Black Lives Matter

[gettafa]

Manx Radio: The Hardy Commission

Oh, that depiction of the Three Legs is going to endear an awful lot of Manx people, but I don't think they care anyway, the indigenous seem to be the chosen enemy for these people.

It's all about them.

 

 

Edited July 28, 2020 by gettafa

[Declan]

4 minutes ago, gettafa said:

Manx Radio: The Hardy Commission

Oh, that depiction of the Three Legs is going to endear an awful lot of Manx people, but I don't think they care anyway, the indigenous seem to be the chosen enemy for these people.

It's all about them.

 

How on Earth do you come to that conclusion based on the interview on that news page?

[HeliX]

You'll have to fill me in on why I should be upset about that triskellion.

[manxman34]

2 minutes ago, HeliX said:

You'll have to fill me in on why I should be upset about that triskellion.

It's a bit shit?

[Declan]

3 minutes ago, HeliX said:

You'll have to fill me in on why I should be upset about that triskellion.

Kneeling, I think.

[HeliX]

1 minute ago, Declan said:

Kneeling, I think.

Ah right. It's facing the wrong way isn't it? Either way I'm not arsed, it's their logo.

[John Wright]

7 hours ago, Declan said:

It's an imagined dramatisation of the life Anthony Walker could have lived had he not been killed in a racist attack at 18.

Actually it’s a dramatisation of the evening of his death ( which appears accurate from the contemporaneous reports of the trial ) and a poignant imagining of his life as it might have been lived over the next 5 years, who he might have met, how he might have affected their lives, what he might have achieved,  and then a recap of those events with him fading out so those who he might have affected are left on their own.

A what might have been,  apart from mindless racially motivated violence.

[Roger Mexico]

1 hour ago, Gladys said:

Indeed.  I often wonder what the real reason was [for the 2003 invasion of Iraq]. 

Two main reasons I think.  Firstly Bush wanted to be seen doing 'something' about 9/11.  The fact that by then (and indeed always) it was perfectly clear it nothing to do with Iraq was irrelevant.  Lots of dead, brown people would please the Republican base and enough Americans could be relied on to shore up Bush's ratings on the grounds of vague patriotism and supporting 'our boys'[1]

Secondly, yes indeed money.  Not in the usual way that way that was suggested by opponents at the time ('oil') but in terms of military contracts.  The Iraq War and especially the attempted reconstruction afterwards were massively outsourced to private companies, usually with the right connections among the Republican elite.  Think of it as a Prom scheme with added corpses.  And like the Prom, the more it failed, the more successful it was those running it.

And it worked.  Bush got re-elected, though not by much, so maybe the War made the difference.  And a lot of very rich people got even richer.  

 

[1]  This is where the US loses out by not being a monarchy and having the country's leading politician and head of state being the same person.  Still at least it gets rid of hereditary privilege.  Imagine a US President being the son of a previous one!

[gettafa]

42 minutes ago, Declan said:

How on Earth do you come to that conclusion based on the interview on that news page?

Because it is. 

41 minutes ago, HeliX said:

You'll have to fill me in on why I should be upset about that triskellion.

I really can't answer that one, only you can say if you are upset or not.

Endear is another matter.

Regarding the direction or which way the 3 legs face, the jury is out and won't ever come back on that one, but you don't need to proclaim your couldn't be arsedness, I think we would know that.

An upside down flag in any country is disrespectful and worse,  but the 3 legs upside down is kneeling and er, erm, Manx people don't do that for anyone.
Except maybe at the behest of the mighty BLM. So maybe it's me out of hilter on this (actually I'm not)

[Declan]

43 minutes ago, HeliX said:

Ah right. It's facing the wrong way isn't it? Either way I'm not arsed, it's their logo.

But best avoided, it's likely to trigger some people. And if your cause is to ask people to be culturally sensitive, well, you need to be culturally sensitive yourselves.

I rather hope that they succeed though. Teaching of history to include the stories of people other than the rich and powerful Englishmen is important because aside from a few Christians, Stephensons and Goldie-Taubmans its not really the history of our ancestors either. Once you start teaching that great events of history, the deeds of powerful men have dreadful life changing consquences for one set of ordinary people you are starting down a very intriguing road. How can you not teach black history, without also teaching working class history and Manx history? I don't think you can. I think they go hand in hand. 

[HeliX]

28 minutes ago, gettafa said:

An upside down flag in any country is disrespectful and worse,  but the 3 legs upside down is kneeling and er, erm, Manx people don't do that for anyone.

Is it upside down or just spun a couple dozen degrees?

I'm plenty Manx and I've kneeled for lots of things. I kneeled for the missus. I kneel to play with dogs. I kneel to play with kids. I kneel to work on vehicles.

I kneeled in a church as a kid. Won't make that mistake again.

[Gladys]

45 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Two main reasons I think.  Firstly Bush wanted to be seen doing 'something' about 9/11.  The fact that by then (and indeed always) it was perfectly clear it nothing to do with Iraq was irrelevant.  Lots of dead, brown people would please the Republican base and enough Americans could be relied on to shore up Bush's ratings on the grounds of vague patriotism and supporting 'our boys'[1]

Secondly, yes indeed money.  Not in the usual way that way that was suggested by opponents at the time ('oil') but in terms of military contracts.  The Iraq War and especially the attempted reconstruction afterwards were massively outsourced to private companies, usually with the right connections among the Republican elite.  Think of it as a Prom scheme with added corpses.  And like the Prom, the more it failed, the more successful it was those running it.

And it worked.  Bush got re-elected, though not by much, so maybe the War made the difference.  And a lot of very rich people got even richer.  

 

[1]  This is where the US loses out by not being a monarchy and having the country's leading politician and head of state being the same person.  Still at least it gets rid of hereditary privilege.  Imagine a US President being the son of a previous one!

Very true on the reconstruction bit.  The first Iraqi war involved huge reconstruction contracts given to the likes of Halliburton.  

[The Old Git]

14 minutes ago, HeliX said:

I kneeled in a church as a kid. Won't make that mistake again.

Sore bottom?

[Max Power]

12 minutes ago, Declan said:

But best avoided, it's likely to trigger some people. And if your cause is to ask people to be culturally sensitive, well, you need to be culturally sensitive yourselves.

I rather hope that they succeed though. Teaching of history to include the stories of people other than the rich and powerful Englishmen is important because aside from a few Christians, Stephensons and Goldie-Taubmans its not really the history of our ancestors either. Once you start teaching that great events of history, the deeds of powerful men have dreadful life changing consquences for one set of ordinary people you are starting down a very intriguing road. How can you not teach black history, without also teaching working class history and Manx history? I don't think you can. I think they go hand in hand. 

Black history, although important, is still a very small part of the history of Britain in the scheme of things though. Apart from slavery, its abolition and the scramble for Africa, then the dissolution of empire and the influx of immigrants, this is only a part of roughly 400 years out of 1,500 years of known history. I don't feel that there is much that needs rewritten, just some additions to include the parts played by significant black people and the way that they were seen and treated at the time. I think that some of this is already covered but a review is certainly worthwhile.  

[Shake me up Judy]

I've got news for ya's all. The new historicism came in decades ago and they've been teaching black history/working class/gender history for a long time. I even remember doing stuff on slavery when I was in short trousers. History from the bottom up. That and the Nazis. We mustn't forget those Nazis. They were bad people.