They do. And as was said, if one house is on fire, and I run into the street shouting 'my house is on fire!' it is not a statement that nobody else's house has problems or that my house matters more, but that mine is actually on fire and it would be good if people could recognise that and put it out, then maybe we can fix Barry's jammed window tomorrow...
"Show them where it hurts, abstain from spending your money in their shops and economies, and invest in black-owned businesses." I seem to remember a similar 'solution' in Germany, late 1930's ... ... rightly condemned as blatantly racist.
So you believe what he said was acceptable? Now imagine Tyson Fury saying the same and encouraging white people to shop in white shops. Then imagine the outcry. Racism works both ways, this is not a one way street
People like Joshua are so simplistic with their solutions. 'Let's stop spending money in the white mobile phone shop where the owner has invested in facilities for young black people ... ... and spend it in the black shop where the owner has convictions for drug dealing and violence. As long as you get the colour right you'll be in the right'.
But do you not recognise the fundamental difference in starting points? Saying that you want people to spend more money in black owned businesses to bring them to an equal point where they can compete with other businesses is not the same. It neglects that most people do already spend money in white-owned businesses because they represent the majority of places people can shop. Saying 'spend more with the people who are disadvantaged' makes perfect sense. If Tyson Fury said he thought gypsies should spend more money in gypsy owned businesses to support their local community, I'd understand exactly what he meant. You know exactly what AJ meant. Saying it's racist to drag the disadvantaged people around you up is just willfully ignoring the point. I wonder, if someone said to spend money in North East businesses over ones in the South, would you consider that anti-Southern, or pro-North-Eastern?
This has been studied by people far more qualified than myself and perhaps a member of our well-informed community could come in at this point if you want to further examine this claim. There is a distinct link between poverty, educational attainment and the subsequent denial of equal opportunity. This link extends to poverty and people of certain ethnic groups and various groups of people of colour and the same link that results in higher crime rates and deaths from coronavirus. The common denominator is relative poverty and that can not be easily extricated from issues relating to race and ethnicities
To be perfectly honest, I wouldn't know what skin colour the owner is in 99% of the shops i go in and couldn't give a flying **** as long as the prices are reasonable. I ask again, is it acceptable what Joshua said? If a white man had said the same would people be jumping through hoops to make excuses or would they instantly think it was racist?
What's stopping them being equal now ... ... do black owners pay higher rates, get taxed more heavily, charged more for having their bins emptied?
If you walk into a shop where every member of staff is black, how do you know if the owner is white. Should you ask for the company details, ethnicity of shareholders, etc.
@Kittenmittons Do you want to try and excuse this text message from Anthony Joshua, too? You’re the only person, that I can see, who is trying to excuse and defend a racist and his racist comments. Shame on you
I notice literally nobody wants to answer the fundamental issue of whether black people are equal after centuries of outright discrimination, where we are one generation removed from No blacks, no Irish, no dogs' and bananas on the pitch. Nobody wants to think about whether it's fair to keep a community down for so long (deliberately and with outright racism) and then say they are equal now. That racism was solved and they have the same opportunities. Nobody wants to admit that if you beat someone up for weeks before a boxing match, then stop beating him the day before and put him in the ring, he's going to lose the majority of his fights. He isn't equal, he's at a disadvantage, he should be given help to make the situation equal. Even now people won;t recognise that this is common sense.
She hits the nail squarely on the head, but in the eyes of those that wish to take offense on other's behalf, they will choose to ignore her sentiments to further their own agendas, which often are the polar opposite of the issues at hand.
But it sounds very radical to some people and, on the whole, people don't like radical solutions. You should be able to see from many of the responses to your posts on this thread how important it is to get the message right.
No I don't, I thought it was racist and he was a ****ing idiot for saying it even in private. But I thought you supported Churchill yeah? The racist? It's ok for you to support him, to say his racism doesn't take away from his achievements in other areas?
Well, that certainly sounds like the sensible middle ground and who could morally disagree that all lives should matter equally irrespective of any racial, cultural or ethnic background? Except when you use this term in the context of a challenge to the Black Lives Matter debate it has the impact of potential to hijack the debate or obfuscate the real issue that systemic racism is still a blight on our society.
I guess i will have to start asking the people who work there? Although I'm not quite sure how to word the question without appearing racist
The answer is that some are equal, some aren't and some are more than equal ... ... same apples to white people. Some black people deserve better and some don't. Some black people prefer criminality to work, as do some white people. Why, when there are so many unemployed black young men, and crops rotting in the fields, do we have to rely on foreigners flying in from Romania. Do you believe the farmers refuse to employ blacks.
