Ah, the terrifying jumbling effect of age and memory. My mum cycles through all our names before landing on the correct one; she’s a bit like that horse that everyone thought could do maths. My grandparents were the same.
Whatever the reasons for Rallyboy’s gender confusion (I did mention that Chuka was a he many times), you’ve got to feel for him.
Originally posted by @Barry-Sanchez
Labour MP Chuka Umunna, who chairs the all-party group, said a “meaningful” integration programme would be needed when the rules are changed after Brexit. He said: "It’s clear that immigration has impacted on different communities in different ways and the pace of change has alarmed many. “The government has a duty to address the lack of integration of immigrants if it is to address this. Failing to do so has left a vacuum for extremists and peddlers of hate to exploit.” Something I have been saying all along, if Labour addressed this before they’d be closer to the tories and the EU vote would have been closer.
Lol @ Labour being remotely close to anyone on the immigration issue.
Do you think you love him? Or am I seeing a Chaka Khan reference that wasn’t intended?
don’t be so sexist, you obviously haven’t heard the trans gender rumours.
I offer this as a comment /POV… to avoid being dragged into yet another round of vitriolic shit slinging with evil bastards.
‘Social integration’ is a rather loose and broad term… it also has two levels with repsect to individuals and communities. These two levels are obviously linked, but should be viewed on from different time perspectives.
With individuals, they can only chose to ‘integrate’ within their own lifespan… or not… so its something tangible that we can review within a relatively short period of time. Younger immigrants tend to find this easiest and tend to respond and adopt some more local customs quickly into their way of life and culture… the older granny brought over once settled, is unlikey to learn the language, because its fucking tough to learn a new one when 40+ let alone 65+, nor is it easy to change your cutural identify when 80% of your life has been lived in acertain way with certain ideals and values, no matter how much you might wnat to… to expect folks to do is at best unreasonable.
Less tangible is ‘community integration’ - and to be homst I have yet to see a decent definition of integration in the first place because there are various issues at play, not least religious and cultural differences, but also the moral, ethical and legal diffrences that exist. Community integration takes longer and will depend on how strong these communities still value their orginal legacy - and yes religious ideiology will play a big part in this - yet we see again and again how on an individual basis, and in general the younger folks, do more readily adapt and move away from more traditional cultural practices… when left alone to do so.
From a legal perspective, everyone has to follow the laws of the land - no ambiguity there. However, (avoiding any naive moralizing) where culture clashes with local law, there does need to be an element of sensitivity as to how prosecutions are reported and processed - reporting crime is one thing, reporting it in terms of culture, race etc only serves to ingrain existing prejudices… it helps no one… a crime is a crime and that is it.
Moral and ethical differences based on cultural or religious ties are more challenging because its easy to focus on what divides us/the differences as it were, a rather nasty trick employed by the smarter racists, than all the great things we share and have in common - by focussing on what we have in common, integration is eased - because the differences become something that can be worked through over time… rather than becomming a ‘barrier to integration’ - the ignorant, yet ‘smart’ battle cry of the casual and not so casual racist.
Finally we have the biggest barrier to integration - fear and ignorance - the lack of senistivity and tolerance to diferent cultures and practices during the longer drawn out community integration phase… something driven by racists. Our own actions, fears and ignorance can create divisions where previously none existed, often fuelled by those with agendas on both sides… the evil IS like indoctrination only works when folks feel disenfranchised, lost and without purpose, or have been victimised, or racially bullied or worse - tell someone they are different, dont fit in, are lesser humans enough times and it cant be surprizing that zealot like fuckers with broader political agendas find a rich and fertile recruiting ground. Religion is not the divider, but merely the tool those with more radical political aims use to enslave
I dont hate all Christians because of a few fundmentalists who think being gay is a sin… I think they are all mad, but I dont hate them…
The problem I have with this thread…is the fact it was created, because by making such an inflamatory statement, it potentially becomes a self fullfilling prophecy… all sorts will add two penennth to the debate and there are plenty who will pretend its a very complicated question - but its not. Current culture only exists because of culturual evolution, the assimilation and integration of migrative populations… it just takes time. Sadly there are those who stand to gain from preventing or holding it back, and they feel they can achieve this by shouting loudly enough that its not working…
It’s a right old pickle Chutney
We need big companies to get involved, perhaps someone like Virgin could help, I’m sure Richard Branston would spread the word.
What we need is a cheeky pop star with a right on attitude to promote integration. Allen’s our girl.
We need an ambassador for multiculturalism. Let’s pick our Lily.
Its not working, a cultural melting pot of ideas and peoples without fear is what I want, that can’t happen in certain religious environments, how do we all come together? I am all for it but I am not giving up any human rights over a religious one and who should?
It’s not going to happen if people like you think it never can, is it, Bazza?
Equality for all and no retraction on people rights, no discussion.
In the eyes of the law you already have equality.
It’s the interpretation that needs to be worked on.
Well played Goat.
Can I just say that I got lambasted (by the fat one) this morning for a similarly tortuous attempt to embed a rude phrase in a post.
I was, and am still very proud of my Wizards leave.
No fucker upvoted me, though.
Pearls before swine. Philistines.
Waters are deliberately muddied on cultural grounds so to continue sexism, racism and homophobia, our liberal attitude allows it.
I genuinely don’t understand what by “equality for all”, and I reckon you’ll have to enumerate or qualify it a bit in order for it to make sense.
Here’s my issue. How can this equality be achieved if people have vastly differing ability? You’re starting from a false premise, that equality can even be achieved. On an individual level, it never can. I will always have my burdens, just as I’ll always have my benefits. I am never going to be equal to a lanky bastard in a B-Ball contest.
He will probably not code better C# than me (but with Steve’s expert help, who knows?)
Ok then replace equality with fairness for all and the same rights for all.
Barry announces no discussion and then continues to discuss it…
It may be a New Year but sadly its the same old Barry 
Hm. Kind of an interesting story.