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.

The hysteria from Tory MPs about a tweet is indeed laughable.

The result would likely be the UK taking a larger number of asylum seekers than it currently does, would you be relaxed about that?

Leaving aside swarm, think about invasion. It's not an invasion, so why use that word? What is its use designed to make you think and feel? Why is someone trying to make you think and feel that way?

Cakeorwine - Turkey is 3.2 times bigger than the UK.

Turkey's population is about 84million people. The UKs is about 67million.

Or are we starting down the argument about Antartica not taking its fair share of refugees again?

jgw1 - Not necessarily, size of country, existing population size in relation to the size of the country would need to be taken into account.

I don’t think the public will accept boats with numbers very high.

Some will but most will want to see action taken, going by polls etc

I have no doubt that Braverman's language is othering of asylum seekers and is designed to dehumanise them and stir up people against them. Her references to bring overwhelmed, of millions or billions coming here, etc., are frankly disgusting and similar to Farage's claims about Rumanians and Bulgarians. The Nazis did think about sending Jews to Africa just as Braverman dreams of sending asylum seekers to Ruanda. Lineker is right to say we take less than some European countries. Tories claim we 'settle' more than others but that is an attempt to muddy the waters: settled refugees are those which the UK government has agreed to take, not those arriving without acceptance. And of course we accept far more immigrants by the visa programme to work and study here. The boat people are a minor number by comparison. Lineker has done well to speak up and I congratulate him and those sports people supporting him. How can a Tory Director General working under a Tory Chairman make any claim to interpret BBC impartiality rules fairly? Other presenters have made political remarks and not been disciplined. If Lineker had said the Tory boat policy was right (a political remark) nothing would have happened. Davies and Sharp should resign immediately.

When Hitler became Chancellor of Germany in 1933 he had the platform to push his hatred of the Jews and the Nazis were able to firmly implant various falsehoods about them into the collective psyche of the German people. They portrayed them as controlling the banking system, as capitalists and communists at the same time (Lenin and Marx were Jewish) and amongst other things as traitors who, despite being a minority in Germany, were responsible for stabbing the country in the back and contributing to the loss of WW1, and incurring the massive debt due to reparations paid to the rest of Europe. The German economy was still in tatters after WW1 so it was easier to sell to the people - it gave them someone to blame for their suffering and thus paved the way for their persecution and planned extermination.

@Oblomov23 - camps started very early in Germany after the Nazis took power.

They were work camps, where ordinary Germans were detained on grounds of being communists. It happened in 1934.

The Germans had a clear warning. Oppose the Government and you would go. They were not the industrial death camps that would be used to exterminate people later on, but it was very clear from an early stage that people could be detained at the whim of the Nazi Government and make to work.

This point is largely forgotten these days, because it is inconvenient to the narrative of a hidden Holocaust. In fact, work camps and detention of undesirables according to Nazis was key. It is, incidentally, an idea firstly done by the British in South Africa.

We all agree that we should help.

The problem is that there aren't any alternative safe routes - and the Home Secretary herself admitted that when asked.

Hence why people are risking their lives by boat.

I doubt very many take the risk unless they really do feel it's the only better alternative.

I’m not sure safe routes will stop the boats

So there still will be people risking their lives

Exactly, the words used have been very carefully and deliberately chosen to inspire certain responses.

What do we do with invaders historically? Do we welcome them with open arms into our society? No, we fight them and defend our lands lest our culture be consumed and our people be put to the sword (and we know a thing or two about invading).

The tories may be awful governors and terrible human beings but they're expert manipulators and know how to pull the strings of each demographic so that a scrutinising gaze is never directed their way for too long.

I mean this government genuinely has had more scandals in the past 2 years than successful policies in the previous 13, and still people rush to defend them at every turn.

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'd like to see both.

Safe and legal routes for those fleeing war and persecution so they don't need to take the unsafe - but currently legal (because seeking asylum is legal) - route of a small boat risking their lives and those of their children.

I think if we had safe legal routes the demand for small boats would decrease. Why risk your life whilst fleeing for your life if you don't need to?

I don't agree with automatically returning those seeking asylum via small boats. But I think that it will automatically become easier to process their claims if the numbers are significantly lower.

I - like I'm sure most people are - am concerned about the numbers taking the journey and how long it's taking to process claims. But I'm also very concerned about the use of language around the problem to "other" asylum seekers rather than hearing language around how they'll solve it effectively and humanely.

I think the point Gary made, has been totally missed by the Tory minds (as is obvious on this thread). Blows their tiny racist minds. Or deliberately missed and twisted. Not sure which is worse.

I hope we can agree that the population of Turkey is not 3.2 times that of the UK?

Did she? Do you have a link please @Clavinova

do you think that means she doesn’t fundamentally have a point then?

jgw1 - Is this just one big joke to you. Of course you have to take into consideration the size of each country and the percentage of population in relation to the size of that country.

You've missing the point that Turkey is 3.2 times larger than the UK so of course they can have a larger population living there. You can't just have an infinite amount of immigrants being allowed to enter one country because that could have disastrous consequences.

Yes. I believe that Brexit was the start of the drip drip effect of dehumanisation and othering.

Even if Cameron didn't think Brexit would happen he still used disgraceful language around it.

Jgw1 - I am talking about the size of Turkey in terms of land mass being 3.2 times the size of the UK.

Sounds like a strong argument to me for helping Turkey much more and the UK taking far more migrants than it already has.

That being so I think we are in agreement.

Antarctica makes up 12% of the world's land area. Yet took no migrants in 2022.
Shocking but there we go. Are you joining me in campaigning for Antarctica to take its fair share?

We aren't suffering food shortages because of asylum seekers. We're more likely suffering them because of consequences of people voting based on prejudice or propaganda.
The supermarkets aren't paying farmers properly, costs are rocketing and the govt are paying farmers to grow flowers instead of crops. Brexit is a factor but not the only reason.
I like Linekar as a pundit but he is a hypocratic greedy twat. He was quite willing to take money for working on the Qatar World Cup
Having said all that, he can tweet what he likes.

Blows their tiny racist minds

This was a good line of attack during Brexit. I can see why it went a ls it did even though I was shocked at the result as the time.

*Hypocritical greedy twat