"English Spoken"
Comments
-
You have highlighted the difficulties in learning a foreign language, but said that economic migrants have no excuse for not learning English prior to moving to the UK. To a certain extent, there is only so much you can learn from a textbook and the majority of your language learning will take place in your host country. You cannot expect a migrant - skilled or otherwise - to arrive in the UK with complete fluency, or even a particularly good grasp of English. It doesn't always happen and it’s not always through lack of trying (poor standards of English teaching in other countries can be a factor). As for support from an employer - that's all very well for the person going out to work. But what about the families who migrate alongside - these don't always have the support networks in place to learn a new language once they've arrived (or before they left), yet they need to assimilate and integrate all the same.EKIMIKE wrote:Ands wrote:
But you have maligned others for failing to do the same?EKIMIKE wrote:[
+1 to that. We Brits are shocking for learning other languages............
And......? It's a simple fact, as a nation we are terrible at learning other languages. By all means, move to a country without learning the language first. Make that decision and be satified that any consequential diffculties will exist. I haven't maligned anyone for not learning a language.
Personally, I would prefer to learn the language of a country to a suitable extent before I physically move there. If I couldn't do that, but still made the decision to move there, I wouldn't have any excuse to feel disadvantaged and I'd fully expect to feel a little alienated.
As an aside, you can move to a country without a language barrier and still feel alienated. It’s a natural part of starting a new life in a strange place. Your attitude to your adopted country plays a large part. Your adopted country’s attitude to you plays a large part – that’s often out of your control.
BTW, I do speak other languages and I have encountered the difficulties of living in a non-English speaking country (France & Spain) – even though I arrived with a very good knowledge of the languages. I don’t support people who can’t make the effort in their adopted land – but I do understand the hurdles that need to be overcome.
0 -
Ands,
Good perspective i like it. Not sure Teapot will though.0 -
Ands - I understand how 'having no excuse' reads. But it was meant in the context of a comparison between economic and political migrants. Of course I do understand that it's not as simple as reading a textbook and as a result gaining a full understanding of a language. In that respect, life isn't so black and white (no pun intended). My point is that if you are in the priveliged position to make a conscious choice to move abroad for economic purposes/gain, there is less of an excuse to not learn the language compared to someone who is forced to move country in unforseen circumstances of persecution (i.e. a political migrant).
The way this country teaches language and our attitudes to learning are a different, seperate issue all together.
Basically i'm +1'ing what you're saying. But I wasn't maligning the guy for moving to Slovakia without learning the language. I was maligning the fact he ignores the different circumstances of Economic and Political Migration0 -
teagar wrote:The only issue I have with the English speaking badge, beyond the fact that it's an issue to be dealt with at the licensing stage, rather than with a badge, is that it can very easily be used as a vehicle for more serious discrimination.
Therefore you are speculatively suggesting an issue of racism where one doesn't currently exist. This attitude and such speculation, I think, is an equal problem as racism itself. This attitude is a breeding ground for racial conflict.
Why would you want to synthesise an issue that's not already there? I know it's only an opinion you have. And I too can see how it's a vehicle/platform for racial division. The problem is, the media place this view into the public domain which polarises people - exactly what is happening here between yourself and markwalker. Our society places too much belief in speculation. Look what it does to stock markets.0 -
-
he might have a kirpan under his jumper.0
-
The question is, are you rejecting their application because they are a goat herder, or because of the assumption that if they are African, they therefore are a goat herder? If the former, then you are discriminating against goat herders (not racist, maybe a bit stupid to assume there are no transferable skills before assessing them); the latter is clearly racist. I suspect the latter as you originally identified their African origin as the issue rather than their prior employment. If so, by any sensible definition of racism, you are a racist. I think that clears the matter up.markwalker wrote:teagar wrote:Hey Mark.
In case you're in denial that you are racist, here's the UN definition for racial discrimination:"the term "racial discrimination" shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life."
As I understand it, you are restricting, excluding, and prefering on the basis of national origin, for that particular job you are apparantly advertising.
but the fundamental freedoms and responsibilities afforded to citizens of Europe dont apply to those people from Africa in relatioin to employment. stop clutching at strraws teagar, Im sure Cherie bleading heart blair couldfind reasons why they do but i cant imagine anyone wanting to interviewa goatherder for a customer services and sales role in the uk unless it was vet or feed or goat meat related and even then why bother. Actually dont answer that were going round in circles and its getting as boring as you0 -
-
That is not relevant - someone of African origin may have the right to work in this country for reasons other than EU citizen status, which obviously doesn't apply. The discussion is not about the legality of their employment, it is about discrimination against them assuming the right of employment already exists. Of course this red herring can be introduced as required to sidestep the unpleasant but correct accusation of racism regarding MW's and rake's attitudes and conduct, but it won't fool many people.redddraggon wrote:Africans don't have a right to work in this country, EU citizens do, does the law not say that?0 -
Laws are open to interpretation. The logical interpretation depends on circumstances. Laws are by no means evidence to prove anything. There are probably 100 different ways in which someone can be convicted of racial discriminination without actually having to be a racist.0
-
The underlying issue is one of immigration and the perception of foreign workers in the UK. A lot of UK residents have a lot of mis-directed anger at the past years immigration policies, call centres being moved to developing countries and the UK and W.Europe being opened to Eastern Europeans, just to name a few. The exploitation of the NHS by foreign nationals who intentionally come here in the hope of treatment and the building trade being undermined by very cheap E.European labour are other issues that people have problems with.
The English Spoken badges have been percieved as being maybe racist or exclusive, but may just be a direct response from a service industry to a bigger national fustration. We, in this country have had intergration for years but is has been the events over the last decade that have defined and divided opinion. Also, I think the press jump on and hype everyone up on half facts and skewed conjecture. Look at Mr Ross and Mr Brand on Radio 2, everyone went potty well after the event, it took the press to whip it into the scandal it grew into.
To summarise, I half understand why the English spoken badges went up, but I do not support it.
There's a bit too much mis-directed anger everywhere at the moment, I find myself counting to 10 a lot and trying to apply perspective, which is working for me.0 -
er. . .is that a response to what I wrote? I fail to see any connection :?EKIMIKE wrote:Laws are open to interpretation. The logical interpretation depends on circumstances. Laws are by no means evidence to prove anything. There are probably 100 different ways in which someone can be convicted of racial discriminination without actually having to be a racist.0 -
Sort of, not directly. I just think what I said is important to consider when defining actions as racist. It was Teagar that used a legal definition.
As much as I don't want to pass opinion on whether markwalker appears to be racist, I would agree with you that he is racist to a certain extent. Obviously I couldn't and wouldn't want to say for definite. I simply don't know him well enough. I certainly wouldn't base my opinion on a legal definition, which by nature is created/intended to be broad and open to interpretation.0 -
Ah, right. Well the UN def of racism that Teagar cites may not be the same as a definition of racial discrimination or racism in British law. The legal definition is not too important to me really, I know when something is abhorrent and the views of these "gentlemen" certainly are!0
-
EKIMIKE wrote:Sort of, not directly. I just think what I said is important to consider when defining actions as racist. It was Teagar that used a legal definition.
As much as I don't want to pass opinion on whether markwalker appears to be racist, I would agree with you that he is racist to a certain extent. Obviously I couldn't and wouldn't want to say for definite. I simply don't know him well enough. I certainly wouldn't base my opinion on a legal definition, which by nature is created/intended to be broad and open to interpretation.
I wouldn't let the laws of the UN let you think that they are some sort of great institution. The UN allowed untold atrocities against civilians over and over again in the Balkans and to a devastating degree, Rwanda. They are spineless and fairly ineffectual, i did a tour of Angola in 1995 for 5 months attached to the UN and it was heart breaking.0 -
Which is where the logical interpretation comes in. markwalker has clearly displayed some racist views.
BTW I have no knowledge of law (even though i'm due to commence a law degree in September) so don't feel like you have to agree.0 -
dmclite wrote:They are spineless and fairly ineffectual.
+1
My point being that just because it's recognised legally, doesn't mean it's absolute.0 -
I don't feel like I have to agree
(when I get that feeling I think it may be time to have my assisted suicide!). Good luck with the law degree - should be fascinating. Where are you applying? 0 -
Thanks, Bristol UWE, I suck at exams so my A levels turned out pretty terrible. The pressure to go to Uni (regardless of what you want to study or what grades you get) was all powerful certainly in my school. Maybe I'd be better doing an apprenticeship but I chose law because it seems really interesting to me and a very diverse subject. Hopefully I can pick my way through the course so it suits me.
I've already got a place on the course cos' I deferred entry. My gap year has been totally fruitless though :roll: . Unfotunate that I'm in the least desireable age group for employers.0 -
Ah, where I work Got a good rep for law I think. 0
-
Yeh my sister did her LPC there so she knew what the style was like there. She said it would suit me. Hopefully she's right. Plus they've got a really good conversion rate from graduation to employment.
You work at UWE or in Bristol?0 -
Yes, the employability stats are reasonable across the uni. We have implemented a graduate development programme to sustain or improve this further. I work in UWE, Health & Life Sciences.0
-
Thats nice.0
-
markwalker wrote:teagar wrote:Hey Mark.
In case you're in denial that you are racist, here's the UN definition for racial discrimination:"the term "racial discrimination" shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life."
As I understand it, you are restricting, excluding, and prefering on the basis of national origin, for that particular job you are apparantly advertising.
but the fundamental freedoms and responsibilities afforded to citizens of Europe dont apply to those people from Africa in relatioin to employment. stop clutching at strraws teagar, Im sure Cherie bleading heart blair couldfind reasons why they do but i cant imagine anyone wanting to interviewa goatherder for a customer services and sales role in the uk unless it was vet or feed or goat meat related and even then why bother. Actually dont answer that were going round in circles and its getting as boring as you
There is only one person clutching at straws, and that's you Mark.
It is clear from your original comment about Africans that you were discriminating against them all because you had pre-judged that they couldn't speak sufficent English. Don't throw this EU employment mcguffin in - that came later, and in fact someone else brought it up.
Frankly, you are showing yourself up to be:
a) racist
b) unable to argue cogently
c) quite unpleasant, the way you throw very condascending insults at other posters0 -
Cool, sorry for the little Off-Topic convo everyone else.0
-
PBo wrote:markwalker wrote:teagar wrote:Hey Mark.
In case you're in denial that you are racist, here's the UN definition for racial discrimination:"the term "racial discrimination" shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life."
As I understand it, you are restricting, excluding, and prefering on the basis of national origin, for that particular job you are apparantly advertising.
but the fundamental freedoms and responsibilities afforded to citizens of Europe dont apply to those people from Africa in relatioin to employment. stop clutching at strraws teagar, Im sure Cherie bleading heart blair couldfind reasons why they do but i cant imagine anyone wanting to interviewa goatherder for a customer services and sales role in the uk unless it was vet or feed or goat meat related and even then why bother. Actually dont answer that were going round in circles and its getting as boring as you
There is only one person clutching at straws, and that's you Mark.
It is clear from your original comment about Africans that you were discriminating against them all because you had pre-judged that they couldn't speak sufficent English. Don't throw this EU employment mcguffin in - that came later, and in fact someone else brought it up.
Frankly, you are showing yourself up to be:
a) racist
b) unable to argue cogently
c) quite unpleasant, the way you throw very condascending insults at other posters
Sunshine i dont care what you think but for the record i dismiss their applications becasue i dont need them and first port of call is and has to be europeans. i dont care if you cant understand that or need a more cogent argument and it was me that brought the EU point up i believe. so dont label me without facts unless you dont mind me calling you a liberal bleeding heart coc k sucker0 -
markwalker - what a thoroughly unpleasant and small minded person you've proven yourself to be in the time you've 'graced' us with your presence on these boards. There are a wide range of political views displayed on this forum - not all of which I agree with but most of which are within the realms of a 'normal' range on the left-right scale, mostly put across with good humour (not to mention intelligence and good grammar). You are an obvious exception. Of all the good folk on this forum who are brought together by a shared love of cycling, you're possibly the only one I'd never hope to come across on a ride anytime soon.0
-
Westerberg wrote:markwalker - what a thoroughly unpleasant and small minded person you've proven yourself to be in the time you've 'graced' us with your presence on these boards. There are a wide range of political views displayed on this forum - not all of which I agree with but most of which are within the realms of a 'normal' range on the left-right scale, mostly put across with good humour (not to mention intelligence and good grammar). You are an obvious exception. Of all the good folk on this forum who are brought together by a shared love of cycling, you're possibly the only one I'd never hope to come across on a ride anytime soon.
got that off your chest have you? btw if commenting on my grammer please punctuate properly.0 -
markwalker wrote:Westerberg wrote:markwalker - what a thoroughly unpleasant and small minded person you've proven yourself to be in the time you've 'graced' us with your presence on these boards. There are a wide range of political views displayed on this forum - not all of which I agree with but most of which are within the realms of a 'normal' range on the left-right scale, mostly put across with good humour (not to mention intelligence and good grammar). You are an obvious exception. Of all the good folk on this forum who are brought together by a shared love of cycling, you're possibly the only one I'd never hope to come across on a ride anytime soon.
got that off your chest have you? btw if commenting on my grammer please punctuate properly.
It looks like very poised punctuation to me. And correct spellings too.0
