Have you listened to the actual interview? He really doesn't have the same POV of people here.

La la la your mum

Why would there be uproar? Social media is used by those who want people to celebrate their lives and big up their egos and when it all goes horribly wrong and they get’ “cancelled” or whatever they refer to it as, then they bitch and moan. As much as it’s great at times for communication, it’s an awful place if not treated with respect. Twitter is a particularly nasty site which I’m sure no one would miss if it was closed down.

A small minority, probably with a jealous streak write rubbish about famous people, some of it defamatory, some of it nasty and some of it racist. If the opportunity is there for them to get away with it, they will continue to do so. I think someone has already posted here that whilst you can remain totally anonymous there will always be an issue.

The world is not going to stop being nasty just because some people want it to.

The word ‘racist’ has no meaning nowadays, except in so far as it is a general term of abuse used by woke people to describe anyone who has different views on issues of race to their views.

It's certainly overused, but of course racism can and does come from all directions. The act of trying to redefine racism in such a way that declares that white people cannot even be on the receiving end of racism is of course absurd for instance.

But I'm not all that eager for a muddled political climate to be used as way of blotting out repugnant acts of racism. That of course is what these footballers have been on the receiving end of, and as I say in any other form of communication people wouldn't put up with it and so they shouldn't have to online either. If someone's brave enough to reel off slurs, they can be brave enough to put their name to it. That'll soon shut them up for the most part, because nobody with a shred of decency about them wants to be linked to such conduct.

Edited by BlueJay (13 Feb 2021 6.10am)

Racism, in its modern usage, ignoring the 'progressive' take (which isn't its original), is a word that simply describes preference for or dislike of an in-group or out-group.

The idea that society can rid itself of genetic preferences or dislikes is so infant-like in its thought process as to be dangerous. What is being created by modern zeitgeist is a dishonest expedient society where honesty is punished rather than discussed.

Preference for your in-group does not make you a bad or 'hateful' person. Those who say otherwise are either brainwashed or have an agenda against that particular group themselves.

Edited by Stirlingsays (13 Feb 2021 9.08am)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Good work, racism sorted.
Next time you’re being racially abused just say ‘sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt me’ to yourself and everything will be fine/ or just grow up because if someone wants to racially abuse you it’s up to them and you should grow up and take it.
Good plan. quote=Stirlingsays;3604110]

He's just desperate to be thought well of by his in-group.

The weaponsised 'racism' word is just a way of demonising an out-group for him.

The fact that they don't see it is a constant source of irony, then again it isn't in their interest to.

Until enough people reject the 'sticks and stones' stuff we will continue on this pointless charade. In truth change only comes when enough elites want it to, as they fund the cultural zeitgeist that the unthinking plebs follow.

When enough elites feel threatened that's when it'll change, that's how history works....it's all very Salem witch trials...which didn't end until the governor of the colony's own wife was accused of witchcraft.

Until then it didn't matter.

However, something on this scale would require an event much more dramatic, which no doubt wouldn't be fun at all.

Edited by Stirlingsays (13 Feb 2021 9.00am)