Booing the knee *Mod Note in Post 1232 and OP*

jakiah

Polar101 wrote: »

I had a season ticket for over 20 years. I never saw or heard anyone boo during a pre-match show of respect. I think if anyone did, they'd get 'sorted out' pretty quickly too.

Political symbolism was banned from football until very recently, otherwise you'd have heard plenty. I take it you werent a ST holder at Celtic where the poppy 'show of respect' was booed repeatedly.

Can anyone who's anti-booing steel-man the argument for booing in good faith?

nolivesmatter

Deleted User wrote: »

Can anyone who's anti-booing steel-man the argument for booing in good faith?

Great question. Fair play.

ArthurDayne

jakiah wrote: »

Would you stop, its clear as day youve never seen the inside of a football ground. People boo, get over it.

Football is a huge part of my life — I guess I just think the craic and sh*thousery goes too far when a grown adult is defending other grown adults booing and jeering at black players doing an anti-racism gesture.

But I must be a snowflake, and those people are really brave.

archfi

ArthurDayne wrote: »

Football is a huge part of my life — I guess I just think the craic and sh*thousery goes too far when a grown adult is defending other grown adults booing and jeering at black players doing an anti-racism gesture.

But I must be a snowflake, and those people are really brave.

Really bad faith.

jakiah

ArthurDayne wrote: »

Football is a huge part of my life — I guess I just think the craic and sh*thousery goes too far when a grown adult is defending other grown adults booing and jeering at black players doing an anti-racism gesture.

But I must be a snowflake, and those people are really brave.

"a grown adult is defending other grown adults booing and jeering at black players doing an anti-racism gesture"

Bollocks, when did we decide that was whats happening? If there were no black players would booing the gesture be ok? Why do you pick out Black players specifically, I thought this was a general anti-racist protest?

Your posts are just 'football fans are all racist' with longer sentences.

ArthurDayne

Deleted User wrote: »

Can anyone who's anti-booing steel-man the argument for booing in good faith?

Well let’s say a player gets booed a whole match for diving, or ref gets booed for bad decision etc etc.

Then let’s say a black player who has been racially abused does an anti-racism gesture and the crowd jeers at him.

Do you consider those to be equivalent on the good faith scale?

bewareofthedog

Foxtrol wrote: »

So we've cleared up that multiple separate groups can use the same slogan and not all be tarnished by the actions of the worst that use it?

This is such an absolute cop out.

I'm sure there was plenty of German civilians giving the sieg heil salute who only wanted German prosperity.

Are we even dealing in reality anymore? "Multiple separate groups" my arse.

martingriff

jakiah wrote: »

Political symbolism was banned from football until very recently, otherwise you'd have heard plenty. I take it you werent a ST holder at Celtic where the poppy 'show of respect' was booed repeatedly.

RACISM is political now!!!!

jakiah

martingriff wrote: »

RACISM is political now!!!!

Same **** the poppy fanatics came out with - "its not political". Celtic disagreed.

nolivesmatter

ArthurDayne wrote: »

Well let’s say a player gets booed a whole match for diving, or ref gets booed for bad decision etc etc.

Then let’s say a black player who has been racially abused does an anti-racism gesture and the crowd jeers at him.

Do you consider those to be equivalent on the good faith scale?

No they mean can you steel-man the argument for booing the kneeling, not just for booing in general. It's an interesting question because it gives people here an opportunity to find some common ground, and to show that they really understand the argument being made from the people against the kneeling.

ArthurDayne

ArthurDayne wrote: »

Well let’s say a player gets booed a whole match for diving, or ref gets booed for bad decision etc etc.

Then let’s say a black player who has been racially abused does an anti-racism gesture and the crowd jeers at him.

Do you consider those to be equivalent on the good faith scale?

Sorry, I should have been more specific.

Can you make a good-faith attempt at a steel-man argument for fans in the stadium booing people on the team they're supporting for taking a knee, as is happening now?

bewareofthedog

Deleted User wrote: »

Sorry, I should have been more specific.

Can you make a good-faith attempt at a steel-man argument for fans in the stadium booing people on the team they're supporting for taking a knee, as is happening now?

It's pretty clear cut in my opinion.

"Taking the knee" is heavily associated with Black Lives Matter, a radical, racist political movement with some of the following beliefs ( These are listed on their fundraiser pages and own website ).

Destruction of the Western Nuclear family and instead install a commune type living arrangement
Dismantlement of the police force
Dismantlement of the prison system and holding centers for criminals
Dismantlement of Western Capitalism

In their "fight for freedom" they've defaced popular UK historical figures like Churchill which the majority found to be totally immoral. They want to eliminate history and begin their "own truth".

Some will argue that the knee pre game has nothing to do with the social/political movement known as Black Lives Matter.

If this is the case why did Sky Sports display their logo on screens for months when the kneeling starting?



Why were empty stadiums across the Country filled with that logo while the pandemic was going on?



If kneeling has nothing to do with that campaign, then why was it rammed down peoples throats and mentioned continuously for months across Sky, BBC, ITV etc that both were one of the same?

The argument that "there's one BLM that means this, and another BLM that means this" is so undeniably disingenuous. It's cloud cuckoo land stuff.

It's really simple, if kneeling isn't showing support for BLM but a different cause, then why not simply use a different slogan and gesture that everybody can get behind. Kneeling will be forever associated with that group and it didn't just occur naturally - even ignoring the recent political history in the US, the major broadcasters and political/sports commentators made the association very clear.

B_ecke_r

Do I support their right to do it ?

100%

Do I think it will achieve anything ?

Probably not. Racists can't be educated.

jakiah

This BLM crowd seem pretty wild, kinda like a yank version of St Pauli

Tell me how

bewareofthedog wrote: »

It's pretty clear cut in my opinion.

"Taking the knee" is heavily associated with Black Lives Matter, a radical, racist political movement with some of the following beliefs ( These are listed on their fundraiser pages and own website ).

Destruction of the Western Nuclear family and instead install a commune type living arrangement
Dismantlement of the police force
Dismantlement of the prison system and holding centers for criminals
Dismantlement of Western Capitalism

In their "fight for freedom" they've defaced popular UK historical figures like Churchill which the majority found to be totally immoral. They want to eliminate history and begin their "own truth".

Some will argue that the knee pre game has nothing to do with the social/political movement known as Black Lives Matter.

If this is the case why did Sky Sports display their logo on screens for months when the kneeling starting?



Why were empty stadiums across the Country filled with that logo while the pandemic was going on?



If kneeling has nothing to do with that campaign, then why was it rammed down peoples throats and mentioned continuously for months across Sky, BBC, ITV etc that both were one of the same?

The argument that "there's one BLM that means this, and another BLM that means this" is so undeniably disingenuous. It's cloud cuckoo land stuff.

It's really simple, if kneeling isn't showing support for BLM but a different cause, then why not simply use a different slogan and gesture that everybody can get behind. Kneeling will be forever associated with that group and it didn't just occur naturally - even ignoring the recent political history in the US, the major broadcasters and political/sports commentators made the association very clear.

A - BLM originated out of a call for action as story after story of black people being treated unfairly and prejudicially by the police in the US.
B - It did not originate from a group of people pushing a singular set of ideals.
C - Some groups have formed and have staked a claim to the phrase, unsuprising given the awareness of it at this point.
D - They did not organise arrange or direct the protests which went on last year but rather these protests were started in each location by local activists.
E - Because of the public awareness of the way people were being treated unfairly because of the colour of the skin, there were protests worldwide throughout last year, including at football matches in Europe.
F - these protests were not organised, arranged or directed by any singular group.
G - Since then, those in particular areas, such as UK footballers have identified the need to continue calling for attention to the issues of racism and abuse they experience.
H - It is for this reason, and under this initiative that kneeling protests have continued.
I - Trying to conflate what is happening now with singular individuals who have coopted the BLM identity for their own reasons is deliberately misrepresenting what is happening given how various responsible groups and people tied to the kneeling at football matches have said.
J - People are doing it because it allows them to claim it is some sort of Marxist takeover program probably conceived by George Soros and Greta Thunberg and they can simplistically dismiss the whole thing for this reason.

bewareofthedog

Tell me how wrote: »

A - BLM originated out of a call for action as story after story of black people being treated unfairly and prejudicially by the police in the US.
B - It did not originate from a group of people pushing a singular set of ideals.
C - Some groups have formed and have staked a claim to the phrase, unsuprising given the awareness of it at this point.
D - They did not organise arrange or direct the protests which went on last year but rather these protests were started in each location by local activists.
E - Because of the public awareness of the way people were being treated unfairly because of the colour of the skin, there were protests worldwide throughout last year, including at football matches in Europe.
F - these protests were not organised, arranged or directed by any singular group.
G - Since then, those in particular areas, such as UK footballers have identified the need to continue calling for attention to the issues of racism and abuse they experience.
H - It is for this reason, and under this initiative that kneeling protests have continued.
I - Trying to conflate what is happening now with singular individuals who have coopted the BLM identity for their own reasons is deliberately misrepresenting what is happening given how various responsible groups and people tied to the kneeling at football matches have said.
J - People are doing it because it allows them to claim it is some sort of Marxist takeover program probably conceived by George Soros and Greta Thunberg and they can simplistically dismiss the whole thing for this reason.

The original founders of BLM describe themselves as trained Marxists, pull your long fangled impossible to reply list nonsense on somebody else.

Tell me how

Tell me how wrote: »

A - BLM originated out of a call for action as story after story of black people being treated unfairly and prejudicially by the police in the US.
B - It did not originate from a group of people pushing a singular set of ideals.
C - Some groups have formed and have staked a claim to the phrase, unsuprising given the awareness of it at this point.
D - They did not organise arrange or direct the protests which went on last year but rather these protests were started in each location by local activists.
E - Because of the public awareness of the way people were being treated unfairly because of the colour of the skin, there were protests worldwide throughout last year, including at football matches in Europe.
F - these protests were not organised, arranged or directed by any singular group.
G - Since then, those in particular areas, such as UK footballers have identified the need to continue calling for attention to the issues of racism and abuse they experience.
H - It is for this reason, and under this initiative that kneeling protests have continued.
I - Trying to conflate what is happening now with singular individuals who have coopted the BLM identity for their own reasons is deliberately misrepresenting what is happening given how various responsible groups and people tied to the kneeling at football matches have said.
J - People are doing it because it allows them to claim it is some sort of Marxist takeover program probably conceived by George Soros and Greta Thunberg and they can simplistically dismiss the whole thing for this reason.

Regardless, I will not support anyone making that gesture for any reason. I also wouldn't support people using a swastika, a Nazi salute or any other gesture that is intrinsically linked to an organisation I oppose.

This has been repeated countless times and we are going around in circles.

Nobody here is seriously opposing making a stand about racism. They are opposing the gesture.

You disagree with that stance. Fair enough. Plenty of posters have accused those against the kneeling are racist for doing so (not true).

You can bleat on about how kneeling and BLM aren't linked and I'll keep bleating on about how they are.

You respect the individuals right to knee, as do I. I also respect the right of the supporter to boo.

bewareofthedog

bewareofthedog wrote: »

The original founders of BLM describe themselves as trained Marxists, pull your long fangled impossible to reply list nonsense on somebody else.

It started with a hashtag and it's a pretty broad movement. The first to take the knee in relation to police violence was Colin Kaepernick who is also most definitely not a Marxist... So ya, I think no matter what gesture was made, posters would be objecting. Suspect plenty of posters objected when Kaepernick took the knee too and it wasn't out of concern for Marxist agendas.

jakiah

Tell me how wrote: »

A - BLM originated out of a call for action as story after story of black people being treated unfairly and prejudicially by the police in the US.
B - It did not originate from a group of people pushing a singular set of ideals.
C - Some groups have formed and have staked a claim to the phrase, unsuprising given the awareness of it at this point.
D - They did not organise arrange or direct the protests which went on last year but rather these protests were started in each location by local activists.
E - Because of the public awareness of the way people were being treated unfairly because of the colour of the skin, there were protests worldwide throughout last year, including at football matches in Europe.
F - these protests were not organised, arranged or directed by any singular group.
G - Since then, those in particular areas, such as UK footballers have identified the need to continue calling for attention to the issues of racism and abuse they experience.
H - It is for this reason, and under this initiative that kneeling protests have continued.
I - Trying to conflate what is happening now with singular individuals who have coopted the BLM identity for their own reasons is deliberately misrepresenting what is happening given how various responsible groups and people tied to the kneeling at football matches have said.
J - People are doing it because it allows them to claim it is some sort of Marxist takeover program probably conceived by George Soros and Greta Thunberg and they can simplistically dismiss the whole thing for this reason.

Mate, if you need a ten point political science history lesson to prove why your protest isnt political, youve probably failed.

Begs the question, did anyone ASK these BLM lads if they wanted their political message watered down so piss-weak that it could pass muster as a sanctioned protest at a UEFA administered football match?

bewareofthedog

Deleted User wrote: »

It started with a hashtag and it's a pretty broad movement. The first to take the knee in relation to police violence was Colin Kaepernick who is also most definitely not a Marxist... So ya, I think no matter what gesture was made, posters would be objecting. Suspect plenty of posters objected when Kaepernick took the knee too and it wasn't out of concern for Marxist agendas.

All I can do is echo the above post by "the_dunne" because what he wrote is exactly my feelings on the matter too. It was a mistake by sport broadcasters and sport in general to get entangled with politics.

On the topic of Kaepernick, wasn't he the one who wore socks displaying police officers as pigs? If you want to hang your hat on somebody like that go ahead.

ArthurDayne

jakiah wrote: »

"a grown adult is defending other grown adults booing and jeering at black players doing an anti-racism gesture"

Bollocks, when did we decide that was whats happening? If there were no black players would booing the gesture be ok? Why do you pick out Black players specifically, I thought this was a general anti-racist protest?

Your posts are just 'football fans are all racist' with longer sentences.

I haven’t called anyone a racist and I have continued to accept that There are people have misgivings about the Taking the Knee thing for reasons that are not motivated by the anti-racism message. I say that because I am one of those people — so if I was calling every football fan racist I’d be calling myself racist. So quit the He-Called-Us-Racist whine.

I mention black players specifically because a lot of teams doing the Knee gesture have black players. For a lot of black players (yes, not all), the gesture for them is not based on tokenism or being afraid to not do it in case they get pilloried — it is a genuine and sincere gesture in a context where many of them will have at some point been subjected to racial abuse at games or online. You will say that the fans booing aren’t motivated by any opposition to the anti-racism message — that they are booing what they perceive to be the tokenistic/down-your-throat-politics of it all/it’s Marxism. Fair enough.

But where black players are on the pitch (let’s say someone like Marcus Rashford) and the gesture might mean something meaningful to him ...are you defending people booing while he does that or are you not defending it? I’m not asking you think it’s racist, simply whether you would defend people booing a gesture that might mean a lot to someone like Marcus Rashford while he does that gesture.

jakiah

bewareofthedog wrote: »

On the topic of Kaepernick, wasn't he the one who wore socks displaying police officers as pigs? If you want to hang your hat on somebody like that go ahead.

Anti-policing messaging is hugely prevalent in radical football supporting circles in Europe. Finally, some common ground.

jakiah

ArthurDayne wrote: »

I haven’t called anyone a racist

Im done with you mate, jog on.

Bobblehats

Deleted User wrote: »

I Suspect plenty of posters objected when Kaepernick took the knee too and it wasn't out of concern for Marxist agendas.

You know anytime I see that name mentioned regarding this topic. No matter how hard I try to separate it; put it to the back of my mind I’m always left with the same overriding thought at the forefront of my conscience - an a is like an e upside down.

jakiah

jakiah wrote: »

Anti-policing messaging is hugely prevalent in radical football supporting circles in Europe. Finally, some common ground.

Suspect it's because black Americans tend to be disproportionately on the receiving end of the Police... On top of that, he was willing to give up his career by standing up for his principles. So realistically, he was responsible for the birth of the gesture, no Marxist conspiracy although you are annoyed by his socks so that is another reason for you to try and divert from the message.

martingriff

bewareofthedog wrote: »

All I can do is echo the above post by "the_dunne" because what he wrote is exactly my feelings on the matter too. It was a mistake by sport broadcasters and sport in general to get entangled with politics.

On the topic of Kaepernick, wasn't he the one who wore socks displaying police officers as pigs? If you want to hang your hat on somebody like that go ahead.

Racism is not political

jakiah

Deleted User wrote: »

Suspect it's because black Americans tend to be disproportionately on the receiving end of the Police... On top of that, he was willing to give up his career by standing up for his principles. So realistically, he was responsible for the birth of the gesture, no Marxist conspiracy although you are annoyed by his socks so that is another reason for you to try and divert from the message.

Guess you replied to the wrong person there?

jakiah

martingriff wrote: »

Racism is not political

Not inherently, but some anti-racist movements are overtly political. We already had non-political anti-racism efforts in football not associated with external political campaigns in specific jurisdictions. I suspect you know this.

ArthurDayne

jakiah wrote: »

Im done with you mate, jog on.

I never called you or anyone else a racist — and I gave you an opportunity to clarify your position with a simple question that you couldn’t answer.

You don’t want to answer that question, and that’s up to you.