Discussion
)
I Don't get it.For clarity, I think she is hopeless, generally rather dim and only there because she's a Boris loyalist. Like much of the cabinet.
However, I think it is possible to hold both of her positions without hypocrisy.
You could view the knee as the wrong symbol, and believe that there are much better ways that the FA could choose to confront racism. Further, you might conclude that because the knee is ineffective, it becomes an empty gesture, with better alternatives.
And you could then call out racism when it happens.
Holding the view that the knee is the wrong way to proceed, and that it is an empty gesture does not make you a hypocrite, in my opinion. It is, in fact, my own position.
However, I think it is possible to hold both of her positions without hypocrisy.
You could view the knee as the wrong symbol, and believe that there are much better ways that the FA could choose to confront racism. Further, you might conclude that because the knee is ineffective, it becomes an empty gesture, with better alternatives.
And you could then call out racism when it happens.
Holding the view that the knee is the wrong way to proceed, and that it is an empty gesture does not make you a hypocrite, in my opinion. It is, in fact, my own position.
Brave Fart said:
For clarity, I think she is hopeless, generally rather dim and only there because she's a Boris loyalist. Like much of the cabinet.
However, I think it is possible to hold both of her positions without hypocrisy.
You could view the knee as the wrong symbol, and believe that there are much better ways that the FA could choose to confront racism. Further, you might conclude that because the knee is ineffective, it becomes an empty gesture, with better alternatives.
And you could then call out racism when it happens.
Holding the view that the knee is the wrong way to proceed, and that it is an empty gesture does not make you a hypocrite, in my opinion. It is, in fact, my own position.
That would all be well and good were it not for the fact that Ms Patel was dog-whistling like a good 'un just a few weeks back. Her fault that she's now seen as a hypocrite and pestilential scumbag.However, I think it is possible to hold both of her positions without hypocrisy.
You could view the knee as the wrong symbol, and believe that there are much better ways that the FA could choose to confront racism. Further, you might conclude that because the knee is ineffective, it becomes an empty gesture, with better alternatives.
And you could then call out racism when it happens.
Holding the view that the knee is the wrong way to proceed, and that it is an empty gesture does not make you a hypocrite, in my opinion. It is, in fact, my own position.
Brave Fart said:
You could view the knee as the wrong symbol, and believe that there are much better ways that the FA could choose to confront racism. Further, you might conclude that because the knee is ineffective, it becomes an empty gesture, with better
Surely taking the knee is not mutually exclusive with other ways of tackling the issue. Particularly compared to what we've been doing about it so far, ie pretty much FA.I think it sends a strong signal but I can see why it's an inconvenience for those who have done nothing about the issue because it doesn't really affect them. They are easily offended by something fairly harmless that is helping fight something fairly harmful. PP fell into that trap which highlights her limited intellect, as if any further evidence was needed.
nickfrog said:
Surely taking the knee is not mutually exclusive with other ways of tackling the issue. Particularly compared to what we've been doing about it so far, ie pretty much FA.
I think it sends a strong signal but I can see why it's a inconvenience for those who have done nothing about the issue because it doesn't really affect them. They are easily offended by something fairly harmless that is helping fight something fairly harmful. PP fell into that trap which highlights her limited intellect, as if any further evidence was needed.
Sure, the FA could sanction any number of counter-racism measures, including kneeling of course.I think it sends a strong signal but I can see why it's a inconvenience for those who have done nothing about the issue because it doesn't really affect them. They are easily offended by something fairly harmless that is helping fight something fairly harmful. PP fell into that trap which highlights her limited intellect, as if any further evidence was needed.
But that wasn't my point.
My point was that she isn't guilty of hypocrisy. If your position is this: "Racism is wrong, but kneeling is the wrong way to oppose it" then I do not consider that as hypocrisy.
As for limited intellect, agreed. As I said, she's rather dim.
longblackcoat said:
That would all be well and good were it not for the fact that Ms Patel was dog-whistling like a good 'un just a few weeks back. Her fault that she's now seen as a hypocrite and pestilential scumbag.
Well, dog whistling is not unique to Ms. Patel of course. And words like "scumbag" aren't appropriate in my opinion. You just end up sounding like Angela Rayner.Brave Fart said:
Sure, the FA could sanction any number of counter-racism measures, including kneeling of course.
But that wasn't my point.
My point was that she isn't guilty of hypocrisy. If your position is this: "Racism is wrong, but kneeling is the wrong way to oppose it" then I do not consider that as hypocrisy.
As for limited intellect, agreed. As I said, she's rather dim.
Fair comment. But that wasn't my point.
My point was that she isn't guilty of hypocrisy. If your position is this: "Racism is wrong, but kneeling is the wrong way to oppose it" then I do not consider that as hypocrisy.
As for limited intellect, agreed. As I said, she's rather dim.
Brave Fart said:
Well, dog whistling is not unique to Ms. Patel of course. And words like "scumbag" aren't appropriate in my opinion. You just end up sounding like Angela Rayner.
'Scumbag' is a term I'm happy to use for someone who had to resign for breaking the ministerial code (after previously breaking it then lying) about unapproved contacts with another country. Or someone who has continued to breach the ministerial code by bullying staff in three separate government departments. Or someone who has led the Home Office to act illegally against migrants? Perhaps the same person who voted against gay marriage? The same someone who now sneers at the England football team?Yeah, scumbag is an entirely appropriate term.
Brave Fart said:
Sure, the FA could sanction any number of counter-racism measures, including kneeling of course.
But that wasn't my point.
My point was that she isn't guilty of hypocrisy. If your position is this: "Racism is wrong, but kneeling is the wrong way to oppose it" then I do not consider that as hypocrisy.
As for limited intellect, agreed. As I said, she's rather dim.
When Patel labelled the soccer players taking the knee as "gesture politics", did she present a better way of Rashford, Kane, Mings & co to get the message across?But that wasn't my point.
My point was that she isn't guilty of hypocrisy. If your position is this: "Racism is wrong, but kneeling is the wrong way to oppose it" then I do not consider that as hypocrisy.
As for limited intellect, agreed. As I said, she's rather dim.
Here is the interview where she made the comments - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ac3VJlKCYM
Maybe I'm being a bit cynical here but she is being interviewed by a GBNews reporter......
Brave Fart said:
nickfrog said:
Surely taking the knee is not mutually exclusive with other ways of tackling the issue. Particularly compared to what we've been doing about it so far, ie pretty much FA.
I think it sends a strong signal but I can see why it's a inconvenience for those who have done nothing about the issue because it doesn't really affect them. They are easily offended by something fairly harmless that is helping fight something fairly harmful. PP fell into that trap which highlights her limited intellect, as if any further evidence was needed.
Sure, the FA could sanction any number of counter-racism measures, including kneeling of course.I think it sends a strong signal but I can see why it's a inconvenience for those who have done nothing about the issue because it doesn't really affect them. They are easily offended by something fairly harmless that is helping fight something fairly harmful. PP fell into that trap which highlights her limited intellect, as if any further evidence was needed.
But that wasn't my point.
My point was that she isn't guilty of hypocrisy. If your position is this: "Racism is wrong, but kneeling is the wrong way to oppose it" then I do not consider that as hypocrisy.
As for limited intellect, agreed. As I said, she's rather dim.
It's a clear dog whistle to the populist right with zero regard for any consequences.
nickfrog said:
Brave Fart said:
You could view the knee as the wrong symbol, and believe that there are much better ways that the FA could choose to confront racism. Further, you might conclude that because the knee is ineffective, it becomes an empty gesture, with better
Surely taking the knee is not mutually exclusive with other ways of tackling the issue. Particularly compared to what we've been doing about it so far, ie pretty much FA.I think it sends a strong signal but I can see why it's an inconvenience for those who have done nothing about the issue because it doesn't really affect them. They are easily offended by something fairly harmless that is helping fight something fairly harmful. PP fell into that trap which highlights her limited intellect, as if any further evidence was needed.
A strong signal would be if all players just walked off the pitch if any player got racist abuse during the game.
[quote=longblackcoat]<edit for brevity>
Yeah, scumbag is an entirely appropriate term.
/quote]
Completely disagree, sorry. Our politics has become far too loaded with terms like this. You may disagree with her politics, sure. But using abusive terms like that is inappropriate, and wouldn't be permitted in Parliament.
Yeah, scumbag is an entirely appropriate term.
/quote]
Completely disagree, sorry. Our politics has become far too loaded with terms like this. You may disagree with her politics, sure. But using abusive terms like that is inappropriate, and wouldn't be permitted in Parliament.
Brave Fart said:
longblackcoat said:
<edit for brevity>
Yeah, scumbag is an entirely appropriate term.
/quote]
Completely disagree, sorry. Our politics has become far too loaded with terms like this. You may disagree with her politics, sure. But using abusive terms like that is inappropriate, and wouldn't be permitted in Parliament.
The point being, she shouldn't even be in Parliament.Yeah, scumbag is an entirely appropriate term.
/quote]
Completely disagree, sorry. Our politics has become far too loaded with terms like this. You may disagree with her politics, sure. But using abusive terms like that is inappropriate, and wouldn't be permitted in Parliament.
Or you approve of politicians like this? Let's get good politicians back and the respect for them too.
So let's call out the bad ones first.
Unknown_User said:
Here is the interview where she made the comments - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ac3VJlKCYM
Christ, that's the very definition of 'word salad'smn159 said:
The idea that Patel is taking a nuanced position on tackling racism is ridiculous though, isn't it.
It's a clear dog whistle to the populist right with zero regard for any consequences.
Well I doubt that Ms. Patel could spell 'nuanced' let alone act in that way.It's a clear dog whistle to the populist right with zero regard for any consequences.
This whole government is populist, which is a bad thing, I think.
For clarity, I am not a fan of hers.
I suppose I'm taking issue with Tyrone Mings: I disagree that, on this occasion, she was being a hypocrite.
Brave Fart said:
longblackcoat said:
<edit for brevity>
Yeah, scumbag is an entirely appropriate term.
/quote]
Completely disagree, sorry. Our politics has become far too loaded with terms like this. You may disagree with her politics, sure. But using abusive terms like that is inappropriate, and wouldn't be permitted in Parliament.
It's not just her politics many people disagree with. It's her complete lack of respect for her position in politics and for the rules which govern how a minister should behave.Yeah, scumbag is an entirely appropriate term.
/quote]
Completely disagree, sorry. Our politics has become far too loaded with terms like this. You may disagree with her politics, sure. But using abusive terms like that is inappropriate, and wouldn't be permitted in Parliament.
That and she seems a bit thick...
Brave Fart said:
Well I doubt that Ms. Patel could spell 'nuanced' let alone act in that way.
This whole government is populist, which is a bad thing, I think.
For clarity, I am not a fan of hers.
I suppose I'm taking issue with Tyrone Mings: I disagree that, on this occasion, she was being a hypocrite.
Hypocrisy being pretending to believe something that you do not, she pretended to be against racist abuse, having said that she supports fans booing the team for making an anti-racist gesture.This whole government is populist, which is a bad thing, I think.
For clarity, I am not a fan of hers.
I suppose I'm taking issue with Tyrone Mings: I disagree that, on this occasion, she was being a hypocrite.
The idea that taking a knee is some neo-marxist conspiracy is beyond fatuous, when the term neo-marxist is solely being used in an attempt to discredit anyone who is a bit too dusky for the usual walking heart-attacks who manage to be offended by any anti-racist gesture or message, or anyone who is not a far-right politician talking about politics.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff