Racist Politician

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Rusty Nails

Country Member
On a slightly different tact, are our MPs not aware that remarks they make are likely to be repeated? It was very naive of this lady to say what she did in public. Politicians of all sides do it repeatedly, and they are supposedly leading us

At fringe meetings many MPs believe that, because they are speaking to a generally like-minded and sympathetic audience, they can say a few things they would not say on a main platform.

Politicians, like any of us crave applause and approval and in the search for it sometimes get carried away. They may be intelligent (or not) but are not always known for their common sense.
 

BoldonLad

Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
Location
South Tyneside
At fringe meetings many MPs believe that, because they are speaking to a generally like-minded and sympathetic audience, they can say a few things they would not say on a main platform.

Politicians, like any of us crave applause and approval and in the search for it sometimes get carried away. They may be intelligent (or not) but are not always known for their common sense.

Are you saying that our revered Politicians are slightly less than honest, and hide their true opinions/views from us, the electorate?

I am shocked!
 

Rusty Nails

Country Member
Are you saying that our revered Politicians are slightly less than honest, and hide their true opinions/views from us, the electorate?

I am shocked!

I think that, just like many of us, they hide their real views for all sorts of reasons, in their case to either get elected or to hold on to their jobs.

I am rarely shocked by this, just disappointed.
 

theclaud

Reading around the chip
My post was pretty clear about which bit I was sure of [which happened to be the important bit], and what I wasn't [the less important bit]. But thanks for the tip all the same . x

I'd dispute that any of it was important, TBH, and would suggest instead taht like most posts of this kind the whole thing is largely nonsense.
 

Rusty Nails

Country Member

It is clear that there is still an attitude of racism in many institutions which in the past have been predominantly white with a white power base, and, disappointingly, there is no reason to expect that the Labour Party will be any different behind its public facade. Parties like to claim the moral high ground when It comes to all forms of racism.

I suspect that the reasons for racist attitudes transcend traditional left vs right and just boil down to ignorance and fear.

Reading that article I think the writer's first mistake was expecting anything more from a bunch of privileged kids playing at grown-up politics after he had been involved in politics in a multi-cultural area.
 
It is clear that there is still an attitude of racism in many institutions which in the past have been predominantly white with a white power base, and, disappointingly, there is no reason to expect that the Labour Party will be any different behind its public facade. Parties like to claim the moral high ground when It comes to all forms of racism.
There might be good intentions behind but they all fail when they start to blame white people for being white. and black people for being black. Terms as ''white priviledge'' ''colonism'' etc. are all made up by those who take advantage of it to claim a certain victimhood, but fighting racism and addressing these victimhood's are two different things.
Because trying to adress them together just lead to a futher divide what we see now, in the racism debate, in the trans-debate, in the US in the abortion debate. It just leads to people with strong opinions fortyfing their positions and the people with more moderate opinion simply ignoring it, because if you say can be taken the wrong way and therefore cost you tour job, position etc. etc.

While if you really want to solve issues you not an broader approach, an approach of understanding, but also an approach or refusing to use the same ammo as the screaming minority who feel their position is being undermined. And yes that screaming minority is often over privileged, and often white.
But it's still an minority, just as the colonizers where still a minority, blaming everyone is just as silly as blaming every Russian civilian form Putins campaign of wrongdoings. Doesn't make it more wrong or more right, it should change the focus from us-vs them to how are we getting along better in the future.

I suspect that the reasons for racist attitudes transcend traditional left vs right and just boil down to ignorance and fear.

Reading that article I think the writer's first mistake was expecting anything more from a bunch of privileged kids playing at grown-up politics after he had been involved in politics in a multi-cultural area.
Think it's more down to the fact that politics are a once every four year topic for most poeple, and in many countries politics have been quite stalemate, just like the Tories are in the power for years here, the VVD in the Netherlands also for more than 12 years now and more importantly the big parties all known eachother it's all part of the same circle and while it is a bit easyer in the one country then the other to start a new party, really big breaktought's of a new party ''out of the blue'' mostly don't really happen. Think closest in the Netherlands was the Lpf in the early 2000's and in the uk the Ukip, both parties crashed soon after. either by their founders/leader being murdered or walking away and starting an new party.
So people really don't feel that represented anymore.
 

Craig the cyclist

Über Member
Given that this was a BAME person commenting on the behaviour of another BAME person, it might be interesting to hear your definition of racism.
Could a white person commenting on the behaviour of another white person ever be seen as racist?
To be clear, I'm not condoning her remarks, merely wondering whether calling them racist is a little lazy.

BAME is not an in-use term any longer. It has been seen to have had its day and the world has moved on again.
 
BAME is not an in-use term any longer. It has been seen to have had its day and the world has moved on again.

I'd heard that too.

What will replace it?
 
OP
OP
spen666

spen666

Active Member
BAME is not an in-use term any longer. It has been seen to have had its day and the world has moved on again.


People try to control the language used to control the people.
Back when I was a student, I wrote an article for the student union newspaper condemning racism at football. The article had to be amended because i made reference to a chant being directed at "black" footballers". This was deemed racist and was edited by the student union council to "coloured" footballers.
If I wrote the same article today using the reference to coloured footballers, it would be edited to read black footballers.
Its similar with the term BAME , when it starts to be used by the masses, people demand it be changed to keep the masses unknowing what to say and effectively controlling the people.


Again, this applies across the political spectrum with people trying to redefine terms to suit their purposes and to try to control the masses
“He who controls the language controls the masses”.
–Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals
 
D

Deleted member 28

Guest
People try to control the language used to control the people.
Back when I was a student, I wrote an article for the student union newspaper condemning racism at football. The article had to be amended because i made reference to a chant being directed at "black" footballers". This was deemed racist and was edited by the student union council to "coloured" footballers.
If I wrote the same article today using the reference to coloured footballers, it would be edited to read black footballers.
Its similar with the term BAME , when it starts to be used by the masses, people demand it be changed to keep the masses unknowing what to say and effectively controlling the people.


Again, this applies across the political spectrum with people trying to redefine terms to suit their purposes and to try to control the masses

Who actually decides what is right and wrong though, is it the people affected or White people?

'Person of colour' was the 'in thing' not so long ago but apparently that's unacceptable now (it was a fookin ridiculous term though) but says who, these coloured people or white people?

Sh*t I said coloured!
 
I'd heard that too.

What will replace it?

PGM (People of the Global Majority) and GMH (Global Majority Heritage) are terms that are starting to gain ground. I find the latter less clumsy. Both, I think, are designed to recognise that 'minority' carries some baggage.

Personally I'm happy to use whatever term is favoured by the person being described. That could be brown, GMH, or Dave depending on the context.
 
Top Bottom