Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Options

A petition to ban racists from football.

145791016

Comments

  • Options
    Meanwhile on Twitter.
    The WhatsApp chat has appeared of the pompey u18s.
    Cries of publish thier names.
    Looks like some bright spark has published the names but it looks like this person has mixed two of the players up.
  • Options
    se9addick said:
    I don’t understand why people suddenly have an issue with footballers “being political”?

    After generations of having footballers with nothing interesting to say or sounding thick as two planks when they did say it, England seem to have a team composed of articulate, intelligent, young men and I find them sharing their experiences and the things they stand for really refreshing. 

    I would guess the people that think these players shouldn’t “be political” by standing against social injustice and racism are the same people that love the wearing of poppies on shirts and the playing of God Save the Queen before matches. 
    exactly, if you're going to claim that kneeling for a few seconds is political, so is kick it out, wearing poppies every year and singing the national anthem. 
  • Options
    Chizz said: it
    Chizz said:
    A couple of posters on this page - @Southbank and @SteveKielyCambridge - have landed on the phrase 'moral panic'.  I don't really know what to think of this stance.  Is there a real equivalence between objecting to racism and there being 'moral panic'? 

    Moral panic has been defined as 'a widespread feeling of fear, often an irrational one, that some evil person or thing threatens the values, interests, or well-being of a community or society'.  

    So, in this regard, at least, the use of the phrase is entirely apposite.  There is a widespread feeling that some evil thing threatens the values or well-being of our society.  To that extent, the phrase is accurate. 

    There is a 'moral panic', for very, very good reasons.  So I would like to thank southbank and stevekielycambridge for reclaiming the phrase from idiots who like to use it as some kind of divisive slur, like this one 


    I am actually quite proud that there is a moral panic about the insouciance with which the current rise in racism is being met within and beyond Whitehall.  Racism, in all its forms, has to be defeated, by all of us.  Otherwise we all end up as empty-headed, pointless and embarrassing as poor Laurence Fox.  

    I will say that sometimes I like what Laurence Fox says and sometimes I do not; the tweet you quote is rather too conspiratorial for my taste.
    I would argue that that a moral-panic, in this case, is the huge over-estimation of the number of racists in the country. Issues like Brexit or voting Tory or booing the kneeling have been taken as sort of tests and so sort of evidence that there are loads or racists around.
    I wish to God it had not happened, but Sunday evening we had a test: by nothing at all but sheer horribly bad luck and no fault of their own, three ethnic-minority players were shoved into the firing line for missing those penalties. I would expect there to be abuse from the despicable morons, because that is what despicable racist morons do.
    So what were the numbers? If the reporting is to be believed, the number of tweets from England was in the low 10s (again, every one of them is one too many).
    I am not daft: not every knuckle-dragger would have reached for their phone, but if the real number of racists is 100 times that, or 1000, then we should still be very happy that we live in a society where these people are so rare, and where not many years ago, these figures would have been much higher.
    Wrong.  Again.  

    We should never be happy if there are merely slightly fewer racists.  Never.  

    Reasonable people can disagree on Brexit, political party affiliation or Scottish independence.  Reasonable people don't agree that racism is ok if there's only a bit of it.   

    You're either completely opposed to any form of racism, expressed on social media or otherwise; or you're not.  It appears you're not.  
    But where is the context? Joe Bloggs reading the news the last few days thinks English football fans are racist, full stop. Again. 

    In reality we may be looking at a few tweets from some either hateful, deranged or immature people who will hate on someone for whatever reason fits at the time. Disgusting, find them, punish them.

    If Kane had missed the pen, he would have been getting the abuse and it would probably be around his speech, like most attacks on him are. When it was Beckham in 98 it was his sexuality, his wife, his children ffs.

    Meanwhile, on the very same night an English football fan was openly violently attacked and videoed in a racist attack by four black men. Disgusting, find them, punish them.

    There is only one story and narrative in everyone heads though, always - the former. Why is that?

    This country is full of racists but they are found in all colours and until that is acknowledged you’re not going to get everyone on board and I think part of that manifests itself in the booing of the knee too unfortunately.
    did he even have any kids in 1998?
  • Options
    I don't think wearing a poppy is political. What politics does it represent? labour supporters wear them and so do Tories. Likewise, Labour supporters are anti racist and so are Tories. A number of Tory MPs have suggested their own Government and Patel have got this wrong.
  • Options
    Chizz I simply do not understand the confusion - having a goal that everyone agrees with does not mean that everything done to achieve that goal is automatically non-political.
    If, for example, Priti Patel came out tomorrow and said "by increasing national borrowing we are forcing the next generation to pay our bills, so we are cutting all unemployment benefit" would you possibly agree that this was not political? Of course not!
    The underlying aim is not political, but the means that the movement chooses to achieve them are.
    Likewise, if Tyrone Mings simply believes that racism is wrong, then I agrees that is entirely non-political. But the way that the movement is choosing to advance its goals absolutely is political if it includes people starting to publicly criticise members of the Cabinet on Twitter.
    I simply do not understand the confusion.  Why would anyone even care if there is a 'political' reason for ridding the country of the abhorrent stench of systemic racism?  And why would anyone think that a campaign - by people who explain their campaign is not political - is political?  

    There is no 'movement'.  No party.  No political allegiance.  It's a campaign against racism.  Support it.  It makes your country better.  

    Alternatively, criticise it, 'because it's political'.  And thereby demonstrating you're being political.  And/or racist.  
  • Options
    edited July 2021
    Chizz said: it
    Chizz said:
    A couple of posters on this page - @Southbank and @SteveKielyCambridge - have landed on the phrase 'moral panic'.  I don't really know what to think of this stance.  Is there a real equivalence between objecting to racism and there being 'moral panic'? 

    Moral panic has been defined as 'a widespread feeling of fear, often an irrational one, that some evil person or thing threatens the values, interests, or well-being of a community or society'.  

    So, in this regard, at least, the use of the phrase is entirely apposite.  There is a widespread feeling that some evil thing threatens the values or well-being of our society.  To that extent, the phrase is accurate. 

    There is a 'moral panic', for very, very good reasons.  So I would like to thank southbank and stevekielycambridge for reclaiming the phrase from idiots who like to use it as some kind of divisive slur, like this one 


    I am actually quite proud that there is a moral panic about the insouciance with which the current rise in racism is being met within and beyond Whitehall.  Racism, in all its forms, has to be defeated, by all of us.  Otherwise we all end up as empty-headed, pointless and embarrassing as poor Laurence Fox.  

    I will say that sometimes I like what Laurence Fox says and sometimes I do not; the tweet you quote is rather too conspiratorial for my taste.
    I would argue that that a moral-panic, in this case, is the huge over-estimation of the number of racists in the country. Issues like Brexit or voting Tory or booing the kneeling have been taken as sort of tests and so sort of evidence that there are loads or racists around.
    I wish to God it had not happened, but Sunday evening we had a test: by nothing at all but sheer horribly bad luck and no fault of their own, three ethnic-minority players were shoved into the firing line for missing those penalties. I would expect there to be abuse from the despicable morons, because that is what despicable racist morons do.
    So what were the numbers? If the reporting is to be believed, the number of tweets from England was in the low 10s (again, every one of them is one too many).
    I am not daft: not every knuckle-dragger would have reached for their phone, but if the real number of racists is 100 times that, or 1000, then we should still be very happy that we live in a society where these people are so rare, and where not many years ago, these figures would have been much higher.
    Wrong.  Again.  

    We should never be happy if there are merely slightly fewer racists.  Never.  

    Reasonable people can disagree on Brexit, political party affiliation or Scottish independence.  Reasonable people don't agree that racism is ok if there's only a bit of it.   

    You're either completely opposed to any form of racism, expressed on social media or otherwise; or you're not.  It appears you're not.  
    But where is the context? Joe Bloggs reading the news the last few days thinks English football fans are racist, full stop. Again. 

    In reality we may be looking at a few tweets from some either hateful, deranged or immature people who will hate on someone for whatever reason fits at the time. Disgusting, find them, punish them.

    If Kane had missed the pen, he would have been getting the abuse and it would probably be around his speech, like most attacks on him are. When it was Beckham in 98 it was his sexuality, his wife, his children ffs.

    Meanwhile, on the very same night an English football fan was openly violently attacked and videoed in a racist attack by four black men. Disgusting, find them, punish them.

    There is only one story and narrative in everyone heads though, always - the former. Why is that?

    This country is full of racists but they are found in all colours and until that is acknowledged you’re not going to get everyone on board and I think part of that manifests itself in the booing of the knee too unfortunately.
    did he even have any kids in 1998?
    Sorry, wrong tournament. He got quite a lot of consistent abuse:

    https://www.thefreelibrary.com/THE+TAUNT+FROM+ENGLAND+FANS+TO+BECKHAM%3A+%27Your+wife+is+a+whore+and+we...-a062720461

    The point is there are hateful scumbag who will find anyway to attack someone and hurt them. It should not translate to English football fans are racist.
  • Options
    I don't think wearing a poppy is political. What politics does it represent? labour supporters wear them and so do Tories. Likewise, Labour supporters are anti racist and so are Tories. A number of Tory MPs have suggested their own Government and Patel have got this wrong.
    We wear poppies to honour the sacrifice and service of our armed forces, the poppy being symbolically associated with WW1 but now encompassing all conflicts. 

    I’m very happy and proud to wear my poppy in honour of those who have sacrificed, and continue to sacrifice for my way of life. But war is undoubtedly included within the definition of politics and armed forces are tools to enforce political will. I like us having poppies on football shirts, but I can acknowledge that the symbol carries political connotations. 

    I think politics goes slightly beyond Labour or Tory. 
  • Sponsored links:


  • Options
    clb74 said:
    SE7toSG3 said:
    I struggle why people are getting so vexed over this, no-one is asking anyone to take the knee or even show visible/audible support for a group of players taking the knee, (a group of players who have consistently said their gesture is not political but something they feel they need to do). 

    All that is being asked is that people respect their 10 second gesture and not to boo it.

    If you don't agree don't engage, to actively boo when a group of players decide they want to do this just seems provocatively childish to me.  
    Why do I get vexed Clive?
    Because in my view in football we only deal with racism when we want to.
    We can have a player racially abuse another player and yes to me its basically swept under the carpet 8 match ban.
    This ban was accepted by the majority of fans and by football clubs.
    Dave from bilericay boos the taking of the knee and we want him banned for life.

    I do think with a lot of these cases there is an explanation. When a player is found guilty of something like this, they will deny it. They are punished because the burden of proof for punishment is set lower than would be in a court of law. This fact alone determines the severity of the punishment.
  • Options
    Chizz said: it
    Chizz said:
    A couple of posters on this page - @Southbank and @SteveKielyCambridge - have landed on the phrase 'moral panic'.  I don't really know what to think of this stance.  Is there a real equivalence between objecting to racism and there being 'moral panic'? 

    Moral panic has been defined as 'a widespread feeling of fear, often an irrational one, that some evil person or thing threatens the values, interests, or well-being of a community or society'.  

    So, in this regard, at least, the use of the phrase is entirely apposite.  There is a widespread feeling that some evil thing threatens the values or well-being of our society.  To that extent, the phrase is accurate. 

    There is a 'moral panic', for very, very good reasons.  So I would like to thank southbank and stevekielycambridge for reclaiming the phrase from idiots who like to use it as some kind of divisive slur, like this one 


    I am actually quite proud that there is a moral panic about the insouciance with which the current rise in racism is being met within and beyond Whitehall.  Racism, in all its forms, has to be defeated, by all of us.  Otherwise we all end up as empty-headed, pointless and embarrassing as poor Laurence Fox.  

    I will say that sometimes I like what Laurence Fox says and sometimes I do not; the tweet you quote is rather too conspiratorial for my taste.
    I would argue that that a moral-panic, in this case, is the huge over-estimation of the number of racists in the country. Issues like Brexit or voting Tory or booing the kneeling have been taken as sort of tests and so sort of evidence that there are loads or racists around.
    I wish to God it had not happened, but Sunday evening we had a test: by nothing at all but sheer horribly bad luck and no fault of their own, three ethnic-minority players were shoved into the firing line for missing those penalties. I would expect there to be abuse from the despicable morons, because that is what despicable racist morons do.
    So what were the numbers? If the reporting is to be believed, the number of tweets from England was in the low 10s (again, every one of them is one too many).
    I am not daft: not every knuckle-dragger would have reached for their phone, but if the real number of racists is 100 times that, or 1000, then we should still be very happy that we live in a society where these people are so rare, and where not many years ago, these figures would have been much higher.
    Wrong.  Again.  

    We should never be happy if there are merely slightly fewer racists.  Never.  

    Reasonable people can disagree on Brexit, political party affiliation or Scottish independence.  Reasonable people don't agree that racism is ok if there's only a bit of it.   

    You're either completely opposed to any form of racism, expressed on social media or otherwise; or you're not.  It appears you're not.  
    But where is the context? Joe Bloggs reading the news the last few days thinks English football fans are racist, full stop. Again. 

    In reality we may be looking at a few tweets from some either hateful, deranged or immature people who will hate on someone for whatever reason fits at the time. Disgusting, find them, punish them.

    If Kane had missed the pen, he would have been getting the abuse and it would probably be around his speech, like most attacks on him are. When it was Beckham in 98 it was his sexuality, his wife, his children ffs.

    Meanwhile, on the very same night an English football fan was openly violently attacked and videoed in a racist attack by four black men. Disgusting, find them, punish them.

    There is only one story and narrative in everyone heads though, always - the former. Why is that?

    This country is full of racists but they are found in all colours and until that is acknowledged you’re not going to get everyone on board and I think part of that manifests itself in the booing of the knee too unfortunately.
    I don't see it like that.  I certainly don't see news headlines and broadcast news stories that carry anything like a sentiment that says 'English football fans are racist'.  No-one is sharing that as news, no-one is claiming it, and, surely, no-one believes it. 

    What I am seeing on the news is that football is tackling the real problem of racism.  That's to the credit of everyone involved in football; from the players to the management; and from those people who support it.  No-one is saying 'English football fans are racist'; everyone is saying 'the England football team is dealing with a real problem it is experiencing'. 

    I completely agree with you that the four men who attacked an English football fan need to be found, arrested and investigated; and, if found guilty, punished.  I haven't seen the video (and don't want to), so I don't know whether race was an exacerbating factor.  If so, any sentence should be extended, appropriately.  

    Did the white goalkeeper receive abuse for letting four penalties in?  Or was the abuse restricted to the black players whose penalties were either saved or missed?  In my view, none of them should receive abuse.  And, where any abuse they did receive was race-based, it should face the strongest-possible punishment.  Starting with - but not limited to - a permanent ban from any football ground in England.  

    Finally, I cannot agree with your suggestion that 'this country is full of racists'.  There are some; and we need them to be silenced.  But the country isn't 'full of racists' in exactly the same way that you can't argue 'English football fans are racist'. 
  • Options
    Chizz, bad terminology on the last part from me. What I meant was that all of the country is full of racists, as in all ethnic backgrounds in the UK have racist people within them, not just the white population.
  • Options
    Chizz, bad terminology on the last part from me. What I meant was that all of the country is full of racists, as in all ethnic backgrounds in the UK have racist people within them, not just the white population.
    I wouldn't differentiate. 
  • Options
    Chizz I do take your point and this is the last I will say on this because I have taken up too much of everyone's time, yours more than anyone. If I have been more belligerent than I intend, I do apologise.
    This cause is important to me for reasons that you have no way to know and that is not your fault.
    My purpose here is that I have seen altogether too many movements like this fritter away into nothing, and part of that process of frittering away begins with giving up the massive advantage of being non-political, as people think it is fine to have a pop at an MP or two according to their own political preferences. (I am not insisting that this is a fair assessment of the case here, but I have just seen this happen before). This is how a movement or campaign loses momentum and drifts away to nothing.
    To achieve things, I feel a campaign like this needs to get some leadership, start setting aims and goals, and, yes, get political. Otherwise in a year's time nothing will have changed, or worse, kneeling will just be 'something that happens at the start of a football match and we cannot quite remember why'.
    Building something to make change also involves listening to people who, at first, oppose you, trying to understand that they might want to achieve the same results but just in a different way, and avoiding the very reasonable temptation to just call them names. But, again, to be able to do that really needs leadership and structure.
    Again, I do think you have made some very important points, which I will consider.
    All the best.
  • Options
    edited July 2021
    Had the politician in question not waded in, and you do have to ask yourself why she did, then there wouldn't have been a reaction from Mings. It was just that, a reaction and the origin of that shouldn't be ignored.
  • Options
    Have seen listing of number of racist comments posted worldwide and apparently 7 countries make up more than 50% of online racial abuse. The UK is definitely NOT one of them. 31,000,000 people watched the final. Go figure.
  • Options
    Chizz I do take your point and this is the last I will say on this because I have taken up too much of everyone's time, yours more than anyone. If I have been more belligerent than I intend, I do apologise.
    This cause is important to me for reasons that you have no way to know and that is not your fault.
    My purpose here is that I have seen altogether too many movements like this fritter away into nothing, and part of that process of frittering away begins with giving up the massive advantage of being non-political, as people think it is fine to have a pop at an MP or two according to their own political preferences. (I am not insisting that this is a fair assessment of the case here, but I have just seen this happen before). This is how a movement or campaign loses momentum and drifts away to nothing.
    To achieve things, I feel a campaign like this needs to get some leadership, start setting aims and goals, and, yes, get political. Otherwise in a year's time nothing will have changed, or worse, kneeling will just be 'something that happens at the start of a football match and we cannot quite remember why'.
    Building something to make change also involves listening to people who, at first, oppose you, trying to understand that they might want to achieve the same results but just in a different way, and avoiding the very reasonable temptation to just call them names. But, again, to be able to do that really needs leadership and structure.
    Again, I do think you have made some very important points, which I will consider.
    All the best.
    Ok. So, you don't support it because you think it's become too political. And you think it needs to get more political. 

    Fair enough.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Options

  • Options
    Some young Pompey players could soon be looking for a job at asda.
  • Options
    Petitions can sometimes be part of change!
  • Options
    colthe3rd said:
    Some tremendous whatboutery in this thread.

    For all those saying, "oh it's a few idiots", "it's not all football fans". Sure, no one is saying that isn't the case, the problem is it is everyone's issue, regardless of the colour of your skin. Groups that we are a part of are getting a bad name, well people with a skin colour other than white are getting racist abuse on a regular basis, which is worse? Anyone who says "well I'm not a racist", good for you but what are you doing to try and stop other people being racist? We ALL (and yes this goes for every person regardless of your colour) have a duty to call out and if needed report anything we've heard or seen.

    I know for a fact that I've heard it at the Valley and one occasion in the last couple of years racist abuse towards one of our own players, sure I don't think everyone who goes is a racist but there is undoubtedly a minority. It's not just limited to Twitter as some seem to think. I wonder how many times we've heard one of our friends say something that is well past the mark, how many times would we call them out on it? This is how these things fester and start to grow.

    So yes, YOU may not be a racist but YOU also have a duty to do something about it. So call out racism when you see or hear it, sign petitions, stop booing like a moron and start applauding the inspirational young men who are trying to make a difference.
    Well said, sir 
  • Options
    Some young Pompey players could soon be looking for a job at asda.
    Why should Asda have to put up with them 😉
  • Options
    edited July 2021
    Chizz said:
    Chizz I do take your point and this is the last I will say on this because I have taken up too much of everyone's time, yours more than anyone. If I have been more belligerent than I intend, I do apologise.
    This cause is important to me for reasons that you have no way to know and that is not your fault.
    My purpose here is that I have seen altogether too many movements like this fritter away into nothing, and part of that process of frittering away begins with giving up the massive advantage of being non-political, as people think it is fine to have a pop at an MP or two according to their own political preferences. (I am not insisting that this is a fair assessment of the case here, but I have just seen this happen before). This is how a movement or campaign loses momentum and drifts away to nothing.
    To achieve things, I feel a campaign like this needs to get some leadership, start setting aims and goals, and, yes, get political. Otherwise in a year's time nothing will have changed, or worse, kneeling will just be 'something that happens at the start of a football match and we cannot quite remember why'.
    Building something to make change also involves listening to people who, at first, oppose you, trying to understand that they might want to achieve the same results but just in a different way, and avoiding the very reasonable temptation to just call them names. But, again, to be able to do that really needs leadership and structure.
    Again, I do think you have made some very important points, which I will consider.
    All the best.
    Ok. So, you don't support it because you think it's become too political. And you think it needs to get more political. 

    Fair enough.
    That confused me. Fighting inequality should not belong to the left or right. It is about right and wrong. Taking the knee is not a political act. It can't be, because the people doing it are not left wing activists, but millionaire footballers. Lewis Hamilton does it and he lives in a tax haven. So you are either thick if you can't work that one out or you seek to make it political for another reason.

    To find that reason, you have to look at what a lot of these anti WOKE mouth foamers views are on racism. These people are the I'm not racist but .... people the Government has courted in recent years. They don't go on EDF rallies and most never have, but they believe that Black people are moaning too much and they have a decent deal, often over working class white people. And they have nothing against foreigners and black people but there are too many of them in this country and we certainly don't want any more.

    They opposed the Diversity dance saying they should be dancing about muggers - I think that is one of Jimbo's but he is talking to like minded people. It isn't anything to do with a left wing movement, but their own view and tiredness about winging anti-racists. 
  • Options
    Chizz said:
    Chizz I do take your point and this is the last I will say on this because I have taken up too much of everyone's time, yours more than anyone. If I have been more belligerent than I intend, I do apologise.
    This cause is important to me for reasons that you have no way to know and that is not your fault.
    My purpose here is that I have seen altogether too many movements like this fritter away into nothing, and part of that process of frittering away begins with giving up the massive advantage of being non-political, as people think it is fine to have a pop at an MP or two according to their own political preferences. (I am not insisting that this is a fair assessment of the case here, but I have just seen this happen before). This is how a movement or campaign loses momentum and drifts away to nothing.
    To achieve things, I feel a campaign like this needs to get some leadership, start setting aims and goals, and, yes, get political. Otherwise in a year's time nothing will have changed, or worse, kneeling will just be 'something that happens at the start of a football match and we cannot quite remember why'.
    Building something to make change also involves listening to people who, at first, oppose you, trying to understand that they might want to achieve the same results but just in a different way, and avoiding the very reasonable temptation to just call them names. But, again, to be able to do that really needs leadership and structure.
    Again, I do think you have made some very important points, which I will consider.
    All the best.
    Ok. So, you don't support it because you think it's become too political. And you think it needs to get more political. 

    Fair enough.
    That confused me. Fighting inequality should not belong to the left or right. It is about right and wrong. Taking the knee is not a political act. It can't be, because the people doing it are not left wing activists, but millionaire footballers. Lewis Hamilton does it and he lives in a tax haven. So you are either thick if you can't work that one out or you seek to make it political for another reason.

    To find that reason, you have to look at what a lot of these anti WOKE mouth foamers views are on racism. These people are the I'm not racist but .... people the Government has courted. They don't go on EDF rallies and most never have, but they believe that Black people are moaning too much and they have a decent deal, often over working class white people. They opposed the Diversity dance saying they should be dancing about muggers - I think that is one of Jimbo's but he is talking to like minded people. It isn't anything to do with a left wing movement, but their own view and tiredness about winging anti-racists. 
    How much do you need to earn before you are no longer capable of making political statements?

    Taking the knee is absolutely a political statement, regardless of the wealth of the sportsmen doing it, and good on them because they are doing the right thing. To think that sportsmen are incapable of making political statements and gestures because they are not “left wing activists” is nonsense.
  • Options
    Chizz said:

    Ok. So, you don't support it because you think it's become too political. And you think it needs to get more political. 

    Fair enough.
    Honestly, did you even consider the point I was trying to make before you wrote that? I do really believe that you want to see positive change, which is a very good thing, but in the long run, this kind of thinking will hold it back. Good luck.

  • Options
    edited July 2021
    se9addick said:
    Chizz said:
    Chizz I do take your point and this is the last I will say on this because I have taken up too much of everyone's time, yours more than anyone. If I have been more belligerent than I intend, I do apologise.
    This cause is important to me for reasons that you have no way to know and that is not your fault.
    My purpose here is that I have seen altogether too many movements like this fritter away into nothing, and part of that process of frittering away begins with giving up the massive advantage of being non-political, as people think it is fine to have a pop at an MP or two according to their own political preferences. (I am not insisting that this is a fair assessment of the case here, but I have just seen this happen before). This is how a movement or campaign loses momentum and drifts away to nothing.
    To achieve things, I feel a campaign like this needs to get some leadership, start setting aims and goals, and, yes, get political. Otherwise in a year's time nothing will have changed, or worse, kneeling will just be 'something that happens at the start of a football match and we cannot quite remember why'.
    Building something to make change also involves listening to people who, at first, oppose you, trying to understand that they might want to achieve the same results but just in a different way, and avoiding the very reasonable temptation to just call them names. But, again, to be able to do that really needs leadership and structure.
    Again, I do think you have made some very important points, which I will consider.
    All the best.
    Ok. So, you don't support it because you think it's become too political. And you think it needs to get more political. 

    Fair enough.
    That confused me. Fighting inequality should not belong to the left or right. It is about right and wrong. Taking the knee is not a political act. It can't be, because the people doing it are not left wing activists, but millionaire footballers. Lewis Hamilton does it and he lives in a tax haven. So you are either thick if you can't work that one out or you seek to make it political for another reason.

    To find that reason, you have to look at what a lot of these anti WOKE mouth foamers views are on racism. These people are the I'm not racist but .... people the Government has courted. They don't go on EDF rallies and most never have, but they believe that Black people are moaning too much and they have a decent deal, often over working class white people. They opposed the Diversity dance saying they should be dancing about muggers - I think that is one of Jimbo's but he is talking to like minded people. It isn't anything to do with a left wing movement, but their own view and tiredness about winging anti-racists. 
    How much do you need to earn before you are no longer capable of making political statements?

    Taking the knee is absolutely a political statement, regardless of the wealth of the sportsmen doing it, and good on them because they are doing the right thing. To think that sportsmen are incapable of making political statements and gestures because they are not “left wing activists” is nonsense.
    If it is political, what party does it represent? The left and right can argue who is right about this or that, but surely we all agree on here that nobody can argue that racism is right.
This discussion has been closed.

Roland Out Forever!