Mein Kampf and racist mindsets - I was noting a pretty extreme disparity in our experiences, and the frequency with which we have each encountered each of those things. However, I accept your last point and that my convenient binary shorthand is not meaningful to you. I suspect other posters/readers will be able to relate, despite the deliberate lack of granularity.

I wasn’t triggered. I was just wondering if you were trying - it is something you have admitted to enjoying previously. And it did tick enough of those boxes to make me genuinely wonder.

My opinions are based on me buying into rhetoric and yours are based on facts, you believe? Well, that’s not really a tenable position. Facts are facts, but they’re meaningless without context and interpretation.

The whataboutery section - Even white lady dog walkers know there’s an issue with Police racism. Black people are often turned away, in all sorts of contexts. While there are no longer ‘white only’ job adverts, black candidates do face discrimination in the employment market. Studies have looked at responses to applications with typically black and white names, for example. Anti-discrimination legislation existing is better than it not, but it won’t be as effective as we’d like.

Black communities in the US started at a massive disadvantage, from slavery, through apartheid and redlining, to the more informal and slightly more subtle prejudices and barriers of the 21st century. At least the direction of travel is good, eh? Like anybody else, black people are responsible for their actions as individuals. However, differences in circumstances need to be acknowledged at a population level and they’re pretty extreme in this context.

Without getting too anthropological about it, why do you think issues/trends have arisen, for example, around absentee fathers in African American and some Afro-Caribbean communities, that are not seen in African communities to the same degree?

My last post is an opinion to which there are many references - Christopher Hitchens being one.

There are many examples of people living in poverty - all you lefties on here keep pointing out how many there are in this country - but we don't see the degree of violence to others especially within their own ethnic group. Black on black killing especially in the gangs in London are significant - why do they do that. The idea that opportunities don't exist for black kids is also untrue. You have to question why are there so many single parent families in that Ethnic group? that has nothing to do with racism. Kids have no structure, again that is not racist issue, so they don't attend school and they wonder why it is difficult to get on the career ladder - again that is a cultural issue nothing to do with racism. You don't have the same issues in the South East Asian or Indian communities - why?

Just to note, as I mentioned elsewhere recently, that I always found Hitchens a pretty unimpressive figure.

On deprivation and relative lack of privilege, it is a question of degree. You’ve asked a lot of questions there, and fundamentally that is what my answers will come back to.

Assuming you don’t accept that, do you have any answers to suggest? Do you think there’s some sort of inherent racial biological and/or cultural issue? If the latter, why and how do you think that issue arose? Or is it just a mystery?

I don't disagree there is racial issues in this country - what I dispute is the reaction to that and the differentials between different cultures. Something you haven't wanted to answer - perhaps the real truth is simply too unpalatable for today's woke culture?

What haven’t I answered? I believe the differences are largely a result of socioeconomic factors and the social-cultural construct of race and the racism that has arisen from it. You may agree or disagree, but surely it is an answer. Acknowledging that we live in a racist society is not hugely palatable - I wish we didn’t. There’d be a huge dividend for white people from an end to racism, imo.

This ‘real truth’ that you allude to, which is perhaps too unpalatable for woke folk... would I be correct in thinking that you’re reluctant to expand on it because it might breach the AUP?

Perhaps we can build instead from a point of agreement and joint-wokeness. Is there minority ethnic group who you think have suffered extensively from oppression and unfair characterisation? I’ll let you choose, but you mentioned Indian communities in an earlier post... or if not them, then maybe Jewish people? Australian or American native peoples? While the role of oppressor is by no means unique to white people, I’m thinking about British, European and colonial examples, for familiarity’s sake (rather than something like Myanmar-Rohingya or Indonesia-West Papua, unless you happen to know a lot about them and have an especial sympathy for their plight).

It's largely a culture thing, but before anyone blows up, it's not a black thing. If we're assuming many blacks come from deprived, poor neighbourhoods - you will see the same behaviour in similarly poor white neighbourhoods. Perhaps a lack of enthusiasm for education leading to either low-level jobs, no jobs and/or criminality. Single parents households. Drugs and drink part of everyday life. Low-level criminality also part of every day life. Drug peddlers and gangs making their money at the expense of those who can't afford it.

The only difference I see in black neighbourhoods is the glamourisation of gang culture, drugs and criminality in music and movies - not so prevalent in white culture although although that hilarious 'fake Jamaican' accent has spread from London and the Yardie gangs, and is now commonplace among street criminals across the country regardless of race - an example of mirroring what is perceived to be a desirable gang culture.

Why are many black US communities poor? Well, I looked at Compton as the most infamous example. Originally a middle-class white neighbourhood, wealthier middle class blacks began to move in. Racial friction in the 50's led to some 'white flight' although it remained still majority white. The Watts Riots (ironically triggered by a police arrest) destroyed large parts of the town and local industry and led to more 'white flight'. Resulting poverty and unemployment contributed to the formation of gangs, resulting in the Bloods vs Crips feud which only added to the violence and deprivation. The emergence of hard drugs in the 70's & 80's escalated things massively and things have never really improved, indeed black on black violence remains by far the biggest cause of death. I'm sure there's more to it but it's a quick synopsis and possibly not dissimilar to other black communities and lends itself to my previous post - how to break the cycle of communities held back far more by gang culture, drug use and criminality than by 'white oppression', although I'm not blind to incidents of white racism, including the police.

Anyway, I see today every historical monument is now under threat and more have been pulled down. The BBC broadcast several hours of the funeral of a violent career criminal and drug user and Labour chose to 'take a knee' in a fricking hilarious photo release. Media pressure is forcing everyone in this country to kneel figuratively and literally to a movement that promotes the destruction of...well everything by the looks of it. This last week has done more to blow up racial tension than Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon has ever done. Take a knee boys, the cameras are watching.

Indeed, I have been saying for a long time that, if we were to retrospectively apply today's "standards" then most of the archives would be empty. Taking Little Britain as a case in point, it is satirical, nothing more. Are they deleting The Two Ronnies, they 'blacked up' and cross-dressed for sketches. Morecambe and Wise featured frequent innuendo and sexism, is it/should it just be about 'white oppression', will Russia be taking down statues of Lenin, Stalin, Germany removing the Khaiser statues. Are we going to close the V&A, and all other history museums (largely built by monies that can be traced back to The Empire and oppression in India) is The Empire State building to be renamed... where does it stop?

Why is it we celebrate London is "multi cultural"but people want to remove markers to the history that contributed to that? (surely things that happened 2,3,4,500 years ago should be remembered, the good and the bad).

Racism and Intolerance isn't purely directed by white people at black people, Indians hate Pakistani's (at least in their 'own' countries they do), Canadians are far from fond of Americans, Australia and America were largely built by the oppression of the indigenous peoples. Attitudes and society have changed, in the case of the snowflakes and milennials a lot of that change hasn't been positive. Will people be happy when BAME becomes WAME, which in some parts of some cities in the UK is already happening....?

Most statues of Lenin and Stalin were removed after the fall of the Soviet Union.
TBH it's amazing that people can't take a moment to reconsider the role of people in history. The standards of their time are static but the standards of our time are not. We can easily ask, "would we put a statue up to that person now?" and, then, "why not?". If it's because their achievements have been forgotten, fine. If it's because they were butchers or slavers then we shouldn't simply leave those monuments around just because they've always been there. Leave the plinths for genuine heroes, the removed statues can be sited in a museum where their context can be explained in greater detail.

People like Churchill are more difficult because he clearly did some awful things but for British people this is balanced by his genuine inspiring leadership. Someone using the profits of their slave business to build some fine buildings in Bristol does not compare - the awful is not outweighed by the good. Fortunately in a lot of these cases the situation is pretty clear cut.

So, you're no longer buying tea, coffee, sugar, clothes etc.No more Gin & Tonic....?

What about Liverpool uni renaming a building because it bears Gladstone's name?

Quote: IR80 "Indeed, I have been saying for a long time that, if we were to retrospectively apply today's "standards" then most of the archives would be empty. Taking Little Britain as a case in point, it is satirical, nothing more. Are they deleting The Two Ronnies, they 'blacked up' and cross-dressed for sketches. Morecambe and Wise featured frequent innuendo and sexism, is it/should it just be about 'white oppression', will Russia be taking down statues of Lenin, Stalin, Germany removing the Khaiser statues. Are we going to close the V&A, and all other history museums (largely built by monies that can be traced back to The Empire and oppression in India) is The Empire State building to be renamed... where does it stop? Why is it we celebrate London is "multi cultural"but people want to remove markers to the history that contributed to that? (surely things that happened 2,3,4,500 years ago should be remembered, the good and the bad). Racism and Intolerance isn't purely directed by white people at black people, Indians hate Pakistani's (at least in their 'own' countries they do), Canadians are far from fond of Americans, Australia and America were largely built by the oppression of the indigenous peoples. Attitudes and society have changed, in the case of the snowflakes and milennials a lot of that change hasn't been positive. Will people be happy when BAME becomes WAME, which in some parts of some cities in the UK is already happening....?'" To some extent I agree. However, I think there’s a difference between remembering and celebrating. De-Stalinization started under Khrushchev with, for example, Stalingrad (formerly Tsaritsyn) being renamed Volgograd. St Petersburg later reverted to that name from Leningrad. Removal of statues was common after the fall of the Soviet Union. https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/ch ... 92856.html There wasn’t much complaint about that statue of Sadaam Hussein being pulled down in Baghdad or talk of criminal damage. Apart from about the brief and slightly clumsy use of a US flag, making it look more conquest than liberation. He was undoubtedly an important historical figure there. These images can be powerful because, like three word slogans, they have a visceral impact. The US mission in Iraq was mightily, probably fatally set back by those images of Charles Grainer and Lynndie England abusing prisoners in Abu Ghraib. This all feels reminiscent of that to me, in terms of shifting public opinion.

Quote: IR80 "Indeed, I have been saying for a long time that, if we were to retrospectively apply today's "standards" then most of the archives would be empty. Taking Little Britain as a case in point, it is satirical, nothing more. Are they deleting The Two Ronnies, they 'blacked up' and cross-dressed for sketches. Morecambe and Wise featured frequent innuendo and sexism, is it/should it just be about 'white oppression', will Russia be taking down statues of Lenin, Stalin, Germany removing the Khaiser statues. Are we going to close the V&A, and all other history museums (largely built by monies that can be traced back to The Empire and oppression in India) is The Empire State building to be renamed... where does it stop? Why is it we celebrate London is "multi cultural"but people want to remove markers to the history that contributed to that? (surely things that happened 2,3,4,500 years ago should be remembered, the good and the bad). Racism and Intolerance isn't purely directed by white people at black people, Indians hate Pakistani's (at least in their 'own' countries they do), Canadians are far from fond of Americans, Australia and America were largely built by the oppression of the indigenous peoples. Attitudes and society have changed, in the case of the snowflakes and milennials a lot of that change hasn't been positive. Will people be happy when BAME becomes WAME, which in some parts of some cities in the UK is already happening....?'" To some extent I agree. However, I think there’s a difference between remembering and celebrating. De-Stalinization started under Khrushchev with, for example, Stalingrad (formerly Tsaritsyn) being renamed Volgograd. St Petersburg later reverted to that name from Leningrad. Removal of statues was common after the fall of the Soviet Union. https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/ch ... 92856.html There wasn’t much complaint about that statue of Sadaam Hussein being pulled down in Baghdad or talk of criminal damage. Apart from about the brief and slightly clumsy use of a US flag, making it look more conquest than liberation. He was undoubtedly an important historical figure there. These images can be powerful because, like three word slogans, they have a visceral impact. The US mission in Iraq was mightily, probably fatally set back by those images of Charles Grainer and Lynndie England abusing prisoners in Abu Ghraib. This all feels reminiscent of that to me, in terms of shifting public opinion.

It's almost impossible to have a grown up conversation with you TBH. Straw manning everything surely gets tedious after a while?

Not straw manning (the late 90's wants it's out dated project management speak back, by the way), you are saying history should be exponged, we can't be selective, can we?

Let's start by destroying all the churches, we fought the crusades and murdered many thousands in the name of Christianity, plundured spices etc. from the near, middle and far east.

Interesting how Labpur are, again, turning this into a political issue...how errr, 'grown up'...!

Under slavery slaves were not regarded as humans but as property. When they picked up slaves in Africa they insured them for what they would be worth when they got to the America’s. When they arrived if any were sick or ill they would be sold at cut price costs hence slavers lost money. So what they used to do was when anyone was sick or injured at sea slavers used to throw them overboard and say they died. Then they used to claim the insurance on them. One ship threw 240 slaves overboard including 18 children and claimed the insurance. They were prosecuted not for MURDER but for fraud for claiming on property. That made coulson a lot of money in Bristol so no sympathy from me for his statue ending ending up in the sea.

Literally hundreds and thousands of live human beings were thrown into the seas because they were worth more dead than alive.

Ah right, so that makes wilful destruction of property, incitement etc. acceptable does it?

Can i go and shoot anyone German because of what they did in two worlds wars..., I best not go on holiday anywhere that used to be red on the map.