Originally posted by kuge

So want to discuss immigration into Britain but not before a certain date and only regarding groups above a certain number? You suggest that past experience with immigration into the UK has no relevance but seek to establish a parallel with events over a thousand five hundred years ago.

I have posted links above that clearly show immigration does not lead to a rise in crime. This is both in the UK and globally. These are long-term studies that look at trends over decades.

Regarding the 50,000 Hugonotes that came to Britain. It is not the same as the number of immigrants that come to Britain in one week. In 2019 614,000 immigrants arrive, however, net immigration was 221,000. (These figures contain overseas students and other that will return home after their study end). That is 4,250 a week.

Denial is a word that you use a lot. It characterises much of what you post.

If you are bored find something interesting to do. Personally, I find going to the gym helps.

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

I looked at some of these....like your crime survey they are misleading....which you put forward as evidence... While police statistics show the realistic reality..

These studies seem to be deliberately ignoring the fact that the immigrant population has been here since the late forties....instead, at least for the UK they seem to be focusing upon recent EU immigration.

Even a layman can use a simple search of the historical crime data and see for themselves. A simple look at the prison population tells the truth......Like here, they talk about immigrants making up only one eighth of the prison population....that's a deliberate disingenuous use of immigrant...ignoring second and third generations, ignoring ethnicity....in fact deliberately doing whatever they can to fit the result they want to show.

I suspect these studies are looking for a result to fit ideology. Like you academics are mostly on the left and they are part of the power structure. They are scared of results that would lead to job loss and abandonment. So like you, they make it work by omission and explanations.

Edited by Stirlingsays (14 Sep 2021 9.36am)

Originally posted by kuge

Ah, this is the 'had enough of experts' position and better the view of the layman.

You dismissed the research papers because they do not look back far enough, but the immigration that Britain experienced in the 17th, 18th, 19th and 20 centuries is not relevant. You say that you are interested in immigration immediately post WWII and then you express concern about immigrants arriving today.

"Like you academics are mostly on the left". Have you been in a university recently or ever? I can assure you that there are plenty of academics from the right. Oxbridge is full of public school educated upper middle class people that vote tory.

Originally posted by kuge

I think that in both cases the questioner was directed towards the data that they were looking for. There is a lot to see there and It would take weeks to read it all.

As regards the information about the Overrepresentation of BAME individuals in prisons. I would suggest that it is very difficult to up pick whether the cause is because these prisoners are immigrants, the children or grandchildren of immigrants or if they have just been let down by governments and society as regards housing, education, etc.

As you say, Lamey says that racism affects the lives of people who experience racism. That sounds like an honest and probable conclusion.

Originally posted by Spiderman

Not having a go at you but that is a very simplistic view. If your ideas came to fruition would you be happy to allow foreign convicted murderers/rapists/ paedos to enter unchecked? Believe me that will happen, as some try to enter now, I have seen them. There are many reasons for certain countries to require a visa, some political, some reciprocal, some for security reasons.

Edited by Spiderman (14 Sep 2021 7.32am)

Originally posted by kuge

Immigration in the past was not tiny.

Perhaps when we look at immigration in the past and numbers it is more useful to look at what percentage of the population they represent. The 50,000 Huguenots that came mainly settled in London and Kent. The population of London in 1715 was about 630,000 and by 1760 it had risen to 750,000 making it the largest city by population in Europe. By 1800 the population was I million.
This rapid growth was mainly a result of immigration from outside the UK and population movement inside the UK. This would suggest that Huguenots were about 7-8% of London’s population and by the time we get to 1800 the number of people with Huguenot ancestry would have been larger still. By the last quarter of the eighteenth century, the black population of London is estimated to have been between 5,000 and 10,000.*

*
[Link]
The above is a fascinating study of London’s population and clearly sets out how it has been diverse and multiethnic for many hundreds of years.
In 1851, over 38 per cent of Londoners were born somewhere else.

As you say the Huguenots were Protestants and that helped them assimilate. It is not clear though that this is the main reason that the Huguenots were welcomed and they thrived. The vast majority of immigrants that came to Britain from Jamaica were also Christians and they and their descendants remain more likely to be regular church attendants than other sectors of the population. Huguenots were in general educated people in possession of skills such as weaving that enabled them to quickly earn a living. Also, their technology was superior to that in Britain at the time.

Perhaps your experience as a school teacher was that you were a lone voice in a socialist enclave. My own experiences of school teachers both in my own education and the education of my daughter have been mixed. For myself, admittedly quite some time ago now, I would say that nearly all my teachers were mainly to the right, although that might be a reflection of the type of school that I attended. As for my experience as a parent, other than the majority of them be very charming I could not really say where their political allegiances lay. My daughter did call her history teacher a fascist when she learnt that he had stood as a UKIP candidate, but I put that down to youthful exuberance (her’s not his).

Edited by kuge (14 Sep 2021 12.20pm)

Originally posted by Ali_Campbell

Maybe, but that could be ironed out with a database check. Not all of the ppl coming over on boats are criminals. The majority just want a better life, I don’t see anything wrong with that. Why should we be a closed shop for ppl willing to come and work hard and pay into the system.

Originally posted by kuge

The thing about racism is you either choose to pretend that it does not exist and that therefore any effect that it might have must also not exist or you take the position that an influx of immigrants will result in racial tension therefore we should curtail all immigration. You appear to want to have it both ways.

As regards Japan I agree that it will be very problematic for Japanese culture to absorb large numbers of people from outside Japan. There is however no other solution if the population is going to remain viable. Without immigration, they become like the Shakers who advocated celibacy and also discourage people from outside joining their society. What happened to them? I think that right now the latter is a likely as the former.

The Japanese have of course plenty of experience of immigration, but mainly as the immigrants. Millions of Japanese left Japan in the 19th and 20th centuries for North and South American and other parts of Asia. There are over 2 million Brazilians with Japanese heritage and 1.5 million in the USA. Also, there are large populations in Peru and the Philippines. The UK has around 66,000 immigrants or people of Japanese descent. Second or third generation Japanese, known as nikkeijin, in the 1980s returned to Japan in large numbers mainly to work in industries such as car making. Although now as industrial production in Japan is declining many have returned to Brazil and Peru where they feel their economic prospects are better.

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

Yawn. It is simple to understand, even for you.

Associating something, easily demonstrable with negative imagery, is a very old trick. It is the only weapon you have to counter reality.

Quote Proponents of the Great Replacement theory often draw on conspiracy theories to amplify
their messaging, suggesting that progressive
politicians, the media and globalists are working
concertedly, actively and purposively to destroy
native Europeans and their culture(s). They often
paint Muslim communities as implicit in these
plans because of the perception that they innately
desire to destroy Western civilisation. Proponents
of the Great Replacement theory frequently overlay
it with anti-Semitic theories, blaming ‘globalist
Jewish elites’ for mass migration."

Quote The Great Replacement theory is inherently
dystopian, emphasising migration as the cause
of downfall and degradation in society, with
governments, tech giants and the media painted
as complicit. This dystopian narrative is conjured
in three key ways by proponents of the Great
Replacement theory:

1. They paint areas with large migrant populations
as degraded, and focus on perceived increases
in crime and violence, urban decay and
economic deprivation in diverse communities.
For example, one vlogger commenting on
ethnic replacement directly referenced a
community cohesion strategy document
produced by Birmingham Council in the UK
to suggest that ethnic minorities actively hurt
the economy of a society: ‘One of the main
issues is that areas where there is a “high
concentration” of ethnic minority groups,
particularly black and Asian communities, have
become more disadvantaged.’30 They often
highlight the culture nurtured by Islamic State
in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) as an exemplar of the
inevitable destiny of societies with large Muslim
populations.

2. They focus on censorship of extreme-right
voices by the government and social media
companies to suggest an Orwellian system
is being created to permanently silence
proponents of the Great Replacement theory.
This concept has previously proved highly
successful in mobilising far-right actors and
demonstrates how proponents of the Great
Replacement theory are able to tap effectively
into other grievances which are held in extremist
communities.

3. They use the cognitive dissonance which
arises around the concept that white people
are actively and willingly involved in their own
destruction to evoke the sense of a mentally ill
society. The recently deceased French journalist
and New Right theorist Guillaume Faye claimed
in a 2015 speech at the white nationalist
National Policy Institute32 that Western
countries are plagued by a ‘mental illness’, which
he labelled ‘ethno-masochism’. According to
him, a combination of pro-abortion, pro-LGBT
and pro-migration policies have led to the
gradual replacement of white people.

Quote

Proponents of the Great Replacement theory stress
the impurity of migrants – in particular from Islamic
countries – as the source of supposed decay of
Europe. They focus on perceived social, cultural
and racial deficiencies of Muslim migrants when
compared with white Europeans. In many instances
they use the perceived degradation of society in
The ‘Great Replacement’: the violent consequences of mainstreamed extremism 13
areas with a diverse population – demonstrated
through the misrepresentation of crime statistics
and economic disparity – to suggest that migrant
communities are directly responsible for this
destruction because of some innate and immutable
difference. Subsequently they use this argument
to suggest explicitly or implicitly that migrant
communities are impure and have a polluting effect
on the host society.