主播大秀

"What can be done to reverse that reputation, and to tackle the causes and the consequences of sectarianism, racism and hatred here?"

I can't speak for NI, but here are a few thoughts from my neck of the woods...

I live in a town in England which is apparently racist, thanks to the hatchet job done by the media not too long ago. There was a supposedly racist incident which led to the death of a middle-eastern student, and, of course, the media circus descended on us, 'interviewed' a few youths hanging around outside a nightclub (really intrepid undercover investigative journalism, don't you think?) and then drew the 'inescapable conclusions'. That isolated incident then branded the whole town 'racist'. The BNP have tried to make headway here, but without success (which rather tells us that this town is not really as racist as the media would love to think).

Let's not forget that good news is just downright boring. It does not sell newspapers. It's 'weak and sentimental'. No, what some in the media need, in order to shore up the bottom line, is something wonderfully grim, that will call forth from the masses the appropriate reaction of disgust and self-righteous indignation. The 'adrenalin rush' of seething anger when reading these tabloids is the drug that keeps a lot of people going, I would like to suggest!

So my point is this: perhaps the media should bend over backwards to report on all the good news about a region of the country, and then, and only then, start on the bad news. Then we can make a proper assessment of the social and moral conditions of that community.

That might then help to start to "tackle the causes and consequences of sectarianism, racism and hatred" by putting them into some kind of sane perspective. Oooh - and it may even draw in investors (Dave and Nick will be pleased).

I seldom here the argument made by one contributor that integrated education makes little difference to reducing the problems associated with sectarianism. It seems obvious to me that children who are educated separately from "the other" are more likely to see themselves as different and more likely to see their own values as superior. There are, of course, parents who do not want their children to "mix" with the other but it is encouraging that the Report states:

"Education - in 2009, 62% of people indicated that they would prefer to send their children to mixed religion schools."

It seems that many people in authority are out of step with the wishes of the people.

Never let the facts get in the way of a good story, eh?

This piece slurs NI as the race prejudice capital of europe.

But on what grounds?

In fact it appears this is claimed on the grounds of a 主播大秀 report which reported that BELFAST was the race hate capital of Europe.

Seems a bit like a circular media argument to me. But where is the evidence? Is it hidden somewhere in there?

I also have to ask for a definition of "prejudice".

Nowadays "prejudice" is generally taken to mean anyone who has the temerity to express reservations about a politically correct world view.

In the past year or two it was reported by a supposed Labour whistleblower on front pages that the party had deliberately taken all brakes off immigration in order to fulfill an ideological agenda and rub the oppositions noses in it.

Certainly in NI nobody has the faintest clue as to actual figures for immigration by foriegn nationals. Does that sound like a sensible way to plan health and edcuation, economy etc etc ....or more like an ideological drive?


The point is that this narrative seems to me to be dangerously close to labelling people who believe in immigration control as "prejudiced" which is dangerously conflating two very different things.

Prejudice actually means to pre-judge a person or case without properly taking in all the facts. If you take in all the facts and make an honest conclusion which is not poliitcally correct then you cant by definition be decribed as prejudiced. but you most likely will be.

We dont have to look any further than our ex prime ministers gaffe during the election campaign when he was recorded in private slandering a voter raising moderate questions about immigration.

The question Will asks is;-

"What can be done to reverse that reputation, and to tackle the causes and the consequences of sectarianism, racism and hatred here?"

I feel this question too quickly conflates causes, consequences and definitions of "sectarianism" "racism" and "hatred"?

For example, on this blog it is normally an indisputable given that those who in good grace and conscience hold to traditional biblical values on family and marriage are guilty of "hatred".

The answer to the question posed could in part be in line with LSV's view (Hi Al, hope you are well!). Is "reputation" really a reliable diagnosis of the existence and nature of a problem before we start throwing millions at it? I dont think so.

Or could this in itself betray a media prejudice against Northern Ireland???????????

;-)

Perhaps NI is just such a slippers-comfortable-safe scapegoat for a liberal media to bash that it just can't help itself but magnify NI as a reincarnated demon?

I am reminded of a debate on Sunday Sequence during the furore over Romanian families being attacked in NI.

I recall one expert contributor being wheeled out during a discussion with a senior NIHE person, and the expert in question expertly made this point using comparative facts and figures from outside NI.

It seemed to confound the presenter and present an embarassing angle on the story which was obviously the opposite of what had been expected / planned. Basically he argued that NI was no different to anywhere else in the UK, if not better.

sincerely

OT

PS Just in case i am taken for a bnp supporter I had lunch with my chinese friend and his NI wife today and am currently completing forms to help an eastern european friend remain in the country. But I find myself always begrudingly thinking in the long run it is better to be loyal to truth over ideology.

OT,

Maybe this research might help :

The link to the full research is at the bottom of the page but I cannot link to pdf files.

OT:

Your avowed commitment to truth is commendable. A pity, then, that the rest of your post contradicts it. If you did a little research and read the actual CSI document instead of being blinded by your anti-主播大秀 鈥榠deology鈥�, you would discover that it is not just the 主播大秀 that has 鈥榠nvented鈥� this charge. Let鈥檚 take the past decade.

1 Connolly, P. and Keenan, M. (2000) carried out a study on ethnic minority experiences of education, training and employment in NI. Their key findings included the fact that racial harassment was a common experience for ethnic minority children in NI schools.

2. In 2000 the University of Ulster published a report based on a survey of 1250 people. It found 鈥榮ignificant levels鈥� of racist prejudice in NI (reported not just by the 主播大秀 but also, for example, in the 鈥楧aily Mail鈥�).

3. A 主播大秀 investigation in 2003 found that ethnic minorities in NI were more than twice as likely to face a a racist attack than those in England and Wales.

4. Also in 2003, Joan Harbison (Chief Commissioner of the Equality Commission) reported that "the incidence of racist attacks in Northern Ireland is higher - at 16.4 per 1000 of the population - than in England and Wales, where attacks are 12.6 per 1000" (as reported in the 鈥楤elfast Telegraph鈥�, 21 March 2003).

5. In 2004, after a number of incidents, the 鈥楪uardian鈥� reported that 鈥淣orthern Ireland, which is 99% white, is fast becoming the race hatred capital of Europe鈥� (鈥楾he Guardian鈥�, 10th January 2004).

5. In a 2006 report the NI Council for Ethnic Minorities called NI 鈥榯he race hate capital of Europe鈥�.

6. In 2009, 61% of respondents to the Northern Ireland Life and Times survey believe that there is more racial prejudice than there was 5 years ago and 51% of people believe that people from a minority ethnic community are less respected than they once were. This point is stated explicitly in the CSI document itself (7.11- p47).

7. Also in the document (4.3 -p26) is stated that 鈥淚n 2007, 24% of young people indicated they were worried about being assaulted due to their religion, while 13% were worried that they would be attacked due to their race or skin colour. In 2007, 10% of young people had been the victims of name-calling or harassment because of their religion.

8. Also on the document, (6.10 - p39, 鈥渢he latest PSNI Statistical Report on Hate Incidents and Crimes shows that during 2009/10 the number of sectarian incidents increased by 245 (an increase of 15.4%) and racist
incidents by 48 (an increase of 4.8%) in comparison to 2008/09鈥�.

So don't blame it all on the 主播大秀.

Hi Brian

We all know I never suggested for a second that there is not real racism in NI - of course there is. it would appear that it has cost at least some people their lives.

So citing numerous sources to prove this either shows a poor effort in trying to understand my point or a deliberate attempt to misrepresent me.

What I asked for was for someone to show me where any of the links William gave actually make a serious evidential case that NI is "the prejudice capital of western europe".

The first link that William gives to support this label for NI refers for its only apparent authority on this point to a 主播大秀 online article which does not even pretend to cite any evidence.

The CSI document itself appears to make no such ref to racism in NI in a European context. Could you either show me where it does make such an argument please Brian or apologise for accusing me of not reading it?

It still appears to me therefore that the thread as actually written has been founded on some very lazy journalism.

I am not suggesting for a second that NI is not the prejudice capital of western Europe. It may well be. But it just didnt cite evidence to prove it.

Two of your nine sources purport to support the argument against NI, 5 and (!) 5. I have not the time or interest to investigate their integrity. They may be very convincing.

But that was never my point.

My point always was that it *appears* to me to be clear evidence of shoddy journalism to assert that NI is the prejudice capital of NI without referring to evidence to support this.

Whether this is the case or not, I reaffirm my argument that this form of journalism, regardless of the subject, smacks of prejudice because the facts presented did not substantiate the introductory argument.

Maybe the journalist was aware of good reasearch which proves his point, perhaps the same work you cite Brian. fine. But he undermines his case by referring to irrelevant research to bolster his case. It smacks of lazy prejudice, but by all means I would give way to the author to have a right to reply here on the blog. Only he can truly present his side of the argument. if I have to apologise I wont hesitate.

It is one thing for a journalist to present apparently lazy work.

However, it is another thing again for a high profile school teacher to defend it without qualification Brian.

However, I thought the most interesting thing on this thread was the conclusion to the Ark report which William cited as proving that NI was the prejudice capital of western Europe.

IN fact its conclusion strongly challenges the assertion that NI is "the prejudice capital of western europe".


It reads;-

"....However, it may be too simplistic
to say that Belfast is the 鈥榬ace hate capital
of Europe鈥� or that Northern Ireland is
more racist.

"This might be the case, but
it is also possible that the change has not
been in levels of racial prejudice, but in
what people mean by racial prejudice.

"This is not to deny the reality of violent attacks
against minority ethnic communities in
Northern Ireland today, but to say that we
need a better understanding of the nature
of racial prejudice and its relationship to
racist attacks.

"There is a lot of data in the
2005 survey that we have not been able
to report in the short space available
here. These data will allow further analysis
to probe the intricacies of racial prejudice
in Northern Ireland in more detail...."


Quite so.

OT

OT:

No, the fact is that you twisted what William actually wrote. You wrote (post 3) : "This piece slurs NI as the race prejudice capital of Europe". What William was referring to was a reputation: 鈥淪ome recent studies have even labelled Northern Ireland the prejudice capital of Western Europe鈥�. His reference to the Ark report was not to prove this claim as you say (鈥渞eport which William cited as proving that NI was the prejudice capital of western Europe鈥�) but merely to give a source for this claim (it appears in para one of the Ark report). So you are misrepresenting what William actually wrote.

Now, the label has clearly been stuck on NI and it isn鈥檛 just the 主播大秀 that reported it, as you claim
(鈥渋t appears this is claimed on the grounds of a 主播大秀 report which reported that BELFAST was the race hate capital of Europe鈥�). So, you are being unfair both to William and to the 主播大秀.

In fact, there are scores of media references to NI in this light, and I only gave a small sample. Check the internet. I quoted the Council for Ethnic Minorities, the 鈥楧aily Mail鈥� and the 鈥楪uardian鈥� as well as the 主播大秀 (the phrase 鈥榬ace hate capital of Europe鈥� seems first to have been used by a Guardian journalist, not by the 主播大秀). You鈥檒l find lots of others.

Is this reputation deserved? That鈥檚 a different question. I certainly gave you evidence that:

1. Racist attacks are higher in NI than in England and Wales.
2. Ethnic minorities are twice as likely to face racist attacks as in England and Wales.
2. Racial harassment is a 鈥榗ommon experience鈥� in NI.
3. There are 鈥榮ignificant levels鈥� of racial prejudice in NI.

1 and 2 clearly indicate that is the race hate capital of England, Wales and Northern Ireland. As for the whole of Europe, maybe you could cite some concrete evidence (as opposed to waffle) that race hatred in higher in some other European country. But then of course you demand an evidential rigour in secular matters that you do not yourself apply to your own religious beliefs.

There is also no doubt that race hatred has been on the increase in NI in recent years. In 1996 there were 41 racially motivated crimes; by 2008 there were nearly a thousand. So, whether or nor NI is 鈥榯he race hate capital of Europe鈥�, there is certainly a lot of race hate about in our great wee province.

well Brian

I commend your forthright apology for slamming me for not reading CSI; and your admission that it does not mention a European context as you inferred.

it takes a big man to admit they could be wrong before challenging an opponent Brian. it takes a much bigger man to confirm that they were.

I am glad we have reached agreement that the supposed reputation of NI on this matter is certainly open to question.

The study William cited did not actually label NI as the prejudice capital of Europe.

It said the 主播大秀 had reported that it was. the 主播大秀 report offered no evidence to substantiate it. the Ark report then concluded by saying the label may be too simplistic and that further work had to be done.

it is a fine example of a circular media argument you present Brian. sorry but I am not impressed with mere name dropping the 主播大秀, Guardian or Daily Mail to support an argument, which is what you have done.

either you dont understand the value of evidence or you think that I dont Brian. some of the other studies you mentioned initially seemed to havce more gravitas ie 5 and (!) 5.

the ad hominem about my faith is a red herring; a personal attack that bears no relevance to the topic.

it seems to be an acknowledgement that you have lost the debate Brian.

OT

OT:

You say: 鈥淚 commend your forthright apology for slamming me for not reading CSI; and your admission that it does not mention a European context as you inferred鈥�.

I made no such apology and no such inference.

You say: 鈥淚 am glad we have reached agreement that the supposed reputation of NI on this matter is certainly open to question鈥�.

While the claim that NI is 鈥榯he race hate capital of Europe鈥� is open to debate, there is no argument about the relatively high level of race hatred in the province. Do you agree or not?

You say: 鈥淭he study William cited did not actually label NI as the prejudice capital of Europe鈥�.

I didn鈥檛 say that it did, and neither did William. Indeed, he cited it! This an irrelevant red herring designed to distract from your misrepresentation.

You say: 鈥淚t said the 主播大秀 had reported that it was. The 主播大秀 report offered no evidence to substantiate it. the Ark report then concluded by saying the label may be too simplistic and that further work had to be done鈥�.

The Ark report stated that 鈥榤edia reports have dubbed....鈥� and then referred to the 主播大秀 in brackets, but any reasonable reader of this would interpret it to to mean that this is only one example: 鈥榤edia鈥� is plural, after all.

You say: 鈥渋t is a fine example of a circular media argument you present Brian. sorry but I am not impressed with mere name dropping the 主播大秀, Guardian or Daily Mail to support an argument, which is what you have done鈥�.

This is bilge. You make an accusation against the 主播大秀 (not for the first time) and then want to ignore other sources which say the same thing!

You say: 鈥淓ither you don't understand the value of evidence or you think that I dont Brian. Some of the other studies you mentioned initially seemed to have more gravitas ie 5 and (!) 5.鈥�

At least, I have presented SOME evidence. You have presented absolutely NONE.

You say: 鈥淭he ad hominem about my faith is a red herring; a personal attack that bears no relevance to the topic鈥�.

I am quite entitled to criticise a belief if I think it is wrong or stupid. I don鈥檛 know you personally. I am criticising your argument, or lack of it in this case. From previous posts, it is quite clear to me that you are demanding here a level of proof that you do not seek in relation to your religious belief.

Answer these questions:

1. Do you dispute that the phrase 'race hate capital of Europe' was not invented by the 主播大秀?
2. Do you dispute that it is cited in numerous other sources besides the 主播大秀?
3. Do you dispute that there is a relatively high level of race hatred in NI?

ok Brian

ya got me.

I went and read the guardian and mail reports and none of them actually even try to account for the figures which purport that NI is the hate capital of Europe.

They do take obviously pleasure from tossing the label around, but dont seem too bothered that they dont acutally cite any evidence to support the smear.

I dont have the slightest problem with it being so, if that is actually the case.

I do have a problem with lazy and potentially inaccurate media reports smearing individuals or groups of people.

the only possible source of this actual claim I came across was from a report;-

The Next Stephen Lawrence? - Racist Violence and Criminal Justice in Northern Ireland

Problem is I have not been able to find access to the report online.

so the question remains, does even *this* report show any figures which hint that NI is indeed the hate capital of Europe.

The more I trace your authorities Brian the more sceptical I become.

Could it be one of those urban myths with no actual foundation.

if it does turn out to be the case then it could be that northern ireland is the innocent hate crime scapegoat of european media.

Name dropping media outlets is not evidence Brian.

OT

yesss. must obey. must answer brians questions. yes masterrr.

im not challenging any of the 3 points you raised.

BUT PLEASE OH PLEASE WILL SOMEONE SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE THAT NI IS THE HATE CAPITAL OF EUROPE!!!!

OT:

You have made no attempt to address any of my three questions. To repeat one: do you accept that there is a relatively level of race hatred in NI? And if so, what can be done about it?

As for 'lazy' reports, they are as bad as 'lazy' posts which make charges without any supporting evidence.

It is patently obvious that you are more concerned to 'smear' (to use your own word) William and the 'liberal' 主播大秀 than to think about the CSI report which is the subject of the thread. I shall come back to that actual report in my next posting.

'Name dropping media outlets'? But you started it by name dropping the 主播大秀!!! Not once, but several times!!!
It is entirely logical to cite others to counter your implication that 'the race hate capital slur' is a 主播大秀 invention? In other words, you don't like seeing the proof that you are talking nonsense presented before your very eyes. Hard cheese!

I return to my basic point. I have cited statistics, reports, surveys, academic and government studies to indicate that there is a high level of race hatred in Northern Ireland. You have cited precisely NOTHING to support any alternative view. Actually, what IS your view on this matter???

Brian, guess what. the reason I challenged the lazy 主播大秀 journalism above was because I read it here and it gave me the opporunity to reply.

since you pointed out the same mistake by the guardian and daily mail i have been more than happy to tar them all with the same brush. They are all equally guilty of the same lazy slipshod journalism, based on the three reports we are looking at.

THE POINT IS BRIAN ALL THESE MEDIA OUTLETS ARE THROWING AROUND SMEARS THAT NI IS THE HATE CAPITAL OF EUROPE WITHOUT ACTUALLY CITING ANY EVIDENCE TO SUPORT THIS.

Just for the record.

1) Yes.
2) No.
3) No I will not dispute the "relatively high" level.

Now please answer my question.

WHERE IS THE ACTUAL EVIDENCE THAT NI IS THE HATE CAPITAL OF EUROPE?

Please can you actually show me the evidence that it is way out in front in Europe?

OT

just read your post again Brian

more misdirection.

in post 6 I made clear my position on racism in NI. it exists. its dangerous. it should be tackled. I also mentioned my active support for a foreign national wishing to remain in NI. All the churches I have ever attended have been multiracial and held the racial equality of all.

NOW. WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE THAT NI IS THE HATE CAPITAL OF EUROPE BRIAN?

You named dropped the Guardian and Daily Mail to bolster the 主播大秀 use of this smear. But none of them cite any actual evidence for the European award. More misdirection Brian.

ref the CSI report you said;-

"If you did a little research and read the actual CSI document instead of being blinded by your anti-主播大秀 鈥榠deology鈥�, you would discover that it is not just the 主播大秀 that has 鈥榠nvented鈥� this charge."

But of course you cant accept now that you said this and that the CSI makes no such mention of such a charge against NI as topping the European league.

Not very impressive Brian.

What evidence is there that NI tops the European league for "hate" Brian?

I expect you to painfully avoid having to deal with your mistake and instead now to go on and give your opinion on a range of other issues.

Fair enough except you have just filed half a dozen posts arguing that NI does top the European league and can't now justify it.

Lazy journalism (主播大秀, G & DM), Lazy defence of lazy journalism. Lazy defence of lazy defence of lazy journalism.


Showing your quality here Brian.

OT

PS just in case you try an attack on another flank, i certainly support the aim of the CSI document. I'm just wary of hastily put together political horse traded plans which will cost the tax payer dearly and have not been well thought through. Im not making that claim about CSI; I am making it about plenty of other govt programs though. Thus it is in everyone's interest to ensure that diagnoses of problems are accurate in order to ensure that the solutions are relevant.

OT:

You keep asking: "where is the actual evidence that NI is the race hate capital of Europe"? There is no precise evidence of this, as far as I know. But neither I nor William nor the 主播大秀 asserted it as a fact. It is however a widespread perception in the UK.

If you agree that:

1. There is a relatively high level of race hatred in NI and certainly higher than in England and Wales
2. It has risen in recent years (93 racist incidents in 1998 and 990 incidents in 2008);

then you are saying that NI is certainly ONE OF the race hate capitals of Europe. It would be difficult to prove which country was the most racist because there is a problem of definition and the hatred may or may not manifest itself in action in a given period. But there is certainly a widespread PERCEPTION in the UK that NI holds this honour. Quite possibly, you might find that there is a similar perception in Denmark about that country or Spain about it, and so on. The difference, though, is that they are politically single countries whereas NI is a region within the UK and from the actual figures definitely appears to be the most racist region. This in itself is a cause for concern.

So, you shouldn鈥檛 be hung up on a phrase. The situation is not good and needs to be improved: that is the important point.

Well Brian

I sincerely applaud you for conceding the point.

And I agree racism needs to be tackled, as I always did.

Sorry for being brusque. Non-verbal communication not possible here and I am sure we could be much more congenial in person.

But you would still be wrong of course.

;-)

OT

sorry, seriously one last point.

I am not just hung up on a phrase.

If we are sloppy in quantifying and defining a problem, how can you be sure you really have a problem? and how can you be sure you are deploying approprioate resources and the correct strategy to deal with it?

Rhetorical question.

good night.

OT

Ignorance, fear, lovelessness and the 'them and us' that permeates so much of society/culture/religion all contribute to racism/hate/homophobia etc. The desire to label people as this or that - Protestant, Catholic, Christian, Polish, Indian, Irish etc contributes to and perpetuates the 'them and us'. There is no 'them and us' - there is just us. One humanity. Rather than labelling people with false identifiers it would be preferable to use the common denominator that we are all first and foremost human beings. All made the same way, all 'work' the same way - in terms of having mind/body/heart/spirit/soul (and if you don't like spirit and soul just stick with the other 3 - point is the same). All human beings desire to love and be loved - even those who seem the furthest from it. The hatred that is projected onto others reflects the hatred one has for oneself - as within so without. So it is true that people do love their neighbours as themselves - problem is they hate themselves and do not love themselves and probably do not even like themselves never mind love. This is then projected onto all others. As I have said before many of the traditional and fundamentalist religious teachings in this country perpetuate the lack of self love by calling people sinners and telling them they are unworthy/bad/fallen etc. This feeds the self hatred and self-loathing that is projected onto others. Of course there is more to it than that including upbringing/loveless environments/abuse etc.(the root being lovelessness). However, it is impossible to hate another if one is truly self-loving. So as for the solution - teach children to be self-caring, self-nurturing, self-respecting and in the ways of love - not just with words but by example and demonstration, stop labelling people as this or that and educate that we are all human beings - one humanity, all equal, all worthy, if it was possible I would love to stop churches telling people week after week that they are sinners and all that goes with that and instead tell them that they are love and because they are love it is good/healthy to be self loving/caring/nurturing - yes that would be a great day! I can dream! :-) (then they can all go along to 'Sinners Anonymous' to share how being told they were and believing they were a sinner caused havoc in their life.)

OT:

Add these to your tally of lazy journalists (there are lots more).


Daily Mirror: 27th January 2004: 鈥淣I IS RACE HATE CAPITAL OF EUROPE鈥�.

Indymedia Ireland, 3rd March 2005: 鈥淏elfast - Now The Most Racist City In The World According To Der Spiegel鈥�

Irish Times, 27th June 2006: 鈥淎 conference on racism in Belfast yesterday noted how leading European publications had described Northern Ireland as the "race hate capital of Europe". Five, and possibly, six suspected racist attacks over the weekend and high PSNI statistics for racist incidents in the North indicated that the indictment may be justified鈥�.

Sky News 10th July 2009: 鈥淭he attacks on the homes of the Roma people in the mainly Protestant Village area of Belfast led to claims that Northern Ireland was the race-hate capital of Europe鈥�.

Now, I NEVER NEVER NEVER stated that NI tops a European league table of race hate. Neither did the 主播大秀 nor William Crawley. It was you who twisted the post to suggest that William and the 主播大秀 did. And now you are throwing me in as well. Man, your logic really is priceless, as others have pointed out on numerous occasions.

But let's be clear. You accept that there is racism in Northern Ireland. You even accept that there is a 'reasonably high level'. Do you also accept that it is ONE OF THE WORST AREAS in Europe for race hatred? If you do, then you are quibbling. Why? Why does it matter greatly whether NI is the race hate capital of Europe or one of the race hate capitals of Europe? Perhaps you could explain that.

Whether it's the worst area, or one of the worst, is largely immaterial. It's bad, man, bad, and something needs to be done about it. We're agreed on that at least.

Eunice:

Thank you for directing me to the CSI paper itself. It is good on aspirations but weak on specific policies. Yes, there are themes for action, such as 鈥榙eveloping shared space鈥�. But how? Just a few initial thoughts:

1. If the two main parties fully agree with the fine sentiments in this document, then they should set an example themselves by trying to transcend their tribal politics and instead represent the interests of the whole community.

2. Integrated schools would seem to be an obvious policy here. But the governmernt seems reluctant to tackle this head on. Still only 5% of pupils attend integrated schools.

3. The sectarian divide should be fully addressed in schools. This means that Protestant and Catholic children should be taught what it is that supposedly divides them. Why are they perceived, rightly or wrongly, to be so different? Why is there so much hatred between them? As you imply, they might actually discover that the differences are more apparent than real and that they have been fighting over shadows. As you say, perhaps they will discover there is just us, a common humanity.

4. RE, which is basically taught in sectarian terms, should be replaced by Philosophy, which would include religious and other world views.

Brian

William said: "Some recent studies have even labelled Northern Ireland the prejudice capital of Western Europe."

The Ark report so cited said: "media reports have dubbed Belfast the 鈥榬ace hate capital of Europe鈥� (主播大秀 News Online, 2004)."

That 主播大秀 report never cited any evidence. THe Ark report said the smear against NI may be "too simplistic" and further work was needed.


In post 6 Brian said:

"Your avowed commitment to truth is commendable. A pity, then, that the rest of your post contradicts it. If you did a little research and read the actual CSI document instead of being blinded by your anti-主播大秀 鈥榠deology鈥�, you would discover that it is not just the 主播大秀 that has 鈥榠nvented鈥� this charge. Let鈥檚 take the past decade."

Brian then cited 10 sources to bolster his position.

In Post 15 Brian said: "You keep asking: "where is the actual evidence that NI is the race hate capital of Europe"? There is no precise evidence of this, as far as I know. But neither I nor William nor the 主播大秀 asserted it as a fact."


Brian

In law if you repeat defamation against an individual or group you are equally liable for damages as the person who originates the smear.

You went out of your way to bolster the claim for several posts until you finally shouted uncle.

In terms of informing, educating and entertaining, I certainly dont think that lazy repetition of an unsubstantiated smear against a country sits comfortably with the 主播大秀 charter.

Makes sexy copy but poor journalism imo.

In fact, until someone actually provides the evidence to support the claim, I unapologetically accuse every media outlet that carried the smear as charged with prejudice and hatred against NI.

Because if I made such a derogatory stereotypical claim against any minority group in NI, that is exactly what I would be buried under.

The charge is lazy liberal hatred and prejudice against NI without any interest in checking the facts. plain and simple.

OT

Brian: I haven't finished the CSI doc myself yet but from what I have read I had the same impression as you - good on aspirations and fine words but not so much on the implementation.

1)I totally agree with you that the 'leaders' need to lead by example - not just in politics but in every sphere of their life. I also feel we each have a personal responsibility to do likewise in all our interactions and communications and day to day living. It is not just up to the leaders - but there is no point in them producing such a document and then acting in an otherwise way: it has no integrity and will not work.

2) I also agree re schools and integration. Someone commented that they thought it was good that 62% of people were in favour of integrated schools - (I might not have that exact but something like that) - whereas I thought that was low!

3) and 4) agree - as well as looking at the differences in the religions they could look at the commonalities - the areas where different language is used to express the same concept/idea etc. At heart - each of them present an all loving God. For me, teaching them in the universal ways of love and understanding and knowing who they are would be a good replacement for religion as it is today - eg the religion of love devoid of bunkum/dogma/doctrine but with practical steps that empower them.

People are people wherever you are, wherever you go - the labels that we acquire through country of birth, religion etc are not who we are - we acquire those labels, they are not part of our inherent make up. The more we see the human being instead of the labels the better in my view. Even on here - people get categorised into the atheists, the christians, the agnostics, the humanists, the fruitcakes etc - all bunkum to use Natman's word. None of us are those things inherently - we were not born atheists/agnostics etc. Strip it all back and address the real human being in front of our eyes.

Eunice:

I totally concur. When the kids discover the reasons why, to coin a phrase on a 主播大秀 site, Northern Ireland is the sectarian hate capital of Europe, they will realise that it is all much ado about nothing. When it dawns on them that Christianity is about love, tolerance and cooperation in this world or it is about nothing, then they will overthrow their prejudices and live and live.

The racism we have been discussing (and it IS very high here, despite OT's smokescreen to hide the fact) is a legacy of sectarianism, in which anyone who appears slightly different is suspect. When the children realise that the supposed differences are often about daft dogmas and irrelevant rituals, then they will ask themselves: "what's this quarrel really all about, Alfie (he is the Dingles' dog)?

Of course, prejudice is also fed by distance and cured by intimacy, which is why integrated schools are ESSENTIAL.

The NT subsumes every theory about creation and origins, there is no room for gaps;-

I Colossians;-

15[Now] He is the [o]exact likeness of the unseen God [the visible representation of the invisible]; He is the Firstborn of all creation.

16For it was in Him that all things were created, in heaven and on earth, things seen and things unseen, whether thrones, dominions, rulers, or authorities; all things were created and exist through Him [by His service, intervention] and in and for Him.

17And He Himself existed before all things, and in Him all things consist (cohere, are held together).(A)

apologies - wrong thread!

OT,

Did you manage to look at the research I linked to in my earlier post, it certainly provides evidence that NI is indeed well up there in the bigotry stakes.

Dave:

You are wasting your breath. In Mark's 'traditionalist' thinking, Professor Vani Borooah is obviously a bleeding heart liberal in cahoots with the liberals in the 主播大秀 and the Guardian. Research! You must be joking. 鈥淣orthern Ireland heads Western Bigotry Index鈥�?? This sensationalist heading indicates more 'lazy journalism' cunningly disguised as research, don't you know?

There is no question that in terms of bigotry, homophobia and race hatred, NI ranks pretty high. OT (Mark) dances on the head of a pin to distract from the real issue and the imperative of rectifying it.

@Dave

I've just read the study and it is only examining a limited subset of data You can find the survey that the study is based on here:

The data used is from a 1999 survey so it may be a little out of date.

Here's the definition of a bigot:

'The information on prejudice is derived from individual responses to the following question: 鈥淲ould you like to have persons from this group as your neighbours?鈥� A negative answer is taken to mean that the respondent is prejudiced against members of this group. Because the basis for this prejudice is socio-cultural, derived from having someone as a neighbour rather than, say, a colleague at work, we refer to it as 鈥渂igotry鈥�.' (pp 3-4)

One interesting conclusion they draw is that 'persons for whom religion was important were not likely to be more bigoted (or strongly bigoted) than persons who attached less importance to religion' (page 19)

The area where Northern Ireland stands out in the bigotry stakes (according to the report) is homosexuality. Looking at the actual survey data, homosexual bigotry is higher among religious practitioners (anyone attending church at least once a month), but within that group, bigotry decreases as church attendance increases in regularity. One possibility there is that people with a degree of religiosity latch on to moral commandments and condemn homosexuals on the basis of law while those who more regularly attend may have more of a conviction regarding grace, leading to less moral judgementalism. Just a theory.

Some of the data for other groups of people is quite interesting. For instance if you take down the results for bigotry against people of a different race and cross reference with a respondent's opinion of whether they are a 'Religious Person', you find that 10.3% of religious people are racist, 11.8% of not religious people and a whopping 27% of convinced atheists. It's a similar story for bigotry against Muslims, Jews, immigrants, but much closer for bigotry against homosexuals: 36.9% religious, 34.1% non-religious, 30.2% atheists.

I haven't had time yet to see if there are any correlating factors which explain why atheists appear to be so bigoted. It could be that a proportionally larger group of them may have a worse education for instance.

Brian: I agree completely. Religion and Nationalism are responsible for creating and promoting separation amongst humanity - not just here but across the world. This feeds the 'them and us' and subsequent acts of terror/evil/hate etc. These are false pillars (religion/nationalism) - the geographic lines on the map are man-made - none present on the land itself. Integrated schools with informed education on these matters could go far to resolve the narrow minded bigotry and hatred that exists here.

According to the study Dave posted, Greece and Italy and the only countries arguably more bigoted that Northern Ireland, with France up there on some metrics, so I've taken those countries, along with our nearest neighbours (Great Britain and Ireland) and taken a look at how bigoted religious people, non-religious people and convinced atheists are in each country towards four different groups: people of a different race, Muslims, immigrants and homosexuals.

In France and Greece, religious people are the most bigoted and atheists the least. Ireland doesn't seem to have any bigoted atheists. Religious people in Ireland are the most bigoted towards Muslims and homosexuals, but the least with regards to those of a different race and immigrants. In Italy, the non-religious are the least bigoted. Religious people are the most bigoted towards Muslims and homosexuals; convinced atheists towards people or another race and immigrants. In Great Britain the non-religious are the most bigoted while atheists are the least bigoted.

In Northern Ireland for people of a different race, Muslims and immigrants, religious people are the least bigoted and atheists the most whereas for for homosexuals it is the other way around.

On the whole, homosexuals are subject to the most bigotry, almost twice as much as other groups.

Comparing religious people in Northern Ireland with their counterparts elsewhere (and against the average for all people), they are less bigoted against people of a different race and Muslims, slightly more bigoted against immigrants and significantly ore bigoted against homosexuals.

Comparing non-religious people, they are more bigoted than their counter-parts elsewhere against every group, though less than the average bigotry for all groups against everyone except immigrants where they are fractionally more bigoted.

Comparing atheists, they are more bigoted than their counterparts elsewhere against every people group by a very significant amount and similarly more bigoted than the average.

The number of people in Northern Ireland identifying themselves as each group is as follows: 596 religious, 332 non-religious, 28 atheist. The results for atheists are consequently less reliable than those for other groups.

On the basis of the evidence presented by the report, it would seem that the large number of religious people means that any attempt to deal with bigotry will have to address them to a certain extent, but a higher level of bigotry exists within non-religious and atheist groupings. For religious people and atheists, this is a contrast to the rest of Europe which suggests that Northern Irish religion may have less of a role in encouraging bigotry while Northern Irish atheism encourages it. The 41.3% bigotry level against immigrants displayed by atheists is particularly worrying. Any thoughts on how we can discourage bigotry with atheism? I'm curious about whether people think it's an issue of schooling, upbringing or simply the nature of atheist 'beliefs' for want of a better word (convictions perhaps?).

Jonathan Boyd,

Thanks for the summary, the data may be a little long in the tooth but it does show that there is something concrete to address.

On the subject of atheists I think, as you point out, the low number of respondents in that group tends to make the outcome unreliable. That is not to take away from the fact that I see no reason why atheists would be free from bigotry by the fact of being atheist simply that the error in the percentage is likely to be higher than the other groups.

The low number of people in that group would also point to a significantly lower absolute number of atheist bigots 'in the wild' when you extrapolate the numbers to the population.

The problem however in reaching the bigoted atheist is significant as there is no structure or bonding or community of interest to get to them en mass.

My view overall, for what it is worth, is that the tribal nature of various aspects of life in N. Ireland contribute to our place at or near the top of this table.

Protestant - Catholic
Republican - Loyalist
Unionist - Nationalist
Never the twain shall meet.

Large numbers live separately, school separately, worship separately and even work separately. We are divided on cultural, political and religions lines and there seems to be distrust and even a level of fear of the motivations of the other side. These divisions are all based on thoughts or convictions.

Interestingly if you look at the groups which are at the receiving end of the bigotry, the divisions in the majority group do not appear to have the same impact. eg there is not, and never has been,a Protestant gay scene and a Catholic gay scene, just a gay scene. Perhaps the reason for that is because they band together for practical needs such as physical safety, acceptance, to find partners etc.

I do sense that things are changing with a softening of attitudes and a greater acceptance of difference and diversity. There are still pockets of hate as the hate crime numbers show and the attacks on ethnic minorities and the murder and assault of homosexuals attest to.

I think I might be rambling a bit now so will stop and have a further think around this.

@Dave (31)

Just a quick thought in response to one of your comments.

'The problem however in reaching the bigoted atheist is significant as there is no structure or bonding or community of interest to get to them en mass.'

That's a very good point. The church has an advantageous position in combatting bigotry and there is some indication in the statistics that this does work in the real world. If you compare bigotry levels with frequency of church attendance, it seems to worst for those who go irregularly - around once a month. As attendance increases in frequency, bigotry drops. Those who don't attend church at all, or only on special occasions are generally less bigoted. This suggests that an absence of religion breeds liberal attitudes, a veneer of religiosity breeds bigotry and genuine commitment to religion combats this affect. Where people treat Protestantism/Catholicism as a tribal identity to differentiate themselves from others rather than having a genuine commitment to Christianity, you're therefore going to get bigotry.

I basically agree with your thesis that tribalism is a problem and that atheists are to a certain extent at a disadvantage in combatting it. Where I disagree is what you say about convictions.

The number of people in Northern Ireland identifying themselves as each group is as follows: 596 religious, 332 non-religious, 28 atheist. The results for atheists are consequently less reliable than those for other groups.

It might be useful to examine just how much less reliable before getting too excited.

In poll type data, a sample size of 800 is big enough to give a 95% confidence level of around 3%. Reduce the size to 600 (the religious sample size in this data, more or less) and the confidence level goes to about 4%. Drop it to 330 (the non religious sample) and we're up to around 5.5% and when we get down to those pesky atheists sampled, 28, the confidence level is up to 18.5%. So applying these figures to the racist results for NI, we can be 95% sure that between 6.3% and 14.3% of religious people are racist, between 6.3% and 17.3% of non religius people are racist and between 8.5% and 45.5% of atheists are racists.

Carry on.

@grokesx (33)

I think you've confused confidence level and confidence interval in a few places there e.g. the confidence interval (or margin of error) for a 95% confidence level for a sample of 800 people is +/- 3%. Got very confused initially when it looked like you said the confidence level was increasing with smaller samples.

Also the confidence interval depends on the percentage of the sample who answer yes (or no), so the intervals are actually slightly smaller than you gave, though not so much as to make a meaningful difference to the point your were making e.g. the religious racist interval would really be 2.4% (compared with 4%) and the atheist racist interval would be 16% (compared with 18.5%).

Though I must confess that I haven't done statistics for a while now and just plugged the numbers into the first calculator I found on the web.

Jonathan

Yes, got me intervals and levels mixed up and left the percentages constant - real life was getting in the way :)

err Brian - are you calling me Mark???

I'm a little confused.

That aint my name - dont know where you are getting that from?

sounds like another red herring.

OT