[flagged]
That’s not really a thing anymore.
Just because you don’t agree with his views doesn’t make it “not a good look”.
In fact, the ability to think outside of his cultural bubble and go against the grain is something that makes him great.
But having DHH as a face of your programming language, a language that's supposed to have a "warm community", doesn't really make any sense, and it will obviously drive people away.
Hateful speech is stating: you are from a MENA region therefore you are x negative trait.
Being critical of migration is just being critical of migration, which is allowed. His defence ("suicidal empathy" etc;) comes from the situation in the UK where people are being arrested en-masse for "hate speech" for referencing acts of terror[0].
You can dislike what he says, but hateful carries a more specific meaning (to me, at least).
[0]: https://nypost.com/2025/08/19/world-news/uk-free-speech-stru...
In "As I remember London" he also says that crime increases when there are more brown people.
We should be able to criticise migration without everyone saying it’s racism otherwise you loosen the definition of racism so much that everybody becomes a “racist” eventually and it stops having a sting
You're allowed to criticize immigration, but if you only ever cherry-pick anecdotes about immigrants of a certain color and creed, and also refuse to correct your statement after you're made aware of the actual facts, you're most likely a racist.
DHH is also not criticizing immigration per se, because he's including non-white native brits in his category of undesirable Londoners. You can't deny that that's racism. These are people who grew up as part of the British culture, they just don't have the right skin tone.
[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20251003224438/https://assets.pu...
However, it highlights major data limitations. Ethnicity was often unrecorded or incomplete. Police forces supplied partial details only. The report notes that “the academic literature highlights significant limitations to what can be said about links between ethnicity and this form of offending”.
It also cautions against conclusions due to “data quality problems, the way the samples were selected in studies, and the potential for bias”. A 2025 audit by Baroness Casey confirmed this. Ethnicity went unrecorded for two-thirds of suspects. Better data collection is now mandatory.
While the report leans towards White predominance overall, it acknowledges high-profile cases “have mainly involved men of Pakistani ethnicity”.(also in[0]) It does not rule out over-representation in specific subtypes. This invites careful interpretation rather than dismissal.
On Cherry-Picking Anecdotes and Corrections: Selective stories can mislead. Yet DHH often cites aggregated data from European reports, such as Denmark’s figures on higher crime rates among certain immigrant groups. He praises selective immigration from compatible cultures and commends Denmark’s integration policies. This points to policy focus, not inherent bias.
If presented with the report’s full nuances and unmoved, that warrants critique. Given its caveats and recent calls for improved data, the debate remains open.
On Non-White Native Brits and Racism; Implying Britishness ties to skin tone is wrong. DHH’s remark about “Brits being a minority in their own capital” refers to the “White British” census category, at 37% in London per the 2021 census. This tracks ethnic shifts officially.
Non-White British citizens, many native-born and fully integrated, are undeniably British. If his phrasing suggests otherwise, it needs clarification. His posts emphasise rapid changes from mass immigration, not rejection of integrated individuals. Many non-White Brits voice similar concerns on resources and cohesion, without racism. Criticising policies can be valid if evidence-based and non-dehumanising. Targeting one group without balance risks bias. DHH’s stance seems data-driven on integration, but scrutiny is fair.
Thanks for the source though.
[0]: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...
You even mention this, although for some reason do not comment on how it's clearly racist and misleading.
So I have to conclude you're either waffling, or you're pasting ChatGPT output without parsing what it means. Because if you apply your own logic, you would come to the conclusion that he's using far-right talking points to further far-right, racist views.
edit: I thought I recognized that name, you've replied to me previously with LLM-ish output. You're the weirdo Malmö guy with racist irc chat logs (this you? https://darkscience.net/quotes/#123). I mean granted, their ten years old. Men fan pinsamt ändå. Och med eget namn också, Jan Harasym. Inte vassaste kniven i lådan, va?