EnjoyingTheSun wrote:I assume the thrust of your original post was ..
You can and invariably do use assumption to ascribe whatever motivation you like to my posts but that does mean your assumptions bear any relation to reality.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:to draw out those who have concerns about immigration in the UK to then hit them with the zinger “but you are an immigrant here!!!!”
Johnson's speech was about a specific issue with immigration in the UK, namely that of failure of immigrants to 'integrate'. Yes I did seek to draw parallels with this issue in the UK and here. It was not some attempt at a 'dirty leftist trick'. It was an attempt at serious discussion about such issues, specifically because I do understand that people have concerns over these issues.
You can have 'concerns about immigration' without being racist. But racists DO exist and every single one of them will also have 'concerns about immigration'. I do not think just because there are many who have concerns about immigration who are not racist and some times these people are unfairly labelled as racist, we should simply deny racism exits.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote: In the UK, Somalian immigrant’s standard of English is notoriously poor which no doubt is a major reason for the 60% unemployment amongst men. Which leads to the question what contribution do they make to the UK. Much as it would be a utopian ideal to take in every economic migrant in the world and improve their lives it is not practical or affordable.
This to me typifies what I see as 'muddled thinking' over these issues that is I think quite common. There is a difference between an 'economic migrant' and someone seeking asylum. How many of the Somali's , with notoriously poor English skills in your stats are in the UK as people seeking asylum or granted asylum vs economic migrants ? For me the stat I would like to see is what is the % employment rate amongst Somali immigrants (those who have been granted asylum or economic migrants) in the UK of the 2nd and 3rd generations ? I strongly suspect that the unemployment rate in this group would not be particularly different from the national average, just as their 'standard of English' will also not be atypical either. What do you think the employment rate (or standard of English) was of 1st generation Jewish immigrants into the UK leading up to, during and immediately after WW2 was ? Do you think it might have been higher than the UK national average ? Will you label me 'antisemitic' for even asking such a question ?
As much as you get frustrated at those who just label anyone with concerns over immigration as racist (something I personal do NOT do) so too I find it frustrating that others label anyone who does not agree with their views on immigration as 'wanting the UK to accept any and all economic migrants from any where in the world without restriction' (something you personally DO do). To say I think the issue of lack of integration of migrants is one that applies in essence to 1st generation migrants and not 2nd or subsequent generations is not to say 'I think the UK should let anyone come and live in the UK legally without any let or hindrance'.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:It would make far more sense to try to improve their lot in their original countries
Who disagrees with this ?
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:which I think we attempt to do with our generous foreign aid. The British people have also been generous in their support of charitable efforts in places such as Africa although that is thrown in our faces as us being a white saviour.
Whatever you think of how generous we are in terms of foreign aid and charity donations the fact is we are not and have not done a very good job in terms of 'improving the lot in their home countries' if you measure it in terms of how many people there are around the world who have been driven from their homes as a result of war and famine and other factors. For me if you are serious about trying to improve the conditions for people in their own country such they are not driven to migrate form such places , then you need to talk about Britain's foreign policy rather than just their foreign aid budget.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:The problem that Johnson can’t allude to, for fear of being labelled a fascist, although he and Rees Mogg are already being tarred as such, is the problem the UK is having with Islam. Forget that the UK and Europe are Christian countries they are, for the most part, secular. As is North Cyprus, which I would imagine is a big reason many of us moved here.
I just do not think there is a problem with Islam, or UK citizens who follow Islam in any sort of sense that is actually generic to followers of Islam in the UK. I am aware that significant numbers of people do perceive such a problem but I just do not agree with them. I think part of the reason why people have such opinions is down to the fact that if a person who is Islamic commits some terrible and heinous act, then they are reported as being Islamic where as when someone who is white and christian commits such an act race and religion are simply irrelevant. There are those (and I am NOT one of them) who claim there is a problem with Jews in the UK, that they do not 'integrate' as they should and hold and place allegiance to things like Judaism and Zionism above any allegiance that have to the UK and its ideals and values and that this is a problem that needs to be dealt with. Do you think it is a problematic that views and opinions such as these can not be stated openly by UK politicians and can only be alluded to ?
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:Islam does not seem to be fit easily into secular Britain.
I just do not agree with this. I think extreme radical Islam does not fit easily into secular Britain, just as extreme radical Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism or any other ism does not fit easily into secular Britain. It is the 'extreme radical' bit that I think does not fit easily into secular Britain, not the religion bit as far as I am concerned.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote: My main truck with the left in the UK ...
You truck is, as far as I can see, always
and only ever
with the left in the UK. I have yet to see you have any truck with anything or anyone in the UK other than 'the left'. Which is what makes it easy to feel like you are driven just as much by 'ideology' as those on the left you accuse of being so driven. It is also why it can feel very frustrating debating with you.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:While we are on the subject, how would YOU label Johnson and Rees Mogg?
I would label them as politicians, which for me is not a particularly complementary label but a fair and accurate one I would claim none the less.