Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
exile

Black Lives Matter... in Scotland

Recommended Posts

Some of the reactions are mental though however that's what happens when the damn bursts. The pendulum is swinging wildly.

It's totally inaccurate to see it as Far left-Far Right but that's the binary simplistic terminology of these times. As Orwell wrote it's just labels for folk you disagree with/ Don't like, Nazi, marxist, etc.

We've got it relatively tame over here in comparison to States where it has went off the deep end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, vanderark14 said:

Some interesting comments from matt le tissier and karl henry. 

Le tissier is reviewing with sky.whether he wants to continue wearing the BLM badge. Henry reckoms the UK needs a new neutral anti racism movement away from BLM

Le tissiet doesnt want to be linked with the far right or far left

 

I tend to think that when someone says they are not far left or far right ( or in this case that they dont want to be linked with either ) they normally veer, to a lesser extreme,  to one of the sides.  They use the word ‘far’ to  make their own position seem more central . 
I have no idea what Le Tissier s politics are however he says he doesnt agree with BLM  views on defunding the police and anti capitalism, which suggests he sways more to the right. 

He says ‘ I agree with the cause but there are parts of the organisation that I just cannot support."( those mentioned above) 

Sounds like he is using his politics to distance himself. Will be interesting to see if others follow. 

 

 


 
 


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see the wearing of BLM slogans on football shirts a bit like wearing poppies, it sort of becomes an expectation imposed on people. Well to be honest I haven't been following the story (English Premier League). It's a bit odd, the authorities veer from banning political or personal statements, then before you know it, they're forcing everyone to do it. It would be Ok for the player's union (or whatever) to issue a statement of solidarity or kick racism oout of football stuff, but I think wearing a slogan or symbol has more power if the individual has chosen to display it themselves.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, exile said:

I see the wearing of BLM slogans on football shirts a bit like wearing poppies, it sort of becomes an expectation imposed on people. Well to be honest I haven't been following the story (English Premier League). It's a bit odd, the authorities veer from banning political or personal statements, then before you know it, they're forcing everyone to do it. It would be Ok for the player's union (or whatever) to issue a statement of solidarity or kick racism oout of football stuff, but I think wearing a slogan or symbol has more power if the individual has chosen to display it themselves.

I've briefly seen screenshots of random Black American being bemused, saying things like "we didn't ask for any of this shit" like cancelling episodes of Golden Girls. It's some weird tokenism.

an example

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/12/2020 at 3:29 PM, phart said:

Half the comments on facebook are calling it fake. Also the page calling itself left wing when it clearly isn't.

50 mill club is also PewDiePie memorabilia. (The top she is wearing)

"Disney has cut ties with the world's highest paid YouTube star PewDiePie over allegations of anti-Semitism.

The decision came after several videos he released over the past few months were found to contain Nazi references or anti-Semitic imagery.

PewDiePie, whose real name is Felix Kjellberg, accepted the material was offensive, but said he did not support "any kind of hateful attitudes".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38965377

The world's highest-paid YouTube star, PewDiePie, has used the "n-word" during an online broadcast.

The 27-year-old Swede - real name Felix Kjellberg - could be heard using the racial slur while he was playing a video game during a live streaming.

After using the term he appeared to recognise his error, saying: "I don't mean that in a bad way."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-41222593

"A gunman opened fire in a mosque in Christchurch, New Zealand, killing 50 people and injuring 50 more. As he did so, he filmed the entire crime and live-streamed it directly to Facebook..."

"...The suspect also referenced a meme in the actual video. Before opening fire he shouted "subscribe to PewDiePie..."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-47583393

Naw. This is neuorplasticity in action. :lol: And all based on a sweatshirt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to Black Lives Matter in Scotland, I see Humza Yousaf has annoyed some people from outside Scotland (I'm talking of Guy Burchill by the way) for pointing out the lack of black and emthnic minority people in leading positions in Scottish public life. For those who may have missed it, the article is titled "Self-hatred is so RAMPANT in the West that politicians are now even denying cold hard facts". But, what cold hard facts are being denied?

Burchill actually claims "here we have a senior member of the Scottish Nationalist Party and Scottish Government apparently complaining that Scotland is full of native Scots." Which is where he slips up, because the issue is not about native Scots at all! 

I presume the cold hard fact the subtitle is referring to is that Scotland is 96% white. Which may be true but the real cold hard fact is this here:

Just two current MSPs are from the black and minority ethnic (BAME) community and there has never been a BAME woman elected to Holyrood.

Labour’s Anas Sarwar and Justice Secretary Humza Yousaf are the only BAME MSPs in Holyrood.

Just 1.5% of MSPs are from a non-white ethnic minority, compared to 4% of the population, as reported in the 2011 census.

1.5% v 4% is the key statistic here. This is about overall under-representation in public life, not simply under-representation at the very top.

The real message is about the aspiration that our parliament should be more representative of all our fellow Scots and not just the white ones. But Burchill is not interested in building a better Scotland, but just sewing discord between Scots, stirring arguments against one of our only two non-white MSPs.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, TDYER63 said:

I tend to think that when someone says they are not far left or far right ( or in this case that they dont want to be linked with either ) they normally veer, to a lesser extreme,  to one of the sides.  They use the word ‘far’ to  make their own position seem more central . 
I have no idea what Le Tissier s politics are however he says he doesnt agree with BLM  views on defunding the police and anti capitalism, which suggests he sways more to the right. 

He says ‘ I agree with the cause but there are parts of the organisation that I just cannot support."( those mentioned above) 

Sounds like he is using his politics to distance himself. Will be interesting to see if others follow. 

 

 


 
 


 

It’s not right wing do not want to dismantle capitalism or defund the police? Or maybe it is in 2020 :lol:

BLM is a garbage movement though so fair play to Le Tissier for speaking out but he’ll need to bend the knee or lose his job. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, exile said:

Back to Black Lives Matter in Scotland, I see Humza Yousaf has annoyed some people from outside Scotland (I'm talking of Guy Burchill by the way) for pointing out the lack of black and emthnic minority people in leading positions in Scottish public life. For those who may have missed it, the article is titled "Self-hatred is so RAMPANT in the West that politicians are now even denying cold hard facts". But, what cold hard facts are being denied?

Burchill actually claims "here we have a senior member of the Scottish Nationalist Party and Scottish Government apparently complaining that Scotland is full of native Scots." Which is where he slips up, because the issue is not about native Scots at all! 

I presume the cold hard fact the subtitle is referring to is that Scotland is 96% white. Which may be true but the real cold hard fact is this here:

Just two current MSPs are from the black and minority ethnic (BAME) community and there has never been a BAME woman elected to Holyrood.

Labour’s Anas Sarwar and Justice Secretary Humza Yousaf are the only BAME MSPs in Holyrood.

Just 1.5% of MSPs are from a non-white ethnic minority, compared to 4% of the population, as reported in the 2011 census.

1.5% v 4% is the key statistic here. This is about overall under-representation in public life, not simply under-representation at the very top.

The real message is about the aspiration that our parliament should be more representative of all our fellow Scots and not just the white ones. But Burchill is not interested in building a better Scotland, but just sewing discord between Scots, stirring arguments against one of our only two non-white MSPs.

Lets say the above stastic is evened up, although i doubt it as the next census is due next year and i would be surprised if scotland is still 96% white.

Anyway, lets say the amount of BAME  MSPs is equal to the percentage of BAME people living in scotland. Some are going to think its now all fair but why assume the views of the BAME MSP represents the views of the BAME community? For example, i dont think every white person represents my views

Surely the person voted in will be the one whos views or policy equal what the individiual voter wants?

Theres lots of statistics like the one.above in politics and in football but the question should be how many of the BAME community have stood for office and who did they lose to and why did they lose? If the number of candidates is extremely low then ask why nobody in the community stands for office? If they lost to the better candidate then its surely fair and they can try again next time.

Not sure if that makes sense or not but hopefully you get my point

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, thplinth said:

What the hell is a CHOP zone was my first reaction. Murica is a fucked up place

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, TDYER63 said:

I tend to think that when someone says they are not far left or far right ( or in this case that they dont want to be linked with either ) they normally veer, to a lesser extreme,  to one of the sides.  They use the word ‘far’ to  make their own position seem more central . 
I have no idea what Le Tissier s politics are however he says he doesnt agree with BLM  views on defunding the police and anti capitalism, which suggests he sways more to the right. 

He says ‘ I agree with the cause but there are parts of the organisation that I just cannot support."( those mentioned above) 

Sounds like he is using his politics to distance himself. Will be interesting to see if others follow. 

 

 


 
 


 

I dont think my point was made very well, it was more about highlighting someone who is well known and on TV regularly going against the grain. Its a dangerous game for him to play in todays society.most will just do it regardless if they agree or not to keep their job.

Patrice Evra also ditched the badge along with jamie redknapp, thats four ex players, two of them black who have ditched BLM. Its about more than Matt Le tissier now

Edited by vanderark14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, vanderark14 said:

Lets say the above stastic is evened up, although i doubt it as the next census is due next year and i would be surprised if scotland is still 96% white.

Anyway, lets say the amount of BAME  MSPs is equal to the percentage of BAME people living in scotland. Some are going to think its now all fair but why assume the views of the BAME MSP represents the views of the BAME community? For example, i dont think every white person represents my views

Surely the person voted in will be the one whos views or policy equal what the individiual voter wants?

Theres lots of statistics like the one.above in politics and in football but the question should be how many of the BAME community have stood for office and who did they lose to and why did they lose? If the number of candidates is extremely low then ask why nobody in the community stands for office? If they lost to the better candidate then its surely fair and they can try again next time.

Not sure if that makes sense or not but hopefully you get my point

Yes I do get your point. I don't have time to respond in full right now but the first most basic point is that our two respresentatives from minority ethnic communities are saying it's not good enough and they would seem to deserve a hearing. 

It's about collective representation, not having candidates specifically on minority issues. (This applies to gender too, and any other issue. For example, imagine if there were no Scots in the upper echelons of the BBC, civil service, etc. It's not that we'd be demanding a scottish angle on everything but it would not feel right if all the top brass was from one part of the country). On the issue of not standing for office, then it could be argued that the system ism or is percevied to be, stacked against them. People on here routinely slag off poliiticans in Holyrood for being imbeciles. It is maybe hard to believe that there wouldn't be better candidates from a wider proportion of the population. It could even be that parties are 'socially conservative' and fear that ethnic minority candidates would be less electable. But whatever the reason, there is an imablance, it seems to me worth looking into, and people can decide if its' something they want to fix. It isn't or needn't be a party political issue and could be addressed here and now within Scotland.

Edited by exile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, ParisInAKilt said:

It’s not right wing do not want to dismantle capitalism or defund the police? Or maybe it is in 2020 :lol:

BLM is a garbage movement though so fair play to Le Tissier for speaking out but he’ll need to bend the knee or lose his job. 

Anyone who is critical of the left is immediately subjected to smears such as they are racists, fascists, supremacists etc.. Endless ad hominem attacks. It is routine. You can see it on here even, it is very obvious. 

The frightening thing is this mirrors the SNP these days as well, they do exactly the same thing when criticized because they are both infested with same woke bampots. With the SNP however it is you must be misogynistic or trans phobic or blah blah blah...

It is a very ugly and cynical tactic being employed by left wing extremists to try to short circuit free speech and sadly it is currently working as people are seriously kowtowed by them. They are worried about saying anything critical for fear of losing their jobs due to being doxxed and having their employer bombarded with all these smears.

And people wonder why folk oppose them. It is because they are political scumbags. Fuck em.

Edited by thplinth
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, ParisInAKilt said:

It’s not right wing do not want to dismantle capitalism or defund the police? Or maybe it is in 2020 :lol:

BLM is a garbage movement though so fair play to Le Tissier for speaking out but he’ll need to bend the knee or lose his job. 

It depends what is meant by BLM movement. Probably there is an original core bunch of activists (who may be Marxists, etc) but there is also a wider movement that people have embraced internationally. Being against one doesn't necessarily mean being against the other.

As a crude parallel. Opponents of Scottish independence have said that Nationalists are xenophobes and racists, that the SNP was founded by xenophobes and racists and Nazi sympathisers, and that the current SNP are a bunch of communists or socialists (or Tartan Tories), (and are woke and/or transphobic) and some SNP members have been shown to be corrupt and/or dodgy; and some independence supporters (with banners like Tory Scum and Engliand Out) are racists and xenophobes. That doesn't mean you can't be a supporter of independence, - it is now a much wider more inclusive movement, with people from all walks of life including ethnic minorities and non-native Scots. Only the most partisan hardline unionists would try to use examples of bad attitude or bad behaviour by individual Scottish nationalists, to smear the whole movement, or as an arguement against independence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, exile said:

It depends what is meant by BLM movement. Probably there is an original core bunch of activists (who may be Marxists, etc) but there is also a wider movement that people have embraced internationally. Being against one doesn't necessarily mean being against the other.

As a crude parallel. Opponents of Scottish independence have said that Nationalists are xenophobes and racists, that the SNP was founded by xenophobes and racists and Nazi sympathisers, and that the current SNP are a bunch of communists or socialists (or Tartan Tories), (and are woke and/or transphobic) and some SNP members have been shown to be corrupt and/or dodgy; and some independence supporters (with banners like Tory Scum and Engliand Out) are racists and xenophobes. That doesn't mean you can't be a supporter of independence, - it is now a much wider more inclusive movement, with people from all walks of life including ethnic minorities and non-native Scots. Only the most partisan hardline unionists would try to use examples of bad attitude or bad behaviour by individual Scottish nationalists, to smear the whole movement, or as an arguement against independence.

Yeah not sure about that parallel. 

I don’t really agree with anything BLM says or does, other than thinking black people should be treated equally to any other race. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, ParisInAKilt said:

 

I don’t really agree with anything BLM says or does, other than thinking black people should be treated equally to any other race. 

 

What other aspects of "what they say or do", don't you agree with?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, aaid said:

What other aspects of "what they say or do", don't you agree with?

That systemic racism is killing black people, defunding the police, mass disobedience.
They are a phony revolution designed to divide working class people and intensify not heal racial tensions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, ParisInAKilt said:

That systemic racism is killing black people, defunding the police, mass disobedience.
They are a phony revolution designed to divide working class people and intensify not heal racial tensions. 

I don't have a problem myself with mass disobedience and disruption particularly where it brings attention on something which wouldn't normally get the same coverage - that stops with me though when it turns to violence and/or vandalism as I think that's totally counter-productive.

In respect of the specifics of black people in the USA being killed by law enforcement, the stats are pretty stark on that, that they are - proportionately - much more likely to be killed than whites.

In the more general sense, I'd say that it's a lot more complex and nuanced, however, people from deprived backgrounds are generally likelier to have poorer health outcomes and lower life expectancy, again the evidence all pretty much points to that and that in the USA, UK and mainland Europe.  black people - specifically - are more likely to be "deprived".  Whether or not that's down to systemic racism is difficult to prove but there is obviously something going on.   In contrast - in the UK specifically - while there are localised areas of deprivation, primarily in the North of England - South Asian immigrants - Indian, Pakistani and Bangladeshi - who immigrated around the same time, or slightly later - have done a lot better than Afro-Caribbeans - who account for the bulk of the UK's black population.

Defunding the police - as I understand it - doesn't mean take all the money away from the police but stop the militarisation of the police and instead spread it around the supporting services, I'm surprised someone in your profession doesn't see the value in that.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, aaid said:

I don't have a problem myself with mass disobedience and disruption particularly where it brings attention on something which wouldn't normally get the same coverage - that stops with me though when it turns to violence and/or vandalism as I think that's totally counter-productive.

In respect of the specifics of black people in the USA being killed by law enforcement, the stats are pretty stark on that, that they are - proportionately - much more likely to be killed than whites.

In the more general sense, I'd say that it's a lot more complex and nuanced, however, people from deprived backgrounds are generally likelier to have poorer health outcomes and lower life expectancy, again the evidence all pretty much points to that and that in the USA, UK and mainland Europe.  black people - specifically - are more likely to be "deprived".  Whether or not that's down to systemic racism is difficult to prove but there is obviously something going on.   In contrast - in the UK specifically - while there are localised areas of deprivation, primarily in the North of England - South Asian immigrants - Indian, Pakistani and Bangladeshi - who immigrated around the same time, or slightly later - have done a lot better than Afro-Caribbeans - who account for the bulk of the UK's black population.

Defunding the police - as I understand it - doesn't mean take all the money away from the police but stop the militarisation of the police and instead spread it around the supporting services, I'm surprised someone in your profession doesn't see the value in that.

I would welcome stopping the militarisation of the police, which is why violent protesting is so counterproductive. 

I do see value in community spending but wouldn’t trust anyone associated with BLM spending it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ParisInAKilt said:

It’s not right wing do not want to dismantle capitalism or defund the police? Or maybe it is in 2020 :lol:

BLM is a garbage movement though so fair play to Le Tissier for speaking out but he’ll need to bend the knee or lose his job. 

Thats not what what I was trying to say , I meant that if Le Tissier thinks you are far left by being anti capitalist then I suggest he sways to the right, you dont need to be far left to dislike capitalism.
I don't really care what his politics are, he is just another celebrity throwing in his tuppence worth, I just think he is letting his political leaning make his decision . If the protesters were in favour of capitalism he would be fine with them. 
I would agree with Exile’s parallel above,  its like someone saying they no longer support scottish independence as they think the SNP is too left wing or they don't like some of the more extreme hangers on. 
I do think however he has every right to speak out and I disagree with the pressure put on people to run with the herd, the poppy analogy being a perfect example. 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TDYER63 said:

Thats not what what I was trying to say , I meant that if Le Tissier thinks you are far left by being anti capitalist then I suggest he sways to the right, you dont need to be far left to dislike capitalism.
I don't really care what his politics are, he is just another celebrity throwing in his tuppence worth, I just think he is letting his political leaning make his decision . If the protesters were in favour of capitalism he would be fine with them. 
I would agree with Exile’s parallel above,  its like someone saying they no longer support scottish independence as they think the SNP is too left wing or they don't like some of the more extreme hangers on. 
I do think however he has every right to speak out and I disagree with the pressure put on people to run with the herd, the poppy analogy being a perfect example. 

 

BLM is a political movement though. His comments are fairly uncontroversial and rather than him being a celebrity throwing in his opinion, he was forced to defend his decision to not wanting to wear the pin. 

You can still want Scottish independence without supporting the yes campaign or SNP, the same way you can support black people without endorsing BLM. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, aaid said:

I don't have a problem myself with mass disobedience and disruption particularly where it brings attention on something which wouldn't normally get the same coverage - that stops with me though when it turns to violence and/or vandalism as I think that's totally counter-productive.

In respect of the specifics of black people in the USA being killed by law enforcement, the stats are pretty stark on that, that they are - proportionately - much more likely to be killed than whites.

In the more general sense, I'd say that it's a lot more complex and nuanced, however, people from deprived backgrounds are generally likelier to have poorer health outcomes and lower life expectancy, again the evidence all pretty much points to that and that in the USA, UK and mainland Europe.  black people - specifically - are more likely to be "deprived".  Whether or not that's down to systemic racism is difficult to prove but there is obviously something going on.   In contrast - in the UK specifically - while there are localised areas of deprivation, primarily in the North of England - South Asian immigrants - Indian, Pakistani and Bangladeshi - who immigrated around the same time, or slightly later - have done a lot better than Afro-Caribbeans - who account for the bulk of the UK's black population.

Defunding the police - as I understand it - doesn't mean take all the money away from the police but stop the militarisation of the police and instead spread it around the supporting services, I'm surprised someone in your profession doesn't see the value in that.

I thought defunding the police sounded bat shit mental but it is really just a really badly worded slogan.  John Oliver on Sky Atlantic did a good piece explaining it and as it stands the top 3 funded armed forces worldwide are: 1) US military 2) Chinese military and 3) US police

Essentially they just want to divvy it up better as the spending on rehabilitation / prevention is peanuts compared to the % we spend on it.  They defunded New Jersey 7 years ago but what that meant was the entire force had to reapply for their jobs due to systemic corruption and since then crime there has dropped 50%.  They're sitting at a reoffending rate of about 80% and only about 30% correctional facilities offer college level education - of those prisoners attaining college level qualifications less than 20% re-offend.   

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, TDYER63 said:

Thats not what what I was trying to say , I meant that if Le Tissier thinks you are far left by being anti capitalist then I suggest he sways to the right, you dont need to be far left to dislike capitalism.
I don't really care what his politics are, he is just another celebrity throwing in his tuppence worth, I just think he is letting his political leaning make his decision . If the protesters were in favour of capitalism he would be fine with them. 
I would agree with Exile’s parallel above,  its like someone saying they no longer support scottish independence as they think the SNP is too left wing or they don't like some of the more extreme hangers on. 
I do think however he has every right to speak out and I disagree with the pressure put on people to run with the herd, the poppy analogy being a perfect example. 

 

Overton's window is as far right as I have seen in my life time to the point Ken Clark looks a raving Pinko.  

In the same day I was a Marxist for sort of agreeing pulling slave owners statues down had merit and a frothing at mouth Nazi for not being onboard with drag queens in school and GRA offering opportunity for predatory blokes, and pharmaceuticals, to take the piss.  Strange times.    

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, vanderark14 said:

Lets say the above stastic is evened up, although i doubt it as the next census is due next year and i would be surprised if scotland is still 96% white.

Anyway, lets say the amount of BAME  MSPs is equal to the percentage of BAME people living in scotland. Some are going to think its now all fair but why assume the views of the BAME MSP represents the views of the BAME community? For example, i dont think every white person represents my views

Surely the person voted in will be the one whos views or policy equal what the individiual voter wants?

Theres lots of statistics like the one.above in politics and in football but the question should be how many of the BAME community have stood for office and who did they lose to and why did they lose? If the number of candidates is extremely low then ask why nobody in the community stands for office? If they lost to the better candidate then its surely fair and they can try again next time.

Not sure if that makes sense or not but hopefully you get my point

I doubt the next census will show a massively different shift in these demographics in Scotland, possibly a slight increase but not to any great degree and probably more in line with the general birth rate.  It might even proportionately decrease as Scotland's population is increasing and that's largely down to immigration - that immigration though will be largely white as it will be from the EU and other parts of the UK.

In comparison with the rest of the UK, Scotland does not have a large black population, only 36,000 in the 2011 census and that was primarily African rather than Afro-Caribbean.   On sheer weight of numbers, it's no surprise that there aren't any black MPs or MSPs in Scotland and I think that the relatively high-profile Graeme Campbell might be the only black councillor.

Scotland's "non-white" population is predominantly Asian, ie., Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Chinese and of course is not a homogeneous group.   It also - with the singular exception of the Southside of Glasgow - not concentrated anywhere.    It's no surprise therefore that both the current MSPs from BAME backgrounds, Humza Yousaf and Anas Sarwar, are both from that area, are both Muslims of Pakistani origin and in fact, they both went to the same school - fee-paying Hutchie.     There have been four BAME MSPs and one MP.   They were all of Pakistani Muslim background and from Glasgow.  The MP was of course Anas Sarwar's dad, so while he's is right to point out the under-representation of BAME people, the Sarwar family is probably over represented.

If you go from a starting point that diversity is a good thing in any walk of like, then at the levels we're talking about, you are probably looking to have a slight over representation of minorities, so that you get a bit more of a reflection of those views and viewpoints and not have the current position where Humza Yousaf and Anas Sarwar are deemed to speak for everyone who isn't white.

The problem with the point you make about "getting the best candidate" is that it doesn't address the reasons why - quite often - the best candidates don't actually make it onto shortlists in the first place - and that's often because they don't put themselves forwards.   That's what - all - political parties have to look at and who do you remove those barriers and there are a lot of those, outright racism will be a part of it but not the only problem.

While it's a problem with respect to BAME, I'd say that its an even bigger problem where the under-representation of women is concerned, who lets not forget are actually in the majority.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, ParisInAKilt said:

 

I do see value in community spending but wouldn’t trust anyone associated with BLM spending it. 

Is that what they are saying though - "give us the money"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  



×
×
  • Create New...