oh Mrs Duffy

[MrGongGong]

I expect Risorgimento means that there have, subsequently, been certain problems to which aeolium was alluding. But to use 'ethnic cleansing' to describe the policy trivialises the horrific atrocities that have been carried out in various parts of the world which DO deserve that emotive description.

Indeed

I'm struck by how the phase ("multiculturalism hasn't worked") is trotted out without any examination of meaning.
It seems that it has become a "truth" by repetition.

[Risorgimento]

.... By going for HIV, Farage appears to me to be targetting unpopular grouips, such as gay men and people from immigrants from Africa, good solid UKIP targets. .....
'

That's one interpretation, I guess. But then one can interpret anything to suit ones viewpoint.

[Risorgimento]

.....
Can you (or anyone else who uses this piece of "received wisdom") give me an example ?

....

The thing is that for every article or reference I will produce arguing that multiculturalism hasn't worked, you will be able to produce a reference that says that it does. So, at the end of the day, as you have noted it comes down to personal observation. Yours is that it works. Mine is that it doesn't. And judging by the recent by-election results, many would agree with me.

[MrGongGong]

The thing is that for every article or reference I will produce arguing that multiculturalism hasn't worked, you will be able to produce a reference that says that it does. So, at the end of the day, as you have noted it comes down to personal observation. Yours is that it works. Mine is that it doesn't. And judging by the recent by-election results, many would agree with me.

That's a rather strange way of conducting a conversation / discussion
So, you simply make a statement with no supporting evidence or rationale ?
You haven't even suggested what exactly YOU mean by "multiculturalism" ?

Just because lots of people can be convinced by obnoxious people means what ?

Why bother saying something if you won't support it in any way ?

What IS YOUR observation then ?

[french frank]

The thing is that for every article or reference I will produce arguing that multiculturalism hasn't worked, you will be able to produce a reference that says that it does. So, at the end of the day, as you have noted it comes down to personal observation. Yours is that it works. Mine is that it doesn't. And judging by the recent by-election results, many would agree with me.

I would have said that it boils down to a polarisation of views: multiculturalism hasn't worked v. multiculturalim has worked.

Or immigration NOT good v. immigration NOT bad. And not a lot of weighing of any view that appears to contradict, even partially, one's own view based on "observation".

[Risorgimento]

..... And not a lot of weighing of any view that appears to contradict, even partially, one's own view based on "observation".

Which pretty much sums up the stance taken by most people.

Certainly there are a lot of closed minds here and I have no intention of getting drawn in to a pointless discussion since I know that nothing that I say (even though it might be valid or based on research, articles, expert opinion) will change their opinions. Suffice to say that for all the negative interpretation of UKIP's policies, there are equally valid alternative interpretations which find merit among an increasing number of the electorate viz last Thursday's results.

[MrGongGong]

Which pretty much sums up the stance taken by most people.

Certainly there are a lot of closed minds here and I have no intention of getting drawn in to a pointless discussion since I know that nothing that I say (even though it might be valid or based on research, articles, expert opinion) will change their opinions. Suffice to say that for all the negative interpretation of UKIP's policies, there are equally valid alternative interpretations which find merit among an increasing number of the electorate viz last Thursday's results.

The moon is made of cheese
It is
It really is

and i'm not going to discuss it with people with "closed minds"
I'm not
in fact
i'm going to keep saying it over and over again
and if I get lots of people to say it THAT will make it true

[french frank]

Certainly there are a lot of closed minds here and I have no intention of getting drawn in to a pointless discussion since I know that nothing that I say (even though it might be valid or based on research, articles, expert opinion) will change their opinions.

But some policies are based on principle: that some things are right and other things are wrong. Producing research, articles, expert opinion that another view commands the support of the majority, isn't enough to change the minds on the principle of the course of action.

Democracy in the end will probably have its way, but for individuals the general principle of what you believe to be morally right won't give in to demagoguery or mob rule.

[amateur51]

Which pretty much sums up the stance taken by most people.

Certainly there are a lot of closed minds here and I have no intention of getting drawn in to a pointless discussion since I know that nothing that I say (even though it might be valid or based on research, articles, expert opinion) will change their opinions. Suffice to say that for all the negative interpretation of UKIP's policies, there are equally valid alternative interpretations which find merit among an increasing number of the electorate viz last Thursday's results.

Welcome back Simon.

My regards to Mr & Mrs Khan when next you see them

[Risorgimento]

Welcome back Simon.

My regards to Mr & Mrs Khan when next you see them

I'm very confused about the constant reference to Simon. Perhaps you can enlighten me?

It is interesting to see the responses from you and Mr GG but exactly what I expected. Stupid little smug jokes and innuendo. You both try to bully your way through against anyone who dares to say that there is a different viewpoint but sadly the browbeating and bullying of you and your ilk ends up with 1400 girls being raped and sexually abused in Rotherham.

In comparison, French Frank argues her points with lucidity and reason.

[MrGongGong]

Welcome back Simon.

My regards to Mr & Mrs Khan when next you see them

HA HA HA HA

Spot on methinks

Prof Says returns ?
I wonder if the

every article or reference I will produce

are the legendary "academic" papers from the University ?

(it's OK FF i'm not going to start up the whole Rupert Bear thing again )

[MrGongGong]

I'm very confused about the constant reference to Simon. Perhaps you can enlighten me?

It is interesting to see the responses from you and Mr GG but exactly what I expected. Stupid little smug jokes and innuendo. You both try to bully your way through against anyone who dares to say that there is a different viewpoint but sadly the browbeating and bullying of you and your ilk ends up with 1400 girls being raped and sexually abused in Rotherham.

Trouble is matey
you seem to

1: Have very little to say
2: Take yourself far too seriously
3: and i'll ignore the ignorant and stupid last comment

Why not try DISCUSSING ?

oh and i don't have an "ilk" I don't even have a small group of caribou (but I do have one of their CD's)

[amateur51]

I'm very confused about the constant reference to Simon. Perhaps you can enlighten me?

It is interesting to see the responses from you and Mr GG but exactly what I expected. Stupid little smug jokes and innuendo. You both try to bully your way through against anyone who dares to say that there is a different viewpoint but sadly the browbeating and bullying of you and your ilk ends up with 1400 girls being raped and sexually abused in Rotherham.

In comparison, French Frank argues her points with lucidity and reason.

Which is in marked contrast to your modus operandi Simon, which is so instantly recognisable. i have quoted a source & an article. I wait for any supporting evidence from you ... but on your past form I'm not holding my breath.

[french frank]

Drop the heavy hints about Simon, chums - you're quite wrong!

[Risorgimento]

....And not a lot of weighing of any view that appears to contradict, even partially, one's own view based on "observation".

This is very true although not everyone is tarred by the same brush. It's why some people read the Daily Mail and others The Guardian. I read neither. I loathe the former for its emotive simplistic rhetoric. And I loathe the Guardian for its emotive simplistic rhetoric.