Gordon Brown's mask slips "she's a very bigoted woman"

[Milford]

Yet the debate continues... not really "shutting down" so much as "not shutting down".

 

This debate in particular hasn't been shut down. But if a thread was started saying that England only survives because its propped up by hard working immigrants who support the lazy feckless idle English it would probably be absolutely lauded by people like you.

 

But lets rewind, think about India before it was independent, the argument there was that the Indians were lazy and feckless and couldn't run their own country so Britain was doing them a favour.

 

You find the second example offensive but would be very comfortable for people to adopt the same attitude about the English. Again, racist.

[Phanerothyme]

would probably be absolutely lauded by people like you.

 

And who are people like me exactly?

[JFKvsNixon]

But lets rewind, think about India before it was independent, the argument there was that the Indians were lazy and feckless and couldn't run their own country so Britain was doing them a favour.

 

That may have been the argument used inside your head, but it certainly wasn't the argument used in the real world.

[Milford]

That may have been the argument used inside your head, but it certainly wasn't the argument used in the real world.

 

Really? It appears the BBC would beg to differ..

 

However, in true British tradition, they also chose to elaborate sophisticated and intellectual arguments to justify and explain their rule.

 

On the one hand, Whigs and Liberals expounded sentiments most iconically expressed by TB Macaulay in 1833: 'that... by good government we may educate our subjects into a capacity for better government, that, having become instructed in European knowledge, they may, in some future age, demand European institutions. Whether such a day will ever come I know not. ... Whenever it comes, it will be the proudest day in English history.'

 

Link to the full article here:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/modern/independence1947_01.shtml

 

So do you still think that the British didn't argue that the Indians weren't fit to govern themselves or is the BBC just lying and making stuff up?

[Milford]

And who are people like me exactly?

 

You are a member of 'the politically correct chatterati'.

[Milford]

That may have been the argument used inside your head, but it certainly wasn't the argument used in the real world.

 

And anyway, that doesn't answer the question. Why is it acceptable to describe the British as bone idle, lazy and workshy when that would cause outrage if the same things were said about any other race?

 

It's a crass generalisation anyway, in another thread on here somebody started pontificating about how the Chinese cockle pickers were doing work the English were too lazy to do. I posted a link to a story on the BBC then too, lots of local people were working as cockle pickers but had bad relations with the Chinese because they were undercutting them. The locals tried to signal to the cockle pickers to come back in but they ignored it because they thought they were abusing them.

 

Anyway, that just goes to show - it's acceptable for far lefties to make sweeping generalisations and stereotype the British as lazy, feckless idle morons without backing it up with any facts at all.

 

That is just as bad as someone saying Ghanains and Nigerians are inherently corrupt, Carribbeans are lazy and stonedm Thai's exploit their children or the Chinese are drones who murder their daughters.

 

Why is it wrong to say those things but it's okay to say vile things about the English?

[purdyamos]

You are a member of 'the politically correct chatterati'.

 

 

Is that like the Freemasons, but with an apron designed by Cath Kidston?

 

 

It's a crass generalisation anyway...

 

 

You'd never do that would you? Oh, you just did. Oh well.

[Milford]

 

 

You'd never do that would you? Oh, you just did. Oh well.

 

 

 

Again, I will ask the question that has not been answered. Why is it okay to make offensive remarks and generalisations about the English which would be unacceptable if they were made about any other ethnic or religious group?

 

I've asked this question several times and had no answer whatsoever, let alone a coherent one.

 

This is exactly what I mean - the debate is being shut down because as soon as the word 'racist' is mentioned and fingers are pointed and everything else in the argument becomes null and void because that trumps everything.

 

Why bother answering the question when a hissy fit about perceived racism do the job just as well.

[Phanerothyme]

You're a nincompoop if you can't see the contradictions in your own posts I'm afraid. Everyone else seems able to, but you.

[rubydazzler]

I'd be interested in a coherent answer to Milford's question, though, rather than throw away attempted putdowns. It does seem that not only immigrants but also the 'indigenous middle class' seem to have this view of people they consider to be beneath them in some way. Is it because so many of them rely on keeping these people 'in their place' to keep themselves in employment?