Too many immigration threads on UK P&P?

[nino_savatte]

You really are a prat. What immigrants do you think i'm not too keen on exactly?

Again with the insults. Again with the lack of substance. Again with the lies. You're not even consistent with your bullshite.

 

[nino_savatte]

Is there now? Why'd you leave the Home Office grandad?

Ah, I see you've come to give balders some support. Do you share his views on immigration or are you just here to make a cunt of yourself?

 

[tbaldwin]

Again with the insults. Again with the lack of substance. Again with the lies. You're not even consistent with your bullshite.

Not exactly a direct answer there nino.

 

[nino_savatte]

Not exactly a direct answer there nino.

Oh, the irony. But you're too thick to ever consciously use irony.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Ah, I see you've come to give balders some support. Do you share his views on immigration or are you just here to make a cunt of yourself?

The latter, obviously.

You know what he's like. He gets the urge to try monstering someone if they don't show him sufficient respect.

Quite sad that he's so insecure, and his insults and insinuations are piss-weak, like tea made from tea-bags and warm water.

Still, I suppose that he's preoccupied a lot of the time, wondering what he can get his hands on...

 

[phildwyer]

Phil. I reckon VP is telling the truth when he says he's based south of the river...But maybe not that far south?

On these boards he claims to live in Tulse Hill. But since not one single person from here has ever met him, the truth about Private Panda remains shrouded in mystery. Its pretty clear he wasn't ever in the army though.

 

[phildwyer]

Scale is the hinge on which many people nowadays hang their concerns, though. It's perhaps difficult for people to appreciate that 40,000 Hugenots or 120,000 east European Jews historically made a bigger impact on resources etc, than current levels of immigration do.

Before the welfare state? I don't think so.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Before the welfare state? I don't think so.

Then you're not thinking very clearly, are you?

 

[phildwyer]

Then you're not thinking very clearly, are you?

Watch it Private, or you'll never make lieutenant.

 

[ViolentPanda]

On these boards he claims to live in Tulse Hill. But since not one single person from here has ever met him, the truth about Private Panda remains shrouded in mystery. Its pretty clear he wasn't ever in the army though.

You appear to still be labouring under the delusion that your opinion has any meaning to anyone except yourself, my little predator.

 

[phildwyer]

You appear to still be labouring under the delusion that your opinion has any meaning to anyone except yourself, my little predator.

At ease, Private. Dismiss!

 

[ViolentPanda]

Watch it Private, or you'll never make lieutenant.

Coming out with "cutting" remarks that are blunt only goes to prove that you're having trouble thinking, fingers.

 

[ViolentPanda]

At ease, Private. Dismiss!

Poor phil.

You do like giving orders, don't you? You must have some very deep-rooted issues about authority.

 

[nino_savatte]

Watch it Private, or you'll never make lieutenant.

The next rank up from private is lance corporal, then corporal, then sergeant...then comes sergeant-major. It's all different in the RAF and navy of course. I could go through the order of ranks if you like. But it's one hell of a leap from private to sergeant.

 

[Jessiedog]

Cos i reckon what most people think is fairly important.

Of course some people think that what is most important is what clever people think....
But i disagree with them.....Is that OK?

Well.

I have about 750,000,000 peeps that reckon that being allowed to work in the UK (or anywhere, for that matter,) is a very good idea.

Do we win?



Woof

 

[Knotted]

Isn't this what I was talking about? Okay, I didn't express it in quite the same terms as you, but I see nationalism as an obstacle.

Do you mean nationalist ideology or the fact that nation states exist? Nation states are a reality not an ideological construct.

In what manner do you oppose nationalist ideology? Are all nationalist ideologies the same? Should the SSP be given the same treatment as the BNP?

Do you oppose the nation state because it is national in scope or because it is a state or both?

Do you want to abolish all things national in scope? The NHS? The welfare state? Parliamentary democracy? Doing these things would bring us into line with other countries who lack these things thus making the world a more equal place. I doubt you would agree with that but why would you put progressive politics ahead of 'internationalism'?

This is why it is important to base internationalism on class politics rather than the other way round.

Incidently I'm surprised nobody has countered tbaldwin & treelover by saying that they favour democratic control of borders but within that democracy they would favour open borders. It underscores the fact that the internationalist ideology you and others proclaim doesn't even have democratic character nevermind a socialist character. Unless that is you are arguing for an international (one world?) government and even if you are, then presumably your open borders will have to wait until that government is established.

 

[ViolentPanda]

"Nation state" isn't a reality, except in terms of it being a constructed phrase used by political theorists to encompass the workings of a geographically bounded/defined national territory, its' population and the forces that govern them. It describes an overarching concept, not an entity.

 

[chilango]

Incidently I'm surprised nobody has countered tbaldwin & treelover by saying that they favour democratic control of borders but within that democracy they would favour open borders. It underscores the fact that the internationalist ideology you and others proclaim doesn't even have democratic character nevermind a socialist character. Unless that is you are arguing for an international (one world?) government and even if you are, then presumably your open borders will have to wait until that government is established.

Thats cos I`m neither a democrat or a socialist!

 

[Knotted]

"Nation state" isn't a reality, except in terms of it being a constructed phrase used by political theorists to encompass the workings of a geographically bounded/defined national territory, its' population and the forces that govern them. It describes an overarching concept, not an entity.

You could say that about about pretty much any social/political/economical organisation. You would even be able to leave out the caveat of 'geographically bounded'. Every human organisation is just a bunch of people and all that. Not a particularly useful starting point.

 

[Knotted]

Thats cos I`m neither a democrat or a socialist!

Fair enough, I never assumed you were. I appreciate you don't like my concept of internationalism, what do you think of Nino's internationalism?

 

[Knotted]

I might just buy Violent Panda's ideas on overarching ideologies. To give a much clearer example of an overarching ideology as opposed to a reality consider the belief that there are "two sides to the immigration debate". If you scrutinise everyone's arguments you will see that they are all different. So there are only individual voices - the 'two sides' is pure construction. Surely this is the first over-arching ideology we should tackle before going onto the big stuff?

 

[brasicritique]

i These narratives automatically carry within them a hidden xenophobic discourse. You may not agree with that but that it the way it works.

I like the way you try to hide behind word.

Xenophobia discoure is not the same as racism. You think some people on these boards are racsist as they disagree with you.Name names fart cushion

I'm not slandering anyone and I anticipated this sort of response from the likes of you. Rather that deal with the points that I have raised you (like too many others who have a vested interest in the subject of immigration)


Looks like insinuations of racsism.Your the only paranoid poster on here my little fluffy weasel

would rather try to smaer and demonise

waaaa mumsy they do not agree with with but nursy told me they would as i went to uni its not fair

Vile likes uniforms! What a suprise. Vile and Nino are the political crankies of Urban

 

[ViolentPanda]

Forget to take your medication today, brasic?

 

[Julie]

fart cushion

my little fluffy weasel

Vile and Nino are the political crankies of Urban

I imagine VP and Nino are absolutely gutted after this barrage of venom.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I imagine VP and Nino are absolutely gutted after this barrage of venom.

He's only posted 200-odd times, and two-thirds of it consists of abuse, pissing about with usernames, and rants about how other posters are "middle class".

I think we may have found you a patient!

 

[teuchter]

Well, what a lot of fun everyone's having on this thread.

I note the tendency to throw in the old "racism" accusations in response to any suggestion that there are problems associated with mass migration.

It reminds me of the tendency to accuse anyone deviating from the "socialist" line as having a hatred of the working classes, or suchlike.

And it always seems to come from the same people who like to make a big deal out of their disapproval of "daily mail" attitudes ... but really they're being just as narrow minded and reactionary themselves.

By the way, I think there's a difference between xenophobia and racism. Personally I think everyones xenophobic to a degree. It's human nature to group with people you see as similar to yourself. There was an interesting thing about it in the New Scientist a couple of weeks ago.

 

[krtek a houby]

By the way, I think there's a difference between xenophobia and racism. Personally I think everyones xenophobic to a degree. It's human nature to group with people you see as similar to yourself. There was an interesting thing about it in the New Scientist a couple of weeks ago.

I disagree. The only people I would chose not to group with would be xenephobes or racists.

Have you got a link for the NS feature?

Cheers.

 

[teuchter]

I disagree. The only people I would chose not to group with would be xenephobes or racists.

Have you got a link for the NS feature?

Cheers.

only this .... you have to be a subscriber to read the full article I'm afraid.

http://www.newscientist.com/channel/being-human/mg19325952.000-are-we-born-prejudiced.html

here's a bit from the conclusion:

"I think all this work refutes those naive enough to believe that if it weren't for bad socialising, we would all be nice tolerant people who accept cultural and ethnic differences easily," says Daniel Chirot, professor of international studies at the University of Washington, Seattle. That may sound disturbing, but being biologically primed for racism does not make it inevitable. For a start, what is natural and biological needn't be considered moral or legal. "The sexual attraction that a grown man feels for a 15-year-old female is perfectly natural," Gil-White points out. But most societies forbid such relations, and all but a very few men can control their urges.

“Being biologically primed for racism does not make it inevitable”
Besides, if ethnocentrism is an evolved adaptation to facilitate smooth social interactions, it is a rather crude one. A far better way to decide who can be trusted and who cannot is to assess an individual's character and personality rather than to rely on meaningless markers. In today's world, that is what most of us do, most of the time. It is only when it becomes difficult to judge individuals that people may instinctively revert to the more primitive mechanism. Hammond and Axelrod argue that this is most likely to happen under harsh social or economic conditions, which may explain why ethnic divisions seem to be exaggerated when societies break down, as a consequence of war, for example. "To me this makes perfect sense," says Chirot. "Especially in times of crisis we tend to fall back on those with whom we are most familiar, who are most like us."

Knowing all this, it may be possible to find ways to curb our unacceptable tendencies. Indeed, experiments show how little it can take to begin breaking down prejudice. Psychologist Susan Fiske from Princeton University and colleagues got students to view photos of individuals from a range of social groups, while using functional MRI to monitor activity in their medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), a brain region known to light up in response to socially significant stimuli. The researchers were shocked to discover that photos of people belonging to "extreme" out-groups, such as drug addicts, stimulated no activity in this region at all, suggesting that the viewers considered them to be less than human. "It is just what you see with homeless people or beggars in the street," says Fiske, "people treat them like piles of garbage." In new experiments, however, she was able to reverse this response. After replicating the earlier results, the researchers asked simple, personal questions about the people in the pictures, such as, "What kind of vegetable do you think this beggar would like?" Just one such question was enough to significantly raise activity in the mPFC. "The question has the effect of making the person back into a person," says Fiske, "and the prejudiced response is much weaker."

It would appear then that we have a strong tendency to see others as individuals, which can begin to erode our groupist instincts with very little prompting. Perhaps this is why, as Chirot points out, ethnocentrism does not always lead to violence. It might also explain why in every case of mass ethnic violence it has taken massive propaganda on the part of specific political figures or parties to stir passions to levels where violence breaks out.

If the seeds of racism are in our nature, so too are the seeds of tolerance and empathy. By better understanding what sorts of situations and environments are conducive to both, we may be able to promote our better nature.

So when I say that people are naturally xenophobic, I don't mean that that absolves you of responsibility to recognise it and do something about it. If you fail to do so, that's when it moves into racism - treating people badly just because of your prejudices.

 

[becky p]

Poor phil.

You do like giving orders, don't you? You must have some very deep-rooted issues about authority.

Good coming from you.

 

[treelover]

you have got in in one there: race has now replaced class as the oppression of choice for the far left.

It reminds me of the tendency to accuse anyone deviating from the "socialist" line as having a hatred of the working classes, or suchlike.