UKIP 'Diversity Carnival' Croydon - A total disaster?

[Densaner]

UKIP want to restrict Immigration from reaching extremely high levels but not abolish it completely. They want Immigrants that are willing to work and contribute to the country, which is clearly what a large amount of the British population want. That is not classed as extremist.

It's classed as idiotic when they play such a huge role in maintaining our economy..

Especially when you see nations such as Germany and Sweden which require immigration to maintain their industry, as people are living longer, marrying later and not having children as often. (Countries which we'll soon be like as the quality of life increases).

I'm happy to see a reduction in immigration and pay for it with a commensurate reduction in GDP. You don't seem to understand that unrestricted immigration was never put to the people in any manifesto by any party or by referendum...

[Densaner]

Exactly. They also want a referendum on the EU. Hardly indicative of an extremist philosophy.

Indeed, I forgot to mention the EU referendum. Sorry about that.

No probs.

[Grave_n_idle]

Extremist xenophobic politics always flourish in economic hard times.

UKIP want to restrict Immigration from reaching extremely high levels but not abolish it completely. They want Immigrants that are willing to work and contribute to the country, which is clearly what a large amount of the British population want. That is not classed as extremist.

But of course, you probably won't even read my post or think about it and like the rest of your kind, you will reply with something along the lines of "But UKIP are racist" or something like that.

I love the "rest of your kind" bit. Very reminiscent of the 'you people' scene from Tropic Thunder.

But you're missing the point I actually already addressed in the post you're allegedly replying to - racist extremism goes hand-in-hand with economic decline. The last time we had an economic crash of this scale was in the 20's and 30's, and I don't need to explain (one hopes) what the political spectrum of Europe came to look like as a result.

The fact that UKIP are currently moderately popular does not mean they aren't racist or extreme. It is a mark of how racism and extremism gain power in down economies.

[The Vekta-Helghast Empire]

It's classed as idiotic when they play such a huge role in maintaining our economy..

Especially when you see nations such as Germany and Sweden which require immigration to maintain their industry, as people are living longer, marrying later and not having children as often. (Countries which we'll soon be like as the quality of life increases).

I'm happy to see a reduction in immigration and pay for it with a commensurate reduction in GDP. You don't seem to understand that unrestricted immigration was never put to the people in any manifesto by any party or by referendum...

Who's going to make up for all the labour shortages though? Who's going to keep producing the quantity of goods we require? And there wasn't a referendum or a party manifesto about it, because it wouldn't make sense, considering the importance of immigration. Even with controlled immigration, you can cause issues (if taken too far, which is quite easy) as you could cause shortages in the working-class employments, as you're not allowing in extra uneducated labourers. Plus, without immigration - you lose the funds you gain from taxing them and who gets to make up for that lil' cut-back? We do.

Edit: Also, extremism - by definition. Is just out-with the norm or considered unacceptable by the majority. Therefore, you could consider UKIP to be extremist, "political, religious, etc. ideas or actions that are extreme and not normal, reasonable or acceptable to most people"

[Densaner]

UKIP want to restrict Immigration from reaching extremely high levels but not abolish it completely. They want Immigrants that are willing to work and contribute to the country, which is clearly what a large amount of the British population want. That is not classed as extremist.

But of course, you probably won't even read my post or think about it and like the rest of your kind, you will reply with something along the lines of "But UKIP are racist" or something like that.

I love the "rest of your kind" bit. Very reminiscent of the 'you people' scene from Tropic Thunder.

But you're missing the point I actually already addressed in the post you're allegedly replying to - racist extremism goes hand-in-hand with economic decline. The last time we had an economic crash of this scale was in the 20's and 30's, and I don't need to explain (one hopes) what the political spectrum of Europe came to look like as a result.

The fact that UKIP are currently moderately popular does not mean they aren't racist or extreme. It is a mark of how racism and extremism gain power in down economies.

Then mainstream politics should address the concerns of people who voted UKIP. I would probably go back to voting Labour if there was a referendum on the EU. Instead of smearing UKIP as racists and xenophobes find out why people voted for them.

[The Vekta-Helghast Empire]

I love the "rest of your kind" bit. Very reminiscent of the 'you people' scene from Tropic Thunder.

But you're missing the point I actually already addressed in the post you're allegedly replying to - racist extremism goes hand-in-hand with economic decline. The last time we had an economic crash of this scale was in the 20's and 30's, and I don't need to explain (one hopes) what the political spectrum of Europe came to look like as a result.

The fact that UKIP are currently moderately popular does not mean they aren't racist or extreme. It is a mark of how racism and extremism gain power in down economies.

Then mainstream politics should address the concerns of people who voted UKIP. I would probably go back to voting Labour if there was a referendum on the EU. Instead of smearing UKIP as racists and xenophobes find out why people voted for them and why.

I imagine most people would probably do the same if the other parties addressed the issue of the EU. So far, all I've seen is the Conservatives jumping on that bandwagon.

[Densaner]

I'm happy to see a reduction in immigration and pay for it with a commensurate reduction in GDP. You don't seem to understand that unrestricted immigration was never put to the people in any manifesto by any party or by referendum...

Who's going to make up for all the labour shortages though? Who's going to keep producing the quantity of goods we require? And there wasn't a referendum or a party manifesto about it, because it wouldn't make sense, considering the importance of immigration. Even with controlled immigration, you can cause issues (if taken too far, which is quite easy) as you could cause shortages in the working-class employments, as you're not allowing in extra uneducated labourers. Plus, without immigration - you lose the funds you gain from taxing them and who gets to make up for that lil' cut-back? We do.

Edit: Also, extremism - by definition. Is just out-with the norm or considered unacceptable by the majority. Therefore, you could consider UKIP to be extremist, "political, religious, etc. ideas or actions that are extreme and not normal, reasonable or acceptable to most people"

Yes putting a massive demographic alteration to people democratically would be a terrible idea, wouldn't it? The answer to the previous post was made on the basis of playing devil's advocate. I don't necessarily accept the idea that restricting immigration or leaving the EU would lead back to the stone age.

[Densaner]

Then mainstream politics should address the concerns of people who voted UKIP. I would probably go back to voting Labour if there was a referendum on the EU. Instead of smearing UKIP as racists and xenophobes find out why people voted for them and why.

I imagine most people would probably do the same if the other parties addressed the issue of the EU. So far, all I've seen is the Conservatives jumping on that bandwagon.

If the Tories and Labour enacted legislation now to have a referendum sometime after the general election then UKIP would be destroyed as a party. They won't though. Another example of an out of touch political elite.

[Wind in the Willows]

UKIP want to restrict Immigration from reaching extremely high levels but not abolish it completely. They want Immigrants that are willing to work and contribute to the country, which is clearly what a large amount of the British population want. That is not classed as extremist.

But of course, you probably won't even read my post or think about it and like the rest of your kind, you will reply with something along the lines of "But UKIP are racist" or something like that.

I love the "rest of your kind" bit. Very reminiscent of the 'you people' scene from Tropic Thunder.

But you're missing the point I actually already addressed in the post you're allegedly replying to - racist extremism goes hand-in-hand with economic decline. The last time we had an economic crash of this scale was in the 20's and 30's, and I don't need to explain (one hopes) what the political spectrum of Europe came to look like as a result.

The fact that UKIP are currently moderately popular does not mean they aren't racist or extreme. It is a mark of how racism and extremism gain power in down economies.

Is that you trying to accuse me of being racist, because I am sympathetic towards UKIP? You're hilarious, by "your kind" I mean left-wingers or whatever you consider yourself.

[Grave_n_idle]

Then mainstream politics should address the concerns of people who voted UKIP. I would probably go back to voting Labour if there was a referendum on the EU. Instead of smearing UKIP as racists and xenophobes find out why people voted for them and why.

We know why people voted for them. The BNP and UKIP are largely fighting over a particular demographic, which has enlarged during the sown economy, since the one thing the racist right and the racist left can agree on is the xenophobia.

The mainstream doesn't need to try to cover the ground xenophobic parties like UKIP and the BNP are fighting over, because allowing racism to determine our (inter)national politics would be a move in the wrong direction. Instead, the main parties need to just weather this storm till the economy recovers, and single-issue racism stops being a significant issue again (as it will), and people start voting for actual political issues that matter.

[Densaner]

Then mainstream politics should address the concerns of people who voted UKIP. I would probably go back to voting Labour if there was a referendum on the EU. Instead of smearing UKIP as racists and xenophobes find out why people voted for them and why.

We know why people voted for them. The BNP and UKIP are largely fighting over a particular demographic, which has enlarged during the sown economy, since the one thing the racist right and the racist left can agree on is the xenophobia.

The mainstream doesn't need to try to cover the ground xenophobic parties like UKIP and the BNP are fighting over, because allowing racism to determine our (inter)national politics would be a move in the wrong direction. Instead, the main parties need to just weather this storm till the economy recovers, and single-issue racism stops being a significant issue again (as it will), and people start voting for actual political issues that matter.

Yeah racism, xenophobia. Change the record, it's cracked...

[Grave_n_idle]

Is that you trying to accuse me of being racist, because I am sympathetic towards UKIP?

No. Try reading.

I'm saying that UKIP are appealing to an increasing groundswell of racism, which is why they are 'popular' despite being extreme.

I can't explain why you make the leap to that being me saying YOU are racist. Unless you are saying that's why YOU support them?

If not, then no - that's not about you. Obviously.

You're hilarious, by "your kind" I mean left-wingers or whatever you consider yourself.

So, whatever I call myself, that's what 'my kind' is? In English terms, I've been a conservative since I was old enough to vote. You're suggesting that conservatives wouldn't even read your post, or think about it?

[The Vekta-Helghast Empire]

Who's going to make up for all the labour shortages though? Who's going to keep producing the quantity of goods we require? And there wasn't a referendum or a party manifesto about it, because it wouldn't make sense, considering the importance of immigration. Even with controlled immigration, you can cause issues (if taken too far, which is quite easy) as you could cause shortages in the working-class employments, as you're not allowing in extra uneducated labourers. Plus, without immigration - you lose the funds you gain from taxing them and who gets to make up for that lil' cut-back? We do.

Edit: Also, extremism - by definition. Is just out-with the norm or considered unacceptable by the majority. Therefore, you could consider UKIP to be extremist, "political, religious, etc. ideas or actions that are extreme and not normal, reasonable or acceptable to most people"

Yes putting a massive demographic alteration to people democratically would be a terrible idea, wouldn't it? The answer to the previous post was made on the basis of playing devil's advocate. I don't necessarily accept the idea that restricting immigration or leaving the EU would lead back to the stone age.

That's a tad exaggerated, your point about the stone-age. All I'm saying is, it'll lead to expenses that the people of Great-Britain could do without at the moment, if you hadn't noticed - we're just at the back-end of a recession, I don't think now's the best time to take spending-power from the people and restricting labour for the Corporate bodies that rely heavily upon foreign workers.

Also, I fail to see your point about demographic alteration. In Scotland, minorities only make up 4% of the population and 12.9% of the population in the UK as a whole, so even if you leave immigration unrestricted, it would take decades to see a significant change in the percentages. Even if there was a significant change, chances are - by the time the balance had change, a majority of the ethnic minorities would've have been assimilated into the culture of Great Britain and adapted to it's norms, as I've seen with Eastern Europeans, Koreans and Africans.

[Grave_n_idle]

We know why people voted for them. The BNP and UKIP are largely fighting over a particular demographic, which has enlarged during the sown economy, since the one thing the racist right and the racist left can agree on is the xenophobia.

The mainstream doesn't need to try to cover the ground xenophobic parties like UKIP and the BNP are fighting over, because allowing racism to determine our (inter)national politics would be a move in the wrong direction. Instead, the main parties need to just weather this storm till the economy recovers, and single-issue racism stops being a significant issue again (as it will), and people start voting for actual political issues that matter.

Yeah racism, xenophobia. Change the record, it's cracked...

Are you suggesting that people should stop decrying the racism and xenophobia of UKIP just because it's been said before?

No, this isn't a magazine, we're not trying to sell copy, so we don't have to find a new issue every week - we don't have to move on to Nigel's shocking hair (or whatever), because if UKIP and the BNP are fighting over xenophobic votes, that's the one issue that MATTERS.

If UKIP want people to 'change the record', they need to stop portraying themselves in the same obnoxious way. Other people aren't somehow obligated to stop talking about it just because it's been going on for a while.

[Densaner]

Yes putting a massive demographic alteration to people democratically would be a terrible idea, wouldn't it? The answer to the previous post was made on the basis of playing devil's advocate. I don't necessarily accept the idea that restricting immigration or leaving the EU would lead back to the stone age.

That's a tad exaggerated, your point about the stone-age. All I'm saying is, it'll lead to expenses that the people of Great-Britain could do without at the moment, if you hadn't noticed - we're just at the back-end of a recession, I don't think now's the best time to take spending-power from the people and restricting labour for the Corporate bodies that rely heavily upon foreign workers.

Also, I fail to see your point about demographic alteration. In Scotland, minorities only make up 4% of the population and 12.9% of the population in the UK as a whole, so even if you leave immigration unrestricted, it would take decades to see a significant change in the percentages. Even if there was a significant change, chances are - by the time the balance had change, a majority of the ethnic minorities would've have been assimilated into the culture of Great Britain and adapted to it's norms, as I've seen with Eastern Europeans, Koreans and Africans.

12.9%. What was it before WWII? Negligible. According to demographers native Brits will be in a minority by the middle of this century. I would call that a massive demographic alteration.

[The Vekta-Helghast Empire]

That's a tad exaggerated, your point about the stone-age. All I'm saying is, it'll lead to expenses that the people of Great-Britain could do without at the moment, if you hadn't noticed - we're just at the back-end of a recession, I don't think now's the best time to take spending-power from the people and restricting labour for the Corporate bodies that rely heavily upon foreign workers.

Also, I fail to see your point about demographic alteration. In Scotland, minorities only make up 4% of the population and 12.9% of the population in the UK as a whole, so even if you leave immigration unrestricted, it would take decades to see a significant change in the percentages. Even if there was a significant change, chances are - by the time the balance had change, a majority of the ethnic minorities would've have been assimilated into the culture of Great Britain and adapted to it's norms, as I've seen with Eastern Europeans, Koreans and Africans.

12.9%. What was it before WWII? Negligible. According to demographers native Brits will be in a minority by the middle of this century. I would call that a massive demographic alteration.

12.9% was in 2011.. With minority religions, eg - Islam, Judaism, etc. Making up only 8.38%. Also, your comment is false - Minorities are said only to make 1/3 of the population by 2050. Which is far from a majority.

[Grave_n_idle]

That's a tad exaggerated, your point about the stone-age. All I'm saying is, it'll lead to expenses that the people of Great-Britain could do without at the moment, if you hadn't noticed - we're just at the back-end of a recession, I don't think now's the best time to take spending-power from the people and restricting labour for the Corporate bodies that rely heavily upon foreign workers.

Also, I fail to see your point about demographic alteration. In Scotland, minorities only make up 4% of the population and 12.9% of the population in the UK as a whole, so even if you leave immigration unrestricted, it would take decades to see a significant change in the percentages. Even if there was a significant change, chances are - by the time the balance had change, a majority of the ethnic minorities would've have been assimilated into the culture of Great Britain and adapted to it's norms, as I've seen with Eastern Europeans, Koreans and Africans.

According to demographers native Brits will be in a minority by the middle of this century. I would call that a massive demographic alteration.

I'd be interested to see where those numbers come from, and what they actually mean.

What's a 'native Brit' in that model?

[Densaner]

12.9%. What was it before WWII? Negligible. According to demographers native Brits will be in a minority by the middle of this century. I would call that a massive demographic alteration.

12.9% was in 2011.. With minority religions, eg - Islam, Judaism, etc. Making up only 8.38%. Also, your comment is false - Minorities are said only to make 1/3 of the population by 2050. Which is far from a majority.

Let me ask you this then? Are you happy and comfortable with Britain becoming a so-called majority-minority country?

[Geilinor]

That's a tad exaggerated, your point about the stone-age. All I'm saying is, it'll lead to expenses that the people of Great-Britain could do without at the moment, if you hadn't noticed - we're just at the back-end of a recession, I don't think now's the best time to take spending-power from the people and restricting labour for the Corporate bodies that rely heavily upon foreign workers.

Also, I fail to see your point about demographic alteration. In Scotland, minorities only make up 4% of the population and 12.9% of the population in the UK as a whole, so even if you leave immigration unrestricted, it would take decades to see a significant change in the percentages. Even if there was a significant change, chances are - by the time the balance had change, a majority of the ethnic minorities would've have been assimilated into the culture of Great Britain and adapted to it's norms, as I've seen with Eastern Europeans, Koreans and Africans.

12.9%. What was it before WWII? Negligible. According to demographers native Brits will be in a minority by the middle of this century. I would call that a massive demographic alteration.

Long-term predictions should not be trusted too highly. The birth rate of all groups will likely drop in the future.

[The Scientific States]

12.9% was in 2011.. With minority religions, eg - Islam, Judaism, etc. Making up only 8.38%. Also, your comment is false - Minorities are said only to make 1/3 of the population by 2050. Which is far from a majority.

Let me ask you this then? Are you happy and comfortable with Britain becoming a so-called majority-minority country?

What is that supposed to mean? Does that mean the majority of people would be what are considered minorities now?

If so, it's irrational to be in such staunch opposition of that. I don't care who lives in Britain, or in my country, the US. I just care that the people who live in my country are good, kind people, and if you don't want minorities in your country, you're sort of implying that the British are superior. It's xenophobia, simply put.

[The Vekta-Helghast Empire]

12.9% was in 2011.. With minority religions, eg - Islam, Judaism, etc. Making up only 8.38%. Also, your comment is false - Minorities are said only to make 1/3 of the population by 2050. Which is far from a majority.

Let me ask you this then? Are you happy and comfortable with Britain becoming a so-called majority-minority country?

I'm fine with it, I quite enjoy the company of my Eastern European compatriots. Hell, they tend to be far more hard-working and law-abiding than my, 'native' friends. If anything, they're a positive influence.

[Nazi Flower Power]

UKIP should have paid the band. Other than that, I really don't see how they're in the wrong. I probably would not vote for them if I lived in the UK, but I don't see what was wrong with this specific event other than the fact it got interrupted by protests (which is not UKIP's fault).

[Densaner]

According to demographers native Brits will be in a minority by the middle of this century. I would call that a massive demographic alteration.

I'd be interested to see where those numbers come from, and what they actually mean.

What's a 'native Brit' in that model?

Source

A native Brit is someone who can trace their heritage in whole or in part to people born in Scotland, England, Wales or Northern Ireland.

[Geilinor]

Let me ask you this then? Are you happy and comfortable with Britain becoming a so-called majority-minority country?

What is that supposed to mean? Does that mean the majority of people would be what are considered minorities now?

If so, it's irrational to be in such staunch opposition of that. I don't care who lives in Britain, or in my country, the US. I just care that the people who live in my country are good, kind people, and if you don't want minorities in your country, you're sort of implying that the British are superior. It's xenophobia, simply put.

Several parts of the United States are majority-minority and they haven't imploded yet. There are complications, such as a higher poverty rate in those places, but it is nothing that can't be overcome.

[The Vekta-Helghast Empire]

I'd be interested to see where those numbers come from, and what they actually mean.

What's a 'native Brit' in that model?

Source

A native Brit is someone who can trace their heritage in whole or in part to people born in Scotland, England, Wales or Northern Ireland.

Source.
Source.
Source.
This one says they'll only make up a fifth!

Also, by that definition - every second generation immigrant is technically a native-Brit and so it's a bit late to stop immigration if your paranoia is even slightly meaningful as chances are we'll end up mixed-race anyway.