Statues and censoring old songs

Other non Stranglers stuff here

Moderator: StanInBlack

User avatar
dronecatcher
VERSATRAN SERIES F
Posts: 127
Joined: 16 Nov 2018, 15:21

Re: Statues and censoring old songs

Post by dronecatcher »

parasiteinblack wrote:
20 Jul 2020, 15:42
That's as may be but there's a big difference between "Black Lives Matter" as a statement - undeniably true, and "Black Lives Matter" as an organisation which is as fallible as everything else.
Yes, there is a difference and as a statement BLM is as puerile as proclaiming Murdering Babies Is Wrong ie stating the asbsolutely obvious.

Their 'statement' has polluted and muddied the minds of a whole new generation who weren't even aware of racism because they were the living proof people had moved on.

Saying BLM as an organisation is 'fallible' is almost excusing their ludicrous anti-establisment ideals as if they've been led astray by some wicked outsiders when infact it's part of their manifesto.

User avatar
parasiteinblack
ManinBlack
ManinBlack
Posts: 3061
Joined: 26 Nov 2003, 11:57
Location: Norwich
Contact:

Re: Statues and censoring old songs

Post by parasiteinblack »

dronecatcher wrote:
20 Jul 2020, 16:08
parasiteinblack wrote:
20 Jul 2020, 15:42
That's as may be but there's a big difference between "Black Lives Matter" as a statement - undeniably true, and "Black Lives Matter" as an organisation which is as fallible as everything else.
Yes, there is a difference and as a statement BLM is as puerile as proclaiming Murdering Babies Is Wrong ie stating the asbsolutely obvious.

Their 'statement' has polluted and muddied the minds of a whole new generation who weren't even aware of racism because they were the living proof people had moved on.
I would love you to be correct but I'm not sure that you are. I used to think this back in my uni days but if anything I've noticed more racism since then than I did at the time. There still exists a great deal of discrimination and prejudice, conscious or not, and the awareness that this year's events has encouraged will hopefully bring us closer to "moving on".
I'm against rewriting history because I think it needs to be accessible for everybody to learn from it, but it doesn't mean I think that we need statues of slave owners in this day and age. Put them in a museum.
Saying BLM as an organisation is 'fallible' is almost excusing their ludicrous anti-establisment ideals as if they've been led astray by some wicked outsiders when infact it's part of their manifesto.
No, not at all, I don't think it's excusing anything, I'm just saying that the actions of the organisation shouldn't negate the overall message.
"I woke up on a good day, and the world was wonderful"

User avatar
dronecatcher
VERSATRAN SERIES F
Posts: 127
Joined: 16 Nov 2018, 15:21

Re: Statues and censoring old songs

Post by dronecatcher »

parasiteinblack wrote:
20 Jul 2020, 16:53
dronecatcher wrote:
20 Jul 2020, 16:08
parasiteinblack wrote:
20 Jul 2020, 15:42
That's as may be but there's a big difference between "Black Lives Matter" as a statement - undeniably true, and "Black Lives Matter" as an organisation which is as fallible as everything else.
Yes, there is a difference and as a statement BLM is as puerile as proclaiming Murdering Babies Is Wrong ie stating the asbsolutely obvious.

Their 'statement' has polluted and muddied the minds of a whole new generation who weren't even aware of racism because they were the living proof people had moved on.
I would love you to be correct but I'm not sure that you are. I used to think this back in my uni days but if anything I've noticed more racism since then than I did at the time. There still exists a great deal of discrimination and prejudice, conscious or not, and the awareness that this year's events has encouraged will hopefully bring us closer to "moving on".
I'm against rewriting history because I think it needs to be accessible for everybody to learn from it, but it doesn't mean I think that we need statues of slave owners in this day and age. Put them in a museum.
Saying BLM as an organisation is 'fallible' is almost excusing their ludicrous anti-establisment ideals as if they've been led astray by some wicked outsiders when infact it's part of their manifesto.
No, not at all, I don't think it's excusing anything, I'm just saying that the actions of the organisation shouldn't negate the overall message.
Well, we'll have to agree to differ but I find that whilst prejudice is still very much alive and well, in general terms it's discredited and frowned upon by rational, ordinary people - and of course, any overt discrimination is heavily legislated against in the UK.

This years events I suspect will not have reversed any inherent racism anywhere but actively promoted it, as generally speaking people object to being unjustly tarred and feathered.
Apart from that, the death toll and cost for criminal damage from the associated 'protests' is unforgivable - especially given the full context and circumstances of the ignition point ie the death of a career criminal due to sloppy, unchecked police procedure.

"The actions of the organisation shouldn't negate the overall message" - the overall message as I've said is puerile and as ineffectual as any "stating the bleedin' obvious" message is. Their actions however, are divisive and degenerate as the post George Floyd fallout has shown: deaths, destruction, looting, historical revisionism, witch hunts for those who disagree, defunding the police, discrediting the police, antisemitism - that's a lot of hatred for a peaceful movement.

User avatar
parasiteinblack
ManinBlack
ManinBlack
Posts: 3061
Joined: 26 Nov 2003, 11:57
Location: Norwich
Contact:

Re: Statues and censoring old songs

Post by parasiteinblack »

dronecatcher wrote:
20 Jul 2020, 17:18
parasiteinblack wrote:
20 Jul 2020, 16:53
dronecatcher wrote:
20 Jul 2020, 16:08


Yes, there is a difference and as a statement BLM is as puerile as proclaiming Murdering Babies Is Wrong ie stating the asbsolutely obvious.

Their 'statement' has polluted and muddied the minds of a whole new generation who weren't even aware of racism because they were the living proof people had moved on.
I would love you to be correct but I'm not sure that you are. I used to think this back in my uni days but if anything I've noticed more racism since then than I did at the time. There still exists a great deal of discrimination and prejudice, conscious or not, and the awareness that this year's events has encouraged will hopefully bring us closer to "moving on".
I'm against rewriting history because I think it needs to be accessible for everybody to learn from it, but it doesn't mean I think that we need statues of slave owners in this day and age. Put them in a museum.
Saying BLM as an organisation is 'fallible' is almost excusing their ludicrous anti-establisment ideals as if they've been led astray by some wicked outsiders when infact it's part of their manifesto.
No, not at all, I don't think it's excusing anything, I'm just saying that the actions of the organisation shouldn't negate the overall message.
Well, we'll have to agree to differ but I find that whilst prejudice is still very much alive and well, in general terms it's discredited and frowned upon by rational, ordinary people - and of course, any overt discrimination is heavily legislated against in the UK.

This years events I suspect will not have reversed any inherent racism anywhere but actively promoted it, as generally speaking people object to being unjustly tarred and feathered.
Apart from that, the death toll and cost for criminal damage from the associated 'protests' is unforgivable - especially given the full context and circumstances of the ignition point ie the death of a career criminal due to sloppy, unchecked police procedure.

"The actions of the organisation shouldn't negate the overall message" - the overall message as I've said is puerile and as ineffectual as any "stating the bleedin' obvious" message is. Their actions however, are divisive and degenerate as the post George Floyd fallout has shown: deaths, destruction, looting, historical revisionism, witch hunts for those who disagree, defunding the police, discrediting the police, antisemitism - that's a lot of hatred for a peaceful movement.
Yes it's a "stating the bleedin' obvious" message but some people still need to hear it. Perhaps there are more people out there who are not "rational, ordinary people".

I'm not sure who is being "unjustly tarred and feathered". Obviously that's no good either, and not one of the tenets of being anti-racist. If it's promoting inherent racism as you say then perhaps the message has been misunderstood and is more nuanced than is being made out. It's a bit more complex than "don't be a racist". I think the phenomenon you are alluding to has been termed "white fragility".

The actions of George Floyd as a person also shouldn't negate the overall message.
None of the issues you list need to occur for anti-racism to exist, although obviously some reform is probably needed with some police forces. The fact that these things may have happened also don't negate the message.
"I woke up on a good day, and the world was wonderful"

User avatar
dronecatcher
VERSATRAN SERIES F
Posts: 127
Joined: 16 Nov 2018, 15:21

Re: Statues and censoring old songs

Post by dronecatcher »

parasiteinblack wrote:
20 Jul 2020, 19:15
Yes it's a "stating the bleedin' obvious" message but some people still need to hear it. Perhaps there are more people out there who are not "rational, ordinary people".

I'm not sure who is being "unjustly tarred and feathered". Obviously that's no good either, and not one of the tenets of being anti-racist. If it's promoting inherent racism as you say then perhaps the message has been misunderstood and is more nuanced than is being made out. It's a bit more complex than "don't be a racist". I think the phenomenon you are alluding to has been termed "white fragility".

The actions of George Floyd as a person also shouldn't negate the overall message.
None of the issues you list need to occur for anti-racism to exist, although obviously some reform is probably needed with some police forces. The fact that these things may have happened also don't negate the message.
There are plenty who are not rational and no they will not be swayed by a catchy slogan, or for that matter any well reasoned arguement (which BLM doesn't provide.)

As to who is being tarred and feathered, you could start with Nick Buckley who I referenced in my post when I entered this discussion - an MBE awarded charity worker of 20 years who's career and reputation have been destroyed by a hate campaign in retaliation for him posting his doubt about BLM's motives.
A search engine sweep will reveal many more - I've lost count over the past month.

It's not promoting inherent racism, it's stirring up resentment that will seek an outlet. To break it down simply, if someone who has never even entertained the idea of themselves being racist is then told by a black protest movement they are racist and then subsequently lose their livelihood after refuting the accusation, there might be the slightest chance they could become resentful against that minority group that has wrecked their life.

I think terming the objection to being accused of a hate crime as "white fragility" is the equivalent of shooting someone in the leg and telling them to "man up" as they bleed all over the floor.

The "message" ie BLM has entered the public sphere for most people directly because of George Floyd, so without him, most people wouldn't have even heard the message because BLM would still be a fringe phenomenon, so to say his actions as a person shouldn't negate the message is a collapse of logic - his very actions are why the message has been promoted.

User avatar
parasiteinblack
ManinBlack
ManinBlack
Posts: 3061
Joined: 26 Nov 2003, 11:57
Location: Norwich
Contact:

Re: Statues and censoring old songs

Post by parasiteinblack »

dronecatcher wrote:
20 Jul 2020, 20:21
parasiteinblack wrote:
20 Jul 2020, 19:15
Yes it's a "stating the bleedin' obvious" message but some people still need to hear it. Perhaps there are more people out there who are not "rational, ordinary people".

I'm not sure who is being "unjustly tarred and feathered". Obviously that's no good either, and not one of the tenets of being anti-racist. If it's promoting inherent racism as you say then perhaps the message has been misunderstood and is more nuanced than is being made out. It's a bit more complex than "don't be a racist". I think the phenomenon you are alluding to has been termed "white fragility".

The actions of George Floyd as a person also shouldn't negate the overall message.
None of the issues you list need to occur for anti-racism to exist, although obviously some reform is probably needed with some police forces. The fact that these things may have happened also don't negate the message.
There are plenty who are not rational and no they will not be swayed by a catchy slogan, or for that matter any well reasoned arguement (which BLM doesn't provide.)

As to who is being tarred and feathered, you could start with Nick Buckley who I referenced in my post when I entered this discussion - an MBE awarded charity worker of 20 years who's career and reputation have been destroyed by a hate campaign in retaliation for him posting his doubt about BLM's motives.
A search engine sweep will reveal many more - I've lost count over the past month.
Buckley seems like a decent bloke, yes, but the comment that got him sacked seemed a bit foolish. How is stating that "black lives matter" a Neo-Marxist attack on Western Democracy? It's fine to take a different view and have a healthy discussion like you and I are doing but he's just talking bollocks on that one.
It's not promoting inherent racism, it's stirring up resentment that will seek an outlet. To break it down simply, if someone who has never even entertained the idea of themselves being racist is then told by a black protest movement they are racist and then subsequently lose their livelihood after refuting the accusation, there might be the slightest chance they could become resentful against that minority group that has wrecked their life.
It won't be "that minority group" that will have wrecked their life, will it? Part of this feeling is the "white fragility" I mentioned before and part of it is the misunderstanding of what seems to be the main takeaway from this whole movement: It is not enough not be racist, you must be anti-racist or else be complicit in the racism of everybody else.
I think terming the objection to being accused of a hate crime as "white fragility" is the equivalent of shooting someone in the leg and telling them to "man up" as they bleed all over the floor.
No, I don't agree, it seems to explain quite a lot of the negative reaction to the idea of anti-racism. Again, the idea and not the organisation.
The "message" ie BLM has entered the public sphere for most people directly because of George Floyd, so without him, most people wouldn't have even heard the message because BLM would still be a fringe phenomenon, so to say his actions as a person shouldn't negate the message is a collapse of logic - his very actions are why the message has been promoted.
It's been around for years, it's been a pretty big thing for about five years but has certainly seen a resurgence since George Floyd. I don't follow your logic in your final sentence; yes George Floyd being killed may have promoted the message but it doesn't negate the spirit of it.
"I woke up on a good day, and the world was wonderful"

User avatar
dronecatcher
VERSATRAN SERIES F
Posts: 127
Joined: 16 Nov 2018, 15:21

Re: Statues and censoring old songs

Post by dronecatcher »

Buckley seems like a decent bloke, yes, but the comment that got him sacked seemed a bit foolish. How is stating that "black lives matter" a Neo-Marxist attack on Western Democracy? It's fine to take a different view and have a healthy discussion like you and I are doing but he's just talking bollocks on that one.
It's only an opinion but easily drawn based on the agenda and 'brand message' easily found on their website and to say his mere words (which aren't even mildly inflammatory) justifies his sacking and public vilification is quite an extraordinary breach of human rights.
It is not enough not be racist, you must be anti-racist or else be complicit in the racism of everybody else.
That's just a meaningless soundbite - our default, resting position is non-racist, as much as we are non-sadist and non-fascist - to imply that anti- any of those terms are somehow mutually exclusive is nonsense - non-racist = anti-racist. No one would ever say, "I'm not racist myself but I don't have an opinion on it either way."

User avatar
parasiteinblack
ManinBlack
ManinBlack
Posts: 3061
Joined: 26 Nov 2003, 11:57
Location: Norwich
Contact:

Re: Statues and censoring old songs

Post by parasiteinblack »

dronecatcher wrote:
20 Jul 2020, 21:06
Buckley seems like a decent bloke, yes, but the comment that got him sacked seemed a bit foolish. How is stating that "black lives matter" a Neo-Marxist attack on Western Democracy? It's fine to take a different view and have a healthy discussion like you and I are doing but he's just talking bollocks on that one.
It's only an opinion but easily drawn based on the agenda and 'brand message' easily found on their website and to say his mere words (which aren't even mildly inflammatory) justifies his sacking and public vilification is quite an extraordinary breach of human rights.
I suppose it would depend on what his contract said and whether there were standards he was expected to uphold. As employers get more savvy with social media more people will get in trouble for posting opinions. Not saying I agree with it but that's just the world we live in these days. Completely agree that public vilification is uncalled for.
It is not enough not be racist, you must be anti-racist or else be complicit in the racism of everybody else.
That's just a meaningless soundbite - our default, resting position is non-racist, as much as we are non-sadist and non-fascist - to imply that anti- any of those terms are somehow mutually exclusive is nonsense - non-racist = anti-racist. No one would ever say, "I'm not racist myself but I don't have an opinion on it either way."
No, they're different things. Contrary to your assertion, I think there are people who think "I'm not racist myself but I don't have an opinion on it either way.". I also think there's plenty of people whose resting position is not "non-racist". I think there's a bit more nuance to it than you are suggesting.
"I woke up on a good day, and the world was wonderful"

Arthur Streeb-Greebling
Man Of The Earth
Man Of The Earth
Posts: 5748
Joined: 25 Nov 2005, 01:00
Location: Yorkshire Pudding Town

Re: Statues and censoring old songs

Post by Arthur Streeb-Greebling »

parasiteinblack wrote:
19 Jul 2020, 23:35
Arthur Streeb-Greebling wrote:
19 Jul 2020, 22:13

As Jordan B. Peterson sez- “I’ve studied Nazism for four decades. And I understand it very well. And I can tell you there are some awful people lurking in the corners,” Peterson says. “They’re ready to come out. And if the radical left keeps pushing the way it’s pushing, they’re going to come”
Oh no, we're not on to quoting him now are we?
Or is this your "humour" again?
Yes that is correct, I am quoting him.
Humour? I was not aware Mr Peterson was famous for his humour but some of his ideas are very illuminating.
You’re not a fan of Mr Peterson? Was it his refusal to use gender-neutral pronouns? Shocking.
:roll:
‘Normal’ Person :: “Hiya mate, how are you?”
Snowflake :: “Fuck you, how dare you talk to me like that? how dare you get in my safe space? this is clearly a violation of my body & soul, please die right now”
‘Normal’ Person :: :roll:

User avatar
parasiteinblack
ManinBlack
ManinBlack
Posts: 3061
Joined: 26 Nov 2003, 11:57
Location: Norwich
Contact:

Re: Statues and censoring old songs

Post by parasiteinblack »

Arthur Streeb-Greebling wrote:
20 Jul 2020, 21:51
parasiteinblack wrote:
19 Jul 2020, 23:35
Arthur Streeb-Greebling wrote:
19 Jul 2020, 22:13

As Jordan B. Peterson sez- “I’ve studied Nazism for four decades. And I understand it very well. And I can tell you there are some awful people lurking in the corners,” Peterson says. “They’re ready to come out. And if the radical left keeps pushing the way it’s pushing, they’re going to come”
Oh no, we're not on to quoting him now are we?
Or is this your "humour" again?
Yes that is correct, I am quoting him.
Humour? I was not aware Mr Peterson was famous for his humour but some of his ideas are very illuminating.
You’re not a fan of Mr Peterson? Was it his refusal to use gender-neutral pronouns? Shocking.
:roll:
I meant your sense of humour not his. Peter Cook quotes (yay) and then the "this will upset the SJW Snowflakes ho ho ho" stuff (boring).

Not a big fan of Peterson, no. He's made a few interesting points on the role of young men in society in this day and age, in fact we're referencing him in one of our forthcoming tracks on our new album, but whether his arguments stand up to scrutiny is up for debate*. All that nonsense about being a Christian he was spouting that didn't quite add up.
It's also interesting how he's become a poster boy for keyboard warrior right-leaning types who moan about snowflakes, SJWs, safe spaces etc... That whole PragerU crowd...

*Not a debate with me thanks, done quite enough of that on this thread now.
"I woke up on a good day, and the world was wonderful"

User avatar
dronecatcher
VERSATRAN SERIES F
Posts: 127
Joined: 16 Nov 2018, 15:21

Re: Statues and censoring old songs

Post by dronecatcher »

parasiteinblack wrote:
20 Jul 2020, 21:41
No, they're different things.
Why are they?

User avatar
parasiteinblack
ManinBlack
ManinBlack
Posts: 3061
Joined: 26 Nov 2003, 11:57
Location: Norwich
Contact:

Re: Statues and censoring old songs

Post by parasiteinblack »

dronecatcher wrote:
20 Jul 2020, 22:14
parasiteinblack wrote:
20 Jul 2020, 21:41
No, they're different things.
Why are they?
An example:

If I was in a conversation with a group of people and someone made a racist comment and I thought "wow, I don't think like that" then I would be non-racist.

If I was in a conversation with a group of people and someone made a racist comment and I said "wow, I don't think like that and here's why" then I would be anti-racist.

There seems to be much more to it than that but I've still got stuff to learn too.
"I woke up on a good day, and the world was wonderful"

Post Reply