Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by abucha3)
    :mfing:
    Some friendly advice. Being so abrasive is hardly conducive to reasoned debate; you're doing yourself no favours by acting so immature. I personally have had no negative dealings with you as of yet, but I'm sure I'm not alone in finding your attitude in general somewhat Irksome at times.

    You would be much better served by acting with decency and letting your points do the talking. Reverting to condescension, while I agree it is not against the rules, just makes you look foolish and insecure in this context. If you cannot win an arguemnt, accept you were wrong - don't automatically become so defensive as there is no need to feel like you always have to be right.

    All the best.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaran-j)
    Absolutely not. Torture should never be used in order to gain information because information from a torture victim is unreliable. If you were strapped to a table, about to have a white hot metal poker applied to your testicles, you'd say whatever your interrogators want to hear to get them to stop.
    This is true.
    Someone who constantly argues this well is Jessie Ventura.
    Whilst being somewhat of an oddball he has made some very good points on this issue that applies to this country as well as the USA.
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    What are your views on immigration and the EU?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paddy__power)
    What are your views on immigration and the EU?
    Personally, I'm a Europhile though with reservations about its neo-liberal stance on economic development. I have little problem with migration since an accident of birth which means I can call myself British rather than Senegalese or Romanian doesn't mean I - and those other Britons - have an exclusive right to the land that we call Britain. I believe fully in collective solutions to the question of human development and am content to share what little I have with other people if it will make us all better off.
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Adorno)
    Personally, I'm a Europhile though with reservations about its neo-liberal stance on economic development. I have little problem with migration since an accident of birth which means I can call myself British rather than Senegalese or Romanian doesn't mean I - and those other Britons - have an exclusive right to the land that we call Britain. I believe fully in collective solutions to the question of human development and am content to share what little I have with other people if it will make us all better off.
    Is your personal view generally cognate with the rest of the party?

    Thanks for the fast reply.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I like the idea of Europe but not how it currently operates, such as restricting the shape of bananas and weight of eggs we can consume... I’m quite happy with how involved in Europe we are now and wouldn’t like to see us join the Euro or hand over anymore powers to Brussels. Edit: Well some can be handed over, but not economic powers and some others.

    As for immigration I don’t really have a problem with it, but I do not like the fact that the UK has become a victim of its own generosity when it comes to the very poor making their way through 5 or 6 ‘wealthy’ countries in the hope of reaching our shores. I don’t so much have a problem with the people doing it, they have every right to try and better themselves. However, I am disappointed with the many countries in Europe turning a blind eye as they pass through knowing they’re unlikely to stop within their borders and seemingly act as though it’s not their problem.

    I am not reffering to EU immigration, I'm refering to Middle-East immigration.
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Cardozo)
    I like the idea of Europe but not how it currently operates, such as restricting the shape of bananas and weight of eggs we can consume... I’m quite happy with how involved in Europe we are now and wouldn’t like to see us join the Euro or hand over anymore powers to Brussels.

    As for immigration I don’t really have a problem with it, but I do not like the fact that the UK has become a victim of its own generosity when it comes to the very poor making their way through 5 or 6 ‘wealthy’ countries in the hope of reaching our shores. I don’t so much have a problem with the people doing it, they have every right to try and better themselves. However, I am disappointed with the many countries in Europe turning a blind eye as they pass through knowing they’re unlikely to stop within their borders and seemingly act as though it’s not their problem.

    I am not reffering to EU immigration, I'm refering to Middle-East immigration.
    Again, thanks for the reply.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paddy__power)
    Is your personal view generally cognate with the rest of the party?
    I would suggest that, particularly with immigration, it's a personal stance. There are very good reasons why immigrants come here rather than to other "very wealthy" nations and it's not got a lot to do with either wealth or the benefits we provide with our welfare state. I would suggest that actually it is because Britain is incredibly tolerant and because we don't have a singular form of civic identity it is easier to fit in here than it is in, say, France where identity is centralised or in Italy where there's a mess.
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Adorno)
    I would suggest that, particularly with immigration, it's a personal stance. There are very good reasons why immigrants come here rather than to other "very wealthy" nations and it's not got a lot to do with either wealth or the benefits we provide with our welfare state. I would suggest that actually it is because Britain is incredibly tolerant and because we don't have a singular form of civic identity it is easier to fit in here than it is in, say, France where identity is centralised or in Italy where there's a mess.
    Surely that's self perpetuating as well, as immigration increases it becomes more desireable for them to come here....
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paddy__power)
    Surely that's self perpetuating as well, as immigration increases it becomes more desireable for them to come here....
    More than likely but then that's what Britain has always been like because we're an island nation. I found a reference once in a set of minutes to a Somali dance troupe in Cowbridge of all places in the 1870s so don't lets kid ourselves that Britain has been the "victim" of immigration under New Labour. I do find the notion that there's an us and them distasteful though.
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Adorno)
    More than likely but then that's what Britain has always been like because we're an island nation. I found a reference once in a set of minutes to a Somali dance troupe in Cowbridge of all places in the 1870s so don't lets kid ourselves that Britain has been the "victim" of immigration under New Labour. I do find the notion that there's an us and them distasteful though.
    I know it's not a new thing, although the Somali dance troupe in Cowbridge is quite interesting. I wasn't using 'them' in an exclusive way, just to refer to a group of people. As such, I would use the same terminology to refer to a group of my friends....

    If you meant in general [I may have been presumptuous in my assumption it was aimed at me] then I still ask why? But have more idea of what the answer may be. Given your previous remarks about collective human responsibility for development I would assume anything that would create disparities (a them vs us approah) would run counter to your beleifs. I could be wrong of course....
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paddy__power)
    I know it's not a new thing, although the Somali dance troupe in Cowbridge is quite interesting. I wasn't using 'them' in an exclusive way, just to refer to a group of people. As such, I would use the same terminology to refer to a group of my friends....
    I know, and it wasn't directed at you but just a general frustration with the tendency to divide people into an us and them. When you're talking about a group of people who suffer from other labels such as "foreigner" or "migrant" and so forth it gets to be a bit dangerous...

    If you meant in general [I may have been presumptuous in my assumption it was aimed at me] then I still ask why? But have more idea of what the answer may be. Given your previous remarks about collective human responsibility for development I would assume anything that would create disparities (a them vs us approah) would run counter to your beleifs. I could be wrong of course....
    Well I believe that we are one human race and that the collective bonds of humanity and collective spirit are greater than the prowess of single individuals. Thus for me, the idea that people from very poor backgrounds should choose to make their way to live in Britain is a reflection of the same desire that I have to go an live somewhere else be it in a safe, comfortable first world country such as Canada or New Zealand or less developed nations where I might put my skills in teaching and research to good use. If people move here from Rwanda and are afforded the great opportunities we have and then go off into the world to try and make it a better place for the people who remained there why should we say no way josé just because we Britons have a jumped up sense of ourselves?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Adorno)
    I would suggest that, particularly with immigration, it's a personal stance. There are very good reasons why immigrants come here rather than to other "very wealthy" nations and it's not got a lot to do with either wealth or the benefits we provide with our welfare state. I would suggest that actually it is because Britain is incredibly tolerant and because we don't have a singular form of civic identity it is easier to fit in here than it is in, say, France where identity is centralised or in Italy where there's a mess.
    So you agree that other nations throughout Europe aren’t making an effort to accommodate these immigrants, as we do. With the vast amount of laws we pass to protect such people and ethnicities (which is a good thing) unlike France and Italy who, rather than following by example, are more than happy continuing shunning these people knowing full well they will pass on by.

    I think these wealthy countries (who are part of the EU we all contribute towards) need to stand up and start making an effort to open up to the idea of Europe being part of an effort to create a fair global society rather than an attitude that stinks of, to put it bluntly, racism and intolerance.

    The simple fact is we, as a wealthy country, have a duty to support those in need just as every country in an economic position to do so should, whether that’s building housing, creating schemes or building religious places of worship. Something which throughout central Europe is met with protests and absolute disgraceful campaigning. Something I’ve started to see around my home town recently! :erm:

    (i should give up using commas...)
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Adorno)
    I know, and it wasn't directed at you but just a general frustration with the tendency to divide people into an us and them. When you're talking about a group of people who suffer from other labels such as "foreigner" or "migrant" and so forth it gets to be a bit dangerous...



    Well I believe that we are one human race and that the collective bonds of humanity and collective spirit are greater than the prowess of single individuals. Thus for me, the idea that people from very poor backgrounds should choose to make their way to live in Britain is a reflection of the same desire that I have to go an live somewhere else be it in a safe, comfortable first world country such as Canada or New Zealand or less developed nations where I might put my skills in teaching and research to good use. If people move here from Rwanda and are afforded the great opportunities we have and then go off into the world to try and make it a better place for the people who remained there why should we say no way josé just because we Britons have a jumped up sense of ourselves?
    It's an interesting view to take. I think that there will always be an 'us' and a 'them' though - not just because of nationality but for many reasons. Whether these differences should manifest in strict immigration laws is of course a different matter though. I'm not sure [which no doubt abhors you] but I'm not sure because large numbers of the global population don't share your hope for cooperative betterment, in fact large amounts actively work to manufacture differences, I'm not sure how allowing these people to move so fluidly between countires - no doubt advocating their divisive views - is a positive thing in anything other than raw principle....
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    For some, the concept of global citizenship is stunningly dangerous and I think that is part of what puts back our efforts to help and welcome those who are in worse off countries than ourselves.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cardozo)
    So you agree that other nations throughout Europe aren’t making an effort to accommodate these immigrants, as we do. With the vast amount of laws we pass to protect such people and ethnicities (which is a good thing) unlike France and Italy who, rather than following by example, are more than happy continuing shunning these people knowing full well they will pass on by.
    No. That's not what I mean. To gain French citizenship you have to accept certain facets of a centralised French identity: the language, the separation of Church and State; the ingrained principle of laicité (secularisation) and so forth. Italy is structurally a mess with identities very much defined by ones city-community but let's leave Italy alone for now since I raised it in haste. In Britain you don't have any of that. There's no central identity built around a language or around a system of secular government. Sure we have parliamentary democracy but the purpose of our system was that it was capable of hearing multiple voices and that's the kind of place that, as an immigrant, you would want to live. Foreign enough that you might prosper but tolerant enough that those aspects of your own culture that you bring with you as baggage are not going to be distinguished by an official identity. This has less to do with economics than is often made out to be the case.

    I think these wealthy countries (who are part of the EU we all contribute towards) need to stand up and start making an effort to open up to the idea of Europe being part of an effort to create a fair global society rather than an attitude that stinks of, to put it bluntly, racism and intolerance.
    Well yes but that's like telling a sheep not to go bah. It's a fundamental shift in a person's psyche but let's not forget that France and Italy both had long standing Communist Parties for a long period after the Second World War. They do know tolerance and understanding but the notion of what makes France French is very different from the notion of what makes Britain British.

    The simple fact is we, as a wealthy country, have a duty to support those in need, just as every country in an economic position to do so should, whether that’s building housing, creating schemes or building religious places of worship. Something which throughout central Europe is met with protests and absolute disgraceful campaigning. Something I’ve started to see around my home town recently! :erm:
    Or giant EU branded concerts to celebrate Europe day as there was when I was in Hungary recently. But the problem goes deeper. Most of central and eastern europe is only a generation out of a totalising regime and to replace Communism with Europeanism is not all that popular at the moment with many people. The politicians running those states are the post-Communist "revolutionaries" and they are reactionary. Time is what is needed.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paddy__power)
    It's an interesting view to take. I think that there will always be an 'us' and a 'them' though - not just because of nationality but for many reasons. Whether these differences should manifest in strict immigration laws is of course a different matter though. I'm not sure [which no doubt abhors you] but I'm not sure because large numbers of the global population don't share your hope for cooperative betterment, in fact large amounts actively work to manufacture differences, I'm not sure how allowing these people to move so fluidly between countires - no doubt advocating their divisive views - is a positive thing in anything other than raw principle....
    But cooperative development doesn't mean capitalism and this is the point. People who stoke up differences insist on the individual. My identity, my purpose, my wealth, my property. As opposed to facing up to the challenges that we all face. Throwing people onto their own devices is not the solution to our problems. Let's remember that people turned to social democratic ideas after the Second World War to avoid two things: economic depression and war. In Europe - at least in Western Europe - that was demonstrably successful and we are living with the - albeit much dismantled - legacy of that vision today.

    I disagree with many people in that I do not believe globalisation is inevitable. Nothing is inevitable, we have to make it. And then our children have to make it. Then theirs and so on. Each generation makes and remakes society according to their circumstances. One generation did get it partly right but that's not really enough because the Baby Boomers got it foully wrong. And I mean foul.

    But anyway, strict controls on immigration are a fallacy. They are all about saying: we're better than you and what we say is what goes. It's individualism gone mad and frankly is contrary to the kind of society that we should be trying to bring about. If we go around tellling people what's best for them, they'll rebel. If we help people create things for their own sake then they are less inclined to rebel because it is something of their own creation. First and foremost we want a progressive, optimistic solution not a regressive and reactionary one. Unfortunately, reaction is all that our generation seems capable of.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Adorno speaks a lot of sense.
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Adorno)
    But cooperative development doesn't mean capitalism and this is the point. People who stoke up differences insist on the individual. My identity, my purpose, my wealth, my property. As opposed to facing up to the challenges that we all face. Throwing people onto their own devices is not the solution to our problems. Let's remember that people turned to social democratic ideas after the Second World War to avoid two things: economic depression and war. In Europe - at least in Western Europe - that was demonstrably successful and we are living with the - albeit much dismantled - legacy of that vision today.

    I disagree with many people in that I do not believe globalisation is inevitable. Nothing is inevitable, we have to make it. And then our children have to make it. Then theirs and so on. Each generation makes and remakes society according to their circumstances. One generation did get it partly right but that's not really enough because the Baby Boomers got it foully wrong. And I mean foul.

    But anyway, strict controls on immigration are a fallacy. They are all about saying: we're better than you and what we say is what goes. It's individualism gone mad and frankly is contrary to the kind of society that we should be trying to bring about. If we go around tellling people what's best for them, they'll rebel. If we help people create things for their own sake then they are less inclined to rebel because it is something of their own creation. First and foremost we want a progressive, optimistic solution not a regressive and reactionary one. Unfortunately, reaction is all that our generation seems capable of.
    I like your ideas, and ideally they would be great, but I can't but feel this is all a little utopian - underlined by your final point. In principle what you say is great but do you honestly think it's a viable way to approach things?

    Immigration controls don't have to be about who's better. Surely they can be about people saying 'this is the power I have to act in the best interests of the people whom have given me the power, in the understanding I will work to that end' - reaction may well be all we are capable of, but we have a lot to react to.... Maybe it's just me but I can't, in my mind, work out how your vision of the future will come to pass, other than through a very very long chain of gradual changes (something you alluded to). Is this how you see it happening?

    I am out of my depth in this discussion if I'm honest because I have not really given opinions such as yours any great thought - as they differ to I think most people I have ever met [hence the questions].
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paddy__power)
    I like your ideas, and ideally they would be great, but I can't but feel this is all a little utopian - underlined by your final point. In principle what you say is great but do you honestly think it's a viable way to approach things?
    Politics is about the utopian. It works best when there is a dream of something better than what exists now. Otherwise it's just tinkering with a broken machine. And if I didn't think it is a viable way to approach things, I wouldn't believe it.

    Immigration controls don't have to be about who's better. Surely they can be about people saying 'this is the power I have to act in the best interests of the people whom have given me the power, in the understanding I will work to that end' - reaction may well be all we are capable of, but we have a lot to react to.... Maybe it's just me but I can't, in my mind, work out how your vision of the future will come to pass, other than through a very very long chain of gradual changes (something you alluded to). Is this how you see it happening?
    Reactionary politics is negative; reaction can contain no positives and this is the problem. If our generation is capable only of reaction then we will end up with a more conservative and nervous society jumping at every boo that occurs. Positive, utopian politics takes things in its stride and doesn't fall into nerves. Sure it can appear impatient and grumpy but that's something else. Gradual change isn't really good enough. We're at a crossroads and we really do have to take the road less travelled.

    I am out of my depth in this discussion if I'm honest because I have not really given opinions such as yours any great thought - as they differ to I think most people I have ever met [hence the questions].
    Of course, but that's because liberal ideas have become the bedrock of our society. And I make this point to the socialists on here all the time, being from the Left means being something different from a liberal. All people whether lib dems or tories are liberal in some fashion - be it economic or social. Socialists are not and that is why young people these days can't really deal with those opinions.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
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: February 17, 2018
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?

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.