Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Is that detective_boy in the new Labour Party ad?

redcogs said:
Absolutely, imperial bobbying was very different. But in terms of the power relations between Orwell (as an organisation's representative, as an enforcer if you like) and those he was policing, there has to be many similarities? i just use the Orwell example to suggest that it is possible for individuals to come through a regime of unwholesomeness and emerge as a decent human being with values and integrity.
Click to expand...

I agree, and I don't doubt that Orwell emerged from his experiences in a way that informed what he did from then on, but power relations-wise his power over colonial subjects was much more oppressive than those of a Met Chief Inspector (about the equivalent rank). He could order corporal punishments that his Met contemporaries could only fantasise over. As my grandad (who spent 12 years in India and Burma as a soldier) said, "colonial coppers were all trained to show no mercy. Mercy was for whites only". Grandad didn't approve of the colonial authorities, probably informed by being brought up first in a workhouse, then in a military orphanage. He respected military authority, but thought that coppers were mostly wanna-be soldiers who didn't have the balls to take the King's shilling. No change there, then! :D

None of which means that the police as an institution of class dominance should not be subject to rigorous criticism. Most people i think, even those who wholeheartedly trust them and their role, know well that its unwise to ever trust a copper.
Click to expand...

Having studied the criminal justice system for a fair length of time (about 15 years) at graduate and postgraduate level, I'm not incline to trust ANY arm of the criminal justice system's apparatus. It's all rife with the same kind of institutional racism and sexism as the police force, and arguably has a much worse problem with both Masonic and non-Masonic "networking".
 
ViolentPanda said:
No, that would have been Ern and flimsier, tonguing Paddick's ringpiece, the pair of pseudo-left middle class sad cases. :D
Click to expand...
Ernesto wasn't even a closet authoritarian. Come the revolution he'd be straight in there as leader of the local committee. He'd be all rallying speeches in the front room and black leather gloves, tying to chairs and pliers in the back room. And while our p&p warriors wouldn't entirely approve, they'd let it ride for the sake of the revolution (the ones who survived the first few purges).
 
Spymaster said:
There were loads of them. Who was that lad from Brixton who got really pally with him? And it wasn't just the obvious arse licking from Ern and ddraig and a few others. There was a general sense of deference when he was posting; it was all "Brian this, and Brian that ..."

These boards were pretty much at peak ACAB at the time and I can't remember anyone really getting stuck into him and cunting him off.
Click to expand...
there was none from me so stop your deflection
provide a post, one single post to back up your shitty claims, go on
you're the one admitting to meeting the cunt and clearly grasping on to his coat tails
 
kabbes said:
Of course, the people can also be racist too, making for a double-whammy. But what I am seeing on this thread is the phrase “institutional racism” to mean something more akin to “widespread racism” rather than its actual meaning.
Click to expand...
'Twas ever thus.

Institutionalised racism when used on Urban regarding the police force is supposed to be synonymous with "all coppers are racist".
 
kabbes said:
The point about institutional racism is that it is the organisational structures that embed racist practices regardless of how well-meaning the individuals are that are following those structures. It’s not about the people, it’s about the governance.

Of course, the people can also be racist too, making for a double-whammy. But what I am seeing on this thread is the phrase “institutional racism” to mean something more akin to “widespread racism” rather than its actual meaning.
Click to expand...
I'm not too sure about that. The institutional racism of, say, the handling of the Stephen Lawrence case began with the racist assumptions of the coppers at the scene, and then following up with his parents. The 'institutional' bit comes at least in part from what teaboy was talking about - the 'all for one' attitude that means said racist coppers and their racist assumptions were never seriously questioned. The racism of some becomes the racism of the entire operation.
 
ddraig said:
you're the one admitting to meeting the cunt and clearly grasping on to his coat tails
Click to expand...
I met him quite a few times. He was very good company and he actually got his rounds in, which is more than I can say for a lot of Urbs.

"Grasping his coat tails" is laughable though. I'm far wealthier and more powerful than he was or ever will be, due to my masonic connections of course.
 
Last edited:
Spymaster said:
'Twas ever thus.

Institutionalised racism when used on Urban regarding the police force is supposed to be synonymous with "all coppers are racist".
Click to expand...

No it's not. There's no organised "ACAR" attitude on Urban, and most posters on here have a more nuanced understanding of "institutional racism" than you do. Institutional racism means that even if you yourself are not racist, you feel the need to conform to the prevailing "ideology" within the institution in order to keep your job and/or seek advancement and/or not get your head kicked in by your colleagues.
 
Spymaster said:
I met him quite a few times. He was very good company and he actually got his rounds in, which is more than I can say for a lot of Urbs.

"Grasping his coat tails" is laughable though. I'm far wealthier and more powerful than he was or ever will be, due to my masonic connections.
Click to expand...

Yep, it is laughable.

It's obvious you were grasping his flies, and lapping at his knob-end. :D
 
littlebabyjesus said:
I'm not too sure about that. The institutional racism of, say, the handling of the Stephen Lawrence case began with the racist assumptions of the coppers at the scene, and then following up with his parents. The 'institutional' bit comes at least in part from what teaboy was talking about - the 'all for one' attitude that means said racist coppers and their racist assumptions were never seriously questioned. The racism of some becomes the racism of the entire operation.
Click to expand...
I don’t think that was what was meant by institutional racism in that context. The institutional bit comes from the way in which evidence and witness statements are treated. It wouldn’t matter how non-racist the individual was on the front line because the process was systematically biased against certain groups.

In addition, however, the coppers themselves were also racist. That meant the problems were made exponentially worse, plus the there was no challenge to the process.

ViolentPanda said:
The structures are arguably not racist, but many of the agents are, which has the effect of rendering the structures non-amenable to people of colour, just as the structures are arguably not sexist, but many of the agents are.
Click to expand...
No, I think the point made by the Inquiry was that the structures are (or at least were) incredibly racist by the very nature of their design.
 
redcogs said:
An interesting observation. Mrs redcogs works within the care sector, which looks after all people who require help and support, where you might imagine unequal treatment of anybody ought not to be problematic. Yet there is significant 'unwhitting'? racism preventing access to promotion etc. Much work to be done i fear.
Click to expand...

I'm not aware of any nation-state, or of any nation-state's structures and institutions that don't effectively discriminate against minorities.
 
Magnus McGinty said:
They don’t appear out of thin air either.
Click to expand...
And neither were they created by the workforce who are abiding by them.

If you can’t recognse the difference, the risk is that you will never identify and act to eliminate the structural and organisational racism.
 
kabbes said:
The point about institutional racism is that it is the organisational structures that embed racist practices regardless of how well-meaning the individuals are that are following those structures. It’s not about the people, it’s about the governance.

Of course, the people can also be racist too, making for a double-whammy. But what I am seeing on this thread is the phrase “institutional racism” to mean something more akin to “widespread racism” rather than its actual meaning.
Click to expand...

The governance, however, is the province of people, not structures.
 
Idaho said:
Ernesto wasn't even a closet authoritarian. Come the revolution he'd be straight in there as leader of the local committee. He'd be all rallying speeches in the front room and black leather gloves, tying to chairs and pliers in the back room. And while our p&p warriors wouldn't entirely approve, they'd let it ride for the sake of the revolution (the ones who survived the first few purges).
Click to expand...

Ern was definitely a closet Beria, but his real politics were so soft left-liberal that I bet the cunt voted Tory when he moved to Norfolk.
 
kabbes said:
And neither were they created by the workforce who are abiding by them.

If you can’t recognse the difference, the risk is that you will never identify and act to eliminate the structural and organisational racism.
Click to expand...

Of course it’s a top down structure but it still came about from people who had agency was my point.
 
Spymaster said:
I met him quite a few times. He was very good company and he actually got his rounds in, which is more than I can say for a lot of Urbs.

"Grasping his coat tails" is laughable though. I'm far wealthier and more powerful than he was or ever will be, due to my masonic connections.
Click to expand...
:D:D:D the desperation :facepalm:
still nothing to back up your shit stirring bullshit i see, not one post, keep looking sad sack
 
Spymaster said:
Don't kid yourself. Your involvement in this thread is going exactly as planned. ;)

"Brian, Brian ... please quote one of my posts!!!"
Click to expand...
still not one post, just more deflection and "going as planned" from the failed wannabe someone in authority with power over others, pathetic
 
kabbes said:
No, I think the point made by the Inquiry was that the structures are (or at least were) incredibly racist by the very nature of their design.
Click to expand...

Racism is a social construction. It's the logical end-point of a colonialist and post-colonialist past, for our ruling class. There's no discriminatory legislation, and hasn't been since the Equality Act, but what there is, is a phalanx of people whose own racist and sexist attitudes inform the interpretation of legislation, so we get, for example, the Met Police inventing out of thin air a crime called "mugging", closely followed by the judiciary handing down tougher sentences to black youths committing street robberies/street robberies with violence. It's not the law, it's the interpretation and the interpreters that are racist.
 
ddraig said:
still not one post, just more deflection and "going as planned" from the failed wannabe someone in authority with power over others, pathetic
Click to expand...
:D My major power at the moment is over you.

I've just PM'd 2 other posters telling them what I'm going to make you post in one of your next 3 contributions to me on this thread.

I'm going to win.
 
Last edited:
ViolentPanda said:
Racism is a social construction. It's the logical end-point of a colonialist and post-colonialist past, for our ruling class. There's no discriminatory legislation, and hasn't been since the Equality Act, but what there is, is a phalanx of people whose own racist and sexist attitudes inform the interpretation of legislation, so we get, for example, the Met Police inventing out of thin air a crime called "mugging", closely followed by the judiciary handing down tougher sentences to black youths committing street robberies/street robberies with violence. It's not the law, it's the interpretation and the interpreters that are racist.
Click to expand...
It's also about the assumptions that drive the direction of an investigation. Prejudices not just against black people, but against crusty types, misfits of various kinds or the unemployed. The Colin Stagg case mentioned earlier is an excellent example of that - decide who's guilty based on your prejudices then build the case.
 
Spymaster said:
:D My major power at the moment is over you.

I've just PM'd 2 other posters telling them what I'm going to make you post in one of your next 3 contributions to this thread.

I'm going to win.
Click to expand...
this and gay jokes lolz
pathetic cap doffing powerless impotent prick
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Kid_Eternity
Collective - new left wing party?
2 3 4 5
Replies
140
Views
4K
hitmouse
hitmouse
Kid_Eternity
New Labour government - legislative agenda
25 26 27 28 29
Replies
848
Views
24K
tommers
tommers
frogwoman
  • Poll
What is the first serious Labour scandal gonna be?
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
182
Views
7K
twistedAM
twistedAM
B
Annals of the Green Party
2
Replies
32
Views
1K
Funky_monks
F
hitmouse
Unions and Labour
Replies
20
Views
920
Fedayn
Fedayn
Back
Top Bottom