How similar do you think the language of 1930s Germany is to the current Tory rhetoric on people crossing the Channel

[cakeorwine]

Using words like invasion,

Stigmatising people coming across the Channel

All the headlines in the news.

I think that we are moving towards language that does demonise people. No matter what you think, the language we use is important. And it's not just people who cross the Channel who face this behaviour

British men are doing most of the raping and trafficking of women in this country.

You do know that is the government that is responsible for caring for those in need in this country?

The government that wasted billions on test and Grace, PPE contracts for their mates, that has used a hardline Brexit to weaken the country's trade and cause massive labour shortages. That puts yhe profits of energy companies ahead of the needs of its own people. Who is allowing water companies to fill our rivers full of sewage. Who is ripping up employment rights and safety standards.

Who have closed every legitimate route for anyone to claim asylum- forcing them to try to get here illegally and unsafely.

All the while pointing at desperate people in small boats as the problem.

As for 'staying and fighting' - how do you fight against your own country?

Without being the thread police - this thread's aims was to discuss the language being used.

The policy itself is not really part of this discussion - it's really supposed to be about the language being used. Plenty of other threads are available to discuss the policy - or else this thread will be derailed

It's hard enough to get the MSM to discuss the language. All they seem to be focusing on is Linekar himself.

The quote you quoted was “Absolutely, if we are feminists who value equality we really need to stop seeing men as having less right to be free from persecution and suffering than women. I also find the use of “fighting age men” really horrible, why should someone have to fight, be injured, injure other people, kill people and/ or die just because they’re relatively young and male.” It wasn’t about men being “so hard done to”. It was about their right not to be persecuted or left in a war zone being equal to that of women.

I’m not arguing about the sex industry, I’m saying it has nothing to do with whether we accept that male human beings should be allowed to flee persecution and violence.

Can you show me any evidence that the “perceived looseness” of women here is why men are travelling here? Or is it just your view of brown men that they want to exploit white women? Are you saying every young male asylum seeker “causes issues”? What about young British white males, do they “cause issues”? Did your father/ husband/ uncle/ son cause issues when young just because they are male?

I’m not sure if you’re meaning to but you’re coming across as a bigot who thinks that men who are not white who come here on boats are only coming to rape and harm women. Obviously the traffickers are harming (generally non British) women but otherwise the vast majority who travel to the UK on boats don’t do that, and are actually coming either because they are fleeing persecution and violence or because they think they will have a better life here than they did where they were living before. If their goal was purely to rape and harm women I am sure there would have been plenty of opportunities to do that in the country they were living in before and I highly doubt young men are risking a highly perilous, expensive journey because of the “attraction” of women with “perceived looseness”.

TooBigForMyBoots
The UK managed to return many more failed asylum applicants under the Dublin Regulation than we do now!

Failed asylum applicants??
Dublin is supposed to determine which member state is responsible for considering the application. The UK was a net recipient in 2018.

FurAndFeathers
I might be dim but I don’t really see what this has to do with the thread on the language used by the government to describe people arriving on boats

I have no idea whether you are dim or not, but I was clearly responding to posts from earlier in thread. Perhaps you should have said something to those posters when you had the chance and 'nipped it in the bud'.

I believe that the Tories are a long long way from the Nazis but that said, I do believe the way they have talked is appalling - in particular the home secretary both now and in her first stint.

Since you ask for an example of the similarities in language: The conversation around how those who support this Governments policy to 'stop the boats' and restrict immigration in this way are patriots and the alternative view 'is 'betraying Britain' as Suella Braverman said is very reminiscent of the tactics of persuasion used in National Socialism to champion nationalism. And yes, as you say, demonise Germany's own people who might otherwise more publicly object. The belittling generalisations made about whole groups of educated professionals in society likely to point out flaws / oppose them ( e.g. Sunak's 'lefty lawyers' or even the 'experts' in general singled out in Covid) is also a hallmark of populist appeal. This didn't originate in post depression Germany of course - any more than it did here - but the tone used is very similar. Listen to the picture Katie Hopkins paints of life in the UK, and read some of the arguments the Right made in the Weimar Republic trying to ramp up supporters to share their take.

We are a world away from ultimately ending up in a Third Reich in the UK- despite the jpeg -
but that isn't what was claimed or what the argument was about in the first place. The language is objectively similar- where those with a platform try to bring extra pressure to convince us of their simplistic accusatory view of a complex situation. It is lazy and unpleasant arguing, self righteous and manipulative is all.

Sorry - more simply, labelling those with a different view and supporters of your disliked minorities as 'national traitors' is straight out of the playbook.

If you actually look at the language and communications used in Germany to dehumanise Jews and other groups in the 1920s and 30s you would see that it is a million times worse than anything our politicians are currently using to discuss or tackle the problem of the people crossing the channel in small boats. Thank goodness

nothing outright similar but the rhetoric is there. It's about stigmatising the refugees, many do flee from persecution in war torn countries.

What a pathetic remark.

pastor martin niemoller ought to be attributed in that much used quotation;
encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/martin-niemoeller-first-they-came-for-the-socialists

Someone just RT'ed this on my Twitter timeline. Relevant.

"This hatred gradually developed from ideas, words, stereotypes & prejudice through legal exclusion, dehumanization...

twitter.com/AuschwitzMuseum/status/1601171008139845633

This
People don't want to accept they're being slowly brainwashed/ influenced/ manipulated into certain beliefs, but it is useful for us all to stop and question it. We teach children that all humans are equal so why can't adults truly believe this?

The ArchBishop of Canterbury has written an open letter to Sunak, along with other religious leaders and charities.

Part of it reads:

They make a stark warning about the political rhetoric being deployed about migrants. “We urge ministers to rein in their inflammatory words that all too often echo the language used by racist groups,” they write. “Dehumanising people in order to target minority and protected groups of people can only draw frightening parallels from history.”

But the original question was "How similar do you think the language of 1930s Germany is to the current Tory rhetoric on people crossing the Channel". Whatever your views on immigration of any sort, you can't deny that the words used by the current government (and the rightwing media) is populist and othering in a very similar way to the 1930s German government.

This is a good explanation of Hitler's rhetorical strategies. The parallels are loud and clear.

www.patriciarobertsmiller.com/2018/08/27/rhetoric-and-hitler-an-introduction/