Jump to content

Racism in Football


Zatman

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Panto_Villan said:

Have the players ever specifically said what they mean by "racism" or "racial equality"? Because those terms can have a lot of different interpretations these days.

I can't help feel like if what the protests were actually in aid of was a bit clearer, the debate would be less heated. If the players said the protest had the narrowest possible interpretation and was purely against racial abuse, I there would be less people disagreeing with the protest. If the players went to the other extreme and said the protests were in support of reparation payments to black people for the historical sins of slavery, I think fewer people would be being called racist for disagreeing with it.

It feels like some people are angry that others won't just get behind a simple anti-racism message, while others are annoyed that they are being called racist for not being 100% on board with a protest that might actually represent views on racism that are far from universally accepted. But it's hard to know how much people actually disagree with each other if there's no common definition of what the protests are hoping to achieve.

EDIT - of course, if they have specifically said it, feel free to link me and then ignore the rest of my post.

I'm not sure they have, but surely that just means they are very specifically not playing the political games they've been accused of.

They have said they want to raise awareness of an equality issue that is still too prevalent and get people talking about it. That's worked. Now it's up to the politicians to try and come up with some solutions for specific issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, blandy said:

The question I asked was "what is "the evidence" that the normal person sees, which counters Gareth Southgate's and the players assertions that it's not to do with the BLM organisation? "

The response you've provided (thanks) in no way provides any evidence at all. The Prime Minister's opinion and the quote of his you provide - is certainly not "evidence that the players actions are to do with the BLM organisation" it's just the opinion of a man (renowned for lying and for using racist slurs).

Wilf Zaha deciding to stop -  he said he stopped because he felt it was degrading (link to video), because it was making black players a target and he didn't feel it was working anyway, not because of anything to do with the BLM organisation. So, while his criticism of the Taking the knee is/may be valid, that's not a justification to actively boo it, is it? - And it's certainly nothing to do with Marxism and the BLM organisation that Wilf is talking about.

I have seen no players say they do or don't like what the BLM organisation stands for. If you have seen players say they don't support taking the knee because of marxism or BLM org then I'd be grateful if you could point me at them.

You also appear to be saying  that  because "[the players] ... come out and say it has nothing to do with BLM" this is evidence it is to do with the BLM mvt and attacking the Police and pulling down statues? That one has got me baffled. An analogy would be like saying someone who argued for (say) better access for football fans to big match tickets was being supportive of the cocaine sniffing yobs who jibbed Wembley and assaulted Italians.

I'm pleased you can see the players are genuine in their reasoning and you're supportive of their stance. That's excellent.

I'm extremely sceptical that a different gesture would just bring applause, and the reason why is that every single anti-racist gesture or action to date, in my lifetime, has brought condemnation from some people -whether it's downright opposition and abuse, or telling them "you're doing the wrong sort of protest" or telling them "your protest might be peaceful, but other people have done non-peaceful actions, so you must be like them" .

When Jack Grealish and Ollie Watkins and Tyrone Mings and Emi Martinez and Ezri Konsa and Marcus Rashford and Southgate and Henderson and .....all of them - when they take the knee and say they are doing so simply to demonstrate a desire for racial equality I wholeheartedly believe them and support them in doing so. If I didn't, I still wouldn't boo them, I'd simply stay silent, accepting that their right to campaign for something they believe in exists (even if I didn't share that belief).

I wrote earlier about why I thought some people didn't support them, and not everyone who doesn't support them is a racist, but people who boo them are wilfully, or unwittingly through their actions, displaying ignorance - to go back to my better ticket allocations analogy - if I (and other fans) do a peaceful protest for more access to tickets for ordinary fans at cup finals, other people may think "no, Corporates deserve to have their privileged rights to tickets maintained, or the sport needs the money from corporates to preserve it's well-being" that's fine and they could campaign for that, too. But if they started actively opposing the gesture to campaign for more even distribution of tickets by booing and jeering from the corporate boxes, I'd not look well upon them either.

I think we need to accept that other people have a right to opinions that differ from our own, but I also think we need to accept that trying to drown out and silence and smother other legitimately held opinions is a bad road to be going down.

"I want racial equality" - "Marxist BOOOO, shut up!" is a really bad look.

And the answer to that question was Southgate coming out saying that the kneeling had nothing to do with BLM. They came out because it was obviously identified that people had this opinion, or why make the statement?

Ive seen several players come out from various leagues saying they didn’t support it because of its association with BLM, I know one was a Forrest player, but I don’t remember their names. 

Ive never said the booing was ok.

Your comment, You also appear to be saying  that  because "[the players] ... come out and say it has nothing to do with BLM" this is evidence it is to do with the BLM mvt and attacking the Police and pulling down statues? No not my point at all. The point was made earlier that some football fans believe there is a link, hence why the manager tried to make the distinction. 
 

Your comment, I wrote earlier about why I thought some people didn't support them, and not everyone who doesn't support them is a racist, but people who boo them are wilfully, or unwittingly through their actions, displaying ignorance. You maybe right, but they also have genuine concerns and believe they have no other way to get their concerns across. It’s easy to say there’s no link, but this only occurred after a horrendous incident in the US, these people saw this on their news, the next thing is there being told they are racists and the football team they’ve supported for years is peacefully protesting anti racism. Not all see through the rhetoric, not all use the sewer of social media.

I agree with your last paragraph, but I also believe the players can be better at bringing all fans along.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, QldVilla said:

The point was made earlier that some football fans believe there is a link, hence why the manager tried to make the distinction. 

He did.

It's notable that previously you said "Just because Southgate came out and said it’s not to do with BLM, the normal person don’t swallow everything they are told, they see the evidence."

 and now after a bit of discussion, I think we are both saying there isn't any evidence, but that Southgate said what he did to counter a misapprehension that had wrongly taken hold amongst some people voicing opposition.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sparrow1988 said:

I just answered all your points with counterarguments. If you're not sure what my post means then look at what you've written in your previous post and compare my points to yours.

Regarding Australia, epidemic is your choice of word, I'd call it an issue or a problem. Epidemic is a tad overexaggerated. Are you looking for a different answer than white people invaded the land 200 to 250 years ago, displaced the native Aboriginal people who had been there for the previous 5000 years or so, and still face prejudice and are integrated very poorly in to today's society, enacted a "White Australia Policy" through a set of racial policies from the beginning of the 1900's through to it finally being abolished in the 1970's, leading to the anti-Asian/anti-Aborigine sentiment that lasts until this day? Coupled with the return of the One Nation Party to prominence as a result being voted for by the public as well as such people as Malclom Roberts and Pauline Hanson, the latter of which wore full islamic dress into the Senate while later calling for the Burqa to be banned. The same party brought an "It's ok to be white" (a phrase associated with white supremacists) motion before the Senate in 2018 which was only narrowly defeated. Also in 2018, Fraser Anning calling for the reintroduction of the White Australia Policy to provide a "Final Solution" (I'm going to assume that you don't need the meaning of this phrase explained to you) with particular regard to the "problem" of Muslim Migration.

And just in case the examples above feel like an attack on you because all the aforementioned people represent QLD, my brother lived in Melbourne for 3 years from 2017 - 2020 and his now wife teached in a few schools there and said that children of the age of 6/7 already have a discriminatory attitude towards Asian kids. I can't remember the exact names they call them but if it's not a problem for the country that kids of 6/7 have that type of attitude (it's obvious they're getting from the adults around them) then I don't know what is.

So to summarise, above are a few points - some that I knew already, some that I researched to double check that I'm not talking bollox, and one from somebody's lived experience in Australia - that display that Australia has a racism problem (not an epidemic).

So you need google to make a point and use your brothers wife’s 3 years in Australia of what she may or may not of experienced. Ok champ. 

You misquoted  Fraser Anning as that wasn’t what he was inferring to, but was thrown out of Parliamanet never to be seen or heard of again. Pauline Hanson has undertaken stunts before, they are stunts. The question she was asking is why are these woman being forced by their husbands to wear burkas in public, they are in Australia, there is no religious need for them to wear it, isn’t that why they came to the Australia to avoid persecution? These woman are oppressed it is well reported, she was trying to stop their oppression.

There isn’t any part of the world that hasn’t been invaded by another race, but Australia is the only country that gives $300m per year to improving the education and standards of the aboriginal people, we have many aboriginals who are great sportsman, artists , politicians etc and my best friend since primary school is also an aboriginal, his name is David.
 

David would say your extremely wide of the mark with regards to assumptions of racism of the aboriginal people. Yes they have challenges, but they are in part because they were a hunter gather people who didn’t evolve for thousands of years, like the outside world, to suddenly have to change within several generations. So maybe it’s not completely racism but the challenges of changes into a different society which was constantly evolving, oh yeah that’s right, you know all that. 
 

The aboriginal people were not enslaved, yes those in power over the past 200 years made some poor decisions with the aboriginal people, but some aboriginal leaders will tell you that the aboriginal people are doing more harm to their own people in remote areas of australia than other. In the current day.

These are the facts you don’t know about nor care because it’s not part of your narrative, is there racism, yes, but it’s not common, it’s rare. Children say the darndest things and most importantly when they repeat things they are generally out of context for which they were inferred.

PS when I was young I used to walk through the valley mall in Brisbane where I would be called a white #$&@* etc by aboriginals. Racism is not always one sided.

Edited by QldVilla
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, blandy said:

He did.

It's notable that previously you said "Just because Southgate came out and said it’s not to do with BLM, the normal person don’t swallow everything they are told, they see the evidence."

 and now after a bit of discussion, I think we are both saying there isn't any evidence, but that Southgate said what he did to counter a misapprehension that had wrongly taken hold amongst some people voicing opposition.

 

I think that’s right mate. That may be a better way to put it that some supporters are still under the misapprehension that it is related and they didn’t buy what Southgate was selling. 
 

They aren’t right or wrong, they just need to be brought along to understand that this gesture is from the players hearts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sam-AVFC said:

What kind of messages do you mean? Because the only reason it's being linked with 'Marxist' messages is because the people against it refuse to stop conflating the too, it's not at all what the players are using it for. Are you against the yearly poppy charade too?

Yearly, you said it. I have the upmost respect for our war hero's, but if they did it everytime there is a game it would wear a bit thin, an maybe lose its importance to some. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, QldVilla said:

I think that’s right mate. That may be a better way to put it that some supporters are still under the misapprehension that it is related and they didn’t buy what Southgate was selling. 
 

They aren’t right or wrong, they just need to be brought along to understand that this gesture is from the players hearts.

no one is selling anything. they are just reinforcing the reasons as to why they are doing the gesture. they have repeated themselves time and time again and yet some still have an issue with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, foreveryoung said:

Yearly, you said it. I have the upmost respect for our war hero's, but if they did it everytime there is a game it would wear a bit thin, an maybe lose its importance to some. 

So by not wanting "these kind of messages" in sport you meant a prolonged campaign?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, tomav84 said:

no one is selling anything. they are just reinforcing the reasons as to why they are doing the gesture. they have repeated themselves time and time again and yet some still have an issue with it.

It was a phrase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, tomav84 said:

no one is selling anything. they are just reinforcing the reasons as to why they are doing the gesture. they have repeated themselves time and time again and yet some still have an issue with it.

I wouldn't bother debating with someone who thinks those who disagree with the publicly stated motives for a campaign "isn't right or wrong". Either the players are telling the truth and the "supporters" are wrong or they're lying and pushing a secret Marxist agenda, in which case those booing it are right. 

I think they're wrong as anyone who thinks a group of millionaires are revolutionary Communists has to be a little deranged. It would be nice if people at least had the courage to say they agree with those booing that the players are liars secretly pushing for a violent overthrow of capitalist society. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, foreveryoung said:

Some fans just don't want football to be used for these kind of messages and I'd kind of agree with that too.

Why don't you want football to be used to spread an anti racism message?

Also football has been used to spread this message for decades via various other means, just far less effectively.

Why are you suddenly against it, or have you always been against anti-racism in football? Is it because this one is working?

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Sam-AVFC said:

So by not wanting "these kind of messages" in sport you meant a prolonged campaign?

Possibly, I'm speaking for the boo boys and I'm not one of those. 

I dont know for sure, but maybe the taking of the knee is the wrong way of getting the message across. I know some people, uneducated or not, think it's kind of bowing down to black people. So I guess it's not the campaign they are booing, it's the way it's being presented at sports events.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sam-AVFC said:

What kind of messages do you mean? Because the only reason it's being linked with 'Marxist' messages is because the people against it refuse to stop conflating the too, it's not at all what the players are using it for. Are you against the yearly poppy charade too?

Hmmm. So one of my friends is against having the annual poppy ceremony in football because he believes we should avoid politics in football wherever possible, and he doesn't think footballers should be taking the knee for the same reason.

His argument has always been that equal rights movements may be a good cause, but they're still inherently political because they still seek to reorder society. If you think politics in football should be allowed as long as it's for a good cause, you're on a slippery slope because what constitutes a good cause clearly varies based on your political stances. So shouldn't we just get rid of it all?

I'm inferring from the fact you use the word "charade" that you don't think the poppy ceremony should happen. So to flip your argument on its head, doesn't that also mean you should be against the equality campaign?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, foreveryoung said:

Possibly, I'm speaking for the boo boys and I'm not one of those. 

I dont know for sure, but maybe the taking of the knee is the wrong way of getting the message across. I know some people, uneducated or not, think it's kind of bowing down to black people. So I guess it's not the campaign they are booing, it's the way it's being presented at sports events.

i bet every single one of those people buys a poppy

and that every single one of them will happily claim that this is different

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Panto_Villan said:

His argument has always been that equal rights movements may be a good cause, but they're still inherently political because they still seek to reorder society. If you think politics in football should be allowed as long as it's for a good cause, you're on a slippery slope because what constitutes a good cause clearly varies based on your political stances. So shouldn't we just get rid of it all?

Pretending that anti racism messages are purely political for one moment.  What about when the racism is directly connected to the game of football itself?  Should we ignore it?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, villa4europe said:

i bet every single one of those people buys a poppy

and that every single one of them will happily claim that this is different

I don’t and it is different. With the poppy, it’s an annual remembrance of people who have fought in wars and charitable fund raising to support those wounded and their families. I’d project that some of the anti TTK lot will be “why should I donate, the government should support them”. 
With the racism thing, there’s no remembrance, no fund raising, just a simple message of “we want equality, not racism”.

Interestingly, the poppy thing has become over-blown, perhaps through the same strain of nationalism that derides the taking of the knee, but I guess that’s a tangential subject. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Panto_Villan said:

Hmmm. So one of my friends is against having the annual poppy ceremony in football because he believes we should avoid politics in football wherever possible, and he doesn't think footballers should be taking the knee for the same reason.

His argument has always been that equal rights movements may be a good cause, but they're still inherently political because they still seek to reorder society. If you think politics in football should be allowed as long as it's for a good cause, you're on a slippery slope because what constitutes a good cause clearly varies based on your political stances. So shouldn't we just get rid of it all?

I'm inferring from the fact you use the word "charade" that you don't think the poppy ceremony should happen. So to flip your argument on its head, doesn't that also mean you should be against the equality campaign?

I'm not against the poppy campaign at all and don't have an issue with it in football, but it has become a yearly game of increasingly crass variations on the poppy and MPs carefully placing them for TV interviews. The annual game of nationalistic top trumps, rather than the campaign and cause, is why I call it a charade. I have no issue with a small poppy on a shirt and a minute's silence before games.

I don't have a problem with politics in sport, I was making the same challenge you are to me and apparently the difference is one is only once a year.

It's also ridiculous to say footballer shouldn't talk about politics, even if you're against any gestures at games. They are citizens of this country and have just as much right as anyone else to make their opinions heard. I don't hear anyone saying builders should stay in their lane and not discuss politics, but I guess that's because they don't have a public voice and are much less likely to cause a widespread shift in opinion. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, blandy said:

Interestingly, the poppy thing has become over-blown, perhaps through the same strain of nationalism that derides the taking of the knee, but I guess that’s a tangential subject. 

It's quite sad really. I always found the day itself and a silence with the last post playing very poignant. Now it's almost overshadowed by the month leading up to it becoming more like Halloween, with any excuse to shill vaguely related cheap tat. As for the 'I'm better at remembrance than you' mindset, I don't even know where to start.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â