[1eyedjack]

UK PM Cameron has come under criticism for describing thousands of immigrants attempting to cross to the UK from Calais as "a swarm".

Your opinions are solicited on a more appropriate collective term.

[kenberg]

I put "swarm" into Google and the top of the list was

"Swarm is the app for keeping up and meeting up with old friends"

But I suppose that the criticism was not that Cameron's use of "swarm" was too friendly.

I guess when I hear "swarm" I expect it to be followed by "of locusts" or something similar. So I understand the criticism. On the other hand, "swarm" suggests to me a large number of unwanted arrivals from somewhere else and, emotions aside, the usage seems about right.

There are people who make their living finding ways to make unpleasant reality seem less bad by clever (and barely decipherable) phrasing. I thought that all politicians had a large squad of such people at their beck and call. Or make that a swarm of such people.

Added: It is my understanding that the land rich but cash poor let their properties to "paying guests" instead of "tenants". Sounds so much better. Maybe the immigrants could be "guests on credit". I'm sure that some inventive phrase will be forthcoming.

[Al_U_Card]

Perhaps a wave or tide would be more appropriate?

Since they are coming from Calais towards the White Cliffs of Dover, perhaps "Reverse Lemmings" would do?

[1eyedjack]

tide implies that it might ebb.

wave? closer maybe. Again there is an implication of temporary. Tsunami might work, but not convinced it would escape similar pc criticism.

[Al_U_Card]

My first impression of "wave" was similar to the wave in arenas where everyone stands up and raises their arms in sequence. This might aptly apply to the type of reception reserved for the incoming horde, n'est-ce pas?

Tsunami would most likely be condemned, as you say. The older version, tidal wave might not?

[Winstonm]

How about "increase", like in, increase of immigrants.

[kenberg]

I suppose the difference between "swarm" and "increase" is in how manageable it is regarded. If I am told that there has been an increase in Norwegian immigration to the US in the last few years I might even welcome it. I certainly would not be asking what can be done to cope with it. Now a swarm of immigrants, Norwegian or otherwise, at least suggests I should sit up and pay attention. Now "massive increase", if accurate, might work for indicating concern without having the negative connotation of "swarm".

I expect that "swarm" reflects his views. The old joke is that a political error occurs when someone actually says what he thinks. He thinks the numbers are large, and he thinks that it's a problem. So he says "swarm". "Increase" does not convey either "large" or "problem".

[1eyedjack]

"Increase" does not express it. It is the absolute size rather than its size relative to some random historical point in time that is the particular point of interest.

[Al_U_Card]

Unless he were to specifically say: "27,000 relative to a historical average of 100..." or some such. That would require some mental acuity, however.

[Trinidad]

1eyedjack, on 2015-August-02, 03:34, said:

UK PM Cameron has come under criticism for describing thousands of immigrants attempting to cross to the UK from Calais as "a swarm".

Your opinions are solicited on a more appropriate collective term.

The terms "lots of" or, if needed, "tons of" seem to convey the emotion that there are many of them without the connotation that we are dealing with animals that should be controlled with pesticides.

Rik

[lamford]

Trinidad, on 2015-August-03, 02:24, said:

The terms "lots of" or, if needed, "tons of" seem to convey the emotion that there are many of them without the connotation that we are dealing with animals that should be controlled with pesticides.
Rik

I agree, Rik. I think the most common use of the collective noun "swarm" in English is for bees and cockroaches, and the use of "swarm" for migrants by David Cameron unfortunately coincided with the government in the UK rescinding the ban on pesticides harmful to bees:

https://home.38degre...-press-release/

[helene_t]

Trinidad, on 2015-August-03, 02:24, said:

The terms "lots of" or, if needed, "tons of" seem to convey the emotion that there are many of them without the connotation that we are dealing with animals that should be controlled with pesticides.

Rik

"Tons of" sounds a bit impolite to me but maybe it is just because English isn't my native language.

"Lots of" would do.

[Al_U_Card]

Or the most PC, "overabundance".

And there is always a plethora or a surfeit to convey a large number and an excess.

Maybe just the KISS "too many" then?

[kenberg]

"Swarm" was an unfortunate word choice, most likely brought on by frustration. This could be acknowledged, and then move on. What really matters is policy, and that's where the frustration comes from. The refugee crisis will not have a happy ending.

Most people believe in helping others, most people believe in watching out for themselves. This sets up a conflict, and when, as with the refugees, the numbers are large and have no end in sight. well, it's a problem.

Neither people nor nations are obligated to give more assistance than they choose to give (yes, I know there are various treaties, such things are routinely circumvented when the need arises). We can hope for a clear statement of intent, implemented honestly and energetically. That already would be more than is often the case.

This is not specifically a UK problem. Large numbers of people are fleeing. Maybe fleeing violence, maybe fleeing hopeless poverty, maybe both, but fleeing. We, all of us, will do what?

To go with a personal analogy: I have mentioned that my parents took in a woman and her two kids after she left her abusive husband. So far so good, but Marie, the mother, took up with a guy, Eddie, and my mother became pretty vocal about what the neighbors thought of Eddie;s visits. Marie thought that it was none of the neighbor's, or my mother's, business. I was about 8 or 9 and not very knowledgeable, but I sided with Marie. Eventually Marie and the kids moved out. The point is that helping people is not as easy as is sometimes advertised. Never mind who was right and who was wrong (I still side with Marie), the best laid plans ....

Anyway, scrap "swarm" and move on. The UK, and everyone else, needs to choose a path and carry it out. We on the sidelines (for now at least) can wish everyone the best.

[lamford]

kenberg, on 2015-August-03, 06:44, said:

"Swarm" was an unfortunate word choice, most likely brought on by frustration.

The suggested collective nouns I have seen include a "mischief of migrants", a "menagerie of migrants", a "mustering of migrants" and a "mutation of migrants"...

[nige1]

Exodus?

[1eyedjack]

"Loads of" might have the advantage of double meaning, since most are embedded within commercial lorry containers

[Al_U_Card]

1eyedjack, on 2015-August-03, 10:22, said:

"Loads of" might have the advantage of double meaning, since most are embedded within commercial lorry containers

Cruel but funny

[MrAce]

Idk in which way he used this term. But they definitely act accordingly in the customs when you try to get in UK. Watch and enjoy it

https://www.youtube....h?v=B6m3XoQvLGQ

[1eyedjack]

MrAce, on 2015-August-03, 15:49, said:

Idk in which way he used this term. But they definitely act accordingly in the customs when you try to get in UK. Watch and enjoy it

https://www.youtube....h?v=B6m3XoQvLGQ

Odd that. BBC Worldwide have instructed YouTube to prevent access to this video to viewers with a UK IP address "on copyright grounds". Yeah, right, like the rest of the world are paying youtube to view it. Not.

Not that it stopped me. I just logged onto Washington DC via my VPN and in the legendary words of Foghorn Leghorn, "Awaaaay you gooooo".

But wtf was the point? The content was completely banal, anyway.