Perhaps we have different opinions on what the desired outcome of an e-petition is. As far as I can see none of the ones that have been debated have influenced Govt policy whatsoever (btw Moose the response to the Sugar Tax one was unequivocal - The Government has no plans to introduce a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages). What is the point of the petitions then? Raising awareness of an issue? Before reading Moose's post how many of the other debated e-petitions were you aware of? Anyway, we can agree to disagree. Maybe I'll change my mind when one of these debates has such an effect on public opinion that it forces a change of Government policy. I accept that it may happen one day but so far after each debate the Government simply issue a statement re-affirming their existing position.
She's very popular with the Iowa evangelicals, hence why he recruited her to give him the rub. Could be the difference in the Iowa vote against Cruz, who's spending most of his time denying he's a Canadian.
Just tried to take my mind off the lack of Suarez news by watching the C4 doc from earlier this week on 'The Donald'. He's clearly unhinged yet what he stands for is hugely attractive to large chunks of the US electorate. I can't help thinking that its only a matter of time before someone with similar appeal emerges that those Europeans who feel marginalised by the policies of the EU liberal political elite can fall-in behind
Because we've been so short of right wing mavericks who shoot their mouths off at the first possible opportunity to the lowest and most divisive denominator.
Boris Johnson isn't particularly right wing at all, a point highlighted by his two election victories in traditionally Labour London. He's not divisive either, most of his political positions are centrist (which may ultimately cost him his chance of becoming Tory leader). As for Lloyd's original point, all over Europe parties that are far to the right (and indeed left) of traditional European political discourse are gaining popularity. Some EU members already have some pretty extreme right wing leaders such as Orban in Hungary and Duda in Poland. The migration crisis isn't going to stop anytime soon and this is likely to further boost these parties. It won't happen in the UK but Lloyd is right, there is a real chance that other European countries may well elect charismatic, nationalist leaders in the coming years.
Steve, you are missing the point. We are never short of a right wing rentamouth. Lloyd was somehow implying that this was new and that whingeing right wing crybabies across Europe might finally gain critical mass. But this type of politician has been an ever present and even now, following Paris and the migrant crisis Marine Le Pen made fairly dismal gains. UKIP? Going nowhere. The more these figures emerge the more the reaction to the centre. The 'right' have been allegedly on the march all my life and yet what has really happened? Anti racism, sexual equality and tolerance are the norm and demanded by a vociferous middle.
There is little doubt that the immigrant issue will bring a backlash in Europe, and it will test the right to free speech throughout. But it won't be just be from the far right, it will also be from just normal people of all political persuasions who just want their way of life to continue as it has done over most of their lives. When they see their chance of getting a house or jobs drastically reduced, or their neighbourhood become like a foreign land with no identity, they will just get upset. They don't like thousands of their young women sexually assaulted in the streets, or gangs of pickpockets marauding around public places. Most don't like that sort of change, they like constancy or gradual change, it is human nature and any attempts by others to tell them that they should welcome and embrace the forced changes, just won't be tolerated as they do not have those liberal political ideals to drive them.
Not everyone blames migrants because they can't get a house. Many people see inequality as the bigger issue. Tolerance to asylum has been overwhelmingly upheld across Europe. It's not beyond Europe to deal with migrancy robustly. But it's not as if any right wing freak has the answer. They can shout no more migrants all they like, but they haven't got a snowball's chance in hell of pulling off without working together. Europe's tastes are for low level efficient asylum processing, with advantageous migrancy only and swift deportation for transgressors. You don't need Jorge Haider for that.
I didnt say "everyone". I am talking about those that are directly affected by the influx of immigrants in their area. 10,000 a day are coming across, they can not be absorbed without affecting the incumbents. And the majority of people do not see inequality (as you see it) as a major issue, that is reserved for the politically minded. But they will baulk at immigrants getting shoe-horned in to the housing waiting lists, or driving down the wages, that sort of inequality will upset them. As for rapid deportation, Sweden have already identified 80,000 illegal immigrants and estimate that it will take years to deport them. In the meantime they have to be housed, fed and watered in the community - and they are still arriving. If you think that will not cause the (normal) locals to get annoyed then you have little understanding of normal people. Anyway, we will see who is right over the next year or two.
The Front National went from 2 million votes in 2010 to almost 7 million in 2015, increasing their share of the vote from 9% to 27%. They only failed to secure any departments due to mass tactical voting. UKIP went from 3% to 12% of the vote, and went from 500,000 to almost 4 million votes. They're also our largest party in the European Parliament. This pattern is repeated in many countries across Northern Europe, including the Danish People's Party, Sweden Democrats, Freedom Party in Austria, Finns Party. All of these parties have had rapid rises in popularity, hugely increasing their vote share in the last 5-10 years. In some of these countries, these parties are now even in coalitions and their policies are being felt - eg the Danish decision to confiscate property worth over 1000 euros from migrants. Poland and Hungary already have right wing authoritarian leaders and even in Greece, the neo-nazi Golden Dawn took almost 10% of the vote in 2014, up from 0.5% in 2010. All of these parties are further to the right than UKIP, yet they're still making large gains. Whilst far right parties and vociferous leaders are not new, the circumstances are now different. They are able to exploit pan-European dissatisfaction with the EU and fears about immigration, neither of which concerns are likely to be allayed any time soon. You may not think it's anything to worry about, but I do...
I agree with ZZ's view that it is mainly the politically-inclined who worry about inequality. In fact, I'd say, far from being obsessed with inequality, most 'ordinary' people respect hard work and admire those who have done well for themselves.
Even the National Front managed some impressive polling shows in 70's. I don't like these right wing parties and politics is turbulent right now, enough so for more socialist parties to have some success like in Greece and Portugal. But rightward is not the inevitable direction of travel in Europe - skim the surface it's same old. Any right wing party wanting success would have to leave most of it's ideology behind. The difference is that once the left were loudest. The right have adopted injured party, victim politics, consequently shouting loudly - only take them so far though.
People can hold more than one view at a time. Sure many people are unhappy about how they feel migration affects them personally, but if they don't get what they need they'll take it to their boss, the council, the Government, anyone. It is not inevitable that people blame the new comer and most are aware that the problem won't disappear with the migrants. In Scotland they certainly think differently.
I am not so familiar with the European political landscape, but not true in this country, the far left are far louder. We have little far right support in this country. As you have admitted in the past, much of the UKIP voters were actually more left than right in their thinking. I don't think that immigration is a right v left issue, although it is usually portrayed as such. Alf Garnett, with his racist attitude, could just so easily have been a Labour voter. We regularly hear Labour voter types saying that we should control immigration. It is, as I have already stated, about the fact that immigration tends to reduce housing and job opportunities and drive down wages in affected localities. Even our own Godfather, who is definitely left of centre, agrees with that, even if you deny it.
The highest the National Front ever polled in a General Election was 0.6% of the vote. They never even won a council seat and only saved their deposit once in a General Election. To compare them to parties that are taking millions of votes and actually participating in government is ridiculous. To say that any extreme right wing party needs to temper its policies to achieve success is nonsense - there are already parties both in coalition and majority governments across Europe that have got there on these manifestos. I think you're approaching this from a UK point of view rather than looking across Europe - it's true that far right politics is unlikely to make much of an impression here but it already is in several parts of Europe. The longer the migration crisis continues, the more it plays into the hands of the far right.
You are not entirely correct about the NF, but whatever. What is it you think these right wing parties can do? In the face of the other member states, commerce and free trade? Even if they break the EU political project up then what?
It isn't so polarising or black and white as you try and make out. Of course no one is suggesting that if immigration stopped everyone would get a job and a house to live in. But immigration can only make a bad situation worse, it is pure arithmetic. You are also wrong in stating that Scotland is thinking the same as you. The main issue there is that the loud Nationalist Party is left-wing and they recognise that their population is slipping in many respects. But Scotland has around half the immigrant population as percentage, 7% v 14% for the UK and so have been relatively unaffected up to now, yet 58% or 69% (dependent on survey) believe immigration should be reduced. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-25910947
I'm sorry, but so what? People are perfectly able to demand curbs on migrancy, more jobs and housing and (for example) gay rights altogether. It doesn't mean they will all stick their jackboots on. No one will match President Trump for dangerousness because no one else has the isolation and the firepower. It's not analogous other than cometh the hour cometh some right wing t.wat to suck up a few of the gullible. But not enough in the EU.
So what? How can anyone "demand" curbs on immigration when they are up against the entire EU machine. As I said, we shall see.
They can't do it alone either - it's a drawbridge up fantasy dismissed by commerce. Well if you believe right wing street and repressive state fury is an inevitable consequence of the current issues facing Europe I hope we can count on your support to oppose it and defeat it's fibs.
What am I wrong about in relation to the NF? What can these parties do? Well, how about pass laws restricting the media in Poland, seize the property of migrants on arrival in Denmark, remove the independence of state broadcast media/judiciary and criminalise refugees by making it an offence for them to cross the border into Hungary. You may think those things are trivial or perhaps you weren't aware of them but that is the reality of these parties being in government. Their policies are having a very real effect on the people of those countries and others. You can carry on sticking your head in the sand though and pass it all off as just a load of scaremongering...
No I don't write those off and I don't like them - I don't see them as a Trump sized threat across Europe though. The Danish thing won't work - is gesture politics and will result in the Government falling there. Poland has always been volatile, Eastern Europe struggling to democracy. It's a high watermark but social democracy is massively stronger. The NF polled up to 20% in some local elections and were widely used as a reason on the left to oppose PR. OK they were small compared to the watered down versions making gains - what I meant was that we have had this fear before. It's not new.
Jeez. Why do you always equate right wing with racism? The BNP are a left wing party for example. You can be right or left wing economically and then racist or not.
Silly - A poll thanks for that. I think the General Election demonstrated the drift there a bit more clearly.
These are the sort of untruths we must guard against. The SNP has pro immigration as one part of its entire manifesto, and you think their vote means that the entire Scottish nation is pro immigration, even when specific polls on immigration clearly show the opposite. Let's not be daft here, Moose, it would be a much better discussion if you stick to be being sensible, reasonable and honest when trying to defend your views. Then we can discuss our opinions based on the truth.
Your game is always transparent ZZ. Clearly migrancy and asylum have been poorly handled in many aspects encouraging too many to come at risk to themselves and stretching the ability of some nations to cope. But for you it's a trojan horse to defeat all kinds of liberal, leftish wrongness you perceive (as if permissiveness was really at the root of the global forces that have created this mess) and triumphantly park a narrow and mistrustful world view. Thankfully most people don't see it that way, know issues can't be reduced to soundbites alone.
Why should rUK get twice as many immigrants as Scotland? As usual we are left out of the economic benefit that these migrants bring (as previously agreed by just about everyone in respect to GDP). Scotland's population has only increased 17% since WW2 and England's population has grown by 57%. Therefor housing shortages are more likely to be caused by the homegrown population of rUK than in Scotland. Yet our housing shortages are on a par with rUK figures. Another myth about immigration busted with pure arithmetic... IMO the reason 50 - 60% of Scots are against immigration is because of the relentlessly successful fear mongering and lack of interest in the facts. When people bring up their fears over immigration on the high street, the justification of it is usually referencing a visit to Manchester or Bradford where immigration has been handled badly (lack of integration and inclusion resulting in palpable tension felt by visitors and residents). Tribal or local mentallity towards competition also play a large part in their fears and is hard for us to overcome this hangover of evolution. I also believe that the terms "we will see" and "we'll find out in a few years" are divisive tools to try to divide and demonize before the fact. Unhelpful with an emotive subject. On Topic: I signed the trump ban as I was emotionally compromised due to my affection for Muslim relatives and friends. On reflection he (and his investment) are welcome in Scotland as long as he is prepared to receive criticism of his world views. He is after all half Scottish and could apply for dual citizenship from the UK gov if the ban was enforced by the home secretary. My MP abhors his opinions but recognizes that the 270 jobs he is accredited with in our constituency are vital for the employees' families. My advice for Trump: Politics is about balancing your head and your heart after reflection on impulses rather than "sticking to your guns" to save face.
Do you actually read what I said? I have said several times that immigration is not an issue of right v left. I cannot get any clearer than that! Yes, and thank you, hopefully I do come across as transparent, I have no wish to hide my feelings or opinions. There is no "game" on my part. Truth and openness, that is me all over. You should try it sometimes.
If you read my post properly instead of clamouring to jump on posts by others that usually disagree with you, you would be less inclined to post incorrectly in haste as you did when you voted to ban Trump. At the risk of sounding patronising, take your time, read properly, and think. I was clearly demonstrating that Moose was wrong when he implied that Scotland was pro immigration as a whole. I couldn't care less why they mostly want immigration reduced, nor if they are right or wrong. I have no view on it. I was just reporting the figures. As long as they stay there, they can have as many immigrants as they want, and take them with them when they vote for independence whenever it comes. As for my "we shall see" comments, we are predicting the future. No matter what our opinions are now we can argue all day and night, but we cannot be certain that each of us, or any of us, will be right. We were going round in circles. So I say we shall see who is right and wrong in the fullness of time. If you find that "divisive" or "demonizing", I find that strange. Re Trump, so your initial view that he should be banned because of his bigoted views has been overridden, not by the freedom of speech argument, but by the £m's he will invest in a local golf club. Fair enough, I think your honesty is refreshing in this case.
So nothing I said about the National Front was incorrect then? I accept your apology. Neither of us knows what the result of the Danish policy will be, to just blithely state it will bring down the government there is speculation. The purpose of that law is to make Denmark less appealing to migrants and asylum seekers. Polls show that 70% of Danish citizens consider excess immigration to be the most serious issue facing their country. It's a bit patronising to suggest that Poland and parts of Eastern Europe are still struggling to come to terms with democracy when they've had 25 years of elections. What is concerning is that Poland turned to such a right wing government after an almost unprecedented period of prosperity and stability. You also seem to be ignoring the fact that it's in Scandinavia (which has often been heralded as the leading example of social democracy) that some of the biggest gains have been made by right wing nationalist parties. Anyway, there seems little point continuing this as your mind is made up that Europe doesn't have a problem with the rise of the far right as you've seen it all before and nothing you say will convince me that this isn't an unprecedentedly precarious situation for Europe. Have a good weekend, here's to a win at the City Ground!
Sound advice that I will endeavour to follow, although forgive my knee jerk reactions when I fail. You should try to care more. Resolution of our differences can only be achieved through understanding which requires at least a modicum of empathy. Economic migrants will go to where the money/prosperity are and an iScotland will not restrict the freedom of movement of anybody as long as I can help it. You don't need to worry, we ain't going anywhere for a long time... What I find strange is that you come across as wanting your (-ve) opinion on migrants to be true and some sort of societal breakdown will make you happy as it would prove your point. Immigrants will come and go forever as has happened throughout human history and your "we will see" comments will echo in eternity with no success. If societal breakdown occurs it will be down to those who didn't care enough to prevent it rather than those who tackle the issues of integration to improve relations that are outwith our natural (white, Christian,Brittish) comfort zones. Freedom of speech is not in question here. If Trump makes these statements in the UK he will be arrested and charged for inciting racial hatred. He is still free to express his views and must accept the consequences. If I ever wanted to encourage Scots to treat the English badly I am free to express that and I am aware that I will be charged for incitement. Fortunately I don't hold -ve opinions about the English although I have had bad experiences with individuals that are English/Welsh/Scottish/Irish/Catholic/Muslim/black/brown white..... Do you believe that hate preachers of any sort are welcome in the UK? Will you be contacting Theresa May to pressure her to lift the ban's already imposed on presumably dangerous individuals? Sorry I forgot you "don't care". Real peoples lives are important to me and I am not stupid enough to endanger the financial security of others to provide me with a sense of revenge for insulting people that I care about. "It's the economy, stupid".
