News Forum - Increasing number of Singaporeans think racism is an important issue

[Thaiger]

The percentage of Singaporeans who think racism in their country is an important issue is growing. While 46.3% thought it was important in 2016, that number has risen to 56.2%. Channel News Asia and the Institute of Policy Studies reported these statistics after surveying more than 2,000 Singapore residents aged 21 and above. CNA says the survey questioned accurate numbers of people from Singapore’s various ethnic groups to appropriately represent the country’s makeup. Even though 88.8% of respondents said it is important for political leaders to talk openly about racism, 58.6 per cent still said they felt like talking about […]

The story Increasing number of Singaporeans think racism is an important issue as seen on Thaiger News.

Read the full story

[Shade_Wilder]

 

Interesting article, and the issue of racism/ethnic differences has long been of interest to me; I have lived most of my adult life in and around Asia and thus been affected by it since the first time I got off the plane in the late 80s.

I think it is important to note and define what is under discussion; the word 'racism' is, in my view, used too much as an all-purpose term to describe ethnic and/or cultural differences. Racism is an extraordinary charge which requires extraordinary evidence and is, in my experience, not what people are talking about. Instead, the term ethnic/cultural difference is usually more appropriate. Living in Thailand requires one to differentiate between the two; I run into ethnic/cultural differences almost every day as I simply do and think things in a different manner to the Thais and vice-versa, and that is not racism.

"Even though 88.8% of respondents said it is important for political leaders to talk openly about racism, 58.6 per cent still said they felt like talking about it could create unnecessary tension."

I take heart in that so many seem to want to discuss racism and/or ethnic/cultural differences, even if there is some trepidation involved; in my early days in the region, even the mention of the word racism and/or ethnic differences would engender a blank stare and a change of subject. That said, I don't think Asians in general have really figured out a way to discuss the issue comfortably; too much history perhaps. When I discuss it with my Thai friends, I usually start out mentioning small things that I do in my culture, and contrasting them with Thai culture; in a short time they pick up on the differences and their curiosity is piqued.

"54.9% of Chinese respondents feel that ethnic minorities are getting overly sensitive in discussions on race. That number is 42.7% for Indian respondents, and 47.8% for Malay respondents. "

I think it s unfortunate that the news article/poll didn't begin with another question. I would have asked "Do you consider yourself to be (Chinese/Indian/Malay) first or Singaporean first?

I think a lot of it is the Asian 'Group' culture; perhaps it is a bit of a stereotype, and stereotypes often have a basis in truth, but when I see an Asian meet someone new, I see them actively searching out a 'group' to belong to and they aren't really happy until they see it. A good example might be what occurred to me a few years ago in my Thai language class. Our teacher, a Thai lady, asked what we (the students) all did outside of class, and was quite confused when we answered that we didn't actually see each other outside of class; it simply never occurred to her. The idea of not actively finding or creating a group to join was... weird.

I, as a BWG (Big White Guy), tend to exist outside of the Asian groups, but am almost always treated well and respectfully. Yes, there are rare exceptions, but there are ignorant a-holes everywhere in the world.

A question to members;

Are you affected by racism? Or by Ethnic/Cultural differences? Or is it the proverbial 'water off a ducks back' and a non-issue/not relevant?

 

[palooka]

1 hour ago, Shade_Wilder said:

I would have asked "Do you consider yourself to be (Chinese/Indian/Malay) first or Singaporean first?

The first person the pollsters asked, cool dude with nice shades, replied what shit are you on man, I'm blind, I'm human, ain't that enough.  thanks for your donation.

[Wingnut]

Personal experience is that without a doubt that Chinese Singaporeans are the most racist people that I have the unfortunate luck to come across bar none. If you put them in a uniform then they become outright obnoxious. 

[palooka]

1 hour ago, Shade_Wilder said:

Are you affected by racism? Or by Ethnic/Cultural differences? Or is it the proverbial 'water off a ducks back' and a non-issue/not relevant?

I have tried to guide my life on the earlier post of a blind man.

He sees no difference, he only hears and reacts to how he is treated. 

I have worked and socialised with many races over the years and have tried to treat people as they treat me.

I have tried to be forgiving of their indiscretions against me and hopefully mine have been forgiven against them, cultural ignorance or whatever reason but this is a two way street both sides have to give and take.

Guilt journalism has a lot to answer for on this subject, they tend to warp reality for their headlines and damn the consequences thus justifying minor indiscretions that may have occurred often through historical educational ignorance and indocrination through parental beliefs.

I am not to blame and shall not accept blame for the actions of my ancestors.

[Marc26]

2 hours ago, palooka said:

I have tried to guide my life on the earlier post of a blind man.

He sees no difference, he only hears and reacts to how he is treated. 

I have worked and socialised with many races over the years and have tried to treat people as they treat me.

I have tried to be forgiving of their indiscretions against me and hopefully mine have been forgiven against them, cultural ignorance or whatever reason but this is a two way street both sides have to give and take.

Guilt journalism has a lot to answer for on this subject, they tend to warp reality for their headlines and damn the consequences thus justifying minor indiscretions that may have occurred often through historical educational ignorance and indocrination through parental beliefs.

I am not to blame and shall not accept blame for the actions of my ancestors.

You are absolutely not to blame for the actions of your ancestors

 

But it should be acknowledged and taught as history.

And it is not, well in North America it is not 

 

A few examples:

 

Juneteenth

A new holiday in the US celebrating the emancipation of slavery

Most scoffed at it and don't want it

A) that's crazy, it's a day off! That's how racist a lot are. They'd rather go to work than have a day off to remember slavery emancipation 

Honestly, just think about that

 

But my main point. My sister was sort of dismissing the new holiday.

I said the same thing, "it's a day off".

She said, "but it's teaching kids a whole different history "

 

Well it's history, kids should know it

 

 

Canada

Mass Graves found at Residential Schools in Canada

Residential Schools basically kidnapped indigenous kids and tried to take the "Indian" out of them

So they are finding mass graves of 1000's of kids killed

But when this all came out, and their were vigils and rallies for it

The overall feeling was annoyance, IMO

Can you imagine if they found mass Graves of white kids???

The uproar

Here, people were annoyed a rally caused traffic

 

So I don't the current attitude of "get over it" works

 

 

[Shade_Wilder]

 

Some interesting responses (Cheers!)

I think that Mr Palooka shows great intelligence (I am a firm believer in the old adage that a true test of another person's intelligence is how much they agree with you) and that the point made is well-stated in the Christian verse Luke 6:31 "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you", the single wisest sentence uttered in human history. In my local context, I make an effort to smile and perhaps crack a joke whenever I have interactions with the Thais and while the very first one is usually not that friendly, the second and subsequent ones are; a friend of mine often says "Thais hate everybody!". In short, I have always managed to become a 'local' quite quickly and then have done well with the Thais.

Does the experience of other members reflect this same idea? Hmm... outside of the horrendous tourist traps?

The Singapore question intrigues me as I think it is emblematic of the situation in many SE Asian nations; there really is not a strong national identity. Yes, speak with a Thai about identity and you'll have the memorized slogans from school repeated back at you, as you will with a Malaysian, a Korean, a Vietnamese, etc., etc. However, dig a bit deeper into the conversation and I find that the National identity often lags behind several others; family, clan, region, religion, etc. Chat with a Thai in the NE and after a few minutes you wonder which is more important; Thai or Lana? Chat with a Thai in the deep South and after a few minutes you wonder which is more important; Thai or Muslim? Chat with a Singaporean or Malaysian and after a few minutes you wonder which is more important; Singaporean or Chinese/Malay/Indian? I contrast it with Western ideas where we tend (no, it isn't absolute) to place a much greater emphasis on national identity, be it German, American, Italian, Aussie, etc. 

I think that there are two main reasons for the above. First, the 'Nanny State'. Yes, many of us live here as we don't really like the 'Nanny State', but I'll leave the pros and cons of that to another thread. However, as it is so prevalent in our lives back in our native countries, it imparts a sense of identity of belonging to the larger whole. In contrast, when I see Thais or others in the region have to deal with government, it is an unwanted chore consisting of a fatalistic mood, too many photocopies, and a concern that somehow they'll attract its unwanted attention. 

The second reason for the lack of a national identity is that the current crop of States in SE Asia are quite young. Yes, people have been living here for thousands of years, but in terms of the State many recall a time where Colonial powers were here and the replacement State still hasn't 'sunk into the bones' yet. Is a person a Thai or Lana? Is a person a Malaysian or an Indian? Is a person Singaporean or Chinese?

When the next global cataclysm hits (we are overdue), will people in SE Asia identify Nationally or by Family/Clan or Religion or by Ethnicity?

And, what will happen to us, the BWGs (Big White Guys)?

Any thoughts?

 

[Marc26]

17 minutes ago, Shade_Wilder said:

Some interesting responses (Cheers!)

I think that Mr Palooka shows great intelligence (I am a firm believer in the old adage that a true test of another person's intelligence is how much they agree with you) and that the point made is well-stated in the Christian verse Luke 6:31 "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you", the single wisest sentence uttered in human history. In my local context, I make an effort to smile and perhaps crack a joke whenever I have interactions with the Thais and while the very first one is usually not that friendly, the second and subsequent ones are; a friend of mine often says "Thais hate everybody!". In short, I have always managed to become a 'local' quite quickly and then have done well with the Thais.

Does the experience of other members reflect this same idea? Hmm... outside of the horrendous tourist traps?

The Singapore question intrigues me as I think it is emblematic of the situation in many SE Asian nations; there really is not a strong national identity. Yes, speak with a Thai about identity and you'll have the memorized slogans from school repeated back at you, as you will with a Malaysian, a Korean, a Vietnamese, etc., etc. However, dig a bit deeper into the conversation and I find that the National identity often lags behind several others; family, clan, region, religion, etc. Chat with a Thai in the NE and after a few minutes you wonder which is more important; Thai or Lana? Chat with a Thai in the deep South and after a few minutes you wonder which is more important; Thai or Muslim? Chat with a Singaporean or Malaysian and after a few minutes you wonder which is more important; Singaporean or Chinese/Malay/Indian? I contrast it with Western ideas where we tend (no, it isn't absolute) to place a much greater emphasis on national identity, be it German, American, Italian, Aussie, etc. 

I think that there are two main reasons for the above. First, the 'Nanny State'. Yes, many of us live here as we don't really like the 'Nanny State', but I'll leave the pros and cons of that to another thread. However, as it is so prevalent in our lives back in our native countries, it imparts a sense of identity of belonging to the larger whole. In contrast, when I see Thais or others in the region have to deal with government, it is an unwanted chore consisting of a fatalistic mood, too many photocopies, and a concern that somehow they'll attract its unwanted attention. 

The second reason for the lack of a national identity is that the current crop of States in SE Asia are quite young. Yes, people have been living here for thousands of years, but in terms of the State many recall a time where Colonial powers were here and the replacement State still hasn't 'sunk into the bones' yet. Is a person a Thai or Lana? Is a person a Malaysian or an Indian? Is a person Singaporean or Chinese?

When the next global cataclysm hits (we are overdue), will people in SE Asia identify Nationally or by Family/Clan or Religion or by Ethnicity?

And, what will happen to us, the BWGs (Big White Guys)?

Any thoughts?

I don't know if it's any different in the US 

 

I would consider myself more Boston than I am American 

 

And because we have so many different cultures within the US, I don't have a ton in common with a lot of fellow Americans 

 

 

[Grumpish]

Racism - call it xenophobia if you want - is deeply rooted in the human psyche, from long before the first humans climbed down from out of the trees. But attitudes change - I can remember my father saying "wash that fruit, nig-nogs have handled it", saying that is something that I, and most people, would find completely unacceptable now. Too much of what is called out as racism these days, though, is journalists and social media looking for story that isn't really there.  

[Soidog]

13 hours ago, Shade_Wilder said:

Are you affected by racism? Or by Ethnic/Cultural differences? Or is it the proverbial 'water off a ducks back' and a non-issue/not relevant?

I have worked and lived in a number of different countries in Asia and Africa and I have been subjected to comments, which had they been reversed, would be regarded as racist. This has happened to me in Thailand where I was angrily asked “why are you in my country?” Too often words and phrases used are ignored or brushed aside as “local idiosyncrasies”. If however a BWG was to utter such collective terms and apply it to locals then it’s termed racist. 
 

Even on this forum, to call out and highlight the shortcomings or total abject failures of government or individuals is often met with a claim of racism or being entitled. I don’t regard myself as racist at all. I have many Thai friends and I have many friends in countries as diverse as Kenya and Oman. I have worked with many nationalities and never had a single issue with racism of any kind.  I treat individuals as individuals, but I won’t make apologies or even allowances for individual comments or government policies which are jingoistic and nationalistic, or restrictive dependant on nationality. 
 

One thing I do note is that many “westerners” don’t actually like what has happened in terms of immigration back in their own countries. Many have now lost their national identity and are increasingly multi-cultural. This leads to some people to praise the actions of the Thai government which restricts what foreigners can and can’t do (Thailand is for Thais), while others are frustrated that they get the rough end of the stick both ways. They have to accept the erosion of their own national identity at home, while being limited what they can do in other countries. I would say I fall in to the latter category. It more than frustrates me that Thais are allowed to fully own a business and property in the UK while no such options are afforded to me in Thailand. I believe that as long as you can take care of yourself and are not likely to be a burden on local tax payers, you should have the freedom to live your life anywhere you choose. After all, what is a border of a country? Simply a line drawn on a map which changes over history. 

[KaptainRob]

14 minutes ago, Grumpish said:

Too much of what is called out as racism these days, though, is journalists and social media looking for story that isn't really there.  

Precisely.  Unfortunately it also pre-conditions many ppl to find racist remarks in perfectly acceptable discussion.

[HiuMak]

1 hour ago, Grumpish said:

Racism - call it xenophobia if you want - is deeply rooted in the human psyche, from long before the first humans climbed down from out of the trees.

Exactly. Everyone has some form of racism in them ( colour, wealth, sex, etc) 

[Shade_Wilder]

1 hour ago, Soidog said:

I have worked and lived in a number of different countries in Asia and Africa and I have been subjected to comments, which had they been reversed, would be regarded as racist. This has happened to me in Thailand where I was angrily asked “why are you in my country?” Too often words and phrases used are ignored or brushed aside as “local idiosyncrasies”. If however a BWG was to utter such collective terms and apply it to locals then it’s termed racist. 
 

Even on this forum, to call out and highlight the shortcomings or total abject failures of government or individuals is often met with a claim of racism or being entitled. I don’t regard myself as racist at all. I have many Thai friends and I have many friends in countries as diverse as Kenya and Oman. I have worked with many nationalities and never had a single issue with racism of any kind.  I treat individuals as individuals, but I won’t make apologies or even allowances for individual comments or government policies which are jingoistic and nationalistic, or restrictive dependant on nationality. 
 

One thing I do note is that many “westerners” don’t actually like what has happened in terms of immigration back in their own countries. Many have now lost their national identity and are increasingly multi-cultural. This leads to some people to praise the actions of the Thai government which restricts what foreigners can and can’t do (Thailand is for Thais), while others are frustrated that they get the rough end of the stick both ways. They have to accept the erosion of their own national identity at home, while being limited what they can do in other countries. I would say I fall in to the latter category. It more than frustrates me that Thais are allowed to fully own a business and property in the UK while no such options are afforded to me in Thailand. I believe that as long as you can take care of yourself and are not likely to be a burden on local tax payers, you should have the freedom to live your life anywhere you choose. After all, what is a border of a country? Simply a line drawn on a map which changes over history. 

 

Hmm... what an interesting post, Mr Dog! 

I didn't really think of you as an advocate of 'Globalism', the 'Free Movement of People' and 'Open Borders', but... (yes, I am messing with you by using those particular words, but only a bit)

I can understand the idea that you (and others) dislike the idea of Thais being able to do things in your native country that you (and others) can't do here, but I can't understand why it matters. If, for example, you could buy land/have a business in Thailand as Thais can do in the UK, wouldn't that lead Thailand down the same cosmopolitan path and lack of national identity you profess to dislike? Alternatively, were Thais (and others) unable to function and flourish in the UK, it'd be a great loss in diversity for the UK. The UK has thrived by allowing other nationalities/ethnic groups to settle; there is a reason that the UK is a global leader in going out and having a delicious curry. There is a balance to be had.

I suspect that you are drawing a distinction with the phrase "...can take care of yourself and not be a burden on the local tax payer..." to argue against unrestricted immigration/refugees to the UK and in favour of you being allowed to settle here, but do we really want the wealthy to have even more perks? And yes, I do consider you to be part of the wealthy; you can move country quite easily while globally most can't.

This discussion is going a wee bit off topic, but I am one of the few foreigners who actually agrees with the Thai policy of not allowing foreigners to own land here, and the reason is quite simple; funds from all over the globe would descend immediately and buy up every inch of waterfront land in the country and forever shut the Thais out, and I would be at the front of that cue. Some restrictions are good.

Getting back on topic...

I actually like borders for the simple reason that if you don't like something about one place or you have... difficulties in one place, you can cross a border and be done with it. Without borders, where you going to go when the feces hits the fan?

Finally, a few comments on some of the other comments in this thread.

1 hour ago, Grumpish said:

Racism - call it xenophobia if you want - is deeply rooted in the human psyche, from long before the first humans climbed down from out of the trees.

Hmm... is it?

I have often seen a bunch of kids play together without the slightest thought of the colour of their skins. I have always felt that racism is something learned from adults.

A genuine question; is there serious evidence to show that racism is inherent/natural as opposed to being learned? Could you provide a link?

1 hour ago, KaptainRob said:

Unfortunately it also pre-conditions many ppl to find racist remarks in perfectly acceptable discussion.

Amen!

If people could just chill a bit and not assume the worst in order to... make a point, then it'd all be easier.

My view is that Legalization of Weed would fix many of those problems, but that's another thread.

 

[Soidog]

17 minutes ago, Shade_Wilder said:

I didn't really think of you as an advocate of 'Globalism', the 'Free Movement of People' and 'Open Borders', but... (yes, I am messing with you by using

Actually I am an advocate of free movement of people, with the caveat that they either work and pay taxes and contribute to society, or they have sufficient funds to take care of themselves if they don’t wish to work. 

 

19 minutes ago, Shade_Wilder said:

The UK has thrived by allowing other nationalities/ethnic groups to settle; there is a reason that the UK is a global leader in going out and having a delicious curry. There is a balance to be had.

The last line here is the important part. It is a balance. Unfettered movement of people and mass migration of one culture in to another can create significant social problems. Maybe one day the Thais will be able to enjoy real fish and chips just as the British enjoy a delicious curry. 

 

21 minutes ago, Shade_Wilder said:

This discussion is going a wee bit off topic, but I am one of the few foreigners who actually agrees with the Thai policy of not allowing foreigners to own land here, and the reason is quite simple; funds from all over the globe would descend immediately and buy up every inch of waterfront land in the country and forever shut the Thais out

I don’t believe that would happen at all. Most waterfront land is already out of the reach of the vast majority of Thais. It is owned by the rich and powerful in Thailand. They can easily compete financially with anyone else in the world. Most people would simply wish to be able to buy the land in Chiangmai or Udon Thani and build a house to live in. If this was a real concern then the law could limit land purchase to certain areas. Malaysia operates a system where foreigners can 100% own land and property with restrictions. These include properties less than 1 million RM (£185,000). This means small village properties are not allowed. They also reserve certain land for Malays only. Thailand could do the same and limit foreign ownership within 5 miles of beachfront or riverfront. I think this is a problem that wouldn’t materialise and could easily be limited to overcome some of the concerns you raise. 
 

The same is true for foreign business ownership in Malaysia where once again, 100% foreign ownership is permitted with some limitations.

So its possible to own land, property and business in Malaysia. A country with just as many beautiful beaches as Thailand  with a fantastic capital city of Kuala Lumpur and yet Malaysia certainly retains its cultural identity and isn’t being bought out by rich foreigners. In my humble opinion, the cultural identity in the UK has been eroded, not by foreign investors and home ownership which attracts people who wish to contribute to society, It’s been eroded by the those who migrate there expecting the pavements to be lined with gold and everything for nothing. They arrive and become disillusioned with British life and decide they wish to turn parts of the UK in to the very places they were so eager to get away from. 

Great discussion Mr Wilder, even if things have strayed a little from your original question of racism

[Shade_Wilder]

 

54 minutes ago, Soidog said:

Actually I am an advocate of free movement of people, with the caveat that they either work and pay taxes and contribute to society, or they have sufficient funds to take care of themselves if they don’t wish to work. 

The last line here is the important part. It is a balance. Unfettered movement of people and mass migration of one culture in to another can create significant social problems. Maybe one day the Thais will be able to enjoy real fish and chips just as the British enjoy a delicious curry. 

I don’t believe that would happen at all. Most waterfront land is already out of the reach of the vast majority of Thais. It is owned by the rich and powerful in Thailand. They can easily compete financially with anyone else in the world. Most people would simply wish to be able to buy the land in Chiangmai or Udon Thani and build a house to live in. If this was a real concern then the law could limit land purchase to certain areas. Malaysia operates a system where foreigners can 100% own land and property with restrictions. These include properties less than 1 million RM (£185,000). This means small village properties are not allowed. They also reserve certain land for Malays only. Thailand could do the same and limit foreign ownership within 5 miles of beachfront or riverfront. I think this is a problem that wouldn’t materialise and could easily be limited to overcome some of the concerns you raise. 
 

The same is true for foreign business ownership in Malaysia where once again, 100% foreign ownership is permitted with some limitations.

So its possible to own land, property and business in Malaysia. A country with just as many beautiful beaches as Thailand  with a fantastic capital city of Kuala Lumpur and yet Malaysia certainly retains its cultural identity and isn’t being bought out by rich foreigners. In my humble opinion, the cultural identity in the UK has been eroded, not by foreign investors and home ownership which attracts people who wish to contribute to society, It’s been eroded by the those who migrate there expecting the pavements to be lined with gold and everything for nothing. They arrive and become disillusioned with British life and decide they wish to turn parts of the UK in to the very places they were so eager to get away from. 

Great discussion Mr Wilder, even if things have strayed a little from your original question of racism

Yes, as always an interesting discussion, Mr Dog. I suspect that we are back to the nuances, as we so often are. Hopefully the bloodthirsty mob known as the "Mods" will be lenient and not wield their sharpened Swords, Axes and Katanas... 

Somehow, we have a dual-track discussion and you have me at a disadvantage as I only spent a year in the UK before fleeing with/for my sanity. Er... and fleeing a horrible, horrid hag, but that is another story.

However...

I am just baffled by UK people's reactions to immigrants and refugees. Yes, the current crop creates ghettoes and enclaves where they re-create what is familiar, but it is the same process used by immigrants and refugees from time immemorial. And, looking back at time immemorial, there is a clear pattern that they will emerge in a generation or two in order to join the mainstream (er... whatever that happens to be). The Irish in the fifties, the South Asians in the seventies, the Carribs for generations, the Nigerians for generations, etc, etc, etc.

As an outsider, I can't help but think that the UK has been used and manipulated by unscrupulous people, both inside of the country and out, as a laboratory to create uncivil behaviour and discord for nefarious purposes. The process of integrating people into our respective societies is well-known and works, but now with the created, desired and planned discord, it is causing problems when it doesn't need to and should not.

I'll just leave that thought there as Brits need to sort it but for themselves, but I will simply point out that nothing new is actually happening, you Brits know what to do, and should just do it.

You make a persuasive case comparing and contrasting Malaysia and Thailand in terms of foreign land ownership, but I remain unconvinced as a matter of nuance (quelle surprise!). In theory, the Malaysian system could be transferred and adapted to Thailand, but I don't believe that it'd work as Thailand doesn't have the same respect for the Rule of Law, something that is required for the system to work. Yes, I know, before you say it, Malaysia isn't exactly a beacon of Virtue and Legality either, but the residual effects of the British Colonization, when your fore-fathers weren't raping, looting and pillaging, was to instill a respect for Law and Ownership that simply isn't present here in the Kingdom. I am sure that there are hordes of people on the border just salivating at the thought of unrestricted or even restricted land ownership.

How do I know this? Do I have evidence to support my assertion? Er... no, but I do already know which piece of land I would bribe an Official for, which Official I would actually bribe, and roughly how much I would pay him to... er...'fiddle' with the documents so that I could... er... 'acquire' them; it is something that I daydream about on slow days. And, I am a law-abiding, rules-following kind of guy. Imagine the Chinese or others descending on the Property office with suitcases full of cash; it'd be a true representation of a 'feeding-frenzy'.

We'll have to just agree to disagree, and so often is the case.

Enjoy your Sunday.

 

 

 

[Soidog]

2 hours ago, Shade_Wilder said:

I'll just leave that thought there as Brits need to sort it but for themselves, but I will simply point out that nothing new is actually happening, you Brits know what to do, and should just do it.

I agree that we Brits should be able to handle this better, as immigration is nothing new to the UK.
 

I heard an interesting thing a few years ago on a radio programme. Immigration was the topic and a representative in support of more immigration was on the show, along with an elderly lady who lives in an inner city part of London. The supporter was from the leafy suburbs of Oxford and explained to the audience that immigration each year only increases the UK population by 0.5%. To help visualise what this meant, he told the audience to get a piece of A4 paper and put 200 dots with a pen on the paper. Each year, all you are doing is adding an extra dot. Not much at all you see. Just one extra dot in 200. To which the lady said - Yes but the 200 dots and the extra dot is not evenly distributed. The population increase in her area was like putting 5 extra dots on the paper whereas where the immigration rep lived  was only putting one extra dot every 5 years. That took the wind out of the sails of the guy as what she was essentially saying is that it’s ok for those people in the leafy white suburbs who don’t suffer the changes to their high streets and schools having to modify classes to accommodate Islamic sensitivities etc. 

So I think the issue in the UK is now becoming one of scale, especially from Muslim countries which itself is causing security issues. More and more UK born British Asians are being radicalised and supporting extreme forms of Islam. Something that never happened with Indian and Caribbean immigrants. 
 

As you say, well off topic so perhaps leave it there. Thanks for the debate. Always enjoy a fair and reasonable debate. 

[Marc26]

13 hours ago, Soidog said:

Actually I am an advocate of free movement of people, with the caveat that they either work and pay taxes and contribute to society, or they have sufficient funds to take care of themselves if they don’t wish to work. 

The last line here is the important part. It is a balance. Unfettered movement of people and mass migration of one culture in to another can create significant social problems. Maybe one day the Thais will be able to enjoy real fish and chips just as the British enjoy a delicious curry. 

I don’t believe that would happen at all. Most waterfront land is already out of the reach of the vast majority of Thais. It is owned by the rich and powerful in Thailand. They can easily compete financially with anyone else in the world. Most people would simply wish to be able to buy the land in Chiangmai or Udon Thani and build a house to live in. If this was a real concern then the law could limit land purchase to certain areas. Malaysia operates a system where foreigners can 100% own land and property with restrictions. These include properties less than 1 million RM (£185,000). This means small village properties are not allowed. They also reserve certain land for Malays only. Thailand could do the same and limit foreign ownership within 5 miles of beachfront or riverfront. I think this is a problem that wouldn’t materialise and could easily be limited to overcome some of the concerns you raise. 
 

The same is true for foreign business ownership in Malaysia where once again, 100% foreign ownership is permitted with some limitations.

So its possible to own land, property and business in Malaysia. A country with just as many beautiful beaches as Thailand  with a fantastic capital city of Kuala Lumpur and yet Malaysia certainly retains its cultural identity and isn’t being bought out by rich foreigners. In my humble opinion, the cultural identity in the UK has been eroded, not by foreign investors and home ownership which attracts people who wish to contribute to society, It’s been eroded by the those who migrate there expecting the pavements to be lined with gold and everything for nothing. They arrive and become disillusioned with British life and decide they wish to turn parts of the UK in to the very places they were so eager to get away from. 

Great discussion Mr Wilder, even if things have strayed a little from your original question of racism

You mean like all the Aussie Bars in Thailand 

 

Or every fish and chip shop and pub in Spain?

 

Everybody does it, we just complain now because it's others that are doing it in our lands

[Soidog]

39 minutes ago, Marc26 said:

You mean like all the Aussie Bars in Thailand 

Or every fish and chip shop and pub in Spain?

Everybody does it, we just complain now because it's others that are doing it in our lands

Well the Aussie bars aren’t owned by Aussies in Thailand, they are owned by Thais. The fish and chips shops in Spain are part of the freedom of people to work where they choose when the UK was in the EU and was a reciprocal arrangement for any Spaniard who wanted to open a Tapas bar in the UK. I have no problem with people moving to “our lands” as long as they contribute or have funds to take care of themselves, as I previously said. My issue is when one country can do it in my home country and I’m not allowed to do it in theirs. That’s unfair and unreasonable. 

[Marc26]

38 minutes ago, Soidog said:

Well the Aussie bars aren’t owned by Aussies in Thailand, they are owned by Thais. The fish and chips shops in Spain are part of the freedom of people to work where they choose when the UK was in the EU and was a reciprocal arrangement for any Spaniard who wanted to open a Tapas bar in the UK. I have no problem with people moving to “our lands” as long as they contribute or have funds to take care of themselves, as I previously said. My issue is when one country can do it in my home country and I’m not allowed to do it in theirs. That’s unfair and unreasonable. 

I agree with that but you did say people immigrate and then turn it into where they came from

 

But it happens everywhere and has been happening our whole life 

 

Where I grew up it's predominantly Italian families

 

Most of the parents barely spoke English and had no desire to

 

Many of my local places I go to could basically be in Italy 

 

But they look like us, so we don't mind that

[Soidog]

7 hours ago, Marc26 said:

I agree with that but you did say people immigrate and then turn it into where they came from

But it happens everywhere and has been happening our whole life 

Where I grew up it's predominantly Italian families

Most of the parents barely spoke English and had no desire to

Many of my local places I go to could basically be in Italy 

But they look like us, so we don't mind that

Ok, sorry, I thought you were referring to ownership of business. 
 

Yes this has happened for many years and as you suggest, will always happen. It’s interesting that you refer to Italians and the issue of English businesses in Spain. In the UK, the real issues have arisen where the culture (non European) and indeed religions are not aligned and where the volumes are overwhelming to the point that entire towns or cites become a different culture. In the UK this never happened before 1970. In Thailand the “Aussie” bars are concentrated on a couple of streets in Pattaya and Phuket with the odd bar scattered through the country. The same goes for fish & chip shops in Spain, many of which are concentrated in Benidorm and a handful of other street locations around the country. Whatever the immigration policy of Thailand was to become, I don’t think we would see the immigration levels to the point where entire towns and cities were essentially full of Westerners, although maybe more Chinese would move in (but that happened already didn’t it and they essentially control big business).
 

Back in the UK in the 1960’s there were concerns by some right wing politicians that net migration (note net) could exceed 50,000 by the end of the 1960’s. Today, that figure is closer 300,000.  In 2020 715,000 people moved to the UK, while 403,000 left.  The vast majority of which are non-EU immigration.
 

It sure is a complex issue and needs serious debate and sensible consideration. Part of the problem is that as soon as you try to raise the question, you are labelled  racist, nationalistic etc. I’m a believer that controlled immigration is good for the economy, the people and hence the country.  It’s the word “controlled” that’s the difficult definition. 

A first start in my opinion would be reciprocity on a number of key issues. I would include:

Visa exemption rules.

Land ownership.

Ability to work.

Ownership of property.

Ownership of businesses.

This would not only allow for a sense of fair play among citizens, it would also act as some leverage to those countries who’s citizens exploit the open policies of other countries, while voting for governments back home that block immigration in their own country. Thailand for example! 

 

 

 

[Marc26]

3 hours ago, Soidog said:

Ok, sorry, I thought you were referring to ownership of business. 
 

Yes this has happened for many years and as you suggest, will always happen. It’s interesting that you refer to Italians and the issue of English businesses in Spain. In the UK, the real issues have arisen where the culture (non European) and indeed religions are not aligned and where the volumes are overwhelming to the point that entire towns or cites become a different culture. In the UK this never happened before 1970. In Thailand the “Aussie” bars are concentrated on a couple of streets in Pattaya and Phuket with the odd bar scattered through the country. The same goes for fish & chip shops in Spain, many of which are concentrated in Benidorm and a handful of other street locations around the country. Whatever the immigration policy of Thailand was to become, I don’t think we would see the immigration levels to the point where entire towns and cities were essentially full of Westerners, although maybe more Chinese would move in (but that happened already didn’t it and they essentially control big business).
 

Back in the UK in the 1960’s there were concerns by some right wing politicians that net migration (note net) could exceed 50,000 by the end of the 1960’s. Today, that figure is closer 300,000.  In 2020 715,000 people moved to the UK, while 403,000 left.  The vast majority of which are non-EU immigration.
 

It sure is a complex issue and needs serious debate and sensible consideration. Part of the problem is that as soon as you try to raise the question, you are labelled  racist, nationalistic etc. I’m a believer that controlled immigration is good for the economy, the people and hence the country.  It’s the word “controlled” that’s the difficult definition. 

A first start in my opinion would be reciprocity on a number of key issues. I would include:

Visa exemption rules.

Land ownership.

Ability to work.

Ownership of property.

Ownership of businesses.

This would not only allow for a sense of fair play among citizens, it would also act as some leverage to those countries who’s citizens exploit the open policies of other countries, while voting for governments back home that block immigration in their own country. Thailand for example! 

Yes I've seen that in the UK

 

We have similar in Vancouver where large parts of it basically Asian

Every business sign, including the Canadian Banks is in Chinese