I'm saying these things to you because fundamentally I agree with you but I also understand why the points that have been made have caused people to react in the way that they have. I'm not asking you to be more respectful, I'm asking you to think about the effectiveness of your points. You've made some excellent ones, such as the house on fire analogy- I believe John Amaechi made a similar one about kids with scraped knees. But you've also repeated some really bad ones, like Joshua's (I understand the point but he didn't make it very well). It's frustrating because I think that you'd find that most people would be on side with the concept if it hadn't been obfuscated by the daft statue, tv programme, film stuff and by people not putting their point across in effective ways.
Thanks for this, I think its quite brave of you! There are relatively few people of colour in the North East and it is clear that black people suffer disproportunately from the mantles of poverty than other groups. You use the term misanthropic I assume to refer to a group of disenfranchised people, including the jobless underclass, adults with continuing learning difficulties, alcoholics and drug abusers and also those who work very hard only to remain struggling. I believe our common denominator here is poverty
You mean like here? Maybe you missed it. The superior race comment was racist. No doubt. Does it invalidate anything else I've said about the centuries of inequality, or the starting point for black people being unequal due to open racism that was tolerated by society until the last 20 years? I don't think so. So if I can see your point and acknowledge it, why can't you see mine? What is it you disagree with?
No, I use the term misanthropic in its correct sense in that generally I don’t like people! . I have friends but overall I keep myself to myself. Out of everyone I work with I would class two as friends, the rest are work colleagues. Out of work my wife and I socialise with others and I guess there are a couple of families that I would say are friends. Probably using the term misanthrope is a bit harsh on me, but doing the job I do, I sometimes see the worst that society has to offer. If there was an easy answer or explanation and an easy solution to solve the disparity between people then I’m sure it would have been found by now.
You’re saying it was a racist comment. I’m saying Anthony Joshua is a racist. There’s a difference there and I still maintain you were wrong to try and excuse his comments about shopping in businesses owned by black people. This country clearly had a race problem a few decades ago. I’d say during the 90’s we started to tackle it more and it’s declined to a point now where I’d say it isn’t noticeable in every day society. Is it still prevalent in businesses? I don’t know, you’ll have to write to every CEO in the country for their opinions. I’d agree that there’s definite room for improvement but we are continuing to tackle it and making great strides in doing so. These protests turning into riots are sending out the wrong message. They’re 20 years to late tbh. There’s no big race problem in this country but we should be looking at every health, education, housing and employment departments in the country to make sure that everywhere is equaled up and we aren’t still carrying inequalities from the past.
What Joshua is advocating is the boycott of businesses based entirely on the colour of a person's skin. How can anyone say that it isn't racist ffs. What he's encouraging is the creation of black ghettos yet some people are praising this initiative.
It appears we have common ground, not that I'm a misanthrope. in the sense that I hope you acknowledge that disparities that exist create an underclass; having a society that condemns drug addicts and alcoholics, ignores those with continuing learning disabilities, has no outreach for those suffering mental health problems, allows young mothers to raise the very young under terrible conditions. Due to the coronavirus the homeless have received help and support, couldn't we possibly do more?
That is all anyone is saying, in a nutshell. I just think it's easy to turn a blind eye to racism, in fact I've done it myself. I was with my ex for many years and one day she said that a black guy on the TV had 'N*gger lips'. And I just looked at her actually gobsmacked It's mental but she was a teacher and she was like 'ah, well nobody heard!' and I was thinking ****ing hell! but I stayed with her for years, even when her sister told her boyfriend to turn off the 'N*gger music'. The thing I always remember was that she didn't consider herself a racist. Her dad had a no-black-boyfriends policy but that's not unusual in Yorkshire and he was a nice bloke, we got on well. Then I remember the girl after her, her dad also had this same policy and she said that since she went to uni, she'd realised it was crazy racist. Her uni group used to refer to every black person secretly as 'Eboue' - yes after the lad who never played for us, but he was just breaking through at Arsenal - and she saw no problem with that until a few months later. I guess what I'm saying is that racism doesn't have to be 'No blacks, no dogs, no Irish', or bananas on the pitch, or the National Front. It's not always something we as white people see ourselves, but it's there, even among people under 30, and in small ways it stops black people advancing. Some employers believe black people don't make great coders. I've heard that said to me as a caution by someone at an event. What do you think that guy is telling his kids? And when he's not saying it out loud, I sometimes wonder if he's ever subtlety steered his recruitment away from black people. I don't know, but it would seem weird to say it and then hire black coders wouldn't it? I'm sure you won't change your mind, but all I can say is that there was a time when I was willing to say that because I treat everyone equally, the world does too. Unfortunately, I've now seen it enough times where white people have been outright racist because they felt that I as a white man would not say anything, to know that while it exists between all races to some degree, I'm inclined to agree with the people who have statistics on their side when they talk about inequality, poverty and lack of opportunity that is directly caused by it.
Black Lives Matter, even when considering the peaceful protests only, are not going to gain many new followers, ones of which are going to be able to make a difference. In fact, I would say that the whole thing will end up being counter productive, particularly when you throw the rioters and statue botherers into the equation. If they merely changed their title to 'All Lives Matter', had folk from all different races as figureheads and spokesmen, I feel they would gain more widespread support from folk like me. Instead, even by their name alone, they risk segregating themselves.
To be fair, there would be black families up and down the country, where parents would be mortified if their child bought a white partner home.
Good Lord what a loudmouth. -whilst I don't deny her experiences with crime or in particular to invalidate her opinion, but my word we live in a society where celebrities deliver a lot of sh!te for their Facebook and Instagram soundbite pages ...unfortunately, this is how quite a number of Millennials receive their information about the world we live in.
Sorry for the repost, this came up earlier in the thread, re: is All Lives Matter a better banner label than Black Lives Matter? Well, that (All Lives Matter) 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.
It will be counter productive imo. The Oxford students, as an example, have been unsurprisingly quick to jump on the BLM bandwagon. In all honesty they're not the kind of people who will lend any degree of gravitas to the campaign. They're well known for getting all giddy when rubbing shoulders with racists, when it suits them, and having a jolly old time. The BLM movement is a good one that's being ruined with attacks on the police, criminal damage and the targeting of statues etc. There's a better way to do things but it takes more effort and isn't half as exciting.
" ... they focus on the one wrong word or phrase they said and make them into a pariah." Joshua thought this through and clearly spelled out that black people should discriminate against people specifically because of the colour of their skin ... how is that focusing on a wrong word or phrase, or twisting his words and how isn't it racist?
That's a whole post that didn't come close to answering my question. 'What's stopping them being equal now ... ... do black owners pay higher rates, get taxed more heavily, charged more for having their bins emptied?'
A totally, he was reading a speech that someone else had written, and was passed around. So literally the opposite of what you say.
You're absolutely desperate to avoid the idea that two centuries of black inequality in Britain wasn't undone the moment they made it illegal to call people names in the street aren't you?
And yes, until you stop trying to twist it into questions that you want to have answered, as a response to a question that I asked, then sure, I'll keep not answering yours.
