It’s probably me that’s not able to follow this now so apologies but Saying that Britain doesn’t want any immigration from cultures that ‘clashes’ with our own is going to be challenged as racist . Do you think that challenging that kind of idea is wrong ?
It should be challenged as pig ignorant. I live in, well near, a city that has sommet like 80 different languages spoken at schools. And it is brilliant.
Challenging for some? Certainly, but the leakage of different cultures into a vibrant city makes that city just ace.
There's the utopian ideal, there's what we as positive-thinking individuals want for society, and partly what some of us experience (I too know & cherish a multi-cultural society). And then there's the reality: Merkel famously said
"multi-culti has failed". This was back in 2010, and even then it was clear parallel societies were forming. This isn't the ideal of multi-culturalism which cherishes integration and inter-mixing.
The
reality is the vast majority of people are on my page on this. I prefer to deal with the reality, as I believe that speaking for the many more effectively leads to treating all people fair and well. My interest is in the well-being of all people, not just the Germans or Europeans, but all. Effectively inviting the able of the third-world to Europe (as a consequence largely of McCain-supported US-meddling) isn't in the best interests of all.
Ignoring reality - speaking to the minority - leads to conflict, and that ultimately will have victims: not least the poor souls who drown trying to reach Italy or Greece, nor the poverty-stricken unfit refugees who can't get past Lebanon/Turkey, nor the war-fleeing refugees who have made it into Europe but are being grouped-in with economic migrants (meaning their status has been cheapened). Those who can't afford or are unable to flee are left behind in a country where all the most able have gone, leaving a yet more globally-unbalanced future as those poor countries won't get better like this. And then there's the increase in victims of crime in Europe from perps with refugee status. Conflict in debate ultimately leads to victims in reality.
Then there's the big elephant of Islam and its potential future influence in Western societies: demographic projections for the next 100 years are interesting and should have us at least thinking about what that might mean.
Again, I'm far from alone in thinking like this, as the
latest piece's comments yet again demonstrate with their many hundreds of
likes outweighing the opposing view some of you here are espousing by a factor of at least 10. Think of it as a poll: if you are only in the 10% while 90% are the opposing view, then maybe you'd do well to listen to what the 90% are saying, because
it's not what you think they are saying:
So we can either ignore what the majority are thinking and just get mad that the world is turning without us (i.e. Brexit/Trump etc), or we can start listening to what people are saying, show some understanding, don't think the worst of people who don't share your views, meet halfway with them, learn to compromise...all those good things. Then the masses might start voting sensibly again, starting with voting against parties & people (like McCain) who support bombing of Arab lands, which in turn will lessen the need for mass migrant waves to Europe.
Insinuating the majority of people are racist/bigoted/nazi/whatever is a dehumanisation of those people. It's beyond insulting, it's socially-damaging. Such crass accusations should be reserved for the genuine racist horrible people out there, otherwise the very idea of racism becomes cheapened, and that only benefits the actual racists (and actual Far Right politics).
I hope it's clear. At least to the extent that yous understand what the majority opinion is.
