The Student Room Group

Is it acceptable for our Prime Minister to describe the Calais migrants as a "swarm"

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Good bloke
I think you need to check your dictionary; those migrants are swarming all over the tunnel entrance.


I apologise I may have worded that wrongly, I checked the defintion of swarm and the first thing that came up was insects (animals) moving in a large group. Then it says 'more definitions' and it comes up with other meanings but its main use is to describe animals.

I don't know if that was supposed to be an example of using that word but it doesn't make sense to me. You don't need to use 'all' you could just say 'migrants were entering the tunnel entrance in large numbers' or simply just say 'migrants were entering the tunnel'. There was no need to use the word swarm.

I am guessing you were trying to offend me in your first irrelevant comment but no thanks I do not need to check my dictionary. :smile:
Original post by MrMackyTv
Still don't understand because animals, when they migrate they travel in a swarm


You are being very silly. I think the first three words of that are the important ones. Animals are generally said to make migration journeys in herds, not swarms; even lemmings are not said to swarm. Insects, generally, swarm.

But the use of swarm to describe crowds of people, in a non-pejorative way, goes all the way back to Shakespeare, who has the Earl of Warwick tell Henry VI the good recruiting news:

Trust me, my lord, all hitherto goes well;
The common people by numbers swarm to us.
Original post by MrMackyTv
I apologise I may have worded that wrongly, I checked the defintion of swarm and the first thing that came up was insects (animals) moving in a large group. Then it says 'more definitions' and it comes up with other meanings but its main use is to describe animals.

I don't know if that was supposed to be an example of using that word but it doesn't make sense to me. You don't need to use 'all' you could just say 'migrants were entering the tunnel entrance in large numbers' or simply just say 'migrants were entering the tunnel'. There was no need to use the word swarm.


Well, which is quicker and more elegant to say in a speech?

migrants are swarming

or

migrants were entering the tunnel entrance in large numbers

and which can be shortened elegantly to one word without losing all the information that is necessary? I think you'll find it is "swarming"., not "entering".

Just because a definition comes first in a dictionary does not mean that is the most usage. Soldiers have been swarming around defence points for centuries and tourists have been swarming around sites for a long time too.

Now we have migrants swarming around tunnel entrances, and the word is perfectly apposite as it conjures up large numbers, en masse, difficult to control or stop, at a single point, operating in unison for their own benefit.
Original post by SeaPony
Why is immigration a different issue since you are describing peoples actions as you would in any other situation?

Oh I get it the people you are describing are not white and therefore we must moderate our language to 'not offend'. Give me a break.


I am talking about Calais not immigration in general. 'Swarm' is an inappropiate word to use when talking about the crisis because that word can be interpreted in a variety of ways (I have a feeling I am being repetitive with my posts to you).

How do you know there are not white people involved? Why are you now introducing race into this topic, it is not relevant. I said whoever writes Cameron's stuff should choose words nore carefully to not cause confusion and contraversy.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by MrMackyTv

I am guessing you were trying to offend me in your first irrelevant comment but no thanks I do not need to check my dictionary. :smile:


You do altogether too much guessing about how people are using words, it seems to me, and you did check your dictionary.
Reply 45
Original post by MrMackyTv
I am talking about Calais not immigration in general. 'Swarm' is an inapprooiate word to use when talking about the crisis because that word can be interpreted in a variety of ways (I have a feeling I am being repetitive with my posts to you).

How do you know there are not white people involved? Why are you know introducing race into this topic, it is not relevant. I said whoever writes Cameron's stuff should choose words nore carefully to not cause confusion and contraversy.

He said a swarm of people not a swarm of migrants, did you even listen to what he actually said instead of reading Guardian articles?
Original post by TomatoLounge
Is it acceptable to describe the Calais migrants as a "swarm" as David Cameron did yesterday? It does have a bit of a Nazi vibe but the rest of his comments weren't quite as dehumanising...

BBC article on this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33716501


Yes! He should have said an infestation too.

Yes some are coming to escape war etc etc, but the next safest country to them should be heaven [currently France], but no they HAVE to come to the UK! Why? for free money, our free benefit system, free housing, free NHS!

The vermin should not be allowed in, they are smiling as it's a game for them. Said in the Gurkhas as suggested and shoot them all dead. What use are they? as much use as they were in their own countries. They are breaking the law, using weapons on lorry drivers? these animalistic behaviour is what they'll bring here to Great Britain! Let Spain, Italy have them, they have less population than us!

ILLEGALS WE ARE FULL, WE WILL NOT TAKE YOU IN, **** OFF, PARASITES!
Original post by SMEGGGY

Yes some are coming to escape war etc etc, but the next safest country to them should be heaven [currently France], but no they HAVE to come to the UK! Why? for free money, our free benefit system, free housing, free NHS!


Illegal immigrants don't have access to these things...
Original post by TomatoLounge
Illegal immigrants don't have access to these things...


Which begs the question - do they know this?
Original post by Roving Fish
Which begs the question - do they know this?


Probably. From what I saw on TV last night most of them seem to want to come to Britain because they already speak the language/have family here. Also Britain is top notch,
A charged term that I wouldn't have used, but semantically apt.

However, what I believe to be absurd is the self-indulgent, narcissistic and in some cases dishonest tone of the press in relation to the matter. Eye-watering arrogance making me almost ashamed to come from the same country.

The ridiculousness of the coverage can be summed up when finding out how many refugees Britain has taken in compared to other European countries, as well as the fact that this has been going on in Calais and Coquelles for years.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by TomatoLounge
Illegal immigrants don't have access to these things...


They will once they claim for asylum, that's inevitable. They pay £3000 pounds to get to France, they can use that money to create a life in countries they flee from just so they can live here for free. We will not allow it. Thankfully PM is seeing this and sending dogs and going to build another fence. I'd send in a sniper.

They should be staying in France. The UK does not want them.
Original post by TomatoLounge
Probably. From what I saw on TV last night most of them seem to want to come to Britain because they already speak the language/have family here. Also Britain is top notch,


I can list over a 100 countries that speak English, why not go there. If they have family why not go about it the LEGAL way.
I think it's acceptable, so many people are butthurt over it. We don't want them here, end of- most have very little to contribute to our society. If you cant be here legally, don't be here at all. :mad:
Original post by rockrunride

The ridiculousness of the coverage can be summed up when finding out how many refugees Britain has taken in compared to other European countries, as well as the fact that this has been going on in Calais and Coquelles for years.


Surely, what the French allow to happen on French territory is no business of the UK government until it affects Britain (which it now does)?

These are not, largely, refugees. They are, if you look, young men who are most likely fleeing justice or seeking to move for economic reasons with the intention of bringing their families in after them. Even if they were genuine asylum seekers (unlikely in the extreme), asylum seekers must seek asylum in the first country of safety which is obviously, for these people, not Britain (as they are currently in a perfectly safe country).
Original post by Good bloke
You do altogether too much guessing about how people are using words, it seems to me, and you did check your dictionary.


Not really. Anyways totally irrelevant to the topic so I would like to move on, thank you.
Original post by SeaPony
He said a swarm of people not a swarm of migrants, did you even listen to what he actually said instead of reading Guardian articles?


I did listen, so what suggests that I didn't? 'Swarm of people' he is clearly talking about the migrants who else? Londoners going to work in rush hour? Kids in the hallway of a school he visited? What is your point? It is still inappropiate to use that word on this topic, are you finding that hard to comprehend? I can repeat it again for you if you want.
(edited 8 years ago)
Reply 57
they *are* like a swarm - they're acting like an annoying bunch of parasitic animals/insects - why shouldn't he call them what they're trying to act like? they *know* their activity is illegal - what do they think they're doing in the eyes of the government? they're nothing but a dangerous nuisance

in order for something like *this* to turn into something politically-incorrect, that takes a left wing liberal. they're using basic language uses that wouldn't be controversial otherwise, and turning them into something partisan/party political and it's pathetic - even if ed miliband said this I wouldn't criticise his language.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by MrMackyTv
It is still inappropiate to use that word on this topic.


It still isn't.
oh for god sake this is a pretty common phrase nowadays. It's just like describing a huge crowd as a mob or a rabble. If a large group of people descend on one small area, it does seem like a swarm!

Quick Reply

Latest