We all know that violent criminals like George Floyd are held in high esteem by woke white liberals . But why don't these characters mourn the death of fantastic human beings like Areanah Preston? Do black people who work hard and make something of themselves and who don't subscribe to the victim\oppression narrative count ? . A question for the white wokes on this board : who would you rather have as your neighbor ? George ? Or Areanah ? . Just asking for decent law abiding black people who are sick to death of wipipo who kneel at the alter of black trash whilst disregarding decent law abiding black people .
George Floyd was the victim of a murder by a state official. He died in the same way that many other black people have been killed over many decades in the United States. It is a matter of fact, that you surely won't dispute, that black people experience more arrests, more stop and search, are charged with offences more and receive harsher sentences. That is here in the UK also. The deaths of many black people here at the hands of the police is also a matter of record. Joy Gardener for example. Or Dalian Atkinson. There are way too many to list. The example of the murder in broad daylight of George Floyd, because it was so blatant and because it was all on video, was a point where people just exploded and said enough is enough. It wasn't making a hero out of Floyd. It was protesting about the manner of his and many other black people's deaths and the general discrimination of every aspect of the justice system. As for Preston, I hadn't heard about this case. There are so many murders in the USA with their guns. It is a dysfunctional society and super violent. I see from the report they even have a 'gunshot monitoring station' in Chicago that picks up all the shootings going on at any time. You can bet that screen is flashing red lights like an Xmas tree! The root cause appears, as ever, to have been money. The filthy dollar. The lads girlfriends told them to get money for a barbecue - presumably followed by "or you're not getting any of this....". The girls even drove them around so they could rob people. It seems they robbed 4 people before the murder of Preston. No shots were fired and the people just lost their phones and wallets etc. Preston shot at them instead and they shot back and got her. Good to see in the report that they took ages to get medical attention to her because they were "very busy". (Rolling eyes smiley) They caught the boys (and the girls by the sounds of it) and knowing the US legal system, they'll probably get 739 years each. I don't know if they still have executions in illinois. Some states still have that barbaric practice. She sounds like a really decent person from the reports and it's a shame she got killed. What you want me to do about it though is beyond me. Perhaps you can clarify? Do you want me to protest against US gun laws? I don't suppose they'll take too much notice of me. Do you want me to protest against the capitalist money system that once again is the root cause of a tragic death? Well I'm already doing that as much as I can. Or is it that you'd like me to turn a blind eye to the mistreatment of black people at the hands of the police? Why would I do that? Why would the death of Preston during a robbery change anything?
Sorry Clive. I really like your posts in general, even when I strongly disagree with them. But this just reads as sickening cope. You mention Joy Gardeners case as an example of how current and frequent a problem police brutality is against black people in the UK. Terrible though it is, it happened 40 years ago, and may have involved an aggressive attempt to resist arrest. And Dalian Atkinson died seven years ago, and did involve a violent attempt to resist arrest, and certainly an over aggressive response from the police. So yes, as you highlight, it is on record that the type of deaths you refer to are rare, and the number of black Britons affected is not disproportionate to the number of White Britons. And you do appear to be saying that if Preston had not defended herself, she would be alive today. That is a fair observation, if it was balanced by the opposing logical argument, which I do not remember anyone making on here. Should good people, in cities that have chosen to defund the police, always hand over their hard earned money, because barbecue, to avoid being killed? If that is good reasoning, do you not think it is a good argument to put to the criminals? Have you ever thought 'Big George may have been better off accepting arrest for trying to rip off a local shop using fake dollar bills?' Nah? Do you consider him resisting arrest as a mark of being a rebel hero against the system? If resisting daylight f'ing robbery is a criticism (why even mention it otherwise) that death could be avoided, then why not criticise Floyd, and virtually every other case of police homicide (black and white) for resisting arrest. In every high profile case, resisting arrest has been the root cause. And, just a reminder. In Floyd's case, the prosecution of the officer that killed him, racism did not play any part what so ever, and the prosecution avoided any such accusations completely. As for a disproportionate number of black Americans being affected by the police, a glance at crime statistics can shed light on that. The Harvard study that Moose quoted recently concluded that the reason more black Americans were affected, was because, proportionally, significantly more were involved in violent crime. The cause of that is something that needs discussing, but you try doing that without being accused of racism, probably by a number of people on here, possibly even yourself. Davy's OP is neither here nor there, in terms of demanding a response from you. I don't particularly care for it. But I find the response you chose to give very disappointing, bordering on callous. It is the sort of thing I would expect from Moose. If Davy makes any salient point, though, it is that to BLM, and social justice advocates in the US as a whole, not all Black lives matter, and your violent death is barely likely to register on the media scale if you were a good person, or if you were murdered by someone, inconveniently, of the same colour as you. Don't anyone tell me that this isn't done to stir up race hatred.
George Floyd’s violent youth was decades behind him. He was known as an anti-violence campaigner. To characterise him simply as a ‘violent criminal’ completely erases the point of rehabilitation. Do you also want white lads, who are violent when young, to be called violent criminals all their lives when they successfully turn their backs on it? And none of it justifies his murder.
He clearly relied on his size to intimidate, and had no problem simply walking away with the goods after handing over fake dollar bills, despite being challenged. Was this his only slip into criminal behaviour since pointing a gun at a pregnant woman's belly and threatening to shoot her unborn baby? He was no saint, even if you measure him by the last day of his life. His criminal behaviour, whether violent or not, is irrelevent with regard to his death, which was avoidable, but his resistance to arrest is THE factor that led to the what happened. But no excuses. He should not have died. I think, reading Davy's post, part of the issue he is referring to is the fact that people like the Democrats and those who support them make this a racial issue of convenience, in order to stir up race hatred (Democrats have a 150 years plus history of doing so). And that the deaths of good people, being murdered in the performance of criminal acts, is overlooked, whilst any person injured or killed resisting arrest is a case of martyrdom (and fund raising). Like it or not, it is a clear demonstration of the callous usery of the black American identity, claiming to care about all black lives, but studiously ignoring the vast majority of deaths within that community caused by a small number of those within it (cue accusations of racism). It is tolerated now because the press are helping to sustain a suspension of disbelief. But in years to come, what is obvious to many of us will become common understanding. I believe that the views of Democrats will come to be associated with the party's historical association with identitarianism, and the whole of the post civil war era will be seen as an issue that took hundreds of years to resolve, way beyond the current date, with Dems on the wrong side throughout - and Republicans at times being equally complicit). Controlling and segregating lower class black Americans has always been an operation of Democrats, often with the collusion of Republicans. That was an issue the US was on the way to putting right, but now it is being dragged back decades. But not a problem, the status quo has been returned, and the establishment is pleased. Hopefully it is the last hurrah for identitarian politics, and it can wonder off and die in agony somewhere. Somehow I doubt it.
Awww Henry! I didn't think you'd choose to dispute the unequal way in which black people are treated by the police. "the number of black Britons affected is not disproportionate to the number of White Britons." - That is just untrue. For example: "From 2012/13 to 2020/21, there have been 119 deaths involving restraint recorded by the IOPC [Independent Office for Police Conduct] ‘in or following police custody’ or recorded as ‘other deaths following police contact’. Of these 23 were of Black people, 86 were White, five were Asian and four were mixed race. Assuming constant demographic profiles over the period considered, Black people are 6.4 times more likely to die than the proportion of the population they represent. For white people the comparable figure is just 0.84." For example: Last year the National Police Chiefs' Council said "We use our powers on Black people disproportionately often compared with White people. Last year, we stopped and searched Black people at a rate that was seven times higher than it was for White people … force was five times higher … we discharged or drew Taser on Black people at a rate that was six times higher … only 3.5% of the population is Black.” For example: "no officer has ever been found to have acted in a racist or discriminatory way following the death of a black person after contact with the police." And this even though report after report has found police to be institutionally racist. One such report on the Met came out just now! For example: Joy Gardner was a 40 year old mature student and mother. Her 5 year old child was with her watching TV at home. 6 goons from the charmingly named 'Aliens Deportation Group' bust in as a surprise. They cuffed her, bound her up with leather straps and used 13 feet of tape wound round and round to gag her until she died from asphyxiation. Oh and her crime by the way, not having the right bloody government stamp on the right piece of immigration paper. That's all. And of course, nobody was to blame. For example: Dalian Atkinson was quite obviously suffering a severe mental illness. He needed urgent medical treatment and the right medication. He didn't need to be tasered 3 times - one for 33 seconds when the maximum is 5 - to get beaten with a truncheon 6 times (even after he'd been restrained and backup had arrived). He especially didn't need to be kicked in the head several times, so hard the imprint of the thug cooper's boot laces were left on his forehead. Nor did the thug cop need to rest his triumphant boot on Atkinson's head after he was down and out. At least this time, the cop got jailed - first time ever apparently. I gave the examples of Gardner and Atkinson spread over decades rather than incidents that have happened together and recently, because I want to illustrate that this is not some bad thing that just happened now. This has been going on with impunity and unchanging for as long as any one can remember. How can you possibly believe that protesting about this state of affairs could be 'stirring up race hate'? It's exactly and precisely race hate we are protesting about!
Firstly, the only reason I have looked into any of the following is to see the information you provide in context. As far as I am concerned, we are all Britons, enjoying and suffering predominantly the same advantages and disadvantages when it comes to living in Britain. I am of the colour blind persuasion. I find it disgusting that so many in politics think it is necessary to pigeon hole us into racial groups so that we can be pitched against each other, or racially abused on mass. So the following is not me having a rant about black people. It is me responding to your ethnicisation of our population. Physical characteristics is the last thing I would consider when it comes to the behaviour of any individual. I am sorry, and you are correct that the numbers you quote are disproportionate. I was wrong there. But I think that if you are going to look into proportional cases, then you should also look into possible reasons why. Here's an infographic from the Ministry of Justice from 2016... https://assets.publishing.service.g...ata/file/663376/race-cjs-2016-infographic.pdf So the disproportion in the number of police issues may have something to do with the disproportion in the number of crimes committed by each group. You may also take into account the geographics and social conditions in which the groups find themselves. A large proportion of one group may find themselves living in more rural areas, where fewer crimes are committed and when they are, they are of a less serious nature than in the city, where minorities tend to form communities. Here is a link to the wiki page giving a breakdown of ethnicity in London... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_in_London So, 71% of the UK's black population lives in London. Where as only 9% of the white population lives in London. Is it possible that this would have an effect on how your figures pan out? I think so. I can't say it accounts for all of the disproportionality, but then, I can't say, either, that it wouldn't. What I can say it that you are talking about 0.000965% of the black population (0.000039% of the total English/Welsh population) in an attempt to create the idea that there is some sort of racist war against black people in this country. Trite I know. But that is how I feel about what you are saying. Actually, 4% of the population overseen by representatitves from this body are black (according to Government figures). So straight away we are seeing a bias that dismisses around 208,600 people. Why should we trust what these people say any further? Here's another reason why this group, represented by this guy, may not be the best people to trust on matters prejudicial and bullying... https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...s-council-chief-retires-after-bullying-claims Is that the very guy you quoted? Nice one. Institutionally racist, and yet the best you can manage regarding brutality against black people is this... I didn't make excuses for or dismiss either of these cases. I just pointed out the fact that one occurring forty years ago and the other seven years ago indicated that such events are rare, and far from evidence that police brutality against black Britons is performed with impunity. Your examples speak for themselves (in terms of the frequency of such things), and although they do not paint a pretty picture, they certainly do not justify the comparisson you made with the US. Do you have a few more of the many you mentioned, that we can consider them? What you are doing is using unpleasant and emotive things we can all find disgusting and unacceptable, and giving a false impression about them. Yes, there will be racists within the police force. But we are also talking about a police force that summarily finds people guilty on record, without representation, of 'non crime hate incidents', simply because someone makes a complaint. A police force that paints rainbow flags on their cars, a gesture of affinity to 1% of the population who right now are responsible for some pretty horrible hate crimes of their own. I didn't mind the Macarana though. I would have found it difficult not to join in with a bit of that. So there is a wide range of people in there from racists to political extremists, and I would rather not see either in their ranks. You are not protesting about race hate. You are speculating, unconvincingly, that there is such a thing, and the statistics and information you quote is, in the real scheme of things, non-existent. You are talking about 3 deaths a year following police restraint, in a population of seventy million; yes it is horrible, but in real terms it represents a very, very small focus of 'bad'. You cannnot provide any proof that there is a racial motive, and given that white people, no matter how disproportionately, also die following police custody, it is clear that that police brutatility, at the very least, is not entirely motivated by race. Which you can include as yet another playing-field levelling factor. So you have, yet again, done the black population of the US a dis-service. What started out as a rather boorish call for some justification for BLM only caring about certain black lives, whilst ignoring others, has now been distracted into your little dig at the UK. Sorry. Not impressed. Still love you though.
Someone on this thread attempting to " pie me " claimed never to never have heard of Areanah . Disgraceful. Anywho. Do you woke ***** think that police brutality is a new thing ? Have you morons ever heard of Liddle Towers for example ? Do you think that the Birmingham 6 or the Guildford 4 are black ? Do you think that law abiding salt of the earth black people care much for your kneeling at the alter at the lowest common denominator? Seriously. Get yourself out of your echo chamber. White liberals . Pisz off .
Fentanyl . George Floyd . Discuss . Decent law abiding black people ? White wokie liberals have nothing to say . Who keeps decent black people down ? Me ? Or the wokies ?
here’s something interesting for people to ignore. If anyone is happy to challenge the content, or state that the guy is some sort of white nationalist, I would still appreciate an explanation of what he is saying that is incorrect, or even controversial. Obviously I won’t be holding my breath. Why would a bunch of critical race theory lefties want to say anything that may leave them open to constructive criticism, discussion, or even, god forbid, debate.
What would you call it when obviously black names on CVs get far fewer interviews than European names for exactly the same qualifications and experience? It’s an experiment repeated dozens of times. Or when black people apply to rent properties and are turned down, but white people find it’s still available? It’s an experiment repeated dozens of times. Or when white people disguise themselves as black and are shocked by the negative reaction they get? Not because the disguise doesn’t work. It’s an experiment repeated dozens of times. Not having the extra burden of those setbacks is privilege. Of course people can be ****** to white people too, because of their accent, manners, education and background and deny them opportunities. Not because they are white though. Because they are working class. Who treats them like that? The same people who fund newspapers and think tanks to bleat on against the concept of ‘white privilege’ like it’s any kind of threat to you. It always comes down to this. Divide and rule.
Coming from someone who once criticized me for distracting from the race issue by insisting it is a class problem, that is quite magnificent. I am glad I have brought you around to my way of thinking. I am confused by your choosing to make an argument and then cut it down in your next few sentences. Basically, whether you meant to or not and whether you like it or not, you have just made it absolutely clear that the lower classes of all colours face prejudice from people who have power over them, say, from executives and business owners who are prejudiced enough to hold their social status against them. And I can tell you for a fact that if a person has a name that is difficult to pronounce, a manager or employer of any colour or ethnic background will hesitate to put themselves in the position of getting that name wrong to that person's face. I will bet you have avoided saying a name because you are unsure of the pronounciation on many occasions. It doesn't make you privileged or racist. I am constantly being asked by other members of staff to call patients with difficult to pronounce names (it is a legal requirement that we use the full name). A Gujrati Indian generally has no more idea than a Mancunian does of how to say a Tamil Indian name, and just as much reluctance to embarrass themselves. Unfortunate but true. To say it is white privilege, though, is simply, nay simplistically, ignorant. I'll bet it is just the same for second and third generation eastern Europeans who are only discernable as such by their name. And don't most 'black' Briton's have very British sounding names? Crikey. It's almost like integration. How silly. That said. I would be interested to read some actual evidence of what you are saying, other than some whitey Grauniad reader who anecdotally tells a story about how they applied for a job in black face and got a negative reaction. The evidence that people find what they are looking for is pretty much irrefutable.
Is there a photo anywhere showing a white person in 'black face' make up on the way to a job interview? If so please post it. After that weekend I could do with a good laugh
Sadly don’t have that to hand for you, but as an experiment it goes back at least to 1948 with a famous account of another published in 1961. Someone does it every few years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Like_Me
There's been a fair few papers written on the subject https://www.nber.org/papers/w29053 http://www-2.rotman.utoronto.ca/facbios/file/Whitening MS R2 Accepted.pdf and some articles: https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/news/hr-magazine/pages/0203hrnews2.aspx https://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/minorities-who-whiten-job-resumes-get-more-interviews https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ll-less-likely-to-get-the-interview#xj4y7vzkg
So, you are quoting stories from a time when parts of the US were legally apartheid? When racism was a definitive element of government and law. Those stories rightly fuelled the Civil Rights movement that rid the country of segregationist BS Jim Crow. Though Democrats have now persuaded minorities to campaign for their own genocide (more black babies aborted in NY, one year, than born, apparently) and self imposed seggregation (BLM). Have you got anything from 2019 in Tooting? I would love to give you a list of foreign sounding names to see how many you could correctly guess the skin colour of the people they belong to.
I am sorry. Because Moose did not refer to American circumstances, I assumed he was talking about the UK. Personally, I can't speak for the US. My concerns are that the rhetoric here is becoming like that of the US, clearly importing political ideas that do not reflect UK culture. When UK protesters are claiming "Hands up, don't shoot" and "I can't breath" as was happening in the BLM protesting, I am afraid I cannot take them seriously. Same with when an English protester calls someone they disagree with an uncle Tom, or a c**n. It's just imported and misplaced outrage from idiots who cannot even be bothered to decide for themselves what they want to protest about. So not really that interested in US data; a country where CRT racism is endemic in the very way they ALL think. In the US, a person is subject to their skin colour before virtually any other characteristic. I can't get over the idea that they have racial caucuses in mainstream politics - it is anethema to me. That is not the case here, and I think that any US data can be removed from the discussion (unless it is used as a warning of where CRT will take us) when talking about the UK. Again, a study from Tooting in 2019 would be appreciated.
Sure - the results of a study done in the UK from 2019 can be found here - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46927417 and another in London in 2017 here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-38751307 and one done back in 2009: https://www.theguardian.com/money/2009/oct/18/racism-discrimination-employment-undercover
But they are three years old? This is also a hertfordfshire football club not London. Can you please link a study from Hertfordshire that was released in the past month by an author who was a Aries?
We have definitely had that one where you go to look round a place to rent and like it and decide to have it. When you tell them you want it and want to sign the papers, there is a sudden silence and then after a day or two they tell you the landlord has decided he's not going to rent the place out after all. Hmmmmmm. Maybe it's true and maybe it isn't. There are loads of things like that where you can't say for sure 100% but you strongly suspect. Of course you can't go shouting racism unless it is definite and clear.
It would be better to see the actual research, rather than the comments of a possibly biased employer who have themselves been reprimanded in court for prejudicial employment policies that have favoured non-white applicants. the first article you link to does not describe the study in any detail, and all the comments regarding it are reactions to the findings, and in some cases completely unrelated anecdotal stories with no corroboration what so ever. If the study was so damning, why avoid discussing IT, and instead focus on people’s reaction to it and unrelated tales of woe? Usually the reason for that is because the subject source does not bare scrutiny. The second link does not describe any method or standard, and admits that it was too small a sample to be taken seriously, whilst also vaunting the fact that despite this, it was in keeping with ‘other’ research. In other words, they found what they were looking for. The article may as well have been written by you Reid’s, or me. It has no validity and cannot be taken seriously. Third one? That seems to have a little more weight to it. I’ll try to dig out the report and have a look. But more interesting than what is being said in the article may be the promised follow up, which promises to penalise companies that reflect the findings of the report. It would be interesting to find out how many did get penalised, after having the chance to respond to the accusations based on a full understanding of the facts.
Would you rather have me believe a thing simply because it said what I want to hear? I work in a large workforce in a majority “minority” environment and I am a rep. I am a trusted confidant and advisor to virtually everyone at every level, and what I read in the Guardian, and on this forum, is not reflected in the reality that I see. And I read what you guys say on here, and very much get the idea that ‘minorities’ are something that you talk about, rather than people you know and work with. That people can talk about ‘black’ and ‘brown’ people as if they are defined by their skin is anathema to me. As is the use of skin colour and ‘foreign sounding names’ for political gain. Yet some people seem to think it is a virtue. Winston Kodogo is innocent.
‘Maybe it’s true and maybe it isn’t’ is quite enough for some people to angrily deny an experience that appears almost universally shared by black people. And ‘the Police wouldn’t stop anyone who wasn’t behaving suspiciously and if you are innocent, what have you got to hide?’
Yes! For every case where it is obvious and out front racism, there are 100s where you think hmmmmm maybe it was or maybe it wasn't. Perhaps you're being paranoid. Perhaps it's just bad luck. You can't go 'playing the race card' as they call it every time something doesn't go your way and some of the incidents must be completely innocent. Imagine how bad you would feel calling it falsely on someone who is innocent. At the same time, there are too many incidents for it just to be bad luck. Some must be racism. What percentage? You can only guess. People know that racism and discrimination are against the law, so they are careful and under cover with it. Not choosing an African or Asian sounding person for a job interview or to be your tenant, is a pretty safe way to express it. There is very little chance to get caught and lots of ways to protest your innocence.
Fairly said, and yes, racism exists. I have experienced it against me, and see it regularly, but to suggest it is a solely 'white' thing is either absurdly naive or deliberately malicious. Perhaps it is because I work in a majority 'minority' environment that I see so much of it, sometimes casual, sometimes unconscious and very occasionally malicious, between 'minority' staff. No doubt in a majority 'white' community I would see more coming from that side of the community. One of my own experiences was, funnily enough, not getting an interview for a job that I was eminently suitable for. I was told later by a friend that worked there that she was not surprised, because everyone that worked there was Indian, as was she. That was a department of one of the country's biggest institutions. And even in my current department, there have been areas within which (minority) racial or gender enclaves used to be created. It has been cracked down on now. I once asked, in a staff meeting, when the special equipement that would enable men to work on a particular new type of treatment machine would be installed! I also asked a manager that was involved in creating such enclaves (they are a friend of mine, and I can speak with them frankly) how they justified it, to which I received the response 'because I need people I can trust.' They were not a bad person, and they genuinely thought they were justified. Unfortunately, though, their behaviour was based on prejudice. They are not white, and they are not unique (and they would do it again if they were alkowed). The use of some pretty ropey research to fuel Moose's racist Britain fantasies is not helping anyone except ideologist CRT race baiters give the idea that it is an exclusively white problem, and a daily occurrance for all 'minority' people. If the problem were so prevalent, you would not need twenty five year old studies of dubious nature to prove it. You would be seeing it every day. Yes I do see it, occasionally, and in my experience it is a problem for all of us, not just whitey. It is far from the white pandemic that race baiters and some Watford fans would have us believe.
Be the best you can be , make good decisions and if anyone mentions the colour of your skin in a negative manor or coats off the Irish , tell me and I shall start throwing punches . But don't let white liberals tell you that you are a victim . My children are all right . No chip .
Seriously Moose, do you really think "Dave" has privilege in Bury Park, Luton, over "Mohammed "? Serious question .
Brilliant. Thanks for this. And what were the results when white and or black people applied for jobs with a Pakistani\Muslim employer? . #JustAskingForBalance #NotExpectingAReply
I’ve been really clear in my answer Davy. White people don’t face certain challenges that black and other visible minorities do. ‘Privilege’ is an unhelpful word. You could see it as the absence of certain overheads. I’m not sure why you would question that ball crunchingly obvious observation. It doesn’t negate the fact that many white people are hugely disadvantaged and marginalised in this society. There is nothing about recognising these things that prevents people uniting. White people should recognise black people’s experience of the law, employment and street hassle. Black people shouldn’t promote or join in when people are snobby towards regional accents and working class manners that in many areas simply means white people. It’s not hard to fathom and I find it disappointing that mischief making rich people use their newspapers, magazines and talking heads to plant this resentment. They give zero ****s about the white working class. They just want us all to fight.
Do white people gain white privilege in Nigeria for example ? Not expecting a reply from the wokest of wokes from wokeland. Cheers. Mines a double. Anywho . Do you wokes ever give a thought to Edward Daly ? Or does the content of his character not count ? Not expecting a reply No woke points on the table
Do you think, then, that black privilege does exist? If so, what action would you suggest be taken to counter that, and why wouldn't you describe it as racism?
