it was a scream.

 

[sihhi]

Maybe but I provided the quote to illustrate that the article does claim that the council are racist against white people. Janner claimed that it was a libel to say so.

For a start it's his actual speech to the Council Chamber:
http://www.bliwca.fsnet.co.uk/multic01.htm

Secondly you've missed out the class element in yr above post

The implication being that the white working class of the area are ‘inherently racist’ even though no proof exists to enforce this assumption

 

[butchersapron]

Maybe I just don't accept bigoted arguements even when they're repackaged with an independant working class spin on them.

What do you think of Crafts crude smear of the government describing them as crudely racist against *white people*? Surely you don't agree?

Maybe you don't understand them or the wider analysis that they're based on?

That's my take on them. maybe you would like to look at the vast IWCA archives in the discussion about just these issues - and the discussion around this particular entry in the SC's diary - and find out what the IWCA's atake on this is, instead of manouvering to gain some ground 14 moinths later.

 

[sihhi]

Maybe I just don't accept bigoted arguements even when they're repackaged with an independant working class spin on them.

What do you think of Crafts crude smear of the government describing them as crudely racist against *white people*? Surely you don't agree?

You've done it again in bold there-- Craft never refered to just "white people" as you do putting it in asterisks.

PS In what way are Craft's arguments bigoted? You've not made the case.

 

[JoePolitix]

Maybe you don't understand them or the wider analysis that they're based on?

Or maybe you don't understand them or the wider analysis that they're based on? Ha touché!

That's my take on them.

Eh? What is your take on them?

 

[butchersapron]

Eh? What is your take on them?

Sorry, that's my take on you. Maybe it's genuine, maybe it's for some sectarian polemical advantage. I don't know.

 

[ViolentPanda]

So why the engagement with him by some?

That'd be because it is great fun to watch how deep a hole some people can dig themselves.

Cruel and sadistic, but also deeply amusing.

 

[ViolentPanda]

My posts are erudite and to the point, unlike some rambling woffle on here.

Nighty night.

I'll agree with the "to the point", but "erudite"?

Only if you've been brought up with Tarzan.

 

[Harold Hill]

Stuart Craft, in his attack on the "dogma of multiculturalism" http://www.bliwca.fsnet.co.uk/multic01.htm, goes on to criticise Oxford City Council for allocating money for Eid lights, using money from the European Capital of Culture to support "East Oxford’s very strong multicultural society with a large Asian population" and for "tackling of ‘racism’ (‘especially hidden racism’)"

Craft argues that money should instead be invested for "the wellbeing of all" giving the example investing in police to tackle class-A drug dealing.

On another occasion coucillor Craft has articulated support for the occupation of Iraq:

"For all my suspicions of Bush and Blair’s motives for going into Iraq and while understanding that the USA and their allies are ready and willing to cause more carnage than the regime they purportedly went in to remove, it remains a fact that the people of Iraq were living under a fascist-type dictatorship in the shape of Saddam and the Baath Party.

"Paradoxically, many of the same people who were quite rightly calling for international intervention against this vile regime under which hundreds of thousands perished, are now siding with the Iraqi resistance which reportedly numbers many Baath supporters amongst its ranks."

http://www.iwca.info/diary/200412.htm

To me this illustrates the politically short-sited localism and economism of the IWCA. On the one hand Councillor Craft moans about his council investing in cultural projects for ethnic minorities and anti-racism initiatives as a waste of cash whilst at the same time backs a war that has cost billions of pounds in public money – additional money that central government could have allocated to local councils.

I reckon Craft’s rant against multi-culturalism is highly devisive and reeks of bigotry.

I think only somebody with an agenda would imply Mr Craft was pro war off the back of those quotes. He agreed with those that said it was right for international intervention against this machine. I agree. What right thinking person wouldn't? That isn't an endorsement of what subsequently happened and you probably know it.

And the council thing to me implies the councils motives as patronising liberalism rather than racism and you interpreting race over and over again probably won't change that in the eyes of most.

 

[audiotech]

I have a lot of time for Kenan Malik, who Craft quotes and I found his articles and writings very useful in a diversity training course I attended. People attending came from a wide range of opinions/backgrounds and were saying they agreed with the points put forward, particularly an Asian woman, who could clearly see and express the fault lines in this idea of a 'cultural identity'.

According to the BNP “races are neither equal nor unequal, but simply different”. What we need, it argues, is to preserve “cultural diversity” –and that's why it fights for “white rights” and “white identity”. It is perhaps the biggest indictment of the contemporary celebration of diversity that it allows an organisation such as the BNP to turn racism into a form of cultural identity.
Kenan Malik (The Perils of Multiculturalism, broadcast on the BBC Asian Network, 12 November 2003.
http://www.bliwca.fsnet.co.uk/multic01.htm

 

[JoePolitix]

You've done it again in bold there-- Craft never refered to just "white people" as you do putting it in asterisks.

PS In what way are Craft's arguments bigoted? You've not made the case.

See my early post, a couple of pages back

1. In his list of "objections" all five examples are of investment in Asian projects and communities.

2 The article doesn’t mention discrimination or racism directed against the Asian community but does claim that the government initiative that the council will invest in implies racism towards white people.

Yes it does say *working class* white people but any article that claims a predominantly white government discriminates against white people in a majority white culture is usually a sign of pretty dodgy politics if you ask me.

 

[Harold Hill]

What are 'diversity training courses' like?

 

[audiotech]

What are 'diversity training courses' like?

They can be very interesting if you know what you're doing and turn up well prepared.