Protests

[Phantom of London]

Aug 10, 2024 22:39:30 GMT orchidman said:

The reality is that immigration has been a huge failure of the democratic process since 1992 and realistically since 1945. The public has never wanted mass immigration and every time the Conservatives have been elected since 1992 they have promised to reduce it, and have then increased it. Tony Blair's government unsurprisingly was particularly egregious in terms of what they promised relative to what they delivered.

We are currently living in an insane situation where many people have been convinced that the most recent Conservative government were very right wing on immigration when they in fact presided over by far the highest incoming levels of net migration ever seen.

The European country which has produced the most longitudinal data on the effect of immigration is Denmark and not uncoincidentally Denmark is now the most anti-immigration country in Western Europe. The data showed exactly what you should expect: measured over a lifetime, immigrants from rich countries are on average beneficial to your economy and immigrants from poor countries on average are detrimental.

After Brexit the UK has replaced very high levels of immigration largely from the EU with almost incomprehensibly high levels of immigration largely from poorer countries. The immediate effect of this is to slightly increase GDP while lowering GDP per capita. The long term effect is almost certainly going to be the lowering of both as immigrants also get older, sicker, and want pensions.

Labour and the Conservatives do not want the electorate to realise any of this as they are equally culpable for these failures since 1992. For now the media is happy to run coverage for them and journalists are increasingly drawn from a narrow set of highly educated cosmopolitans who consider any criticism of immigration to be uncouth, not least because journalism is an increasingly low paying job only likely to appeal to those willing to trade high status for low income, in particular the already wealthy.

Labour has been losing votes from both Muslim communities and white working class communities. Their differing responses to the BLM situation, the Palestine situation, and to this situation makes it clear that they are going to side with their middle class voters and their multicultural voters against their traditional base.

This has been the strategy of the Democratic party in the US since 2008 and it is a winning long-term strategy whilst mass immigration continues because immigrants tend to vote Democrat and Labour and over time you can import yourself the electorate you want. Kamala Harris would have lost to Donald Trump with 2016's electorate but she has a chance in 2024. With 1980's electorate she would have been unlikely to win a single state.

It is therefore hugely in the interest of Keir Starmer and the Labour Party to suppress information concerning immigration. Drumming up the essentially non-existent threat of the 'far-right' is now a convenient way to achieve this.

But this strategy now puts Starmer on a collision course against one of the world's richest and most powerful men who controls one of the few major media outlets still committed to something resembling free speech, and this could easily backfire on Labour and lead to the election of a party that would be genuinely right-wing on the issue of immigration, which would of course only be the correction expected in a functioning democracy.

What point are you trying to make?

[oxfordsimon]

Shutting down social media would be utterly counterproductive.

It shuts down so many ways of getting information out during a time of crisis just as when people have marked themselves as safe during tragic events round the globe.

The idea that the way Telegram acted stopped events in Wednesday is without foundation. It is not a massive network compared to Facebook and Twitter.

Other than a widely shared list of locations, there is little evidence to show that these were actually going to be targeted.

Shutting down social media is a disproportionate response to what was going on. It is the response used by tyrants, authoritarian regimes and petty despots.

There are ways, as I suggested, of increasing transparency on social media. But state control is never going to be the right policy response.

It amazes me how those who would like to think of themselves as liberals and progressives who then start adopting incredibly regressive ideas such as shutting down social media. And we have seen plenty of that over recent days.

[Phantom of London]

Simon it is not a authoritarian state, tyranny or petty despots from stopping people from disseminating false information on social media that could endanger life, that is as laughable as saying that arresting shoplifters that we are turning into a police state.

People who live in a social media bubble tend to not vote.

Your suggestion of verification can easily be bypassed with false emails etc.

There will always be a place for responsible social media.

[oxfordsimon]

Trying to exercise state control of social media in the way you suggest is illiberal, regressive and totalitarian.

Even for short periods.

States that do this include Russia and China.

They are not examples we should ever follow. Ever.

Any form of communication is going to be open to misuse. But having state control over it is not the solution.

It never has been and it never will be.

I don't understand how anyone can legitimately want to give the state the power to shut down any method of communication.

Access to social media in the many and varied forms that exist is now so deeply entrenched in modern life that you are just going to have to live with it.

Even this forum is a form of social media allowing people to post their opinions and share material both publicly and privately. And so this would have been included in your government ordered shut down.

Would you also ban text messages? Sending emails?

What about chat in online games? All sorts can be shared via those.

How about closing down print shops in case people create posters that they put up? Banning the sale of printer ink and paper?


The state has to accept there are limits to what it should ever seek to do. And one if those limits is this. Social media is here and no government of any complexion should seek to try to shut it down.

Stuff that you don't like is always going to get shared. Teaching critical thinking at all stages of education will help equip people to make better decisions over what to believe and what to discount. That is a far better way forward to any thoughts about shut downs and state control.

There is little point in continue going back and forth on this.

[aspieandy]

Army on the street, state control of media ... we haven't seen this level of liberal extremism, well, since #peoplesvote.

Starmer has said the - politically inheritied - Online Safety Act isn't fit for purpose. I would imagine, after the past week or so, many would agree.

Given his ability to overreact generally, it will be interesting to see what (proposed) reforms emerge.

Overseas, Musk has had a difficult month with Tesla droping 20%. A lot of stress for the star performer. He shouldn't have got involved, not a good look, not helpful.

Scope now for everyone to take a few breaths.

[vdcni]

The idea that Musk and X is some kind of bastion of free speech is ridiculous.

It's certainly a bastion of misinformation and abuse and Musk has helped drive the personally but no more than that. Just like others he's only talking about speech he approves of.

That doesn't mean X should be closed down but as long as the law is being properly applied some speech should be as regulated there as it outside of social media.

[interval99]

Please inform us what speech or views are not avaliable on X?

[aspieandy]

There is plenty of censorship in UK media but it is self-appointed censorship, done by the people who know what's best. And that is still the Blairite centre/centre right.

The great problem for some is that Twitter/X is not in the same hands as the BBC and other mainstream UK media: where does misinformation end and misrepresentation begin.

BBC has Charter obligations re balanced political reporting, which it barely bothers to hide its contempt for. There is no balanced reporting as between classes of people, for example magic money tree dwellers and the rest.

[lichtie]

There is self censorship because they are publishers of record and therefore can be held responsible for what appears on any of their platforms. The companies can be sued for what is said, even if it wasn't said by them directly (hence the heavy moderation on comments on classical media). Social media got released from that at the start in the US and most other democratic countries to try and encourage their progress and that is still the case fundamentally. So Elon can't be challenged legally for anything Tommy Robinson says on X, only Robinson himself can. There is therefore absolutely no comparison when it comes to censorship on old fashioned and social media.

[aspieandy]

‘publisher of record’ is self-aggrandising bogus nonsense from newspapers. Newspapers trying to pretend they are other than the puppet of their owners, and that they should be believed because they are important!

It’s like my unpaid water bills where my ‘title’ is Lord <insert name>.

A publisher of record is whoever publishes a book with an ISBN number and barcode.

[wiggymess]

Aug 10, 2024 22:39:30 GMT orchidman said:

The reality is that immigration has been a huge failure of the democratic process since 1992 and realistically since 1945. The public has never wanted mass immigration and every time the Conservatives have been elected since 1992 they have promised to reduce it, and have then increased it. Tony Blair's government unsurprisingly was particularly egregious in terms of what they promised relative to what they delivered.

We are currently living in an insane situation where many people have been convinced that the most recent Conservative government were very right wing on immigration when they in fact presided over by far the highest incoming levels of net migration ever seen.

The European country which has produced the most longitudinal data on the effect of immigration is Denmark and not uncoincidentally Denmark is now the most anti-immigration country in Western Europe. The data showed exactly what you should expect: measured over a lifetime, immigrants from rich countries are on average beneficial to your economy and immigrants from poor countries on average are detrimental.

After Brexit the UK has replaced very high levels of immigration largely from the EU with almost incomprehensibly high levels of immigration largely from poorer countries. The immediate effect of this is to slightly increase GDP while lowering GDP per capita. The long term effect is almost certainly going to be the lowering of both as immigrants also get older, sicker, and want pensions.

Labour and the Conservatives do not want the electorate to realise any of this as they are equally culpable for these failures since 1992. For now the media is happy to run coverage for them and journalists are increasingly drawn from a narrow set of highly educated cosmopolitans who consider any criticism of immigration to be uncouth, not least because journalism is an increasingly low paying job only likely to appeal to those willing to trade high status for low income, in particular the already wealthy.

Labour has been losing votes from both Muslim communities and white working class communities. Their differing responses to the BLM situation, the Palestine situation, and to this situation makes it clear that they are going to side with their middle class voters and their multicultural voters against their traditional base.

This has been the strategy of the Democratic party in the US since 2008 and it is a winning long-term strategy whilst mass immigration continues because immigrants tend to vote Democrat and Labour and over time you can import yourself the electorate you want. Kamala Harris would have lost to Donald Trump with 2016's electorate but she has a chance in 2024. With 1980's electorate she would have been unlikely to win a single state.

It is therefore hugely in the interest of Keir Starmer and the Labour Party to suppress information concerning immigration. Drumming up the essentially non-existent threat of the 'far-right' is now a convenient way to achieve this.

But this strategy now puts Starmer on a collision course against one of the world's richest and most powerful men who controls one of the few major media outlets still committed to something resembling free speech, and this could easily backfire on Labour and lead to the election of a party that would be genuinely right-wing on the issue of immigration, which would of course only be the correction expected in a functioning democracy.

Can't abide by the 'people just being numbers' attitude some have towards this debate. No empathy or even attempt to see the human side of mass immigration.

We must all read many many paragraphs about GDP and whether people coming to this country are long term net-contributors. Makes my skin crawl in honesty. Genuinely pity the people who see it like that.

[aspieandy]

Very few people have an issue with genuine asylum seekers, or even "mass immigration" - it's a weird description as includes students with family and numbers in the 1000,000s

The issue is people paying, say, £3,000 to £5,000 to jump in a small boat, from the coast of a safe EU country, arrive illegally and be housed in hotels. These people do not come from the same countries as legal migrants (largest legal groups: India, China/HK, eastern Europe): points system or work/student visas.

Last year the largest ethnic group of illegals was Albanians (the cocaine trade), this year it is Vietnamese (cannabis farms). There are some women and children though the considerable majority are young men. I am not sure they intend to contribute positively to UK GDP.

These people are not regarded well by people who do follow the rules and arrive legally.

[wiggymess]

Aug 11, 2024 19:09:38 GMT aspieandy said:

Very few people have an issue with genuine asylum seekers, or even "mass immigration" - it's a weird description as includes students with family and numbers in the 1000,000s

The issue is people paying, say, £3,000 to £5,000 to jump in a small boat, from the coast of a safe EU country, arrive illegally and be housed in hotels. These people do not come from the same countries as legal migrants (largest legal groups: India, China/HK, eastern Europe): points system or work/student visas.

Last year the largest ethnic group of illegals was Albanians (the cocaine trade), this year it is Vietnamese (cannabis farms). There are some women and children though the considerable majority are young men. I am not sure they intend to contribute positively to UK GDP.

These people are not regarded well by people who do follow the rules and arrive legally.

If that's a response to me then the post I quoted does not mention illegal immigration once.

I don't know why people are trying to intellectualise attempted mass murder, racial violence and opportunistic looting by connecting those things with genuine and understandable concerns about immigration.

If you protest alongside a neo-nazi, then I'm afraid you have protested alongside a neo-nazi, even if all the crocs had gone by the time you arrived.

[oxfordsimon]

We need to take the heat out of the language used to discuss these issues.

I know there are strong emotions and people feel very passionately about the issues.

But using some of the language I have seen in the media and on here does not help.

Everyone should seek to examine things with as cool a head as possible.

[nick]

Aug 11, 2024 19:09:38 GMT aspieandy said:

Last year the largest ethnic group of illegals was Albanians (the cocaine trade), this year it is Vietnamese (cannabis farms). There are some women and children though the considerable majority are young men. I am not sure they intend to contribute positively to UK GDP.

You try and make valid points but then link Albanian immigrants to cocaine and Vietnamese immigrants to cannabis? It weakens what you are trying to say and begins to sound prejudiced.


It's likely that many illegal immigrants are economic. It's definite that most are young men But I don't think it's at all certain that they are linked to illegal drug activity. Give us links to proof if you can.

I think we should treat illegal immigrants as human beings and as individuals. There should be a mature debate over what policy we should have.

My belief is that we are a mongrel country who have benefitted for centuries from new people coming into our country and contributing to our culture (Where was St George from again?) and if that is not the case today then we need to ask ourselves why and change that.

[wiggymess]

Aug 11, 2024 20:17:36 GMT oxfordsimon said:

We need to take the year out of the language used to discuss these issues.

I know there are strong emotions and people feel very passionately about the issues.

But using some of the language I have seen in the media and on here does not help.

Everyone should seek to examine things with as cool a head as possible.

Again unhelpfully not quoting who you're referring to so if it was me then there were literally people walking around the protests showing off swastika tattoos. Sorry if some people don't want to look this in the face and call it what it is but those are the facts; these protests were organised and carried out by neo nazi and fascist groups. Everyone who willingly participated in them did so alongside the worst kind of people on the planet and I make no apologies for that opinion.

My point is that we have probably all seen the images of groups of people trying to set fire to hotels containing actual human beings, so to now attempt to rationalise that as a genuine concern about immigration is wrong in my opinion.

[interval99]

The current UK policy is so generous it's why so many pass through many safe countries and pay to land on the UK shores where they will instantly get shelter, food, heating, medical and legal assistance, accepted at whatever age they claim to be and without any papers or vetting.

If it's so repressive and horrific here why do so many continue to arrive.

[oxfordsimon]

I wasn't pointing the finger at any individuals as that would have been unfair and unkind.

It is for us each to look at how we express ourselves and see whether what we say might not go too far.

[wiggymess]

Aug 11, 2024 21:25:48 GMT interval99 said:

The current UK policy is so generous it's why so many pass through many safe countries and pay to land on the UK shores where they will instantly get shelter, food, heating, medical and legal assistance, accepted at whatever age they claim to be and without any papers or vetting.

If it's so repressive and horrific here why do so many continue to arrive.

What an in depth and wholly correct interpretation of the UK's immigration policy. We're all very grateful

[aspieandy]

Aug 11, 2024 21:05:52 GMT nick said:

Aug 11, 2024 19:09:38 GMT aspieandy said:

Last year the largest ethnic group of illegals was Albanians (the cocaine trade), this year it is Vietnamese (cannabis farms). There are some women and children though the considerable majority are young men. I am not sure they intend to contribute positively to UK GDP.

You try and make valid points but then link Albanian immigrants to cocaine and Vietnamese immigrants to cannabis? It weakens what you are trying to say and begins to sound prejudiced.


It's likely that many illegal immigrants are economic. It's definite that most are young men But I don't think it's at all certain that they are linked to illegal drug activity. Give us links to proof if you can.

I think we should treat illegal immigrants as human beings and as individuals. There should be a mature debate over what policy we should have.

My belief is that we are a mongrel country who have benefitted for centuries from new people coming into our country and contributing to our culture (Where was St George from again?) and if that is not the case today then we need to ask ourselves why and change that.

Tbh, I'm a little past caring what most of the internet has to say, which is not to say I can't make mistakes. It comes from a lot of study.  For anyone interested, here's details of the UK government's unique arrangement with Albania: www.gov.uk/government/news/milestone-reached-in-uk-albania-agreement-on-illegal-migration

A little early for any solutions with Vietnam as numbers only grew noticably 6 or so months ago.

[theglenbucklaird]

Aug 11, 2024 23:06:18 GMT aspieandy said:

Aug 11, 2024 21:05:52 GMT nick said:

You try and make valid points but then link Albanian immigrants to cocaine and Vietnamese immigrants to cannabis? It weakens what you are trying to say and begins to sound prejudiced.


It's likely that many illegal immigrants are economic. It's definite that most are young men But I don't think it's at all certain that they are linked to illegal drug activity. Give us links to proof if you can.

I think we should treat illegal immigrants as human beings and as individuals. There should be a mature debate over what policy we should have.

My belief is that we are a mongrel country who have benefitted for centuries from new people coming into our country and contributing to our culture (Where was St George from again?) and if that is not the case today then we need to ask ourselves why and change that.

Tbh, I'm a little past caring what most of the internet has to say, which is not to say I can't make mistakes. It comes from a lot of study.  For anyone interested, here's details of the UK government's unique arrangement with Albania: www.gov.uk/government/news/milestone-reached-in-uk-albania-agreement-on-illegal-migration

A little early for any solutions with Vietnam as numbers only grew noticably 6 or so months ago.

I don’t like the use of term illegal immigrants. What are the legal routes to the country again?

[nick]

Aug 11, 2024 23:06:18 GMT aspieandy said:

Aug 11, 2024 21:05:52 GMT nick said:

You try and make valid points but then link Albanian immigrants to cocaine and Vietnamese immigrants to cannabis? It weakens what you are trying to say and begins to sound prejudiced.


It's likely that many illegal immigrants are economic. It's definite that most are young men But I don't think it's at all certain that they are linked to illegal drug activity. Give us links to proof if you can.

I think we should treat illegal immigrants as human beings and as individuals. There should be a mature debate over what policy we should have.

My belief is that we are a mongrel country who have benefitted for centuries from new people coming into our country and contributing to our culture (Where was St George from again?) and if that is not the case today then we need to ask ourselves why and change that.

Tbh, I'm a little past caring what most of the internet has to say, which is not to say I can't make mistakes. It comes from a lot of study.  For anyone interested, here's details of the UK government's unique arrangement with Albania: www.gov.uk/government/news/milestone-reached-in-uk-albania-agreement-on-illegal-migration

A little early for any solutions with Vietnam as numbers only grew noticably 6 or so months ago.

I really don't want to be picky but your link doesn't address why you are linking immigrants with drug dealing. And therefore why we need solutions for immigrants from those particular countries.

While I think it's a good thing to have a debate and, from that, revise our policies on immigration, I don't like the knee jerk reaction of 'send them back', 'stop immigration'. So far the only effect that seems to have is to slow immigration of qualified people (into the health service for example) and to not even come close to addressing how we can help immigrants integrate quickly and become positive members of our society as quickly as possible.


I can't even begin to understand why immigration as a concept can be thought of as negative. Our culture is littered with influences of immigrants.  from food to language. We have a society that is much richer than many others because we have assimilated incomers - my home town had one non-white family when I was growing who ran the fish and chip shop - over the years they expanded their chinese menu. Now you can choose from dozens of different menus around the town. Our health service runs largely on immigrants as is our service industry.

[oxfordsimon]

The BBC investigated the link between Albanian gangs and their recruitment of those seeking to enter the UK back in 2022

www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-63488070

So there is a link between Albanian migrants and drugs and that seems to be the reason for the work being done to reduce the numbers coming from Albania.

It is obviously a complex situation but from that article it would appear that they had (and may possibly still have) a well oiled machine to facilitate things.

There are also obviously reasons why Albanians are seeking to leave their country but I doubt many fall under asylum rules.

None of this is easy to solve. But there does appear to be a proven link between Albanian migration and drug gangs.

[wiggymess]

Just in case anyone is interested in the other side of the story, so often untold in this debate; the human side.
www.lawcentres.org.uk/news/immigration-scapegoats-albanian-asylum-seekers-and-the-law-centre

Interesting to say "There are also obviously reasons why Albanians are seeking to leave their country but I doubt many fall under asylum rules." when, as per the link, "The grant rate for initial decisions on Albanian asylum claims in 2022 was 60%. Those that were rejected first time round but appealed to the First-tier Tribunal had a 57% success rate."

Examine things with a cool head indeed.

[crowblack]

I'm in a city notorious for drugs and yes, people are being smuggled in to work as labour in the cannabis farms. A recent NW news report was on dozens of domestic addresses in one town that had been converted by one gang - Romanian / Roma - into cannabis farms. Clearing a burned out factory in Oldham months after a fire in 2022, four skeletons were found - young Vietnamese men, no one knew they were there. It was a cannabis farm, of course, & arrests have now been made but I don't think it's come to trial yet. Two years ago the road outside my house closed for two days as police combed the remains of a large burned out house being used as a cannabis farm for human remains - fortunately, none were found, but the money laundering front 'nail bars', 'saunas' and empty Turkish barbers popping up on run-down streets round here show the extent of human trafficking and exploitation. The groups exploited by these gangs are not the focus of the angry immigration / migration debate. Indeed they are largely ignored by British people happy to smoke the dope, snort the coke and sexually exploit the young women in the 'saunas' and enrich the gangsters who control them.

If you've ever read China Mieville's novel The City and the City, where two city populations live alongside each other but 'unsee' the other group, it feels like that, in this case one using / abusing the other.