Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
Yes, indeed, because Birmingham’s massively integrated like that.
Well, thank you at least for demonstrating another page of the Left/metro-liberal playbook - claiming “we don’t know” stuff we actually very easily do know (c.f. “How do you know I’m a man?” Posited by obviously male trans-rights heckler at a conference women’s event yesterday). It’s just another facet of the same narrative, designed to ensure you can’t even talk about a subject.
You only have to spend an hour or so walking through these places - and I have, incidentally, spent some time living and walking in the fringes of Brum and Smethwick some years ago - to see who’s embracing Britishness and who’s forming enclaves.
It is not racist to draw attention to observable facts. It is utter foolishness to continue to insist certain topics can’t be discussed, are inherently evil or are unknowable.* The longer the metropolitan commentariat class continues to peddle these absurdities, the angrier people who can see it’s untrue will get. And *that’s* when you have an actual problem, because people - voters - turn to extremists when they think the mainstream parties aren’t listening.
*Lots of young women in Rochdale and elsewhere stand as witnesses to what happens when important issues are shut down just in case they’re seen as racist. Seems like we’ve learned nothing.
|
You cannot tell how integrated someone is by the colour of their skin. It was the lack of white people he was commenting on, suggesting that it was a failure of integration. He didn't provide any other example. Integration is about language, culture and participation in society. The colour of your skin is not a proxy for these discussions.
This is a gaslighting technique, where he defends that statement by pretending it was the following sentence about concerns about integration that people are objecting to. He is smarter than that; he knew what he was doing. It's not the first time he has used white people in connection with his claimed concerns about integration. When talking of a decline of British people in certain areas, he makes sure to specify 'White British'. He also knows, as we all do, that this is taking place when some - not all - right-wing commentators are pushing the idea that you cannot be deemed English and black. If it was a one-off, you could claim he phrased it badly, but it isn't.
As for the metropolitan commentariat class, I think the objections to what he said would extend far beyond them, which is why he has to pretend he was saying something else. He'll keep dallying with this language 'white british' instead of British, making comments on skin colour, then get faux-offended when challenged it saying he is simply talking about integration until such a time he feels confident enough to say what he means. If we are at the point where ethnicity is now a valid concern, then we're already at the extremes. It's not what I want the mainstream parties pandering to.