Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

New Mayor of London shows most people don't support the racist agenda Watch

    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ImmunetoShaming)
    In what way is it 'increasing representation'? That's such a bunch of tribal, bigoted nonsense.

    Your argument basically implies, like that of the OP (well, no, the OP exploited racism to make people conform to his or her political perspective in the most totalitarian way imaginable), that the only way for Muslims to be represented is to be represented by other Muslims, which is just as bigoted as suggesting the only way for white people to be represented is by other white people. It isn't a solution to the problem, it feeds the problem and that's the problem.

    'You can vote for someone because they're Muslim, you can vote for someone because they're black, you can vote for someone because they're female, but FFS don't vote for someone because they're white - that's racist!'

    I'm a proud black man, said the black man.
    I'm a proud woman, said the woman.
    I'm a proud Muslim, said the Muslim.
    I'm a proud homosexual, said the homosexual.
    I'm a proud white man, said the white supremacist and bigoted racist.

    As per the OP's instructions, only some tribalism is acceptable and for the love of God, OBEY the OP, otherwise he will call you a racist - fall in line people, follow his tribal inclinations to side with the out-group at every available opportunity.

    Welcome to the moral relativist identity war which brings down western civilisation - it's pathological. It's an affront to intellectual thought.
    Okay. Let's take a look at the representation of women in the house of Commons. 29% are women, the rest are male. There are plenty of examples of female MP's being better at representing women than men. Google it for yourself, I don't need to prove it.
    Using this knowledge and applying it to Sadiq Khan now...Sadiq Khan is a "muslim son of a busdriver". What does it imply? He will represent muslims and the working class better than an Etonite, Conservative - Zac Goldsmith.
    The point is someone who is in the same situation as you is more likely to represent you better than someone who is not.
    Reason is because you cannot truly empathise with someone until you have experienced the same experiences they have. Hence George Osborne sucks, e.g on Tax credits. He was never on it, nor his family, so how could he possibly understand the impact of that tax on the poor? Economically sure, but morally never.
    I don't agree with positive discrimination- it's still a form of discrimination after all. And yes, I agree there are double standards in regards for how "racism" works. People don't understand a "black" man can be racist to a "white" man, even though it applies vice versa anyway.
    But the reason classes feel "proud" is because they believe they are "minority" groups, so they are standing out from the norms- defying the expectations of society.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Betelgeuse-)
    I mean how many times have you lambasted your fellow countrymen as racists and islamophobes? Muslim goes to Syria to behead children = ohh its cos he was discriminated against here in UK

    I think his appointment crushes the narrative that muslims are victims of the evil bad british people
    I don't lambast my fellow countrypeople randomly. I lambast the sort of brainless rightwing headbangers who infest web forums like this with their racist and racist-inspired hate propaganda.

    His win as Mayor shows that Londoners decisively rejected the appeals of Crosby's twisted hate campaign (parroted by David Cameron in the Commons, lest we forget) and I am full of praise for them and for the common decency of British people in rejecting it.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    I don't lambast my fellow countrypeople randomly. I lambast the sort of brainless rightwing headbangers who infest web forums like this with their racist and racist-inspired hate propaganda.

    His win as Mayor shows that Londoners decisively rejected the appeals of Crosby's twisted hate campaign (parroted by David Cameron in the Commons, lest we forget) and I am full of praise for them and for the common decency of British people in rejecting it.
    Your comment is the reverse of the truth:
    Read the real truth.
    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/03...e-muslim-card/

    There is no way Khan is a muslim any more than someone born a catholic who votes for same sex marriage/abortion etc etc is a catholic in the sense of it being news worthy.

    Who was pushing the "muslim identity" down our throats?
    Answer: THE LABOUR PARTY.

    Khan is voted for same sex marriage... Come on no way is that guy a muslim...
    who is Corbyn trying to kid.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Betelgeuse-)

    I think his appointment crushes the narrative that muslims are victims of the evil bad british people
    Oh don't be silly, that was just our sneaky way of masking our racism. Same what they did when they gave Obama the presidency twice.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FredOrJohn)

    There is no way Khan is a muslim any more than someone born a catholic who votes for same sex marriage/abortion etc etc is a catholic in the sense of it being news worthy.
    So this wasn't newsworthy?

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7157409.stm
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FredOrJohn)
    Your comment is the reverse of the truth:
    Read the real truth.
    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/03...e-muslim-card/

    There is no way Khan is a muslim any more than someone born a catholic who votes for same sex marriage/abortion etc etc is a catholic in the sense of it being news worthy.

    Who was pushing the "muslim identity" down our throats?
    Answer: THE LABOUR PARTY.

    Khan is voted for same sex marriage... Come on no way is that guy a muslim...
    who is Corbyn trying to kid.
    You seem to be confused. I am celebrating the fact that the Tory attacks did not work. It was they who attempted to brand him as a Muslim extremist. To argue that it was the Labour Party is five star ********.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ImmunetoShaming)
    So, you agree with propagating the election of Sadiq Khan as a victory based on the fact he's Muslim, but you'd disagree with propagating the election of Zac Goldsmith as a victory based on the fact he's white?

    That's consistent.
    No, I agree with propogating the election of Khan as a victory based on the fact he is the best candidate for the job despite his ethnicity and religion. I am glad that the majority was not too blinded by prejudice to see this.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ImmunetoShaming)
    'You sound like the typical black meninist.' And now you're a racist. How dare you pick black people off for their skin colour, you bigot.

    It doesn't matter if they are 'two-a-penny.' If you are willing to legitimise the notion that this is a victory because he's the first Muslim Mayor, then you are willing to legitimise the notion that when a Christian Mayor is elected next time round it will be a victory for Christianity.

    I thought we lived in a secular society? Apparently not - as far as you're concerned, it's Prophet before policy.
    I don't actually particularly like Islam myself, however legitimately questioning some of their cultures and beliefs is completely different to attacking someone before he even had a chance to do anything.

    Regarding the rest of your argument, if you don't want to understand it, that's fine. That is your choice. But do not spread your hatred on here and expect to get away with it.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    The left's constant Islamophilia never ceases to amaze me.

    I am indifferent to Mr Khan's faith; he ran a good campaign and that's that.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Conflating UKIP and racism is like conflating Labour and Antisemitism
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by brainhuman)
    I don't actually particularly like Islam myself, however legitimately questioning some of their cultures and beliefs is completely different to attacking someone before he even had a chance to do anything.

    Regarding the rest of your argument, if you don't want to understand it, that's fine. That is your choice. But do not spread your hatred on here and expect to get away with it.
    Don't conflate logic with hatred in an attempt to legitimise your bigoted agenda. Everything I said in my previous post stands, and the only bigotry is amongst those who are revelling in the victory of an ethnic minority while hypocritically chastising any white person for revelling in their identity.

    You tell me I don't understand your argument, but there's nothing to understand - all there is is bigotry and identity politics. The fact Khan is Muslim is being revelled in by progressives, in a way they would never ever stomach if a white candidate was revelling in a victory for whiteness, or Christianity. Your hypocrisy is nauseating, your hatred of individualism is divisive.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AverageExcellence)
    Conflating UKIP and racism is like conflating Labour and Antisemitism
    So if UKIP isn't racist, how come it attracts so many racists?
    http://leftfootforward.org/2015/02/i...ld-suggest-so/
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I don't really think it's a surprise that the Labour Party candidate won. It took Boris Johnson, arguably the Conservative's most popular (if not popular then most recognisable) politician to gain control of the London Mayor job off of Ken Livingston who once again recently showed how much of a muppet he is. I think there's plenty of people in London who naturally vote Labour regardless as people in urban areas tend to do & it's no secret that Labour do better among most ethnic minority groups.
    I doubt the fact that Khan was a Muslim really influenced too many people in London. I'd say he won because he's from a working class background & he's the member of political party which naturally attracts voters in London.
    Zac Goldsmith's campaign almost certainly helped rather then hindered Khan among the majority of voters. Some of the more easily influenced ones may have been swayed but I do think Tory campaign probably drove more voters to Khan.
    I actually think the election win for Labour is more due to their family background then religion - Goldsmith was always at a disadvantage as he's rich (he can't even argue he's self-made), white, posh & a Tory. Khan's father was a bus driver, he's from an ethnic minority (in a city where ethnic minorities are quite a large group) & he has worked his way up. I don't think Khan's past is completely clean (the Uncle Tom gaffe won't have earned him any new friends) but I also don't think he's an extremist or a terrorist sympathiser.
    Maybe someone like Sajid Javid would have run Khan close but I think Labour will naturally win an inner city like London. And this picture probably didn't help Goldsmith (although I don't actually think pics like this really swing the electorate despite some people claiming out here that the bacon sandwich is the reason Ed Miliband lost in 2015)
    Name:  96632800_Boris_Johnson_Zac_Goldsmith-medium_trans++eo_i_u9APj8RuoebjoAHt0k9u7HhRJvuo-ZLenGRumA.jpg
Views: 43
Size:  28.3 KB
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Grand High Witch)
    The left's constant Islamophilia never ceases to amaze me.

    I am indifferent to Mr Khan's faith; he ran a good campaign and that's that.
    I'm indifferent to their 'Islamophobia' (that term is borderline satirical), I despise their hypocrisy. They've just legitimised - yet again - identity based voting. They've declared that voting for a Muslim candidate is a 'victory' for their way of life, in a way they'd never dare declare the election of a Christian candidate is a victory for the Christian way of life. How they can maintain such flagrant double standards, how the voting public endures such outright hypocrisy, is beyond me.

    They've as good as declared that Prophet comes before policy, and that we should vote not based on what someone has to offer, but because he's of a particular identity. If you don't believe me, ask yourself: when would the election of a white candidate ever be declared a victory for whiteness across the MSM? Such rhetoric would not only never occur, it would be declared 'white supremacism.'

    Their hypocrisy is dumbfounding and they've denounced logic, rationalism, principle and intellectual thought in favour of identity politics, of the type which should have remained confined to the 1960s. They are regressive and they are advocating ultra-conservatism.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CarlTheCuck)
    Isn't surprising for a city to vote for a Labour Party candidate
    Fixed that for you.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tempest II)
    I don't really think it's a surprise that the Labour Party candidate won. It took Boris Johnson, arguably the Conservative's most popular (if not popular then most recognisable) politician to gain control of the London Mayor job off of Ken Livingston who once again recently showed how much of a muppet he is. I think there's plenty of people in London who naturally vote Labour regardless as people in urban areas tend to do & it's no secret that Labour do better among most ethnic minority groups.
    I doubt the fact that Khan was a Muslim really influenced too many people in London. I'd say he won because he's from a working class background & he's the member of political party which naturally attracts voters in London.
    Zac Goldsmith's campaign almost certainly helped rather then hindered Khan among the majority of voters. Some of the more easily influenced ones may have been swayed but I do think Tory campaign probably drove more voters to Khan.
    I actually think the election win for Labour is more due to their family background then religion - Goldsmith was always at a disadvantage as he's rich (he can't even argue he's self-made), white, posh & a Tory. Khan's father was a bus driver, he's from an ethnic minority (in a city where ethnic minorities are quite a large group) & he has worked his way up. I don't think Khan's past is completely clean (the Uncle Tom gaffe won't have earned him any new friends) but I also don't think he's an extremist or a terrorist sympathiser.
    Maybe someone like Sajid Javid would have run Khan close but I think Labour will naturally win an inner city like London. And this picture probably didn't help Goldsmith (although I don't actually think pics like this really swing the electorate despite some people claiming out here that the bacon sandwich is the reason Ed Miliband lost in 2015)
    Name:  96632800_Boris_Johnson_Zac_Goldsmith-medium_trans++eo_i_u9APj8RuoebjoAHt0k9u7HhRJvuo-ZLenGRumA.jpg
Views: 43
Size:  28.3 KB
    The bacon sandwich was another Tory race smear operation, it was surfaced by Guido Fawkes but Crosby was behind it, as he had a squad of photographers following Ed around at all times with instructions to try to catch him looking 'weird', eg, 'Jewish'.

    The London Mayor election is not just 'inner city', it covers a large part of suburban (and usually Tory-voting) London as well.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    So if UKIP isn't racist, how come it attracts so many racists?
    http://leftfootforward.org/2015/02/i...ld-suggest-so/
    Very impartial and well researched source. Tell me why they are racist?

    Tighter control of immigration policy and Euroscepticism are nothing close to the definition of racism.

    Labour on the other hand have had vehement anti semites spout their vile views like they're progressive and righteous, Naz Shah, Ken Livingston... thats just in the last fortnight, the list goes on to levels above and below! Jezza corbyn even supports hamas and hezbollah and refuses to condemn them.

    MP Tom Harris wrote this week that the party “does indeed have a problem with Jews”.

    This is not evening covering the fact that labour has for the last 2 or 3 decades been turning a blind eye to problems to almost state collaboration in child abuse as not to accuse a minority community, from which their careers and electoral survival depends or bring them to account until its far too late.

    Not only is that putting your own greedy career ambitions beyond the country, but it damages the genuine muslim community by conflating them with these perpetrators by implying we didnt' want to seem insensitive.. how pathetic.

    Labour have been playing partisan politics for years to court the vote of minority communities for their twisted ends, its no wonder that antisemitism is part and parcel of that to really wrap the ribbon on the bow...

    this entire thread is complete pot calling the kettle black in all my time here.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ImmunetoShaming)
    Don't conflate logic with hatred in an attempt to legitimise your bigoted agenda. Everything I said in my previous post stands, and the only bigotry is amongst those who are revelling in the victory of an ethnic minority while hypocritically chastising any white person for revelling in their identity.

    You tell me I don't understand your argument, but there's nothing to understand - all there is is bigotry and identity politics. The fact Khan is Muslim is being revelled in by progressives, in a way they would never ever stomach if a white candidate was revelling in a victory for whiteness, or Christianity. Your hypocrisy is nauseating, your hatred of individualism is divisive.
    No, it doesn't you are completely wrong. But you are too arrogant and biased to see that, much less admit it.

    Do you even know what bigoted means, or is it just some word you like to throw around because if you accuse others of being a bigot then you win the argument, because a bigot must be wrong surely?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)

    The London Mayor election is not just 'inner city', it covers a large part of suburban (and usually Tory-voting) London as well.
    Of the 8 million people living there, the most are poor.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    The bacon sandwich was another Tory race smear operation, it was surfaced by Guido Fawkes but Crosby was behind it, as he had a squad of photographers following Ed around at all times with instructions to try to catch him looking 'weird', eg, 'Jewish'.

    The London Mayor election is not just 'inner city', it covers a large part of suburban (and usually Tory-voting) London as well.
    Your opinion of the British electorate can't be particularly high if you genuinely think that image cost Labour the 2015 GE. It certainly wasn't a flattering photo but I highly doubt it actually affects the majority of the public.

    The administrative area, region and ceremonial county of Greater London, including the City of London, is divided into 73 parliamentary constituencies which are all borough constituencies. As of May 2015, forty-five are represented by Labour MPs, twenty-seven by Conservative MPs, and one by a Liberal Democrat MP. (copied from Google)

    I think this confirms how much support Labour has in London. Any Conservative candidate was always going to struggle. Goldsmith's campaign obviously did himself no favours either.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Have you ever participated in a Secret Santa?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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

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