Total respect for BLM UK
BLM in the Prem
- Thread starter Wumminator
- Start date
Hear Hear!
Yeah I can acknowledge they’re separate things, never said otherwise, I was just unaware they they were really, I thought it was a slogan for that organisation, for want of a better explanation.
my original question was the difference between UKBLM and BLMUK. I was just curious.
What people need to understand is that BLM is just a trojan horse. It will achieve nothing. If you want to rid racism, what you do is 1) stop radicialising students/people and 2) see it for what it is. Evil and not racism. That way, people start looking at behaviors and not colour.....Racism is evil but there is evil in ALL races.....If you are serious about ending racism? That is what you do. That is how you begin to stop it. If people think BLM will change anything? They're sadly mistaken and the message is not out of being genuine but rather to gain sympathy and support. What do people think, BLMS ultimate aim is? ..I watched an interview recently with a blm supporter and she was like...there's no such thing as black on black crime.....and that's why I call it evil. It's all about power truly. A movement such as this MAY start off as noble.......but when it get's political, its usually radicalized. Because it's all about moving large groups of people. Language plays a big part and many people don't think as individuals because of a common goal.
Last edited:
Is this a genuine post?
Keane walked as you call it, into a team at the bottom of the championship (so hardly top job), who's chairman was Irish and who's then owner was American Irish and took them to EPL in the same season, so that was an achievement and his next Job was lower league.
Neville only took on the job as a favour to his fellow co owner of Salford, Lim.
yeah just like the Trojan horse. Love it.
The rest of your post is incomprehensible.
Rid racism by saying it's not racism and racism is evil.
I managed to rid my ingrown toenail by similarly saying it wasn't my toenail.
Overwhelming, massed evidence there. A whole one person...
Also:
And how is that bad? A lot of people still deny the severity of everyday racism. Sounds like a reasonable first step to get sympathy for the cause.
So there is one person that says something dumb and that condems the entire movement and the wider message?
The last few pages of this thread are literally all about being able to distinguish the organization from the message.
Last edited:
Dude, you can't define the problem away by changing the name of it.
Systemic racism is absolutely a thing. Try looking for a job in a rural white district while your name is Mohammed and you only have a basic eduction. Let's see how many interviewers prefer the candidate with the name they are comfortable with. Ill give you the answer: Nearly every single one.
Racism isn't only cowards who yell the n word and drive off in their trucks flying the rebel flag, it's real challenges facing people in their everyday life in and out of their communities because of the name they were given at birth and absymally enough, the amount of melanin in their skin.
I don't quite undertand how you think racism is only people of color being killed by white policemen or lynched, but let me tell you that that is by far the least of their problems when society itself is rigged against you from birth. If you are white and born in western Europe, you picked the winning lottery ticket of life. If only you or even I understood just how good we have it compared to people who have to justify who they are to even get by, maybe we'd all make some progress.
And please don't give me the "There's bad people of all colors" schtick. Yeah there is, so fkn what, it's not remotely relevant in this dicussion.
Frankly, claiming that the historically (and currently) powerless are somehow both powerful and have an 'evil' agenda is much the same as Nazi propaganda aimed at Jewish people - they depicted a people who possessed no homeland, no army, not even a flag, as an incredible and nefarious threat. Meanwhile, the U.S. has one Black Republican senator; one.
And as for the others remarks about insincerity and and the seeking of sympathy, well, they're contemptible too.
And as for the others remarks about insincerity and and the seeking of sympathy, well, they're contemptible too.
Is that really true though?
My guess is that the overwhelming majority of British citizens, from all racial backgrounds including white, acknowledge there's an ongoing fight (and it will always be ongoing to some extent) against racism, bigotry and tribalism, and also that we all have a vested interest as a society in doing the right thing and fighting that fight.
What people also believe however, is that we do in fact live in a country of fundamental good will, which isn't evil, that has a history of making societal progress - in all sorts of ways - over time; and the way we make that progress involves mechanisms like letting everybody speak their mind and sifting good opinions from bad ones.
The way to 'create sympathy for the cause' is not to label white people evil, or mob abuse individuals whose opinions you don't like, or tear down statues (a few of which do deserve to go) without consent of the wider community.
In fact, it is so obvious you don't do those things to create peace and consensus, that is understandable to question the motives of those who act that way. Especially when you don't have to delve too far into the history of people doing this sort of stuff to find predictable references to Socialism and Marxism, including that, unfortunately, of the BLM UK organisation.
Also though, one shouldn't ignore the sordid and ongoing history of entirely peaceable movements & demonstrations in Britain and the U.S. being infiltrated by state actors, and the resulting rogue actions which attempt to discredit both. From knitting circles (yes, really) to mining unions to anti-nuclear groups and many more, these actors and actions are notorious for their involvement.
I think so, yes. I can't speak for every place in the world, of course, but I think there are still a lot of people who think that, nowadays, we live in a world of equal opportunity, and that everyone can make it if they just make an effort to fit in and try hard enough. 'They' say the same thing about women, who are nonetheless clearly still disadvantaged in lots of ways, like in the job market.
Sure, but if you let discussions play out quietly, change can take decades and longer to materialize. Activism serves to speed up that process. Yes, activists can go a little far sometimes and make oversized claims (by which I am talking about the mainstream activists; not those that start plundering stores) - insofar as they have anythnig to do with the relevant movement at all), but politely asking whether perhaps an issue could be considered tends to be a lot less effective.
Obviously, they should just speed things up a bit by using this method:
Guardian said:
Most countries will spout about good will for their citizens. You could say America is fundamentally a country that believes in freedom & justice for all but the truth is that’s not what all people actually get.
Nothing like using idealist rhetoric as a defence for what actually happens; we may fundamentally live in a society [I’m heading you mean the UK] where people want to do good but it’s far from happening regularly enough for a certain demographic in society.
Surely part of societal progress is being by able to reflect on history, assess what went wrong & ensure it’s doesn’t happen again. Claiming people are labelling white people as evil is laughable.
You also need to find distinction between, protesters & rioters because the VAST majority of protesters have torn down statues or ‘mob abused’ individuals.
I agree.
Strange that this hasn't come from BLM in the USA though, perhaps some investigation into their leadership might produce some results...
To be honest, I used to find this Black Lives Matter movement pretty pointless as it would never affect the people who matter (Trump etc) and even wondered why it wasn’t All Lives Matter. However, I had a thought about it and realised that if so many people were in on the movement, then they were doing it for a good reason and that it was most certainly not to defame other races.
Thus, I took some time to educate myself by reading articles and watching Youtube videos on the matter, and I found out that BLM was not Only BLM, but rather BLM Too and that they wanted equality, not superiority. Therefore, I am for the movement now, as despite not knowing anyone Black, I recognise their pain from seeing their own people disgracefully murdered in public as if it was a television programme and generally being harshly treated and discriminated against. The cause they are fighting for is brilliant.
However, I do understand why people cannot see this as they are uneducated on the matter (although some are just undeniably flat-out racist) like I used to be. So, I truly encourage everybody on the forum, as I believe this forum is fully made up of good people unlike Twitter and other social media platforms, to do some research and then put yourself in their shoes. What if, God forbid, White, Chinese, Indian or any other race’s killings were a regular occurrence? People of that race would be raging too.
Essentially, let’s just have some empathy and educate ourselves. By doing that, just to move it back to football as this is on the Football Forum, as football fans we are even taking baby steps to cleansing our beloved sport from racism, which has sadly become rife in football again. Just to end off, this isn’t me telling anyone what to do, but me trying to enlighten people arguing against the BLM movement that it is a great cause for equality, and to get some education to understand that by themselves.
Thus, I took some time to educate myself by reading articles and watching Youtube videos on the matter, and I found out that BLM was not Only BLM, but rather BLM Too and that they wanted equality, not superiority. Therefore, I am for the movement now, as despite not knowing anyone Black, I recognise their pain from seeing their own people disgracefully murdered in public as if it was a television programme and generally being harshly treated and discriminated against. The cause they are fighting for is brilliant.
However, I do understand why people cannot see this as they are uneducated on the matter (although some are just undeniably flat-out racist) like I used to be. So, I truly encourage everybody on the forum, as I believe this forum is fully made up of good people unlike Twitter and other social media platforms, to do some research and then put yourself in their shoes. What if, God forbid, White, Chinese, Indian or any other race’s killings were a regular occurrence? People of that race would be raging too.
Essentially, let’s just have some empathy and educate ourselves. By doing that, just to move it back to football as this is on the Football Forum, as football fans we are even taking baby steps to cleansing our beloved sport from racism, which has sadly become rife in football again. Just to end off, this isn’t me telling anyone what to do, but me trying to enlighten people arguing against the BLM movement that it is a great cause for equality, and to get some education to understand that by themselves.
I wish all people on this earth had the mindset to question their own judgement. Credit where it's due here Rashy.
Yeah, good on you!
If he’s not feeding starving kids, he’s learning sign language. If he’s not learning sign language he’s on RedCafe learning to heal the world.
Well done Rashy, Sports Personality of the Year.
Most pointless post of the year goes to..
Most pointless quoting of a post of the year goes to. . .
The PL/PFA are funding a first batch of bursaries/placements initially aimed at helping BAME coaches who have the UEFA-B qualification get their UEFA-A badges. Early days in terms of the work to be done, but a useful initiative.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53221680
"This is a critical time for black, Asian and minority ethnic coaches," said Doncaster Rovers manager Darren Moore, who is chair of the Premier League's black participants' advisory group.
"We all know and agree that the diversity of coaches and managers must increase and this placement scheme represents a positive step.
"There are lots of roles in the academy system, all the way through to first team, and young coaches can slot in at different points to begin that journey.
"We need to have the right structures and people in place to develop their careers. I know from my own experiences the value of strong support throughout the coaching journey."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53221680
"This is a critical time for black, Asian and minority ethnic coaches," said Doncaster Rovers manager Darren Moore, who is chair of the Premier League's black participants' advisory group.
"We all know and agree that the diversity of coaches and managers must increase and this placement scheme represents a positive step.
"There are lots of roles in the academy system, all the way through to first team, and young coaches can slot in at different points to begin that journey.
"We need to have the right structures and people in place to develop their careers. I know from my own experiences the value of strong support throughout the coaching journey."
It's good to see concrete action. Slogans, words of support, and good intentions are a nice first step, but they won't accomplish much if there is no follow-up.
Leaving aside that this whole post is just a word salad of nonsense, I just love the "just a trojan horse. It will achieve nothing" part. How the feck did that guy last 16 years and almost 20k posts on here?
I’m was not describing activists merely ‘going a little far’.
What I was talking about is left-wing activists being in the regular habit of portraying the complex, sometimes tragic, histories and and present situations of some of the world’s most unequivocally successful and free countries, as simplistic tales about sordid, evil, corrupt societies, with bigoted populations to match.
And then acting on these portrayals by deciding they can do things like shut down other people’s events when somebody they don’t like is talking; mob-attack individuals whose opinions they don’t like, even if the opinions are reasonable; tear down statues, that are shared belongings of society, without consent; and attempt to break people’s reputations for allegations, without due process.
None of this is justified.
And I think you are hugely underestimating how much rancour, including racial, is being stirred up by it.
OK. I will address this point although there’s a lot in it.
A majority of people in America and Britain believe we live in a country of equal opportunity. Probably, you are correct that is an accurate statement.
I don’t believe it is a majority view that everyone will ‘make it’ - it depends what you mean by make it. I believe the view is that life is inherently difficult (or at least society should emphasise that, because it’s true) but that in a free society you get an incredible amount of freedom, by historical standards, in choosing how you wish to be productive. This is the premise of equality of opportunity, which is pertinent to discussions of racial, class fairness, etc. Success is not considered to be guaranteed, but working hard towards a decent objective will probably be rewarded, is basically the deal.
What a lot of people see in our societies is evidence that, over time, we are making progress in creating this possibility. That includes improvements on social matters, including race (and also the integration of women into all levels of social life, since you mention it - which has arguably been very successful in a short time).
Examples of this, on race, might include the way language has changed - the overall accepted norm over a few short decades has changed dramatically, in favour of much more respectful language towards not a part of the racial majority. Another might be the efforts of many of America's police forces to increase the amount of non-white officers that they have in uniform, which in some areas has been quite successful (not that it appears to necessarily help with flash-point incidents).
There have also been structural reforms, like Affirmative Action, and initiatives of inclusion, like Black History month. Both the UK and America, by this point in time, do have burgeoning black, and other non-white, middle and upper-middle classes.
You might argue this stuff doesn’t go far enough. Fair enough. But it does represent a big change, going back to times like the 60’s.
A lot of people conclude, therefore, that their countries care about this stuff, and have made a lot headway, and deserve recognition for doing so.
And also, there's some contrasting white failure. In the America, the racial group with most welfare claimants is white people. Yes, they’re also the biggest racial group. But it’s still a huge amount of individuals and communities that are badly failing, often in dying towns with rampant drug issues. In the UK you can see that white boys are in prolonged trouble with attainment at higher education.
Despite this, there is a special issue with lingering trauma in black communities. That needs to be addressed. America had a job to accommodate, protect, and promote, the success of black communities post-emancipation, and failed - or, in some grim chapters like destruction of Black Wall Street, violently worked against it. There is a job to do in the West when it comes to fixing communities. Maybe that hasn't been articulated well enough recently.
But none of that messy reality means that the democratic systems of the West, and scandalous mechanisms such as freespeech, innocence until proven guilty, or even capitalism, don’t work.
Minorities may yet rue the opportunist activists, who are use this situation to fuel emotional needs, or push fundamentalist agendas, while claiming to be the ones most helping.
Well, as much as I don't like using it myself, I do think hyperbole is a useful tool for activism. If you are all nuanced about the issue you want addressed (like I would tend to be; I'd be a poor activist), the bigger point does not get out the same way. That might make some people unhappy, but on balance, I think it's effective.
(As a side point, there is also a strong argument that these successful countries became successful over the back of, especially, the lower classes and immigrants, and owe those people way more than anyone has any intention to repay. Also, with the way inequity has been on the rise in OECD countries since the 80s, we now have some 40 years of backsliding covered up by technological advances. So even at a high level overview, the success story could anyway use some nuance.)
Yeah, I am not a fan of online mob justice or violence of any kind. I can understand how some frustrations boil over into violence, but I can't justify one group's violence (because I agree with or understand them, or think the violence has some proportionality) while condemning another's (because I don't agree etc.).
I don't think an anti-racism protester should have to worry too much about hurting people into becoming racists though. If that's someone's go-to reaction when they're upset, then that only confirms that there is still a lot of anti-racism work to done.
Just to clarify that with 'make it', I did not mean 'become very successful'; just that you can live a relatively stable and worry-free life.
Absolutely, there has been a lot of change since the 60s. I mean, the US at that time was pretty much still a segregated country. Still, given that although no-one sensible still believes in racial theories, inequity is on the rise across the OECD countries while there is enormous wealth in society and black people (and BAME more generally) still commonly experience acts of racism/bias in their everyday lives (like being stopped by police relatively often or generally being considered with more suspicion), I think people can also fairly ask to speed up next steps. Improvement does not have to be a kind of slow and organic process, where every next step comes once it's been stewing long enough. Going back to the US, police reform like what's happening now across the country could easily have happened 10 years ago (as indeed it did in some localities), but it took the current situation to really move that forward nationwide. Simply seeing that happen so quickly right now I think validates all current activism, and encourages it to keep going to achieve much more still.
Absolutely, equity is not just a BAME issue; lower classes suffer from it across the world. But the existence of one issue doesn't invalidate the existence of another, and I don't think that's being claimed. Also, many issues, if they are addresses systematically (instead of papering over cracks with small, tailored measures), will help lots of groups that are in the same boat, but do not tend to work together on their issues.
Actually, I think the claims for democracy and capitalism are overstated in many ways, especially if one claims it benefits everyone more or less equaitably in the relevant societies. For example, democracy is a scale: its extreme form would be an anarchic system where everything is decided through communal consensus, but no-one does that; systems are always only partially democratic. One downside of every system currently in use, is that you only have to cater to people that will get you elected in the way you want. This has long caused minorities to be ignored, because there is not enough 'electoral capital' in them. This is particularly bad in first-past-the-post systems (as used in the US, UK, Canada, etc.) where you can win a riding by just having more votes than your competitors. Here in Canada, where there are more than two parties, that can mean that candidates in hotly contested ridings can win with only some 35% of the votes - 65% thus not having voted for them, and possibly not at all supporting them. On the democratic scale, that's obviously pretty low, and arguably not really all that 'democratic' (in the true sense of the word).
I would argue (hopefully this isn't becoming pedantic) that capitalism is a scale as well. No country currently actually employs a fully capitalistic system; it is always tempered by all kinds of laws. (Like banning child labour.) So countries are capitalistic to various degrees, and the current overall tendency in 'the west', is that the most capitalistic countries are also the least equitable.
To bring this back to our subject: in both cases (democracy and capitalism), if you're on the wrong side of the equation, you suffer: you are poor and ignored. Absolutely, some BAME people are very successful, and overall, things are on the up for these groups as a whole. But overall, they have been among those suffering relatively often, and still are. So I can very well understand that they would question parts of the system (and have leftist leanings). It may be true that 'capitalism and democracy are bad, but everything else is worse' (or however the maxim goes) - but these are not absolutes. We can have different kinds of capitalism and democracy, that cater better to everyone across society. So it's not a question of 'they don't work', but 'they don't work good enough'.
(Sorry for the long essay...
)Just consider, for a moment, how utterly insignificant and mostly harmless virtually those things are compared to what Black people have gone through & are still going through.
And still, apparently, the rest of us get to patronisingly tell them how they should protest; whether they should protest at all; and to shut up and be satisfied with the begrudging 'progress' achieved at a snail's pace and only when it suits authorities due to overwhelming pressure or crisis or the meeting of force with force despite the danger involved in protest.
Yeah, there's that as well. People are upset that, after generations of repression and neglect, black people take down statues that in many way symbolize the state and society responsible. (Also, being able to have and defend those statues is clear example of white privilege.) Again, I am not a fan of violence or taking justice into your own hands, but you also have to understand that people in those situations can't forever keep on turning the other cheek, taking the higher ground, and so on.
But what about The FA? That's where the issue arises. If there isn't buy in or change at the top, it's not going to change to the desired level.
The FA are "old, white, and predominately white homophobic men who are out of touch with reality" as John Amaechi once strongly said in-person to a global business audience I was part of.
Isn’t that report racist in itself? Why are they looking at colour of a player & seeing what people say his attributes are? What if a particular black player does have power has an attribute- commentators can’t say that anymore? Not really sure what this report is trying to achieve, apart from trying to divide & separate players based on their skin colour
Ultimately everyone, of all races, is racist to a point. It shouldn't be projected as a white only issue because it simply emboldens the far right, which ultimately leads to more racism.
Institutional racism exists in all countries in the world. So called Democracies need to lead by example and legislate against institutional racism. The problem is change is slow, the institutions that form countries don't change overnight. Also, cultures and widely held societal beliefs don't change over night.
The way forward is to ensure education for all kids teaches them about all aspects of equality. We also need to address causes of racism in the adult population (media and populist politicians).
Institutional racism exists in all countries in the world. So called Democracies need to lead by example and legislate against institutional racism. The problem is change is slow, the institutions that form countries don't change overnight. Also, cultures and widely held societal beliefs don't change over night.
The way forward is to ensure education for all kids teaches them about all aspects of equality. We also need to address causes of racism in the adult population (media and populist politicians).
I mean... I mean is this really your take?
I always thought it was a daft idea for the Premier League to get into bed with a movement that is selective in it's opposition to racism. I guess that's the power of peer pressure from the players. What would have been more apt would have been to display the names of BAME people who have lost their lives to covid in the UK to highlight how disproportionately these communities have been affected by the virus and the reasons why they are so vunerable to it (structural racism). Instead you now have the players donning the name of a movement which has today published some lovely antisemitic nonsense on their twitter account. A couple of days ago they released another statement on twitter clarifying their position on a few other things as well: "We are an ABOLITIONIST movement, we do not believe in reforming the police, the state or the prison industrial complex".
Last edited:
I probably should have read the previous page before posting the old news. My point still stands regardless.
Agreed, this is where the white savourism of BLM begins to go way too far, to the point that it's already receiving blowback from people who were originally on board with it and is going to create the kind of climate that will see Trump re-elected and our no-deal Brexit cheered from the rafters.
The simple fact of this study is that if one was to chart physical attributes of footballers against their race, there would be a very clear correlation between strength, power, and being black. Not because I'm indulging in racist stereotypes, but because of the scientifically affirmed facts that black people have higher lean mass, higher limb vs torso proportion and higher centres of gravity. That's not to say that Maguire can't be strong and Sancho can't be skilful, but if one is going to do a broad brush, generalised analysis of how commentators describe footballers of different races then these are fair and unremarkable results.
I apologise for getting political with this post. But in light on that post you have just written, I wanted to say a few things about that post in question.
Firstly, while there are Anti-Zionists that are far too friendly with Islamists & other Anti-Semitic Organisations (such as Hamas) and there are many who fail to understand that there are various different kinds of Zionism in the first place (1). I don't see the Tweet in question (despite my issues with them misusing the Zionist term) as Anti-Semitic, rather their issue is over both Israel's recent actions against the Palestinians and in relation to attempts by some to shut down fair criticism of the Israeli Right by accusing said critics of being Anti-Semitic.
Likewise while I do disagree with those among the Black Lives Matter Movement that want to "Defund/Abolish the Police", I don't really blame them for holding such a view. What I do feel however is that their focus (on both sides of the Altantic) should more on encouraging more Non-Whites to join the Police, for the Police to take Bigtory of all kinds more seriously (and to be given more resources to stop it) and for any Bigots within our Police Forces to be kicked out of said forces. All those measures would be far more effective at reducing Racism on both sides of the Atlantic compared any attempt to "Defund/Abolish the Police.
(1) It would make far more sense calling the likes of Netanyahu as members of the "Israeli Right" or even the "Israeli Far-Right" rather than just "Zionists". Because there are plenty of Zionists in both Israel and elsewhere that are deeply opposed to the unequal treatment of Palestinians in the Holy Land (even those that are opposed to Hamas).