Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think that howling at people that they are racist is not...

590 replies

fidelineish · 23/04/2014 15:35

..the best way to challenge their thinking or change their views?

It crops up on here frequently and it is only going to become more frequent as UKIP campaigning steps up.

OP posts:
softlysoftly · 23/04/2014 17:57

Persecution on the basis of race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership of a particular social group

So the Syrian refugees not claiming on the basis of Christianity are absolutely eligible on other grounds

What is your reasoning to explain away why Farage would ban them? Other than HIM persecuting on the basis of faith?

caruthers · 23/04/2014 17:59

Farage hasn't banned anyone.

However it's this govt today and now that has allowed the extradition of two girls back to Nigeria who face FGM.

Are THEY racists too?

Original poster
fidelineish · 23/04/2014 18:02

OP, as MrsDevere has said, you can patiently explain all day long, but some people just don't want to understand. Big difference between ignorance and wilfull ignorance, the latter is when it is fitting to just say 'you are a racist'

Of course Amber but it takes a few minutes to work out which is which sometimes. A few minutes is a small investment.

OP posts:
softlysoftly · 23/04/2014 18:02

Because he doesn't have the power yet. His stance however was to only accept Christian so instead of sidestepping again what's his reasoning?

And the FGM case I have no detail on the case, provide it and I'll debate.

caruthers · 23/04/2014 18:03

That's been explained Softly.

I see someone up thread posted SOME of UKIPs policies but not the so called racist ones.

I'm still waiting.

softlysoftly · 23/04/2014 18:03

Fide I think I've soent more than my minute. I'm calling stupidity on this one rather than actually being a racist so in essence YANBU but it makes no damn difference either way sadly.

Original poster
fidelineish · 23/04/2014 18:04

I agree with the OP that reasoned debate is better to discuss racist views as it also educates those reading

I also completely agree if people keep on with their racist vitriol that they should be told they are racist (or at least hold racist views)

Exactly that Rufus on both counts

OP posts:
softlysoftly · 23/04/2014 18:05

No you've explained why we should accept Christian refugees not why we shouldn't accept muslim ones.

And therein lies the leader of the UKIP party's culpanility.

WetAugust · 23/04/2014 18:06

Because he doesn't have the power yet^

Bollocks!

You could say that about any political party. You could say it about the Conservatives who insist that the UK is a Christian country. You could say that about Gordon and his British jobs for British people.

Basically, you are seeing things that simply are not there. Because you want to.

Because when another politician says something unpalatable it's OK - as long as Nigel doesn't say it.

AmberLeaf · 23/04/2014 18:12

Of course Amber but it takes a few minutes to work out which is which sometimes. A few minutes is a small investment

I have no problem with invessting a few minutes, in fact, I have invested a lot more than a few minutes on here trying to reasonably explain things to those who appear ignorant.

Ive been listening to racist rantings and casual racism for as long as I have been aware of what others say, so I'd say 35+ years and I can say, that I can pretty much tell which camp they fall in. On here, I will always give the benefit of the doubt and assume they are just ignorant though, if only for the reason that someone who is genuinely ignorant may read what I write.

AmberLeaf · 23/04/2014 18:26

If you want to change rather than entrench expressed views then you need to give the other person a way of changing their mind and agreeing with you that doesn't force them implicitly first to agree that they are a vile and nasty person (rather than, say, mistaken or misinformed or confused

What I have found, is that those who will argue till the cows come home, that what they said isn't racist [no matter how reasonably you explain how and why it is], are those who genuinely believed they as a person were not racist, so they think what they think/are saying can't be racist.

The idea of being labelled 'racist' is not a positive one and it can be hard for some to accept that maybe they aren't as liberal as they thought and that despite thinking they are not racist, they still seem to hold some racist viewpoints.

softlysoftly · 23/04/2014 18:27

Oh you're back wet thought all this lowbrow debate was boring you?

He said he would allow Christian not muslim refugees in FACT

His party isn't in power yet FACT

ergo he hasn't the power to follow through FACT

what about that is unclear?

The statement in itself is discriminatory against Muslims as they would be allowed in under the rules of asylum FACT

And I have never said any other politicians statements are acceptable but his are not, where did you read that?

caruthers · 23/04/2014 18:31

Show me a racist policy for the umpteenth time Softly?

UKIPs immigration policies are almost identical to the Conservatives immigration policies.

softlysoftly · 23/04/2014 18:44

Caruthers as I said about 3 times just because they don't write it down doesn't mean they aren't. They aren't going to write a policy that states they are racist Hmm

If you are too blind to see their actions, examples, behaviours and various statements don't show they are bigots I can't help you.

I can't believe anyone can reach voting age without realising you have to look at a party as a whole not at their written policiesis beyond me.

Now back to the reasons muslims aren't allowed?

caruthers · 23/04/2014 18:50

Caruthers as I said about 3 times just because they don't write it down doesn't mean they aren't. They aren't going to write a policy that states they are racist

That'll do for me and you've convinced me that there really isn't any point making a point when your point has no point.

They're racists but I can't prove it because they are hiding the fact they are racists so well that nobody can see it.

And as the dragons on dragons den say.

"I'm out!!"

Chapsview · 23/04/2014 18:52

Lets listen to them on BBC to see

Chapsview · 23/04/2014 18:57

Did not find any of that racist at all - was that because they hid it?

WetAugust · 23/04/2014 18:59

Yes Chaps, they hid it Grin

Catch-22!

caruthers · 23/04/2014 19:00

They've hidden it so well that not one poster can find proof.

Assumption and baseless propaganda intentionally deflecting from the real issue of Europe is the key.

rabbitrisen · 23/04/2014 19:01

Do you think that they were a racist party but now are not?

Or are one and not saying it?

My problem is that I am utterly fed up with the other parties. Utterly fed up.
Basically I am looking around for hope.

rabbitrisen · 23/04/2014 19:05

But I realise that it could be a case of out of the frying pan and into the fire. Potentially dangerous.

WetAugust · 23/04/2014 19:08

Their Deputy Leader said that the party had not vetted many of their candidates and had not exercised an appropriate level of control over them.

People like Bloom exist in every party. UKIP are weeding out their rogue members. They have some excellent female candidates like the woman who came runner up at the recent by-election.

They are also consciously promoting other members of the leadership team, which is why in tonight's party political broadcasr you saw the Deputy Leader and the man you saw in the kitchen was actually a UKIP prospective MEP and UKIP's spokesperson on small businesses.

It's not all about Nigel.

2rebecca · 23/04/2014 19:37

There is a huge amount of ignorance on this thread as to what "race" actually means with some people thinking Bulgarians are a different race to white English or Scottish people. They aren't. White people belong to the caucvasian race which is a fairly loose term. This applies to Scots, Irish, German, Poles, Russians, etc. Aboriginal people are a different race as are negroes.
A white English person wanting to stop the immigration of a white Bulgarian is not being racist. They may be an unpleasant bigot but racisthas a definite meaning although it's hard to define "race" on much more than appearance as genetically it's a bit of a nonsenses.
www.diffen.com/difference/Ethnicity_vs_Race a link that at least defines race. It also mentions ethnicity and I think UKIP does discriminate against people according to their ethnicity, although some UKIP supporters want no more immigrants even if they are N American white immigrants who were originally descended from Brits and have a similar race and ethnicity. They just want no more people to enter the country than leave it.
I hate many UKIP policies but to call them racist is muddled thinking. You can oppose immigration without being racist. It's a numbers issue, and to some extent an ethnicity issue, not a colour/ race issue

Montegomongoose · 23/04/2014 19:46

to call them racist is muddled thinking. You can oppose immigration without being racist. It's a numbers issue, and to some extent an ethnicity issue, not a colour/ race issue

Thank you for articulating this.

Objecting to or expressing concern over immigration may be nationalist or xenophobic but not racist.

To claim it as such in order to stop the debate or establish political credentials is, in my view, utterly facile.

WetAugust · 23/04/2014 19:49

To claim it as such in order to stop the debate or establish political credentials is, in my view, utterly facile.

But highly effective, as can be seen from some of the very misinformed views expressed on this thread.

Swipe left for the next trending thread