Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » What sort of future do we want?

13567

Comments

  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    Alistair said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    A "colour blind" society is a farcical and offensive proposition. It's saying you can you only treat BAME people with respect as long you don't realise they are BAME.

    I do agree with @whunter's proposition is that the old order is being swept away and will not return. Unlike them, I give it full throated welcome.

    "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." Martin Luther King, 1963

    Was he advocating an offensive proposition to black people?
    " No amount of gold could provide an adequate compensation for the exploitation and humiliation of the Negro in America down through the centuries. Not all the wealth of this affluent society could meet the bill. Yet a price can be placed on unpaid wages. The ancient common law has always provided a remedy for the appropriation of the labor of one human being by another. This law should be made to apply for American Negroes. The payment should be in the form of a massive program by the government of special, compensatory measures which could be regarded as a settlement in accordance with the accepted practice of common law"

    Why is it people can only remember the one bit of King's speeches and writings which they can interpret as meaning they have to do nothing?
    Because that second quote falls full-square into the palpable nonsense of material reparations for ancient historical injustices? 'Let us treat one another as equals in the future' is an inspiring message; 'Let us exhume every historical injustice in human history and demand restitution for them all' is a recipe for endless civil war.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    malcolmg said:

    kle4 said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Mr. Pioneers, you remember the Scots voted to stay in the UK in a once in a generation vote, right?

    That was six years ago.

    They voted to stay in the UK that was part of the EU. Johnson upended that ludo board into the fireplace and is a sufficiently fundamental change that another referendum is warranted if they ask for it.

    How long is a "generation" anyway?
    Can I refer Mr Dancer back to the basic point which is that it is not up to England what Scotland does in a Union of Equals. If events mean Scotland changes it's mind then fine. The Union in question only came into being at the 4th attempt. We had two re-elections before the end of the 2015 parliament because the party who won the 2015 election didn't like the result...
    Yes. And we can safely assume that a second referendum in Scotland that resulted in a second No vote would result in the defeated side starting the campaign for a third vote the next day. And, because they have a solid grip on the Scottish Parliament, they'd get it before many more years had passed. And then, if necessary, a fourth, fifth and sixth. Rinse, repeat.

    This is just one of the reasons why we should hope for and embrace the end of the Union. It would bring clarity, and resolve a lot of problems.
    It's not inevitable that support for indy will remain so high. I think it will and the union will end, but that doesnt mean I think union supporters should give up because indy supporters will keep trying and probably win in the end.

    They probably will, but they need to work for it.

    And it's a bit strange to assume the clarification and resolution of problems which would occur would not also potentially create a bunch of issues as well. Many people believe on balance it would be worth it and fair enough, embracing the end doesnt end problems.
    Does not justify England's governments current attitude or the Scottish Government meekly accepting it.
    I wouldn't expect people to think it would, but as with Brexit I'm sure any sensible Indy supporter would not claim all problems would go away once there is independence, they just think it will be better overall, and even if there are additional issues, worth it.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967
    rcs1000 said:

    On topic...

    The US has two problems that the UK does not:

    1. The police are a paramilitary organisation. In the UK, or France, or Canada, or Italy, there is roughly a one-to-one ratio between the number of police killed by criminals, and the number of criminals (and others) killed by the police. In the US, more than 1,000 we're shot and killed by the police last year, and another 1,600 died in police custody. In total, 89 police were killed in the line of duty. That's a 30-1 ratio.

    2. Behaviour, as CR has pointed out, is accepted from white people (such as donning assault weapons and occupying the state senate), that would not be accepted from African Americans. There is a legacy of racism in the US, going all the way back to slavery, that has not been eradicated.

    Both these problems need to be solved. But they are separate issues.

    But as I keep pointing out why do so many Democrat party strongholds feature a privileged white overclass and an exploited black underclass ?

    Perhaps because urban middle class life requires a high level of exploitation and inequality ?

    Similarly in the UK inequality and exploitation are high in the likes of London and Bristol.

    Now how does this link in to the present world of covid and the changes it will bring ?

    If you're an exploited member of a less successful migrant community the world is going to get even harder.

    And if you're an over-educated but under-skilled, over-indebted and under-housed graduate * the world is going to get even harder.

    For such people a protest cause which damns the current world and offers to destroy it will surely be attractive for many.

    * What I think of as middle class regression.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,981
    eristdoof said:


    It would work for me if Scotland & N Ireland went back to EU membership and left England in its Littler Britain.

    Be careful not to slip while typing that penultimate word.
    Littler???? Has it been banned by BLM?
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967

    The painful conclusion is that Britain has the wrong sort of government for a pandemic—and, in Boris Johnson, the wrong sort of prime minister. Elected in December with the slogan of “Get Brexit Done”, he did not pay covid-19 enough attention. Ministers were chosen on ideological grounds; talented candidates with the wrong views were left out in the cold. Mr Johnson got the top job because he is a brilliant campaigner and a charismatic entertainer with whom the Conservative Party fell in love. Beating the coronavirus calls for attention to detail, consistency and implementation, but they are not his forte.

    The pandemic has many lessons for the government, which the inevitable public inquiry will surely clarify. Here is one for voters: when choosing a person or party to vote for, do not underestimate the importance of ordinary, decent competence.


    https://www.economist.com/leaders/2020/06/18/britain-has-the-wrong-government-for-the-covid-crisis

    As usual the absent 'talent' is not named.

    Who are these people ?

    Liam Fox perhaps ?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,019
    Alistair said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    A "colour blind" society is a farcical and offensive proposition. It's saying you can you only treat BAME people with respect as long you don't realise they are BAME.

    I do agree with @whunter's proposition is that the old order is being swept away and will not return. Unlike them, I give it full throated welcome.

    "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." Martin Luther King, 1963

    Was he advocating an offensive proposition to black people?
    " No amount of gold could provide an adequate compensation for the exploitation and humiliation of the Negro in America down through the centuries. Not all the wealth of this affluent society could meet the bill. Yet a price can be placed on unpaid wages. The ancient common law has always provided a remedy for the appropriation of the labor of one human being by another. This law should be made to apply for American Negroes. The payment should be in the form of a massive program by the government of special, compensatory measures which could be regarded as a settlement in accordance with the accepted practice of common law"

    Why is it people can only remember the one bit of King's speeches and writings which they can interpret as meaning they have to do nothing?
    You can read the full speech here. Those words don't feature:

    https://www.archives.gov/files/press/exhibits/dream-speech.pdf

    You are quoting from one of King's earlier books. And it doesn't say what you think it does. He was actually arguing for compensatory programs as benefiting African Americans and poor whites, whom he regarded as “derivative victims” of slavery and Jim Crow. Besides you don't have to agree with all his policies in order to agree with his vision.

    I am not arguing for doing nothing: I think we need to do far more with education, mentoring, coaching, and community development. We need to do far more to change attitudes and create positive role models.

    I am advocating a future where we judge people as individuals, to which their colour of their skin is irrelevant.

    That was his dream, and it's one which I share.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072
    @BluestBlue you cannot seperate race from power and wealth. No matter how meritocratic we make our society, and how easy it becomes for a non white person to work hard and secure an upper-middle-class career, its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.

    There is no easy solution. I don’t know what the solution is.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited June 2020

    HYUFD said:

    The Union itself is the last vestige of Empire and we can only become a modern 21st Century nation by its dissolution. I wish this wasn’t the case but I’m beginning to realize it is. Those who believe the Union can be held together by force are deluded as well as downright immoral.

    If it was still based on Empire there would still be direct rule of Scotland from Westminster, no Scottish MPs and no Holyrood and the 2014 indyref would not have been allowed
    If Johnson rejects Indyref2 after a significant SNP win next year he shoots your argument down in flames.
    He doesn't as the 2014 referendum was 'once in a generation' and he will not be scrapping Holyrood and imposing direct rule from Westminster
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,585

    HYUFD said:

    The Union itself is the last vestige of Empire and we can only become a modern 21st Century nation by its dissolution. I wish this wasn’t the case but I’m beginning to realize it is. Those who believe the Union can be held together by force are deluded as well as downright immoral.

    If it was still based on Empire there would still be direct rule of Scotland from Westminster, no Scottish MPs and no Holyrood and the 2014 indyref would not have been allowed
    If Johnson rejects Indyref2 after a significant SNP win next year he shoots your argument down in flames.
    Starmer's position will be key

    2 questions for him.

    Does he support the union

    Will he agree to indy2 but campaign against
    If I was Starmer, I would have to reluctantly agree to both your questions
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,674

    @rkrkrk

    1 of 2

    I have done a bit of listening.

    Over the last two weeks I've contacted (privately) four people in my professional network of an African or Afro-Caribbean heritage. I actually had work-related reasons for contacting each, so it wasn't explicitly a social call.

    None of them raised the protests with me. I initiated the subject in each situation. I asked them what they thought about what was going on.

    What they all said was similar. They all started by being at pains to point out that the USA was not the UK. The UK isn't armed, the police don't have guns, and the UK doesn't have the same legacy issues. What they'd seen in the USA had upset them a lot, as had some of the violent riots in response to it, and they wanted to keep it in proportion but also for people to reflect on it.

    They then said whilst it's nothing like as overt and bad in the UK as the USA, it still goes on here. People are more reserved and introverted here, so it's far more hidden. There's an "air" sometimes around them when they walk out, which they can sense, and it isn't always comfortable. The events in the USA have helped shine a bit of spotlight on this, from which they hope comes some good.

    One said that whilst her race had never held her back, her 7 year old daughter in primary school has on at least three occasions had one or two other children say they don't want to play with her because she has a black mummy. Also (and I was really surprised by this) she works for a major private telecomms company and said they've been excellent but her husband works for the NHS and has encountered a very solid ceiling. She's convinced the NHS is racist. I gently challenged her on this "really?", but she was adamant: "the NHS is racist".

    One man said that when he was at school (he wanted to be an engineer) the careers advisor said he'd never be a professional engineer, and advised him to be a mechanic instead. They assumed no ambition or dismissed what was there. So he had to work hard at night school later to get the qualifications to get him back on track. Many of his old school friends turned to crime and are now in jail, as they didn't feel they had much future and also had broken families at home, often with absent fathers.

    My headmaster told my mother that I would never amount to anything , despite or because I used to beat all the toffs kids for being Dux. It happens to lots of people of all colours and shades and yes I proved the old arsehole well wrong and did not need to waste 4 years at University to do it.
    People need to get on with it and stop whining about being hard done by , mostly it is just an excuse to hide fact that they are not up to it.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,019

    whunter said:




    Under the old order I would have been regarded 'liberal left' but even I can see that this is turning in to a choice between living in Putins Russia or the Khymer Rouge.

    The option of living in a state where you can keep your head down and avoid trouble but stay secure, retain some sense of personal, private freedom is, when all things are considered, preferable over living in an intrusive revolutionary state which seeks to remake human nature.

    Both are awful choices. By contrast, the liberal Britain that we knew and has existed for most of our lifetimes was a utopia. But right now it feels like it is lost forever. It wont be saved by bowing to the mob.

    Sorry to depress you all on Sunday morning. Enjoy your freedom while you still have it.



    In contrast with the thoughtful and well-considered thread header, this is melodramatic twaddle. The incipient "communist" revolution you refer to has barely been noticed by most people, who do indeed just get on with their lives much as ever. Very few protesters wish to overthrow the state; probably the same tiny number on the far left and the far right. The vast majority of peaceful protesters just want a fairer society, simple as that.

    On the thread header, Casino Royale has written a good, classically liberal let's all be kind and colour blind piece. Hard to disagree with the thrust of this, but I'm less sure about the solutions. He acknowledges that there may be residual racial prejudice amongst 15%-25% of the population - really, a very high number if he's right, and I suspect he is. What precisely is to be done about this - I don't think appealing to such people to be colour blind will really cut it.

    I guess my main quibble is that in quite a long thread header the word power does not feature once. Any solution to our current woes surely needs to contain some analysis of power - who has it, in whose interest is it used, and how can it be more evenly distributed to challenge both real and perceived (racial) injustice.
    I do think advantage exists. I'd say it lies with those with money, stable families, those who live in safe areas and (this one isn't mentioned very much) with physically attractive and articulate people.

    I think it is still the case that an RP accent is sometimes conflated with being articulate and educated in this country, whereas that is far from the case. However, it is also not an excuse to be *inarticulate* - i.e you can be educated and articulate, with good English and diction, in a variety of accents - and we shouldn't conflate the two, or else it can hold people back.

    My sense is that too many people simply let their unconscious bias make subjective decisions about black people almost automatically, and this hinders their fair treatment.
    To what do you attribute the growing disparity in outcomes for recent immigrants from Africa and the older black community?

    It is quite noticeable, that when you work with black people in high end white collar jobs, that you find they are nearly always from the former group.

    The first order reason for this is education - such jobs are now only open to the holders of a 2.1 or 1st from a Russell Group university.

    What is the reason that that there is such a disparity in educational outcomes?
    I don't know. One possible answer could be that Afro-Caribbeans who arrived here in the 1940s-60s came here to do fairly low-medium skilled jobs, like bus driving, whereas now in order to immigrate from Africa you have to clear a significant salary threshold and you generally need to be well-educated to get that.

    But, I am guessing. I'd need to do research.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    IanB2 said:

    Breaking (Guardian): Ministers are expecting a wide-ranging government reshuffle in September in which Boris Johnson will sack key figures who are judged to have underperformed in the Covid-19 crisis.

    Cabinet sources said the move was now seen as inevitable. They believe sweeping changes will be made in an attempt to defuse mounting discontent on the Tory backbenches following a stream of U-turns and a fall in the party’s poll ratings.

    Among those seen as vulnerable are education secretary Gavin Williamson, communities secretary Robert Jenrick and work and pensions secretary Thérèse Coffey... Names being tipped for returns to the top table include Jeremy Hunt and Liam Fox

    Jenrick should be sacked now with regard to his behaviour over the Desmond planning application. It’s not his behaviour over Covid which is the issue but this, which stinks mightily.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    malcolmg said:

    kle4 said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Mr. Pioneers, you remember the Scots voted to stay in the UK in a once in a generation vote, right?

    That was six years ago.

    They voted to stay in the UK that was part of the EU. Johnson upended that ludo board into the fireplace and is a sufficiently fundamental change that another referendum is warranted if they ask for it.

    How long is a "generation" anyway?
    Can I refer Mr Dancer back to the basic point which is that it is not up to England what Scotland does in a Union of Equals. If events mean Scotland changes it's mind then fine. The Union in question only came into being at the 4th attempt. We had two re-elections before the end of the 2015 parliament because the party who won the 2015 election didn't like the result...
    Yes. And we can safely assume that a second referendum in Scotland that resulted in a second No vote would result in the defeated side starting the campaign for a third vote the next day. And, because they have a solid grip on the Scottish Parliament, they'd get it before many more years had passed. And then, if necessary, a fourth, fifth and sixth. Rinse, repeat.

    This is just one of the reasons why we should hope for and embrace the end of the Union. It would bring clarity, and resolve a lot of problems.
    It's not inevitable that support for indy will remain so high. I think it will and the union will end, but that doesnt mean I think union supporters should give up because indy supporters will keep trying and probably win in the end.

    They probably will, but they need to work for it.

    And it's a bit strange to assume the clarification and resolution of problems which would occur would not also potentially create a bunch of issues as well. Many people believe on balance it would be worth it and fair enough, embracing the end doesnt end problems.
    Does not justify England's governments current attitude or the Scottish Government meekly accepting it.
    There is no England government. Which is part of the problem.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    @BluestBlue you cannot seperate race from power and wealth. No matter how meritocratic we make our society, and how easy it becomes for a non white person to work hard and secure an upper-middle-class career, its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.

    There is no easy solution. I don’t know what the solution is.

    And yet the protestors seem to think there are very easy solutions, and if someone says it is complicated I find it hard to believe they would get a positive reception.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 14,912
    I think this piece by Reni Eddo Lodge is pretty illuminating. I was going to comment on this header but I don't really have anything to say that she doesn't say better here. Her book is excellent too.
    https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/jun/21/reni-eddo-lodge-uk-book-charts-debate-racism-game-some-dont-want-to-play
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    The Union itself is the last vestige of Empire and we can only become a modern 21st Century nation by its dissolution. I wish this wasn’t the case but I’m beginning to realize it is. Those who believe the Union can be held together by force are deluded as well as downright immoral.

    If it was still based on Empire there would still be direct rule of Scotland from Westminster, no Scottish MPs and no Holyrood and the 2014 indyref would not have been allowed
    If Johnson rejects Indyref2 after a significant SNP win next year he shoots your argument down in flames.
    He doesn't as the 2014 referendum was 'once in a generation' and he will not be scrapping Holyrood and imposing direct rule from Westminster
    You’ve said repeatedly that Boris would impose direct rule from Westminster, directly in contravention of Section 63A of the Scotland Act 1998, if Holyrood was to organise a referendum without Westminster’s “permission”.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,585

    HYUFD said:

    The Union itself is the last vestige of Empire and we can only become a modern 21st Century nation by its dissolution. I wish this wasn’t the case but I’m beginning to realize it is. Those who believe the Union can be held together by force are deluded as well as downright immoral.

    If it was still based on Empire there would still be direct rule of Scotland from Westminster, no Scottish MPs and no Holyrood and the 2014 indyref would not have been allowed
    If Johnson rejects Indyref2 after a significant SNP win next year he shoots your argument down in flames.
    Starmer's position will be key

    2 questions for him.

    Does he support the union

    Will he agree to indy2 but campaign against
    If I was Starmer, I would have to reluctantly agree to both your questions
    Sorry BigG, my reluctance would be for your second question rather than the first. Both would answer yes though.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,669

    Scott_xP said:

    I see Trump’s rally was a flop.

    “Playing into his hands”

    https://twitter.com/ProjectLincoln/status/1274486981897195522
    Lord, this will play into Trump’s hands, but not yet.
    How do you work that out?
    Fun fact: Two weeks (the average Coronavirus incubation period) after Trump's rally is 4th of July.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,748
    Just in case anyone thinks all of Scottish Labour is going to meekly fall in behind Starmer (who in turn looks like he's going to meekly fall in behind the Uber Unionist SLab rump now in control)...

    https://twitter.com/shirkerism/status/1274398270203322370?s=20
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    edited June 2020

    @BluestBlue you cannot seperate race from power and wealth. No matter how meritocratic we make our society, and how easy it becomes for a non white person to work hard and secure an upper-middle-class career, its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.

    There is no easy solution. I don’t know what the solution is.

    'its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.'

    I have literally no idea what this means. I have personal experience of first- and second-generation immigrants who have scaled the economic, educational, social, and professional heights of Britain, reaching levels that many of the 'white hands' you mention haven't grasped in the past 1000 years.

    This is a state of affairs of which both those 'new Britons' and the old ones should be immensely proud.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,585
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    The Union itself is the last vestige of Empire and we can only become a modern 21st Century nation by its dissolution. I wish this wasn’t the case but I’m beginning to realize it is. Those who believe the Union can be held together by force are deluded as well as downright immoral.

    If it was still based on Empire there would still be direct rule of Scotland from Westminster, no Scottish MPs and no Holyrood and the 2014 indyref would not have been allowed
    If Johnson rejects Indyref2 after a significant SNP win next year he shoots your argument down in flames.
    He doesn't as the 2014 referendum was 'once in a generation' and he will not be scrapping Holyrood and imposing direct rule from Westminster
    Cameron did put the issue to bed for a generation. Hats off! But then he changed the dynamic by losing the Brexit vote. Everything has changed and we are back to square one. Why don't you see that?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,674

    HYUFD said:

    The Union itself is the last vestige of Empire and we can only become a modern 21st Century nation by its dissolution. I wish this wasn’t the case but I’m beginning to realize it is. Those who believe the Union can be held together by force are deluded as well as downright immoral.

    If it was still based on Empire there would still be direct rule of Scotland from Westminster, no Scottish MPs and no Holyrood and the 2014 indyref would not have been allowed
    If Johnson rejects Indyref2 after a significant SNP win next year he shoots your argument down in flames.
    Starmer's position will be key

    2 questions for him.

    Does he support the union

    Will he agree to indy2 but campaign against
    Leonard has already said the Scottish sockpuppets will campaign against and their already dire polling has taken yet another plunge. Starmer will be for the union , Labour like the trough too much.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    kle4 said:

    The painful conclusion is that Britain has the wrong sort of government for a pandemic—and, in Boris Johnson, the wrong sort of prime minister. Elected in December with the slogan of “Get Brexit Done”, he did not pay covid-19 enough attention. Ministers were chosen on ideological grounds; talented candidates with the wrong views were left out in the cold. Mr Johnson got the top job because he is a brilliant campaigner and a charismatic entertainer with whom the Conservative Party fell in love. Beating the coronavirus calls for attention to detail, consistency and implementation, but they are not his forte.

    The pandemic has many lessons for the government, which the inevitable public inquiry will surely clarify. Here is one for voters: when choosing a person or party to vote for, do not underestimate the importance of ordinary, decent competence.


    https://www.economist.com/leaders/2020/06/18/britain-has-the-wrong-government-for-the-covid-crisis

    I don't know how we can usefully measure actual competence in politicians however. There are certainly key signs of genuine incompetence, but competence is trickier. Someone good in opposition might not be in government, but how can we know until they are there? Someone might have done poorly in one ministerial position, but thrive in another. Perhaps they were an expert lawyer or journalist, but poor as a legislator. Maybe they are an expert on legislation but terrible at party management.

    Much as I would criticise the public for going on their gut, I don't think it is realistic to expect a judgement based on simple competence. All government is a little crappy after all.
    I doubt anyone who remotely paid attention to how Johnson acquitted himself as Foreign Secretary can have been remotely surprised by his performance as Prime Minister.
    That's why I said there are key signs of genuine incompetence. But competence is not so easy. What makes a good PM? Some think it is about ideas and intentions and think Corbyn would have been a great PM as a result, but his inability to deal with party management issues suggests otherwise. Some think it is about political management, and that Boris is great as a result (he clearly has been politically successful) but what about delivery of aims?

    Being PM is hard, you need political judgement, ability, vision and a lot more, to be a good one. Even the good ones will do some crappy things. But while some people are easy to spot as likely to be incompetence, even someone who seems competent may be shown up once there, so it's just a gamble really.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,765

    @BluestBlue you cannot seperate race from power and wealth. No matter how meritocratic we make our society, and how easy it becomes for a non white person to work hard and secure an upper-middle-class career, its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.

    There is no easy solution. I don’t know what the solution is.

    If one is an aristocrat, one is almost certainly going to be white. There's nothing one can do about that. But aristocratic families eventually die out, or produce people like the Marquess of Bristol, who blow the family wealth.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,981
    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:


    Does not justify England's governments current attitude or the Scottish Government meekly accepting it.

    There is no England government. Which is part of the problem.
    Technically you are correct.

    In practice, it feels like the "Provinces" have been given their Assemblies and Westminster governs for England. What is good for England is good for the UK, so to speak.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,718

    @rkrkrk

    1 of 2

    I have done a bit of listening.

    Over the last two weeks I've contacted (privately) four people in my professional network of an African or Afro-Caribbean heritage. I actually had work-related reasons for contacting each, so it wasn't explicitly a social call.

    None of them raised the protests with me. I initiated the subject in each situation. I asked them what they thought about what was going on.

    What they all said was similar. They all started by being at pains to point out that the USA was not the UK. The UK isn't armed, the police don't have guns, and the UK doesn't have the same legacy issues. What they'd seen in the USA had upset them a lot, as had some of the violent riots in response to it, and they wanted to keep it in proportion but also for people to reflect on it.

    They then said whilst it's nothing like as overt and bad in the UK as the USA, it still goes on here. People are more reserved and introverted here, so it's far more hidden. There's an "air" sometimes around them when they walk out, which they can sense, and it isn't always comfortable. The events in the USA have helped shine a bit of spotlight on this, from which they hope comes some good.

    One said that whilst her race had never held her back, her 7 year old daughter in primary school has on at least three occasions had one or two other children say they don't want to play with her because she has a black mummy. Also (and I was really surprised by this) she works for a major private telecomms company and said they've been excellent but her husband works for the NHS and has encountered a very solid ceiling. She's convinced the NHS is racist. I gently challenged her on this "really?", but she was adamant: "the NHS is racist".

    One man said that when he was at school (he wanted to be an engineer) the careers advisor said he'd never be a professional engineer, and advised him to be a mechanic instead. They assumed no ambition or dismissed what was there. So he had to work hard at night school later to get the qualifications to get him back on track. Many of his old school friends turned to crime and are now in jail, as they didn't feel they had much future and also had broken families at home, often with absent fathers.

    As far as the NHS is concerned, it's a good 15 years since I had anything to do with management there, but I would gently suggest that there's been so much, successful, effort to promote women that there could well be problems for 'black' men.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,585
    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    The Union itself is the last vestige of Empire and we can only become a modern 21st Century nation by its dissolution. I wish this wasn’t the case but I’m beginning to realize it is. Those who believe the Union can be held together by force are deluded as well as downright immoral.

    If it was still based on Empire there would still be direct rule of Scotland from Westminster, no Scottish MPs and no Holyrood and the 2014 indyref would not have been allowed
    If Johnson rejects Indyref2 after a significant SNP win next year he shoots your argument down in flames.
    Starmer's position will be key

    2 questions for him.

    Does he support the union

    Will he agree to indy2 but campaign against
    Leonard has already said the Scottish sockpuppets will campaign against and their already dire polling has taken yet another plunge. Starmer will be for the union , Labour like the trough too much.
    Practically speaking Labour are in opposition for perpetuity in a Scotland free England and Wales. Not enough non-Tories to keep the Tories out. Thanks for that!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709

    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:


    Does not justify England's governments current attitude or the Scottish Government meekly accepting it.

    There is no England government. Which is part of the problem.
    Technically you are correct.

    In practice, it feels like the "Provinces" have been given their Assemblies and Westminster governs for England. What is good for England is good for the UK, so to speak.
    No, as there are still Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish MPs at Westminster.

    Personally I have no problem with an English Parliament
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072

    @BluestBlue you cannot seperate race from power and wealth. No matter how meritocratic we make our society, and how easy it becomes for a non white person to work hard and secure an upper-middle-class career, its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.

    There is no easy solution. I don’t know what the solution is.

    'its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.'

    I have literally no idea what this means. I have personal experience of first- and second-generation immigrants who have scaled the economic, educational, social, and professional heights of Britain, reaching levels that many of the 'white hands' you mention haven't grasped in the past 1000 years.

    This is a state of affairs of which both those 'new Britons' and the old ones should be immensely proud.
    What are you talking about? I’m not saying that immigrants cannot scale economic, educational, social, and professional heights. I’m saying that as a whole, it’s impossible to catch up with accumulated wealth. Just look at South Africa for god sake. White South Africans still are, on the whole, the richest.

    To deny such a fact is just willful ignorance.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,019
    Sean_F said:

    @BluestBlue you cannot seperate race from power and wealth. No matter how meritocratic we make our society, and how easy it becomes for a non white person to work hard and secure an upper-middle-class career, its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.

    There is no easy solution. I don’t know what the solution is.

    If one is an aristocrat, one is almost certainly going to be white. There's nothing one can do about that. But aristocratic families eventually die out, or produce people like the Marquess of Bristol, who blow the family wealth.
    Although interestingly, like the new Lord Bath or son of Lord Montagu, some have taken non-white wives.

    Over the very long term I'd expect that to change a bit.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,881

    @rkrkrk

    2 of 2

    It was they who convinced me I was correct to write this article in the way I did, and I'm pleased I spoke to them first before I did.

    Thanks for sharing these stories. I think it's great you spoke to those people.
    I would encourage you also to listen to people who were protesting and reflect on whether your professional networks are representative.

    Amongst those you spoke to, you received a clear message that the largest employer in the land is racist. That alone suggests a systemic problem, rather than a minortiy with outdated attitudes.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    Sean_F said:

    @BluestBlue you cannot seperate race from power and wealth. No matter how meritocratic we make our society, and how easy it becomes for a non white person to work hard and secure an upper-middle-class career, its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.

    There is no easy solution. I don’t know what the solution is.

    If one is an aristocrat, one is almost certainly going to be white. There's nothing one can do about that. But aristocratic families eventually die out, or produce people like the Marquess of Bristol, who blow the family wealth.
    There are also of course plenty of extremely wealthy families of Maharajas in India for example
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072
    Sean_F said:

    @BluestBlue you cannot seperate race from power and wealth. No matter how meritocratic we make our society, and how easy it becomes for a non white person to work hard and secure an upper-middle-class career, its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.

    There is no easy solution. I don’t know what the solution is.

    If one is an aristocrat, one is almost certainly going to be white. There's nothing one can do about that. But aristocratic families eventually die out, or produce people like the Marquess of Bristol, who blow the family wealth.
    We’re not talking about aristocratic families exclusively. This is more wilful ignorance to deny the truth - due to our history race, power, and wealth are intertwined and it will take many, many generations to even begin to unwind.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,019

    @BluestBlue you cannot seperate race from power and wealth. No matter how meritocratic we make our society, and how easy it becomes for a non white person to work hard and secure an upper-middle-class career, its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.

    There is no easy solution. I don’t know what the solution is.

    'its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.'

    I have literally no idea what this means. I have personal experience of first- and second-generation immigrants who have scaled the economic, educational, social, and professional heights of Britain, reaching levels that many of the 'white hands' you mention haven't grasped in the past 1000 years.

    This is a state of affairs of which both those 'new Britons' and the old ones should be immensely proud.
    What are you talking about? I’m not saying that immigrants cannot scale economic, educational, social, and professional heights. I’m saying that as a whole, it’s impossible to catch up with accumulated wealth. Just look at South Africa for god sake. White South Africans still are, on the whole, the richest.

    To deny such a fact is just willful ignorance.
    I think fundamentally what much of this comes down to is an argument on wealth inequality.

    Fine. Let's have that debate (that's politics) but I'm not sure racialising it is a constructive way forward.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967

    whunter said:




    Under the old order I would have been regarded 'liberal left' but even I can see that this is turning in to a choice between living in Putins Russia or the Khymer Rouge.

    The option of living in a state where you can keep your head down and avoid trouble but stay secure, retain some sense of personal, private freedom is, when all things are considered, preferable over living in an intrusive revolutionary state which seeks to remake human nature.

    Both are awful choices. By contrast, the liberal Britain that we knew and has existed for most of our lifetimes was a utopia. But right now it feels like it is lost forever. It wont be saved by bowing to the mob.

    Sorry to depress you all on Sunday morning. Enjoy your freedom while you still have it.



    In contrast with the thoughtful and well-considered thread header, this is melodramatic twaddle. The incipient "communist" revolution you refer to has barely been noticed by most people, who do indeed just get on with their lives much as ever. Very few protesters wish to overthrow the state; probably the same tiny number on the far left and the far right. The vast majority of peaceful protesters just want a fairer society, simple as that.

    On the thread header, Casino Royale has written a good, classically liberal let's all be kind and colour blind piece. Hard to disagree with the thrust of this, but I'm less sure about the solutions. He acknowledges that there may be residual racial prejudice amongst 15%-25% of the population - really, a very high number if he's right, and I suspect he is. What precisely is to be done about this - I don't think appealing to such people to be colour blind will really cut it.

    I guess my main quibble is that in quite a long thread header the word power does not feature once. Any solution to our current woes surely needs to contain some analysis of power - who has it, in whose interest is it used, and how can it be more evenly distributed to challenge both real and perceived (racial) injustice.
    I do think advantage exists. I'd say it lies with those with money, stable families, those who live in safe areas and (this one isn't mentioned very much) with physically attractive and articulate people.

    I think it is still the case that an RP accent is sometimes conflated with being articulate and educated in this country, whereas that is far from the case. However, it is also not an excuse to be *inarticulate* - i.e you can be educated and articulate, with good English and diction, in a variety of accents - and we shouldn't conflate the two, or else it can hold people back.

    My sense is that too many people simply let their unconscious bias make subjective decisions about black people almost automatically, and this hinders their fair treatment.
    To what do you attribute the growing disparity in outcomes for recent immigrants from Africa and the older black community?

    It is quite noticeable, that when you work with black people in high end white collar jobs, that you find they are nearly always from the former group.

    The first order reason for this is education - such jobs are now only open to the holders of a 2.1 or 1st from a Russell Group university.

    What is the reason that that there is such a disparity in educational outcomes?
    I don't know. One possible answer could be that Afro-Caribbeans who arrived here in the 1940s-60s came here to do fairly low-medium skilled jobs, like bus driving, whereas now in order to immigrate from Africa you have to clear a significant salary threshold and you generally need to be well-educated to get that.

    But, I am guessing. I'd need to do research.
    I wonder how much socioeconomic mobility varies between areas according to how affordable housing is and, a linked factor, how much inequality there is.

    How easy is it to start from the bottom and work your way up so that in twenty years you can afford a nice house in a nice area ?

    In most of the areas where the Afro-Caribbean community settled that seems to be pretty much impossible now.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,585
    So who are the terrorists?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    The Union itself is the last vestige of Empire and we can only become a modern 21st Century nation by its dissolution. I wish this wasn’t the case but I’m beginning to realize it is. Those who believe the Union can be held together by force are deluded as well as downright immoral.

    If it was still based on Empire there would still be direct rule of Scotland from Westminster, no Scottish MPs and no Holyrood and the 2014 indyref would not have been allowed
    If Johnson rejects Indyref2 after a significant SNP win next year he shoots your argument down in flames.
    He doesn't as the 2014 referendum was 'once in a generation' and he will not be scrapping Holyrood and imposing direct rule from Westminster
    Cameron did put the issue to bed for a generation. Hats off! But then he changed the dynamic by losing the Brexit vote. Everything has changed and we are back to square one. Why don't you see that?
    The vote was once in a generation in even Salmond's words.

    We won't even know what the ultimate Brexit situation is for at least 5 years anyway, Brexit Deal or WTO terms Brexit with Boris or back in the single market after the 2024 general election with Starmer
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,065

    @rkrkrk

    2 of 2


    They all said that the absence of black leaders at a very senior level in British organisations in a problem. They need to see some people like them at that level to show it's possible to everyone else. They also stressed the importance of mentoring and coaching. Two said they thought the UK was a bit obsessed at present with gender equality at corporate level, which was "squeezing out" attention from black role models and representation at that level.

    None of them mentioned statues. When I asked one of them directly about she said that the 'past is the past' and 'it is what it is' but there might be a handful, like Christopher Columbus for example who didn't 'discover' America that are insensitive and need better qualification or possibly re-locating if it really sticks in the throat. However, this wasn't her priority: she's more interested in the future.

    All seemed delighted I'd asked them about this and said they wanted to meet up for drinks and a chat socially soon, and really appreciated I'd listened to them.

    It was they who convinced me I was correct to write this article in the way I did, and I'm pleased I spoke to them first before I did.

    In the Eighties, I was working in psychiatry, on a youth unit in South London. The diagnosis was usually Conduct disorder, often overlaid with drug and alcohol abuse, criminal contacts, abnormal sexual behaviour etc, basically what was previously known as Juvenile delinquency. An interesting bunch, and many were black or mixed heritage.

    I presented my worked up interview to the chief psychiatrist on one young black teenage prostitute. Generally he found my presentation thorough, but he faulted me for not asking her about her experience of racism. I had attempted to be colour blind. For the next ward round I did enquire of this, and quite an eye opener it was to a whitle middle class lad. It put a very different perspective on many of the events in her turbulent life.

    The lesson is that even people you think you know well will rarely raise these things spontaneously, only if something egregious happens. Following this I always asked. This is the origin of the much misused term Woke. I was awakened to racial injustice and how it impacted on so many aspects of life for others. Things that had passed me by before.

    I gained a lot from the attachment, and am much more comfortable discussing these issues, and correcting my own predjudices. We do not always find what we expect, and peoples responses differ, so Priti Patel has come to terms of her experiences in a contrasting way to Ash Sharkar, but that is all part of the rich tapestry of life. Seek and ye shall find.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,019
    Interesting article on VAT in the Sunday Times to boost the economy.

    I'd say cut it to 10% for 18 months. When you're £400bn in the hole it's not the time to play it safe for the sake of saving another £40bn, at the cost of staying there forever.

    You need to make some big moves.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,038
    Trump Rally Fizzles as Attendance Falls Short of Campaign’s Expectations
    President Trump’s attempt to revive his re-election bid sputtered badly as he traveled to Tulsa for his first mass rally in months but found a small crowd and delivered a disjointed speech.

    NYTimes
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,620

    whunter said:




    Under the old order I would have been regarded 'liberal left' but even I can see that this is turning in to a choice between living in Putins Russia or the Khymer Rouge.

    The option of living in a state where you can keep your head down and avoid trouble but stay secure, retain some sense of personal, private freedom is, when all things are considered, preferable over living in an intrusive revolutionary state which seeks to remake human nature.

    Both are awful choices. By contrast, the liberal Britain that we knew and has existed for most of our lifetimes was a utopia. But right now it feels like it is lost forever. It wont be saved by bowing to the mob.

    Sorry to depress you all on Sunday morning. Enjoy your freedom while you still have it.



    In contrast with the thoughtful and well-considered thread header, this is melodramatic twaddle. The incipient "communist" revolution you refer to has barely been noticed by most people, who do indeed just get on with their lives much as ever. Very few protesters wish to overthrow the state; probably the same tiny number on the far left and the far right. The vast majority of peaceful protesters just want a fairer society, simple as that.

    On the thread header, Casino Royale has written a good, classically liberal let's all be kind and colour blind piece. Hard to disagree with the thrust of this, but I'm less sure about the solutions. He acknowledges that there may be residual racial prejudice amongst 15%-25% of the population - really, a very high number if he's right, and I suspect he is. What precisely is to be done about this - I don't think appealing to such people to be colour blind will really cut it.

    I guess my main quibble is that in quite a long thread header the word power does not feature once. Any solution to our current woes surely needs to contain some analysis of power - who has it, in whose interest is it used, and how can it be more evenly distributed to challenge both real and perceived (racial) injustice.
    I do think advantage exists. I'd say it lies with those with money, stable families, those who live in safe areas and (this one isn't mentioned very much) with physically attractive and articulate people.

    I think it is still the case that an RP accent is sometimes conflated with being articulate and educated in this country, whereas that is far from the case. However, it is also not an excuse to be *inarticulate* - i.e you can be educated and articulate, with good English and diction, in a variety of accents - and we shouldn't conflate the two, or else it can hold people back.

    My sense is that too many people simply let their unconscious bias make subjective decisions about black people almost automatically, and this hinders their fair treatment.
    To what do you attribute the growing disparity in outcomes for recent immigrants from Africa and the older black community?

    It is quite noticeable, that when you work with black people in high end white collar jobs, that you find they are nearly always from the former group.

    The first order reason for this is education - such jobs are now only open to the holders of a 2.1 or 1st from a Russell Group university.

    What is the reason that that there is such a disparity in educational outcomes?
    I don't know. One possible answer could be that Afro-Caribbeans who arrived here in the 1940s-60s came here to do fairly low-medium skilled jobs, like bus driving, whereas now in order to immigrate from Africa you have to clear a significant salary threshold and you generally need to be well-educated to get that.

    But, I am guessing. I'd need to do research.
    My personal take, from talking to people, is that a portion of the Afro-Carribean community has absorbed a chunk of the "Isn't for the likes of us" attitude you find among the white working class. This combined with racism (and expectations of racism) creates a toxic self-fulling prophecy.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074

    One for @Cyclefree

    The family of the investment banker who was ousted as chief executive of Barclays in the wake of the Libor-rigging scandal quietly pledged £50,000 to Boris Johnson during December’s election — but delayed the gift until February to avoid awkward headlines during the campaign.

    Bob Diamond, who was forced to resign in 2012, days after Barclays paid a £290m fine for rigging the interbank lending rate, donated the sum to the Conservative Party on February 20, according to the Electoral Commission.

    A source said that Diamond, who lives in New York but retains UK citizenship, pledged to give the Tories the money as they were preparing to do battle with Jeremy Corbyn three months earlier, but waited to transfer it.

    The donation was made by Diamond’s son, who is also called Robert Edward Diamond and also has UK citizenship. The Electoral Commission publishes information about donations and loans four times a year — at the end of February, May, August and November.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/disgraced-bank-boss-bob-diamonds-50-000-gift-to-tories-gpc8hbktc

    Oh, colour me surprised!

    I’m more concerned about why Jes Staley is still there. The FCA’s failure to make an example of him over his treatment of a whistleblower was a black mark against them, a real missed opportunity. Then there is the issue of what his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein was and why the FCA is now looking at what he and the bank told the FCA about it.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    The Union itself is the last vestige of Empire and we can only become a modern 21st Century nation by its dissolution. I wish this wasn’t the case but I’m beginning to realize it is. Those who believe the Union can be held together by force are deluded as well as downright immoral.

    If it was still based on Empire there would still be direct rule of Scotland from Westminster, no Scottish MPs and no Holyrood and the 2014 indyref would not have been allowed
    If Johnson rejects Indyref2 after a significant SNP win next year he shoots your argument down in flames.
    Starmer's position will be key

    2 questions for him.

    Does he support the union

    Will he agree to indy2 but campaign against
    Leonard has already said the Scottish sockpuppets will campaign against and their already dire polling has taken yet another plunge. Starmer will be for the union , Labour like the trough too much.
    I hope Labour will agree to a Scottish referendum.
    Scotland deserves another say , due to the circumstances have changed in a massive way , due to leaving the EU.
    There is no chance with Johnson.
    The SNP made a huge mistake in pushing for an early GE.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072

    @BluestBlue you cannot seperate race from power and wealth. No matter how meritocratic we make our society, and how easy it becomes for a non white person to work hard and secure an upper-middle-class career, its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.

    There is no easy solution. I don’t know what the solution is.

    'its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.'

    I have literally no idea what this means. I have personal experience of first- and second-generation immigrants who have scaled the economic, educational, social, and professional heights of Britain, reaching levels that many of the 'white hands' you mention haven't grasped in the past 1000 years.

    This is a state of affairs of which both those 'new Britons' and the old ones should be immensely proud.
    What are you talking about? I’m not saying that immigrants cannot scale economic, educational, social, and professional heights. I’m saying that as a whole, it’s impossible to catch up with accumulated wealth. Just look at South Africa for god sake. White South Africans still are, on the whole, the richest.

    To deny such a fact is just willful ignorance.
    I think fundamentally what much of this comes down to is an argument on wealth inequality.

    Fine. Let's have that debate (that's politics) but I'm not sure racialising it is a constructive way forward.
    I completely agree with you. However, the problem is like I previous said, even if we made our society even more meritocratic than it already is, non-White Britons will always be statistically poorer than white britons due to accumulated wealth. There’s no easy way of fixing that. I don’t agree with reparations or anything extreme like that, but it must be acknowledged as a byproduct of our history.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556

    @BluestBlue you cannot seperate race from power and wealth. No matter how meritocratic we make our society, and how easy it becomes for a non white person to work hard and secure an upper-middle-class career, its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.

    There is no easy solution. I don’t know what the solution is.

    'its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.'

    I have literally no idea what this means. I have personal experience of first- and second-generation immigrants who have scaled the economic, educational, social, and professional heights of Britain, reaching levels that many of the 'white hands' you mention haven't grasped in the past 1000 years.

    This is a state of affairs of which both those 'new Britons' and the old ones should be immensely proud.
    What are you talking about? I’m not saying that immigrants cannot scale economic, educational, social, and professional heights. I’m saying that as a whole, it’s impossible to catch up with accumulated wealth. Just look at South Africa for god sake. White South Africans still are, on the whole, the richest.

    To deny such a fact is just willful ignorance.
    I'm not a socialist - I don't view absolute equality of outcome for every social group as a good, whether a family has been here for a thousand years or for five.

    Your idea implies that we would need to bring the material and 'power' assets of the entire population to a level of equality, which is frankly bonkers. Much better to create a free society in which the industrious and talented rise and the rest dip, from generation to generation. That's all that can or should be done.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,585
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    The Union itself is the last vestige of Empire and we can only become a modern 21st Century nation by its dissolution. I wish this wasn’t the case but I’m beginning to realize it is. Those who believe the Union can be held together by force are deluded as well as downright immoral.

    If it was still based on Empire there would still be direct rule of Scotland from Westminster, no Scottish MPs and no Holyrood and the 2014 indyref would not have been allowed
    If Johnson rejects Indyref2 after a significant SNP win next year he shoots your argument down in flames.
    He doesn't as the 2014 referendum was 'once in a generation' and he will not be scrapping Holyrood and imposing direct rule from Westminster
    Cameron did put the issue to bed for a generation. Hats off! But then he changed the dynamic by losing the Brexit vote. Everything has changed and we are back to square one. Why don't you see that?
    The vote was once in a generation in even Salmond's words.

    We won't even know what the ultimate Brexit situation is for at least 5 years anyway, Brexit Deal or WTO terms Brexit with Boris or back in the single market after the 2024 general election with Starmer
    Brexit is over bar the trade agreement. Unless the EU 27 roll over it will be an "Australia -style" deal. This may suit England and Wales, but Scotland didn't vote for that.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,038
    Drudge:

    MAGA LESS MEGA
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,002
    Breaking

    Police declare Reading stabbing a terrorist incident
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,718

    @BluestBlue you cannot seperate race from power and wealth. No matter how meritocratic we make our society, and how easy it becomes for a non white person to work hard and secure an upper-middle-class career, its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.

    There is no easy solution. I don’t know what the solution is.

    'its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.'

    I have literally no idea what this means. I have personal experience of first- and second-generation immigrants who have scaled the economic, educational, social, and professional heights of Britain, reaching levels that many of the 'white hands' you mention haven't grasped in the past 1000 years.

    This is a state of affairs of which both those 'new Britons' and the old ones should be immensely proud.
    We have had, have we not, two main 'sorts' of immigrant waves since WWII. Afro-Caribbeans, plus a sprinkling of West Africans, dominated by the 'Windrush generation' and Asians, dominated by the Ugandan Asians.

    The latter have prospered and integrated; the former less so.

    Over-simplification of course.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,019
    rkrkrk said:

    @rkrkrk

    2 of 2

    It was they who convinced me I was correct to write this article in the way I did, and I'm pleased I spoke to them first before I did.

    Thanks for sharing these stories. I think it's great you spoke to those people.
    I would encourage you also to listen to people who were protesting and reflect on whether your professional networks are representative.

    Amongst those you spoke to, you received a clear message that the largest employer in the land is racist. That alone suggests a systemic problem, rather than a minortiy with outdated attitudes.
    They weren't representative, of course. However they do support my point that neither are BLM - three of them are actually practicing Christians who believe very strongly in marriage and the family and one of them has views on same-sex couples that would make you blush.

    It's good advice to continue to talk and listen to people though. I prefer to do that rather than virtue signal on social media or in my professional life (although I suppose you could argue some of my posts today are a kind of signalling, but its rather me testing my point of view and sharing my experiences and findings)

  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,787
    Biden will have to up the ante after Trump managed to drink unaided.

    https://twitter.com/deanna4congress/status/1274522762502160386?s=21
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,981
    HYUFD said:

    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:


    Does not justify England's governments current attitude or the Scottish Government meekly accepting it.

    There is no England government. Which is part of the problem.
    Technically you are correct.

    In practice, it feels like the "Provinces" have been given their Assemblies and Westminster governs for England. What is good for England is good for the UK, so to speak.
    No, as there are still Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish MPs at Westminster.

    Personally I have no problem with an English Parliament
    Technically you are also correct. But it does not feel like that.

    When are you going to grasp the fact that for Ordinary Joe/Joanne, perception is everything and facts are a long way down the list...
  • Starmer should oppose Indy Ref 2 for the time being and be pro-Union.

    If a second Indy Ref becomes inevitable, then he should campaign strongly against. Shoot down those Lab/SNP pact ideas early.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967

    @BluestBlue you cannot seperate race from power and wealth. No matter how meritocratic we make our society, and how easy it becomes for a non white person to work hard and secure an upper-middle-class career, its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.

    There is no easy solution. I don’t know what the solution is.

    'its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.'

    I have literally no idea what this means. I have personal experience of first- and second-generation immigrants who have scaled the economic, educational, social, and professional heights of Britain, reaching levels that many of the 'white hands' you mention haven't grasped in the past 1000 years.

    This is a state of affairs of which both those 'new Britons' and the old ones should be immensely proud.
    What are you talking about? I’m not saying that immigrants cannot scale economic, educational, social, and professional heights. I’m saying that as a whole, it’s impossible to catch up with accumulated wealth. Just look at South Africa for god sake. White South Africans still are, on the whole, the richest.

    To deny such a fact is just willful ignorance.
    Rishi Sunak's not doing so badly.

    Extreme wealth is more a global thing but on a national level a comfortable middle class level of wealth has certainly been reached by immigrant communities - Jews, Indians, perhaps some African and Eastern European migrants.
  • Biden will have to up the ante after Trump managed to drink unaided.

    https://twitter.com/deanna4congress/status/1274522762502160386?s=21

    To this day, I cannot see how anyone could vote for this guy.

    Cult.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,019
    edited June 2020
    Foxy said:

    @rkrkrk

    2 of 2


    They all said that the absence of black leaders at a very senior level in British organisations in a problem. They need to see some people like them at that level to show it's possible to everyone else. They also stressed the importance of mentoring and coaching. Two said they thought the UK was a bit obsessed at present with gender equality at corporate level, which was "squeezing out" attention from black role models and representation at that level.

    None of them mentioned statues. When I asked one of them directly about she said that the 'past is the past' and 'it is what it is' but there might be a handful, like Christopher Columbus for example who didn't 'discover' America that are insensitive and need better qualification or possibly re-locating if it really sticks in the throat. However, this wasn't her priority: she's more interested in the future.

    All seemed delighted I'd asked them about this and said they wanted to meet up for drinks and a chat socially soon, and really appreciated I'd listened to them.

    It was they who convinced me I was correct to write this article in the way I did, and I'm pleased I spoke to them first before I did.

    In the Eighties, I was working in psychiatry, on a youth unit in South London. The diagnosis was usually Conduct disorder, often overlaid with drug and alcohol abuse, criminal contacts, abnormal sexual behaviour etc, basically what was previously known as Juvenile delinquency. An interesting bunch, and many were black or mixed heritage.

    I presented my worked up interview to the chief psychiatrist on one young black teenage prostitute. Generally he found my presentation thorough, but he faulted me for not asking her about her experience of racism. I had attempted to be colour blind. For the next ward round I did enquire of this, and quite an eye opener it was to a whitle middle class lad. It put a very different perspective on many of the events in her turbulent life.

    The lesson is that even people you think you know well will rarely raise these things spontaneously, only if something egregious happens. Following this I always asked. This is the origin of the much misused term Woke. I was awakened to racial injustice and how it impacted on so many aspects of life for others. Things that had passed me by before.

    I gained a lot from the attachment, and am much more comfortable discussing these issues, and correcting my own predjudices. We do not always find what we expect, and peoples responses differ, so Priti Patel has come to terms of her experiences in a contrasting way to Ash Sharkar, but that is all part of the rich tapestry of life. Seek and ye shall find.
    Isn't that what I've done? I've been speaking to people of a different background to mine to find out about their experiences.

    Where I differ from you is that "woke" carries certain connotations with it that including an obsession with policing language, denouncing unorthodox perspectives and publicly signalling your credentials. It's a narcissistic and somewhat unpleasant creed that is fuelled on dogma, with a dash of socialist injustice injected into it.

    I prefer liberalism and open-mindedness. And I will always be patriotic and pro-freedom and look to influence others with my views, and vice versa, too.

    Sorry.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072

    @BluestBlue you cannot seperate race from power and wealth. No matter how meritocratic we make our society, and how easy it becomes for a non white person to work hard and secure an upper-middle-class career, its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.

    There is no easy solution. I don’t know what the solution is.

    'its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.'

    I have literally no idea what this means. I have personal experience of first- and second-generation immigrants who have scaled the economic, educational, social, and professional heights of Britain, reaching levels that many of the 'white hands' you mention haven't grasped in the past 1000 years.

    This is a state of affairs of which both those 'new Britons' and the old ones should be immensely proud.
    What are you talking about? I’m not saying that immigrants cannot scale economic, educational, social, and professional heights. I’m saying that as a whole, it’s impossible to catch up with accumulated wealth. Just look at South Africa for god sake. White South Africans still are, on the whole, the richest.

    To deny such a fact is just willful ignorance.
    I'm not a socialist - I don't view absolute equality of outcome for every social group as a good, whether a family has been here for a thousand years or for five.

    Your idea implies that we would need to bring the material and 'power' assets of the entire population to a level of equality, which is frankly bonkers. Much better to create a free society in which the industrious and talented rise and the rest dip, from generation to generation. That's all that can or should be done.
    I’m not putting forward any “idea” and neither am I a “socialist”.

    You’re missing the point entirely. I’m not offering a solution. I’m merely highlighting a problem.

    You’re ignoring the indisputable problem because it’s an inconvenient roadblock to your utopian idea of what Britain should be.

    Like I said, even if we created an utopian perfect meritocracy, which is basically what you’re proposing, white Britons will be on average richer and therefore more powerful than non-white Britons due to historical accumulated wealth. This is indisputable.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,765

    Sean_F said:

    @BluestBlue you cannot seperate race from power and wealth. No matter how meritocratic we make our society, and how easy it becomes for a non white person to work hard and secure an upper-middle-class career, its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.

    There is no easy solution. I don’t know what the solution is.

    If one is an aristocrat, one is almost certainly going to be white. There's nothing one can do about that. But aristocratic families eventually die out, or produce people like the Marquess of Bristol, who blow the family wealth.
    We’re not talking about aristocratic families exclusively. This is more wilful ignorance to deny the truth - due to our history race, power, and wealth are intertwined and it will take many, many generations to even begin to unwind.
    That may be true overall. But, there are ethnic minority groups (Indians, Chinese, people of mixed race) that earn more on average than white people do. Over time, their average household wealth will come to exceed the average household wealth of the white population.

    Certainly, though, inherited wealth gives one a huge head start in life.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,981

    Interesting article on VAT in the Sunday Times to boost the economy.

    I'd say cut it to 10% for 18 months. When you're £400bn in the hole it's not the time to play it safe for the sake of saving another £40bn, at the cost of staying there forever.

    You need to make some big moves.

    Cut taxes, raise money?

    So if we put tax levels to 0%....?????
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072

    @BluestBlue you cannot seperate race from power and wealth. No matter how meritocratic we make our society, and how easy it becomes for a non white person to work hard and secure an upper-middle-class career, its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.

    There is no easy solution. I don’t know what the solution is.

    'its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.'

    I have literally no idea what this means. I have personal experience of first- and second-generation immigrants who have scaled the economic, educational, social, and professional heights of Britain, reaching levels that many of the 'white hands' you mention haven't grasped in the past 1000 years.

    This is a state of affairs of which both those 'new Britons' and the old ones should be immensely proud.
    What are you talking about? I’m not saying that immigrants cannot scale economic, educational, social, and professional heights. I’m saying that as a whole, it’s impossible to catch up with accumulated wealth. Just look at South Africa for god sake. White South Africans still are, on the whole, the richest.

    To deny such a fact is just willful ignorance.
    Rishi Sunak's not doing so badly.

    Extreme wealth is more a global thing but on a national level a comfortable middle class level of wealth has certainly been reached by immigrant communities - Jews, Indians, perhaps some African and Eastern European migrants.
    I don’t disagree with what you have said, however it is irrelevant to the point I am making.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,674

    malcolmg said:

    Mr. Pioneers, you remember the Scots voted to stay in the UK in a once in a generation vote, right?

    That was six years ago.

    ... a generation in politics is a parliament and many have passed since then ...
    @malcolmg - I am sympathetic, but even I think that statement is a stretch.....
    Bev, no problem, however each election everything and anything is up for change, this pathetic diversion of trying to say it was written in law that a generation must pass is pathetic and encapsulates everything that is rotten and putrid in the unionists. Bunch of cowards desperate to keep Scotland under the yoke, so unsure of themselves they try to prevent a referendum, it speaks volumes of the cowards they are.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,585

    Biden will have to up the ante after Trump managed to drink unaided.

    https://twitter.com/deanna4congress/status/1274522762502160386?s=21

    To this day, I cannot see how anyone could vote for this guy.

    Cult.
    The argument here specifically, is Trump can at least perform basic functions unaided. The question is, can Biden match Trump's dexterity?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    Interesting article on VAT in the Sunday Times to boost the economy.

    I'd say cut it to 10% for 18 months. When you're £400bn in the hole it's not the time to play it safe for the sake of saving another £40bn, at the cost of staying there forever.

    You need to make some big moves.

    I’d be much more strategic on VAT, now that we’re out of the EU. For example, set vat at zero on hotels, holiday parks, pubs and restaurants, while still levying it on overseas package holidays.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    Thanks to @Casino_Royale for a nice header. It well articulates many sentiments that most people (including me) would agree with. But let's focus on the main message - that we need more and better dialogue about the subject of racism.

    We do. Everyone says this. But do they really mean it? Or is it a piece of motherhood and apple pie deflection? You know, along the lines of the notorious platitude, "the way to prevent affluent people using private schools is to make state schools so good that they don't want to."

    Because it seems to me that for those who constantly deride anti-racist campaigners as the "woke brigade" more conversation about racism - indeed any conversation about racism - is precisely what they do not want. It exasperates. It bores. Why? Because in truth they feel the problem is at best wildly exaggerated and at worst a grievance narrative invented by a Left obsessed with identity politics.

    Either that or they suspect there is a problem but would prefer to shy away from it since it creates queasiness to consider there might - there just might - be a lingering, deep-seated racist legacy from Empire, Slavery & Colonialism which we need to face up to in order to realize the "colour blind" future that almost everyone (I think sincerely) wishes to see.

    So rather than put in the hard yards to confront the issue - which could be difficult and unpleasant but would have a chance of paying real dividends - what they seek to do instead is pretend it isn't there. Not so much "let's talk about racism" - it's "let's talk about anything except racism." The desire is to close the subject down. Cards used - invention, extrapolation, deflection, ridicule.

    We see it time and time again on here.

    The reaction to a statue of a slaver coming down? - The evergreen "Oh FFS what's next?" plus a cry of "Mob rule, lock em up!"

    To the N word removed from a TV show? - "Oh FFS, what's next?" plus "How come Kanye West can say it? It's not fair! No consistency!"

    To an anti-racist # of Black Lives Matter - "Yeah, so how come they don't talk about all the blacks killing other blacks?"

    In other words - long story short - I like the message of more dialogue on racism in this header but I question the good faith of those on here who are probably applauding it the most strongly. Since they are the very people who in practice demonstrate to me the opposite tendency.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,019

    whunter said:




    Under the old order I would have been regarded 'liberal left' but even I can see that this is turning in to a choice between living in Putins Russia or the Khymer Rouge.

    The option of living in a state where you can keep your head down and avoid trouble but stay secure, retain some sense of personal, private freedom is, when all things are considered, preferable over living in an intrusive revolutionary state which seeks to remake human nature.

    Both are awful choices. By contrast, the liberal Britain that we knew and has existed for most of our lifetimes was a utopia. But right now it feels like it is lost forever. It wont be saved by bowing to the mob.

    Sorry to depress you all on Sunday morning. Enjoy your freedom while you still have it.



    In contrast with the thoughtful and well-considered thread header, this is melodramatic twaddle. The incipient "communist" revolution you refer to has barely been noticed by most people, who do indeed just get on with their lives much as ever. Very few protesters wish to overthrow the state; probably the same tiny number on the far left and the far right. The vast majority of peaceful protesters just want a fairer society, simple as that.

    On the thread header, Casino Royale has written a good, classically liberal let's all be kind and colour blind piece. Hard to disagree with the thrust of this, but I'm less sure about the solutions. He acknowledges that there may be residual racial prejudice amongst 15%-25% of the population - really, a very high number if he's right, and I suspect he is. What precisely is to be done about this - I don't think appealing to such people to be colour blind will really cut it.

    I guess my main quibble is that in quite a long thread header the word power does not feature once. Any solution to our current woes surely needs to contain some analysis of power - who has it, in whose interest is it used, and how can it be more evenly distributed to challenge both real and perceived (racial) injustice.
    I do think advantage exists. I'd say it lies with those with money, stable families, those who live in safe areas and (this one isn't mentioned very much) with physically attractive and articulate people.

    I think it is still the case that an RP accent is sometimes conflated with being articulate and educated in this country, whereas that is far from the case. However, it is also not an excuse to be *inarticulate* - i.e you can be educated and articulate, with good English and diction, in a variety of accents - and we shouldn't conflate the two, or else it can hold people back.

    My sense is that too many people simply let their unconscious bias make subjective decisions about black people almost automatically, and this hinders their fair treatment.
    To what do you attribute the growing disparity in outcomes for recent immigrants from Africa and the older black community?

    It is quite noticeable, that when you work with black people in high end white collar jobs, that you find they are nearly always from the former group.

    The first order reason for this is education - such jobs are now only open to the holders of a 2.1 or 1st from a Russell Group university.

    What is the reason that that there is such a disparity in educational outcomes?
    I don't know. One possible answer could be that Afro-Caribbeans who arrived here in the 1940s-60s came here to do fairly low-medium skilled jobs, like bus driving, whereas now in order to immigrate from Africa you have to clear a significant salary threshold and you generally need to be well-educated to get that.

    But, I am guessing. I'd need to do research.
    I wonder how much socioeconomic mobility varies between areas according to how affordable housing is and, a linked factor, how much inequality there is.

    How easy is it to start from the bottom and work your way up so that in twenty years you can afford a nice house in a nice area ?

    In most of the areas where the Afro-Caribbean community settled that seems to be pretty much impossible now.
    I would look to expand opportunity so there's much more of it and it's fair to all.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,674
    kle4 said:

    malcolmg said:

    kle4 said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Mr. Pioneers, you remember the Scots voted to stay in the UK in a once in a generation vote, right?

    That was six years ago.

    They voted to stay in the UK that was part of the EU. Johnson upended that ludo board into the fireplace and is a sufficiently fundamental change that another referendum is warranted if they ask for it.

    How long is a "generation" anyway?
    Can I refer Mr Dancer back to the basic point which is that it is not up to England what Scotland does in a Union of Equals. If events mean Scotland changes it's mind then fine. The Union in question only came into being at the 4th attempt. We had two re-elections before the end of the 2015 parliament because the party who won the 2015 election didn't like the result...
    Yes. And we can safely assume that a second referendum in Scotland that resulted in a second No vote would result in the defeated side starting the campaign for a third vote the next day. And, because they have a solid grip on the Scottish Parliament, they'd get it before many more years had passed. And then, if necessary, a fourth, fifth and sixth. Rinse, repeat.

    This is just one of the reasons why we should hope for and embrace the end of the Union. It would bring clarity, and resolve a lot of problems.
    It's not inevitable that support for indy will remain so high. I think it will and the union will end, but that doesnt mean I think union supporters should give up because indy supporters will keep trying and probably win in the end.

    They probably will, but they need to work for it.

    And it's a bit strange to assume the clarification and resolution of problems which would occur would not also potentially create a bunch of issues as well. Many people believe on balance it would be worth it and fair enough, embracing the end doesnt end problems.
    Does not justify England's governments current attitude or the Scottish Government meekly accepting it.
    I wouldn't expect people to think it would, but as with Brexit I'm sure any sensible Indy supporter would not claim all problems would go away once there is independence, they just think it will be better overall, and even if there are additional issues, worth it.
    For sure , it is not about being better off , it is about making the decisions that suit Scotland not having to have the policies that suit just England, for good or bad.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,019

    Interesting article on VAT in the Sunday Times to boost the economy.

    I'd say cut it to 10% for 18 months. When you're £400bn in the hole it's not the time to play it safe for the sake of saving another £40bn, at the cost of staying there forever.

    You need to make some big moves.

    Cut taxes, raise money?

    So if we put tax levels to 0%....?????
    No. That's not what I'm saying at all.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967

    @BluestBlue you cannot seperate race from power and wealth. No matter how meritocratic we make our society, and how easy it becomes for a non white person to work hard and secure an upper-middle-class career, its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.

    There is no easy solution. I don’t know what the solution is.

    'its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.'

    I have literally no idea what this means. I have personal experience of first- and second-generation immigrants who have scaled the economic, educational, social, and professional heights of Britain, reaching levels that many of the 'white hands' you mention haven't grasped in the past 1000 years.

    This is a state of affairs of which both those 'new Britons' and the old ones should be immensely proud.
    We have had, have we not, two main 'sorts' of immigrant waves since WWII. Afro-Caribbeans, plus a sprinkling of West Africans, dominated by the 'Windrush generation' and Asians, dominated by the Ugandan Asians.

    The latter have prospered and integrated; the former less so.

    Over-simplification of course.
    The odd thing is that the Afro-Caribbeans did have integration advantages over the Asian immigrants as they were English speaking and Christian.

    They even had role models who were widely admired across communities - albeit in the stereotypes of entertainers and sportsmen.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,718
    Oscar Wilde applies does it not. The remark about 'Little Nell"!
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    A really thoughtful and interesting header. Thank you @Casino_Royale.
  • I am worried by an increasing number of older people I meet who say "we should stop curtailing to these minorities", that whenever a black or minority actor is on TV it's always because of some political statement they say.

    What they are saying by implication, is that TV should only have white people shown. It's racism clear and simple but because it's not as open and obvious, people ignore it.
  • I suspect a VAT cut achieves sod all, as Brown found out (albeit his cut was a lot smaller than being proposed).

    If the economy is in the toilet, which it is, people aren't going to spend spend spend and rescue it.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 23,926

    Biden will have to up the ante after Trump managed to drink unaided.

    https://twitter.com/deanna4congress/status/1274522762502160386?s=21

    To this day, I cannot see how anyone could vote for this guy.

    Cult.
    People vote for unconscionable leaders because the alternatives are, in their view, worse. Forgetting policy differences for the moment, if an American voter thinks Trump is an idiot but Biden is, literally, demented then it is Hobson's Choice. If a French voter thinks Macron believes he is a king, they cannot vote for him right up until they remember the likely alternative is a fascist.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,019

    whunter said:




    Under the old order I would have been regarded 'liberal left' but even I can see that this is turning in to a choice between living in Putins Russia or the Khymer Rouge.

    The option of living in a state where you can keep your head down and avoid trouble but stay secure, retain some sense of personal, private freedom is, when all things are considered, preferable over living in an intrusive revolutionary state which seeks to remake human nature.

    Both are awful choices. By contrast, the liberal Britain that we knew and has existed for most of our lifetimes was a utopia. But right now it feels like it is lost forever. It wont be saved by bowing to the mob.

    Sorry to depress you all on Sunday morning. Enjoy your freedom while you still have it.



    In contrast with the thoughtful and well-considered thread header, this is melodramatic twaddle. The incipient "communist" revolution you refer to has barely been noticed by most people, who do indeed just get on with their lives much as ever. Very few protesters wish to overthrow the state; probably the same tiny number on the far left and the far right. The vast majority of peaceful protesters just want a fairer society, simple as that.

    On the thread header, Casino Royale has written a good, classically liberal let's all be kind and colour blind piece. Hard to disagree with the thrust of this, but I'm less sure about the solutions. He acknowledges that there may be residual racial prejudice amongst 15%-25% of the population - really, a very high number if he's right, and I suspect he is. What precisely is to be done about this - I don't think appealing to such people to be colour blind will really cut it.

    I guess my main quibble is that in quite a long thread header the word power does not feature once. Any solution to our current woes surely needs to contain some analysis of power - who has it, in whose interest is it used, and how can it be more evenly distributed to challenge both real and perceived (racial) injustice.
    I do think advantage exists. I'd say it lies with those with money, stable families, those who live in safe areas and (this one isn't mentioned very much) with physically attractive and articulate people.

    I think it is still the case that an RP accent is sometimes conflated with being articulate and educated in this country, whereas that is far from the case. However, it is also not an excuse to be *inarticulate* - i.e you can be educated and articulate, with good English and diction, in a variety of accents - and we shouldn't conflate the two, or else it can hold people back.

    My sense is that too many people simply let their unconscious bias make subjective decisions about black people almost automatically, and this hinders their fair treatment.
    To what do you attribute the growing disparity in outcomes for recent immigrants from Africa and the older black community?

    It is quite noticeable, that when you work with black people in high end white collar jobs, that you find they are nearly always from the former group.

    The first order reason for this is education - such jobs are now only open to the holders of a 2.1 or 1st from a Russell Group university.

    What is the reason that that there is such a disparity in educational outcomes?
    I don't know. One possible answer could be that Afro-Caribbeans who arrived here in the 1940s-60s came here to do fairly low-medium skilled jobs, like bus driving, whereas now in order to immigrate from Africa you have to clear a significant salary threshold and you generally need to be well-educated to get that.

    But, I am guessing. I'd need to do research.
    My personal take, from talking to people, is that a portion of the Afro-Carribean community has absorbed a chunk of the "Isn't for the likes of us" attitude you find among the white working class. This combined with racism (and expectations of racism) creates a toxic self-fulling prophecy.
    If I were a Conservative political strategist then I'd say there are therefore real opportunities for the Conservative Party to make inroads into that vote in future by spreading opportunity more widely.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072

    I suspect a VAT cut achieves sod all, as Brown found out (albeit his cut was a lot smaller than being proposed).

    If the economy is in the toilet, which it is, people aren't going to spend spend spend and rescue it.

    I dunno, I think it makes some sense. VAT is essentially a tax on spending and it seems odd to disincentivise spending in a capitalist economy. I know it’s one of the easiest tax to collect, but still.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,981

    Interesting article on VAT in the Sunday Times to boost the economy.

    I'd say cut it to 10% for 18 months. When you're £400bn in the hole it's not the time to play it safe for the sake of saving another £40bn, at the cost of staying there forever.

    You need to make some big moves.

    Cut taxes, raise money?

    So if we put tax levels to 0%....?????
    No. That's not what I'm saying at all.
    The problem is that if you cut taxes, some people (those who can afford to) will simply squirrel it away for rainy days. It does not all go back into circulation right now, when it is needed. Also, cutting it on other items that people will buy anyway regardless of the tax rate, simply reduces revenue.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556

    @BluestBlue you cannot seperate race from power and wealth. No matter how meritocratic we make our society, and how easy it becomes for a non white person to work hard and secure an upper-middle-class career, its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.

    There is no easy solution. I don’t know what the solution is.

    'its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.'

    I have literally no idea what this means. I have personal experience of first- and second-generation immigrants who have scaled the economic, educational, social, and professional heights of Britain, reaching levels that many of the 'white hands' you mention haven't grasped in the past 1000 years.

    This is a state of affairs of which both those 'new Britons' and the old ones should be immensely proud.
    What are you talking about? I’m not saying that immigrants cannot scale economic, educational, social, and professional heights. I’m saying that as a whole, it’s impossible to catch up with accumulated wealth. Just look at South Africa for god sake. White South Africans still are, on the whole, the richest.

    To deny such a fact is just willful ignorance.
    I'm not a socialist - I don't view absolute equality of outcome for every social group as a good, whether a family has been here for a thousand years or for five.

    Your idea implies that we would need to bring the material and 'power' assets of the entire population to a level of equality, which is frankly bonkers. Much better to create a free society in which the industrious and talented rise and the rest dip, from generation to generation. That's all that can or should be done.
    I’m not putting forward any “idea” and neither am I a “socialist”.

    You’re missing the point entirely. I’m not offering a solution. I’m merely highlighting a problem.

    You’re ignoring the indisputable problem because it’s an inconvenient roadblock to your utopian idea of what Britain should be.

    Like I said, even if we created an utopian perfect meritocracy, which is basically what you’re proposing, white Britons will be on average richer and therefore more powerful than non-white Britons due to historical accumulated wealth. This is indisputable.
    Indisputable? What happens when particular immigrant groups reach a level of average household income, wealth, or educational status that exceeds that of the white majority? That's not unlikely to happen at some point - indeed, it may already be the case in a few specific areas - and it will blow your theory out of the water.

    And even if it turns out that you're correct, so what? That's life - some groups will benefit from a greater period of historical advantage than others. If history had been different and different groups had held power throughout the centuries, it would be equally unjust to deprive them of it for the sake of some abstract concept of equality.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967

    @BluestBlue you cannot seperate race from power and wealth. No matter how meritocratic we make our society, and how easy it becomes for a non white person to work hard and secure an upper-middle-class career, its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.

    There is no easy solution. I don’t know what the solution is.

    'its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.'

    I have literally no idea what this means. I have personal experience of first- and second-generation immigrants who have scaled the economic, educational, social, and professional heights of Britain, reaching levels that many of the 'white hands' you mention haven't grasped in the past 1000 years.

    This is a state of affairs of which both those 'new Britons' and the old ones should be immensely proud.
    What are you talking about? I’m not saying that immigrants cannot scale economic, educational, social, and professional heights. I’m saying that as a whole, it’s impossible to catch up with accumulated wealth. Just look at South Africa for god sake. White South Africans still are, on the whole, the richest.

    To deny such a fact is just willful ignorance.
    Rishi Sunak's not doing so badly.

    Extreme wealth is more a global thing but on a national level a comfortable middle class level of wealth has certainly been reached by immigrant communities - Jews, Indians, perhaps some African and Eastern European migrants.
    I don’t disagree with what you have said, however it is irrelevant to the point I am making.
    Well consider this.

    Economic migrants move from poor to rich countries.

    So the accumulated wealth of the average person in the rich country is going to be higher than that of the migrant from the poor country.

    If it wasn't then the migrant from the poor country would be migrating somewhere else.
  • I suspect a VAT cut achieves sod all, as Brown found out (albeit his cut was a lot smaller than being proposed).

    If the economy is in the toilet, which it is, people aren't going to spend spend spend and rescue it.

    I dunno, I think it makes some sense. VAT is essentially a tax on spending and it seems odd to disincentivise spending in a capitalist economy. I know it’s one of the easiest tax to collect, but still.
    I think it makes sense to try it and if it works great - but I don't think it will be the boost the economy needs.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,674

    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:


    Does not justify England's governments current attitude or the Scottish Government meekly accepting it.

    There is no England government. Which is part of the problem.
    Technically you are correct.

    In practice, it feels like the "Provinces" have been given their Assemblies and Westminster governs for England. What is good for England is good for the UK, so to speak.
    Exactly, there is ONLY English government is the problem.
  • If it was me, I would invest massively in infrastructure, specifically full FTTP to every home.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072

    @BluestBlue you cannot seperate race from power and wealth. No matter how meritocratic we make our society, and how easy it becomes for a non white person to work hard and secure an upper-middle-class career, its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.

    There is no easy solution. I don’t know what the solution is.

    'its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.'

    I have literally no idea what this means. I have personal experience of first- and second-generation immigrants who have scaled the economic, educational, social, and professional heights of Britain, reaching levels that many of the 'white hands' you mention haven't grasped in the past 1000 years.

    This is a state of affairs of which both those 'new Britons' and the old ones should be immensely proud.
    What are you talking about? I’m not saying that immigrants cannot scale economic, educational, social, and professional heights. I’m saying that as a whole, it’s impossible to catch up with accumulated wealth. Just look at South Africa for god sake. White South Africans still are, on the whole, the richest.

    To deny such a fact is just willful ignorance.
    Rishi Sunak's not doing so badly.

    Extreme wealth is more a global thing but on a national level a comfortable middle class level of wealth has certainly been reached by immigrant communities - Jews, Indians, perhaps some African and Eastern European migrants.
    I don’t disagree with what you have said, however it is irrelevant to the point I am making.
    Well consider this.

    Economic migrants move from poor to rich countries.

    So the accumulated wealth of the average person in the rich country is going to be higher than that of the migrant from the poor country.

    If it wasn't then the migrant from the poor country would be migrating somewhere else.
    What point are you making?
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967
    edited June 2020
    kinabalu said:

    Thanks to @Casino_Royale for a nice header. It well articulates many sentiments that most people (including me) would agree with. But let's focus on the main message - that we need more and better dialogue about the subject of racism.

    We do. Everyone says this. But do they really mean it? Or is it a piece of motherhood and apple pie deflection? You know, along the lines of the notorious platitude, "the way to prevent affluent people using private schools is to make state schools so good that they don't want to."

    Because it seems to me that for those who constantly deride anti-racist campaigners as the "woke brigade" more conversation about racism - indeed any conversation about racism - is precisely what they do not want. It exasperates. It bores. Why? Because in truth they feel the problem is at best wildly exaggerated and at worst a grievance narrative invented by a Left obsessed with identity politics.

    Either that or they suspect there is a problem but would prefer to shy away from it since it creates queasiness to consider there might - there just might - be a lingering, deep-seated racist legacy from Empire, Slavery & Colonialism which we need to face up to in order to realize the "colour blind" future that almost everyone (I think sincerely) wishes to see.

    So rather than put in the hard yards to confront the issue - which could be difficult and unpleasant but would have a chance of paying real dividends - what they seek to do instead is pretend it isn't there. Not so much "let's talk about racism" - it's "let's talk about anything except racism." The desire is to close the subject down. Cards used - invention, extrapolation, deflection, ridicule.

    We see it time and time again on here.

    The reaction to a statue of a slaver coming down? - The evergreen "Oh FFS what's next?" plus a cry of "Mob rule, lock em up!"

    To the N word removed from a TV show? - "Oh FFS, what's next?" plus "How come Kanye West can say it? It's not fair! No consistency!"

    To an anti-racist # of Black Lives Matter - "Yeah, so how come they don't talk about all the blacks killing other blacks?"

    In other words - long story short - I like the message of more dialogue on racism in this header but I question the good faith of those on here who are probably applauding it the most strongly. Since they are the very people who in practice demonstrate to me the opposite tendency.

    Perhaps there's many issues relating to race in the modern world you prefer not to discuss ?

    So you keep retreating to your 18th century comfort zone.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Mr. Pioneers, you remember the Scots voted to stay in the UK in a once in a generation vote, right?

    That was six years ago.

    ... a generation in politics is a parliament and many have passed since then ...
    @malcolmg - I am sympathetic, but even I think that statement is a stretch.....
    Bev, no problem, however each election everything and anything is up for change, this pathetic diversion of trying to say it was written in law that a generation must pass is pathetic and encapsulates everything that is rotten and putrid in the unionists. Bunch of cowards desperate to keep Scotland under the yoke, so unsure of themselves they try to prevent a referendum, it speaks volumes of the cowards they are.
    "Once in a generation" was a personal promise by Salmond. If we accept that *parliaments* cannot pass *laws* binding their successors why would we even pretend to think that the personal dicta of FMs can? We live under the rule of law, not the rule of the whims of Big Men. A breach of Salmond's undertaking would be personally dishonourable on the part of Salmond and anyone who adopted it last time round, but constitutionally it is irrelevant.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,674
    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:

    kle4 said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Mr. Pioneers, you remember the Scots voted to stay in the UK in a once in a generation vote, right?

    That was six years ago.

    They voted to stay in the UK that was part of the EU. Johnson upended that ludo board into the fireplace and is a sufficiently fundamental change that another referendum is warranted if they ask for it.

    How long is a "generation" anyway?
    Can I refer Mr Dancer back to the basic point which is that it is not up to England what Scotland does in a Union of Equals. If events mean Scotland changes it's mind then fine. The Union in question only came into being at the 4th attempt. We had two re-elections before the end of the 2015 parliament because the party who won the 2015 election didn't like the result...
    Yes. And we can safely assume that a second referendum in Scotland that resulted in a second No vote would result in the defeated side starting the campaign for a third vote the next day. And, because they have a solid grip on the Scottish Parliament, they'd get it before many more years had passed. And then, if necessary, a fourth, fifth and sixth. Rinse, repeat.

    This is just one of the reasons why we should hope for and embrace the end of the Union. It would bring clarity, and resolve a lot of problems.
    It's not inevitable that support for indy will remain so high. I think it will and the union will end, but that doesnt mean I think union supporters should give up because indy supporters will keep trying and probably win in the end.

    They probably will, but they need to work for it.

    And it's a bit strange to assume the clarification and resolution of problems which would occur would not also potentially create a bunch of issues as well. Many people believe on balance it would be worth it and fair enough, embracing the end doesnt end problems.
    Does not justify England's governments current attitude or the Scottish Government meekly accepting it.
    There is no England government. Which is part of the problem.
    There is only English government, that is the whole issue
  • Reducing to 1m I think is a mistake. Because at that point people will stop distancing altogether.

    We're going to have a second wave due to this Government's incompetence. They obviously assume Coronavirus has now disappeared and the economic agenda will restart. I think that is laughable.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709

    HYUFD said:

    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:


    Does not justify England's governments current attitude or the Scottish Government meekly accepting it.

    There is no England government. Which is part of the problem.
    Technically you are correct.

    In practice, it feels like the "Provinces" have been given their Assemblies and Westminster governs for England. What is good for England is good for the UK, so to speak.
    No, as there are still Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish MPs at Westminster.

    Personally I have no problem with an English Parliament
    Technically you are also correct. But it does not feel like that.

    When are you going to grasp the fact that for Ordinary Joe/Joanne, perception is everything and facts are a long way down the list...
    The facts are there is a UK Parliament at Westminster, a Scottish Parliament at Holyrood, a Welsh Assembly in Cardiff Bay and a Northern Ireland Assembly at Stormont but no English Parliament or Assembly.

    As for perception 41% of English voters and 52% of Leave voters do indeed want an English Parliament

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44208859
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072

    If it was me, I would invest massively in infrastructure, specifically full FTTP to every home.

    Maybe a UK Sovereign Investment Fund should buy a stake in SpaceX (I know it isn’t public but that’s not a complete bar). Starlink perhaps is a better long term proposition than FTTP - especially with rural properties.
  • CorrectHorseBatteryCorrectHorseBattery Posts: 21,436
    edited June 2020

    If it was me, I would invest massively in infrastructure, specifically full FTTP to every home.

    Maybe a UK Sovereign Investment Fund should buy a stake in SpaceX (I know it isn’t public but that’s not a complete bar). Starlink perhaps is a better long term proposition than FTTP - especially with rural properties.
    FTTP is one of the best investments we can make and will be the cheapest it's been for a long time.

    Do it once, never have to do it again. 1 Gb will be fine for a decade and it will scale to 10 Gb quite easily.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:


    Does not justify England's governments current attitude or the Scottish Government meekly accepting it.

    There is no England government. Which is part of the problem.
    Technically you are correct.

    In practice, it feels like the "Provinces" have been given their Assemblies and Westminster governs for England. What is good for England is good for the UK, so to speak.
    No, as there are still Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish MPs at Westminster.

    Personally I have no problem with an English Parliament
    Technically you are also correct. But it does not feel like that.

    When are you going to grasp the fact that for Ordinary Joe/Joanne, perception is everything and facts are a long way down the list...
    The facts are there is a UK Parliament at Westminster, a Scottish Parliament at Holyrood, a Welsh Assembly in Cardiff Bay and a Northern Ireland Assembly at Stormont but no English Parliament or Assembly.

    As for perception 41% of English voters and 52% of Leave voters do indeed want an English Parliament

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44208859
    So a minority of English voters want an English Parliament. Glad you agree. The fact that 52% of “Leave voters” support one is a complete irrelevance.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    I suspect a VAT cut achieves sod all, as Brown found out (albeit his cut was a lot smaller than being proposed).

    If the economy is in the toilet, which it is, people aren't going to spend spend spend and rescue it.

    I dunno, I think it makes some sense. VAT is essentially a tax on spending and it seems odd to disincentivise spending in a capitalist economy. I know it’s one of the easiest tax to collect, but still.
    I think it makes sense to try it and if it works great - but I don't think it will be the boost the economy needs.
    You do it in a targeted manner. Dropping VAT on pubs makes a £6 pint £5. Leave the VAT on off sales though, make the supermarket booze relatively more expensive.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,019

    Interesting article on VAT in the Sunday Times to boost the economy.

    I'd say cut it to 10% for 18 months. When you're £400bn in the hole it's not the time to play it safe for the sake of saving another £40bn, at the cost of staying there forever.

    You need to make some big moves.

    Cut taxes, raise money?

    So if we put tax levels to 0%....?????
    No. That's not what I'm saying at all.
    The problem is that if you cut taxes, some people (those who can afford to) will simply squirrel it away for rainy days. It does not all go back into circulation right now, when it is needed. Also, cutting it on other items that people will buy anyway regardless of the tax rate, simply reduces revenue.
    A big cut in VAT might encourage people to bring forward spending on windows, bathrooms and kitchens for the 1-2 years it's in effect.

    That's what we need.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,585

    Reducing to 1m I think is a mistake. Because at that point people will stop distancing altogether.

    We're going to have a second wave due to this Government's incompetence. They obviously assume Coronavirus has now disappeared and the economic agenda will restart. I think that is laughable.

    The Westminster government has long since dispensed with any notion that the Covid-19 response is framed on anything but economic terms. The polling suggest they are getting away with it.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,002

    Reducing to 1m I think is a mistake. Because at that point people will stop distancing altogether.

    We're going to have a second wave due to this Government's incompetence. They obviously assume Coronavirus has now disappeared and the economic agenda will restart. I think that is laughable.

    Can I politely say hang on

    You are not an expert in this field and this morning the media have featured advisors to HMG giving it the green light. Indeed even labour have offered support subject to safeguards

    This is not government incompetence and the idea it is is lazy politics
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,718

    @BluestBlue you cannot seperate race from power and wealth. No matter how meritocratic we make our society, and how easy it becomes for a non white person to work hard and secure an upper-middle-class career, its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.

    There is no easy solution. I don’t know what the solution is.

    'its impossible to compete, or catch up, with wealth and power accumulated over 1000 years, predominately in white hands. It’s impossible.'

    I have literally no idea what this means. I have personal experience of first- and second-generation immigrants who have scaled the economic, educational, social, and professional heights of Britain, reaching levels that many of the 'white hands' you mention haven't grasped in the past 1000 years.

    This is a state of affairs of which both those 'new Britons' and the old ones should be immensely proud.
    We have had, have we not, two main 'sorts' of immigrant waves since WWII. Afro-Caribbeans, plus a sprinkling of West Africans, dominated by the 'Windrush generation' and Asians, dominated by the Ugandan Asians.

    The latter have prospered and integrated; the former less so.

    Over-simplification of course.
    The odd thing is that the Afro-Caribbeans did have integration advantages over the Asian immigrants as they were English speaking and Christian.

    They even had role models who were widely admired across communities - albeit in the stereotypes of entertainers and sportsmen.
    Agree. Although the 'English' wasn't the 'English' of the communities they joined. Nor, shamefully, perhaps, was the Christianity, or at least the form of worship.
    While the Kashmiris who were moving into the mill towns of the NorthWest when I lived there often spoke poor or no English, the Ugandan Asians I met....... and as a pharmacist I've met quite a lot ...... all spoke good English.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967

    Interesting article on VAT in the Sunday Times to boost the economy.

    I'd say cut it to 10% for 18 months. When you're £400bn in the hole it's not the time to play it safe for the sake of saving another £40bn, at the cost of staying there forever.

    You need to make some big moves.

    Cut taxes on employment if you want tax cuts.

    But cutting taxes on imported consumer tat will just bring forward some spending which was going to happen anyway.
This discussion has been closed.