George Floyd (60 Viewers)

[Nick]

A good idea I think for football clubs would be to have integration events in their city / area. Maybe have some of the players there from different backgrounds and countries to be interviewed about their life experiences.

I'd happily listen and take on board things that way than some pricks smashing up statues etc or using it for politics.

A bit like the supporters club Q and A stuff but with the aim of integration / education.

Football clubs have a fairly broad range of players / nationalities (not so much in the lower leagues).

Even so, we have Bakayoko and Biamou who would have grown up in different countries. Then players like Jodi Jones who grew up in London (which the majority of city fans won't have) as a mixed race kid.

Even ex players like Michael Doyle who would have grown up in Ireland would be "different" to people born and raised in Coventry. The obvious one is when Bigi tells his story about moving over to Coventry, that sort of thing is going to go much further.

It's just about sharing experiences / integrating. Then that breeds that sort of attitude between the fans. (well the majority, not the ignorant cunts)

 

---

[Otis]

So embarrassing reading stories like this back.

How we were back then.


Statue campaign for dropped black player

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

You don't have to get the bus, you can just get in your car and figure out things for yourself. You don't have to jump on bandwagons.

I'm not sure that if you want progress and change you have to "support" BlackLivesMatter at all. People are starting to see that, especially when the true colours keep coming out of what it's all about.

It hasn't really been much more than a front to divide people even more, the point about equality has been completely lost and forgotten about.

The Premier League are back tracking and saying "They dont support the politics of BLM" even though they had their logo plastered over everything.

If everyone gets in their own car you end up with gridlock, nobody making an progress or getting anywhere and just getting roadrage at everyone else even though they just want to get to somewhere close to where you want to go.

 

[Nick]

If everyone gets in their own car you end up with gridlock, nobody making an progress or getting anywhere and just getting roadrage at everyone else even though they just want to get to somewhere close to where you want to go.

Then again you might get on a bus thinking you are going somewhere but it takes you somewhere completely different, you are then on the bus

 

[Nick]

So embarrassing reading stories like this back.

How we were back then.


Statue campaign for dropped black player

It's madness, even looking back to the Regis era it's completely different and unthinkable.

Granted there are still a tiny minority of cunts within football crowds but it's come a long way thankfully.

 

[ajsccfc]

Reminded me of this I saw the other day

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Then again you might get on a bus thinking you are going somewhere but it takes you somewhere completely different, you are then on the bus

And as soon as you realise it's not taking you that near to your destination you can choose to get off.

Good luck with forcing change on your own. A thousand bees coming at you individually are easy to avoid. A thousand bees coming at you in a swarm are a big problem.

 

[Nick]

And as soon as you realise it's not taking you that near to your destination you can choose to get off.

Good luck with forcing change on your own. A thousand bees coming at you individually are easy to avoid. A thousand bees coming at you in a swarm are a big problem.

Yeah, people are starting to try and get off now that they have realised all isn't as it seems. There won't be anybody on the bus soon so it will just stop.

 

[Monners]

A good idea I think for football clubs would be to have integration events in their city / area. Maybe have some of the players there from different backgrounds and countries to be interviewed about their life experiences.

I'd happily listen and take on board things that way than some pricks smashing up statues etc or using it for politics.

A bit like the supporters club Q and A stuff but with the aim of integration / education.

Football clubs have a fairly broad range of players / nationalities (not so much in the lower leagues).

Even so, we have Bakayoko and Biamou who would have grown up in different countries. Then players like Jodi Jones who grew up in London (which the majority of city fans won't have) as a mixed race kid.

Even ex players like Michael Doyle who would have grown up in Ireland would be "different" to people born and raised in Coventry. The obvious one is when Bigi tells his story about moving over to Coventry, that sort of thing is going to go much further.

It's just about sharing experiences / integrating. Then that breeds that sort of attitude between the fans. (well the majority, not the ignorant cunts)

This is a good idea Nick

The organisation I work for is taking a similar approach. I have just come off a call, and there were some very interesting views and experiences from people from different backgrounds and countries.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Yeah, people are starting to try and get off now that they have realised all isn't as it seems. There won't be anybody on the bus soon so it will just stop.

I guess it's more like others are seeing the popularity of that particular route and sending out their own buses using the same route number to get people on board even though they're heading to a less popular destination. If you then decide to change the route number all the time people will just be confused and it wouldn't be long before the imitators copied it again.

There isn't a foolproof means of doing it, but a collective will be more effective than a load of individuals.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I guess it's more like others are seeing the popularity of that particular route and sending out their own buses using the same route number to get people on board even though they're heading to a less popular destination. If you then decide to change the route number all the time people will just be confused and it wouldn't be long before the imitators copied it again.

There isn't a foolproof means of doing it, but a collective will be more effective than a load of individuals.

Getting lost with all the analogies here. Unless people are clear about what success looks like, or what the end goal is, I guess we’re going to keep hearing conflicting messages and seeing different actions carried out under the same banner.

 

[Nick]

Getting lost with all the analogies here. Unless people are clear about what success looks like, or what the end goal is, I guess we’re going to keep hearing conflicting messages and seeing different actions carried out under the same banner.

I've been asking about the aims and stuff and it turns out the aims are just pathetic politics. Raised over a million off the back of it though.

Black lives matter wasn't a new thing before everybody jumped on it, nobody checked though.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Getting lost with all the analogies here. Unless people are clear about what success looks like, or what the end goal is, I guess we’re going to keep hearing conflicting messages and seeing different actions carried out under the same banner.

If you’re cynical, the vague nature of what any success would like is deliberate.

To use an example, dismantling Physical legal structures e.g. discrimination laws (against women, LGBT and POC) was a objective goal that could be achieved.

On social media, and even close friends of mine talk of dismantling/changing ‘the system’. It is often the case that the issues and/or solutions are addressed in a very abstract, metaphysical way.

I read Burke at university, commenting on the French Revolution and he warned against the dangerous of such upheaval on metaphysical abstractions.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

If you’re cynical, the vague nature of what any success would like is deliberate.

To use an example, dismantling Physical legal structures e.g. discrimination laws (against women, LGBT and POC) was a objective goal that could be achieved.

On social media, and even close friends of mine talk of dismantling/changing ‘the system’. It is often the case that the issues and/or solutions are addressed in a very abstract, metaphysical way.

I read Burke at university, commenting on the French Revolution and he warned against the dangerous of such upheaval on metaphysical abstractions.

I suppose what I’m looking for are some of the leading figures in the campaign to lay out what the concrete objectives are in the short and long term, with some idea of a strategy. The war in Afghanistan has gone on for 20 years precisely because nobody could say what ‘mission complete’ would look like.

I get that I’m a scientist thinking in black and white terms (excuse the pun).

 

[Nick]

I suppose what I’m looking for are some of the leading figures in the campaign to lay out what the concrete objectives are in the short and long term, with some idea of a strategy. The war in Afghanistan has gone on for 20 years precisely because nobody could say what ‘mission complete’ would look like.

I get that I’m a scientist thinking in black and white terms (excuse the pun).

Defund the Police (Which means get rid of the police but if you get questioned about it, it means "Reroute funding")

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Defund the Police (Which means get rid of the police but if you get questioned about it, it means "Reroute funding")

That has also meant different things according to who you ask. Some literally mean completely scrap it, but others mean to cut the funding and reroute it elsewhere. The appeal of sound bites is that everyone thinks it applies to them, but that’s also the drawback.

 

[Nick]

That has also meant different things according to who you ask. Some literally mean completely scrap it, but others mean to cut the funding and reroute it elsewhere. The appeal of sound bites is that everyone thinks it applies to them, but that’s also the drawback.

That's the thing. "Depending on who you ask". I mean when you research it, the people pushing it want the police to be scrapped completely, all of the speakers at marches and protests seem to be pushing that.

It's like when we had NOPM, it stood for Not One Penny More but it was Not One Penny More when we were losing or if there was a big game coming up.

BLM has been around for years and has aims and propaganda when you have a look into it, it shouldn't have really been the phrase that was pushed. It's like somebody pushing "English Defence League" now and saying it's for army vets who have defending the country. There was such a frenzy after George Floyd that nobody really stopped to think, everybody just jumped on it.

Somebody has now made over a million quid from it in this country alone, how much worldwide?

 

[shmmeee]

I suppose what I’m looking for are some of the leading figures in the campaign to lay out what the concrete objectives are in the short and long term, with some idea of a strategy. The war in Afghanistan has gone on for 20 years precisely because nobody could say what ‘mission complete’ would look like.

I get that I’m a scientist thinking in black and white terms (excuse the pun).

Could've done with you in about a million threads about CCFC protests.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Defund the Police (Which means get rid of the police but if you get questioned about it, it means "Reroute funding")

It means get rid of the police by your interpretation of it. Doesn't mean everyone means it that way. It can mean anything from slight budget cuts, to change how it is spent on law and order, to the crackpot militants that mean completely get rid of the police.

MAGA got loads of people on board. Because it was open to interpretation and what one person believes would make America great would be what another thinks would be terrible for it. But they bother gather under the same banner.

Same with Fund the NHS. Hardly anyone would disagree with that. But it could mean more funding for frontline, adding in levels of management or getting private companies involved amongst many other things. I imagine quite a few wouldn't be so keen on the last two though.

 

[Nick]

It means get rid of the police by your interpretation of it. Doesn't mean everyone means it that way. It can mean anything from slight budget cuts, to change how it is spent on law and order, to the crackpot militants that mean completely get rid of the police.

MAGA got loads of people on board. Because it was open to interpretation and what one person believes would make America great would be what another thinks would be terrible for it. But they bother gather under the same banner.

Same with Fund the NHS. Hardly anyone would disagree with that. But it could mean more funding for frontline, adding in levels of management or getting private companies involved amongst many other things. I imagine quite a few wouldn't be so keen on the last two though.

Yet when you try to research it online, the only results you get are the sources where it originated from which clearly state it's to abolish the police? Which is why I was asking what the aims of it all were weeks ago, the only real aims that can be found are again from the sources (which people want to distance from suddenly, even though the Premier League are using their logos etc).

Exactly the same as when people tried to alter "Not One Penny More" to suit, even though the message is in the name and was pretty clear it was to not give the club a penny when it started.

 

[shmmeee]

That's the thing. "Depending on who you ask". I mean when you research it, the people pushing it want the police to be scrapped completely, all of the speakers at marches and protests seem to be pushing that.

It's like when we had NOPM, it stood for Not One Penny More but it was Not One Penny More when we were losing or if there was a big game coming up.

BLM has been around for years and has aims and propaganda when you have a look into it, it shouldn't have really been the phrase that was pushed. It's like somebody pushing "English Defence League" now and saying it's for army vets who have defending the country. There was such a frenzy after George Floyd that nobody really stopped to think, everybody just jumped on it.

Somebody has now made over a million quid from it in this country alone, how much worldwide?

Are you claiming all the millions of people marching and protesting believe everything the leaders of the BLM org believe?

If not, what’s your point? That protesters should all leave when someone with shitty views turns up? You just come across as “this isn’t perfect so we should ignore it”. It’s perfectly possible to say “I agree with black lives matter but I don’t agree with defunding the police (or whatever)”. I don’t get why you’re expecting purity from a grassroots uprising.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

That's the thing. "Depending on who you ask". I mean when you research it, the people pushing it want the police to be scrapped completely, all of the speakers at marches and protests seem to be pushing that.

It's like when we had NOPM, it stood for Not One Penny More but it was Not One Penny More when we were losing or if there was a big game coming up.

BLM has been around for years and has aims and propaganda when you have a look into it, it shouldn't have really been the phrase that was pushed. It's like somebody pushing "English Defence League" now and saying it's for army vets who have defending the country. There was such a frenzy after George Floyd that nobody really stopped to think, everybody just jumped on it.

Somebody has now made over a million quid from it in this country alone, how much worldwide?

A huge movement now but it risks being undermined by lack of direction.

 

[shmmeee]

A huge movement now but it risks being undermined by lack of direction.

It’s a real problem with a lot of social movements these days. Hard and fast legislation changes aren’t what’s needed and that’s what protest has been effective at. You can’t protest the government about racism in society for example because they don’t have the power to change it. So who are you demanding action from and how do you hold them accountable?

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Could've done with you in about a million threads about CCFC protests.

The protests to get us back in Coventry had a very clear aim, the ones to get rid of SISU sort of but few could answer ‘and who should replace them?’.

 

[shmmeee]

The protests to get us back in Coventry had a very clear aim, the ones to get rid of SISU sort of but few could answer ‘and who should replace them?’.

The first march was clear, “don’t leave Cov”, the rest have been unfocused “down with this sort of thing” protests.

 

[Nick]

Are you claiming all the millions of people marching and protesting believe everything the leaders of the BPM org believe?

If not, what’s your point? That protesters should all leave when someone with shitty views turns up? You just come across as “this isn’t perfect so we should ignore it”. It’s perfectly possible to say “I agree with black lives matter but I don’t agree with defunding the police (or whatever)”. I don’t get why you’re expecting purity from a grassroots uprising.

I mean, Black Lives Matter is the actual thing that they founded and was already founded before it was suddenly pushed. The Premier League are using the logo on shirts.

I'm claiming that not many people seemed to have stopped to check things before jumping on it and asked what the aims were. Of course a lot of people were there because they wanted Equality, then again people march for Brexit based on being misled on aims and by creating anger and divide.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

It’s a real problem with a lot of social movements these days. Hard and fast legislation changes aren’t what’s needed and that’s what protest has been effective at. You can’t protest the government about racism in society for example because they don’t have the power to change it. So who are you demanding action from and how do you hold them accountable?

Of course, but you should still have an idea of what success looks like and therefore how it might be achieved.

 

[shmmeee]

I mean, Black Lives Matter is the actual thing that they founded and was already founded before it was suddenly pushed. The Premier League are using the logo on shirts.

I'm claiming that not many people seemed to have stopped to check things before jumping on it and asked what the aims were. Of course a lot of people were there because they wanted Equality, then again people march for Brexit based on being misled on aims and by creating anger and divide.

This isn't grassroots, it's not a new thing. That's my point, it's been around for years and had the same views pushed even before it went "big" but nobody stopped to think. Meanwhile people are raking in the cash for their political organisations.

It is grassroots. You’re attributing far too much power to an organisation rather than a general message. And from what I can tell no the EPL aren’t using their logo, they’re just using the phrase.

 

[Nick]

It is grassroots. You’re attributing far too much power to an organisation rather than a general message. And from what I can tell no the EPL aren’t using their logo, they’re just using the phrase.

It isn't grassroots though is it? BLM / Black Lives Matter has been around for years.

Is it just a massive coincidence that the "general message" just happens to be exactly the same as the organisations that are making millions from "the general message" and are pushing political views?

It's not much different to Tommy Robinson starting a "be nice to people" organisation to try and push his bullshit after everybody has jumped on it. The name is nice, the message is nice but what it stands for isn't.

 

[shmmeee]

Of course, but you should still have an idea of what success looks like and therefore how it might be achieved.

No we’re in agreement. In the States at least at first BLM had a clear aim of “bring these cops to justice”, later and over here from the start IMO is was unfocused because it had no clear aim and that’s allowed some of the mental stuff to bubble up as well as stopping it being effective. The general answer has been like Nicks “yes it exists and it’s wrong but what do I need to do??”

 

[shmmeee]

It isn't grassroots though is it? Is it just a massive coincidence that the "general message" just happens to be exactly the same as the organisations that are making millions from "the general message"?

Do you think @hill83 is taking cues from the organisation? Am I?

 

[Nick]

Do you think @hill83 is taking cues from the organisation? Am I?

Hill is probably one of a minority who hasn't gone into politics in this thread, which has been my point.

People obviously are though, you see people on the news being interviewed and reporting their random facts, they are raising millions worldwide from it.

The whole precedent is set from "the organisation" that just happened to be run by the people who came up with it, just happen to make millions from it and just happen to all share the same political views.

Did nobody stop to think "Actually, Black Lives Matter seems like it's a political movement to me. How about we just say "Treat People as Equals" instead? I mean everybody should be Anti Facist but nobody is going around shouting antifa or holding up signs.

Of course, there should be equality. The whole "Black Lives Matter" slogan isn't new and it's making political groups a lot of money off the back of what happened in America.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

I suppose what I’m looking for are some of the leading figures in the campaign to lay out what the concrete objectives are in the short and long term, with some idea of a strategy. The war in Afghanistan has gone on for 20 years precisely because nobody could say what ‘mission complete’ would look like.

I get that I’m a scientist thinking in black and white terms (excuse the pun).

The predominant objective of the movement is to end ‘systemic injustices’. The precise meaning of this is not clear. There is a subsection If the movement that is neo-Marxist, a co-founder of the movement claim they are ‘trained Marxists’. So the term for them, would be the overthrow of capitalism and so on. Whereas the ordinary person going to demonstrations want to address disparities in society. However, disparities and discrimination are not mutually exclusive - again, this is a v complex, multifaceted issue that is being simplified.

Police brutality in the USA is such a complex issue. Firstly, the amount of guns in US society means the police have to be armed. Secondly, they also need to combat ready.

Where I sympathise with the ‘defund the police’, is that there are police departments that are almost microcosms of the industrial military complex. Reroute this spending on putting more police, and invest in better training and possibly even mental well-being services. After all, it is a very stressful and thankless profession. For anyone interested, look up Jocko Wilink’s appearance on Joe Rogan’s podcast (JRE 1492).

However, the term ‘defund the police’ is a loaded term that is often use to promote anti-police sentiments and/or policies. From abolition of the police force, to rerouting funding to various new branches e.g. mental health teams and so on. Yet, the viability of having no police, or unarmed units doing areas of policing is an untried policy that is based on unsound principles that could put more people at risk.

 

[Nick]

This is a good idea Nick

The organisation I work for is taking a similar approach. I have just come off a call, and there were some very interesting views and experiences from people from different backgrounds and countries.

They do it at my daughters school, not so much "lets have one of each in this group" but they move around where the kids sit every so often and mix the groups they work in. Everybody gets to know everybody and be friends with everybody. It's not allowing the kids to just naturally pick their groups that might happen usually.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

The predominant objective of the movement is to end ‘systemic injustices’. The precise meaning of this is not clear. There is a subsection If the movement that is neo-Marxist, a co-founder of the movement claim they are ‘trained Marxists’. So the term for them, would be the overthrow of capitalism and so on. Whereas the ordinary person going to demonstrations want to address disparities in society. However, disparities and discrimination are not mutually exclusive - again, this is a v complex, multifaceted issue that is being simplified.

Police brutality in the USA is such a complex issue. Firstly, the amount of guns in US society means the police have to be armed. Secondly, they also need to combat ready.

Where I sympathise with the ‘defund the police’, is that there are police departments that are almost microcosms of the industrial military complex. Reroute this spending on putting more police, and invest in better training and possibly even mental well-being services. After all, it is a very stressful and thankless profession. For anyone interested, look up Jocko Wilink’s appearance on Joe Rogan’s podcast (JRE 1492).

However, the term ‘defund the police’ is a loaded term that is often use to promote anti-police sentiments and/or policies. From abolition of the police force, to rerouting funding to various new branches e.g. mental health teams and so on. Yet, the viability of having no police, or unarmed units doing areas of policing is an untried policy that is based on unsound principles that could put more people at risk.

The best and most specific I have seen are the Campaign Zero reforms

Campaign Zero