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

nullzero

Tell me how wrote: »

Quote the post and show the relevant part that heavily implies racism.

Okey doke;

"Even if black people do what they tell them and stop taking the knee they'll just change their minds again and conjure up a new way to be offended by them. They'll never be happy until they are out of sight and out of mind (having said that even when NFL teams stayed in their locker rooms to avoid a situation with the knee the usual suspects took offense)."

Seems pretty obvious to everyone but you. It would be interesting to get the opinion of the person who posted it and not their spokesperson...

Faugheen

Faugheen wrote: »

So tell black people how to protest then.

Foxtrol wrote: »

Even if black people do what they tell them and stop taking the knee they'll just change their minds again and conjure up a new way to be offended by them. They'll never be happy until they are out of sight and out of mind (having said that even when NFL teams stayed in their locker rooms to avoid a situation with the knee the usual suspects took offense).

Same arguments being made here have been made every time black people protest - 'not that way', 'you should be happy things are better than they were'...

The first post implied racism by me (shocker) for telling black people how to protest.

The second post was a direct reply and uses "they" and "their" meaning "racists" and "them" meaning blacks in that context

It's quite obvious but not explicit.

Very common tactic.

Tell me how

Omackeral wrote: »

Here's something I take a bit of umbrage with on a wider scale. The idea of the black community, in the context of the entire world, is a flawed concept. What has an urban London lad got in common with a Kenyan villager. What has a Caribbean retired gentleman got in common with some hipster nerd from Seattle? Where does a hot shot stockbroker on Wall Street fit in? A Dutch mechanic. Grouping people by their skin colour like that is lazy and ridiculously counterproductive.

Leaving aside that I haven't seen anyone try to group them together as you are implying is done.

You don't for a second think that they might have a common experience as to how they have been treated or perceived in a particular negative way because of the colour of their skin?

Has anyone else suggested that they all be grouped together collectively in all aspects of their lives?

Can you quote a link where you saw this?

Omackeral

Omackeral wrote: »

Here's something I take a bit of umbrage with on a wider scale. The idea of the black community, in the context of the entire world, is a flawed concept. What has an urban London lad got in common with a Kenyan villager. What has a Caribbean retired gentleman got in common with some hipster nerd from Seattle? Where does a hot shot stockbroker on Wall Street fit in? A Dutch mechanic. Grouping people by their skin colour like that is lazy and ridiculously counterproductive.

Hugely agree.

One of my main bones of contention is the inference that all black people are victims. It's so patronising

Faugheen

nullzero wrote: »

That's a completely ridiculous take on what's being discussed here, you're making assumptions, casting people in the role of racists without good cause, pure self indulgent over the top garbage.

Discussing the effectiveness of taking the knee isn't the same as wanting black people out of sight and denying them the right to any type of protest. You SHOULD be ashamed of yourself, but I'm guessing you're quite proud of that diatribe.

Nobody has labelled anybody a racist.

The fact you have somehow attributed what was said to calling people racists is quite telling, however.

Fact of the matter is, many peaceful protests led by black people have rubbed some people the wrong way and those same people then pretend to foam at the mouth if a protest turns violent.

What is it you actually want? Do you want people to be able to protest against racism without being ridiculed for it?

If yes, then what the f*ck is the problem with kneeling?

Don't give me any BLM bollocks. The English players, manager and FA have said it's nothing to do with BLM. Why are you so upset that players will kneel peacefully?

Faugheen

Deleted User wrote: »

The first post implied racism by me (shocker) for telling black people how to protest.

The second post was a direct reply and uses "they" and "their" meaning "racists" and "them" meaning blacks in that context

It's quite obvious but not explicit.

Very common tactic.

No implications for racism whatsoever. I simply just said you want to tell black people how to protest.

Again though, the fact you think it implicates you as a racist is telling.

Tell me how

nullzero wrote: »

Okey doke;

"Even if black people do what they tell them and stop taking the knee they'll just change their minds again and conjure up a new way to be offended by them. They'll never be happy until they are out of sight and out of mind (having said that even when NFL teams stayed in their locker rooms to avoid a situation with the knee the usual suspects took offense)."

Seems pretty obvious to everyone but you. It would be interesting to get the opinion of the person who posted it and not their spokesperson...

You seem very annoyed on my commenting on this while it's ok for you to do so.

what's that all about?

You didn't show where racism is implied by the way.

Faugheen

Faugheen wrote: »

No implications for racism whatsoever. I simply just said you want to tell black people how to protest.

Again though, the fact you think it implicates you as a racist is telling.

Sorry faugheen,

It's probably the fact that you have explicitly called me a racist previously and followed it up with many different implications that I was a racist, and then told me that I was telling black people how to protest.....

Obviously I misread you and you weren't in any way calling me a racist for the umpteenth time.

I'll do my best not to reply to you.

nullzero

Faugheen wrote: »

Nobody has labelled anybody a racist.

The fact you have somehow attributed what was said to calling people racists is quite telling, however.

Fact of the matter is, many peaceful protests led by black people have rubbed some people the wrong way and those same people then pretend to foam at the mouth if a protest turns violent.

What is it you actually want? Do you want people to be able to protest against racism without being ridiculed for it?

If yes, then what the f*ck is the problem with kneeling?

Don't give me any BLM bollocks. The English players, manager and FA have said it's nothing to do with BLM. Why are you so upset that players will kneel peacefully?

Yet another spokesperson for Foxtrol.

Foxtrol posted something that clearly implies racism. It is there in black and white for all (barring yourself and Tell me how) to see.

What is your problem with examining taking the knee in light of it resulting in increasing support for racist morons?

Discussing the virtue of taking the knee doesn't equal a person being a racist or having an issue with anti racist protest of any kind. My contention is that any anti racist action that results in more support for racist ideology may need a rethink.

You're projecting all sorts of issues onto this one and using emotive language to try and bludgeon your point home.

bewareofthedog

Faugheen wrote: »

Don't give me any BLM bollocks. The English players, manager and FA have said it's nothing to do with BLM. Why are you so upset that players will kneel peacefully?

How can it not be seen as that when Sky Sports had their official logo plastered over the screen throughout the lock down period in conjunction with taking the knee?

You can sure as shít if there was a major incident where someone was hurt/killed involving BLM in the UK they wouldn't be kneeling for the very same reasons. It's trendy and woke at the moment to do so though.

nullzero

Tell me how wrote: »

You seem very annoyed on my commenting on this while it's ok for you to do so.

what's that all about?

You didn't show where racism is implied by the way.

I'm not annoyed by you commenting ( you always assume you're eliciting an emotional reaction from people, why is that?) on the intent behind another user's posts, I'm just flabbergasted by your willingness to do so.

The racism is implied very clearly in the quoted section of my previous post here it is a again

"Even if black people do what they tell them and stop taking the knee they'll just change their minds again and conjure up a new way to be offended by them. They'll never be happy until they are out of sight and out of mind (having said that even when NFL teams stayed in their locker rooms to avoid a situation with the knee the usual suspects took offense)."

If you want to tell me 2+2=5 that's your problem.

Tell me how

Deleted User wrote: »

Hugely agree.

One of my main bones of contention is the inference that all black people are victims. It's so patronising

Link please.

nullzero

Tell me how wrote: »

Link please.

You want a link to the general ongoing inference of an idea?

When you're given the evidence you demand you simply interpret it any way you see fit.

You literally cannot lose any argument when you fail to engage in any way, bravo.

Tell me how

nullzero wrote: »

You want a link to the general ongoing inference of an idea?

Yes. If it's so prevalent, it should be easy to provide one. No?

Omackeral

Tell me how wrote: »

Leaving aside that I haven't seen anyone try to group them together as you are implying is done.

You don't for a second think that they might have a common experience as to how they have been treated or perceived in a particular negative way because of the colour of their skin?

Has anyone else suggested that they all be grouped together collectively in all aspects of their lives?

Can you quote a link where you saw this?

It's done plenty with catch-all terms like the Black Community. POC is another term that's used basically just to mean non white. It's divisive and it's using pigeonholes.

nullzero

Tell me how wrote: »

Yes. If it's so prevalent, it should be easy to provide one. No?

Everything that is provided to you is reinterpreted to you suit your narrative so why should anyone bother entertaining your requests?

You literally never engage in good faith in any discussion.

Tell me how

Tell me how wrote: »

Link please.

Use Google.

Just type in white privilege, it will show how an awful lot of people assume that white people benefit from their colour, which implies that any other person is a victim of theirs.

It's awful reading and terribly untrue.

I assume you don't believe in the concept of white privilege?

Because if you did, you'd believe that black people are victims due to their skin colour and wouldn't need a source from me.

Tell me how

Omackeral wrote: »

It's done plenty with catch-all terms like the Black Community. POC is another term that's used basically just to mean non white. It's divisive and it's using pigeonholes.

So divisive terms and pigeonholes are bad now are they?

Omackeral wrote: »

As for talk of the police in America, it's not something I concern myself with too much. I think the US as a society is a basket case.

Omackeral wrote: »

More US stuff. A basket case of a nation absolutely obsessed with labels, race and identity politics.

Good to know. Let us know when it changes again.

Tell me how

Deleted User wrote: »

Use Google.

Just type in white privilege, it will show how an awful lot of people assume that white people benefit from their colour, which implies that any other person is a victim of theirs.

It's awful reading and terribly untrue.

I assume you don't believe in the concept of white privilege?

Because if you did, you'd believe that black people are victims due to their skin colour and wouldn't need a source from me.

Wrong.

It's that they don't suffer because of their colour. Notice the difference?

nullzero

Tell me how wrote: »

So divisive terms and pigeonholes are bad now are they?





Good to know. Let us know when it changes again.

So you're saying the criminal justice system in America is functioning as well as could be hoped for?

Tell me how

nullzero wrote: »

Everything that is provided to you is reinterpreted to you suit your narrative so why should anyone bother entertaining your requests?

You literally never engage in good faith in any discussion.

Look, send me a PM of what way you want me to post, I'll consider it and if I do post it, you can thank it and we can pretend we are on the same page.

How does that sound? Are you suggesting that you don't interpret my posts and others from your own perspective?

nullzero

Tell me how wrote: »

Look, send me a PM of what way you want me to post, I'll consider it and if I do post it, you can thank it and we can pretend we are on the same page.

How does that sound? Are you suggesting that you don't interpret my posts and others from your own perspective?

No, I won't be sending that PM.

On two occasions tonight you have interpreted the posts of one poster.

If that's your thing go for it, but when you're ignoring the facts of what they're posting you can expect people to be bemused by your choosing that course of action. As well as being called out for talking demonstrable nonsense.

Tell me how

Tell me how wrote: »

Wrong.

It's that they don't suffer because of their colour. Notice the difference?

I don't.

Assuming something because of someone's skin colour is wrong.

Some white people do suffer because of their colour.

Do you accept black privilege exists? Asian privilege? Ginger privilege?

Do you think you are treated better because of your skin colour?

Omackeral

Tell me how wrote: »

So divisive terms and pigeonholes are bad now are they?

Good to know. Let us know when it changes again.

You avoided the actual points I replied to and moved on to what you think is a clever gotcha. It's not. I am of the opinion that widespread gun culture, a two party system bordering on religious zealotry and, relevantly, a racial obsession makes the country less than desirable from a societal point of view. Hardly a groundbreaking take.

Omackeral

Tell me how wrote: »

Wrong.

It's that they don't suffer because of their colour. Notice the difference?

We'll bring that home for a minute, shall we? Did the workers and customers in Eurospar Hartstown have this luxury when they were barricaded into the shop and abused and threatened because of their skin colour? Racists exist in every race and against every race.

Tell me how

Deleted User wrote: »

Assuming something because of someone's skin colour is wrong.

No argument there.

Deleted User wrote: »

White people do suffer because of their colour.

If this is the case, that is wrong. Obviously.

Deleted User wrote: »

Do you accept black privilege exists? Asian privilege? Ginger privilege?

No. Not to any significant degree.

Deleted User wrote: »

Do you think you are treated better because of your skin colour?

On occasion. Absolutely yes.

Tell me how

Tell me how wrote: »

No argument there.

Yet you say there is such a thing as "white" privilege.

Tell me how

Omackeral wrote: »

You avoided the actual points I replied to and moved on to what you think is a clever gotcha. It's not. I am of the opinion that widespread gun culture, a two party system bordering on religious zealotry and, relevantly, a racial obsession makes the country less than desirable from a societal point of view. Hardly a groundbreaking take.

I asked you for a link, you didn't provide any and then you suggest I avoided your points which were so vague as to not really merit attention.

Again, for the second time, say one thing, do another.

Tell me how

Deleted User wrote: »

Yet you say there is such a thing as "white" privilege.

Yes. Are you saying there isn't?

Does it have to apply to every person around the world in the same way to the same extend for it to exist?

Tell me how

Tell me how wrote: »

Yes. Are you saying there isn't?

Does it have to apply to every person around the world in the same way to the same extend for it to exist?

Well, yes.

If it doesn't apply to all white people, then it's just personal privilege surely?