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

Retr0gamer

TomTomTim wrote: »

I haven't seen any of those. I have seen numerous people on this site, through the years, ask posters like you to back up claims like this, which you never do. Many of the people who make claims like yours do the equivalent of saying "there's racism in the air, so I can't point to it". Is that what you consider a "fact"?

It's ballocks like I'm not racist but I don't support bending the knee because it's supporting a socialist organisation.

Then you point out the stupidity and wrongness of the situation. Poster of course can't comprehend it. Says the same thing again not realising the implications of what they are saying and the cycle continues because said posters are in their own confirmation bias bubble. It could well be subconsciously dog whistling racist arguments but it's still posting racism no matter how ignorant you are to the fact.

Plenty of examples here in this thread and if you can't see that then you are in your own confirmation bias bubble.

Omackeral

Retr0gamer wrote: »

It's ballocks like I'm not racist but I don't support bending the knee

I’m not racist. I don’t support bending the knee.

BluePlanet

It's not 'bending the knee'; it's taking the knee.

irishchris

BluePlanet wrote: »

It's not 'bending the knee'; it's taking the knee.

Pedantic completely against racism but completely against continuing TAKING the knee as well past its message

Retr0gamer

Retr0gamer wrote: »

It's ballocks like I'm not racist but I don't support bending the knee because it's supporting a socialist organisation.

Then you point out the stupidity and wrongness of the situation. Poster of course can't comprehend it. Says the same thing again not realising the implications of what they are saying and the cycle continues because said posters are in their own confirmation bias bubble. It could well be subconsciously dog whistling racist arguments but it's still posting racism no matter how ignorant you are to the fact.

Plenty of examples here in this thread and if you can't see that then you are in your own confirmation bias bubble.

It's a little ironic that you are accusing people of being in a confirmation bias bubble when you are the one who asserts that anyone who disagrees with you is either racist or stupid.

Hande hoche!

BluePlanet wrote: »

It's not 'bending the knee'; it's taking the knee.

Does taking the knee not involve the bending of the knee?

Retr0gamer

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It's a little ironic that you are accusing people of being in a confirmation bias bubble when you are the one who asserts that anyone who disagrees with you is either racist or stupid.

I haven't asserted that, thank you very much.

It's more people that ignore all the evidence and facts for confirmation bias using extreme events that are outliers, or biased opinions from fringe far right groups and individuals. I believe that's called being ignorant.

BluePlanet

irishchris wrote: »

Pedantic completely against racism but completely against continuing TAKING the knee as well past its message

It most certainly is not pedantic.

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/bend-the-knee

bend the knee
in British English
or bow the knee
to kneel or submit

Retr0gamer

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I haven't asserted that, thank you very much.

except you did. You think that anyone who is against your way of thinking (i.e that kneeling isn't an appropriate protest to unite people against racism) is racist.

Deleted User wrote: »

I find it amusing that you think anyone who isn't on board with your way of thinking is not against racism.

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I'm just against racism in all it's forms.

I think you'll find the opposite of that is a racist.

You also have the cute little tactic that whenever someone who disagrees with you and explains how they can be against racism at the same time as opposing the knee, you resort to their response with a childish

I'm not racist but....

Sand

'Taking the knee' is objectionable for many reasons:

1) It is driven by the Black Lives Matter group
2) It is millionaires, in association with all the political, legal and financial power of the world, punching down against ordinary people.
3) It exalts the death of a habitual criminal who died from a heart attack while resisting arrest over and above more worthy causes. The Manchester Arena bombings didn't spark more than a year of public spectacles. Neither did the beheading of Lee Rigby on a UK street. Neither did the systematic rape and abuse of tens of thousands of English girls. They got a minutes silence, if that, and then things just moved on.

None of the above requires racism as a motivation - just a sense of right and wrong.

Foxtrol

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Ah, but you know what I mean, our attention has been captured by the bend the knee message and we have received the message loud and clear, and it's now well ingrained in our consciousness, hence message delivered.

But just like a BBQ or a boiler, there comes a time when you can let go of the ignition switch and let the system flow by itself otherwise you get issues with some people (the booing people for example).

The whole point is that the issue hasn't gone away. Just because certain people have short attention spans or don't like to face reality racism isn't 'solved'.

The system you want to let 'flow' by them shutting down their peaceful protest is one that they believe is racist.

Foxtrol

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I haven't asserted that, thank you very much.

It's more people that ignore all the evidence and facts for confirmation bias using extreme events that are outliers, or biased opinions from fringe far right groups and individuals. I believe that's called being ignorant.

It isn't just ignorance, it is usually willful ignorance - prime example being the topic of this thread and choosing to ignore the repeated statements from those protesting who have explicitly distanced themselves from the BLM organisation.

Ahwell

Sand wrote: »

'Taking the knee' is objectionable for many reasons:

1) It is driven by the Black Lives Matter group
2) It is millionaires, in association with all the political, legal and financial power of the world, punching down against ordinary people.
3) It exalts the death of a habitual criminal who died from a heart attack while resisting arrest over and above more worthy causes. The Manchester Arena bombings didn't spark more than a year of public spectacles. Neither did the beheading of Lee Rigby on a UK street. Neither did the systematic rape and abuse of tens of thousands of English girls. They got a minutes silence, if that, and then things just moved on.

None of the above requires racism as a motivation - just a sense of right and wrong.

1) It was driven a group of Premier League captains and PFA representatives

2) Who are these ordinary people they are punching down too?

3) It may of escaped your notice, but the police officer involved has just been convicted of second-degree murder.

Sand

Sand wrote: »

'Taking the knee' is objectionable for many reasons:

1) It is driven by the Black Lives Matter group
2) It is millionaires, in association with all the political, legal and financial power of the world, punching down against ordinary people.
3) It exalts the death of a habitual criminal who died from a heart attack while resisting arrest over and above more worthy causes. The Manchester Arena bombings didn't spark more than a year of public spectacles. Neither did the beheading of Lee Rigby on a UK street. Neither did the systematic rape and abuse of tens of thousands of English girls. They got a minutes silence, if that, and then things just moved on.

None of the above requires racism as a motivation - just a sense of right and wrong.

I agree with point one.

Not sure about point two. I don't understand the punching down argument.

Point 3 is a poorly phrased. There is a point there, but the unnecessary way of describing George Floyds death without mentioning chauvin is a little inflammatory

Sand

Deleted User wrote: »

Not sure about point two. I don't understand the punching down argument.

Taking a knee is not a grass roots movement. It is top down. And it implicitly criticizes racism as a real and ongoing threat by white people against non-white people. English football fans tend to be white and working class, so its an attack on them. It is punching down by millionaires against those in far more precarious circumstances.

Point 3 is a poorly phrased. There is a point there, but the unnecessary way of describing George Floyds death without mentioning chauvin is a little inflammatory

I wasn't aware Chauvin always had to be mentioned in connection with GF's death. Either way, the point is made: those atrocities - which happened in England so close to home- didn't attract any long running response when they should have long, long, long before GF.

Foxtrol

Sand wrote: »

Taking a knee is not a grass roots movement. It is top down. And it implicitly criticizes racism as a real and ongoing threat by white people against non-white people. English football fans tend to be white and working class, so its an attack on them. It is punching down by millionaires against those in far more precarious circumstances.

Racism is a real and ongoing threat by white people against non-white people.

Unless the football fans are racist there is no 'punching down'... if they are racist they deserve all the metaphorical 'punches' they get no matter the angle they are coming from.

I wasn't aware Chauvin always had to be mentioned in connection with GF's death. Either way, the point is made: those atrocities - which happened in England so close to home- didn't attract any long running response when they should have long, long, long before GF.

They aren't protesting GF, they are protesting racism which has been around 'long, long, long before' the instances you're using for whataboutery and a problem that continues to be a significant issue for non-white communities.

Sand

Foxtrol wrote: »

Racism is a real and ongoing threat by white people against non-white people.

Thanks for that. When I wrote it I was concerned I'd invite some other posters to waste time by pretending that wasn't the message being communicated. Glad as well you accept its targeted against white people generally, not white racists specifically.

Unless the football fans are racist there is no 'punching down'... if they are racist they deserve all the metaphorical 'punches' they get no matter the angle they are coming from.

Let put it like this: Say that everytime I meet you I loudly inform you that raping children is wrong. You agree. So no problem at first. But by the 50th time when I again loudly inform you that raping children is wrong, you're going to presume its a dig at you that you repeatedly need to be told this.

The whole BLM/take a knee performance is a way for those with power to criticise and demonize those with far less power.

They aren't protesting GF, they are protesting racism

If you can unwrap 'taking a knee' from George Floyd and BLM and pretend its wholly different things, be my guest. But the point is still made: The mass murder of English children didn't motivate them to protest. The mass rape of English children didn't motivate them to protest. And the decapitation of a British soldier on an English street didn't motivate them to protest.

But when there is a chance to punch down...more than a year of performative anti-racism.

nolivesmatter

Sand wrote: »

If you can unwrap 'taking a knee' from George Floyd and BLM and pretend its wholly different things, be my guest. But the point is still made: The mass murder of English children didn't motivate them to protest. The mass rape of English children didn't motivate them to protest. And the decapitation of a British soldier on an English street didn't motivate them to protest.

There's as much chance of that as there is of unwrapping the swastika from nazis, which originally meant something very different.

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-29644591

Foxtrol

Sand wrote: »

Thanks for that. When I wrote it I was concerned I'd invite some other posters to waste time by pretending that wasn't the message being communicated. Glad as well you accept its targeted against white people generally, not white racists specifically.

Let put it like this: Say that everytime I meet you I loudly inform you that raping children is wrong. You agree. So no problem at first. But by the 50th time when I again loudly inform you that raping children is wrong, you're going to presume its a dig at you that you repeatedly need to be told this.

The whole BLM/take a knee performance is a way for those with power to criticise and demonize those with far less power.

Why do you presume racists are only people with 'less power'? Plenty of evidence there are plenty of powerful racists out there.

If you can unwrap 'taking a knee' from George Floyd and BLM and pretend its wholly different things, be my guest. But the point is still made: The mass murder of English children didn't motivate them to protest. The mass rape of English children didn't motivate them to protest. And the decapitation of a British soldier on an English street didn't motivate them to protest.

But when there is a chance to punch down...more than a year of performative anti-racism.

What you're doing is whataboutery at its finest. If you want to go down that road, why aren't you and English fans putting your effort into protesting the murder of English children rather than being outraged about peaceful seconds long anti-racism protests? :rolleyes:

Foxtrol

nolivesmatter wrote: »

There's as much chance of that as there is of unwrapping the swastika from nazis, which originally meant something very different.

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-29644591

BLM were apparently akin to the IRA yesterday and now Nazi's today...

I'm sure they're comparable with the monsters under your bed too.

nolivesmatter

Foxtrol wrote: »

BLM were apparently akin to the IRA yesterday and now Nazi's today...

I'm sure they're comparable with the monsters under your bed too.

I didn't compare them to nazis. I compared two symbols on the basis that they cannot shake off a certain meaning no matter what people say they mean. I didn't say they mean the same thing. Be serious.

Retr0gamer

Deleted User wrote: »

except you did. You think that anyone who is against your way of thinking (i.e that kneeling isn't an appropriate protest to unite people against racism) is racist.

You also have the cute little tactic that whenever someone who disagrees with you and explains how they can be against racism at the same time as opposing the knee, you resort to their response with a childish

It's not a cute little tactic. I'm just calling out racist dog whistling when I see it. I didn't call anyone a racist but what I am trying to explain is that saying you are against taking the knee because it's associated with a socialist domestic terror organisation, BLM, is echoing racist far right dog whistling.

BLM is a slogan taken up by the anti racism movement. It's been explained many, many times that the BLM movement has nothing to do with any charlatan organizations taking the BLM name. The vast majority of people that support the BLM movement don't recognise these dopes and denounce the violence at the very small minority of protests. That's the facts. Whether you choose to believe them is up to you.

However these so called BLM organisations and the violence have enabled the far right to spew racist dog whistling about BLM being associated with socialists and violence. But it's nonsense. It's racist rhethoric and repeating and spreading it is spreading a racist message even if you think 'I'm not racist but...'. It's the exact same as the right calling the Democrats 'socialist' in America when the same party would be seen a very right wing in any parliament.

Taking the knee is statement against racism. BLM is a slogan and a movement against racism. However there's a lot of racist hate groups out there muddying the waters and trying to associate both with anti establishment groups to suit their racist agenda. Organisations calling themselves BLM are like the National Socialist party calling themselves 'Socialist'.

So by keeping up that type of thinking you are spreading hate group rhetoric and fallen for their lies. Well done.

Potential-Monke

Can you agree though that at a certain point, for some* people, the association has been made and can never be removed, ie: anytime I see a rainbow picture I immediately think LGBT. Any time I see a standard crucifix, I see Catholicism. Any time I see the phrase "Just do it", I think Nike. On the negative side of things, swastika=nazi, black flag with white Arabic writing=ISIS, upsidedown cross=satanism, etc. Like a few on here, and while I understand that the original goal of BLM is still ongoing and is a good thing, there have been too many negative things associated with it for me to now draw a connection, right or wrong in your opinion that may be.

I think what BLM started as, and where it's at now, they should change the name. We know, black lives matter, we have that message. Now progress, move forward, come up with something else to distance yourselves from the negative side (and let them keep BLM so we know), and come up with something that moves beyond highlighting and can cause action, something like Black Rights Association, but shur then people will say they're just full of tits. The negative associations with BLM, while minor and most not directly related, have done damage to the name and continuing on will not unite people again, it will keep them separated. Just my 2 cents.

* A sizeable sum

Retr0gamer

The problem is the same groups will draw up the same associations and whatever the new thing is while be attacked in the same way.

Better to stand your ground and not let them win in this case. Changing it up just dilutes the message further and plays into their hands.

Retr0gamer

Retr0gamer wrote: »

The problem is the same groups will draw up the same associations and whatever the new thing is while be attacked in the same way.

Better to stand your ground and not let them win in this case. Changing it up just dilutes the message further and plays into their hands.

I like the way you say the "same groups".

It wasn't long ago people were going ape **** about people making the okay symbol, saying it was racist. Did you agree with that?

If you saw someone to a open palmed straight hanged salute, would you associate them with being a Nazi?

Retr0gamer

Retr0gamer wrote: »

So by keeping up that type of thinking you are spreading hate group rhetoric and fallen for their lies. Well done.

I wholeheartedly disagree and as for you calling out dog whistling wherever you see it, that is shorthand for labelling anything you don't like as racist.

Me preferring an anti racism initiative to distance their gesture from the one they used with a divisive group like BLM is not any type of dog whistle.

It is to ensure that the message "racism off all types is not acceptable" isn't conflated with BLM.

I don't know many that would have an issue with that.

But your constant and brave "calling out" of people who aren't remotely racist is actually the thing which dilutes and pushes people further away.

Well done.

Foxtrol

nolivesmatter wrote: »

I didn't compare them to nazis. I compared two symbols on the basis that they cannot shake off a certain meaning no matter what people say they mean. I didn't say they mean the same thing. Be serious.

Get off, you knew exactly what you were doing with your statement invoking Nazis - Godwins law at its finest.

If I came out claiming that the Nazi's also didn't like it when people protested against racism you and others would rightly call me out on it.

I know it is tough to defend these outraged fans but you can do better than that weak trick.

Foxtrol

Retr0gamer wrote: »

The problem is the same groups will draw up the same associations and whatever the new thing is while be attacked in the same way.

Better to stand your ground and not let them win in this case. Changing it up just dilutes the message further and plays into their hands.

This.

We saw in US sports that no matter the way the players protested elements of the crowd booed.

Certain people will always find a way to fake outrage, they are faking outrage here just like they faked outraged in the US when players did it, like the faked outrage when MLK marched and spoke, like they faked outrage during bus boycotts, like they faked outrage practically every other time people protest against racism or for the rights of non-white people. It has gotten to the point now that they are even faking outrage at learning history.

If you give in they'll just find another reason to be fake outraged by.

jakiah

Retr0gamer wrote: »

It's not a cute little tactic. I'm just calling out racist dog whistling when I see it. I didn't call anyone a racist

I see you are back and calling everyone who disagrees with kneeling racist again.

You were going to tell us whether you supported the Poppy being inserted into the matchday before you left the thread last time, can you fill us in?

Retr0gamer

jakiah wrote: »

I see you are back and calling everyone who disagrees with kneeling racist again.

You were going to tell us whether you supported the Poppy being inserted into the matchday before you left the thread last time, can you fill us in?

I'm not engaging in deflection.

It's a morally grey are that's quite complex and has its own thread. Stop derailing while thinking you have a point to prove.

Booing the knee on the other hand is black and white if you excuse the pub