UK Politics: Deal, or No Deal. To May and Beyond.

[mormont]

39 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

The UK foreign born population in 2017 was 14.4%.. which is pretty close to 15% wouldn't you agree? But the more telling statistic is that the foreign born population DOUBLED from 2004 to 2017. I think more important than the overall numbers is the rate of change.

'Close' isn't the point, nor is the rate of increase. You're the one citing this as a universal truth.

Your whole approach is like this: make sweeping assertions and ask us to engage. You're the guy sitting behind the desk with the 'change my mind' sign. I'm not buying.

 

[Heartofice]

17 minutes ago, mormont said:

'Close' isn't the point, nor is the rate of increase. You're the one citing this as a universal truth.

Your whole approach is like this: make sweeping assertions and ask us to engage. You're the guy sitting behind the desk with the 'change my mind' sign. I'm not buying.

 

Lol, I'm no Crowder thanks!

I'm just seeing many of the same arguments here that were being trotted out during the referendum, and that failed enormously to engage half the country, and yet people are still trying to make them. The argument that immigration is a net positive for the economy or that feeling that immigration levels are too means you are racist. It doesn't work, it just reinforces your own blinkered thinking and puts up a wall to those you are reaching out to. 

If you want to get people to accept immigration into a country then first you need to accept that possibly that the level and rate of change needs to be controlled to allow proper integration (if you can't even acknowledge the enormous immigration change then you how can you even have a conversation)
 Then engage people on the things that actually matter to them, culture, shared values and stories, traditions etc. Don't deride traditional British culture, or tell people change is inevitable, that the things they value aren't really that valuable (this happened a lot during and post referendum). 

[Conflicting Thought]

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

The UK foreign born population in 2017 was 14.4%.. which is pretty close to 15% wouldn't you agree? But the more telling statistic is that the foreign born population DOUBLED from 2004 to 2017. I think more important than the overall numbers is the rate of change. 

 

Is this an example of some one who belives in the great replacement? 

[Heartofice]

2 minutes ago, Conflicting Thought said:

Is this an example of some one who belives in the great replacement? 

Yep, those sort of silly statements is what I'm talking about. Good illustration.

[Zorral]

After reading the impulse to share is irresistible!  Lookin' ahead to Christmas 2019 after BREXIT:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/23/prepare-for-a-no-christmas-brexit-in-2019

 

[mormont]

8 hours ago, Heartofice said:

I'm just seeing many of the same arguments here that were being trotted out during the referendum

I'm seeing them too, in your posts. You're repeating the shit you saw on Facebook in 2016, and then sitting back and demanding that we change your mind. And even as you do it, you're denying that you're doing it. Seen that tactic before. Not into it.

[Heartofice]

I’m not asking you to convince me of anything. If I was asking anything at all, a first step would be to at least acknowledge that the rate of immigration was exceptionally high. It seems nobody is able to even do that, and I’m not sure why.. maybe they don’t want to lose or something ?! No idea what the prize would be here, we’ve all lost already.

I voted Remain but I suspect if I’d come into contact with the way some are talking here I’d be disgusted enough to vote leave. 

[polishgenius]

I don't believe for a second that you actually voted remain. 'Oh I'm on your side but you're so awful that I'm gonna change my mind and then you'll be sorry!!!' is a pretty shitty debating tactic.

[Heartofice]

12 minutes ago, polishgenius said:

I don't believe for a second that you actually voted remain. 'Oh I'm on your side but you're so awful that I'm gonna change my mind and then you'll be sorry!!!' is a pretty shitty debating tactic.

Oh I promise you I voted remain. I even said many of the same things I’ve read here on a daily basis, which is why I now see how totally ineffective they are. I wasn’t as rude as some people here however hopefully.

i would probably vote remain again now, although I’ve made sure in the past 2 years I’ve managed to read up on the arguments on both sides rather than stay in my Guardian bubble. 

[Werthead]

Quote

If you want to get people to accept immigration into a country then first you need to accept that possibly that the level and rate of change needs to be controlled to allow proper integration (if you can't even acknowledge the enormous immigration change then you how can you even have a conversation)

This is at least a valid point, but also as previously mentioned, under the EU we had the authority and power to reduce and limit immigration from the EU to a much lower level by insisting that all people coming into the country had jobs or got one within 3 months of arriving or had to leave. The New Labour government chose not to enforce that rule when it was brought in and the Conservatives chose not to enforce it when they came into office.

Quote

 

 Then engage people on the things that actually matter to them, culture, shared values and stories, traditions etc. Don't deride traditional British culture, or tell people change is inevitable, that the things they value aren't really that valuable (this happened a lot during and post referendum). 

 

What is traditional British culture? Our national drink is Chinese, our two main national dishes are Portuguese and Indian, we're shit at our national game, our national saint is Syrian, our most popular legend is French and our modern popular culture is dominated by American imports. Ask 10 people what is "British culture" and you will get 10 different responses.

And change is inevitable. We're a mongrel nation that has been changing continuously for over a thousand years. Going backwards to some mythical JRM-blinkered view of the 1950s is never going to happen.

[Free Northman Reborn]

What is wrong with an Australia style points based system that strictly limits immigrants to those you actually need, and which also throws in a relatively tough English language test for good measure, to help ensure that new arrivals fit in with local society as much as possible?

[ants]

15 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

What is wrong with an Australia style points based system that strictly limits immigrants to those you actually need, and which also throws in a relatively tough English language test for good measure, to help ensure that new arrivals fit in with local society as much as possible?

Because in the EU there is freedom of movement and work for EU members. 

[ants]

On 12/24/2018 at 8:06 PM, Heartofice said:

.....I even said many of the same things I’ve read here on a daily basis, which is why I now see how totally ineffective they are. ....

You keep saying this like it wins your argument. Yes some have just said they were/are racist (which is true), but many have given good reasons. You then go that those arguments are ineffective, as if that somehow trumps them. 

The reality is that these people either aren’t hearing these arguments (due to media choices), are racist and don’t care, or for a few are just ignorant. Yet somehow it’s Remain’s fault for not expressing the issues appropriately. Sorry for being the ones using facts. Sorry for that they don’t want to listen and want to believe what they want to believe. Funny that their not susceptible to logic, it’s all our fault....

Oh, and a few other fallacies you keep mentioning. That people voting leave are worried over losing jobs and that they have no power. The biggest block of people voting Leave were the elderly. They aren’t working and are the most powerful voting block in the UK. The people whose jobs would be theoretically lost to immigrants (the young) voted Remain. 

[Free Northman Reborn]

16 minutes ago, ants said:

Because in the EU there is freedom of movement and work for EU members. 

Maybe I phrased that wrong. I know that’s an EU law. My question is why it is so frowned upon for people to want that very reasonable level of control over who comes into their country. To me, just getting that basic level of power over your borders is already worth the whole Brexit move.

[The Marquis de Leech]

26 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Maybe I phrased that wrong. I know that’s an EU law. My question is why it is so frowned upon for people to want that very reasonable level of control over who comes into their country.

I'm no fan of the EU (being the board's resident Lexiter), but Australian immigration/refugee policy is seriously unpleasant. Australia and New Zealand have freedom of movement between each other, which de facto leads to Australia making it ever more bureaucratically nasty at their end, complete with standard rhetoric (New Zealanders can live in Australia indefinitely... but since 2001 can't access the social welfare system. New Zealand, by contrast, bends over backwards when Australians come here). Oh, and Canberra keeps trying to bully us into changing our immigration policies, because they see New Zealand as a backdoor loophole to undesirables going to Australia - the two countries have been drifting apart politically for decades.

[Heartofice]

6 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Maybe I phrased that wrong. I know that’s an EU law. My question is why it is so frowned upon for people to want that very reasonable level of control over who comes into their country. To me, just getting that basic level of power over your borders is already worth the whole Brexit move.

This is part of what I am getting it at. It is characterised as an unreasonable position, when actually a lot of people would agree that there is a point at where immigration levels are too rapid and change is too great, and it comes as a shock to the native population. The truth is, we could have done more to limit the immigration level from a domestic level, but chose not to.

I think we are only now approaching a point in time where the conversations around immigration are becoming more reasoned. However there are still those who like to smear people with terms like racist or nazi, without really thinking too hard about what they are saying. Had we had a more reasoned debate on immigration (on both sides) before the referendum then maybe things would have been very different. 

On 12/24/2018 at 7:17 PM, Werthead said:

What is traditional British culture? Our national drink is Chinese, our two main national dishes are Portuguese and Indian, we're shit at our national game, our national saint is Syrian, our most popular legend is French and our modern popular culture is dominated by American imports. Ask 10 people what is "British culture" and you will get 10 different responses.

When talking about 'culture', it isn't about fish and chips or curry or what people drink,  but of a sense of collective community , a shared history and group mentality. As a country with a prominent welfare state, it becomes increasingly difficult to ask people to put their money into a collective pot when there is a greater number of people who are not viewed as part of the community, or are potentially temporary members. I think it is very important for a nation to have collective sense of purpose to function, and we are doing a lot of things to erode that.

Quote

And change is inevitable. We're a mongrel nation that has been changing continuously for over a thousand years. Going backwards to some mythical JRM-blinkered view of the 1950s is never going to happen

I'm pretty sure that this is a bit of a myth trotted out time and time again. I'm not sure we want to be comparing immigration waves in the 21st century to the slaughter of the invasion of the Normans or Vikings or Romans. Any other immigration waves would be considered insignificant compared to modern ones.

And @ants your post is exactly what I'm trying to get away from. Rather than examine your own beliefs you've sat there and stated that Brexit voters are just a bunch of ignorant racist old people who should be ignored. That shows a stunning lack of reflection. At least try and look at what Leave voters were worried about and why, and then maybe there won't be such a huge level of polarisation next time.

[Derfel Cadarn]

"Shared history?"

You mean Germans attacking what's now England, Irish attacking what's now Scotland, almost everyone getting attackedby Scandanavians, England, Ireland and Wales getting attacked by the Scandanavians who conquered northern France, Scotland and England fighting each other, everyone fighting amongst themselves, England attacking Scotland and Ireland again, the Protestants fighting the Catholics, the royalists fighting Cromwell, catholic royalists fighting protestant royalists...

 

So much shared history ...

[A Horse Named Stranger]

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

I think we are only now approaching a point in time where the conversations around immigration are becoming more reasoned. However there are still those who like to smear people with terms like racist or nazi, without really thinking too hard about what they are saying. Had we had a more reasoned debate on immigration (on both sides) before the referendum then maybe things would have been very different. 

On the other hand we have people acting like those are not racists. (I mean the inked guy with the colourful beard in particular)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jofDZjruhD4

If you think that's normal, then you are mistaken.

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

When talking about 'culture', it isn't about fish and chips or curry or what people drink,  but of a sense of collective community , a shared history and group mentality. As a country with a prominent welfare state, it becomes increasingly difficult to ask people to put their money into a collective pot when there is a greater number of people who are not viewed as part of the community, or are potentially temporary members. I think it is very important for a nation to have collective sense of purpose to function, and we are doing a lot of things to erode that.

I like the slightly racist undertone of that argument. The lazy ass immigrant living on the expense of the welfare state of the hardworking white Briton. While it basically ignores the fact, that EU migrants pay into the NHS and other institutions of the English welfare state. You know who is living on the expense of it? Elderly Britons living in Britain.

I am not even arsed asking about the shared history group mentality thing. I just assume, it's those obese milky white dudes travelling to a hotel in Spain once a year and getting pissed out drunk (and aquiring a lobster red skin colour), while complaining that the lazy residents don't speak proper English, drunk English. In many respects, Paul Gascoigne (despite his French looking name) is probably the living embodiement of the English man.

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

I'm pretty sure that this is a bit of a myth trotted out time and time again. I'm not sure we want to be comparing immigration waves in the 21st century to the slaughter of the invasion of the Normans or Vikings or Romans. Any other immigration waves would be considered insignificant compared to modern ones.

Nope, not going down that rabbit hole. But I am glad you stopped short of that great replacement stuff. On the other hand, do you happen to live in Clacton-on-Sea by any chance?

 

 

[Werthead]

23 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

What is wrong with an Australia style points based system that strictly limits immigrants to those you actually need, and which also throws in a relatively tough English language test for good measure, to help ensure that new arrivals fit in with local society as much as possible?

Because there would have to be reciprocation, and the likely majority of those English people wanting to retire to live in Spain or whatever would not have passed it.

 

Quote

 

When talking about 'culture', it isn't about fish and chips or curry or what people drink,  but of a sense of collective community , a shared history and group mentality. As a country with a prominent welfare state, it becomes increasingly difficult to ask people to put their money into a collective pot when there is a greater number of people who are not viewed as part of the community, or are potentially temporary members. I think it is very important for a nation to have collective sense of purpose to function, and we are doing a lot of things to erode that.

 

As noted above, this is ignoring the fact that immigrants 1) pay more into the welfare state than any other group and 2) are needed to pay into that pot to keep it viable.

If, as mentioned previously, Brexiters want to propose a plan to completely revamp the British social, economic and political system to support a country with a declining population (as, say, Japan has failed to do), they are welcome to do so. But they have so far failed to do this, because their vote for Brexit was based on "feelings" rather than rooted in any kind of logic or coherent political ideology.

Quote

 

At least try and look at what Leave voters were worried about and why, and then maybe there won't be such a huge level of polarisation next time.

 

This demonstrates the problem. When history, logic, politics and economics are brought into the argument, Brexit loses, loses hard and loses every single time. And because those arguing for Brexit are doing so from an emotional position based on vague "feelings", they get angry because they are frustrated by their own lack of articulation and sense and vow to keep fighting for Brexit because it's about their own sense of self-importance, their egos and their overwhelming need to be "right" in the face of the evidence.

You keep saying, "engage with what the Brexiters" are saying without taking on board the fact that Remainers have been doing that, and have given Brexiters 2 and a half years to come up with some kind of firm plan for Brexit that is sensible and realistic, only to see no such plan emerge, because it cannot. It is a myth and a unicorn. What you are asking is for people to believe in unicorns and, weirdly, they are unwilling to do so.

[BigFatCoward]

15 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

 

I am not even arsed asking about the shared history group mentality thing. I just assume, it's those obese milky white dudes travelling to a hotel in Spain once a year and getting pissed out drunk (and aquiring a lobster red skin colour), while complaining that the lazy residents don't speak proper English, drunk English. In many respects, Paul Gascoigne (despite his French looking name) is probably the living embodiement of the English man.

 

 

 

Hey, Gazza learned italian when he went to Lazio, how, I'm still not sure.