Black Lives Matter and the American Protests

First topic message reminder :

Because this issue is seeping into other threads, why not talk about it here instead? I don't really have anything particularly pithy to say, so write your own bloody topic intros.

Duty281 wrote:Hopefully he'll have encouraged the police to come down hard on the first signs of any more violence or destruction over the weekend

Well the police did come down hard, thank goodness, not just in London but other places as well, including Newcastle. Hopefully it's deterred the thugs on both sides, and we won't see similar scenes next weekend.

Thugs on both sides? Jesus.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Thugs on both sides? Jesus.

Judging by the trouble both weeks it is simply true.

Not even comparable really. Embarrassing to see the right wingers jump through these hoops. Trumpian good people on both sides.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Not even comparable really.  Embarrassing to see the right wingers jump through these hoops. Trumpian good people on both sides.

The worst elements of each protest are comparable, the movements themselves are not being compared.

Soul Requiem wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Not even comparable really.  Embarrassing to see the right wingers jump through these hoops. Trumpian good people on both sides.

The worst elements of each protest are comparable, the movements themselves are not being compared.

Tearing down a statue of a slave trader is comparable to urinating on a memorial to a dead policeman? Sure, bud.

Maybe he means writing he was racist on a statues plinth was the same as giving nazi salutes next to the cenotaph?

Let's face it a bunch of racists had a day out on the piss looking for fights. Did like the lads and lasses protecting the statue of Earl Grey though. Kinda proving some dont learn about history from lumps of metal and stone.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Thugs on both sides? Jesus.

Yes 27 police officers were injured in last week's BLM protests. 6 police officers were injured yesterday. There are thugs on both sides. There's no dispute to that.

Perhaps the thugs from last weekend are not on the same side as the anti-racists - they have their own side, separate from the peaceful protestors. Whereas everyone on the racist side, thug or not, deserves condemnation.

I mean that's a real stretch duty. Ignores a lot of things but you've sided with the racists fair enough.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I mean that's a real stretch duty. Ignores a lot of things but you've sided with the racists fair enough.

How's it a stretch? Just factual information. I'm sorry that your bias doesn't allow you to be objective. I've criticised both sides, I haven't sided with anyone.

JuliusHMarx wrote:Perhaps the thugs from last weekend are not on the same side as the anti-racists - they have their own side, separate from the peaceful protestors. Whereas everyone on the racist side, thug or not, deserves condemnation.

I think the Black Lives Matter movement would want to distance themselves from the violent minority who marred their own protest, just like they had to condemn the homophobia at one of their recent marches.

Hows it a stretch? Thousands of people come out to protest about institutional racism. Vast majority do so peacefully and vast majority legally. Against normal police. The next weekend a load of racists come out to drink and have fights. Police are in riot gear.
Your criticism rings of all lives matter when someone says to you black lives matter. It's an anonymous forum I don't know why you have to play silly games. I'd get that in real life you'd never say these things.

I'm really struggling to understand your viewpoint here and unsure how criticising anyone who has caused trouble over the past two weekends is picking sides. You're reducing a serious subject into point scoring.

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:Perhaps the thugs from last weekend are not on the same side as the anti-racists - they have their own side, separate from the peaceful protestors. Whereas everyone on the racist side, thug or not, deserves condemnation.

I think the Black Lives Matter movement would want to distance themselves from the violent minority who marred their own protest, just like they had to condemn the homophobia at one of their recent marches.

I guess that you haven't been reading about how they are trying to do exactly that.

You profess to struggle a lot Soul.

Soul Requiem wrote:I'm really struggling to understand your viewpoint here and unsure how criticising anyone who has caused trouble over the past two weekends is picking sides. You're reducing a serious subject into point scoring.

Racism constantly causes trouble regardless of whether it manifests itself in physical violence every now and then. Fighting against injustice is a good thing, even though it may manifest itself in physical violence every now and then. Maybe focus on that viewpoint.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Hows it a stretch? Thousands of people come out to protest about institutional racism. Vast majority do so peacefully and vast majority legally. Against normal police. The next weekend a load of racists come out to drink and have fights. Police are in riot gear.
Your criticism rings of all lives matter when someone says to you black lives matter. It's an anonymous forum I don't know why you have to play silly games. I'd get that in real life you'd never say these things.

Yep, no dispute the vast majority of BLM protestors last weekend were peaceful. But a minority were violent, hence the 27 police injuries. The minority spoil it for the majority, and also give BLM a worse reputation (because it's the violent minority that make the headlines), hence why I've condemned them.

Also the reason why I was calling for the police to enforce the rule of law when Colston's statue was torn down was because this exact thing (yesterday's thuggery from the football mob) was a direct consequence of it. Anyone could have predicted it happening. Thankfully the police finally cracked down yesterday with plenty of arrests. Hopefully that's the end of the far-right coming out for a punch-up, and hopefully we return to orderly protests.

I would say these things in real life/have said these things in real life. I don't understand why there'd be any qualms there.

Duty281 wrote:The minority spoil it for the majority.

Only if people let it by focussing on it, rather than the more important issues at stake i.e. a more just and equal society.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:I'm really struggling to understand your viewpoint here and unsure how criticising anyone who has caused trouble over the past two weekends is picking sides. You're reducing a serious subject into point scoring.

Racism constantly causes trouble regardless of whether it manifests itself in physical violence every now and then. Fighting against injustice is a good thing, even though it may manifest itself in physical violence every now and then. Maybe focus on that viewpoint.

Manifesting in violence against police officers is unacceptable on any level so I'll stick with that viewpoint thank you.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:The minority spoil it for the majority.

Only if people let it by focussing on it, rather than the more important issues at stake i.e. a more just and equal society.  

Yes, but people in general are guided by what the mainstream media say (at least for now), and if 27 police officers are injured at a protest then that's what the media will focus on, and in turn it's what the general public impression will be.

On a personal level, I consider violence in a democratic society to be inexcusable, and it can't be swept under the carpet by chasing the utopian dream of a more just and equal society. Of course, BLMUK want to abolish the police force, so maybe they view this as collateral damage?

Soul Requiem wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:I'm really struggling to understand your viewpoint here and unsure how criticising anyone who has caused trouble over the past two weekends is picking sides. You're reducing a serious subject into point scoring.

Racism constantly causes trouble regardless of whether it manifests itself in physical violence every now and then. Fighting against injustice is a good thing, even though it may manifest itself in physical violence every now and then. Maybe focus on that viewpoint.

Manifesting in violence against police officers is unacceptable on any level so I'll stick with that viewpoint thank you.

What about if a police officer is about to murder an innocent black person? Would violence against that police officer to prevent that murder be acceptable at that level?

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:I'm really struggling to understand your viewpoint here and unsure how criticising anyone who has caused trouble over the past two weekends is picking sides. You're reducing a serious subject into point scoring.

Racism constantly causes trouble regardless of whether it manifests itself in physical violence every now and then. Fighting against injustice is a good thing, even though it may manifest itself in physical violence every now and then. Maybe focus on that viewpoint.

Manifesting in violence against police officers is unacceptable on any level so I'll stick with that viewpoint thank you.

What about if a police officer is about to murder an innocent black person? Would violence against that police officer to prevent that murder be acceptable at that level?

That would self defence wouldn't it not assault, that doesn't even work as an argument on any level in this context, good try though.

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:The minority spoil it for the majority.

Only if people let it by focussing on it, rather than the more important issues at stake i.e. a more just and equal society.  

Yes, but people in general are guided by what the mainstream media say (at least for now), and if 27 police officers are injured at a protest then that's what the media will focus on, and in turn it's what the general public impression will be.

On a personal level, I consider violence in a democratic society to be inexcusable, and it can't be swept under the carpet by chasing the utopian dream of a more just and equal society. Of course, BLMUK want to abolish the police force, so maybe they view this as collateral damage?

It's better to try to keep chasing a more just and equal society than let a minority of people distract you from that. What's the alternative - accept things as they are? Why would you give up so easily, unless you're OK with things the way they are?

Soul Requiem wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:I'm really struggling to understand your viewpoint here and unsure how criticising anyone who has caused trouble over the past two weekends is picking sides. You're reducing a serious subject into point scoring.

Racism constantly causes trouble regardless of whether it manifests itself in physical violence every now and then. Fighting against injustice is a good thing, even though it may manifest itself in physical violence every now and then. Maybe focus on that viewpoint.

Manifesting in violence against police officers is unacceptable on any level so I'll stick with that viewpoint thank you.

What about if a police officer is about to murder an innocent black person? Would violence against that police officer to prevent that murder be acceptable at that level?

That would self defence wouldn't it not assault, that doesn't even work as an argument on any level in this context, good try though.

OK, so you've gone from saying violence is unacceptable 'at any level' to saying it is acceptable at some level. Fair enough.
But you still not addressing the main issue - racism in our society and what to do about it.

Edit - I'm assuming you'd want to do something about it. Maybe I'm wrong.

So the minority tars to the same extent as the majority yesterday. You wouldn't say these things in real life. At least not twice.

No 7&1/2 wrote:So the minority tars to the same extent as the majority yesterday. You wouldn't say these things in real life. At least not twice.

Why wouldn't I?

Directed at duty. But day things like that to the wrong people and you're likely to get punched.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:The minority spoil it for the majority.

Only if people let it by focussing on it, rather than the more important issues at stake i.e. a more just and equal society.  

Yes, but people in general are guided by what the mainstream media say (at least for now), and if 27 police officers are injured at a protest then that's what the media will focus on, and in turn it's what the general public impression will be.

On a personal level, I consider violence in a democratic society to be inexcusable, and it can't be swept under the carpet by chasing the utopian dream of a more just and equal society. Of course, BLMUK want to abolish the police force, so maybe they view this as collateral damage?

It's better to try to keep chasing a more just and equal society than let a minority of people distract you from that. What's the alternative - accept things as they are? Why would you give up so easily, unless you're OK with things the way they are?

I haven't said anything about giving up. I've criticised the violent minority of BLM protestors, and commented that the reputation of BLM would be besmirched if it keeps happening.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Directed at duty. But day things like that to the wrong people and you're likely to get punched.

In real life I only have political conversations, and possibly disagreements, with civil, decent people, where there is no chance of being punched, so I have no qualms about stating my opinions in real life. Any one who thinks violence is an answer during a civil conversation is likely to be an extremist, of either the left or the right, so is best avoided.

Keep pushing your luck I beg you

No 7&1/2 wrote:Keep pushing your luck I beg you

You're treating this like it's a game, beyond the stupidity of a minority last week there are actual issues that need addressing. I tend to think as a country we're generally in the right direction but more needs to be done as highlighted by the differing death rates with regards to Covid-19.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Keep pushing your luck I beg you

I will. People I interact with are able to understand that issues and topics are not a simple case of right vs wrong, and they don't get angry when others disagree with them.

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:The minority spoil it for the majority.

Only if people let it by focussing on it, rather than the more important issues at stake i.e. a more just and equal society.  

Yes, but people in general are guided by what the mainstream media say (at least for now), and if 27 police officers are injured at a protest then that's what the media will focus on, and in turn it's what the general public impression will be.

On a personal level, I consider violence in a democratic society to be inexcusable, and it can't be swept under the carpet by chasing the utopian dream of a more just and equal society. Of course, BLMUK want to abolish the police force, so maybe they view this as collateral damage?

It's better to try to keep chasing a more just and equal society than let a minority of people distract you from that. What's the alternative - accept things as they are? Why would you give up so easily, unless you're OK with things the way they are?

I haven't said anything about giving up. I've criticised the violent minority of BLM protestors, and commented that the reputation of BLM would be besmirched if it keeps happening.

I'm glad we both support the peaceful anti-racist protests and are against the racists who gathered yesterday, violent or otherwise.

Nutters on all sides. Main difference seems to be that the vast majority of the BLM marchers were not.

Very little evidence of anybody else apart from the nutters over the weekend.

Am I the only one thinking 2 weeks' prison sentence for the guy who urinated by the memorial is a tad excessive?

He had no previous convictions, handed himself in voluntarily, and appeared to have been completely unaware of the memorial (had been downing pints for most of the day and previous night).  In short he was behaving like he probably does after a match or night out - disgusting as it is, not an offence we would normally see a custodial sentence for.

I would have thought a warning would have sufficed - there were far more serious acts taking place during these demonstrations (e.g. actual violence).

Also compare and contrast with this, where police appear to have stood by and taken no action: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-52979267 .  I have a work colleague who lives in this area and is now scared to leave home because of this.

Apparently a lot of English think we should be celebrating British history a lot more instead of hiding it. Ok cool. What shall we remember today:

School children in Wales being humiliated and forced to wear a 'Welsh Not' for speaking their own language?

Welsh families taking in refugee children during WW2 from places like Coventry. Or are refugees still classed as the scum of the earth?

People in Capel Celyn forced out of their homes and made to dig up their dead so the Tryweryn valley could be flooded to provide water for Merseyside?

Or are we keeping a lid on these ones???

MrInvisible wrote:Am I the only one thinking 2 weeks' prison sentence for the guy who urinated by the memorial is a tad excessive?

He had no previous convictions, handed himself in voluntarily, and appeared to have been completely unaware of the memorial (had been downing pints for most of the day and previous night).  In short he was behaving like he probably does after a match or night out - disgusting as it is, not an offence we would normally see a custodial sentence for.

I would have thought a warning would have sufficed - there were far more serious acts taking place during these demonstrations (e.g. actual violence).

Also compare and contrast with this, where police appear to have stood by and taken no action: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-52979267 .  I have a work colleague who lives in this area and is now scared to leave home because of this.

The man doesn't need to be locked up, he needs rehabilitation to get his life back in order.

Prosecutor Michael Mallon said Banks, a Tottenham Hotspur fan, was in central London to "protect statues", but admitted he did not know which statues.

He was said to have drunk 16 pints during Friday night into Saturday morning, and had not been to sleep.

Goodness.

Good news story for the day. There were a handful of Edinburgh residents in the street handing out BLM literature and talking to locals about inequality in Scotland. How it affects people in ways you might not realise. Simple steps we can all take to raise awareness and make a difference etc. Lovely and very bright young people from a mix of races.

A bloke wanders over and starts hurling some very uninformed vitriol at them. Which a young fellow who I'm guessing lives in a flat across the street responded to by appearing out his buildings stairwell door with a set of bagpipes and proceeded to drown out the idiot hurling vitriol at the peaceful activists by playing Loch Lomond until the obnoxious gentleman decided it was probably best to walk away.

Duty281 wrote:

MrInvisible wrote:Am I the only one thinking 2 weeks' prison sentence for the guy who urinated by the memorial is a tad excessive?

He had no previous convictions, handed himself in voluntarily, and appeared to have been completely unaware of the memorial (had been downing pints for most of the day and previous night).  In short he was behaving like he probably does after a match or night out - disgusting as it is, not an offence we would normally see a custodial sentence for.

I would have thought a warning would have sufficed - there were far more serious acts taking place during these demonstrations (e.g. actual violence).

Also compare and contrast with this, where police appear to have stood by and taken no action: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-52979267 .  I have a work colleague who lives in this area and is now scared to leave home because of this.

The man doesn't need to be locked up, he needs rehabilitation to get his life back in order.

Prosecutor Michael Mallon said Banks, a Tottenham Hotspur fan, was in central London to "protect statues", but admitted he did not know which statues.

He was said to have drunk 16 pints during Friday night into Saturday morning, and had not been to sleep.

Goodness.

Sums up the protests on Saturday. The only thing that protesters such as them are usually sure of is that they are angry. Once you ask a question or two about why the facade usually breaks down and it becomes clear that their anger is actually nothing to do with statues, BLM protests, immigration, etc. Their anger is actually about a system of wealth inequality that sees too large a proportion of our society left behind. Largely due to intentionally misinforming reporting from several major papers that anger is usually directed in completely the wrong place though.

Steffan wrote:Apparently a lot of English think we should be celebrating British history a lot more instead of hiding it. Ok cool. What shall we remember today:

School children in Wales being humiliated and forced to wear a 'Welsh Not' for speaking their own language?

Welsh families taking in refugee children during WW2 from places like Coventry. Or are refugees still classed as the scum of the earth?

People in Capel Celyn forced out of their homes and made to dig up their dead so the Tryweryn valley could be flooded to provide water for Merseyside?

Or are we keeping a lid on these ones???

What’s “a lot” to you?

MrInvisible wrote:Am I the only one thinking 2 weeks' prison sentence for the guy who urinated by the memorial is a tad excessive?

He had no previous convictions, handed himself in voluntarily, and appeared to have been completely unaware of the memorial (had been downing pints for most of the day and previous night).  In short he was behaving like he probably does after a match or night out - disgusting as it is, not an offence we would normally see a custodial sentence for.

I would have thought a warning would have sufficed - there were far more serious acts taking place during these demonstrations (e.g. actual violence).

Also compare and contrast with this, where police appear to have stood by and taken no action: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-52979267 .  I have a work colleague who lives in this area and is now scared to leave home because of this.

No, you're not. Personally think this is absurd, but understandable in circumstances. Officialdom have to be seen to be doing something, even if it's patently nonsensical.

Steffan wrote:Apparently a lot of English think we should be celebrating British history a lot more instead of hiding it. Ok cool. What shall we remember today:

School children in Wales being humiliated and forced to wear a 'Welsh Not' for speaking their own language?

Welsh families taking in refugee children during WW2 from places like Coventry. Or are refugees still classed as the scum of the earth?

People in Capel Celyn forced out of their homes and made to dig up their dead so the Tryweryn valley could be flooded to provide water for Merseyside?

Or are we keeping a lid on these ones???

No; one would hope not and perhaps should be part of much wider discussions. But it's a little bit 'whataboutery' re. this actual topic.

So the first piece of actual legislation to come from all of this looks like it'll protect statues and not human beings.

Good stuff.

Pr4wn wrote:So the first piece of actual legislation to come from all of this looks like it'll protect statues and not human beings.

Good stuff.

The new commission to investigate racial inequalities in the UK is being headed up by Munira Mirza, a No 10 advisor who has never believed in institutional racism and has condemned past investigations as fostering a “culture of grievance”. Her first member appears to be Trevor Phillips, a man suspended by the Labour party for islamophobic comments.

Might aswell not bother.

Samo wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:So the first piece of actual legislation to come from all of this looks like it'll protect statues and not human beings.

Good stuff.

The new commission to investigate racial inequalities in the UK is being headed up by Munira Mirza, a No 10 advisor who has never believed in institutional racism and has condemned past investigations as fostering a “culture of grievance”. Her first member appears to be Trevor Phillips, a man suspended by the Labour party for islamophobic comments.

Might aswell not bother.

The plan was announced by Johnson in a Telegraph comment piece which was largely about statues with a small add on about race.

Johnson spouting drivel as usual about how he'd "resist with every breath" any attempts to removed the Churchill statue. Of course he doesn't mention that I've not seen a single call for that to happen. Playing to his base and distracting from the point.

He also mentioned that he was "dubious of the growing campaign to edit or Photoshop the entire cultural landscape". Once again failing to acknowledge that is what has happened for generations with regards to large parts of Colonialism and black British history due to school curriculum.

king_carlos wrote:

Samo wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:So the first piece of actual legislation to come from all of this looks like it'll protect statues and not human beings.

Good stuff.

The new commission to investigate racial inequalities in the UK is being headed up by Munira Mirza, a No 10 advisor who has never believed in institutional racism and has condemned past investigations as fostering a “culture of grievance”. Her first member appears to be Trevor Phillips, a man suspended by the Labour party for islamophobic comments.

Might aswell not bother.

The plan was announced by Johnson in a Telegraph comment piece which was largely about statues with a small add on about race.

Johnson spouting drivel as usual about how he'd "resist with every breath" any attempts to removed the Churchill statue. Of course he doesn't mention that I've not seen a single call for that to happen. Playing to his base and distracting from the point.

He also mentioned that he was "dubious of the growing campaign to edit or Photoshop the entire cultural landscape". Once again failing to acknowledge that is what has happened for generations with regards to large parts of Colonialism and black British history due to school curriculum.

Dangerous words given the state of his lungs at the moment.

king_carlos wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

MrInvisible wrote:Am I the only one thinking 2 weeks' prison sentence for the guy who urinated by the memorial is a tad excessive?

He had no previous convictions, handed himself in voluntarily, and appeared to have been completely unaware of the memorial (had been downing pints for most of the day and previous night).  In short he was behaving like he probably does after a match or night out - disgusting as it is, not an offence we would normally see a custodial sentence for.

I would have thought a warning would have sufficed - there were far more serious acts taking place during these demonstrations (e.g. actual violence).

Also compare and contrast with this, where police appear to have stood by and taken no action: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-52979267 .  I have a work colleague who lives in this area and is now scared to leave home because of this.

The man doesn't need to be locked up, he needs rehabilitation to get his life back in order.

Prosecutor Michael Mallon said Banks, a Tottenham Hotspur fan, was in central London to "protect statues", but admitted he did not know which statues.

He was said to have drunk 16 pints during Friday night into Saturday morning, and had not been to sleep.

Goodness.

Sums up the protests on Saturday. The only thing that protesters such as them are usually sure of is that they are angry. Once you ask a question or two about why the facade usually breaks down and it becomes clear that their anger is actually nothing to do with statues, BLM protests, immigration, etc. Their anger is actually about a system of wealth inequality that sees too large a proportion of our society left behind. Largely due to intentionally misinforming reporting from several major papers that anger is usually directed in completely the wrong place though.

Just saw a photo of a group of “lads” “defending” the George Eliot statue in Nuneaton.

They were clearly never forced to read Silas Marner at school.

Samo wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:So the first piece of actual legislation to come from all of this looks like it'll protect statues and not human beings.

Good stuff.

The new commission to investigate racial inequalities in the UK is being headed up by Munira Mirza, a No 10 advisor who has never believed in institutional racism and has condemned past investigations as fostering a “culture of grievance”. Her first member appears to be Trevor Phillips, a man suspended by the Labour party for islamophobic comments.

Might aswell not bother.

For Heaven's sake, give them a chance. That's only two people, and both from BAME backgrounds.

Re. Phillips, this would be same man appointed by Blair as head of the Commission for Racial Equality? This would be same Labour Party that dealt so well w/ anti-Semitism?