Maybe not Aussie bartender but even a lot of typically 'white' Europeans have very different cultures than English and Australian. For example when it comes when it comes to punctuality or queuing. Even stuff like how contracts are treated can be very different depending on the culture. DHH is Dutch and maybe closer to English culture than Italian/Spanish/French.
"Do you really think he's complaining about the white Aussie bartender who comes over here?"
-> Theres little complaint about the "white" Ausie bartender, BECAUSE he probably speaks great English, came there legally, isn't consuming wellfare resources, isn't advocating for Sharia law, and might even end up going back to Ausie land.
It's not about *skin color*, it is about culture/crime/wellfare resources and legal double standards.
If an Ausie entered the UK illegally, he would be deported. If an Ausie committed a crime, he goes to jail and/or deported. With these other people, they enter illegally but then get placed in tax payer funded hotels and politicians conspire with police to cover up their crimes (see the rape gang scandals) and they literaly arrested the victims.
At one point there were plenty of complaints when *too many Polish white dudes* rocked up in the UK and competed for jobs and didn't always speak good English.
Not about race - it is about Language, culture, job competition, crime rates, wellfare resources, values (sharia-law / treatment of women), social integration vs enclaves.
And only when it involves so many millions of people comming in that it rapidly alters the local culture. (or shifts votes! or whatever other thing people care about - overwhelming of infrastructure / housing availability)
Why is DHH a racist for sympathising with some Britts whom are unhappy with the 60% cultural transformation that is occuring in London?
You are reading between the lines to hastily conclude that DHH is a racist. You need more than just "he wasn't complaining about white Ausie bartenders".
Quote me an actual paragraph or sentence where DHH says he dislikes anyone because of their race ? Or stop calling people racists without hard proof. The tone of that DDH London article seems quite radical. But tone is not enough to indict.
Calling people racist is cheap.
I literally just explained how people can have legitimate concerns about illegal migrants entering in large numbers, concerns which are COMPLETELY UNRELATED to skin color, and all you do is call these things racist talking points.
He says "non-native brits" and says there are "about a third" and links to a page showing 36% "White British"[0] (note: explicitly excluding non-white british)
he excels in this kind of dog whistling. it confuses people who were born yesterday, but it is loud and clear to people who agree with him or are the intended victims.
Agreed, but being a conservative or right wing person does not equal being a fascist. We should be reserving those words to the people that really deserve them, otherwise the word loses the meaning.
We as a society keep coming up with more and more esoteric definition of "fascist" just to avoid having one that fits modern day political actors. I feel like the word has far more meaning here, where it's used to describe a set of policy prescriptions than it is as only referring to a list of groups with all criteria for entry erased.
Personally it seems the other way round, more and more esoteric definition of X so you can label your opponent it and discount everything about them without having to debate. Hence why I had to ask if he actually is one.
Let's start with the simplest definition I could find, just to walk you through it.
> "(n) an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization."
Is this what DHH is advocating for? Absolutely. I'll skip past right wing because that part is obvious. Nationalistic in terms of "non-Londoners" being used interchangeably with immigrants, a person from Birmingham meets his "Native London" criteria, and using that criteria for social organization.
Pretty cut and dry for anyone using just the basic dictionary definition. Obviously, there's a version with more stipulations and exceptions you'd rather use but those can be safely filled under "overly esoteric".
And this is why these very serious words have lost their power. Racist, Sexist, Fascist.... When half the country is deemed to support "literal" Himler, or when Elon Musk, or Jews with family impacted by the Holocaust, are called Nahtzees, then these words have been diluted to mean nothing.
I hope people who so overused&misused these words are happy with what they achieved.
Congratulations you made these words lose all power. I would have preferred a world where these words still had serious meaning attached to them.
Interesting it says knife crime for 23/24 was up 16% for London. I wonder if they only record convictions so the 19% decrease will change as people are convicted.
Also West Midlands is that not Biringham etc? Is that not one of the other mostly non-white places in the UK? You could have pointed to number 3 on the list Cleveland being mostly white(95%+ I think) and not being much lower than London.
It's almost like crime isn't that strongly correlated with the ethnic mix of a place! I'm sorry reality doesn't support your racism.
Of course, if you don't believe the police data, that page suggests you look at hospital admissions.
Again, as I said, London is lovely. You said there was a problem with knife crime. I pointed out that London is lower than a comparable major US city. It's also lower than several areas in the UK.
Come and visit - don't believe the lies being spread.
> It's almost like crime isn't that strongly correlated with the ethnic mix of a place! I'm sorry reality doesn't support your racism.
How is what I said racist? I was agreeing with you but saying London being #2 and pointing to #1 is not really proving your point. You should point to #3 to make your point.
> I pointed out that London is lower than a comparable major US city.
Again, you can not compare across countries you don't know the difference in how the data is recorded. For example is a murder not recorded in the USA for every suspious death where as the UK it is for every murder conviction?
> It's also lower than several areas in the UK.
It is #2 on that 23/24 list.
> Come and visit - don't believe the lies being spread.
I lived on London's outskirts for multiple years and have to visit multiple times a year. I wouldn't describe it as great, I dread going everytime.
He's gone pretty mask-off at this point.