To wonder what part of this statement reminded Gary L of Nazi Germany?

[marmaladeo]

This is Suella Braverman's statement Gary Lineker was reacting to when he said "This is just an immeasurably cruel policy directed at the most vulnerable people in language that is not dissimilar to that used by Germany in the 30s" ... twitter.com/GaryLineker/status/1633094764865126400

If she was saying she wanted to stop immigration I could understand GL's reaction. But she's not. I don't understand why anyone would not want to "stop the boats" when 1. they're lethal and 2. they're being run by criminal gangs. If GL had made it clear he wanted to stop the boats but thought this policy was the wrong way to do it, then fine. But he didn't - he just made an extremely inflammatory statement. He might be getting lots of love from some quarters, but personally I think he's an egotist who is playing into the hands of the people smugglers.

I think the problem people have with people coming across in boats, and some of them are economic migrants, is that they don't have to make that journey. France is a safe country as are numerous other countries in mainland Europe. It is not a matter of life or death.

These crossings do need to stop. Now I'm not saying that we shouldn't help genuine refugees, we should but at the moment it is all a complete shambles and not just in this country. All European countries need to work together.

cakeorwine
No it hasn't

Yes - there has, e.g.
"The Holocaust didn't start with people being dragged away in the night and shipped off to their deaths. It's started with othering in the media, a "them Vs us" rhetoric, provocative language about "swarms" ...

On another thread today, there is a video clip criticising Suella Braverman with the explanation;
"She might not have used the word 'swarm' but she may as well as done..." - at same time asking the viewer to look at the words Gary Lineker actually tweeted. So hypocritical.

I wonder what we would do if we didn't have the Channel and were connected to mainland Europe.

Would we build a wall? Like Trump

*Obviously WW2 would probably have had a very different outcome

This is a very important point that you raise.
The relevant law - the 1951 convention is quite explicit on the subject, having been careful drafted by British legal experts. Aylum seekers in law have an absolute right to enter in any way they choose any safe country and claim asylum there.

Do please watch this video that explains the basics of the law in this area. Well worth 5 minutes of your time.

twitter.com/crimlawuk/status/1634330359839031301

A few comments - and part of the wider narrative around language that has been used - as you said, by Cameron himself.

It's not been the dominant comment.

Words like invasion, illegal immigrants.

Can you see what effect those words might have?
How it can "other" people and dehumanise them?

Notonthestairs
A human rights group has condemned David Cameron's description of "swarms" of migrants, calling his language "irresponsible, dehumanising"

Indeed - does Gary Lineker think David Cameron is a far-right extremist as well?

No idea. Maybe you could tweet and ask him?

My perspective is most are ok with skilled immigration, some maybe most would be ok with safe routes but boats will still attempt crossing with safe routes in place so it’s should they be stopped or not.

Some say yes to stopping them, it’d be interesting to know how many say no to stopping them

I would say that Cameron needs to think about his use of language and ask himself why he chose that language.

The Home Secretary does not regret using her language and will not apologise for it.

When there is an attack on people who have come across the Channel, I wonder if people who have used such language and those in the media who have stoked up the rhetoric will look at themselves and ask if they have helped stir up emotions?

There is lots of useful information on this thread about why people come here and how it is only a fraction of the people seeking refuge across the world. Also information about the proportion of people who cross the channel and are eventually awarded asylum here. Might help you understand the situation a little more.

Re German history I think the first train of poles sent to Auschwitz was 1940. The Germans started preparing in the 30's. It was a gradual process. Understanding German citizens mentality, their history going back centuries, their history in the 1920's and 1930's is very complex. Why did citizens, germans of aryan race, report others, not stand up for them. Why did the German soldiers kills Jews in the concentration camps. It's a very complex issue.

cakeorwine
A few comments

You have listed the word 'swarm' yourself seven times - on six occasions you listed 'swarm' before 'invasion'.

There is lots of useful information on this thread about why people come here and how it is only a fraction of the people seeking refuge across the world. Also information about the proportion of people who cross the channel and are eventually awarded asylum here. Might help you understand the situation a little more

I think that would make an interesting infographic.

Especially if done to scale.

Turkie has 3.6 MILLION refugees. Kind of puts things in perspective.

Words used by the Tory Government - these are words that have been used by the Tory party over the last decade.

Illegal immigration - no, it isn't. They are people in boats - but the words are carefully chosen

Invasion

Decent patrotic British people - so if you don't agree, what does that make you?

cakeorwine
I would say that Cameron needs to think about his use of language and ask himself why he chose that language

Perhaps he did - in 2015.

You obviously chose to list 'swarm' first because you thought it had more 'impact' - even though it was not a word Suella Braverman had used herself.

No idea why Cameron using the word swarm is held up as a point scored. It just means the Conservatives have been using inflammatory and dehumanising language for years. I guess you welcome that.

Notonthestairs
I guess you welcome that

Not at all. Do you think that David Cameron's government was reminiscent of 1930s Germany?

It is all part of the language being used. I have been paying attention to the language used over the years. Along with the imagery.

I also referenced Enemies of the people.
Because my points have been about the ENTIRE discussion about the people coming across the Channel and the language used - by politicians, the media and people on MN

Not just the Home Secretary.

The language used by these groups has been dehumanising.

Certain elements of the media have played a massive role in this.
Certain people on here have used words like "illegals"

Maybe you can't see how this is dehumanising?
Maybe you aren't clear what dehumanising means and the effect this can have?

I would hope that you can though.

Some of its language was. Which is precisely what Lineker said.

This hysteria about words is laughable.

The looney left list of scary words grows ever longer.

Rumour has it the BBC Chairman will resign later today. We shall see.

Still continuing to make Lineker's point for him I see.

jgw - I would change that to claiming asylum in the first safe country, and then processing applicants from there, which country they had a preference for, if they already have family there etc.

Nobody should be risking their life or their children's lives crossing the channel in a small boat. They don't need to, it's not life or death

Is it? Which words deemed inappropriate do you think should be restored to common usage?