So does "far right" mean you're concerned about the impacts of mass immigration?

This current government are going an excellent job of controlling illegal immigration not that the main street news are reporting it
www.threads.net/@kayc1773/post/DEoAecTohNS?xmt=AQGzXf_RXXOz3r35MpO-XTej1XL02K3SsyMDTHK4_dVXtA

I think managed migration is a good thing. Skilled people contributing to society. Uncontrolled migration is a bad thing - we will end up as the world dumpster if we don’t mange it better.

This is ridiculous.

So, because you think your mum won’t follow medical advice then everybody else’s mother will need to wait for hours while people who are here illegally, and the article mentions refused asylum seekers as well, go right to the top of the queue?

And there is the heart of the problem

Not exactly what the headlines are making it to be.

Many Inclusion Health (IH) patients struggle to attend A&E due to the long delays waiting to be seen, which can often trigger withdrawal symptoms and other issues. To combat this, the IH team at University College London Hospitals (UCLH) have set up the 987 initiative, so-called because email referrals should have '987' in the subject line to make it easier to find them.
987 is a route for patients to attend University College Hospital (UCH) and have an A&E level of access to tests/treatments, but without the prolonged waits and other problems associated with attending A&E spontaneously.
If you have an IH patient that you feel needs urgent (though not emergency) assessment, you can contact Dr James Norman and team directly, who can arrange attendance to UCH's ambulatory emergency care (AEC) departmentss_ for investigations and a Holistic Inclusion Health Patient Assessment (HIPA).
Please note: This is a planned attendance and must be arranged by the UCH team and a time agreed with the referrer. To access 987, contact Dr Norman directly on the numbers below while also completing the referral form (attached). Dr Norman and team will then book the patient into AEC and confirm the time and date with you (the referrer) for the patient to attend.
On the day, the patient attends A&E at UCH but is directed to AEC rather than the main reception area. In AEC they're quickly seen by the AEC nurses (usually within 15 minutes) who perform the requested blood tests and other simple assessments, before contacting Dr Norman who then sees the patient and performs a more thorough evaluation, with a particular focus on the acute issue. From there, Dr Norman can arrange same day tests, if possible, or even admission if necessary.
To learn more about this initiative, contact Dr Norman, IH consultant at UCLH directly (see Service Feedback).

Eligibility Criteria
INCLUSIONS
IH patients, meaning over 18s who:
• are homeless
• use, or have used, class A drugs
• are on methadone/buprenorphine
• struggle with persistent alcohol misuse
• are undocumented migrants
• have other issues that mean they may have been excluded from good quality healthcare in the past.

Right so the people who fund the medical services don’t get medical treatment easily or quickly, but an individual here illegally gets to the front of the queue? How sustainable do you think that is? Economically and politically? We may as well call the nhs what it has become the International Health Service.

Not sure you're talking to the right poster?
I was asking Getmeonaflight, who said, 'Yes..its all over the news..the rape of white [my bold] girls ignored because of who they were'

I do not agree with that poster's assertion that 'white people face discrimination in uk'.

@Nordione1

Yes the breakdown of the Brexit vote is complex, but it was in part driven by fear of mass immigration as it coincided with large numbers of migrants making their way across Europe. As it happened there was mass immigration into the UK anyway.

Personally I voted remain simply because I didn't want to be poorer or my children poorer or the economy worse off and that's it.

Part of the explanation for the difference in education (degree/no degree) between Remain and Leave is due to the age of the voter. Significantly more people go to university these days despite the degrees often being crap. In the 90s only 10% roughly of school leavers went to university. So I'm not sure how useful a metric it is. The age of the voter is definitely useful as more young people vote Labour although that will probably change over the next few years.

You're misquoting.
The article you quote says 'force for ill' not 'force for evil'.

According to analysis I've read:

Those voters who backed staying in the EU tended to be socially liberal (60 per cent), believed in feminism (62 per cent), and saw multiculturalism (71 per cent), immigration (79 per cent) and globalisation (62 per cent) as 'forces for good'.

Those backing Leave believed the following were 'forces for ill': social liberalism (74 per cent), feminism (74 per cent), multiculturalism (81 per cent), and globalisation (69 per cent).
https://www.theparliamentmagazine.eu/news/article/brexit-referendum-voting-analysis

74% of Leave voters thought social liberalism is a force for evil. Imagine that. A very emotional way of looking at things; evil.

@username299

"Brexit was very emotionally driven; people arguing till they were blue in the face. Mostly nonsense but they were very passionate about it."

You seem to think that voting for Brexit was purely a right wing thing, whereas 68% of the 2017 election Labour voters had voted Leave in the 2016 referendum.

Here is the breakdown of the Brexit vote which does indeed show Conservative support n 2016 voted to Leave, 61% to 39%. Labour voters in 2016 (65%) and Liberal Democrats (68%) largely voted for Remain but significant minorities went for Leave.

A large number of Conservative voters in 2016 had switched their support to Labour by 2017 as the Tories lost more and more popular support witnessed by the reduced majority of Theresa May.

But a far bigger differentiator than political leaning was education with 70% of voters whose educational attainment is only GCSE or lower voted to Leave, while 68% of voters with a university degree voted to Remain in the EU.

Right wing politics is very emotionally driven. The right wing were throwing bricks at the police last year and yet again are very riled up by social media.

Brexit was very emotionally driven; people arguing till they were blue in the face. Mostly nonsense but they were very passionate about it.

It's not difficult to get them jumping up and down.

@1Week

"It's the adage, the right think the left are wrong, but the left think the right are evil.
Head & heart I suppose - you need both"

Or another adage "if you vote right then you have no heart but if you vote left you have no brain"

Left wing politics is very emotionally driven and views that for every winner there must be a loser or an oppressor and the oppressed or the bourgeois and the proletariat.

For example they cannot comprehend that it is in everyone's to actually grow the economy.

That's true for now but give it another couple of years with weaker economic data and some drubbings in local elections and by elections and the Labour Party will get restless. My hunch is that the Labour Party members will decide the reason for their falling support is that they are not left wing enough and will want someone much more left wing for the 2029 election.

@username299

"Brexit was created by people who wanted to get rid off immigrants. And to say that the far right didn't support Brexit is surely in jest. They didn't consider the glaring fact that immigrants would simply come from outside the EU. "

Brexit was created by people who believed a bullshit story about how the EU needs us more than we need them and that we could select all the bits we want and to ignore the bits we don't like. Also it attracted people who liked simple slogans like "take back control ".

Honestly how can you care about people like that? Why would you want their company?

We were at school event recently where a group of about 10 parents had gathered and were sat around a table catching up. One couple pointedly chose to sit separately, alone on a separate table as they count themselves as left wing/liberal and one of the parents from the main group is a journalist associated with a right leaning newspaper…
The irony.

Really? I've never experienced that! Even as a trotskist left student all the way through my current position as vaguely centre right I suppose.
It really is the left who are more intolerant. I was myself - youth I suppose but also certainty. Why can't they just SEE!? It's the adage, the right think the left are wrong, but the left think the right are evil.
Head & heart I suppose - you need both

Own your politics. It’s the only way democracy works. You may find it means different company.

Well that's a turn up. It's normally the other way round!

He has no shame in veering to the right but unfortunately we find increasingly that a majority of the left wing in our circle are intolerant of that, they can make it feel uncomfortable & confrontational, so he sometimes holds back.

@username299 that poster's agenda has become very clear . As expected, it has nothing to do with CSE.

I suppose I just find all this profoundly undemocratic.
Do the natives of a country have the right to decide who comes to their country?
Is it within their gift to deny or grant access or is it the migrants choice,or is it the government's decision?

I never thought I'd say it but multiculturalism doesn't seem to have worked.
Nationalism is profoundly unfashionable among the bien-pensant, pointing to centuries of war to back up their point.
Yes, but it's incomplete - we're tribal and territorial.

If international borders are arbitrary lines on a map, we'll sort ourselves into other groups. Slow migration can be assimilated into the culture, we can see that over and over again throughout history.
The vast majority of people have an ingroup bias. That will manifest at international conferences or outside pubs at closing time. I don't think we can simply be educated out of it. It's depressing but maybe we have to face it.