Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

People getting racially abused because of the referendum result

Because, when you look at the dawn of the third Reich, it started with "relatively mild racist incidents"
No it didn't, the anti-semitism of the Nazi's had far longer and deeper roots. There was the whole background of decades of racial/national ideologies that built on the already existing prejudices.

These incidents are awful but to make nonsense comparisons like yours are not helpful, it's like all the idiots claiming UKIP are fascists. Wrong, stupid and unhelpful.
 
No it didn't, the anti-semitism of the Nazi's had far longer and deeper roots. There was the whole background of decades of racial/national ideologies that built on the already existing prejudices.

These incidents are awful but to make nonsense comparisons like yours are not helpful, it's like all the idiots claiming UKIP are fascists. Wrong, stupid and unhelpful.
I think that the rise of antisemitism in Nazi Germany has lots of relevant lessons to teach us without necessarily having to be all "O noes, Nazis". Violence and discrimination needs certain conditions to prevail in order to flourish, like dehumanisation of the targets, a general normalisation of the notion of violence against them, blame/scapegoating, and so on. Nazi Germany is a stark historical example of those things happening; using it as an example does not mean I'm suggesting that jackboots and black shirts are just around the corner.

Although they could be, in time, if we choose to ignore the lessons of history: this is as close to morally justified racism as I have seen in my life - even in the 70s and 80s,there was an awareness among racists that their opinions were not mainstream, but I have a sense now that a lot of the racism is being done, at least in the minds of those doing it, on behalf of us all.
 
The people you seem to be blaming. The fact that you quantify racism in terms of severity is akin to saying people should 'grow a thicker skin' and just get over or ignore some of it.
Utter tosh. Let's put some context into this , despite what some posters in Planet Urban say the level and type of incidents being reported are not akin to the rise of Hitler in Germany .
 
I think that the rise of antisemitism in Nazi Germany has lots of relevant lessons to teach us without necessarily having to be all "O noes, Nazis". Violence and discrimination needs certain conditions to prevail in order to flourish, like dehumanisation of the targets, a general normalisation of the notion of violence against them, blame/scapegoating, and so on. Nazi Germany is a stark historical example of those things happening; using it as an example does not mean I'm suggesting that jackboots and black shirts are just around the corner.

Although they could be, in time, if we choose to ignore the lessons of history: this is as close to morally justified racism as I have seen in my life - even in the 70s and 80s,there was an awareness among racists that their opinions were not mainstream, but I have a sense now that a lot of the racism is being done, at least in the minds of those doing it, on behalf of us all.
If you had been around in the 70s you would have found that the racists actually thought that they did think their views were mainstream and spoke for the majority.
 
You say this as if the bigotry and racism people are experiencing a spike in is something that just 'happened' because of the rhetoric of the referendum. That's not true. I think you know that also.
Of course not, but there hasn't been the decades of racial theorising that formed the backdrop to Nazi's, there aren't large numbers of eugenics supporters for example, there isn't the (bar a very few hard right scum) link between "blood and soil" that there was in Germany at the beginning of the 20th century. To pretend that the current situation in Britain is anything link 30s Germany is just unhelpful twaddle.
 
If you had been around in the 70s you would have found that the racists actually thought that they did think their views were mainstream and spoke for the majority.

I was, and they didn't. They still knew that their shit wasn't shared by the majority, even if "Nationwide" did show "dockers for Enoch" marching, and the OB (as ever) policed NF marches in a biased manner. It's why Webster couldn't drink in any local pubs within about a two mile radius of his home, except The Pine Tavern by Clapham Junction station. It's why the NF had to sneak onto most estates in London in the middle of the night to post up their propaganda, and why most of it lasted less than 24 hours. I can think of about 3 areas that were serious redoubts of racist nationalism in the SE around the '70s and '80s: Eltham, the area around Swanley, and Dover. Everywhere else, it was a minority of spuds making a lot of noise.
 
The people you seem to be blaming. The fact that you quantify racism in terms of severity is akin to saying people should 'grow a thicker skin' and just get over or ignore some of it.

This isn't true though is it? It is accurate to say that racism was more prevalent and more openly expressed in the 1970s than it is now; just look at popular cultural representations in news papers and on the television. Or if you prefer go to a source like the Mass Observation Archive and look at the depth, virulence and common sense of antisemitism prior to the second world war. It is not asking anyone to get over anything to acknowledge this history.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice
 
Of course not, but there hasn't been the decades of racial theorising that formed the backdrop to Nazi's, there aren't large numbers of eugenics supporters for example, there isn't the (bar a very few hard right scum) link between "blood and soil" that there was in Germany at the beginning of the 20th century. To pretend that the current situation in Britain is anything link 30s Germany is just unhelpful twaddle.

TBF, the whole "blood and soil" thing hasn't gone away. It's just couched in ever more "scientific" language. There are still academics pushing the line (although whether through conviction or because of available funding, I don't know), even though most socio-biological claims are long discredited, or are nowadays so conditional and contingent as to be meaningless.

I think we can use Germany between 1890 and 1930 as a template for an expansion of minority behaviour - and anti-Semitism was a minority behaviour in Germany - into the mainstream, and how the antisocial elements of behaviour become normalised into everyday majority behaviour quite quickly. In terms of similarity here and now though, I'd say that the only meaningful similarity so far is that politicians are driving this, for their own purposes (as ever!) rather than ours.
 
I was, and they didn't. They still knew that their shit wasn't shared by the majority, even if "Nationwide" did show "dockers for Enoch" marching, and the OB (as ever) policed NF marches in a biased manner. It's why Webster couldn't drink in any local pubs within about a two mile radius of his home, except The Pine Tavern by Clapham Junction station. It's why the NF had to sneak onto most estates in London in the middle of the night to post up their propaganda, and why most of it lasted less than 24 hours. I can think of about 3 areas that were serious redoubts of racist nationalism in the SE around the '70s and '80s: Eltham, the area around Swanley, and Dover. Everywhere else, it was a minority of spuds making a lot of noise.

I was as well (down on the true blue south coast), and in my experience there was much more racism expressed in the day to day conversation and the media. I don't think that this meant that active racists - i.e. those consciously promoting racism - thought they were speaking for a silenced majority, but they were a lot more confident that they'd get a hearing.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice
 
This isn't true though is it? It is accurate to say that racism was more prevalent and more openly expressed in the 1970s than it is now; just look at popular cultural representations in news papers and on the television. Or if you prefer go to a source like the Mass Observation Archive and look at the depth, virulence and common sense of antisemitism prior to the second world war. It is not asking anyone to get over anything to acknowledge this history.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

I think Rutita has a point, in that one of the most frequent refrains to mates who protested about racist language in the 70s and 80s - even from their own families, sometimes - was "ignore it".

Regarding prevalence, especially media prevalence, I'm somewhat sceptical toward the view that represents that prevalence as indicative of widely-held sentiment. The media have a long history of running with the prejudices and political preferences of their owners and/or other elements of the ruling class.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CRI
I was as well (down on the true blue south coast), and in my experience there was much more racism expressed in the day to day conversation and the media. I don't think that this meant that active racists - i.e. those consciously promoting racism - thought they were speaking for a silenced majority, but they were a lot more confident that they'd get a hearing.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

I think there are two issues that often get fused together, but that need to be addressed separately: the degree of normative quasi-racist language - which was often (but not always) a product of ignorance that tended to have fallen away with exposure to a multi-cultural environment - and actual hard-bitten racism and the politics of racism, which has shrunk consistently since the 70s except when mainstream politicians have stirred the pot.
 
I was, and they didn't. They still knew that their shit wasn't shared by the majority, even if "Nationwide" did show "dockers for Enoch" marching, and the OB (as ever) policed NF marches in a biased manner. It's why Webster couldn't drink in any local pubs within about a two mile radius of his home, except The Pine Tavern by Clapham Junction station. It's why the NF had to sneak onto most estates in London in the middle of the night to post up their propaganda, and why most of it lasted less than 24 hours. I can think of about 3 areas that were serious redoubts of racist nationalism in the SE around the '70s and '80s: Eltham, the area around Swanley, and Dover. Everywhere else, it was a minority of spuds making a lot of noise.
Yeah, I hear this used as an excuse for old people being racist - 'well everyone was back in their day'. No, everyone wasn't.
 
This isn't true though is it? It is accurate to say that racism was more prevalent and more openly expressed in the 1970s than it is now; just look at popular cultural representations in news papers and on the television. Or if you prefer go to a source like the Mass Observation Archive and look at the depth, virulence and common sense of antisemitism prior to the second world war. It is not asking anyone to get over anything to acknowledge this history.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

Yes it is true. I was not referring to prevalence as compared to another era so I am not sure why you have introduced that comparison as if you know something I don't. I have no trouble acknowledging history/the period you have referred to either thanks for the most part because I lived that too and as a result have my own opinions and understanding.

I was specifically focusing on the offensive idea that you can measure racism on some kind of sliding scale of severity. Mild racism? That concept can GTF.
 
I was, and they didn't. They still knew that their shit wasn't shared by the majority, even if "Nationwide" did show "dockers for Enoch" marching, and the OB (as ever) policed NF marches in a biased manner. It's why Webster couldn't drink in any local pubs within about a two mile radius of his home, except The Pine Tavern by Clapham Junction station. It's why the NF had to sneak onto most estates in London in the middle of the night to post up their propaganda, and why most of it lasted less than 24 hours. I can think of about 3 areas that were serious redoubts of racist nationalism in the SE around the '70s and '80s: Eltham, the area around Swanley, and Dover. Everywhere else, it was a minority of spuds making a lot of noise.

I was responding to the posters comments about racists not the nazi far right.
 
Yes it is true. I was not referring to prevalence as compared to another era so I am not sure why you have introduced that comparison as if you know something I don't. I have no trouble acknowledging history/the period you have referred to either thanks for the most part because I lived that too and as a result have my own opinions and understanding.

I was specifically focusing on the offensive idea that you can measure racism on some kind of sliding scale of severity. Mild racism? That concept can GTF.

All I was trying to say is that pointing out that some racism has worse effects than others (which is a sliding scale of severity), shouldn't be controversial and absolutely shouldn't be used to excuse any racism.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice
 
All I was trying to say is that pointing out that some racism has worse effects than others (which is a sliding scale of severity), shouldn't be controversial and absolutely shouldn't be used to excuse any racism.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

That is a shift away from the point I made which was not a focus on the possible effects/outcomes as a result of racism.
 
Last edited:
Are you implying that there is such a thing as non-extreme xenophobia?
And by asking that question are you comparing making a racist joke to racially prejudiced genocide in their severity?

You can't simultaneously argue that "minor" racism incidents lead to "severe" racist incidents and that there's no distinction between "minor" and "severe" at the same time.
 
And by asking that question are you comparing making a racist joke to racially prejudiced genocide in their severity?

You can't simultaneously argue that "minor" racism incidents lead to "severe" racist incidents and that there's no distinction between "minor" and "severe" at the same time.

Which was my point. It was a rhetorical question.
 
Indeed. Wtf is that?

Racism is racism.
hang on, we had this discussion re homophobia on the other thread. Yes, of course racism is racism, but sometimes it is worse than at other times. The racism of the scum who killed Stephen Lawrence was far far worse than the racism of someone who 'doesn't mind individual people from [insert country here]', but thinks that there are too many over here, for whatever reason. There is a difference between those who have some racist ideas, and some non, or even anti-racist, ones, and those who just hate all pakis/niggers/etc If we just lump them all in together, we push those with some soft racist ideas into the hands of the hardened scumbags.

But that wasn't actually the point I was making, and that 39th was agreeing with. My point was that the attacks themsleves were, mostly, comparatively mild compared to the attacks that happened when I was growing up. Having yoghurt thrown over you, being spat at, told to 'fuck off home' are all absolutely vile, but there's no blood spilt, no 13 dead in a house fire and the police laughing about it. That doesnt mean we should jsut ignore it, or dismiss it, but we must get it into persepctive. otherwise we cant deal with it properly
 
Back
Top Bottom