Politics Thread 5

Fed up talking videogames? Why?
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Moggy » Thu Feb 21, 2019 5:39 pm

Denster wrote:
Tafdolphin wrote:
Denster wrote:
Preezy wrote:
Parksey wrote:
more heat than light wrote:
Parksey wrote:If I committed a crime here in Japan, I'm sure no-one would object to me being deported and sent back to the UK to face the consequences. Of course, I'm sure that fact that I'm a (damn attractive) young Caucasian male definitely wouldn't alter how people say others as "ours" and "not ours", but that's by the by.


You're right, but if your crime was the same (ie, leaving to join a terrorist organisation) I don't think you'd have as much sympathy as you think.


I would expect sympathy, nor am I massively sympathetic towards Begum herself. She hasn't shown herself to be particularly repentant, and only seems to want to come back because the squalid conditions over there have cost the lives of two other children. It definitely strikes me as opportunistic rather than a reformed character seeing the light. She still strikes me as quite an arrogant and naive teenager. As a completely aside, we do need to remember though, that her radicalisation wont have been entirely her own doing and she was radicalised as a minor, though I'm not sure how these impact on things legally.

But in a legal sense, how sympathetic a case is has no bearing on matters. As far as I am aware, legally the crime committed has no bearing on what the Government are trying to do - which is effectively leave her stateless and hoping someone else picks her up (why would they, as I previously said).

How sympathetic we are towards her, how much we like her or how much we want her back, having no bearing. Begum might have idealogically forsaken British values and laws when she left for Syria, but legally and morally, she has to be treated as a British citizen as things currently stand.

That sort of distance between what we feel and think and how our laws try and deal with people, is arguably one of the foundations of what we call "British values", so it's odd that some want them to not apply to a British citizen because it suits their personal emotions.

As for the comparison with me, I wouldn't expect sympathy either had I done something similar in Japan.

But I just wonder, if it was my (sexy) white face plastered all over the news, whether there would be the same clamour to strip me off my citizenship. I'd probably make the news, but the media circus would probably be about me being deported back here and any subsequent crime, rather than trying to weasel a way out of it and make me not a British citizen. I doubt they'd be looking at my immediate family and trying to see if they could give me to another country.

If I had commited a crime immediately before getting on a plane to Japan, would people back in the UK be saying I should never be allowed to set foot back in the country again? Would there be a massive backlash if it was revealed I was coming back to face any consequences of actions or any relevant criminal proceedings against me? Would anyone object to British justice for a British citizen in that sense? Maybe not for everyone voicing opinions on that story, but I don't think people's reactions would be quite the same if it was a young Caucasian face staring back at them on the front page of their newspaper.

To be honest, I wonder if they'd have done the same too, had the other country been someone like France or America, rather than little old Bangladesh. It's pretty insulting to try and coerce another country in to dealing with something which is, in every sense, your problem.

Like I said, her mum might have been Bangladeshi but Begum was born in the UK, lived here her whole life, was educated her and radicalised here. Her crime of leaving with the intent of joining a terrorist organisation was commited here, given that she lied to her family about where she was going (she wasn't just wandering g through the Syrian desert trying to take some awesome Instagram photos and got turned).

Again, putting all feelings aside, in what sense should she be stripped of her citizenship? The only reason the government have of doing so is that her mother was born in another country. Isn't that white a frighteningly tenuous thing to be used in order to remove your nationality? It flies in the face of what we all believe to constitute a citizen - and what makes us a citizen - as well as being on very, very shaky legal ground.

Yeah but Denster said she forfeited her rights so I'm torn.



Yeah but what do I know? I'm a heartless Tory and apparently a racist now.


This is what's so aggravating about your posts on issues such as these I think. You act as if your views are inevitable and unchangeable, and that people are somehow slandering you personally by pointing out ways in which your thinking doesn't align with certain facts. When the situation because too complex to argue against, or you are proven wrong by long, thoughtful posting as demonstrated here by Moggy and Parksey, you throw your hands up in the air and claim you're the one being persecuted simply because of your beliefs going against the norm on here, rather than because you're morally or factually in the wrong.

It's claiming the high ground whilst digging around in the muck and it's... enraging sometimes.

I'm not claiming persecution at all. Although I have been persecuted in the politics threads many times. I do object to being tarred with the same brush as racists.
The situation isn't too complex to argue about.
The legality of the issue is a subject of debate and will no doubt continue to be so. It may well prove to be that we are legally responsible for this girl. I fail to see how we are morally responsible for her. In my opinion she certainly lost that right when she made the choices she made.

If you disagree that's fine. This place is all about opinions.
The opinion that everyone who is happy with her citizenship being revoked is either racist or morally questionable is both wrong and equally as enraging as anything I do.


There isn’t much debate about the legal side of things. The Home Office has lost these cases before and Bangladesh have confirmed she doesn’t have citizenship.

Morally? I’d say it was morally wrong to try and palm her off onto Bangladesh or to force Syria to keep her in a refugee camp taking resources from innocent refugees.

Very few people want her back in the UK, but we don’t really have a choice. Unless we ignore international law, which with all the mistrust following Brexit probably isn’t a good course to take.

User avatar
<]:^D
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by <]:^D » Thu Feb 21, 2019 5:41 pm

its morally questionable when you are suggesting that people can and (should?) lose basic human rights
you could of course argue that citizenship isnt a basic human right but instead you went right for the 'she doesnt deserve that right anymore' which is definitely a bit more of a questionable judgement

User avatar
Denster
Member
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Denster » Thu Feb 21, 2019 5:46 pm

I said she lost her right to British citizenship. Not her human rights.

User avatar
<]:^D
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by <]:^D » Thu Feb 21, 2019 5:48 pm

ok now we're getting somewhere - so you dont think citizenship should be a human right?

User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Moggy » Thu Feb 21, 2019 5:49 pm

Denster wrote:I said she lost her right to British citizenship. Not her human rights.


The right to a nationality is a fundamental human right.

https://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Pages/Nationality.aspx

User avatar
Denster
Member
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Denster » Thu Feb 21, 2019 5:59 pm

<]:^D wrote:ok now we're getting somewhere - so you dont think citizenship should be a human right?

I think if you leave the country of your birth to join a terrorist state then you forfeit that right to remain a citizen. If that means I'm for forfeiting a human right in this circumstance then yes -
I'm happy to say that you should forfeit that human right in these circumstances.

User avatar
<]:^D
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by <]:^D » Thu Feb 21, 2019 6:02 pm

so, morally questionable then :lol:

User avatar
Cuttooth
Emeritus
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Cuttooth » Thu Feb 21, 2019 6:05 pm

Denster wrote:
<]:^D wrote:ok now we're getting somewhere - so you dont think citizenship should be a human right?

I think if you leave the country of your birth to join a terrorist state then you forfeit that right to remain a citizen. If that means I'm for forfeiting a human right in this circumstance then yes -
I'm happy to say that you should forfeit that human right in these circumstances.

Do you think it's OK that this only applies to people who might hold dual citizenship, which is disproportionately immigrants and the children of immigrants?

User avatar
Denster
Member
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Denster » Thu Feb 21, 2019 6:13 pm

I'm ok if it only applies to people who join terrorist states.

User avatar
Denster
Member
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Denster » Thu Feb 21, 2019 6:15 pm

<]:^D wrote:so, morally questionable then :lol:

In the eyes of some on here. Certainly.

User avatar
<]:^D
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by <]:^D » Thu Feb 21, 2019 6:20 pm

do you not think that if there are such a thing as human rights, that they should be inalienable (1) and that states could find other ways, such as criminal trial to pass judgement on actions they think are illegal (2)?

User avatar
Denster
Member
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Denster » Thu Feb 21, 2019 6:21 pm

In this instance. No.

User avatar
<]:^D
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by <]:^D » Thu Feb 21, 2019 6:22 pm

Denster wrote:I'm ok if it only applies to people who join terrorist states.

of course in this case ISIS are unquestionably terrorists, but should for example, Spain take away Spanish citizenship from the Catalan politician separatists who held the 'illegal' election?

User avatar
<]:^D
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by <]:^D » Thu Feb 21, 2019 6:23 pm

Denster wrote:In this instance. No.

thats what people find morally questionable. human rights are meant to protect the individual from the capricious actions of nation states. if you say that those rights are subject to the whims of those states then that is very worrying to some people.

User avatar
Tafdolphin
RETURN POLICY ABUSER
RETURN POLICY ABUSER
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Tafdolphin » Thu Feb 21, 2019 7:09 pm

<]:^D wrote:
Denster wrote:In this instance. No.

thats what people find morally questionable. human rights are meant to protect the individual from the capricious actions of nation states. if you say that those rights are subject to the whims of those states then that is very worrying to some people.


Exactly. To revoke human rights is illegal no matter what that person has done. I hate to go all Godwin's Law here but the Nuremburg trials happened for a reason: those on the right side of history cannot reduced themselves to the level of those on the side of, for want of a better word, evil by aping their actions.

I don't think there's any moral ambiguity here at all.

---------------------------
Games wot I worked on:
Night Call: Out now!
Rip Them Off: Out now!
Chinatown Detective Agency: 2021!
EXOGATE Initiative: Early Access Summer 2021
t: @Tafdolphin | Twitch: Tafdolphin
User avatar
Denster
Member
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Denster » Thu Feb 21, 2019 7:16 pm

:lol:

User avatar
Denster
Member
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Denster » Thu Feb 21, 2019 7:17 pm

I thought being tarred with the same brush as racists was bad enough. Now I'm no better than a nazi?

Priceless.

User avatar
Tafdolphin
RETURN POLICY ABUSER
RETURN POLICY ABUSER
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Tafdolphin » Thu Feb 21, 2019 7:20 pm

Wind him up, watch him go.

A person can invoke a subject without drawing a direct comparison to said subject. No-one's called you racist, no-one's called you a nazi yet there you go claiming you're the victim.

You hold views that support an illegal action by the government. Your reasons for supporting this viewpoint are a based on...nothing really. Except your belief that the moral values you hold are indisputable and any deviation should be punished, even if enacting that punishment breaks the law. This is as close to objectively wrong as an opinion can be. You are still allowed to hold it, but you cannot expect not to be criticised for it.

Last edited by Tafdolphin on Thu Feb 21, 2019 7:28 pm, edited 3 times in total.
---------------------------
Games wot I worked on:
Night Call: Out now!
Rip Them Off: Out now!
Chinatown Detective Agency: 2021!
EXOGATE Initiative: Early Access Summer 2021
t: @Tafdolphin | Twitch: Tafdolphin
User avatar
Denster
Member
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Denster » Thu Feb 21, 2019 7:25 pm

Bless.

User avatar
Garth
Emeritus
Joined in 2008
Location: Norn Iron

PostRe: Politics Thread 5
by Garth » Thu Feb 21, 2019 7:36 pm

twitter.com/rosskempsell/status/1098660985638998018



Return to “Stuff”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Gideon, Memento Mori, more heat than light, Rubix, Vermilion, Xeno and 461 guests