|
Post by countofmontecristo on Apr 2, 2013 13:39:38 GMT
Those on this board that are advocating discrimination against Di Canio for his political views, should perhaps research the definition of a Fascist.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2013 14:12:00 GMT
Facism, racism...call it what you will. In times of economic hardship, such tendencies will always be more prevalent than during healthier economic times. If the BNP had an intelligent leader (maybe even someone like Hitler who could actually speak convincingly and find the words to tap into a nations frustration) they would most likely be a more viable political party than they are right now. Regardless, I would still welcome Di Canio to Stoke had he turned up as our manager. Careful Dave, that in some people's eyes is enough to class you as a staunch Nazi! When they had their time on Newsnight (which they have every right to) then the people asking the questions didnt really help by playing in to their hands with the racist card - something they'll have heard a billion times. The best way to overcome people like that is to actually treat them as an equal - ask them about energy, pensions, jobs, education, health, transport etc. The witchhunting mob in society like to show their superiority by beating their chests instead of engaging their brains
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Apr 2, 2013 14:20:43 GMT
Indeed POOB. Hence my point.
I am neither a racist nor a fascist for the record but I did find great interest in reading about both Hitler and Stalin in all honesty and have long held the opinion that England is ripe for a Hitler character. Were there one around, instead of the apparent knuckledraggers that represent the BNP, they might well have a chance of becoming a major political party.
I watched that Newsnight programme. Now that was embarrassing. Certainly more embarrassing than a lone voice chanting PULIS OUT at the weekend. :-)
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Apr 2, 2013 14:41:48 GMT
Facism, racism...call it what you will. In times of economic hardship, such tendencies will always be more prevalent than during healthier economic times. If the BNP had an intelligent leader (maybe even someone like Hitler who could actually speak convincingly and find the words to tap into a nations frustration) they would most likely be a more viable political party than they are right now. Regardless, I would still welcome Di Canio to Stoke had he turned up as our manager. They're called UKIP!
|
|
|
Post by ColonelMustard on Apr 2, 2013 15:13:40 GMT
I'd be gutted. He's a fascist. FFS!!
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Apr 2, 2013 15:15:33 GMT
Indeed POOB. Hence my point. I am neither a racist nor a fascist for the record but I did find great interest in reading about both Hitler and Stalin in all honesty and have long held the opinion that England is ripe for a Hitler character. Were there one around, instead of the apparent knuckledraggers that represent the BNP, they might well have a chance of becoming a major political party. I watched that Newsnight programme. Now that was embarrassing. Certainly more embarrassing than a lone voice chanting PULIS OUT at the weekend. :-) The problem with Fascism is that it can't co-exist with Democracy. Democracy has its faults but its great strength is that, providing people do exercise their democratic rights at elections, they can displace a government by peaceful means, should a majority vote to do so. Fascism, on the other hand, views political violence as a means to achieve national rejuvenation. One effect of this is that the ordinary people have no way (by peaceful means) of changing a government determined to hang on to power, and are forced to violence (by coup or civil war) to change things. That's why dictators tend to have such long periods in power - without outside aid from neighbouring states, few populations have the resources to change their rulers. Chile under Pinochet was an exception. He assumed power by a military coup but relinquished it after a democratic vote. So, arguably, the Chilean Fascists became democrats at the end of their rule. Me? I'll stick with democracy for all its imperfections. Di Canio has a right to his views - but I have a right to mine - and I really don't want anyone holding fascist views managing my football club.
|
|
|
Post by iglugluk on Apr 2, 2013 15:16:33 GMT
Those on this board that are advocating discrimination against Di Canio for his political views, should perhaps research the definition of a Fascist. maybe you need to research the definition of the word discrimination before writing that...simplistic piece of logic.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Apr 2, 2013 15:21:19 GMT
I guess that is why Tony Pulis has had such a long period in power Lakeland.
Mussolini's version of fascism, as far as I understand it was about as pure as Stalin's version of communism and quite possibly even Hitler's interpretation of fascism.
All aspects of those particular ideology's were adapted and modified to suit their own approach to power and rule. Di Canio could be a fascist without ever approving of an adopted version of the ideology that approved dictatorship and the killing of other races and religions.
What you are effectively saying is that Fascism is fine, so long as it is implemented by a democratcially elected process rather than assumption of power in some form of coup/revolution. Maybe Di Canio shares your views!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2013 15:36:17 GMT
The problem with Fascism is that it can't co-exist with Democracy. Well lets just turn that statement around Lakeland... Can a democracy truly exist if people aren't able to beat the enemies of democracy through intelligence and instead have to rely upon threat, abuse, violence or oppression? Then if under any circumstance the people who had them views were democratically elected to any position, then is that not the actual fundamental principal of democracy right there? I actually think you'd make a 'good' journalist for the Daily Mail. You'd poke around enough people's business asking them all kinds of irrelevant questions until you can find something to scaremonger over. When you buy Coates' out, then you can call it your football club, and you can feel free to hunt out those with different political beliefs. Oh, no you couldnt actually. What you and most people want is a selective democracy which stamps out certain groups because you consider them to have 'extreme' views that fly directly in the face of yours. Your best defence against that is not to fight or to act in the ways that you detest so much, but through education. You are more than welcome to set up your own group to battle facism and racism should you feel so strongly about it. I suggest given the strength of your views, which others would consider extreme themselves, that you dedicate your personal time to eradicating this behaviour. Democracy rules eh!
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Apr 2, 2013 15:38:53 GMT
You've lost me POOB!
|
|
|
Post by countofmontecristo on Apr 2, 2013 15:40:51 GMT
Those on this board that are advocating discrimination against Di Canio for his political views, should perhaps research the definition of a Fascist. maybe you need to research the definition of the word discrimination before writing that...simplistic piece of logic. Discrimination From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search This article is about prejudicial treatment. For statistical discrimination, see linear discriminant analysis. For other uses, see wikt:discrimination. Part of a series on Discrimination General forms[show] · · · · · · · · · · Specific forms Social[show] · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Manifestations[show] · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Policies[show] · · · · · · · Other forms[show] · · Countermeasures[show] · · Related topics[show] · · · · · · Discrimination portal v · t · e Discrimination is the prejudicial and/or distinguishing treatment of an individual based on their actual or perceived membership in a certain group or category, "in a way that is worse than the way people are usually treated. seems to sum it up nicely.....whats your point iglugluk??
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Apr 2, 2013 15:52:29 GMT
The problem with Fascism is that it can't co-exist with Democracy. Well lets just turn that statement around Lakeland... Can a democracy truly exist if people aren't able to beat the enemies of democracy through intelligence and instead have to rely upon threat, abuse, violence or oppression? Then if under any circumstance the people who had them views were democratically elected to any position, then is that not the actual fundamental principal of democracy right there? I actually think you'd make a 'good' journalist for the Daily Mail. You'd poke around enough people's business asking them all kinds of irrelevant questions until you can find something to scaremonger over. When you buy Coates' out, then you can call it your football club, and you can feel free to hunt out those with different political beliefs. Oh, no you couldnt actually. What you and most people want is a selective democracy which stamps out certain groups because you consider them to have 'extreme' views that fly directly in the face of yours. Your best defence against that is not to fight or to act in the ways that you detest so much, but through education. You are more than welcome to set up your own group to battle facism and racism should you feel so strongly about it. I suggest given the strength of your views, which others would consider extreme themselves, that you dedicate your personal time to eradicating this behaviour. Democracy rules eh! Congratulations, that's the first time I've ever been accused of being a Daily Mail sympathiser! I've never even bought it let alone agreed with its politics. Sorry, to disappoint you, but I am well to the left of the Mail. I'm not going to apologise for saying that I believe in democracy and free speech. I don't deny the right of the BNP or Di Canio to express their opinions. Indeed, as I said in an earlier post on this thread, I condemn Di Canio for NOT expressing his opinion in today's press conference. He chose to go public several years ago saying that he was a fascist. Sunderland, last night, criticised the media for suggesting that he still was one. Today he refused to confirm whether or not he holds fascist views. He's chosen not to exercise his right to free speech this week - no one has denied him that right. He has the right to hold whatever political views he wishes. Just as I have the right not to vote BNP or not to want a fascist as manager of my football club. That's what democracy is all about. If I proposed a law to ban fascists from being football managers, that would be undemocratic but not wanting one to be the manager of your own club is simply exercising a democratic right to hold and express an opinion. PS - if the Daily Mail want to print this - tough shit - I refuse to agree!
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Apr 2, 2013 15:59:50 GMT
His views are massively misinterepreted imo. Hes actively supported anti-racism campaigns on numerous occasions and stated that it wasnt necessarily the actions of Mussolini that he supported, but rather that he felt he was "deeply misunderstood". Hes another guy who left wing happy clapping champagne socialist bastards can take a cheap shot at. I'd be delighted if we sacked Pulis and brought in someone of Di Canio's ability. Agree with most of that There are a host of other reasons why I wouldn't want dicanio. Would the employment of glen hoddle cause as much fuss, his beliefs in my opinion are just as if not more offensive than di canios. Good article here www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/sunderland/9966368/Paolo-Di-Canio-hasnt-told-us-anything-about-his-real-views-but-hes-revealed-plenty-about-ours.html
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Apr 2, 2013 16:04:34 GMT
And forget the fact that he's shit at the moment lets sack pulis for being a catholic. An abhorrent religion that has caused and is still causing misery and suffering to thousands of people
And we have players from all sorts of religions that have caused wars and sufferings.
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Apr 2, 2013 16:05:49 GMT
His views are massively misinterepreted imo. Hes actively supported anti-racism campaigns on numerous occasions and stated that it wasnt necessarily the actions of Mussolini that he supported, but rather that he felt he was "deeply misunderstood". Hes another guy who left wing happy clapping champagne socialist bastards can take a cheap shot at. I'd be delighted if we sacked Pulis and brought in someone of Di Canio's ability. Agree with most of that There are a host of other reasons why I wouldn't want dicanio. Would the employment of glen hoddle cause as much fuss, his beliefs in my opinion are just as if not more offensive than di canios. Good article here www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/sunderland/9966368/Paolo-Di-Canio-hasnt-told-us-anything-about-his-real-views-but-hes-revealed-plenty-about-ours.htmlWe had a thread the other week about the prospect of Hoddle as manager. I THINK a majority of posters on that thread (including me) didn't want him because of his beliefs. I can't imagine it would go down too well if he were involved in fundraising for Donna Louise - whilst holding the opinion that the children's illnesses were punishment for what they had done in a previous life.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Apr 2, 2013 16:10:47 GMT
We had a thread the other week about the prospect of Hoddle as manager. I THINK a majority of posters on that thread (including me) didn't want him because of his beliefs. I can't imagine it would go down too well if he were involved in fundraising for Donna Louise - whilst holding the opinion that the children's illnesses were punishment for what they had done in a previous life. Exactly My point is dicanio has done nothing wrong and it's all a fuss about nothing, the press are crucifying him for some out of context quotes and his own political beliefs. I thought we lived in a country where we were free to have our own freedoms, it's not likes hes on the streets of Luton with a 100 black shirts and a microphone.
|
|
|
Post by lordeffinghamhunt on Apr 2, 2013 16:16:22 GMT
How would you react if Stoke appointed a manager with the same political wiews as Di Canio has expressed for several years? Personally I couldn`t have stand to have a self-declared facist as a manager at the club. Even though you shouldn`t mix up political wiews with football or sport, it`s a limit for everything... How would you react if the owners of the club were gangsters? How would react if one the players had killed somebody say in a car crash thro been pissed up? How would you react if one of your players had been up on a sexual assault charge? The thing is football is now a sport that it full of murky characters.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Apr 2, 2013 16:16:28 GMT
I had stopped short of saying that Pulis should be sacked for being a catholic (an abhorrent religion if ever there was one yet one which TP is totally committed to) but see someone mentioned it above! :-)
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2013 16:23:45 GMT
I'm not going to apologise for saying that I believe in democracy and free speech. ...and I'm not expecting or asking you to. I just picked up on your statement that Fascism cant exist within a Democracy and wanted to flip that on its head and went off on one I'm pretty good at that. But asking again though...can a democracy actually exist if some groups are brushed under the table and not allowed to express their views or hold certain positions? Read whatever paper you want too...I read the bloody Metro
|
|
|
Post by lordeffinghamhunt on Apr 2, 2013 16:25:07 GMT
Plus if DiCanio was at Stoke and we were winning games I don't think many of you would give a flying fuck
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Apr 2, 2013 16:31:05 GMT
I had stopped short of saying that Pulis should be sacked for being a catholic (an abhorrent religion if ever there was one yet one which TP is totally committed to) but see someone mentioned it above! :-) Devils advocate and all that mate Some people like to moan about anything. All a storm in a teacup
|
|
|
Post by stokiejoe on Apr 2, 2013 16:35:23 GMT
A silly thread, facism is quite a complex system of government, perhapswhen everone gets fed up of calling each other nams they may wish to read up on the subject and THEN air knowledgeable views. "Historians, political scientists and other scholars have long debated the exact nature of fascism.[19] Each form of fascism is distinct, leaving many definitions too wide or narrow.[20][21] Roger Griffin describes fascism as "a genus of political ideology whose mythic core in its various permutations is a palingenetic form of populist ultranationalism".[22] Griffin describes the ideology as having three core components: "(i) the rebirth myth, (ii) populist ultra-nationalism and (iii) the myth of decadence".[23] Fascism is "a genuinely revolutionary, trans-class form of anti-liberal, and in the last analysis, anti-conservative nationalism" built on a complex range of theoretical and cultural influences. He distinguishes an inter-war period in which it manifested itself in elite-led but populist "armed party" politics opposing socialism and liberalism and promising radical politics to rescue the nation from decadence " en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Apr 2, 2013 16:37:49 GMT
Isn't that pretty much what I alluded to above Joe?
The same is true of far left ideologies just as it is with those from the far right.
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Apr 2, 2013 16:52:09 GMT
I'm not going to apologise for saying that I believe in democracy and free speech. ...and I'm not expecting or asking you to. I just picked up on your statement that Fascism cant exist within a Democracy and wanted to flip that on its head and went off on one I'm pretty good at that. But asking again though...can a democracy actually exist if some groups are brushed under the table and not allowed to express their views or hold certain positions? Read whatever paper you want too...I read the bloody Metro I didn't actually say that Fascism can't exist within a Democracy. I said Fascism can't co-exist with democracy. I should perhaps have said that democracy can't be exercised within a Fascist state, which is what I was trying to say. One of the tenets of Fascism (it seems to me) is that it provides no way for the general population to change a regime by peaceful means - which is why I find it to be such a hateful creed. As I said in my earlier post Chile is unusual in that Pinochet, having seized power then introduced democracy (thus abandoning his fascist principles?) and that is what ended his regime. Very odd! PS - wouldn't my support for gay marriage be a bit of a bar to me being a Daily Mail journalist? Or are they planning to go on a wishy washy liberal offensive?
|
|
|
Post by countofmontecristo on Apr 2, 2013 17:00:49 GMT
A key component of fascism is 'suppression of the opposition through censorship' and this is effectively what we are seeing with Di Canio. The left wing media (and some on here) are demonising him for his political beliefs and hold that he should not be able to seek employment in his chosen field. This seems (to me at least) akin to fascism.
For the record, I wouldn't want him here at the moment (too risky!).
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Apr 2, 2013 17:10:01 GMT
A key component of fascism is 'suppression of the opposition through censorship' and this is effectively what we are seeing with Di Canio. The left wing media (and some on here) are demonising him for his political beliefs and hold that he should not be able to seek employment in his chosen field. This seems (to me at least) akin to fascism. For the record, I wouldn't want him here at the moment (too risky!). Name one poster on this thread who has said he should not be able to seek employment in his chosen field. The question was how would we Stokies feel about his appointment if it was at Stoke. Many of us have said we are against his appointment at Stoke. How is that denying him the right to seek employment? I'm against Brian Little coming back to to manage Stoke but I'm not denying him the right to manage again if he can find a club to take him on. Edit: And how has Di Canio been censored? The problem is that he is refusing to answer questions as to whether he still holds the beliefs he said he held a few years back. No one is refusing to print his comments.
|
|
|
Post by countofmontecristo on Apr 2, 2013 17:30:10 GMT
Lakeland
You are saying that he should not manage Stoke BECAUSE OF HIS POLITICAL BELIEFS - surely therefore you would not mind others doing the same therefore denying him the chance to work.
The censorship part is there for all to see today....Di Canio himself dare not reiterate his beliefs because of the media frenzy that would ensue (in this case self-censorship due to fear of persecution and that is why I used the word 'effectively').
The Brian Little part is a complete red-herring as this is based purely on football reasons (and I agree completely!!!!).
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Apr 2, 2013 18:14:08 GMT
Lakeland You are saying that he should not manage Stoke BECAUSE OF HIS POLITICAL BELIEFS - surely therefore you would not mind others doing the same therefore denying him the chance to work. The censorship part is there for all to see today....Di Canio himself dare not reiterate his beliefs because of the media frenzy that would ensue (in this case self-censorship due to fear of persecution and that is why I used the word 'effectively'). The Brian Little part is a complete red-herring as this is based purely on football reasons (and I agree completely!!!!). At the end of the day, it is down to the club directors and owners to offer or decline to offer the job to a manager. Given that the relationship between a manager and a club chairman is often such a personal thing, I'd be gob smacked if Peter Coates, as a staunch Socialist and Labour Party member, decided to offer the job to someone who has declared themselves to be a fascist. And I doubt if any court would find that he had behaved unreasonably in refusing to offer Di Canio a job in the circumstances. Each club owner will have different beliefs - Ellis Short obviously has no problems with employing Di Cano and I have no problem with that. Sunderland are welcome to him. So I fail to see how he has been denied the chance to work. I simply don't agree with your comments on censorship. The politics of 90% of the people I know or see on TV (outside of politics) are a total mystery to me. I simply don't ask what their politics are - if they want to volunteer the information that's fine. Paulo Di Canio chose to go public about his politics with, first the fascist salute at Lazio, and then the interview he gave afterwards. HE put his politics into the public domain. Now he takes up a job in one of the most cosmopolitan Football Leagues in the world and his new employer chooses to announce (last night) that it is wrong of the media to imply that he is still a fascist. Anyone with a modicum of common sense would see that the media was right to ask him if it was true that he had changed his beliefs. He put his beliefs into the public domain years ago and Sunderland choose to imply that his beliefs have changed. Why shouldn't the press seek clarification of the ambiguity in the Sunderland statement?
|
|
|
Post by countofmontecristo on Apr 2, 2013 18:48:34 GMT
Lakeland
I agree with parts of that. But YOU would not employ him due to his political beliefs. Would you be comfortable with someone being denied employment due to their socialist beliefs?
Would the media be so interested if he had espoused socialist beliefs in the past?
I suppose my point is that there is an agenda at work here and it is rank hipocrisy for someone to be hounded for their political beliefs by those that purport to support democracy.
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Apr 2, 2013 19:31:20 GMT
Lakeland I agree with parts of that. But YOU would not employ him due to his political beliefs. Would you be comfortable with someone being denied employment due to their socialist beliefs? Would the media be so interested if he had espoused socialist beliefs in the past? I suppose my point is that there is an agenda at work here and it is rank hipocrisy for someone to be hounded for their political beliefs by those that purport to support democracy. So, if I were a Rabbi, you'd say I should not be able to refuse to employ Di Canio (on the grounds of his fascism) if he applied for a job at my synagogue because otherwise I would be denying him employment because of his political beliefs? Presumably the same would be true if I were the owner of Maccabi Tel Aviv or even Spurs?
|
|