To be 'liberal'

[Brian Griffin]

Basically when any liberal started calling anybody who didn't agree with them 'thick and racist', that's when it became a bad thing.

 

[Al]

It's just that some people have started using the interpretation of liberal from the land of the free, which is never what it meant in this country.
FFS, we'll be saying f***ing aluminum next!

 

[TK-421]

Nothin wrong with being a liberal. In America liberal means left wing, which is often not liberal (they call authoritarian leftists 'liberals' for example). The problem is the use of the word.

 

[Hep]

They aren't.

I'm not racist but I don't want any more immigrants - Not racist unless there's context added. Feel that the current population level is at a maximum? Not racist. Is an immigrant a race? Typically yes, as in non-british.
I'm not racist but British people should get the jobs - Not racist at all. - Yes it is, you want to give preference to those who are British by race.
I'm not racist but lets build a wall to keep the Mexicans out - I'd agree that's racist.
I'm not racist but outraged that a sign in the civic centre is in another language - Not racist. - So why are people outraged???
I'm not racist but I don't like Muslims - Stupid and is Islamophobia. - Again, indirect racism, Muslim are typically non-british by race/ethnic origin

 

[Brexit]

A load of rubbish

Quite.

 

[Hep]

You're laughing, but they're not.

They're often voices by people who may well be racist, but the actual points themselves aren't racist.

"British jobs for British workers" isn't inherently racist. I know some wouldn't have it this way but the reality is the world is divided into states with clearly defined borders and each state has it's own government and those governments have a duty of care to their own citizens first before anyone else.

Which is discriminating by race/nationality. That's the problem, why can't we judge people on their own individual merits, regardless of race or nationality.

Quite.

you really reinforce my point that racist people are not aware that they are racist.

 

[Brexit]

you really reinforce my point that racist people are not aware that they are racist.

I even prefer blacks to you.

 

[Hep]

It's not quite as cut and dried as you say. While free trade as we know it has been going on for many decades now, the mass free movement of workers seen in globalisation is relatively new and is already demonstrating that there are winners and losers. I think we should say the jury is still out on this.

Equally, while it's not strictly protectionism (in that it was enforced from outside) the economy of Zimbabwe post-UDI is an interesting example. With no access to foreign markets - either to buy or sell - under sanctions the local economy boomed. They manufactured their own cars, were self-sufficient in food and even established a local wine-making industry. While Mugabe destroyed this in short order, it does present an alternative model to your blanket statement.

China - which has had the biggest single impact on reducing global poverty levels in the last couple of decades - is another example of protectionism not exactly failing.

And, of course, the EU is a protectionist customs union...

I don't think the Zimbabwe model is held in high esteem, even if they had a couple of areas that thrived locally. The ultimate model, that we will eventually get to is total globalization, it will happen and there is nothing people can do to stop it. It scares people as does most change. Countries, Unions, Religions, and Cultures will all be things of the past in the future and I love it.

I even prefer blacks to you.

I love the way you have no responses of any substance, it just verifies the low brow tribalism view.

 

[Brexit]

I love the way you have no responses of any substance, it just verifies the low brow tribalism view.

I've no time for anybody that calls me a racist.

 

[PeteFTM]

It's more that we cannot understand or figure out the logic of those who voted out. It just looks like low brow tribalism and I've yet to hear an argument to the contrary.

This is my point exactly. It seems completely implausible that someone could have the opposite opinion to yourself, and therefore it's just neanderthal behaviour and no other explanation.

"Liberals" to me come across as a bunch of retail entry level managers who believe God has chosen them to be the highest within their local chain, and are given the gift of never being wrong and having the perfect opinion.

 

[Hep]

This is my point exactly. It seems completely implausible that someone could have the opposite opinion to yourself, and therefore it's just neanderthal behaviour and no other explanation.

Far from neanderthal, it's the failure to construct any critical thinking by the brexiteers. I'd happily consider rational arguments but 'we don't want any more immigrants' has no logical rationale, especially when there is considerable evidence that they contribute positively to the economy.

 

[Silksworth Lad]

I don't think the Zimbabwe model is held in high esteem, even if they had a couple of areas that thrived locally. The ultimate model, that we will eventually get to is total globalization, it will happen and there is nothing people can do to stop it. It scares people as does most change. Countries, Unions, Religions, and Cultures will all be things of the past in the future and I love it.

I must admit that I can't fault your objective and intellectually robust view that what you want to happen will happen. Well argued, sir!

 

[PeteFTM]

Far from neanderthal, it's the failure to construct any critical thinking by the brexiteers. I'd happily consider rational arguments but 'we don't want any more immigrants' has no logical rationale, especially when there is considerable evidence that they contribute positively to the economy.

But whenever a good point is put across, you get comebacks like "you're racist" "clearly brainwashed" etc. It's either child-like responses or a series of unnecessarily elaborate vocabulary mixed together to make out that their opinion is therefore the most important.

Far from neanderthal, it's the failure to construct any critical thinking by the brexiteers. I'd happily consider rational arguments but 'we don't want any more immigrants' has no logical rationale, especially when there is considerable evidence that they contribute positively to the economy.

Just to test, here's my reason for voting out;

Who gets paid more, the self-employed tradesman, or the employed tradesmen? ... Obviously the self-employed, because he's able to negotiate all his own deals.

Who is better suited to manage a shop, the manager within the shop, or the manager who has visited twice in the past 10 years and has no experience of the day to day in said shop?

Never in the history of the world has any country prospered from being controlled by an outside nation. "We're stronger together" to me just sounds like weakness and arse dropping.. We WERE a very strong, independent country and have always been seen as an ideal place to live for many reasons. We literally have no need for anyone outside this country to be interfering with our business, and we are certainly too large to have other countries decide what our rules or and how we control our borders.

 

[Hep]

But whenever a good point is put across, you get comebacks like "you're racist" "clearly brainwashed" etc. It's either child-like responses or a series of unnecessarily elaborate vocabulary mixed together to make out that their opinion is therefore the most important.



Just to test, here's my reason for voting out;

Who gets paid more, the self-employed tradesman, or the employed tradesmen? ... Obviously the self-employed, because he's able to negotiate all his own deals.

Who is better suited to manage a shop, the manager within the shop, or the manager who has visited twice in the past 10 years and has no experience of the day to day in said shop?

Never in the history of the world has any country prospered from being controlled by an outside nation. "We're stronger together" to me just sounds like weakness and arse dropping.. We WERE a very strong, independent country and have always been seen as an ideal place to live for many reasons. We literally have no need for anyone outside this country to be interfering with our business, and we are certainly too large to have other countries decide what our rules or and how we control our borders.

At last some rational argument. I respect you for at least giving an educated response. However, if you take your argument, then you could apply it to England leaving the UK, or Sunderland leaving England. What ever argument for the four countries of the UK working as a union is surely valid for being part of a larger union. As I said previously, we'll all end up as part of a global union at some point, although probably in many decades time.

And if you agree with the UK splitting into independent countries, why not split into independent counties? All the argument against Brussels such as waste, bureaucracy can be levied at Westminster too. If we split into independent counties as was the case many years ago, then why not independent villages or houses. Whilst then answer for some sort of union is obvious, the question is to what scale and it's only the flag wavers holding back the single global union.

 

[Tadger]

Which is discriminating by race/nationality. That's the problem, why can't we judge people on their own individual merits, regardless of race or nationality.

So any country that tries to get it's own citizens employed before migrants has a racist immigration policy?

We should judge on merit but only according to what our society needs.

 

[Hep]

So any country that tries to get it's own citizens employed before migrants has a racist immigration policy?

We should judge on merit but only according to what our society needs.

The problem is the very concept of a country, why should someone be privileged or otherwise just because they were born on one particular land mass. If you look at history, you see the borders of various governing entities merge and grow. The counties of England used to be independent before being united into a single kingdom. The very concept of not being able to work in a different county demonstrates how ludicrous it is to create borders at all. What purpose do they serve? If we had no border controls anywhere on earth, people who travel to where the jobs are. I think we in Britain are just a little scared of that competition but the internet will automate and supersede many jobs anyway and that's a border we cannot close. We must accept globalisation or it will leave behind those who don't.

 

[Daydream Believer]

Liberals feel the need to apologize for anything and everything that this country has done in the past and they shed a tear for IRA terrorists that die believing them to be peace brokers etc etc etc.....oh and they get upset at football chants and most of them voted to remain part of europe.....thats the real cause of their anger and dummy spitting.

None of that is describing liberals. You appear to be describing Jeremy Corbyn when he's a leftie socialist, not a liberal.

By the way I'm a liberal & think apologising for things done before I was even born is ridiculous, Martin McGuiness was a murdering bastard & because liberals believe in less government not more I voted leave in the referendum.

A 'liberal' today is likely to believe in the opposite of classical liberalism, in higher taxes, government regulations, restrictions on freedom of the press and free speech, and controls over what you can say, do and even think.

I'd argue that those people are not liberals & that calling themselves, or being called one by right wingers doesn't make it so.

 

[Tadger]

The problem is the very concept of a country, why should someone be privileged or otherwise just because they were born on one particular land mass. If you look at history, you see the borders of various governing entities merge and grow. The counties of England used to be independent before being united into a single kingdom. The very concept of not being able to work in a different county demonstrates how ludicrous it is to create borders at all. What purpose do they serve? If we had no border controls anywhere on earth, people who travel to where the jobs are. I think we in Britain are just a little scared of that competition but the internet will automate and supersede many jobs anyway and that's a border we cannot close. We must accept globalisation or it will leave behind those who don't.

So you're one of the "No borders" brigade. That's fine, that's your opinion and you're entitled to it.

Realistically though, that will never, ever work and I think deep down you know that. Idealism always gives way to pragmatism.

Crying "racism" just poisons the debate around immigration.

 

[Hep]

So you're one of the "No borders" brigade. That's fine, that's your opinion and you're entitled to it.

Realistically though, that will never, ever work and I think deep down you know that. Idealism always gives way to pragmatism.

Crying "racism" just poisons the debate around immigration.

It will happen, if you look at history, you can see the borders becoming less and less. Countries will enter into unions as it makes logical sense.

 

[Tadger]

It will happen, if you look at history, you can see the borders becoming less and less. Countries will enter into unions as it makes logical sense.

Borders are never removed, they're just redrawn.

If you look at history, unions break up.