Jump to content

Congratulations Stu Peters


Max Power
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, The Voice of Reason said:

How many non racists ( the vast majority in society) feel insulted that they think this gesture actually adds any value to the anti racist movement. A lot I would suggest ( including me)

It just pisses people off

I don't claim to speak for others.  Personally I applaud when I see people trying to unite their fellow members of society against racism by taking the knee.  The unity it has generated in the English football team has been a joy to behold.  The results on the pitch have improved too, with them now being ranked higher than ever before.  I struggle to understand why anyone who is against racism is upset by the gesture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Without doubt it has sowed division. For example taking the knee.

How many racists have changed their minds as a result? ( close to zero I would suggest)

How many non racists ( the vast majority in society) feel insulted that they think this gesture actually adds any value to the anti racist movement. A lot I would suggest ( including me)

It just pisses people off

Bit like the Insulate Britain mob

Virtually no actions are going to change the mind or opinions of racists. Taking a knee may start loosing some meaning as it just becomes to be seen a hollow routine gesture but I doubt that huge number who are not racists feel insulted by it. If they are they need to have a look in the mirror. 

Has it sowed division or was that division already there and it has either just highlighted it or changed the narrative and that as society seeks to address so that one party of the divide feels less alienated the other side starts to feel alienated. You did not here much before about about the issue from the "anti woke warriors" as they were perfectly happy how things were. Now issues are being addressed they are coming out of the woodwork.

BLM and taking the knee will probably not have a huge effect in the UK, although it has clearly made some institutions think about, and I struggle what to think would in a short space of time but if it continually reminds society that a problem remains that needs to be addressed I do not think that is a  bad think. Turning a blind eye has not worked so why not try something else. Racism and prejudice will not go away but continually reminding people that it is out there and demonstrating that most right minded people are anti racism and prejudice is a start. You will not change peoples views quickly, if at all, but making it socially unacceptable to spout those views might make the next generation less likely to have those views. If when I take my kids to a football match if I do not swear and shout abuse then it is less likely they will view that as acceptable behaviour later in life. 

I actually think the MLB movement has been pretty effective in highlighting that racism remains a problem and that more needs to be done to address it rather than just leave it continuing to run below the surface. If you don't recognise a problem exists you can not start to address. As another poster said I do not agree with the actions of extinction rebellion or insulate but they have been effective in getting the issue raised and protests have long been the means of obtaining change in the UK. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Someone Who Cares said:

I don't claim to speak for others.  Personally I applaud when I see people trying to unite their fellow members of society against racism by taking the knee.  The unity it has generated in the English football team has been a joy to behold.  The results on the pitch have improved too, with them now being ranked higher than ever before.  I struggle to understand why anyone who is against racism is upset by the gesture.

I am not sure that it has had an impact on results but if the players make the gesture each game and the majority of fan support it may not change the opinions of the minority but they might at least keep their opinions to themselves. In the case of football I actually think that they have brought a lot of the issues on themselves as generally they have not been that bothered about abuse along as it was not homophobic or racist. If you are going to tolerate abuse you will get some that is deliberately racists or homophobic and some that is simply a use of such language unthinkingly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Lost Login said:

... It may not change the opinions of the minority but they might at least keep their opinions to themselves.

Seems you'd rather those with a different opinion to yours kept them to themselves, or preferably, cancelled

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, quilp said:

Seems you'd rather those with a different opinion to yours kept them to themselves, or preferably, cancelled

No, we just need to 'educate ourselves' until we agree.

  • Like 5
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, quilp said:

Seems you'd rather those with a different opinion to yours kept them to themselves, or preferably, cancelled

No , people are perfectly entitled to have a different opinion but should there not be acceptable limits? It is fine to have  different opinions over whether the acceptable accompaniment to a curry is beer not wine, that David Beckham was over rated, legalisation of cannabis or the tax rate.

But how far do you go. What do you do with those who have what we call extreme position?. Should people be allowed to argue, protest etc if they thought there was nothing wrong with FGM or paedophilia? Not in my view. What about where a person's opinion simply ignores the facts and causes harm to others? 

Should white supremacists or Islamic extremists be given the freedom to say what they want.

It is not in my view a simple black and white issue and because of that people deliberately try and refuse to obfuscate the issue by saying if you did or stopped X then Y would not be allowed so you cannot possibly do or stop X.  We have the argument with speed limits where some appear to argue that until we could stop or catch all offenders then we should not introduce. A daft argument that would effectively see the end of all laws if that was the criteria being in place.  

It is fair to have an opinion on where the boundary lines are on what is acceptable and what is not acceptable to with regard to being able to go out and express an opinion on but I would hope that we are all of the opinion that some things are not acceptable. 

   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Stu Peters said:

No, we just need to 'educate ourselves' until we agree.

Well you certainly need to educate yourself but as you publically state that you disagree with the consensus view of experts on matters that you are completely unqualified on, then it is probably difficult to educate yourself if you are happy to ignore the evidence. 

I have replied to quilp's post in a similar vein but I presume or would hope that you are of the view that it is wrong to preach religious hatred, that the opinions of the like of the English Defence League and Tommy Robinson are indefensible. In my view there are certain things that people who hold certain views on should educate themselves on and come to a different view and these include such matters that it is not OK to be racist, homophobic etc. It seems that you disagree and that you are perfectly happy for others to hold different views on this and to promote those views on the the basis people should be free express their opinions no matter how vile. You may be surprised to learn I actually think it would be great if everybody educated themselves and agreed that racial, religious, sexual intolerance and abuse were wrong but there is me being "woke". 

A person was recently convicted on the IoM for falsely accusing another person of being a paedophile. Presumably you are perfectly happy that individual did not educate himself first on the matter and that it was fine as he was only expressing his opinion no matter that it was completely wrong.

To misquote an old saying: Sometimes it is probably better to say nothing and let people think you are X, Y or Z rather than to say something and confirm that you are X, Y or Z.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread started as a congratulations to a forum member for being elected and has evolved, due to the contributions of one or two who wish to insult and make allegations, into a series of threads about rascism, homophobia and sexism. Into the mix have been thrown Fascists and dim English Nationalists. I do recall the comments that got Stu Peters into bother on Manx Radio. He was goaded into a response by someone with an agenda and his response was, in my opinion, clumsy and ill-judged. From there, the provokers win and the cancel culture/censorship of opinion begins… I am not a politician and never wish to be but my advice to Stu is to consider his responses and not be goaded into endless and increasingly meaningless debates about “wokeness” with those that presume to stand on some higher moral ground. Let the gesturers keep gesturing. Real politics is about dealing with real issues and doing things that make a real difference to improve the lives of real people, whatever their ethnic, religious, sexual or disability background. There are far more important things to do than argue with those who have probably never done a thing to improve the lot of anybody, including the disadvantaged or discriminated against except signal their supposed virtue. Just get on with your job Stu. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How long will it be before other sports people start to "drop the knee" - should female tennis players start doing it at Wimbledon ? - what happens when it gets accompanied by a 'raised fist' ?.

""Let the gesturers keep gesturing. Real politics is about dealing with real issues and doing things that make a real difference to improve the lives of real people, whatever their ethnic, religious, sexual or disability background. There are far more important things to do than argue with those who have probably never done a thing to improve the lot of anybody, including the disadvantaged or discriminated against except signal their supposed virtue. Just get on with your job Stu""

@joebeanHear Hear.

 

Edited by Apple
Common Sense just arrived.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Apple said:

How long will it be before other sports people start to "drop the knee" - should female tennis players start doing it at Wimbledon ? - what happens when it gets accompanied by a 'raised fist' ?.

 

The simple answer should be, if they want to. Nobody should be forced to "drop the knee" or prevented from doing so. I try to be against double standards and would have no issue with the sport preventing such gestures across the board if it was a blanket policy. It is the picking and choosing of which are acceptable I struggle with. I don't see why over recent years it has become a requirement for all premier league clubs to have poppies on their shirts and have a minutes silence on games  nearest 11th November. I accept it though but once you allow certain gestures it becomes difficult to deny others.

Some sportsman make religious gestures on the pitch before or after games, when they score etc. Some relate to a charity they support. I am not bothered by these what I would not be in favour of is allowing in favour of some but not others

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, joebean said:

Real politics is about dealing with real issues and doing things that make a real difference to improve the lives of real people, whatever their ethnic, religious, sexual or disability background. There are far more important things to do than argue with those who have probably never done a thing to improve the lot of anybody, including the disadvantaged or discriminated against except signal their supposed virtue. Just get on with your job Stu. 

Is white prejudice and treating others less favourably not a real issue? Is man made climate change not a real issue that we should try to do something about? If you do not recognise issues and argue they don't exist or argue there is nothing you can do about then how are you going to deal with and make a real difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, quilp said:

For fucks sake, talk about going overboard. You're a piece of work...

That's you opinion but my opinion is that you made a rather ill thought trough comment which suggested I was against people having different opinions. 

9 hours ago, quilp said:

Seems you'd rather those with a different opinion to yours kept them to themselves, or preferably, cancelled

I am not but only with reasonably boundaries, and it is a matter of opinion where they lie.  You asked a question of me and I answered it. It seems that you may not like my answer as it is not a glib one liner of the sort you and SP appear to favour to which you can attach a label such as it being "woke" or part of "cancel culture"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Lost Login said:

Is white prejudice and treating others less favourably not a real issue? Is man made climate change not a real issue that we should try to do something about? If you do not recognise issues and argue they don't exist or argue there is nothing you can do about then how are you going to deal with and make a real difference.

I didn’t say that did I? Any politician should be judged on what he/she does. If they were judged on actions and achievements we would end up with much better politics. The question for Stu Peters, and all the others, is whether he wishes to spend his time talking rubbish or doing something worthwhile. I’d recommend the latter. There are sufficient people in the world who talk but don’t act already - even here. As we have seen in this thread, there are plenty of people who will want to distract him with virtue signalling and accusations when, actually, there is real work to be done. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, joebean said:

I didn’t say that did I? Any politician should be judged on what he/she does. If they were judged on actions and achievements we would end up with much better politics. The question for Stu Peters, and all the others, is whether he wishes to spend his time talking rubbish or doing something worthwhile. I’d recommend the latter. There are sufficient people in the world who talk but don’t act already - even here. As we have seen in this thread, there are plenty of people who will want to distract him with virtue signalling and accusations when, actually, there is real work to be done. 

You are right. He should be judged by his actions. It will be interesting to see if he  (and others elected) actually roll their sleeves up and take positive remedial action. By which I mean not shouting the odds from the back benches or obsessing about planning or parking etc but dealing with our fiscal and budgetary issues and genuine cash generating enterprises. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...