Racism in Britain and Europe is getting scary

Scroll to see replies

Y'know, some people say that if you don't believe in freedom of speech for everybody then you don't really believe in it at all. I'm inclined to agree with them. Social justice is justice enough for people who are stupid enough to believe in hateful politics and then shout about it online.

Would you believe in the right to speech even if it means the outcome is more harmful than people not having the freedom of speech?

Reply 61

alapa

Original post by MagicNMedicine

Here we go again the right wingers predicting rivers of blood, they have been doing since Enoch Powell's time. The reality is they are a tiny minority, their views are not shared by the vast mainstream, and so
they will still be in the same place in 20 years time, complaining on the internet about cultural Marxism and multiculturalism and how bad their world is lol.

Their world is bad mate!!!! id hate to be stuck in the mind of these people. Constantly afriad of enemies they create in their heads. I pity them!!!

Reply 62

username129099

Original post by lulubel

if you read the material from genocidewatch.org they say very clearly that the farm murders are orchestrated acts of terror designed to get white people off of the farms.

south africa was a police state under apartheid. even in so called true democracies like britain the powers that be payed no notice to the general population -- maybe you have personal responsibility for the iraq war? maybe in a few years the iraq people will come and torture you in your home and you can tell them how much you deserved it.

Yes because the land is stolen land. Why can't you understand that point. The source you keep referencing says why they are being forced off the land. I even quoted the part in a post.

Its nothing like it. I am not directly benefitting from the Iraq war. I don't own Iraqi land or sell Iraqi oil. If I did, then yes, they could quite rightly be angry.

Reply 63

bishbash72

Original post by doggyfizzel

I didn't point to an individual case, I was stating the problems they have in their county are of their own making.

I might go shake down the next Japanese person I see, since my great uncle was killed in WW2. After the brutality of the war, they obviously have it coming.

Sins of the fathers...

Reply 64

MagicNMedicine

Original post by alapa

Their world is bad mate!!!! id hate to be stuck in the mind of these people. Constantly afriad of enemies they create in their heads. I pity them!!!

I know, every time they walk down the street and see non white faces it must eat away at them. They can't get the tube or anything without getting stressed.

Remember when the Olympics opening ceremony was on, everyone else was just enjoying the entertainment of the ceremony and they were all getting wound up by the fact there were black guys playing cricket etc.

Reply 65

democracyforum

Original post by doggyfizzel

If you think Africa was bad under white rule, it will be much much worse under the rule of the Chinese

Reply 66

username129099

Original post by Callum828

I might go shake down the next Japanese person I see, since my great uncle was killed in WW2. After the brutality of the war, they obviously have it coming.

Sins of the fathers...

Did you not read the last part. Its nothing to do with sins of the fathers. Its the fact the things stolen, the things gained, they are still profiting from. They still own the land, the business. They aren't innocent in this whole situation, they didn't commit the theft, but they still own the stolen property. Where exactly did the land from these farms come from?

Reply 67

Muffled Snuffles

Original post by lulubel

no true. maybe you are reading them wrong. the stats are completely consistent with other stats from a few years ago. from wiki:

''The British Crime Survey reveals that in 2004, 87,000 people from black or minority ethnic communities said they had been a victim of a racially motivated crime. They had suffered 49,000 violent attacks, with 4,000 being wounded. At the same time 92,000 white people said they had also fallen victim of a racially motivated crime. The number of violent attacks against whites reached 77,000, while the number of white people who reported being wounded was five times the number of black and minority ethnic victims at 20,000.''

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_Kingdom

so white people suffer over 50% of the all racist crime.

when it comes to racist violence, white people are victims roughly 60% of the time.

when it comes racist violence with injury or worse, white people are victims 80% of the time.

what this means is that 10%-15% of the population is committing up to 80% of the racist crime.

as white people are the majority you would expect them to commit the overwhelming majority of racist crime.

This is just embarrassing for you now. You posted a source, you misinterpreted that source and now you're attempting to claw back some shred of credibility.

Here you go, from your source, page 8:

Tables show the unweighted base which represents the number of people/households interviewed in the specified group.

Didn't you say that was the number of people that had been victims? Er...

As for your Wikipedia source, I checked the reference for the 'British Crime Survey' which highlighted all these awful statistics. The source was not the survey but a White Racism wordpress blog: http://card.wordpress.com/2006/11/12/the-hidden-white-victims-of-racism/

The actual figures for Racially Motivated Crimes are on Page 15 of the British Crime Survey - http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218135832/rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs06/rdsolr2506.pdf - which mirror the statistics cited whilst revealing the misleading and skewed nature in the way that these have been interpreted by your darling Wordpress blog.

If you turn to Page 16:

In terms of risk of becoming a victim of a racially motivated crime, i.e. the percentage of adults or households that had been victims of any BCS racially motivated crime, White people, or households with a White HRP, had a lower risk of becoming victims of racially motivated crimes than people in any of the BME groups.

In terms of total BCS crimes, less than one per cent of the White population had been victims of racially motivated crimes. The risk of racially motivated crimes was two per cent for people from all BME groups.

In summary, for personal offences (i.e. those committed against individuals) the risk of racially motivated (all BCS) personal crimes and violent crimes was again lower for White people (<1%) in comparison with people from Mixed (1%) Asian (1%), Black (1%) and Chinese and Other (1%) ethnic groups.

But hey, carry on spreading lies in the guise of 'statistics'. At least bother to do some research, or read the statistics you're so keen on citing. You're acting as the perfect representation of the type of dullards that usually spout these sorts of views.

Reply 68

lulubel

Original post by doggyfizzel

Stolen from who? When those white settlers set up that country all those centuries ago South Africa was barely populated. Most of the black people who live there are from immigrant stock themselves. As these black immigrants overtook the white immigrants in numbers the white government set up apartheid in an attempt to protect their Culture.

But, that's beside the point. If a squatter overtakes a house, are you saying it is acceptable to torture them to death to force them to leave?

This is the issue. The government ( not directly proven but almost certainly the case given their land reform agenda and numerous threats to kill the boars ) is sanctioning an orchestrated campaign of terror against its own citizens.

Apartheid was wrong. But post apartheid is also wrong. You cannot justify the horrendous situation by the past.

Anyway, the story I gave you earlier about the 12 year old who was murdered did not live on alarm

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 69

username129099

Original post by democracyforum

If you think Africa was bad under white rule, it will be much much worse under the rule of the Chinese

Once again proving its all about race to you. Why does a country need to be ruled by a single ethnic group exactly?

I don't care ultimately, their future in their hands. I'm just of the opinion until they fix the problems caused by apartheid they will continue to live in a country with severe problems, racial discontent, and huge levels of inequality. That affects everyone in SA and is slowing their progress as a nation.

Reply 70

username129099

Original post by lulubel

I have little time for people who can't be bother to read. The Group Area's Act, that is one of the key points I have been making, which you seem incapable of digesting or addressing.

But, that's beside the point. If a squatter overtakes a house, are you saying it is acceptable to torture them to death to force them to leave?

First of all comparing the most privilege in society to squatters is a joke. A better analogy would be me stealing your house and then renting it out while you live in a slum. You have an desperate need to see what were effectively a group of privileged thieves as victims. I'm not saying they deserve to be victims, I'm simply saying there is a reason why they are targeted.

Apartheid was wrong. But post apartheid is also wrong. You cannot justify the horrendous situation by the past.

Anyway, the story I gave you earlier about the 12 year old who was murdered did not live on alarm

I'm not justifying. I'm not taking a side. As a nation they are responsible for their problems. One of the reasons post apartheid is wrong is because the mistakes from apartheid were not corrected.

You only brought that story up because the victim was white. No stories about the other countless killings or rapes that happen everyday and that go unpunished. Don't pretend you care about the victims suffering, you care about the colour of their skin and the colour of the perpetrators skin.

Reply 71

lulubel

Original post by Muffled Snuffles

This is just embarrassing for you now. You posted a source, you misinterpreted that source and now you're attempting to claw back some shred of credibility.

Here you go, from your source, page 8:

Didn't you say that was the number of people that had been victims? Er...

As for your Wikipedia source, I checked the reference for the 'British Crime Survey' which highlighted all these awful statistics. The source was not the survey but a White Racism wordpress blog: http://card.wordpress.com/2006/11/12/the-hidden-white-victims-of-racism/

The actual figures for Racially Motivated Crimes are on Page 15 of the British Crime Survey - http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218135832/rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs06/rdsolr2506.pdf - which mirror the statistics cited whilst revealing the misleading and skewed nature in the way that these have been interpreted by your darling Wordpress blog.

If you turn to Page 16:

But hey, carry on spreading lies in the guise of 'statistics'. At least bother to do some research, or read the statistics you're so keen on citing. You're acting as the perfect representation of the type of dullards that usually spout these sorts of views.

i posted a home office source that clearly stats victims numbers and you attempted to say otherwise.

i gave you the older version because the results are similar and so your attempts to ridicule the findings just fall flat.

the wikipedia data may have been picked up by dubious websites i do not know, but it was posted on the bbc here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6128466.stm

your argument seems to be that the stats are skewed because white people are less likely to become victims of racially motivated crime. well, this is a deliberate red herring on your part i am sure.

why, because britains demographics are roughly 85% white and 15% non white.

if white people are victims over 50% of the time ( low figure from 2004) then it means 15% of the population is committing over 50% of all racist crime.

this is the issue. not percentages.

if 2 aliens went on a crime spree in a city of a million people, and one of those 2 aliens ended up becoming the victim of a crime, you would say they were 1000X more likely ( or whatever) to become the victim of a crime -- but that does not negate their disproportionate crime rates.

Reply 72

Sparkle24

Original post by PopaPork

Being against mass immigration is not racism

Would Indians be racist if they objected to half of Pakistan moving to India?

It’s simple we are in a shrinking economy we cannot take in more people uncontrolled. I mean we have old people freezing to death in winter but we can home immigrants from Somalia in million pound houses

Sooner or later this is all going to get very ugly

Indians and Pakistani's are basically the same people.The only thing between them is a man made border.

Reply 73

Legal drugdealer

Original post by Sparkle24

Indians and Pakistani's are basically the same people.The only thing between them is a man made border.

The most ignorant and stupid thing ive heard for a long time. You have no idea of how much blood shed there was for the independence of the two nations. The two nations are also unique in many ways.

You cant pick and chose when you want immigrants. If there were no immigrants Britain would be a **** hole.

Reply 74

lulubel

Original post by doggyfizzel

I have little time for people who can't be bother to read. The Group Area's Act, that is one of the key points I have been making, which you seem incapable of digesting or addressing.

First of all comparing the most privilege in society to squatters is a joke. A better analogy would be me stealing your house and then renting it out while you live in a slum. You have an desperate need to see what were effectively a group of privileged thieves as victims. I'm not saying they deserve to be victims, I'm simply saying there is a reason why they are targeted.

I'm not justifying. I'm not taking a side. As a nation they are responsible for their problems. One of the reasons post apartheid is wrong is because the mistakes from apartheid were not corrected.

You only brought that story up because the victim was white. No stories about the other countless killings or rapes that happen everyday and that go unpunished. Don't pretend you care about the victims suffering, you care about the colour of their skin and the colour of the perpetrators skin.

first off, you may as well stop with the tacit accusations that i am racist. it is old. boring and i just tune out. so please just get off your high horse because you know nothing of my motivations. all i see is you defending hate crime, murder, oppression and a possible genocide.

so who really is the racist here?

the group act was enacted under apartheid. you keep on talking about stealing land as if the white settlers went into a fully functioning country and stole land when in reality they created the society. the land was not stolen -- maybe if you believe that blacks have land rights because they are black and africa is a black continent then it would make sense but that view would also make you a racist.

apartheid was wrong but all it was, was a desperate attempt by a police state to keep control of resources.

also, one of their justifications was that if there was no apartheid then the crime rates and violence would get out of control. they have been proven right about that.

those who oppose the apartheid regime but then use justifications to downplay the evils of the anc government i would call massive hypocrites at best.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 75

Sparkle24

Original post by Legal drugdealer

Nice.But got to say that's subjective.Actually I kind of do know how much bloodshed they was.Like as if you know me that you are saying "you don't know..."I do agree with you that they are unique but do you know how similar they are? They were both one country so they have the same past.They may have different interpretations of it but it still is the same.

In a way you can.You open your borders and you close your borders.But in reality I know that it is not a simple as that.

Reply 76

username129099

Original post by lulubel

first off, you may as well stop with the tacit accusations that i am racist. it is old. boring and i just tune out. so please just get off your high horse because you know nothing of my motivations. all i see is you defending hate crime, murder, oppression and a possible genocide.

so who really is the racist here?

the group act was enacted under apartheid. you keep on talking about stealing land as if the white settlers went into a fully functioning country and stole land when in reality they created the society. the land was not stolen -- maybe if you believe that blacks have land rights because they are black and africa is a black continent then it would make sense but that view would also make you a racist.

apartheid was wrong because it prevented blacks from participating in the country fully but no land was stolen. apartheid was a desperate attempt by a police state to keep control of resources.

also, one of their justifications was that if there was no apartheid then the crime rates and violence would get out of control. they have been proven right about that.

those who oppose the apartheid regime but then use justifications to downplay the evils of the anc government i would call massive hypocrites at best.

I haven't called you a racist once. I said you only brought that story up because the victims were white. You could have brought any story out, where the crime went unpunished or you could have just quoted the murder rate. I'm just saying for someone who was talking about everyone being human, why exactly did you pick that crime or even reference and individual crime which just so happened to be white? I've criticised your lack of neutrality. My points not about race its about inequality, it just so happens that inequality is racially divided. There are plenty of black SA who are to blame for the problems, as I said they are hardly angels in this. I've said SA deserved the mess they are in. That includes everyone. You are incapable of looking past black and white.

I never said they went into a perfect nation. I'm just saying the nations resources, hotspots and businesses were allocated based on race and that imbalance remains, and you are surprised there are racial tensions. People forcible had their assets removed, that is theft. After this one small group ended up with 85% of the land, that is not an accident or a coincidence.

Yes apartheid was wrong. You mention the group act then say land wasn't stolen. So taking something from someone and allocating it to someone else is not theft? Don't pretend apartheid was about saving SA, it was about race and the keeping control and power in the hands of the white minority.

You keep saying I am downplaying it. Point to where I have mentioned the ANC once. Can you do that? The thing I won't ignore is that ending apartheid but keeping the riches you gained during it doesn't make you blameless. You can't wash your hands of the problems created while you make money from land, property and business you gained from it.

Unless you can accept that these white farms were in the vast majority of cases acquired by ill means then we can't move forward. Because you can never see these people as anything other than blameless victims, who are targeted purely because they are white. If you can't accept that, don't bother replying to the post, because we are just going round in circles.

Reply 77

McMurdo

Original post by sissoko46

Wouldn't a better solution be to just stop housing immigrants then instead of attacking people. Its not like they are housing themselves by force are they?

Obviously that would be an ideal solution; however, it isn't happening, is it? So many people are getting fed up with it and choosing to act abrasively in the hope they will be heard.

Reply 78

Kiss

Original post by khala

Are you supporting the fact that the boy should have been able to make a nazi account?! thats sick...

Yes, yes I was. What is wrong with believing in something without acting upon it? What is wrong with be able to voice your beliefs/opinions? He wasn't harming anyone directly.

Original post by callum9999

This obsession with freedom of speech is getting ridiculously absurd now - some people even act so irrational over this topic they value the freedom to spread hate over the freedom to live your life in peace (or even live your life at all...).

I'd rather live in a world where I can encounter ********s now and then, ignore them but be safe with the knowledge that their rights aren't marginalised as much as mines aren't. FoS is not 'hate speech' - it is speech for everyone, even the people we disagree with. If the world was ran accordingly without Free speech then we'd live in a totalitarian one, though Britain is getting closer to that.

That boy knew EXACTLY what he was doing, he had exactly what was coming to him and it isn't remotely an example of the police just randomly charging people for having "opinions" they don't agree with.

Maybe because he wanted to voice his opinion - it is an example of people being arrested for merely stating or believing in something the state disagrees with. It's tyrannical.

Original post by Chad_Bronson

Except he wasn't trying to state an opinion. By opening a Nazi Twitter account it is implied he will try and invite unnecessary controversy with Germany's sordid history.