We had a large protest the other day in the nearby town of Dudley, the English Defence League were there as were Unite Against Fascism. The whole thing is over a mosque that is planned for the town, and has been somewhat convtroversial.
Cue riot police, protestors, disruption, etc, etc.
This brings me to my greatest fear over the debate on racism, immigration, far right elements and the politics of all of this; not only that a reasoned debate will be completely absent but that it will be of such low quality that it might as well be absent.
Let me be very clear. It’s no good trying to brush the fears of the right wing under the carpet or drown their voices out, any method that does not address and successfully resolve the reasons for those fears will be doomed to fail. Also, attacks on the main players will not do, this method of “tackling the man not the ball” (formally known as an “ad hominem” attack) simply leaves the ball in play and at great risk of going to the feet of someone else. When these answers come, everyone must be willing to listen, not to simply sloganise and brush them aside. I get a distinct feeling of a sense of disenfranchisement in this, this must be addressed urgently, how can someone who feels shut out of things be expected to have any faith in political solutions?
Furthermore, we are an island nation with limited space, resources and limited capacity of public services. There are serious structural, logisitic and operational issues here that society needs to address with complete seriousness, not in the form of populist soundbite politics. We try to approach things with a willingness to listen to the other person’s viewpoint, even if we won’t like what we hear, because the other person may well have a serious point to make, we must try not to make things about taking sides.
I fear very greatly for the future of this debate.
What’s your stance re the issues in the debate? If you could serve as the final arbiter, how would you seek to resolve the differences of opinion?
My stance is one of practicalities, the very real problems with having a limited system with people drawing heavily from it who’ve never paid into it. A bit of basic maths leads inarguably to a failure of that system, ultimately, you can’t cheat reality. Once the collapse happens, everybody suffers regardless, we’re all in the same boat.
There are religious issues, though I tend to the view that the future is largely secular. I think the data so far (plus the various things I’m reading) supports that view at present, though the 2011 UK census will be very interesting reading.
I have had a close friend point out to me that some people in the debate might not be open to being reasonable about it, I have professional experience trying to explain things to people who really can’t understand what’s being said. I usually try to keep it simple and consistent. If they won’t be reasonable, then I’ll leave them to it, such courses of action have their own Karma and I won’t get drawn in.
How would I seek to resolve it? That’s a good question and I’m very glad you asked, I don’t think a designed solution can be imposed. My own feeling is that the Zeitgeist will resolve these things in a Darwinian fashion, it’ll be a bumpy ride for sure, but we will evolve a solution that works.
Interesting to read this from the other side of the pond, where voices have been intemperate for a good while now on a variety of issues, and where anger all too dominates over reason. We are facing tough times globally, with a population expanding seemingly beyond the planet’–and its inhabitants’– ability to cope. Good luck to you in your debate!