Rivers of Blood.
- Thread starter tbaldwin
- Start date
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
Sorry, am I seriously now reading a thread that's supposed to be about whether Enoch was right?
(Cut it out with the pictures btw, there are rules in WorldPol about it from endless abuse and complaint, don't want to have to start them up here too.)
(Cut it out with the pictures btw, there are rules in WorldPol about it from endless abuse and complaint, don't want to have to start them up here too.)
bluestreak
HomosexualityIsStalin’sAtomBombtoDestroyAmerica
well, i've now lived 29 years on this planet, the vast majority of them in london. i've never seen a river of blood yet.
Idris2002
Stay Alive in '25
Powell was a lunatic - really.
I mean, this is a man who genuinely believed that the assasination of Airey Neave was carried out by the CIA. Powell thought that they were aiding the INLA (who were revolutionary marxists!) in order to get a united Ireland that would join NATO.
I mean, this is a man who genuinely believed that the assasination of Airey Neave was carried out by the CIA. Powell thought that they were aiding the INLA (who were revolutionary marxists!) in order to get a united Ireland that would join NATO.
poster342002
PROPER leftwing socialist
Didn't the East-German Stasi also believe the IRA were CIA-backed (for similar reasons)?Idris2002 said:
poster342002
PROPER leftwing socialist
Afraid not - I think it was something I saw on the news (possibly about released stasi-files) some years back.Idris2002 said:
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
JHE said:
Your first point is only relevant if the outpacing is sustained through every generation. It isn't. It lapses to around the national average for the "host nation" after the first generation (Check ONS and Eurostat figures if you don't believe me.
). Combine that with the well-known and well-researched phenomenon of higher mortality in first generation immigrants, and your point becomes irrelevant.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
tbaldwin said:
What does that have to do with anything, bearing in mind that many of the so-called "gangs" the media are talking about are multi-racial?
JoePolitix
Gone
A T Baldwin thread in the form of a photo montage
JHE said:
Answers to these depend on the time-frame you have in mind.
1. This is certainly true for Pakistani and Bangladeshi people in the UK. Contrasts in the lifetime fertility rates for different ethnic groups are particularly marked in London. You can find these by hunting around on the Greater London Authority's website.
ViolentPanda makes a good general point about birth rates for ethnic groups falling into line with that of the 'host' population. This has happened with the Black Caribbean, Indian and Chinese birth rates. But a similar decline to convergence in Pakistani and Bangladeshi birthrates is thought unlikely to occur before at least mid-century because of (a) lower levels of female economic activity in those groups and (b) arranged marriages involving spouses brought in from countries where high birth rates are the norm.
2. Sooner or later some governing party, probably the Conservatives, will act to reduce immigration, as is already happening elsewhere in Western Europe. There will doubtless be attempts to claim that 'it's not about race', but of course it will work out that way. Unlikely, either, to be quite as pragmatic as the Dutch 'gay men kissing on a beach' video shown to prospective immigrants to Holland (pretty obvious who that's meant to put off).
3. Very hard to predict how that will work out. 40+ years ago, for instance, when France and Britain imported (or lured) large numbers of workers and their families from predominantly Muslim countries, Islamism wasn't on the radar. 40 years hence, things may be very different yet again.
(Referring back to point 2, there is a section of the establishment whose developing ideas on ethnic conflict and, possibly, immigration is overlooked, and that involves senior military staff, and military and intelligence planners.)
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
tbaldwin said:
Given the context of Powell's so-called "rivers of blood" speech, which was that he expected racial conflict so bad that the river would foam with blood, whether or not the gangs are multi-racial is very much the point, especially given that it's you who posted this thread based on Powell's speech in the first place.
Oh, and 18 killings of juveniles in London, however saddening, doesn't constitute a "river of blood" either, barely a bathful, in fact.
ViolentPanda said:
My comment related to Bluestreaks specific post. So the gangs being multiracial is besides the point to me.
Those 18 killings are barely the tip of a very nasty iceberg. I think life is really very grim for a lot of teenagers. Many are scared to leave their local areas,even to travel 2 or 3 streets away.
MC5 said:This is what Powell '...watched with horror on the other side of the Atlantic..'.
It was black people resisting their status, demanding equal treatment in housing, education and jobs, that in fact aroused the ire of the then shadow Minister of Defence.
I think your probably right.
He was an urdu speaker apparently but ex army. I think he was bound to have racist views.
But that does not mean, everything he thought or said was wrong.
Racism is still a huge problem in this country and many young Black and Asian people have been written off in this country.
White Liberalism of the Guardian reading types in many respects has been as negative as Daily Mail type racism.
One views people as eternal victims the other as eternal criminals..
Similar threads
