Laurence Fox - New Political Party
Discussion
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: I love when people say what a "tolerant" country we are.
It must warm the cockles of your heart to know you're fortunate enough to live in a country that "tolerates" you.
You really love these superficial angles, huh? It must warm the cockles of your heart to know you're fortunate enough to live in a country that "tolerates" you.
allow the existence, occurrence, or practice of (something that one dislikes or disagrees with) without interference..
What's wrong with being tolerated? Some people would give anything to have their existence tolerated by their country.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
No not really as I do take the point he's making but when you think about it it's a strange word.But I suspect most of us don't fall into groups that get told we're lucky enough to be "tolerated" because we simply take it for granted so don't give it a second thought.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said:anonymous said:
[redacted]
No not really as I do take the point he's making but when you think about it it's a strange word.But I suspect most of us don't fall into groups that get told we're lucky enough to be "tolerated" because we simply take it for granted so don't give it a second thought.
amusingduck said:
It'd be a better analogy if you could explain in which circumstances you would discount somebody's opinion outright on the Civic Type R because of their social standing, gender, or race.
Hopefully, the answer is "I wouldn't".
Of course I wouldn't. But you're mixing reality with analogy. People's gender/sex/orientation/race/bank account has no bearing on what a car is like to drive. It can have a bearing on their opinon and experience of matters of social discrimination.Hopefully, the answer is "I wouldn't".
The experience, knowledge and interest of the person is relevant in the car example. The demographics of the person is relevant in the socio-political one.
Which brings us to -
anonymous said:
[redacted]
This is kinda the point - our experience of interaction with others varies massively from person to person. Mr. Fox's life experience will be not be shared with many of the rest of us, and when it comes to the matter of racism it will certainly be very different to that of the black woman he crossed swords with on QT. He was denying her lived experience - she was merely saying that his wasn't universal. What does Laurence Fox's social experience add to the debate, other than to confirm what is blindingly obvious - that if you're a rich, white, straight man in the UK your life is pretty good ("lovely", in fact) compared to anyone who is even one of the antonyms of those things, let alone multiple?
In Mr. Fox's specific case, this is a man who - by his own words - has only experienced 'deferential' racism, and then was unable to explain exactly what that was. So why should people give weight to his opinions on matters of social discrimination? What experience, knowledge or expertise does he bring to his debate? Even he doesn't seem to be exactly sure, since he almost simultaneously says that racism isn't a problem in the UK while also claiming that he's been a victim of it by being told he has 'white privilege'.
Interesting to compare two recent threads on Pistonheads.
In one, an actor who has experienced a considerable amount of racism has tried to tell people what racism is: he gets torn to shreds
In the other, an actor who has no experience of racism tries to tell people what it isn't: all of sudden it's 'hear him out, his opinion is as valid as anyone else's'
In one, an actor who has experienced a considerable amount of racism has tried to tell people what racism is: he gets torn to shreds
In the other, an actor who has no experience of racism tries to tell people what it isn't: all of sudden it's 'hear him out, his opinion is as valid as anyone else's'
doesthiswork said:
Interesting to compare two recent threads on Pistonheads.
In one, an actor who has experienced a considerable amount of racism has tried to tell people what racism is: he gets torn to shreds
In the other, an actor who has no experience of racism tries to tell people what it isn't: all of sudden it's 'hear him out, his opinion is as valid as anyone else's'
I did have a chuckle at that myself.In one, an actor who has experienced a considerable amount of racism has tried to tell people what racism is: he gets torn to shreds
In the other, an actor who has no experience of racism tries to tell people what it isn't: all of sudden it's 'hear him out, his opinion is as valid as anyone else's'
The contrast is stark and not entirely unexpected.
doesthiswork said:
Interesting to compare two recent threads on Pistonheads.
In one, an actor who has experienced a considerable amount of racism has tried to tell people what racism is: he gets torn to shreds
In the other, an actor who has no experience of racism tries to tell people what it isn't: all of sudden it's 'hear him out, his opinion is as valid as anyone else's'
Can you please post a link to the other thread?In one, an actor who has experienced a considerable amount of racism has tried to tell people what racism is: he gets torn to shreds
In the other, an actor who has no experience of racism tries to tell people what it isn't: all of sudden it's 'hear him out, his opinion is as valid as anyone else's'
I think I found it, the Star Wars actor. I’ll have a read.
Read it.
Boyega was racially abused on social media, those involved in the abuse should be held to account for their actions.
I‘m not sure Disney not continuing with his character is necessarily racist.
It was racist to remove his picture from Chinese Movie posters though. WTF! Pathetic.
I didn’t think Boyega was torn to shreds by PH posters. Some people didn’t rate him as an actor, some people commented that he should stick to acting, some people clearly don’t like him. People are allowed to have opinions, I didn’t really pick up much racist vibes in the comments though.
As an aside, I watched him in that movie. I thought he acted well. I‘m prime Star Wars fan age, I grew up with my friends endlessly blathering on about it & I like SciFi. The movies bore the sh!t out of me though, all of them.
Edited by Kawasicki on Tuesday 29th September 19:48
Edited by Kawasicki on Tuesday 29th September 20:49
2xChevrons said:
amusingduck said:
It'd be a better analogy if you could explain in which circumstances you would discount somebody's opinion outright on the Civic Type R because of their social standing, gender, or race.
Hopefully, the answer is "I wouldn't".
Of course I wouldn't. But you're mixing reality with analogy. People's gender/sex/orientation/race/bank account has no bearing on what a car is like to drive. It can have a bearing on their opinon and experience of matters of social discrimination.Hopefully, the answer is "I wouldn't".
The experience, knowledge and interest of the person is relevant in the car example. The demographics of the person is relevant in the socio-political one.
You quoted Voight, bolded the section that said "I said that his social standing, gender and race shouldn't be used as a means to discount his opinions outright.", and started your reply with "Why not?".
All I'm doing is trying to understand under which circumstances you find it appropriate to discount somebody's opinion outright based on their social standing/race/gender, as you strongly suggested by saying "why not?".
doesthiswork said:
Interesting to compare two recent threads on Pistonheads.
In one, an actor who has experienced a considerable amount of racism has tried to tell people what racism is: he gets torn to shreds
In the other, an actor who has no experience of racism tries to tell people what it isn't: all of sudden it's 'hear him out, his opinion is as valid as anyone else's'
You do seem to want to put spin on the things you read.In one, an actor who has experienced a considerable amount of racism has tried to tell people what racism is: he gets torn to shreds
In the other, an actor who has no experience of racism tries to tell people what it isn't: all of sudden it's 'hear him out, his opinion is as valid as anyone else's'
Alternative spin...
One massively privileged actor bemoans the fact that he wasn't the lead part in a film/given a high enough profile/top billing/enough $s. Also moans that he's been cut out of an advert in China.
Another massively privileged actor decides he's had enough of woke culture and wants to start a political party to go against it.
I would expect most people's, irrespective of colour, gender, sexuality or any other angle, hearts will be bleeding for the first privileged actor. I would think most people won't look twice at the second or even know he exists.
If the second privileged actor, once his party is started, starts moaning about how he's not given as much publicity as Boris, or isn't earning as much as others from the venture, I fully expect he will get pilloried on this thread too. (My guess is he probably won't go down that path because he seems to appreciate he's a massively privileged actor. But you never know with massively privileged actors. As a group they are naturally "me me me" to a greater or lesser extent
).If you look for racism everywhere, you will find it.
Purple Turtle said:
Let's hope for his sake he doesn't go the route of Katie Hopkins, but I dare say he'll bail before saying too much.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
My point here is that Katie Hopkins (white, posh, previously financially OK but hardly 'rich') decided to monetise spouting off, as Laurence Fox is seeming to do. Will his political party make a scratch on the surface of British politics? No. It'll be a gnats fart in a universe of louder noise, then disappear into the abyss. The similarity being that Katie Hopkins. of no previous discernible talent and no formal training as a journalist decided to put herself front and centre as the spokesperson for whatever right wing twaddle she wanted to peddle in papers and on radio and a certain audience lapped it up and paid her for it. That she has ended up bankrupt because she is so stupid that she wrongly accused someone of desecrating a war memorial on Twitter, refused to apologise and make a small donation to charity, but instead decided to defend her libellous comments as 'free speech', losing in court and subsequently being bankrupted by legal fees is her sorry demise.
She could have just said sorry, STFU and moved on, but that didn't fit her Poundshop Julia Hartley-Brewer agenda. .
Yet here we are with Laurence Fox (white, posh, apparently wealthy through family money and acting income) seems to want to plough a similar furrow.
As I say, he would be well advised to consider when he too should just STFU, which I suspect will be when he does very badly indeed at the ballot box.
Murph7355 said:
doesthiswork said:
Interesting to compare two recent threads on Pistonheads.
In one, an actor who has experienced a considerable amount of racism has tried to tell people what racism is: he gets torn to shreds
In the other, an actor who has no experience of racism tries to tell people what it isn't: all of sudden it's 'hear him out, his opinion is as valid as anyone else's'
You do seem to want to put spin on the things you read.In one, an actor who has experienced a considerable amount of racism has tried to tell people what racism is: he gets torn to shreds
In the other, an actor who has no experience of racism tries to tell people what it isn't: all of sudden it's 'hear him out, his opinion is as valid as anyone else's'
Alternative spin...
One massively privileged actor bemoans the fact that he wasn't the lead part in a film/given a high enough profile/top billing/enough $s. Also moans that he's been cut out of an advert in China.
Another massively privileged actor decides he's had enough of woke culture and wants to start a political party to go against it.
I would expect most people's, irrespective of colour, gender, sexuality or any other angle, hearts will be bleeding for the first privileged actor. I would think most people won't look twice at the second or even know he exists.
If the second privileged actor, once his party is started, starts moaning about how he's not given as much publicity as Boris, or isn't earning as much as others from the venture, I fully expect he will get pilloried on this thread too. (My guess is he probably won't go down that path because he seems to appreciate he's a massively privileged actor. But you never know with massively privileged actors. As a group they are naturally "me me me" to a greater or lesser extent
).If you look for racism everywhere, you will find it.
As 2 Chevrons correctly pointed out, as the woman did to Fox, Boyega is perfectly entitled to say what he thinks, based on his lived experience. It would appear however, that right and "freedom of speech" is only granted to middle class white guys not uppity black dudes.
No doubt someone will press the Report button because "racist".
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff