I'm not saying that at all ... ... you're just jumping from one standpoint to another when you lose your footing.
Faux pretty much sums it up ... ... when the novelty of jumping around for the cameras, in London, wears off 90% of the protestors won't lift a finger to actually help the black community .... ... nor will the internet heroes who think they're fighting the good fight by posting drivel on forums like this. I've worked for the Methodist Church, the Salvation Army and the British Legion so feel entitled to say that.
I haven't lost any footing and please don't be patronising You clearly indicated that things were in some form of chaos before the arrival colonising Europeans ...Care to explain this Eurocentric viewpoint?
Every one of your posts is patronising ... ... you should grow up and drop the attention seeking routine.
Doesn't it come from India where there was a right pack of bastards called Thugees who would beat people up for money. Hooligan is Irish iirc so that'll be next. I always wondered about 'good Samaritan' ... ... surely that's an insult because you're saying it's rare and the others are all splitters.
Long story, but this reminds me of one night in Jamaica in a packed dance hall with the wife and I the only white faces in the place, it was absolute magic, and I don't think I have ever experienced a more smokey or friendly atmosphere anywhere. Made me laugh when media here tried to brand Bob Marley as a fire brand and a danger to society when he broke here a year or two later.
This is the problem. Tommy Robinson and his idiots just make the situation worse. Their actions shouldn't be publicised. We just end up in a situation where the most extreme views on either side are given the biggest platform leaving no room for the sensible, moderate views of those in the middle, who are most likely to be able to come together to find a resolution.
Just watched C4 news where a black community leader and pastor was commenting on the right wing idiots. She was actually shouting and ranting about how unacceptable their actions were but, despite being asked twice, she just couldn't bring herself to condemn the BLM rioters who'd attacked police, etc. She insisted it was right to tear down statues but, when asked about Churchills statue and if she thought he was a racist said, "Well I wouldn't know, I've never met him" which is frankly idiotic. If people truly want equality they should have the courage to see things from both sides ... ... surely that's what the protestor are demanding.
Protests are something our society is built on, the Jarrow March, the Iraq war protests, The poll tax riots. There are others, but they have achieved things and often looked correct despite mockery at the time. By definition, the people at these marches have already contributed meaningfully to the black community by standing in solidarity with them at a time when they are highlighting systemic racism, when in the past, it was easier to look the other way. It's nice that you worked for a bunch of organisations that help people, but I suspect if you asked many black people today, they would also appreciate the people who stand with them and help bring attention to a cause that white people in particular have found excuses to ignore for a long time. Much of the protest revolves around the awareness of racism that is built-in to structures that we take for granted as white people. Particularly, they draw attention to the police, an institution to protect all of us. According to the police's own data, black people are five times more likely to have force used against them when arrested than white people who are being arrested. To put it another way, have you ever felt that being white was a disadvantage when being arrested in this country? Have you ever felt 'oh ****, the police might treat me badly here because of the colour of my skin?' I haven't. Never crossed my mind. Yet whenever black people say anything about this blatant discrimination, they are dismissed out of hand, as if racism has been solved and everyone has moved on, as if they'll never be happy until - god forbid - we actually get rid of all discrimination from the police. Imagine that? Bloody unreasonable, asking the police to not beat black people more than they beat white people. And they say it so disingenuously too, as if my mother and father in law didn't have a rule saying my mrs wasn't allowed to bring a black man home (this is very common up here and you all know it). As if they don't describe themselves as racists and think that's ok because if black people are allowed to be proud of being black, they should be proud of being white and **** the fact that pretty much anyone saying they're proud to be white is doing it as a '**** you' way to undermine genuine problems black people face. As if I haven't seen black peoples' CV's torn up and put in a bin before even being looked at in a sports shop, as if the press don't treat our young black footballers differently to young white footballers. I could go on. One of my good friends is black and he once came into my place of work. When he left one of the people called me a 'N*gger lover'. And I haven't even started on the depressingly clear racism you hear almost every match that is excused due to passion by some. 'All lives matter' is such a very difficult thing for me to say when the ultimate reason for saying it is to undermine the BLM message and maintain a status quo where some lives currently matter less than others. If my house was on fire, and someone turned up saying their house should get water because it was a bit hot and all houses matter, I'd politely suggest that maybe we could look at his house once the actual flames weren't burning mine to the ground. Nobody is saying that my house matters more than others, but if it's on fire, I don't run into the street shouting 'Everyone's house is on fire!!!' We (rightly) still believe in the North East that we are a forgotten man of the country, that we don't get the same type of help from central government that the south does. If we want to highlight that, it would be useless to go to a protest and start chanting 'The South have it quite bad too!'. If we said 'The North East matters!' people wouldn't bat an eyelid, yet when black people highlight that they are less than equal in pretty fundamental ways in this country... why is that different? As for the riots, there were some idiots who took it upon themselves to do things that were not at the heart of why the majority are protesting. I disagree with that and think it gives easy ammo to people who are desperate to pretend that there's no legitimate reason to protest, but I can at least understand why people become utterly disillusioned with being told to keep protesting in the same way that has been ineffective for decades. I spoke to someone the other day and when he said that he didn't like the riots, I started talking about the peaceful protests and the real message. Pretty soon, he'd made his mind up that even that peaceful protest was somehow inherently flawed too. You can't win. Peaceful protests are dismissed as useless and their words fall on deaf ears. They're ignored for decades and then when the levee breaks, it comes out as frustration. When it does, people use that as a reason to pour cold water on the ideas that the majority of peaceful protesters were standing for. The democratic means to prevent inequality have failed here and in America. There, moreso. I don't agree with pulling down Churchill's statue, but I do think that people would not be pulling it down if the country was more willing to listen and actually understand why many black people feel they are treated differently because of the colour of their skin.
This gave me a really good belly laugh This form of argumentation is called ad hominen and serves no place in reasoned pr intelligent debate In this case, its also a device to avoid the question, but hey, nice try
A response full of the patronising arrogance of which you accuse others ... ... and which characterised your initial post. I'm not avoiding the question because you've absolutely no idea what you're asking ... ... it's just a litany of tired old internet comebacks and 'buzz phrases'. Just get to the point instead of the endless waffling.
The BLM movement is a very noble one. No one in this country should be treated differently on the basis of the colour of their skin. Removing statues and symbols of the slave trade is one thing but I think attacking statues of individuals such as Chuchill is a deliberate attempt to antagonize. Or possibly, a deliberate attempt to discredit the movement by its opponents. One of the main pieces of evidence cited for Churchill being racist is the Bengal famine of 1943. Although the famine is considered to be 'man made' its causes were many and varied. Churchill's role in it was to (initially) refuse to send aid. But Britain, and therefore the rest of the Empire, was at war and, as I understand it, the decision not to send aid was a tactical decision. I'd argue that his motives here were more to do with winning at all costs than anything else. Similarly, for tactical reasons, Churchill ordered the attack on the French fleet ar Mers-el-Kébir with the loss of more than 1000 French lives (which I realise is a lot less than died in the famine) but no one calls him anti-French.
