Is Bernie going senile?
Discussion
Poor old Bernie, it seems like every time he's asked a question in the media these days, he says something daft...
Ernie Cobblestone said:
"I don't think it was anything to do with racism," he said. "In Spain people were supporting Alonso and in Sao Paulo they were supporting Felipe. There were a few people in Spain and that was probably beginning as a joke rather than anything abusive.
"I think people look and read into things [things] that are not there. All those things are all a bit of a joke and people are entitled to support who they want to support.
"I don't see why people should have been [insulted by it]. These things are people expressing themselves."
I suppose it wouldn't be quite such a "joke" if you substitute the word "black" with "Jewish", would it, Mr Ecclestein?"I think people look and read into things [things] that are not there. All those things are all a bit of a joke and people are entitled to support who they want to support.
"I don't see why people should have been [insulted by it]. These things are people expressing themselves."
I am not used to seeing such Politically Correct posts on this forum -
Bernie is right, it was harmless.
The champ will always get abuse - how much abuse have Alonso, Schumacher, Senna, Hill, Mansell, Villeneuve had on this forum over the years. Abuse about their nationality, looks, accent, and even class in the case of English drivers.
Both Hamiltons need to ignore it or get used to it.
LOJO
Bernie is right, it was harmless.
The champ will always get abuse - how much abuse have Alonso, Schumacher, Senna, Hill, Mansell, Villeneuve had on this forum over the years. Abuse about their nationality, looks, accent, and even class in the case of English drivers.
Both Hamiltons need to ignore it or get used to it.
LOJO
Mr Whippy's cohorts at the FIA said:
An act of this kind is a clear breach of the principles enshrined in the FIA statutes, and any repetition will result in sanctions
If it was a harmless act, why did the FIA feel the need to make that statement ?Edited by MonkeyHanger on Friday 7th November 12:22
It doers show how he feels that F1 is immune from the issues other sports feel they need to be concerned about.
I do think that Bernie is rather out of touch with normal sentiment.
Of course, the issue in this case was not what the FIA thought about the abuse or what Bernie thought about the abuse - but what Lewis Hamilton thought about it.
I do think that Bernie is rather out of touch with normal sentiment.
Of course, the issue in this case was not what the FIA thought about the abuse or what Bernie thought about the abuse - but what Lewis Hamilton thought about it.
Bernie was up for a scrap at Barcelona
BE: Right you lot, come and meet Lewis
Racist crowd: No
BE: Oh, are you sure?
RC: Yes
BE: Oh, OK then. Bye.
Bernie in Autosport* article said:
"I said to the promoters in Barcelona, 'Let me go and get the people that blacked their faces up and bring them into the paddock and introduce them to Lewis and then see what they've got to say.' But the police said, 'Don't do it.' I personally was going to get them."
I can imagine that conversation....BE: Right you lot, come and meet Lewis
Racist crowd: No
BE: Oh, are you sure?
RC: Yes
BE: Oh, OK then. Bye.
It was disapointing to hear Bernie come out with this especially when the FIA made such a big story of it when it happened. It is not excusable and after the abuse the English football players get when in Spain, it just sums up the Spanish mentality. Th Santander deal has something to do with it in my opinion.
It's got to stop. Now.
Good to see Bernie's getting a lot of stick for his very old fashioned views. At least he'll be gone in a couple of years.
This one amused me:
Good to see Bernie's getting a lot of stick for his very old fashioned views. At least he'll be gone in a couple of years.
This one amused me:
Bernie said:
I was the one who pulled the Grand Prix out of South Africa (after 1985) in support of Nelson Mandela because of bloody apartheid before these people knew anything about racism
Funny, I'm sure they were one of the last sports and even then it was only after pressure from Renault and others.Edited by kevin ritson on Friday 7th November 13:05
kevin ritson said:
This one amused me:
Bernie said:
I was the one who pulled the Grand Prix out of South Africa (after 1985) in support of Nelson Mandela because of bloody apartheid before these people knew anything about racism
In Bernie's head said:
And once I put an end to apartheid, I unilaterally banned tobacco advertising from F1 and banned smoking in public places. Next week: the cure for Bird Flu!
All he had to say was something like "no-one wants to see that sort of behaviour in any sport" instead we get this backward nonsense , time to wake up grandad were not living in the 1950s now. As the previous poster said , I wonder if the word black and Jewish were substituted ? take it a step further what if they had dressed with comedy long beards and black hats/garbs ridiculing his background , I think Bernie may have thought about it differently. Perhaps we should illustrate a point and open a Kubica car wash at the back of the pits for you Bernie ? as you seem to encourage stereotypes.
I think we could be confusing racism with nationalism. It's quite common for people to be abusive towards the French or the Germans, and this is regarded as a form of reverse patriotism. It may not be right but it is a far lesser offence than overt racism.
I don't agree with the derogatory names aimed at Fernando Alonso et al, and have never used them on this or any other forum, but it is a different matter when someone is taunted over the colour of his or her skin.
I don't agree with the derogatory names aimed at Fernando Alonso et al, and have never used them on this or any other forum, but it is a different matter when someone is taunted over the colour of his or her skin.
At the expense of opening a can of worms, I think BE's approach is, in part, a reasonable one. I say in part, not because I approve of or condone racism, but because I believe it is tackled in most places in the wrong way.
To try to "ban" racism, to criminalise or otherwise vilify others for their views or beliefs, is not reasonable. As a society, we should be beyond the idea of "thought crimes", and should have started, at least, to understand that education and persuasion are far better for society than banning and even criminalising views we disagree with. The latter is how we end up with hardcore, fringe movements, radicalisation, follow-on criminality, and so on.
BE's stated approach of "let them meet Lewis" is, in general, the right one. Frog-marching those "fans" to, say, the nearest police station would not be useful.
Tolerance is a two-way street. We hope that our non-racist point of view will be shared by the majority of people, and we further hope that our collective efforts to educate the population will result in vanishingly few people holding views we disagree with. But that just means that every racist "event" is a failure of our strategy, not a failure of the racists' for having honestly-held views that we (vehemently or otherwise) disagree with, and our self-proclaimed credo of tolerance must be applied equally to include those whose views we disagree with.
And, yes, I think that jingoistic nationalism is just as bad as racism; I believe we need to try to educate those who think that stance is reasonable in just the same way as we've sought to persuade the Alf Garnetts of this world. It saddens me, however, how much of that sort of nonsense we see here on PH, which at times rivals the Daily Mail for the moniker of land of the free (terms and conditions apply, "free" applies only to the right-thinking silent majority, all other freedoms are subject to curtailment and/or ridicule).
To try to "ban" racism, to criminalise or otherwise vilify others for their views or beliefs, is not reasonable. As a society, we should be beyond the idea of "thought crimes", and should have started, at least, to understand that education and persuasion are far better for society than banning and even criminalising views we disagree with. The latter is how we end up with hardcore, fringe movements, radicalisation, follow-on criminality, and so on.
BE's stated approach of "let them meet Lewis" is, in general, the right one. Frog-marching those "fans" to, say, the nearest police station would not be useful.
Tolerance is a two-way street. We hope that our non-racist point of view will be shared by the majority of people, and we further hope that our collective efforts to educate the population will result in vanishingly few people holding views we disagree with. But that just means that every racist "event" is a failure of our strategy, not a failure of the racists' for having honestly-held views that we (vehemently or otherwise) disagree with, and our self-proclaimed credo of tolerance must be applied equally to include those whose views we disagree with.
And, yes, I think that jingoistic nationalism is just as bad as racism; I believe we need to try to educate those who think that stance is reasonable in just the same way as we've sought to persuade the Alf Garnetts of this world. It saddens me, however, how much of that sort of nonsense we see here on PH, which at times rivals the Daily Mail for the moniker of land of the free (terms and conditions apply, "free" applies only to the right-thinking silent majority, all other freedoms are subject to curtailment and/or ridicule).
Skwdenyer, you describe an interesting viewpoint, though it doesn't seem to offer much succour to the victims of racism/racist abuse, whose protection is the raison d'etre of that legislation which criminalises those individuals with whose opinions, and with whose criminalisation, you disagree.
Further, in order to educate and/or inform these individuals, ought we to question (note, I do not say challenge) such opinions when stated in written/virtual format? In so doing, should we be prepared to endure being called a PC a
hole and a troll, and become an object of hate/ridicule?
Or do we just float above it all and wait for evolution to make one side of the argument extinct?
Further, in order to educate and/or inform these individuals, ought we to question (note, I do not say challenge) such opinions when stated in written/virtual format? In so doing, should we be prepared to endure being called a PC a
hole and a troll, and become an object of hate/ridicule?Or do we just float above it all and wait for evolution to make one side of the argument extinct?
skwdenyer said:
At the expense of opening a can of worms, I think BE's approach is, in part, a reasonable one. I say in part, not because I approve of or condone racism, but because I believe it is tackled in most places in the wrong way.
To try to "ban" racism, to criminalise or otherwise vilify others for their views or beliefs, is not reasonable. As a society, we should be beyond the idea of "thought crimes", and should have started, at least, to understand that education and persuasion are far better for society than banning and even criminalising views we disagree with. The latter is how we end up with hardcore, fringe movements, radicalisation, follow-on criminality, and so on.
BE's stated approach of "let them meet Lewis" is, in general, the right one. Frog-marching those "fans" to, say, the nearest police station would not be useful.
Tolerance is a two-way street. We hope that our non-racist point of view will be shared by the majority of people, and we further hope that our collective efforts to educate the population will result in vanishingly few people holding views we disagree with. But that just means that every racist "event" is a failure of our strategy, not a failure of the racists' for having honestly-held views that we (vehemently or otherwise) disagree with, and our self-proclaimed credo of tolerance must be applied equally to include those whose views we disagree with.
And, yes, I think that jingoistic nationalism is just as bad as racism; I believe we need to try to educate those who think that stance is reasonable in just the same way as we've sought to persuade the Alf Garnetts of this world. It saddens me, however, how much of that sort of nonsense we see here on PH, which at times rivals the Daily Mail for the moniker of land of the free (terms and conditions apply, "free" applies only to the right-thinking silent majority, all other freedoms are subject to curtailment and/or ridicule).
If only Neville Chamberlain had followed this policy of appeasement...To try to "ban" racism, to criminalise or otherwise vilify others for their views or beliefs, is not reasonable. As a society, we should be beyond the idea of "thought crimes", and should have started, at least, to understand that education and persuasion are far better for society than banning and even criminalising views we disagree with. The latter is how we end up with hardcore, fringe movements, radicalisation, follow-on criminality, and so on.
BE's stated approach of "let them meet Lewis" is, in general, the right one. Frog-marching those "fans" to, say, the nearest police station would not be useful.
Tolerance is a two-way street. We hope that our non-racist point of view will be shared by the majority of people, and we further hope that our collective efforts to educate the population will result in vanishingly few people holding views we disagree with. But that just means that every racist "event" is a failure of our strategy, not a failure of the racists' for having honestly-held views that we (vehemently or otherwise) disagree with, and our self-proclaimed credo of tolerance must be applied equally to include those whose views we disagree with.
And, yes, I think that jingoistic nationalism is just as bad as racism; I believe we need to try to educate those who think that stance is reasonable in just the same way as we've sought to persuade the Alf Garnetts of this world. It saddens me, however, how much of that sort of nonsense we see here on PH, which at times rivals the Daily Mail for the moniker of land of the free (terms and conditions apply, "free" applies only to the right-thinking silent majority, all other freedoms are subject to curtailment and/or ridicule).
Forums | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff