London Mayor- 'too many white men'

Post Reply New Topic

http://newobserveronline.com/london-many-white-men/

This shill was only elected because English people are now a minority in their own capital city. If he'd complained about 'too many' of certain other groups of people being in high positions he would be out of a job.

Would be interested to see where you got the stats from as they usually classify British rather English in demographics, not sure I have ever seen stats on English/Scotts/Welsh here tbh. Last census (2011) had majority of London as British, but yeah wouldn't be hugely surprised if English were in the minority there as the British numbers on the census would be heavily split.

The comment is from seven months ago, so hardly qualifies as News or a Current Event.

I think it's completely fair comment to say that 81.25% of a government body coming from a group which represents only 30% of the population is too much. It's not racist at all. London is 60% white and 50% male so why isn't the other 70% being properly represented?

London is not majority non-British or non-English. 64% of the population were born in the UK. It would be very surprising to see Scottish, Welsh or Northern Irish people taking up one in four British people in London.

Sorry yes, I meant "British". I'd imagine the figure is lower now after 5 years.

Why is gender and ethnicity so important? People should be given jobs on merit. As I said, if he'd complained about a different ethnic group being in so many positions in high places he would be jobless. Let's have some consistency?

And sorry yes, I should have checked if it was a recent article. I just came across it.

Just noticed that link is the New Observer. Wtf bro ???? You know what it is famous for and what they try and promote?!

Cherry picking extremists. The New Zealand stuff on their website is laughably slanted to suit their ideas.

Yeah. I wouldn't trust this reporting for a second. If you look at the front page of the linked e-rag, you'll see articles with titles like:

"Jews: Trump's 'Banker Speech' Means Them"

"Paris: 200,000 March Against Homo Marriage"

"World Jewish Congress and Official German Jewry Welcome Nonwhite Invasion"

"Science Confirms: Genes Determine Brain Size" with a picture of African, East Asian, and European skulls in ascending size.

They also sell books like "Folk and Nation: Ethnonationalism Explained" and "Gruesome Harvest: The Allied Attempt to Exterminate Germany After 1945."

You're citing a Nazi publication.

Nope, never really come across it. I'm sure the story is available on other sites.

Hang on, so if they criticized whites that's fine, but anyone else and it's not?

It's on other sites, just seems the mainstream media didn't want to report on it.

http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2016/03/ ... rt-for-lon

If you can't see the difference in how your link and others report it, in both detail and language, and also can't see what's wrong with using Observer Online (even if you haven't heard of it, just look at the other links and headlines surrounding that story! ) then I would rather not get into a conversation with you tbh. We clearly hold very different values.

I can see it, I shouldn't have used the first site, it was lazy of me. The fact is that he said those words. If he was talking about a different ethnic group, the mainstream media would be all over it calling him every name under the sun. These stupid sites just counter what the mainstream does, they're both idiotic.

The Mayor of London, who is English, by the way, did not criticize whites. He noted that the disproportionate representation was likely responsible for the needs of parts of the ridership not being served and said that a more porportional management would correct those service deficiencies.

It's not an US versus THEM race story.

So, here he's saying not that London has too many white men, or even its city government as a whole. But that one specific government department is vastly out of proportion with London's demographics. That's totally fair, especially for something governing as day-to-day a necessity as public transit.

In a multicultural city with many different communities, mostly separated by neighborhood, you'd think a transport board should have a representative for the interests of a large segment of the population. As it stands, predominantly Black or South Asian neighborhoods don't have a representative on the board, which currently only has people who represent White community/neighborhood interests. That's going to make things inefficient for members of non-white communities.


As shown by the actual stats here he's referring to, those other groups don't have disproportionate representation on the transit board. In fact, they have none. So if he were referring to a different ethnic group, he'd be mistaken at best and delusional at worst. The difference is one of power and actual concrete representation.

Again, if he was white and he was talking about another ethnic group being too prominent and powerful, would he get away with it?