Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Brexit Banned from Cafe
lobster
Crusty Veteran
As bigotry, racism and division is now 'acceptable' [shame on them] in some peoples minds ... is this?
I am all for talking to demons. I even talk to myself as an excellent source of hell dwellers ... Can Brexiteers or EU'rs be exempt from karmic consequences? What is a potential Buddha to do? Be kind to the hurtful?
OM MANI PEME HUM as we Euro-Tibetans say ...
0
Comments
I think they may be Buddhists, or whoever produced the notice.
"United against brexit. United against the causes of brexit." has definite similarities in framing as the four noble truths, lol.
I have just heard that a 'Sangha Sausage' [think that is right] is available in oz barbecues and cafes. Are those involuntary ex-pats mincing monks?
They iz barbarians!
Toffs like them wouldn't use a cafe anyway.
^^^ When I use the term 'involuntary ex-pats' I consider the non indigenous prison colony descendents as ancestrally poor Brits.
I am working on cunning plans to accomodate everyone, examples include:
We can laugh but there is also a serious side to this exclusion/inclusion behaviour
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36634786
From over here (USA) and with the attendant risk of oversimplification, the vote appeared to have a significant element of intolerance. There seem to 'be been themes of intolerance of immigrants, intolerance if international regulations, intolerance of global collaboration.
Does banning those whose views differ from your own constitute intolerance? Is the cafe management really any better than their targets? If they disagree with adversarialism, why are they practicing it?
Very true... One might argue that the remain camp, being the more mature, didn't show enough care and compassion in explaining their views to the leave camp. But one might equally argue that compassion should be shown to seagulls, which won't stop them from brazenly stealing chips off your plate at the seaside if you leave it unattended.
People at this forum are unnecessarily complicating a simple matter. If I own a cafe and do not allow members of certain ethnic groups, that's intolerance. But if I don't allow racists, that's not intolerance. That's just a matter of principle.
Yes indeed @techie.
At the moment the racists think they have won.
They have not.
Comedy politicians who wish to create a mess, profit from it and leave others to suffer, struggle and be victimised, are to their utter shame squabbling over power.
The sausage sanga I mentioned earlier is an Australian delicacy incidentally.
At the moment the uncertainty, anger, triumphalism, fear, turmoil etc is settling.
Settle it will. Samsara swirls. Dharma path continues ....
I find it extraordinary that we have reached such a politically-correct level of communication that it is now virtually impossible to distinguish between Patriots and racists.
Why do those those who would like to hear their own language, spoken in their own country by the inhabitants, get branded as racists?
The UK is one of the most tolerant and permissive countries in THE WORLD.
All our official Government Literature is printed in every language of Europe and the Commonwealth. If translators or interpreters are required in any offical capacity - they will be provided - Free of charge.
The French make no such allowance for non-Nationals. Everything is in French. If you can't read it, or speak the language, you are stuck between a rock and a hard place. You want an interpreter? Really...? why? What for? Ok. But you pay the fee.
I'm British. I speak French fluently. I lived there for 6 years, feeding their economy.
Could I get a job? Nope. The French come first.
I wanted to teach English in primary schools.
I had to take exams to prove my competence in English.
French nationals who teach English do not have to sit that exam!
So when it comes to accepting people from other countries into the UK, we are Class Masters.
We know how to make room and accommodate them.
What we cannot do is to fit a Quart into a Pint Pot.
That's not Racism.
That's pure, mathematical logic.
And there is nothing wrong with an English person, wishing to hear English, spoken by others, in England.
English is, after all, THE most commonly-shared language in the World.
That, combined with our Social Policies, is why people from other nations, come here.
Because under their veneer they sometimes are.
Try this:
Why do those those who would like to see their own skin tone/dress sense/sexual orientation, in a diverse culture, get branded as bigots?
Apart from Nigella Farage who is a racist, I don't believe the individuals on the poster are racist.
Perhaps you can answer the question for us?
And under the veneer of others - they aren't. Why do we always have to assume the negative and brand ALL people as racists? It's ridiculous. It's like saying all Buddhists are fat, jolly bald and vegetarian.
That's different. It's like comparing apples to oranges.
It's a question of creating a separatist group via ostracism through language.
I know three Muslims who are homosexual, and, to differentiate, two lesbians. I know plenty of people from India (of any religion) who wear Western clothing. I have no qualms regarding skin colour sexual or religious orientation.
But when people in their own home town, are surrounded by others all speaking a language they cannot understand - and it has become the norm for that community - then I see no reason why a Briton cannot seek a communal environment, by asking those who have come to Britain to profit from the beneficial advantages herein - to speak the language.
I took French, Spanish, and Russian in school. I passed the courses, but I certainly am not fluent in those languages. If you're fluent in French, I'm impressed. And if you and someone else, speaking to each other and not to me, speak in French, I'd certainly take no offense at all if you did so near my ears. I am in no way harmed by cultural richness. But you may have identified a cultural difference between the UK and the USA. Over here we tend to use the term racist to apply to intolerance of nonwhites. Nonwhite simply applies to race. Do you look black, yellow, olive, red? Intolerance of that diversity is called racism in our culture. If you were over here and expressed intolerance of people for the language they speak, or the sex partner they choose, or the political party they join, you wouldn't have to worry about me calling you a racist.
There have been high levels of immigration, and it's mostly into deprived share areas which already have a lot to deal with. And public services are already under a lot of strain due to austerity.
I think there has been too much political correctness on the immigration issue, it's a valid concern for some and should not be brushed aside. There certainly are racists, but most people with concerns about immigration are not racist, and making that allegation is counterproductive and disingenuous. The racism we have seen is partly the fault of the political class for ignoring the problems which exist, the right-wing are only too happy to fill the gap.
I totally take on board what you are saying, @Steve_B but I think I can pretty much state for certain that if you look around your home town, and imagine that the majority of people - in your home town - are from another country that speaks a completely foreign language - and that's pretty much all you hear, day in, day out - I can promise you, before long, you are going to be asking what exactly is going on.
And let's say you go out for the day. You close your windows, lock your door, make sure you've got your keys, and off you go.
You come back in the afternoon - and there are people in your lounge, watching TV, feet on your coffee table; some people are in the kitchen, helping themselves to your food and drink, cooking, eating... others in your yard, are sunbathing, having a barbecue.
You have no idea who they are, what they want or what they're saying. But they got into your home (some by breaking in, others through the front door with a skeleton key) and they've made themselves at home.
Would you just walk in, nod and say nothing, or wouldn't you want to know who they are and what they want?
And if you ask them to leave, because the house isn't big enough for the 50-odd people there, and they called you a damn racist for your attitude....
Do you see where I'm going with this?
Now, I used to live in Bedford. The city of Bedford is a pretty big place.
I am talking mainly about the actual city centre of Bedford, where WE lived.
I promise you, as I sure as I'm typing here, to hear English being spoken among passers-by, was very rare.
There were many different languages being spoken: Bangladeshi, Urdu, Polish, Romanian and Latvian, to name a few.
But in order to hear English, I had to speak it.
And let's not pretend here: The reason they can live and function in the UK - is because they speak English.
They CAN speak the language. They can understand every word you say.
But they deliberately CHOOSE to insulate themselves from the social community by excluding others, who DON'T speak their language.
It's a choice they make.
And through making this choice, they isolate themselves, and exclude others.
We don't have a multi-national country. We have a country that is trying to accommodate a multi-cultural population.
As the very wise Norman Tebbit MP, once said (I'm paraphrasing) You can have Multi-National; you CANNOT have 'Multi-Cultural'. Because as I think your extremely famous President Lincoln once said: "You can't please all of the People, all of the time."
And currently - ALL the people want pleasing.
I'm not sure how banning people from a cafe over their views isn't intolerance. It's clearly intolerant. Let's cut to the chase: the argument isn't really about whether it's intolerant, but rather on what is "acceptable" intolerance regarding someone's views. In order to not support intolerance, it sorta kinda helps to not engage in it. Just a hunch.
There's always the next scapegoat. Right now it's not just the right wing. It's everyone who doesn't necessarily support the Remain side. Of course the tribalism of anti-immigrant stances scapegoat. But far more in the big media are scapegoating those who aren't true believers of neoliberal economic globalism.
The entire Brexit discussion also seems to be framed within very, very narrow parameters, and in the lion's share of establishment media, it's a simple "nativism vs internationalism" trope. Well, there are plenty who support Brexit, even here in the US, based on the pitfalls of economic globalism, austerity and horrific foreign policy.
And nobody seems to be asking why there are more immigrants fleeing their homes in record numbers in the first place from places like Iraq and Syria. The west has effectively destabilized the entire region, and is now just screaming at the end result.
My Husband described it like this:
We humans are very good at f*&#ing up 'the system'. We introduce Wildlife to effect one result and then wonder why it's all got out of control. Like the Giant toads imported to eat slugs and pests, and now proving to be an environmental disaster because they will eat anything and everything. Or Rabbits in Australia, to feed the emerging population, which then - poor Rabbits - were subjected to myxomatosis to eradicate them.
Whenever a creature is displaced, or introduced to somewhere else, it results in an imbalance and inequality, which then needs remedying by going COMPLETELY the other way, or taking some form of drastic (and usually destructive) action....
Oh, sure, we can meddle with Nature (to our cost) but meddling with Humans is a trickier business....
Oh my, isn't it just.
The BREXIT debate was about EU migrants, not refugees.
I think the language thing just depends on the situation. If you are in an English primarily speaking country and you speak another language, it's not really fair to expect them to accommodate you in every situation. I wouldn't go to Africa and demand they learn how to serve me and talk to me. I'd learn how to talk to them or have a translator. That part just seems like common sense to me. But to think that every person has to only speak English, I think, is wrong. It's not rude to speak your home language to your family just because you happen to be in the English country. Older people tend to think it's SO RUDE. My dad thinks that. We were on vacation and there was a Scandinavian couple speaking their native language to their kids. My dad went on a tirade about it later on (not in front of them at least) about how rude it is. How? Why? Why should we feel entitled to eavesdrop on what everyone else is saying? We are we worried they are talking about us?
If I go to a restaurant in the US, I don't expect to have to learn another language to order. But I do expect language barriers at ethnic restaurants. We work through them. But I'm not going to say "you are in the US, speak English!" to someone standing in line at Walmart who is talking to her kids. There is a severe lack of common sense in dealing with people these days, and a lot of it is because we never deal with people. We just talk to them online where we can perfectly form everything we want to say and then we lose our social skills. Work with people. Not against them. And if you don't like their language but it doesn't affect you, it's your problem.
@karasti, sadly you have no idea what you're talking about.
Nigel Farage's proposed plan for leaving the EU
http://thebrexitplan.com/
@federica My post was in regards to my experiences here. Not comparing to yours, as I cannot do so never having lived there. I could say the same thing about all the opinions you share about how we do things in the US. Just because I share different experiences doesn't mean I "don't know what I am talking about." I wasn't suggesting that YOU said or did any of those things. Just that that is what I see, hear and experience here.
The metaphor of my house suddenly acquiring 50 uninvited homeless moochers is used in the US, so the cultures do have that commonality. I do not buy into the emotional lather that this metaphor is intended to engender. Many many metaphors are used. My favorite is the one that ends with "The one I feed."
As you can see, my views are admittedly not mainstream. I believe we should be much more tolerant of those different from us. And much more compassionate to those less fortunate. And much more accepting of diversity. And much more willing to collaborate across cultures. Maybe I'm being inaccurate by saying tolerance, compassion, acceptance, and collaboration are opposed by the mainstream. It might not truly be the main stream, but lamentably it is at least a very large stream if not the main one.
Federica, I have long enjoyed your unique command of emotional intelligence, and your flair for capturing in writing (with vivid clarity) right-brain topics that in lesser hands would be very hard to express so clearly.
But I must also say that there are others here I similarly admire. Some of them hold views different from yours. That difference, that diversity, enriches us all, doesn't it? Especially when we can express our views while respecting, not insulting, others. Aren't there far too many websites where those who express a unique view are treated to an ad hominem attack in response?
We have many people here who know what they are talking about. And we are very very lucky to have a few who can convey their wisdom so engagingly. Not all knowing is equal, as we see here. Each of us knows things in a different way. But wouldn't it be better to see our differences celebrated rather than insulted? Don't you enjoy the variety of flavors that can be sampled here?
I think all toffs should be banned from cafes, they just lower the tone.
Globalization is a reality. People move from place to place in search of better opportunities, jobs. Which means local and foreign cultures interact and undergo changes etc. Change is a fact of life. Nothing stays static. Buddhism 101.
It's an opinion based on long experience, and of both 'worlds'. Sometimes, however fluent and fluid it might be, elaboration is both pointless and unnecessary.
It's clear (statement of fact, not sarcasm) that karasti and I have lived and still live in completely different worlds/environments.
This is to her abundant and environmental advantage; but I once lived this way too, and the 'return' to a more bustling, busy and frantic conurbation was like a bucket of icy water, on exiting from a sauna.
From a purely subjective PoV, her comments were naive and idealistic.
@techie, who gave you my password - ?! Damn, will have to change it now. Nothing stays static, indeed!
I find it strange that these type of arguments always boil down to people in the UK are so well off that they have to allow unlimited migration into their homelands no matter what the costs are socially or economically. That if British people don't want to open their hearts and give to the rest of the world, their hearts should be forced open.
The leave side do get a bit of stick for being creative with basic economic principles, but is it really feasible to pay or provide work for the millions that wish to enter the UK? And when the NHS collapses and no one can afford healthcare, is that ok?, because at least the Brits tried to help people less fortunate than them. Which, technically is billions of people.
A question to the open border advocates, how many should the UK allow in? 10 million? 100 million? Or anyone who wants in the UK?
I always take people as they come with no prejudice. I worked in security before. A lot of the time I worked with immigrants most of whom I got on very well with. I worked with people from eastern Europe, Brazil, Pakistan, India, United States and other places and never had any problems. We all had to speak English as that was company rules.
Then I worked in a factory for a short period of time. There was only a handful of Irish people working there and they were in management. Everyone else was from Lithuania or Latvia. No one spoke English or even made an effort to speak to me in English because I was in the minority and they felt they didn't need to bother learning it. I felt uncomfortable and awkward whenever we had to stand around and everyone around me was speaking a foreign language and I couldn't wait to get back to work.
My point is, and it could be what @federica was trying to get across and I apologise if I am wrong, is that I have no problem with immigrants or even people speaking foreign languages around me but when I am the person who is the odd one out and being excluded because I can't speak their language, how is that right? This is becoming the new normal.
And it's not just about language or a few cultural differences. Here is one London woman's experience of where she lives:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/9831912/I-feel-like-a-stranger-where-I-live.html
Nigel Farage has resigned as head of UKIP, probably due to the ban on his free movement into the cafe in the first post ...
@Boru, I really can't put it any better.
“There are three conditions which often look alike
Yet differ completely, flourish in the same hedgerow:
Attachment to self and to things and to persons, detachment
From self and from things and from persons; and, growing between them, indifference, ... .”
T.S.Eliot Little Gidding
Having read the various posts on this subject I find that I am completely divided within on the subjects of race and immigration. The only solution that I have found recently is to regard my attitude as being split into two:Yang male, exclusive and aggressive and Yin female, accepting and nurturing. Both I find within myself and I view them as a type of Taijitu excess of either (attachment to one or the other) will cause problems. Too much Yin and we allow too many people into the country, which causes defensiveness and fear and hence a Yang response which precipitates exclusion and violence requiring more Yin...... and so the wheel keeps turning.
So why the quote? I doubt that I am the only person with these two currents running in opposite polarity. So maybe the cafe owners are trying to exclude their own xenophobic and racist tendencies within (much in the way that fanaticism is considered to be a reaction to profound inner doubt).
Very well put. I promise you, you are not the only one to find themselves in a Yin-Yang mind-set...
I very much doubt that that was the effect on his political career that he had in mind when he first started supporting the brexit campaign.
I am not naive. I have a lot of idealistic views of how I would like the world to be. I think humans are capable of much more cooperation than we exhibit. Just because I would like it that way doesn't mean that I don't understand that things are not that way. But it also doesn't mean that I find it useful to continue in less-ideal ways just because that is what we are doing now. What we are doing (very generally speaking) isn't working in a lot of cases and while I don't expect anything on a large scale, I'm certainly willing to work on a personal, familial, and community level at getting closer to a better ideal. I might live in a rural area, but I am not an idiot.
Typical, he creates a political, economic and social crisis and then disappears into the woodwork to check his stocks and bonds. And he's got a French name! Pah!
Whether migrants or refugees, nearly the entire debate has been swirling around the issue of foreign people moving throughout Europe and the UK, and after reading article after article in publications like the Guardian, it seems that anyone who is at the very least not sold on Britain remaining is somehow supporting the worst elements of xenophobic right wing populism and is against any semblance of Internationalism. That's extreme in itself. The issue is far more reaching than that.
Where is the "international love" from the EU when places like Greece are subjected to crushing austerity, paying off a system of bankers that they never asked for? It seems that socialism is OK, as long as it doesn't filter down to the citizens who pay into it. Or the "international love" of NATO beefing up military presence in eastern Europe?
We'll likely rarely hear about these kind of grievances in the Guardian, or even here in the Washington Post, because they are the wrong kind of grievances. They need to be "right wing" grievances that don't conflict economic neoliberal globalization, and if you aren't a true believer, you need to get in the "anti internationalist" box.
@karasti, nobody has said you're an idiot, OR Naive.
As a mother of a son with Autism, I don't think it can be said by anyone that you are either an idiot or naive.
I said I thought your comment was naive, and to be honest, I believe it is.
Have you read the link @Boru posted?
This is how it is, in a huge number of towns and locations throughout the country, not just London.
Fascinating, I only just read that. It does ring true from what I know of London. When I was younger I lived for several years in Notting Hill, London, near the Portobello Road. It was very cosmopolitan, lots of Irish, Jamaicans and Italians, but it felt OK, an interesting mix, not dominated by any one group ( apart from a particular Jamaican area where the police never went into, but even there it was OK when they got to know you, I mean you had to smoke some ganja just to be sociable..ahem, anyway ).
I can't imagine the US ever giving up the amount of sovereignty to a larger body that countries in the EU have to give up. I think there is a certain amount of immigration any given country can assimilate at a time before it becomes a drag rather than a help. I think there are good arguments against too much immigration. I'm not sure how good not liking to see the countries culture change or feelings of exclusion are though. I've been on the outside most of my life though so maybe I just can't relate well.
Why would a close community welcome a large number of people who want to exclude them and create a parallel society? Surely it would be better for everyone if everyone mixed and got along?
Just going to leave this here
I would tend to agree, but to the newcomers it will feel like giving up a large part of their identity if they are not able to speak their language and have to adopt new customs. Often the old timer community does not accept the newcomers in compassionate welcome, encounters are often a question of feeling things out. One is unsure how accepted one is going to be.
The reactions of those few old timers who just reject newcomers or are mean or violent towards them end up tainting the process. The newcomers become cautious, rely on eachother mostly for aid, and voila, you have a community in a community again.
Colonisation is interesting, especially when it comes to the karmic consequences...
When I think about the moaning and whinging that goes on in the world (including here in Aotearoa 'Pakeha and Maori' alike both have a whinge) for example, "The bloody foreigners coming over and taking our jobs, buying up our land/properties etc etc " and then I think about the amount of countries that Britain and other European countries had colonised where the indigenous populations became 'second class citizens' (or worse slavery or genocide) in their own land...
That was then and this is now....Two wrongs don't make things "right"... but karma is not about right & wrong...It's just cause condition effect/fallout.
Thannisaro Bikkhu explains this very nicely in his 'wings to awakening': this/that conditionality, dependent co-arising, four noble truths
Buddha's Teaching never (time and space) fails
I do think there is a thing as too much immigration. I decided to look up the actual percent of immigrant population by country to see just how bad it has gotten in the UK and I see its only %11.3. The US has %14.3, @ %25 if you include immigrants born here (the US and Canada are the only countries who grant birthright citizenship), Australia %27.7, New Zealand %25.1, and most of the rest of Europe is between %11 and %15. If lack of assimilation is such a problem I'm thinking it could be an issue with policy or the culture of acceptance rather than a massive influx of foreigners.
Its a sensitive topic for me with the rise of Trump in the US and all of his nationalistic rhetoric. So intent and degree are legitimate and important distinctions but its too similar for my liking.
I think the home analogy works well. There should be no problem inviting strangers in when they are caught in the rain. If they are to stay long term, they are expected to follow the house rules. I wouldn't want strangers crowding me out of my living room.
But if they become family, they would be good company and a source of support in troubled times. Remember that no one wants strangers in their home and some don't open their doors even if there is rain outside.
The question becomes whether those living in the house are willing to be part of the family assuming that they actually want to stay on.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35967349
BTW in my last post, it should have read karmic "consequences" and not "consistencies" but I guess it really does not matter
.... (Damn you spell checker 
)
Moderator Note Changed. Thank goodness for Moderator Spell-checker!