Don’t knock diversity. If we had a bit more Nazism and “Pol Potism” in the UK, we’d be more “diverse”, which proves that herding Jews into gas chambers and shooting people who wear glasses are both great ideas.
And I note that dear Giles rubbishes Teresa May’s solution, but doesn’t attempt to offer any proposals himself…
Bernie G.
There was never a problem with outsiders; there were always outsiders, from Ireland and Poland and Jamaica… The problems began when the number of outsiders morphed into rival tribes on separate sides of ‘their’ street, in competition for resources and cultural supremacy. I think it’s referred to as gentrification.
Mr Ecks
A few is one thing.
Vast numbers are an open attack on Western nations and peoples with the intention of replacing or even wiping them out.
Migration must end and the scum of the left must be ended with it.
The Inimitable Steve
Diversity is our greatest stench.
ken
Giles Fraser is a fascinating example of a pseud. His understanding of theology is pathetic as is his ability to reason, which is odd since he supposedly trained as a philosopher, albeit his doctorate was at the decidedly third tier Lancaster. He has no intellectual ability and he does not appear particularly godly. His main attributes are unpleasant left wing views and appearing a lot on the BBC. He gives “christian” cover for stupid left wing views.
Rob
“Diversity is a boon”
I’d like to see the proof please, written down. Otherwise I will file under the same location of Lefty myths as
“The NHS is the envy of the world”
“Building more prisons creates crime”
Rob
“but we’re losing our sense of community”
I’m not sure why the ‘but’ is there – that was the point. Hasn’t he understood this yet?
So Much For Subtlety
As Robert Putnam showed, more diversity, less trust and social cohesion. We have put people in power who hate Britain and want to destroy it forever. Our future is to be a Low Trust, high crime, ethnically diverse society. Like Brazil. Our Army will be no more efficient than Italy’s. Nor will the police.
Actually Putnam is wrong about one thing. Low diversity societies are also dysfunctional if they are not White. As you see in Detroit.
Adrian
He blames business for wanting thin communities but I read somewhere that big companies prefer homogenous communities. More harmony, less trouble.
I’ve always thought it was the left that hated community harmony – things like family, church, private clubs etc. The push for diversity was aimed to destroy it. These compete with the state for loyalty.
Theophrastus
“Diversity” is (part of) Britain’s equivalent of China’s Cultural Revolution. Diversity has been the objective of the vanguard – the Red Guards, if you like – of the UK’s left-liberal axis for several decades.
Besotted with fashionable ideas of anti-racism, plus self-imposed masochistic liberal guilt over the largely imagined crimes of British imperialism and colonialism, Guardianistas and other diversity-wibblers (like the ghastly Giles Fraser) exemplify the left-liberal death wish. To the vanguard, whose aim is to destroy traditional British society, the diversity-wibblers are merely “useful idiots”.
To achieve their cultural revolution, China’s Red Guards sought to destroy what they described as the “four olds” – old customs, old culture, old habits and old ideas. And it’s the same modish attitude that has driven the vanguard of the left-liberal axis.
With Britain (unlike Mao’s China) short on peasants, or even a genuine proletariat in the Marxist sense, this vanguard has decided to encourage mass immigration, multiculturalism and diversity to supplant the “olds” they want to destroy. That the attitudes of some of the new cultures – typically Islam – that they have cynically welcomed and embraced are considerably less enlightened than those of the host nation does not matter to (say) Ken Livingstone and other members of the vanguard.
Their aim is to destroy the status quo. And, eventually, in the ensuing chaos, they hope to seize power in a revolution and to implement a socialist tyranny.
Or, at least, that’s my reading of “diversity”. Any thoughts?
Andrew M
A fragmented, diverse population is consequently more dependent on the state. That appears to be the real goal: keeping all those welfare officers in jobs. Angela Merkel wet herself at the idea of importing a million supplicants.
Custard Cream
My first thought after reading that, Theo, is to go and pour myself a large one and wallow for a while.
Bloke in Wiltshire
Theophrastus,
That’s pretty much spot on, I think. The left has realised that it cannot sell its message to the voters, so change the voters. They’re mad, of course, because this new bunch will want various savage new laws (against feminists for example) that will be terrible, but they aren’t looking that far ahead.
The last few years has pretty much destroyed their strategy. What’s happened with immigration, in Rotherham has culminated in the revolution of the Brexit vote. May and Rudd said some things that had Twatter reaching for the smelling salts and quoting Mein Kampf, but none of the people I know on Facebook who live near places like Kettering, Northampton, Swindon or Worcester cares. They actually want less immigrants. And don’t give me that “contributing to the economy” stuff. Sure, French teachers and German engineers do, but your average barista probably isn’t covering their costs with taxes. I don’t care that Poles are upset that they might have to leave. If you’re working as a nanny or in a petrol station you can go.
So Much For Subtlety
Bloke in Wiltshire – “but your average barista probably isn’t covering their costs with taxes.”
I agree Theo is spot on. But it is too late. 27% of new births are to mothers born overseas. Britain is lost. Maybe New Zealand can be saved. Maybe not. Still, at least we are not France. 40% of their new births are Muslim.
Because in the end the baristas aren’t the issue. The Poles aren’t the problem. The rapists of Rotherham are. And our government shows no signs whatsoever of restricting them.
jgh
And, incredibly, the government had and has the power to limit Muslim immigration, yet lost a referendum on the issue of unrestricted immigration from Christian Europe.
Bloke in Wales
And, incredibly, the government had and has the power to limit Muslim immigration, yet lost a referendum on the issue of unrestricted immigration from Christian Europe.
Do you wonder why they’ve never held a referendum about restricting immigration of vibrants?
And besides, Christian Europe is getting less Christian by the day.
Martin
Christian Europe? Is that like Christian Mecca? Christian Jerusalem? Christian America?
PF
Because in the end the baristas aren’t the issue. The Poles aren’t the problem.
And, incredibly, the government had and has the power to limit Muslim immigration, yet lost a referendum on the issue of unrestricted immigration from Christian Europe.
+1
Do you wonder why they’ve never held a referendum about restricting immigration of vibrants?
Not needed, the ability was already there, it just wasn’t properly exercised. The ability to restrict EU immigration wasn’t actually there.
The referendum wasn’t about “policy”, it was about having the ability, amongst the other things that made up the concept of “Leave”.
Day to day policy is a separate issue, for the demos to vote on at general elections.
Theo, what did you accuse Ecks of – was it Paranoid Central..:) (I’m not judging….)
Pat
So a cabinet level decision to “rub the right’s nose in diversity” has affected working class communities. Who knew that Labour voters were right wing?
Agammamon
“Diversity is a boon – but we’re losing our sense of community”
There are rarely ever genuine solutions – only a different mix of trade-offs.
Theophrastus
PF:
At least, I didn’t suggest the security services are involved! There is evidence to support my case. And the theory of the Great Liberal Death Wish goes back some 50 years.
So Much For Subtlety
Agammamon – “There are rarely ever genuine solutions – only a different mix of trade-offs.”
An ethnically homogeneous society has no downsides. It is a genuine solution.
Gamecock
‘Diversity is a boon – but we’re losing our sense of community’
It’s the choice they made.
It’s what you get when you allow – even encourage – invaders who aren’t required to assimilate.
The longer Fraser verks for the Guardian, diverse it gets.
Don’t knock diversity. If we had a bit more Nazism and “Pol Potism” in the UK, we’d be more “diverse”, which proves that herding Jews into gas chambers and shooting people who wear glasses are both great ideas.
Isn’t Guardian / leftie logic just great?
So, you really can be ‘too thin’.
And I note that dear Giles rubbishes Teresa May’s solution, but doesn’t attempt to offer any proposals himself…
There was never a problem with outsiders; there were always outsiders, from Ireland and Poland and Jamaica… The problems began when the number of outsiders morphed into rival tribes on separate sides of ‘their’ street, in competition for resources and cultural supremacy. I think it’s referred to as gentrification.
A few is one thing.
Vast numbers are an open attack on Western nations and peoples with the intention of replacing or even wiping them out.
Migration must end and the scum of the left must be ended with it.
Diversity is our greatest stench.
Giles Fraser is a fascinating example of a pseud. His understanding of theology is pathetic as is his ability to reason, which is odd since he supposedly trained as a philosopher, albeit his doctorate was at the decidedly third tier Lancaster. He has no intellectual ability and he does not appear particularly godly. His main attributes are unpleasant left wing views and appearing a lot on the BBC. He gives “christian” cover for stupid left wing views.
“Diversity is a boon”
I’d like to see the proof please, written down. Otherwise I will file under the same location of Lefty myths as
“The NHS is the envy of the world”
“Building more prisons creates crime”
“but we’re losing our sense of community”
I’m not sure why the ‘but’ is there – that was the point. Hasn’t he understood this yet?
As Robert Putnam showed, more diversity, less trust and social cohesion. We have put people in power who hate Britain and want to destroy it forever. Our future is to be a Low Trust, high crime, ethnically diverse society. Like Brazil. Our Army will be no more efficient than Italy’s. Nor will the police.
Actually Putnam is wrong about one thing. Low diversity societies are also dysfunctional if they are not White. As you see in Detroit.
He blames business for wanting thin communities but I read somewhere that big companies prefer homogenous communities. More harmony, less trouble.
I’ve always thought it was the left that hated community harmony – things like family, church, private clubs etc. The push for diversity was aimed to destroy it. These compete with the state for loyalty.
“Diversity” is (part of) Britain’s equivalent of China’s Cultural Revolution. Diversity has been the objective of the vanguard – the Red Guards, if you like – of the UK’s left-liberal axis for several decades.
Besotted with fashionable ideas of anti-racism, plus self-imposed masochistic liberal guilt over the largely imagined crimes of British imperialism and colonialism, Guardianistas and other diversity-wibblers (like the ghastly Giles Fraser) exemplify the left-liberal death wish. To the vanguard, whose aim is to destroy traditional British society, the diversity-wibblers are merely “useful idiots”.
To achieve their cultural revolution, China’s Red Guards sought to destroy what they described as the “four olds” – old customs, old culture, old habits and old ideas. And it’s the same modish attitude that has driven the vanguard of the left-liberal axis.
With Britain (unlike Mao’s China) short on peasants, or even a genuine proletariat in the Marxist sense, this vanguard has decided to encourage mass immigration, multiculturalism and diversity to supplant the “olds” they want to destroy. That the attitudes of some of the new cultures – typically Islam – that they have cynically welcomed and embraced are considerably less enlightened than those of the host nation does not matter to (say) Ken Livingstone and other members of the vanguard.
Their aim is to destroy the status quo. And, eventually, in the ensuing chaos, they hope to seize power in a revolution and to implement a socialist tyranny.
Or, at least, that’s my reading of “diversity”. Any thoughts?
A fragmented, diverse population is consequently more dependent on the state. That appears to be the real goal: keeping all those welfare officers in jobs. Angela Merkel wet herself at the idea of importing a million supplicants.
My first thought after reading that, Theo, is to go and pour myself a large one and wallow for a while.
Theophrastus,
That’s pretty much spot on, I think. The left has realised that it cannot sell its message to the voters, so change the voters. They’re mad, of course, because this new bunch will want various savage new laws (against feminists for example) that will be terrible, but they aren’t looking that far ahead.
The last few years has pretty much destroyed their strategy. What’s happened with immigration, in Rotherham has culminated in the revolution of the Brexit vote. May and Rudd said some things that had Twatter reaching for the smelling salts and quoting Mein Kampf, but none of the people I know on Facebook who live near places like Kettering, Northampton, Swindon or Worcester cares. They actually want less immigrants. And don’t give me that “contributing to the economy” stuff. Sure, French teachers and German engineers do, but your average barista probably isn’t covering their costs with taxes. I don’t care that Poles are upset that they might have to leave. If you’re working as a nanny or in a petrol station you can go.
Bloke in Wiltshire – “but your average barista probably isn’t covering their costs with taxes.”
I agree Theo is spot on. But it is too late. 27% of new births are to mothers born overseas. Britain is lost. Maybe New Zealand can be saved. Maybe not. Still, at least we are not France. 40% of their new births are Muslim.
Because in the end the baristas aren’t the issue. The Poles aren’t the problem. The rapists of Rotherham are. And our government shows no signs whatsoever of restricting them.
And, incredibly, the government had and has the power to limit Muslim immigration, yet lost a referendum on the issue of unrestricted immigration from Christian Europe.
Do you wonder why they’ve never held a referendum about restricting immigration of vibrants?
And besides, Christian Europe is getting less Christian by the day.
Christian Europe? Is that like Christian Mecca? Christian Jerusalem? Christian America?
+1
Not needed, the ability was already there, it just wasn’t properly exercised. The ability to restrict EU immigration wasn’t actually there.
The referendum wasn’t about “policy”, it was about having the ability, amongst the other things that made up the concept of “Leave”.
Day to day policy is a separate issue, for the demos to vote on at general elections.
Theo, what did you accuse Ecks of – was it Paranoid Central..:) (I’m not judging….)
So a cabinet level decision to “rub the right’s nose in diversity” has affected working class communities. Who knew that Labour voters were right wing?
“Diversity is a boon – but we’re losing our sense of community”
There are rarely ever genuine solutions – only a different mix of trade-offs.
PF:
At least, I didn’t suggest the security services are involved! There is evidence to support my case. And the theory of the Great Liberal Death Wish goes back some 50 years.
Agammamon – “There are rarely ever genuine solutions – only a different mix of trade-offs.”
An ethnically homogeneous society has no downsides. It is a genuine solution.
‘Diversity is a boon – but we’re losing our sense of community’
It’s the choice they made.
It’s what you get when you allow – even encourage – invaders who aren’t required to assimilate.
The longer Fraser verks for the Guardian, diverse it gets.