The UK is one of the least racist countries in the world. The Netherlands might be slightly ahead of us.
Citation needed? About average in my view, though much less so than it used to be and certainly less than France and Russia. I'd give the Americans credit for being a bit ahead of us, and the Germans too - they have their racists but the depth of loathing for racism among most people is much greater, because of the national experience of it.
By the way, I think we need to make a distinction between people who say they'd like to have sharia law or an Islamic state, and people who attempt violence or intimidation. The former is permissible (freedom of opinion and all that), the latter not. At present I can't see why this requires a new law of any kind, and I'm opposed to "crushing" any peacefully-expressed opinion. Too much of the "we had to destroy freedom in order to save it" thinking about that.
No Nick, we do not need to make that distinction.
Anyone who would like to have Sharia law and an Islamic state should not be here in the first place, regardless of whether they are prepared to use violence or intimidation, they are simply in the wrong country.
I cannot tell you how scary I find it that you are likely to be elected soon.
The UK is one of the least racist countries in the world. The Netherlands might be slightly ahead of us.
Citation needed? About average in my view, though much less so than it used to be and certainly less than France and Russia. I'd give the Americans credit for being a bit ahead of us, and the Germans too - they have their racists but the depth of loathing for racism among most people is much greater, because of the national experience of it.
By the way, I think we need to make a distinction between people who say they'd like to have sharia law or an Islamic state, and people who attempt violence or intimidation. The former is permissible (freedom of opinion and all that), the latter not. At present I can't see why this requires a new law of any kind, and I'm opposed to "crushing" any peacefully-expressed opinion. Too much of the "we had to destroy freedom in order to save it" thinking about that.
Not really. Trevor doesn't seem to mention Europe in the piece even though the Mail's headline-writer does, and he tacitly concedes America is less racist. The BSAS shows we're less racist than we were, which I'm sure is true.
Anyway, it's not really a competition - main thing is that it's improved. Overt racism is now extraordinarily rare
The UK is one of the least racist countries in the world. The Netherlands might be slightly ahead of us.
Citation needed? About average in my view, though much less so than it used to be and certainly less than France and Russia. I'd give the Americans credit for being a bit ahead of us, and the Germans too - they have their racists but the depth of loathing for racism among most people is much greater, because of the national experience of it.
By the way, I think we need to make a distinction between people who say they'd like to have sharia law or an Islamic state, and people who attempt violence or intimidation. The former is permissible (freedom of opinion and all that), the latter not. At present I can't see why this requires a new law of any kind, and I'm opposed to "crushing" any peacefully-expressed opinion. Too much of the "we had to destroy freedom in order to save it" thinking about that.
Not really. Trevor doesn't seem to mention Europe in the piece even though the Mail's headline-writer does, and he tacitly concedes America is less racist. The BSAS shows we're less racist than we were, which I'm sure is true.
Anyway, it's not really a competition - main thing is that it's improved. Overt racism is now extraordinarily rare
I'd also cite for example in this country, a party like Front National has never even come close to winning a nationwide election.
For me this sums up how wonderful this country is, from Roderick Spode, the best thing we've done is laugh at the extremists
Makes you proud to be British
Far-Right Extremists Chased Through London by Women Dressed as Badgers
@nigel4england No explanation that you will understand until you learn what fear is and why it can save you or kill you. Short term fear sharpens your reactions and can save your life, long term fear makes you irrational and gets you killed.
But surely, Mr. Eagles, you welcome religious and ethnic minorities being welcomed into political organisations?
Additionally, you must have nothing but praise for Nick Griffin's exposure of Asian, Northern, Muslim child abusers, especially after his persecution by the BBC and the authorities?
First point, not really.
Second point yes, criminality needs to be exposed, I wish he had also focussed on the abuse of Catholic Church's systematic abuse of children.
I'm not sure that's entirely fair.
Certainly they systematically covered it up and, in moving alleged offenders around rather than, ahem, exposing them, facilitated further abuse.
But it was a sin of omission rather than commission, which is what your post implies.
@nigel4england No explanation that you will understand until you learn what fear is and why it can save you or kill you. Short term fear sharpens your reactions and can save your life, long term fear makes you irrational and gets you killed.
Oh please do grow up, just answer the original question and spare me the amateur dramatics.
Congratulations, sir, it appears you have isolated and identified the toxin.
For the LibDems, it's running an election campaign to the left of Labour Party, but ending up in coalition with the Conservative Party.
For the Tories, it's throwing their erstwhile friends under buses. Current examples: their entire membership - 'swivel-eyed', social and religious conservatives - 'bigots', Eurosceptics (no Lisbon referendum), patriots - 'racists' and, finally, the providers of annuities (largest industry of its kind in the World). Remember, it was the callous destruction of mortgagees and small businessmen/self-employed under Major that gave the Tories the epithet in the first place.
Cameron de-toxifying the Conservatives? He seems to have concentrated it with his chumocracy and his reducing the membership to laughable numbers.
Personally, I think it's to do with their attending boarding schools.
My sister is a 'social and religious' conservative. She is a regular churchgoer and actually believes in God as well. When her son got married (to a woman I should add) there were 3 gay people at his wedding. She gets on with them quite well and is not horrified at the issue of gay partnership or marriage. Her experience and the polling which show clear majorities in favour of gay marriage in all 4 parties tells me that your analysis 'is not only not right, it is not even wrong'.
Yeah, amazing how UKIP's rise 'coincided' with being the only party that opposed gay marriage.
Equally amazing how such a 'vote-winner' led directly to a slump in Conservative ratings. And a mass exodus from that party.
Also, adding belief in God as an afterthought in your anecdote hardly suggests your sister is that much of a 'religious conservative'.
Congratulations to your nephew and his new wife, BTW.
You have less sensible to say in reply than originally. Amazing.
A nice prepared smartarse response devoid of any counter-arguments, but rendered obviously stupid by your ignoring my wedding congratulation to your nephew.
But, what did I expect from someone ignoring the fundamental meaning of matrimony, literally 'mother-making'.
As a Christian, I find it impossible to believe that a loving God would wish people excluded from the joys of lifelong commitment as expressed in marriage.
@Charles Of course many don't, and neither do many on the right. Public ownership of the means of production is as insane as the "free market". They are ideological fortresses we retreat to when the "enemy appears".
Pamela Geller @PamelaGeller 42m Jewish man arrested after chasing off pro-Hamas Jew haters in London: Jewish persecution in the UK. The Brits ... http://bit.ly/YO9cLC
British cops in magnificent form tonight.
Well done for linking to Pamela Geller, a woman banned from this country for her views, the SPLC have damned her as well.
Well I certainly prefer Pamela Geller to Khadijah Dare.
From the sound of her that Dare girl is a product of the gang culture as both a victim and participant. In terms of religion as an excuse as opposed to religion as a reason there was always likely to be crossover.
I can't wait to see the back of Grayling as Justice Secretary. Banning the one thing prisoners should be permitted - books - was an unforgivable error IMO.
@AndyJS Not books per se, the ban is on "importing books", which you can sort of see a reason behind. The problem there is that the prisoners then can only access what is allowed in the library, so you are denying them the freedom of thought. Another field day for the lawyers, and another excuse to demand withdrawal from the Human Rights?
@AndyJS Not books per se, the ban is on "importing books", which you can sort of see a reason behind. The problem there is that the prisoners then can only access what is allowed in the library, so you are denying them the freedom of thought. Another field day for the lawyers, and another excuse to demand withdrawal from the Human Rights?
Wasn't the problem to do with smuggling stuff inside them? Surely the expense for checking them is not exactly massive?
As a Christian, I find it impossible to believe that a loving God would wish people excluded from the joys of lifelong commitment as expressed in marriage.
Shame God didn't marry the mother of His Only Begotten Son
@RobD Yes, it is patently daft. But you can then only really conclude that is must be a ban on the content? The other option is, whoever made the ruling should be considering his/her position?
Fraser Nelson believes the UK is poorer than any US state apart from Mississippi. I haven't studied the data in detail but it sounds like utter nonsense to me:
As a Christian, I find it impossible to believe that a loving God would wish people excluded from the joys of lifelong commitment as expressed in marriage.
Shame God didn't marry the mother of His Only Begotten Son
As a Christian, I find it impossible to believe that a loving God would wish people excluded from the joys of lifelong commitment as expressed in marriage.
Shame God didn't marry the mother of His Only Begotten Son
would have been bigamy?
Mary could have left a mere carpenter to marry a deity!
@dugarbandier Religion needs mystery, otherwise people might start listening to what there prophet/god was actually saying, rather than what the priest/leader tell them he said
@nigel4england No explanation that you will understand until you learn what fear is and why it can save you or kill you. Short term fear sharpens your reactions and can save your life, long term fear makes you irrational and gets you killed.
"Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering!" - Master Yoda.
@Smarmeron I assumed you would have read Dune, but in case you haven't
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.[2]
A really interesting discussion tonight and congratulations to Smarmie for graduating into a decent contributor (with the Tromso-Troll adding the usual insightful/incite-ful barbs). But why anyone bothers discussing anything with the Plastic-Yorkshireman/Scots-born-Muhammadan is beyond me: Given the choice of the EDL and Islam I will pinch-my-nose and take the former....*
* And our least favourite Lawyer may also like to point to the EDL website where it states it is 'anti-Islam'. Gossip and conjecture from the HuffPuff is not fact.
EtA: Before anyone calls 'wacist' a quick question: If you were asked to define a bigot in two words would the phrase 'Phil Woolas' qualify? [I.e is a name two words or an identifying phrase?]
You don't think for a minute that I didn't take that into consideration when I posted that link and raised my concerns? But, hey, this is the Daily Mail, their online site is so successful that circulation of this article was guaranteed despite my concerns! Maybe I should just have posted a mysterious comment alluding to an article by a mainstream UK newspaper online and raising my concerns, and then left you all to go on a newspaper hunt to find the right article that was freely available to anyone! What patronising prat.
That editorial is laughable. In the end its only recommendation is that Dave should deliver a lecture.
'What is missing is a narrative from Britain's political leader that is strong on clarity and firm on logic. He is in a position where he could contribute to – and even lead – a meaningful, nuanced and robust discussion about what current events in Iraq tell us about the delicate tribal, economic and religious issues at play and what part Britain played in that narrative over the last 10 years.'
When Libya kicked off in 2011 lots of left wingers, both politicians and journalists, were ranting about government inaction and predicting a hostage crisis. In reality MI6 and UK special forces were already in Libya, and very successfully rounded up British citizens, and safely got them out of the country. Some of them had to leave via Hercules aircraft that landed on airfields our soldiers secured in the desert. The government kept shtum while all this was happening.
I suspect that the UK is very much involved in taking action against ISIS now, for obvious reasons, but we won't know about it until it's all over.
The government needs no advice from the likes of the Observer.
For those clinging to canvassing results (and will no doubt spot a conspiracy when the final outcome is not in line with them) a useful piece from the What Scotland Thinks website:
Political campaigners can often be heard complaining that opinion polls do not reflect what they are hearing ‘on the doorstep’. Arguing that they have spoken to many more people than the 1,000 or so typically interviewed for a poll, they claim the polls must be biased or just plain wrong. In Scotland, the Radical Independence Campaign has carried out several ‘mass canvasses’ in which its activists have contacted over 5,000 households. After undecided voters are excluded, they report a majority for Yes by around 60% to 40%. This is almost the polar opposite of the picture presented by the polls – the most recent ‘poll of polls’ (based on an average of the last 6 published polls) puts Yes support at 43% and No on 57%.
Which intoxicating substance is associated with the most lethal violence? Devotees of the Wire might presume that cocaine or maybe heroin would top the list, especially if you asked the worst causes of violence in poor, minority communities.
The correct answer, by far, is alcohol. It’s involved in more homicides than pretty much every other substance, combined. Alcohol’s relative importance has grown over the last fifteen years, as aging populations of cocaine users account for a declining proportion of violent crime.
That editorial is laughable. In the end its only recommendation is that Dave should deliver a lecture.
'What is missing is a narrative from Britain's political leader that is strong on clarity and firm on logic. He is in a position where he could contribute to – and even lead – a meaningful, nuanced and robust discussion about what current events in Iraq tell us about the delicate tribal, economic and religious issues at play and what part Britain played in that narrative over the last 10 years.'
When Libya kicked off in 2011 lots of left wingers, both politicians and journalists, were ranting about government inaction and predicting a hostage crisis. In reality MI6 and UK special forces were already in Libya, and very successfully rounded up British citizens, and safely got them out of the country. Some of them had to leave via Hercules aircraft that landed on airfields our soldiers secured in the desert. The government kept shtum while all this was happening.
I suspect that the UK is very much involved in taking action against ISIS now, for obvious reasons, but we won't know about it until it's all over.
The government needs no advice from the likes of the Observer.
The article starts: "The Mail on Sunday has been given a detailed account of how ...". In other words, the authorities want this published, presumably to deter any more would-be jihadists from buying airline tickets.
For those clinging to canvassing results (and will no doubt spot a conspiracy when the final outcome is not in line with them) a useful piece from the What Scotland Thinks website:
Political campaigners can often be heard complaining that opinion polls do not reflect what they are hearing ‘on the doorstep’. Arguing that they have spoken to many more people than the 1,000 or so typically interviewed for a poll, they claim the polls must be biased or just plain wrong. In Scotland, the Radical Independence Campaign has carried out several ‘mass canvasses’ in which its activists have contacted over 5,000 households. After undecided voters are excluded, they report a majority for Yes by around 60% to 40%. This is almost the polar opposite of the picture presented by the polls – the most recent ‘poll of polls’ (based on an average of the last 6 published polls) puts Yes support at 43% and No on 57%.
I question whether people talking face to face on the doorstep wish to be seen as travelling on the populist wave of independence, whereas when dealing with pollsters they are more likely to reflect what they are likely to do in the privacy of the polling booth.
I further question whether the polarised and sometimes aggressive nature of the debate, makes it even more likely that those being doorstepped will choose the "Yes dear" option, both to maker life easier, and so they can get back to the telly.
@nigel4england Catholicism and Protestantism need crushed as well do they? Hinduism and Buddhism and every other "ism"?
No, nor Judaism.
Just those who do not wish to live within our society, the way we have lived for centuries in the British way of life. Is that too much to expect?
Just curious: All of the ism's mentioned still have their militant minorities who would like to change the UK to fit their dream and everyone else's nightmares.
Take a look at the history of these Isles. We have had brutal Catholicism and Protestantism, there has been mass murder of Jews (York), civil wars, racist pogroms and discrimination. Heck, one town even managed to hang a monkey because they thought he was french.
One of the great things about this country is now our consensus of ignoring or even laughing at some of the extreme bigotry and intolerance.
However, by your argument, all forms of religous extremism and any other ism you dislike or disapprove of, should be banned on pain of death.
I suspect that should your ideas come about, that the population of the UK would decrease dramatically, until, at the last, only you were alive.
Of course, all this is just speculation. I, personally, tend more to militant atheism as I believe that religons have been a curse on this planet ... AAAARRRRRRGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
For those clinging to canvassing results (and will no doubt spot a conspiracy when the final outcome is not in line with them) a useful piece from the What Scotland Thinks website:
Political campaigners can often be heard complaining that opinion polls do not reflect what they are hearing ‘on the doorstep’. Arguing that they have spoken to many more people than the 1,000 or so typically interviewed for a poll, they claim the polls must be biased or just plain wrong. In Scotland, the Radical Independence Campaign has carried out several ‘mass canvasses’ in which its activists have contacted over 5,000 households. After undecided voters are excluded, they report a majority for Yes by around 60% to 40%. This is almost the polar opposite of the picture presented by the polls – the most recent ‘poll of polls’ (based on an average of the last 6 published polls) puts Yes support at 43% and No on 57%.
And I am to disagree with a SNumPtie who chaps on my door, holding a clipboard with a piece of paper on which is my name and address and a box alongside waiting for a tick or a cross??
For those clinging to canvassing results (and will no doubt spot a conspiracy when the final outcome is not in line with them) a useful piece from the What Scotland Thinks website:
Political campaigners can often be heard complaining that opinion polls do not reflect what they are hearing ‘on the doorstep’. Arguing that they have spoken to many more people than the 1,000 or so typically interviewed for a poll, they claim the polls must be biased or just plain wrong. In Scotland, the Radical Independence Campaign has carried out several ‘mass canvasses’ in which its activists have contacted over 5,000 households. After undecided voters are excluded, they report a majority for Yes by around 60% to 40%. This is almost the polar opposite of the picture presented by the polls – the most recent ‘poll of polls’ (based on an average of the last 6 published polls) puts Yes support at 43% and No on 57%.
And I am to disagree with a SNumPtie who chaps on my door, holding a clipboard with a piece of paper on which is my name and address and a box alongside waiting for a tick or a cross??
Er! No!
Any normal person would just tell the truth unless they were spineless.
Considering these polls were taken in areas where you would not normally knock someones door and try to intimidate them and the people knocking are not likely to be hard nuts, I doubt many would be intimidated into giving false information.
For those clinging to canvassing results (and will no doubt spot a conspiracy when the final outcome is not in line with them) a useful piece from the What Scotland Thinks website:
Political campaigners can often be heard complaining that opinion polls do not reflect what they are hearing ‘on the doorstep’. Arguing that they have spoken to many more people than the 1,000 or so typically interviewed for a poll, they claim the polls must be biased or just plain wrong. In Scotland, the Radical Independence Campaign has carried out several ‘mass canvasses’ in which its activists have contacted over 5,000 households. After undecided voters are excluded, they report a majority for Yes by around 60% to 40%. This is almost the polar opposite of the picture presented by the polls – the most recent ‘poll of polls’ (based on an average of the last 6 published polls) puts Yes support at 43% and No on 57%.
And I am to disagree with a SNumPtie who chaps on my door, holding a clipboard with a piece of paper on which is my name and address and a box alongside waiting for a tick or a cross??
Er! No!
Thoughts from a No voter on what it's like to face a YESNP canvasser and the belief system at work:
The signs are as follows:
- assertion that the cause (in this case independence) will of itself bring about miraculous results
- messianic belief that the cause is a force of destiny, i.e., that “history is on our side”
- hatred and belittling of those who do not share the cause (see above)
- irrational dismissal of impartial information such as opinion polls and the media as being in the hands of the enemies of the people
- conspiracy theories (like advising voters to not use pencil provided as it can be rubbed out and falsified)
Haven't heard the last one yet - but the rest of it rings pretty true.....
Comments
I am afraid not, you will have to learn for yourself why fear generates hate, and hatred has no reason.
Anyone who would like to have Sharia law and an Islamic state should not be here in the first place, regardless of whether they are prepared to use violence or intimidation, they are simply in the wrong country.
I cannot tell you how scary I find it that you are likely to be elected soon.
Anyway, it's not really a competition - main thing is that it's improved. Overt racism is now extraordinarily rare
So we'll have to wait until 6am for YouGov to post the figures.
Good night everyone.
For me this sums up how wonderful this country is, from Roderick Spode, the best thing we've done is laugh at the extremists
Makes you proud to be British
Far-Right Extremists Chased Through London by Women Dressed as Badgers
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/bnp-edl-hate-fascist-badgers-473597
I love discussing stuff with people who think the EDL are the voice of reason.
Look forward to crossing swords next week, when no doubt more radicalized Brits will have helped to further your argument.
No explanation that you will understand until you learn what fear is and why it can save you or kill you.
Short term fear sharpens your reactions and can save your life, long term fear makes you irrational and gets you killed.
Certainly they systematically covered it up and, in moving alleged offenders around rather than, ahem, exposing them, facilitated further abuse.
But it was a sin of omission rather than commission, which is what your post implies.
I will explain it all to you later Nigel, when you have become a big boy. and have stopped being scared of monsters your mind creates.
Of course many don't, and neither do many on the right.
Public ownership of the means of production is as insane as the "free market". They are ideological fortresses we retreat to when the "enemy appears".
Not books per se, the ban is on "importing books", which you can sort of see a reason behind.
The problem there is that the prisoners then can only access what is allowed in the library, so you are denying them the freedom of thought.
Another field day for the lawyers, and another excuse to demand withdrawal from the Human Rights?
"Porn-agains: meet the middle-aged men - and women - warped by internet porn
Society's anxiety about online porn has been so focused on the young that its impact on the older generation has gone largely unnoticed"
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9275381/porn-agains-meet-the-middle-aged-men-and-women-warped-by-internet-porn/
How favourable or unfavourable are you towards Scottish Independence (fav/unfav)
Scotland: 45:36
OA: 14:49
http://comres.co.uk/polls/SM_IoS_Political_Poll_24th_August_2014_12371.pdf
Table 21
It is more to do with the content of the book I think?
Checking a book for contraband should be reasonably easy though.
How long would it take to run it through a scanner, and let "fred" the sniffer dog give it a nose?
Yes, it is patently daft. But you can then only really conclude that is must be a ban on the content?
The other option is, whoever made the ruling should be considering his/her position?
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/fraser-nelson/2014/08/why-britain-is-poorer-than-any-us-state-other-than-mississippi/
I wouldn't call it utter nonsense. It would depend on the data chosen of course, but there will be a an amount of truth in it.
fanstastic , makes you think. utterly manic Mifune Toshiro.
See, I'm catching up on 1950 films. I'll get to return of the jedi eventually. I guess in about 50 years time.
I'll watch the new Disney Star Wars one if Mickey Mouse appears.
(I'm up to about 1949 with Mickey)
Religion needs mystery, otherwise people might start listening to what there prophet/god was actually saying, rather than what the priest/leader tell them he said
"Fear is the little death... Dune
I assumed you would have read Dune, but in case you haven't
I must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my fear.
I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing.
Only I will remain.[2]
A really interesting discussion tonight and congratulations to Smarmie for graduating into a decent contributor (with the Tromso-Troll adding the usual insightful/incite-ful barbs). But why anyone bothers discussing anything with the Plastic-Yorkshireman/Scots-born-Muhammadan is beyond me: Given the choice of the EDL and Islam I will pinch-my-nose and take the former....*
* And our least favourite Lawyer may also like to point to the EDL website where it states it is 'anti-Islam'. Gossip and conjecture from the HuffPuff is not fact.
EtA: Before anyone calls 'wacist' a quick question: If you were asked to define a bigot in two words would the phrase 'Phil Woolas' qualify? [I.e is a name two words or an identifying phrase?]
http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2014/08/why-bigger-isnt-always-better/
Political campaigners can often be heard complaining that opinion polls do not reflect what they are hearing ‘on the doorstep’. Arguing that they have spoken to many more people than the 1,000 or so typically interviewed for a poll, they claim the polls must be biased or just plain wrong. In Scotland, the Radical Independence Campaign has carried out several ‘mass canvasses’ in which its activists have contacted over 5,000 households. After undecided voters are excluded, they report a majority for Yes by around 60% to 40%. This is almost the polar opposite of the picture presented by the polls – the most recent ‘poll of polls’ (based on an average of the last 6 published polls) puts Yes support at 43% and No on 57%.
Which intoxicating substance is associated with the most lethal violence? Devotees of the Wire might presume that cocaine or maybe heroin would top the list, especially if you asked the worst causes of violence in poor, minority communities.
The correct answer, by far, is alcohol. It’s involved in more homicides than pretty much every other substance, combined. Alcohol’s relative importance has grown over the last fifteen years, as aging populations of cocaine users account for a declining proportion of violent crime.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/08/19/alcohol-is-still-the-deadliest-drug-in-the-united-states-and-its-not-even-close/
http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/8wj4hu4alm/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-140822-2.pdf
Con/UKIP:
RAF dropping humanitarian supplies: +77 / +58
US air strikes: +65 / +41
RAF participating in air strikes: +31 / +10
Britain arming Kurds: +7 / -10
Britain sending troops to train anti-ISIS: -11 / -37
Britain giving asylum to homeless Iraqi Christians: -11 / -44
I further question whether the polarised and sometimes aggressive nature of the debate, makes it even more likely that those being doorstepped will choose the "Yes dear" option, both to maker life easier, and so they can get back to the telly.
Take a look at the history of these Isles. We have had brutal Catholicism and Protestantism, there has been mass murder of Jews (York), civil wars, racist pogroms and discrimination. Heck, one town even managed to hang a monkey because they thought he was french.
One of the great things about this country is now our consensus of ignoring or even laughing at some of the extreme bigotry and intolerance.
However, by your argument, all forms of religous extremism and any other ism you dislike or disapprove of, should be banned on pain of death.
I suspect that should your ideas come about, that the population of the UK would decrease dramatically, until, at the last, only you were alive.
Of course, all this is just speculation. I, personally, tend more to militant atheism as I believe that religons have been a curse on this planet ... AAAARRRRRRGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Er! No!
Considering these polls were taken in areas where you would not normally knock someones door and try to intimidate them and the people knocking are not likely to be hard nuts, I doubt many would be intimidated into giving false information.
The signs are as follows:
- assertion that the cause (in this case independence) will of itself bring about miraculous results
- messianic belief that the cause is a force of destiny, i.e., that “history is on our side”
- hatred and belittling of those who do not share the cause (see above)
- irrational dismissal of impartial information such as opinion polls and the
media as being in the hands of the enemies of the people
- conspiracy theories (like advising voters to not use pencil provided as it can be rubbed out and
falsified)
Haven't heard the last one yet - but the rest of it rings pretty true.....
http://planetpedro.wordpress.com/2014/08/23/dear-yes-voters-and-other-nationalists/
Och it's gruesome!!
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_SRTBaafRZfw/TOq_839e-hI/AAAAAAAAFLw/Cg18gonIXkY/s1600/queen_and_soldiers.jpg