@passingthruthislife That's true, and like 80% of immigration in this country is from the EU anyway, and since we are part of the Schengen Agreement that makes it a void a point.
482c - Choosing a leader simply because they are non-white is an empty gesture that any intelligent person will see through, making that organisation look shallow and foolish. A leader needs to be qualified for the job, no matter what ethnicity they are. A party or union would be pretty incompetent (as well as racist) to reject a candidate who could be a great leader simply because he/she had white skin.
"the left" can "accept" non-white leadership but it would be pointless and counter-productive for it to be enforced. I don't see the relevance of your examples. 21st cent Britain is very different to Algeria in 1945 under French colonial rule. Algerians won independence under a Socialist resistance. It's hardly surprising the Black Panther Party wanted black leadership considering they had all black members. The USA at the time of the civil rights movement is very different to 21st cent Britain.
You mean to AVOID racism by saying that the left MUST have a non-white leadership? Defeat racism by enforcing racism?
Im sorry, but should the reverse comment be said about ensuring that there was a non-black leader in Africa to avoid racism (which there is plenty against non-blacks), im sure you would condemn that.
How about a non-oriental leader in China?
A non-Latin leader in Latin America?
No
Your "strategy" is merely a way for you to try and appear liberal and oh-so-tolerant.
Tbh, far-left Socialist/ Communist groups in the UK have very little chance of gaining mainstream support on any issues. The BNP would actually gain support and the Left lose support if ridiculous positive discrimination rules were enforced. You're making the strange assumption that far-left groups are inherently racist when in fact it's the Socialist parties in the UK who have been most active in opposing racism and Islamophobia in recent years.
Enforcing a non-white leadership would be meaningless tokenism. So-called 'positive discrimination' is just reverse racism and personally I'm against it. Leaders should be selected on merit, not skin colour. In the UK non-white people only constitute 10% of the population, so a non-white leader chosen simply for being non-white wouldn't even be representative of a large minority.
@passingthruthislife That's true, and like 80% of immigration in this country is from the EU anyway, and since we are part of the Schengen Agreement that makes it a void a point.
jamaica2aroma 1 year ago
they're scared of everyone and everything
WhiteLionV1 2 years ago 2
Such a shame that the TRUE Left never get much publicity in the UK. BNP fuckers and Labour traitors still clog the media...
OthewolfislooseO 2 years ago 11
Well thanks for sharing. Peace : )
oclandestin 2 years ago
482c - Choosing a leader simply because they are non-white is an empty gesture that any intelligent person will see through, making that organisation look shallow and foolish. A leader needs to be qualified for the job, no matter what ethnicity they are. A party or union would be pretty incompetent (as well as racist) to reject a candidate who could be a great leader simply because he/she had white skin.
oclandestin 2 years ago
"the left" can "accept" non-white leadership but it would be pointless and counter-productive for it to be enforced. I don't see the relevance of your examples. 21st cent Britain is very different to Algeria in 1945 under French colonial rule. Algerians won independence under a Socialist resistance. It's hardly surprising the Black Panther Party wanted black leadership considering they had all black members. The USA at the time of the civil rights movement is very different to 21st cent Britain.
oclandestin 2 years ago
You mean to AVOID racism by saying that the left MUST have a non-white leadership? Defeat racism by enforcing racism?
Im sorry, but should the reverse comment be said about ensuring that there was a non-black leader in Africa to avoid racism (which there is plenty against non-blacks), im sure you would condemn that.
How about a non-oriental leader in China?
A non-Latin leader in Latin America?
No
Your "strategy" is merely a way for you to try and appear liberal and oh-so-tolerant.
yington 3 years ago 4
Tbh, far-left Socialist/ Communist groups in the UK have very little chance of gaining mainstream support on any issues. The BNP would actually gain support and the Left lose support if ridiculous positive discrimination rules were enforced. You're making the strange assumption that far-left groups are inherently racist when in fact it's the Socialist parties in the UK who have been most active in opposing racism and Islamophobia in recent years.
oclandestin 3 years ago
Thanks for your comment : )
oclandestin 3 years ago
Enforcing a non-white leadership would be meaningless tokenism. So-called 'positive discrimination' is just reverse racism and personally I'm against it. Leaders should be selected on merit, not skin colour. In the UK non-white people only constitute 10% of the population, so a non-white leader chosen simply for being non-white wouldn't even be representative of a large minority.
oclandestin 3 years ago
"The left MUST have non white leadership"
What a horribly racist comment.
Revolting.
yington 3 years ago 6
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Utter nonsense!
arcanekrusader 3 years ago
It's far from nonsense. The BNP have been capitalising on areas of high poverty, unemployment and housing demands for years.
oclandestin 3 years ago