Current Affairs The Landmarks of Slavery;

[Amw79]

They're not beyond reproach. The central issue shouldn't be a shield to avoid all criticism of their methods.

The alternative is blindly agreeing to anything BLM want out of fear of being called a racist, regardless of how mental it is.

Not sure I said they should be beyond reproach, or otherwise immune from criticism. Nobody should be.

But there seems to be a group of people who are desperate to tell black people that they’re doing it wrong, have the wrong slogan, have the wrong politics, need to change their method, and I think much of that criticism is utterly disingenuous, and simply seeking to find a hole in the movement in order to denigrate it.

For those people, the label or the gesture is irrelevant, as they’d simply find a new problem to criticise the movement.

 

[tsubaki]

That's the part that goes totally over your head - the absolute essential need to have a broad appeal to change societal attitudes overall.

If you appeal only to black people, you are an echo chamber and changing very little. If your cause is morally just and appeals to everyone then you get lasting change.

Sorry, but that’s ridiculous. It’s the sort of attitude that is the reason why people have been protesting, as well as a good part of the reason why these sorts of injustices exist in the first place and for so long.

Rights exist absolutely, not at the whim of a majority and only when they can be arsed.

 

[summerisle]

Particularly like the very end.

 

[Kenshin]

Just thinking out loud here.

But disagreeing with something automatically making you racist , isn't that a little ..... well extreme?

Can apply that logic to anything. Disagree with something and you are phobic in some capacity , racist, sexist etc.

Why does everything have to be black and white? Why does things have to be forced on a culture with such an aggressive reaction if you don't go along with it?

 

[peteblue]

Just thinking out loud here.

But disagreeing with something automatically making you racist , isn't that a little ..... well extreme?

Can apply that logic to anything. Disagree with something and you are phobic in some capacity , racist, sexist etc.

Why does everything have to be black and white? Why does things have to be forced on a culture with such an aggressive reaction if you don't go along with it?

Welcome to the Brexit thread......

 

[tsubaki]

Just thinking out loud here.

But disagreeing with something automatically making you racist , isn't that a little ..... well extreme?

Can apply that logic to anything. Disagree with something and you are phobic in some capacity , racist, sexist etc.

Why does everything have to be black and white? Why does things have to be forced on a culture with such an aggressive reaction if you don't go along with it?

You can disagree with anything without being racist, homophobic or whatever - though if you are disagreeing with the idea that anyone’s death at the hands of anyone else shouldn’t be appropriately investigated and (if necessary) punished then expect to be challenged on that disagreement.

 

[Kenshin]

You can disagree with anything without being racist, homophobic or whatever - though if you are disagreeing with the idea that anyone’s death at the hands of anyone else shouldn’t be appropriately investigated and (if necessary) punished then expect to be challenged on that disagreement.

Not so much that side no. Just the idea that, in topic of recent discussion.

Person a 'i don't like the fact the players are taking the knee'

Person b 'that makes you racist then'.

I see there has been discussion on here with tubey but generally speaking that is an automatic response. Straight to racist, no other alternative to it. Same as , like I say phobic (current flavour of the month trans) , sexist , other term etc.

It's like @BirkenheadBlue said to someone over the election. Anyone can voice their opinion and anyone can disagree. Yet going straight to calling someone a racist is kinda not allowing opinion lol

 

[Charro]

Not so much that side no. Just the idea that, in topic of recent discussion.

Person a 'i don't like the fact the players are taking the knee'

Person b 'that makes you racist then'.

I see there has been discussion on here with tubey but generally speaking that is an automatic response. Straight to racist, no other alternative to it. Same as , like I say phobic (current flavour of the month trans) , sexist , other term etc.

It's like @BirkenheadBlue said to someone over the election. Anyone can voice their opinion and anyone can disagree. Yet going straight to calling someone a racist is kinda not allowing opinion lol

That hasn’t happened on here though.

 

[Kenshin]

That hasn’t happened on here though.

Perhaps not and I'd hope it didn't between blues tbh

 

[dead_soft]

etc. etc. bloody etc.

It's never the optimum approach.

I class "violence" as proactive antagonism as well. Extinction Rebellion glueing themselves to trains resulted in this:

Extinction Rebellion protesters dragged from Tube train roof

Extinction Rebellion says it will "take stock" of the reaction to the action for future protests.

www.bbc.co.uk

Indeed.

If you have the moral high ground, you don't forfeit it. BLM spectacularly forfeited it and support for their underlying aims, which is obviously morally just, has dwindled. Because of their failure to win hearts and minds through their actions, the support for their cause has narrowed substantially to an increasing echo chamber.

Black Lives Matter support down since June, still strong among Black adults | Pew Research Center

55% of U.S. adults now express at least some support for the Black Lives Matter movement, down from 67% in June.

www.pewresearch.org

The longer this goes, the more ground is lost.

So you've thrown some evidence up and then changed the goalposts of what 'violence' is. Quite a bizarre thing.

The evidence does suggest non-violent protests work more often but not that violent or 'antagonistic' (laughable) protests don't work.

Why Violent Protests Work

A conversation with author and University of Pennsylvania professor Daniel Q. Gillion about the history of protests in America and how they've inspired actual policy change.

www.gq.com

'One of the most contentious protests we’ve seen that we can relate and compare to what we’re seeing now in 2020 is the Rodney King riots in the 1990s. This is a protest that became very violent, and if you look at the representative for that area, it was Maxine Waters in South Central L.A. When she spoke about these events, she referred to it as “righteous anger,” because she understood the pain individuals were going through. And it led her to engage in more policy actions in the House. Before the riots took place, she was looking at initiatives involving international things, women’s rights— but after this took place, she began focusing on bills dealing with the concerns of protesters. We saw her work on public housing, we saw a neighborhood infrastructure bill pass, we saw an inner city job creation bill she introduced. In addition to that, George Bush had several meetings looking at how he should address this. Later Bush came out and he had no choice but to acknowledge the reality of the times. He said, “In the wake of the L.A. riots, can any one of us argue that we have solved the problem of poverty and racism?” And the answer is no. Every day discussions at the water cooler actually changed because of that.

Oftentimes, when people say “violent protest has no impact,” it’s not because they have empirical evidence. They’re relying on their optimistic notions of seeing King and hearing his rhetoric. And those things are true, that nonviolence can be effective, but the violence can also be effective if you look at the data and follow the protests and see the impact it has on policy.'

Your talk of moral high ground and BLM (and let's be clear, black people) decamping from it it is nonsense. It's becoming harder to think anything other than that you really just don't think black protestors should be too vocal or prominent.

 

[JimmyJeffers]

David Squires on … the booing of footballers taking a knee

Our cartoonist on demoralising scenes at Millwall, angry old white men and unlikely Marxism

www.theguardian.com

Sums it up nicely. Wait months and months to finally watch your team play again just to start booing before a ball is kicked. lol

 

[dead_soft]

I know I shouldn't be going on there for my own well being, but some spectacular posts on that Millwall forum. This piece of self-awareness is one of my personal faves

'He really can’t be selected tonight. If anyone is going to cause ***** it’s him. I can’t see him playing for us again. Great shame, but you can’t have someone causing the club as much grief as he has.'

 

[JimmyJeffers]

I know I shouldn't be going on there for my own well being, but some spectacular posts on that Millwall forum. This piece of self-awareness is one of my personal faves

'He really can’t be selected tonight. If anyone is going to cause ***** it’s him. I can’t see him playing for us again. Great shame, but you can’t have someone causing the club as much grief as he has.'

Delete hard drive

 

[JimmyJeffers]

Imagine how you’d feel if you were a semi sensible Millwall fan. I mean we all have our fair share of idiot fans but the likes of Chelsea, Millwall and Rangers all seem to be fairly poisonous institutions. In the news time and time again for all the wrong reasons. You’d just not bother after a while and support Bromley or Partick Thistle.
The boys across the park have hardly covered themselves in glory last few years either.

 

[roydo]

Imagine how you’d feel if you were a semi sensible Millwall fan. I mean we all have our fair share of idiot fans but the likes of Chelsea, Millwall and Rangers all seem to be fairly poisonous institutions. In the news time and time again for all the wrong reasons. You’d just not bother after a while and support Bromley or Partick Thistle.
The boys across the park have hardly covered themselves in glory last few years either.

Dont know about Chelsea these days, but like every football club, there is a DNA in Millwall. And it isnt a pretty one.

Remember a few years back, when they had a semi final at Wembley and their fans started fighting between themselves? @Yid4life explained that every faux hard man from that part of London would turn up for a fight, but dont bother with normal games.

Well, the other night, their hard core, STH fans, showed the world their DNA.

And some Londoners dismiss areas of the UK as brexit racists.