BNP ad in Ham & High

[lozzyloz]

Good post Moos. I'm sure that tribalism, rascism, prejudice etc is a basic human instinct that evolved as a need for our survival as we competed against other groups and predators for food, resources and space to expand. I'd like to think that as a species we've evolved enough to the point of sophistication that we could find humanitarian, technological and scientific ways to live together. The proliferation of WMD's, wars over oil, starvation in the developing world versus obesity in the West, destruction of natural resources and our habitat suggest otherwise.

Why? Greed perhaps.

We're quick to forget that our little islands wealth was largely been built on the exploitation of black slave labour coupled with the exploitation of other countries natural resources, yet we're slow to give anything back for fear of diluting our own wealth. Yet we continue to cause misery abroad in our quest to protect oil interests in the Middle East, starve people because of our need for bio-fuels and suppress the development of third world economies with derisive trade arrangements. Yet we still believe that we have the right to treat those who want to come here to do our crappy cleaning jobs, or ecscape some tyrannical regime (fuelled by the arms we sell) as second class human beings simply because they are deemed to be different to us.

But to be fair rascism/tribalism/prejudice is largely an irrational emotion. We all have it about something. Again as Moos points out, not everyone is honest about facing up to their prejudices and doing something about it and understanding where this fear, because that's what it is, fear, comes from. Apparently the Scots don't like the English though they're both British, Catholics don't like Protestants - though they're all Christian, West Indians don't like Africans though they originate from the same continent and Arsenal fans don't like Man U fans even though they both share a love of the same sport. But these are all sweeping generalisations and when you really scrutinise it most people in these groups just say it as a kind of mob rule thing but in reality could quite easily get on with this person they hated but never met.

But then governments have other agendas.

[SeanMacGabhann]

nicely put lozzyloz (and Happy Birthday as I can't face just adding another one in that thread!)

[Keef]

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> (and Happy Birthday as I can't face just adding another one in that thread!)

Bless you, I bet you stop liking bands when they get too commercial don't you? ;-)

[SeanMacGabhann]

I wish my bands did!

Nah it's more like the birthday cards at work - If I get to sign one that has everyone else on there already it's very hard to come up with anything original ( I should have just done it... I know...)

[bignumber5]

Bloody Hell people, I'm away from t'internet for 6 hours and this is what you get up to...

To catch up a bit, echos david_carnell on pretty much every point since my last post.

Moos, I think that your assertions about tribalism are pretty much spot-on and have never really changed, the fluid concept is on which criteria each individual includes or excludes others into their tribe. The days of tribe being based on skin colour or nationality are, I like to think, well and truely over in the developed world. As the species has become more and more socially complex, so the criteria change. I don't feel more loyal to an Englishman that I've never met than to my friends in other countries, and only demonstrate blind loyalty to my nation when England are playing rugby.

This doesn't mean I don't like being English or I'm not proud of being, because I do and I am. But in the majority of situations, my nationality and my ethnicity do not define my "tribe" because my life events don't take place on that scale. That being said, I think an element of tribalism is self preservation/safety in numbers, and I feel safe and secure in my life and my choices. Might I feel differently if I'd competed and lost in all walks of life to people who consistently came from what I perceived to be an externally identifiable common group?

I'm not attempting to justify racism on behalf of those that cling to it, I'm noting that I have no personal experiences that would make me feel in such a way. But I've been harrassed when in a white-working-class Northern town for being different in a way that I never have in even the most ethnically diverse areas of London or any of the other countries that I have been to.

[Moos]

To pick up on BN5's thread, this is a source of a genuine (if amicable) divide in my family. My parents would regard themselves as part of the tribe of 'The English' and can't understand why concept seems a bit comic to my friends who feel that they have a great deal more in common with New Yorkers and Barcelonistas (??) than people from rural Devon or Cumbria.

Sorry, somewhat off topic.

[Cassius]

I guess Sophie Lawrence's bereaved family know all about the uglier side of tribalism!

Editing to add that I agree with Moos - I have more in common with similar age group etc of people from Amsterdam than I do with those from my home town in Devon.

[Jah Lush]

Cassius Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I guess Sophie Lawrence's bereaved family know

> all about the uglier side of tribalism!

It's very unfortunate that Mrs Lawrence, who passed away last week, didn't get justice in her lifetime for what happened to her son in what was a blatantly vicious and racist attack on her son. Those five bastards seem to have got away with it.

Rock Against Racism

[Cassius]

Jah Lush Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Cassius Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I guess Sophie Lawrence's bereaved family know

> > all about the uglier side of tribalism!

>

> It's very unfortunate that Mrs Lawrence, who

> passed away last week, didn't get justice in her

> lifetime for what happened to her son in what was

> a blatantly vicious and racist attack on her son.

> Those five bastards seem to have got away with it.

Hi Jah - I was referring to Sophie Lawrence who was kicked to death for having the audacity for being a goth - however I also agree that the Taylor case was a tragedy, and hope in death she has found some peace.

[Jah Lush]

Sorry, Cassius, my mistake. I was thinking of the Stephen Lawrence murder in Eltham more than a decade ago.

[Cassius]

Goodness did Stephen Lawerence's mother die the same week as Damilola Taylor's (also got wires crossed) how very very sad.

[david_carnell]

I thought you meant Sophie Lawrence who plays Diane Butcher in Eastenders - that gritty urban portrayal of East-End life.

>:D<

I think you mean Sophie Lancaster (goth)

or

Gloria Taylor (mother of Damilola)

[Jah Lush]

Blimey, we've got our wires a bit crossed today haven't we.

[Marmora Man]

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Question

> 1. should immigration continue at the present

> level, and if so why? Answer: I have no problem

> with current levels. I would even extend it to

> allow non EU citizens and non-Asylum seekers to

> stay longer (eg Australian/Safrican and US

> citizens)

> 2. should it be reduced and to how much? Nope. And

> no-one will ever be able to come to a sensible

> answer on "how much" is a good amount

> 3. should it be stopped and if so why? Nope -

> answer already given in previous posts

I didn't want to mix it on this thread but Sean's response to SteveT's questions caught my eye - as always my libertarian / liberal instincts tend to agree with Sean's left leaning / liberal answer but ... what if the questions were rephrased slightly as:

1. Can UK / the world cope with continued population growth?

2. Should population growth be contained in some fashion?

3. Should population growth be reduced?

Then it becomes a question of balancing resources (space, homes, services, minerals, energy supplies, water) against demand. My answers would be:

1. Can UK / the world cope with continued population growth? Not for ever - there will come a point where it becomes too crowded.

2. Should population growth be contained in some fashion? Yes - because of a. above but it will be difficult

3. Should population growth be reduced? Target rate of growth should be reduced to sustainable level(s) (ie v. low growth / no growth) tho' how to do this is a major difficulty.

I have no objection to anyone of any nation coming to live here, in my street , my village or my community. I do have concerns that as an economy UK cannot sustain the population growth it is experiencing. If the outflow / inflow was more balanced such that the UK experienced a relatively steady state of population wouldn't UK, and all its varied population, be better off? Ditto for the world as a whole - excessive population growth hurts everyone but it hurts the poorest mostest.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Interesting mix there MM

I tend to agree more on the population level on the planet as a whole - I see no reason why the UK economy would struggle with current population growth however..

[cdonline]

A few years ago, we were told the country was heading for disaster, as we weren't producing enough babies and the population was too old.

Voila, we get loads of young people, more children and suddenly we're in shit creak. Not sure why, except we don't like the way they look or the way they speak.

[LeonWatson]

Can't be bothered to read this thread - it seems to have gone off topic a bit. But just to say there's absolutely no chance a BNP advert would appear in the SLP. All the staff would walk out.

[Brendan]

OK maybe I am just playing devil?s advocate here but here is an argument that I feel is valid for any country in this world:

Would you not say that if there are any people at all in a country who are not employed and contributing to (and therefore benefiting from) the formal economy then that country is not meeting its responsibility to its citizens?

Is having skilled/educated immigrants (like myself) come into this country and take thousands upon thousands of jobs when there are also thousands upon thousands of unemployed people in the uk, not just testament to the fact that the state has failed to educate and properly use the human resources available to it?

I would add this though: When it comes to "Britain" you can?t consider anyone from places like the west indies, Indian subcontinent or any other ex-colony* an immigrant.

*excluding those who formally won independence like the USA or SA.

[Maximay]

Talking of resurrecting threads.... The BNP only need to improve their share of the vote by 0.2% to have the required 5% needed to gain a seat on the Assembly, maybe more people that you think actually vote for them

[Jeremy]

Yes, Maximay... good point, you should never underestimate the BNP, and their ability to gain support from vulnerable and disaffected sections of society. All the more reason to use your vote to keep these twisted people out.

[annaj]

Welcome back to the debate Maximay. I never denied there were people out there voting for the BNP, that is exactly what I find so alarming.

Now that you're back are you planning to address the questions that were put to you and explain or defend your comment that "there's nothing wrong with the BNP"?

[Jah Lush]

Yes, for that comment alone you've definitely got some explaining to do.

Rock Against Racism

[Tony Parkes]

According to politico.co.uk the BNP have just polled 14%, level pegging with the Lib Dems.

[annaj]

And do you have an opinion on that Tony, or did you register just to inform us?

I'm just curious. Seems a bit odd to me to care enough to post for the first time, but not express an opinion either way.

[bignumber5]

Welcome to the forum Tony Parkes - a hell of a thread to start posting on!