Sunday, 1 March 2009

I'm looking forward to this

Given that kids of ethnic minorities are doing better at school than white kids, can we now start a postive discriminatory action for the benefit of whites?

No?

Why not then?

Update: LFAT has the following, rather staggering comment on his post on the matter:

Unknown to almost every voter, the ‘Standards Fund’ contains a huge sum of money that is given to local authorities through the ’Ethnic Minority Achievement’ grant. Notice that it is not called the ‘Underachievement’ grant or the ‘Supporting weaker pupils ‘grant - it’s labelled the ‘Ethnic Minority Achievement’ grant because not a single British child with white skin gets a penny from it. This grant is ring-fenced so that every local authority is forced to use it on non-white children, even if they have very high percentages of white children in their schools.


Excuse me? Imagine if there were funds ring-fenced so that Asian children could not get access to them ... people would be up in arms!

33 comments:

Anonymous said...

Because they're white (therefore evil), and worse, half of them will grow up to be white males.

Every 'right' thinking person in the world knows that white men are GUILTY OF EVERYTHING.

I notice that 'professions' still don't include any form of engineering.

Good luck with manufacturing things (now the financial sector has (inevitably) stopped being a way for the country to pay its way).

But hey, we've got lots of architects and accountants

Concerned Citizen said...

Mr Clown, In newspeak "racism" can only happen one way, from white to black.
Its the law.

Plato said...

I've decided to become Chinese.

Their take-outs are better and I've never met a stupid one.

an ex-apprentice said...

Mrs P,

But how would you know? Them being so inscrutable?

Oleuanna said...

OMG will the White Middle Class ever stop moaning.....

Their empires are gone now, can they still not share?

Whilst they are all running around protesting about the price of
frois grois, the rest of the world made the best of what was ruined by yesteryears ego's and are getting on with it.

Farkwin and Lucinda will survive...it's not the ethnics faults, that drugs are more appealing than education.....oh hold on...yes it is!

Enoch was right...but none of this has anything to do with racism...just simple cause and effect....deal with it.

JuliaM said...

"..."racism" can only happen one way, from white to black.
Its the law."


As noted by that authority on the subject, Cllr Shirley Brown... ;)

Obnoxio The Clown said...

@oleuanna, it sounds like you're on drugs yourself. :o)

I am certainly not moaning about the loss of empire here, I'm just making the point that for years people have justified chucking money at minorities precisely because they don't do well enough at school. Are they now going to chuck money at white students for the same reason?

Oleuanna said...

@ Obo....(sighs, yes I must be on drugs) ¬_¬

'chucking money at minorities' nice..

I have worked front line in social services in England and now fund services in the public sector in Scotland.

If you don't feel that money is going to the indigenous kids of this community...then you are unaware of the programmes in place helping the 'welfare class' kids in either keeping them in school, finding them alternatives to mainstream education or preventing homelessness, drugs misuse...I could go on.

Yes there were a lot of short term, guilty funding for minorities, to help the f2 generation of children of the Windrush and other minorities....quite literally in places, to catch up with their white peers.

This was (rightly or wrongly) an attempt, to make them feel part of a society that all too often rejected them.

The funding that comes from the Government especially here in Scotland inadvertently goes on the indigenous kids...as they are the one's who seem to need it most.

Maybe there isn't a big awareness campaign happening for the students who are now lagging behind..but money is being chucked at the problem.....I can assure you, i'm sorting out budgets now to tackle some of this fall out.

Be happy the system worked for the minorities and they are now surpassing expectations. Maybe the 'majority' parents who were in such a decadent position shouldn't have relaxed their priorities in regards to their children's education.

Maybe it is them you need to take issue with and not the minorities alone being funded. I was under the impression the 'majority's' were at an advantage....but now they need funding....strange that!!

Obnoxio The Clown said...

If you don't feel that money is going to the indigenous kids of this community...then you are unaware of the programmes in place helping the 'welfare class' kids in either keeping them in school, finding them alternatives to mainstream education or preventing homelessness, drugs misuse...I could go on.

I'm all to aware of these pointless, wasteful programs pissing my money at feckless cunts. Every time I get my payslip, I remember how much of MY money goes towards funding diversity outreach councillors and reiki massage for gang members.

But you're missing the point. The point is that for years, we have had positive discrimination in favour of everybody but white people. Are we now going to see an era when progressive policies are going be promoting white people (AKA apartheid)?

Is it part of a plan by the Labour Party to steal back some votes from the BNP?

Oleuanna said...

'Are we now going to see an era when progressive policies are going be promoting white people (AKA apartheid)?'

I'm not missing the point....just not quite sure, what kind of white only policies you want to have implemented? What is it do you think the white people are in such desperate need for, to warrant such segregation. that the Labour party needs to put it's best people on, then throw funding at it?

Equality policies that were put in place for the minorities had better intentions, than segregation...it's pretty much the opposite to what the minorities are fighting for.

The policy's are to work towards equality for marginalised people in this diverse country, who are oppressed by the majority rule.

Why such an ardent need to pull away again making policy for just the 'whites'.

All the initial policies set out to do, was to embrace and give an understanding to the different cultures that were invited here.

Now in place and an awareness risen, surely it's time to start working and pulling together, why not stop trying to divide.

Feel free to be bitter at a party that has an amazing travesty of faults, I'm no fan of the Labour Party......but I just can't agree wanting equality for everyone is one of them.

When it come to equality, it may have looked like it was one set of rules being different for others....but people were playing catch up and still are.

The whites are still the rulers in their, country they are still in front, their progressive policy is that they were here first. Possibly a policy adage would be, free classes in how to teach your children to work and study harder, the minorities are managing it...then maybe your dwindling pay packet won't feel the effects as badly....

And you'll excuse me but the majority of your mentally ill, elderly and disabled have received plenty of positive discrimination over the years and I think you will find that the large majority of them are white....or do you have an issue with those feckless twats as well...

Stop segregating and think equality..thankfully the majority (no colour pronounced) of us are....

Obnoxio The Clown said...

@oleuanna: I won't take any fucking lessons in "thinking equality" from someone who spends my fucking money promoting their own political agenda, ta very much.

As the Labour party is busy discovering, the money promoting "awareness" and "diversity" has achieved more for the BNP than for any kind of equality.

I have a very clear personal ethos that is completely egalitarian: everybody is a cunt, regardless of gender, race, creed or sexual preference.

Including me.

Oleuanna said...

@ obo.....


'zzZZ' I have no political agenda you xenophobic twat.....and your money is going on your people....

May the BNP be with you....

Obnoxio The Clown said...

I have worked front line in social services in England and now fund services in the public sector in Scotland.

I have no political agenda you xenophobic twat

Sure.

.....and your money is going on your people....

And who, pray tell, are "my people"?

Oleuanna said...

I am a humanitarian.....

I don't work for the government as I am an agency worker....I am self employed.....and work where I find work, in the field I am most interested in.....The work I choose to do is with people who are margernalised...I don't actually have to wear a political badge to be a fucking human being. Only feckless cunts wander around in large groups, with the need to be led....I'm a afraid I don't qualify.

Screaming that I have to have some agenda, political at that, smells of middle class telegraph reading hang ups.

Your people?.....Well I think you know what badge you wear....?

Obnoxio The Clown said...

Go on then, tell me!

Because you are not being prejudiced, are you?

Oleuanna said...

Nope.... and you damn well know i'm not, I didn't say I have anything against Telegraph readers, or people who like to be led, just said I'm not one of them.

You're not a racist, you hate all us cunts alike....and it's nothing I would imply, as there is nothing about you I want to hate or attack, I quite like you.

...I suspect you're a Nationalist.

A people I am trying to get my head round....but I'm still working on that....I'm without people prejudice....ok maybe some Americans fuck me off...but that's about it.

Obnoxio The Clown said...

Screaming that I have to have some agenda, political at that, smells of middle class telegraph reading hang ups.

Of course you have a political agenda, you've said so yourself!

...I suspect you're a Nationalist.

A Nationalist? You mean BNP?

Oleuanna said...

As you well know...I mean UKIP....of which I am still finding it hard to differentiate from BNP.

Ok I may come off as a Marxist....but if I am to have an agenda it would be for humanitarian issues and equality...for all! Why does there need to be some big political stance to back that up?

I don't need a political party to decide my beliefs, but it would be handy if they all supported them.

Are you going to say you are fucking BNP now? Who of course I have equal respect for as with each political party...variants of the same power hungry corrupt shite.

Obnoxio The Clown said...

What does "equality" mean? What are "humanitarian issues"?

Oleuanna said...

Oh my, are you just trying to box me?

You choose not to say your party line, so you want to strip out mine.

Some humanitarian issues, are....
ending poverty
asylum seekers
refugees
rights for women (this includes reproductive rights..stopping violence against women, illegal trafficking of women and their children....many more)

I try to help develop policies that hard headed governments nationally and internationally, legally have to start doing something about the issues that either cause people pain, leave them hungry or living in constant fear.

Equality is a harder question to answer, as it would depend on who's perspective? From my stance and from what I try to do, equality is to celebrate diversity and work for everyone to have access to all opportunities that can give them a better way of life....

And if those opportunities aren't there, then to help create them....can't see one political party not wanting that...well except for fascism and constantly in the wrong hands communism...

Are you BNP or not?

Obnoxio The Clown said...

@oleuanna: I'm not trying to box you. You say you want "equality" but you can't even tell me what it is, so how can you be sure that it's a good thing.

I absolutely do not believe people are equal, or I'd have Fabio's hair, Arnie's body, Fred's pension pot and I'd be knobbing Sheryl Crow. People are different, our differences actually make society successful and trying to force everyone into some "equal" box is insulting.

You'll never end poverty, especially not while poverty is defined on a relative basis. But the capitalist era has lifted more people out of absolute poverty than any Marxist, leftist codswallop, ever.

I have no problem with genuine asylum seekers or refugees (although I'm sick of that bloody "Killing me softly" song), but I do have a problem with the generous benefits that we throw at people which encourages benefit tourism. I believe that if we had a Citizen's Income that could only be given to British Citizens (whether born here or earned) and no other welfare, the whole issue of "asylum seekers" would go away, because only genuine cases would bother to come here and I'd have no problem welcoming them, heartily and unequivocally. Even now, I have no problem with economic migrants who come here and work and pay their way -- they are always welcome in my eyes.

I'm very cynical about trafficking -- I don't deny it happens and it's awful when it does, but it's not nearly as big an issue as people make out. And I'm fully in favour of legalising prostitution fully, because that is how many women choose to earn a living.

In essence, then, it seems that you are not at all clear about what you are advocating, apart from some high-minded platitudes that completely ignore the realities of life. Are you, perchance, a Guardian reader?

PS There is no secret about my politics ... I advertise my favourite political party on my blog.

Oleuanna said...

No...I read the Times and the Independent, hate the Guardian...but it's good that you remain on the attack.....it's such a clever tact. ooo what box has he put me in now??

Well done!! you have a few thought out resolves that placate your tendency towards Nationalism....that will be UKIP then...

Slapping people around in the face with a slight bullying tactic I see is something you get off on....fair enough, it's the usual right wing way...people follow you for your views and seem to like them, people that sware and shout tend to get listened to...look at Boris.

There are plenty of defences I could throw up.....I'm choosing not to, as your methods have made me loose interest in the very writing of this.

It's true I was too wishy washy and quite uncommitted in my reply to you, I'll never make that mistake again.

Equality gives everyone a chance of living a full life...it's not about making everyone a carbon copy...that in it's self is not possible.

And what a silly thing to say...you can't get rid of poverty...fucking hell man....then I shall die trying...Poverty is a subject too intrinsic to scribble resolves in a box, working out each individual model needed where? how? and when? to put in place, for all the societies that need help resolving it. My life is front line work, not pop journo politics!

Quote 'You'll never end poverty, especially not while poverty is defined on a relative basis. But the capitalist era has lifted more people out of absolute poverty than any Marxist, leftist codswallop, ever'

ONCE AGAIN....as I feel you more enjoy your own rhetoric....I don't have a leaning to any political stance.......so you can compare what you like up against capitalism....that in it's self is a bigger argument! Stop trying to box me.

I'm going to do something else somewhere else and look forward to something different to talk about next time.....sexism, golliwogs and BNP usually gets my attention...you like those don't you??

I'll keep listening ....thing is about the shouty one's is after awhile people stop listening....how long does anyone want to listen to a cunt for?

Obnoxio The Clown said...

Well done!! you have a few thought out resolves that placate your tendency towards Nationalism....that will be UKIP then...

Wrong!!

There are plenty of defences I could throw up.....I'm choosing not to, as your methods have made me loose interest in the very writing of this.

Or: There are plenty of defences I could throw up ... but I just can't think of them right now.

Equality gives everyone a chance of living a full life...it's not about making everyone a carbon copy...that in it's self is not possible.

If we we all prehistoric hunter-gatherers, you might have a point, but we're not. This is just a mealy-mouthed, vacuous platitude.

And what a silly thing to say...you can't get rid of poverty...fucking hell man....then I shall die trying...Poverty is a subject too intrinsic to scribble resolves in a box, working out each individual model needed where? how? and when? to put in place, for all the societies that need help resolving it.

And when you've finished boiling the ocean, what's next? According to the Labour Party, we still need to fix poverty in the UK. I've been to genuinely poor countries in my life. The problem of bringing any one of these countries up to current western standards is far too big for us to fix, so how are you going to do it for the whole world?

Might I suggest that you let people get on with the business of making a life for themselves and stop trying to patronise them all?

Anyway, you keep going with the ad hominem chirps, rather than saying anything constructive. I could care less about what box you fit it, but you sound suspiciously like someone who knows better than everyone else how they should live their lives.

And it doesn't sound like you've got anything particularly useful as a basis for those views.

Oleuanna said...

Minarchist Libertarian......you have got to be joking me?

Why the fuck are shouting me down...actually it's ok...I really don't need to hear any more!!!!

Obnoxio The Clown said...

Shouting you down?

Here's how it works: you make a point. I rebut your point. You point out errors in my rebuttal or raise another point to shore up your argument.

Telling me I'm shouting you down when I'm simply rebutting your points is the arguing style of a woman -- you can't win the argument, so you promptly resort to emotive blackmail.

Let's turn it on its head: I say I am a minarchist Libertarian. Please tell me why you do not believe this is the case?

Oleuanna said...

'The arguing style of a blackmailing woman'.....not patronising at all.....clever tact once again...good style

I can't believe you felt you were winning the argument.....honestly, you offered one resolve then started insulting....didn't say I could save the fucking world....just told you where my values ethics and how I chose to live my life, also even admitting to it being a basic perspective....

I'm not going to f and blind with you selling the reason why I am a humanitarian and speak down to you if I feel you weaken, in your reply...that's not rebuttle....it's not even good teaching....if your argument is more intelligent..show it.

But if you want to....then lets deal with this and only this one argument 'Minarchist Libertarian' my apologies you miss understood my scoff.

My point was why would I argue with someone who's values are about looking after the individual. Your beliefs don't really stretch to helping anyone outside of a small existence.....and to be honest, I don't know much more about it than it seems like such a limited government can just become as corrupt and consume itself with capitalism.

And if you are going to shout back, can you keep it down a bit...I'm going to sleep.

Obnoxio The Clown said...

My point was why would I argue with someone who's values are about looking after the individual. Your beliefs don't really stretch to helping anyone outside of a small existence.....and to be honest, I don't know much more about it than it seems like such a limited government can just become as corrupt and consume itself with capitalism.

I don't believe in looking after the individual. I believe in letting the individual look after him- or herself.

You haven't got a clue about what Libertarianism is, yet you still feel compelled to pass fatuous comment about it.

You keep accusing me of shouting at you, I'm curious why you feel that a reasoned argument or a desire for a reasoned argument implies shouting.

It sounds very much to me as though you either do not have any structural basis for your wibbling or you are incapable of articulating it. Certainly, your use of English is no better than that of the feral kids I walk past on street corners every day.

As far as I can make out from your grammatically obtuse meanderings, you seem to feel that a small government would inherently be more prone to corruption than what we currently have.

I am confused as to how this might technically be possible. Perhaps you could enlighten me?

But even if a minarchist government were as corrupt and depraved as New Labour, their influence would be much smaller and "the little people" like you and me could go about their business without let or hindrance to a much greater degree than is currently the case.

It strikes me as odd that without having even the most basic grasp of my political ideology, you somehow feel qualified to sneer at it and dismiss it out of hand.

I have actually taken the time to study different forms of economics and I've even manfully struggled my way through "Das Kapital" and the "Communist Party Manifesto" by Marx and Engels. Do you even have that much of a grounding in your own beliefs?

You seem to think that if people have more money in their pockets, they would simply spend it all in careless abandon (much like a government does.) I, on the other hand, believe that an individual would make much better and more careful choices about how they would spend their money than a government. I believe that they would take much better care of their own parents and family than the state would. And I believe that people would still happily and generously donate to real charities that were not part of the state's propaganda machine.

A smaller state would be focused on only those things that could not be efficiently provided by the private sector: Police, Defence, Roads, Rubbish Collection. Anything with externalities.

No glossy council pamphlets telling you how good they are. No databases. No Reiki masssages for troubled teenagers. No Diversity Outreach Facilitators. No paying kids to go to school. No ID cards. No foreign wars (unless British interests were directly threatened.) No paying French farmers not to produce stuff. No paying British farmers not to produce stuff. Etc., etc.

Whereas your beliefs (as implemented by successive generations of "progressives") have brought us to where we are today: a broke, fragmented, broken society. And you insist, like Gordon Brown, that if we just keep doing it some more, it will all get better.

Which is, I believe, the textbook definition of lunacy.

Oleuanna said...

You win....I am an intellectual retard....i shall never comment on your blogs again and shall do you the courtesy of un-following you.

I hope you get what you want in this life.....you seem determined enough to get your point out there.

I shall get back to my work on my MSc and proposol for my PhD and develop my knowledge before I get entangled with such a figure as yourself again.

Obnoxio The Clown said...

Or: "And now I'm going storm off in a huff because I can't think of anything useful to say."

PS I'm surprised you didn't mention your MENSA membership.

Oleuanna said...

Now that's just nasty.....i'm not in a huff. I have just bowed out. you should be more graceful in your win.

You let yourself down.

Obnoxio The Clown said...

You can only "win" if there's been a contest.

Oleuanna said...

very WWF.....

Obnoxio The Clown said...

World Wildlife Fund?