Birmingham attack gone quiet ?!

[AlwaysHopefull89]

correct me if I have missed anything here on this… but has the news gone quiet on the woman who was attacked unprovoked in Birmingham? Do we know who done it?!

Two things can be simultaneously true. Firstly, the fact that racial diversity in the UK goes back a very long way. Secondly, the fact that the UK has become more racially diverse in recent years.

I'm not really sure what either of those facts have to do with the other facts that both the Southport killer and the Birmingham attacker were British.

Are you trying to suggest that they cannot be British because of their race? And are you disturbed for some reason by the fact that the proportion of British people who are not white has increased? Why would that bother you exactly?

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/revision-to-march-2024-neighbourhood-policing-numbers

No you didn’t. You talked about “total non-policing of our streets”. Which you have now switched to discussing shoplifters being apprehended which is an entirely different thing with private venue security generally not being managed by police.

Try reading my post again. I didn't comment on the Southport killer or the Birmingham attacker. I am not trying to suggest anything. You're inferring way too much here.

I was asking another poster why they claimed Britain had been racially diverse for centuries when that's not true. A population that is 99.5% white is, by definition, not racially diverse, unless we mean the presence of one non-white person in a white population makes it, de facto, racially diverse. Perhaps a definition of the term would be useful.

So what was the point of asking that question if it wasn't in any way related to the rest of the thread?

Your reason for asking was pretty clear.

@JHound you're right - it was my second post at 12.14pm

Again, not clear at all if what you're actually trying to do is imply I'm racist.

My reason for asking was:
a) the poster I was responding to demands accuracy and facts of others

b) I see this claim a lot on Mumsnet that Britain has been racially diverse for aeons. Often when they're trying to shut down people who make the point that rapid demographic change has consequences for some communities. If we're going to shut people down, we should at least be clear about Britain's history.

But Britain has been racially diverse for a very long time. Yes, it has become more diverse, but so what?

Yes, facts matter. But it wasn't incorrect for the pp to highlight the fact that racial diversity has been a feature of Britain for a very long time, so why pull her up on it? Unless you're trying to push another agenda?

Yes, there has been demographic change in Britain in recent years. If you don't like the fact that there is greater racial diversity now, then at least have the courage to own that. But don't try to pretend that Britain was always 100% white or that people from ethnic minorities can't be British.

I don’t agree at all that Britain has been racially diverse for a ‘very long time’ that simply isn’t true - factually.

@MrsBennetsPoorNervesAreBack But that's just the point. It hasn't been racially diverse (again, perhaps a definition is needed here) for a 'very long time' - unless you mean 80 years?

Britain was overwhelmingly white until mass migration after WW2. I'm not trying to pretend anything. Why are you so keen to suggest otherwise?

There have been black people in Britain at least since the Roman times. I would call that a pretty long time, personally.

Nobody is denying that the proportions have shifted, but there have been POC in these islands for a very long time. Whether you want to accept that or not.

Oh FFS, you checked the Daily Mail. 🙄

White people live in Japan but most would accept that Japan is not racially diverse. What point are you trying to make?

Who bought and sold slavery in Africa? Oh yeah, the British Empire.

@JaneEyre40 sorry, how is that relevant to the conversation?

Well, that all depends on what you mean by racial diversity. Is there a specific percentage of non-white people that has to be reached in order for a country to be considered diverse? Who sets that threshold and what is the percentage required for us to be able to use that description?

In the context of this thread, a racist poster was clearly implying that POC could not be British. Someone made the point that racial diversity in Britain has a very long history. That was factually correct.

So once again, if you didn't have a specific agenda that you wanted to promote, why did you choose to take issue with that point?

I’ve live in London too and crime stats round here (south) as same as they ever were. Streets feel the same as they ever were. You’re probably just getting older and more conservative/ cautious

I agree that definition in the context of this discussion would be useful. But I would posit that a population of 99.5% white people would not be described by most reasonable thinkers as 'racially diverse'.

And I've already answered your question about why I took issue with that point. I felt it was inaccurate and misrepresents the history of migration in Britain and I think it gets mentioned often without challenge on here.

There have been Jewish people in Britain since 1066-albeit with a somewhat checkered history. Certainly there have been many Jewish immigrants since 164something. Vile things were said about them too….

Actually, there have been ethnic minority communities in Japan for centuries, but that's a separate discussion.

The point I'm trying to make is that the pp's statement wasn't incorrect and didn't need correcting. So I was wondering why you felt the need to challenge it. But you don't need to answer as I think I know why.

In your opinion, it wasn't incorrect.

Without a definition of what 'racially diverse' means (which was PP's choice of words), neither of us can be proved correct or incorrect.

If that's a dig at me, I'm not saying anything vile about anyone. Much as @MrsBennetsPoorNervesAreBack would like me to.

That's not my agenda.

I was taking issue with the assertion that Britain has been racially diverse for centuries. I'm aware that people of other races have inhabited Britain for centuries. That's not the same thing as being racially diverse, in my opinion. It's just facts, not sure why it's being seen as me being implicitly racist.

But in the context of the point that the pp was making, the definition of "racially diverse" was totally irrelevant.

The racist poster implied that Black people couldn't be British. It was pointed out in response to that that there have been POC in this country for a very long time. Why would you argue with that point unless you had a particular axe to grind?

He was arrested for violent offences that occurred on 27 October, following that he went on to murder this lady last week. So yeah, it seems whatever police intervention happened between 27 October and 7 November was insufficient to deter him going on to commit murder such a short time later. He wasn’t a first time offender.

So you chose to argue the toss about semantics rather than distancing yourself from the blatantly racist remark just above?

OK then.