[colombiamigra] Fw: [NIEM] Reino Unido
- From: "william mejia" <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Redacted sender "wmejia8a@xxxxxxxxx" for DMARC)
- To: Colombiamigra <colombiamigra@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 14:39:05 +0000 (UTC)
On Tuesday, October 28, 2014 5:38 AM, "'niem.migr' NIEM.migr@xxxxxxxxx
[niem_rj]" <niem_rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/26/british-towns-swamped-immigrants-michael-fallon-eu
British towns being ‘swamped’ by immigrants, says Michael Fallon
Defence secretary’s use of word harks back to Thatcher, amid Ukip pressure and
Tory calls for renegotiation of EU membership
-
- Rajeev Syal
-
- The Guardian, Sunday 26 October 2014 14.42 GMT
Michael Fallon, the defence secretary. He said: ‘In some areas of the UK,
down the east coast, towns do feel under siege, large numbers of migrant
workers and people claiming benefits.’ Photograph: Ben Birchall/PA Michael
Fallon, the defence secretary, has claimed British towns are being “swamped” by
immigrants and their residents are “under siege”, in an escalation of the
emotive language being used by Tory ministers calling for a renegotiation of
the UK’s relationship with Europe. In terms reminiscent of Margaret Thatcher in
the 1970s, he said on Sunday that in some areas of the UK, large numbers of
migrant workers and foreign people claiming benefits should be subject to some
form of restraint – or risk dominating the local population. Under pressure
from Ukip in the polls and facing the possibility of losing the Rochester and
Strood byelection to the party next month, David Cameron has indicated he would
make changes to the principle of freedom of movement of workers within the
union a “red line” in a mooted renegotiation of the UK’s membership terms.
Fallon made his comments after being forced to deny that Cameron’s efforts to
renegotiate the UK’s relationship with Europe were foundering after Angela
Merkel spelled out her opposition. After the prime minister detailed his plan
for Britain to regain control over its borders, Merkel told a Sunday newspaper
she was opposed to fundamental change. Fallon told Sky News: “The Germans
haven’t seen our proposals yet and we haven’t seen our proposals yet, and
that’s still being worked on at the moment to see what we can do to prevent
whole towns and communities being swamped by huge numbers of migrants. “In some
areas of the UK, down the east coast, towns do feel under siege, [with] large
numbers of migrant workers and people claiming benefits, and it’s quite right
we look at that,” he said. His comments were immediately condemned by his
cabinet colleague Ed Davey, the Liberal Democrat energy secretary, who said he
disagreed with Fallon’s language on the same programme. “When we talk about
immigration we need to be responsible in the words that we use,” he said.
Shadow foreign secretary Douglas Alexander said Fallon’s remarks reflected “the
desperation of the Conservative Party”. “You have got to be responsible always
in the language that you use around issues of immigration. “Of course there are
challenges, I recognise that, but I think that embodies part of the problem at
the moment. “We have got a government that is spending more time negotiating
with its backbenchers than negotiating with other European leaders. “The truth
is, if you are looking out the back window of your car all the time, you tend
to crash the car and right now David Cameron is so fearful of internal
challenge on the issue of immigration and external challenge electorally from
Ukip that I think he is letting Britain down, and we saw that in some of the
intemperate comments this week in relation to the unacceptable demand by the
European Union in relation to the budget. “Frankly I don’t think anybody will
be convinced by David Cameron’s anger or indeed Michael Fallon’s anger. “What
we need is action on change and reform in Europe and, alas, that’s not what we
are getting from this Conservative Government.” Steven Woolfe, Ukip’s
immigration spokesman, said that Fallon’s comments were reminiscent of the
Tories previous over-the-top policy of launching poster vans to drive around
areas with high immigration to urge illegal entrants to return home. He said:
“We are trying to have a serious debate about the spectre of mass inward
migration and its impact on low wage, low skilled workers. Meanwhile, the
government is resorting to intemperate language. Can you imagine what would
have been said if we had said that?” The prime minister is said by aides to be
preparing a manifesto pledge to introduce quotas for low-skilled migrants from
the EU. Before the last general election Cameron promised to bring net annual
immigration down to the “tens of thousands” but has failed to get anywhere near
the target. It comes after a difficult few days for Cameron, which saw him
ambushed at a Brussels summit with a demand to pay an extra £1.7bn into EU
coffers. Cameron responded furiously to the bill, insisting it would not be
paid by the deadline of 1 December and claiming the row risked pushing the UK
closer to the exit door. The European commission dismissed the objections,
saying the contribution revisions were calculated by independent statisticians
using a standard formula agreed by all member states. That process varies the
contribution depending on economic performance. In an interview with the Sunday
Times, the German chancellor appeared to dismiss the prospect of radical
change. “Germany will not tamper with the fundamental principles of free
movement in the EU,” Merkel said. The Tories have faced criticism before for
the use of the word “swamped”. In 1978, Margaret Thatcher used it in saying
people feared being “swamped” by immigrants from the new Commonwealth and
Pakistan. Racial tensions had been brewing in the UK and Thatcher brought
immigration and race to the forefront of the political debate in the year
leading up to the 1979 general election. When asked by the interviewer how
severely she would cut the immigration numbers if she got to power, Thatcher
replied: “If we went on as we are then by the end of the century there would be
4 million people of the new Commonwealth or Pakistan here. Now, that is an
awful lot and I think it means that people are really rather afraid that this
country might be rather swamped by people with a different culture.” She was
elected the following year.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/27/archbishop-canterbury-justin-welby-warns-not-demonise-immigrants-michael-fallon-swamped
Archbishop of Canterbury: ‘don’t demonise immigrants’
Justin Welby says he is worried about the language used to debate immigration
after Michael Fallon’s ‘swamped’ comment
- Michael White and Rajeev Syal
-
- The Guardian, Monday 27 October 2014
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/27/immigration-neoliberalism-michael-fallon-tories-labour-ukip
Justin Welby, the archbishop of Canterbury, has expressed worry about
the language used to discuss immigration. Photograph: Philip Toscano/PA The
archbishop of Canterbury has warned politicians not to demonise immigrants a
day after a Cabinet minister suggested some parts of the country felt “swamped”
by foreign arrivals. Justin Welby said on Monday that he was worried about the
language used in the debate amid an upsurge of racist abuse noted by clergy
across Britain. The intervention of the Church of England’s leader will deepen
the embarrassment for Michael Fallon. The defence secretary said on Sunday that
David Cameron must challenge the freedom of movement of Europeans “to prevent
whole towns and communities being swamped by huge numbers of migrant workers”.
Fallon was forced to admit on Monday morning that he was “a bit careless” with
how he phrased his concerns, but maintained that the large number of immigrants
coming from the continent was putting pressure on housing and essential
services in the UK. Under pressure from Ukip and with a crunch byelection
looming in Rochester and Strood, Fallon had significantly ramped up Tory
rhetoric on the sensitive issue. The word “swamped” is seen as inflammatory and
Margaret Thatcher was criticised for using it in the 1970s. At a press gallery
lunch, the archbishop – who said he was not criticising any individual –
appealed for moderation. “Do I worry about the language? Yes, I do, I really
do,” he told journalists. “We can’t overburden communities, we have to be
realistic about that. But at the heart of Christian teaching about the human
being is that all human beings are of absolutely equal and infinite value and
the language we use must reflect the value of the human being and not treat
immigration as a deep menace that is somehow going to overwhelm a country that
has coped with many waves of immigration and has usually done so with enormous
success.” He said that the Church of England has noted an upsurge in racist
incidents from evidence sent in from parishes. “We have 9,000 clergy working in
16,000 parishes, living in these parishes. We have better reports from the
grassroots than almost anyone. “What we are seeing is an upsurge of minor
racist, antisemitic, anti-Islamic, anti-foreigner xenophobia – not major things
– just comments being made, things being said which are for the people who grew
up in those backgrounds seriously uncomfortable, really quite frightening.”
Standing by the substance of his remarks, Fallon told Sky News: “I was a bit
careless with my words, I accept that. “But, yes, there is pressure now, there
are a large number of people coming here from the rest of Europe – this is one
of the more successful economies in Europe and there is pressure as a result of
that migration on social services, on housing, on school places for example.
“That’s what the prime minister will be addressing when he puts forward his
proposals for some kind of control.” Eurosceptic Tories have expressed their
dismay at No 10’s decision to force Fallon to backtrack on the word “swamped”.
Stewart Jackson, the MP for Peterborough, wrote on Twitter: “Fallon absolutely
right to use the word ‘swamped’ about ‘some’ immigration hotspots despite what
teenage spin doctors at No 10 might say.” Philip Davies, MP for Shipley, told
the Daily Mail: “What the Old Etonian praetorian guard around the prime
minister have done shows how out of touch they are, and how in touch Michael
Fallon is. “Margaret Thatcher used the word ‘swamped’, and she was in touch
with public opinion. Michael Fallon was speaking up for millions up and down
the country.” Peter Bone, MP for Wellingborough, said: “No 10 and Mr Fallon are
saying the same thing, but he is reflecting more the words you hear on the
doorstep.” Fallon’s comments followed Cameron’s pledge to make changes to the
principle of freedom of movement of workers within the EU – a “red line” in a
mooted renegotiation of the UK’s membership terms. The prime minister is said
by aides to be preparing a manifesto pledge to introduce quotas for low-skilled
migrants from the EU. Before the last general election, Cameron promised to
bring down net annual immigration to the tens of thousands but has failed to
get anywhere near the target. The row comes after a difficult few days for
Cameron, during which he was ambushed at a Brussels summit with a demand to pay
an extra £1.7bn in EU funds. A furious Cameron, who is under pressure to react
from Tory Eurosceptic backbenchers, insisted the money would not be paid by the
1 December deadline and said the dispute risked pushing the UK closer to the
exit. The Tories have faced criticism before for the use of the word “swamped”.
In 1978, Thatcher said people feared being swamped by immigrants from the new
Commonwealth and Pakistan. She was elected prime minister in the general
election the following year.
27/10/14
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/david-hanson-mp-time-action-migrants-coming-britain-000042403.html#Xlywe67
David Hanson MP: Time for action on migrants coming into Britain through Calais
Epolitix
Shadow Immigration Minister David Hanson writes about migrants risking their
lives to enter the UK as the Mayor of Calais visits parliament today.Today the
Mayor of Calais visits Westminster to discuss illegal migration with the Home
Affairs Select Committee and, along with our own Government, she has some big
questions to answer on how the French authorities are dealing with this dire
situation.Last week, for my part, I actually went to Calais to see for myself
the pressures on the border there. It was a challenging visit.A busy port,
central to the UK and the rest of Europe, a hub for tourist and business
travel, the gateway to the UK but also now something else. An end destination
for hundreds of migrants who have travelled across Europe seeking a better
life.Some may have travelled across many borders to find employment. Others may
have claimed asylum or refuge elsewhere in Europe. Many may have been the
victims of traffickers and gangs, extorting money to bring people across the
world in terrible conditions.Whatever their journey, no one who sees the
disturbing sight of migrants, homeless, huddled on street sidewalks, in roads,
by lorries, near cars, washing in the canal, desperate at the end of long
journeys, can fail to be concerned.Nor can we turn a blind eye to the problems
for lorry drivers and holiday makers, worried that people are quite literally
risking their lives to jump on a truck, hide in a car or simply run to the
railway lines or charge a barrier.On the day I went, in the space of 12 hours
at the one part of the port I visited 75 migrants were removed from 30 lorries
out of the 2000 that passed - many more tried.This is not new – we saw problems
over ten years ago. And the Labour Government acted with France to tackle the
problem.But urgent action is needed again now. Because it can't go on.And that
needs at its heart action to quell the flow of those migrants whose journey
ends in CalaisWe need action from the Government – including looking again at
introducing fingerprinting and working with allies across Europe to enforce
EU-wide agreements to prevent migrants travelling unimpeded across borders.But
I think we have to be frank that, whilst there is a clear and urgent role for
our Government, there is far more the French authorities should be doing to
stop the dangerous stream of migrants trying to enter our country illegally. No
one I met in Calais could explain to me why the French authorities are not
apprehending people in France, determining their status and either offering
asylum, refuge or repatriating them home or the country in Europe they first
entered (as agreed in the Dublin Convention).I've even heard stories this week
that the 75 stopped from travelling whilst I was there will simply be picked up
by the police and then dropped off again outside Calais - that’s not good
enough. France needs to step up its game.So at the Home Affairs Select
Committee today, I think Natacha Bouchart, the Mayor of Calais has these
questions to answer:1) Why are the French authorities failing to stop people
entering France and making their way to Calais?2) What is she doing to work
with the British Government to stem the flow of illegal immigrants through her
city?3) Why are the French border forces not apprehending people and returning
them to the country in Europe they originally entered?4) What is being done to
stop the same people trying night after night to get into Britain?5) Are there
changes that can be made to the port of Calais to make it harder for people to
attempt to climb into lorries – at much personal risk?This is an untenable
situation and today in the Committee I hope Ms Bouchart will recognise her role
in taking action to sort this out.
http://miguelimigrante.blogspot.com.br/2014/10/o-presidente-da-comissao-europeia.html
22 de outubro de 2014
O presidente da Comissão Europeia surpreendeu com um discurso forte contra as
políticas anti-imigração do Governo britânico.
Durão Barroso fez ontem um dos seusdiscursos mais marcantes desde que é
presidente da Comissão Europeia (CE).Muitas vezes atacado por excesso de
colagem às posições das potências maispoderosas, sobretudo desde que a crise do
subprime bateu àsportas da União, em 2011, desta vez Durão não usou de meias
palavras paracriticar as recém-anunciadas medidas que David Cameron tenciona
apresentar paraimpor barreiras à entrada de cidadãos europeus no país.
Curiosamente, estaintervenção não só foi feita em solo britânico (Londres) como
já foiconsiderada "o mais forte ataque de Bruxelas aos conservadores",segundo o
Guardian. Para assinalar ainda mais a surpreendenteatitude de Barroso,
recorde-se que o partido de Cameron faz parte da famíliapolítica europeia em
que se situa o PSD, partido que Barroso liderava antes deassumir o seu mandato
europeu.Mas, afinal, o que quer Cameron?Impedir a livre circulação de cidadãos
comunitários através das suas fronteiras,o que, como bem recordou Durão, não só
contraria as leis europeias, como"é um princípio muito importante para o
mercado único" tão caro aoReino Unido. Ficou assim claro que esta matéria não
só não é negociável como setornará incómoda para o Reino Unido, que corre o
risco de isolamento face aosseus aliados "naturais" do centro e Leste do
continente, os maisvisados por estas políticas. "Um erro histórico", advertiu
aindaDurão, que Londres pagará caro na medida em que põe em causa a sua tão
reivindicadareforma da EU.Já não é de agora a inflexãobritânica em termos de
políticas de imigração com muita polémica à mistura. Nofinal de 2013, um pacote
de restrições à livre circulação de romenos e búlgaros(com início a partir de 1
de Janeiro deste ano) incendiou os ânimos. Na altura,Barroso não foi tão
assertivo, mas outro português, António Guterres, foi oalvo dos tories. O
alto-comissário das Nações Unidas para osRefugiados, preocupado com as leis em
preparação, entregou no Parlamentobritânico um documento de alerta, no qual
advertia contra os perigos de tallegislação "propiciar racismo étnico",
"estigmatizarestrangeiros" e negar asilo a quem precise. Douglas
Carswell,deputado torie, não hesitou em qualificar e dar destino ao texto
deGuterres: "É lixo e devia ir para o lixo."Já toda a gente percebeu que
aderiva radical do Governo britânico (e, já agora, de outros países europeus)
emmatéria de imigração tem que ver com o crescimento da extrema-direita, quetem
tirado vantagem da crise económica e da falta de soluções para desgastar
ospartidos tradicionais e se tornar cada vez mais ameaçadora para o statuquo.
Ora justamente, Barroso tem sido alvo de críticas violentas pela suaalegada
incapacidade de conduzir a Comissão no sentido de maior equilíbrioentre países
RICOS e pobres, entre oNorte/centro e a periferia, enfim, um líder respeitado
e capaz de mostrar firmezaem momentos cruciais. Agora, quase de saída, já não
pode dar a volta a dez anosde mandato, mas sempre é melhor partir com um
discurso que fique na memória...pelas melhores razõe
Immigration is vital to neoliberalism – but no politician will admit it
Michael Fallon and his fellow Tories know it, as do Labour, Ukip too. But they
won’t tell the ‘ordinary people’ they’re fighting over
-
- Deborah Orr
-
- theguardian.com, Monday 27 October 2014 11.05 GMT
-
'Both Labour and the Conservatives have shied away from explaining that
immigrants provide a steady supply of labour.' Photograph: Jeff Overs/BBC/PA
The defence secretary, Michael Fallon, is under siege. He is being swamped with
criticism. He has used the language of plague and war to describe how the
residents of British towns feel about immigrants, even though this is broadly
considered to be an unhelpful and cheap, populist way of discussing profound
demographic change in the UK. Downing Street has been quick to disassociate
itself from such intemperate language. Ukip, universally viewed as the
political force that is persuading Conservatives to ramp up their
anti-immigration hyperbole, has been quick to point out that their political
opponents would be very annoyed if their own campaigners started using words
like “swamped” and “siege”. Yet, such language attracts votes. It must be
annoying, seeing your power base slip away, simply because your bosses don’t
want you articulating how you reckon your constituents feel. Fallon, no doubt,
is annoyed. Why shouldn’t he be allowed to express thoughts that chime with
those of potential voters? Well, first, such words are divisive. And, second,
they are hypocritical. Politicians have had decades to explain that high levels
of immigration are part and parcel of neoliberalism, because they offer speedy,
few-questions-asked economic growth. For some reason, however, both Labour and
the Conservatives have shied away from explaining to “ordinary people” that
immigrants provide a steady supply of labour, stopping “ordinary” wages and
expectations from getting out of hand. It’s a strategy that has placed Britain
in the extraordinary position whereby it now has a record number of people in
low-paid jobs amid historically low levels of wage inflation. That’s a hard
“achievement” for any political party to sell. So they simply don’t try. Labour
and the Conservatives just carry on blaming each other, while at the same time
quietly getting on with the real business of nicking each other’s policies.
Ukip, however, has been happy to step into the empty space the mainstream has
created, merrily stirring up resentment by linking low wages and immigration,
as if this is the personal fault of immigrants, rather than an inevitable
aspect of globalisation. Of course, Ukip would come unstuck if they achieved
power and revealed themselves as every bit as neoliberal as all the others. But
that’s not something Ukip needs to worry about too much yet. Their power to set
the agenda comes without responsibility. That’s what makes them so dangerous
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/27/swamped-and-riddled-toxic-phrases-wreck-politics-immigration-michael-fallon
Swamped’ and ‘riddled’: the toxic words that wreck public discourse
Why do politicians such as Michael Fallon trot out the same loaded phrases?
-
-
- Stuart Jeffries
-
- The Guardian, Monday 27 October 2014
In the swamp: the phrase was famously used by Margaret Thatcher about
immigration in 1979 – and revived by Michael Fallon. Photograph: Ed
Reschke/Getty Images
Over the weekend, defence secretary Michael Fallon claimed British towns are
being “swamped” by immigrants and their residents are “under siege [with] large
numbers of migrant workers and people claiming benefits”. Poor Mr Fallon, did
you miss that mixed metaphors class? Is that useful cliche, “ordinary British
working people”, sinking beneath rising waters of oleaginous, pestilential
filth? Or are blameless British towns from Wrexham to Wroxham even now ringed
by foreign vigilantes in makeshift trenches with knives between their teeth and
murder in their heart? Is it just me who is imagining an infernal alliance of
Polish plumbers tooled up with spanners and Wahhabist militants waving
ancestral scimitars as they secure the cheese counter at the local Morrison’s
with their war traditional cry “Aiee! Die infidel dogs! No more unpasteurised
stilton for you!”? Probably. Are we being swamped or are we under siege, Mr
Fallon? It must be one or the other. Not, surely, both at the same time. But if
it is both, then can I have tickets for the movie version? It sounds like a
must-see. Of course, the people claiming benefits in Fallon’s nightmare
scenario probably aren’t foreign at all: they are Britons auditioning for roles
on knock-off versions of Benefits Street. If any of them are also vigilante
members of the terrifying Polish-Wahhabist Alliance (see above) conquering our
British cities and, you’d think, slaying their brethren, you can’t really blame
them; that is what it takes to put food on the table during George Osborne’s
“economic recovery”. Even though Fallon later withdrew the remarks as
“careless”, they are surely symptomatic. Clearly, the Conservatives feel they
need to do something if they are to win the Rochester byelection and see off
the Ukip threat at next May’s general election, even if this means outdoing
Farage and his henchpersons in demonising the Other, even if it means
disinterring Enoch Powell and his language of infection, blood and hate. But
“swamped”? Really? Perhaps, as we begin the ramping up of rhetoric in
preparation for next year’s general election, we need a remedial guide for
politicians of words that are too toxic to be used in the next six months.
Margaret Thatcher: played on fears of immigration to help win the 1979
election. Photograph: Hulton Archive/Getty Images
Geological themes
“If we went on as we are then, by the end of the century, there would be four
million people of the new Commonwealth or Pakistan here. Now, that is an awful
lot and I think it means that people are really rather afraid that this country
might be rather swamped by people with a different culture.” These were
Margaret Thatcher’s words in 1978 when she was asked by an interviewer how she
would cut the immigration numbers if she got to power. As you will notice, that
wasn’t an answer to the questions. As you have also noticed, she won the 1979
election. One might think David Cameron’s cronies are trying to win the 2015
election by reviving this sort of language. Of course, one might substitute
“enriched” for “swamped”, but Thatcher didn’t roll that way, and nobody, so far
as I can recall, won an election by praising immigrants. Still, Fallon’s
revival of Thatcher’s language has a wider remit than hers did: his version
castigates not just immigrants from the Commonwealth, but those from eastern
Europe and developing countries outside the Commonwealth too, in an expanded
piece of hate speech that brilliantly combines the notion of infection (swamps,
like marshes, bogs, morasses and fens, are incubators of disease), a sense of
being physically overwhelmed, as in a flood) and the sense of implacable
physical forces over which mere Britons have no control (even though
immigration policies are not physical forces but determined by humans). True,
some Britons might be struggling in these austerity years to deal with the
rapid shift in ethnic make-up of our towns and cities, but “swamped”? What a
dehumanising word to use of someone else. Imagine being a Lithuanian cleaner,
for instance, and told that you were part of a swamp, a flood, a ruinous
invasion made rhetorically part of something akin, say, to the devastation of
the lowlands of Somerset last winter. Yes, she may not have a vote, but she has
feelings. No matter: such geological figures of speech as swamping have often
played well with those sympathetic to politicians’ racist speeches. For
instance, when Enoch Powell made his “rivers of blood” speech in Birmingham in
1968, he didn’t actually use the words “rivers of blood”, but instead quoted
Virgil’s Aeneid. “As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding; like the Roman,
I seem to see ‘the river Tiber foaming with much blood’.” The speech invoked
the image of a flood of bloodied water, bloodied, that is, by the riots and
unease unleashed by racial tension. Through such words, Powell won votes and
titillated white British fears of people with different coloured skins. Fingers
crossed, British politicians won’t be tempted to follow the same electoral
strategy nearly half a century on. And, while we are getting geological, let’s
not forget the stone age, which is what the Americans threatened to bomb
Pakistan back to. Here’s a tip: never suggest that you are prepared to reverse
the evolutionary history of a portion of humanity if someone refuses to do what
you want. (Actually, is it possible to reverse evolution, you ask. What am I,
Richard Dawkins?) Particularly if you want to get them to do something that
involves the sacrifice of things such as life and blood. This was the mistake
of a US official a decade ago (possibly former deputy secretary of state
Richard Armitage, talking to Pakistan’s intelligence director), when he was
trying to get Pakistan to join George W Bush’s fight against al-Qaida, and
insisting that Pakistan suppress domestic expressions of support for attacks on
the United States. Think about it: the threat is so toxic that, you would
think, any sentient human when confronted by your proposal might well be minded
to say: “You know what? What he wants? Let’s do the opposite.” It’s worth
British politicians bearing this in mind when they rage against Jean-Claude
Juncker or Angela Merkel over Britain’s outstanding EU bill – probably best to
avoid big-ass US-style bombing metaphors or, you would think, allusions to the
German chancellor’s less illustrious predecessor (cf Nazism, below). Probably
best not to accuse Merkel of running the EU according to the Führerprinzip, or
attacking Juncker for having the mindset of his namesakes, the land-owning
aristocracy of Prussia who were heavily represented in German government and
military command in the bad old days. No matter how tempting you find it.
Virology
If not geology, then virology is the go-to discipline for hateful metaphors.
In the early 1980s, some newspapers described Aids as a “gay plague”, something
that risked infecting the “innocent majority” for the supposed sexual
transgressions of the demonised minority. Since those dismally homophobic days,
metaphors of infection and the unfair blaming of particular social groups for
spreading literal or metaphorical viruses have diminished. But figures of
speech that involve infection are usually used to project on to hated
minorities characteristics that are not really theirs. Seen thus, what was true
of gay men in the 80s, one might say, is true of immigrants now. The metaphor
of disease also seems to figure in my favourite toxic no-no here: “riddled”, as
in the Daily Express’s headline: “The scandal of Britain’s ‘Shameless’ estates
riddled with crime and violence.” That’s what happens in underclass Britain:
its estates aren’t riddled with foreigners, they are riddled with crime and
violence. Riddled perhaps here signifies a body corrupted by disease. Or maybe
not. Maybe they meant riddled with holes, like a fine gruyère? It seems
unlikely. Or riddled like soil that has been lovingly sieved through a garden
riddle? Extremely unlikely. Unless you can be sure that your listeners
understand riddled in the second and third senses here, it’s probably best not
to use the term to describe a group of people or where they hang out. Ken
Livingstone broke this sacred rule in 2012 when he said that the Conservative
party was riddled with homosexuals: unless he was comparing the Tories to
high-end Swiss cheese – and thereby praising its excellence (and he wasn’t) –
Livingstone should have known better than to go viral in his language. But he
didn’t. Poor show, Red Ken. Godfrey Bloom’s comments about ‘bongo bongo land’
dunked him in hot water in 2013. Photograph: Luke Macgregor/Reuters
‘Jungle’ language
Can it really be just a year since Ukip’s Godfrey Bloom told party activists
that Britain should not be sending aid to “bongo bongo land”? “How we can
possibly be giving a billion pounds a month when we’re in this sort of debt to
bongo bongo land is completely beyond me,” he said in a speech. “To buy Ray-Ban
sunglasses, apartments in Paris, Ferraris and all the rest of it that goes with
most of the foreign aid. F18s for Pakistan.” I know what you’re wondering: do
they even play bongos in Pakistan? But that’s the point: Bloom’s catch-all slur
reduced all the developing countries to which Britain gives aid to one
demonised, unworthy mass with a different skin colour from white Britons such
as Bloom. Which was racism, the last time I looked. Still, what he said seems
particularly vile at a time when, you would hope, British aid is going to
countries in west Africa struggling to contain the Ebola virus. Yes, Fallon may
long for the halcyon days when you could call a spade a spade, but since the
race-hate sitcom Love Thy Neighbour was cancelled in the mid 1970s, those days
are over. Or are they? It was only last year that the British National party,
then led by MEP Nick Griffin, called Polish immigrants “monkeys” and earlier
this summer Ofcom found that Top Gear presenter Jeremy Clarkson had
deliberately used racially offensive language in the programme’s Burma special
and used the N-word in an outtake.
Fascist slurs
Probably best to eschew terms that compare your foe to the Nazis. It’s easy to
call someone a fascist; less easy to justify that abuse in historically
accurate terms. Probably unwise to accuse Vladimir Putin of seeking Lebensraum
in the Crimea, still less to compare him to Hitler. Even if you don’t like a
council leader, don’t call her a gauleiter. It’s witless to describe a
political foe’s memoirs as Mein Kampf. Insensitive to compare any legal reform
to the Nuremberg Laws. Folly to describe any political purge as a Night of the
Long Knives, not just because it won’t be as bloody as the purge of the
Sturmabteilung in 1934 which gave its name to the term, but also because the
phrase was boringly recycled for Harold Macmillan’s purge of his cabinet during
the Conservative party’s drawn-out meltdown in the early 1960s. Ken
Livingstone: an unfortunate turn of phrase. Photograph: Frank Baron for the
Guardian Don’t call political opponents blackshirts, blue shirts or brown
shirts. In fact, best stay away from colour-coding their shirts altogether. And
think twice if you are contemplating describing a sneaky political ploy as akin
to the Reichstag fire (in which, it is claimed, the Nazis burned down the
German parliament building and fingered the communists for the crime), or an
official attack as resembling Kristallnacht (the Nazi-led persecution of Jews
across Germany in 1938). It’s always a bad idea to compare anyone to a
concentration camp guard, especially if they are Jewish. Oh come on, you say:
no leading politician would be as witless as to do that. Well, step forward Ken
Livingstone, again, who, when he was mayor of London, was suspended for four
weeks for bringing his office into disrepute by doing just that. The Evening
Standard’s Oliver Finegold had approached Livingstone at a public-funded party
and revealed that he worked for the Standard. Livingstone asked him: “Have you
thought of having treatment?” and “What did you do? Were you a German war
criminal?” When Finegold complained, Livingstone accused him of acting “like a
concentration camp guard – you are just doing it because you are paid to”. And
don’t drop the H-bomb: the Holocaust, unless you are talking about the mass
murder of six million Jews, probably isn’t the term you are looking for. That
said, if you use the term Gleichschaltung (used to describe the imposing of
Nazi ideology and values) successfully in political debate between now and
polling day next May, I, for one, might be tempted to applaud.
--
[mensagem organizada por Helion Póvoa Neto]
__._,_.___ Enviado por: "niem.migr" <NIEM.migr@xxxxxxxxx>
| Responder através da web | • | | • | através de email | • |
Adicionar um novo tópico | • | Mensagens neste tópico (44) |
[As opiniões veiculadas não expressam (necessariamente) a opinião dos
organizadores da lista do NIEM]
Para cancelar sua assinatura desse grupo, favor enviar um e-mail para:
niem_rj-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To cancel your subscription to this group, please send an e-mail to:
niem_rj-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
para enviar mensagens / to send messages: niem_rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Visite
seu Grupo
- Novos usuários 5
• Privacidade • Sair do grupo • Termos de uso
.
__,_._,___ <!--#yiv9754707212 #yiv9754707212ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv9754707212
#yiv9754707212ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv9754707212
#yiv9754707212ygrp-mkp #yiv9754707212hd
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px
0;}#yiv9754707212 #yiv9754707212ygrp-mkp #yiv9754707212ads
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv9754707212 #yiv9754707212ygrp-mkp .yiv9754707212ad
{padding:0 0;}#yiv9754707212 #yiv9754707212ygrp-mkp .yiv9754707212ad p
{margin:0;}#yiv9754707212 #yiv9754707212ygrp-mkp .yiv9754707212ad a
{color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv9754707212 #yiv9754707212ygrp-sponsor
#yiv9754707212ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv9754707212
#yiv9754707212ygrp-sponsor #yiv9754707212ygrp-lc #yiv9754707212hd {margin:10px
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv9754707212
#yiv9754707212ygrp-sponsor #yiv9754707212ygrp-lc .yiv9754707212ad
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv9754707212 #yiv9754707212actions
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv9754707212
#yiv9754707212activity
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv9754707212
#yiv9754707212activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv9754707212
#yiv9754707212activity span:first-child
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv9754707212 #yiv9754707212activity span a
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv9754707212 #yiv9754707212activity span
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv9754707212 #yiv9754707212activity span
.yiv9754707212underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv9754707212
.yiv9754707212attach
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px
0;width:400px;}#yiv9754707212 .yiv9754707212attach div a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv9754707212 .yiv9754707212attach img
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv9754707212 .yiv9754707212attach label
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv9754707212 .yiv9754707212attach label a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv9754707212 blockquote {margin:0 0 0
4px;}#yiv9754707212 .yiv9754707212bold
{font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv9754707212
.yiv9754707212bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv9754707212 dd.yiv9754707212last
p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv9754707212 dd.yiv9754707212last p
span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv9754707212
dd.yiv9754707212last p span.yiv9754707212yshortcuts
{margin-right:0;}#yiv9754707212 div.yiv9754707212attach-table div div a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv9754707212 div.yiv9754707212attach-table
{width:400px;}#yiv9754707212 div.yiv9754707212file-title a, #yiv9754707212
div.yiv9754707212file-title a:active, #yiv9754707212
div.yiv9754707212file-title a:hover, #yiv9754707212 div.yiv9754707212file-title
a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv9754707212 div.yiv9754707212photo-title a,
#yiv9754707212 div.yiv9754707212photo-title a:active, #yiv9754707212
div.yiv9754707212photo-title a:hover, #yiv9754707212
div.yiv9754707212photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv9754707212
div#yiv9754707212ygrp-mlmsg #yiv9754707212ygrp-msg p a
span.yiv9754707212yshortcuts
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv9754707212
.yiv9754707212green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv9754707212 .yiv9754707212MsoNormal
{margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv9754707212 o {font-size:0;}#yiv9754707212
#yiv9754707212photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv9754707212
#yiv9754707212photos div div {border:1px solid
#666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv9754707212
#yiv9754707212photos div label
{color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv9754707212
#yiv9754707212reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv9754707212
#yiv9754707212reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv9754707212 .yiv9754707212replbq
{margin:4px;}#yiv9754707212 #yiv9754707212ygrp-actbar div a:first-child
{margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv9754707212 #yiv9754707212ygrp-mlmsg
{font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv9754707212
#yiv9754707212ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv9754707212
#yiv9754707212ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv9754707212 input, #yiv9754707212 textarea
{font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv9754707212
#yiv9754707212ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv9754707212 code {font:115%
monospace;}#yiv9754707212 #yiv9754707212ygrp-mlmsg *
{line-height:1.22em;}#yiv9754707212 #yiv9754707212ygrp-mlmsg #yiv9754707212logo
{padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv9754707212 #yiv9754707212ygrp-msg p a
{font-family:Verdana;}#yiv9754707212 #yiv9754707212ygrp-msg
p#yiv9754707212attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv9754707212
#yiv9754707212ygrp-reco #yiv9754707212reco-head
{color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv9754707212 #yiv9754707212ygrp-reco
{margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv9754707212 #yiv9754707212ygrp-sponsor
#yiv9754707212ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv9754707212
#yiv9754707212ygrp-sponsor #yiv9754707212ov li
{font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv9754707212
#yiv9754707212ygrp-sponsor #yiv9754707212ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0
8px;}#yiv9754707212 #yiv9754707212ygrp-text
{font-family:Georgia;}#yiv9754707212 #yiv9754707212ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em
0;}#yiv9754707212 #yiv9754707212ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv9754707212
#yiv9754707212ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none !important;}-->
Other related posts:
