Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Tommy Robinson, the court case and (guffaw) 'free speech'

few weeks back I had the discussion with a chap round my brothers house. All I had was the class point- and logic tbf, what seems really likely here, the suddenly anti racist old bill etc? Can't say I convinced him. It does seem strange to me that the depressingly banal sociopaths indifference of the state towards the working class girls is the 'out there' unbelievable thing though. Like people have trouble accepting how little these people give a shit?
Good point about the cops.

I still wonder if that's not too easy an explanation. But then I don't know any better.

(that feeling when you start to know how much you don't)

Of course the cops are part of the institution that the TR brigrade think should be protected - the thin blue establishment line, who's skin is seen only in one colour of course - so arguing this point is always going to be difficult I would think
 
Has TR ever ever campaigned against white paedos ever?
He doesn't care about the victims, just himself, image, ego and bank balance
Doubtful, though of course he'll point to Saville as he has done many times because Saville was part of the lefty liberal BBC cultural marxist blah blah
 
Nah I disagree. He really believes what he’s saying. That’s what makes him dangerous.
Laurie penny did an interview with him where she seemed to find him a bit of a fantasist, walter mitty type. If that makes any sense; gullible. I suspect that's the case; easily led. Ripe for the likes of Steve fucking Bannon
 
Nah I disagree. He really believes what he’s saying. That’s what makes him dangerous.
that doesn't negate what I posted though, he may believe it but him not doorstepping or campaigning against any white paedos ever shows his agenda no?
e2a and that he's earning decent money from it
 
Laurie penny did an interview with him where she seemed to find him a bit of a fantasist, walter mitty type. If that makes any sense; gullible. I suspect that's the case; easily led. Ripe for the likes of Steve fucking Bannon
Link for interest?

All the stuff of his I’ve seen has been him interviewing (ie in the position of power).
 
Early EDL tried to (unsuccessfully) keep them quiet for reasons of PR, but seem very much at home now. Who'd have though that recruiting football "firms" to take to the streets to combat "Islamification" would have turned at this way eh? (apart from just about everybody)
As a footnote antifascist football firms kept the police very busy at the weekend in Scotland when the SDL marched
 
that laurrie penny interview was awful stuff. Tommy ordered the most expensive steak on the menu, apparently. Probably ordered a double on the journo's expenses too, the swine. A proper nothing of an interview that really told us more about vapid class prejudice and the menu at Hungry Horse than anything else. Observe tommy's flashy motor etc
 
You'll have to explain the failure of multiculturalism to me, not sure what that means?

Anyone?

I ask because it's something I tend to hear from the right - the failure of the multiculty experiment and all that bollocks.

To me, multiculturalism just means our societies where we have friends, families, neighbours, colleagues etc who come from all walks of life/religions/parents from a different country and so on...
 
Anyone?

I ask because it's something I tend to hear from the right - the failure of the multiculty experiment and all that bollocks.

To me, multiculturalism just means our societies where we have friends, families, neighbours, colleagues etc who come from all walks of life/religions/parents from a different country and so on...
Well that isn’t what multiculturalism means, no.
 
EDL was very much had its genesis with football firms though - and the FLA has followed exactly the same trajectory.
 
that laurrie penny interview was awful stuff. Tommy ordered the most expensive steak on the menu, apparently. Probably ordered a double on the journo's expenses too, the swine. A proper nothing of an interview that really told us more about vapid class prejudice and the menu at Hungry Horse than anything else. Observe tommy's flashy motor etc
Because he presents himself as working class, i think that was the point, rather than the author's own prejudices
 
what does it mean and how has it failed then?

Please, tell me what it means to you.
Well I thought it was the idea that different ethnic groups could live alongside each other without necessarily the aim of integrating. And re failure, look at much of the North where communities are often almost completely divided by ethnic background eg white working class and British Pakistani, and the racial tensions from that.
 
Well I thought it was the idea that different ethnic groups could live alongside each other without necessarily the aim of integrating. And re failure, look at much of the North where communities are often almost completely divided by ethnic background eg white working class and British Pakistani, and the racial tensions from that.

I never saw segregation as a part of it - to me that isn't multiculturalism. Neither is racial tension. That's the negatives that right wing critics obsess on & I know you're not right wing at all, so ... how has people of different backgrounds living together/working together/marrying/contributing/friendships/fighting fascism etc... how has that failed, as such?

Not having a go, btw. Just curious as to what term you would use instead of multiculturalism?
 
I think you just don’t understand what the term actually means. I don’t mean ‘means to you’, I mean what the accepted meaning actually is?

Edit: I mean multiculturalism as opposed to integration, or cultural assimilation. I dunno if that makes it clearer?
 
Well I thought it was the idea that different ethnic groups could live alongside each other without necessarily the aim of integrating. And re failure, look at much of the North where communities are often almost completely divided by ethnic background eg white working class and British Pakistani, and the racial tensions from that.

Those situations never exist in isolation, though. Take the North, which the government in Westminster has almost systematically allowed to decline - industries gone, quality education gone, those young that can going down to London for what passes for decent work nowadays, local services and transport links wrecked and with the few nice bits priced out of the hands of locals by holiday home ownership or retirees.

Rather than admit what successive Governments have done they have at best not challenged the belief (if not encouraged, to a degree) the idea that the people to blame for the scarce resources are those lot, "over there".
 
I think you just don’t understand what the term actually means. I don’t mean ‘means to you’, I mean what the accepted meaning actually is?

Edit: I mean multiculturalism as opposed to integration, or cultural assimilation. I dunno if that makes it clearer?

I find it gets used in both ways, which obviously leads to people talking past each other when you have:

Meaning 1: People getting on and living together despite differences, which are tolerated even if not always exactly celebrated
Meaning 2: People ignoring and segregating themselves from each other because of the same differences
 
malik critiques multiculturalism quite a bit
The truth about multiculturalism is far more complex than either side will allow, and the debate about it has often devolved into sophistry. Multiculturalism has become a proxy for other social and political issues: immigration, identity, political disenchantment, working-class decline. Different countries, moreover, have followed distinct paths. The United Kingdom has sought to give various ethnic communities a more equal stake in the political system. Germany has encouraged immigrants to pursue separate lives in lieu of granting them citizenship. And France has rejected multicultural policies in favour of assimilationist ones. The specific outcomes have also varied: in the United Kingdom, there has been communal violence; in Germany, Turkish communities have drifted further from mainstream society; and in France, the relationship between the authorities and North African communities has become highly charged. But everywhere, the overarching consequences have been the same: fragmented societies, alienated minorities, and resentful citizenries.

As a political tool, multiculturalism has functioned as not merely a response to diversity but also a means of constraining it. And that insight reveals a paradox. Multicultural policies accept as a given that societies are diverse, yet they implicitly assume that such diversity ends at the edges of minority communities. They seek to institutionalize diversity by putting people into ethnic and cultural boxes – into a singular, homogeneous Muslim community, for example – and defining their needs and rights accordingly. Such policies, in other words, have helped create the very divisions they were meant to manage.

THE FAILURE OF MULTICULTURALISM
 
I think you just don’t understand what the term actually means. I don’t mean ‘means to you’, I mean what the accepted meaning actually is?

Edit: I mean multiculturalism as opposed to integration, or cultural assimilation. I dunno if that makes it clearer?

If you mean integration has failed; I'd disagree - at least, from a London perspective. As for the latter, I think that's a whole different kettle of fish. Anyways, don't want to derail any further but it certainly is something worth discussing elsewhere.
 
If you mean integration has failed; I'd disagree - at least, from a London perspective. As for the latter, I think that's a whole different kettle of fish. Anyways, don't want to derail any further but it certainly is something worth discussing elsewhere.
Except it’s not really derailing the thread. Cos a lot of what TR goes on about is related. FGM for example.
 
I never saw segregation as a part of it - to me that isn't multiculturalism. Neither is racial tension. That's the negatives that right wing critics obsess on & I know you're not right wing at all, so ... how has people of different backgrounds living together/working together/marrying/contributing/friendships/fighting fascism etc... how has that failed, as such?

Not having a go, btw. Just curious as to what term you would use instead of multiculturalism?
You are confusing multiculturalism and multiracialism. Edie's right. Top down multiculturalism doesnt encourage integration , it encourages seperation or side by side living. Many of the funding streams under Labour for communities were race based not community based.When people complained they were labelled racist. Even Trevor Philips who was a key proponent of top down multiculturalism acknowledges that not onlydid it fail but has created divisions.
 
That Laurie penny article is proper snotty - hinting at mental illness is shoddy. At least she prophesied the fall of tommy and the EDL accurately

Oh hang on....
 
Back
Top Bottom