Further to an earlier rant, it appears that even objections to new pikey camps by the Police are considered to be racist and ignored in the "planning process".
This is apparently thanks to "guidance" sent to local authorities by that fat pie-and secretary-stuffer John Two Jags Prescott, whereby treating people equally does not lead to fair outcomes, and so special treatment is required for minority groups such as Pikeys. Now, I don't know what force such guidance from a fat porker has in law, but if it is not legally binding why don't the planning departments of local authorities just fucking ignore it?
And why are local councillors not telling them to fucking ignore it and listen to the voters whose will doubtless be marking their cards "goodbye" come the next election?
The Penguin
10 comments:
Its all very well you telling us to ignore the government's insistance that we provide 'traveller' sites but when we do the wretched inspector reverses the ruling. And we stand a chance of paying costs to the appellants!
As this fat ex commnunist, ex shop steward when he was in the merchant navy likes these thieving benfit fiddling bastards so much why doesn't he let them use part of his extensive garden as a site?
Anonymous 1, I agree the rules stink, but you're the folk with the inside track to influence a change in the rules. Make sure your local MP's are left in no doubt that you'll mobilise local opinion to have them slung out unless they support getting some decency and common sense back into the process.
You know, this is a damned good blog with excellent debates in the comments section; in which it has been my pleasure from time to time to deposit my own loving gifts, but...
Epithets like 'pikey', whilst funny to some, do tend to lower the tone of an argument.
I blog with very rude stuff myself sometimes but for reinforcement and morale only - not when I'm trying to persuade people to think differently than already they do.
Your blog. Your freedom of speech.
I don't want to try to constrain you in either. I detest PC as well, but...
You have an excellent argument as usual, and as usual I agree with it, but 'pikey' drags it down and it isn't going to help waverers who'd be open to reason but would shy away from harsh vocabulary.
Just a friendly thought, Penguin.
Oh no not the word Pikey! Gentlemen of the road sounds much better, of course that road leads to the benefit office. Anyone remember the bit in Viz years ago "Thieving gypsy bastards" so very true even with the van from the council with gypsy patronising on it's side?
That lasted one issue because the thieving gypsy bastards protested.
Tell you what pal, you call them what you want and I will call the scum what i want to OK?
NNW, I agree with you that using words that some might find offensive is a very tricky area. However, in my humble opinion, and having several genuine Gypsy friends who are even more offended by being associated with the "Irish Travellers / Tinkers" and "Hippy New Age" lot than is often realised, the overall word Pikey is sort of shorthand. And yes, it carries connotations as do all words with any weight of meaning.
I'm afraid that the travelling community do themselves no favours by their behaviour, which is why they are by and large not welcome.
Just up the road from where I live is a large official site, possibly 40 or so units. On two sides is a country park, one side is farmland, the fourth wooded verge to the road. You have to see the litter flung around to believe it. The local Plod visit in dozens, not alone or in pairs.
I am far from prejudiced - my grandfather was an itinerant agricultural labourer. They did not live like this.
The Penguin
Pikey is the correct word to describe a gypo as they used to travel the turnpikes.
In Sussex we prefer to use the descriptions "thieving fucking pikey"or "pikey bastard.
If Pikeys are travellers why dont they fuck off and travel back to Ireland where they all came from in the first place.
I'm sure Mr Prescott has spare land he wouldn't mind donating to some "traveller friends"...
TRP.
Thanks for your courteous answer and detailed explanation.
And you're right; some 'travellers/tinkers/gypsies', whatever, do themselves no favours by their behaviour. I used to live in a working-class area of my city which had a traveller/gypsy population and there was a lot of trouble up to and including letter bombing within feuds.
On the other hand, a local suburban commuter town outside the city has a well-run gypsies-only site which is pretty nice and not (much) objected to by locals.
On the other hand,[that's three] a local port town has a mixed Irish/'native' traveller area where they are settled into, mostly, garish and trashy, but big houses. Oddly, it's only the poorer ones who live in local caravan sites that are commonly despised by the settled citizens. And boy, are there some dodgy benefit claims! But you get those from the native population,too. Another story.
On the other hand I know of rich, productive, mostly-settled travellers in this county whose rare rebels are making very positive contributions within the local public sector. Now, that's a rarity!
And so on.
No argument: there are two problems here.
One is the scruffy and argumentative ways of some travellers [up to and including armed violence and organised theft]. It should be a law and order issue for the individuals involved, but our 'justice' system is so politicised and corrupt these days, there's no chance - as Anonymous 04:28 points out.
The other is the arrogance of politically-correct (read 'cultural Marxist') 'authorities' who brand any community-based objections as racist.
Remember, in the West a racist is usually someone who has, or is about to, inconvenience the Left in any community, national, or religious argument. This is so they can get on with their social engineering and sometimes moving potential Labour voters into solidly or marginal Tory areas. Very popular move, that. With the Reds.
It's lamentable, unjust, and obviously bent, and that's what you and the other poster are blogging about. I get that and agree.
Hopefully, anyone tempted [but not yet committed to 'our' side in this debate] who comes across your blog will follow the arguments and think we're not so bad, but the Left owns the culture, and to be 'racist' is to have your argument instantly invalidated. that may hold for potential new friends Who know?
Mind you, I do feel that way about anti-Semitism, as you may remember when another Anonymous referred to someone as an ugly Semite.
Ah well, it's your blog and it's a good one to read and to visit, and that was my Saturday afternoon two ha'peth worth.
Sue said...I'm sure Mr Prescott has spare land he wouldn't mind donating to some "traveller friends"..
Ah, in all those safe Labour constituencies with acres of cleared, unfarmable land, I suppose.
Oh, maybe not.
Good point.
Post a Comment