To be fair a right wing politician would hate all of them…whatever their beliefs or how much tea they were offered. (It’s not about religion for them you see…)
What did you get when surveying white English homes, a share of their fish and chip supper with a pint of bitter!
None of the above: it’s that there shouldn’t be a defacto blasphemy law that applies only to one religion. Last year we were on the brink of that. Hopefully a definition of Islamophobia that is compatible with a pluralistic, liberal society can, and will, be found.
Perhaps he was in Portsmouth’s hooligan firm.
How do you feel about the IHRA definition of anti-semitism?
2 Likes
You’re right, I’m not ‘demonising people who aren’t from round here’. As I’ve said before, I treat individualswith love and respect no matter where they’re from - unless they give me cause to reconsider.
As for the economic argument for immigration - that’s been so comprehensively debunked that I wonder what rock you’ve been living under. What on Earth is the point of bringing in unskilled labour when we’ve got millions unemployed? The OBR’s own figures tell us that each unskilled immigrant will cost the tax payer upwards of £150k in their lifetime. And as immigrants get old and sick too, the idea that they are helping the NHS is laughable: it’s an infinite ponzi scheme. I’m pretty sure that only 2% of immigrants are doctors, and in any case, as our medical schools are oversubscribed it’s crazy that we don’t train our own. The fact is that we a supposed to be nation, not an economic zone. Your capitalist fundamentalist stance is destroying nations across the globe and driving more and more wealth into fewer and fewer hands. Edit: I forgot to mention that immigration is used to boost GDP, but it is, of course, GDP per capita that is the only figure of interest us.
There you go again. Putting words into my mouth. You’re very good at it aren’t you?
Not once did I say the current way we are using immigration is good, or that it is working. You have assumed I’m saying that.
But saying that you want no immigration at all is an extreme view.
I dispute that wanting to maintain the status quo can be an extreme view. I said higher up that I might allow someone in if there is a clear benefit to us, but the current threshold is much, much too low.
Maintaining the status quo clearly can be an extreme view, why would you think otherwise?
Have you read the report? Do you think it’s possible that certain cultural attitudes towards women within some Pakistani Muslim communities could have played a role, or do you think raising that concern is automatically Islamophobic?
I happen to agree with you btw that it is a travesty that we aren’t training enough of doctors within the uk.
But we need doctors.
So how are we actually going to fill doctors positions that we need? Just pick one of the 1.8million unemployed people and give them that job and hope for the best? Because it takes alllllong time to train even the most competent of those unemployed people. And most of them aren’t anywhere near competent enough.
Your argument holds water in theory. But when it comes to filling actual jobs with actual people, we NEED the tool of immigration
1 Like
Interested in your opinion on net zero
Do you have the same kinds of questions around the sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic Church?
I certainly do, but the difference is that, as far as I know, there has been no attempt at a cover up from outside the church, and mentioning Catholic abuse of children is unlikely to make you a social pariah in middle class circles.
This is nonsense tbh
2 Likes
Which bit? You mean there has been a cover up of Catholic abuse, or you’re effectively not allowed to mention it?
I confess that I haven’t done nearly enough research into this; which is particularly remiss of me as I consider the environment to be by far the most important issue. As a general observation, there’s no point in fiddling the books by outsourcing our polution.
1 Like
I don’t think I’ve read it since the Corbyn antisemitism accusations about ten years ago, but I don’t recall having a problem with it.
I like the mandate of Buckethead with renaming HS2 to FFS1
1 Like
Both. There was most definitely more of a cover-up of Catholic abuse.
Of course you’re allowed to talk about grooming gangs. What people might disagree with is weaponising that conversation to make it about criticising Islam or Muslims in a way that you wouldn’t about Catholics.