Priti Patel

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Brave Fart said:

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.

Scumbag is too polite for her. Let's not forget, not that long ago, she could have been given the death penalty. That was the punishment for treason, long after it was outlawed for murder. But having committed treason by having secret meetings with a foreign govt and lying about it to her own govt, she's ended up as Home Secretary.

Which also tells you a lot about the other scumbag who gave her that job.

[smn159]

blindspot said:

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.

Indeed. Those right wing culture warriors who feel affronted by black people complaining about racism clearly can't say that, so they have to jump through some intellectual hoops such that we end up with millionaire footballers being accused of being marxist sympathisers.

Ludicrous, but plenty seem willing to repeat the talking points.

[Puggit]

blindspot said:

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.

I see you've used the word 'pretend' too. And I have an issue with Mings using it.

It's implying that you both know whats going on in PP's head. So how did you do that?

[TwigtheWonderkid]

smn159 said:

blindspot said:

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.

Indeed. Those right wing culture warriors who feel affronted by black people complaining about racism clearly can't say that, so they have to jump through some intellectual hoops such that we end up with millionaire footballers being accused of being marxist sympathisers.

Ludicrous, but plenty seem willing to repeat the talking points.

The idea that international footballers, who, apart from the very youngest members, are all multi millionaires, are in fact Marxist sympathisers, is beyond stupid. If I choose to kneel down, only I know why I'm doing it. Anyone who tells me what my motivation is must a special kind of idiot.

[longblackcoat]

Puggit said:

I see you've used the word 'pretend' too. And I have an issue with Mings using it.

It's implying that you both know what's going on in PP's head. So how did you do that?

OK, so let's suppose she's absolutely anti-racist but just wants to work the crowd and whip up some anti-footballer sentiment by condoning the booing. Remember, this is a Home Secretary who, when asked whether fans should boo England players, refused to condemn the abuse and said:
"Well that's a choice for them".

How does that make things better?

[Puggit]

longblackcoat said:

Puggit said:

I see you've used the word 'pretend' too. And I have an issue with Mings using it.

It's implying that you both know what's going on in PP's head. So how did you do that?

OK, so let's suppose she's absolutely anti-racist but just wants to work the crowd and whip up some anti-footballer sentiment by condoning the booing. Remember, this is a Home Secretary who, when asked whether fans should boo England players, refused to condemn the abuse and said:
"Well that's a choice for them".

How does that make things better?

I'm looking for evidence of pretence, not a defence of the attack on her.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

SpeckledJim said:

I'm overall very much not a fan, but I get it.

She is diddy and bossy and beautiful.

I don't know why but she reminds me a bit of Kristin Chenoweth as Frasier's agent.

She reminds me of a young Anthony Valentine, who always used to play vicious Nazi officers. It's the pathological sadist smirk.

[longblackcoat]

Puggit said:

longblackcoat said:

Puggit said:

I see you've used the word 'pretend' too. And I have an issue with Mings using it.

It's implying that you both know what's going on in PP's head. So how did you do that?

OK, so let's suppose she's absolutely anti-racist but just wants to work the crowd and whip up some anti-footballer sentiment by condoning the booing. Remember, this is a Home Secretary who, when asked whether fans should boo England players, refused to condemn the abuse and said:
"Well that's a choice for them".

How does that make things better?

I'm looking for evidence of pretence, not a defence of the attack on her.

You're entirely correct that they can't know. It's a supposition, based on their observation of her actions.

The choices are that she's pretending to care about racism but really doesn't or that she does care but is nevertheless prepared to pander to racists.

Which of these is better for a Home Secretary, do you think?

[SpeckledJim]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

SpeckledJim said:

I'm overall very much not a fan, but I get it.

She is diddy and bossy and beautiful.

I don't know why but she reminds me a bit of Kristin Chenoweth as Frasier's agent.

She reminds me of a young Anthony Valentine, who always used to play vicious Nazi officers. It's the pathological sadist smirk.

...but in a good way...?

[nickfrog]

egor110 said:

It's not a strong signal though it's something easy for the players to latch onto.

A strong signal would be if all players just walked off the pitch if any player got racist abuse during the game.

As I said, it's not mutually exclusive. They can take the knee AND walk off in protest if needed.

[SpeckledJim]

nickfrog said:

egor110 said:

It's not a strong signal though it's something easy for the players to latch onto.

A strong signal would be if all players just walked off the pitch if any player got racist abuse during the game.

As I said, it's not mutually exclusive. They can take the knee AND walk off in protest if needed.

Not simultaneously though. That'd look silly.

[nickfrog]

SpeckledJim said:

Not simultaneously though. That'd look silly.

[crankedup5]

How many other sports have the players ‘taking a knee’ before start of the game?
I have seen F1 taking part but that’s about it?
Either way side from participants perhaps feeling that they are doing something worthy, it’s not making a jot of difference it seems. Waste of time, education starts when kids start school.

[egor110]

nickfrog said:

egor110 said:

It's not a strong signal though it's something easy for the players to latch onto.

A strong signal would be if all players just walked off the pitch if any player got racist abuse during the game.

As I said, it's not mutually exclusive. They can take the knee AND walk off in protest if needed.

One is going to have far more impact than the other though and i'm guessing would cost them financially for refusing to pay .

Far easier to kneel on the floor with zero financial risk .

[mpkayeuk]

longblackcoat said:

You're entirely correct that they can't know. It's a supposition, based on their observation of her actions.

The choices are that she's pretending to care about racism but really doesn't or that she does care but is nevertheless prepared to pander to racists.

Which of these is better for a Home Secretary, do you think?

You forgot the most likely option:

She recognises the right of people to express their view in a time honoured and harmless way.

After all we are mostly a free country.

Your outrage is entirely predicated on the belief that a boo = a racist. But it's equally likely, due to the clumsily selected gesture, that people are simply booing what they perceive is forelock tugging towards BLM. Even if these people were racist, as abhorrent as that is, they have an absolute right to hold and express those views as long as it does not stretch into hate crime.

Edited by mpkayeuk on Tuesday 13th July 16:15

[mpkayeuk]

smn159 said:

Indeed. Those right wing culture warriors who feel affronted by black people complaining about racism clearly can't say that, so they have to jump through some intellectual hoops such that we end up with millionaire footballers being accused of being marxist sympathisers.

Ludicrous, but plenty seem willing to repeat the talking points.

Great in theory, pathetic in reality. Many contemporary leftist activists are well off, some are millionaires, and I'm sure you know that. Do you really think the likes of Owen Jones, Jeremy Corbyn, Ash Sarkar, Patrisse Cullors, Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez are on their arses?

So yes, the reality suggests that intellectual hoops are not needed at all.

[smn159]

mpkayeuk said:

smn159 said:

Indeed. Those right wing culture warriors who feel affronted by black people complaining about racism clearly can't say that, so they have to jump through some intellectual hoops such that we end up with millionaire footballers being accused of being marxist sympathisers.

Ludicrous, but plenty seem willing to repeat the talking points.

Great in theory, pathetic in reality. Many contemporary leftist activists are well off, some are millionaires, and I'm sure you know that. Do you really think the likes of Owen Jones, Jeremy Corbyn, Ash Sarkar, Patrisse Cullors, Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez are on their arses?

So yes, the reality suggests that intellectual hoops are not needed at all.

Ah, that's more like it - back to some good old whataboutism.

[mpkayeuk]

smn159 said:

Ah, that's more like it - back to some good old whataboutism.

So, you suggest footballers can't be Marxist sympathisers because they are millionaires. I give you some millionaire Marxist sympathisers, proving your point is absolute drivel, and that's all you can muster? Could try harder.

I can give you some more millionaire Marxists if you want? Would that help you understand how ridiculous your ideas are?

[smn159]

mpkayeuk said:

smn159 said:

Ah, that's more like it - back to some good old whataboutism.

So, you suggest footballers can't be Marxist sympathisers because they are millionaires. I give you some millionaire Marxist sympathisers, proving your point is absolute drivel, and that's all you can muster? Could try harder.

I can give you some more millionaire Marxists if you want? Would that help you understand how ridiculous your ideas are?

fking hell you're serious!

You think that the footballers taking the knee are doing it because they are marxists!

[768]

crankedup5 said:

How many other sports have the players ‘taking a knee’ before start of the game?
I have seen F1 taking part but that’s about it?
Either way side from participants perhaps feeling that they are doing something worthy, it’s not making a jot of difference it seems. Waste of time, education starts when kids start school.

Something the F1 did were those tshirts that just said end racism. They looked a bit jarring against the race suits but I thought that was a clearer way of letting the drivers who supported the message convey it without seeming to attract the divisive BLM associations.

At the moment I'm not sure the campaigning isn't worse than ineffective.