Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Why do the left believe the govt on immigration but nothing else?

do you believe the govt on ..

  • WMD

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • guantanamo bay

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • the reasons for iraq war

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • the neccessity for nuclear power

    Votes: 5 62.5%
  • its socialist credentials

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • that there is very little immigration and it is good for the w/c

    Votes: 3 37.5%

  • Total voters
    8
belboid said:
There is no such thing as different 'races'. And jews have been racially discrimanted against despite 'appearing white'.

Because the Nazis made them into a separate race. They were just German citizens.

I'm not entirely convinced that there are no such thing as "races". Nor are about 99% of the population I imagine.
 
mattkidd12 said:
I'm not entirely convinced that there are no such thing as "races". Nor are about 99% of the population I imagine.

It's a complicated issue indeed. I am not completely sure what to make of it. However . . .

If you tell most people 'there are no races' then they'll probably look at you like you're daft, or mutter something about 'political correctness'. The reason is the evidence of their own eyes suggests something different.

But most people have only partial exposure to the full range of human variation in the world. Everyone in this country sees Europeans, and everyone has seen sub-Saharan Africans (mainly West Africans and their descendants in the diaspora), if not in real life then in pictures or on the telly. So it seems commonsensical that there are two distinct races: blacks and whites.

Far fewer people will have encountered Eritreans, Ethiopians, Somalians, or Sudanese. People from these countries often appear to be intermediate between black and white. So the reality is maybe closer to a spectrum of difference than two distinct and separate groups.
 
mattkidd12 said:
Because the Nazis made them into a separate race. They were just German citizens.
what? no one had considred them a race before Hitler came along? Thats just utter nonsense Matt.
 
Look - is Chomsky a different race to any other white American? Was Einstein a different race to any other white German? Only according to Nazis and anti-semitics.
 
mattkidd12 said:
Because the Nazis made them into a separate race. They were just German citizens.

I'm not entirely convinced that there are no such thing as "races". Nor are about 99% of the population I imagine.

Errr no Matt the Jewish community in Germany was a reasonably specific ethnic minority, the Nazi's didnt make them that but they exploited it along with the centuries of prejudice and persecution the said minority had suffered. 'Race' as a meaningful explanation of perceived or 'real' biological distinctiveness between different groups of people or even two individuals is utter twaddle and meaningless. That of course doesnt alter the fact that cultural groups exist but these are not fixed entities either, neither in the way they may indentify themselves nor in the way they are indentified by wider society.
 
mattkidd12 said:
Look - is Chomsky a different race to any other white American? Was Einstein a different race to any other white German? Only according to Nazis and anti-semitics.

Errrr well you'll find that some of the more extreme Zionists would concur as well, incidentally not all Jewish people are white.
 
mattkidd12 said:
They enshrined it in law.



So? Race doesn't exist does it?

I would say not as a meaningful term, and scientifically the concept was ridiculed decades ago. It doesnt mean that specific cultural or ethnic groups dont exist though
 
mattkidd12 said:
They enshrined it in law.
yes they did. Well spotted. But they could hardly have done so if 'many perople' hadnt already thought of them as a seperate grouping/race, could they?

You never came back on how 'Slavs' were considered a completely seperate race either, btw.
 
were considered...

Is the key term.

This argument is obviously going in circles, because people all seem to have different definitions of what "race" actually means.

My argument was - immigration controls discriminate against people of ALL races, but they only discriminate against people of a certain class - far from being "racist", they are in fact "classist."
 
mattkidd12 said:
Is the key term.

This argument is obviously going in circles, because people all seem to have different definitions of what "race" actually means.

My argument was - immigration controls discriminate against people of ALL races, but they only discriminate against people of a certain class - far from being "racist", they are in fact "classist."
An interesting argument, but it doesn't really reflect reality. As I understand it, it's not the rich and powerful immigrating, they don't need to, it's the slightly better off individuals within the working class.
 
What does that mean Matt? Makes very little sense I'm afraid,

Of course immigration controls are classist - the rich will always be able to come here no matter what there race/skin colour. But that doesnt mean they arent racist as well.
 
Have you ever been abroad matt? Do you never galnce over at who is getting stopped and interviewed most when coming into this country? Cos it sure aint the white australians.

If you're rich, colour is all but irrelevant, if you're poor, it becomes incredibly relevant.
 
oh fer fucks sake. this is a complete waste of time.

You have been utterly unable to reply to anything other than by repeating what you wrote in the first place. Its like trying to argue with a six year old.
 
I'm trying to better understand your arguments. You said white australians aren't stopped. Are white Irish?

I'm trying to get to the bottom of your argument that race isn't based on skin colour.
 
mattkidd12 said:
I'm trying to better understand your arguments. You said white australians aren't stopped. Are white Irish?

I'm trying to get to the bottom of your argument that race isn't based on skin colour.

white irish aren't stopped much these days either.

The point is that if your black and poor your much more likely (all other things being even) to get hauled over than if your white and poor.

i've witnessed it myself ont he belfast to dublin bus. Anyone looking a bit swarthy gets told to present their passport by the gards. one fella i know a black guy from west belfast got asked for his passport and replied in a broad belfast accent "i'm from the fucking north, mate", to much insuing laughter on the bus.
 
skin colour makes 'difference' obvious, but it is not the be all and end all. Is that too hard to grasp?
 
mattkidd12 said:
yes - so would a black jew more likely be stopped than a white jew?

a black jew.

What the fuck is your point dickhead.

we all know that race is a social construct, that it has no solid definition, but i think we can all understand it's usage in certain contexts ie police are racist etc.
Stop being a dull little cunt and shut the fuck up!
 
big words for a small fella.

skin colour makes 'difference' obvious, but it is not the be all and end all. Is that too hard to grasp?

No - I understand your argument. I guess i'll have to come to terms with the fact that Irish is a separate race, as is Polish, as is Slav etc. You learn something new every day.
 
mattkidd12 said:
big words for a small fella.



No - I understand your argument. I guess i'll have to come to terms with the fact that Irish is a separate race, as is Polish, as is Slav etc. You learn something new every day.

or maybe come to terms with the fact race is an unstable word used in many contexts and your being an annoyingly literal cunt. Somewhere a Philosophy Undergraduate tutorial is missing an idiot.:mad:
 
mattkidd12 said:
No - I understand your argument. I guess i'll have to come to terms with the fact that Irish is a separate race, as is Polish, as is Slav etc. You learn something new every day.
or you could try actually defending your position, and coming up with a reasoned argument about why it is the way you think it is. Simply repeating 'well, thats what people think it is isnt it?' doesnt really do that.
 
mattkidd12 said:
Bit hypocritical of you, isn't it? Why not stick to the topic?

sorry but you seem to be trying to conflate different usages of the term "race" in order to make an idiotic point.

Now if you had any fucking wit, you would argue that the joke about Poles wasn't racist cause there isn;t the same historical context, polish people have ben held as sub human etc etc, and therefore the joke is more in common with ones about scousers or the french.

of course in the current climate of anti immigration, polish people are being incresinly "racialised", with myths circulating about their inherent this or that, and their desire to eat sawns etc.

Explain to me though how i'm being literal.
 
belboid said:
or you could try actually defending your position, and coming up with a reasoned argument about why it is the way you think it is. Simply repeating 'well, thats what people think it is isnt it?' doesnt really do that.

It's just the definition of "race" i've been taught and have used all my life - based on skin colour. So discrimination against black people based on their skin colour is racist. Whereas taking the piss out of French people isn't racist, because it's not based on race, it's based on their nationality. In that sense, surely it's xenophobia?

Explain to me though how i'm being literal

Thought you said little. My mistake.
 
well that's why people were educating you to the fact that race being a social construct and having no biological basis is actually a very fluid term that can not be reduced to skin colour, afterall the irish were considered a seperate race a few centuries ago, and the nazi's thought plenty of pale fuckers were racially below them.
 
Back
Top Bottom