They're not refugees, we're being invaded

[goonthenflameme]

I admit, the Syrians have got it bad. There is a war and those boys who haven't been shot by ISIL are being conscripted by the President.

But if life is that bad, why do they only want to go to Germany and if they can't go then then they'll go back to Syria.

Why are we now seeing people from Kazakstan joining the throngs?

I agree that people from Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria need help. But the thougsands and thousands of people coming through can't all be refugees in dire need of help if they are so picky as to where they will live.

They're invading Europe. And we are letting them. What's going to happen in 20 years? Will Christianity and western ways be swept under the carpet?

One of the good things about MN is that fact that we can have these discussions. In RL I would tend to have these conversations either with people who essentially agreed with me or with whom I felt safe. Here it is much more enlightening.

Where women's rights and multiculturalism collide, my interests lie with women's rights.

100% agree with this. And it's amazing how frequently, when women's rights clash with some other minority cause, women's rights tend to lose out. Witness the rampant bad faith with which many proponents of multiculturalism sweep often violent sexism under the carpet when advocating for poor oppressed minority cultures.

Oh come off it oaf, don't just hang around being a plonker. I was trying to answer you reasonably.

I think you have found a spurious correlation Lisbeth. Britain isn't wealthy in the 21st century because it had an empire over a hundred years ago.

It had an empire because it had a superior political system. That superior political system allowed it to continue to be wealthy long after losing it's colonies and even after being brought to its financial knees by WWII.

We all like to complain about "Westiminster," but it's success is the reason people want to come. The extractive dictatorships that fail to create wealth and security for their people are the reasons people want to leave.

OTheHugeManatee I don't understand why though? Even on here amongst a predominantly female membership, the sexism is dismissed as purely "cultural". Why?????

BTW, not saying that Empire was a good or moral thing, just that it took strength to achieve it. And Britain would not have been strong enough with an exceptional form of government.

Lisbeth " Britain has invaded, conquered or sought to establish through force or other means all but 22 countries in the entire world "

" However, Britain also now has a standard of living, despite its faults, which is one of the highest the world has ever seen,"

Do you not see the connection between these two statements?

Instead of asking leading questions, why don't you simply say what you mean?

If it is your unstated conclusion that Britain and the British should somehow do penance by letting refugees in without quibble, then its not supported by international law. Its not really a solution either, as you are dimly ignoring other issues in your blinkered singled-mindedness to portray Britain as wicked and other countries as good.

What I would say is that Britain in these modern times when we have the benefit of mass media communications, has cleaned up its act substantially, while other countries which may have even benefitted from greater civilisations in the past (also built on slave labour) have not managed to become more humanitarian in the way much of Europe has done. For instance, we now have a very good understanding of what human rights are and have defined them in law. Have all other countries which have access to this and which indeed send plenty of students here to study copied them? No.

Which point in history do you want to pick on exactly? Many Britons have a good claim at being descended from Pagan Picts and Celts. Theres historical evidence for those groups having been driven out of their original homelands in the South of Europe at one point. Who do you think built the Pyramids? Who do you think collaborated with the Romans to build what are now imposing ruins over much of the Med and North Africa? Britain's history of invasion and, linked to that, prosperity, is actually much shorter than most other countries in the world, because we were pagan relatively disorganised tribes until relatively recently.

No it was a genuine question.
It just seems ....I don't know....a bit... thick? to not see the connection.

We all want to believe we're the goodies. We really do. And our politicians and media want us to believe it even more than we do.

But the reason we have so much in the West (and actually the majority of us are getting poorer and won't have nearly so much in the few years, if the super-rich continue to get more super-duper at everyone else's expense) is partly because we're a part of a rather nasty (financial-based) system that fucks other people over. It's a very unpleasant realisation.

Scremersford That is partly what I was trying ot say when I asked "How far back do you go?" - but you have better examples.

and sorry but talking about the Picts and Celts is just ....disingenous if not out right plain silly.
As I said, Britain has been playing God in the Middle East for at least a century. That is the century just past, not 2000 years ago.

OTheHugeManatee 100% agree with this. And it's amazing how frequently, when women's rights clash with some other minority cause, women's rights tend to lose out. Witness the rampant bad faith with which many proponents of multiculturalism sweep often violent sexism under the carpet when advocating for poor oppressed minority cultures.

And the law here currently supports that viewpoint. There are no sexually aggravated crimes as there are specifically racially aggravated crimes. True, of course we have the traditional sex crimes, which have been around for centuries, very little updated, with the appalling conviction rates for rape. But racism is seen as somehow more worthy of protection than sexism. So much so I think that we are seeing instances of sex crimes being swept under the carpet for fear of being accused of racism.

What we need of course is further research into who is committing sex crimes, including based on real racial statistics, proper research into whether increasing Muslim populations and promoting Muslim culture leads to more likelihood of sex crime for women and how we should go about preventing that (integration would be a start) and giving higher status to sex crimes and crimes against women by adding an "aggravated" status to them, in the same way that we provide protection for racial minorities.

Changing the law can do an awful lot to improve society's behaviour, and if a solution is out there, then we should be using it.

I don't think I am thick Lisbeth. I do think you have fallen into the classic trap of noticing two correlating variables and assuming causation, though.

Lisbeth and sorry but talking about the Picts and Celts is just ....disingenous if not out right plain silly.As I said, Britain has been playing God in the Middle East for at least a century. That is the century just past, not 2000 years ago

Don't be ridiculous. Just because your education didn't cover much of world history, doesn't mean its a good idea to pick one short period of it which favours your argument and dismiss the remainder of an entire country's history.

Modern history actually tells us that certain countries have continually failed to adopt even basic human rights legislation. Why are you ignoring that? How long do you think the concept of human rights legislation has been around for now?

And Britain is not the only country, nor indeed Europe is not the only part of the world, which had empires, oppressed populations or permitted slavery. Some parts of the Muslim world still do that latter two, and that despite our increased knowledge of human rights and access to education and media.

But the reason we have so much in the West (and actually the majority of us are getting poorer and won't have nearly so much in the few years, if the super-rich continue to get more super-duper at everyone else's expense) is partly because we're a part of a rather nasty (financial-based) system that fucks other people over. It's a very unpleasant realisation.

The evidence does not support this.

" . Just because your education didn't cover much of world history, "
oh now you know about my education do you?
Whatever, it certainly sounds as though it was better than yours.
Pathetic. Utterly.

And Britain is not the only country, nor indeed Europe is not the only part of the world, which had empires, oppressed populations or permitted slavery. Some parts of the Muslim world still do that latter two, and that despite our increased knowledge of human rights and access to education and media.

True

There are 60 million people currently refugees or displaced in the world. That The burden for the vast majority of these falls on developing countries. The "tide" of refugees in Europe are a tiny proportion of these - we need to get this in context and stop focussing on the perceived "threat" to our own comfortable little lives.

The evidence does not support this.

Very much depends on which evidence we're talking about.

BlueJug One of the good things about MN is that fact that we can have these discussions. In RL I would tend to have these conversations either with people who essentially agreed with me or with whom I felt safe. Here it is much more enlightening.

I tend to have these sort of discussions in real life with other academics and with students, some of whom can be very biased. Theres always the hopeless lefty do-gooders who cannot see more than their own viewpoint (and who won't get very good grades as a result as they only half answer questions) and there are some who just hate Britain. Usually non-Brits. I was having this discussion with a German the other day, who was of the opinion that Britain is a right wing society with no provision for the poor, and that Germany is a compassionate caring society which has learned from its past mistakes, and is therefore right on almost every issue affecting Europe today. Based on the short history of the German nation, that's rather worrying...

What makes you think you are more deserving of 'Europe' than anyone else?

Presumably by contributing over the years one has lived here.

Lisbeth " . Just because your education didn't cover much of world history, "-oh now you know about my education do you? grin
Whatever, it certainly sounds as though it was better than yours.
Pathetic. Utterly.

Well, I'm simply going by what you write and the way you write it

Well I could say the same about you Scremersford couldn't I?
But belittling someone's education as a debating technique is...hmmm..off?
If I simply went by the way you wrote and what you write about , I would have said you were an uneducated fuckwith with zero history education and the mind of a seagull.
But I wouldn't , as that would have been silly.

• fuckwit obvs

Scremersford - don't waste your energy! I can see who has a mind of a seagull, and it is not you.