Well, in about two years we’ll have PM Starmer and for all his faults he doesn’t strike me as the type to build concentration camps. I suppose I could be very surprised.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The BBC | Tim Davie resigns as Director General over Trump documentary edit (p 187)
- Thread starter dave_blue12
- Start date
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
But Lineker hasn’t compared anything to the holocaust.It is offensive to trivialise the holocaust by comparing it to current UK government immigration policy.
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
#metaparodyAre you going to admit your Klopp comparison with Nazi Germany was offensive?
Citizen Mike
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Dec 2008
- Messages
- 619
exactly , why doesn't he go into politics . The answer is he has more influence from his current high profile situationThe comparison I was making in my previous post was highlighting the low/high public profile of the poster, not the subject matter.
If I posted that the government were shit*, who would care? if Pep posted that on twitter then there would be a pile on from all areas of society.
This is why I think lineker should have exercised caution as he is undoubtedly high profile.
I am not sure how different our views are, but it seems to matter more to you so I will leave it there as I dont intend to offend anyone.
*not necessarily my real opinion, just an example to highlight my point, so no politically motivated replies please.
blueparrot
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 7 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 33,456
No, the hysterical overeaction has been the reaction to somebody simply opposing the policy and pointing out similarities to the way the government were using language. The hysteria has come from those saying he was comparing the government to nazis and the genocide committed by them.Not really though is it. That is an hysterical overreaction.
Dear Chris B i note you have chosen not answer my question relating what actual holocaust survivors thought of Suella B. I can't think whyIt makes sense. If you take a very evil event and say it is similar to a normal everyday experience, then you are implying the evil event wasn’t particularly evil.
For instance “Harold Shipman was only like a hospice nurse”, or “people who protest are the same as arena bomber Salman Abedi”. It is offensive to trivialise evil by saying it is similar to something not evil. These statements are not only offensive to hospice nurses or protestors. They are offensive to anyone who understands the evils of the events they are compared to, because they minimise and trivialise those evil actions.
It is offensive to trivialise the holocaust by comparing it to current UK government immigration policy. This is especially true of the Nazi period in Germany, more so than my previous examples, because of the long history of holocaust denial and antisemitism across the world.
west didsblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Oct 2011
- Messages
- 34,070
He’s only been told that about 50 times. I don’t think it’s sinking in.But Lineker hasn’t compared anything to the holocaust.
No, he was one step away, but there is enough awareness of the where the Nazi regime led to understand what he was implying.But Lineker hasn’t compared anything to the holocaust.
If he was saying the current government is similar to a period of the Nazi rule when Germany was peaceful and well run, it would be a very strange argument to make.
It is clear he is saying the Home Secretary is leading us towards a holocaust like future. There is literally no other sensible interpretation of his words.
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
Maybe he’s too consumed with being offended.He’s only been told that about 50 times. I don’t think it’s sinking in.
Dealing with a lot of questions here bud, I’ll get back to it.Dear Chris B i note you have chosen not answer my question relating what actual holocaust survivors thought of Suella B. I can't think why
kaz7
Well-Known Member
One step away is not what he actually said thenNo, he was one step away, but there is enough awareness of the where the Nazi regime led to understand what he was implying.
If he was saying the current government is similar to a period of the Nazi rule when Germany was peaceful and well run, it would be a very strange argument to make.
It is clear he is saying the Home Secretary is leading us towards a holocaust like future. There is literally no other sensible interpretation of his words.
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
It’s not clear that he said that at all. There is literally nothing sensible about this truly absurd interpretation.It is clear he is saying the Home Secretary is leading us towards a holocaust like future. There is literally no other sensible interpretation of his words.
When people invoke the example of the Nazis they do so to highlight either the evil or the path to evil. Why else pick them as an example? They are only an example of evil and nothing else. If Lineker was not suggesting some kind of path to dehumanisation and holocaust he should have picked a better example.It’s not clear that he said that at all. There is literally nothing sensible about this truly absurd interpretation.
If you take a very evil event and say it is similar to a normal everyday experience, then you are implying the evil event wasn’t particularly evil.
Perhaps we are approaching the root of the problem.
This isn’t an every day experience.
When was the last time the British government declared it was going to pass an illegal bill on asylum and immigration that has been decried by the UN, the ECHR, the refugee council?
This government is pulling us out of international treaties that we founded 70 years ago. They’re boastfully removing the human rights of illegal immigrants.
Nothing about this is “everyday”.
I think if anyone is guilty of trivialising, it’s you.
dronefromsector7G
Well-Known Member
Just read the last 30 pages. Chris B is having a mare. Everyone arguing with him is wasting their time
west didsblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Oct 2011
- Messages
- 34,070
Unfortunately Jim chipped in and told us we weren’t allowed to call him a fucking idiot.Just read the last 30 pages. Chris B is having a mare. Everyone arguing with him is wasting their time
To be honest it’s not particularly different from the approach of the previous Home Secretary a couple of years ago. We don’t know that it is illegal yet, doubtless it will be tested in court. It seems a big reach to say a bill very similar to previous ineffective government acts is equivalent to genocide.Perhaps we are approaching the root of the problem.
This isn’t an every day experience.
When was the last time the British government declared it was going to pass an illegal bill on asylum and immigration that has been decried by the UN, the ECHR, the refugee council?
This government is pulling us out of international treaties that we founded 70 years ago. They’re boastfully removing the human rights of illegal immigrants.
Nothing about this is “everyday”.
I think if anyone is guilty of trivialising, it’s you.
Shipping refugees off to Rwanda is a bit fascist for me, you may not agree.But it’s not similar. There are no death camps or mass murders. We’re not going to have any, it’s not the same situation. The only camp been built is a refugee camp in France using UK tax payers money. The current situation is in no way similar to the evils of Nazi Germany. That is why using it as a comparison is trivialising, and that is why it is offensive.
In what way is it fascist? The fascist thing to do would be to treat them as subhumans, round them up into camps, and work them to death. I don’t think that’s the case here.Shipping refugees off to Rwanda is a bit fascist for me, you may not agree.