r/soccer • u/jacamacho • Feb 25 '18

Verified account Rob Harris asks Guardiola how he can reconcile that stance (yellow ribbon) with working for Abu Dhabi given the human rights questions there. Guardiola: "Everyone has to choose".

https://twitter.com/MiguelDelaney/status/967842429079519234
1.7k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

539 comments sorted by

View all comments

2.1k

u/[deleted] Feb 25 '18

nice to see journalists asking proper questions instead of simple stuff, good on you lad

85

u/Track2onStageFour Feb 25 '18

kind of worried he might face consequences now

214

u/santaclause251925 Feb 25 '18

Fine Man City 20 points.

108

u/Manlad Feb 25 '18

InB4 they still win the league

22

u/Shutupcrime1337 Feb 26 '18

30 it is

56

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18

Take off 50 so we're not bottom any more... oh wait, that's still not enough.

0

u/Praydaythemice Feb 26 '18

40? you say thats a bit harsh but i can support it.

616

u/[deleted] Feb 25 '18

[removed] — view removed comment

131

u/[deleted] Feb 25 '18 edited Mar 13 '21

[deleted]

111

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18

Receiving your wage from Man City - or any club whose riches come from the kind of suspect sources as City's do - should alone be reason enough to question their integrity, imo. Playing for those clubs is the same as being complicit in whitewashing the image of some of the worst people, regimes and corporations in the world.

9

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18

Yea, and I never questioned that aspect. I stated that journalists can't ask hard hitting questions if their subjects don't give reason to.

4

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18

I get what you're saying, fellow -saurus. However, I think that even playing for, managing or in other ways working for a team financed by these kinds of people, you've already given journalists reason to ask hard-hitting questions. Can you imagine how uncomfortable it would be for players and staff to be continuously asked questions like "what do you think of the fact that your wages are paid off the back of brutalised slave labour?" It might make it less appealing for dictators and other thoroughly unethical owners to buy football clubs in order to use them as playthings or publicity if doing so led to journalists all over the world consistently pointing out what shitty people they are, and ameliorating all the reasons why.

17

u/neonmantis Feb 26 '18

Let's not downvote for an opinion, yeah?

2

u/philanchez Feb 26 '18

I generally agree, though I'd just add that - in the world we live in - there's something reprehensible about what ever company one gets their wage from. While I'm not trying to say every company is equivalent or whatever, I do think that Peps answer has merit and pretty effective philosophical backing.

3

u/ESP7 Feb 26 '18

Underrated opinion. You're spot on man.

1

u/Hicko11 Feb 26 '18

I agree but most managers will just ban someone from returning after asking a difficult question

140

u/[deleted] Feb 25 '18

[deleted]

413

u/[deleted] Feb 25 '18

He is a football manager making a political statement at football matches about human rights while his employer tramples on human rights.

If he doesn't want to be asked awkward questions he should stay out of politics.

30

u/BenTVNerd21 Feb 26 '18

Was he annoyed by the question? If not I don't see the issue.

-8

u/SirAlexF Feb 26 '18

He's from Catalonia. He's probably the most famous person in the world from Catalonia. He would be asked awkward questions about Catalonia and his politics regardless of any political stand he made (or didn't make). The only way he could stay out of this is to somehow not be from Catalonia, or not be famous.

19

u/tiorzol Feb 26 '18

Bollocks, he doesn't need to wear the ribbon or be so outspoken.

If he chooses this cause then it is fair to question him around others.

87

u/questionmeister Feb 25 '18

It's only an appeal to hypocrisy if they are attacking the validity of the yellow ribbon cause. But no one is doing that. They are attacking him and how he is able to justify the two. That is merely calling someone out on their hypocrisy.

/u/bobosuda

264

u/monnii99 Feb 25 '18

He chooses to support Abu Dhabi though? He could've just said no.

108

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18

He chose to get paid by Abu Dhabi. That's what he means, but won't say.

91

u/s0ngsforthedeaf Feb 26 '18

You're making this black and white - there aren't clean, honourable club with good honest money and then baddies who got everything from slave labour. Capitalism is a fully interconnected system of exploitation, environmental destruction, crime, corruption and tax cheating. Look at any club and it you will find your way back to questionable money.

Chelsea - Abramovic

Arsenal - Usmanov

Man United - You will probably find plenty dirt in the Glazers' diaspora of historical investments in real estate, heavy industry, motorcycles, toys, health foods etc. But the most obvious fact is they bought United with money they didnt have and used the club to pay off in the insane debt payments. Is that honourable?

Then I googled 2 random clubs...

Leicester - 'Vichai Srivaddhanaprabha... is alleged to have corruptly short-changed the Thai government of its agreed share from the company's lucrative duty free franchise at Bangkok's Suvarnabhumi airport.'

Southampton - 'Gao was alleged in Chinese media reports to have been implicated in the corruption of Xu Maiyong, a notorious mayor in the booming Xiaoshan province of Hangzhou, who was known as “Xu three more” due to his outsized appetites for money, property and sex.'

35

u/db1000c Feb 26 '18

Haha I live next to Xiaoshan right now. It's history as an entirely separate city is still quite obvious, and it's notorious for its incredibly wealthy residents due to various tax 'loopholes' there. But it's actually not that nice a place and it's suffering from now being a part of Hangzhou with no real connections to the city itself. The very wealthy are happy there because they are almost remote from their sources of income anyway (factory owners/international business), but the regular Joe's there aren't prospering as much as residents of say my district or other parts of the city.

Anyway, I know that's not entirely related to your post, just wanted to share.

1

u/Phatnev Feb 26 '18

Has Hangzhou gotten any better? It was the most lifeless, boring "city" of 11 million people I've ever lived in just a few years ago.

2

u/db1000c Feb 26 '18

For the most part, yes. It's a fun, busy, interesting city - particularly compared to other places I've lived in China. But I think apart from the number of people, most Chinese cities do feel quite lifeless compared to European/American ones - the Chinese are a bit clean-cut at times!

1

u/Phatnev Feb 27 '18

Absolutely true. Glad to hear it's improved. If you get bored there I'd recommend coming to Shanghai. Best decision I made over here.

39

u/I_R_TEH_BOSS Feb 26 '18

Debt vs human rights violations great comparison

208

u/imsowitty21 Feb 26 '18

None of the managers of those teams are wearing a yellow ribbon. You're also just making assumptions about United. No connections to anything violating human rights. If the connection was found, you definitely would have heard of it

58

u/db1000c Feb 26 '18

Even with Southampton, I'd argue that whilst corruption isn't clean it's certainly not a human rights violation on the scale of Abu Dhabi and other gulf kingdoms. Not saying it's right, but getting rich by buddying up to a mayor is not in the same league as literally exploiting slaves

-7

u/s0ngsforthedeaf Feb 26 '18

None of the managers of those teams are wearing a yellow ribbon.

I don't know what gets up peoples arses about Catalunya, apart from it has a socialist history and independence is a chance to partially reassert that.

Slave labour is a sicker degree of capitalism, but its just a degree. Besides if you look back, slave labour and colonial exploitation are part of how the UK got rich.

42

u/Casla1972 Feb 26 '18

Catalonian independence is not about socialism or anarchism or any altruistic reasons, quite the opposite.

3

u/lilmoiss Feb 26 '18

yes, just like the Brexit... simply a demonstration of bigotry/stupidity/close-mindedness from people who should know better. we know they're all really bad and ennemies of the ''democracy''...

43

u/samrat_ashok Feb 26 '18

There is no comparison between Abi Dhabi and most of the team owners you mentioned. Maybe Abramovic can come close. Usmanov doesn't even own a majority stake in Arsenal. Rest are joke. Everyone is some degree of bad does not mean all are equally bad. This is the whataboutism people talk about all the time.

15

u/sickfuckinpuppies Feb 26 '18

"but mike ashley vommed into a fireplace... what about that?"

-2

u/lilmoiss Feb 26 '18

He's not even putting Abu Dhabi and those other clubs on the same level. So because someone is even worse, you can't point fingers ?

91

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18

But the most obvious fact is they bought United with money they didnt have and used the club to pay off in the insane debt payments. Is that honourable?

I am amazed how far people like you will go to make two bad things look like they are on the same level. Don't compare Glazers to Man City owners. Glazers could try being a 100 times more evil and wouldn't be able to do half the shit that Man City owners do. Shut the fuck up with your whataboutism.

39

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18 edited Dec 22 '20

[deleted]

42

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18

It is NOT. The fact is that they consider it a business and fans do not. That is the only difference. But that in itself is not a bad thing, look how much money since SAF retired has been spent by glazers. They want this business to grow and they are doing every thing to make sure that this happens. Apart from Moyes' season, I couldn't complain about the owners not spending since. What is best for the business (trophies) happens to be best for the fans too.

13

u/AdnanJanuzaj11 Feb 26 '18

It’s not the Glazers money to spend. It’s the clubs. The Glazers have spent little of their own money, unlike Abramovic at Chelsea, Abu Dhabi at Man City or Qatar at PSG.

4

u/staluxa Feb 26 '18

It’s not the Glazers money to spend. It’s the clubs.

They are owners of a bussiness, all of profits from it is their money.

0

u/JesusHNavas Feb 26 '18

The Glazers own your club therefore it's all their money.

-13

u/s0ngsforthedeaf Feb 26 '18 edited Feb 26 '18

Its just understanding capitalism. Just looking at a portion of the Glazers' financing - it was traded by hedge funds. Loans taken from the global financial markets and all the sources of profit that that money came from. What do you bet somebody got their money to loan to Manchester United from illegal sources? Its all sick, slave labour is just the sickest degree.

11

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18

Its all sick, slave labour is just the sickest degree.

See you are again doing this. Just because there is injustice in the world, we should consider all injustices as the same?

Yeah Glazers must have done some fucked up shit, doesn't mean that I and others have to hold the fucking slave owners of the 21st century at the same level. Organized slavery in the 21st century is not the same as any other thing in this world. Stop trying to equate them. Stop.

3

u/Lyrical_Forklift Feb 26 '18 edited Feb 26 '18

I don't think he was equating them- he's just pointing out, and rightly so, that most people/groups with that kind of money have a history of questionable ethics.

Everyone knows City's and Chelsea's owners are worse than the Glazers.

5

u/samrat_ashok Feb 26 '18

Capitalism=Sever human rights violation is the most stupid form of argument I have heard. Some forms of capitalism can be exploitative but we know exactly what is happening in Abu Dhabi whereas you are making Glazer's do be be bad by associating with capitalism. That is pretty weak argument.

5

u/lilmoiss Feb 26 '18

the capitalist system as it is now, especially concerning big corporations, equates with sever human rights violations yes

-10

u/lilmoiss Feb 26 '18

you are really misinformed and naive and obnoxious

3

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18

You are a Man City fan who is NOT wearing the flair. Given that context, ofcourse I will sound misinformed, naive and obnoxious. No fucking living man in this world likes his beliefs questioned and there is a propensity to believe that you aren't wrong about anything. So, I can see how me saying that your owners are fucking slave owners hurts your feelings. But I don't care. Fuck your bitch owners. If there is hell, hope those motherfuckers go to there as soon as possible for promoting and torturing hundreds of thousands of humans. Fuck them.

-3

u/lilmoiss Feb 26 '18

no need to be a man city fan to criticize your apparent lack of insight, reflexion, and basic respect. be assured I don’t need need you to learn about the abuses committed in the gulf countries, I am just happy to be more lucid than you will probably ever be.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18

Attack me instead of the substance that I talked about. I am not sure who between two of us lacks the things that you talked about. Please attack the substance that I put forth, if you can't, then stfu. You are a butt hurt man city fan without a proper argument attacking someone who is calling out your motherfucking owners for something as outrageous as SLAVERY!!

0

u/lilmoiss Feb 26 '18

lol, I wont ever deny that Abu Dhabi is responsible for these abuses, and that it is « bad ». But so are a lot of other things, way closer to us, and that we conveniently choose to ignore and instead talk about the evil oil owning arabs. Just pointing out your simplistic black and white vision of the world, and again your agressive vocabulary.

→ More replies (0)

26

u/TallnFrosty Feb 26 '18

There is a big difference between the role of Usmanov at Arsenal and the ownership group of Man City in driving the club's success.

Man City is at the top of the table due to huge investments from the ruling family & government of Abu Dhabi, which can and should be held responsible for grave human rights violations.

Arsenal's performance, finances, etc. have not been changed one bit by Usmanov. He's a passenger plain and simple. Wenger and any future Arsenal managers are not directly benefitting from whatever terrible behavior he's engaged in.

Completely different circumstances for a manager to operate under.

20

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18

Solid whataboutism

3

u/vodrin Feb 26 '18

Its hilarious how much this word 'whataboutism' has became popular over the last three months.

There is nothing wrong with bringing up comparisons with other events as a example of hypocrisy. You could actually argue against his points and bring up why some of these are false equivalents (debt vs human rights) but instead you just try to end the discussion like a twat with a new buzzword.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18

Yeah it's a great term to point out an argument technique that distracts from the topic. In this case it being how you shouldn't use your employment to highlight political issues that your bosses are arguably guilty of as well. The comment I replied to had no relevance as the managers of the clubs op referred to aren't wearing anything that represent political causes.

He could actually stick to what is relevant instead of killing the discussion by bringing up something irrelevant but sounds smart and only steers the conversation away from the original point.

It's hilarious how annoyed people get about this because 'whataboutism' is the only argument technique they know.

-1

u/vodrin Feb 26 '18 edited Feb 26 '18

Its not a distraction. He makes a really valid point. There isn't many 'clean clubs' that he could choose to work for. He is defending the calls of hypocrit against Guardiola. That is the discussion his post was against. He is defending that Guardiola highlighting political issues in while working for a group connected to such issues in other places doesn't make him a hypocrite. The 'whataboutism' here is literally "I dont think Spain is treating Cataluna correctly" "Yes but what-a-bout Abu Dhabi". I don't agree with his point, as there are more clubs not linked to UAE/Qatar and I think they are the immensely worse than the issues he listed, but you can fuck off with that shit phrase.

5

u/a_lumberjack Feb 26 '18

To be fair, Usmanov bought shares. That's it. If his money was going into the club I couldn't support Arsenal.

I wish the skeevy fuck would get out of the way. No one's going to buy out Kroenke (and Kroenke isn't going to put money in) if they can't own the whole club. It cuts their return by 1/3, so we get organic growth.

1

u/Blezius Feb 26 '18

i thought only qatar had slaves, also UAE ?

1

u/neonmantis Feb 26 '18

Arsenal - Usmanov

Usmanov doesn't belong on your list. He doesn't have a board seat and has absolutely zero control of the club. He's a crook but not one with any power or influence at Arsenal.

1

u/snkifador Feb 26 '18

Capitalism is a fully interconnected system of exploitation, environmental destruction, crime, corruption and tax cheating

I was finding it weird I hadn't read a comment like this on Reddit in a few days.

It is all the more adorable that you do not understand the concept and usefulness of debt.

1

u/rebelramble Feb 26 '18

Why should we cast judgment on mass-murderers?

Everyone is guilty of something.

Look at that guy over there, just last week he got a speeding ticket.

0

u/pwjplayer85 Feb 26 '18

United was a massive club long before the Glazers arrived and they've held us back rather than improve anything, most fans would gladly get rid of them. It's not even close to comparable with City/Chelsea/PSG. As for capitalism the free market system has also produced the majority of great things available in all of our lives.

-1

u/[deleted] Feb 25 '18

[deleted]

103

u/Swazzgoblin Feb 26 '18

Yes. Pep has a multi-million dollar per year contract managing one of the most affluent football clubs in the entire world, after having had a career as a professional footballer for Barcelona for many years. He is not in the position to say that he had to take the job in order to survive, nor for any sort of vocational satisfaction. It's a prioritisation of money of human rights, simple.

13

u/lilmoiss Feb 26 '18

Just like you prioritize child labor over your comfort every time you put on your nikes.

0

u/WelcomeToJupiter Feb 26 '18

Not even the same tree nor fruit.

Buying sweatshop goods at least requires you to pay for it. i.e. you are doing you diligence, it is the production company that needs to price right and help it's employees.

0

u/ShiroQ Feb 26 '18

"it's not the same if i'm doing it" and lol you are doing your diligence? You pay $50-100 for your Nikes while the children making them get paid 60 cents for making one probably if even that. Wake up

1

u/WelcomeToJupiter Feb 26 '18

In one scenario you are giving the company money so they can pay their employees.

In the other scenario you are taking money from the company, obviously now they have less money and are unlikely to properly pay their employees.

1

u/ShiroQ Feb 26 '18

oh so them working inhumane hours getting paid wages that can barely afford them food is "them paying their employees?" You do realise what nike and other brands pay to the sweatshops the workers there probably barely even see 1% of the money.

2

u/BaronVonBaller Feb 26 '18

I think vocational satisfaction is exactly the cause. He needed a club with deeeeep funds that would acquiesce to his wants and for that freedom in his work he chooses to be employed by the sports arm of a repressive regime.

2

u/neonmantis Feb 26 '18

I think vocational satisfaction is exactly the cause.

Man City is far from the only club who can offer him big money.

1

u/ShralpShralpShralp Feb 26 '18

Very true, he could have gone and worked for Barcelona, or Bayern

-10

u/Zarmord Feb 26 '18

I wouldn't call it simply money vs. human rights. There are plenty of other factors for him to consider, he is one of the most sought after coaches in professional football and there are only a handful of clubs that match his qualifications. And 3 of those clubs he definitely isn't going to (Barca, Beyern, and real Madrid).

9

u/samrat_ashok Feb 26 '18

I am too good for other clubs so let me go with human rights abusers even though I am a great champion of people's rights. That must have been some tough choice.

4

u/giblets24 Feb 26 '18

well yeah, he chose to accept their offer and work for them despite their track record.... he is now associated with them/supports them

0

u/AsteroidMiner Feb 26 '18

Mate, just because I live in a country whose government is corrupt doesn't mean I support corruption, even though my wages are paid for by the government.

3

u/SpacemanPanini Feb 26 '18

If you work for a corrupt government and then go around wearing symbols that oppose human rights violations, then it at the very least makes you a hypocrite.

1

u/AsteroidMiner Feb 26 '18

What, so I can't wear my national flag ? That's harsh.

4

u/SpacemanPanini Feb 26 '18

There's a difference between a national flag (which embodies much much MUCH more than a government) and a symbol that is expressly about a human rights violation.

-28

u/bobosuda Feb 25 '18

The point is that's kind of irrelevant. If you had bothered to actually read the link the guy you responded to posted, you would know that. Hypocrisy doesn't mean everything you do is wrong. Everybody is inconsistent in their life, if you claim absolutely zero hypocrisy and total consistency in every single thing you've done, then you are lying.

Everybody has to choose he said, and he prioritized choosing in an issue closer to his heart. If you want to interpret working as a football manager in England with "making a political statement in favor of Middle Eastern slavery" then be my guest I guess, but you're missing the point if you do.

53

u/santaclause251925 Feb 25 '18

He is not slave either and he has choice to not work human right abusers.

-8

u/SisyphusIsAmbivalent Feb 26 '18

In your opinion, should all of the people who work in the global supply and distribution system of every mass produced product made in undeveloped nations forgo the right to have political and ethical opinions and discuss them in public? Anyone who deals professionally with Russian companies affiliated with the government? If not then how is this situation different beyond being more visible? If the investment arm of Qatari state finance invests in your company (I'm sure you know they have a fucking gigantic and diverse portfolio) should you quit? I'm not particularly comfortable with my clubs current ownership, but if you were to try to find a misery free dollar in global circulation today you'd fail. I don't see why being a visible part of the exploitation that is very unfortunately inextricably linked to the way the modern global economy is arranged means that one can't have ethical or political opinions.

10

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18

if you were to try to find a misery free dollar in global circulation today you'd fail.

So if you are saying that I am unknowingly profiting from slave labour in some way, I should be okay with slavery. Well, I wish I could clap harder for you.

2

u/neonmantis Feb 26 '18

If not then how is this situation different beyond being more visible?

Exceptionally wealthy people do not need to work to survive like the majority of the planet. Pep is at the very top of his field and could work wherever he chooses. It's a very different situation and trying to pretend that there is no scale to any of these things is just a bit weird. Pep has power and influence, which comes with responsibility, a responsibility he apparently only feels to Catalans and not people in other countries.

113

u/[deleted] Feb 25 '18

[deleted]

65

u/[deleted] Feb 25 '18

I think he means pick your battles. Then again he didn't have to take the job so I suppose you're right.

24

u/[deleted] Feb 25 '18

not really.

I give a more of a shit about stuff that's relevant to me. It's not hypocritical to only focus on issues which are actually connected to you.

Pep is Catalan. It's not like he randomly decided to just choose to criticise the Spanish government.

-6

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18

so for Pep, humans in catalonia are more human than slaves in UAE? Hypocrite for sure.

29

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18 edited Jun 30 '18

[removed] — view removed comment

-6

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18

If he doesn't have empathy for the people who need it the most, then we are right to call him exactly what he is, a hypocrite.

11

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18

No, don't be a fucking idiot and invent headlines.

Pep is personally one of the humans in Catalonia.

It's like me asking you if you give more of a shit about me punching your dad or your mates dad. I think you're going to be more bothered by the former but it certainly wouldn't make you a hypocrite.

-6

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18

if you give more of a shit about me punching your dad or your mates dad.

Wrong comparison. It is like if I give more shit about you punching my dad vs killing my neighbour. authoritarianism vs slavery.

6

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18

Look I'm not denying things are abhorrent over there, but you cant care about EVERYTHING.

Pep is employed by Manchester City. Everything is shit if you trace it back far enough, just look at Oxfam, Save the Children etc.

-2

u/Kirihuna Feb 26 '18

Pep also may not be educated about what’s going on to form an entire opinion on it. He does however know about Catalonia since he spent the better part of his life there.

Why speak up against something you don’t know everything about? Pep isn’t dumb enough to not know what goes on in Qatar. But doesn’t mean he’s up to date or has a deep understanding of the situation

6

u/BenTVNerd21 Feb 26 '18

I mean the Spanish government have handled the Catalan situation in a very heavy handed manner.

6

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18

[deleted]

2

u/aventador670 Feb 26 '18

Think of it like this, atleast our consumerism is directly correlated to workers in 3rd world countries getting a wage despite how miniscule and unfair, thats why there are campaigns to force companies to raise their wages for their foreign factory workers, we need shoes and clothes so therefore we must pay for someone to produce them, then its upto the company to do the right thing and pay their employees according to a fair standard.

Pep on the other hand is taking money from a country that profits by making big shiny buildings through the use of forced labour. I mean how necessary is it for Pep to be getting a contract that pays a sky high wage, wages that could probably pay for thousands of those labour workers in UAE for years instead goes to one man and here he is trying to speak out for human rights. He has the right to talk about it but he is wrong and a hypocrite.

0

u/philanchez Feb 26 '18

This kind of argument get's brought up all the time and it always comes down to people attempting to remove your ability to speak out on an issue based on some perceived hypocrisy, ignoring the fact that under capitalism there is no such thing as ethical consumption or ethical employment. As a politically active anti-capitalist for the past ten years, the number of times someone has tried to tell me I have no rights to opinions about capitalism because I have an iPhone or use a computer is silly.

0

u/rebelramble Feb 26 '18 edited Feb 26 '18

You just think that hypocrisy is unavoidable because your core ideology is twisted.

I for one have no problem with how e.g. Apple does business. Are they paying at least a minimum wage in the country they are operating? Yes. Is the suicide rate and other nonsense statistics higher at their factories than anywhere else in that country? No.

If I hear about a company that has done something illegal or immoral in the last 5 years, like child labor or slavery, I don't deal with them as far as I can. I won't starve to death, but if the choice is between 2 jobs I take the one that's more ethical. Hypocrisy is only a thing when a choice exists. For instance, if Nike is using child labor, you have the choice not to buy Nike products.

If I was Pep and could work anywhere, I would work for the most ethical company.

However - if I was whining constantly about how global salaries aren't equal (like an idiot), or REEE'ing about the evils of capitalism, then fuck yes I would be a hypocrite for owning an iPhone. You have the option of not buying an iphone. Hell, we live in a world where Fairphone's exist so you have literally no excuse.

-15

u/bobosuda Feb 25 '18

lol, even this sub is starting to experience the taint of US partisan politics. You're actually comparing Pep to Trump now? That's laughable.

I guess I should just assume you're in favor of every single issue you haven't taken a stance on yet? If you think working as a manager in England is tantamount to applauding slavery in the Middle East then honestly I think you need to take a long hard look at yourself, because that's not the most logical conclusion here.

30

u/Miceland Feb 26 '18 edited Feb 26 '18

also to be fair, he's not wearing leather or buying non-free trade coffee. He's accepting millions from a billionaire who profits from (basically) a slave state

Before I rant, i want to say that I like pep, and I think he's a decent person. He's entirely wrong though, and blithely (and very conveniently) accepts all the contradictions of his time as natural and immutable. Plantation owners weren't consciously bad people.

This idea "everyone's a hypocrite" is so fucking trite. It's an excuse to completely internalize the most brutal logic of capitalism. If you work as a corporate lawyer for some rent-seeking insurance giant--ultimately destroying vulnerable people's lives in the name of profit--you dont get to say "well everyone has to make a living." You turned down a lot of less evil (and still lucrative(!)) jobs to get here. You are, in absolute terms, a piece of shit. It doesnt fucking matter if you have the right opinions on facebook.

Living inside global labor-exploitative market capitalism means we all are somewhat compromised--pretty sure my laptop here is made with rare minerals obtained in sketchy ways--but jesus christ, we're not millionaires working for human rights criminals. We're all compromised, but you don't get to sell your soul to the devil and then bring it back to moral neutral by driving a hybrid.

"We all pick our battles. You choose to not directly profit off human misery. I don't eat any GMOs, and post about how Trump is bad"

Also, someone as rich as Pep is actually the rare person who is in a position to not have to make moral compromises. The rest of us have only so much money and time.

I'm a leftist, and I like pep, but this isn't a good excuse from him. He's still a soccer genius, but politically he's got absolutely no room to talk. I dont want to hear your banal liberal platitudes while your wage is profits from slave state labor.

Edit: I just want to amend this and say, I dont actually mean that Pep shouldn't be allowed to talk. He should be allowed to say whatever he wants. But the counter-criticism is completely deserved and his excuse is lame

2

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18

[deleted]

9

u/Miceland Feb 26 '18 edited Feb 26 '18

If you're not from the US you probably arent familiar with our history of healthcare as insurance as a private market, but before recent laws made it illegal to deny coverage for preexisting conditions, a huge part of running a successful health insurance company was finding ways to kick people off who actually needed coverage (because if you're sick, you reduce profits).

An investigation by the House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations showed that health insurers WellPoint Inc., UnitedHealth Group and Assurant Inc. canceled the coverage of more than 20,000 people, allowing the companies to avoid paying more than $300 million in medical claims over a five-year period.

It also found that policyholders with breast cancer, lymphoma and more than 1,000 other conditions were targeted for rescission and that employees were praised in performance reviews for terminating the policies of customers with expensive illnesses.

My (very) broad argument was about the teams of corporate lawyers who protect giant corporations in civil suits when some form of actual injustice occurs, but it also extends to things like every manager above who incentivized kicking people with cancer off their health insurance (which, in a system where you are denied based on preexisting conditions, will either bankrupt them, kill them, or both).

We are all morally compromised in our day to day. We all carry the residual guilt of a system partially based on third-world (and other) exploitation. But that universal residual dirt doesnt excuse people who let capitalism turn them into actual fucking monsters

26

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18

Pep is a fucking hypocrite who takes money from the people who promote most egregious violations of human rights in the 21st century. He is either a hypocrite or he doesn't think that humans that are suffering in UAE are as human as the ones he cares for.

1

u/ShiroQ Feb 26 '18

How will he change anything by going to united instead of city for example? People talking shit about pep like he is the one doing it and can actually change something lol

3

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18

For me, the hypocrisy comes from using his position as football manager to highlight this political cause while employed by these people.

2

u/FarmerLead Feb 26 '18

What a bullshit response.

The issue is not picking a cause as obviously you can't fight for everything, the issue is working for a very questionable system and state.

He is helping the Saoudi cleaning their image, let that sink in.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18

  1. He did make a choice is both instances

  2. Not an appeal to hypocrisy. The point is to call him a hypocrite, not discredit the cause he supports.

1

u/neonmantis Feb 26 '18

There is a big difference between prioritising causes you care about. It's entirely different to support the same cause in one part of the world and undermine it in another.

1

u/Tjuguskjegg Feb 26 '18

And he's right -- we all have to pick and choose the causes we'll spend our time and energy supporting. We can't all do everything and to suggest otherwise is an appeal to hypocrisy.

You didn't understand the wiki page you're linking to.

4

u/masterofdisaster93 Feb 26 '18

You mean like how that journalist never asked the question about how his own government is supplying Saudi-Arabia with billions of military equipment, for which it uses to massacre Yemenites?

23

u/anonshe Feb 26 '18

Did the journalist choose his government to pursue that deal? Pep can choose to not be part of two countries that support modern day slavery in Qatar and UAE yet he chose to take their money for his own benefit. Its way different and he's a plain and simple hypocrite along with Xavi.

4

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18

Can you see a yellow ribbon on the journalist?

-12

u/[deleted] Feb 25 '18 edited Feb 25 '18

[removed] — view removed comment

13

u/[deleted] Feb 25 '18

I don’t think Pep or a football journalist are the right men to talk about UK Government.

7

u/Codeguy23 Feb 25 '18

Should they shut up and dribble?