|
Post by mattmw on Jan 5, 2012 21:58:06 GMT 1
McCarthism in the air at the moment. just be grateful we don't get bogged down with Leninism. I always thought McCartney was the talented one in the Beatles though...
|
|
|
Post by shrewsTRUST on Jan 5, 2012 22:19:17 GMT 1
"Just for the record, I think that abbott is an idiot and always has been, her comments though are an irrelevance as i think she doesnt in any way represent "the black community" She's a black MP. Struggle to think of anyone whose views represent the black community more... 1 member of any community shouldnt be seen as a representitive of that community just because they are part of it. I dont represent the white community, Cameron doesnt represent the white community, she doesnt represent hers. we are all so diverse that you cant represent me and vice versa
|
|
|
Post by thesensationaljt on Jan 5, 2012 22:19:24 GMT 1
Anyone on here ever said something in the heat of the moment that you wish you hadn't? I certainly have. (Several times).
Perhaps that why I don't get too excited about Terry, Abbott, etc.
If we're looking for racial harmony, keeping it at the top of the agenda does nothing to help community relations.
But the truth is, there are people who look to be offended, mostly on the behalf of others. A good example was Mark Lawrenson and his, "now there's two Benders on the field", or something similar. I believe there was one complaint, but he still had to apologise.
Some people need to get a thicker skin. (What ever the colour).
By the way, Diane, I wasn't offended at all by your remarks. I don't like you, because you're a politician. I dislike you all equally.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Jan 5, 2012 23:27:31 GMT 1
Crippen's been waiting for a story like this for months - he typed his original post one handed surely?
It's not racist at all - the tweet is a reply to a constituent's comment around the coverage of the Lawrence trial and his objection to people talking about the "black community". She agreed the point that he was making, i.e. the "black community" isn't homogenous but considered that given the subject matter she didn't consider it a problem as people outside the black community (white people - by definition) played the divide and rule game. Except she had 140 characters to say it in.
The reaction of the Labour leadership - just as Liam Byrne's comments about the welfare State did earlier in the week shows that the parliamentary party is still swinging in the breeze and isn't worthy of electoral support.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Jan 5, 2012 23:49:53 GMT 1
The difference in tense doesn't change it. But go your own way Crippen.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2012 23:53:44 GMT 1
The difference in tense doesn't change it. How can it possibly not?
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Jan 5, 2012 23:57:00 GMT 1
Because it doesn't. I was reporting what she was saying (which happened in the past thus enabling the reporting) and not quoting.
|
|
lewie
Salop Leisure League
Posts: 3
|
Post by lewie on Jan 6, 2012 0:00:05 GMT 1
Politicians should be free to speak their mind, thats the point of democracy
|
|
prawnsarnie
Midland League Division Two
[k4r]
Posts: 243
|
Post by prawnsarnie on Jan 6, 2012 0:07:18 GMT 1
To fail to dismiss her is to compound the mistake.
IMO she should be out on her 'arris. Remember the guy who had the temerity to go on a stag do where someone else wore a fancy dress outfit that caused outrage? Publicly demoted.
We need to either draw a 'common sense' line in the sand and accept she made a mistake (and bear that in mind for future mistakes made by others) or get rid and continue the sequence of public humiliation whenever someone slips up.
|
|
|
Post by thesensationaljt on Jan 6, 2012 0:07:20 GMT 1
Thanks, John Terry, Diane Abbott and zealots on here on either side. In future, when we sign anyone, Instead of excitingly looking at their playing career, I'm going to look what colour they are. Much more important.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Jan 6, 2012 1:45:02 GMT 1
That twitter post is a load of b******s. Racism is racism, whatever guise. And each case should be looked at independently... We can agree to differ on the Twitter post, no problem. Racism is racism - agreed. Here's a question - Tommie Smith and John Carlos's salutes on the Olympic 200m podium in Mexico '68, were they racist do you think? Each case should be looked at independently - agreed. Having done that, this seems to me like a lot of froth and lather over not very much at all.
|
|
|
Post by africanshrew on Jan 6, 2012 8:44:45 GMT 1
I'm still not overly excited by Abbot's comments though. And therein lies my point. Had the comments been made towards the black population, you (and the likes of AfricanShrew) would have been frothing at the mouth and condemning the use of racist language as unacceptable. Why the change in approach? Try reading my post before telling me what I think! I actually condemned Diane Abbott's comments in this case but, hey, don't let facts get in the way. It's a shame you are not capable of engaging in a debate without resorting to vitriolic rants and the same tired generalisations and insults. Even the idea that someone could hold an opinion different to yours seems to be beyond your comprehension...
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Jan 6, 2012 10:39:03 GMT 1
That twitter post is a load of b******s. Racism is racism, whatever guise. And each case should be looked at independently... We can agree to differ on the Twitter post, no problem. Racism is racism - agreed. Here's a question - Tommie Smith and John Carlos's salutes on the Olympic 200m podium in Mexico '68, were they racist do you think? Each case should be looked at independently - agreed. Having done that, this seems to me like a lot of froth and lather over not very much at all. As for Smith and Carlos I don't know a great deal about them but for what little I know then no, I would not deem that salute racist. As for your final point, well that's how it is now isn't it. That is what it has become. Through no fault of the vast majority but for those who look to pick up on the smallest of things and take them completely out of proportion. That seems to be where we are today, that's how thing are now. And with that it is no surprise that some people will deem those comments unacceptable, crude and offensive. Now you might not, fine. I may not. But others may, others will. Same with Suarez. Same with Terry. Everyone will have an opinion. But the one thing that grabbed me about that twitter was the reference to the Stephen Lawrence. I think that's pretty low, pretty disgusting that someone would look to even compare the two incidents. I suppose the timing is perfect for anyone to do so but don't blame anyone who may be upset by Abbot's remarks for that, blame Abbot for making them. The timing is all on her part and no one else. To suggest that people are up in arms about this because they wish to try and score even in the racist stakes is way off for me (...A black man gets knifed to death by a white mob; a black MP writes a carelessly worded tweet about white people. It all evens out...) and how people can see it that way is alien to me. I thought that was pretty rum. And it's not as if Abbot hasn't put her foot in her mouth before now is it...
|
|
carlj
Shropshire County League
Veni, Vidi, Vici
Posts: 42
|
Post by carlj on Jan 6, 2012 11:42:13 GMT 1
I don't like Diane Abbot anyway as I believe she is a massive hypocrite but to sack her would be wrong. The comment was made in about genralisation and it just shows her ignorance as a person rather than down right racism.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2012 14:20:58 GMT 1
I think what Crippen is trying to say (rightly or wrongly) is that there doesnt seem to be the mass hysteria you get when a white person (particularly someone in a high profile job such as a MP) makes sweeping generalisations about a race. And regardless of the tense of her quote, she has made a general comment about white people.........and not the first time she has made race related comments.
I agree with him on this and said similar things in the past. I stand to be corrected but the perception I have is that there seems to be an element of fear from white people to criticise people of different colours, particularly when it comes to race issues. The only person Ive seen to publicly come out to say her comments are racist and she she should be sacked is an Iraqi born MP who doesnt have the same fear as his white collegues (although I know he's a Tory and probably just looking to score political points).
If Mrs Abbott was white then Id expect people from all communities (am I allowed to use that word now) come out condemning the words she had used. Id expect all sorts of high profile groups and individuals telling us that Britain is a tolerant, multicultural country and her words are out of touch and she is an embarrasment who should not hold such a high profile job. However as she is black we get a few comments telling us she has been stupid but lets not get carried away and make a meal out of it.
Personally Im not offended by her comments, what annoys me is the double standards we hav
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Jan 6, 2012 15:06:18 GMT 1
We can agree to differ on the Twitter post, no problem. Racism is racism - agreed. Here's a question - Tommie Smith and John Carlos's salutes on the Olympic 200m podium in Mexico '68, were they racist do you think? Each case should be looked at independently - agreed. Having done that, this seems to me like a lot of froth and lather over not very much at all. As for Smith and Carlos I don't know a great deal about them but for what little I know then no, I would not deem that salute racist. As for your final point, well that's how it is now isn't it. That is what it has become. Through no fault of the vast majority but for those who look to pick up on the smallest of things and take them completely out of proportion. That seems to be where we are today, that's how thing are now. And with that it is no surprise that some people will deem those comments unacceptable, crude and offensive. Now you might not, fine. I may not. But others may, others will. Same with Suarez. Same with Terry. Everyone will have an opinion. But the one thing that grabbed me about that twitter was the reference to the Stephen Lawrence. I think that's pretty low, pretty disgusting that someone would look to even compare the two incidents. I suppose the timing is perfect for anyone to do so but don't blame anyone who may be upset by Abbot's remarks for that, blame Abbot for making them. The timing is all on her part and no one else. To suggest that people are up in arms about this because they wish to try and score even in the racist stakes is way off for me (...A black man gets knifed to death by a white mob; a black MP writes a carelessly worded tweet about white people. It all evens out...) and how people can see it that way is alien to me. I thought that was pretty rum. And it's not as if Abbot hasn't put her foot in her mouth before now is it... Fair comments. I asked the Smith/Carlos question because I just wondered whether some might even view their black power salutes (although it was actually a bit more subtle than that) as racist. Just trying to gauge where people are starting from. We live in an over-emotive age where people are mock-offended by any old thing and it lessens the impact of things people have more reason to find offensive. Yes that's subjective but a careless tweet by a politician or, on the other side of the coin, a daft joke by a TV presenter (Clarkson) are no reason for us to get an attack of the vapours and act as if we never heard anything so outrageous. I'm neutral on Abbott herself but I'd rather politicians make the odd harmless gaffe than be forever mouthing party platitudes. I thought people wanted their politicians to be human, not bland party mouthpieces. I respect your interpretation but I didn't think the Twitter piece was making a direct comparison with Lawrence. I read it as saying that some might try to do that - as in making the argument that racism's bad but both sides are equally at fault. That was the key point in the piece; that the power relationship can't be ignored and affluent whites have the power in this country (and before anyone jumps in, there's nothing wrong with that, if it's fairly held and not abused). When you take racism out of that power context, it makes it seem less dangerous, not such a terrible thing. So away fans telling Shrews fans they're Welsh - is that racist or just name-calling? It has little, if any, meaningful modern cultural context, so it's not racism coloured by a recent experience of discrimination, never mind relatively recent experiences of slavery or genocide. The racism tag just doesn't carry the same weight if the power relationship is ignored. A white person in Zimbabwe would have reason to be concerned about black racism. The threat from a careless remark on Twitter here is not remotely comparable. It strikes me as a gross over-simplification to call that double standards. Anyway, nice to have a civilised discussion. Never understand why some people's keyboards make them so angry.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2012 15:29:31 GMT 1
Just for curiositys sake, does anyone know of any comparible quotes from mps or celebs that have landed them in any more trouble than diane abbots in?
Im sure there must be some, i just cant think of any off top of my head, and for the sake of the debate, i guess its important to determine if a disparity actually exists before we start to condemn it, or if in fact its just one of those great myths of our time?
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Jan 6, 2012 17:34:19 GMT 1
Just for curiositys sake, does anyone know of any comparible quotes from mps or celebs that have landed them in any more trouble than diane abbots in? Im sure there must be some, i just cant think of any off top of my head, and for the sake of the debate, i guess its important to determine if a disparity actually exists before we start to condemn it, or if in fact its just one of those great myths of our time? Alan Clark made his infamous Bongo Bongo Land remark years ago. I guess it's possible to be offensive and amusing at the same time. Boris Johnson apparently referred to "piccaninnies" a bit more recently. Seems to have got away with it but then, with Boris, there are so many gaffes to choose from. And then there was the Duke of Ed's notorious "slitty eyes" gaffe. Though he's no politician, to say the least. They were newsworthy but I don't recall any serious eruption over these, of the "off with his head" variety. Clark probably came closest to that. All were in the bygone days before social media made more exciteable idiots of us all, of course.
|
|
|
Post by shrewsace on Jan 6, 2012 19:05:09 GMT 1
For me though, Venceremos, the twitter poster's premise seems to be that black-on-white racism isn't as abhorrent or serious as white -on-black racism due to the historical and cultural context.
Playing off the murder of Stephen Lawrence against the comments of Diane Abbott as if each represents the most egregious transgressions of each 'side' is straw man arguing at its worst and does nothing but inflame and divide.
It was a poor show from Abbott, no doubt about it.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Jan 6, 2012 19:34:38 GMT 1
For me though, Venceremos, the twitter poster's premise seems to be that black-on-white racism isn't as abhorrent or serious as white -on-black racism due to the historical and cultural context. Playing off the murder of Stephen Lawrence against the comments of Diane Abbott as if each represents the most egregious transgressions of each 'side' is straw man arguing at its worst and does nothing but inflame and divide. It was a poor show from Abbott, no doubt about it. Yes, I think that's his premise and, in the UK, I agree with it. I don't think he's making a direct comparison between Lawrence and Abbott in that way, more that he's trying to put things into context. I'm sure no-one's suggesting they're both equally as bad but when the same "racist" terminology is applied to both, do you not think that the enormous distinction between the two cases could become blurred for some people? And when that happens, the real offence of racism becomes diluted. Again, you can make racism a catch all term to cover anything from murder to name calling but, if you take it out of the power relationship within its cultural context, it really doesn't mean much at all. That would suit some people (and I'm not suggesting anyone here) very well. And yes, it was a poor show from Abbott, but not a hanging offence.
|
|
|
Post by shrewsace on Jan 6, 2012 19:51:16 GMT 1
For me though, Venceremos, the twitter poster's premise seems to be that black-on-white racism isn't as abhorrent or serious as white -on-black racism due to the historical and cultural context. Playing off the murder of Stephen Lawrence against the comments of Diane Abbott as if each represents the most egregious transgressions of each 'side' is straw man arguing at its worst and does nothing but inflame and divide. It was a poor show from Abbott, no doubt about it. Yes, I think that's his premise and, in the UK, I agree with it. I don't think he's making a direct comparison between Lawrence and Abbott in that way, more that he's trying to put things into context. I'm sure no-one's suggesting they're both equally as bad but when the same "racist" terminology is applied to both, do you not think that the enormous distinction between the two cases could become blurred for some people? And when that happens, the real offence of racism becomes diluted. Again, you can make racism a catch all term to cover anything from murder to name calling but, if you take it out of the power relationship within its cultural context, it really doesn't mean much at all. That would suit some people (and I'm not suggesting anyone here) very well. And yes, it was a poor show from Abbott, but not a hanging offence. Would you say the murder of Kriss Donald (a white Scottish teenager murdered by an Asian gang) - setting aside the historical and cultural backdrop - was less horrific than that of Stephen Lawrence? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Kriss_DonaldSurely it's an issue of prevalence rather than degree?
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Jan 6, 2012 20:20:56 GMT 1
No, I remember that case and it was terrible of course - all such murders are. The murders are just as senseless and poisonous as each other. The Lawrence killing has been more of a landmark, not because of liberal handwringing as some of the frothier elements might suggest, but because of the Met's complicity in the comprehensive mishandling of the case.
Yes, prevalence is a factor. But why has the Lawrence case made such a profound impact? The Macpherson report highlighted "institutional racism" within the Met. That couldn't have happened after the Donald killing. The phrase "institutional racism" then went to the heart of British society because it said something profound about the state of the nation. That wasn't just the left getting uppity, it was the British establishment criticising itself.
And then the injustice that followed from the Met's incompetence heightened the impact. Remember the Daily Mail's "sue us if you dare" headline - "Murderers!" - with all five pictured on the front page? Who could have expected that?
I don't excuse the Donald killing or think it somehow less of an offence than Lawrence. Its implications were less widespread though, and with good reason.
|
|
|
Post by shrewsace on Jan 6, 2012 20:24:10 GMT 1
No, I remember that case and it was terrible of course - all such murders are. The murders are just as senseless and poisonous as each other. The Lawrence killing has been more of a landmark, not because of liberal handwringing as some of the frothier elements might suggest, but because of the Met's complicity in the comprehensive mishandling of the case. Yes, prevalence is a factor. But why has the Lawrence case made such a profound impact? The Macpherson report highlighted "institutional racism" within the Met. That couldn't have happened after the Donald killing. The phrase "institutional racism" then went to the heart of British society because it said something profound about the state of the nation. That wasn't just the left getting uppity, it was the British establishment criticising itself. And then the injustice that followed from the Met's incompetence heightened the impact. Remember the Daily Mail's "sue us if you dare" headline - "Murderers!" - with all five pictured on the front page? Who could have expected that? I don't excuse the Donald killing or think it somehow less of an offence than Lawrence. Its implications were less widespread though, and with good reason. Yes, agree the implications of the Lawrence case were more far reaching for the country.
|
|
|
Post by El Presidente on Jan 6, 2012 20:41:30 GMT 1
the Met's complicity in the comprehensive mishandling of the case. And Strathclyde police were accused in a similar vein of being institutionally in fear of being labelled racist after pulling Op Gather - their operation aimed at tackling asian street gangs in Glasgow. We have to remain level headed about such issues as Abbott and scruitinise impartially based on facts. Overly harsh or soft responses only harm future attempts to deal with these cases.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Jan 8, 2012 13:19:50 GMT 1
As for Smith and Carlos I don't know a great deal about them but for what little I know then no, I would not deem that salute racist. As for your final point, well that's how it is now isn't it. That is what it has become. Through no fault of the vast majority but for those who look to pick up on the smallest of things and take them completely out of proportion. That seems to be where we are today, that's how thing are now. And with that it is no surprise that some people will deem those comments unacceptable, crude and offensive. Now you might not, fine. I may not. But others may, others will. Same with Suarez. Same with Terry. Everyone will have an opinion. But the one thing that grabbed me about that twitter was the reference to the Stephen Lawrence. I think that's pretty low, pretty disgusting that someone would look to even compare the two incidents. I suppose the timing is perfect for anyone to do so but don't blame anyone who may be upset by Abbot's remarks for that, blame Abbot for making them. The timing is all on her part and no one else. To suggest that people are up in arms about this because they wish to try and score even in the racist stakes is way off for me (...A black man gets knifed to death by a white mob; a black MP writes a carelessly worded tweet about white people. It all evens out...) and how people can see it that way is alien to me. I thought that was pretty rum. And it's not as if Abbot hasn't put her foot in her mouth before now is it... Fair comments. I asked the Smith/Carlos question because I just wondered whether some might even view their black power salutes (although it was actually a bit more subtle than that) as racist. Just trying to gauge where people are starting from. We live in an over-emotive age where people are mock-offended by any old thing and it lessens the impact of things people have more reason to find offensive. Yes that's subjective but a careless tweet by a politician or, on the other side of the coin, a daft joke by a TV presenter (Clarkson) are no reason for us to get an attack of the vapours and act as if we never heard anything so outrageous. I'm neutral on Abbott herself but I'd rather politicians make the odd harmless gaffe than be forever mouthing party platitudes. I thought people wanted their politicians to be human, not bland party mouthpieces. I respect your interpretation but I didn't think the Twitter piece was making a direct comparison with Lawrence. I read it as saying that some might try to do that - as in making the argument that racism's bad but both sides are equally at fault. That was the key point in the piece; that the power relationship can't be ignored and affluent whites have the power in this country (and before anyone jumps in, there's nothing wrong with that, if it's fairly held and not abused). When you take racism out of that power context, it makes it seem less dangerous, not such a terrible thing. So away fans telling Shrews fans they're Welsh - is that racist or just name-calling? It has little, if any, meaningful modern cultural context, so it's not racism coloured by a recent experience of discrimination, never mind relatively recent experiences of slavery or genocide. The racism tag just doesn't carry the same weight if the power relationship is ignored. A white person in Zimbabwe would have reason to be concerned about black racism. The threat from a careless remark on Twitter here is not remotely comparable. It strikes me as a gross over-simplification to call that double standards. Anyway, nice to have a civilised discussion. Never understand why some people's keyboards make them so angry. The simple fact is she said 'white', we should not play 'their' game. She did not need to use the term 'white' at all. She could have specifically pin pointed the people she was referring to who bounded the term 'black community' about. Was she not is a discussion about the press? So why not specifically say the press like to play divide and rule? It doesn't matter what anyone says, it doesn't matter who may or may not have been offended, it doesn't matter whether anyone feels any threat from what was said. The simply fact is that in using the term 'white' the comment she made was racist. There is no getting away from that...
|
|