Black Lives Matter

[Grays_1890]

I have just come across the phrase "cancel culture"...I consider myself probably one of the more "left" members of this forum, but I am equally aware of the dangers in things being taken too far and at warp speed. There is a danger that taking a scorched earth policy and flagging every tiny particle will dim the vital and important light being shed on true issues of institutional racism and prejudice. As people reading this thread know, I am a supporter of the BLM movement and initiative. I am a supporter of tackling engrained institutional prejudice and I am a supporter of making sure we tackle policing in a whole new way. I am not comfortable with looking at Fawlty Towers and "banning" it, or indeed any moves of that nature.

Im the same in terms of huge believer in BLM, fight against racism 100%. I don’t agree with how the message sometimes comes across or the symbolism like in F1 where you kneel or you are part of the problem but that doesn’t mean I’m racist or part of the problem.

I think like you say with warp speed there is also a danger where if you discuss or highlight certain pitfalls things get misconstrued that you are somehow against it.

I was having a chat about Vienna this week with a colleague and we got onto a chat where the concentration camp history there is not hidden and used as a point of education and all kids have to visit some area as part of their curriculum. That’s how I view the statues TBH, instant anger is “tear them down” but in reflection the longer impact is leave them, hang like a mark of shame but use as education. Make kids learn the two faces of Churchill, leave it as a symbol of the past and why we should change.

 

[spurspinter1]

you mentioned people putting themselves into groups suggesting that opened them up to terms like “f” I assumed you meant fags. From that it read and maybe I read it wrong that you were saying it’s a choice for someone to be classed as such as they chose a group?
Was that not what you was saying? That was the basis of my last comment, it wasn’t personal.

I will leave the above on to show I was wrong, I’ve read back and realised it was not what you was saying and I read it wrong, just to prove I’m not trying to demean etc, hands up so apologise there, my bad.

So you are saying prejudice has to sit under Individual banner on here to be discussed?

I don’t understand that TBH.

As for the last point, as a white Jew who has suffered abuse from all walks of life and colours and creeds. If someone white and Jewish who I hold in high regard was racist or homophobic I would highlight it, I would also highlight how it’s disappointed based on the struggles Jewish people have them self endured if that person had banged that drum.

Look I’m not trying to point score or undermine the BLM movement, I’m just trying to highlight that prejudice views exist everywhere and like racism the way out is education. I’m not saying because a black man made a homophobic remark that BLM is no longer relevant or because of that racism is ok. That’s kinda the vibe I am getting from you that you believe I am saying. I’m really not.

If by chance we are likely to fall out on this, I will leave it, wipe my mouth and move on, ask many on here and I like to discuss these things out and will admit when I am wrong.

I appreciate and accept the apology bud.

I can't stress enough there's no specific point you have made that I disagree with, honestly something just seemed a bit off due the link being in this thread. I don't know you too well so it seemed to me (and clearly this isn't the case) that it may have been a "Look at the black folks being racist/whatever the correct term is, this means we can behave that way too". As you said, people do need to be reminded that prejudice is out there in all corners + everyone isn't defined by race, religion, sexuality etc. Honestly I shouldn't have been so bothered either way and have been spending way too much time on the internet following what's going on with all this stuff, it's great to be aware in general but when you look at the insanely despicable ways people treat each other it gets you down..

 

[spitshine]

Even your groups of stereotyping there, it's so unbelievably basic these really aren't things you need to type. Sounds like you've tried to get a bit personal at the end which is interesting! If you've got "everyone can say fag" from my last post then I am even more lost than I was before haha, that's just basic reading skills so try that before you start sending for me, I've been super patient so far.

This has been a process of trying to understand where you're coming from and it doesn't make any sense to me. Prejudice is bad and it's everywhere? Glad I was sitting down for that one phew... If you'd have said the link was in relation to cancel culture due to tensions regarding anything to do with race I could see some relevance, but would you have posted the link re Nick Cannon if he wasn't white?

As it’s getting late you will be afforded some slack on this occasion.

However, I would suggest that you should read all posts clearly, taking your time to understand fully what the poster is trying to get across before jumping to conclusions.

Finally, it would be beneficial if you would review your earlier posts, reflect and perhaps in a softer your tone, revert back to this thread once you’ve calmed down.

I would be grateful for a response by Friday COB.

thanks

 

[spurspinter1]

As it’s getting late you will be afforded some slack on this occasion.

However, I would suggest that you should read all posts clearly, taking your time to understand fully what the poster is trying to get across before jumping to conclusions.

Finally, it would be beneficial if you would review your earlier posts, reflect and perhaps in a softer your tone, revert back to this thread once you’ve calmed down.

I would be grateful for a response by Friday COB.

thanks

If this is a joke due to me being a bit wannabe moderator in my initial post then fair play to you!

If that's not the case...I appreciate my tone in the message quoted was off and it's not an excuse (as I get it's childish behaviour to do this) but Grays had got slightly personal after misreading a post; you might have missed that part where we figured it out? Speaking of conclusions I'm not sure what you're talking about, and legit hope that doesn't come as a wilful ignorance, you're welcome to enlighten me though.

 

[braineclipse]

I have just come across the phrase "cancel culture"...I consider myself probably one of the more "left" members of this forum, but I am equally aware of the dangers in things being taken too far and at warp speed. There is a danger that taking a scorched earth policy and flagging every tiny particle will dim the vital and important light being shed on true issues of institutional racism and prejudice. As people reading this thread know, I am a supporter of the BLM movement and initiative. I am a supporter of tackling engrained institutional prejudice and I am a supporter of making sure we tackle policing in a whole new way. I am not comfortable with looking at Fawlty Towers and "banning" it, or indeed any moves of that nature.

Somewhat ambivalent about cancel culture myself.

There have been examples that are just silly, mostly resulting from listening to a vocal minority or an overreaction in fear of further anger.

At the same time I've been rather convinced by some aspects of cancel culture, and the approach in general if well executed.

Take away platforms, stop some of the ways this spreads, de-monetize direct bigotry and dangerous falsehoods.

 

[braineclipse]

Im the same in terms of huge believer in BLM, fight against racism 400%. I don’t agree with how the message sometimes comes across or the symbolism like in F1 where you kneel or you are part of the problem but that doesn’t mean I’m racist or part of the problem.

I think like you say with warp speed there is also a danger where if you discuss or highlight certain pitfalls things get misconstrued that you are somehow against it.

I was having a chat about Vienna this week with a colleague and we got onto a chat where the concentration camp history there is not hidden and used as a point of education and all kids have to visit some area as part of their curriculum. That’s how I view the statues TBH, instant anger is “tear them down” but in reflection the longer impact is leave them, hang like a mark of shame but use as education. Make kids learn the two faces of Churchill, leave it as a symbol of the past and why we should change.

Statues in prominent public places are rarely used to teach history.

Statues are frequently used, and interpreted, as celebrations of the person depicted.

Do you think statues contribute to a nuanced understanding of the positive and negative aspects of that person's life and historical impact?

Moving a statue to a museum, tearing a statue down or defacing a statue makes a much greater educational impact than leaving it be in my opinion.

Or to return to your example of consentration camps. In general the education surrounding concentration camps and the holocaust is seen as a success I think, though probably not a perfect success.

That has happened, as far as I know, without statues of the war criminals involved scattered across European cities. The Holocaust memorial in Berlin does a fine job at its intended function. A statue of a nazi wouldn't have been appropriate, effective or accepted.

Tear down a Robert E. Lee statue, replace it with something that commemorates the suffering of slaves. Then you're teaching history, respectfully though belatedly. Without at the same time celebrating someone that's seemingly gotten way more than their fair share of celebrations.

That or throw a bucket of red paint over the fudger.

 

[Grays_1890]

Statues in prominent public places are rarely used to teach history.

Statues are frequently used, and interpreted, as celebrations of the person depicted.

Do you think statues contribute to a nuanced understanding of the positive and negative aspects of that person's life and historical impact?

Moving a statue to a museum, tearing a statue down or defacing a statue makes a much greater educational impact than leaving it be in my opinion.

Or to return to your example of consentration camps. In general the education surrounding concentration camps and the holocaust is seen as a success I think, though probably not a perfect success.
.

The point I was making which you missed is that they SHOULD be used as a point of education and used as a point to highlight the level of shame and the implications on history. You can change the perception by using a clear statement and having a campaign behind it that benefits the movement

Include visits to the statues on school trips as part of education to the negatives of the person and the longer impact of views on the U.K. Use it as a reason to enlighten kids to the issues around racial prejudice the history of the country and some of the more notable people throughout history.

For me having a systematic approach and a plan to change the mindset is far better than defacing or removal. But that’s just my view

Defacing a statue makes a short term impact it doesn’t make a longer term impact into educating people to the long term problems of that person.

Removing Churchill statues removes him from the mindset but an effort to not hide him and changing the curriculum to include why he polarises opinion is more sensible and has a longer term impact that actually feeds into the young and makes a change of mindset for the masses.

I would say Austrians and Germans highlighting the atrocities and using them as shame and education is as close as you are going to get using the past to educate in a way that might make for positive minds as you are going to get.

 

[scaramanga]

Somewhat ambivalent about cancel culture myself.

There have been examples that are just silly, mostly resulting from listening to a vocal minority or an overreaction in fear of further anger.

At the same time I've been rather convinced by some aspects of cancel culture, and the approach in general if well executed.

Take away platforms, stop some of the ways this spreads, de-monetize direct bigotry and dangerous falsehoods.

In theory that idea's fine, but the reality is that it runs the significant risk of the few dictating what is and isn't accepted speech, culture, etc.

Not so bad when it's the humanist types cancelling racists, but I'd imagine we'd all feel differently if it were Trumpists cancelling opinions we agree with.

 

[braineclipse]

The point I was making which you missed is that they SHOULD be used as a point of education and used as a point to highlight the level of shame and the implications on history. You can change the perception by using a clear statement and having a campaign behind it that benefits the movement

Include visits to the statues on school trips as part of education to the negatives of the person and the longer impact of views on the U.K. Use it as a reason to enlighten kids to the issues around racial prejudice the history of the country and some of the more notable people throughout history.

For me having a systematic approach and a plan to change the mindset is far better than defacing or removal. But that’s just my view

Defacing a statue makes a short term impact it doesn’t make a longer term impact into educating people to the long term problems of that person.

Removing Churchill statues removes him from the mindset but an effort to not hide him and changing the curriculum to include why he polarises opinion is more sensible and has a longer term impact that actually feeds into the young and makes a change of mindset for the masses.

I would say Austrians and Germans highlighting the atrocities and using them as shame and education is as close as you are going to get using the past to educate in a way that might make for positive minds as you are going to get.

Should, but why then doesn't it?

Should, but why? What is it about keeping the most controversial of these stratues that is of such value?

I think I argued that the education you want can be done better by moving or removing at least some of these statues. Then why keep them?

Edit to clarify:

I realise that there are more difficult and difficult cases, I'm talking about the clear cases. The one's where if there wasn't a statue up of them already we wouldn't ever have one put up now.

On education. Why drag kids to one statue somewhere. Take them to a museum where context is available, where historans and curators work to present history. Take them to actual historical sites. Or teach them. Have them read. Statues alone on some square with no context isn't a very good teaching aid imo. Whilst being at the very least symbolically a celebration of the person and their actions.

Continously defacing is the only real option for anyone without power. Since its illegal (and paint presumably will get expensive) it's not the best. I certainly applaude at least some of those efforts. (just delete this if solidarity with vandalism is against the rules of master admaker. I won't complain about free speech and the effects this has on upholding the systemic racism that seems so resistant to peaceful protest)

 

[braineclipse]

In theory that idea's fine, but the reality is that it runs the significant risk of the few dictating what is and isn't accepted speech, culture, etc.

Not so bad when it's the humanist types cancelling racists, but I'd imagine we'd all feel differently if it were Trumpists cancelling opinions we agree with.

I think we would have to move to specific examples to pinpoint our disagreement here.

I'm primarily talking about not platforming. The intellectually dishonest, the clearly bigoted. To stop thinking that we can just platform and "debate" them or bring them into mainstream media. When the effect is mostly that their audience grows. This already goes on, has always gone on to some extent. I'm just talking about a tweak in the approach.

I wish we would stop letting the utter fringe dictate when they want to be in the mass media by being outrageous. 10 lunatics walk with placards is not a story.

Social media must take responsibility. They've started to, barely. But they've made it very profitable to peddle hate, bigotry and xenophobia. People have a freedom of speech, but not a right to an audience and profit. Clear, transparent rules and enforcement.

Trump and the right are already doing this to a massive extent. Fox news seemingly have some of their viewership believing that they're "fair and balanced" whilst being nothing of the sort. Meanwhile media outside the far right too often bring in a false balance. Climate debate being the prime example.

Then boycott the odd brand for laughs and giggles. Use the market forces as one can, try to influence massive advertisers to spend their money more ethically or risk the twitter mob to call you racist. Again, nothing the right isn't already doing.

 

[scaramanga]

I think we would have to move to specific examples to pinpoint our disagreement here.

I'm primarily talking about not platforming. The intellectually dishonest, the clearly bigoted. To stop thinking that we can just platform and "debate" them or bring them into mainstream media. When the effect is mostly that their audience grows. This already goes on, has always gone on to some extent. I'm just talking about a tweak in the approach.

I wish we would stop letting the utter fringe dictate when they want to be in the mass media by being outrageous. 10 lunatics walk with placards is not a story.

Social media must take responsibility. They've started to, barely. But they've made it very profitable to peddle hate, bigotry and xenophobia. People have a freedom of speech, but not a right to an audience and profit. Clear, transparent rules and enforcement.

Trump and the right are already doing this to a massive extent. Fox news seemingly have some of their viewership believing that they're "fair and balanced" whilst being nothing of the sort. Meanwhile media outside the far right too often bring in a false balance. Climate debate being the prime example.

Then boycott the odd brand for laughs and giggles. Use the market forces as one can, try to influence massive advertisers to spend their money more ethically or risk the twitter mob to call you racist. Again, nothing the right isn't already doing.

One man's intellectually dishonest bigot is another man's...... whatever the fudge.

I don't think it's all that difficult to imagine a USA (should Trump win the election) where viewpoints like ours are outlawed. If we want to protect the absolute right to voice our opinions, no matter who those in control are, then we have to make that space for all opinions - no matter how unpalatable.

I also don't think that just not listening to opinions is the answer either. Breaking down and deconstructing viewpoints we disagree with is both an important intellectual exercise that allows us to analyse our own and a method for demonstrating to others such an opinion is wrong. Building ourselves an echo chamber simply on a larger scale is neither healthy for intellectual development nor effective to remove opinions we don't like. It simply shuts our ears to them.

 

[SteveAWOL]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1284563535129968640

 

[braineclipse]

One man's intellectually dishonest bigot is another man's...... whatever the fudge.

I don't think it's all that difficult to imagine a USA (should Trump win the election) where viewpoints like ours are outlawed. If we want to protect the absolute right to voice our opinions, no matter who those in control are, then we have to make that space for all opinions - no matter how unpalatable.

I also don't think that just not listening to opinions is the answer either. Breaking down and deconstructing viewpoints we disagree with is both an important intellectual exercise that allows us to analyse our own and a method for demonstrating to others such an opinion is wrong. Building ourselves an echo chamber simply on a larger scale is neither healthy for intellectual development nor effective to remove opinions we don't like. It simply shuts our ears to them.

I'm not talking about outlawing speech. I'm quite the absolutist like you when it comes to that.

Like I said I think we'd have to focus on a specific example to pinpoint our disagreement. Are there aspects of cancel culture you find particularly troubling?

I agree that we should discuss, debate, allow. At the same time debate often further polarizes the audience.

There is a need to be smart about which opinions are given a greater platform. Do you think we are unable to evaluate if people are intellectually dishonest or not?

 

[Grays_1890]

Should, but why then doesn't it?

Should, but why? What is it about keeping the most controversial of these stratues that is of such value?

I think I argued that the education you want can be done better by moving or removing at least some of these statues. Then why keep them?

Edit to clarify:

I realise that there are more difficult and difficult cases, I'm talking about the clear cases. The one's where if there wasn't a statue up of them already we wouldn't ever have one put up now.

On education. Why drag kids to one statue somewhere. Take them to a museum where context is available, where historans and curators work to present history. Take them to actual historical sites. Or teach them. Have them read. Statues alone on some square with no context isn't a very good teaching aid imo. Whilst being at the very least symbolically a celebration of the person and their actions.

Continously defacing is the only real option for anyone without power. Since its illegal (and paint presumably will get expensive) it's not the best. I certainly applaude at least some of those efforts. (just delete this if solidarity with vandalism is against the rules of master admaker. I won't complain about free speech and the effects this has on upholding the systemic racism that seems so resistant to peaceful protest)

Potato Tomato for me, I think we are both arguing for the same but have different ideas of how to execute it.

 

[JerusalemMan]

Posted this interview in the TV thread, but last night I watched the documentary it refers to - Accidental Courtesy on Amazon Prime.
A really wonderful and challenging piece.
This is an inspiring fellow, living out his faith and beliefs. The Kennedy quote that starts his documentary is pretty resonant and his words about Trump at the end of the interview below are possibly very prescient.

“Few will have the greatness to bend history itself, but each of us can work to change a small portion of events, and in the total of all those acts will be written the history of [each] generation.”

 

[Grays_1890]

Posted this interview in the TV thread, but last night I watched the documentary it refers to - Accidental Courtesy on Amazon Prime.
A really wonderful and challenging piece.
This is an inspiring fellow, living out his faith and beliefs. The Kennedy quote that starts his documentary is pretty resonant and his words about Trump at the end of the interview below are possibly very prescient.

“Few will have the greatness to bend history itself, but each of us can work to change a small portion of events, and in the total of all those acts will be written the history of [each] generation.”

m

There we go, 100% the type of guy I’ve been championing for weeks on here. Someone who is black and able to take a step back and breath and move things forward in a way that has a long term outcome.

His view on not erasing history but using it to educate is right up my strasse too.

What a legend and shining example he is, I take my hat off to him.

 

[Rorschach]

m

There we go, 400% the type of guy I’ve been championing for weeks on here. Someone who is black and able to take a step back and breath and move things forward in a way that has a long term outcome.

His view on not erasing history but using it to educate is right up my strasse too.

What a legend and shining example he is, I take my hate off to him.

Typo?

 

[Grays_1890]

Yep obvious typo.

What’s going on with Lewis Hamilton? One week he says he doesn’t care about people taking the knee and this week it’s annoyed him that some haven’t

 

[scaramanga]

Yep obvious typo.

What’s going on with Lewis Hamilton? One week he says he doesn’t care about people taking the knee and this week it’s annoyed him that some haven’t

Last week complaining was getting him bad publicity so he stopped.

This week being silent was getting him no publicity so he started up again.

 

[Parklaner81]

So a BBC news report a few minutes ago contained the words "...George Floyd's death at the hands of white police officers back in May..."

I'm no fan of the BBC, but I'd usually trust them to get simple facts right...