andysays
Love and solidarity
...anti-GRT racism...
Can someone explain what this means
...anti-GRT racism...
Can someone explain what this means
When I say being called out, I mean challenged because it's a controversial view and could be construed as being very offensive. (When I came across this stance in a training course many years ago I actually found it offensive and I am not Irish, Jewish or Gypsy/Roma/Traveller).It's not even so much about being called out, imo. Are we not allowed to have a discussion/debate/argument about this issue?
On this thread, it's been pointed out that DLR thinks it's a racist letter while I don't. Does that mean one or other of us needs to be 'called out'? We disagree. We're allowed to disagree. If DLR were following Starmer's lead, presumably he'd be calling for me to be banned from the thread, and quite possibly thrown off Urban.
gypsy / roma / traveller
Romani (Gypsy), Roma and Irish Tr…
Advocating for and working with Gypsy, Roma and Traveller people to tackle discrimination and promote equalitytravellermovement.org.uk
could you share the text so we don't have to register to read the ns?Tomiwa Owolade has published a response to Abbott's letter responding to his article.
What Diane Abbott gets wrong about racism
The Labour MP’s response to my column showed a stunning lack of judgement and awareness.www.newstatesman.com
Sorrycould you share the text so we don't have to register to read the ns?
nah, ban whoever tim is lolBan this one again please editor
Owolade makes a very strong argument, and I also like his wider points made elsewhere about the dangers of conflating US racism with UK racism, but I don't quite see why there is a need to have a dig at Abbott or insist that Starmer's response was right. 'I think you're wrong, and this is why'. Isn't that enough? Why add 'I think you're wrong and you're not fit to be in public life'?Tomiwa Owolade has published a response to Abbott's letter responding to his article.
What Diane Abbott gets wrong about racism
The Labour MP’s response to my column showed a stunning lack of judgement and awareness.www.newstatesman.com
Yes. Better, though, to have left his critique at that. He doesn't seem to buy the 'wrong draft' argument, but then few people will.Owolade makes a very strong argument, and I also like his wider points made elsewhere about the dangers of conflating US racism with UK racism, but I don't quite see why there is a need to have a dig at Abbott or insist that Starmer's response was right. 'I think you're wrong, and this is why'. Isn't that enough? Why add 'I think you're wrong and you're not fit to be in public life'?
i haven't read that but on this point 100% yes, the opposite, we need MPs who actually care enough to talk about racism rather than bow to the power of those who ignore their own reports telling them their party is racist, systemically ignoring their ethnic minority MPs who complain it is being ignored etc.'I think you're wrong, and this is why'. Isn't that enough? Why add 'I think you're wrong and you're not fit to be in public life'?
She hasn't been sacked. Starmer can't do that. If she had been in the shadow cabinet, then ok, he sacks her. But she's not. She's been purged, basically. He was waiting for an excuse and here it is.Whatever the nuances of the letter's content and history of racism/s might be in a wide ranging discussion (not a 150 or so word letter ffs) the complete fucking incompetence and tone-deafness of sending a letter saying Jewish, Irish and traveller people don't experience racism give the context of these arguments and raging problems this has caused in her party the last years is pretty mind blowing.
And then what seems likes minutes later issues a weird apology that incredibly manages to seem more incompetent than the original letter.
Absolute fucking moron, she deserves to be sacked for completely earth shattering idiocy.
She hasn't been sacked. Starmer can't do that. If she had been in the shadow cabinet, then ok, he sacks her. But she's not. She's been purged, basically. He was waiting for an excuse and here it is.
Aside from the insensitivity in this case to the experience of Jewish, Traveller and Irish people, is it any wonder that black people 'slag off' white people?Also, I'm only repeating what one of them said, I don't know if it's true, but apparently she has been heard to slag off white people.
Here are the proposed boundary changes to the Hackney constituencies: existing in dark blue, proposed in light blue.
View attachment 371918
The ongoing (third attempt!) boundary review process should conclude this year. The next election will be fought on the new boundaries.What does that mean?
Will the constituency till exist - will the carve up make any real difference?