Is the UK more racist than other countries?

john.xs

most people are racist in one form or another or at the least something - ist !

however this country is more accomodating than most others!

wouldnt be the same if we all got on now would it!

dandy-candy

Thanks for all the responses - it's good to know that overall you all feel we are tolerant and the UK is a nice place to live
I am going to avoid even glancing at The Mail and it's s***-stirring headlines from now on!

Wookster

On the topic of immigrants integrating, what exactly do you take this to mean and to what extent?

Denmark for instance has requirements over speaking the language for citizenship, what are your thoughts, is this unreasonable?

lostinrates

Wookster wrote: »

On the topic of immigrants integrating, what exactly do you take this to mean and to what extent?

Denmark for instance has requirements over speaking the language for citizenship, what are your thoughts, is this unreasonable?

No. It is not unreasonable to expect abilty to intigrate. Language is a basic for this. I think to expect total fluency is impossible. But to expect basic written and verbal skills. But again, its a tough line. I wouldn't feel aggreived that, for example, the elderly widowed mother of a fluent integrated acquaitance, couldn't write in English. However, I'd expect the children to be fluent

caveman38

dandy-candy wrote: »

Thanks for all the responses - it's good to know that overall you all feel we are tolerant and the UK is a nice place to live
I am going to avoid even glancing at The Mail and it's s***-stirring headlines from now on!

Not all of us. I will concede that my views on this subject are clearly the minority (of one). At least on this BB.
Enoch, Idi and I shall leave now.

bendix

caveman38 wrote: »

Furthermore ""asians," he said, in front of a sea of beaming black Ugandans, most of whom wore military uniforms, "have kept themselves to themselves and as a community have refused to integrate with Africans. Their main interest has been to exploit the economy. They have been milking our economy for years and now I say to them all - Go!"

Is that not true of most immigrants or are they of some benefit, to which I am unaware.
I am not a BNP thug. I have lived in London for all of my 60 years. In that time I have watched all the E1 -E17 districts change ethnically.
I would just like to be told how I as an Englishman living in England benefit from this mass immigration.
You've had your pop at me, now give me an answer to my question.

For the record, the Indians in Uganda were an incredible driving force for the development of the Ugandan economy, not it's exploitation. How they could be milking an economy which effectively didnt exist without their economic activity is hard to imagine, but let's not go there. I admire your admiration of the admirable Amin.

The history of immigration to the UK is a long one, going back centuries, but to keep it simple, let's focus on the post-war period.

In the period of the 50s and 60s there were severe labour shortages. To counter this, cheap labour in the form of west indian immigrants were actively sought. They did the menial tasks British workers didnt want - driving buses, cleaning factories etc.

The next wave of immigrants from the sub-continent generally spread themselves around the country. While there are certain areas more prone to sub-continent settlement (Southall, Brick Lane, Bradford, Leicester) the dynamics driving this wave was very different. People came to seek their fortunes. The more successful built textile factories which created wealth, jobs and taxes. The less successful opened restaurants and changed and greatly enriched this country's eating habits. Others spread themselves to every town in the country, opening small shops which stayed open long after the English wanted to work. They changed our concepts of service. Their work ethic was completely different.

The last great wave has been the Eastern Europeans who arrived with the expansion of the EU. As has been recorded here many times, most are prepared to work in semi-professional roles for considerably less than their British counterparts, bringing down prices in the process.

You genuinely can't see any benefits in all that?

i8change

There was high unemployment in the 70's, 80's and 90's, so we then got riots in St Pauls, Brixton, Oldham, Bradford etc. Remember PC Blakelocks head being chopped off, that was a first. I could n't list all the mayhem and downside.
But then why would I. Looking at any poll, large scale immigration is unpopular because most people can balance the good and bad an arrive at a judgement, for themselves.

bo_drinker

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dI1XSUpJBqA

caveman38

bendix wrote: »

For the record, the Indians in Uganda were an incredible driving force for the development of the Ugandan economy, not it's exploitation. How they could be milking an economy which effectively didnt exist without their economic activity is hard to imagine, but let's not go there. I admire your admiration of the admirable Amin.

The history of immigration to the UK is a long one, going back centuries, but to keep it simple, let's focus on the post-war period.

In the period of the 50s and 60s there were severe labour shortages. To counter this, cheap labour in the form of west indian immigrants were actively sought. They did the menial tasks British workers didnt want - driving buses, cleaning factories etc.

The next wave of immigrants from the sub-continent generally spread themselves around the country. While there are certain areas more prone to sub-continent settlement (Southall, Brick Lane, Bradford, Leicester) the dynamics driving this wave was very different. People came to seek their fortunes. The more successful built textile factories which created wealth, jobs and taxes. The less successful opened restaurants and changed and greatly enriched this country's eating habits. Others spread themselves to every town in the country, opening small shops which stayed open long after the English wanted to work. They changed our concepts of service. Their work ethic was completely different.

The last great wave has been the Eastern Europeans who arrived with the expansion of the EU. As has been recorded here many times, most are prepared to work in semi-professional roles for considerably less than their British counterparts, bringing down prices in the process.

You genuinely can't see any benefits in all that?

You are very eloquent in your argument and I cannot match it. As I have already said, we are all entiltled to our opinions, both you and I . At least we aren't being rude and insulting (to each other at least)
In response to your points on how we benefit etc.

I imagine Amin was reflecting - like the Black South Africans in SA - that the native Ugandans saw litthle of the wealth that the asians generated.
As you say, we cannot take this argument back to the Saxons and Normans. As as you say the Carribean immigrants in the 50's were a benefit to us - but they were invited.
The asians from the Indian sub continent were as you say originally a hard working culture. They did create new businesses and their shops were open long hours. Alas the Factory / shop owners only employ other asians. A high proportion of asians today are on benefits and the work ethic is no longer an argument. As regarding the shops opening long hours. I managed for the first half of my life wit 9 - 5 M - F shopping hours and could quite easily manage today.
Your last point re. E. Europeans. To my knowledge it is mainly the Poles that bring skills to this country. The Romanians, Bulgarian etc. and the rest that are queing up in Calais - as we speak - are only here for the free ride.

Therefor to conclude. Do I see any benefit to them being here NO.

lostinrates

caveman38 wrote: »

You are very eloquent in your argument and I cannot match it. As I have already said, we are all entiltled to our opinions, both you and I . At least we aren't being rude and insulting (to each other at least)
In response to your points on how we benefit etc.

I imagine Amin was reflecting - like the Black South Africans in SA - that the native Ugandans saw litthle of the wealth that the asians generated.
As you say, we cannot take this argument back to the Saxons and Normans. As as you say the Carribean immigrants in the 50's were a benefit to us - but they were invited.
The asians from the Indian sub continent were as you say originally a hard working culture. They did create new businesses and their shops were open long hours. Alas the Factory / shop owners only employ other asians. A high proportion of asians today are on benefits and the work ethic is no longer an argument. As regarding the shops opening long hours. I managed for the first half of my life wit 9 - 5 M - F shopping hours and could quite easily manage today.
Your last point re. E. Europeans. To my knowledge it is mainly the Poles that bring skills to this country. The Romanians, Bulgarian etc. and the rest that are queing up in Calais - as we speak - are only here for the free ride.

Therefor to conclude. Do I see any benefit to them being here NO.

How far back can we take it and why?

I also think its crucial to differentiate, again, racism and uncontrolled immigration.