-
Posts
-
Drac, you denounce identity politics, but you are one of the real advocates of identity politics on these boards.
The identity politics you advocate is national identity, which you see as far more important than identity by religion or a feeling of exclusion..
If you feel English, you are English. I was born and bred in England, but I’ve been called un-English. Care I?
The identity that matters to me is the identity of being excluded, of being downtrodden, of being beaten up and tortured for what you are. That’s why I’m on the Left, and hate the whole politics of UKIP, Trump and the new authoritarian Right, chock-full of patriots (Dr Johnson: Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel)
Drac, you denounce identity politics, but you are one of the real advocates of identity politics on these boards. The identity politics you advocate is national identity, which you see as far more important than identity by religion or a feeling of exclusion.
I will provide an example of why a country should have some degree of shared values. The Dutch government has a party called Denk, which in reality is loyal to Turkey not the Netherlands. This allows Erdogan to indirectly have influence in Dutch politics. They currently have seats because they seperated from an existing party and were allowed to inherit some of their seats, I hope that they will be losing them in the next election there. This should not be something that is allowed to happen.
The identity that matters to me is the identity of being excluded, of being downtrodden, of being beaten up and tortured for what you are. That’s why I’m on the Left, and hate the whole politics of UKIP, Trump and the new authoritarian Right, chock-full of patriots (Dr Johnson: Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel)
Do you actually know what UKIPs policies are? Some of them are quite left wing, free university courses (STEM only), and they are talking about a universal basic income. The identity politics of the left is to segregate people by race and sexuality. I don’t like this at all, and for the most part the right doesn’t try to do this at all.
Cultures have shared values, countries are political entities covering a geographic area. If a country had shared values, then that removes a big source of conflict, but you can’t force shared values of that kind. What you can have is a system of laws which reflect an evolving set of values. But shared values are not set in stone, especially in a rapidly changing world such as ours. You really can’t stop the world and get off; not even North Korea.
You have a very warped view of the Left. I don’t seek to segregate people by gender or race, though I do recognise that there are left-wing people who do want that. There are racial and gender issues, however, whihc are very real and won’t go away by your denoundcig them as just identity politics..
UKIP’s policies are based on a return to national insularism – that’s their politics of identity. They share that politics with every fascist, racist and authoritarian party in Europe. That’s what makes them a right-wing party, with storng links to Trump. Trump has economic policies which overlap with the Left in some way – opposition to the TPP, for example. There’s likely to be a short-term boom, but God help us after it peters out.
All the new authoritarian Right make populist noises, but their politics is one of national identity. It’s an identity politics all of its own, and you can’t go round denouncing identity politics without admitting that you have them.
The identity politics of the Authoritarian Right is a sham. The talk is of the people, but the reality is that the nation doesn’t actually have shared interests. There a re the values of many white working-class people – who feel left on the shelf, excluded from prosperity – and the politics of bankers like Goldman Sachs and bank of America. The Right talk of the nation, of the people, but look at Trump’s team – they’re from Goldman Sachs. people shout blue murder at bankers – but the bankers are now in charge in the USA.
The fact that UKIP are attacking Labour’s northern strongholds, exploiting the discontent there by making myths about immigrants being the cause of the problems of ordinary people, is playing on an ugly identity politics. Farage wants the NHS closed down and replaced with some kind of private system of health insurance, but that was played down. They’re a con party of the worst kind, full of easy slogans and and an economic strategy of nationalism which endangers us all.
Cultures have shared values, countries are political entities covering a geographic area. If a country had shared values, then that removes a big source of conflict, but you can’t force shared values of that kind. What you can have is a system of laws which reflect an evolving set of values. But shared values are not set in stone, especially in a rapidly changing world such as ours. You really can’t stop the world and get off; not even North Korea.
I should have worded my response better, I used the word country because I was talking about Britain in which the culture has fairly clearly defined geographical boundaries. The sea doesn’t really care about culture much.
You have a very warped view of the Left. I don’t seek to segregate people by gender or race, though I do recognise that there are left-wing people who do want that. There are racial and gender issues, however, whihc are very real and won’t go away by your denoundcig them as just identity politics..
Both Labour and Greens are trying to segregate people, which only really leaves SNP which I wouldn’t be able to vote for (if I wanted to vote left) as they don’t field many candidates in England. So my view of the left wing in England at least seems fairly accurate.
And race / gender issues mostly go away when you stop talking about them. Look at what identity politics has done to race relations in the US for example (under a black pressident even).
All the new authoritarian Right make populist noises, but their politics is one of national identity. It’s an identity politics all of its own, and you can’t go round denouncing identity politics without admitting that you have them.
National identity with the aims to unify people instead of dividing them by race or gender, yes. I don’t really see the problem with this particular version of identity politics. If you have any other solutions then please tell me.
The identity politics of the Authoritarian Right is a sham. The talk is of the people, but the reality is that the nation doesn’t actually have shared interests. There a re the values of many white working-class people – who feel left on the shelf, excluded from prosperity – and the politics of bankers like Goldman Sachs and bank of America. The Right talk of the nation, of the people, but look at Trump’s team – they’re from Goldman Sachs. people shout blue murder at bankers – but the bankers are now in charge in the USA.
Trump’s team is similar to ones Clinton would have picked, her short list of candidates was leaked recently. This is more an issue of corruption in the US government than it is left / right politics.
The fact that UKIP are attacking Labour’s northern strongholds, exploiting the discontent there by making myths about immigrants being the cause of the problems of ordinary people, is playing on an ugly identity politics.
I showed you a Bank Of England study in another thread describing how immigration depresses wages. Its not a myth, and this is one of few things I agree with SHR on.
Farage wants the NHS closed down and replaced with some kind of private system of health insurance, but that was played down. They’re a con party of the worst kind, full of easy slogans and and an economic strategy of nationalism which endangers us all.
I don’t know what Farage personly wants, but he isn’t in charge anymore and UKIPs official policy has always been to increase NHS funding. If they actually would do this or not I don’t know. The main problem with UKIP is their energy policy, which is aweful.
** (see at the end, drac)
On the main argument, abut national identity, around which the Right’s identity politics revolves.
You say that ” I used the word country because I was talking about Britain in which the culture has fairly clearly defined geographical boundaries. The sea doesn’t really care about culture much”.
In fact, the sea never did protect Britain in that way, and in the last century this protection has been less than ever. We re a multi-cultural country – London is the most spectacular example, but there are many other areas. Britain doesn’t have shared values – Jews have a very different set of values, Muslims different again. There are not really any shared values between Brits of Afro-Caribbean descent, Brits of African descent, or the Bangladeshi community in Tower Hamlets, or the various Indian communities of Brits of Indian descent. Some of these communities are very poor, or have a greater degree of unemployment; others, like the Indian community, have proved (for social reasons) to be very successful, more successful in educational attainment and in employment, than the white Brits.
There are also not really any shared values between white Brits. The north Welsh have a very different culture than the south Welsh, and both are very distinct from the English. The Scots have divisions all of their own, apart from an ambiguous feeling against the English (try going into the William Wallace pub in Stirling and saying “what-ho, well old chaps?” See what happens to you. Within England itself, there are big differences between north and south, and within both regions. I cannot make out what a Geordie is saying once they’re in full flow, and Wearsiders don’t particularly like the Geordies anyway.
There are precious few shared values.
One shared value which has seen Britain though the centuries is a benign tolerance of these differences, and the result has been a certain level of integration. Another is a respect for the laws which regulate the country (though sometimes there has been resistance to laws such as the poll tax in 1990). There have been tensions – the anti-Jewish riots in Liverpool in 1948, or the racial riots in Notting Hill in 1958 are examples. I’m not so sure that more recent riots can be so easily categorised as racial, though teh fear cause by the national Front in its day was certainly behind some of them.
Another is a determination to se things though together, despite our divisions. Brexit is going to test that quite a lot in eh enxt few years.
So a limited number of shared values, a divers set of cultures. The problem wiht muslim integration lies in their adherence to the sharia, and that has been the subject of debate throughout this thread. I don’t think any of the contributors want a community in which the sharia would replace British law – that would not be part of our shard values.parts of sharia law, including the limited role of sharia courts as advisory bodies, is acceptable as far as I understand things.
Only radicals want to go further, and part of our shared values as British people is our resistance to them without declaring anyting like all-out war on their community. There are tension, and oddbods like BB rant and rave, others actually attack mosques etc, but for the vast majority of Brits, our share values of tolerance for minorities is seeing us through. This may well be tested if a major atrocity takes place, but other serious atricities have happened (eg the Birmingham pub bombing of 1974) without brits declaring all-out-war on the Irish community then.
Your conception of identity politics seems to mean an end to this shared value, which goes back centuries, in favour of an atavistic idea of a Britain which existed in childhood memories. Wake up.
Again, I’m not going to take up every one of your points, especially with regard to UKIP policies, because I want to focus on the main argument. It certainly doesn’t mean I agree with you. But my understanding of the Bank’s papers on immigration is that the effect on immigration is far more complicated than the ones you highlight. I apologise, but I don’t remember getting any link you sent, though. I’d also appreciate a link with regard to Clinton’s team. Clinton is a twister, who is unable to tell the truth and virtually admitted so, but Trump was always claiming to be something more. Still, unlike UKIP, Trump has the working laboratory of power with which to test his authoritarian nationalism.
I am disapointed in your response Scep.
There are not really any shared values between Brits of Afro-Caribbean descent, Brits of African descent, or the Bangladeshi community in Tower Hamlets, or the various Indian communities of Brits of Indian descent. Some of these communities are very poor, or have a greater degree of unemployment; others, like the Indian community, have proved (for social reasons) to be very successful, more successful in educational attainment and in employment, than the white Brits. There are also not really any shared values between white Brits. The north Welsh have a very different culture than the south Welsh, and both are very distinct from the English.
You are dividing people up by race, i’m starting to think what BB said about you being racist my have some truth to it. People don’t think the same as each other because they have the same skin colour. A white working class man has a lot more in common with an Indian working class man than a white middle class man.
In regards to shared values, I think there is a lot more shared values that you seem to think. For example I think a large majority of British people, regardless of background would object to punishing a shoplifter by cutting off their hands. This is a shared value, and one that Sharia would undermine.
Some of these communities are very poor, or have a greater degree of unemployment; others, like the Indian community, have proved (for social reasons) to be very successful, more successful in educational attainment and in employment, than the white Brits.
Racially segregated residential areas aren’t a community, they are an enclave and shouldn’t exist. The reason that Indians do better than other minorities is that they live with other British people and participate in the culture and economy that exists outside. This is what I want all minority groups to do. But you seem call this identity politics for some reason.
The Scots have divisions all of their own, apart from an ambiguous feeling against the English (try going into the William Wallace pub in Stirling and saying “what-ho, well old chaps?” See what happens to you.
You are talking about a minority of Scotish people here, most of them are Unionists and see English people the same as other Scots.
So a limited number of shared values, a divers set of cultures. The problem wiht muslim integration lies in their adherence to the sharia, and that has been the subject of debate throughout this thread. I don’t think any of the contributors want a community in which the sharia would replace British law – that would not be part of our shard values.parts of sharia law, including the limited role of sharia courts as advisory bodies, is acceptable as far as I understand things.
Advising to cut people’s hands off isn’t something I am willing to accept, and I don’t think most people in Britain would be. I will always have a zero tollerance stance towards Sharia. You can’t select which parts of Sharia are compatible, they are the divine laws of Allah. To do this would be an insult to their god, at least for the fundementalists. Once you have officially accepted any part of Sharia there will always be a movement to fully implement it, and it will by financed from countries like Saudi.
There are tension, and oddbods like BB rant and rave, others actually attack mosques etc, but for the vast majority of Brits, our share values of tolerance for minorities is seeing us through.
This discussion is about what happens when a minority doesn’t tollerate you, to which you haven’t been able to provide any solutions.
Your conception of identity politics seems to mean an end to this shared value, which goes back centuries, in favour of an atavistic idea of a Britain which existed in childhood memories. Wake up.
I don’t understand what you are trying to say, my childhood memories are either in France or in England but being unable to communicate with anyone because I didn’t speak English.
drac, If you think I’m a racist then you’re living in the same upside-down world as BB, where good is bad, right is wrong, Hitler is a centre-left politician.
I hate to point out the obvious, but Scots don’t have a different skin-colour, and you’re entering into definite realms of maybe when you say that Scots aren’t separate from England – look at their governmnt
We are a multi-cultural society. values are not shared between Christians, atheists, Muslims, Jews etc. We are a varied country – we’re not all English in the old sense of the term. We’re British, and we are changing as we’ve always changed in response to other societies..
But there are shared values which have characterized Britain – in particular, a tolerance of different cultures.
The thread is about the integration of Muslims. I’ve stressed that sharia law must be subordinate to British law – connect the dots.If you know of a good way to end terrorism, let us know. So far the only ways are the ones I’ve mentioned – good policing and the use of peer group pressure within Muslim society.
if you think I’m a racist, then you’re in danger of turning the thread into idiot talk – of UKIP extremism where tolerance of different cultures within one country is unacceptable, and your opponents as traitors etc. This is actually NOT British values.
betyond thos diverse values, we ar human beings. That’s it.
Hmm I think maybe what happens is that they’re more past-thinking than always looking forward compared to most people so maybe they feel absolutely alienated by traditional ways and see it as a rejection rather than celebration of religion bringing people together. I feel like I guess if there’s a popular muslim show, for example, that shows them being more optimistic about ‘why wouldn’t they not be included absolutely,’ then that kind of thing would integrate them more? I think most people know that people aren’t objects and things shouldn’t be ‘all of nothing,’ when it comes to actual happiness. Like just because most people are Christian, that doesn’t mean they don’t want a best friend who is different religion. Things like that aren’t supposed to be perfect as long as good morals are taught, etc. It could also be the “fuel” people are used to, too. Some people are used to fear as their motivation and happiness and what they’re good at, and Islam has mostly fear as a motivator compared to the fruits/rewards motivation in some other religions, so the mainstream society seems kind of different. But I think there’s so much real happiness in places like UK, so it’s definitely worth it for them to socialize just for the sake of socializing, for fun, and being in the loop.
You seem to not have tasted fresh water before you’re starting to judge and criticize a culture you’re not even free in. I have never heard of a convert with no strings attached wanting to ever go back. There is only one way everyone likes and everyone likes fruits and rewards without gambling rather than negativity that sucks out energy and makes everyone poor. If a person doesn’t understand their own feelings, it’ll never go away- people will never want to make others happy by giving them what they want because they never had what they wanted.
shame such political correctness is failing to address they actual concept by setting aside tradition and culture that may cause offence . the ideas behind such actions can be from well meaning and worthy desires to allow all to live happily side by side in a ‘perfect world’ .sadly they do not allow all inclusiveness they they are trying to achieve as they sideline they very citizens they want to integrate with the incoming newcomers etc. I and many I know are offended by the full face covering with just eye slits but our feelings are considered racist and xenophobic etc as brushed aside. no comment or views allowed without penalty etc . its not majority of voters joining our country or community that are all not integrating but the natural state of play where all enclaves the attract more of same ilk are when at a strong local stage ( even national) getting organised to push own culture and agenda. this gets political backing past point of logic and reason by overriding such traditions and culture as exist. I can fully understand why some things are now considered to cause offence and outlawed etc ( Golliwogs for example) as they do cause offence and we can see both sides of viewpoints. however we see increasing case of british values being set aside to accommodate others whom hold little or no regard for the very country they are fortunate enough to reside in. Sharia law areas have been set up . Police have to refer offenders to these and not our local courts etc mandatory consolations with ‘community leaders’. a polite word for immigrant enclaves . there is not enough balance and open discussion with such groups so integration is and will fail. Islam for example is supposed to mean ‘peace; but it can be hard to get a single example of this but many many example of opposite . we respect females here but others treat them as objects. for example Uk allows others to have more than one wife as its religion and tradition ( even though not ours and we find that offensive) . we even PAY benefits to ALL the wives. yet they in many case despise our attitudes and religions. the world is going to change in next decade or so and it won’t be for benefit of residents whom were brought up to encompass all walks of life and all cultures when one group is not willing to do so and is getting premium treatment above residents wishes.aspirations etc . even this mailing will be subject review and removal if it causes ‘offence;.
It’s not good to not have tasted fresh water before starting to judge and criticize a culture you’re not even free in. I have never heard of a convert with no strings attached wanting to ever go back. There is only one way everyone likes and everyone likes fruits and rewards without gambling rather than negativity that sucks out energy and makes everyone poor. If a person doesn’t understand their own feelings, it’ll never go away- people will never want to make others happy by giving them what they want because they never had what they wanted.
Get involved in this discussion! Log in or register now to have your say!