What a bizarre set of polls – if someone asked me whether I thought Germans *as a whole* were trustworthy, I’d have no idea where to begin. Some Germans are trustworthy, some are not, the fact that they are German has no impact on either group.

So…Twitter is not representative, but the Daily Mail is? Not a very convincing start to this article. Looks like a straw man to me.

And the focus on ‘trustworthiness’ seems a bit tenuous, interesting though these results are. I only watched the #tram thing once, but as I recall, the woman’s objections had nothing to do with whether she considers ‘foreigners’ to be trustworthy, and everything to do with her feeling of being marginalised and a minority in her ‘own country’. Appalling though it might be to witness, it just goes to show that you cannot force people to embrace multiculturalism. Of course, you can just arrest and criminalise people for their views, but that really doesn’t address the issue, or help the people who are subjected to outbursts of abuse like this.

You don’t have to distrust ‘foreigners’ in order to over-extend the category in a racist way, or in order to feel that your culture (I use the term loosely) and sense of belonging is threatened by becoming a minority in your native land. I would argue that the best way to address racism (including the BNP &tc) is to acknowledge these people’s concerns, not shout them down and criminalise them.

As a German living in London, I find this very reassuring.
Still, whenever there is a football world cup, Ill have to listen to World War 2 comparisons for two weeks.

On a serious note: I am German and I have an Iranian girlfriend. We feel quite accepted and welcome here in London, definitely much more so than we felt in Germany.

But then, I don’t know what it would be like if we didn’t live in London, but in a small village up north.

I think the Mails hatchet job on Clegg did have an effect on lie dems performance. After the first debate when Clegg jumped up to 30% the rabid right wing media turned their fire on him because they were worried he would take votes away from the tories.

By the time of the election the lie dems had fallen right back.

I don’t think either the woman or the Mail on Sunday represent Britain but I do think the Twitterati calling for her to be sterilised or shot in the ovaries, or at the very least have her children taken into care, tell us much more about the fascism of class hatred and misogyny out there.

I take it “twitterati” is the new slang term for twitter users then?

@ 6 Cylux

“I take it “twitterati” is the new slang term for twitter users then?”

The new derogative term. Think “Guardianista” or, um, “Mail reader”.

@ 5 Shatterface

“or at the very least have her children taken into care”

Hadn’t seen that, but assumed we’d hear it from somewhere. Happily, political views (no matter how stupid) are not generally seen as a reason to break up families.

I don’t think either the woman or the Mail on Sunday represent Britain but I do think the Twitterati calling for her to be sterilised or shot in the ovaries, or at the very least have her children taken into care, tell us much more about the fascism of class hatred and misogyny out there.

I can’t be arsed to watch the video but I’m willing to bet a tenner that Brendan O’Neill will soon produce a piece that the reactions to this woman’s outburst says something about the deep distrust the liberal elite has for the tram-catching masses.

I don’t think either the woman or the Mail on Sunday represent Britain but I do think the Twitterati calling for her to be sterilised or shot in the ovaries, or at the very least have her children taken into care, tell us much more about the fascism of class hatred and misogyny out there.

I can’t be arsed watching this video but I’m willing to bet a tenner that Brendan O’Neill will soon produce a piece about how the disdainful reaction of the liberal elite to this woman shows their deep distrust of the tram catching classes.

@3 – I’m White(Other), look “British”, and the government-endorsed casual racism I hear these days is souring me, very rapidly, on the UK. It’s amazing what people say when they think everyone around them is “English”.

@2 – Ah right. So what part of their policy do you want to implement?

Apparently she’s on remand for a week, what on earth happened to free speech? Ho hum. Stupid – definately, illegal – doubtfully.

Actually, I retract my previous comment – forced to entrust my keys to a stranger, I would choose a Lyonais over a Londoner as I think our French neighbours are on average more trustworthy than the average Londoner.

Of course her behaviour was illegal. It was ‘behaviour likely to cause a breech of the peace’ for one thing!

@3. Andreas Moser:

“On a serious note: I am German and I have an Iranian girlfriend. We feel quite accepted and welcome here in London, definitely much more so than we felt in Germany.

But then, I don’t know what it would be like if we didn’t live in London, but in a small village up north.”

Hello, Andreas. I think this is the first time that we have addressed on LC.

My guess is that if you booked into a UK bed and breakfast (acknowledging your wit and appreciation of UK culture), I doubt problems in the north where people are friendly (and people beyond Hadrian’s Wall will tell you the same thing).

@16: “(and people beyond Hadrian’s Wall will tell you the same thing).”

This shows the sort of warm welcome: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/5105452.stm

It was ‘behaviour likely to cause a breech of the peace’ for one thing!

By the legal definition? Because that phrase could be used to describe almost anything. Expressing political views because it might lead to a fight. Listening to music loudly on the bus for the same reason. Walking slowly down a crowded street because people might push you out of the way. I thought “breach of the peace” was more for deliberate attempts to incite crime.

@ 16 Bob B

It’s been some time since you’ve been given an excuse to spread your weird hatred of the Scots using your old method of posting anecdotal stories, isn’t it? Did you miss it?

@17. Chaise Guevara: “I thought “breach of the peace” was more for deliberate attempts to incite crime.”

No, “breach of the peace” is used by the police to clear up minor alarming behaviour for which there is no specific law. So police would not use breach for disorder outside a football ground because public conduct there is defined in law.

A transvestite changing clothes in a women’s lavatory *may* bring breach into use, for example. To my knowledge, there are no explicit laws defining male, female and TG toilets, which creates a conundrum for TG people. Case law suggests that TG people should use the loo that suits them and their circumstances, which may be difficult to determine when caught short. TS people, of course, use the ladies or gents as appropriate to their adopted/natural sex.

“Breach” is not about prosecution, it is more about practical policing. So if you pop into the lady’s bog to put on your finery, and one of the ladies gets upset, you’ll get shifted quickly regardless of dishabille. It’s a breach of the peace — you upset somebody — so remove the problem (you). End of story unless you act to create another scene.

“Breach” is about annoying the people around you such that a disturbance may occur. Should you, Chaise, dance naked around a camp fire in the New Forest, observed by coppers, there is no offence. Recent case law suggests that you could wave fingers and tell the coppers to “fuck off” (noting that this is not your normal conduct).

@18: “It’s been some time since you’ve been given an excuse to spread your weird hatred of the Scots using your old method of posting anecdotal stories, isn’t it?”

Try this BBC report of the annual Orange Order parade in Glasgow in July this year:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-13993505

By the report, 8000 people were on parade so this was hardly a minor event. The leading lines in the BBC report were:

“Police arrested 32 people – six for sectarian offences – during an Orange parade through Glasgow. Police and the Orange Order had warned people to leave the ‘booze and bigotry’ behind, ahead of the annual march.”

There was a similar event in july 2010 with, reportedly, 8000 or so on parade then.

What makes this annual event so extraordinary is that the main focus of the Orange Order is to celebrate the outcome of the Battle of the Boyne in 1690 – yes, 1690 – between the armies of two rival claimants to the ENGLISH throne – James II, who was Catholic, and William of Orange, who was Protestant. The army of William of Orange won. Quite why Glasgow is the regular venue for this annual celebration remains a matter for speculation.

I’ve no need to invent any of this. All that I need to do is to gently remind readers of the stark reality.

Btw the Battle of the Boyne didn’t settle the succession to the throne, not did the Act of Union between England and Scotland of 1707. In the course of the 18th century, there were a series of Jacobite uprisings, intending to put another Stuart on the throne, culminating in 1745 when an invading army from Scotland captured Derby, just a 100 or so miles north of London. The Battle of Culloden of 1746 resolved the matter until recently.

@ Charlieman

Oh, ok, it’s more like a privilege extended to policemen to allow them to, well, keep the peace. Fair enough – it sounds like it has the potential to be abused, but I guess as long as nobody’s being convicted of it and the police aren’t using it to mess with people too much, it probably does more good than harm.

@ 20 Bob B

So, 32 arrests out of a crowd of 8,000, some with booze, at a politicised event. It’s hardly shocking.

Bob, I don’t suspect you of inventing anything. Nobody could ever say that you don’t source your statements. The point is that you are, for reasons best known to yourself, always VERY eager to provide examples of criminal behaviour by members of certain demographic groups (Muslims and Scots to my knowledge, there may be more).

@21. Chaise Guevara: “Fair enough – it sounds like it has the potential to be abused…”

I think that is why we need lots of liberals.

Chaise: “The point is that you are, for reasons best known to yourself, always VERY eager to provide examples of criminal behaviour by members of certain demographic groups (Muslims and Scots to my knowledge, there may be more).”

Don’t forget to add the Israelis to that list of infamy, digging out sources to show that the Nazis were really deviant left-wing ideologues, not right-wing as popularly supposed, and to show that Robespierre’s declared objective of creating the “virtuous society” was a credible rhetorical device to obscure his authoritarian ambitions. I mean, who could possibly object to the promotion of “virtue” – whatever that is? Much recent political spin uses a similar deceit to conceal intent – for instance: You can’t stop modernisation.

I’ve this dedicated commitment to dissecting popular mythologies – such as whether we really need to worry more about pornography than the pernicious influence of violent video games.

Naturally, I expect those who espouse popular mythologies to get upset.

After all, compare that woman with a limited and obscene vocabulary on the Croydon tram with Comedian John Cleese “who sparked fury after he said that London is ‘no longer an English city’.”
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23983436-londoners-hit-back-as-cleese-says-city-is-no-longer-english.do

Perhaps he was onto to something in the light of that BBC Newsnight report in 2008 which said that 40 pc of London residents were born abroad.

KB Player

I can’t be arsed to watch the video but I’m willing to bet a tenner that Brendan O’Neill will soon produce a piece that the reactions to this woman’s outburst says something about the deep distrust the liberal elite has for the tram-catching masses.

It probably won’t be about the tram-catching masses, but more likely liberal’s hate for the more lumpen working class and people like Rod Liddle.

@ 24 Bob B

“I’ve this dedicated commitment to dissecting popular mythologies – such as whether we really need to worry more about pornography than the pernicious influence of violent video games.”

Leaving aside the no-doubt terrifying spectre of violent video games (dun-dun-DUUUN!), I’m at a loss to how you think you’re dissecting popular mythologies by using selective evidence to portray Muslims and Scottish people as violent. Some would call that more “reinforcing popular stereotypes”.

(Incidentally, with no word of a lie, I just a minute ago turned off the Xbox, having slain a dragon. And yet I feel no desire to hit real human beings with a sword, nor to confound their attacks using spells from the school of illusion… oh, never mind, this stuff is always wasted on the histrionically reactionary type.)

@ 23

“I think that is why we need lots of liberals.”

Yeah. The system seems to work, broadly. Plenty of people watching the watchmen.

Chaise: “I’m at a loss to how you think you’re dissecting popular mythologies by using selective evidence to portray Muslims and Scottish people as violent. Some would call that more “reinforcing popular stereotypes”.

C’mon, Blair, Cameron and others kept insisting that Islam is a peaceful religion when, as a matter of historical fact, the Moors invaded Spain and settled there from 711 onwards, starting more than three hundred years before the (truly barbaric) First Crusade in 1096. Islam was spread by the sword, hence the settled Uighurs in western China where Buddhism was previously the established religion.

The news reports about Scotland – not least the reports of concerns by the devolved government there about the extent of alcohol abuse – belie the continuing claims of normality. It isn’t necessary to select news reports about the extraordinary amount of alcohol consumed by the Scots and the predictable consequences of that for healthcare and mortality rates. What is peculiar is why we are expected to accept all that as a valid rationale for public spending per capita in Scotland having to be higher than in England.

@28 – You’re nuts.

Leon: “You’re nuts”

As Mandy Rice Davies famously said: You would say that, wouldn’t you? And her credentials are impeccable – a career starting as Rachman’s mistress which progressed by stages to running a popular night club in Tel Aviv.

Do try this report from the BBC website about a BBCTV Panorama programme broadcast in 2005:

“Sectarianism and religious bigotry have long been accepted as part of a way of life in Scotland. The divide between Protestant and Catholic, the Orange and the Green, is most visibly reflected in the support for Rangers and Celtic which begins early and spreads from parent to child, from one generation to the next.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/4284023.stm

The mortality rate from alcohol related causes in Scotland is twice the rate for the UK as a whole – as reported by the Scottisssh government. That probably goes a way to explaining why the two biggest banks which the then government had to bail out in 2008 with taxpayers’ money both had headoffices in Scotland – RBS and HBOS. IMO we need a new criminal offence – drunk while banking.

@30 – Hazelnuts.

@ 28 Bob B

“C’mon, Blair, Cameron and others kept insisting that Islam is a peaceful religion when, as a matter of historical fact, the Moors invaded Spain…”

You’re confused because you don’t see the distinction between a) What a religion’s official text/spokesperson preaches; b) What is done by believers in the name of the religion and c) What is done by believers not in the name of the religion.

In the case of Islam, the Koran is pretty peaceful by comparison with similar works, and Muslims in Britain are probably not notably more or less violent than other demographics. The latter is probably what people mean when they say it’s a “peaceful religion”; they’re trying to counter the bigoted popular mythology (thank you) that Muslims are a bunch of dangerous nutters. Y’know, the bigoted mythology spread by bigots like yourself.

I’ve told you this a thousand times, maybe it’ll penetrate your skull on attempt 1,001: the fact that you can selectively assemble anecdotes and historical examples to support your prejudices does not make your prejudices justified.

“The news reports about Scotland – not least the reports of concerns by the devolved government there about the extent of alcohol abuse – belie the continuing claims of normality. It isn’t necessary to select news reports about the extraordinary amount of alcohol consumed by the Scots and the predictable consequences of that for healthcare and mortality rates.”

What claims of normality? In my experience, Scots are stereotyped as drunken and violent. If you want to show that alcohol abuse and criminal violence are especially high in Scotland, all you need is the relevant stats, not emotive, undemonstrative anecdotes.

“What is peculiar is why we are expected to accept all that as a valid rationale for public spending per capita in Scotland having to be higher than in England.”

Wow. This is the first time in my memory that you’ve actually suggested that there’s a point to your Islamaphobic and anti-Scottish posts. Normally you just post anecdotes and expect us to draw our own conclusions, it borders on the creepy. Sadly it doesn’t make sense: why would claiming that Scotland DOESN’T have problems be a rationale for higher spending?

You’d do a lot better if you a) investigated the difference between an anecdote and statistical evidence, b) started explaining the point behind your posts instead of just creepily smearing groups you happen to hate, and c) realised that we’re not actually all going to be murdered in our beds by Islamic Scottish Grand Theft Auto players.

@ 29 Leon

“You’re nuts.”

That’s my other conclusion. I love the way he responds to complaints about use of anecdotal evidence with, um, more anecdotes.

He reminds me of well-meaning religious people who try to convert you on your doorstep by telling you how wonderful Jesus is, while being incapable of understanding that you don’t believe in Jesus so the claims of wonderfulness are redundant.

Chaise: “I’ve told you this a thousand times, maybe it’ll penetrate your skull on attempt 1,001: the fact that you can selectively assemble anecdotes and historical examples to support your prejudices does not make your prejudices justified.”

Translated that means no amount of evidence from documented sources will ever cause you to change your mind about what you hold to be true.

As for me, I go by the evidence to be found in well-reputed sources, not by what you claim.

Reports on the BBC website about annual Orange parades in Glasgow involving 8000 people and BBC documentaries are hardly “selected anecdotes”. As an undeniable fact, the two biggest banks in Britain, which had to be bailed out with taxpayers’ money in 2008, both had headoffices in Scotland. The Scottish government is saying that its nationals drink to excess:

Scotland’s drink problem is significantly worse than the rest of the UK. Figures suggest that as many as half of men and a third of women in Scotland regularly drink above sensible drinking guidelines.
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Health/health/Alcohol

As for Islam, as a historical fact, the religion was spread by invasions. The most recent attempted military invasion of Europe was the siege of Vienna in 1683 – see the entry in Wikipedia for details. It’s demonstrable nonsense to claim that Islam is a peaceful religion in the face of overwhelming historical evidence to the contrary.

Btw note I’m hardly renown for complimenting Christianity and its institutions – in particular, I’ve argued that the Confucian ethic is superior to the Christian ethic and contrasted the notably faster economic development of countries in east and soth-east Asia, where Christianity has had little historic influence, with South America and Sub-Sahara Africa. On the international evidence of the scale of abuse of children and youths by Catholic priets in many countries, I’ve suggested there is a strong case for banning the Catholic church.

On the evidence, I’m not the bigot.

@ 34 Bob B

“Translated that means no amount of evidence from documented sources will ever cause you to change your mind about what you hold to be true. ”

No, it means I don’t draw wild conclusions from anecdotes. Do keep up!

“As for me, I go by the evidence to be found in well-reputed sources, not by what you claim.”

Reports on the BBC website about annual Orange parades in Glasgow involving 8000 people and BBC documentaries are hardly “selected anecdotes”. As an undeniable fact, the two biggest banks in Britain, which had to be bailed out with taxpayers’ money in 2008, both had headoffices in Scotland. ”

They are anecdotes, and you selected them. But I’m not going to explain the concept of anecdotal evidence again. It’ll give me deja vu.

“The Scottish government is saying that its nationals drink to excess:

Scotland’s drink problem is significantly worse than the rest of the UK. Figures suggest that as many as half of men and a third of women in Scotland regularly drink above sensible drinking guidelines.
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Health/health/Alcohol ”

Finally! Law of averages says this is probably jjust fluke, but you’ve actually managed to pick up a reasonable data point for once! Now explain how this shows that English people crossing the border can be expected to be assaulted, in line with your post @16.

“On the evidence, I’m not the bigot.”

If the evidence includes your posts on this site, you really, really are. You’re the most blatantly bigoted LC regular I can think of, if only because those who are more obvious about it than you tend to get deleted.