Diane Abbott MP....Racist?

[argylepaul]

I'm all for positive black role models in society, but she is appallingly bad on This Week. If anything, she is an embarassment to the black community and it would be interesting to hear the views of those who she claims to represent? Maybe I'm wrong, perhaps the whole point of Diane Abbott is that if she can reach these dizzy heights, then so can just about anyone...with a privileged education.

Diane Abbott is a tough character. Feisty and stubborn, and you just know she won't take any sh*t. it goes back to that chip on their shoulder, which I think, a lot of black people have for the injustices and indignities their race has suffered
It is also why (from what I have seen) very little white and black positive interaction on the streets of London.
There's a lack of trust from both sides, and it's not the way forward for what is supposed to be a racially tolerant society.
I see groups of people grouped along racial lines, whether it is kids on the way to school, or middle-age mums comparing baby stories on the train. That cannot be right.

For a lot of indigenous, white people, tolerance for them, is about 'Putting up and having to accept', rather then 'Pulling down barriers and living happily side-by-side with someone of another race', and while immigration (from all directions and from all races) continues to increase to frankly, unsustainable levels , that issue is going to be a powderkeg.
People like Diane Abbott are going to have plenty more to say on the matter, and a lot of people aren't going to like what she says.

She has issues with how black people have been treated, and continue to be treated in some quarters.
She is overreacting in this respect, because blacks are doing a lot better for themselves in the UK, then they would have done, say ten years ago. Attitudes to race are at the forefront of those in power.
Look at that furore over the Luis Suarez row (blown out of all proportion, but the FA felt obliged to hit him hard with an 8 game ban, and to be shown to be doing something, after they criticised Blatter for his 'handshake' comments. (The John Terry episode, is a different issue entirely).

It is inaccurate to say that white people can only be racist, because it is they that have the power. This is complete nonsense, and that attitude is dangerous for race relations.
If you look back on the riots, there was a photo in the papers of a 6ft 3 black bloke standing over a 5ft 7 puny white kid, forcing him to strip down to his Y fronts (whilst having just robbed him).
Though it can't be proved, I would say, that forced and demoralising act was based on racial lines, and the want by this black man in the photo, to exert power.
Imagine the outcry in the 'Black community', if this had been the other way round!? You would have seen all manner of PC do-gooders falling over themselves to bring him to justice.
There is a real mindset for being seen to be doing the right thing. It is almost like the white majority are making up for past indiscretions, while the black race want to make up for lost time. But is this a good thing?...or does it make the UK more racially sensitive?
In my opinion, I am sure (like anybody who has got to where they are) Abbott has and isn't adverse to a bit of brown nosing .
Nowadays, in these sh*t-awful, politically correct times, the white duffers in and around Parliament are running scared of her, for making a racial slip-up, and that's partly how she has got to where she has (in my opinion).
Diane Abbott and what she has tweeted, is just a continuation of the complex issue of race relations. She (unfortunately) and it are not going to go away.

 

[mfcrocker]

It's weird AP, you make a number of excellent observations and then draw ludicrous conclusions from them.

Also any suggestion that the Suarez thing was disproportionate is insane. He was incredibly racist and got punished for it. Both he and LFC have acted like utter tw*ts throughout and I'd love LFC to get charged with bringing the game into disrepute.

 

[Jason H]

Ha, what chance has Abbott got when her leader manages to slip up by referring on Twitter to the recently deceased Bob Holness as the host of "Blackbusters"?

 

[argylepaul]

It's weird AP, you make a number of excellent observations and then draw ludicrous conclusions from them.

Also any suggestion that the Suarez thing was disproportionate is insane. He was incredibly racist and got punished for it. Both he and LFC have acted like utter tw*ts throughout and I'd love LFC to get charged with bringing the game into disrepute.

Ludicrous, as in you don't agree with it. My conclusions are my own, based on what I see everyday in London, which will be a little different to wherever you happen to be. You seem to be implying that I am a racist, when all I am doing is stating that this notion of racial tolerance and harmony is not what it seems. Where I am on the issue of race, is that there is far too much UK immigration from all corners of the world (irrespective of colour). You are a liar, or you are blinkered and living in cloud cuckoo land, if you do not agree with me on that.

We all know by now that Suarez was using a term he can 'get away with' in Uruguay. Even though when people bring the colour of skin into a conversation, it becomes an issue of race, I think he was just having a dig at Evra, in the heat of the battle.
I was a little concerned at first, when I saw footage of Suarez, pinching Evra's skin, but that could be done in the same way as pulling his hair.
We all get called 'Gringo' and 'Blondito' in Latin America. I have been loads of times, and I spent 18 months out there. I have been to Uruguay, and have never come across any form of racism from anybody, on me, or on anyone else. To say Liverpool should be charged with bringing the game into disrepute is farcical. They are protecting the interests of their investment/player, and that is only natural. They would naturally have been less accommodating to him, if he had been deemed racist. He would have been sacked, long before he would have been charged.
Using the term 'Negro' and ' Negrito' is common-place out there, as are terms like mulatto, etc. They are not harmful terms when used correctly - they only become so, when people take it out of context, or when someone is bring racist, which I don't think Suarez was being.
My work colleague and my age (from Trinidad) uses the term 'negro' all the time. Does that make it OK for him to say it, but not OK for 'white man' me or the hispanic, olive skinned Suarez?
Maybe foreign footballers should be getting a lesson in what is right and wrong on the field, in the UK, so there are no misunderstandings. There is a very obvious difference between a commonplace word in another country, to something that is downright offensive. This is where we get to the John Terry episode, but I won't go into that.
Now, I know you are entitled to your opinion, but just saying what I posted is ludicrous, just because you don't agree with it, is not enough. You need to come back with why you think it is.

 

[Jason H]

We all know by now that Suarez was using a term he can 'get away with' in Uruguay.

Actually, the FA evidence suggests that even in Uruguay, to use the phrase as he did is to be construed as offensive. And contrary to what he said about using the phrase once, in actual fact he used it 8 times.

 

[mfcrocker]

Ludicrous, as in you don't agree with it. My conclusions are my own, based on what I see everyday in London, which will be a little different to wherever you happen to be. You seem to be implying that I am a racist, when all I am doing is stating that this notion of racial tolerance and harmony is not what it seems. Where I am on the issue of race, is that there is far too much UK immigration from all corners of the world (irrespective of colour). You are a liar, or you are blinkered and living in cloud cuckoo land, if you do not agree with me on that.

Talk about pot kettle black given that last sentence, but you're right - a drive by disagreement is pretty poor.

I'm not sure where you've decided I'm calling you a racist but I'm not - I in fact said that a number of your observations were astute. Your ludicrous conclusions are as follows:

1) That blacks should be happy with what they have now because it's better than 10 years ago. What a stupid statement. They should be happy when they're properly represented and not prejudiced against for the colour of their skin. While this still goes on they've every right to continue to make noise.

2) That white people as a group are trying to make it up to black people as a group. While that will be the aim of a small number, the majority of us PC brigade are simply doing it because we believe all should be equal. This isn't done out of some sense of guilt; personally I couldn't give a monkey's what my race might've done in the past and I'm strongly against the American idea of reparations.

3) That Diane Abbott is in her position partly because politicians are scared of her. Not sure where the hell this has come from. MPs should be watching for offensive language anyway - they're under intense public scrutiny and slip ups get pounced upon. Abbott doesn't factor into it. Now, if you'd come out and said that Abbott's skin colour has resulted in her position I think you'd be closer to the mark. It's very useful for Labour to have a black, female cabinet minister - it fits two groups who tend to be woefully under-represented at the upper levels of Parliament (and of course makes Labour look good - I'm not trying to argue they're doing it out of altruism towards women/the black community)

Suarez

You've clearly not been following recent developments whatsoever. The FA roundly rejected the idea that it would be considered acceptable in Uruguay. Additionally, the "it's OK in my country" defence is utterly ridiculous anyway. When you come to a country you obey their rules - you anti-immigration lot should believe that more than anyone.

When you look at what was said there is absolutely no question that Suarez was prejudiced against Evra based on the colour of his skin. To my mind the penalty is about what I'd expect any player to get for the comments he made.

Oh, and to argue with the debate you've tried to shoehorn in here immigration levels at the moment are perfectly reasonable. Remember also that immigration is not necessarily a bad thing and brings a wide range of economic benefits to the country.

 

[argylepaul]

Actually, the FA evidence suggests that even in Uruguay, to use the phrase as he did is to be construed as offensive. And contrary to what he said about using the phrase once, in actual fact he used it 8 times.

When somebody says something 7 or 8 times, they want to get their point across. It doesn't necessarily imply they are being insulting or racially offensive.
I still don't think it was anything other then some bitchy, banter. You and I will never really know the full story (and neither will the FA), because we weren't in the goalmouth that day. Maybe Dirk Kuyt can shed some light, but perhaps he wasn't in earshot - in which case it all becomes hearsay, and Evra's word against Suarez's.
No amount of lip readers, Spanish speakers or body language experts will probably get to the bottom of this. All we know for certain is, that following the FA's stance over Blatter's 'handskake comments (which were ludicrous, bigfatspacko), they are making an example of Luis Suarez, and because of this witchhunt, which now leads to Piara Power, Suarez could well be driven out of the Premier League. We may lose a valuable and world class footballer for what? Because of some hardcore goading between two players - both of whom are no angels.
To quantify my remarks, I would hate to think that Evra was being racially abused by Suarez. Metaphorically, I stand next to the well dressed black man on my train home, and (actually) sit next to my work colleague, and i think, how could anyone be racially insulting to them. And in the past, how could anyone, deprive Patrick Evra of the right to exist as an equal?
Finally, my point about what Suarez can get away with in Uruguay is what he he thinks and (probably) knows he can get away with over there. It has been 15 years since I was there, so maybe they have done what we do here, and put their racial sterotype house in order. Words are said on the heat of battle, but (in this case) politically driven overreaction by the FA is making a mountain out of the proverbial mole hill.
This post applies to your reply too, bigfatspacko.

 

[argylepaul]

Talk about pot kettle black given that last sentence, but you're right - a drive by disagreement is pretty poor.

I'm not sure where you've decided I'm calling you a racist but I'm not - I in fact said that a number of your observations were astute. Your ludicrous conclusions are as follows:

1) That blacks should be happy with what they have now because it's better than 10 years ago. What a stupid statement. They should be happy when they're properly represented and not prejudiced against for the colour of their skin. While this still goes on they've every right to continue to make noise.

2) That white people as a group are trying to make it up to black people as a group. While that will be the aim of a small number, the majority of us PC brigade are simply doing it because we believe all should be equal. This isn't done out of some sense of guilt; personally I couldn't give a monkey's what my race might've done in the past and I'm strongly against the American idea of reparations.

3) That Diane Abbott is in her position partly because politicians are scared of her. Not sure where the hell this has come from. MPs should be watching for offensive language anyway - they're under intense public scrutiny and slip ups get pounced upon. Abbott doesn't factor into it. Now, if you'd come out and said that Abbott's skin colour has resulted in her position I think you'd be closer to the mark. It's very useful for Labour to have a black, female cabinet minister - it fits two groups who tend to be woefully under-represented at the upper levels of Parliament (and of course makes Labour look good - I'm not trying to argue they're doing it out of altruism towards women/the black community)



You've clearly not been following recent developments whatsoever. The FA roundly rejected the idea that it would be considered acceptable in Uruguay. Additionally, the "it's OK in my country" defence is utterly ridiculous anyway. When you come to a country you obey their rules - you anti-immigration lot should believe that more than anyone.

When you look at what was said there is absolutely no question that Suarez was prejudiced against Evra based on the colour of his skin. To my mind the penalty is about what I'd expect any player to get for the comments he made.

Oh, and to argue with the debate you've tried to shoehorn in here immigration levels at the moment are perfectly reasonable. Remember also that immigration is not necessarily a bad thing and brings a wide range of economic benefits to the country.

Since you have taken the trouble to reply, I will reply too, but over the weekend. I had better get back to do some work. Hope your team loses awfully tomorrow.

 

[mfcrocker]

When somebody says something 7 or 8 times, they want to get their point across. It doesn't necessarily imply they are being insulting or racially offensive.
I still don't think it was anything other then some bitchy, banter. You and I will never really know the full story (and neither will the FA), because we weren't in the goalmouth that day. Maybe Dirk Kuyt can shed some light, but perhaps he wasn't in earshot - in which case it all becomes hearsay, and Evra's word against Suarez's.
No amount of lip readers, Spanish speakers or body language experts will probably get to the bottom of this. All we know for certain is, that following the FA's stance over Blatter's 'handskake comments (which were ludicrous, bigfatspacko), they are making an example of Luis Suarez, and because of this witchhunt, which now leads to Piara Power, Suarez could well be driven out of the Premier League. We may lose a valuable and world class footballer for what? Because of some hardcore goading between two players - both of whom are no angels.
To quantify my remarks, I would hate to think that Evra was being racially abused by Suarez. Metaphorically, I stand next to the well dressed black man on my train home, and (actually) sit next to my work colleague, and i think, how could anyone be racially insulting to them. And in the past, how could anyone, deprive Patrick Evra of the right to exist as an equal?
Finally, my point about what Suarez can get away with in Uruguay is what he he thinks and (probably) knows he can get away with over there. It has been 15 years since I was there, so maybe they have done what we do here, and put their racial sterotype house in order. Words are said on the heat of battle, but (in this case) politically driven overreaction by the FA is making a mountain out of the proverbial mole hill.
This post applies to your reply too, bigfatspacko.

Umm the FA knew exactly what was said. You can keep trying to pretend to the contrary all you like but Suarez racially abused Evra that day and the evidence is conclusive. Suarez himself (stupidly IMO) admitted the language he'd used.

All this "heat of battle" stuff is absolute b*ll*cks. Someone on another forum put it way better than me; if I'm angry at someone I'd say something like "f*ck off you person". If a racist is angry at someone they'd say "f*ck off you black person". If you're angry the bloke's race doesn't come into it. The only reason race should ever come into it is if the bloke's race is a problem for you.

Why is this so hard for you to accept? There's no grand conspiracy here and no great political motive. Suarez broke the rules and got the fair penalty. Cause and effect.

 

[mfcrocker]

Since you have taken the trouble to reply, I will reply too, but over the weekend. I had better get back to do some work. Hope your team loses awfully tomorrow.

Come on the Crewe