1.21Gigawatts
Banned
Not wanting to be dragged into the abyss by a racist, reactionary movement in England is the same as racism.
Okay then.
Okay then.
Of course I wasn't saying it's like for like, lets just leave it out then.
If Scottish people don't want to be ruled by Westminster lets have a vote. The last vote was on the basis of being in the EU. If we the UK end up leaving I fully support a Scottish referendum.
Wait... what in the fuck is this utter stupidity?It's a cover for racism.
You start off with discussing 'illegal immigrants' and then you carefully weave your discrimination into the narrative.
With Boris, people at least knew what they were getting. This guy on the other hand has no clue and says a lot of nonsense half of the time.
He's a million times better than Boris and has been openly inclusive for everyone (at a time when it is needed), hence why these remarks are lighting a fire under Labours ass. As always the SNP have been pretty open about working with Labour to tackle the Tories, but the fear of Scottish independence has Labour twitching too often. Ironically the best way for there to stand a chance of keeping the UK together would be an alliance with the SNP which would lead the Scottish people to thinking the Tories can actually be opposed, and we aren't heading for constant Tory reign. That would slowly chip away at some of the independence voters.
Meanwhile, all these remarks have done is cause the SNP party members to go off at Khan and Labour. Which then seeps through to Scottish voter public opinion. Labour playing themselves yet again.
Is it sad that the main thing I know this guy for was his invocation of GTA as a sign of Scotland's strength in new industries? (I mean, he wasn't wrong, but it's the main thing that sticks in my mind)
But yeah, Khan's method here isn't really an argument for uniting the voting base, it's to try and not divide them. Which I mean, can work when people are on the fence, but when they're already on the other side, you have to actually convince them to come back. This is not that at all.
The operative words here are "trying to divide us".
GAF continuing to talk in TV language based on sound quips and inflammatory language to destroy the person instead of deconstructing the argument is sad.
Not GAF. Some people on GAF. They are usual suspects.The operative words here are "trying to divide us".
GAF continuing to talk in TV language based on sound quips and inflammatory language to destroy the person instead of deconstructing the argument is sad.
...just as some had suggested Khan might be a leadership candidate sometime in the future....
doh!
There is an element of anti-Englishness in Scottish nationalism.
Spectacular lack of comprehension OP. Khan didn't frame it like that, like at all. He said
His message is to maintain and protect a strong, prosperous United Kingdom.
Say good bye to one the best Mayor we've had in decades ? Sorry, but no.
Wow OP, inflammatory title much? He simply said Nationalism can be as divisive as racism and other forms of bigotry, not that scottish nationalists are racists. Use Guardian as your source next time.
Sadiq Khan: nationalism can be as divisive as bigotry and racism
Khan is expected to tell Scottish Labour's spring conference on Saturday that there is no difference between nationalists trying to divide Scottish and English people and ”those who try to divide us on the basis of our background, race or religion".
For me, the most frustrating aspect of the debate on Scottish independence has been the failure of the English left to recognise that there is more than one type of nationalism. People who can explain in minute detail the many forms of socialism on offer at any demo or conference seem incapable of differentiating when it comes to nationalists.
Confronted by someone recently who claimed to believe that there was no difference between the Scottish National party and the British National party, I can't help wondering if this is wilful – like the Daily Mail's insistence that anyone who wants to see a fairer society must be a Stalinist.
Thus proving my point that your title is inflammatory bullshit that Khan did not mean?Says the exact same thing in your source?
Who gives a flying fuuuuck about social media? Maybe your social media circle is a giant anti-Muslim circlejerk?Take a look at social media to see how it is going down/being received.
Isn't that nationalism?
Thus proving my point that your title is inflammatory bullshit that Khan did not mean?
Who gives a flying fuuuuck about social media? Maybe your social media circle is a giant anti-Muslim circlejerk?
Wow OP, inflammatory title much? He simply said Nationalism can be as divisive as racism and other forms of bigotry, not that scottish nationalists are racists. Use Guardian as your source next time.
Sadiq Khan: nationalism can be as divisive as bigotry and racism
Not GAF. Some people on GAF. They are usual suspects.
Khan is expected to tell Scottish Labour's spring conference on Saturday that there is no difference between nationalists trying to divide Scottish and English people and ”those who try to divide us on the basis of our background, race or religion".
Dont deflect. Social media is not an excuse for your thread's title.This has absolutely nothing to do with Khan being a Muslim? What on earth are you talking about?
Dont deflect. Social media is not an excuse for your thread's title.
Says the exact same thing in your source?
Khan is expected to tell Scottish Labours spring conference on Saturday that there is no difference between nationalists trying to divide Scottish and English people and those who try to divide us on the basis of our background, race or religion.
So Indians and Pakistani's were racists when they fought for their independence from Great Britain?
Or their cause was different than the one of the Scottish people?
Dont bring up social media then. I dont give a fuck what idiots there are saying. Dont use it as a crutch for your inflammatory title by saying "but look at how social media is receiving the news!!".I'll say it again Rusty, not even on social media is anyone talking about him being a Muslim. I really don't know why you are fighting imaginary ghosts here.
Let's examine that particular statement:
This might be read as a judgment on the character of people who are typically racist and/or nationalistic. On that basis there's quite a lot of wriggle room in the quote for Kahn to state that he isn't talking about all nationalists, and such a comparison isn't entirely unfair - some Scottish nationalists are very antagonistic about the English - but making such a comparison is naturally going to be incendiary when read as relating to all nationalists.
It might also be read as an epistemological evaluation of the nature of nationalism as inherently divisive. I don't think that that's controversial - to divide one area from another by defining it in either ethnic, race or cultural terms must be as exclusive as it is inclusive. But, as others have pointed out, the vacuity of making such a statement is evident in Kahn's recourse to another, British-related brand of nationalism, which is functionally no different!
Dont bring up social media then. I dont give a fuck what idiots there are saying. Dont use it as a crutch for your inflammatory title by saying "but look at how social media is receiving the news!!".
Dont deflect. Social media is not an excuse for your thread's title.
He didnt go down to the SNP vs UKIP level? He just says nationalism in general is bad. Read the Guardian piece. He says Scotland and England share the same progressive values.How is this
helping the situation?
There is no difference between Sturgeon and Farage? Between SNP voters and UKIP voters? Aren't a lot of SNP voters former Labour voters?
Who the hell is this statement helping? Is it really uniting anything?
You can't accuse someone's social media of being Islamaphobic then accuse them of deflecting.
Especially when you keep making these accusations about his title being inflammatory when it's really just a condensed version of the quote from the article?
He didnt go down to the SNP vs UKIP level? He just says nationalism in general is bad. Read the Guardian piece. He says Scotland and England share the same progressive values.
He didnt go down to the SNP vs UKIP level? He just says nationalism in general is bad. Read the Guardian piece. He says Scotland and England share the same progressive values.
No, it was an example of saying social media cannot be trusted as a barometer. It could be skewed through whatever groups are running with misconstruing something he said. Every single fucking thing Obama said was skewed against him through the filter of racism on social media by the anti-Obama crowd. I wont say "look how social media is receiving Obama's words" when all of them were either skirting racism or bigotry or full on racists.You can't accuse someone's social media of being Islamaphobic then accuse them of deflecting.
Especially when you keep making these accusations about his title being inflammatory when it's really just a condensed version of the quote from the article?
I'm no Europeman but
Brexit was supposed to be about England taking control of whatever rights they'd hypothetically given up to to the EU, right?
And now Scotland seems to be thinking about independence more seriously than in a minute because of the negative fallout Brexit.
So for the mayor of London to disparage the notion of Scotland taking back whatver rights they've hypothetically given up by being part of the UK...
Ain't that like... hypocrisy?
He says it here.Then who is talking about in that quote if not SNP? Is there another force, more extremist behind the push for Scottish independence?
As for England and Scotland sharing the same progressive values, isn't that heavily contradicted by the votes in the recent years?
Khan is expected to resist claims he is accusing Scottish nationalism of being racist or sectarian. In extracts of his speech seen in advance he said he believed Scotland and London were both beacons of progressive values. Labour sources said Khan believed nationalism as a concept was divisive by definition because it stresses differences, implies superiority and erects barriers to other people.
In a direct attack on nationalists who portray London as Scotlands opponent, he will tell delegates in Perth: There are some in Scotland who try to define London as your enemy, who want to paint the city that I love as the home of the elite or the establishment and who want the Scottish people to believe that London is a hotbed of conservatism.
They make out that London is always working to undermine Scotland. I can tell you that nothing could be further from the truth. That is not my London and its not Labours London.
He will argue that London and Scotlands votes against Brexit showed they had much in common. London and Scotland have always had a very special relationship. Were both beacons of progressive values and hope within the United Kingdom.
We celebrate our diversity and take pride in our tolerance. We strive for equality and to increase opportunities. And we fight tooth and nail for fairness and inclusion.
The SNP were behind Scottish independence when there was a real risk that it would mean they'd be out of the EU, and now the risk of being out of the EU is apparently a big factor in them wanting out of the UK. There is hypocrisy on both sides of this debate. Sturgeon is basically being an opportunist and making the most of the current upheaval to get what she would have wanted regardless of Brexit.
No, it was an example of saying social media cannot be trusted as a barometer. It could be skewed through whatever groups are running with misconstruing something he said. Every single fucking thing Obama said was skewed against him through the filter of racism on social media by the anti-Obama crowd. I wont say "look how social media is receiving Obama's words" when all of them were either skirting racism or bigotry or full on racists.
I'm no Europeman but
Brexit was supposed to be about England taking control of whatever rights they'd hypothetically given up to to the EU, right?
And now Scotland seems to be thinking about independence more seriously than in a minute because of the negative fallout Brexit.
So for the mayor of London to disparage the notion of Scotland taking back whatver rights they've hypothetically given up by being part of the UK...
Ain't that like... hypocrisy?
Not quite equivalent scenarios, owing to the difference in a risk of being out of the EU - however very probable that would be, given the general interpretation of the law and the issue of Spanish support (or lack thereof) - versus the now seeming guarantee, especially when one would have been voted for by the Scottish people for the Scottish people, where now they're gonna be dragged out against their will thanks to the English and Welsh.
There are some in Scotland who try to define London as your enemy, who want to paint the city that I love as the home of the elite or the establishment and who want the Scottish people to believe that London is a hotbed of conservatism.