UK PM: Multiculturalism has failed

[Republic_Of_Public]

The point was that too often Leftists call themselves "Liberal", and the result has been to defile a once noble word.

They consider word games to be their forte. But they seem to overlook that other people use those terms as sarcastic perjoritives due to the leftists' high mindedness. They certainly lack humility.

Those same words were used by the National Front...

Maybe, but I also explained my own meaning. Which is one better than the cowardly and hypocritical Lib-Left, a class of people making no secret or proper explanation of why whites are such a disasterous demographic presence in their own West.


HIDEOUSLY WHITE: http://www.debatepolitics.com/europ...pular-boys-name-england-7.html#post1059107626

(And if it's any consolation to the Godwin's Law-men on here, their fellow paragons of the Multi Cultural Society would consider me 'too white' to adopt any children!)

 

[Infinite Chaos]

The point was that too often Leftists call themselves "Liberal", and the result has been to defile a once noble word. Calling them "Progressive" is another term that should be avoided when referring to these people.

They are Leftists and their commonality is in wanting a strong centralized government. What form this takes is often unimportant.

But the point remains that we should use the appropriate words when we refer to them, and not use the words of their choosing. Their attempts to control the language should always be challenged.

Have you read back to the original post that he comments on to talk about "liberal leftists?"

If I recall, I used the term "mongrel" from a genetic POV (there ain't no other true version for me) - it's a term used when racists try to espouse their ideals about racial purity. Slainte (if I recall) was the one discussing "Britishness."

Nobody (if I recall) talked about Englishness - so any ensuing discussion of "Englishness" is already on the wrong footing. I personally don't align myself with any particular party (I have said this in British general election threads before) so I have no true idea what my political lean is - I think speaking of "the left" or "the right" is moronically simplistic as I have yet to meet anyone online or in real life in the UK whose political views don't cross an ideological divide every so often. You will have conservatives here who speak highly of the NHS, you will have Labour and Conservative politicians who have very similar views (pro and anti) the EU.

If I'm labelled liberal left or whatever others decide to call me then that's fine with me. I've been called "left" here and I've also been called "right." I try to decide my views on a subject by reading about it rather than taking a dogmatic political stance.

Right now and as long as I have lived, I have never been an anti-semite and I have not been a bald faced liar.

 

[gunner]

The point was that too often Leftists call themselves "Liberal", and the result has been to defile a once noble word. Calling them "Progressive" is another term that should be avoided when referring to these people.

They are Leftists and their commonality is in wanting a strong centralized government. What form this takes is often unimportant.

But the point remains that we should use the appropriate words when we refer to them, and not use the words of their choosing. Their attempts to control the language should always be challenged.

Grant, can you demonstrate a single liberal philosopher that conforms to constraint of expression?
What i think is your getting confused with those philosophers who challenge and highlight the difference between descriptive and normative perspectives. Can you even, from the top of your head, name a contemporary academic dealing with liberal issues?

Paul

 

[Republic_Of_Public]

If I recall, I used the term "mongrel" from a genetic POV (there ain't no other true version for me) - it's a term used when racists try to espouse their ideals about racial purity.

Might be worth butting-in to say that using a DNA debate to debase or glorify a people is equally wrong. And I can say with confidence I did neither, merely prove that there is a sizeable indigenous people still here when it was contested.


And Alexa spoke about Englishness, saying it didn't exist. Imagine the extra vitriol I'd receive if I'd said something similar about the Indians or Pakistanis.

 

[alexa]

And Alexa spoke about Englishness, saying it didn't exist. Imagine the extra vitriol I'd receive if I'd said something similar about the Indians or Pakistanis.

What are you trying to suggest here. I suggested there is no distinct 'English' culture, that rather there were many smaller communities within England, some of whom at times were called Scotland. What on earth are you trying to change that into. I would think it was much the same in India and Pakistan.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

-- I suggested there is no distinct 'English' culture, that rather there were many smaller communities within England, some of whom at times were called Scotland --

I now live near old "Riever" country and feelings still run strong both ways regarding the Scots and English descendents. I sometimes feel that if you took other ethnic and immigrant groups out of the picture that makes up the current UK, there'd still be someone to bear a historic grudge against.

I have no background familial link to this part of England but my father's side of the family was Cornish and we're mostly familiar with the Cornish separatist movement. My mother's family background was Scottish and then I myself was born in Central Africa - I feel I am British rather than English / Cornish or Scottish - I'll happily call myself a mongrel in my racial background, especially as most of my father's family also have a complex background relationship with France (most of my father's family have birth certificates stating birth on French estates).

I've lived in Wales and Scotland and sometimes felt that "Scottishness" and "Welshness" were defined by an anti-English sentiment going back to the battles that unified the kingdom. That's not always true as most Scots and Welsh are simply proud of their ancestral background.

 

[Gardener]

In short, you lied and made a serious but false accusation in that post against me. You have no proof to back your lies up, there are no posts I have made which back your claim up and thus you are a complete and utter liar.

I'll happily take whatever infraction I get for calling you a liar because you have proven how little your evil sneering posts are actually based in any form of truth or honesty. It would dissapoint me no end that Mods would seek to protect you if I was infracted for calling you the liar that you are.

I made a claim against RoP which is based not just in what I personally recieved in leaflets through my door but the Telegraph article I linked clearly demonstrated the words he used were also used by the BNP in the last decade. Those same words were used by the National Front and I also have a link to show those same words used by the White Defence League in 1958.

Trying to pass your accusation off as a "few mentions of antisemitism" is a total lie because there is nothing to back the falsehoods that drip from your mouth. I have never said the words on this forum nor have I thought the thoughts that could create such words and used them against jews.

You lied then and you lie in the post I am quoting. Have I told you enough times that you are a liar for you to realise that I want proof of your claim otherwise I will treat every post you ever make to me with the same contempt you deserve?



First time I've ever seen a bald faced liar complimented for "getting to the nub of a matter." :doh

I sure hope you cleaned up all the spittle after that one, I.C.

 

[William Rea]

If you have read through a lot of this thread you will see that many people share your views and your frustrations in dealing with the right-wing on DP who claim that not only has multiculturalism failed, but that it should because it's a wicked cover for handing over our nations to Moslems. You will also notice that a key number of those right-wingers are trolling, have no interest in a debate and get a kick out of insulting 'Europe', 'Europeans', 'Eurotards', 'Leftards' etc ad nauseam.

I strongly recommend using the full filtering features of the site. Just like during an election when I wouldn't tell you who to vote for, I won't suggest any names to put on ignore as that's against house rules, I believe. Your ignore button however, just like your vote, is there to be used.

I enjoy the full filtering features of the site and recommend them.

 

[Grant]

Grant, can you demonstrate a single liberal philosopher that conforms to constraint of expression?

Certainly Paul. The Universities in Canada, the United States, and Europe are full of them. But the point I'm making is that the people are not Liberal, they are Leftists.

What i think is your getting confused with those philosophers who challenge and highlight the difference between descriptive and normative perspectives. Can you even, from the top of your head, name a contemporary academic dealing with liberal issues?

It seems to me that the term Liberal and Conservative have become confused and meaningless. The political correctness that arrived on campuses a generation or so have limited debate to the point where anyone with an opinion contrary to that of the majority is shouted down, and the speakers need protection from the protesters. So would we call those protesters who would deny opposing points of view "liberal" or "conservative". I think we can agree that they have a very conservative point of view, and in fact would be the definition of a closed conservative mind, while they would think of themselves as being very liberal.

 

[Redress]

Moderator's Warning:

Infinite Chaos is banned from this thread.

 

[Gardener]

Certainly Paul. The Universities in Canada, the United States, and Europe are full of them. But the point I'm making is that the people are not Liberal, they are Leftists.


It seems to me that the term Liberal and Conservative have become confused and meaningless. The political correctness that arrived on campuses a generation or so have limited debate to the point where anyone with an opinion contrary to that of the majority is shouted down, and the speakers need protection from the protesters. So would we call those protesters who would deny opposing points of view "liberal" or "conservative". I think we can agree that they have a very conservative point of view, and in fact would be the definition of a closed conservative mind, while they would think of themselves as being very liberal.

One of the reasons the terms have become all but meaningless has to do with the way they have become unhinged from their moorings due to the dogma of multiculturalism. It is this extreme moral and cultural relativism inherent in these leftist's knee-jerk need to defend the most backwards and illiberal people imaginable that has turned the word liberal on its ear. There is nothing the least bit liberal about those who mutilate the genitals of their girls so they cannot enjoy sex, view women as property, hate homosexuals, hate Jews, and wish to live the same benighted life their ancestors lived 1500 years ago, but to listen to all the finger-wagging screams of "Islamophobia" any time one dares object to any of these attitudes or practices, points out their prevelence or substantiates in any way the true nature of the beliefs in question, it become obvious that this portion of the left does not base their opinions on any sort of consistent value system, but simply on the need to conform.

Two thirds of Britain's Muslims want people jailed if they criticize Islam. Can we not criticize this majority without being accused of bigotry against the minority? 40% of Britain's Muslims want the imposition of the brutal legal system of Sharia. Can we not criticize this sizable minority without being accused of bigotry against the rest? That is the problem here with these dogmatic, lock-step leftists in that they don't care one whit about freedom of speech or the brutality of a legal system that discriminates against women, since they don't base their opinions on any sort of liberal values. All that concerns them is saying whatever they need to say to avoid being called an "Islamophobe", a term they then apply to anybody who DOES reject the illiberal attitudes and practices.

The dogma of multiculturalism demands hypocrisy, and the hypocritical authoritarians who attack anybody who objects to the hypocrisy are anything but liberal.

 

[Republic_Of_Public]

I would think it was much the same in India and Pakistan.

I wouldn't provoke an Indian with that myself. And I explained that more homogenous regional groups would still share cultural traits enough to consider themselves as English people. And there are definite distinctions from nation to nation. (And what's more, no few integrated members of the ethnic minorities have called themselves proud to be English, British and apparently showing an understanding of those terms.)


And on a wider liberal scale, as touched on before, there is a demented mass-movement to constantly denigrate and denude the culture and people existent in Britain for centuries. Which, indeed, only goes to prove that there is an English or British culture for it to be sidelined in the process of Multi Culturalism.


Another video:



The Liberal-infected country's proved itself totally insane as the term 'chocolate brownie' is now officially racist! With schoolchildren being denounced and locked up for Orwellian 'thought crimes', the process of debasing an entire race in law has completed.

Britain is 'too white' and without culture, they say. Its public services are 'institutionally racist', whilst ethnic minority criminals can't be locked away without the legal system being accused of 'discrimination'! Meanwhile, countless pressure groups and professional associations based purely on race are established to cater for all... almost all.

Can't a MultiCultural Society exist without breaking apart the native resident culture and providing leg-ups for others? Or is that so obviously the necessity?!

 

[gunner]

Certainly Paul. The Universities in Canada, the United States, and Europe are full of them. But the point I'm making is that the people are not Liberal, they are Leftists.


It seems to me that the term Liberal and Conservative have become confused and meaningless. The political correctness that arrived on campuses a generation or so have limited debate to the point where anyone with an opinion contrary to that of the majority is shouted down, and the speakers need protection from the protesters. So would we call those protesters who would deny opposing points of view "liberal" or "conservative". I think we can agree that they have a very conservative point of view, and in fact would be the definition of a closed conservative mind, while they would think of themselves as being very liberal.

Rather than offering a blanket statement of what you assume is being taught in Universities can you answer what i previously asked?, of course it will no longer be off the top of your head.

I would agree liberal, Conservative or any other ideology or leaning has had their demarcation lines blurred. That's pretty much in keeping with voting patterns and party affiliation on the decline. I feel one by product of this lack of association of single value systems is voters are more inclined to be stirred by single issue politics rather than all policy's from one party etc.

Paul

 

[Grant]

One of the reasons the terms have become all but meaningless has to do with the way they have become unhinged from their moorings due to the dogma of multiculturalism. It is this extreme moral and cultural relativism inherent in these leftist's knee-jerk need to defend the most backwards and illiberal people imaginable that has turned the word liberal on its ear. There is nothing the least bit liberal about those who mutilate the genitals of their girls so they cannot enjoy sex, view women as property, hate homosexuals, hate Jews, and wish to live the same benighted life their ancestors lived 1500 years ago, but to listen to all the finger-wagging screams of "Islamophobia" any time one dares object to any of these attitudes or practices, points out their prevelence or substantiates in any way the true nature of the beliefs in question, it become obvious that this portion of the left does not base their opinions on any sort of consistent value system, but simply on the need to conform.

Two thirds of Britain's Muslims want people jailed if they criticize Islam. Can we not criticize this majority without being accused of bigotry against the minority? 40% of Britain's Muslims want the imposition of the brutal legal system of Sharia. Can we not criticize this sizable minority without being accused of bigotry against the rest? That is the problem here with these dogmatic, lock-step leftists in that they don't care one whit about freedom of speech or the brutality of a legal system that discriminates against women, since they don't base their opinions on any sort of liberal values. All that concerns them is saying whatever they need to say to avoid being called an "Islamophobe", a term they then apply to anybody who DOES reject the illiberal attitudes and practices.

The dogma of multiculturalism demands hypocrisy, and the hypocritical authoritarians who attack anybody who objects to the hypocrisy are anything but liberal.

It should be no surprise that I absolutely agree perhaps but can add to your example of the Muslim situation.

Israel has been that shining beacon of liberty in the Middle East and has been under consistent attack by the Leftists, yet no one bothers to call this "Israelophobia". It takes a leftist to use this sort of juvenile language whereas any intelligent adult would simply be too embarrassed to use such a term. The Left lacks such shame, and the names used form the underpinning of their political thought. And of course the tie-in with Jews and America allow them a twofer in these particular attacks.

More recently Hosnir Mubarak, after 30 desultory years, has finally caught the attention of the Left. There were no previous threads on this forum regarding this fellow that I can find and yet within 24 hours of the demonstrations the "lock-step leftists" were convinced he was the epitome of evil, and the United States as well because they had been offering the country aid. They swarm, just as any angry mob would, and immature rhetoric and cliched repetition are their buzzwords.

 

[Grant]

Rather than offering a blanket statement of what you assume is being taught in Universities can you answer what i previously asked?, of course it will no longer be off the top of your head.

Are you going to be a smartass, Paul?

I would agree liberal, Conservative or any other ideology or leaning has had their demarcation lines blurred. That's pretty much in keeping with voting patterns and party affiliation on the decline. I feel one by product of this lack of association of single value systems is voters are more inclined to be stirred by single issue politics rather than all policy's from one party etc.

What does the blurring of defintions have to do with voting patterns or single issue politics?

The point was that those who call themselves 'liberal" these days aren't.

 

[alexa]

I now live near old "Riever" country and feelings still run strong both ways regarding the Scots and English descendents. I sometimes feel that if you took other ethnic and immigrant groups out of the picture that makes up the current UK, there'd still be someone to bear a historic grudge against.

Always has been. My Mother an Irish Catholic suffered from considerable prejudice in Scotland in the 40's and 50's

I have no background familial link to this part of England but my father's side of the family was Cornish and we're mostly familiar with the Cornish separatist movement. My mother's family background was Scottish and then I myself was born in Central Africa - I feel I am British rather than English / Cornish or Scottish - I'll happily call myself a mongrel in my racial background, especially as most of my father's family also have a complex background relationship with France (most of my father's family have birth certificates stating birth on French estates).

I've lived in Wales and Scotland and sometimes felt that "Scottishness" and "Welshness" were defined by an anti-English sentiment going back to the battles that unified the kingdom. That's not always true as most Scots and Welsh are simply proud of their ancestral background.

Yes, I never heard anything about the Reivers when I was young so it is interesting to hear that they are still spoken of.

Having moved in and out of Scotland a good bit in my life, I would say that my childhood taught me to believe the English were a different and not very pleasant species. I was completely taken aback when I met my first Englishman and found him to be a very agreeable person.

When I came back in the late '80's I met some considerable racism towards the English but that was within a couple of years tackled as racism and I have not come across it since I came back (having left and come back again). There are a fair number of English around where I live now.

When we moved here from London when my daughter was 7 the thing she loved most was the feeling which she got from people of being proud to be Scottish. That I think is the thing which smaller communities can give.

However spending some time in the North of England, I found antagonism for London to be as strong there as it is in Scotland. You know something like, who do they think they are? There are people and communities here as well. You do not speak for all of us and I think your examples just show how indeed historically different England's many cultures are.

I know you have been thread banned - ah well - I thought I would answer even though you can't reply....and of course there is Berwick!

Berwick-upon-Tweed Feature Page on Undiscovered Scotland

 

[Republic_Of_Public]

So come on MultiCulti supporters, let's not keep it a secret?

Why do people need to be slandered as 'too white', racist and without culture, schoolkids need to be punished for phony 'thought crimes', unlimited and demographic-changing immigration required and vast tax resources wasted on telling us how rubbish we are and to pay for sovereign destruction in the EU?


Why's all that the coke for the fire of a failed Multi-Cultural Society?

 

[Andalublue]

So come on MultiCulti supporters, let's not keep it a secret?

Why do people need to be slandered as 'too white', racist and without culture...


Why's all that the coke for the fire of a failed Multi-Cultural Society?

You appear to be getting frustrated at people not being prepared to engage with your selected talking points. I think that's true, because they (your points) are dishonest and pure baiting. No one called anyone 'too white'. I assume you are referring to Greg Dyke's view that the BBC used to be 'hideously white'. That is not accusing anyone of being any such thing. It's merely a recognition that the BBC did not reflect the multicultural diversity of modern Britain. Here's how he explained it:

What I meant was that as an organisation we needed to become more open and accessible, and in particular we needed a workforce that reflected the society we serve. I'm often asked does that mean you want racial quotas?

My answer is always no – I want the best, most creative people to work at the BBC and I don't want anyone to get a job solely because of his or her colour.

But at the same time I do want people from different backgrounds and I just don't believe that there aren't creative people who come from different ethnic backgrounds who would bring a great deal to the BBC.

If you want to label that 'reverse discrimination' or anti-white 'waycism', then go ahead, but don't expect anyone to take you seriously. I know you didn't anyway.

 

[Republic_Of_Public]

You appear to be getting frustrated at people not being prepared to engage with your selected talking points.

No, I'm just prepared to ask over and over. If people can't or won't have an answer then it would wrap it up soonest to say they're unable to respond.

Because how are you supposed to learn if questions go unanswered, save to call names or pontificate with other statements?

pure baiting

Repeated unanswered questions are 'baiting'; like it!

No one called anyone 'too white'.

Not just Greg Dyke but a whole slew of people who wouldn't be seen dead doing the same to blacks. Indeed, no 'equality' fanatics, either here or out in the wider world, have clamoured for India, Japan or the African nations to become 'multiculural'.

And to say that 'hideously white' doesn't mean 'hideously white' after all is the true dishonesty. Especially when we've already had a system supposedly based on meritocracy all these years.

And supposedly 'reflecting the racial makeup' by force is hardly true equality is it. And for all those 'anti-racist' race-obsessed nutters to call even entire towns and professions 'too white', in a West where whites are the majority anyway, just makes a mockery of the entire concept of giving everybody an equal chance without prejudice.


No wonder my opposition suddenly aren't as vocal when they encounter someone who actually needs work to debate and/or be persuaded. And with the lunacy at hand, they realise it's too uphill a struggle to bother with often.

 

[Republic_Of_Public]

More on the sinister side of Multi Culturalism:



But then, when was it not when taken to its logical end? ('Mongrel race' indeed!)

 

[Andalublue]

More on the sinister side of Multi Culturalism:



But then, when was it not when taken to its logical end? ('Mongrel race' indeed!)

Bwahahahah!! You're kidding! You're using far-right American propaganda to attack Britain? That strikes me as vaguely treasonable. You really must hate modern Britain that much that you'd rather listen to Pat Robertson than real commentators.

 

[Republic_Of_Public]

That strikes me as vaguely treasonable

Using an (unrefuted) link reporting on what's been done to Britain? That's a weird description of treason. And first time from you, even though we've had questions on sovereignty signed to the EU againt public wishes.

...Though perhaps not. I already had Arcana (or someone) telling me I was dumping on Britain for criticising the Government over the EU. When there's PC at work, Government and nation seem suddenly the same.



Now, that niggly unanswered question again:

So come on MultiCulti supporters, let's not keep it a secret?

Why do people need to be slandered as 'too white', racist and without culture, schoolkids need to be punished for phony 'thought crimes', unlimited and demographic-changing immigration required and vast tax resources wasted on telling us how rubbish we are and to pay for sovereign destruction in the EU?


Why's all that the coke for the fire of a failed Multi-Cultural Society?

Indeed so: The town branded too white and too British | Mail Online

Social workers said we were too middle-class and too white to adopt | Mail Online


If anything, that's your treason.

 

[Republic_Of_Public]

Another glaring and unmistakable symptom of MultiCulturalism is the likes of the Muslim Brotherhood being entrusted with some kind of official authority, despite its program of oppression and supremacy:



THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD'S INFILTRATION OF EUROPE:




The "Project': Muslim Brotherhood blueprint for cultural jihad - English translation - Militant Islam Monitor - Militant Islam Monitor

Obama OKs Muslim Brotherhood - By Stanley Kurtz - The Corner - National Review Online

Obama’s Muslim Brotherhood Ties - HUMAN EVENTS

The Muslim Brotherhood gets a PR makeover from the Obama administration – Telegraph Blogs

New Homeland Security Advisor is Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas : Politics & Gov Projects

The Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Report » EXCLUSIVE: New US Homeland Security Advisor Head Of Organization With Ties To Global Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas » Print

http://www.debatepolitics.com/europe/91789-obama-betrays-britain.html#post1059265367


Leftards can fool some of the people some of the time, all of the people some of the time. But all of the people all of the time?!

 

[Andalublue]

Using an (unrefuted) link reporting on what's been done to Britain?

If we spent time refuting, point-by-point every criticism of modern, multi-cultural Britain by its enemies we'd never get any Gin Rummy played. I don't feel the need to refute the rantings of the far-right Pat Robertson any more than those of the fascistic Ahmadinejad. Would YOU accept Ahmadinejad's criticisms at face value? Well, I don't accept Robertson's.

Indeed so: The town branded too white and too British | Mail Online

Social workers said we were too middle-class and too white to adopt | Mail Online

If anything, that's your treason.

Now these two, although equally coming from a source that is a proven enemy of modern Britain, are easily refuted if you just read the two articles.

The first is explained clearly that the jobs were moved from Corby to Leicester because Leicester has a more educated workforce and they could be confident of being able to fill the posts with more intelligent, better qualified, more diverse applicants. In recruitment terms, it's a bit of a no-brainer.

The second is equally easily explained. There aren't enough kids requiring adoption in the areas that the couple lived. My sister: nice, middle-class senior nurse married to nice, middle-class police inspector, just adopted a couple of years ago. It took a while to find the right kids for them, but while they were waiting they weren't moaning about not getting their kids because they were too white and middle class.

Your incessant posting of moaning, negative, partial and partially true knocking copy about modern Britain is dull beyond measure. As you are fond of saying about immigrants, if you don't like it there's nothing keeping you there. There are other places to live, I suspect you and Britain would both be much happier with an amicable divorce. I suspect Alaska might suit you well.

 

[Gardener]

If we spent time refuting, point-by-point every criticism of modern, multi-cultural Britain

One doesn't need to refute modern day British Multiculturalist dogma point by point, as the hypocritical double standards upon which it is predicated are indefensable if one simply adopts the position that all people should be treated equally and with the same expectations for behavior.

I find it odd that in other threads you have championed the need for establishing consitant values when regarding the way we look at different countries, but you are unwilling to extend such notions to those living within a country.