|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2020 19:12:37 GMT
Ridiculous, What does this achieve other than more demonstrations of people trying to be more woke than everyone else No sane normal person supports racism If it meant ridding the world of the words "woke" and "virtue signalling" I'd happily take a knee......
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jun 9, 2020 19:16:33 GMT
You sure? Mainstream broadcaster and friend of the Tory Party Nick Ferrari asks this black woman 'why do you stay in this country'. Unless you're white British, it doesn't matter, you never truly belong here regardless of your status. It's endemic and normalised and that's why just waiting around for things to change isn't an option. And kier Starmer kneeling down will stop idiots like that? Probably not but protesters being patted on the head by Johnson and Patel and basically told to you've had your whinge up now fuck off, doesn't tell me the establishment recognise the size of the problem or the depth of feeling either.
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Jun 9, 2020 19:32:15 GMT
And kier Starmer kneeling down will stop idiots like that? Probably not but protesters being patted on the head by Johnson and Patel and basically told to you've had your whinge up now fuck off, doesn't tell me the establishment recognise the size of the problem or the depth of feeling either. What would you like the government to say on the matter? I’m not trying to wind you up, just wonder what you think the best course of immediate action is👍🏻
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Jun 9, 2020 19:39:44 GMT
Probably not but protesters being patted on the head by Johnson and Patel and basically told to you've had your whinge up now fuck off, doesn't tell me the establishment recognise the size of the problem or the depth of feeling either. What would you like the government to say on the matter? I’m not trying to wind you up, just wonder what you think the best course of immediate action is👍🏻 All get down to the Winchester
|
|
|
Post by hoffgreen on Jun 9, 2020 19:40:42 GMT
news
Another bit of our indigenous history stripped away.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Jun 9, 2020 19:41:58 GMT
No sane normal person supports racism You sure? Mainstream broadcaster and friend of the Tory Party Nick Ferrari asks this black woman 'why do you stay in this country'. Unless you're white British, it doesn't matter, you never truly belong here regardless of your status. It's endemic and normalised and that's why just waiting around for things to change isn't an option. Someone is worried she is missing the bandwagon there, its not language I'd ever consider using but there is a world of difference between asking someone why there stay somewhere if it's as bad as the privately schooled, oxford educated barrister claims and telling her to leave, if there wasn't she wouldn't need to well lie in her tweet.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Jun 9, 2020 19:46:40 GMT
You sure? Mainstream broadcaster and friend of the Tory Party Nick Ferrari asks this black woman 'why do you stay in this country'. Unless you're white British, it doesn't matter, you never truly belong here regardless of your status. It's endemic and normalised and that's why just waiting around for things to change isn't an option. And kier Starmer kneeling down will stop idiots like that? He would have to get of the fence not going to happen.
|
|
|
Post by Boothen on Jun 9, 2020 20:05:21 GMT
She went so quiet you could almost hear the mic. drop.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jun 9, 2020 20:25:45 GMT
You sure? Mainstream broadcaster and friend of the Tory Party Nick Ferrari asks this black woman 'why do you stay in this country'. Unless you're white British, it doesn't matter, you never truly belong here regardless of your status. It's endemic and normalised and that's why just waiting around for things to change isn't an option. Someone is worried she is missing the bandwagon there, its not language I'd ever consider using but there is a world of difference between asking someone why there stay somewhere if it's as bad as the privately schooled, oxford educated barrister claims and telling her to leave, if there wasn't she wouldn't need to well lie in her tweet. So your point is, she shouldn't be offended by language by your own admission you'd never ever use? Interesting.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2020 21:06:33 GMT
They do a nice Coffin in the USA, Splendid, I could see myself in something like that.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Jun 9, 2020 21:19:00 GMT
Someone is worried she is missing the bandwagon there, its not language I'd ever consider using but there is a world of difference between asking someone why there stay somewhere if it's as bad as the privately schooled, oxford educated barrister claims and telling her to leave, if there wasn't she wouldn't need to well lie in her tweet. So your point is, she shouldn't be offended by language by your own admission you'd never ever use? Interesting. It’s the hypocrisy of it all. Not directly aimed at Starmer but it does come across as such and other parties inc tory. but All these people, groups, firms etc making these virtuous signalling gestures of BLM (and ME2) for other reasons. But still will do what ever they want to suit them. Move factories to third world sweat shops, associate with companies or people, turn blind eyes etc etc. You get the drift Football is no better. Have an annual kick it out or rainbow laces day but do nothing significant to countries or clubs when fans start acting like animals etc
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Jun 9, 2020 21:29:55 GMT
So your point is, she shouldn't be offended by language by your own admission you'd never ever use? Interesting. It’s the hypocrisy of it all. Not directly aimed at Starmer but it does come across as such and other parties inc tory. but All these people, groups, firms etc making these virtuous signalling gestures of BLM (and ME2) for other reasons. But still will do what ever they want to suit them. Move factories to third world sweat shops, associate with companies or people, turn blind eyes etc etc. You get the drift Football is no better. Have an annual kick it out or rainbow laces day but do nothing significant to countries or clubs when fans start acting like animals etc Ah, Rainbow Laces. Let's stick a rainbow flag on a scoreboard, that'll show 'em. If football wanted to make a proper stand against homophobia, perhaps awarding the World Cup to Qatar, where homosexuality is illegal, wasn't the best move?
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Jun 9, 2020 21:47:58 GMT
Someone is worried she is missing the bandwagon there, its not language I'd ever consider using but there is a world of difference between asking someone why there stay somewhere if it's as bad as the privately schooled, oxford educated barrister claims and telling her to leave, if there wasn't she wouldn't need to well lie in her tweet. So your point is, she shouldn't be offended by language by your own admission you'd never ever use? Interesting. I'd notmally say if you find that interesting you should get out more but probably not good advice at the moment, as I said she has to overegg the words in the tweet to jump on the bandwagon. To be honest I think much of this country couldn't care less about statues of long dead people but sooner or later someone will start to stoke their discontent, they will point at these politicians and say look what they did for a guy who was brutally murdered in the usa and how they fall over themselves to apologise for things that happened 400 years ago or whatever and they will point to something that happened here like the grooming gangs or whatever and say what have they done for them and I fear with the millions of soon to be unemployed they will find plenty of people who will listen.
|
|
whakka
Youth Player
Posts: 322
|
Post by whakka on Jun 10, 2020 7:19:45 GMT
At least we now know what kind of prime minister he would make.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Jun 10, 2020 7:43:16 GMT
So your point is, she shouldn't be offended by language by your own admission you'd never ever use? Interesting. I'd notmally say if you find that interesting you should get out more but probably not good advice at the moment, as I said she has to overegg the words in the tweet to jump on the bandwagon. To be honest I think much of this country couldn't care less about statues of long dead people but sooner or later someone will start to stoke their discontent, they will point at these politicians and say look what they did for a guy who was brutally murdered in the usa and how they fall over themselves to apologise for things that happened 400 years ago or whatever and they will point to something that happened here like the grooming gangs or whatever and say what have they done for them and I fear with the millions of soon to be unemployed they will find plenty of people who will listen. Slavery wasn't abolished in the US until just over 150 years ago, 1865.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Jun 10, 2020 7:59:56 GMT
I'd notmally say if you find that interesting you should get out more but probably not good advice at the moment, as I said she has to overegg the words in the tweet to jump on the bandwagon. To be honest I think much of this country couldn't care less about statues of long dead people but sooner or later someone will start to stoke their discontent, they will point at these politicians and say look what they did for a guy who was brutally murdered in the usa and how they fall over themselves to apologise for things that happened 400 years ago or whatever and they will point to something that happened here like the grooming gangs or whatever and say what have they done for them and I fear with the millions of soon to be unemployed they will find plenty of people who will listen. Slavery wasn't abolished in the US until just over 150 years ago, 1865. And ? Colston, Nelson etc that people are demanding their statues be taken down are from 1700s and 1800s, the 400 years or whatever kind of gives it away that is was not meant to be an exact reference but thanks for the irrelevant history lesson anyway.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Jun 10, 2020 8:07:58 GMT
Slavery wasn't abolished in the US until just over 150 years ago, 1865. And ? Colston, Nelson etc that people are demanding their statues be taken down are from 1700s and 1800s, the 400 years or whatever kind of gives it away that is was not meant to be an exact reference but thanks for the irrelevant history lesson anyway. Seems a bit more relevant to me, it's probable that there are people still alive whose Grandparents were born into slavery. What made you pick the figure of 400 years, out of interest?
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Jun 10, 2020 8:29:11 GMT
And ? Colston, Nelson etc that people are demanding their statues be taken down are from 1700s and 1800s, the 400 years or whatever kind of gives it away that is was not meant to be an exact reference but thanks for the irrelevant history lesson anyway. Seems a bit more relevant to me, it's probable that there are people still alive whose Grandparents were born into slavery. What made you pick the figure of 400 years, out of interest? As I said on the statues of Colston, Nelson are from the 1700s and 1800s make it 300 years or whatever if it makes you happier but then you will I assume reference the end of slavery in the UK rather than the USA if you want to be such a stickler, the underlying point is still that there seems more handwringing and anger over things that happened all that time ago than there is on things happening now. The Mayor of London now has a special commission on statues, street names but for knife crime where on average one person dies a week not so much.....
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Jun 10, 2020 8:35:35 GMT
Seems a bit more relevant to me, it's probable that there are people still alive whose Grandparents were born into slavery. What made you pick the figure of 400 years, out of interest? As I said on the statues of Colston, Nelson are from the 1700s and 1800s make it 300 years or whatever if it makes you happier but then you will I assume reference the end of slavery in the UK rather than the USA if you want to be such a stickler, the underlying point is still that there seems more handwringing and anger over things that happened all that time ago than there is on things happening now. The Mayor of London now has a special commission on statues, street names but for knife crime where on average one person dies a week not so much..... I think "all that time ago" is the reason you came up with 400 years in truth. Abolition of slavery in the UK was less than 200 years ago, but I suspect you know that. Last sentence I can't work out what you're trying to say or what your point is, I've read it a few times, it's not like I haven't tried
|
|
|
Post by vokeswagen on Jun 10, 2020 8:36:29 GMT
I have to say as an "ordinary citizen" I do find it fairly alarming that perfectly decent "other ordinary citizens" such as yourself are so cynical about the BBC and the police as sources of information. They may not get it right all the time but they are provably more reliable than any number of online outlets with vested interests in whipping up hatred and misinformation about them. I do agree about the grooming gangs but I really don't think that "treading on eggshells" is a crazy idea here, given how the US protests have gone. There have been minimal arrests here and it's now calming down. Pragmatic policing. The real concern is that these conditions where folk such as yourself feel they have nothing to trust are exactly the conditions, history tells us, in which very bad people attain power and do very bad things.Good post. You are right in what you say about the bbc. The issue however is not whether the bbc is more or less partisan than private media organisations (in many cases provably less as you say) but that the bbc, unlike private media, has no right to meander from impartiality - and the organisation has wandered so far from the path of impartiality that it’s very difficult for someone like me (who sees the bad in their politics) not to see it as a total affront and a national outrage. The news site for example has been a progressive propaganda leaflet for the best part of a decade now. And, whilst people deny this, it’s also completely provable - their coverage of the referendum and the aftermath was a total scandal, and a total violation of any trust they had in my eyes. When influential people working there are incredulous at the suggestion that the bbc is biased, for the most part I actually think their unwillingness to even consider that there could be truth in the accusations is genuine. It makes sense to me. The woke, progressive and pro-globalist politics that the bbc champions is odd in that, the proponents of these mindsets have the generalised habit of feeling that their outlook is so righteous and so obviously correct, that they hardly even view it as a political position, and instead view it as a way of being. Good vs bad. So little wonder the “progressive” bbc don’t see their political biases. Ultimately though, a great many people do see the fallacies and dangers in their world outlook so I think it’s fairly fucking outrageous that they’re taxing the nation to then expose them to political outlooks that maybe only 10% of the country share. With regards to the worry that the resentment I and others harbour can lead to dark places - I take your point but I seriously don’t think there’s anyone ion this forum just biding their time before pledging their allegiance to hitler or Lord Voldemort. Maybe it’s a sign of the polarisation of politics that, you could largely split the EE political posters into two camps (yes I know retarded thought exercise and I wouldn’t like to pigeonhole myself or anyone else) but both sides seem terrified of the most extreme imagined consequences that the spread of the other sides’ ideas could lead to. I would bet my life that your worst fears will never even come close to pass. Let’s not forget that this is the same country that went to war vs the nazis in living memory, and paid for it with an empire. Maybe we all need to be a bit more introspective and a bit less willing to imagine the worst. A very fair analysis mate, and I agree that the BBC sometimes isn't impartial. Large organisations make mistakes, partly for institutional/structural reasons, and partly at an individual level I would point out though, that there are many on "the left" who would also argue that the BBC is not impartial. It's faced many accusations, some fair, some not, about it's coverage of Jeremy Corbyn for example. It's also fairly provably biased in terms of its economic coverage. Which is to say it doesn't ever ask tough questions of the economic system which we operate in - that of neoliberal free markets and exponential growth. Our model is simply assumed to be right. The BBC can't be both "a progressive propaganda leaflet for decades" AND guilty of partisan coverage against the progressive policies of Labour under Corbyn or the implementation of more progressive economic policies. Nor, for example, can it be biased towards both the Israelis and the Palestinians, even though it's frequently vilified by both sides. For me the rational explanation of these discrepancies is that broadly speaking, it does a reasonably good job of being impartial (ie pissing off everyone ) I agree that it was poor on the referendum but don't agree with your bit about how we're relatively safe from sleepwalking into extremism. The sleepwalking was exactly what happened in Germany in the 1930's, in economic/political/geopolitical conditions not so very different to those we're living through today. Not many ordinary Germans started out liking Hitler. They were softened up over time by exactly the same strategies you can now see leaders like Trump and Putin using (and, to a lesser extent for now, Johnson/Cummings). You only have to look at something like starkiller's frankly insane post about a global communist conspiracy (liked and lauded by other posters) to see a slow shift to extremism in front of your eyes on this very board.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jun 10, 2020 8:41:44 GMT
Id sack the twat for wearing that blue suit with green carpet
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jun 10, 2020 8:55:11 GMT
Id sack the twat for wearing that blue suit with green carpet Ha! Quite the clash! But since we've reduced it to how people look, I thought he looked quite smart, unlike the current PM who appears unable to find any clothes that fit, ever!
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jun 10, 2020 8:59:53 GMT
Good post. You are right in what you say about the bbc. The issue however is not whether the bbc is more or less partisan than private media organisations (in many cases provably less as you say) but that the bbc, unlike private media, has no right to meander from impartiality - and the organisation has wandered so far from the path of impartiality that it’s very difficult for someone like me (who sees the bad in their politics) not to see it as a total affront and a national outrage. The news site for example has been a progressive propaganda leaflet for the best part of a decade now. And, whilst people deny this, it’s also completely provable - their coverage of the referendum and the aftermath was a total scandal, and a total violation of any trust they had in my eyes. When influential people working there are incredulous at the suggestion that the bbc is biased, for the most part I actually think their unwillingness to even consider that there could be truth in the accusations is genuine. It makes sense to me. The woke, progressive and pro-globalist politics that the bbc champions is odd in that, the proponents of these mindsets have the generalised habit of feeling that their outlook is so righteous and so obviously correct, that they hardly even view it as a political position, and instead view it as a way of being. Good vs bad. So little wonder the “progressive” bbc don’t see their political biases. Ultimately though, a great many people do see the fallacies and dangers in their world outlook so I think it’s fairly fucking outrageous that they’re taxing the nation to then expose them to political outlooks that maybe only 10% of the country share. With regards to the worry that the resentment I and others harbour can lead to dark places - I take your point but I seriously don’t think there’s anyone ion this forum just biding their time before pledging their allegiance to hitler or Lord Voldemort. Maybe it’s a sign of the polarisation of politics that, you could largely split the EE political posters into two camps (yes I know retarded thought exercise and I wouldn’t like to pigeonhole myself or anyone else) but both sides seem terrified of the most extreme imagined consequences that the spread of the other sides’ ideas could lead to. I would bet my life that your worst fears will never even come close to pass. Let’s not forget that this is the same country that went to war vs the nazis in living memory, and paid for it with an empire. Maybe we all need to be a bit more introspective and a bit less willing to imagine the worst. A very fair analysis mate, and I agree that the BBC sometimes isn't impartial. Large organisations make mistakes, partly for institutional/structural reasons, and partly at an individual level I would point out though, that there are many on "the left" who would also argue that the BBC is not impartial. It's faced many accusations, some fair, some not, about it's coverage of Jeremy Corbyn for example. It's also fairly provably biased in terms of its economic coverage. Which is to say it doesn't ever ask tough questions of the economic system which we operate in - that of neoliberal free markets and exponential growth. Our model is simply assumed to be right. The BBC can't be both "a progressive propaganda leaflet for decades" AND guilty of partisan coverage against the progressive policies of Labour under Corbyn or the implementation of more progressive economic policies. Nor, for example, can it be biased towards both the Israelis and the Palestinians, even though it's frequently vilified by both sides. For me the rational explanation of these discrepancies is that broadly speaking, it does a reasonably good job of being impartial (ie pissing off everyone ) I agree that it was poor on the referendum but don't agree with your bit about how we're relatively safe from sleepwalking into extremism. The sleepwalking was exactly what happened in Germany in the 1930's, in economic/political/geopolitical conditions not so very different to those we're living through today. Not many ordinary Germans started out liking Hitler. They were softened up over time by exactly the same strategies you can now see leaders like Trump and Putin using (and, to a lesser extent for now, Johnson/Cummings). You only have to look at something like starkiller's frankly insane post about a global communist conspiracy (liked and lauded by other posters) to see a slow shift to extremism in front of your eyes on this very board.I can't imagine the right on here will like this surveys as it doesn't meet their narrative for trusted media sources, but I'll leave it here anyway: www.survation.com/survation-covid-19-public-attitude-tracker/
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jun 10, 2020 9:00:44 GMT
Id sack the twat for wearing that blue suit with green carpet Ha! Quite the clash! But since we've reduced it to how people look, I thought he looked quite smart, unlike the current PM who appears unable to find any clothes that fit, ever! Id get rid of that scruffy bugger as well
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Jun 10, 2020 9:02:34 GMT
Ha! Quite the clash! But since we've reduced it to how people look, I thought he looked quite smart, unlike the current PM who appears unable to find any clothes that fit, ever! Id get rid of that scruffy bugger as well Would you also get rid of his scruffy boss?
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jun 10, 2020 9:13:54 GMT
Id get rid of that scruffy bugger as well Would you also get rid of his scruffy boss? Yes I'd give him a peerage and stick him in the house of lords
|
|
|
Post by vokeswagen on Jun 10, 2020 9:15:49 GMT
A very fair analysis mate, and I agree that the BBC sometimes isn't impartial. Large organisations make mistakes, partly for institutional/structural reasons, and partly at an individual level I would point out though, that there are many on "the left" who would also argue that the BBC is not impartial. It's faced many accusations, some fair, some not, about it's coverage of Jeremy Corbyn for example. It's also fairly provably biased in terms of its economic coverage. Which is to say it doesn't ever ask tough questions of the economic system which we operate in - that of neoliberal free markets and exponential growth. Our model is simply assumed to be right. The BBC can't be both "a progressive propaganda leaflet for decades" AND guilty of partisan coverage against the progressive policies of Labour under Corbyn or the implementation of more progressive economic policies. Nor, for example, can it be biased towards both the Israelis and the Palestinians, even though it's frequently vilified by both sides. For me the rational explanation of these discrepancies is that broadly speaking, it does a reasonably good job of being impartial (ie pissing off everyone ) I agree that it was poor on the referendum but don't agree with your bit about how we're relatively safe from sleepwalking into extremism. The sleepwalking was exactly what happened in Germany in the 1930's, in economic/political/geopolitical conditions not so very different to those we're living through today. Not many ordinary Germans started out liking Hitler. They were softened up over time by exactly the same strategies you can now see leaders like Trump and Putin using (and, to a lesser extent for now, Johnson/Cummings). You only have to look at something like starkiller's frankly insane post about a global communist conspiracy (liked and lauded by other posters) to see a slow shift to extremism in front of your eyes on this very board.I can't imagine the right on here will like this surveys as it doesn't meet their narrative for trusted media sources, but I'll leave it here anyway: www.survation.com/survation-covid-19-public-attitude-tracker/ Interesting survey. In terms of the media questions I feel they've somewhat missed a trick though by not including any of the numerous online news providers, from Breitbart to the Canary.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Jun 10, 2020 9:21:46 GMT
Would you also get rid of his scruffy boss? Yes I'd give him a peerage and stick him in the house of lords I actually like the sound of that funnily enough, he'd certainly ruffle some feathers I imagine, could be very entertaining, I suspect the old buggers wouldn't be too amused by his constant lateness tho
|
|
|
Post by vokeswagen on Jun 10, 2020 10:01:18 GMT
|
|
|
Post by noustie on Jun 10, 2020 10:05:42 GMT
Id sack the twat for wearing that blue suit with green carpet Ha! Quite the clash! But since we've reduced it to how people look, I thought he looked quite smart, unlike the current PM who appears unable to find any clothes that fit, ever! I think he does it on purpose and all part of the persona. Remember seeing something that when people come out to make apologies stylists put them in suit jackets too big for them so it illicits sympathy (little boy lost type of thing).
|
|