We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
UKIP .... the BNP for softies...
Comments
-
Labour are far more racist than even the BNP.
That's complete and utter garbage.Black/asian only shortlists? If that isnt racist, what is!
I agree that black / asian / women only shortlists are maybe not the direction to take. But calling it a racist gesture is completely stupid. If you have a community that has a high percentage of people from a certain race or background it makes sense that they are represented by some people from their background / race. I personally don't think that clumsy, regemented shortlists are they way to go to achieve this, but to call it 'more racist than the BNP' is not correct.0 -
That's complete and utter garbage.
I agree that black / asian / women only shortlists are maybe not the direction to take. But calling it a racist gesture is completely stupid. If you have a community that has a high percentage of people from a certain race or background it makes sense that they are represented by some people from their background / race. I personally don't think that clumsy, regemented shortlists are they way to go to achieve this, but to call it 'more racist than the BNP' is not correct.
What a load of tosh.
You'd be up in arms is there were 'white only' shortlists.
Stop being a racist and move forward.0 -
Hang on a second.
Labour are far more racist than even the BNP. The difference is that labour have been allowed to use their policies of employment on basis of race, while the BNP have (and hopefully never will) any real power.
Black/asian only shortlists? If that isnt racist, what is!
Please let us know which constituencies have Labour imposed "black/asian only" shortlists.
Black or asian only shortlists would be currently against the law.
"Labour are far more racist than even the BNP"
Oh dear.US housing: it's not a bubble
Moneyweek, December 20050 -
kennyboy66 wrote: »Please let us know which constituencies have Labour imposed "black/asian only" shortlists.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=labour+black+shortlist
enjoy
Even a bit of sexism in there too.0 -
What a load of tosh.
You'd be up in arms is there were 'white only' shortlists.
Okay, let's take this slowly. There's a fictional African town with a population of 10,000 people which has no white people living there. The local parliament / council is made up entirely of black, African people. That makes sense to me.
A British company moves to the area with 500 employees. Over the next twenty years more and more British people move to the area, meaning that the diversity of the place changes. The population is now 70% black, African and 30% white, British. Because of this there are British shops, British businesses and local community that sees itself as British, but living happily in Africa. There's a great deal of mixed culture as well. If the local councils / parliament is still entirely made up of black, african people and I were a British person living in the area I would expect my leaders to reflect my background. I.e. I would be calling for more white people on the board of my local council. So whilst I don't agree with regemented shortlists, I could understand a 'white-only' shortlist in this circumstance, although I wouldn't agree with it (as I don't agree with 'black only' shortlists).
As another example, would you say Tesco are racist? They identify areas with large Polish communities (as just one example) and then employ Polish staff to source Polish food and stock it only in stores where there are large Polish communities. Seems to make sense to me. To take that a step further, why shouldn't the local GP practice have a Polish nurse or GP to help care for the local Polish population? And to take another logical step, if that local population is 30% Polish, then why not have Polish people on the local council? Or do you see this as racist?
Go to a hospital in Spain where a lot of Brits holiday or retire. They set up a great deal of their healthcare system to cope with British people. There are some hospitals in touristy regions of Spain where they try to employ English doctors to help treat English people. Do you see this as racist? Or is it a common sense approach to deal with a problem that's happening in their area?
I said in my first post that 'xx only' shortlists are not the answer. I don't agree with them. But they certainly aren't racist. They are a clumsy, ill-divised way to attempt to combat racism in some sense. I don't think it works, but it clearly isn't a racist action.Stop being a racist and move forward.
Sorry, but can you highlight any of my two posts that show any evidence of me being racist?0 -
If you think black / asian / women only shortlists are evidence of racism and sexism then you are clearly not that bright and see things in a very simplistic way. Sorry to be that blunt, but I can't see any other reason why you would think this. By all means criticise why they are a stupid idea (some wouldn't agree with you, I personally would) but to say that they are evidence as to why Labour are more racist than the BNP is completely dumb.0 -
Presumablyby your deluded logic the hundreds of seats were there were white only shortlists (for Labour, Tory or Lib-Dem) would be evidence of racism as well.US housing: it's not a bubble
Moneyweek, December 20050 -
If you think black / asian / women only shortlists are evidence of racism and sexism then you are clearly not that bright and see things in a very simplistic way. Sorry to be that blunt, but I can't see any other reason why you would think this. By all means criticise why they are a stupid idea (some wouldn't agree with you, I personally would) but to say that they are evidence as to why Labour are more racist than the BNP is completely dumb.
The use of colour / sex / race / religion / etc to discriminate has no place anywhere (apart from actors). The ability to do the job is all that counts.
My point is that labour has the power to implement racist/sexist polices when the BNP does not. Actions are always more important than talk. However, if the BNP had any power I would agree the situation was reversed.
In terms of racism, I think we have a similar view. The difference being, I beleive in a total destruction decision making on specification, that has no baring on the decision.
We can never kill of racism/sexist/etc if we allow discrimination (either negatively or positively) in any form.0 -
its not about black or white, man or woman, immigrant or British - its about decency v. scum.
remember that. scum come from all walks of life, and the scum needs to be eradicated, whether they are indiginous or immigrant, black or white, male or female, young or old.
WE NEED TO FIGHT AGAINST SCUM.0 -
The use of colour / sex / race / religion / etc to discriminate has no place anywhere (apart from actors). The ability to do the job is all that counts.
Ahh, fantastic, you agree with me. Glad I've changed your mind. Because the aim of the local council is to serve the local people. The ability to do a job for your lcoal council will include, amongst other things, serving your community. Often someone from a certain background will have a better understanding of other people from that background. Thus, as long as they have the same skills as other people doing that job, they have a better ability to do that particular job.
This is exactly the same as a Spanish hospital employing some English doctors as they treat a lot of English patients. The English doctors have exactly the same medical skills as the Spanish doctors, but they have a better affinity with the English patients coming in. The Spanish hospitals spend the same money on a Doctor but their English patients get treated 'better'. Everyone's a winner.We can never kill of racism/sexist/etc if we allow discrimination (either negatively or positively) in any form.
Well I agree with that to a certain extent. I've said a number of times that 'xx only' shortlists are, in my opinion, not a good idea. But you specifically said that they were racist, which they clearly aren't.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.3K Spending & Discounts
- 247.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.3K Life & Family
- 261.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards