Multiculturalism

Considering the problems it has been shown to cause, is it worth it?

In b4 racists, stormfags and anyone with a prejudiced opinion and little else.

RON PAUL /newpol/,

I have discovered an amazing site. Turn the volume for your computer ON, and go to http://blocked.on.nimp.org with Internet Explorer. After going there with Internet Explorer, go there with Mozilla Firefox.

>>1
>In b4 racists, stormfags and anyone with a prejudiced opinion and little else.

Does a comment about that on newpol really need to be made?

Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans strictly as members of groups rather than as individuals. Racists believe that all individuals who share superficial physical characteristics are alike: as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called "diversity" actually perpetuate racism.

>>1

what problems?  sure, blacks commit more crime, but in a larger, overall sense, crime is down in every category since the end of the civil rights era.

Multiculturalism can be a problem when the society as a whole lacks a certain level of cohesiveness.  Too many groups of people value different things and want to take the country in opposing directions.  Everyone loses because no real progress can be made, since the efforts of one group contradict those of another group.

In my opinion, multiculturalism is only good in the kitchen where the best foods of each culture can be shared.  Anywhere else and it devolves to people bitching about one another.

>>6

what are you talking about?  crime is down.  education is up.  trade of goods and ideas is at its highest level in human history.

you're just bitching because you believe in an idealized past that never existed.  also you're starting to realize your liberal arts community college degree won't get you very far, despite your rosy white skin.

>>7
Crime is down and education is up since when? Not since before the Civil Rights era.

>>7
I wasn't bitching about anything.  Just saying that there can be problems with multiculturalism.  It seems like you're the one with an agenda to push.  Sorry if I didn't go to some homo-friendly liberal paradise of a college, but I don't think multicultural automatically means entirely good things without consequences.

gb2 moveon.org

>>8 >Crime is down and education is up since when?

Crime is down in all categories: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance.htm

Education/enrollment is up as a percentage of the population:  http://www.census.gov/population/pop-profile/2000/chap09.pdf

And yet this nation is more diverse than ever.  Hmm... THIS IS THE PROBLEM WITH YOU RACIST FAGGOTS GETTING ALL YOUR NEWS FROM STORMFRONT!

>>9 |Just saying that there can be problems with multiculturalism.

what problems?  as has been noted, crime is down, education is up and people are richer than ever before.  remember, we're talking about the overall issues.  keep this in mind before you start bitching about your own minor experiences which are completely irrelevant to the larger picture.

>>10
LMAO education enrolment is up, no fucking shit. We are talking about standards. Civil Rights era = the 60s, and since then crime has increased greatly.

>>12 |LMAO education enrolment is up, no fucking shit. We are talking about standards.
The Flynn effect shows a rise in IQ across time since the 1960s

|since then crime has increased greatly.
oh hey we're making shit up now.  SAUCE

MIXING CULTURES IS ABSOLUTELY PERFECT IN EVERY WAY AND IT MAKES EVERYTHING 10X BETTER THAN IT WAS BEFORE WITHOUT A DOUBT.  EVEN WEED IS BETTER WHEN IT'S MULTICULTURAL, ESPECIALLY SMOKED IN A MULTICULTURAL BOWL.  I KNOW SO BECAUSE MY DUTCH-ALBINO-JEW TEACHER IN ANTHROPOLOGY 101 AT BERKLY TOLD ME THIS FIRST HAND.

>>14

i thought you stormfaggots were supposed to be good a rational arguments.  no matter how hard you try, your limited wit and boorish sarcasm won't make up for the fact that you're ignoring evidence that directly counters your idiotic claims.  the world is better than it's ever been.  cry MOAR

>>15
How are stormfags supposed to formulate rational arguments? If they could, they wouldn't be stormfags would they? Get the fuck out.

Pushing for multiculturalism is as pointless as pushing for monoculturalism. Why should I pretend to like Ramen when it tastes like someone's just taken a shit in mouth?

>>16

i don't think you understood my post.  Stormfags claim they hate minorities because of X, Y, and Z, but when you get down to it all their reasons are hollow and they're just racist.

I think it is funny how many (mostly liberal types) think that we need to have a true "melting pot" but then want to celebrate diversity.

So which is it? Are we all the same and should be treated as equals or should we celebrate diversity? If we choose to recognize everyone's differences, we cannot treat everyone equally. If we say everyone should be treated equally, we cannot point out differences (thereby making everyone not equal).

Multiculturalism is neither universally bad nor universally good. Too much diversity and societal cohesion breaks down. Too little and... well I don't know.

Multiculturalism with civilized cultures like whites/East Asians/Jews = win
Multiculturalism with mud people = fail

>>18
Expect a facepalm by mail in several days.

>>18
I hate minorities because it is an evolutionarily better strategy to spend beneficial behaviour towards fellow ethnics than towards outsiders, just because you are more closely related to them. Also, ethnic competition over territory does NOT pay off in terms of reproductive fitness. You cannot refute that logic. Prove me wrong.

>>23
Why don't you go and piss over a tree to mark your territory, if it doesn't strain your pathetic cognitive capabilities too much?

also, in after DURRR HURRR PROOOV ME RONG

Multiculturalism is code for multiracialism otherwise they would push it in countries without a white majority, liberals think white people are evil.

>>25

you missed a spot

>>25
White men owning businesses and being in government = Evil right wing oppressors

Minorities owning businesses and being in government = La la love land paradise

>>10

This has nothing to do with multiculturalism. Technology progresses and things generally get better for people. This has nothing to do with multiculturalism.

OP here, perhaps it was the wrong board for me to post on, but I was thinking more in terms of the UK where I get the impression it is much more of a currently salient issue than in the US.

>>29
Multicuntyism is welcomed in America.
We like minority women who have 2, and sometimes 3, cunts.

>>23
Will he bite?

Multiculturalism is tolerable as long as it doesn't start displacing the native culture.  Notice how no one complains when their country isn't being swamped with foreigners.  English-speaking countries just take the whole politically correct thing too far.

>>32

what are you basing your statements on?

Of all the mass imbecilities which have demoralised mankind, this of racial equality between all peoples, White, Black, Red and Yellow, is the most inane. Politically, it has already stirred up all the minor races into a state of belligerence and discontent which will impose minor wars on the dominant nations for years to come. But when it comes to racial integration between the White and Black races, sanity has descended to the looney bin of the impossible, because the intermixture of blood between those races must degrade the White race to the level of the Negro and cannot raise the Negro to the level of the White. Where today we see some evidence of the effect of education on the Negro it is the White blood in him that stirs some animation in his sluggish mental faculties, but the Negro pure, as he exists in Africa, cannot be educated even up to the standard of the lowest content of the White race. He may learn to parrot all the political and sociological clichés of today, but unless he is buttressed by the White race, and policed by it, he must relapse back to the jungle, which is his predestined habitat.

There appears to be an illusion today that this age is the first one in which the Negro has come into contact with a White civilisation, and so had a chance to benefit by its cultural and sociological ordinances. This is not the case. Since the genesis of this present civilisation some six or seven thousand years ago, the Negro has had contact with many past episodes of civilisation, but always, as each subsided, he has relapsed back to the jungle. The other three races, White, Yellow and Red, have devised their own civilisations, and have maintained them through the ages, but it is only in quite recent years that the Negro has come into relations with them. As in the past, his status has been one of slavery, because he has never been able to compete culturally with their achievements in the arts and crafts and intellectual standards. Nor can he compete today with those same achievements, because he utterly lacks the creative faculty: he has no thumbs. The only thing he ever learned to do was to smelt iron ore and hammer out his spear heads. That weapon was essential to the preservation of his existence in his tribal wars, and his food derived from wild animals able to defend themselves with teeth and claws.

Save for the Chinese, and other Asiatic peoples, all other civilisations were generated on the shores of the Mediterranean and the Negro penetration of them was very slight, except, perhaps, with the Egyptians, who were themselves a dark coloured race, but with no relation to the Negroid peoples. Only the Moors and Arabs, because of their geographical contiguity with Africa, have kept up the slave trade with Negroes, but sexual union with them was strictly prohibited. Or impossible for that matter. By a very simple clinical ritual, the Negro became a harmless guard and menial to the Harem. It is only since the colonisation of Africa by the British, Dutch, French and Belgian peoples that the Negro has become a momentous world problem within the last two decades. The British, French and Belgian peoples solved it for themselves by handing their colonies over to the Negroes. The Dutch could not do that. They had been so long in South Africa that they had built up another white race there—the Boers. And there, the world may be assured, they will remain, and the Negro will not be permitted racial equality with them. What must happen shortly between those peoples is already predestined. The only other country on which the full weight of the Negro falls is America.

And the Politician’s solution to it of race integration is a desperation measure which never can succeed, as the politicians themselves know, but at present, they dare not do anything about it, for President Johnson won the presidential campaign by handing himself over to the largest section of the community to command the vote, just as Roosevelt did to capture the presidential chair. We know that section, which is the pestilential problem of all peoples who seek to keep a sane balance of rationality in the conduct of their political and sociological affairs. In Australia, we call them Wowsers—a stigma word which Mencken incorporated in his American Language, but as yet Americans have not adopted it. A stigma word has great power.

In America the Wowser is the self-elected Dogooder—the temperance crank, the Purity Leaguer, the anti-saloon leaguer, the Comstock bookshop smasher and picture slasher; in short, that chapel product of the cheap suburbs and the rural back blocks which seeks to impose its own horrible codes and doctrines on all that makes life tolerable for well constituted humanity. They are the people who imposed Prohibition on America and very nearly wrecked the country. In Russia, they were largely responsible for the Revolution by cutting off the people’s need for liquor during the 194 war. They are the Pacifists—the peace at any pricers, the appeasers at any threat of war which thereby makes it inevitable by inviting aggression from piratically inclined nations. They are today trying to cripple Johnson’s handling of the Viet Nam war: the finest piece of statecraft since the great days of England as a world power, when half a dozen words from Lord Salisbury was enough to send Russia scuttling back from the Oxus. It is a great pleasure to know that our men are fighting with the Yanks, and that more are being trained to follow, if needed.

It is the Wowser, then, to use one stigma term for a generic type common to America, England, and Australia, who is doing all the mischief today by inflating the Negro with a state of megalomania which convinces him that he is the victim of monstrous injustice by the white peoples, and all revenges on them are his by right of martyrdom. And that revenge he will take whenever he has power to do so.

We must concede him injustice so far in that the Whites have invaded his country and taken possession of large sections of it. In the past, they made a commodity of him in the slave market. Those same Whites have now handed back to him the sections of country they had occupied and have freed him from slavery. Justice can go no further than that.

But America, swung off a sane balance of rationality by the maudlin sentimentality of the Wowsers for the assumed sad lot of the Negroes, has allowed its politicians to establish them in equal civil and social rights with the Whites. They have ordained that the white children must consort intimately with the black offspring from infancy to adolescence, and that alone insures sexual intimacy between the two races. That American mothers—always so passionately possessive over their young—should have allowed them to do such a noxious thing is evidence that they are too dazed by the bulldozing tactics of the politicians to realise its inevitable consequences. It is assumed that education will dispose of the physiological compulsions inherent in all such propinquity of the human species.

Education! This age has become besotted over its assumed potentialities to perform a universal miracle, which is that text books alone can create a civilisation. It ignores the irrefutable evidence that only a civilised mind can be educated. Education is nothing more than a procedure for exercising intellectual faculties which are a content of the mind at birth. It has taken the white race six thousand years to develop those special faculties on which all civilisations have been built. The craftsman’s fingers, the musician’s ear, the artist’s hand and eye, the scientist’s investigation of all natural phenomena are inherited from progenitors who have left behind them the brain cells, and the muscular reflexes essential to all creative effort. And it is now assumed that education, in a generation or two, will allow the wretched Negro to develop those special faculties and so allow him to compete on equal terms with the White race as a civilised being. Imbecility can go no further than such a preposterous assumption.

Already the Negro mass is in a vicious state of resentment because it has not straightway been vested in all the rights and privileges of the Whites. The Los Angeles episode is a sufficient evidence of a universal state of mind among the Negroes. And that is only the beginning of the trouble. When he finds that the higher-class whites will not consort with him on equal terms, and that there is no place for him among the trained working class, no police force in the world will be adequate to control him.

Americans are not a docile people when politicians impose arbitrary interdictions on the free conduct of their civic rights and their private lives. The politicians’ failure to inflict Prohibition on the American people is evidence of what they must expect by this proposal to impose racial integration with the Negroes on them. It only required an adjustment of the legal code to dispose of Prohibition, but no such adjustment can solve the Negro problem for them. There is only one possible solution to that, but I am not going to take it on myself to suggest it. It must be already pregnant in the minds of all higher class American thinkers today.

>>34

hey great.  80 year old copypasta from an Austfailian shows original thinking on your part.  way to ignore the falling crime rates, higher levels of education and record lifespans here in the US in 2008.  Way to ignore the fact that the states with the highest percentage of immigrants have the lowest unemployment rates.  Way to ignore the fact that were it not for immigration, the US couldn't maintain it's redstate welfare of farm subsidies and the $700,000,000,000 annual military budget.

The 'it's for the economy' excuse is used by the government in the UK, which gives the assumption that immigration is allowed for the fiscal good of the nation. However, somehow I doubt the economic advantages of immigration outweigh the damage caused by police hours and justice system resources wasted in the rising crime rates, child support for huge families created by overbreeding 3rd world immigrants, highly expensive medical treatment for inbreeding Pakistani and other incestuous cultures' (literally) retarded children, money being sent abroad by foreign workers to their families outside the UK, educational courses set up to accomodate foreign workers with the language etc, and probably some other expenses I can't recall now.

Obviously this post is highly biased against the huge levels of immigration the UK is experiencing right now, but I really would welcome any genuine arguments against my points to get a clearer picture of the issue.

>>35
How does it feel to get intellectually butt-raped by an Austfailian?

Your points are pathetic. Crime was lower before mass immigration in Western countries, I'm a Britfag and here crime has increased by a factor of 10 in the last 50 years.
http://www.civitas.org.uk/pubs/crimeBB.php
So crime is "down" in America the last 10 years but that's a blip on an otherwise rising trend. Everyone knows immigrants cause a surge in crime rates, it's happening all over Europe. Sweden has a rape epidemic currently.

"States with the highest percentage of immigrants have the lowest unemployment rates" - strange statistic, and no source. Immigrants on average have higher rates of unemployment except for perhaps East Asians, so is this saying the states are richer DESPITE having more immigrants?

As for your economic arguments, they are one sided and don't include the overwhelming costs of immigrants. It's debatable if immigration even makes normal citizens people better off. A study recently in the UK showed they caused no increase in GDP per capita.

>>37

|Crime was lower before mass immigration in Western countries
the US is a western country that has always had mass immigration and crime is at it's lowest levels ever

|I'm a Britfag
i think i'm beginning to see the problem

|Everyone knows immigrants cause a surge in crime rates
REPEAT AFTER ME: the US is a western country with high immigration and crime is at it's lowest levels ever

|it's happening all over Europe. Sweden has a rape epidemic currently.
I don't think 1 rape per 4500 people qualifies as a "rape epidemic"

|As for your economic arguments, they are one sided and don't include the overwhelming costs of immigrants.
ahh, the classic "dey took our jobs" argument has finally made it across the pond.  go back to Econ 101 - there is no set number of jobs that can be drawn from.  the benefits immigrants bring to the table far outweigh the costs.  You have to think in terms of opportunity.  In the US the states with the highest percentage of immigrants have the lowest unemployment rates.  The reason is that a factory that would have cost to much to build before suddenly becomes affordable and springs up in Texas or California. hundreds of jobs are suddenly created that otherwise would not have been there.  this is a key reason you can't judge immigration on the costs.  also in the US, immigrants (illegal or not) commit crime at lower rates than citizens.  people whine about them not paying taxes, but the truth is that most of them do have income taxes withdrawn from their paychecks.  some of them might beat the system, but that's a simple matter of raising the sales tax.  problem solved.

the U.K. is a fail country too xenophobic and shocked over its rapid departure from the world stage that it can't take the rose colored glasses off.  don't be so sure of yourself, you're not that important.  you should just be glad that people want to live in your archaic country in the first place.  also, the bethel green folks in your country voted in the best guy ever.

>>36

You post is just a bunch of BAWWWW!!!

I mean that in the politest possible way, since you seem genuine in your intention to seriously debate the issue.  I just don't understand how you expect Britain (or Europe) to survive without immigration.  You guys are only having like 1 child per couple, it'll be hilarious if in the future you shut out the immigrants and stand by while a whole generation of you has to be put to sleep when you grow older because the money and manpower aren't there to provide for you.

Yes, there are valid cultural issues that need to be discussed when talking about immigration.  Are you willing to discuss them in a format other than us vs. them?  If not, there's no point to this reply.  If so, which are the major issues that need to be addressed?

Multiculturalism's great.

Just ask Yugoslavia.

>>38
"crime is at it's lowest levels ever". Lie, and even if it was it would be much lower without spics and blacks who commit most of the crime (look at the fucking statistics). You are retarded since you don't even understand these things. The fact is there are 10 times the number of people in prison than 50 years ago, keep lying to yourself that diversity is great.

>>40
Actually it was great, until serbs started to think that they were better than the rest...

>>41

your post contained the most fail i've ever seen. in 1900 1/2 of people in Boston used opium legally.  so yes more people are in prison, but that's because of drug laws.

and crime is at its lowest level ever. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance.htm

and yes minorities commit more crime proportionally but most minorities aren't criminals.  keep crying faggot

>>43
Second time you link to figures that only go back to the 70s? Fail yet again. How about some figures on the number of people incarcerated? Locking up all the criminals is a good way to reduce crime and something the US has done right.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/corrtyp.htm

>>44
Except it's expensive as shit to lock up that many people.  There are cheaper ways of reducing crime.  Better laws, better law enforcement, and education.

>>44

so my stats show an drop of over 2,000,000 incidents of serious violent crime annually; we are at the safest period in American history.  and your stats show that the an increased incarceration rate of 400,000 people, about 0.1% of the American population.

sounds like we're much safer, and for those who still commit crime it sounds like the system is working.  why are you bitching?

>go back to Econ 101 - there is no set number of jobs that can be drawn from.  the benefits immigrants bring to the table far outweigh the costs.  You have to think in terms of opportunity.

Net wealth for a country goes down drastically with many immigrants. There is no "benefit" to anyone except large industries in manufacturing and certain service sector jobs.
"The people" of said country get nothing, in fact it pushes down wages and (as in the case in England) makes things more unequal from richest to poorest, it drives up the price of every amenity people have to purchase.
You're completely ignoring the literal expansion in every sector of a country that is nescessary for mass immigration. Not to mention the hilariously expensive legal process involved with asylum seekers and then immigrants aswel.

>In the US the states with the highest percentage of immigrants have the lowest unemployment rates.  The reason is that a factory that would have cost to much to build before suddenly becomes affordable and springs up in Texas or California. hundreds of jobs are suddenly created that otherwise would not have been there.  this is a key reason you can't judge immigration on the costs.

USA is ligh years ahead of most countries

>also in the US, immigrants (illegal or not) commit crime at lower rates than citizens.

Links plz

>the U.K. is a fail country too xenophobic

lol the classic "racism" arguement. Don't be so stupid. The UK is an incredibly tolerant country. I myself am mixed race and I don't like what multiculturalism is doing to this counrty, strangly alot of people in a similar position as mine tend to agree.

>>39
>I just don't understand how you expect Britain (or Europe) to survive without immigration.

This is a completly idiotic statement. If you lower the cost of living more people will have children at a younger age, it is beacuse of the massive pressure on mainly the housing market that is caused by immigration that the birth rate is going down.

And why are we talking about crime statistics? Increased police effectiveness, better social sevices and education all make crime go down. Doesn't have anything to do with multiculturalism. More Bs argument that dont add up to squat from the liberals.

>>39
Immigration seems to be the government's short term solution of papering over cracks in it's deficiency in responding to an ageing population. I'm certainly no socio-economist, but surely the government should be thinking more in terms of promoting having more children in British couples with tax advantages and better financial support for couples with more than one child, and creating advertising campaigns and better informing the population of the need for more children. If I recall rightly something similar was attempted in France some years back with results I cannot remember.

The main cultural issues to be addressed is the complete lack of solidarity in the British people, and the unwillingness of many immigrants to assimilate. While British culture has always been one of being fairly aloof and cold in comparison to others, now British society raises people to believe that being white and having pride in being British (I'm only half white and not even born in the UK, yet because I am part of a predominantly white social group can sense the strength of this and feel it myself) has an immediate connotation with being racist (thank you BNP, thank you very much) and unless you are an apologetic liberal and have no qualms with anything done by those of a foreign culture or skin colour are viewed as having somewhat fascist tendencies, regardless of the objection. The politically correct environment is incredibly tedious too and is readily exploited by many minorities in the workplace, the justice system, and everyday life.

The unwillingness of minorities and immigrants to assimilate has never been much of a problem, but with the rapidly rising numbers it has become a cause for concern among many. While 'British' culture has the stigma attached to it, foreign cultures are protected and encouraged to thrive and all the while growing bigger with rising levels of immigration.

Even writing this I feel like a fascist even though broadly speaking I have liberal views and hate racism, have obviously not explored the huge issue fully. However, objectively speaking (as objective as you can get on social commentary at any rate) I think the majority of British born people, regardless of skin colour, who do not attribute themselves to a foreign culture would agree with most of these points. Again, feel free to point out any flaws, fallacies or inaccuracies in my post.

>>47
|Net wealth for a country goes down drastically with many immigrants. There is no "benefit" to anyone except large industries in manufacturing and certain service sector jobs.
I guess America's wealth is all just phantom.  Infact, the simplistic, unsourced, generalized immgiration axioms you lay out are so inaccurate with respect to the United States, I'm guessing this whole section of your post is about the European situation.  I would urge you to avoid making simplistic general statements in the future. Honestly, I don't know too much about the European situation other than what I read in the papers.  Seems like your options are pretty simple - either close or restrict immigration or find ways to better integrate people into society.  You seem to prefer the former even though the later is probably simpler and more beneficial to your country.  Remember, the point of immigration isn't for your country to be better now but to be in a better, more competitive position 25 years down the road.  You seem to be stuck in some sort of permanent nostalgia though.

|USA is ligh years ahead of most countries
care to explain?  the US isn't that different from Europe and yet we're doing much better.

|Links plz
a Harvard Study: http://contexts.org/articles/files/2008/01/contexts_winter08_sampson.pdf

|I myself am mixed race and I don't like what multiculturalism is doing to this counrty
you might actually try to articulate your specific concerns instead of casting them as wide, ambiguous threats.  I'm not even sure what points I'm supposed to be arguing here.

|If you lower the cost of living more people will have children at a younger age
Oh, OK.  Get on it then.  Sounds easy enough.

>>48
|Immigration seems to be the government's short term solution of papering over cracks in it's deficiency in responding to an ageing population.
So it's the government's role to convince white Brits to have more kids?   White Brits aren't having kids because they're spoiled and want to extend their carefree childhood into their mid-30s.  Economics has nothing to do with it.  If it did the birthrate during WW1 and WW2 would have been zero. You're engaged in a type of wishful thinking that is like pissing into the winds of social change.  Government policy has nothing to do with it, as long as your navel gazing, effeminate values continue, your native population will decline.

|The main cultural issues to be addressed is the complete lack of solidarity in the British people, and the unwillingness of many immigrants to assimilate.
I have yet to see any major British cultural export (TV shows, soccer, etc...) than isn't 100% white.  There will never be a British Barack Obama because your nation never had anything comparable to the civil rights movement.  When the Empire Windrush docked in 1948, one of your MPs suggested they would be on the first boat home!  Enoch Powell spews racism and gets 100,000 letters of support.  Your government policies force immigrants into vast ghettos. You throw bananas at your African soccer players for fucks sake!  I'm not suggesting that it all your fault, but there is nothing like the BNP in American political life.  You bringing up political correctness is a major Red Herring, because I see anti-immigrant sentiment expressed by Brits all the time.

This is a critical point. 

|While 'British' culture has the stigma attached to it, foreign cultures are protected and encouraged to thrive and all the while growing bigger with rising levels of immigration.
examples?  fuck.

You seem to have already made up you mind that immigration is a cancer on Britian, yet paradoxically you claim to be representative of a tolerant culture.  Why don't you just drop the veneer and say you want to drastically cut the immigration rate.  At least that way you'll be honest.  Who knows, maybe the rest of the country will go along with you.  It'll be interesting to see how you're doing in 50 years though.

"I think Enoch's right ... we should send them all back. Throw the wogs out! Keep Britain white!"

-Eric Clapton

>>50
You're being pretty presumptuous on the lifestyle of another nation and approaching it from a very US-centric viewpoint.

If it isn't the government's job to convince the native populace to have more children for national and economic interests then why is it their job to dictate how medical services, education, transport, lowering crime rates, or - rather saliently - immigration is to be handled? Surely this too is in the interests of the country is it not? Hell, why not have anarchy instead? Also note, the people of the UK are not my native populace, this isn't a 'keep the darkies out' rant nor am I trying to use my ethnicity to prove a point, it's for a little more impartiality on the subject of the racial side of the issue.

Secondly you are comparing the UK to the USA as if it is a model to be strived for. I don't want to start a petty UK vs US argument, but obviously the differences in the history and culture are grand, and minorities have not had as strong a hand in influencing popular UK culture as in America over the last century. How many years did it take to stop the persecution of blacks in America? Considering UK immigration only began in a larger scale post-WW2 if I'm correct I'd say the UK has done pretty well in striving for equality for immigrants and their families thus far. Just because a black prime minister is not as close to a black president does not mean the UK is 'behind' America, the amount of brown people in the House of Commons is not indicative of how progressive a country is.

Your arguments also seem to be a little outdated - Enoch Powell's controversial statement was in 1968 was it not? And the banana throwing incident was years ago and there has since been massive campaigns in football to reduce racism. As for the immigrants in ghettos, what is this? When was this? Immigrants usually end up in poor areas along with poor white English people because they are all poor as hell, it's not preferential treatment, it's logic. As for the BNP, they are one of the most widely hated groups of people in the UK and I don't know a single person who would admit to sympathising to their cause.

There has been a rise in anti-immigration sentiment for good reason (as explained in my previous post), not just simple bigotry and racism of people simply because they are different from yourself as the term 'anti-immigration' implies.

While 'British' culture has the stigma attached to it, foreign cultures are protected and encouraged to thrive and all the while growing bigger with rising levels of immigration.
examples?  fuck.
Unless you live in the UK I doubt you have little right to question this until you witness it yourself, I would have thought you'd seen the same effect in the US regarding minorities.

I do not think immigration is the cancer of Britain, I think mass immigration in a short space of time with little scope for assimilation and no regard for the conflicts it causes is the cancer on Britain. Change is inevitable, but to push it this fast is seriously inconsiderate to public opinion and national identity and solidarity. But to return to my first point, your answer was at best poor, do you have better response for it?

>>51
And that's why Clapton is a dick.

>>50
"I have yet to see any major British cultural export (TV shows, soccer, etc...) than isn't 100% white."
lol no, there's token blacks in every TV show now. Diversity is being rammed down our throats. The BBC is left-wing biased and pro-multiculturalism. As for "soccer" there's loads of players that are non-white, ever watch an Arsenal game? The fans love them all the same.

"There will never be a British Barack Obama because your nation never had anything comparable to the civil rights movement." And thank God for that. We've actually had a female and Jewish Prime Minister already, America needs to catch up.

"Enoch Powell spews racism and gets 100,000 letters of support." I don't think he said anything disparaging of other races,  but he was too frank and rhetorical and got burned by political correctness.

"Your government policies force immigrants into vast ghettos." lol wut? You take third world unskilled (often illegal) immigrants what do you expect? Last I checked the Polish aren't doing too bad, and the Chinese and Indians earn more on average than Brits.

"there is nothing like the BNP in American political life."
BNP are a non-entity in British political life, they have no MPs. They are only brought up by the left, who compare anyone who is anti-immigration to the BNP to defame them.

GDP per capita in the UK. We're so racist right? Holding our minorities back?

1     Indian     £30,211
2     Chinese     £25,964
3     Pakistani     £24,917
4     White     £24,756
5     National average     £24,568
6     Any other ethnic group     £23,350
7     Black African     £23,109
8     Black Caribbean     £22,902
9     Bangladeshi     £18,209

>>51

he's back traced on that but still feels that "inviting" non-whites to work for them is entrapment and they end up living in ghetto's and complaining. sounds logical now, but no one is sure of the sentiment Enoch was speaking racist or sympathetic towards poor non-whites. at least powell dug out the racist and exposed them (for support? not sure).it helped ease the already racist tensions that were growing by showing support for minorities and not powell. sure clapton was high when he said that but at least he's not a political figure so no one listened.