Did you read this curious piece by Mark Easton?
The home secretary says her demand that foreign wives and husbands of British citizens learn basic English before they come to the UK is about promoting integration. But critics claim there’s a more sinister and discriminatory reason for introducing the new rules.
So it’s now ‘sinister’ to demand people speakEnglish? Oh well this is what you might expect “critics” to say. Mark then reveals his own thoughts on the issue…
The real issue here is not integration or removing cultural barriers, it might be argued. It is about trying to reduce the economic impact of a legacy of British colonial rule.
Easton reveals his own typical BBC antipathy to our British heritage. Little wonder the BBC was such a cheer-leader for the destructive policies of Labour that forced unrestricted unassimilated immigration down our throats,
Who needs to speak English, the native tongue of these and many other lands when immigrants can get free translators whenever they require them?
Who needs to integrate when the immigrants are repeatedly told told how evil and cruel and racist the native inhabitants are and how our viscious colonial past makes unworthy to be integrated with.
The racist policy of multiculturism and encouraged segragation on racial and religious grounds is bringing about a Balkans type powder keg.
The importation of alien colonists whose cultures are entirely alien to the native culture and actively portrayed as superior to that native culture will bring only distress and unhapiness and conflict.
Cassie,
Exactly. There are many countries in the World where it would be impossible to survive if you didn’t learn the language.
A civil war is coming to Europe. It will not be of our making but when Muslims feel they have the numbers to take over Britain. Even then, with beheadings, destruction of churches, etc, the BBC will still be claiming that it is our fault.
DP111
How many Beeboids have converted to Islam ? And if not, why not ?
“It might be argued“. So that is nothing but idle speculation. Yet this idle and unsubstantiated product of imagination is followed by speculation presented as a statement of fact: “It is about trying to reduce the economic impact of a legacy of British colonial rule.”
What is that but the random thought or invention of a fevered Beeboid mind? They are always fevered on the subject of immigration.
If I start throwing out random thoughts and musings on everything from English language tests for would-be immigrants to the World Cup to the economy, will the Beeb give me a platform to spout them even if they have no rational, factual basis or substance to them? Probably not.
What’s the difference between that and what the Beeboid is doing in the quotes above?
It might be argued that the BBC should be abolished !
It is about trying to reduce the economic impact of a legacy of British colonial rule.
That’s what these people are force fed at university – anti-British history and an obsession with the problems with the days of the Empire. The left wing brainwashing of academic institutions fuels the fire of these lefties.
It’s odd how all the anonymous voices in Mark Easton’s article support just one side of the argument – the side that opposes the government’s new English language requirements, the side he clearly supports.
There are those “critics” (as quoted by David), who suspect “sinister” motives on the part of the government. Then there are “some” more who question whether the changes will have any impact anyway. “Some” others “suspect the motivation for introducing the rules is to target British citizens with an Asian heritage”. Easton then says that ministers may also be “accused” by persons unknown “of being disengenuous”.
Mark Easton is a propagandist.
Craig ,
Great analysis, as usual ! Miss your blog !!!!!!!
And that’s putting it very nicely Craig. ‘Some might say’ ..
… that his insult to people’s intelligence invokes the most chilling memories of one party state propaganda in the most repressive of totalitarian iron curtain countries. Some might say.
Sheena is just a useless left wing wanker.
Eight words said it better than my my one hundred!
Martin,
Says it all !
There again Martin, some might say this as well!
I am afraid the BBC is fully bought into this adolescent half baked tripe. In essence Easton is saying that anyone who disagrees with unfettered immigration and specifically with ideological multi-culturalism is sinister (evil) – although ironically sinister means “left sided”.
The man has set out a classic multi-culturalist manifesto. Why do we only ever hear this sort of offensive nonsense from the BBC.
Here’s the bit I don’t get – freaks like Easton claim that we should have open borders as some kind of karmic payback for the alleged evils of empire. OK, then: at what point will we have ‘paid our debt to society’? Prssumably, at some point, tthe books will balance and we can stop letting felons and illiterate fanatics into the country?
I don’t think these people believe there comes a point where we have ‘paid our debt to society’. These people are consumed by post-colonial guilt, white guilt, guilt about coming from a wealthy country. Guilt runs through them. It’s the same mentality as these rich kids that bang on about helping 3rd world debt – it’s a way of dealing with their insecurities about their comfortable background. It’s a very liberal thing – guilt about being well off, guilt about being a success about anything, ergo – guilt about British history and Britain’s place in the world.
Mark Richard Erskine Easton blames Empire just as 18 year olds blame Thacher. We do not have an empire we had many years ago, we are now a province of the EU empire.
Easton and his ilk will only be happy when England has been decimated and he can return to his native Scotland happy.
In a period of spending cuts, millions of pounds are spent by local and central government and assorted public bodies in providing translation, both written and spoken for the benefit of those who can’t be bothered to learn English. How about the government saying from now on, if you want to use public services, you have to pay for your own translation service and not expect the taxpayer to fund it?
The problem with these local authorities and quangos who send out all these docs in multiple languages and provide interpreters etc, is that if the government reduces the amount it gives them from central funds, they will cut services to the elderly, for example, before they will consider cutting the translations.