Racism in Football

[foreveryoung]

31 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

Undercover job hunters reveal huge race bias in Britain's workplaces

A test for racial discrimination in recruitment practice in British cities:

Does it get any more systemic than this?

Picking out the best bits to suit your narrative will never work and is for the tabloids. Read the first quote again from the Guardian all the way to the bottom, where they say the research was flawed anyway. 

This is far from proof of systematic racism, try again!

[Keyblade]

7 minutes ago, foreveryoung said:

Picking out the best bits to suit your narrative will never work and is for the tabloids. Read the first quote again from the Guardian all the way to the bottom, where they say the research was flawed anyway. 

This is far from proof of systematic racism, try again!

Sorry, what? Quoting the findings isn't "picking out the best bits", it's called summarizing. Which is why I included the rest of the article as a link. Furthermore, "they" don't say the research is flawed, but rather a single, unrelated person (Abigal Morris of the British Chambers of Commerce) is quoted saying as much, someone who has a vested interest in denying racist labour practices. Quite ironic that you would latch onto that in the same sentence where you accuse me of "picking out the best bits".

In any case, there have been dozens if not hundreds of similar studies spanning decades, all concluding the same thing. I even quoted another one in my post where they sent out 1000 applications. I can link you 10 other similar studies if you want, or better yet, a meta-study that analyzes all of the studies on this issue, which believe it or not is very well documented. 

[Davkaus]

I wonder what your life would be like if you spent as much effort on something else as you do trying to deny racism is a problem.

[DCJonah]

10 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

I wonder what your life would be like if you spent as much effort on something else as you do trying to deny racism is a problem.

I genuinely can't get my head round the mindset of being against racism but spending so much time denying it's an issue or finding various excuses when it's displayed. The only assumption to make is that maybe these people aren't that against racism as they like to pretend.

[foreveryoung]

9 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

I wonder what your life would be like if you spent as much effort on something else as you do trying to deny racism is a problem.

I'm certainly not saying racism is not a problem, please quote me if I have said that.

What I am saying is everyone who boos the knee should not be automatically labled as a racist. Also, I will not believe our country is systematically racist, but I'm not stating this as fact it's all opinion and my belief. Unlike others trying to state the boo boys are racist as fact.

[Keyblade]

5 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

I genuinely can't get my head round the mindset of being against racism but spending so much time denying it's an issue or finding various excuses when it's displayed. The only assumption to make is that maybe these people aren't that against racism as they like to pretend.

I think it's just a refusal to accept the uncomfortable truth that society can be very racist. To accept that people can be systematically discriminated against is to completely change how you think about your country/society and evidently people are reluctant to do that. I guess that's the famous British Exceptionalism I hear about in action.

[paul514]

10 hours ago, TRO said:

That is precisely the complexity I was championing.

until we know for sure why each one is booing, which may not be the same motive, we can't just jump to conclusions.

When they are caught, they should be debriefed and the authorities maybe clearer as to what they are dealing with....as we know some are just sheep, the big bloke boos, so I better boo.

Perhaps, we should clap and drown out the boos.

Sorry, what?

The authorities should be interviewing people who boo?

[paul514]

6 hours ago, Keyblade said:

Undercover job hunters reveal huge race bias in Britain's workplaces

A test for racial discrimination in recruitment practice in British cities:

Does it get any more systemic than this?

Systemic racism isn't evident here.

Individuals who read the applications may be racist but that isn't a system a racism.

[paul514]

6 hours ago, fruitvilla said:

So someone today with a Spanish surname, whose ancestors can be traced back to a shipwreck during the Armada in Cornwall is .... ? How many centuries before someone with the surname Patel becomes English? The concept of being English is not some unchanging monolith. 

As much as I want to support your argument, but ethnicity is some arbitrary, or at best convenient, delineation in our DNA. 

This is my inner fish speaking. No Rashica puns please.

Someone with the surname Patel can be english, one parent being of a different ethnicity doesn't suddenly change your ethnicity you just fit under two....

[fruitvilla]

18 minutes ago, paul514 said:

Someone with the surname Patel can be english, one parent being of a different ethnicity doesn't suddenly change your ethnicity you just fit under two....

So by your definition would Patel be English?

[paul514]

2 minutes ago, fruitvilla said:

So by your definition would Patel be English?

And Indian presumably.

[Keyblade]

1 hour ago, paul514 said:

Systemic racism isn't evident here.

Individuals who read the applications may be racist but that isn't a system a racism.

Quote

sys·tem·ic | \ si-ˈste-mik

fundamental to a predominant social, economic, or political practice

Systemic/institutional racism typically refers to discrimination within the established institutions of society such as the workplace, housing, the justice system etc.

People being discriminated against in the job market is the very definition of institutional racism, regardless of whether individuals are the ones making the decisions. 

[paul514]

7 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

Systemic/institutional racism typically refers to discrimination within the established institutions of society such as the workplace, housing, the justice system etc.

People being discriminated against in the job market is the very definition of institutional racism, regardless of whether individuals are the ones making the decisions. 

I don’t consider a few dozen individuals in this case or even hundreds or single thousands assessing job applications to be evidence of systemic racism.

I consider systemic racism to be laws mainly and to a lesser extent widespread beliefs to be held typically by the majority but even a very significant minority would do say a quarter.

[Keyblade]

So calling someone a lazy **** n***** isn't racist, and the most fundamental institution in the life of a person living in our current economic system discriminating against people along racial lines isn't institutional racism. I'm genuinely at a loss, what actually qualifies as racism then? It's not insulting slurs and it's not putting people at an inherent disadvantage when it comes to putting food on their table. What is it?

[paul514]

1 minute ago, Keyblade said:

So calling someone a lazy **** n***** isn't racist, and the most fundamental institution in the life of a person living in our current economic system discriminating against people along racial lines isn't institutional racism. I'm genuinely at a loss, what actually qualifies as racism then? It's not insulting slurs and it's not putting people at an inherent disadvantage when it comes to putting food on their table. What is it?

That is apparent racism individual's part and I already explained what I consider systemic racism.

Individuals being racist is of no concern to me. I can’t control other people’s thoughts/beliefs and I don’t consider it desirable.

[Keyblade]

Just now, paul514 said:

I don’t consider a few dozen individuals in this case or even hundreds or single thousands assessing job applications to be evidence of systemic racism.

I consider systemic racism to be laws mainly and to a lesser extent widespread beliefs to be held typically by the majority but even a very significant minority would do say a quarter.

Your convenient personal opinion is kind of irrelevant isn't it? When people and most scholars refer to systemic racism, they refer to racism within the various institutions of society.

[QldVilla]

On 16/07/2021 at 17:54, sparrow1988 said:

There are so many holes in your post that I don't know where to start but here we go...

ABC are left leaning? Seriously? They are the equivalent of the BBC in the UK, a fairly centrist organisation who do a pretty good job of presenting the news in a neutral way. There is no way to present what Fraser Anning said that doesn't come across as leftist to right wing lunatics. And hold on, did I misquote him like you said or did he word it poorly? Calling for a final solution with regards to the problem of the amount immigrants coming in to the country is no way racist? Fair enough mate. His party still got voted in by people of that state, marginally or not. Here is what it says on the Australian government website. You know the process already but the votes of the people of that state got him elected.

Senators are elected by a system of proportional representation which ensures that the proportion of seats won by each party in each State or Territory closely reflects the proportion of the votes gained by that party in that State or Territory.

You said that she was interested in helping the women that were oppressed. If that's not women's rights then I don't know what is. Strange that she is only interested in the women that are Muslim women.

I know that they weren't enslaved but to say that the country wasn't invaded is just bullshit. You even mentioned that there has been no country in the world that hasn't been invaded and now your saying that the country wasn't invaded. Make your mind up. There was a literally a law introduced to say that the land belonged to nobody at the time of occupation and the land then taken from the people who were living there. The British anti-slavery stance? You're talking through your arse here. They stopped trading slaves in 1807. The first penal colony was established in 1788. Before this they were among the biggest if not the biggest slave traders in the world. Granted it was probably on the wane for the previous hundred years or so but anti-slavery? Come on.

And for something worse could have happened, that's all conjecture. We are discussing what did happen. Not what might have happened had Captain Cook's ship sank in the pacific in 1770.

I know about the attempts to integrate the Aborigine community in the last half a century or so. That is obviously very positive. I never denied this or said that Australia doesn't try to rectify it. You asked me about racism in Australia and I gave you my opinion based on facts. I just said there is a problem with racism in Australia resulting from policies of the past. My point is and has been that there is a legacy racism and in the last few years, as is the trend globally, this racism has bubbled up again. For example with the rise of parties such as The One Nation Party in Australia, UKIP/ Brexit Party in the UK, AFD in Germany, Le Pen's party in France, the rise of Trump in the US. If you can't see that then I don't know what I can do to make it any clearer.

Anyway, this is the racism in football thread not the racism in Australia thread so I'm just going to leave it now. As for your BLM and black lives matter comments, maybe mute/block the term because you're obviously triggered by it and have serious issues with it.

Of course you find holes in my post, because you would have to stop and think, rather than changing views formed on BBC articles, Google and your brothers wife's 3 year experience in the country!

Your problem is you take comments literally rather than the scope and meaning of what they were intended and in the context they were intended.

You called Australia a racist country it is not, You infer details that aren't there. Not everything is black and white, a handful of racist comments does not make a racial nation.

You use the term final solution based on a BBC article not knowing the context or the way it was intended, it was insensitive. So you know for certain by reading a  BBC article that he was saying it as the Nazi final solution, not as a country we need to come up with a final solution to solve the illegal immigration issue? How arrogant are you? Do you really believe that he wanted all illegal immigrants to be executed, really, is that what you believe?

If you had any idea of Australian politics you would know that illegal immigration has been a flash point on both sides of the political divide for the past 30 years, but of course you know everything because you read an article on the BBC website.

The one nation party is not a racist party. They have made statements which trigger those on the left because if they had the chance we would have open borders and anyone could come into the country. Before you go calling someone racist, maybe go and read everything they have said then form your opinion. She has made comments about other nationalities that they don't assimilate when they come to the country, people have been triggered by that, but is what she said true, absolutely, could she communicate it better, absolutely. Was wearing a burka a stunt, absolutely, but her point was why are these woman being forced to wear a burka in Australia? People of the left become triggered and call the comments racist, no she just says what some are thinking, that these woman shouldn't be forced to wear the burka in public. Your obviously in favor of it as you haven't said bo peep! She was interested in woman being oppressed, muslim woman, if you can point to the other oppressed woman in Australia, I will send the Senator an email, (PS she has come out for woman who are abused by their husbands, she has come out for woman who have husbands who dont pay their alamony etc etc, I'm sure the BBC didn't report these things or you just didnt think it suited your narrative). I'm sure the BBC have something made up for you to read. 

My comments regarding invasion were in the context of the First Fleet of approx. 1,500 people, of which approx. 780 were convicts and and the rest were soldiers, botanists, cooks, civil officers and free people etc etc. Just doesn't meet the definition of invasion, nor was it the intent of the British, the intent was a penal colony because of the overloaded jails from people stealing bread.

You call your comments facts, but they aren't based on anything relative, historical or even from different sources, maybe read a book or three, rather than googling your opinion. 

Racism is not simple it is complex, the one thing worse than a racist is the person who calls someone a racist, not because they've said or done anything racist, because they disagree or don't like what the person said.

[paul514]

4 hours ago, Keyblade said:

Your convenient personal opinion is kind of irrelevant isn't it? When people and most scholars refer to systemic racism, they refer to racism within the various institutions of society.

Is my opinion irrelevant? My opinion was asked for, I would therefore assume it is relevant in that context.

As for other people’s opinions if you asked if they thought the country was systemically racist, they would say no.

As for scholars of race relations, give me a break, I couldn't give a shiny shite what those race baiters have to say.

Edited July 18, 2021 by paul514

[Keyblade]

1 hour ago, paul514 said:

Is my opinion irrelevant? My opinion was asked for, I would therefore assume it is relevant in that context.

As for other people’s opinions if you asked if they thought the country was systemically racist, they would say no.

As for scholars of race relations, give me a break, I could give a shiny shite what those race baiters have to say.

I never asked for your opinion?

Other people could think the sky is green. It doesn't mean anything. Just like how you still think the players are kneeling for BLM. It's an opinion sure, it just has no bearing in reality.

 

[sparrow1988]

9 hours ago, QldVilla said:

Of course you find holes in my post, because you would have to stop and think, rather than changing views formed on BBC articles, Google and your brothers wife's 3 year experience in the country!

Your problem is you take comments literally rather than the scope and meaning of what they were intended and in the context they were intended.

You called Australia a racist country it is not, You infer details that aren't there. Not everything is black and white, a handful of racist comments does not make a racial nation.

You use the term final solution based on a BBC article not knowing the context or the way it was intended, it was insensitive. So you know for certain by reading a  BBC article that he was saying it as the Nazi final solution, not as a country we need to come up with a final solution to solve the illegal immigration issue? How arrogant are you? Do you really believe that he wanted all illegal immigrants to be executed, really, is that what you believe?

If you had any idea of Australian politics you would know that illegal immigration has been a flash point on both sides of the political divide for the past 30 years, but of course you know everything because you read an article on the BBC website.

The one nation party is not a racist party. They have made statements which trigger those on the left because if they had the chance we would have open borders and anyone could come into the country. Before you go calling someone racist, maybe go and read everything they have said then form your opinion. She has made comments about other nationalities that they don't assimilate when they come to the country, people have been triggered by that, but is what she said true, absolutely, could she communicate it better, absolutely. Was wearing a burka a stunt, absolutely, but her point was why are these woman being forced to wear a burka in Australia? People of the left become triggered and call the comments racist, no she just says what some are thinking, that these woman shouldn't be forced to wear the burka in public. Your obviously in favor of it as you haven't said bo peep! She was interested in woman being oppressed, muslim woman, if you can point to the other oppressed woman in Australia, I will send the Senator an email, (PS she has come out for woman who are abused by their husbands, she has come out for woman who have husbands who dont pay their alamony etc etc, I'm sure the BBC didn't report these things or you just didnt think it suited your narrative). I'm sure the BBC have something made up for you to read. 

My comments regarding invasion were in the context of the First Fleet of approx. 1,500 people, of which approx. 780 were convicts and and the rest were soldiers, botanists, cooks, civil officers and free people etc etc. Just doesn't meet the definition of invasion, nor was it the intent of the British, the intent was a penal colony because of the overloaded jails from people stealing bread.

You call your comments facts, but they aren't based on anything relative, historical or even from different sources, maybe read a book or three, rather than googling your opinion. 

Racism is not simple it is complex, the one thing worse than a racist is the person who calls someone a racist, not because they've said or done anything racist, because they disagree or don't like what the person said.

Fair enough mate. I refuse to get into discussions with people who claim that organisations like the BBC have a bias. The BBC annoy people on the left and right with both sides claiming that the BBC are biased. If they are pissing both sides off then there probably just providing a balanced opinion on matters. I mean the BBC left leaning? This is a company who until very recently employed Andrew f***ing Neil. I'm sure that you've got examples to show that they are loony lefties but as I said it is just a fairly neutral organisation.

Also, I never called Australia as a racist country. I said it has a problem with racism as does nearly every country, maybe even all.

And on your last line, the racist is definitely the worst of the two people. The other person is not right and has a lot to learn but yeah, the racist is definitely worse.

EDIT: And just for future reference, just how long does someone have to live in Oz before they can have an opinion on it? Is it that for the first few years people there make racist comments sometimes and then after you've served the sufficient amount of time they tell you it was just a big joke and everyone has a laugh?

Edited July 18, 2021 by sparrow1988