O/T Nelson's statue defaced, when will this all stop?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ragingpup

I would if they lacked credibility or came from a place of hostility as opposed to trying to understand or help resolve a situation. I don't personally see any hostility in saying that a section of society are more likely than others to be the ones who are anxious and agitated by something. And it certainly is trying to understand the situation. Feel free to disagree, but much evidence is on this board >:)

You may wish for a world where skin colour is insignificant. It is to you. You have achieved that. You never had the problem of not having that as a problem in your life. But it isn't to people who have demonstrably less favourable prospects in their education and careers compared to white people. And you won't achieve your nirvana until that balance is reached I'm afraid.

I tend to agree on the statues/historical figures comment but refer you back to my point that such actions and arguments for all but the more obvious targets are very, very minority extremists or owners/councils that are responsible for statues that have a perfect right to review with their communities whether such figures are still relevant to the lives of the people within those communities.

---

So sweeping generalisations are ok provided the person making them believes them? Or does the principle only apply if it is a person from the left who is making them?

As sweeping generalisations appear to be in vogue, I will join in. I think there is plenty of evidence on this site and across the media in general that people of the left have a misplaced belief in their own moral superiority and an obsession with identity politics and a victim culture. And of course, it is the left who decides who is worthy of victim status, which is one of the reasons why Labour has got itself so tied in knots about anti-Semitism.

It’s not a good look to anyone outside the left bubble.

I appreciate that you will dismiss my observations. And then you will find some excuses (that horrid MSM no doubt) for why Labour can't win elections, ignoring the reality that it might just be that the electorate finds the sanctimonious and hypocritical attitudes of some of it's activists unpalatable.

Just saying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by howdydoo

https://harpers.org/a-letter-on-just...d-open-debate/

---

'A blinding moral certainty'.

Exactly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by howdydoo

https://harpers.org/a-letter-on-just...d-open-debate/

---

Very true. And probably why we're so short of decent leaders in public life. All the good ones are hounded out by their opponents. It leaves a god awful sanitised world of clean cut nodding dogs.

No one's safe. Put a foot out of place and you're history. The attack is spun as some sort of morale crusade. But, in fact, its much simpler. If the opposition see you as a threat they use it as chance to destabilise your organisation by getting you out the way.

Theres a billion dollar media machine behind it.

Like Grist says "Just lately though I’ve heard more negative stuff about BLM and “non whites” than I’ve ever heard before."

Why do you think that is? And why are these stories suddenly appearing now? Its a fight back.

Like dear old Tommy Robinson the working class hero (or BLM). Look at who is funding him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WanChaiMiller

Very true. And probably why we're so short of decent leaders in public life. All the good ones are hounded out by their opponents. It leaves a god awful sanitised world of clean cut nodding dogs.

---

Sorry I've just spat mi tea out. Donald Trump, Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage... are these the sanitised clean cut nodding dogs you refer to?

This isn’t about who funds who. Isn't the point that it is impossible to have a reasonable debate in today's world? Look at some of the behaviours on here where posters are denounced as 'right wing' and veiled demands are made for them to be banned, simply because they don't buy into the current narrative of the left.

As I have said, the sanctimonious and hypocritical tone of some of the people who are having their voices pushed forward is not going to help. Change cannot be delivered from the top alone; it has to come from the grass roots as well. As Labour discovered in its Northern seats, telling people that they are ignorant racists who lack the capacity to understand in the way that the metropolitan elite do simply hardens attitudes.

I want change and am seeing the prospects of it being pushed back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KerrAvon

So sweeping generalisations are ok provided the person making them believes them? Or does the principle only apply if it is a person from the left who is making them?

As sweeping generalisations appear to be in vogue, I will join in. I think there is plenty of evidence on this site and across the media in general that people of the left have a misplaced belief in their own moral superiority and an obsession with identity politics and a victim culture. And of course, it is the left who decides who is worthy of victim status, which is one of the reasons why Labour has got itself so tied in knots about anti-Semitism.

It’s not a good look to anyone outside the left bubble.

I appreciate that you will dismiss my observations. And then you will find some excuses (that horrid MSM no doubt) for why Labour can't win elections, ignoring the reality that it might just be that the electorate finds the sanctimonious and hypocritical attitudes of some of it's activists unpalatable.

Just saying.

---

I don't think that it is a sweeping generalisation to say that the demographic that are most oppositional to BLM aims and actively engage with countering the arguments are white over 50s. I think that this is backed up with everything we see about us, on here, social media, film footage of counter protests, polls. I ask again, are you saying that you disagree that this demographic is the one most oppositional? Please clarify.

"people of the left have a misplaced belief in their own moral superiority and an obsession with identity politics and a victim culture". I'm genuinely sadened to hear a professed former Labour voter write this. Hasn't the whole point of the left, and Labour party been to represent not just workers, but to strive for equality for all parts of society. Isn't it true that this has always been the case with the left? Even your own Tony Blair, whom won your vote, made substantial improvements to gay rights as well as addressing other social inequalities. Why do you think it was OK to argue for more equal rights then, to the extent that you actively voted for it, without it being suddenly seen as "virtue signalling", "moral superiority", "victim culture" and "identity politics"? Were you "virtue signalling" then? Were the gay people for whom it was illegal for them to marry their partners simply part of "victim culture"?

Back to my central point. In my experience, the hysterics on the left and right belong to the extremists: the minority of extremists on the left over state the levels of discrimination, see all white people as racists, want to pull down all symbolism of anything with associations of racism and use violence as a means of advancing their cause. Extremists on the right see no inequalities or barriers whatsoever, that any argument suggesting that there may be inequalities is conspiracy against white people with a view to making them a subordinate race, that the presence of BAME minorities in the UK is detrimental to the UK, that they are inferior, violent, less educated and demean our society.

In the middle, the majority of people recognise that we have done a lot to address basic inequalities, it has improved in many areas but sympathise with black people they know and work with when they hear of how they have experienced discrimination in the workplace, in job interviews and dealings with the police, and how this is backed up with unquestionable data that discrimination exists. This has become more focused in the workplace in recent months as a result of world events, but most of the real work is being done with real people in upper management, HR talking to their black workers, recognising the need to make adjustments within their own working protocol and making positive adjustments, without the shrill histrionics you read on here. As I said, the majority of people do want change and change is happening regardless of what you read on here. I hope it is in your profession as well but you do have to work with your bosses to take a good hard look at your selves and be positive. You say in your other post this morning that you do want change. Well make a positive change then. As my beloved former boss used to say "JFDI son" - just ****ing do it! :)

Socialists/ Marxists are always pushing for "progression", by which they mean revolution, and that never ends well.

The Conservatives only conserve what Labour has already done, they're "slowcialists" (you could actually call them Fabian Socialists as they're also slowcialists).

As in this satirical article:

"Conservative Slams Liberal Policies He'll Support Five Years From Now"

https://babylonbee.com/news/conserva...years-from-now

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John2

Sorry I've just spat mi tea out. Donald Trump, Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage... are these the sanitised clean cut nodding dogs you refer to?

---

I was thinking UK. Farage and Johnson are one trick ponies with zero policy playing to a single audience. Where's Johnson been the last 6 months through Covid. Farage is currently seen hanging round Dover looking for immigrants arriving on rowing boats. They are both cocooned in a fantacy world.

So dig down a layer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by great_fire

Socialists/ Marxists are always pushing for "progression", by which they mean revolution, and that never ends well.

The Conservatives only conserve what Labour has already done, they're "slowcialists" (you could actually call them Fabian Socialists as they're also slowcialists).

As in this satirical article:

"Conservative Slams Liberal Policies He'll Support Five Years From Now"

https://babylonbee.com/news/conserva...years-from-now

---

Fire , if I had a pound every time I heard we are two years from a revolution I'd be retired now mate .

Ain't going to happen ...... unless the vast majority of people skip three main meals and that won't be happening either .

The Tories will become anything they want to be to keep winning elections , it doesn't mean they actually believe in it .

Just as long as they are controlling events and keeping the wealth where they want it to be anything goes with them .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by great_fire

Socialists/ Marxists are always pushing for "progression", by which they mean revolution, and that never ends well.

The Conservatives only conserve what Labour has already done, they're "slowcialists" (you could actually call them Fabian Socialists as they're also slowcialists).

As in this satirical article:

"Conservative Slams Liberal Policies He'll Support Five Years From Now"

https://babylonbee.com/news/conserva...years-from-now

---

How about the French one
Didn't work out too bad did it?