School rolls: 'fewer whites than ethnics in many London boroughs'.

[Bryn]

SS = Simon Says.

You seem to have some sort of obsession with Nazi Germany. Get help.

Oh, and then there are the alternative versions he sometimes uses, which he does not want generally known. If there is an obsession involved, it is Simon's (not his given name, of course) identification with those initials.

Now for something Constructive on Radio 3.

[ahinton]

Do forgive me Alistair, but I rarely read your longer posts so I don't usually answer them.

That's fine by me - and there's therefore no need even to think about any need for "forgiveness".

That's because on the times you aren't actually wrong

Ooh, there's nothing quite like a feeble attempt at patronising when you don't actually have an argument, is there?! But, let's be fair and see whether or not you actually do have one.

you appear to have a very strange manner of reasoning, that I can't fathom the logic of.

Learn to end sentences with words that aren't prepositions and maybe, just maybe, that inability to fathom (a curiously imperial measure) might begin to resolve iself.

It's a sort of crumb logic - you appear to believe that you've successfully answered a point you don't agree with by finding some tiny circumstance that in certain cases appears to counter it. It's a bit like me saying that crows are generally black and then you coming along, having seen a single rare albino crow, and pointing out that I'm wrong because the one you saw was white. Quite true, but completely irrelevant to the main point that crows, in general, are black.

Rubbish! And leave George Crumb out of this! First off, I don't "believe" anything of the kind. Secondly, your analogy simply doesn't fit the circumstances and you do nothing to try to prove that it does; for you, a simple Simon statement apparently suffices which, if it suits you, is fine - for you.

Now I'm not saying you're doing this on purpose or that you mean to be annoying - I think it's just a rather unique way of looking at things. I believe that you are fair-minded and i'm sure you're a thoroughly decent chap. But you don't seem to grasp the full picture - to see the wood for looking at the details of all the trees.

What I don't grasp is YOUR picture which, I imagine, is a good deal closer to uniqueness than is anything that I've written.

To illustrate this, I'll take your shortish post above, point by point.

The disease factors I mentioned you are wrong about: there is serious concern about measles and TB, which are now beginning to be problematic in areas of high immigration. It has no correlation with holidays. Your next point is a prime example of something that is true but irrelevant: I'm quite sure that people from this country do take ailments elsewhere in the world, and they certainly did in past centuries. But most British people don't carry measles and TB, and, fortunately, many of the worst diseases in the world are not prevalent here anyway - YF, dengue, typhoid etc. - so we can't carry them. But even if we did, it doesn't negate in any way my point. I wonder that you can't see that.

Whilst you're not wrong about the disease factors that you mention, they do not tell the whole story. You state that certain disease factors are now begining to be problematic in areas of high immigration but, somehow, I don't get any sense that you're referring to areas other than UK or maybe even its immediate neighbouring countries; you make no mention of diseases spread elsewhere, nor do you take any account of the diseases that might be spread as an unwitting consequence of frequent international travel from anywhere to anywhere else. What you seem to ignore is that many of us now travel to and from places to and from which we could not easily do in the past.

You are right that crime, gangs and knife cerime fester in urban areas. But the majority of knife problems are amongst the ethnic communities and crime of many sorts - especially drugs - is endemic amongst many groups of young black men and the demographic distribution of these in cities is no coincidence. That there are economic problems involved is undeniable. So again, your points are fair but don't negate my own: indeed, the two points correlate.

I have not sought to suggest that gangland activity, knife crime et al is a whites-only problem but that it is endemic in society irrespective of who involves themselves in it.

Your next point, that the NHS and other systems have many problems is also true. But yet again, you appear to believe that this is an argument against my points. It isn't. It's irrelevant to them. However many other problems it may have, the NHS has major, not small, problems dealing with ethnic minorities. I know this second-hand as my sister works in medicine in Sheffield, and, as you can imagine, we hear about some of her concerns and those of her colleagues, as well as those of a neighbour who is a surgeon. As for the educational system, you're right again. It is not easy at all - and very expensive - to assimilate kids with no English. It's done, largely, to the detriment of other kids and again at vast expense. But I do admire your honesty: you admit that you view it as a legacy of our colonies in the past - as a sort of punishment, perhaps, for the activities of past generations? That's where we differ, fundamentally. You say we need to get used to it: I say we need to stop it. Because if we don't, the England you and I knoew as children won't exist for our grandchildren.

First off, I didn't know any kind of England as a small child ( I was an immigrant to England at the age of eight) and, as I have no children, I'll be having no grandchildren. I do not actually view Britain's past colonisation activities as something for which present-day Brits should be or are being "punished" - I don't happen to embrace any such retributional mindset - but the fact is that these past activities have nevertherless had consequences with which we all now have to deal, even though they're quite obviously not something that present generations have brought about. That said, what yuou continue to ignore is that I don't feel as though England, Britain or whatever is somehow "mine" and that people coming to it without my personal sanction might somehow be against my interests as a "British citizen" (this is perhaps where you and I really differ). To my mind, we are all "ethnic minorities" wherever we may be - and indeed should be; the sooner we accept that, the better for all of us. You write about something that you seem to believe needs "stopping", when it simply cannot, should not and need not be "stopped"; we all move from place to place and from time to time and, every time that each of us does so, we disturb certain previous balances. That's life. Society changes with every millisecond. That's life, too. Musicians ought to recognise that better than most, since their entire activity involves change, not just from generation to generation but from note to note, with each sounding note, having been sounded, giving way to someting else, however tightly organised might be the overall structure within which this occurs at any given time and within any given work.

[MrGongGong]

I am going to stop contributing to this interesting discussion for a couple of reasons

1: It really is impossible to have a discussion when one of the people contributing decides to ignore at least 2 of the other people in the discussion, the effect of this is to give undue weight to the person doing the ignoring. This is particularly irritating in this instance as the person doing the ignoring is largely ignorant of the facts surrounding this discussion, it becomes a waste of time.

and

2: when I read the title at the start I felt that I had more than a little real experience of the issue given that at the moment I am actually working in schools where the majority of children have ESL. However, the total refusal of some people to actually engage in discussion based on experience and fact rather than making a load of superficial assumptions renders discussion meaningless.

MrP will never really say what he means by "British Culture" because I guess he really has no idea , simply parroting what he has read in the tabloid press and driving though Lewisham and seeing some black people. As for Simon, he really needs help with his anger issues. I suggest a trip to the Fishpond in Matlock Bath for some frenzied dancing ! But he isn't listening anyway ...........
What's the point in a debate where some people are ignoring some of the participants ?
bye

[Serial_Apologist]

I am going to stop contributing to this interesting discussion for a couple of reasons

1: It really is impossible to have a discussion when one of the people contributing decides to ignore at least 2 of the other people in the discussion, the effect of this is to give undue weight to the person doing the ignoring. This is particularly irritating in this instance as the person doing the ignoring is largely ignorant of the facts surrounding this discussion, it becomes a waste of time.

and

2: when I read the title at the start I felt that I had more than a little real experience of the issue given that at the moment I am actually working in schools where the majority of children have ESL. However, the total refusal of some people to actually engage in discussion based on experience and fact rather than making a load of superficial assumptions renders discussion meaningless.

MrP will never really say what he means by "British Culture" because I guess he really has no idea , simply parroting what he has read in the tabloid press and driving though Lewisham and seeing some black people. As for Simon, he really needs help with his anger issues. I suggest a trip to the Fishpond in Matlock Bath for some frenzied dancing ! But he isn't listening anyway ...........
What's the point in a debate where some people are ignoring some of the participants ?
bye

Maybe this helps...?

[Flosshilde]

I hope that doesn't mean that you are leaving the board altogether, Mr GG?

It doesn't matter if Simon ignores one or not, as he never engages in discussion or debate over the actual arguments, but simply tells everyone how wrong everyone is & how right (in a number of senses) he is. It would be better if everyone who disagreed with him simply ignored (or Ignored) him - the he would just be talking to Mr Pee & maybe a couple of others. Then his ego would be nicely stroked & everyone would be happy.

[aeolium]

This table of data, published earlier in the year and derived from the same 2009 ONS statistics used for the Evening Standard article, shows the ethnic breakdown not just for London but for the whole of England and Wales (not sure why the rest of the UK are excluded). It shows inter al that the Standard is being economical with the truth in saying that there are 'fewer whites than ethnics in many London boroughs' as only five show a white population less than 50%. The analysis of the data trends accompanying the data table also shows that a large increase in mixed race population (of 50% since the census in 2001) was due to interrelationships across ethnic lines.

[Serial_Apologist]

This table of data, published earlier in the year and derived from the same 2009 ONS statistics used for the Evening Standard article, shows the ethnic breakdown not just for London but for the whole of England and Wales (not sure why the rest of the UK are excluded). It shows inter al that the Standard is being economical with the truth in saying that there are 'fewer whites than ethnics in many London boroughs' as only five show a white population less than 50%. The analysis of the data trends accompanying the data table also shows that a large increase in mixed race population (of 50% since the census in 2001) was due to interrelationships across ethnic lines.

I find it reassuring that, if correct, the figures quoted show that 50% increase in the mixed race population. This could give the lie to the ubiquity of racism among the general population suggested by much of the discussion on the "racism" thread here. Excepting instances of rape, one surely can't think people of racist inclinations would be wanting to sleep with those of different ethnicity, let alone have children by or with them.

[MrGongGong]

I hope that doesn't mean that you are leaving the board altogether, Mr GG?

It doesn't matter if Simon ignores one or not, as he never engages in discussion or debate over the actual arguments, but simply tells everyone how wrong everyone is & how right (in a number of senses) he is. It would be better if everyone who disagreed with him simply ignored (or Ignored) him - the he would just be talking to Mr Pee & maybe a couple of others. Then his ego would be nicely stroked & everyone would be happy.

indeed
but what's the point in trying to have a discussion when the same old nonsense just returns over and over ?
I'll get my coat and see you in the LBT

I wasn't planning on leaving all together .............

[amateur51]

I wasn't planning on leaving all together .............

Best news I've heard in a while, MrGG

[Flosshilde]

indeed
but what's the point in trying to have a discussion when the same old nonsense just returns over and over ?
I'll get my coat and see you in the LBT

I wasn't planning on leaving all together .............

I'm much relieved by that reassurance.

[Ferretfancy]

MrGongGong,

Please don't send Simon to Matlock Bath, it's a rather nice place if I remember correctly. Even the town slogan inspires confidence -- "And when the sun goes down, the fun ddosn't stop ! "

[handsomefortune]

#122 - That's life, too. Musicians ought to recognise that better than most, since their entire activity involves change, not just from generation to generation but from note to note, with each sounding note, having been sounded, giving way to someting else, however tightly organised might be the overall structure within which this occurs at any given time and within any given work.

well said ahinton! Musicians ought to recognise that better than most you'd think so! though imv everyone involved with the arts ... not just music/ians has a part to play.

physical thatre co DV8 are currently touring 'we need to talk about this'? .. i'd recommend it. it was a very diverse audience -age race gender economic etc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmP3vHb2aeE

it's been interesting to read the recent discussions, try to gauge whether posts actually engage; or whether they're 'reticent'; or, perhaps in 'paralysis' as to a pont a view; or, saying 'what's expected' socially; or censored, not allowed to think/express some things;, or controlling, ..as per DV8 exploration of tensions.

a 'reticent perspective' proved the reality the night i was in the DV8 audience: only 30% immediately put their hands up, (in the fractional window of opportunity provided), as to 'the badness of the taliban'!

personally, i was 'guilty' of reticence, since i hesitated .....(because i was pondering as to whether many rounded up and destined for gitmo, were considered 'taliban', and according to which gubmint)?

there's all sorts of reasons for reticents, but the important thing now, and that DV8 seek to emphasis, is for wide spread re-engagement, new discussion as regards freedom of speech, and other treasured aspects of uk life under threat.

! the irony of these titles co existing : 'we need to talk about kevin' currently at cinemas everywhere, and seriously terrifying; i haven't, as yet, read 'we need to talk about alan' by steve coogan ..... it'll (probably) be witty, if sour.

but DV8's 'need' is perhaps 'the greatest', since 'we need to talk about this'? might serve us all, as it re-welcomes participant citizens to the debate. evidently, no one person can/will help 'everyone' adapt, though plenty will exploit cultural tensions. regardless, we must speak up now, as (apparently) 'white reticents' is currently endangering free speech etc. (i suspect theories that wars, and consumerism have also helped mute, mask problems around discussion ie a collective paralysis....are probably true too, and that interpretation of cultural relativism is often wholey inappropriate to 'the greater good of everyone' overall, as DV8 demonstrate).

[Serial_Apologist]

#122 - That's life, too. Musicians ought to recognise that better than most, since their entire activity involves change, not just from generation to generation but from note to note, with each sounding note, having been sounded, giving way to someting else, however tightly organised might be the overall structure within which this occurs at any given time and within any given work.

well said ahinton! Musicians ought to recognise that better than most you'd think so! though imv everyone involved with the arts ... not just music/ians has a part to play.

physical thatre co DV8 are currently touring 'we need to talk about this'? .. i'd recommend it. it was a very diverse audience -age race gender economic etc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmP3vHb2aeE

it's been interesting to read the recent discussions, try to gauge whether posts actually engage; or whether they're 'reticent'; or, perhaps in 'paralysis' as to a pont a view; or, saying 'what's expected' socially; or censored, not allowed to think/express some things;, or controlling, ..as per DV8 exploration of tensions.

a 'reticent perspective' proved the reality the night i was in the DV8 audience: only 30% immediately put their hands up, (in the fractional window of opportunity provided), as to 'the badness of the taliban'!

personally, i was 'guilty' of reticence, since i hesitated .....(because i was pondering as to whether many rounded up and destined for gitmo, were considered 'taliban', and according to which gubmint)?

there's all sorts of reasons for reticents, but the important thing now, and that DV8 seek to emphasis, is for wide spread re-engagement, new discussion as regards freedom of speech, and other treasured aspects of uk life under threat.

! the irony of these titles co existing : 'we need to talk about kevin' currently at cinemas everywhere, and seriously terrifying; i haven't, as yet, read 'we need to talk about alan' by steve coogan ..... it'll (probably) be witty, if sour.

but DV8's 'need' is perhaps 'the greatest', since 'we need to talk about this'? might serve us all, as it re-welcomes participant citizens to the debate. evidently, no one person can/will help 'everyone' adapt, though plenty will exploit cultural tensions. regardless, we must speak up now, as (apparently) 'white reticents' is currently endangering free speech etc. (i suspect theories that wars, and consumerism have also helped mute, mask problems around discussion ie a collective paralysis....are probably true too, and that interpretation of cultural relativism is often wholey inappropriate to 'the greater good of everyone' overall, as DV8 demonstrate).

What really ****** me off these days are TV so-called "discussion" programmes in which views are posed a rhetorical question at the start, e.g. "Do you think IVF treatment on the NHS is a good thing?", and are then expected to phone in their vote. Totally misleading, and a total waste of time and money. That vote got 92% saying no, iirc. Obviously no reticents voting there. Forget about broadcasting standards of balance. The Dimblebums and Humphrys-Dumpties cast that aside ages ago anyway with their mid-first sentance replies interruptions and pretense at devil's advocate. Anyone surprised about reticence when questions are posed in this no grey in-between way? Er..... under what circumstances? - Doesn't figure, of course.

[Simon]

So - what shades of grey are there in expecting the taxpayer to provide IVF in this overpopulated world of ours? Should every female who can't conceive be helped to do so by the taxpayer?

Or should the money, instead, be used to provide better services for the elderly, and perhaps prevent so many of them dying in filth and discomfort for want of hydration, food, or just simply care?

[Simon]

To AH - thanks for your lucid and fair response to mine. I'll try to get back to you in a day or two.