A black or Asian prime minister

Original post by mightybis0n

Of course he was. America is much worse off under Obama, racial relations are in tatters and the national debt has risen rapidly.

And those points weren't connected. UK parties and MPs are the same in the way that they largely hold all the same idea and principles, and its incredibly minor things (tax credits, where cuts will fall) that divide them.

Debating retarded rappers is less fun that I'd hoped

1) Nope, and he was much better than his rivals. Name another candidate that would have done better.

2) Completely irrelevant statement, got nothing to do with the issue at hand

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 42

Someone32

OP

Original post by mightybis0n

If all people are the same why would anyone strive to do anything? Are you an idiot? equality is to allow people to have the same opportunities as in white people can become pm so why shouldn't black or Asians.

Where are the quotes in sewage jobs, or refuse collectors? what?

Name one thing I've said that's 'racist'.

you are defending the belief that black people shouldn't be PM because of there skin colour.

Reply 43

Original post by StrawbAri

What a backwards and ridiculous comment.
The west is a place where everyone has equal opportunity. People are given roles and appointments or are brought into power solely by virtue of their capability to do the job to the expected degree of competence. It is not a society where nepotism and racial politics are the order of the day.
It is not possible for anyone to be elected into power or given an important position by virtue of their race. If that was the case the west wouldn't be at the stage it is at now.

Please rid yourself of such a primitive notion. It is an insult to the society you live in.

>brought into power solely by virtue of their capability

I'm afraid you're wrong there. If that was the case, why isn't every one of our prime ministers a great and capable man? All of the past four have been worse than useless. There could have been much better candidates but as usual, nepotism, money and connections won them their positions.

Obama was elected because he was black. A newcomer with hardly any experience gets elected over Mitt Romney? Please. It was the 'progressive' thing to do, and look how it's turned out for them.

Reply 44

Original post by Someone32

you are defending the belief that black people shouldn't be PM because of there skin colour.

Quote me. I never said anything of the sort.

Reply 45

Someone32

OP

Original post by mightybis0n

People don't like change. Not necessarily a bad thing either.

so people not voting for black people isn't a bad thing

Reply 46

Gucci Mane.

1

Original post by StrawbAri

What a backwards and ridiculous comment.
The west is a place where everyone has equal opportunity. People are given roles and appointments or are brought into power solely by virtue of their capability to do the job to the expected degree of competence. It is not a society where nepotism and racial politics are the order of the day.
It is not possible for anyone to be elected into power or given an important position by virtue of their race. If that was the case the west wouldn't be at the stage it is at now.

Please rid yourself of such a primitive notion. It is an insult to the society you live in.

You make it sound like the West is some utopia where racism doesnt exist.

Reply 47

Original post by Someone32

so people not voting for black people isn't a bad thing

Did I say that?

Change isn't always good (something most people forget).

Reply 48

StrawbAri

17

Original post by mightybis0n

>brought into power solely by virtue of their capability

I'm afraid you're wrong there. If that was the case, why isn't every one of our prime ministers a great and capable man? All of the past four have been worse than useless. There could have been much better candidates but as usual, nepotism, money and connections won them their positions.

Obama was elected because he was black. A newcomer with hardly any experience gets elected over Mitt Romney? Please. It was the 'progressive' thing to do, and look how it's turned out for them.

I will never understand why white people complain so much about their leaders. If you want to see leaders that are worse than useless take a look at the developing world. It might not be absolutely perfect but I'd take David Cameron over Robert Mugabe any day.

That's not possible. Obama was elected twice. America isn't exactly the most PC anti racist country around. The majority are white. What would they gain from electing a mixed race man as president twice? I spoke to a lot of Americans and lurked on pretty much all American forums/blogs during the 2012 election and general consensus was he was the lesser of two evils.
Maybe he wasn't a perfect president but America is the most powerful country in the world there's too much at stake to just elect someone based on something as frivolous as race. It's the same reason why Hilary doesn't have the amount of support people thought she would. People don't like her policies and the fact that she's a woman won't make them risk tanking their country.

Reply 49

Judas69

WHy is it a good thing that a white community is represented by a black or asain man

Reply 50

Roofas

We don't need a Black or Asian Prime Minister.

If it is to be argued that 90% of the population should elect a leader who is an 'ethnic minority' and be open to them representing them...Why can't the other fractured 10% put up with a white leader?

If you break down that 10% you have Blacks, Indians, Chinese, even people from Mexico. No one 'ethnic minority' will represent any of them anyway. It's entirely ridiculous (and offensively patronising) to elect some token Black or Asian Prime Minister to represent all non 'White' people.

I think it's disgusting we continue to act as though there is no diversity within the 'White' label when we have Caucasian people in this country descendent from Anglo-Saxons, Celts, Germans, Italians, Frenchmen, Irishmen, Norwegians and plenty more. Britain is already mutli-cultural and diverse with its current population and pool of White politicians.

Reply 51

StrawbAri

17

Original post by Gucci Mane.

You make it sound like the West is some utopia where racism doesnt exist.

Racism exists but not to that level. We've progressed past the days when non whites weren't allowed to hold public office. Every one has equal opportunity it's just that there isn't equal outcome.

Reply 52

999tigger

19

I will be surprised if we get one in the next 50 years.

Reply 53

RayApparently

Original post by mightybis0n

Nothing wrong with wanting someone of your own race as Prime Minister.

You'd pick a head of government based on whether or not they were the same race as you? That's rather primitive.

Reply 54

DIN-NARYU-FARORE

17

we had 4 million ukip voters last election; so youre potentially looking at a couple million racists right there. nah i would say maybe 200 years until a black prime minister happens and maybe 100 for asian

Reply 55

Original post by RayApparently

You'd pick a head of government based on whether or not they were the same race as you? That's rather primitive.

No, but I imagine it's how most of the population think. Unfortunately I think we'll get the same banal, unoriginal grey suits in office. If anyone of ANY race showed originality, charisma and talent I wouldn't have a problem voting for them.

Reply 56

RayApparently

Original post by Roofas

We don't need a Black or Asian Prime Minister.

If it is to be argued that 90% of the population should elect a leader who is an 'ethnic minority' and be open to them representing them...Why can't the other fractured 10% put up with a white leader?

If you break down that 10% you have Blacks, Indians, Chinese, even people from Mexico. No one 'ethnic minority' will represent any of them anyway. It's entirely ridiculous (and offensively patronising) to elect some token Black or Asian Prime Minister to represent all non 'White' people.

I think it's disgusting we continue to act as though there is no diversity within the 'White' label when we have Caucasian people in this country descendent from Anglo-Saxons, Celts, Germans, Italians, Frenchmen, Irishmen, Norwegians and plenty more. Britain is already mutli-cultural and diverse with its current population and pool of White politicians.

Race should be completely discounted from discussion on who should hold public office to be honest. We are indeed a country of many diverse backgrounds and I expect a head of government to work in the interests of Britons regardless of their own race of the different backgrounds of the people they represent.

Reply 57

GaelicBolshevik

18

Original post by Someone32

How far do you think Britain is from having a black or Asian prime minister? why do you think we are behind America in terms of ethnic minorities in government?

Unlikely in the near future - we've yet to have a non-Protestant/Catholic PM, I believe that's still against the law.

Reply 58

RayApparently

Original post by mightybis0n

No, but I imagine it's how most of the population think. Unfortunately I think we'll get the same banal, unoriginal grey suits in office. If anyone of ANY race showed originality, charisma and talent I wouldn't have a problem voting for them.

That's a reasonable position.

Hopefully it isn't what most people think, though there's always going to be the odd prejudiced person.

Reply 59

gr8wizard10