I hope I’m wrong

Well if you start discussions about it, I and I suspect some others may respond without the usual level on here

I think that you can be sure major upheaval is coming to most societies, a lot of things indicate WWIII is round the corner right now, hope not but looks likely, that will change absolutely everything in one fell swoop as it always does

This is why I wanted to clarify what you are saying. The other thread (which I was unaware of) doesn’t seem overly relevant to this thread.

Your point then is that a large proportion of immigrants - I presume you mainly mean people here to claim asylum - are undesirables and criminals. OK finally I am clear.

It is true of course that in any subset of humanity, there will be some who intend or slip into criminality. It’s just the way humans function. The reality is that in general people here claiming asylum are far more law abiding than the average citizen. That is just factual. There are all sorts of reasons for that fact of which the biggest is perhaps the simple fact that the purpose of them being here is to claim asylum with all the benefits to their future that that brings and being caught committing crimes compromises the chances of a successful claim.

This reality did not apply in the case of Albanian people who came in reasonable large numbers last year (or was it the year before). Many of these people were spurious asylum seekers abusing the system as a way of gaining entry to the country not intending to pursue an asylum claim but in fact coming to work for the Albanian crime syndicates that do exist. Frankly those people are coming anyway. For a while they switched their entry method to small boats. That route has been made more difficult and hence they have gone back to their former methods of gaining entry. I am sure we would all agree we would like this stopped but the reality is nobody knows how to.

The question then given the reality that asylum seekers are more law abiding than “regular” inhabitants, why do some people have the perception that asylum seekers are on the main “undesirable” or “criminals”. The answer to that question is surely not hard to find. For time immemorial some politicians have sought power by demonising a small group of people, making the main body of population terrified of them and then promising to protect the people from these “undesirables”. It’s a really old trick reaching its nadir in Nazi Germany but used many times before and since. For a while as people had improved access to more available and better more factual information, that old trick became more difficult to pull off. The advent of the internet has given the likes of Farage and his mates at GB News and some of the newspapers and their equivalents in mainland Europe and the US the opportunity to dust off and exploit this old playbook. I see Trump even dusted off the old “they are eating your pets” meme the other day.

So I suppose the question we should be asking is how in democracy do we prevent politicians seeking power by telling lies about whichever small group is todays demonised grouping?

Before discussing that let’s pause there and check we are all on the same page accepting this premise.

Don't worry Wapentake. It is very clear to all that you linking of two completely unrelated threads was a very contrived attempt to justify applying the term "undesirables" to people claiming asylum. Not an auspicious start  if you wish a serious conversation.

you say there is "clearly a significant section of criminally minded people" within those who arrive claiming asylum. Could you show some evidence for that statement. Perhaps you could show some evidence that in general asylum seekers are more likely to commit criminal offences than the average population. I don't believe the facts support the position your prejudices take you to, but willing as ever to be proven wrong. 

You say there is a large number not fleeing an unsafe regime. That's factually wrong to. Once there case is examined rigorously, around 75% of people are found to meet the criteria for being entitled to asylum. We would both agree that those not meeting that standard should be removed.

Again you are factually wrong in respect of any crimes committed here impacting their asylum claim. That is the law.  Do you see a trend developing between what you have been lead to believe and what is actually true?

Unfortunately its almost impossible to stop well resourced people finding a way to get into the country and disappear into the underworld. If you have any ideas of how to do this, do share. Remember these people don't arrive by small boats and report to the immigration authorities. Its a very different issue to asylum.

Let us for a moment assume that your efforts to show facts to support your view that asylum seekers commit substantially more crimes than other people will fail.  Yet you and many other people who listen to Farage and GB News and the like tend to believe that to be the case.  Would those people who formed their erroneous views have done so of their own account  would you say, or have they been lied to, following the same playbook that has been used by unscrupulous pursuers of power so many times in history?  Not a difficult question surely.. And once you conclude they have been cynically and repeatedly lied to, the next question would be "do you not see that as a problem?"

I have not referred to anyone as "far right" or "racist".  Yet again a factually incorrect assertion


 

Well Wapentake, let’s examine your post.

I think we all well understand your rationale for linking “undesirables” and “asylum seekers”

I explained to you that most asylum seekers tend to be careful to avoid crime because being convicted of crimes impacts negatively on their chances of a successful asylum claim. You assert that is not the law and provide a link which explains in detail how being convicted of crimes impacts negatively on chances of a successful asylum claim. Truly Rackhamesque levels of shooting your own argument in the foot.

You have failed of course to find evidence of the assertions that I have suggested are factually wrong.

And finally having accused me of saying you were far right and racist, you now accept I said no such thing and try to retreat to a position of “you didn’t say it but I know you thought it” oh dear!!

How do you think this thread is going for you?

Bless. I’ll leave you and your shovel to enjoy each others company.

Serious issue this though and not an easy one to solve. How do you protect our democracy from the lies of the likes of Farage and the fear and hatred that flows from them without undermining the freedom ( including freedom of speech) that is the very essence of our democracy.

Not sure I know the answer to be honest.

And this is where I leave you dappy and I tried to exchange my thoughts with you and remained polite as possible and your only replies are “ how do you think this thread is going for you”  add that in bold above and the Rackhamesque comment displays your sense of superiority (false imo)over others especially those on a certain other forum you once posted on and where you and others perhaps regard as a place with many undesirables.