No-one here said that using the word 'black' was inherently racist. It's the context it's used in which defines it. For instance: "You black b*stard* IS racist, whereas "I'll have a black coffee" isn't.

If a newspaper whose sales are aimed at the black community wants to describe itself as a "black" paper, what does it matter? Why feel so threatened and defensive? Why not be secure in your own identity without having to feel antagonistic to others? Why feel the need to aim animosity at those who don't fit your view of who belongs in this country and who doesn't? We are all decendents of immigrants after all.

"You can feel the stadium jumping. The stadium is actually physically moving up and down"
FA Cup MOTD 24/4/16

You're missing the point. If a newspaper styled itself as aimed towards white people, and openly proclaimed it to be so, would it be allowed to do that? You know what the answer to that is. And please don't misinterpret my comments as being defensive - read what I've said very carefully before making ridiculous comments.

you obviously don't realise that every other form of music that i have omitted descends from MOBO then.

Edited by tetley (27 Nov 2004 1:28pm)

[Link]

This argument has been done before... You're looking at it in completely the wrong way. The Voice is needed for black people to read about issues that effect them i.e the black community, black culture and news coming from black countries etc. It in no way discriminates against any other race.

All Football fans are scum and should be treated as such

Thank You, Goodnight, Much Love x

Personally, I don't have a problem with "the voice" magazine, being the voice of black people, it's just the fact that white people are too f***ing worried about putting out a magazine which in any ways promotes white culture, as they will no doubt be pounced on for being racist. The thing is, 90% of the time, it's not even ethnics complaining that these things are racist, it's just the happy clappy government, who will do everything in their power to keep the ethnic population of England happy, whilst in the mean time completely over-looking the white population.

Something wrong with your hearing, then. My question wasn't answered.

I was commenting on madcap's reply, not your question.

"You can feel the stadium jumping. The stadium is actually physically moving up and down"
FA Cup MOTD 24/4/16

Launching a "white" newspaper would be more wrong

seems like you wanna have your cake and eat it too. you claim it's needed but still admit that it is wrong

just an observation - i may have taken it the wrong way

More wrong in terms of the argument. The only thing wrong about the voice is the need for a black newspaper in this multi-racial society. If you get waht i mean...

All Football fans are scum and should be treated as such

Thank You, Goodnight, Much Love x

seems like you wanna have your cake and eat it too. you claim it's needed but still admit that it is wrong

just an observation - i may have taken it the wrong way

More wrong in terms of the argument. The only thing wrong about the voice is the need for a black newspaper in this multi-racial society. If you get waht i mean...

As I thought. Double standards.

The issue is this.

The content of the respective papers is, in fact, irrelevant. The point I'm making is simple: it is clearly acceptable for a newspaper to promote itself as being aimed at a black readership (qed) but, in this political climate, it would be seen as unacceptable for another newspaper to directly align itself with a white readership and would have the pc brigade bleating about it being 'racist' quicker than you could say 'hypocrite'.

It is a fact that native, white culture in this country has been largely subordinated so as not to 'offend' those whose origins are not from these shores - making excessive allowance for religious festivals celebrated by a tiny minority of the population at the expense of established and traditional customs (you only have to see the number of local authorities putting the damper on Santa and carol singers for fear of causing some kind of offence), selectively altering the way history is taught in schools so as to show the British in an unfavourable light (regardless of the benefits that colonialism etc. offered), the demoralisation of the police by describing them as 'institutionally racist' (a ridiculous expression as they are the ones who see who the crimes are committed by and know that, in some areas, it's an even money bet that the culprit is non-white and probably already known to them) and I could go on.

Given that non-whites represent maybe 7-8% of the population (if that figure's wrong, it's not much higher), why are we so sensitive about it? In practice, many, both black and white, would rather things shake down naturally over a period of time rather than introduce legislation which, in effect, tell people what they must think. As others have noted here, the problem is not with non-whites but the do-gooding, Guardian reading, left wing thinkers who have us by the throats from Downing Street, through to the town halls up and down the country.

What makes people angry, myself included, is the way that there is this rush to absorb other cultures, almost by force feeding, while at the same time making many of us (the majority of us)feel like aliens in our own country.

This isn't a white v black issue - it's about the way our political lords and masters try to control our thinking. Education about these issues is fine; making laws that end up alienating the majority is not only stupid but also very, very dangerous.