It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
PO, you might have been just quoting something, but at the same time you said you thought it was reasonable. That's what worries me.
I don't care if you're from South Africa or Mongolia - "kick out the foreigners" is a nasty position to take.
No the policy makers I guess. I'm definitely ignorant in these matters as I don't invest too much time in this area. Just seems that Australia has stricter rules on immigration but this is respected rather than frowned upon.
Just thinking aloud really.
I rather think that PO made that comment tongue-in-cheek, CM. That's how I took it, anyway, based on the fact that she was (until fairly recently) a foreigner living here.
btw, what is your avatar? I see it's a moose, but what's it painted on?
If it was tongue in cheek then I'm sorry for getting on the case, but it's an inflammatory subject and it's difficult to put a tone of voice into words on paper (or a screen). One person's 'tongue-in-cheek' is another person's verbal attack.
The moose is printed on a t-shirt - the first I ever raced in.
Sorry to disagree Wilks but WW2 was absolutely about Fascism
The Nazi concept of Volkisch movement and creating a 'Greater Germany' were some of the keystones of Nazi ideology - they wouldn't have invaded other countries without this to justify their expansion. GB BTW or at least the English were looked on as Germanic people... and would have been invited to become allies.
Churchill, who was a staunch anti-communist said upon Hitler's invasion of Communist USSR "If Hitler invaded hell, I'd offer support to the Devil"
Now most people didn't join up to fight Fascism - but if you look at the rhetoric of the time it is laced with anti-Nazi; anti Fascist frames of reference.
Coops10 wrote (see)
I see the BNP leader Nick Griffin wasn't too happy after pelted with eggs just the other day.He said "The bastards could have seperated the whites first........"
I see the BNP leader Nick Griffin wasn't too happy after pelted with eggs just the other day.
He said "The bastards could have seperated the whites first........"
Hey, don't sweat it PO! I'm not accusing you of anything.
An inflammatory subject simply is an inflammatory subject - there's no condition on it. If you're going to say something that sounds even slightly sympathetic towards extremism, then you''ve got to be ready for some robust answers whether you were being serious or not. That's a fact of life, as well of this forum.
Well it depends upon what one defines as fascism.
I have to dredge back many decades to my history studies so I am a bit shaky on the detail now but the concept of Lebensraum (= living space) was a well established tenent of German foreign policy long before WW1 (and WW! was initiated by the Germans as a part of that thought process). The expansion to the east of the German state was seen as the "natural" target area.Insofar as Hitler adopted those ideas and expressed them in his book, Mien Kampf they became part of nazi political objectives
The difficulty is that the terms fascism and nazism have become interchangeable - normally as a term of abuse (very properly) but without a standard definition of what they, and particularly fascism ,stands for it becomes very difficult to actually pin anyone down as to whether or not they are "fascist"
For example simply to express an opinion about tighter immigration control to one of the most densely populated land masses in Europe does not necessarily make one "fascist"
Equally support of the expansion of government surveillance systems to provide say ID cards, more CCTV, intercepts of email etc does not necessarily make one "fascist"
- though both conditions could be labelled fascist in the broadest sense - and I am for one of the above and against the other .
So as a Friday afternoon quiz.........................
I partly agree with Dustin on this one(blimey!!). Immigration needs to be dealt with by the major parties.Then, hopefully, the BNP will lose significance. I have actually heard school kids shouting BNP in the streets at asian kids. That disturbs me and I am fearful of their influence. Aged about 14 me and my mate met this bloke who was going on about the National Front, trying to encourage us to shout it and other slogans. Same old crap -blaming immigrants for lack of jobs and stuff. Worse still I hear a lot of crap from ordinary working class people about "robbing jobs" and "send em home" . I suspect the many of the middle classes think the same but feel it is impolite to say it. The major parties not tackling the issue will give the BNP a louder voice and bigger influence.
I don't believe I mentioned any rules of any kind - but look, I'm not trying to start an argument - honest, I'm a nice guy!
I'm sorry if I got on your case...
I get £50 an hour for that at work... use Wikipeadia like my students do...
National Socialism is/was a distinct form of Fascism that came about in Germany as an amalgamation of different philosophical, 'scientific' and political theories from 1890 to 1936 and beyond...
...only £50/hour - see point proven about cheap labour undermining the earnings potential of the indigenous population.
Well as fascism has an Italian root not a German one I had better look and see what good ol' Benito M. had to say about it.
But without agreement on what it stands for it's a bit difficult for anyone to argue that anyone else's views are/are not fascist.
..........if students use Wikipeadia for this then they are in trouble
definitions of fascism
On balance I think I prefer George Orwell's which is about where it has got to in popular use...............
TS... £50 is my nominal rate...
You might start with Fascio; Fascis or Fasces... and Angelo Oliviero Olivetti
I thought they'd recruited Michael Barrymore as their new spokesman ....
Australia is not a signed to the 1952 Human Rights convention, so they are able to basically refuse people entry to the country in any manner they like, and deport criminals, immigrants, etc, pretty much without problem. They also do not have the same freedom of movement that we have within the EU.
Having worked in Immigration, it would be much easier if we were also not a signatory to the convention, but instead had our own constitution drawn up. At it heart, the human rights act is a beautiful document designed to protect the fundamental rights of individuals. However, in current practise, it is abused to a massive extent to unfairly entitle people to luxuries etched up as rights.
For example, the human rights convention was not drawn up to protect war criminals, and it states it should not be used in order to do so. HOWEVER, Because of article 2 and 3 (right to life) if the worse, most vile war criminal were to claim asylum (say Robert Mugabe for instance), he would not get asylum, but if he was at any risk in his own country (having been responsible for the rape and murder or a large part of the population), he would still get to stay in the UK. We simply wouldn't be able to deport him under human rights grounds.
Likewise, individuals who prove to be incredibly vile, and completely unconducive to the public good cannot be deported if they can prove (and the level of proof is bare minimum) that they would be at any risk at all in their home country. But we cant detain them either. So they can pretty much do what they like.
The Government once tried to argue that a persons right to life should be considered in proportion to the risk they placed upon the right to life of the population as a whole. The argument was rejected outright.
I just can't understand that.
I think stuff like that is what makes people support the BNP. Its like a rebel vote to the mainstream parties "Stuff like this worries us, so do something about it".
It's not something I would personally do myself though