Anonymous #1 8w

Sure immigration will always be a 50/50 but my main thing was that people only ever mention people of color or minorities on the facts of why immigration is bad but let it be a white European country like Germans moving to Ireland or The UK nobody would bat an eye they wouldn’t care because ideally they are all the same complexion which is white

10

Anonymous #1 8w

That’s why I said to simply want an all white country means you support immigration just not for people of color

8

Anonymous #1 8w

Would love for you to point me to these studies because everything I’m finding says different

6

Anonymous #2 8w

I haven’t stated a study?

1

Anonymous OP 8w

That’s what the MEDIA always mentions but as someone from a blue collar community ppl have very legitimate concerns about the effects of immigration on their ability to feed their family

-3

Anonymous OP 8w

Meant for #1

6

Anonymous #2 8w

I was explaining my reasoning on what people are saying, people aren’t truly against immigration they are against immigration for minorities? Maybe you didn’t understand my comment right?

4

Anonymous #2 8w

I can explain it in a different way if you need

3

Anonymous #2 8w

OHHH

3

Anonymous #2 8w

LMAOOO

6

Anonymous #2 8w

DISREGARD THEN

6

Anonymous OP 8w

But a lot of people don’t want an “all white country” they just want to make sure their kids have clothes on their back. I agree the current administrations policies are very cruel but there should still be reasonable restrictions

-2

Anonymous #1 8w

Yes and restrictions are totally fine like I said in my post you can want to preserve your culture and want respect for it but those who are not in support for immigrant their main points are always about minorities which is why what they really mean is as long as you are from another white or European nation it’s okay but if you are a person of color we want restrictions and being held at borders and being turned away

5

Anonymous #1 8w

Yes and that’s totally fine there are actually many European countries who put a stricter immigration policy like Poland and Sweden(they had one for years and their minority population is about 1%-2%) and they are thriving but of course they don’t any immigration progressions so they are behind in some things that for example the US probably thrives in

6

Anonymous #1 8w

But they are also aren’t allowing themselves to bond with other cultures which makes them more stuck in a isolated box, for example Asian countries don’t have a black population but when black people started going over there they were shocked another race existed outside of white and that’s the isolation most of these people want

8

Anonymous #1 8w

I think there’s valid labor or social welfare arguments but the anti-immigrant groups always end up being racist so I can’t take them seriously

4

Anonymous #3 8w

That’s what I mean! That’s why I’m saying people who say they are against immigration aren’t really against immigration they are against immigration for minorities or people of color, but let it be another race that’s similarity to them then it’s whatever

1

Anonymous #3 8w

Because yes I agree immigration has its ups and it’s downs nothing is a perfect system

1

Anonymous #1 8w

And also take FIFA for example racism was at an all time high! Paraguay doesn’t have a huge minority population and they treated people of color like shit! But that’s what happens when you isolate yourself from other races or take Argentina for example they are know for racism against people of color it’s sad but they also don’t have a huge minority population so it’s just extreme isolation of other cultures and realities

6

Anonymous #1 8w

If countries would stop seeing immigration as such a terrible thing to the world maybe racism and sexism and other things could slowly become less and less but that’s why European and Asian countries are the most racist compared to the US where we have multiple cultures and we adapt and learn

6

Anonymous OP 8w

I have to say tho all of your comments appear to me as incredibly privileged. These incidental problems matter much less to people who can’t feed their families than job security does

-1

Anonymous OP 8w

Right I’m just saying both sides have idiotic policies. Dems shouldn’t let everyone in and republicans shouldn’t keep everyone out

4

Anonymous #1 8w

Trust me I am definitely not privileged not even in the slightest but you clearly don’t understand the argument? The point of the argument is that people don’t hate immigration they hate minorities immigrating to their country

8

Anonymous #1 8w

If you read previous comments I agree that immigration has its ups and it’s downs and it’s not a perfect system but my point was the racism hope that helps

8

Anonymous #1 8w

Yes but what I was saying was more so that those who claim they are against immigration aren’t truly against it for the reasons they claim it’s always a racism or prejudice factor

6

Anonymous #1 8w

except dem policy isn’t to fucking let everyone in, that’s just what right-wing outrage farm pundits claim dem policy is.

8

Anonymous #6 8w

you’re saying that advocating for the creation or maintenance of a white ethnostate is not racist?

1

Anonymous #5 8w

OP mixes two claims: disliking immigration is racist and wanting an all-white country. People can be anti-immigration without being motivated by race. I assume #1 is talking about simply opposing immigration.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

I’m saying people wanting white countries in historically and traditionally European countries are likely not coming from a hatred of minorities as much as they are coming from a place of mind similar to that of those who wished to preserve the blue macaw.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

You can not want immigration and also not hold that belief too, though.

1

Anonymous #4 8w

#1 says “nah you can want that and not be racist”. OP describes two ‘wants’ and says that one is not inherently racist, but the other is. It would make no sense to begin the statement with no if #1 were referring to wanting cultural preservation.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

framing ecological conservation and the conservation of a particular racial/ethnic makeup is fucking deranged lmao. what a false equivalency.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

I mean that’s what it is though. Why do we preserve the blue macaw? They are just macaws with a different colors. What’s the point? And if want to preserve, why did they have controlled reproduction and not breeding with other macaws, since they are compatible?

1

Anonymous #6 8w

ecological conservation of the blue macaw was the conservation of its particular ethnicity

1

Anonymous #6 8w

ecological conservation exists to prevent species of animal from going extinct. the idea of ethnic makeup preservation within a particular city or country does not preserve/protect a dying population, because white people aren’t being killed en masse to be replaced with poc.

3

Anonymous #6 8w

also, blue macaw is not a fucking ethnicity in any respect, and the scale of the reduction in blue macaw population is incomparable to any human processes, with there being only a single wild blue macaw at one point.

6

Anonymous #5 8w

I’ve seen situations where a village of 160 is overwhelmed by 1000+ immigrants, and considering that they really only have one native homeland. And considering the amount of targeting against British ethnic girls, and decreasing population, it’s not like they’re entirely stable. Also, the blue macaw is not a species, but a group of species/ethnicities which have that similar blue plumage. Like Europeans.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

I was assuming he was talking about disliking immigration but apparently he meant white conservation. So my bad for guessing wrong 😑

1

Anonymous #6 8w

What? Like you can simply dislike immigration without being racist?

1

Anonymous #6 8w

Ethnicity is a term referring to a social/cultural subgroups within the human species. Birds do not have ‘ethnicity’ in any respect resembling humans. Just say you got conned into believing in the great replacement at this point. it’s the only way your argument functions, and it’s demonstrably false.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

Are you saying birds aren’t social? As if they don’t have their own form of communication, not as sophisticated as ours but regardless still present. Also, I literally said nothing about GRT. Just observing what’s going on. You didn’t really disagree with me you just said “it’s not that bad” essentially, so do you have a cutoff point where it would hypothetically get bad enough for you?

1

Anonymous #6 8w

I’m a biologist who actually works in the conservation of endangered fish and you’re so full of shit oh my god

6

Anonymous #3 8w

White people aren’t a fucking separate species and aren’t under threat 💀

5

Anonymous #6 8w

Also these are birds, our version of ethnicity is only scaled down to theirs appropriately. Naturally it doesn’t have as much content.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

I’ve not made a single point stating that anything ‘isn’t that bad’. you’ve offered unsourced anecdotes and reasoning that can only function if GRT is taken as fact. the ‘noticer’ line won’t get you off here. I’m arguing that you’re drawing a completely inapt comparison because ecological preservation based on taxonomy is not comparable to the maintenance of an ethnostate. I also never said that birds weren’t social, but that ethnicity is a much more complicated thing than pigmentation/plumage.

5

Anonymous #3 8w

I never said they were 💀

1

Anonymous #3 8w

i believe that the blue macaw is particularly chosen to make this shitty argument because it is a subset of the macaw species, and can mate with other macaws, but i’m in eng so idk much ecology/taxonomy stuff.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

you implicitly did when you drew comparison to ecological conservation efforts, which are explicitly undertaken when a given population is under threat.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

We do make an effort to conserve separate subspecies or individual endangered populations. I in fact am heavily in favor of the conservation of endangered cultures. The endangered cultures in Europe are threatened by assimilation into the dominant ethnicities of their countries. The dominant ethnicities are not the ones under threat. If anything the only threat immigrants present to a group like the Occitans is that when they assimilate they will adopt the dominant French culture

1

Anonymous #5 8w

Was referring to the first part bro. Also, there is data on demographic decline, inquiry on UK targeted rapes, population shift, etc.

1

Anonymous #3 8w

Frisian or Occitan or Breton or basque culture is not threatened by immigrants. They are threatened by the assimilatory ethnonationalism of their countries which says you must speak French/spanish/Dutch to be an equal citizen of that country.

1

Anonymous #3 8w

oh i was just pointing out that the blue macaw is most likely a cherry-picked example because the majority of other conservation work targets a particular species, and therefore can’t be compared to human populations because humans are one species.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

The immigrants aren’t making the white people not fuck bro. British culture is not endangered.

5

Anonymous #3 8w

fr. having been in the UK (i’m an international student studying there) for the whole world cup, i can assure you British culture is going strong lmao.

1

Anonymous #3 8w

Speaking a particular language is not an endangerment when you have the choice to be bilingual.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

tell that to the welsh, dumbass.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

Right because you would rather have me call white people a different species when they aren’t?

1

Anonymous #6 8w

Languages can be endangered. But if you don’t give a fuck about languages then what are you even fearmongering about? If language, one of the primary markers of distinct culture, doesn’t matter, what could immigrants possibly be threatening?

3

Anonymous #6 8w

I’m pointing out that your argument relies on the acceptability/normality of ecological preservation efforts, to defend something that is not comparable in any respect to the vast majority of ecological preservation work.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

as if the weren’t just tearing down people’s British flags, as though there weren’t towns where a majority don’t even speak the native language, or even adopt the culture.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

I’m not advocating for removing all other languages but one, though? The welsh should speaks Welsh and Irish should speak Gaelic. Since they are in relationship, they’d want to know a language that they both understand.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

I’ve lived in the UK for the past 10 months now, in a city that has been the site of many of the white nationalist riots, and I can assure you basically everybody speaks english here. On the flags, they get torn down because they are used as a symbol of something deeply racist and antithetical to the UK as a nation. Was the swastika a symbol of peace in the 1930s?

1

Anonymous #6 8w

Ah yes all those second and third generation Britons who don’t speak English. Also I thought you said language didn’t matter because people can be bilingual?

4

Anonymous #6 8w

Well britain doesn’t really seem to think the welsh should speak welsh, or at least didn’t act like it for centuries.

3

Anonymous #5 8w

Really comparing the swastika to the British Flag. So if you hang the British flag are you a racist? Did they just adopt that flag with Starmer or? Do you mean the riots where people protest or are you talking about the stuff similar to some of the Irish response to a man getting mutilated. Funny you say white nationalist riots, they definitely gained popularity after the various displays of systemic injustice, unless it’s wrong to point that out.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

God dammit I was hoping it would have died out by now fucking beans and toast my ass

1

Anonymous #6 8w

It’s an illustration of how the meaning of a symbol can change, and how a symbol can be co opted by hate groups. Hanging the british flag is not inherently racist, but some hang it to signal their support for a racist, xenophobic movement. nuance is a fact of life, my friend.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

Bro’s describing racial pogroms as “responses to systemic injustice” fucking chud

1

Anonymous #6 8w

it’s so interesting how conservatives used to shit on any mention of ‘systemic injustice’ when it was directed towards poc, but will now happily use the term.

5

Anonymous #3 8w

That’s not what I said. I said you can use the language you want but you should prioritize the one native to the country. Also, that would be something to work through after the flood recedes.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

Funny how the nationalist Brits you parrot from coincidentally also hate Irish, Scots, and welsh culture.

4

Anonymous #5 8w

Because in the Nowak case there actually is policy explicit material that directly influenced how that arrest was carried out and resulted in death. And the mutilations, rape, could be mitigated had not the ruling administration for the last decades not done what they had done

1

Anonymous #6 8w

brother, you need to look into what the british empire did to the welsh people and their language. Wales was independent, had their own language, and had self governing kingdoms and princedoms with their own laws, before the british colonized them and attempted to exterminate the welsh language.

3

Anonymous #6 8w

Oh you care about learning native languages? How are your Cherokee lessons going?

4

Anonymous #6 8w

oh shut the fuck up about Nowak. That case had fuckall to do with race and there was nothing that could have been done for the guy. It’s incredibly sad, and he did not deserve death in any respect, but the wound was mortal. Also, before you start he wasn’t killed with a Kirpan.

1

Anonymous #3 8w

Funny because that doesn’t happen

1

Anonymous #5 8w

That has no bearings on the situation now. I did say blue macaw and not some blue macaw now did I?

1

Anonymous #6 8w

i’m sorry is your contention that welsh people do not have an ethnicity distinct from the british? because they’re both largely white populations?

1

Anonymous #5 8w

Yes it literally did. Explicit policy gave police to be skeptical about the word of the white man. That wound may not have been mortal, had he not be dragged around and opened further, so says actual medical experts. They could’ve taken care of the guy instead of calling him a liar for saying he can’t breathe. We all saw the footage. Was the race and religious targeting of ethnic British girls not racial when the system helped them be groomed and taken?

1

Anonymous #5 8w

My contention is that they have a common concern now, not issues of the past which are irrelevant.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

if it wasn’t racial Labour would have never conceded to calling the policy ambiguous and in need of rephrasing

1

Anonymous #6 8w

dude the welsh language is effectively endangered as a direct result of british colonialism and imperialism. you claim to care about the preservation of white ethnicities, do the welsh not count to you? or does preservation of ethnicity only matter to you when it justifies racism and xenophobia?

6

Anonymous #6 8w

Nowak died because of internal bleeding. how on earth are law enforcement supposed to detect internal bleeding? it’s fucking internal.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

No one is preventing you from learning Welsh and helping out. I’m literally just saying, they are all under the same concern now. They have been for a while. Thats like saying they should keep having a tantrum on the beach while the tsunami comes.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

except the tsunami doesn’t fucking exist.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

Well they could have believed him, and they could’ve not dragged him. Their policy was still racist. How would you like where he was and be told that he’s a liar and be cuffed up instead of examined until it’s too late. That whole situation wouldn’t have happened had the policy that allowed Digwa to abuse the system not existed, although it seems the system worked just fine then didn’t it?

1

Anonymous #3 8w

whataboutism.

0

Anonymous #5 8w

except it does and I already explained how

1

Anonymous #6 8w

Digwa was sentenced to prison time for murdering Nowak. I’m literally a student at the University of Southampton. Nowak’s parents and family have condemned racial agitation related to their son’s murder. Sincerely, stop trying to spew bullshit about a tragedy that has affected my university and community. The narrative that has been pushed about this tragedy by Farage and reform is extremely misleading, and a single anecdote doesn’t make a tsunami. Fuck off, racist.

3

Anonymous #6 8w

except you haven’t offered anything beyond cherry-picked anecdotes and unsourced stories.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

No no you don’t get it #6 only cares about language preservation when it’s the least endangered language in the world that everybody is learning

1

Anonymous #5 8w

There have been literally more cases. Digwa getting sentenced does not mean it didn’t happen. As if there haven’t been police testimonials about how the fear of racism inhibited their ability to act fairly

1

Anonymous #6 8w

i never said it didn’t happen. It was an unjustifiable killing. There were also police testimonials saying that Derek Chauvin acted justly.

1

Anonymous #3 8w

Like how you tried to derail the entire conversation about European problems particularly with UK and make it like culture is only language. You can’t undo four hundred years, but can undo forty if the process is still ongoing. That’s the difference.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

like if your argument hinges on fucking police officers being reliable narrators of their own internal monologue and reasoning, it’s a stupid fucking argument. Cops lie frequently, and have a particular agenda w/r/t race.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

So literally what culture is endangered then.

3

Anonymous #3 8w

the endangered culture is white nationalism

1

Anonymous #5 8w

That is dissimilar from testimony about the greater complications of a system. And video evidence will ultimately show the errors

1

Anonymous #5 8w

These are former police, not police. No one is perfectly reliable either, but if you trust no one you essentially cut yourself off from reality

1

Anonymous #6 8w

Testimony is an extremely unreliable source for systemic analysis.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

The oppressed white people in the UK 💀 God if only you fucks cared about real systemic injustice. But no it only matters when you can play white people as the underdogs

3

Anonymous #6 8w

oh wow, because they retired from policing their word is suddenly reliable? Information can exist through other forms than direct testimony. Statistical analysis, for example allows us much more insight into the direct effects of policy than personal opinion about cause and effect.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

How the fuck did telegram messages convince you fucks that white Englishmen are being hunted for sport

3

Anonymous #3 8w

motivated reasoning is a powerful thing…

1

Anonymous #5 8w

that’s an ideology, not a culture. Gee I wonder what happens when an island nation receives a constant stream of individuals whose cultures conflict either morally or ethically and, having generally a higher population, express their cultures while the native one is put on back burn because diversity and hospitality and trust. Sound familiar?

1

Anonymous #5 8w

So if a large number of people experience similar things rooting from similar causes in relationship to a system, that means nothing?

1

Anonymous #6 8w

i mean it seems to be your culture lmao. you’re just making up scenarios in your head that aren’t happening, and then getting outraged at them.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

you would know

1

Anonymous #6 8w

your argument here relies on the person experiencing these things to accurately determine the root cause, which is notoriously difficult with systemic effects. Testimony is great insight into what’s happening factually speaking, it’s piss poor for determining why on a systemic level.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

like why social care workers will directly lead a young girl into a car full of strangers that groom her with cigarettes and gifts and then use her? Or why healthcare workers will send them away with birth control when they have obvious abuse injuries. Or how the leading party had access to what was happening and still did nothing? Again look at the inquiry report and read through those testimonies, there is section on Islam and possible motivations.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

more unsourced anecdotes lmao. i don’t give a single shit about what labor does, they also suck ass.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/6810978a41bbc42489eafa81/t/6a314bb1151e511944bd4421/1781615537601/The+Rape+Gang+Inquiry+Report.pdf

1

Anonymous #6 8w

fucking squarespace link LMAO

1

Anonymous #6 8w

https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/the-impact-of-migration-on-uk-population-growth/

1

Anonymous #6 8w

https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/uk-population-by-ethnicity/national-and-regional-populations/population-of-england-and-wales/latest/

1

Anonymous #6 8w

so that’s a study about growth. To date roughly 19% of the UK’s population are immigrants. The UK is a nation of ~69M people, and the largest annual growth attributable to migration was ~1M. there is no threat of mass replacement.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

that source says that as of 2021 the UK was 81.7% white.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

more than that, and there was decrease in native population. The data from years ago, projections do not show it halting

1

Anonymous #5 8w

you missed the part when it lowered by almost 8%

1

Anonymous #6 8w

so? That’s still an overwhelming majority. also, 4.3 percentage points (86-81.7) is far from ‘almost 8 percent’ lmao

1

Anonymous #6 8w

They could be 2/3s the population sooner

1

Anonymous #5 8w

the other source has them go down from that to 74%

1

Anonymous #6 8w

Do you think that the 8% drop was white people disappearing

1

Anonymous #6 8w

I can’t find that data in the oxford source, and I don’t give much (if any) credence to a document hosted on squarespace by someone who couldn’t even buy a domain.

1

Anonymous #3 8w

the decrease of reproduction versus the opposite would result in that. They are below the line, like 1.54

0

Anonymous #5 8w

so in other words you don’t contend with the citations of statistical data and other testimonies because you don’t trust square space, even though that has nothing to do with whether or not the data is actually false, that’s just the assumption.

0

Anonymous #6 8w

you realize i can’t copy links from this app, and that the provenance of a source is relevant to its reliability? anybody can host a file on squarespace.

-1

Anonymous #6 8w

like the other two sources you gave are the UK government, and Oxford. I’ll happily trust that those are reliable sources, at least to a point. Some pdf hosted on squarespace with a random string of numbers and letters as the url, not so much.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

well you can only know for sure by looking at it. Also, you seemed to get the other sources pretty easily so this shouldn’t be difficult. I literally just looked up the title and found the square space link. Provenance doesn’t matter as long as what is being said is supported which there are citations. That’s the difference between judging the contents as opposed to the appearance. The citations are from what you would consider higher provenance anyways.

0

Anonymous #6 8w

so you just have a slippery slope argument and don’t want to institute any policy that would help raise birth rates? like are you shocked that people don’t really want to have kids in the midst of a cost of living crisis caused by worldwide economic struggles?

1

Anonymous #5 8w

It’s not really a slippery slope the decrease is real, I never said the native population was decreasing because of immigrants, I was saying that the increase of one and the decrease of other are happening at the time. They could be related, but that’s not an argument I even made.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

provenance absolutely fucking matters, unless you are manually checking every single reference in the document. When I read a document on a .gov.uk site, I probably don’t need to verify that the citations actually support the claims being attributed to them, because the official government sources are reliable. There’s nothing stopping me from putting a citation to that demographic data in a paper, and then claiming that the white population has increased, even though that would be false.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

if you don’t believe that one is the cause of the other, why are the immigrants being targeted by policy efforts?

1

Anonymous #5 8w

you wont know unless you see. Also, “since government said so therefore no need to check” is really not going to work out well. You wouldn’t trust everything published by the US government or the Chinese government, or heaven forbid North Korean government would you?

0

Anonymous #5 8w

because that has to do with the cultural crisis and the many government corruptions going on as I’ve espoused. It’s not like immigrants are intentionally decreasing some other population, that’s just what policy has led to. It would be more so that a non-integrating population would be overpowering a native one, which would project to happen, just not now, unless there are greater privileges given to them than to native, which offsets that.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

immigration is a net economic benefit and has been shown to be one in study after study.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

if it has to do with behavior and culture that is something that must be fixed. You shouldn’t rely on foreigners for your economy, that’s unhealthy. Also, economics is really a small part of an entire country. Without an identity, it would all mean nothing. So, have you decided to dip your toe and falsify the square space document?

1

Anonymous #6 8w

what do immigrants provide economically that can’t be provided by native British?

1

Anonymous #6 8w

do you realize how much worse the UK’s economy would be without immigration? The economic state of a nation is not a fucking ‘small part of an entire country’ it is a major determining factor of the day to day experience of a country’s citizens and near-directly dictates cost of living and affordability.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

it’s not about individual tasks or skills, it’s about numbers, you dipshit. If you offer visas to highly skilled workers from other countries you can increase the total number of highly skilled workers within the country, which increases GDP and GDP per capita, which leads to a stronger economy. The argument is not that Britain has some massive need that can’t be met with domestic labor, but that the inclusion of immigrants in the labor force results in more prosperity than purely domestic labor

1

Anonymous #5 8w

So you’re seriously using “they make us more money”? What if they automated? The economy isn’t particularly exceptional. And since there is a majority of native population as of now, there’s more than enough domestic workforce to learn and be incentivized to get into some work. Sure they might take a hit now, but it’s not impossible to recover. Won’t be as hard a hit as the US South. That’s not a very secure economy if it relies on the exporting countries to continue.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

Even so they do not automatically have any interest in the country itself besides to make money or to use provided funds and housing at the expense of natives

1

Anonymous #6 8w

And people born in the country automatically have that?

1

Anonymous #6 8w

argument from incredulity. it’s a demonstrated economic fact that immigration is a net benefit to the economy and results in increased economic output.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

why do you think the world is a zero-sum game?

1

Anonymous #5 8w

wdym?

1

Anonymous #5 8w

what is wrong with demographic security for the natives of those islands who have existed in their ancestral homeland for thousands of years?

1

Anonymous #6 8w

there is no significant threat to demographic security in britain. I don’t have a problem with the occurrence of demographic security, it’s the racist and xenophobic policies and actions that demographic security is being used as justification for, despite it not being under genuine threat.

1

Anonymous #4 8w

Sorry I’m taking summer classes and I work so I’ve been busy but yes #5 basically summed up what I was talking about I’m not saying that there is anything wrong with not liking immigration because it’s not perfect but the majority of peoples arguments tend to be more race based on immigration which is why I say they hate immigration for minorities not other Europeans or white people.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

And no you can’t! You are extremely prejudice and racist #6 just from reading your responses maybe learn some decency

1

Anonymous OP 8w

lol I’m not racist or prejudiced? Try to take some time and actually explain what the problem is instead of pulling the notes from your political reductionist fun bag.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

You’re literally advocating for the maintenance of a white ethnostate.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

But you are! You are literally what I meant by you want an all white country!

1

Anonymous #6 8w

People are proving you wrong like #5 and #3 I don’t know what else to say to you that will click

1

Anonymous #6 8w

Why has every argument against it been that it isn’t happening, or to call attention to completely different matters, or to accept that it is happening but justify it with “oh but the British were colonizers” or some historical action as if that justifies what is essentially colonization?

1

Anonymous OP 8w

maybe because I’m not wrong? I never asked for an all-white country, I asked for one where they aren’t racially or religiously targeted, and where they, the natives, can have power over their own ancestral homeland?

1

Anonymous #6 8w

Immigration isn’t a terrible thing it literally helps economies and genuinely the US gets a bad rep but they deal with immigration and diversity very well vs Asian countries and European counties! Europe is in a crisis because 1. They don’t know how to take on diversity they don’t know how to handle or make laws that are needed for people of color 2. They want progression but also want to keep to themselves! Which the UK is good for branching out but they don’t know how

1

Anonymous #6 8w

Nobody is dismissing anything but the British heritage and the British history isn’t going anywhere😭 literally British people are still having babies and their birth rate is on a incline compared to the US so I believe the UK will be alright a whole civilization isn’t going to disappear because of immigration if that was the case then the US should be a shit show and everyone should close their borders

1

Anonymous OP 8w

Wdym by the sources I found they are below the rebound line. It’s like 1.5 babies per couple; that’s really bad. Perhaps I didn’t explain a whole lot more, but some of the policies of the UK government also flat out suppress aspects of the native culture as expense for incoming ones, and that also is impactful.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

Like I said it’s fine to be against immigration that’s your own opinion, but most immigration arguments are always and always about how they should preserve white nationalism and stricter border laws for minorities! Which is racism, it’s one thing to be worried about how it effects jobs and money, and travel and etc but it’s always usually about race because if an Irish person moved to the UK it’s fine but let a Nigerian and it’s hell

1

Anonymous #6 8w

I said they are better than the US birth rate but look at my last comment on the reasons why the UK is struggling a lot of European and Asian countries don’t know how to make laws or policies for minorities or people of color because they don’t know how to deal with those types of struggles which is why their government is a bit in shambles but that doesn’t excuse that immigration is good because it’s a good thing it’s progression and evolution

1

Anonymous #6 8w

For example, British and St. George’s flags are regularly taken down. In fact their own St. George’s day itself was essential cancelled which is an important holiday for them. Their system seems also to be less lenient towards natives than others, and there have been instances such as Anne Boleyn and Sir Isaac Newton, historical heritage, who were appropriated to a different race (African) unapologetically by their film industry.

0

Anonymous #6 8w

What the fuck are you talking about 💀

5

Anonymous #6 8w

Compare Sweden who’s majority of the population is white(Swedish) who’s immigration policy is strict and barely lets anyone move there unless you have European or Swedish ancestry vs the US where we have multiple cultures and laws that protect people to color and minorities and we are a melting pot! There are things the Swedish do better than the US but then there are things the US does better than the Swedish because we have that diversity factor behind us which comes from immigration

1

Anonymous #3 8w

Guys in the WOKE USA they are trying to turn all the presidents BLACK. My source? Hamilton.

6

Anonymous OP 8w

Immigration can be not bad if it is actually handled well, and sometimes there’s reasons not to. This voyage for progress often leads others in the dust, as if the undefined ends justify the constant means

1

Anonymous #6 8w

And you haven’t fucking demonstrated that british people are racially or religiously targeted, or that there’s any indication they will have power over their homeland taken from them. jesus fucking christ man.

5

Anonymous OP 8w

Does bro think Sweden tests how white immigrants are?

4

Anonymous #3 8w

I’m telling you they just let everything go in one ear and out the other 🤷‍♀️ because I just explained like 20 times why the UK struggles but also why immigration isn’t the end of the world but clearly he is the reason why I say those who are against immigration are against minorities immigration

1

Anonymous #5 8w

I did and you refused to read the source for it that I gave you because “muh government is always right”.

0

Anonymous #6 8w

it was hosted on fucking squarespace, you fucking dolt, and both of your other sources weren’t dispositive at all.

1

Anonymous OP 8w

The Irish are literally part of the same lineage and on the same group of islands. That’s different from if all of a sudden ten million Greeks start coming in

1

Anonymous #3 8w

LMAOOO STOP I DIDNT EVEN THINK HAMILTON THATS A GOOD ONE OMGGG

1

Anonymous #6 8w

If you have that report from a reputable source, like idk whoever commissioned the inquiry? I’d be happy to take a look.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

because you refuse to confirm the 200+ page documentation produced by actual MPs within government agency that I sent you and then you act like I never gave you a source for it. It’s actually dishonest

1

Anonymous #6 8w

You are just ignorant because I just again explained the reasons why the UK is struggling because they clearly don’t know how to create laws or policies for minorities yet you keep going back and forth without acknowledgment that you understand my side? So you are prejudice against minorities because that’s been your whole argument that you want to persevere white nationalism and that’s cool but clearly countries don’t believe in that because they still let immigration happen

1

Anonymous OP 8w

Literally how am I prejudiced? I don’t see people as less than on the basis of skin tone? I understand where you come from but UK clearly has failed and it has backfired on ordinary people who aren’t “the struggling class”. What is your solution then, that would be best?

1

Anonymous #6 8w

Yet you didn’t deny that if a Nigerian man came in it would be hell so you just proved my point

1

Anonymous OP 8w

A Nigerian coming in wouldn’t be hell. Ten thousand coming in to a village of one thousand, without vet and with no desire to capitulate with the hosting people would be. And that wouldn’t be very natural for immigration in the first place.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

The Irish had a pretty damn different culture than the English before England colonized them. Also you keep bringing up “lineage” and we all know that’s sus as fuck. Also I don’t see you freaking out about all the Polish immigrants to the UK.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

do you have any evidence or proof that this happens/is happening?

1

Anonymous #3 8w

That’s because I wasn’t aware of the Polish. Tell me then, how many and what is the general behavior in terms of integration and culture?

1

Anonymous #5 8w

for what? For some reason all the comments are mixed up and out of order, so I can’t tell what you are referring to lol?

1

Anonymous #6 8w

You’re talking about a group of migrants 6-10 times the population of a village being dropped into the village over a short period of time. Do you have a proof or evidence that has actually happened or happens regularly in the UK?

1

Anonymous #6 8w

There’s no objective shit about “general behavior in terms of integration and culture” or whatever but there’s a hell of a lot more poles than most of the other groups you’re freaking out about

3

Anonymous #5 8w

That was a hypothetical in response to the hypothetical about the one Nigerian. I was just showing how the problem would occur and how it isn’t just an argument of one Nigerien = raise hell. Here is a real example of a surplus, though not as extreme https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/2034319/irish-village-arms-migrants-being/amp and look up the small county of Lisdoonvarna and how they took up Ukrainians

1

Anonymous #6 8w

No you also made a similar claim earlier about 1,000 migrants in a village of 160.

1

Anonymous #3 8w

The Poles aren’t the ones greatly responsible for the multi-county child trafficking ring in the UK, though.

0

Anonymous #6 8w

How many immigrants are in the UK, and how many were involved in that trafficking ring?

1

Anonymous #5 8w

You can figure that out in that inquiry I sent you. I already gave you the resources to answer those questions or to come back and show how they are false.

0

Anonymous #6 8w

No, you’re making affirmative claims, which means you must substantiate them.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

moreover, a single isolated instance of a town taking in refugees of an acute conflict isn’t really the point you think it is against immigration.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

I did, but you refused to look at the source I sent you to substantiate those claims about the trafficking.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

I just gave you two. Now those are the only ones I found actually reported on, which is different from say smaller areas within cities, for example.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

even if i were to concede the trafficking ring exists, which I generally believe it does, you still haven’t completed the logic on why that justifies racism, and why it’s dispositive/probative about all muslims.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

Anecdotal evidence detected. you are affirmatively claiming that small communities are regularly being overwhelmed by immigrants. substantiate the claim or it is false.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

I never said any sort of racism. Look at Brent, Westminster, Kensington and Chelsea, and Newham which have a majority non-native population, most of those are Middle East population, and also all in London which is a hub for the trafficking, which you would know about if you actually contended with the source I gave you. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/6810978a41bbc42489eafa81/t/6a314bb1151e511944bd4421/1781615537601/The+Rape+Gang+Inquiry+Report.pdf

1

Anonymous #6 8w

Please explain why having people from the middle east in the country is bad.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

because that’s your contention

1

Anonymous #6 8w

That would be Prince Andrew. I guess his family is technically German.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

read the inquiry, I’m not breaking down 200+ pages for you. Did you know that blond hair is seen as belonging to witches in Islam, and how their age of consent and treatment of women works, especially non-Muslims and how that conflicts with European ideals. If you won’t contend with the source I give you, that you ask for and then deny I did, I have no choice but to believe you acting in bad faith. There is a whole Islam section. Go to page 116.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

All statistical data surrounding people is built on a collection of anecdotal data. It’s not my fault that there aren’t 1 million small villages for you. Again read the source I won’t provide a third time

1

Anonymous #6 8w

do you know that not all the content in the quran is representative of modern islam?

1

Anonymous #5 8w

Clearly it still happens in modern day. Did you look at the source I sent you?

1

Anonymous #6 8w

thats not what statistical data is you dumbass. anecdotal data is unreliable because it has an extremely small sample size. when you sample a large sample population that addresses the issue. this fact does not make anecdotal evidence meaningful.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

There aren’t 1 million small villages. There aren’t 1 million counties in London. Also, there are statistics in the source I provided you. But you wouldn’t know that because you refuse to read it.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

where did the number 1 million come from? anecdotal evidence is categorically meaningless.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

Thats just completely wrong lmao. What makes a statistical sample in error is based on its sample size in relation to the total population of its sampled population, not just flatly the size of the sample. Also, if by policy such cases that I provided do happen, it can apply to any small town or county. And when you think that way, it changes a lot.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

slippery slope fallacy, and I know what a statistical sample is.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

clearly you don’t, and if you won’t look at the source, I would have to assume that you’ve either refused because you know it is damning or you did read it and it is damning. Only the guilty run remember?

1

Anonymous #6 8w

You still have to contend with whether or not the government is okay to overpower whole populations, until they only have half or less the population in their own towns.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

the government should overwhelm racist populations. no government should be obligated to honor or enforce a discriminatory preference

1

Anonymous #6 8w

there is no fundamental right to determine your neighbors through exclusion. you’re owed a legal right to move elsewhere at your own expense, which you are granted.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

You are the racist. You are the colonist. You are the problem. What right does a native have to be overwhelmed by people who are not willing to respect the host, and who strip power. You say “move” but then where will they go, somewhere else where they are alien in their own land? If you support this you support the colonization of the New World, because it is the same thing. They did move away, you know, but eventually there was no where to go.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

A people has a fundamental right to their nation and to their home. A people has a fundamental right to say who stays and who goes. This is necessary for all countries.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

You just think they are racist because they are white, and not because they are being occupied without permission. You blame the victims. The fact that you won’t even contend with the most damning piece of evidence for the ongoing issue is proof that you have no problem with it.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

Have you been to the UK, dude?

1

Anonymous #6 8w

that is not what occupation means lmao.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

read the source or block me. What you see is just as much an anecdote as you accuse me of providing. Lots of people see differently. Some things can’t be misinterpreted without malice, like the stories of victims that you refuse to acknowledge.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

read the inquiry or block me

1

Anonymous #6 8w

The UK government controls the lives of people who populations are forced upon by force. That is occupation.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

it’s literally not, definitionally.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

not according to Merriam Webster

1

Anonymous #5 8w

Cambridge too

1

Anonymous #6 8w

brother my screenshot is from marian webster and has a different definition two. try again, dumbass.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

*merriam

1

Anonymous #6 8w

that refers to a foreign power, you’re moving the goalposts by switching to a different definition

1

Anonymous #5 8w

No it doesn’t. It says army OR group of people.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

you said merriam webster and i gave you a fucking screenshot of merriam webster and it disagrees with you so you’re moving the goalposts

1

Anonymous #5 8w

So did I. I also gave you a screenshot of merriam Webster

1

Anonymous #6 8w

Also, when you gonna read that inquiry. Are you just moving goalposts and diverting to ignore it?

1

Anonymous #6 8w

i told you I’d read it if you can share it from a reliable source, and you haven’t provided one. if it was an official government report, it will be on a government website. i have no clue whether that an authentic copy of the inquiry report, this is scummy ass reform shit.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

If it was released on a government site it would not change the contents. And it is listed in the government site, it’s just pay to open or waiting for arrival. The MP who co-authored decided to share it with everyone in a square space link on X. And don’t worry, it’s not Reform.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

Here you go. Let me know what goalpost you want to move to next https://edm.parliament.uk/early-day-motion/66091/independent-rape-gang-inquiry-report

1

Anonymous #6 8w

dude that’s a bunch of restore (further right splinter of reform) chuds conducting their own private inquiry completely separate from the official parliamentary inquiry

1

Anonymous #5 8w

Right so now it’s a government website but you don’t want it. Okay bro, just say you can’t contend.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

It’s obvious you aren’t actually in good faith btw, but just know that it doesn’t absolve you

1

Anonymous #6 8w

thats just fucking political spin and racism LMAO

1

Anonymous #5 8w

prove it

1

Anonymous #6 8w

brother you said it involved 200MPs, it was fucking 8 on the early day motion you linked

1

Anonymous #5 8w

I never said it involved 200 MPs, I said it was over 200 pages lol 💀

1

Anonymous #6 8w

right and the co-author gave a link to it which is what I sent you

1

Anonymous #6 8w

it’s a report published by a far right MP, who has a political bias fundamentally.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

Let me know when you have gone through it.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

okay, so does every MP have a fundamental political bias. Thats why they are for Labour or Reform or Restore. You have to show that either the data citations are wrong or the analysis are wrong, or that they are misconstrued.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

truth is truth no matter who says it buddy

1

Anonymous #5 8w

#5 I don’t even think it’s worth fighting anymore 😭 #6 is just ignorant and proves my post right they won’t listen to reason and admit faults and truly believe in the UK British heritage! Genuinely they should move to the UK and run for government so they can fix the white nationalism 😭

1

Anonymous #6 8w

the many of the quantitative claims are completely unverified, in any public records. the testimony is real, but most of the statistical and quantitative stuff is just claims.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

like what?

1

Anonymous #6 8w

my bad, I genuinely misread the 200 mps thing. But also the report determined if people were muslim or not based on whether they had muslim sounding names. jesus christ y’all never have facts or data on your side 😂😂😂😂

1

Anonymous OP 8w

ignorant of what?

1

Anonymous #5 8w

I mean if it’s consistent…

1

Anonymous #6 8w

no, thats fucking profiling

1

Anonymous #5 8w

See it’s not even worth it 😭 I knew #6 true colors would show

1

Anonymous #5 8w

what page?

1

Anonymous OP 8w

because people who are from a region or culture are likely to select names from their region or culture?

1

Anonymous #6 8w

or rather last names have region etymology

1

Anonymous OP 8w

I can see your argument against that method. But if we are talking specifically accuracy, we can compare its results with other demographic studies in the same timeframe

1

Anonymous #6 8w

no, it indicates a clear bias that casts doubt on the rest of the report.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

slippery slope

1

Anonymous #6 8w

that is not slippery slope. slippery slope is about a chain of events, “if we x then y, which will cause z” and it’s only a fallacy when the causal link can’t be justified. This is a reasonable inference about the intention and credibility of the authors based on the bias demonstrated. It doesn’t cover everything, the survivor testimonials are still credible, but the conclusions about Islam are void because the way Islam was identified was flawed.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

But see you’ve been incorrect. The Islam section has nothing to do with population, and everything to do with Islam as a motivation for the actions committed.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

If the some or all of the perpetrators weren’t actually muslims, and were Sikhs, say, that would make the Islam section irrelevant. We do not know what proportion of the perpetrators were muslims because the methodology used to determine if people were muslims was flawed.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

like if I put a report together documenting a bunch of crimes committed by christians and atheists, and then write a section about how the teachings of islam could have inspired it, that would be fucking stupid.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

right but the report states that an overwhelming 87% of those responsible do the trafficking were Pakistani Muslims. It follows that their behavior can be traced to their culture and those things that they are normalized to or believe is correct. Testimonies suggest Muslim influence, and Islam section shows where specifically it can come from.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

but the classification of muslim to generate that fucking number is biased and unreliable, how can you not fucking grasp this

1

Anonymous #5 8w

wdym? If you come from a Muslim country, you might be Muslim, and again testimonies and Islamic text corroborate. Obviously you don’t automatically assume Muslim, until further data which is what I just mentioned. Did you read the testimonies?

1

Anonymous #6 8w

brother do you realize how many logical leaps you’re making there holy fuck

1

Anonymous #5 8w

care to elaborate? These are just answers to the questions of “why does this particular demographic from this region contribute this much to trafficking? (87% Pakistani) What are the actions being taken (racial/religious targeting) and why? (possible Islamic motivations through testimony of words given by actual traffickers)”

1

Anonymous #6 8w

It’s circular reasoning dumbass. you determine that all these people are muslim based on their names, then look for an explanation of why islam explains the behavior, and then that’s evidence that they’re muslim. it’s the dog wagging the tail, and a bunch of confirmation bias. jesus fucking christ you’re dense.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

You act as if using names is inconsistent. And there’s nothing illogical to raise questions when a pattern emerges in both the victim and victimizers. Nobody is using “Islam explains behavior” to self-justify that they are Muslim. It’s already predetermined before that they are Muslim. I have no idea where you are mixing all of this up lol. I mean if you come from a Muslim-ruled region and your name is of Islamic origin…. They obviously didn’t use names to determine Pakistani demographics.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

Pg 109 really shows where you mischaracterized because they still aren’t going off of names alone, and not one source either. Keyword heritage, keyword background.

1

Anonymous #6 8w

*106

1

Anonymous #6 8w

You’re actually dense. I’m talking about the investigative process and how this compromises the integrity of the report. You cannot justify using an unreliable method to ‘detect’ muslims, based on the explanation for Islam as the cause, which relies on the proportion of muslim perpetrators.

1

Anonymous #5 8w

when I literally just told you they didn’t use only that, and you have yet to show how it is “unreliable”, and they are literally not even using self-justification like you say

1

Anonymous #6 8w

IT INFORMS THE WHOLE PROCESS OF THE REPORT WHEN YOU HAVE A PREEXISTING NOTION OF WHO IS RESPONSIBLE YOU FUCKING IDIOT

1

Anonymous #5 8w

Pg 107 literally expresses their use of a wide range of data

1

Anonymous #6 8w

I mean sorry that the array of data and testimony help each other out. Obviously if you are making such an argument you would want to use a range of data types. The demographic data shows the implicated demographic, the testimony shows the specific patterns and witnesses to such events, the rest gets into offending patterns and possible suggestions as to why using what was established in the data before. Pretty straight

1

Anonymous #6 8w

brother it’s racist theorycrafting based on interpreting the worst lines of the quran as if every line of every religious text is taken to heart by all practitioners

1

Anonymous #5 8w

It never said “all Muslims”, it’s specifically addressing the cases of what is going on in the UK. Theorycrafting but forget the testimonies about being called kafar or being taken to other countries to be subjected to Muslim matrimony, and literally everything else. I really don’t care what you call it. If it’s true it’s true 🤷

1