White lives matter - n/g

[Tarian]

I've never said that you are right wing or racist.

Lier.

I was making the point that there are two different types of right wing racist
- the uneducated and ignorant bigot being one type;
- the other being the rhetoric using cogent arguer,
of which you are a prime example.

But I do hate your modus operandi. I think it is dishonest and involves manipulation, distortion and pseudo-intellectualism, all in an effort to confuse, sidetrack and derail.

Hypocrite.
Do you have a mirror ?

Actually, you know what.....
.....maybe the biggest insult is being called "pseudo"-intellectual .....

 

[Buddha]

Ok, a bit of critical thinking, I can do that. I think your example, merging the entire lower divisions together is a bit spurious. The slogan is "black lives matter" not "poor lives matter" or "oppressed lives matter".

I think a more accurate scenario would be a "1st Division teams matter" slogan. This would have the same affect as "lower' clubs protesting about unfair treatment from "higher clubs", but would also specifically exclude other teams that are ostensibly in the same position.

The analogy was never going to be perfect. Those with honourable intentions will see through the inaccuracies of the analogy and will grasp the spirit of the analogy. Those with dishonourable intentions will pick holes in it.

I son't care if you and Tarian can't see the relevance of the analogy. I just hope that others might.

 

[alphabet_king]

It's not about either of us being able to convince the other that they're wrong, as you say, that aint gonna happen.

It's more about what other people think. Lots of people have decided to 'ignore' certain posters. As I asked before, how many people have 'ignored' me. I know only of Bert. Yet several posters have said that the fab four are on their 'ignore' list.

This doesn't mean that people agree with me or my viewpoint. But it does suggest that they certainly DO NOT agree with the right-wing quartet, and that they find those views abhorrent and don't want to be exposed to them, hence they're 'ignored'.

All I'm trying to do is provide some balance to Tarian's outlandish assertions. I worry that if I leave them unchecked some might think I have no answer to his bullshit. I'm not particularly bothered if Tarian himself thinks that, because I know it to be untrue and his opinion of me is of no consequence to me. But I do worry that others might glean from my silence that Tarian must be correct. He is not.

And it's not about people just taking the same old sides. The very fact that AK and I - two individuals with very different politics and outlook on life who could argue for ages about loads of different things - are so united on this issue speaks volumes. AK wouldn't just back me up out of some kind of loyalty. And vice versa. We agree about this issue because it is so fucking obvious. We might disagree about the whys and wherefores, and we might disagree about what the best solution may be. But we both can see there is a problem in society (particularly US society) and we both recognise that something needs to change.

Only a blind person or a belligerent racist would even try to deny the existence of racism, or the urgent necessity to address the inequality and injustice that this racism engenders and perpetuates.

IMO the whole WLM or ALM revolves around the fact that people dont really want to, or simply cannot face up to the fact they are priviledged and they cannot bear to accept that the actions of their ancestors created this in equality.

The very fabric of their beliefs of being proud of their country is 'under attack'.

No one is asking for constant apologies from the white community for these mistakes. But they are asking for help from white communities to ensure the gross mistakes we made are made up for, and black people finally get the equality they deserve. No more than equality is required.

Whats bonkers is that some people are still refusing to accept there even is any inequality. Mad.

 

[Tarian]

Listen Tarian, if the slogan had been 'All Lives Matter' I wouldn't have been arguing against that. It is quite clearly true.

The only problem with the slogan 'All Lives Matter' is that it has been adopted by the far right in opposition to the anti-racist movement..

But where are all these "far right" ?

Far more people, ordinary, apolitical people were uneasy about the sectional, divisive nature of "BLM".

People arrived at "ALM" all by themselves - ordinary, decent people - not on facebook or twitter - because "ALL" is so stark-staringly obvious as inclusive and non-divisive.

Are you a nervous wreck because the passengers on the "far right" minibus have settled permanently around your home ?

 

[Buddha]

Lier.

Ok, fair cop, I did suggest that you are a prime example of one of the more dangerous types of right-wing racist.

What I should have said is:

Although you may not actually be either right-wing or racist you give the impression, through the arguments you present, that if you are not either racist or right-wing, you are an apologist for those who are. This may not be quite so bad but it is still morally reprehensible.

 

[alphabet_king]

Ok, a bit of critical thinking, I can do that. I think your example, merging the entire lower divisions together is a bit spurious. The slogan is "black lives matter" not "poor lives matter" or "oppressed lives matter".

I think a more accurate scenario would be a "1st Division teams matter" slogan. This would have the same affect as "lower' clubs protesting about unfair treatment from "higher clubs", but would also specifically exclude other teams that are ostensibly in the same position.

You seem to misunderstand what an analogy is 666. An analogy is not an exact comparison that has to be exactly the same. That would not be an analogy. That would be
another example of something happening.

Definition:

A correspondence or partial similarity
A thing which is comparable to something else in significant respects.

In this instance the significant similarity between the two analogies is a 'minority group that are disadvantaged'. I think most people can see that.

 

[Buddha]

IMO the whole WLM or ALM revolves around the fact that people dont really want to, or simply cannot face up to the fact they are priviledged and they cannot bear to accept that the actions of their ancestors created this in equality.

The very fabric of their beliefs of being proud of their country is 'under attack'.

No one is asking for constant apologies from the white community for these mistakes. But they are asking for help from white communities to ensure the gross mistakes we made are made up for, and black people finally get the equality they deserve. No more than equality is required.

Whats bonkers is that some people are still refusing to accept there even is any inequality. Mad.

You're spot on there, AK. I think so anyway.

What is important is why some people are so "bonkers" that they wont accept the blatantly obvious inequality in society. What are they afraid of losing? Why argue against movements for equality unless they have something to lose? Perhaps they enjoy white privilege and are so scared of losing it they will fight tooth and nail against anybody who calls out the inequality and demands change?

 

[Buddha]

You seem to misunderstand what an analogy is 666. An analogy is not an exact comparison that has to be exactly the same. That would not be an analogy. That would be
another example of something happening.

Definition:

A correspondence or partial similarity
A thing which is comparable to something else in significant respects.

In this instance the significant similarity between the two analogies is a 'minority group that are disadvantaged'. I think most people can see that.

Great! I'm glad that much is obvious, AK. They even had me starting to doubt it myself!

 

[Buddha]

Incidentally, has anyone ever seen Tarian post anything about the Gills? Is he even a supporter of our club?

I know that I post loads of non-Gills stuff but I do try to contribute when and where I can to Gills related threads. I might be wrong but I don't remember Tarian ever making any comment about our club...

 

[nitram77]

People will always interpret logic differently, normally because they jump to conclusions. There are many on this board at the moment blaming the government for the covid deaths, they might well be at fault but we need to wait for a public enquiry before making that call.
I could jump to the conclusion that our high death rate is because Russia and India have a better health service than us, they both have massively higher confirmed cases, yet massively lower deaths.
The one fact we know for definite is some people are racist, the secret is to understand why.

 

[Whitstabletangerine]

You're spot on there, AK. I think so anyway.

What is important is why some people are so "bonkers" that they wont accept the blatantly obvious inequality in society. What are they afraid of losing? Why argue against movements for equality unless they have something to lose? Perhaps they enjoy white privilege and are so scared of losing it they will fight tooth and nail against anybody who calls out the inequality and demands change?

Equality in their eyes would be to lose control.

 

[Buddha]

Incidentally, has anyone ever seen Tarian post anything about the Gills? Is he even a supporter of our club?

I know that I post loads of non-Gills stuff but I do try to contribute when and where I can to Gills related threads. I might be wrong but I don't remember Tarian ever making any comment about our club...

Yep, I've just scanned through his last 200 posts and there is one about Scally and one about L1 clubs.

He likes statistics so maybe he'll like this:

Of his last 200 posts, 0.5% have been related to GFC, and 1% related to football.

I'm the last person to moan that this is supposed to be a football forum. We've done that to death and seem to be broadly in agreement that if this board was Gills and Gills only, it'd be more boring than it already is.

But such a distinct lack of Gills related talk, it makes me wonder if he actually supports our club.

Maybe that's unfair. C'mon Tarian, as much as your political comments are so appreciated on here, I'm sure we'd all love to hear you talk football once in a while.

 

[Gills 58]

It was a response to Tarian. Hence it's length and tedium.

You are wasting your time. Einstein couldn't make him think differenly once he's got a "take" on something. Give up like I did. It's far less stressful. You'd have more luck trying to persude the tide to stop ebbing and flowing.

 

[Tarian]

IMO the whole WLM or ALM revolves around the fact that people dont really want to, or simply cannot face up to the fact they are priviledged and they cannot bear to accept that the actions of their ancestors created this in equality.

The very fabric of their beliefs of being proud of their country is 'under attack'.

No one is asking for constant apologies from the white community for these mistakes.
But they are asking for help from white communities to ensure the gross mistakes we made are made up for, and black people finally get the equality they deserve. No more than equality is required.
.

Individuals object to being :
a) made to feel guilty about something that a handful of people, NOT their ancestors, 10 generations ago did.
b) asked to "make up for"
....."gross mistakes" that "we" did not do.

Of course black people should "get the equality they deserve" - but that should be equality of opportunity - not necessarily outcome
(the collective vs individuals)

....and they cannot bear to accept that the actions of their ancestors created this in equality.

A) "their" ancestors" ??
How many people today have an ancestor relevant to this discussion ?

B) If by "actions" you mean slavery, how is this relevant to current generations of black people ?
Many black people now in the UK do not have slave ancestors - so what have "our ancestors" got to do with any of this ?

Whats bonkers is that some people are still refusing to accept there even is any inequality. Mad.

Define "inequality".

Of course people's lives turn out differently. We are all individuals (....whatever the collectivists think)

Occasionally people are treated unfairly.
That's why we have laws - and investigative reporters to highlight lawful, but bad practices.

But people who exaggerate problems to the point of incredulity, are doing so either to create a taxpayer-funded wagon to free-load on...
.....or just to be disruptive.

 

[alphabet_king]

You're spot on there, AK. I think so anyway.

What is important is why some people are so "bonkers" that they wont accept the blatantly obvious inequality in society. What are they afraid of losing? Why argue against movements for equality unless they have something to lose? Perhaps they enjoy white privilege and are so scared of losing it they will fight tooth and nail against anybody who calls out the inequality and demands change?

Aye, its mad that we have people saying, blm, then we have people saying, oh i totally agree in equality lets say instead ALM, yet they then are really anti blm and really militant in their demand to call it alm. FFS, just let people call it what they want and focus on the actual point of what they are saying.

The very fact the argument has centred on blm vs alm and now even wlm is only distracting from the main point of it all in tue first place. It seems like a deliberate tactic by those who dont want the blm movement to succeed, personally.

 

[Tarian]

C'mon Tarian, as much as your political comments are so appreciated on here, I'm sure we'd all love to hear you talk football once in a while.

i) Evans cleared out too many players. So it took longer for the team to gel.

ii) Scally should cede control (reduce shareholding) to (say) 30% if he wants new investment

iii) Regional Leagues would make more sense economically - and for fan experience.

iv) Ogilvie was a waste of space for a couple of seasons (indecision at left back) - but Evans & Co have improved him considerably

Is that enough for now ?

 

[Gills 58]

The analogy was never going to be perfect. Those with honourable intentions will see through the inaccuracies of the analogy and will grasp the spirit of the analogy. Those with dishonourable intentions will pick holes in it.

I son't care if you and Tarian can't see the relevance of the analogy. I just hope that others might.

I did. Perhaps others didn't want to.

 

[Buddha]

Aye, its mad that we have people saying, blm, then we have people saying, oh i totally agree in equality lets say instead ALM, yet they then are really anti blm and really militant in their demand to call it alm. FFS, just let people call it what they want and focus on the actual point of what they are saying.

The very fact the argument has centred on blm vs alm and now even wlm is only distracting from the main point of it all in tue first place. It seems like a deliberate tactic by those who dont want the blm movement to succeed, personally.

That is exactly what it is, AK. A deliberate attempt to distract, distort and derail.

 

[Buddha]

i) Evans cleared out too many players. So it took longer for the team to gel.

ii) Scally should cede control (reduce shareholding) to (say) 30% if he wants new investment

iii) Regional Leagues would make more sense economically - and for fan experience.

iv) Ogilvie was a waste of space for a couple of seasons (indecision at left back) - but Evans & Co have improved him considerably

Is that enough for now ?

Not really, Tarian, no.

Tell us about your first ever Gills game.

 

[GillsBluenose]

People will always interpret logic differently, normally because they jump to conclusions.

I agree. If logic is the only adjudicator:
1. If you just want to be treated the same and not viewed as different from any other citizen due to the colour of your skin, is "Black lives matter" logically the best slogan?
2. Is it logical to demolish or vandalise a whole set of statues that nobody has previously petitioned to have taken down even though some have been there for decades? (ditto, the banning and editing of classic TV programmes and films) - what logically has changed this month to merit that?
3. Is it logical to paint someone who has been convicted of armed bank robbery, drug abuse and other crime, to be some sort of saint who could not possibly have been using a threatening manner and have needed some form of restraining when challenged? (That is not to condone the unnecessary force used afterwards).

If you are/were not there, you can only draw your "logic" from likelyhood and your existing attitude or in-built opinion.