I hate Tony Blair.

Yes you said British people who colonised other places kept being British and didn't change to be apart of the place they moved it, rather to forced their will upon the local population. You don't think you need to become British and you think you should keep your immigrant legacy and force it upon the population through the Green party. You are a colonialist.

I have said what I feel that I don't care about someones skin colour, I care about their legacy and culture. It just so happens many non-white people don't have British legacy or culture. Neither do many eastern Europeans. You are the second person to call me a closet racist, I just don't understand it. I say nothing racist, but because I keep to protect my legacy and culture I must be hiding my racism?

It don't care about people taking money they shouldn't from the government. I care about people becoming dependent upon the government programs. I care about the government having to much power. The majority beholden to the government. Sure majority want work, however because they get benefits and as soon as they start working they get taxed, it simply does make sense for them to work full time. So they dependent upon the government, which increases the governments power, which is what the government wants. Maybe if the government would stop taxing everybody so highly and would inflating the property market people could afford rent and mortgages.

Yes removal of minimum wage, removal of holiday pay, employer PAYE. Having to to pay a worker for getting sacked and so on. What happens is a better economy and people with greater opportunities to get a job. The great recession happened because of the US government safeguarding loans to poor people, allowing banks to give out loans to people who could never pay them back. Over time these loans buildup and were not long viable so they had to be cut from the balance sheets of banks. So the government recapitalised the banks and house mark fell, as did the stock market, so many people lost money. However the recession is never the issue the governments reaction to it is. If the government just left things alone the rubbish in the economy would be done away with and replaced. However what the government intervention does is prolong the rubbish company by bailing it out. So in fact it regulation and government intervention which caused the great recession. I want recession every 10-15 years, recession are needed in a good economy. If they are able to run their course, the economy emerges much stronger. Britain already is between Russia and US, because of policing reforms and increasing power of the government.

The difference is the British are already here, they have legacy and a culture. The immigrants don't. Working for their own interests does bolster the economy. However the pure libertarian view of immigration as an economic issue doesn't take into account legacy and culture. How the country being prospering with all this immigration and emigration then? Are really so oikophobic that you think British people won't do curtain jobs? Or are they just under cut by immigration and the government who makes it impossible for them to compete? British people help Britain, immigrants must become British.

So have Conservative and Labour people, nobody really cares about the Lib Dems or Greens so I would know. The hall mark of racism is the policies which the party but forward. UKIP policies aren't racist.

As I said the British Empire was internal free trade and external protectionism. It was the British Empire.

Want to leave the EU, vote UKIP.

What about the 50,000 British people taken as slaves by the Ottoman Proxy of the Barbary States? What about the 1,000,000 Irish people who were enslaved by land owners in the colonies.

What you think the Arabs aren't racist? That they didn't destroy entire African cultures?

The slave trade pre dates the Arab occupation, were they forced to trade slaves prior to that? Was the internal trade of slaves forced upon them? Where the Africans forced to buy a portion the estimated 1 million European slaves taken by the Barbary pirates- some of which were sold in north Africa? The answere is that they were not forced, if you force someone to trade why would you pay them with guns and European finery? You wouldn't pay them at all- thy were greedy and guilty in part, this is supply and demand. you have said one thing that is correct in your argument which is that the kind of African slavery that was practiced was different in some places, however this changed following the Arab invasion and chattle slavery spread. Chattle slavery had been common in north Africa from the roman times and spread to other areas, this is a form of slavery that views people as property - the adoption of this form of slaver by Africans was a key factor that allowed them to trade slaves as they were seen as property just like any goods- may traders sold both to the Europeans. Regardless of what you believed you must conceed that greed played a huge part in the motivation of the African slaver, for what else would make him chain up his countrymen like an animal and march them to the coast to be sold? The Europeans stayed at the coast so the slaver went of his own volition for no other reason than greed.

Greed? more like self protection.

Like i said the west threatened tribes and coerced them to participate in slave trade with them. Whom provided the africans with the chains? african slavery was akin to greek/jewish slavery in that there was no destruction of self. the slave was not made to hate his own race. Like i said the Africans did not have the foresight of the effects of slavery, which still affect blacks to this day. had they known they would most likely not have participated

You force people to trade so you dont look like a "bad guy". in reality its not equal bargaining power. either trade, co-operate or be taken as slaves yourself.

ill concede that some african tribes sold others to europeans but not the vast majority

The arab control of north africa is what further led to african self hatred. with islam being forciby put on the north africans there was a reason to hate their own brethren who did not follow the religion. this of course made it easier for some traders to sell blacks into slavery. Some

Africans did not appreciate the long term damage chattle slavery. the western ideas of property surely did not mirror all the ideas of property in africa, seeing as africa was an extremely diverse place at the time

Mate what you want is america; all the benefits of immigrants without the multiculturalism; a police state, lower taxes and subsequently privatization of everything through a free market economy

Go to america then. you'd fit in perfectly

Both were able to keep their identities and both weren't vilified to the extent as blacks. Sure there was once a time when blacks and irish were off a similar second citizen level but the irish have now generally risen to equal status with the rest of western society. the irish are generally seen as equal and benefit from white privilege. blacks are still seen as negative people and the stereotypes/instituions of slavery and post slavery still affect them

And what about the European slaves that Africans bought? It is perfectly logical to assert that greed influenced the decision of the African slavers to trade their fellow countrymen. It is after all greed that causes Africans to enslave one another to this day in the pursuit of wealth. The modern slavery in Africa encapsulates the destruction of identity, villages are raided, people are taken away from there homes and forced to work, many are killed. There are clear parallels between the actions of African slavers who sold to merchants and modern African slavers. Is modern African slavery out of self protection?

You obviously know nothing about American if you think it is some kinds of classical liberal, no government dream world.

The US has multiculturalism also. I actually want less people to leave people, so we don't have the churn affect I worry about most. I support open borders immigration, but only if the economy incentives for people to move here are removed.

We already live in a police state, we already have privatisation and free market. I want to removed the government so the police are held to account and used in correct way to prevent crime. Where we have free trade without the government deciding who gets what through bribes, as happens now.

I wouldn't fit in to the US, which state would I go to? I am a Monarchist, I support the Aristocracy and Church of England. I think the British legal system was superior to the US legal system.

Explain?

Britain benefited from the bondage of other human beings. Africa as a continent did not benefit from that bondage. Britian destroyed african identity so much that i dont even know what "tribe" im from, assuming im from a tribe

The huge scale in difference is what makes it incomparable. we're talking about reparations that are innumerable in regards to brtiain's actions

so you want to remove the government the only check on police powers? you're insane

Barbary slavery was mostly dominated by arabic people. Sub sahara africa did not play a major role in this. Yes it was technically in africa but its much more honest to say that the slavery here was between people of arabic descent and whites rather than blacks and whites

It is not greed that forces people to enslave. it is poverty and desperation, mostly caused by europe

There are no parallels. african slave traders of old sold because they were forced. "sell or be sold". The traders of today do it because the opportunities to do other things are not available due to corruption in government and other factors namely the west intervention.

LISTEN BLACK PEOPLE DID NOT PLAY A MAJOR VOLUNTARY PART IN SLAVERY. THEY WERE FORCED TO DO IT, DURING THE FEW OCCASIONS WHEN THEY DID

PUTTING SOMETHING IN CAPITALS DOESN'T MAKE IT RIGHT.


What I'm sure you don't know is that following the passing of the Anti slavery bill in the UK we took action against those trading slaves, we even had to depose some African rulers who REFUSED to stop selling slaves.

So nice of you to help after you massively and illegitimately profited. Bravo lol

I didn't do anything, I'm not a slave merchant and as far as I'm aware have no ancestors who bought and traded slaves It is a huge disgrace, a disgrace to ALL involved. But our whole argument came over the point that you made that white people have committed much worse atrocities than those committed by people of other races. Slavery was only one example where the atrocities were not just by white people. We didn't even talk about the deaths in china under mao, something like 60 million people died. Or In Africa we could of talked about the Rwandan genocide, the red terror in Ethiopia or the Nigerian civil war. In Europe we could of talked about the Holocaust. My basic belief is that there are evil people everywhere in every society that do hideous things. Every country has committed wrong but we cant judge a country by its past or the actions of a few individuals. The key thing is to never forget, to forget is inviting history to repeat its self.

Unsure about education. I think his greatest strengths was certainly on Europe and foreign policy. Probably best leader we had on an international level.

Always funny seeing him wrecking the eurosceptics!: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-ZeCNXTjL4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DT--RnOYORI

Twice I see you defending the EU now. Gordon Brown's single most important role in politics was to stop the UK joining the euro. Tony Blair was determined to see that happen and even offered to allow Brown the prime ministerial position if he would accept to let Britain join. Crisis after crisis has proven that Blair was wrong on that matter and I am certainly thankful for Brown's intervention.

Evidently, Blairs policy in Iraq was disastrous and his 'yes man' persona to anyone who held power in the White House saw the needless death of thousands of British serviceman, let alone all the thousands of innocent Iraqi's: something Iraq shall never forget. What we learnt from that war is that we can penetrate pretty much any defence in the world but we cannot rebuild a country. We invaded and just expected a peaceful democratic state to emerge from the rubble.
Posted from TSR Mobile