I'm not sure that the Madagascar Plan is an apt comparison. Had the Nazis implemented it, millions of Jewish lives would have been saved instead of being exterminated in the Holocaust. Some Jews would have succumbed to the harsh conditions that the Nazis planned for them in Madagascar, but obviously nothing approaching the zero survival rate of the Auschwitz-Birkenau, Treblinka etc gas chambers. The Royal Navy blockade prevented the plan being carried out from 1940, after which the Germans resorted to the Final Solution, namely the physical extermination of the 10 million Jews of Europe (as documented at the Wansee Conference), of which 6 million had been exterminated by the end of the war. So I don't think that Madagascar is necessarily the case here.
Johnson's dead cat has a very strong whiff of his previous comments on "picinnies.. water melon smiles..letterboxes" and is produced to reunite his red-wall/Tory intolerants/racists. It's a ridiculous far-right overreaction promoted by opaquely funded right-wing think tanks in the Bannon/Trump mould. A shameful moment in British political history.
Its difficult to convince people otherwise with statistics when they can see with their own eyes. Channel crossings are made predominately by single young men. Your header photo being a good example.
Driving into work this morning I heard an announcement about this and was sure I had misheard it. Then listened to the news and realized that I hadn't. Monstrous policy.
Knowing at least in name and scope, what the Madagascar Plan was and what it led to, when I read the headline this morning I couldn't help but be horrified. I mean this government has always been trying to fight its war on what it deems 'radical views' and yet they seem to be the biggest zealots of the lot. Come on people, get real, if you want to control the number of migrants coming in, set up decent administration systems, instead of an exorbitant scheme to cart them off to the middle of Africa
As an actual functioning policy, this scheme makes no sense at all - aside from anything else, judging from the Australian attempts to do something similar, the cost per applicant is likely to be over £1m - at a time when the UK actually needs unskilled as well as skilled labour! No, the hatred is surely the point, which is why Johnson is so keen to get the policy out - and to associate himself personally with it - ahead of the local government elections in May. It's just another one of those shoddy attempts to shore up a sagging Tory vote by distracting us all with the next episode of these forever Culture Wars that no one really wants. (See also everything Johnson says or does about trans people, the BBC, etc, etc.) Yet at the same time, the recent outpouring of support for Ukrainian refugees reminds us that hatred of strangers isn't the default setting of the British electorate. The better solution to all of this would be to make it easier for those leaving their countries to make proper applications to come here - whether as economic migrants or actual refugees - and then to enrich the UK with their diverse skills, their energy and the motivation that comes from their sometimes very challenging life experiences.
As the daughter of a WWII refugee I thank the UK for giving my mother safety with my father. As a child of Africa, born in a British protectorate, I am constantly deeply saddened with how too many independent African nations have been so cruel, callous to their own people having given them "One Man: One Vote" and that was all. The corruption of those in power whether via the ballot box or the bullet, and further down the system is indescribable and the resources of Africa are being plundered by Russia and China who ensure nations are into massive debt unable to pay back even the interest on the loans so Russia and China choose what they want back in payment like airports being the latest grab. Yes - empires do that throughout history and these two new empires - for that is what they are - are the same in many ways but how much do they give back to help the nations being used? A new presidential palace, new government buildings, a road or rail link here and there to ensure what is wanted is removed swiftly. How do these benefit the ordinary man and woman whose lives have in many cases been reduced to survival. South Africa was once hoped to be the shining light but look at her now. Tribal loyalty ensures constant conflicts in Africa, Middle East let alone religious differences. Of course refugees need vetting to ensure none are terrorists but I dare say many leave countries truly devastated by corruption, wars, abject poverty and feel this is a last chance to do something for themselves and families back home. Those who come to do evil must be dealt with severely and without question. This nation has become that "great big melting pot" and that is a wonderful one to live in and to enjoy every person, their language, their religion and their lives and their cuisine all together. But - first and foremost all refugees must obey this nation's laws, respect our flag, our history with all its imperfections and our beloved Monarch Queen Elizabeth II. Our empire has given us a wonderful vibrant common wealth of peoples, and for that we should be proud and treasure it and welcome all those who wish to live here and to do us no harm.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pwe-pA6TaZk If this can be accessed and heard then how 2012 for many nations were very much happier - it always cheers! Watch for the seal... It starts with Kigali and ends there too. But why Rwanda? I thought Albania was a choice for refugees? I would not wish to be in Patel's shoes now deciding how to deal with this tragic problem.
I'm not sure that the Madagascar Plan is an apt comparison. Had the Nazis implemented it, millions of Jewish lives would have been saved instead of being exterminated in the Holocaust. Some Jews would have succumbed to the harsh conditions that the Nazis planned for them in Madagascar, but obviously nothing approaching the zero survival rate of the Auschwitz-Birkenau, Treblinka etc gas chambers. The Royal Navy blockade prevented the plan being carried out from 1940, after which the Germans resorted to the Final Solution, namely the physical extermination of the 10 million Jews of Europe (as documented at the Wansee Conference), of which 6 million had been exterminated by the end of the war. So I don't think that Madagascar is necessarily the case here.
Johnson's dead cat has a very strong whiff of his previous comments on "picinnies.. water melon smiles..letterboxes" and is produced to reunite his red-wall/Tory intolerants/racists. It's a ridiculous far-right overreaction promoted by opaquely funded right-wing think tanks in the Bannon/Trump mould. A shameful moment in British political history.
Its difficult to convince people otherwise with statistics when they can see with their own eyes. Channel crossings are made predominately by single young men. Your header photo being a good example.
It smacks of a poorly thought out sticking plaster to placate a few voters...
Driving into work this morning I heard an announcement about this and was sure I had misheard it. Then listened to the news and realized that I hadn't. Monstrous policy.
I agree Douglas. It's nuts.
Knowing at least in name and scope, what the Madagascar Plan was and what it led to, when I read the headline this morning I couldn't help but be horrified. I mean this government has always been trying to fight its war on what it deems 'radical views' and yet they seem to be the biggest zealots of the lot. Come on people, get real, if you want to control the number of migrants coming in, set up decent administration systems, instead of an exorbitant scheme to cart them off to the middle of Africa
Agree Ben. The answer surely lies in keeping things onshore.
See Also: Children of Men (2006) and its portrayal of a system that isn't so different
As an actual functioning policy, this scheme makes no sense at all - aside from anything else, judging from the Australian attempts to do something similar, the cost per applicant is likely to be over £1m - at a time when the UK actually needs unskilled as well as skilled labour! No, the hatred is surely the point, which is why Johnson is so keen to get the policy out - and to associate himself personally with it - ahead of the local government elections in May. It's just another one of those shoddy attempts to shore up a sagging Tory vote by distracting us all with the next episode of these forever Culture Wars that no one really wants. (See also everything Johnson says or does about trans people, the BBC, etc, etc.) Yet at the same time, the recent outpouring of support for Ukrainian refugees reminds us that hatred of strangers isn't the default setting of the British electorate. The better solution to all of this would be to make it easier for those leaving their countries to make proper applications to come here - whether as economic migrants or actual refugees - and then to enrich the UK with their diverse skills, their energy and the motivation that comes from their sometimes very challenging life experiences.
Thank you. Agree with all that. £1m per applicant is extraordinary. And heaven alone knows what conditions will be like in these centres.
Can you imagine, if we gave every “potential deportee” £1,000,000 how welcomed they’d be in any UK location!
As the daughter of a WWII refugee I thank the UK for giving my mother safety with my father. As a child of Africa, born in a British protectorate, I am constantly deeply saddened with how too many independent African nations have been so cruel, callous to their own people having given them "One Man: One Vote" and that was all. The corruption of those in power whether via the ballot box or the bullet, and further down the system is indescribable and the resources of Africa are being plundered by Russia and China who ensure nations are into massive debt unable to pay back even the interest on the loans so Russia and China choose what they want back in payment like airports being the latest grab. Yes - empires do that throughout history and these two new empires - for that is what they are - are the same in many ways but how much do they give back to help the nations being used? A new presidential palace, new government buildings, a road or rail link here and there to ensure what is wanted is removed swiftly. How do these benefit the ordinary man and woman whose lives have in many cases been reduced to survival. South Africa was once hoped to be the shining light but look at her now. Tribal loyalty ensures constant conflicts in Africa, Middle East let alone religious differences. Of course refugees need vetting to ensure none are terrorists but I dare say many leave countries truly devastated by corruption, wars, abject poverty and feel this is a last chance to do something for themselves and families back home. Those who come to do evil must be dealt with severely and without question. This nation has become that "great big melting pot" and that is a wonderful one to live in and to enjoy every person, their language, their religion and their lives and their cuisine all together. But - first and foremost all refugees must obey this nation's laws, respect our flag, our history with all its imperfections and our beloved Monarch Queen Elizabeth II. Our empire has given us a wonderful vibrant common wealth of peoples, and for that we should be proud and treasure it and welcome all those who wish to live here and to do us no harm.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pwe-pA6TaZk If this can be accessed and heard then how 2012 for many nations were very much happier - it always cheers! Watch for the seal... It starts with Kigali and ends there too. But why Rwanda? I thought Albania was a choice for refugees? I would not wish to be in Patel's shoes now deciding how to deal with this tragic problem.