The Mail went all Aidan Burley last night with an unsubtle race-baiting attack on the Olympics opening ceremony, reports Shamik Das.
.
The Mail went all Aidan Burley last night with an unsubtle race-baiting attack on the Olympics opening ceremony.
The paper said the Nazi party Tory MP was “right to point out on Twitter that it was a load of ‘leftie multicultural crap'”, hitting out at the “absurdly unrealistic” representation of a “mixed-race middle-class family in a detached new-build suburban home”, the “politically correct agenda in modern Britain” and the “multicultural equality agenda”.
They then amended some of those offensive lines – within 20 minutes of the initial post – but not before freelance writer John Walker had screengrabbed the initial article.
Here are the original despicable paragraphs in full – printed by a national newspaper, in Britain, in 2012:
“It was the absurdly unrealistic scene – and indeed one that would spring from the kind of nonsensical targets and equality quotas we see in the NHS – showing a mixed-race middle-class family in a detached new-build suburban home, which was most symptomatic of the politically correct agenda in modern Britain.
“This was supposed to be a representation of modern life in England but it is likely to be a challenge for the organisers to find an educated white middle-aged mother and black father living together with a happy family in such a set-up.
“Almost, if not every, shot in the next sequence included an ethnic minority performer. The BBC presenter Hazel Irvine gushed about the importance of grime music (a form of awful electronic music popular among black youths) to east London. This multicultural equality agenda was so staged it was painful to watch.
“And Conservative MP Aidan Burley was right to point out on Twitter that it was a load of ‘leftie multicultural c**p’. Yet predictably he has been castigated by Twitter’s Guadanista [sic] brigade.
“Unfortunately the kind of politically driven multiculturalism we saw last night is the kind of social engineering we have come to expect.”
Just. In. Credible. Just when you might think the Mail couldn’t possibly get any worse.
• Wrong again: The Daily Mail claim wind farms change the weather 2 May 2012
• “According to my tax breakdown, Daily Mail readers are the biggest scroungers” 20 Mar 2012
• The Mail’s rent-a-rev called for gays to be tattooed with health warnings 27 Oct 2011
• Coogan: “If the Daily Mail went to the wall tomorrow I’d be delighted” 13 Oct 2011
• Exposed: The Mail-inspired Dispatches hatchet job on Blair 26 Sep 2011
As someone tweeted on Friday night in response to Burley’s outrage (and even more so in the case of the Mail given their history):
“Did you prefer the opening ceremony of the Berlin Olympics?”
106 Responses to “Mail back Burley in attack on opening ceremony’s “absurdly unrealistic” mixed-race family”
Anonymous
If you tried to submit a scientific paper using “Anglo-Saxon” as a race, it would go straight into the discard pile.
And it’s a “fact” that you can’t read growth trends, I see. You keep attacking the poor, your targets, for being “unproductive”. The vast majority of which are of course White British.
Stop pretending you’re not a Corporatist shill.
Lee Hyde
“I sense you deny the racial existence of the English people…”
On your own narrow terms, yes, I do! The English people, narrowly defined as Anglo-Saxons, are a historical rather than a modern reality. We are no longer a solely Germanic people. If, in fact, we every were. One has to wonder (or at least anyone with a grip on reality) whether the various various waves of Germanic immigration pre-1066 strictly displaced ALL of the indigenous Britons (Romano-Britons, Celts, Gales, etc.). I suspect not, and so refute your claim that we are even a predominantly Germanic peoples (without even having to reference to post-1066 migration).
“…which is a denial of Anglo-Saxon history. ”
not at all. I simply recognize that such is a PART of our shared HISTORY. A part which at best contributes to our modern culture, rather than defines it absolutely,
“I’m thrilled you have Irish & Italian blood, which makes you broadly European.”
Well I’m thrilled that you are thrilled. I’m almost near certain that you’re not actually thrilled, although I appreciate the pleasantry. 😉
I only have to go back a mere 4-5 generations to find foreign/European ancestor I suspect if I could venture back a few more generations I’d find ancestors from even further afield. I suspect that this is true for many English people today (eg. Iain Duncan Smith is part Japanese).
“…the English are a race & we’re Germanic.”
There’s a reason why racial purity as a concept has been abandoned, and why racial theory is but a distant and unpleasant memory in the social and biological sciences. It has nothing to do with some grand multicultural or cultural Marxist plot, nor does it have anything to do with political correctness (gone mad or otherwise). It has everything to do with the fact that it bear little if any fruit. It is a thoroughly discredited field.
So no, the English are NOT a race, and we are not exclusively Germanic. I suspect we’d find it difficult to justify a description of the English as a distinct ethnic group. The English are a culture, perhaps a diverse mix of cultures (to wit I am referring just as much to regional cultural identity in Cornwall and the North, as I am to immigrant populations).
“Other European whites might have influenced our gene pool to some extent but don’t ever deny our Germanic roots.”
This is precisely the kind of language I would expect from the kind of crazed nut-ball who’d have bought into the theosophical societies various ‘theories’ on racial purity. You’re revealing not only your rank ignorance here, but a rather vile ideological association. Wow!
“Your disingenuous attempt to deny the deliberate policy of third world immigration is laughable”
Your own rabid assertions are equally laughable my friend. Well I’m being immodest here, you ramblings are by far the more laughable. You should be a comic, you might be the first funny right-wing comic ever! Though not intentionally, I’m sure. 😉
“This phenomena affects all western European countries & concerns all indigenous European peoples.”
You might want to take a gander at the demographic statistics for European nations, and in particular the United Kingdom and contrast them with those of the USA. If we’re in trouble, then the USA is surely just days away from being declared the nation of New Africa.~
“Thankfully many of us see the truth: third world migrants have higher birthrates & are within decades of outnumbering us in our ancestral homeland. This is a fact. ”
Suffixing your statements with the word fact does not make them so. Everything that I have observed and read suggests that you’re little ‘fact’ is in fact, false. Do you happen to have any credible sources to back up your ‘fact’? Birth rates are high amongst the poor and undereducated, I assumed that you are just as afraid of the impoverished and/or the dumb outnumbering us in a couple of decades (I’m starting to think that the latter already do)?
Also, what exactly scares you so much about the mutability of culture represented by demographic changes. Why does crystallizing our present (or I suspect for you some mythical idealistic past) demography appeal to you so much? Had earlier generations been so obsessed, I venture to guess that neither that you or I would exist in any recognizable form.
“But like I also stated earlier the entire system is flawed, we don’t have the money, land or resources to cope with all these unproductive people. ”
Really?! We’re one of the richest nations (both in absolute and per capita terms) on the Earth. What’s more, I’d imagine that any objectively collated data on the subject would show (as many employers continually reinforce) that these immigrants you so fear are amongst the most productive (certainly on a per £ basis) employees available to the UK labour market. I would fall short of saying that this is because the native English (myself included) have ‘a poor work ethic’, rather preferring to interperet this productivity gap arising from immigrant populations willing to accept rank exploitation by employers which native born Britons are no longer willing to accept (and against which we have spent over a century fighting). Regardless, this reality, a reality experienced by many employers as well as the proverbial the man on the street (seeking to commission a new drive-way, conservatory or extension), rather highlights the shoddy basis upon which you base your entire attitude towards foreigners.
Whilst I am aware that the labour market is not indefinitely elastic, it also clear that it is also not based on a fixed supply (see lump of labour fallacy). There’s little or no notion in your head that multiplier effects might very well mean that such productive immigrants are a net benefit to society and the economy. That their productivity can (and does) create jobs in a virtuous spiral, as virtually every economist worth his salt will tell you. Whilst there are undoubtedly grave and perhaps mortal inefficiencies in our current economic strategy, which fall on the shoulders of unskilled, semi-skilled and select skilled labourers disproportionately (many of whom are from that white working class community, to wit we both associate I’m sure). These inefficiencies however, are neither the fault of immigrants, nor will they be solved by the immediate removal of immigrants or curtailment of further immigration. Quite the contrary, such might very well make the necessary re-balancing of our economy towards more manufacturing by far the more difficult.
Anyway, I find you vexing and pointless. I’ve wasted far too much of my keyboards lifespan responding to your drivel. Hopefully, one day, you’ll come to understand our ridiculous and eerily familiar your particular brand of ‘truth’ is. :-
Thomas Watkins
I thought the whole ceremony was excessively PC. But I didn’t take issue with that particular element. Daily Mail are fearmongering bullshit peddlers.
Barney
phrost,
I’ve been wondering exactly what point you’ve been trying to make but I think I’ve got it now –
The pagan Jutes, Angles and Saxons invaded the Christian land of Britain in the 5th/6th centuries, uninvited by the local population, who you are pleased to refer to as “earlier Britons”. Are the Germanic English Britons, then?
As the Welsh were British already, can they be “foreigners”? Nasty way to talk about the people of the country you’ve immigrated to, if you ask me.
So, by your definition, the “English” are illegal immigrants in that they came to Britain uninvited by the local population and, true to your convictions, should be deported back to where they came from.
I don’t agree with you. As a Celt, the “English” of whatever faith, ethnicity, colour are welcome in our land, as are you.
Anonymous
We’re not acting like a rich nation, though, and hence we will not be one for long.