1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Who should we let in - Ian Hislop BBC2

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by Faustus, Jun 22, 2017.

  1. Vonhelmet

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jun 28, 2005

    Posts: 48,116

    Location: On the hoods

    It's not in the millions. The other guy said he hoped it was in the thousands and was told that it is, and you're telling me that we don't want it to be in the millions and... it isn't. So, um, that's good, right?

    Firstly, I really have to take issue with your notion that "we" will end up in a minority. Secondly, I'm still waiting to be shown that migration is a bad thing. You're talking about some terrible change that is going to occur, but you aren't showing how or where or when or why it will occur.

    If you're worried about "us" being outnumber, maybe natives should have some babies... Except falling birth rates are totally expected in populations like ours. We need increasing populations to prop up our pension schemes, our health service and our aging population. Either "we" have babies, which you can hardly mandate, or you live with migration. If the migrants weren't coming, then our population would be shrinking and we'd be dying out anyway. So you either have your hypothetical minority long-ancestry population or you have a hypothetical declining population. How is the latter preferable to the forum?

    I am criticising the article. It doesn't say anything conclusive beyond providing a whole bunch of not very exciting statistics. More Romanians and Bulgarians came than someone thought. Um... so what? Then midway through the article you get this:

    Weasel words. Nothing of substance, just lots of speculation. It doesn't mean anything. I particularly like the nebulous appeal to authority in the last line.

    We haven't been able to domestically feed our population for decades, long before recent mass immigration. Environmental degradation is a problem worldwide due to our appalling track record across the board, immigration isn't exactly making the difference there. We're not overcrowded and - tied to the next point - we could have housing stock if anyone bothered to build any. Racial/religious/cultural tensions, sure, but a bit more tolerance from our lot certainly wouldn't hurt. Can you show me evidence of depressed wages?

    So do the overwhelming majority of countries. That's hardly an excuse, but don't think we're alone on this one.
     
  2. Amp34

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jul 25, 2005

    Posts: 28,490

    Location: Canada

    I'll ask again. Why does that matter, as you ignored the response and question previously? Are children born to immigrants not considered British? Why? Because they're not white?

    They speak English, they all be taught in British schools, they will be no different than pretty much any white British child.

    So whats the issue? The only difference I can see is they may have a different skin colour, non "traditional" British name and perhaps they may like "foreign" foods more than other white Brits.

    Yes, I'm bringing up the "racist" card, but as you failed to answer the question the first time and I'm struggling to think of any other reason Brits with foreign born parents are any different to Brits without foreign born parents I'm bringing that up until I'm enlightened with something better.
     
    Last edited: Oct 24, 2017
  3. Gravitas

    Associate

    Joined: Oct 5, 2017

    Posts: 93

    Oh Gawd! That is ONE YEAR! Multiply it by 5, 10, 15, 20 years, etc.
     
  4. Caracus2k

    Mobster

    Joined: Jan 27, 2009

    Posts: 4,084

    It's in the hundreds on thousands annually, and no I don't think that's good, as I pointed out the UK now has a situation where it's population with long standing ancestry domestically will soon be in the minority.
     
  5. Vonhelmet

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jun 28, 2005

    Posts: 48,116

    Location: On the hoods

    And you'll get bigger numbers? Awesome.

    So go on, why is immigration overall a bad thing?
     
  6. Vonhelmet

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jun 28, 2005

    Posts: 48,116

    Location: On the hoods

    Then we need to have more babies, except most people aren't interested in that.
     
  7. Caracus2k

    Mobster

    Joined: Jan 27, 2009

    Posts: 4,084

    Yeah what could go wrong if we all just engage in a program of trying to outbread each other....

    Much like you 'what's wrong with mass immigration' stance you appear to be rather myopic as to what the downsides of it all could be
     
  8. Vonhelmet

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jun 28, 2005

    Posts: 48,116

    Location: On the hoods

    I agree it's hardly preferable, but the fact is our birth rate is falling. So on the one hand, our population will naturally decline whether there's anyone else here for us to worry about in terms of your "minority" fears. On the other hand, a falling, aging population is a problem in terms of pensions, healthcare, etc. We need people to make up the difference, be that more "natives" or more migrants.

    While there may be issues, I'm not seeing this as the overall catastrophe you are, that's for sure.
     
  9. Caracus2k

    Mobster

    Joined: Jan 27, 2009

    Posts: 4,084

    So in Amp 34’s world the only difference to someone born to foreign parents in the UK is that they might have a different skin tone to me, might have a non “traditional “ name and might like some different food to me…..

    I have to ask are you serious? No really are you? … is that how limited your understanding of the world is that you think I’m a racist because I don’t like people with darker skin, people with funny sounding names or peole who like different food to me?

    Let's have a look a some actual issues shall we... take a particularly egregious recent example…. Salman Abedi a twenty two year old ‘Brit’ born and raised in the United Kingdom. With religious and cultural views from his upbringing that lead him to set off a bomb outside a concert mostly patronised by children and their accompanying parents. Yep he was clearly upset about not being accepted by racists like me who thought he had a funny name, too much melanin in his skin and a taste for different food.

    But before you get carried away and accuse me of cherry picking let’s have a look at the view of the wider community he came from shall we… (and let’s remember these are the views that they are willing to openly admit to pollsters and as such are likely to be a good deal tamer then their actual views)

    So what do we have…. a population where nearly half would like to see homosexuality criminalised (remind me which countries globally still have the death penalty for homosexuality and what’s the majority religion in these countries?) and where nearly a quarter would like to institute a theocracy in the UK where I would officially be a second class citizen with less rights and the pleasure of paying higher taxes for the pleasure of not being executed for being a non-believer.

    A population where a third seems to have some sympathy with stoning people for adultery and would approve of (male) polygamy…. And a population where a not insignificant minority will openly state that they sympathise with suicide bombers who blow up children at concert’s....

    I wonder as well what your views are on women’s rights as well when 39% think that women should always obey their husbands. I wonder if the majority of the 61% from that question were from just one of the two sexes?

    Of course not all migration and by extension migrants themselves are the same or bring an equal measure of good and bad things to the UK with them. In the past (prior to the 1950’s) many migrants (almost universally European) came in far smaller numbers (as a percentage of the existing population) to these Islands and assimilated into the wider population without too much incident. But when, as I have shown, over 50% of the ‘new’ population is no longer from the established population whose assimilating who?

    Frankly it’s predictably depressing that, in your world view, my opposition to all this is ‘racist’ apparently because you think I don’t like some combination of darker people, people with non “traditional” names and people that like foreign food.

    Personally I wouldn’t mind a bit more melanin myself as I burn all to easily and quite like a varied cuisine if not personally liking spicy food (nothing racist, it just doesn’t agree with my digestion)...

    I also have a rather unusual surname which is often thought by others (mistakenly) to have non-native origins. In fact I can trace my ancestors back domestically to the 16th century on one side and the 17th on the other and this is only because record keeping wasn’t so great before these times.

    I can actually trace my surname back to a village in Kent (the same county I grew up in myself) which is known to have existed since at least the 13th century....

    So nice try at ‘pulling the race card’ but as is commonly the case when it’s pulled it’s a lazy, reductionist, poor substitution for having an actual argument.



    You take issue with the fact that ‘we’....
    (to be clear by ‘we’ I mean the population of this country that is still currently in the majority and which has ancestry in the country going back hundreds if not thousands of years)
    ...... will be in the minority ….it’s an empirical fact that this will be the case unless something drastic happens. I therefore assume that it offends your feelings? … and if this is the case I don’t care in fact it gives me a scintilla of mild satisfaction if stating facts like this causes you a degree of at least minor consternation or unease because it, in my mind, demonstrates that you are operating with a considerable degree of cognitive dissonance on the subject trying to rationalise your virtue signalling with empirical reality. I have shown above one example as to why (at least certain types) of migration might be a very bad thing. So how about you try and answer my question about where a similar demographic experiment has been tried before and ended with favourable results for the initial population of the area before they became a minority?

    Who would have ever voted for such a thing had it ever been on a manifesto pledge for a party or a referendum…. I think you know the answer – you and Amp34 are in a minority of views on the subject and I say with good reasons
     
    Last edited: Oct 24, 2017
  10. Vonhelmet

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jun 28, 2005

    Posts: 48,116

    Location: On the hoods

    Virtue signalling! Bing! It's impossible I believe anything authentically if it offends your sensibilities. I must be doing it to look good.

    More on that story later.
     
  11. Caracus2k

    Mobster

    Joined: Jan 27, 2009

    Posts: 4,084

    Shall I call you a cultural Marxist as well so you can completely excuse yourself from having to actually provide a cogent argument for your views?

    Feel free to try and argue you point without 'feels' if you wish....
     
  12. Vonhelmet

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jun 28, 2005

    Posts: 48,116

    Location: On the hoods

    Ok, let's see. You claim it is "empirical fact" that people with a long ancestry (a very vague and nebulous term) will be a minority in the future. Now fine, it's a "fact" that if X is growing while Y is declining then at some point X will exceed Y. What you're not demonstrating is any evidence that the current rates of growth and decline won't ever change. You're making a huge assumption and extrapolating a position from there.

    So yeah, I *feel* that your argument is based on shaky ground.

    As said, we also have a problem with our top heavy population who need incoming taxes to support them and low end workers to look after them. Who do you suggest does that in a society where - as said - the "native" birth rate is falling?
     
  13. Caracus2k

    Mobster

    Joined: Jan 27, 2009

    Posts: 4,084

    You support a ponzi scheme... a shrinking population causes problems but I would suggest a smaller population (especially for the south east of England) would be desirable. How exactly to you imagine China will pr over with their enforced mass decrease in the replacement rate up until recently?


    If the Uk were to remain in the EU and with massive population growth in the MENA areas why exactly would you think the numbers coming to the UK would go down? There's absolutely no reason outside of fantasy or catastrophe to imagine the numbers would go down and sound reasons to think the numbers (especially from outside of the EU) will increase

    Still wish thinking appears popular with some.
     
  14. Vonhelmet

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jun 28, 2005

    Posts: 48,116

    Location: On the hoods

    As ever, I'd also like to know who the people with a "long ancestry" are. How far back are we talking?

    My mum is Finnish, and I assume her lineage goes back centuries over there, so I guess I'm on shaky ground straightaway, and she should definitely have been deported at least 4 decades ago. My dad was born in England, which is good, but his dad was born in Australia, which is bad, but at some point the line comes back to Scotland, possibly around the late 18th Century and the Highland Clearances, so that's... sort of good, I guess? He was probably a filthy Jacobite, though, hellbent on bringing down the British parliament, and if his blood runs in my veins, then I'm probably exactly the sort of person this country doesn't need.

    So am I allowed to stay? Where do we draw the line? Are you going to pass judgement on this for everyone? I expect that will take up a significant amount of your time, so I hope you've not got anything planned for the rest of your life.
     
  15. JeditOjanen

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 7, 2011

    Posts: 3,946



    The article on immigration that you linked to shows that net migration peaked six years ago and is down over the last two years, the stated cause being an almost 40% rise in EU citizens leaving (from 81k to 117k). So migration is not a problem, and in fact you're overplaying the effects of it.

    And the children of migrants are the children of people who have settled here. Those people mainly want to be British, and their kids are British. Saying that someone isn't British because their parents came here from another country is "blood and soil" racism and it has no place in civilised society.
     
  16. Caracus2k

    Mobster

    Joined: Jan 27, 2009

    Posts: 4,084


    Stop being obtuse.... you know full well that the majority of people in this country who are 'white' and not immigrants from the EU since freedom of movement started have ancestors going back at least 100's if not thousands of years. It doesn't really matter if some people have some other European descent generations ago because in the thousand or so years from the arrival of the Norman's till the 1950's the amounts of people arriving arriving were tiny compared to the population at the time, and the incomers were quickly assimilated into the wider populafuom within a generation or two as they had somewhat similar ideals as they were almost universally from similar European countries and there small numbers meant that assimilation into the wider community was both desirable and necessary. With migrants and their children now making up well over 50‰ of new population growth I say this is no longer likely to remain the case
     
  17. Vonhelmet

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jun 28, 2005

    Posts: 48,116

    Location: On the hoods

    OK, so it's obtuse to ask a question about my standing as the son of a migrant in a discussion in which you are deeply concerned about the plight of people with "long ancestry" in this country in the face of an onslaught of migrants. Righty ho.
     
  18. Caracus2k

    Mobster

    Joined: Jan 27, 2009

    Posts: 4,084

    I never said there were not British so you can put the straw man away. I did say the can can will some rather unpleasant cultural beliefs..

    I'm not and have never suggested any form of repatriation m asking is it a good idea to continue our current trajectory?
     
  19. Caracus2k

    Mobster

    Joined: Jan 27, 2009

    Posts: 4,084

    Now you really are being obtuse. I really doubt that in your day to day life you exercise much in the way of an identifiable 'Finnish' identity from your mother's side. Because as I suggested the history of migration into the UK was one of small numbers from Europe who assimilated into the wider population. You being a relative outlier in having some recent European heritage outside of the UK is not a great argument in favour of over 50% of the new population per annunciation coming from migrants or their children
     
  20. Vonhelmet

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jun 28, 2005

    Posts: 48,116

    Location: On the hoods

    No, but I recognise that we have one. What alternative would you suggest?

    The South East of England can cry all the way to the bank with all their wealth and disproportionate amount of government spending. And I can't parse your second sentence, it looks like there's a typo or two in there.

    And you're still yet to tell me why it would be such a bad thing. And even if it were to go up and up and up forever, you're still in a position where we stop them coming and we shrink away and die out to nothing, leaving our once glorious British Isles empty, or we are apparently swamped by interlopers. Why is the former any better than the latter? Last one to die please switch off the nuclear power plants?