Topic

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

ukip (LOCKED)

Page 44 of 311 < 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 >

Topic Locked

jamiemartin721 Reading 15 May 14 1.51pm
Massive fuss about nothing. The UK ecconomically cannot afford to do away with low wage migrant workers from the EU. The consequent impact of losing those workers would be a need to migrate people from elsewhere in the UK to fill employment gaps, and thats not something any government is finance. Its important to remember than in large parts the influx of migrant workers has been to fill lower wage manual and semi-skilled work in high employment areas. Whilst some unemployed exist in those regions, they aren't in sufficent numbers to fill those gaps. As for culture, culture is dynamic and changes on a continual basis. British Culture changes every generation. Those who hark back to some imagined gold age of Britishness or British culture have fallen into the trap of nostalgia and selective memory. Migration changes cultures, it doesn't render them obsolete. Culture is a discourse, not an intrinsic thing. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 15 May 14 1.51pm

Massive fuss about nothing. The UK ecconomically cannot afford to do away with low wage migrant workers from the EU. The consequent impact of losing those workers would be a need to migrate people from elsewhere in the UK to fill employment gaps, and thats not something any government is finance.

Its important to remember than in large parts the influx of migrant workers has been to fill lower wage manual and semi-skilled work in high employment areas.

Whilst some unemployed exist in those regions, they aren't in sufficent numbers to fill those gaps.

As for culture, culture is dynamic and changes on a continual basis. British Culture changes every generation. Those who hark back to some imagined gold age of Britishness or British culture have fallen into the trap of nostalgia and selective memory.

Migration changes cultures, it doesn't render them obsolete. Culture is a discourse, not an intrinsic thing.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 15 May 14 1.57pm
Quote Johnny Eagles at 15 May 2014 11.27am Quote The White Horse at 14 May 2014 4.16pm Quote Johnny Eagles at 14 May 2014 2.15pm To avoid it turning into an absolute waffle-fest, I'll concentrate my reply on just the points above. I think we actually broadly agree. We differ essentially only on one point. You think it "unlikely that an "external culture" would be able to affect the original culture profoundly". I disagree. To borrow your melting pot analogy, I see the recent wave of immigration (ie, all the Eastern Europeans) if it continues at a similar pace as much more than a few extra ingredients. I think it will completely change the recipe. I'm not claiming certainty, but I do think it likely given the scale over the last few years and the changes which have already happened in a relatively short space of time. I've yet to see anything which convinces me otherwise. I think AT BEST the politicians who unleashed this wave of immigration have simply no idea what the long-term effects will be. I therefore think it likely that the prevailing culture will be radically altered and many things which are "traditionally British" (I know this is an incredibly slippery term to use, but I don't want to get bogged down in long definitions) will disappear or alter beyond recognition. I think that's fairly speculative and doesn't culture essentially operate on a supply and demand basis? If Morris dancing is part of the traditional culture, it will be maintained only if there's a demand for it. Likewise if there are elements that disappear, that's not likely to be because the immigrants didn't care about it, more likely that non-immigrants couldn't be bothered to keep it going. I'd argue that immigration has been going on for decades in the eyes of those alive today and yet there are few examples of culture that has died. Things have been added (curry being the most obvious example) but I don't think many elements of British culture have been mourned. Quote Johnny Eagles at 14 May 2014 2.15pm Which isn't to foretell doom, necessarily. He he who rejects change is the architect of decay and all that. And I love a curry as much as the next person. But it will be sad to see some things go. And, most importantly, it's absolutely fair enough for some people to be concerned and even angry about it. It's going to have a massive effect on them and their children and they've not been given any choice in the matter whatsoever. I don't think politics should be the realm at which the parameters of culture should be defined, I think that culture should be an accidental product of society. If you want something cultural to survive, then promote it, simple as that. Speaking as a white (notionally) Christian middle class man, many facets of culture simply don't appeal to me, British or otherwise. I find this odd, since I'm kind of the target group for it. But if I don't give a toss about St George's Day or Morris dancing or whatever, I fail to see the harm on an individual level. If as an individual I ought to be contributing to the common good, I can't say I'm particularly fond of the common good being "culture", since I value far more tangible things like education, healthcare, jobs, housing and so on. If I thought immigration was a threat to these things, it might bother me, but I'm not going to lose any sleep at night over "culture". I find it quite amusing that the left-wing unionista is preaching "supply and demand" when it comes to culture. Let the free market rip, eh? I don't agree. I think that culture isn't just about supply and demand. It is something which gets handed down the generations and needs to be protected. My view on British culture is a lot like Tony Benn's view on industry, in fact. Just as you can destroy a culture of male bread-winning employment by letting the free market rip through industrial communities, so can you destroy a "traditional British" culture (again, apologies for the slippery term) by, say, letting a few million Eastern Europeans come and settle within the space of a single generation. It's not just about morris dancing and curry. It's about language, law, sense of humour. Most of all, it's about a sense of cohesion, feeling as though one is part of the same culture as the people one shares one's country with. The truth is that immigrants who come as part of a large wave tend not to integrate with the host culture but end up in ghettoes and islands of solitude. This undermines the sense of cohesion and ultimately damages society. But that has never been the case, all societies are divided by their sub-cultures. If you look back through history, you'll see societys exist as cultural discourses in conflict, not alignment and cohesion. Probably the only times when society cultural divisions are put aside is during times of war or great tragedy. To imagine a past England where everyone belonged to the same culture, spoke the same language, had a sense of cohesion and belonging is a myth. The nature of those subcultures might have been different, but they existed in conflict, not harmony or even alignment. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 15 May 14 1.57pm

Quote Johnny Eagles at 15 May 2014 11.27am

Quote The White Horse at 14 May 2014 4.16pm

Quote Johnny Eagles at 14 May 2014 2.15pm

To avoid it turning into an absolute waffle-fest, I'll concentrate my reply on just the points above.

I think we actually broadly agree. We differ essentially only on one point. You think it "unlikely that an "external culture" would be able to affect the original culture profoundly". I disagree.

To borrow your melting pot analogy, I see the recent wave of immigration (ie, all the Eastern Europeans) if it continues at a similar pace as much more than a few extra ingredients. I think it will completely change the recipe.

I'm not claiming certainty, but I do think it likely given the scale over the last few years and the changes which have already happened in a relatively short space of time. I've yet to see anything which convinces me otherwise. I think AT BEST the politicians who unleashed this wave of immigration have simply no idea what the long-term effects will be.

I therefore think it likely that the prevailing culture will be radically altered and many things which are "traditionally British" (I know this is an incredibly slippery term to use, but I don't want to get bogged down in long definitions) will disappear or alter beyond recognition.

I think that's fairly speculative and doesn't culture essentially operate on a supply and demand basis? If Morris dancing is part of the traditional culture, it will be maintained only if there's a demand for it.

Likewise if there are elements that disappear, that's not likely to be because the immigrants didn't care about it, more likely that non-immigrants couldn't be bothered to keep it going.

I'd argue that immigration has been going on for decades in the eyes of those alive today and yet there are few examples of culture that has died. Things have been added (curry being the most obvious example) but I don't think many elements of British culture have been mourned.

Quote Johnny Eagles at 14 May 2014 2.15pm

Which isn't to foretell doom, necessarily. He he who rejects change is the architect of decay and all that. And I love a curry as much as the next person. But it will be sad to see some things go. And, most importantly, it's absolutely fair enough for some people to be concerned and even angry about it. It's going to have a massive effect on them and their children and they've not been given any choice in the matter whatsoever.

I don't think politics should be the realm at which the parameters of culture should be defined, I think that culture should be an accidental product of society. If you want something cultural to survive, then promote it, simple as that.

Speaking as a white (notionally) Christian middle class man, many facets of culture simply don't appeal to me, British or otherwise. I find this odd, since I'm kind of the target group for it. But if I don't give a toss about St George's Day or Morris dancing or whatever, I fail to see the harm on an individual level.

If as an individual I ought to be contributing to the common good, I can't say I'm particularly fond of the common good being "culture", since I value far more tangible things like education, healthcare, jobs, housing and so on. If I thought immigration was a threat to these things, it might bother me, but I'm not going to lose any sleep at night over "culture".

I find it quite amusing that the left-wing unionista is preaching "supply and demand" when it comes to culture. Let the free market rip, eh?

I don't agree. I think that culture isn't just about supply and demand. It is something which gets handed down the generations and needs to be protected.

My view on British culture is a lot like Tony Benn's view on industry, in fact.

Just as you can destroy a culture of male bread-winning employment by letting the free market rip through industrial communities, so can you destroy a "traditional British" culture (again, apologies for the slippery term) by, say, letting a few million Eastern Europeans come and settle within the space of a single generation.

It's not just about morris dancing and curry. It's about language, law, sense of humour. Most of all, it's about a sense of cohesion, feeling as though one is part of the same culture as the people one shares one's country with.

The truth is that immigrants who come as part of a large wave tend not to integrate with the host culture but end up in ghettoes and islands of solitude. This undermines the sense of cohesion and ultimately damages society.

But that has never been the case, all societies are divided by their sub-cultures. If you look back through history, you'll see societys exist as cultural discourses in conflict, not alignment and cohesion. Probably the only times when society cultural divisions are put aside is during times of war or great tragedy.

To imagine a past England where everyone belonged to the same culture, spoke the same language, had a sense of cohesion and belonging is a myth. The nature of those subcultures might have been different, but they existed in conflict, not harmony or even alignment.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 15 May 14 2.08pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 15 May 2014 1.57pm But that has never been the case, all societies are divided by their sub-cultures. If you look back through history, you'll see societys exist as cultural discourses in conflict, not alignment and cohesion. Probably the only times when society cultural divisions are put aside is during times of war or great tragedy. To imagine a past England where everyone belonged to the same culture, spoke the same language, had a sense of cohesion and belonging is a myth. The nature of those subcultures might have been different, but they existed in conflict, not harmony or even alignment. You are providing an all or nothing argument here. Just because there are sub-divisions within all cultures that doesn't mean that they don't all agree that they exist within the same framework and share the same alligence. It just isn't accurate to suggest that these things aren't worthy of definable protection due to an argument based upon perceptions. We can use the argument of perception about anything and everything. Culture exists because people believe it does....The fact that people can point to sub-divisions doesn't mean that the difference in shared cultures between me and my mate in the pub isn't different to the Polish bloke I work with. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

15 May 14 2.08pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 15 May 2014 1.57pm

You are providing an all or nothing argument here.

Just because there are sub-divisions within all cultures that doesn't mean that they don't all agree that they exist within the same framework and share the same alligence.

It just isn't accurate to suggest that these things aren't worthy of definable protection due to an argument based upon perceptions. We can use the argument of perception about anything and everything.

Culture exists because people believe it does....The fact that people can point to sub-divisions doesn't mean that the difference in shared cultures between me and my mate in the pub isn't different to the Polish bloke I work with.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 15 May 14 2.11pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 15 May 2014 1.51pm Massive fuss about nothing. The UK ecconomically cannot afford to do away with low wage migrant workers from the EU. The consequent impact of losing those workers would be a need to migrate people from elsewhere in the UK to fill employment gaps, and thats not something any government is finance. Its important to remember than in large parts the influx of migrant workers has been to fill lower wage manual and semi-skilled work in high employment areas. Whilst some unemployed exist in those regions, they aren't in sufficent numbers to fill those gaps. As for culture, culture is dynamic and changes on a continual basis. British Culture changes every generation. Those who hark back to some imagined gold age of Britishness or British culture have fallen into the trap of nostalgia and selective memory. Migration changes cultures, it doesn't render them obsolete. Culture is a discourse, not an intrinsic thing. Typical left wing opinion on this: dismissal and denial. Apparently people just don't understand and their feelings on belonging and cultural/national attachment are invalid. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

15 May 14 2.11pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 15 May 2014 1.51pm

Its important to remember than in large parts the influx of migrant workers has been to fill lower wage manual and semi-skilled work in high employment areas.

Whilst some unemployed exist in those regions, they aren't in sufficent numbers to fill those gaps.

Migration changes cultures, it doesn't render them obsolete. Culture is a discourse, not an intrinsic thing.

Typical left wing opinion on this: dismissal and denial.

Apparently people just don't understand and their feelings on belonging and cultural/national attachment are invalid.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

SloveniaDave Tirana, Albania 15 May 14 3.24pm
Quote kangel at 15 May 2014 10.46am Quote SloveniaDave at 15 May 2014 10.17am Quote Penge Eagle at 15 May 2014 9.59am Quote The White Horse at 14 May 2014 11.45pm Quote Penge Eagle at 14 May 2014 11.42pm I think White Horse and Nick totally miss the point, and as ever, move the goal posts. The UKIP argument is that the UK should be in charge of controlling our borders, with an emphasis of quality, not quantity. At the moment, having the EU in charge allows the opposite - which you clearly prefer! And it also disregards high quality professionals from places like India or Australia. Edited by Penge Eagle (14 May 2014 11.44pm) Lets compromise on a third option. What do you think to nobody controlling our borders... To White Horse, question for you... Would you prefer to have totally unrestricted immigration and just limited to Europeans? All the rules made by bureaucrats in Belgium who have no real interest in the UK. OR Controlled immigration with people seeking asylum and immigrants who can fill certain job shortages that will benefit the country. Rules decided by our MPs in London and can easily held accountable. Having CONTROL ensures the balance between numbers and the impact on infrastructure and social aspects. Edited by Penge Eagle (15 May 2014 10.00am) The principle of the free movement of people, goods, services and money within the EU is a basic concept that has been agreed by all members, including the UK. It is not something made up by bureaucrats in Brussels. They only really get involved where member states do not comply. Although this results in economic migration within the EU, which causes some problems, I am convinced that the overall benefits associated with it far outweigh the problems The same principle which allows other EU nationals to come to the UK is also the one which allows the Nissan plant in Sunderland to export hundreds of thousands of cars throughout Europe with no restrictions. What are the problems you are referring to? You want me to explain what problems are associated with immigration? I would have thought that was fairly obvious in general terms. There are a number, some of which are real, some perceived and some depend on the time and the way in which it happens. Just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand! My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right. (Member of the School of Optimism 1969-2016 inclusive)
Alert a moderator to this post

SloveniaDave

Tirana, Albania 15 May 14 3.24pm

Quote kangel at 15 May 2014 10.46am

Quote SloveniaDave at 15 May 2014 10.17am

Quote Penge Eagle at 15 May 2014 9.59am

Quote The White Horse at 14 May 2014 11.45pm

Quote Penge Eagle at 14 May 2014 11.42pm

I think White Horse and Nick totally miss the point, and as ever, move the goal posts.

The UKIP argument is that the UK should be in charge of controlling our borders, with an emphasis of quality, not quantity.

At the moment, having the EU in charge allows the opposite - which you clearly prefer! And it also disregards high quality professionals from places like India or Australia.

Edited by Penge Eagle (14 May 2014 11.44pm)

Lets compromise on a third option.

What do you think to nobody controlling our borders...

To White Horse, question for you...

Would you prefer to have totally unrestricted immigration and just limited to Europeans? All the rules made by bureaucrats in Belgium who have no real interest in the UK.

Controlled immigration with people seeking asylum and immigrants who can fill certain job shortages that will benefit the country. Rules decided by our MPs in London and can easily held accountable. Having CONTROL ensures the balance between numbers and the impact on infrastructure and social aspects.

Edited by Penge Eagle (15 May 2014 10.00am)

The principle of the free movement of people, goods, services and money within the EU is a basic concept that has been agreed by all members, including the UK. It is not something made up by bureaucrats in Brussels. They only really get involved where member states do not comply.

Although this results in economic migration within the EU, which causes some problems, I am convinced that the overall benefits associated with it far outweigh the problems

The same principle which allows other EU nationals to come to the UK is also the one which allows the Nissan plant in Sunderland to export hundreds of thousands of cars throughout Europe with no restrictions.

What are the problems you are referring to?

You want me to explain what problems are associated with immigration? I would have thought that was fairly obvious in general terms.

There are a number, some of which are real, some perceived and some depend on the time and the way in which it happens.

Just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand!

My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right.

(Member of the School of Optimism 1969-2016 inclusive)

Alert a moderator to this post

Proper_Gander Anerley 15 May 14 3.33pm
Quote Stirlingsays at 15 May 2014 2.11pm Quote jamiemartin721 at 15 May 2014 1.51pm Massive fuss about nothing. The UK ecconomically cannot afford to do away with low wage migrant workers from the EU. The consequent impact of losing those workers would be a need to migrate people from elsewhere in the UK to fill employment gaps, and thats not something any government is finance. Its important to remember than in large parts the influx of migrant workers has been to fill lower wage manual and semi-skilled work in high employment areas. Whilst some unemployed exist in those regions, they aren't in sufficent numbers to fill those gaps. As for culture, culture is dynamic and changes on a continual basis. British Culture changes every generation. Those who hark back to some imagined gold age of Britishness or British culture have fallen into the trap of nostalgia and selective memory. Migration changes cultures, it doesn't render them obsolete. Culture is a discourse, not an intrinsic thing. Typical left wing opinion on this: dismissal and denial. Apparently people just don't understand and their feelings on belonging and cultural/national attachment are invalid. Oh yes, filling jobs which are paid too badly for the local populace to pick up, with foreign peasants, to enrich business owners, is a real left wing ideology.
Alert a moderator to this post

Proper_Gander

Anerley 15 May 14 3.33pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 15 May 2014 2.11pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 15 May 2014 1.51pm

Its important to remember than in large parts the influx of migrant workers has been to fill lower wage manual and semi-skilled work in high employment areas.

Whilst some unemployed exist in those regions, they aren't in sufficent numbers to fill those gaps.

Migration changes cultures, it doesn't render them obsolete. Culture is a discourse, not an intrinsic thing.

Typical left wing opinion on this: dismissal and denial.

Apparently people just don't understand and their feelings on belonging and cultural/national attachment are invalid.

Oh yes, filling jobs which are paid too badly for the local populace to pick up, with foreign peasants, to enrich business owners, is a real left wing ideology.

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 15 May 14 3.40pm
Quote Proper_Gander at 15 May 2014 3.33pm Quote Stirlingsays at 15 May 2014 2.11pm Quote jamiemartin721 at 15 May 2014 1.51pm Massive fuss about nothing. The UK ecconomically cannot afford to do away with low wage migrant workers from the EU. The consequent impact of losing those workers would be a need to migrate people from elsewhere in the UK to fill employment gaps, and thats not something any government is finance. Its important to remember than in large parts the influx of migrant workers has been to fill lower wage manual and semi-skilled work in high employment areas. Whilst some unemployed exist in those regions, they aren't in sufficent numbers to fill those gaps. As for culture, culture is dynamic and changes on a continual basis. British Culture changes every generation. Those who hark back to some imagined gold age of Britishness or British culture have fallen into the trap of nostalgia and selective memory. Migration changes cultures, it doesn't render them obsolete. Culture is a discourse, not an intrinsic thing. Typical left wing opinion on this: dismissal and denial. Apparently people just don't understand and their feelings on belonging and cultural/national attachment are invalid. Oh yes, filling jobs which are paid too badly for the local populace to pick up, with foreign peasants, to enrich business owners, is a real left wing ideology. What you are referring too there is a different aspect of the debate. Big business don't produce anything like the argument Jamie did here. Jamie's post was pure left wing idealogy of a type....Not all the of the left are so relaxed about the situation of the working class within our current EU context. You're right about certain elements of big business libertarianism but those are different arguments and beliefs even if they end up with the same result. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

15 May 14 3.40pm

Quote Proper_Gander at 15 May 2014 3.33pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 15 May 2014 2.11pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 15 May 2014 1.51pm

Its important to remember than in large parts the influx of migrant workers has been to fill lower wage manual and semi-skilled work in high employment areas.

Whilst some unemployed exist in those regions, they aren't in sufficent numbers to fill those gaps.

Migration changes cultures, it doesn't render them obsolete. Culture is a discourse, not an intrinsic thing.

Typical left wing opinion on this: dismissal and denial.

Apparently people just don't understand and their feelings on belonging and cultural/national attachment are invalid.

Oh yes, filling jobs which are paid too badly for the local populace to pick up, with foreign peasants, to enrich business owners, is a real left wing ideology.

What you are referring too there is a different aspect of the debate. Big business don't produce anything like the argument Jamie did here. Jamie's post was pure left wing idealogy of a type....Not all the of the left are so relaxed about the situation of the working class within our current EU context.

You're right about certain elements of big business libertarianism but those are different arguments and beliefs even if they end up with the same result.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 15 May 14 4.41pm
Quote Stirlingsays at 15 May 2014 2.08pm Quote jamiemartin721 at 15 May 2014 1.57pm But that has never been the case, all societies are divided by their sub-cultures. If you look back through history, you'll see societys exist as cultural discourses in conflict, not alignment and cohesion. Probably the only times when society cultural divisions are put aside is during times of war or great tragedy. To imagine a past England where everyone belonged to the same culture, spoke the same language, had a sense of cohesion and belonging is a myth. The nature of those subcultures might have been different, but they existed in conflict, not harmony or even alignment. You are providing an all or nothing argument here. Just because there are sub-divisions within all cultures that doesn't mean that they don't all agree that they exist within the same framework and share the same alligence. It just isn't accurate to suggest that these things aren't worthy of definable protection due to an argument based upon perceptions. We can use the argument of perception about anything and everything. Culture exists because people believe it does....The fact that people can point to sub-divisions doesn't mean that the difference in shared cultures between me and my mate in the pub isn't different to the Polish bloke I work with. Usually sub-cultural movements have a number of share themes, what they tend to differ on is how those shared ideas are expressed and valued. Typically thats where conflict occurs, and change in society occurs as those discourses are resolved, and then the next generation of discourses evolve. Its almost human nature for culture to change over time, as people interact and engage in social behaviour and self expression. The British culture of my youth is a far cry from that of my 40s - and thats inevitable, the nature of all things is change. The problem is we tend to nostaligise a past that never really existed. When I say conflict I don't mean war and violence, but of clashing ideologies, views and social movements. The recent past was one of conflict, the very nature of Industrial society was one of social divsions acting in direct opposition. The 60s to late 80s were a period of great upheaval, and social and cultural change in the face of resistance to those changes. Trying to 'control' cultural change is like trying to order back the sea. Culture doesn't exist because people believe in it, so much as culture and people are utterly inseperable concepts. Successive migrations into the UK created new and different patterns and cultural influences as well as options, that over time have merged into, and some times supplanted, existing cultures. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 15 May 14 4.41pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 15 May 2014 2.08pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 15 May 2014 1.57pm

You are providing an all or nothing argument here.

Just because there are sub-divisions within all cultures that doesn't mean that they don't all agree that they exist within the same framework and share the same alligence.

Usually sub-cultural movements have a number of share themes, what they tend to differ on is how those shared ideas are expressed and valued. Typically thats where conflict occurs, and change in society occurs as those discourses are resolved, and then the next generation of discourses evolve.

Its almost human nature for culture to change over time, as people interact and engage in social behaviour and self expression. The British culture of my youth is a far cry from that of my 40s - and thats inevitable, the nature of all things is change. The problem is we tend to nostaligise a past that never really existed.

When I say conflict I don't mean war and violence, but of clashing ideologies, views and social movements.

The recent past was one of conflict, the very nature of Industrial society was one of social divsions acting in direct opposition. The 60s to late 80s were a period of great upheaval, and social and cultural change in the face of resistance to those changes.

Trying to 'control' cultural change is like trying to order back the sea.

Culture doesn't exist because people believe in it, so much as culture and people are utterly inseperable concepts. Successive migrations into the UK created new and different patterns and cultural influences as well as options, that over time have merged into, and some times supplanted, existing cultures.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 15 May 14 4.51pm
Quote Stirlingsays at 15 May 2014 2.11pm Quote jamiemartin721 at 15 May 2014 1.51pm Massive fuss about nothing. The UK ecconomically cannot afford to do away with low wage migrant workers from the EU. The consequent impact of losing those workers would be a need to migrate people from elsewhere in the UK to fill employment gaps, and thats not something any government is finance. Its important to remember than in large parts the influx of migrant workers has been to fill lower wage manual and semi-skilled work in high employment areas. Whilst some unemployed exist in those regions, they aren't in sufficent numbers to fill those gaps. As for culture, culture is dynamic and changes on a continual basis. British Culture changes every generation. Those who hark back to some imagined gold age of Britishness or British culture have fallen into the trap of nostalgia and selective memory. Migration changes cultures, it doesn't render them obsolete. Culture is a discourse, not an intrinsic thing. Typical left wing opinion on this: dismissal and denial. Apparently people just don't understand and their feelings on belonging and cultural/national attachment are invalid. I wouldn't go so far as to say they're invalid, they're invalid to some, questioned by others. I think its always more interesting and important as to why people think or feel something, than just accepting that they are validated just because they experience them. I have cultural attachments, feelings of belonging, and a national identity (admittedly one probably based on the rejection of the idea of nation identity). We all do, its impossible not to, we are all produced within the discourses of our social environments and experiences. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 15 May 14 4.51pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 15 May 2014 2.11pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 15 May 2014 1.51pm

Its important to remember than in large parts the influx of migrant workers has been to fill lower wage manual and semi-skilled work in high employment areas.

Whilst some unemployed exist in those regions, they aren't in sufficent numbers to fill those gaps.

Migration changes cultures, it doesn't render them obsolete. Culture is a discourse, not an intrinsic thing.

Typical left wing opinion on this: dismissal and denial.

Apparently people just don't understand and their feelings on belonging and cultural/national attachment are invalid.

I wouldn't go so far as to say they're invalid, they're invalid to some, questioned by others. I think its always more interesting and important as to why people think or feel something, than just accepting that they are validated just because they experience them.

I have cultural attachments, feelings of belonging, and a national identity (admittedly one probably based on the rejection of the idea of nation identity). We all do, its impossible not to, we are all produced within the discourses of our social environments and experiences.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 15 May 14 4.55pm
Quote Stirlingsays at 15 May 2014 3.40pm Quote Proper_Gander at 15 May 2014 3.33pm Quote Stirlingsays at 15 May 2014 2.11pm Quote jamiemartin721 at 15 May 2014 1.51pm Massive fuss about nothing. The UK ecconomically cannot afford to do away with low wage migrant workers from the EU. The consequent impact of losing those workers would be a need to migrate people from elsewhere in the UK to fill employment gaps, and thats not something any government is finance. Its important to remember than in large parts the influx of migrant workers has been to fill lower wage manual and semi-skilled work in high employment areas. Whilst some unemployed exist in those regions, they aren't in sufficent numbers to fill those gaps. As for culture, culture is dynamic and changes on a continual basis. British Culture changes every generation. Those who hark back to some imagined gold age of Britishness or British culture have fallen into the trap of nostalgia and selective memory. Migration changes cultures, it doesn't render them obsolete. Culture is a discourse, not an intrinsic thing. Typical left wing opinion on this: dismissal and denial. Apparently people just don't understand and their feelings on belonging and cultural/national attachment are invalid. Oh yes, filling jobs which are paid too badly for the local populace to pick up, with foreign peasants, to enrich business owners, is a real left wing ideology. What you are referring too there is a different aspect of the debate. Big business don't produce anything like the argument Jamie did here. Jamie's post was pure left wing idealogy of a type....Not all the of the left are so relaxed about the situation of the working class within our current EU context. You're right about certain elements of big business libertarianism but those are different arguments and beliefs even if they end up with the same result. Its more based on Social Constructionist theory and phenomonological research of culture. Traditionally the leftists have always been more influenced by modernism and empiricisim. I've been a long critic of the effect that ecconomic migration has had on producing an artifically low working wage - and how that has perpetuated the problem of an underclass and 'benefits' classes. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 15 May 14 4.55pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 15 May 2014 3.40pm

Quote Proper_Gander at 15 May 2014 3.33pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 15 May 2014 2.11pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 15 May 2014 1.51pm

Its important to remember than in large parts the influx of migrant workers has been to fill lower wage manual and semi-skilled work in high employment areas.

Whilst some unemployed exist in those regions, they aren't in sufficent numbers to fill those gaps.

Migration changes cultures, it doesn't render them obsolete. Culture is a discourse, not an intrinsic thing.

Typical left wing opinion on this: dismissal and denial.

Apparently people just don't understand and their feelings on belonging and cultural/national attachment are invalid.

Oh yes, filling jobs which are paid too badly for the local populace to pick up, with foreign peasants, to enrich business owners, is a real left wing ideology.

What you are referring too there is a different aspect of the debate. Big business don't produce anything like the argument Jamie did here. Jamie's post was pure left wing idealogy of a type....Not all the of the left are so relaxed about the situation of the working class within our current EU context.

You're right about certain elements of big business libertarianism but those are different arguments and beliefs even if they end up with the same result.

Its more based on Social Constructionist theory and phenomonological research of culture. Traditionally the leftists have always been more influenced by modernism and empiricisim.

I've been a long critic of the effect that ecconomic migration has had on producing an artifically low working wage - and how that has perpetuated the problem of an underclass and 'benefits' classes.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

kangel 15 May 14 5.24pm
Quote SloveniaDave at 15 May 2014 3.24pm Quote kangel at 15 May 2014 10.46am Quote SloveniaDave at 15 May 2014 10.17am Quote Penge Eagle at 15 May 2014 9.59am Quote The White Horse at 14 May 2014 11.45pm Quote Penge Eagle at 14 May 2014 11.42pm I think White Horse and Nick totally miss the point, and as ever, move the goal posts. The UKIP argument is that the UK should be in charge of controlling our borders, with an emphasis of quality, not quantity. At the moment, having the EU in charge allows the opposite - which you clearly prefer! And it also disregards high quality professionals from places like India or Australia. Edited by Penge Eagle (14 May 2014 11.44pm) Lets compromise on a third option. What do you think to nobody controlling our borders... To White Horse, question for you... Would you prefer to have totally unrestricted immigration and just limited to Europeans? All the rules made by bureaucrats in Belgium who have no real interest in the UK. OR Controlled immigration with people seeking asylum and immigrants who can fill certain job shortages that will benefit the country. Rules decided by our MPs in London and can easily held accountable. Having CONTROL ensures the balance between numbers and the impact on infrastructure and social aspects. Edited by Penge Eagle (15 May 2014 10.00am) The principle of the free movement of people, goods, services and money within the EU is a basic concept that has been agreed by all members, including the UK. It is not something made up by bureaucrats in Brussels. They only really get involved where member states do not comply. Although this results in economic migration within the EU, which causes some problems, I am convinced that the overall benefits associated with it far outweigh the problems The same principle which allows other EU nationals to come to the UK is also the one which allows the Nissan plant in Sunderland to export hundreds of thousands of cars throughout Europe with no restrictions. What are the problems you are referring to? You want me to explain what problems are associated with immigration? I would have thought that was fairly obvious in general terms. There are a number, some of which are real, some perceived and some depend on the time and the way in which it happens. As you admit that there a number of problems. If you could actually name them, then we could go on to discuss how big these problems need to become before the problems outweigh the benefits. As for the Nissan plant in Sunderland, if they produce products that people want to buy, then they will still export hundreds of thousands of cars throughout Europe, whether we are in the EU or not. Edited by kangel (15 May 2014 5.57pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

kangel

15 May 14 5.24pm

Quote SloveniaDave at 15 May 2014 3.24pm

Quote kangel at 15 May 2014 10.46am

Quote SloveniaDave at 15 May 2014 10.17am

Quote Penge Eagle at 15 May 2014 9.59am

Quote The White Horse at 14 May 2014 11.45pm

Quote Penge Eagle at 14 May 2014 11.42pm

I think White Horse and Nick totally miss the point, and as ever, move the goal posts.

The UKIP argument is that the UK should be in charge of controlling our borders, with an emphasis of quality, not quantity.

At the moment, having the EU in charge allows the opposite - which you clearly prefer! And it also disregards high quality professionals from places like India or Australia.

Edited by Penge Eagle (14 May 2014 11.44pm)

Lets compromise on a third option.

What do you think to nobody controlling our borders...

To White Horse, question for you...

Would you prefer to have totally unrestricted immigration and just limited to Europeans? All the rules made by bureaucrats in Belgium who have no real interest in the UK.

Edited by Penge Eagle (15 May 2014 10.00am)

Although this results in economic migration within the EU, which causes some problems, I am convinced that the overall benefits associated with it far outweigh the problems

What are the problems you are referring to?

You want me to explain what problems are associated with immigration? I would have thought that was fairly obvious in general terms.

There are a number, some of which are real, some perceived and some depend on the time and the way in which it happens.

As you admit that there a number of problems. If you could actually name them, then we could go on to discuss how big these problems need to become before the problems outweigh the benefits.

As for the Nissan plant in Sunderland, if they produce products that people want to buy, then they will still export hundreds of thousands of cars throughout Europe, whether we are in the EU or not.

Edited by kangel (15 May 2014 5.57pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 15 May 14 5.47pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 15 May 2014 4.55pm Its more based on Social Constructionist theory and phenomonological research of culture. Traditionally the leftists have always been more influenced by modernism and empiricisim. I've been a long critic of the effect that ecconomic migration has had on producing an artifically low working wage - and how that has perpetuated the problem of an underclass and 'benefits' classes. You have and we share that belief..I'm just opposing on the specific points in that particular post. As an aside, no one sensible really blames an immigrant for wishing to improve their life....It's always down those in power taking certain views based upon their attitude to business or the EU. Edited by Stirlingsays (15 May 2014 5.47pm) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

15 May 14 5.47pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 15 May 2014 4.55pm

Its more based on Social Constructionist theory and phenomonological research of culture. Traditionally the leftists have always been more influenced by modernism and empiricisim.

I've been a long critic of the effect that ecconomic migration has had on producing an artifically low working wage - and how that has perpetuated the problem of an underclass and 'benefits' classes.

You have and we share that belief..I'm just opposing on the specific points in that particular post.

As an aside, no one sensible really blames an immigrant for wishing to improve their life....It's always down those in power taking certain views based upon their attitude to business or the EU.

Edited by Stirlingsays (15 May 2014 5.47pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Topic Locked

Page 44 of 311 < 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

ukip (LOCKED)

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors