Current Affairs London Protests

[tsubaki]

And people who wear poppies are....?

Mainly the people who support BLM.

After all, its kind of hypocritical to be a fascist and to wear a poppy.

 

[Hickson9]

Do the players support it? Or are they coerced? Are they pressured into kneeling down?

Any player that chooses to remain impartial at kick-off and stand, is just going to face the full wrath of the left wing press and social media mob. It's probably easier for them just to kneel down and submit to social pressure.

Pressured in to supporting racial equality....

 

[peteblue]

Of course I think BLM matters, but the likes of my mum, who’s a pensioner, finds it all a bit frightening and disagrees strongly with smashing stuff up and webbing police officers.

I don’t think she’s in any rush to don her best Stone Island gear and head off to protect some statues in London with Tommy and the boys tbh.

She much rather be at home, feet up on her Parker Knoll, watching Countdown.

Obvious far right thug.......

 

[Hickson9]

And people who wear poppies are....?

Raising money for the Legion. Obviously.

 

[Mr. White]

Pressured in to supporting racial equality....

So, you support pressure that forces people to oppose anti-oppressive behaviour? Do you not see the irony here?

 

[Hickson9]

So, you support pressure that forces people to oppose anti-oppressive behaviour? Do you not see the irony here?

Social pressure governs all of our lives. They haven't got a gun to their heads.

But we are heading towards the tolerance paradox here.

I don't tolerate intolerance.

For example, fascism should be utterly and mercilessly crushed. Otherwise intolerance takes over.

 

[Mr. White]

Social pressure governs all of our lives. They haven't got a gun to their heads.

But we are heading towards the tolerance paradox here.

I don't tolerate intolerance.

For example, fascism should be utterly and mercilessly crushed. Otherwise intolerance takes over.

Social pressure depends on who you are. Social pressure on my Nan is just to turn up to Bingo each week. Social pressure on a 20 year old is to garner as many likes from their 1000's of Tiktok 'friends' as they can, most of whom they don't even know.


And I don't think you understand true Fascism. You don't get to choose to crush it...you get crushed.

 

[Hickson9]

Social pressure depends on who you are. Social pressure on my Nan is just to turn up to Bingo each week. Social pressure on a 20 year old is to garner as many likes from their 1000's of Tiktok 'friends' as they can, most of whom they don't even know.


And I don't think you understand true Fascism. You don't get to choose to crush it...you get crushed.

I understand fascism to a certain degree, as a student of history and of politics. I understand it needs to be constantly challenged and never allowed a platform.

 

[PSB1]

Social pressure depends on who you are. Social pressure on my Nan is just to turn up to Bingo each week. Social pressure on a 20 year old is to garner as many likes from their 1000's of Tiktok 'friends' as they can, most of whom they don't even know.


And I don't think you understand true Fascism. You don't get to choose to crush it...you get crushed.

The enemy is extremist intolerance, I think. Call it fascism or communism ... the people who died under Hitler and Stalin or Franco and Pol Pot died in that white noise of unreasoning bigotry. The direction from which it comes - left or right - is unimportant to me.

 

[Hickson9]

The enemy is extremist intolerance, I think. Call it fascism or communism ... the people who died under Hitler and Stalin or Franco and Pol Pot died in that white noise of unreasoning bigotry. The direction from which it comes - left or right - is unimportant to me.

Well said.

 

[Kenshin]

The enemy is extremist intolerance, I think. Call it fascism or communism ... the people who died under Hitler and Stalin or Franco and Pol Pot died in that white noise of unreasoning bigotry. The direction from which it comes - left or right - is unimportant to me.

Then that enemy is extremely small in this country so makes you wonder why wage a war on it at all?

Perhaps, the enemy isn't as you say, but the enemy is people who choose to hold opposite beliefs. Are holding opposite beliefs a crime now in this day and age?

Now look, in terms of the specific topic in here , a complete opposition to , well not being racist is what is always going to be an issue we need to hope fades in the generations to come.

But , extreme intolerance? That for me I have a sticking point with , how do you define it, how do you measure it.

At what point do you start to blur the lines between hate and simply opinion?

 

[Hickson9]

Then that enemy is extremely small in this country so makes you wonder why wage a war on it at all?

Perhaps, the enemy isn't as you say, but the enemy is people who choose to hold opposite beliefs. Are holding opposite beliefs a crime now in this day and age?

Now look, in terms of the specific topic in here , a complete opposition to , well not being racist is what is always going to be an issue we need to hope fades in the generations to come.

But , extreme intolerance? That for me I have a sticking point with , how do you define it, how do you measure it.

At what point do you start to blur the lines between hate and simply opinion?

That is the intellectual debate.

That free speech should be constrained is obvious.

Where those constraints are and how they are imposed is where the discussion should be.

 

[Kenshin]

That is the intellectual debate.

That free speech should be constrained is obvious.

Where those constraints are and how they are imposed is where the discussion should be.

I disagree , to an extent.

People should be able to voice opinion but I am firmly in the belief that we should rewind 20 years and allow for logical dismissal of opinion.

There are plenty of examples all for other threads but simply out. You are entitled to your opinion , people should be also able to oppose it.

I know this isn't specific to racism for clear reasons but I'm talking generally here. You can do / think that and I should he able to disagree with that view without being attacked and labelled for it as we see today.

So in this example , I (being plural) should be able to hold opposing views on the BLM protests or disagree with parts without then being labelled facist , racist , ignorant , white privilege and whatever else is being handed about.

This is not the case, evident alone on this very site where people who disagree aren't being met with discussion but rather attack. If I (plural) offer an alternative view , that should be considered into the narrative just as much as your (plural) opinion no matter how staunch it may be.

Perhaps this sort of discussion will start to eliminate many issues in this country because we sure as hell are as inclusive and multi cultured as anywhere in the world for any kind of subject.

 

[Hickson9]

I disagree , to an extent.

People should be able to voice opinion but I am firmly in the belief that we should rewind 20 years and allow for logical dismissal of opinion.

There are plenty of examples all for other threads but simply out. You are entitled to your opinion , people should be also able to oppose it.

I know this isn't specific to racism for clear reasons but I'm talking generally here. You can do / think that and I should he able to disagree with that view without being attacked and labelled for it as we see today.

So in this example , I (being plural) should be able to hold opposing views on the BLM protests or disagree with parts without then being labelled facist , racist , ignorant , white privilege and whatever else is being handed about.

This is not the case, evident alone on this very site where people who disagree aren't being met with discussion but rather attack. If I (plural) offer an alternative view , that should be considered into the narrative just as much as your (plural) opinion no matter how staunch it may be.

Perhaps this sort of discussion will start to eliminate many issues in this country because we sure as hell are as inclusive and multi cultured as anywhere in the world for any kind of subject.

I am very much for reasoned debate and differing opinions, within certain bounds of toleration (hence referencing the toleration paradox earlier).

The things that shouldn't be tolerated essentially comes down to intolerance of others and how that manifests itself.

Those opposed to racial equality for example, I consider to be outside the bounds of toleration that we should set within out society.

For BLM there are side issues that are areas of debate, such as implementing the recommendations of the Lammy Report, reviewing what we commemorate within our society, the lack of racial integration in certain areas, the cycles of crime etc.

These shouldn't stray in to compromising the overall aim and the message of racial equality however, a way in which these (side) issues are unfortunately too often used.

On a positive note, I am sure that there is much that most of us here all agree on. We just don't discuss it as we all accept it (items like a free press, freedom of speech within the law, the right to privacy, the right to safety, the right to a fair trial, Kopites are Gobshites etc.).

 

[mill]

Why do people not have a problem with the NHS badge on shirts?