Computers1 min ago
Is It Politically Naive To Racially Profile Voters?
Brand new one to me!
http://
I can sort of understand why the Tories did it and perhaps with the best of intentions, but still...it doesn't seem to have been well thought out.
Your thoughts?
http://
I can sort of understand why the Tories did it and perhaps with the best of intentions, but still...it doesn't seem to have been well thought out.
Your thoughts?
Answers
1 to 8 of 8
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sp1814. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
don't know about that particularly - but it's politically naiive for any party to believe that pandering to minority groups will win them an electoral majority. regardless of any minority classification, most londoners want the same things in their lives, and all parties would do well to ensure their campaign majors on that.
“regardless of any minority classifications, most londoners want the same things in their lives..”
That was certainly not true of large numbers of voters (or at least the people who harvested their postal ballot papers) in the election for the mayor of Tower Hamlets in 2012. They wanted a Muslim mayor, and in particular one Lutfur Rahman, elected at all costs. They had no concern about what most constituents wanted. And some of those costs were indeed considerable, to many of the constituents (who had wasted their time voting in an election that was subsequenquently ruled void) and especially those who chose to challenge the validity of the election risking their own money to do so.
So it will be with the London mayoral election. There are many Muslims in London for whom the draw of Mr Khan, whatever his politics, will be simply that of him being a Muslim. Hopefully there will be no repeat of the wholesale electoral malpractice that took place in Tower Hamlets, but you never know.
Having said that it is somewhat naïve of Mr Goldsmith to target Londoners with “British Indian” names (whatever they might be). Many Indians (including “British” Indians) are not Muslims and his attempt to lure them away from the Muslim candidate (which clearly this strategy is) may backfire.
As an aside I can never understand why there are Muslims in India (or indeed “British Indian” Muslims). Pakistan was created for Indian Muslims in 1947 because the various factions could not get on with one another. It hardly seems fair to partition a country to keep rival factions apart (which seems the only way to resolve differences of this nature) if one of the factions is simply going to re-populate the bit that wasn’t theirs.
That was certainly not true of large numbers of voters (or at least the people who harvested their postal ballot papers) in the election for the mayor of Tower Hamlets in 2012. They wanted a Muslim mayor, and in particular one Lutfur Rahman, elected at all costs. They had no concern about what most constituents wanted. And some of those costs were indeed considerable, to many of the constituents (who had wasted their time voting in an election that was subsequenquently ruled void) and especially those who chose to challenge the validity of the election risking their own money to do so.
So it will be with the London mayoral election. There are many Muslims in London for whom the draw of Mr Khan, whatever his politics, will be simply that of him being a Muslim. Hopefully there will be no repeat of the wholesale electoral malpractice that took place in Tower Hamlets, but you never know.
Having said that it is somewhat naïve of Mr Goldsmith to target Londoners with “British Indian” names (whatever they might be). Many Indians (including “British” Indians) are not Muslims and his attempt to lure them away from the Muslim candidate (which clearly this strategy is) may backfire.
As an aside I can never understand why there are Muslims in India (or indeed “British Indian” Muslims). Pakistan was created for Indian Muslims in 1947 because the various factions could not get on with one another. It hardly seems fair to partition a country to keep rival factions apart (which seems the only way to resolve differences of this nature) if one of the factions is simply going to re-populate the bit that wasn’t theirs.
1 to 8 of 8
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.