| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
GoneToShowgies 
Ray Houghton
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 3983
|
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote  Reply
 Posted: 09 Dec 2020 at 4:33pm |
 pre Madonna wrote:
GoneToShowgies wrote:
pre Madonna wrote:
sid waddell wrote:
GoneToShowgies wrote:
Jackal wrote:
Good old PSG, completely forgetting who their owners are. |
Exactly. PSG owned by the ruler of Quatar who have terrible human rights abuse.
I'm sure UEFA and FIFA will come out and this official will be banned or fined, but they will be more than happy to sit in their fancy VIP seats in the world cup stadiums that have been built by migrants who have been treated terribly and where over 30 have died to build the Quatar WC stadiums. |
I think it's best to examine the incident last night based on what actually happened
Qatar's ownership of PSG is obviously a serious issue as is indentured slavery in the building of World Cup stadiums, but reference to it in an attempt to muddy the waters around a different incident is not good
I also hold this view about the abuse Raheem Sterling took at Stamford Bridge that time, despite there being clear issues with the ownership of his team
Racist or alleged racist incidents can be examined separately from team ownership
But they can also be used to stimulate a wider conversation about the ownership of those teams - ie. we rightly don't tolerate Raheem Sterling being racially abused, so maybe we should also examine the human rights abuses of the owners of Manchester City
Earlier I talked about the search for purity not being such a good thing in many instances
Another problem is that a search for "purity" - which when it comes from the left is still done in an essentially good faith way - can be twisted in a bad faith way by right wingers to essentially protect racism and racists, ie. it would be a really bad situation if we were to say to Raheem Sterling - "but you play for a team which is owned by a despotic regime, so you haven't a leg to stand on as regards your racism complaint"
Deal with the racist abuse, and then, when we've all agreed that such racist abuse is a really bad thing that no player should have to suffer regardless of who they play for, examine the issues as regards the ownership of teams - and let these instances of racial abuse inform that discussion
|
Indeed. It is a massive part of the problem. Even the narrative that has appeared here, and elsewhere, that a lot worse has gone on so this should have been accepted. It all feels like arguments from people who don't want to confront their own views and reactions, so will just latch on to deflection tactics.
We are all likely to be racist as we grew up in a racist society, when something happens, like last night, instead of jumping in to try and talk about something slightly related or talk about things going too far, use your emotional intelligence and try and understand why someone might be upset by this, because a lot of things are wrong in the world and trying to use another wrong to disprove racism and justify your own is just f**king stupid. |
Nobody is using it as a bigger issue to justify acceptance or deflect from what happened.
Nobody is trying to deflect from the issue or to minimize the incident from last night. You come across as a clown when you are saying people (you dont even know) are trying to disprove racism and calling people's comments stupid. Good man ... great way to approach a discussion on racism and equality. |
You appear to have confused me with someone who gives a f**k how I come across. You have approached this discussion with ignorance and stupidity, so I hope you at least feel similarly.
Now, as for the point raised, people on here, as well as in the wider world, have done exactly that. Deflecting about who owns PSG and Istanbul Basaksehir being a fine example. Unfortunately, people who think this way are determined to dig their heels in and point out that the people that say they might need to look at themselves are the problem, because that's the way of the modern snowflake. |
For someone who dosent give a fucck you sure go to some pretty long lengths to make your point know.
Anyway well done on picking up that im ignorant and stupid (double whammy) based on a couple of random posts. I didnt have enough time to put something extensive together cause I have better things to be at then posting a million crap posts a day and trying to be the thread captain all the time. Get a life you sad pr8ck. 
|
 |
|
Sponsored Links
|
|
|
sid waddell
Roy Keane
On a dark desert highway
Joined: 20 Nov 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 12173
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 09 Dec 2020 at 5:12pm |
Borussia wrote:
theworm2345 wrote:
On this particular incident, I have a genuine question for anyone who might be able to answer.
The referee referred to someone as "black" and also as "black guy". The reason that this is considered offensive (I wouldn't go so far as to say racist), is because it strips away the individuality, or dehumanizes, the person to which he was referring. It reduces that person to the color of their skin, and I think most people would argue that is not something that should be aspired to. My hope would be that any individual would be judged on the quality of their character and whatever virtues they may or may not possess.
One of the fundamental tenets of Marxism is class consciousness, which manifests itself in the prioritization of group identity. We have a referee, born in 1977, who would've grown up under Ceaușescu's regime in Romania with their Marxist doctrine. We have players constantly kneeling for Black Lives Matter -- an avowedly Marxist-led organization that quite clearly upholds these ideals of class consciousness.
Am I the only one who sees a fair bit of cognitive dissonance here? |
2 points on this - Players are not kneeling to highlight injustice through racism. They are not doing it to specifically support the BLM group, at last not as a collective though some individually do so. And I'm not sure how BLM could be described as a Marxist led organisation given it doesn't really have a formalised structure. |
But they are kneeling to highlight injustice though racism, and the kneeling was introduced to support the Black Lives Matter protests, the back of the jerseys had "Black Lives Matter" on them
Like, I don't know what other reading of it you could have
Perhaps there was a typo there
|
|
pre Madonna
Robbie Keane
I am MALDING
Joined: 30 Nov 2014
Location: Trumpton
Status: Offline
Points: 44659
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 09 Dec 2020 at 5:18pm |
GoneToShowgies wrote:
pre Madonna wrote:
GoneToShowgies wrote:
pre Madonna wrote:
sid waddell wrote:
GoneToShowgies wrote:
Jackal wrote:
Good old PSG, completely forgetting who their owners are. |
Exactly. PSG owned by the ruler of Quatar who have terrible human rights abuse.
I'm sure UEFA and FIFA will come out and this official will be banned or fined, but they will be more than happy to sit in their fancy VIP seats in the world cup stadiums that have been built by migrants who have been treated terribly and where over 30 have died to build the Quatar WC stadiums. |
I think it's best to examine the incident last night based on what actually happened
Qatar's ownership of PSG is obviously a serious issue as is indentured slavery in the building of World Cup stadiums, but reference to it in an attempt to muddy the waters around a different incident is not good
I also hold this view about the abuse Raheem Sterling took at Stamford Bridge that time, despite there being clear issues with the ownership of his team
Racist or alleged racist incidents can be examined separately from team ownership
But they can also be used to stimulate a wider conversation about the ownership of those teams - ie. we rightly don't tolerate Raheem Sterling being racially abused, so maybe we should also examine the human rights abuses of the owners of Manchester City
Earlier I talked about the search for purity not being such a good thing in many instances
Another problem is that a search for "purity" - which when it comes from the left is still done in an essentially good faith way - can be twisted in a bad faith way by right wingers to essentially protect racism and racists, ie. it would be a really bad situation if we were to say to Raheem Sterling - "but you play for a team which is owned by a despotic regime, so you haven't a leg to stand on as regards your racism complaint"
Deal with the racist abuse, and then, when we've all agreed that such racist abuse is a really bad thing that no player should have to suffer regardless of who they play for, examine the issues as regards the ownership of teams - and let these instances of racial abuse inform that discussion
|
Indeed. It is a massive part of the problem. Even the narrative that has appeared here, and elsewhere, that a lot worse has gone on so this should have been accepted. It all feels like arguments from people who don't want to confront their own views and reactions, so will just latch on to deflection tactics.
We are all likely to be racist as we grew up in a racist society, when something happens, like last night, instead of jumping in to try and talk about something slightly related or talk about things going too far, use your emotional intelligence and try and understand why someone might be upset by this, because a lot of things are wrong in the world and trying to use another wrong to disprove racism and justify your own is just f**king stupid. |
Nobody is using it as a bigger issue to justify acceptance or deflect from what happened.
Nobody is trying to deflect from the issue or to minimize the incident from last night. You come across as a clown when you are saying people (you dont even know) are trying to disprove racism and calling people's comments stupid. Good man ... great way to approach a discussion on racism and equality. |
You appear to have confused me with someone who gives a f**k how I come across. You have approached this discussion with ignorance and stupidity, so I hope you at least feel similarly.
Now, as for the point raised, people on here, as well as in the wider world, have done exactly that. Deflecting about who owns PSG and Istanbul Basaksehir being a fine example. Unfortunately, people who think this way are determined to dig their heels in and point out that the people that say they might need to look at themselves are the problem, because that's the way of the modern snowflake. |
For someone who dosent give a fucck you sure go to some pretty long lengths to make your point know.
Anyway well done on picking up that im ignorant and stupid (double whammy) based on a couple of random posts. I didnt have enough time to put something extensive together cause I have better things to be at then posting a million crap posts a day and trying to be the thread captain all the time. Get a life you sad pr8ck. |
You appear to have misunderstood, again. I don't give a f**k how I come across. I certainly give a f**k about racism. That was fairly clear.
I only come on here once a day now, as there isn't much to interest me, but this does. I have a great life though, but am happy to be a sad prick in cases like this. 
|
|
Borussia
Roy Keane
Joined: 14 Oct 2010
Location: UK
Status: Online
Points: 10750
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 09 Dec 2020 at 5:20pm |
sid waddell wrote:
Borussia wrote:
theworm2345 wrote:
On this particular incident, I have a genuine question for anyone who might be able to answer.
The referee referred to someone as "black" and also as "black guy". The reason that this is considered offensive (I wouldn't go so far as to say racist), is because it strips away the individuality, or dehumanizes, the person to which he was referring. It reduces that person to the color of their skin, and I think most people would argue that is not something that should be aspired to. My hope would be that any individual would be judged on the quality of their character and whatever virtues they may or may not possess.
One of the fundamental tenets of Marxism is class consciousness, which manifests itself in the prioritization of group identity. We have a referee, born in 1977, who would've grown up under Ceaușescu's regime in Romania with their Marxist doctrine. We have players constantly kneeling for Black Lives Matter -- an avowedly Marxist-led organization that quite clearly upholds these ideals of class consciousness.
Am I the only one who sees a fair bit of cognitive dissonance here? |
2 points on this - Players are not kneeling to highlight injustice through racism. They are not doing it to specifically support the BLM group, at last not as a collective though some individually do so. And I'm not sure how BLM could be described as a Marxist led organisation given it doesn't really have a formalised structure. |
But they are kneeling to highlight injustice though racism, and the kneeling was introduced to support the Black Lives Matter protests, the back of the jerseys had "Black Lives Matter" on them
Like, I don't know what other reading of it you could have
Perhaps there was a typo there |
Yeah, definitely type there Sidney. The first "Not" should not have been there.
|
|
pre Madonna
Robbie Keane
I am MALDING
Joined: 30 Nov 2014
Location: Trumpton
Status: Offline
Points: 44659
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 09 Dec 2020 at 5:21pm |
sid waddell wrote:
pre Madonna wrote:
sid waddell wrote:
If you really examine what Barnes says it is quietly radical, the problem is white people cherry pick quotes from him in a totally context-free fashion to try and excuse their own racism
Like, say, this one
Barnes told the Sophy Ridge On Sunday programme on Sky News that "racism was understandable" because of what people have been wrongly taught about others for hundreds of years.
If you look at it with no context - as a lot of white people like to do with his quotes - all they would have read is "Barnes says "racism is understandable"" - it could read as a defence of racism - but it's not that at all - it's a deep critique of how the structure of British society - bad media, bad education, bad history, socialises white people into being racist
That racism is in fact embedded in the very fabric of British society - that it is essentially a white supremacist society
That's what I and many others have been saying about the US - and a lot of white people didn't like this line of argument at all - they portrayed it as "you're gone off the deep end" - when it's actually demonstrably true - the US is a white supremacist society, so is Britain, and so is Ireland
|
I'm not disagreeing with that, but how he has chosen to make this argument is often contradictory and perplexing. I certainly can't understand his grievances at Celtic, which he still goes on about and makes him look foolish. Likewise his autobiography, admittedly written with a cretin, and 20 years ago, where he came across dreadfully. As does this. He has become the acceptable face of Black British footballers in such a society for a reason. |
I think he perhaps alienates some people on the left who are constantly searching for total purity
But I think the fault lies more with those searching for total purity than with Barnes
And there is a phenomenon where at least some of those who outwardly search for total purity are only really interested in superficial things rather than real structural change
The search for total purity requires a rejection of the concept of human fallibility
I think Barnes recognises that sometimes things are slightly grey and that's probably the case with the incident last night
From what I can make out anyway, I think at very worst it was probably a case of a clumsy and innocently ignorant use of words, which was probably exacerbated by a language barrier
But I can understand why Demba Ba or Pierre Webo would think it was something else, because they almost certainly have long lived experience of racism
But a lot of people feel the need to rush in and judge the whole incident in completely black and white terms, if you will excuse the slightly awkward phraseology - I don't know how else to express the point
When I think it is not that simple
Awkward yes, clumsy yes, perhaps a touch of ignorance, yes, but I do not believe it merits being the international lightning rod type incident it has become
The best way to resolve it would be to get all parties around a table and talk to each other, socially distanced of course
|
This post is certainly clumsy. I am also not sure why you quoted me and went off about things that aren't relevant to any point I made.
|
|
sid waddell
Roy Keane
On a dark desert highway
Joined: 20 Nov 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 12173
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 09 Dec 2020 at 5:23pm |
pre Madonna wrote:
sid waddell wrote:
pre Madonna wrote:
sid waddell wrote:
If you really examine what Barnes says it is quietly radical, the problem is white people cherry pick quotes from him in a totally context-free fashion to try and excuse their own racism
Like, say, this one
Barnes told the Sophy Ridge On Sunday programme on Sky News that "racism was understandable" because of what people have been wrongly taught about others for hundreds of years.
If you look at it with no context - as a lot of white people like to do with his quotes - all they would have read is "Barnes says "racism is understandable"" - it could read as a defence of racism - but it's not that at all - it's a deep critique of how the structure of British society - bad media, bad education, bad history, socialises white people into being racist
That racism is in fact embedded in the very fabric of British society - that it is essentially a white supremacist society
That's what I and many others have been saying about the US - and a lot of white people didn't like this line of argument at all - they portrayed it as "you're gone off the deep end" - when it's actually demonstrably true - the US is a white supremacist society, so is Britain, and so is Ireland
|
I'm not disagreeing with that, but how he has chosen to make this argument is often contradictory and perplexing. I certainly can't understand his grievances at Celtic, which he still goes on about and makes him look foolish. Likewise his autobiography, admittedly written with a cretin, and 20 years ago, where he came across dreadfully. As does this. He has become the acceptable face of Black British footballers in such a society for a reason. |
I think he perhaps alienates some people on the left who are constantly searching for total purity
But I think the fault lies more with those searching for total purity than with Barnes
And there is a phenomenon where at least some of those who outwardly search for total purity are only really interested in superficial things rather than real structural change
The search for total purity requires a rejection of the concept of human fallibility
I think Barnes recognises that sometimes things are slightly grey and that's probably the case with the incident last night
From what I can make out anyway, I think at very worst it was probably a case of a clumsy and innocently ignorant use of words, which was probably exacerbated by a language barrier
But I can understand why Demba Ba or Pierre Webo would think it was something else, because they almost certainly have long lived experience of racism
But a lot of people feel the need to rush in and judge the whole incident in completely black and white terms, if you will excuse the slightly awkward phraseology - I don't know how else to express the point
When I think it is not that simple
Awkward yes, clumsy yes, perhaps a touch of ignorance, yes, but I do not believe it merits being the international lightning rod type incident it has become
The best way to resolve it would be to get all parties around a table and talk to each other, socially distanced of course
|
This post is certainly clumsy. I am also not sure why you quoted me and went off about things that aren't relevant to any point I made. |
What's clumsy about it?
|
|
pre Madonna
Robbie Keane
I am MALDING
Joined: 30 Nov 2014
Location: Trumpton
Status: Offline
Points: 44659
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 09 Dec 2020 at 5:24pm |
Maybe it is me, I just don't really get the relevance to what I said, or, in some parts, to this thread.
Anyway, I am about to stop being paid for being on here. 
Edited by pre Madonna - 09 Dec 2020 at 5:26pm
|
|
Het-field
Roy Keane
By Appointment to His Majesty The King
Joined: 08 Mar 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 10653
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 09 Dec 2020 at 5:32pm |
sid waddell wrote:
But they are kneeling to highlight injustice though racism, and the kneeling was introduced to support the Black Lives Matter protests, the back of the jerseys had "Black Lives Matter" on them
Like, I don't know what other reading of it you could have
Perhaps there was a typo there |
The other reading that I think most people had was that it was a contemporary display of solidarity at a particular time, and that it was a symbolic display?
|
|
sid waddell
Roy Keane
On a dark desert highway
Joined: 20 Nov 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 12173
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 09 Dec 2020 at 5:36pm |
pre Madonna wrote:
Maybe it is me, I just don't really get the relevance to what I said, or, in some parts, to this thread.
Anyway, I am about to stop being paid for being on here. |
But I don't really see what about Barnes is contradictory and perplexing not do I see what is clumsy about my post
But nor would it necessarily be a problem is somebody was to come across as contradictory or perplexing - that's the human condition
I haven't read his autobiography so I don't know how he comes across in it
I guess his problem with Celtic is he felt he was sacked too quickly in a season when Henrik Larsson had a broken leg and he sees a problem with black managers getting a lack of opportunity in football in general
|
|
sid waddell
Roy Keane
On a dark desert highway
Joined: 20 Nov 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 12173
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 09 Dec 2020 at 5:49pm |
Het-field wrote:
sid waddell wrote:
But they are kneeling to highlight injustice though racism, and the kneeling was introduced to support the Black Lives Matter protests, the back of the jerseys had "Black Lives Matter" on them
Like, I don't know what other reading of it you could have
Perhaps there was a typo there |
The other reading that I think most people had was that it was a contemporary display of solidarity at a particular time, and that it was a symbolic display? |
Well obviously it was those things, and it could not be anything other than a symbolic display
But it was definitely in support of the Black Lives Matter protests
The Black Lives Matter protestors are not a monolith - they have different beliefs which others who are protesting will not agree with
But the central unifying feature of the protests is political, and confrontational - but sporting organisations hate confrontation
The interesting thing is that the kneeling started at a time when there were no supporters in stadiums - and that's still largely the case
What happened when supporters came back was always going to be fraught because there are a lot of knuckle draggers in English football crowds
It's difficult to read what happened at Millwall as anything other than a total caving in to racists
The gesture itself, while one of solidarity, is also confrontational and meant to be - so if you stop doing it at the first sign of backlash, you are caving in to racists, you are essentially saying, "oh, we didn't really mean it"
Which is very disappointing - when you get booed is when you should ramp up the confrontation
Edited by sid waddell - 09 Dec 2020 at 5:49pm
|
|
Het-field
Roy Keane
By Appointment to His Majesty The King
Joined: 08 Mar 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 10653
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 09 Dec 2020 at 6:04pm |
sid waddell wrote:
Well obviously it was those things, and it could not be anything other than a symbolic display
But it was definitely in support of the Black Lives Matter protests
The Black Lives Matter protestors are not a monolith - they have different beliefs which others who are protesting will not agree with
But the central unifying feature of the protests is political, and confrontational - but sporting organisations hate confrontation
The interesting thing is that the kneeling started at a time when there were no supporters in stadiums - and that's still largely the case
What happened when supporters came back was always going to be fraught because there are a lot of knuckle draggers in English football crowds
It's difficult to read what happened at Millwall as anything other than a total caving in to racists
The gesture itself, while one of solidarity, is also confrontational and meant to be - so if you stop doing it at the first sign of backlash, you are caving in to racists, you are essentially saying, "oh, we didn't really mean it"
Which is very disappointing - when you get booed is when you should ramp up the confrontation
|
But if the protestors aren't a monolith (which I agree with), and come with different viewpoints and disagreements (which I also agree with), then the protests themselves cant be monolithic, and as a result you cant necessarily be seen to support all, or any actions, without actively discussing these with individuals showing solidarity and indicating their own views
But its easier to see this as symbolic solidarity at a time when it is necessary and welcome, and not an endorsement of any specific aspects of the protests, as by the above, the protests and the protestor are different.
|
|
sid waddell
Roy Keane
On a dark desert highway
Joined: 20 Nov 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 12173
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 09 Dec 2020 at 6:29pm |
Het-field wrote:
sid waddell wrote:
Well obviously it was those things, and it could not be anything other than a symbolic display
But it was definitely in support of the Black Lives Matter protests
The Black Lives Matter protestors are not a monolith - they have different beliefs which others who are protesting will not agree with
But the central unifying feature of the protests is political, and confrontational - but sporting organisations hate confrontation
The interesting thing is that the kneeling started at a time when there were no supporters in stadiums - and that's still largely the case
What happened when supporters came back was always going to be fraught because there are a lot of knuckle draggers in English football crowds
It's difficult to read what happened at Millwall as anything other than a total caving in to racists
The gesture itself, while one of solidarity, is also confrontational and meant to be - so if you stop doing it at the first sign of backlash, you are caving in to racists, you are essentially saying, "oh, we didn't really mean it"
Which is very disappointing - when you get booed is when you should ramp up the confrontation
|
But if the protestors aren't a monolith (which I agree with), and come with different viewpoints and disagreements (which I also agree with), then the protests themselves cant be monolithic, and as a result you cant necessarily be seen to support all, or any actions, without actively discussing these with individuals showing solidarity and indicating their own views
But its easier to see this as symbolic solidarity at a time when it is necessary and welcome, and not an endorsement of any specific aspects of the protests, as by the above, the protests and the protestor are different. |
If you go to the Black Lives Matter page it affirms a set of general principles
And that's basically what the kneeling is in support of
The problem with the BLM movement itself is that because it is not a monolith it is likely at some stage to splinter - as different people have different solutions and there are some serious disagreements among protestors
Like, Mitt Romney turned up to one of the protests, but the majority of the protestors are certainly not going to agree with his solutions
There is clearly a thing where some, probably most players won't really have a clue of the real ins and outs of the issues, but don't want to be seen to be going against the symbolism of kneeling
Then we had the instant abandonment of the kneeling in the face of the Millwall knuckle draggers
And we will have an increasing amount of negative bad faith coverage of the kneeling in the right wing media
So how this plays out could be awkward and it could end up leaving a bad taste, I think it's likely to actually - not because of confrontation - but because it's likely to end with a lack of willingness to have confrontation - even the general principles of BLM themselves are confrontational
But without articulate voices among players who really know the issues and drive them, the whole thing will probably descend into a sort of awkward space where the Premier League etc are putting pressure on the players and clubs to end it and hoping nobody will notice - but people will notice, and players who are concerned with the issues will notice, and communities of colour will notice
If you say "we're doing this up to the end of the season and that's it", people would rightly say "but the issues which led to the protests won't end at the end of the season"
|
|
Het-field
Roy Keane
By Appointment to His Majesty The King
Joined: 08 Mar 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 10653
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 09 Dec 2020 at 6:44pm |
sid waddell wrote:
If you go to the Black Lives Matter page it affirms a set of general principles
And that's basically what the kneeling is in support of
The problem with the BLM movement itself is that because it is not a monolith it is likely at some stage to splinter - as different people have different solutions and there are some serious disagreements among protestors
Like, Mitt Romney turned up to one of the protests, but the majority of the protestors are certainly not going to agree with his solutions
There is clearly a thing where some, probably most players won't really have a clue of the real ins and outs of the issues, but don't want to be seen to be going against the symbolism of kneeling
Then we had the instant abandonment of the kneeling in the face of the Millwall knuckle draggers
And we will have an increasing amount of negative bad faith coverage of the kneeling in the right wing media
So how this plays out could be awkward and it could end up leaving a bad taste, I think it's likely to actually - not because of confrontation - but because it's likely to end with a lack of willingness to have confrontation - even the general principles of BLM themselves are confrontational
But without articulate voices among players who really know the issues and drive them, the whole thing will probably descend into a sort of awkward space where the Premier League etc are putting pressure on the players and clubs to end it and hoping nobody will notice - but people will notice, and players who are concerned with the issues will notice, and communities of colour will notice
If you say "we're doing this up to the end of the season and that's it", people would rightly say "but the issues which led to the protests won't end at the end of the season"
|
I think that's it. A lot of players will definitely sympathise, but put a microphone in front of the, I suspect many would end up given a "both side" party line, with a number of caveats which would suggest they agree with the symbolism, but the impact might erode if they were pressed on it. Its an easy and powerful symbol, but it doesn't require further action. I'm okay with that as its doing something. However, I would disagree that this encompasses standing in line with all aspects of BLM protests and all protestors.
The shame is, Millwall have broken the mould a bit by moving on from taking the knee, and that's a shame. I fear the lesson that will be taken is that if fans feel they kick up enough of a stink that it will be ended, which would be a bad outcome.
|
|
Roberto Baggio
Robbie Keane
UNBELIEVABLE JEFF
Joined: 28 Jan 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 37333
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 09 Dec 2020 at 7:33pm |
|
What was Millwall players reasoning for not taking a knee last night?
|
|
Roberto Baggio
Robbie Keane
UNBELIEVABLE JEFF
Joined: 28 Jan 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 37333
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 09 Dec 2020 at 7:34pm |
pre Madonna wrote:
The Huntacha wrote:
pre Madonna wrote:
MC Hammered wrote:
What’s your view on John Barnes comments on this?
|
I have said it before and will say it again: John Barnes is a f**king idiot. Whatever he has to say on anything should be ignored. |
Interested in your reasoning behind your thoughts on Barnes PM.
He's definitely more qualified to speak about racism, given his experiences as a player/person, than anyone on this forum. |
Barnes defended Peter Beardsley's racism because he was his mate. He seemed to defend Bernardo Silva's Tweet to keep himself relevant, yet he claims he was sacked at Celtic after losing to a part-time side in the cup, a few days after losing at home to Hearts 3-2, having been 2-0 up. . |
The Celtic board are currently displaying that Barnes may have had a point here
|
|
NewtNewbie
Liam Brady
Joined: 05 Feb 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 2416
|
Post Options
Thanks(1)
Quote Reply
Posted: 09 Dec 2020 at 8:44pm |
Barnes is absolutely entitled to his opinion. You may disagree. Well, fine.
But this 'you ain't no black' attitude of a certain section of white people that expects all black people - no matter their background - to hold an identical political viewpoint, as if they are a homogeneous whole and, unlike white people, are unentitled to individuality and expected to have a singular point of view, otherwise they're somehow 'letting the side down', is the very definition of racism.
Edited by NewtNewbie - 10 Dec 2020 at 7:58am
|
|
ChesterCopperpot
Liam Brady
Joined: 28 Feb 2019
Status: Offline
Points: 1169
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 10 Dec 2020 at 6:00pm |
|
|
|
Hotlips_Hoolahan
Jack Charlton
Joined: 04 Aug 2020
Status: Offline
Points: 6615
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 10 Dec 2020 at 6:48pm |
Funny how little outrage there was over Neymar making homophobic remarks towards Alvaro Gonzalez.
|
|
Tweet
