To intimidate protesters.
No.
The horse bolted, the rider wasn’t in control because scum had been throwing objects at the animal.
To intimidate protesters.
Genuinely, I'm being objective here but...
What's the real difference between wanting to support a group exclusively because of their race, colour or creed and boycotting because of the same criteria?
This is veering close to 'keep them down before they rise up'
Like I said, I have no issue with people choosing to shop in their local community or for those who they feel have less representation. That's a good cause.because this is about doing whatever you can to help switch the power dynamic. Buying from businesses owned by people who have had less representation and less equality of opportunity is a way to attempt to begin to redress the power balance. It’s a positive act not a negative act.
I also think it might be worth trying to find the whole statement rather than just the selective selection by a failed Far right political candidate
Jesus. Hope they're ok. Any idea as to why they were galloping like that?
I'm sure they will. It's only when they have to be accountable for their own actions the police tend to capitulate.Someone threw a bike at the horse. The rider must have been severely hurt yet ‘protesters’ we’re still throwing bottles and stuff even when it was obvious someone was seriously hurt. I sincerely hope the police can track down and prosecute those throwing the bikes and bottles. March by all means but innocent people are getting hurt because of this.....
Absolute inflammatory nonsense. This is why people don’t take this kind of thing as seriously as they should.This is what is meant by white privilege, and why in Europe and America, you can’t really accuse a POC of being racist towards whites.
because this is about doing whatever you can to help switch the power dynamic. Buying from businesses owned by people who have had less representation and less equality of opportunity is a way to attempt to begin to redress the power balance. It’s a positive act not a negative act.
I also think it might be worth trying to find the whole statement rather than just the selective selection by a failed Far right political candidate
No.
The horse bolted, the rider wasn’t in control because scum had been throwing objects at the animal.
I’m not being funny but around 99% of this forum (whether white or black) couldn’t start a business to compete multinational organisations. It’s nothing to do with skin colour, it’s identitying a massive niche market that can be exploited.
now if you want people to support local shops that’s perfectly fine as long as it’s not based on race. I get some things I need from my local newsagents (owned by lovely a fella from Yemen) and I got other things from a bakery owned by a white British guy. Are you suggesting I boycott the British fella because he’s white??
When you consider the speed of the movement compared to the line and that police horses are trained to at most canter, not gallop, I would say it's likely it bolted.Ok it's hard to see that from the video. From my experience of protests and football, its not uncommon for police to charge horses into people, on most occasions to intimidate and disperse people. Unfortunately in this instance he rode is straight into a traffic light, so an unfortunate accident really.
The suggestion is surely you consider where you want to spend your money as a consumer?
When you consider the speed of the movement compared to the line and that police horses are trained to canter, not gallop, I would say it's more likely it bolted.
By shifting your buying power to those who have been less represented?? I don’t think that is the suggestion.
Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.