Nice one prince - fancy writing my speeches? 
You can be my Alistair Campbell!
You can be my Alistair Campbell!
Election ‘04: Black London Decides
- Thread starter Kid_Eternity
- Start date
Kid_Eternity
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Fair enough but i would call 15-20 (you're talking about mainly @s right going by the figure?) out of 200 or so regulars many (its even less if you look at it within the context of the 6000 odd who are registered here).
Kid_Eternity
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
It appears that he is using the Trevor Phillips version of multi-culturalism. This is not some thing (as far as i'm aware) that any of the orgs involved in this support.kea said:
what's 'the trevor phillips' verson of multiculturalism, and how does it differ from the kind of multiculturalism you think these orgs support? i'm not being akward, i'm genuinely interested, as i don't know much about this area but i thought kropotkin's points were interesting.
These orgs are the Lee Jasper form - which sends shivers down my spine.
Kid_Eternity
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
google search Trevor Phillips, multi-culturalism and you should get some interesting reading material (sorry to be blunt but i'm kinda busy at work!).
ai
ai
kea said:what's 'the lee jasper form' then?
How did you ever get a job as a journalist?
hmm found this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3615379.stm
so basically TP is saying that 'multiculturalism' is divisive and 'suggests seperateness' (quote from above link)? yes i can see that what kropotkin wrote ties in with this, but what's the argument against it? if the orgs organising this meeting disagree with trevor philips' take on it, what's their definition of what multiculturalism means? (and what's the 'lee jasper' position? i found something on google about 'treat people differently to treat them equally' - is that it?)
edit: in other words, i'm trying to find out why you dismiss kropotkin's points on the basis of his and TP's definition of what multiculturalism means. iyswim.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3615379.stm
so basically TP is saying that 'multiculturalism' is divisive and 'suggests seperateness' (quote from above link)? yes i can see that what kropotkin wrote ties in with this, but what's the argument against it? if the orgs organising this meeting disagree with trevor philips' take on it, what's their definition of what multiculturalism means? (and what's the 'lee jasper' position? i found something on google about 'treat people differently to treat them equally' - is that it?)
edit: in other words, i'm trying to find out why you dismiss kropotkin's points on the basis of his and TP's definition of what multiculturalism means. iyswim.
DO you agree with the setting up of racially-segregated schools in London? Lee Jasper does, so does the BNP.
Jasper believes black children are being 'institutionally-racially-discriminated against' in mainstream schools (as does the SWP). He wants black children to be taught by black teachers who follow his dogma. What the SWP want I don't know. Jasper believes black children will do better this way. He also believes that less black male teenagers will be excluded.
The BNP believe that white children are being 'brainwashed by the state' into accepting the erosion of their white culture. They believe that white children should be taught in all-white schools by white teachers, who follow their dogma. They believe that the segregated schools' results will then show up black children (ie Caribbean-background rather than African) to be educationally-inferior to white (or Asian) children. They will also hold up claims that schools will be better-behaved without black teenagers.
There you go kea - how Lee Jasper, Operation Black Vote, Nick Griffin, The BNP, Trevor Phillips and the SWP are all cosy bed-fellows.
Jasper believes black children are being 'institutionally-racially-discriminated against' in mainstream schools (as does the SWP). He wants black children to be taught by black teachers who follow his dogma. What the SWP want I don't know. Jasper believes black children will do better this way. He also believes that less black male teenagers will be excluded.
The BNP believe that white children are being 'brainwashed by the state' into accepting the erosion of their white culture. They believe that white children should be taught in all-white schools by white teachers, who follow their dogma. They believe that the segregated schools' results will then show up black children (ie Caribbean-background rather than African) to be educationally-inferior to white (or Asian) children. They will also hold up claims that schools will be better-behaved without black teenagers.
There you go kea - how Lee Jasper, Operation Black Vote, Nick Griffin, The BNP, Trevor Phillips and the SWP are all cosy bed-fellows.
cheers ern, most helpful 
Harold Hill
Jay Emm forgot his p/word
angry idiot said:
What are they?
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
No, that's TPs new position kea - his old one (which AI was referring to i think) was the same as Lee Jaspers - as close at to make no subtsantial difference anyway, and those of us on here who have been attacking the ideology of multi-culturalism have been aiming it very squarely at the Lee Jasper type i'm afraid.
I'd like to know what the idiot meant by 'pseudo-racist'...its like when the liberals squawk 'borderline rascist' and stuff.
Pure guff.
Pure guff.
butchersapron said:
ah ok, the plot thickens
so kropotkin's criticism rests on the LJ/TP#1 view of multiculturalism? whereas the orgs arranging this meeting would support the TP#2 view of multiculturalism? in which case how come they still want a seperate BME hustings? how does this fit into the TP#2 position? <those q's are for AI btw tho anyone else is welcome to enlighten me too >
Kid_Eternity
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
There is no plot and I must say the attitude that is being taken toward this is revealing. I wonder if there would be the same kind of posts/questions if this meeting was targeted at women so they could hold these politicians to account with their concerns and issue??
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
No, they support the mark one version kea. They've not altered at all - TPs has, but only for publicity reasons.
angry idiot said:
I think they hold meetings that are segregated by gender in Saudi Arabia if you're interested.
Phototropic
Active Member
<kea posting>
if it's my attitude you're talking about, then it's one of honest enquiry. i'm not trying to make a point with my questions, i'm trying to honestly find out about it. if you don't want to answer then fine but don't attribute your unwillingness to answer to my supposed 'attitude'!
as for your point about women, well hmm. i dunno. it's an interesting consideration. i personally don't have anything to ask the mayoral candidates about which i'd want to do specifically in an all-women group, but if others wanted to then i wouldn't try and stop them.
of course, whether the mayoral hopefuls would agree to appear before an all-women audience is another matter - anyone know if they have done so?
angry idiot said:
if it's my attitude you're talking about, then it's one of honest enquiry. i'm not trying to make a point with my questions, i'm trying to honestly find out about it. if you don't want to answer then fine but don't attribute your unwillingness to answer to my supposed 'attitude'!
as for your point about women, well hmm. i dunno. it's an interesting consideration. i personally don't have anything to ask the mayoral candidates about which i'd want to do specifically in an all-women group, but if others wanted to then i wouldn't try and stop them.
of course, whether the mayoral hopefuls would agree to appear before an all-women audience is another matter - anyone know if they have done so?
Phototropic
Active Member
butchersapron said:
ok, so you're saying that these groups support the lee jasper view of multiculturalism? AI, would you say this is correct? and do you agree with the lee jasper view? am i right in saying that the lee jasper view would support positive discrimination?
Kid_Eternity
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Phototropic said:
It was a general view of the tone of this thread...I didn't bother answering some of these "questions" because there is frankly no point given that some come from anarchists who've view on politicians are well documented (and some were purposely antagonistic, others I couldn’t begin to answer because I did not understand them).
I've known plenty of women active in politics over the years that’d argue for a meeting of this kind but targeted at females. Again this is open to everybody but is aimed primarily at BME people and is organised by BME people. I don’t see why it’s a threat or a bother if us black folk want to organise ourselves politically in the manner of our choosing (would anyone on this thread deny us that right?).
The candidates that are attending the meeting were chosen thus; OBV consulted its membership and the top six were chosen. The hall is simply not big enough for all 11 candidates and indeed no one chose for the BNP or UKIP to have a candidate there.
There are still a few places left so if you are interested BME people and non BME of U75 then please come along.
Kid_Eternity
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
On the issue of Lee Jasper, i'd do some actual research rather than relying on the skewered information about him posted here (plus I think thats a matter for another thread).Phototropic said:
nick griffin said:
______________________
Kid_Eternity
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Perhaps the following may be conducive to a more mature approach?
What is that a threat? You have failed to address the main points against the liberal state's multicultural agenda which is endorsed by racists of both black and white, and now you call for me to be banned?!?!?
It's like 1933 all over again
It's like 1933 all over again
I am not against people gettng together to discuss the specific issues faced mainly or solely by women in society - eg childcare, inequality in wages, woman's health - but as a society these issues need to be faced up to and addressed by *everyone*. In a similar way I am not against a meeting or even organisations which discuss issues faced mainly or solely by (so-called) "black" and/or "non-white" people in the UK. I recognise the value of having a meeting which consists mainly of people who can speak about these issues from direct firsthand experience (primarily because, living in the UK they find themselves in this "black" and/or "non-white" category) and who are not on the back foot and defensive about these things to the point of not being able to discuss them sensibly (which a large majority of the so-called "white population" are). However I am against separatism of any sort or black nationalism as a useful political philosophy. It ios important to also recognise that there are many people with so-called "white" skin or "black" skin who have families full of people with the "other" type and the fact is that humanity is one family. We need to move forward together, and so just as with woman's issues, issues which maybe tend to be seen as only issues for "black" people need to be faced up to and addressed by *everyone*.angry idiot said:
The bottom line is that there is nothing wrong with having a "single issue" group or meeting that focusses on issues that mainly or solely effect (so-called) "black" people or "non-white" - and this could be extended to include issues that effect ceratin cultural and ethnic groups and communities - for example Rastafarians or people from Nigeria or whatever...
...But I would never support having a closed meeting on the basis of skin colour or only listening to and weighing what someone was saying on the basis of this either. Laws, policies and funding don't in themselves have colours, but they do usually have underlying cultural assumptions and bias and can be disproportionate in their impact on different sections of society. My attitude is that if you provide a good education to poor people you will be providing a good education to many "black" people, and if you make sure that everyone has the chance to get a decent job and earn a decent wage, then you will be making sure that "black" people can get a decent job and wage. If you make sure that the police have respect for their local communities and communicate with them, then you will be making sure that the police have respect for local "black" communities and communicate with them. It is important IMO to communicate this in down-to-earth language that everyone can understand, so the UK political system has still got a long way to go to be open and accessible to all and any type of person who is in the UK. I think that there is still a gulf between the old style system and a vast number of ordinary people. It isn't about skin colour as much as it is about a gulf in language, culture, expectations, insider knowledge of the law and the system, social connections, the need to join a political party to participate meaningfully in UK politics and therefore in effect the need to adapt fully to the dominant culture to be able to contribute or be taken seriously by the system - and also a gulf created by some very bitter and alienating experiences of a several generations of people while living in the UK.
People here might try and deny all this complexity and the urgent need toi address it seriously, mainly because they are locked into a static and unimaginative discourse - they can't think outside the box. This is best displayed by the way several people assumed, without any kind of evidence whatsoever that there was some kind of "racial requirement" for attending this event. The fact is as long as one person is "black" we are all "black" - because tht is the baseline for being a human being. If people who think they are "white" because of their pale skin want to be in denial then they are just in denial about their own humanity - fuck them. Its their loss.
Harold Hill
Jay Emm forgot his p/word
angry idiot said:
My question wasn't a trick or a fly trap.
I wasn't trying to antagonise anyone, I was just trying to get across the underlying reasons for the well-founded criticisms of the "multiculturalism" on which this initiative is based.
Perhaps a good angle to approach this discussion from is the one suggested by a few poster already. Namely, "What would be the different concerns expressed by BME people that would neccessitate a meeting segregated by race?"
Perhaps a good angle to approach this discussion from is the one suggested by a few poster already. Namely, "What would be the different concerns expressed by BME people that would neccessitate a meeting segregated by race?"
Similar threads
