Turn on thread page Beta

Having lots of "culture minority" MPs is NOT good watch

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by subject1)
    But the BNPs will never be in power because most British people are not racist and intolerant. I am glad racist views are stemmed out of society, particularly for important roles such as teaching so that we don't breed a new generation of racists. And this does not only apply to white people, it applies to anyone, including extremist Muslims.
    Oh, that's good news. I have been informed repeatedly by political opponents that UKIP are a racist party, but apparently 4 million people just voted for them. That's quite a lot of racists.

    I believe in France there is a party called the Front National who are attracting a lot of votes. In fact this is happening throughout Europe. That genie is not going back into its bottle.

    And please can you answer my question - Are Caucasians who live in America NOT American? Since America is "only" for the Native Americans.
    This is a very weird question. The Red Indians didn't have a conceptualisation of nations to my knowledge. If they had a name for the land mass on which they pursued their primitive existence it would not have been America. The nation of America was founded by [white] European settlers. That it was to be a white nation was written into its constitution. Thus the American was created.

    If you agree then say "George W Bush is not an American president"
    because he is obviously a European one right!
    And yes I didn't choose Barack Obama because you would probably say "yes he is not, he is African!"
    Indeed, he is African. He is also Kenyan.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thesabbath)
    There is no evidence that what you refer to as white-British culture is being adopted and perpetuated by non-white, non-British arrivals.
    Really? How about the UKIP candidates that are non-white? Or the ethnic minority Conservative MPs, like Alan Mak or Sam Gyimah? How about people like Konnie Huq? (sure she's a muslim but I wasn't even aware of that until I was informed so, which shows a lot actually)

    I find it surprising how you've never met these people. I certainly have, throughout my entire life actually. I feel sorry for you.

    (Original post by thesabbath)
    Probably, you ask a lot of questions.

    Again, this is due to government policies of Mass immigration, ghettoisation (so-called "multiculturalism") and a totalitarian crackdown on opposition to this, which was labelled "racist" and de facto outlawed.
    Likewise, you never answer questions. Can you even justify the claim that white genocide is happening in this country?

    Please provide me with evidence that mass immigration and multiculturalism have been introduced with the purpose of destroying, in whole or in part, the white population.

    Please provide me of examples of ''conditions of life'' that are destroying the white population. Or, please explain to me how mass immigration, ghettoisation and ''a totalitarian crackdown on opposition to this'' is destroying the white population.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SHallowvale)
    Really? How about the UKIP candidates that are non-white? Or the ethnic minority Conservative MPs, like Alan Mak or Sam Gyimah? How about people like Konnie Huq? (sure she's a muslim but I wasn't even aware of that until I was informed so, which shows a lot actually)

    I find it surprising how you've never met these people. I certainly have, throughout my entire life actually. I feel sorry for you.
    This is happening, on a minute scale, at an individual level. That was always the case, when immigration was a trickle, and integration was the only acceptable behaviour.

    Collectively, the opposite is happening. This is embodied by ghettoisation.

    Likewise, you never answer questions. Can you even justify the claim that white genocide is happening in this country?

    Please provide me with evidence that mass immigration and multiculturalism have been introduced with the purpose of destroying, in whole or in part, the white population.

    Please provide me of examples of ''conditions of life'' that are destroying the white population. Or, please explain to me how mass immigration, ghettoisation and ''a totalitarian crackdown on opposition to this'' is destroying the white population.
    I have already done so.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thesabbath)
    This is happening, on a minute scale, at an individual level. That was always the case, when immigration was a trickle, and integration was the only acceptable behaviour.

    Collectively, the opposite is happening. This is embodied by ghettoisation.
    First you said that you didn't want a non-white majority because the culture would be different. Then you've said that non-white people cannot have the culture of white people. Now you're saying that they can but they exist in small numbers.

    So it is possible that a non-white majority can exist with the same culture as the white majority today, so long as they integrate. Which all brings me back to my original question: why is it a problem for white people to become a minority? If you ensure that non-white people integrate why would it be an issue that there are less white people (either absolutely or relative to the number of non-white people).

    (Original post by thesabbath)
    I have already done so.
    No you haven't. You've literally said ''mass immigration is occuring therefore white genocide is happening''. You've only assumed that the sole purpose of mass immigration was to destroy the white population. You have not demonstrated that mass immigration was indeed caused to destroy white people.

    In the real world there are plenty of reasons why someone could encourage or accept mass immigration (it's better for the economy, to fill in job shortages, to enable access to a free market, etc).
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Now he has changed the title. This thread is very very uncivil and filled with reiligous prejudists.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nоt elohssa)
    They've also created a very nice country to live in. Not the best, but in the top 10% of countries in the world. What have Muslims created? Poverty, everywhere there isn't oil.
    Yep, aided by colonisation like a lot of European countries. Also, you are acting as if Islam is the sole reason why these countries are poor. There are many Christian countries which have high levels if poverty in Africa etc, also predominantly Hindu countries such as India and white European countries such as Bulgaria, Romania etc. These countries are poor due to a variety of factors.

    Personally, I see no reason for there NOT to be MPs who are ethnic minorities. I don't care if they are white, black, gay, transgender or whatever as long as they do a good job.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SHallowvale)
    First you said that you didn't want a non-white majority because the culture would be different. Then you've said that non-white people cannot have the culture of white people. Now you're saying that they can but they exist in small numbers.

    So it is possible that a non-white majority can exist with the same culture as the white majority today, so long as they integrate. Which all brings me back to my original question: why is it a problem for white people to become a minority? If you ensure that non-white people integrate why would it be an issue that there are less white people (either absolutely or relative to the number of non-white people).



    No you haven't. You've literally said ''mass immigration is occuring therefore white genocide is happening''. You've only assumed that the sole purpose of mass immigration was to destroy the white population. You have not demonstrated that mass immigration was indeed caused to destroy white people.

    In the real world there are plenty of reasons why someone could encourage or accept mass immigration (it's better for the economy, to fill in job shortages, to enable access to a free market, etc).
    I think it is absolutely disgusting how the word "genocide" has been thrown around in this thread.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by billydisco)
    No, I am saying this is a trend and its not going to be stopping....


    Really? Is that why so many people voted UKIP and the Tories and Labour had to adopt immigration policies because the British public love immigration so much? Because its part of our culture?

    Care to tell me how immigration is part of our culture?


    If certain immigrants weren't bringing their culture with them, posts like this wouldn't exist.


    Why do I need to tell you what British culture is? How does the answer relate to British culture? The point is this is Britain and the only culture should be the one which was here before any 1990s immigration occurred.


    You mean when Britain was actually a powerful and wealthy country and everybody had a job and houses were cheap? Wow, sounds dreadful.... :rolleyes:



    Do you understand how expenses work? Im asking seriously? Do you think you only claim for things you cannot afford? :confused:
    Hahaha, did you really just say post-WW2 times were great for Britain? You're honestly a fool if you believe that.

    Secondly, you really blame IMMIGRANTS for the xenophobia they have to face? Ummmmm?

    Third, I know exactly how expenses work thank you very much - my point is that the same people who claim that immigrants are "sponging" off the generous benefits system are the same people who could equally be accused of "sponging" off the expenses system.

    Please don't talk to me as though I'm not educated, it makes you seem even less so
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by t0sin)
    Hahaha, did you really just say post-WW2 times were great for Britain? You're honestly a fool if you believe that.
    -Jobs
    -Cheap houses

    Whats not to like?

    (Original post by t0sin)
    Secondly, you really blame IMMIGRANTS for the xenophobia they have to face? Ummmmm?
    Do you ever hear xenophobia directed towards Italians? Dutch? Belgians? Portuguese?

    (Original post by t0sin)
    Third, I know exactly how expenses work thank you very much
    Really? Then why were you questioning why an MP claims breakfast simply because they could afford it?

    (Original post by t0sin)
    my point is that the same people who claim that immigrants are "sponging" off the generous benefits system are the same people who could equally be accused of "sponging" off the expenses system.
    But the politicians are doing a job.... in their own country..... claiming expenses as the rules state. Immigrants are moving here and then saying "oh, ive arrived here but I have no money. Give me some of your's". Bit of a difference

    (Original post by t0sin)
    Please don't talk to me as though I'm not educated, it makes you seem even less so
    Except it doesn't....
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrMackyTv)
    Now he has changed the title. This thread is very very uncivil and filled with reiligous prejudists.
    Yeah I changed the title after somebody asked whether I actually meant cultural, rather than ethnic :rolleyes:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrMackyTv)
    It helped Britain post ww2. It fueled our economy again and got us back onto our feet. If it wasn't for conquering those empires, maybe Britain wouldn't be so rich today. Thats one advantage. I am pretty sure you are smart enough to search up more advantages of multicultralism. We do have chinese culture here, we have bhuddist temples where they can worship, of course their food is one I see no reason why it can't be their culture because it is.
    Do you know the difference between immigration and multiculturalism? Immigrants arriving here is not the same as multiculturalism- if they embrace British culture.....

    (Original post by MrMackyTv)
    You didn't answer my question, I said are you Islamophobic? It is yes or no. It is not a full ' I am against any religion which is currently responsible for violence in 70 countries globally'. I really think that argument it invalid, and I have said this to you before several times. It is the people of the religion not the relgion itself, if I was Muslim and I killed someone you would start saying how bad my religion is when in fact you know absolutley nothing about it.
    Hang on, so these are the number of countries in the world each religion is currently responsible for violence:

    -Islam ~70
    -Christianity 0-2?
    -Judaism 0-1
    -Sikhism 0-1
    -Hinduism 0-1
    -Buddhism 1-3
    -Orthodox 0-2

    and you don't see any problem with the above? :rolleyes:

    (Original post by MrMackyTv)
    Don't want to be personal but who is teaching you all of this? Are your parents brainwashig you? Telling you Muslims are bad, don't go near them? If they are I feel very sorry for you because upbringing is the main cause of religious prejudist because parents are brainwashing their poor children saying that this religion is bad don't near them. Like they're a disease. We are all humans, start being civil to people billydisco. Jeez.
    Somebody is brainwashing me that 70 countries around the world are currently experiencing terrorism in the name of Islam? Oh my......
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by subject1)
    I never said groups of people don't exist. I said this is NOT a "white country". There is nothing in the constitution that says this piece of land is only for WHITES. Great Britain is an island with people living on it. Just because it happens to be white does not mean that this place is EXCLUSIVELY white.

    I like how you think Native Americans are a good comparison. In that case you also agree that Caucasians in America are NOT Americans.
    Firstly, immigrants are not trying to put us into reservations and trying to kill us. There is no war between white people and other ethnic groups.

    And your incorrect views are not shared by "99.95%" of the population who do not vote BNP. You will find that those views will lead you to isolation and make it very difficult for you in life. Just today a BNP member is banned from teaching because he said he was "allergic to Mohammedans"
    Just so I understand you correctly, you think countries such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia wouldn't have a problem if 10 million Americans went at settled there and demanded those host countries changed their culture, to suit the new Americans?

    I can just imagine the conservative Muslims reeeeeaaaally appreciating the Western female dress sense of showing off their bodies.......
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by billydisco)
    Do you know the difference between immigration and multiculturalism? Immigrants arriving here is not the same as multiculturalism- if they embrace British culture.....


    Hang on, so these are the number of countries in the world each religion is currently responsible for violence:

    -Islam ~70
    -Christianity 0-2?
    -Judaism 0-1
    -Sikhism 0-1
    -Hinduism 0-1
    -Buddhism 1-3
    -Orthodox 0-2

    and you don't see any problem with the above? :rolleyes:


    Somebody is brainwashing me that 70 countries around the world are currently experiencing terrorism in the name of Islam? Oh my......


    Posted from TSR Mobile

    Yes. I do know the difference. But if those immigrants come here and don't embrace British culture then is that not multicultralism?

    How many times do I need to tell you? It is not the religion it's the people. Do you not know the difference? Those are numbers, and blaming a religion for violence sounds very immature and ignorant. Islam does not teach us that violence is good in fact it tells us not like Christianity, one commandment says do not kill but there are some that don't follow that and disobey. If I am a Muslim and I kill a bunch of people, Islam is not the problem it's me. I see no problem with the above because they are not true. Replace the religion name to the name of the religous people who follow that religion. For eg. Muslims cause violence in 70 countries, not Islam because then you're saying Islam is bad when in fact it is not. So stop playing the religion blame game because all you're going to get out of this is a hurl of abuse from people labelling you as a religous prejudist and to be more precise, Islamophobic.

    It sounds like you have been brainwashed. Either by your parents or the media. If it is not your parents it is most likely the media because the media are potraying Islam in a bad way when in fact the religion (if you even learn about it) does not promote violence to whatever number of countries. Religion is not responsible for violence it is the people. Get that into your head.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by billydisco)
    Firstly, it depends on the phrase "culture minority". However, the point I am trying to make is that, considering how members of a certain culture **cough cough** don't exactly have a good record of integrating/adapting to the host culture, is it really smart if our Parliament is made up of people from different cultures? I would quite like Britain to retain its British culture. Thats very unlikely to happen if 400 MPs in Parliament do not embrace British culture.....

    NB: Its not "waycist" to want your country to preserve its identity/culture.....
    This is already the case: you can't stand for public office unless you have indefinite leave to remain, which is more or less exactly the same as full citizenship.

    Who are the 400 MPs who do not embrace British culture? I'd wager that if there were that many, they'd have a tough time getting elected; that, or British culture would have evolved, as all cultures do.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by billydisco)
    Firstly, it depends on the phrase "culture minority". However, the point I am trying to make is that, considering how members of a certain culture **cough cough** don't exactly have a good record of integrating/adapting to the host culture, is it really smart if our Parliament is made up of people from different cultures? I would quite like Britain to retain its British culture. Thats very unlikely to happen if 400 MPs in Parliament do not embrace British culture.....

    NB: Its not "waycist" to want your country to preserve its identity/culture.....
    Well I would have thought the candidates would have integrated well enough that their local people in the constituency would be happy voting for them...Also, you say it like they can just run amock and do as they please when actually they can't do much alone at all. You are racist, you can't discriminate upon a job (MP is a job) based upon ethnicity. You'll find the law would classify your beliefs as racist
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    In about 50 years the English race will be mostly exterminated anyway, so all MPs will be different ethnicities.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by billydisco)
    -Jobs
    -Cheap houses

    Whats not to like?


    Do you ever hear xenophobia directed towards Italians? Dutch? Belgians? Portuguese?


    Really? Then why were you questioning why an MP claims breakfast simply because they could afford it?


    But the politicians are doing a job.... in their own country..... claiming expenses as the rules state. Immigrants are moving here and then saying "oh, ive arrived here but I have no money. Give me some of your's". Bit of a difference


    Except it doesn't....

    Well, your point about post WW2 Britain was absolute crap and I think you desperately need to brush up on your British history because it's honestly embarrassing. Not to mention the fact that you quite incorrectly assume that all immigrants are lazy and look for British benefits when in fact it could be argued to be the other way round.

    This is exactly the kind of UKIPesque bull**** that is plaguing British politics and the simple minds of people like you - not an increased number of ethnic minorities.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by billydisco)
    Just so I understand you correctly, you think countries such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia wouldn't have a problem if 10 million Americans went at settled there and demanded those host countries changed their culture, to suit the new Americans?

    I can just imagine the conservative Muslims reeeeeaaaally appreciating the Western female dress sense of showing off their bodies.......
    Those countries may be less accepting to other cultures, but that does not mean they are right. People should be tolerant of other cultures and races.

    And there are many countries who would be OK with having people of a different colour standing as MPs (or equivalent) there. Singapore has a parliament with many different races and cultures which represents its multiracial population. This is also the case in the USA, Canada and much of Europe. Most people do not think that having ethnic minority MPs will lead to the end of the "dominant" race.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by billydisco)
    So? Humans have always copied each other since the dawn of time.

    For example, if you took most of the smokers in the UK, the majority would be uneducated (and probably Labour voters).

    Most Staffordshire Bull terrirer owners are also typically uneducated chavs.....

    Think I'm wrong? Ok, think back to the last few times where a child has been mauled by a dog:

    -The dog was one of a particular dangerous breed
    -The family were lower class/broken

    Stereotypes exist
    Sure stereotypes exist but if the human race went by stereotypes god forbid where we might end up. Plus stereotypes are only a factor based on the majority. Not all. And they can change too. And the smoker thing was a weak argument. People who smoke also tend to be business and office workers too as they tend to be become stressed a lot, so smokers are not necessarily uneducated.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    Diane Abbott is a culture MP and gets in every time off of the black vote. She's a single issue politician chairing "black groups" and "black initiatives" and whatnot.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: June 23, 2015

4,135

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.