Reform voters may not be racist but they are at least dangerously naive

[ChocolateMagnum]

AIBU to accept that some Reform voters may not actually be racist, but to be pretty certain that, if they're not, they are at the very least dangerously naive?

I thought we all got taught at school about how fascism took over in 1939s Germany? And there's so much out there at the moment showing why we are at a dangerous turning point in history again.

Why is it that the so-called non-racist Reform voters not see that they are aligning themselves with a covertly racist and fascist-leaning party and that their support risks tipping the balance towards a fascist dictatorship in the UK?

Nah, I like to write people off as layabouts and unable to turn their lives around

Oh wait, that is you. Compassionate leftie at it again.

Exactly. And speaking of undue influence, how many people were surprised to learn that first cousin marriage is not illegal in this country?

I only found out when a Bill was introduced to Parliament this year to ban it. I mean, what sane country wouldn’t want to ban a practice that causes 12% infant mortality (especially if compounded by generations of first cousin marriage) and a similar amount of serious congenital abnormalities?

Unfortunately, for *reasons , it was voted down and didn’t pass. Could the Muslim Council have had anything to do with it? First cousin marriage is practised widely in various parts of the Muslim community. People originating from Pakistan have up to 2/3 of marriages to first cousins.

When I brought this up in another thread, I was told to stop talking and stop being ‘anti Muslim’. Does anyone else think we should be allowed to talk about this and even criticise it as a harmful and unwanted practice in the UK?

Apart from the cruelty to the children themselves, we don’t have the spare bandwidth and money in the NHS to spend a lifetime treating so many severely disabled people. It’s nit going to help pay our pensions as a pp suggested is the purpose if immigration.

From the article below:

Children born of cousin marriages face an increased risk of genetic disorders and childhood mortality[2][3] and are thus prohibited in some countries.[4][5] One study estimated infant mortality at 12.7 percent for married double first cousins, 7.9 percent for first cousins, 9.2 percent for first cousins once removed/double second cousins, 6.9 percent for second cousins, and 5.1 percent among non-consanguineous progeny. Among double first cousin progeny, 41.2 percent of pre-reproductive deaths were associated with the expression of detrimental recessive genes, with equivalent values of 26.0, 14.9, and 8.1 percent for first cousins, first cousins once removed/double second cousins, and second cousins respectively.

wikiislam.net/wiki/Cousin_Marriage_in_Islamic_Law

If the benefits system can be that easily gamed that it is the fault of government. Also, if what you describe is correct then we should be equally concerned by white people gaming the system (white people are disproportionate recipients of benefits - far higher than the proportion of the population that they represent).

People are not being honest with themselves here. If you had no issue with Ukrainian refugees getting freebies all over the place, you have to ask yourself what the MAIN difference is now. Qwhite obvious to me, but others appear to be kidding themselves (or maybe haven’t been able to put their finger on what truly bothered them, until now).

I'm not particularly left wing. I mentioned SAHMs after the goalposts had already been moved from "unemployed" to "economically inactive".

The reality is that the true unemployment rate in the UK is low compared to most other countries. There just aren't millions of suitably qualified British people queueing up to take jobs currently being given to immigrants.

Islamic state?

Ever thought people actually mean it when they say they want Islamic rule in the UK?

Because reform has said they will deport people from this country who currently have the legal right to be here.

They have said this. Many times now. This is their policy.

Which part are you not getting?

They get it, they just don't care.

Why only threads about migrants and Farage

@MissScarletInTheBallroom

Now you might be willing to write off 9.2 million Brits who are economically inactive as layabouts and unemployable but I'm not.

If you want to reduce the number of economic inactive it is simply a matter of making employment far more economically attractive than benefits and providing the necessary training.

Or in simple terms if you doubled the salaries of say Amazon delivery drivers then you would have no problem filling these jobs with British citizens. If Amazon didn't want to pay up then they don't get their parcels delivered. Yes this additional salary will be passed on through higher prices but equally we have savings from that person no longer drawing incapacity payments plus they will be paying tax on their income.

Yes, but there is no prospect of that happening in the UK. Can you explain why you disagree and how you envisage it happening?

But I assume you're going to be happy to pay the higher fees too then? I'm not saying it's right that carers are so poorly paid but let's face it, adult care is already expensive.

I think that the slide is most telling. First get people all riled up about illegal immigration. Niche, single issue with negligible political or economic relevance but effects some people personally, gets the racist foot soldiers involved and funding from right wing organisations.

Run a campaign when normal political parties are in recess (which reform could do as a private company) and capture the media when there is little else to report on and then drop in the fact that it’s not just illegal immigrants you have a problem with but immigration in general and actually you want to deport all legal migrants with indefinite leave to remain if they do not earn a set amount far higher than national average wage regardless of whether they claim benefits or are married to a British citizen or have children who are British citizens or have worked and paid taxes for the years they have lived here.

How many people would have supported farage and reform if he had been honest from the outset? Illegal immigrants out is sensible. All migrants out is BNP territory.

I can’t understand people not understanding this.

Do you understand the difference between economically inactive and unemployed?

It's absolutely stark raving bonkers to think that people will recover in lower taxes what they pay in higher Amazon delivery fees.

They come here to live under an unislamuc government.

What part are you not getting?

I have just ChatGPT'ed this because I can't be arsed writing it out:

Key proposals / statements

1. Abolish Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) / Rescind legal settlement status
2. Farage has pledged to scrap the status of Indefinite Leave to Remain — the route by which many migrants settle permanently — for new and existing migrants. The Guardian+2The Independent+2
3. Under his plan, those with existing ILR could lose that status unless they reapply under stricter new rules. The Economist+3The Guardian+3The Independent+3
4. The replacement would be a visa regime with stricter criteria — for example, higher salary thresholds, advanced English, tighter family reunification rules. The Guardian+2The Independent+2
5. Some statements suggest that ILR would not be automatic and would require regular renewal (e.g. every five years) under the new scheme. The Independent+2The Guardian+2
6. Mass deportations of illegal migrants
7. Farage has stated that he would deport large numbers of illegal migrants if his party (Reform UK) comes to power. ynetglobal+2Wikipedia+2
8. In one pledge, he said he would “deport 600,000 illegal migrants over five years.” ynetglobal+1
9. His party talks of establishing a “UK Deportation Command” (analogous to U.S. ICE) to enforce deportations. The Independent+1
10. He has also said that all illegal immigrants, including women and children, would be subject to deportation under such policies (though later statements reportedly narrowed focus to adult men, then revised again). Wikipedia+1
11. Withdrawal from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)
12. Farage has argued that the UK should withdraw from the ECHR (or significantly alter its role) because he believes it constrains the government's ability to deport foreign criminals

Because that is the only thing Farage cares about.

Note the point I made about it keeping all our wages down?

Right, now, using your own brain rather than ChatGPT, which of these policies do you agree with?

All of them

The head in the sand position they have clearly adopted just has to be ignored. They are so complacent that they can’t envisage that anything, ever, could threaten their supremacy.
They aren’t looking at the situation at all, they are clucking virtue signalling noises and busily believing other people are ‘thick’.

All of those proposals are immoral because they lump existing and new immigrants together in one large dragnet that will see lives ruined and families torn apart. It's cruel and unjust but sums up just what Reform and its followers are like.

So Farage is the great Socialist after all, he wants to see an increase in wages for the lowest paid does he? I'm not convinced that is Reform's priority 👉 https://news.sky.com/story/reform-uks-tax-plans-disproportionately-benefit-high-earners-analysis-shows-13156776

I'm horrified by the lack of humanity.

Did you not concentrate in your maths class at school? The reporter in this article clearly didn't either

Honestly, you go on about Reform voters being thick....