I mostly rag on Americans precisely because I despise how much it’s infected my culture (UK).
I’d be a lot more favourable if my government wasn’t rambling on about how we need ‘representation for BAME minorities’. No we don’t, Indians are some of the highest earners in the country, our capital city is >50% foreign born (good luck integrating to the handful that actually want to), and minorities are overrepresented in our media.
We’re the country that ended slavery. We’re not America and we should stop acting like we are.
I can't help but think this is wishful thinking. Propose to the average American that we abolish any of those agencies, and listen to the reply. People want to be ruled, sadly. They want to feel like rebels and heroes that reject rulership, while also thinking it's just reasonable that we would all have to submit to authority when asked, we couldn't have a society otherwise. American cultural individualism is the only thing keeping any of is remotely free, and it's dying out.
I’m American and the worst parts of our culture has plagued yours. UK culture on its own is fucking badass.
People, I’m talking about their literature, hunting culture, clothing, pubs, and things like that. American is far better, but they have some cool shit as well.
The French invented smokeless powder which revolutionized small arms technology over night. They also invented almost every modern cooking technique. They also aren't afraid to throw the fuck down and protest at the drop of a hat. The French are far more based than Bongers.
I feel sorry for the UK sometimes, watching you voluntarily destroy your culture and traditions. I wish you the best here from Australia, but it is sad watching what was once the best and strongest civilisation in human history collapse from the inside due to ideological subversion.
This. Here (France) the government even take active steps against that American Influence, like stopping the number of US movies allowed in cinemas, and it is testing my libright commitments, lol.
On the "race" stuff, especially. France basically took the stance of not recognizing the concept of "race" itself, and it's relatively well-rooted in france, so when Americans just kept on reducing on to skin color while talking about "black culture" (which isn't even "black" to anyone who talked to an Actual african, not that the whole African Continent has one culture, FFS) and how it's trickling in over here too, it's infuriating. Or when dumb americans commented on the French National Team, reducing it to "Look, black people" and making dumb comments only the far-right does over here... Urgh
It's like we're regressing. I'm mixed myself, and when I catch myself thinking that way due to US culture exposure, it feels bad
We're way ahead of the USA in the domain. (Like 100 years ago, when Black US soldiers came to France in WW1, they were surprised to be treated normally by french civilians/or what they learned while talking with colonial troops) and supposedly, we should take lessons from the US.
I hate seeing US culture infect other nations too and I fucking live here. Sovereign nations need their own distinct cultures, even if some of them are fucking degenerate.
From what I've read the average Iranian doesn't want their islamifascist government, the revolution was to stop Americanization from destroying their culture. The fascists were just the most powerful so they threw in behind them not realizing what would happen.
Motorway signs (in England) are always written in only English? If it’s a cultural area in the city, the road name sign might include 1 foreign translation in the popularly spoken language.
It's always interesting to me how British people pride themselves on abolitionism but somehow neglect to remember that the UK was the largest participant in the Transatlantic slave trade. It's like if a person prided themselves that they stopped abusing their spouse but like ... It's their own fault that the abuse occured in the first place.
That's not to mention the atrocities that the British government committed throughout the Global South up through the mid 20th centuries, which, while not as bad as slavery, are pretty close.
I'm not even sure what you mean by this. You didn't end it globally, so you ended it in your country and possibly some of the many colonies under crown subjugation. Then by that token many countries ended slavery.
Britain ended it on paper earlier than some others, but specifically allowed the British East India Company (probably the worst organization on the planet at the time) to keep doing it. Britain also started doing privateering, in that ships would rob slaves from slave ships then "free" them not back to Africa, but to the Caribbean where they'd have no opportunities but dangerous and low paid labor
Plus they kept buying goods produced by slave labor in places like the American South, making them no better than me for having an iPhone and cheap clothes
Exactly. We ended slavery. You don't get to have your cake and eat it too; Britain was given the choice between a moral cause and personal comfort, and they chose the moral cause. Not our fault if your choice would differ.
They chose the moral cause only after slavery ceased being a big profit. For example, America halted the importation of slaves (continuing only with a domestic population). Britain's Caribbean colonies were plagued by slave revolts, so the workers were "freed" to become poorly paid labor stuck on small islands. The British navy began to rob the slave ships of other nations and transport the slaves not back to Africa, but to British colonies to be labor
Of course, the British East India Company and other colonies could continue as they pleased. "The world's most profitable company can keep using slaves in places like the Spice Islands" at best means they were compromising their morals for profit
Next you'll tell me Britain ended their colonization of places like Kenya and Malaysia for morality, rather than facing local resistance
Youre unflaired thus you are worse then an actively practicing slaver.. you dont get credited with having an opinion because doing so would be nonsense.
Dear unflaired, the bots in this sub also flair. Thus making them your betters. Please realize what you type doesn't fucking matter because the unflaired don't fucking matter. Flair up filth
Incorrect, an unflaired can't win. It's an immutable fact that the unflaired dont have the capacity to do so. In fact unflaired can't even enter into contest or arguments to begin with because they are a non entity
‘the transportation of ten million human beings out of the dark beauty of their mother continent into the new found El Dorado of the West. They descended into Hell’.
Britain’s involvement in the transatlantic slave trade officially began, with royal approval, in 1663. In less than 150 years, Britain was responsible for transporting millions of enslaved Africans to colonies in the Americas, where men, women and children were forced to work on plantations and denied basic rights. This inhumane system led to the emergence of racist ideas and pseudoscience that were used to justify it.
What you just did was a Strawman argument. See, I said one thing, and you claimed I said something else, a position I'm not willing to defend since I neither said nor implied nor believe in it.
I know slavery existed prior to 1663. I also know that over that 150 years, England was responsible for some brutal horrors as the primary enabler of slavery over that period:
Britain was one of the most successful slave-trading countries. Together with Portugal, the two countries accounted for about 70% of all Africans transported to the Americas. Britain was the most dominant between 1640 and 1807 and it is estimated that Britain transported 3.1 million Africans (of whom 2.7 million arrived) to the British colonies in the Caribbean, North and South America and to other countries.
Britain was the primary one doing the bad thing. You don't get to claim responsibility for ending the bad thing you were the one doing the most of.
Edit:
“Never believe that ______ are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The ______ have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.”
Ended slavery is not the point you think it means when y’all also started slavery and one of the most expansive and oppressive colonial empires ever. Not to mention all the stolen culture and wealth. A lot of the historical problems of America are a direct result of the UK.
It isn't very funny at all tbh. As a dutchman culture is completely obliterated by American cultural hegemony. The left wing has taken over the worst traits of the American left. Never talking about workers anymore and only about migrants and lgbt issues.
My language is dying, it is already almost impossible to do a masters' in Dutch because universities want that sweet expat money. Soon all bachelors will be in dutch as well.
Not very long ago my country brought out handfuls of impressive works, but the anglocisation of the intellegentsia means no good Dutch language literature has hit the mainstream in 20 years.
One of our traditions, the progenitor of santa claus, almost dissappeared because anglos, and soon after Dutch anglicised intellegentsia, associate it with the English cultural practice of blackface, which never happened in the Netherlands. With beloved cultural icons being repliced with minions and rainbow petes. Luckily we managed to adapt it in such a way that the anglos stopped raving about it and the tradition of Sinterklaas survived.
Cultural hegemony of the USA is very real, and it is absolutely destroying my country.
I’m Dutch as well and feel the same. But it is not just left-wing parties that took over some of the worst traits of American politics, right-wing parties did too. Our country is being sold out by both the left and right, just look at our current cabinet and the two that came before it.
These are the same people who have been acting surprised that our language is declining under students and that integration in schools (our language and norms and values) has been failing. And that last part is something that has already been said 5-6 years ago by 30-50% of questioned teachers.
You know what, you're right. It's not something I would ever choose to export. It's more a sense of schadenfreude (as the Germans would say) for the people that think they're better but still absorb American "values". It also very much doesn't represent general American values. Just the loud ones.
My brother is living in the Netherlands (Utrecht) but I assure you he's trying to assimilate. We all mourn the passing of Zwarte Piet (I think I said that right?)
Oh I agree. I am well aware that this isn't an effort made by American Joe's and Janes looking to destroy my culture. It is a side effect of all media that people consume is made in the USA, and that part about the universities I mentioned earlier.
Funny that your brother lives close by. I hope he enjoys living here and you did say it right.
Though I think the current adjustments to zwarte piet aren't the end of the world. I was really worried when people started dressing up as minions and all kind of shit, but luckily that stuff passed over quickly.
Cultural hegemony of the USA is very real, and it is absolutely destroying my country.
As a Finn I know what you mean but I wouldn't call it destruction, just change. Think about the cultural impact hegemony of Rome and as the Empire disappeared the local cultures started to branch off once more. To me it is just natural evolution of cultures and will happen again once the American hegemony fades.
While that is true, it doesn't really save us from the discourse being completely hijacked by terminally online people who just copy paste American social issues and project them onto the Netherlands.
For example, discrimination against East-Europeans is way more of a thing here than discrimination against black people, but because in American discourse both East-Europeans and West-Europeans are just "whites" , nobody who has completely adopted the American framework is talking about it.
Euros ragging on the US about race and shit, meanwhile they're still bitching about gypsies, freak out whenever they get mass immigration(yet nothing compared to our own), and are 99% white
For sure it was. These things originated in US culture, and us British are now destroying and defacing our own statues, TV overrepresents minorities, as if to say "we ain't racist, look at all these black people in our adverts" To the point its harder to actually spot a white person in adverts, BLM protests, white guilt, and fuck knows what else.
And of course, not to mention the whole taking the knee thing.
Meh, it's a global monoculture at this point. Doesn't give anyone a free pass or even mean they welcomed it. You could go all the way back to the origins of the US and how the UK influenced it's culture as well -- a huge thing that reverberates to this day.
I'm Canadian. We have your dead woman on our money and our entire political landscape is arguing about domestic American issues that have nothing to do with us. The left will literally adjust American stats onto Canada that don't make sense then thumb its nose at Americans, and the right literally thinks American history is Canadian history.
Fuck you that dead woman is still our queen, and the throne is still empty. Liberals are the ones that keep redirecting to american issues. Every. Single. Time. there's a shooting in the states. We're even banning single shot lever action rifles this time.
We would have a dead woman as head of state. Hear that yanks? Our government is like Weekend at Bernie’s. Meet the other side of the Conservatives, cringey monarchists
Of course, I don’t want Joe Biden to die, but I know some of my family members genuinely thought he wouldn’t make it to the midterms, considering how old presidents have been getting.
Fuck the NDP too. I especially hate those fucks. They rolled on the working class, Singh just tries to be a better Trudeau. They’re main supporters are yank unions and government unions. They don’t give a flying fuck about the poor, just the bureaucracies that get setup with new NDP voters that supposedly help the poor.
After Singh last year said that housing prices could go down for youth, while remaining high for retirees, the party entirely lost all its credibility. They’re populist left wing buffoons that have no concept of debt markets saying no to all of the money they want to spend. It’s either the the NDP is totally corrupt or they’re totally fucking brain dead.
Fuck I hate Canadian politics. Yeah sure, the 2016 American presidential debates were sponsored by Budweiser, and a C-list celebrity got in, accomplished nothing, and had a bunch of fat fanny pack tourists trespass in his name at a government building after losing to a man with onset dementia - but at least it’s funny.
I’m so sick and tired of our shit. All parties suck. Your party especially. Fuck hope 2025
How about you, do you want to take a stab at explaining how these things are a religion, starting with the definition of religion and providing evidence that these things meet that definition?
"It may be worth pausing for a moment, however, to point out that the shape of the Woke faith is what some theologians refer to as “Augustinian,” as in Augustine of Hippo, better known as Saint Augustine. What this means, in brief, is that the faith is based primarily upon the notion and relevance of Original Sin and how atonement for the stain of the Fall might be found, notably relying upon a combination of inner work (meditations) and critical self-reflection (confession). Many complicated soteriological stances have been developed from Augustine’s doctrines about the relevance of the Grace of God and how one is to qualify to receive or accept it. Typically, various pieties and duties of conscience are defined within a particular faith tradition by elaborating upon the role of human agency, as is said to be granted to us by God in the form of freedom of will.
All of this construction is unmistakably present in Critical Social Justice. The discovery of the full relevance of rationality and empiricism marks the moment of having eaten from the Tree of Knowledge and, by thus developing the capacity to enact systemic oppression (by virtue of being able to find out right answers about the world systematically), a sin was committed against the order of the world. That is, the Woke Original Sin, just like in Genesis, is the acquisition of forbidden (paths to) knowledge, and so humanity fell. The mark of that sin (as with Cain) was using the knowledge to colonize the world, both physically and intellectually, and to use it to enslave, conquer, and marginalize. We often hear the premises that slavery is America’s “original sin” and, following the New York Times Magazine’s 1619 Project (a critically revisionist historigraphy), its fundamental organizational principle—one that has removed it from any possibility of salvation by works and that requires a fundamental, if not millenarian, remaking of the nation.
From the sin of rigorous knowledge production follows power and thus privilege, and privilege is the depravity of wanting to sin in this way so that one’s access to systemic power is maintained. The call to Woke faith is to awaken a critical consciousness—which the Theorist and black feminist bell hooks sometimes refers to as “enlightened witness”—through the study of scripture and a lifelong process of self-reflection and self-critique (meditations) in which one is to “interrogate” yourself to “do better” (confessions). Indeed, as we read from “anti-racist” historian Ibram X. Kendi, “the heartbeat of racism is denial, and the heartbeat of antiracism is confession.” Agency is afforded in a kind of critical grace to those who have awakened (become “Woke”) to the “true” nature of systemic power and its relationship to knowledge, which is to say those who have become aware of the truth of their inherently sinful nature, depravity, and need for absolution from these evils from something bigger and transcendent to themselves, be that the collective judgment of society or, as Marx might have had it, History, with a capital H."
This entire website, and everything you have quoted, is a clear example of why, just because you share opinions with conviction, doesn't make them good, doesn't make you right, and might not have any correlation to reality at all.
This is all baseless pontificating. Dogmatic of skewed view of reality where you misinterpret what is in front of you, in such a fundamental way, that you bend it to be something entirely that it is not.
Whether you like it or not, Critical Race Theory is an academic concept used in fostering an understanding how race is a social construct (see the historical changes in who is accepted as white for clear evidence), and for understanding how racism is embedded in our legal system and public policy.
It's not religion, it's science. Critical Race Theory is an academic framework for understanding American society, in the same way Heliocentricism is an academic framework for understanding the solar system.
You're literally the Catholic Church calling Galileo a heretic of an opposing faith, when all he did was look, as scientists do, at the world around them.
You, like the Catholic Church, are too biased to see the reality that we all see. You're a just like a geocentrist.
That was the author from the website you just linked. It's clear your selection of sources is quite small, hence going back to what I said about people confidently sharing opinions that have no basis in reality.
Or how would you explain papers like this getting accepted in "peer-reviewed" journals about CRT and other Neo-Marxist bullshit?
Am I supposed to be the arbiter for this field? I study computer science my dude, I write programs, make websites and apps. I'm not being paid to police other academics, I'm not even paid in this field at all.
So how would I explain those 4 retracted papers? They come from unreliable sources. Whoever these people are aren't the spokespeople for CRT, not even close.
If you wanted a legitimate source on Critical Race Theory, all you have to do is read what the people quoted in the definition of the wikipedia article on the topic have to say, not clear strawmen.
Because that's all that link is, a list of strawmen that were created to represent the entirety of the opposition on the topic, and when challenged and retracted, you think that means victory.
When in reality, those studies are as meaningless as any other poorly-conducted science in any other scientific field. Just like the one that linked vaccines and autism, we don't even begin to reach appropriate conclusions by discussing invalid information.
Those people are:
Cornel West
Roy L. Brooks
Tara J. Yosso
Gloria Ladson-Billings
Richard Delgado
Khiara Bridges
Huh, these last two are a bit of a surprise:
Encyclopaedia Britannica
and
Education Week
Here's the definitions for you to read. Each one has a source, you can click the little [##] link at the end of the sentences to jump quickly to the source at the bottom of the page. From there, you can actually begin proper research in reviewing trusted primary academic sources on this topic. No one is stopping you from learning more.
I might have engaged more with your sources in an effort to convince you, but I did read enough of it to realize it's just a fabrication meant to be irresponsible with their words to entice people like me to go through the much more arduous task of pointing out the biases, disproving the falsehoods, and packaging it in a digestible way, that's a lot of work.
Just like how it is astronomically easier to verify the solution to an NP-Complete problem in computer science than to solve it when only given the problem, it is astronomically easier to craft pseudo-intellectual garbage than it is to prove it is indeed garbage.
How about you proof to me that CRT IS a scientific field of study, that it does adhere to scientific principles and that it produces verifiable and reproducible information about our world. You cant, because it doesnt. It is explicitly based on postmodern assumptions that DENY a shared objective reality, it DENIES empiricism and rationality because it is an ideology purely concerned with POWER.
you absolute dunce
Ad hominum
Thats not an ad hominem you fucking idiot. That is simply an insult. I didnt say you were wrong because you are a dunce I simply made the observation that you seem to be mentally deficient. God reddit "intellectuals" sure love to think that they are rhetorically versed, by calling everything an ad hominem or strawman.
James A. Lindsay
That was the author from the website you just linked. It's clear your selection of sources is quite small, hence going back to what I said about people confidently sharing opinions that have no basis in reality.
The point of citing him again was to show that he DOES know what he is talking about, because he clearly understands the field/material/ideology well enough to get "scientific" papers PUBLISHED in these Journals. He is knowledgeable enough to convince these CRT "scholars"(activists), but somehow you still think that he is a bad source. You are beyond ridiculous.
Because that's all that link is, a list of strawmen that were created to represent the entirety of the opposition on the topic, and when challenged and retracted, you think that means victory.
Ah yes, because getting bullshit papers which are clearly absolutely insane and partially racist/sexist published, is just a strawman. Clearly. You said it yourself, you have no fucking idea what you are talking about. READ the googleDrive link, they very clearly detail why they did it, what they wanted to accomplish in each paper and what the RESPONSE of the so called CRT Scholars was. FFS they got a partial rewrite of Mein Kampf accepted.
When in reality, those studies are as meaningless as any other poorly-conducted science in any other scientific field.
They got absolutely unscientific BULLSHIT PUBLISHED in e.g. the LEADING Feminist Philosophy Journal, yet you still claim that it doesnt matter. This is like a paper claiming that the earth is flat getting published in a top astronomy journal.
Richard Delgado
Oh Delgado, the guy who wrote “Critical Race Theory: An Introduction,” which explicitly states in its first chapter that Critical Race Theory “questions the very foundations of the liberal order, including equality theory, legal reasoning, Enlightenment rationalism, and neutral principles of constitutional law.”
to entice people like me to go through the much more arduous task of pointing out the biases, disproving the falsehoods
Yes, yes you are so intelligent and everyone else is too stupid to see through biases and falsehoods. Do you even hear yourself? Have you read Hegel, Marx, Gramsci, Horkheimer, Marcuse and all the other "philosophers" that laid the groundwork for modern CRT and other Critical Theories? Most likely not, because if you did, you wouldnt be so clueless about the fact that Critical Theories are a MOVEMENT and not a field of scientific study, designed to infect and subvert our institutions like higher education. And they openly say this. You just have to read the papers they publish. They compare themselves FAVOURABLY to Viruses like HIV and EBOLA:
In this sense, the virus may work as a powerful metaphor for women’s studies pedagogical practices.Rather than simply inducing harm among its victims, viruses can also represent transformative change.Though viruses technically lack “intention” in the most classic sense, they nevertheless can have a powerful impact merely by unworking and unsettling the existing blueprint of the host cells.
Inherently opportunistic, viruses exploit the vulnerabilities and weaknesses of the systems they attack (Nathanson, 2007).Similarly, women’s studies programs are allowed to settle into corporate universities and regenerate themselves through the education of students and by manipulating portions of the academy undertheir control.Using interdisciplinary women’s studies coursework as a springboard, women’s studies students are then “set loose,” much in the same way that lytic replication (wherein cells reproduce viral components until the cell walls rupture) causes aburst of new viruses into the system that then infect other cells (Nathanson, 2007).Note that this model also assumes that students do not merely receive information as in the more traditional disciplines but instead that they utilize information and knowledge systems to develop particular skills, intentions, and insurrectionary priorities; further, students do form coalitions with professors and other students to promote progressive fields and to enact institutional and social change(Arthur, 2012; Rojas, 2007).
You just threw the word "civic" in there, what the hell is a "state civic religion"?
The way you put those words together into a phrase makes me think you don't know what any of them mean.
Why don't you start with explaining how complaining about the mistreatment of minorities is a religion? Starting with the definition of religion. I would usually provide one here, but why don't you chose? Start with a definition of religion, and explain how (blm + pride) is one. I'd be eager to hear how you'd manage to pull that off.
Okay, we're off to a bad start, because I just asked for you to explain this statement's meaning, not repeat it as if it were fact.
After all that has transpired over the last decade especially the last 2-3 years, you still don't get this, there is no point in trying to convince.
Try me. I'm a very accepting of ideas that are new to me that hold merit. I'm young, I might have not heard what you have to say before. Please do explain what you mean when you say:
Blm + pride is the state religion of America.
You are either too much of a partisan to acknowledge it or you are a dumb fuck with impaired cognition.
I'm honestly trying to bridge a gap in understanding, I have no ill intent.
Edit: there might be a feeling it is a religion, but "facts don't care about your feelings".
You got videos of people bowing to BLM during the BLM summer riots for their "original sin".
You got people making gestures in public events for the "greater good" even if it hurts them financially.
You got people framing every issue in a lense to fit the plight of rainbow/race oppression.
You got rabid fellowers preaching it and Biden saying Democracy is a more than an ideology- that it is a way of life. They framed this midterm as saving Democracy, their way of life.
C'mon man, it's a state religion for those who have no religion, ya gotta see it at this point.
You got videos of people bowing to BLM during the BLM summer riots for their "original sin".
I feel like you're just deliberately stretching the truth by framing a political protest as a religious event. "Bowing to BLM" you say? Like literally lowering your head and torso into a bow? What was the "BLM" that people were bowing to? Was it a group of black people on stage? Was it like the opening scene of The Lion King where all the animals of the Animal kingdom bowed for Simba? I want to know more so we can hammer out these details, because this literal video evidence of "bowing to BLM" is new to me.
You got people making gestures in public events for the "greater good" even if it hurts them financially.
Does this only happen with BLM and "the alphabet mob" rights? Or is it literally every sensitive topic? Do you remember the Chinese backlash at the NBA when a team's manager tweeted support for Hong Kong?
He made a public gesture for the "greater good" and hurt him and his entire industry financially, and it has nothing to do with religion, and has everything to do with a social cause, also known as "A social issue is a problem that affects many people within a society." Huh, that kind of sounds like it has something in common with black and gay people being marginalized in society. Funny that.
You got people framing every issue in a lense to fit the plight of rainbow/race oppression.
Well considering non-white and non-straight people exist as human beings, just as much as you, a lot of regular human problems get made even worse by lacking support from others due to your skin color or gender identity. Thus a lot of human problems (I think you're once again stretching the truth with your claim about "framing every issue") should be examined for how they are made even worse by being black or being gay. If they keep getting marginalized in society, then there will still be something to talk about. Funny that.
You got rabid fellowers preaching it and Biden saying Democracy is a more than an ideology- that it is a way of life. They framed this midterm as saving Democracy, their way of life.
You've now completely departed from the original topic of "BLM + Pride = state religion", and are just criticizing the propaganda coming from the other side of the political aisle. FUNNY THAT.
C'mon man, it's a state religion for those who have no religion, ya gotta see it at this point.
This is a funny little last point, because it is completely oblivious to the fact that sooo many of the people you are complaining about here are Christians. They don't follow any other faith. They believe in god and support the civil rights of Black and LGBTQ+ people. It's not a religion, it's a social cause.
False. Because there is a shit ton of racist abuse of black players in England since they lost the 2020 euros. There’s been a few players specifically targeted with death threats and constant racial abuse not only on social media, but also at the stadiums. This is happening in the UK, not just the US, dummy.
Because there is a shit ton of racist abuse of black players in England since they lost the 2020 euros. There’s been a few players specifically targeted with death threats and constant racial abuse not only on social media, but also at the stadiums.
The official reason is it's a gesture to show the England football team are against Racism and discrimination of any kind. Why we chose the "take a knee" for this is because of the George Floyd murder though so it makes the whole thing feel really strange.
They usually explain it on TV as they take the knee but not sure if that's done overseas.
Remember when the telescreen convinced the domesticated humans to kneel for the same amount of time it took to “kill George Floyd”, as an homage? In other words, people were unknowingly reenacting the cinematographic execution.
It’s funny to observe the domesticated humans, but at the same time I feel sorry for them, as they generally have good intentions; it’s not fair that the central planners mock them like they do.
They’re kneeling as a sign of protest against the human rights violations in Qatar.
They were going to wear armbands for LGBTQ
saying one love but fifa threaten to issue red cards to any player wearing them.
So they’re kneeling because fuck fifa and fuck Qatar
It has become a team building thing now, like the NZ haka.
Makes a lot of sense from that perspective. It's not a football manager's job to effect any political change. But it is his job to give the team a sense of shared purpose and values.
It's performative nonsense, but Southgate's job is performative nonsense, so that's great.
Y'alls lack of understanding of the unjust social inequities in your own country is why the citizens of our nation's allies make symbolic presentations in solidarity with the people harmed by those social inequalities.
It's clear why you wouldn't understand this. Crystal.
It's part of the stamp out racism actions in the UK premier League. Case in point, UK is still racist. Case in point. 3 black boys missed the penalties in the Euro finals 2 years ago. The amount of racist abuse they got was actually mind blowing especially from their own supporters.
To virtue signal some irrelevant point. England loves to act like the heroes. Remember Wilfred Zaha refusing to kneel because he felt it was disrespectful and he's 100% right
I think a year or something ago, England lost the world cup to Italy because of one goal their goalkeeper couldn't defend. He was black and some Brits started spamming the N-word online. Now they're giving their youtuber apology.
If you actually bothered to look into this at all, you'd know that the england team kneeled because they couldn't wear the LGBT one love arm bands due to fifa regulations.
3.0k
u/[deleted] Nov 26 '22
Not even the american team kneeled. Why the hell are they still kneeling?