What would the Left call the Right, if the small boat people were white?

[Blondiebeachbabe]

I'll start by saying, I am very anti open boarders, and I am horrified that so many illegal immigrants are arriving every day. But for me, it has absolutely nothing to do with skin colour, it is more to do with :

ONE) They have no documentation, and we have no idea if they have criminal backgrounds

TWO) They tend to come from cultures where women are not respected

THREE) They often come from places where rape is not a crime

FOUR) They cannot work, and it is costing Millions to house, feed and clothe them

FIVE) We are granting asylum to some people who should never get it - like the Hamas bodyguard we heard of yesterday

Lots of valid reasons I feel, however, for me, it has nothing to do with skin colour. If I had to be locked in a room overnight with a white man from a backward culture, or a black man from the UK, I would choose the latter, every single time.

It isn't colour, it's culture

But I see that people on the Far Left just scream "Racist" to anyone who opposes illegal immigration. What would they scream, if all the small boats were full of white men? And would people still march for England?

So, to be clear: you would still recommend that women and LGBT folk from Britain go and live in the places whose values are being imported by the immigrants under discussion?

Again: more and more people are seeing through your virtue signalling, and more and more people are voting accordingly. Clutch your pearls all you like, but all your pearl-clutching is accelerating the very political outcome you claim not to want.

Did you not remember what happened in Cologne?

Did you not remember what happened in Cologne?

There's a lot of screaming in the streets here, yes. Every grievance in the world is played out on Britains streets.

You're assuming the consequent that they are actually genuine asylum seekers. Why should we have to shoulder the risk during their appraisal?

Some use the term willy-nilly but some do notice a difference among some people of how they embrace white asylum seekers and shun non-white ones. Also so often conversations about small boat arrivals seem to meander into general discussion of migration and ethnicity. When people keep conflating them all you can see why others think racism is behind it.

I don’t think it’s particularly right / left either.

Nobody actually believes it's all the same, it's just that people on the left have to pretend that they do.

Rhiannon Whyte

We royally screwed up Afghanistan and left a vacuum that the Taliban jumped into very quickly. We also royally screwed up Pakistan and India by dividing up countries based on drawing lines on a map, ignoring local ethnic and political divides, which have led to years of infighting and instability. So yes, we created an awful legacy that still has repercussions today.

It’s concerning though as it’s hard fought by women to get here.

Which countries have " we" made unsafe in our lifetimes?

I think the entire premise of a "fair share" of "refuge" for Africans, middle Easterners, and South Asians is bogus.

They have plenty of space for refuge on their own continents and don't need to come to this tiny island at all. Obviously they like the free stuff though.

India is an economic powerhouse and growing very fast. They picked themselves up and just worked hard

I vote that reform voters should go live in those countries. Because they always seem to argue online for things that are common in totalitarian states, like detaining people, the death penalty/harsher prison sentences, allowing vigilantes/retribution, reducing taxes for the wealthy, policing what women wear, and making women stay at home looking after children.

The home secretary wants to make safe routes for women from Afghanistan because they are not safe from the men there? So why is it ok to let Afghan men in here? There are notorious for how they treat women. We don't know which ones are decent so keep them all out.

Both the number of crossings and the number of people making those crossings have fallen significantly this year.* The number of people returned has significantly increased, so it looks as though things are going in the right direction.

Re your point about the allowance given to asylum seekers you seem to want it both ways. You resent the money they're given (£9-something pw if they get their meals provided, £49-something if they don't) while also believing that there would be a rise in crime if they didn't get it.

*Source:

Economically it is. That hasn't benefited everyone in India though, the disparity between the rich (those we supported into power) and poor (those we didn't) is huge.

Even the thing that gets the heckles up most for many reformers - asylum based on sexuality - is usually our legal legacy, or from another European coloniser.

It's got nothing to do with colour 🤷
Many of the 'boat people' are kind of different shades of brown 🤔. Should we develop a colour chart, Dulux-style?
My parents, when they economically migrated to the UK in the 1950s were subject to a fair amount of racism
I was too, at school, to a lesser degree. We are (were) very white.
My ex-partner, also a child of economic migrants, also on the receiving end of racism, is South Asian.

Not safe from the men in power there. No one is inviting the Taliban to claim asylum here.

How can you check the background of the men arriving?

Did we royally screw up Afghanistan? Tony Blair and The Labour Party have a lot of blood on their hands for sure, but as I said previously they were under Taliban rule before and they're under Taliban rule again now. Is it any less safe there now than it was before, save for a small number of people who assisted Nato forces?

Your comments on Pakistan and India are reliant on acceptance of the idea that erstwhile colonial rule makes the UK responsible for all problems in those countries forever. Where parts of Pakistan are unsafe, the problem tends to be Islamist insurgency or sectarianism. I'm not at all interested in taking responsibility for the internal squabbles amongst the various sects of Islam.

Fucking hell, hyperbole doesn't seem strong enough to describe this post and I can't think of a stronger word for it.

1. It may suprise you that people who are enjoying being in power in their own country rarely decide to give that up to travel halfway across the world to choose a life of poverty where people like you openly hate them
2. Whilst no process is perfect, the whole point of the asylum process is to investigate as far as possible to understand people's circumstances and what is plausible and genuine. That's one of the reasons it takes a long time. No one gets off a boat, decides they're known as John Smith, and gets sent on their merry way, contrary to popular reformer belief.
3. In countries like Afghanistan, the UK has a decent amount of intelligence on those in power and their supporters because of how long our forces were there.

You won't answer the question you deflect with a stereotypical attack, typical reformer. You missed out woke but you're pretty much following their script