White lives matter - n/g

[Gills 58]

Why are you (and so many people) so caught up on what it's called though? Can you not see that this has simply derailed the whole discussion, and is doing nothing to address the actual point? People expressing 'ALM' all seem to claim they are fully in support of equality and the principles of what BLM are asking for (equality), yet since the BLM movement has started have done nothing but derail the discussion to split hairs over ALM vs BLM. Can you not see how people might think you really dont want movement for equality to succeed?


A whole set? Lets take the rhetoric out of this please. Whole sets of statues were not demolished. As far as I am aware (i am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong), the only statue that was demolished by protesters was the one in Bristol. People had petitioned for years to get it taken down, and those petitions had been ignored. In hindsight, pretty much everyone now agrees it should have been taken down well before the protesters did so. Are you seriously disapointed that that this statue in particular was taken down?

I fully support saving it and putting it in a Black history museum and having as an example of something we can learn from, but simply cannot agree with leaving it up simply because 'it was put up in a time when that was deemed acceptable'. We are no longer in a time when it is acceptable to revere someone that was a slave trader, even if he did some philanthropy also. Just as it's not acceptable to leave up any statues of Jimmy Saville "for his charity work", ignoring the 'little matter of paedophilia'.

And yes it's right that now this has been highlighted, that a 'review of statues' is undertaken to review whether all statues are right to be displayed. This is probably something that should have been done some time ago. Thankfully the actions of the protesters has meant that actually this review is finally being done.

In reference to vandalism, of course a few more statues were vandalised rather than demolished. I only know of one other, but i am sure there was more. I acutally disagree with the Churchill vandalisms. This i think was just BLM protestors getting too over the top. For this they made a mistake here. That said, the statue protectors made their own mistakes, ask Nobby what he thinks of what the hero statue protectors did to the Keith Palmer statue.



No one is painting George Floyd as a saint? What are you on about? People have fully accepted he was probably quite a bad character overall, no one's trying to say he's a saint, or any sort of martyr. People are saying the brutality he was unfortunate to receive is simply one example of what many black people receive all over the US, and in the UK also. That's all that's being said. The reason he has become so popular, and the reason it's caused so much 'trouble', is that its a rare moment that this brutality and systematic inequality has been caught quite so vividly on camera. It's a rare moment they are able to prove what has been said for years and years. It's created a movement of people who have experienced rough treatment by cops etc. or just general rough treatment by other factions of society. No one is saying Floyd was a saint at all. That is all in your head.

Nailed it again AK. Nice one.

 

[ThreeSixes]

Nailed it again AK. Nice one.

Awwwww!

 

[Buddha]

Well fair enough, Tarian, this post suggests you're actually telling the truth. You've got some of the facts wrong but that would correlate with your age and the tricks that memory can play on us all. And goes to prove that facts aint everything.

You see, this is how to be fair and even handed in argument. Sometimes the facts and details can be wrong but the spirit or essence remains true .or correct

You might have got the year and the round wrong (we got knocked out in 2nd round against Leyton Orient in 68/69 season but we did play Peterboro in the 4th round the following season, so it was January 1970). But I'm not going to question your dates and details, it's clear to me that either:

a) you're telling the truth and just got things muddled
or
b) It was a deliberate and calculated ploy to get the details wrong; designed precisely to make people think you must be telling the truth, simply because it was so long ago and it's quite likely you might get details wrong. A kind of double bluff.

I reckon all in all it's gotta be a). Shirley not even you have could be so deranged you'd actually do b) ??!!


Congratulations, you've been a Gills fan longer than me. We have obviously shared many moments of despair and a few joyful ones too. How bizarre.

Only scan read these so maybe I missed it but don't see anything here about the Gills playing in red that day. Would have thought it'd be mentioned in match reports. And the picture (although black and white) doesn't immediately suggest that it was reds v blues, looks more like dark colour vs light colour. Not conclusive though, I know.
http://gillinghamfcscrapbook.co.uk/... FAC4.jpg&matchdate=24/01/1970&season=1969-70

So what is the story about the red shirts?

 

[ThreeSixes]

I'm interested to know what you mean by that. I have read a report of the statement he made, which is probably incomplete, and can't see anything that matches.

The statement he made included;

"please try to understand that black people’s lives are not like those of the white population, who are viewed negatively and with suspicion. We’re watched as we walk around shops, we don’t hold positions of influence in organisations"

He is saying that black people are viewed suspiciously when walking around shops, whilst white people aren't? Have I misunderstood that?

 

[Buddha]

The statement he made included;

"please try to understand that black people’s lives are not like those of the white population, who are viewed negatively and with suspicion. We’re watched as we walk around shops, we don’t hold positions of influence in organisations"

He is saying that black people are viewed suspiciously when walking around shops, whilst white people aren't? Have I misunderstood that?

I know exactly what it's like to be followed around a shop because of what you look like. It doesn't happen to me anymore because I dress far more conservatively than I used to. Years ago in my youth I wore the crusty traveller 'anti-uniform'. It was youthful naivety. Nowadays I don't particularly stand out.

But back then I did, and security guards would regularly follow me around shops. It used to make me laugh and if I was bored I'd play games with them, picking things up and putting them in my pockets walk about a bit and then go and return the things to the shelf I'd found them on. I used to hope that whilst the prejudiced security guard was wasting his time on me, someone else might be able to get themselves a five-finger discount. Would serve the company right for employing a security guard who decided to follow me just because of what I looked like!

All I had to do to stop this from happening was change my appearance. Do you doubt that BAME people get disproportionately 'watched' whilst in shops? Want can they do to remedy this prejudice and injustice, change their skin colour?!

 

[GillsBluenose]

Nailed it again AK. Nice one.

I think as it has gone beyond the "like" button, we have a bromance going on. Get the Barry White records out...

 

[GillsBluenose]

Why are you (and so many people) so caught up on what it's called though? Can you not see that this has simply derailed the whole discussion, and is doing nothing to address the actual point?

So many people? Does that include Ben Mee? He seemed to be caught up with what something was called. Or could he just not play football with a plane in the sky above him?

Actually, come to think of it, that was what it looked like.

 

[alphabet_king]

I think as it has gone beyond the "like" button, we have a bromance going on. Get the Barry White records out...

So many people? Does that include Ben Mee? He seemed to be caught up with what something was called. Or could he just not play football with a plane in the sky above him?

Actually, come to think of it, that was what it looked like.

Youve not answered the question though have you? A classic diversion technique to answer questions with other questions or just trying to belittle people.

 

[jogills]

The statement he made included;

"please try to understand that black people’s lives are not like those of the white population, who are viewed negatively and with suspicion. We’re watched as we walk around shops, we don’t hold positions of influence in organisations"

He is saying that black people are viewed suspiciously when walking around shops, whilst white people aren't? Have I misunderstood that?

No not at all, that's how I understand it. Do you not believe him when he says that? A question not a challenge.

 

[ThreeSixes]

Do you doubt that BAME people get disproportionately 'watched' whilst in shops?

I mean, you have LITERALLY just explained why YOU got disproportionately watched whilst in shops, so yes, I suppose I do.

And please stop saying BAME. It is Black lives that matter. No one has said BAME lives matter (or is this another thing that should be "implied" by BLM?).

 

[ThreeSixes]

No not at all, that's how I understand it. Do you not believe him when he says that? A question not a challenge.

No. Honest answer. I think it is an unsubstantiated guess.

As stated before, I think that groups of young people dressed a certain way will arouse suspicion regardless of skin colour. I think a young black man with a "gangsta limp" will be viewed differently from a black church pastor. And I think his statement is frankly slanderous to shop staff (the majority of whom, in London at least, will be ethnic minority themselves)

Ive never been black though, so I don't know for certain. My original point was (yonks ago) that it wasn't just his "murdered by police" sentence that could be questioned

 

[jogills]

No. Honest answer. I think it is an unsubstantiated guess.

As stated before, I think that groups of young people dressed a certain way will arouse suspicion regardless of skin colour. I think a young black man with a "gangsta limp" will be viewed differently from a black church pastor. And I think his statement is frankly slanderous to shop staff (the majority of whom, in London at least, will be ethnic minority themselves)

Ive never been black though, so I don't know for certain. My original point was (yonks ago) that it wasn't just his "murdered by police" sentence that could be questioned

OK thanks for the reply I just wasn't sure exactly where we were. We'll agree to disagree but it's not central.

 

[GillsBluenose]

Youve not answered the question though have you? A classic diversion technique to answer questions with other questions or just trying to belittle people.

Actually, I was answering the question by pointing that your assertion is clearly false and saying why. If you see that as a diversion, I feel sorry for you.

You have got such a thick pair of blinkers on that you can not see that Ben Mee's right-on statement about White Lives matter is hypocritical when he has Black lives matter emblazoned on his shirt. He clearly has no concept of double standards.

You are clearly willing to give the benefit of the doubt to BLM but not WLM which is also double standards.

You also reply to a post that clearly referred to statues being demolished OR VANDALISED with the statement "A whole set? Lets take the rhetoric out of this please. Whole sets of statues were not demolished. As far as I am aware (i am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong), the only statue that was demolished by protesters was the one in Bristol. " - and you gave the gall to say you are taking the rhetoric out of it.

Still, at least your new admirer is clearly in to you.

 

[mehmets_curlies]

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.

It is similar to how I feel about the St George's flag. Back in the '80s whenever the English national team played the supporters would wave Union Jacks. This used to irritate me and I often moaned about it, asking why the English don't embrace the St. George's flag. For me, that is more relevant to England than the Union Jack.

So, in a way I was pleased when the St George's flags started appearing. Unfortunately the flag was co-opted by the far-right and as a result I lost any affinity with the flag that I may have once had.

Yes, 'All LIves Matter' would be a better slogan. Yes, the St Geoorge's flag is more appropriate for the English national team. Unfortunately the right wing got hold of both and corrupted the symbolism. As a result the slogan and the flag are tainted, they start to represent something different to what they should, and I therefore reject them.

As the punk band Crisis said "they've hidden their swastika behind the union jack"

 

[MedwayModernist]

Actually, I was answering the question by pointing that your assertion is clearly false and saying why. If you see that as a diversion, I feel sorry for you.

You have got such a thick pair of blinkers on that you can not see that Ben Mee's right-on statement about White Lives matter is hypocritical when he has Black lives matter emblazoned on his shirt. He clearly has no concept of double standards.

You are clearly willing to give the benefit of the doubt to BLM but not WLM which is also double standards.

You also reply to a post that clearly referred to statues being demolished OR VANDALISED with the statement "A whole set? Lets take the rhetoric out of this please. Whole sets of statues were not demolished. As far as I am aware (i am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong), the only statue that was demolished by protesters was the one in Bristol. " - and you gave the gall to say you are taking the rhetoric out of it.

Still, at least your new admirer is clearly in to you.

Answering the question by pointing out an assertion is false when it isn't is a diversion.

 

[Baghdad_Rob]

Meanwhile an Cambridge university profession tweets:





In response to a petition to have her fired then Cambridge say:


and a promotion:


Shock that her main teaching is in colonial and post colonial literature and theory.

When people say that "Black Lives Matter" doesn't mean "White Lives don't matter" then apparently some people didn't get the memo

 

[valenciagill]

Meanwhile an Cambridge university profession tweets:


View attachment 40430
View attachment 40429

In response to a petition to have her fired then Cambridge say:
View attachment 40432

and a promotion:
View attachment 40431

Shock that her main teaching is in colonial and post colonial literature and theory.

When people say that "Black Lives Matter" doesn't mean "White Lives don't matter" then apparently some people didn't get the memo

Their masks are slipping.

 

[Jerryattrick]

Speak for yourself there, jerry. I don't have a 'chosen bubble' and some of the stuff that gets written on here definitely gets me thinking. Even when it's utter ignorant bullshit it's still occasionally thought provoking and at least provides reaffirmation that there are bigoted people out there who will not listen to reason.

There is also evidence of more dangerous proponents of right-wing rhetoric, those who can argue cogently and manipulate language and statistics to make it appear that their viewpoint is based upon reason, when in reality it is based purely upon prejudice and fear. These posters make me think that I must engage because the alternative (just ignoring them) wont make them go away. It just means that anybody reading their shite and not properly thinking might get fooled. They mustn't be left unchallenged, their racist views must be shouted down. It might not make them think but it might encourage others to think for themselves.

I want to know where all of these statue-toppling book-burning fascists are, jerry. To date 'the mob' have pulled down one statue. It was a particular statue that should have already been pulled down and would have been had it not been for a lack of money and (perverse and ironically) because the Mayor is of Jamaican descent himself and was worried that if he had made it a priority it may have been counter productive. (Counter productive because racists would have used it as a reason not only to criticise him but to oppose other positions of power being occupied by members of the BAME communities).

So other than that one, there have been no violent mobs roaming the streets trying to pull down statues. Instead there has only been violent mobs roaming the streets claiming to be protecting statues but finding that there's nobody to protect said statues from and so instead getting pissed and abusive, urinating on memorials of their heroes and fighting with the police whom they claim to support and respect.

All the nonsense about statues coming down and tv shows being pulled, that hasn't come from the streets but from the media and the corporations. And they're not really bothered by the issue, all they care about is their image and their profit margins.

The people who support the BLM movement support it because they are anti-racist. If you are an anti-racist the chances are that you're anti-fascist too. It seems difficult to conceive how somebody could be both anti-racist and fascist since an essential core element of fascism is identifying a section of society as 'different' or as 'outsiders' and then scapegoating them for the problems in society. Anti-racists stand against that kind of discrimination and scapegoating. Anti-racists want a society where someone's race or skin colour bears no influence upon their life opportunities. The only section of society that anti-racists target are the racist elements.

If anti-racists are fascists simply for identifying racists as 'different' from the rest of us, and as the obstacle or problem blocking a more progressive society, then so be it. If demanding that racism be confined to the dustbin of history is fascist then we really have entered the realms of doublethink and there is no hope.

I don't believe that to be true and will maintain a noble position of staunch anti-fascist and committed anti-racist.

I'm a no fascist. I don't want to melt down statues or burn any books. But neither do I want statues of racists on our streets or fascist literature disseminated at large. Put the statues in museums and the books in libraries. Not celebrating and memorialising hate and oppression is not the same as destroying history and pretending it didn't happen. It's just not celebrating and memorialising it.

maybe a linguistic or semantics based victory can be declared by those who I oppose. But it is meaningless and hollow.

There you go, you've made me think a bit just now...!!

I was not including you in my post as you are not a ‘normal’ poster lol. I already know where you are coming from :)

Exactly who is deciding which books and statues go to a museum? Therein lies the danger. Who's version of history will go on the plaques/narratives?
History must expanded but be unfettered, factual without a leaning or opinion.
The truth is whats important as the basis of free speech and political independence.

Anti racist is not always antifascist as fascism is not only about race.

 

[Jerryattrick]

Meanwhile an Cambridge university profession tweets:


View attachment 40430
View attachment 40429

In response to a petition to have her fired then Cambridge say:
View attachment 40432

and a promotion:
View attachment 40431

Shock that her main teaching is in colonial and post colonial literature and theory.

When people say that "Black Lives Matter" doesn't mean "White Lives don't matter" then apparently some people didn't get the memo

What is your point? You are no different from other social media users grasping at straws for ‘your gang’.
People posting a tweat from some unknown unimportant human talking absolute divisive crap is a joke.

 

[GillsBluenose]

The funny thing is that you could regard the rise of White lives Matter in response to Black lives Matter as an equivalent to the "#metoo" movement - even mentioning the Reading incident would validate that.

If the plane had instead trailed a message of "Black lives don't matter" that would be an entirely different, racist and disgraceful thing. Then Ben Mee would have been entitled to say what he did and the instigator would have been rightly prosecuted.
As it is, the police have given their take on it - although that is probably only a diversion.