• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

A Political Thread pt. 2

Its ok, no worries.

Yeah that's reasonable - I'm not solely laying it at the player's feet, I think it's a been a joint effort, but not intentional. Honestly though it's not really that relevant any more, it has been tarnished, there is pretty wide spread divide and it should in theory be a pretty unifying issue. The fact that split exists is what suggests to me it's not doing more good than harm.

https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2021-06/Ipsos MORI Euros 2020 polling_120621_PUBLIC.pdf

Page 4 on there has only 40% of the country supporting the kneeling, with a good amount being ambivalent and almost a third being against it - the largest "anti racism" gesture in the nation should in theory garner a hell of a lot more support than that. I suppose where you expect it to be comes down to the proportion of the country you think are actual racist, I'd wager about 10% are actually racists, so then 40% support looks really really low. If it was really unifying then I'd expect at least 70% support. It may well be though that others on this forum believe it's a much higher amount but unfortunately we dont have any real polling for the answer!

The polling doesn't suggest unity on an issue that should be unifying - does that not suggest we are probably going about it wrong?

Unfortunately the link above doesnt let you isolate factors etc as they've listed multiple reasons for opposing the gesture rather than having to pick only one and I dont have the time to slog through all the data, but if you did, it would give you a pretty clear indication of when and where campaigning and protests would be effective, especially if you had a concrete mainfesto/legislative aims to go along with it. It would be good to know how they gave them options as well but hey ho, it gives the skeleton of good info
I think the reality is that white people in this country are so oblivious to white privilege and systemic, institutional racism that any gesture unifying them is unlikely. Part of the problem is while many people say they are against racism, they are only referring to the overt direct racism. They don't believe that structural, institutional racism and white privilege exist. The recent action of taking the knee has not really been about drawing attention to direct racism, but to the structural, institutional racism that black and other ethnic minority people face on a daily basis. It was always going to be divisive because the reality is that most important issues are. Rashford's feed the children is an more of an exception to the rule and even then you still had Tory MPs campaigning against the issue. MLK is one of a long line of black activists and he is actually in the middle and there have been plenty more since and there still are as racism and structural, institutional racism is still a huge issue. He didn't decide one day to just start a campaign and once black people were given the vote he would stop. It's an ongoing process and an ongoing conversation and often it means persevering even when many people disagree with you, because especially in this case you are trying to change societal institutions and values that have developed over centuries. It was always going to be divisive. However, the more people talk about it, discuss it and research it, the more opportunity there is for people to change their minds.

I don't have data, but I am positive that more people will have reassessed their views as racist and started to think more about racism than will have been against racism and then decided that taking the knee means they should stop being anti racist. As I said most people who have moved from being anti-racist to anti taking the knee will probably have been surface anti-racism people who only focused on direct racism.

As for whether this symbol has run it's course and another symbol would be more effective. I think that's the wrong way to view it. Even if a new, effective anti-racism symbol was created, people who want to shut the conversation down would find a way to tarnish that too. All that would happen is you would keep moving from new symbol to new symbol, and that would be even worse as ordinary people was just get confused. While this symbol may be divisive, it certainly is clear with what it means.

Finally, the events of the past week and England nearly winning have actually gone a long way to showing why taking the knee is important and I think many people will have reassessed their view. Someone else mentioned this in regards to those politicians who have changed their tune and are coming off as hypocrites. Many other people will be the same and while they may be hypocrites, at least they have acknowledge indirectly that they were wrong.

I think that the conversation it generates is far more important that trying to be a unifying symbol that will defeat racism, because that ultimately is a pipe dream, this is a long process that will take time, but as long as people keep talking about it, progress will be made.
 
Do you not think people not getting behind the gesture is indicative of the problem? They can't back down on taking the knee now. It's been established, it's making a lot of the oppressors uncomfortable/angry. Change isn't achieved by making a compromise just for the purpose of opening a dialogue, the dialogue comes first.

What the disagreement over/refusal to taking the knee shows is that racists, whether they're open racists or hide behind excuses to be against it, aren't ready to change or open to the idea of changing. Stopping now isn't going to get anyone a "seat at the table" to enter into constructive discussions, it's just going to brush it all under the rug again.

Taking the knee is still new, one year-old in Europe. It took me quite a while to understand it, I'm fairly sure there's a post on these boards from last year where I say I don't think I'd be comfortable taking it, I'm not racist in the slightest and I absolutely would be now. In the past week we've seen the most high profile case of why it's needed in England, you should see a lot of the "keep politics out of sport" types change their tune as long as they're not thick as pig **** once they've seen what their heroes are exposed to.

I really don't understand the criticism of gesture and identity politics when it comes to inequality, Patel's comments sounded very much like telling Mings et al to get back in their box and obey the status quo and we'll reward you. In reality if someone that high in government is criticising footballers they're on the ropes and but still desperate to resist change. Ultimately when you're an oppressed minority there's very little leverage you have to enforce change, if you're doing something that is making people uncomfortable and angry, while not causing harm and while showing your discontent you're doing something right. Giving it up to start campaigns and open a dialogue is wishful thinking when campaigns and dialogue aren't being offered.
 
Obviously newer data would be lovely...


I mean if you're fine with ambivalence to the anti racism gesture then that's not hugely productive? I'd have thought you'd have wanted wide spread support, not less than half.

I'd personally prefer if there was a gesture that far more than that number could get behind but hey, if that's fine for you
I'll be surprised if there is a gesture you'd get behind.

But your missing my point, we know with our eyes and ears that this has been constantly talked about for the past month probably the most its been discussed since the initial wave of protests in the wake of George Floyd's murder and taking the knee was widely adopted in the UK sports people. Its also possibly the clearest point its had in the public eye in discussing what taking the knee is really in protest of instead of smokescreens designed to dismiss it. We have a pre-tournament view that is whilst not terrible also not great either the campaign goes and they stick through it to the end we need that secondary data to know if the gesture worked and views did soften. If they did I'd say taking the knee was high successful if they didn't and number stayed the same it wouldn't of been sucessful.

I mean if everyone was behind the anti-racism message before the tournament there wouldn't much need to have one.
 
I think the reality is that white people in this country are so oblivious to white privilege and systemic, institutional racism that any gesture unifying them is unlikely. Part of the problem is while many people say they are against racism, they are only referring to the overt direct racism. They don't believe that structural, institutional racism and white privilege exist.
. . . . . I'm white, and I'm damn well not priviliged - you'd really struggle to find anyone less priviliged than me! Dad was a copper, Mum's a nurse - salt of the eart working class background me, from the rough end of town. Stuff you, and your claims that I have any privilege!"
So... you came from a two-parent household then, with two income streams - did your parents own the house or rent? did they have a car?
. . . . . That's nothing to do with it! My parents worked bloody hard to pay for those things!
Have you ever been abused by people you don't know, just because of your colour?
. . . . . Yeah - when I was in Glasgow for the football.
The... colour of your skin, not your shirt.... OK - have you ever had the shit kicked out of you because you held hands with your lover?
. . . . . No, and I don't know anyone who's told me it happened to them, so it can't be that common.
Have you ever been denied a drink because of your accent?
. . . . . Yeah, the bastard said I was slurring - I'd only had 6!
Okay then - have you ever been denied a promotion at work because someone less qualified, but less likely to be called away for childcare also applied?
. . . . . How dare you say I'm not a great dad! but yeah, I've missed out on promotions at work because some Polish bloke came over and stole my job.
There aren't any polish people at all at your work, but... erm... okay...
. . . . . Talk of combating racism/sexism/homophobia in this country is a solution looking for a problem - trouble is, that problem simply doesn't exist. Let's talk about voter fraud instead!
 
Last edited:
I'll be surprised if there is a gesture you'd get behind.

But your missing my point, we know with our eyes and ears that this has been constantly talked about for the past month probably the most its been discussed since the initial wave of protests in the wake of George Floyd's murder and taking the knee was widely adopted in the UK sports people. Its also possibly the clearest point its had in the public eye in discussing what taking the knee is really in protest of instead of smokescreens designed to dismiss it. We have a pre-tournament view that is whilst not terrible also not great either the campaign goes and they stick through it to the end we need that secondary data to know if the gesture worked and views did soften. If they did I'd say taking the knee was high successful if they didn't and number stayed the same it wouldn't of been sucessful.

I mean if everyone was behind the anti-racism message before the tournament there wouldn't much need to have one.
Does every post have to start with a snarky quip?

It would be interesting to see what happens if they run the same study again now but we'll both have to wait on that I guess.

If that, and whatever metrics they're using to measure racism indicate a shift then I'm happy to be wrong
 


"Yeah, that's America, it's simply not the same here"

 
Last edited:
Obviously newer data would be lovely...


I mean if you're fine with ambivalence to the anti racism gesture then that's not hugely productive? I'd have thought you'd have wanted wide spread support, not less than half.

I'd personally prefer if there was a gesture that far more than that number could get behind but hey, if that's fine for you

Sorry but can you name a single gesture that has ever been used by a civil rights movement that the established and usually right wing didn't then claim was uniquely associated with extremism? The gesture is not the problem, the fact ANY gesture is eventually dismissed as being related to an extremist group because the issue at hand inherently attracts all sorts of people. Surprisingly enough the issue of racial injustice has a fair number of angry black people who stand by it, yet somehow the second that happens the whole movement and all things related to it are associated with extremism. People that are now looked on as freedom fighters and revered at the time were called extremists, why do you think this will be any different?

That's the problem, there is NO gesture that can be associated with the fight against racism that the right wing will not end up claiming is associated with extremism and demanding that they protest in a way that is out of sight, out of mind and entirely ineffectual.

It's the very nature of civil rights movements, convincing the haves that the current situation is no acceptable and change is needed. That always causes pushback.
 


Remember when there was Labour leader who in 2019 said the Conservatives had plans to sell the NHS but the media said it was false?

Screenshot_20210715-090813.jpg
 
I always laugh when I see Tory MPs pretend to love the NHS even though they ideologically oppose it. They know it would be political suicide to come out and say they hate it so they say how great it is and how proud we are of it (even though it's a socialist institution essentially) but then seek to sell it off and privatise more of it as that's more in line with their ideology.
 
Wetherspoons TV (AKA GB News), the anti-cancel channel, who believe to the hilt in free speech, free of consequence; have cancelled Guto Harri as a consequence of his free speech
 
Wetherspoons TV (AKA GB News), the anti-cancel channel, who believe to the hilt in free speech, free of consequence; have cancelled Guto Harri as a consequence of his free speech
Usually the way. Every right wing "free speech" platform that has been launched the last few years has actually ended up being the exact opposite. What they actually meant was free speech for those on the right to spew hatred, any left wing views were instantly kicked off these supposed "free speech" platforms. By all means if the right wing want to have their platform and deny anyone else access who doesn't agree with it that's their choice, just don't delude yourself into thinking you are fighting for free speech if you do.
 
I see GB News officially hit zero viewers a couple of times this week - not even graveyard shift, it was 1pm and 5pm
 
I see GB News officially hit zero viewers a couple of times this week - not even graveyard shift, it was 1pm and 5pm
Apparently all because one presenter took the knee. If so, it tells you all you need to know about GB News's viewership.
 

Latest posts

Top