Picked up a copy of Red Ken’s red leaflet yesterday.

Ken apparently represents ‘the clear choice to celebrate London’s diversity and tackle racism’. He makes it very clear that he intends to get re-elected on the backs of ethnic minorities; and - if re-elected - taxpayers’ money will continue to be diverted for the next four years into schemes which unfairly privilege London’s ethnics at the expense of everyone else.

The leaflet has a dreamlike, unreal quality. Under ‘reasons to vote Ken’ he mentions that he has ‘apologised on behalf of London for its role in the trade of enslaved Africans.’ (Well, thank goodness – time someone did after 300 years!) Moreover, Ken ‘promotes multiculturalism’, has ‘increased the numbers of black police’, and has ‘secured permanent recognition of the international fight for black freedom by putting up a statue of Nelson Mandela in Parliament Square.’

It’s now clear that I have picked up Ken’s Brixton leaflet. Among the charges against Boris, the main one is that the BNP have asked their supporters to give Johnson their second vote.

Well, I know of BNP activists who are giving Boris their FIRST vote - so desperate is their desire to be rid of Ken.
[Rep]

He is truly an awful man.
[Rep]

Ah Livingstone and Johnson what a wonderful choice.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by BonnieDundee:
Ah Livingstone and Johnson what a wonderful choice.

All three main candidates back anti-white discrimination policies.
[Rep]

You mean affirmative action. Try and not use silly rhetoric, it doesn't impress. Whether you are for against aa, and I'm generally against, it isn't racism. It is an attempt to right past wrongs.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by BonnieDundee:
You mean affirmative action. Try and not use silly rhetoric, it doesn't impress. Whether you are for against aa, and I'm generally against, it isn't racism. It is an attempt to right past wrongs.

Discriminating against people because of the colour of their skin is nothing but racism.

Just because you're doing it against the indigenous population does not make it acceptable or desirable - quite the opposite. All forms of racism, including 'positive' discrimination/affirmative action (which are oxymorons of the highest order) are despicable and should be opposed.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Eurosceptic Atlanticist:
Discriminating against people because of the colour of their skin is nothing but racism.

Just because you're doing it against the indigenous population does not make it acceptable or desirable - quite the opposite. All forms of racism, including 'positive' discrimination/affirmative action (which are oxymorons of the highest order) are despicable and should be opposed.

It depends, if you are doing it to make up for past discrimination it is no more racist than awarding damages is theft. To call it such is just empty rhetoric and makes the user look silly.

Whether it is a good idea is a whole different matter. I can't see it being applicable in the UK at all, but I can understand some action to help blacks in the USA.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by BonnieDundee:
It depends, if you are doing it to make up for past discrimination it is no more racist than awarding damages is theft. To call it such is just empty rhetoric and makes the user look silly.

As my mother taught me - "Two wrongs don't make a right". I am not responsible for the past transgressions of my ancestors, so don't presume to treat me like I am.

Any attempt to discriminate against people because they are white is racism, and shows the white liberal elite at their worst for supporting such a policy. They are no better than the BNP.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Eurosceptic Atlanticist:
As my mother taught me - "Two wrongs don't make a right". I am not responsible for the past transgressions of my ancestors, so don't presume to treat me like I am.

Any attempt to discriminate against people because they are white is racism, and shows the white liberal elite at their worst for supporting such a policy. They are no better than the BNP.

I agree with the first part. But to call it racist is silly rhetoric and rather destroys the credibility of the rest of your argument. And they are alot better than the BNP.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by BonnieDundee:
I agree with the first part. But to call it racist is silly rhetoric and rather destroys the credibility of the rest of your argument. And they are alot better than the BNP.

Please tell me how discriminating against people because they are white is anything but racism.
[Rep]