[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by arista

Starbucks Yesterday told staff
not to have BLM Clothes on.

But then a backlash
Today they said they are making BLM gear for their Staff.


CNN HD Smerconish

Starbucks are masters of folding to a bit of social media pressure.

"No you can't do that"
"Umm we will stop buying coffee from u"
"WAIT hold on hold on hold on how can we help you? We LOVE what you are doing. We will do it FOR you."

Not that I'm saying they should have disallowed BLM stuff, I just find their total lack of resolve on all issues amusing.

[GiRTh]

Youtube video

The Chris Dorner bit

"We saw ourselves like you saw yourselves” - Dave Chapelle

[Denver]

27 year old Rayshard Brooks was murded by police in Atlanta last night, he is the latest black man to be killed by police

[Denver]

He was murdered after taken a police taser and running away, a taser is not a life threatening weapon so no matter what they should never shoot to kill

[Ashley.]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

Don’t be condescending by telling people to educate themselves.

Lots try and use the fact that woman’s rights and gays rights as an example of how change will come by getting yourself out in the public eye.

Racism is a far deeper divide but change will come if the people that we vote into power have no choice but to make laws that protect ethnic minority’s because the overwhelming voice from the people is we want the law changed.

As soon as protesters show violence and start attacking businesses and the police all the momentum is lost and we are back to square one.

All good people don’t want violence and vandalism on the streets so that the empathy they felt for the cause is replaced by anger.

It’s people in suits that use pens that change life’s not those in hoodies carrying improvised weapons.

Are black people not good people for wishing for change after centuries of mistreatment? It seems as though you have completely missed my point if you believe that 'people in suits' will change the world, because that has rarely been the case in similar situations in the past. People will rebel until they are listened to, in the same vein children will cry until they are fed. As I said before - human nature.

Change does not happen because people 'wait patiently' or 'ask' for it' - it happens because people fight for it. And you'll have an extremely difficult time trying to convincing me otherwise.

[arista]

Originally Posted by Denver

27 year old Rayshard Brooks was murded by police in Atlanta last night, he is the latest black man to be killed by police

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53037953


Yes
A Wendys Burgers Drive through ,
is now on Fire
The place it went on in the car park.

Atlanta Police Chief & Mayor
have resigned.



[It had started late on Friday night when police
were called to reports of a man sleeping
in a car and blocking a drive-thru lane at a Wendy's restaurant.
The bureau's director, Vic Reynolds,
said Mr Brooks had grabbed a Taser from
one officer and pointed it towards him as he ran.
After running a short distance,
Mr Brooks "turns around and it appears to
the eye that he points the Taser
at the Atlanta officer", Mr Reynolds said,
in comments reported by NBC.
"At that point, the Atlanta officer reaches
down and retrieves his weapon from his holster,
discharges it, strikes Mr Brooks there
on the parking lot, and he goes down."]

https://news.sky.com/story/atlanta-p...ficer-12006386

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by Ashley.

Are black people not good people for wishing for change after centuries of mistreatment? It seems as though you have completely missed my point if you believe that 'people in suits' will change the world, because that has rarely been the case in similar situations in the past. People will rebel until they are listened to, in the same vein children will cry until they are fed. As I said before - human nature.

Change does not happen because people 'wait patiently' or 'ask' for it' - it happens because people fight for it. And you'll have an extremely difficult time trying to convincing me otherwise.

I think you have missed my point.
I’m not trying to convince you, because your opinion is your opinion.

Protest’s work when the cause makes the news not the fact violence and vandalism where used at the protest.

People recently celebrated VE Day for people then to attack Churchill who is probably the most admired prime minister in this countries history will get people’s backs up.

He came from a time when that’s how people viewed the word

You can’t rewrite history and it should be left as an example of the wrong doings
That have happened.

Smashing a window will get you noticed but it won’t change someone’s life for the better.

Only when the laws get passed does real change happen.

[bitontheslide]

violence and property damage were a means of attracting attention in the past as it was the only way to get the news that something was happening on the front page of the papers. That simply does not apply now.

The only way to change things is to change the consensus view, and that wont be achieved through violence and destruction

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

violence and property damage were a means of attracting attention in the past as it was the only way to get the news that something was happening on the front page of the papers. That simply does not apply now.

The only way to change things is to change the consensus view, and that wont be achieved through violence and destruction

We are on the same page.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

violence and property damage were a means of attracting attention in the past as it was the only way to get the news that something was happening on the front page of the papers. That simply does not apply now.

The only way to change things is to change the consensus view, and that wont be achieved through violence and destruction

Exactly.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

violence and property damage were a means of attracting attention in the past as it was the only way to get the news that something was happening on the front page of the papers. That simply does not apply now.

The only way to change things is to change the consensus view, and that wont be achieved through violence and destruction

How do you achieve that however when you have those in power dismissing or only paying lip service to arising issues.
So ignore petitions and currently even their own all party select committees.

Con or Lab or even the coalition.
These issues have been swept under the carpet and largely ignored.
Even moreso under this power mad lot in now.

From Labour in 2005 taking power with barely 36% of the vote.
The major so called parties, barely take 75% of the votes between them.
That means 25% of voters don't even vote for either main party..
I in 4 voters.

Yet one or the other gets absolute power, to ride over and ignore serious issues like race and even the massive social injustices.

In the light of that ignorance from those supposedly in power to serve, no matter which party it is in power,even in local authority settings too, how do you get things that should be, changed and put right.

Everyone has 2 ears and one mouth, as the saying goes.
Which means, even moreso to those in power, we should be listening twice as much as we are talking.

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

I think you have missed my point.
I’m not trying to convince you, because your opinion is your opinion.

Protest’s work when the cause makes the news not the fact violence and vandalism where used at the protest.

People recently celebrated VE Day for people then to attack Churchill who is probably the most admired prime minister in this countries history will get people’s backs up.

He came from a time when that’s how people viewed the word

You can’t rewrite history and it should be left as an example of the wrong doings
That have happened.

Smashing a window will get you noticed but it won’t change someone’s life for the better.

Only when the laws get passed does real change happen.

People of grenfell have been protesting since it happened. The only violence was committed by the government and the cladding companies. They have pretty much 100% public support, and they've achieved nothing.

The cladding still exists, people are still homeless, governmental friends have avoided charges, so protests don't necessarily work when the things you say need to happen, actually happen.

Protests are supposed to be disruptive.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

People of grenfell have been protesting since it happened. The only violence was committed by the government and the cladding companies. They have pretty much 100% public support, and they've achieved nothing.

The cladding still exists, people are still homeless, governmental friends have avoided charges, so protests don't necessarily work when the things you say need to happen, actually happen.

Protests are supposed to be disruptive.

Exactly right.

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

People of grenfell have been protesting since it happened. The only violence was committed by the government and the cladding companies. They have pretty much 100% public support, and they've achieved nothing.

The cladding still exists, people are still homeless, governmental friends have avoided charges, so protests don't necessarily work when the things you say need to happen, actually happen.

Protests are supposed to be disruptive.

Same as the Windrush generation. Even with almost univeral public support, so little has been done.

The Windrush generation deserves justice – not video chats with the home secretary

[Oliver_W]

The cladding thing being treated like a race-battle is odd, anyone can end up in a crappy block of flats. Of course all buildings with that cladding should be sorted out, and those rendered homeless by the fire should be given new homes, but there's no need to make it a race thing?

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

The cladding thing being treated like a race-battle is odd, anyone can end up in a crappy block of flats. Of course all buildings with that cladding should be sorted out, and those rendered homeless by the fire should be given new homes, but there's no need to make it a race thing?

Wasn't made a race battle, I made it a justice and protest thing. It's actually widely about class and I can prove it really easily. If the grenfell fire had happened to the gherkin, do you think the cladding on all similar structures would have been replaced by now? Would it be functional again, or would it have been pulled down by now with a replacement building already being erected, and would the people renting office space have been relocated by now?

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

Wasn't made a race battle, I made it a justice and protest thing. It's actually widely about class and I can prove it really easily. If the grenfell fire had happened to the gherkin, do you think the cladding on all similar structures would have been replaced by now? Would it be functional again, or would it have been pulled down by now with a replacement building already being erected, and would the people renting office space have been relocated by now?

That's different because the Gherkin is full of multi-million pound businesses, whereas people only lived in Grenfel

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

That's different because the Gherkin is full of multi-million pound businesses, whereas people only lived in Grenfel

Exactly, so it's about class.

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

Wasn't made a race battle, I made it a justice and protest thing. It's actually widely about class and I can prove it really easily. If the grenfell fire had happened to the gherkin, do you think the cladding on all similar structures would have been replaced by now? Would it be functional again, or would it have been pulled down by now with a replacement building already being erected, and would the people renting office space have been relocated by now?

To be fair, all of it is a class battle, however race and class are intricately interwoven so a race battle can be a class battle and a class battle can become a race battle. Mostly because race is the easiest way for people to automatically assume class. They dont discriminate because someone is black, they discriminate because they think they are lesser (classist). But, they make the assumption that they are likely to be lesser because they are black (racist).

There are of course a small number of flat-out biological race supremacists, but when it comes down to it, for the vast majority of casual racists the feeling of superiority is socioeconomic, and the racist part is the assumption of socioeconomic status through physical appearance.

[Liam-]

[Toy Soldier]

An easy illustration I guess, is that in most "racist white areas", if they saw a black celebrity (let's say Will Smith) hopping out of their expensive car in the street, they would be over the ****ing moon, telling him how much they love his movies, pestering for an autograph. They don't care that he's a black man - they KNOW he has enhanced social status. They wouldn't prefer it to be a white celebrity. Certainly not a lower-status white celebrity.

If they saw a black man they've never seen before they'd call the police. Because they're racist, yes, in assuming that an unknown black man is likely to be a criminal - and that's the part they hate/fear.

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

To be fair, all of it is a class battle, however race and class are intricately interwoven so a race battle can be a class battle and a class battle can become a race battle. Mostly because race is the easiest way for people to automatically assume class. They dont discriminate because someone is black, they discriminate because they think they are lesser (classist). But, they make the assumption that they are likely to be lesser because they are black (racist).

There are of course a small number of flat-out biological race supremacists, but when it comes down to it, for the vast majority of casual racists the feeling of superiority is socioeconomic, and the racist part is the assumption of socioeconomic status through physical appearance.

Not sure I agree entirely. Making poor people fight and blame each other regardless of colour is absolutely a genuine strategy, but I still think poor people from minorities are viewed as "lower" than poor whites. At least societally.

It's the difference that is always highlighted; the weird clothes, the stupid names, ramadamadingdong, overbreeding etc. They're always painted as having nefarious intentions, so blacks always wanted your daughters, muslims want to take over our country and rule us, coming for our jobs etc. There is a distinction between the classism that incorporates everyone and the racism that doesn't.

[Liam-]

Fair trade

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

The cladding thing being treated like a race-battle is odd, anyone can end up in a crappy block of flats. Of course all buildings with that cladding should be sorted out, and those rendered homeless by the fire should be given new homes, but there's no need to make it a race thing?

Ok let's make it a class thing, if it were flats that MPS live in would they be on the position the tenants of Grenfell are?

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Starbucks are masters of folding to a bit of social media pressure.

"No you can't do that"
"Umm we will stop buying coffee from u"
"WAIT hold on hold on hold on how can we help you? We LOVE what you are doing. We will do it FOR you."

Not that I'm saying they should have disallowed BLM stuff, I just find their total lack of resolve on all issues amusing.

Yep, you can't do anything.... unless it has the Starbucks branding on.