Something has bothered me whilst I watch some of the Premier League games since the resumption of the season.

Whilst I am not going down the line of “some of my best friends are black” in order to mitigate anything I wish to say (I don’t at this moment have any black friends), I have questioned how I behave towards anyone and everyone.

In one of my previous roles I worked quite a lot in the US and it did strike a nerve when I asked my black colleagues why I’d not seen them in a bar in the evenings and it struck me when they mentioned black and white bars. To me my colleagues were Mike and Crosswell, my other colleague was Alan who white and I thought I was even minded with everyone. Colour never mattered. I worked with another black guy in the states but I can’t for the life of me remember his name because he was a d1ck but this was not to do with colour as far as I was concerned. Anyway, I digress. Needless to say I do not have a racist thought towards anyone although I have an opinion about prejudice and perceived prejudice or even positive discrimination.

The main problem I have with the PL when faced with taking a knee is the Black Power symbolism of the raised fist. As we have been told that racism is about White power over Black peoples it does smack of hypocrisy that this symbol is now being elevated before every game. When Kapernaek (spelling) began his solitary protest about police brutality, his protest was against the standing for the American anthem which he saw as belonging to a country that had systemic bigotry and racism. Because he didn’t want his protest to be Black against White but about changing people’s attitude towards how they saw people of different races and colours in society. The raising of the fist is a symbol of racism every bit as the raising of a forearmed salute (you know the one) and for this reason I believed Kap did not make this symbol during his protest.

When any symbol of this sort has been brought up in football the powers that be rightly punish the individual, another example being Gascoigne when he mimicked playing a fife in an old firm derby = punishable.

Will the Black Power salute be banned from football the same way other symbols of racist doctrine have been?

Very interesting post Ade, and I guess your interpretation depends on where your coming from. I have a family member who has written extensively about the Spanish civil war, and he is confident that this is where the raised clenched fist originated, as a popular front and anti-fascist salute.

It was picked up by students in the 60s Paris riots, and in my memory simply stood at the time as a symbol against common oppression.

I think the fact it became the black panther symbol (in the 70s?) may have given it a more threatening symbolism, but I still think most of my generation (in my 70s) see it as a universal anger felt by the treatment of minorities.

Very interesting post Ade, and I guess your interpretation depends on where your coming from. I have a family member who has written extensively about the Spanish civil war, and he is confident that this is where the raised clenched fist originated, as a popular front and anti-fascist salute.

It was picked up by students in the 60s Paris riots, and in my memory simply stood at the time as a symbol against common oppression.

I think the fact it became the black panther symbol (in the 70s?) may have given it a more threatening symbolism, but I still think most of my generation (in my 70s) see it as a universal anger felt by the treatment of minorities.

I don’t believe the raised fist salute can be attributed to any one time and imagine it has symbolism dating back to early civilisations as a form of salutation as I would assume the same for what we would call the Nazi forearmed salute now.

For symbolism to have any resonance it must be validated by time and date - pre or post 1930s Germany for example. I doubt anyone making that motion could argue it’s a Buddhist welcome sign. In the same way I doubt anybody making the clenched fist salute is doing so without taking reference to Tommy Smith.

There have been numerous footballers sited for making the Nazi salute:

Mark Bosnich, Paolo Di Canio, Joey Barton and Wayne Hennessy have all been charged with doing so with various degrees of backsliding grovelling apologies. If after 70 years this still has the power to shock maybe the black power salute needs to be quietly left out of the symbolism today before it takes on a more sinister meaning?

I get where you are coming from Ade , as some people could read it that way, but as Mervyn points out it can also have anti fascist roots.

Let's face it, raising a clenched fist in the air is more of a natural poze than the Nazi salute and can be used to express a number of different emotions. Alan Shearer used it in his goal celebrations.

If this is made an issue we are in danger of throwing red meat to the racists, who would feed on any scraps to dilute or discredit the message that non white skinned people in this country get institutionally treated differently in their every day lives.

As far as I know the IOC still have the black power salute, taking the knee and any other political salute or slogan on their banned list.

The FA, FIFA and EUEFA rules are:

Any slogan, statement or image which falls into any of these categories is not permitted.

Whilst 'religious' and 'personal' are relatively easily defined, 'political' is less clear but slogans, statements or images related to the following are not permitted:

any person(s), living or dead (unless part of the official competition name)
any local, regional, national or international political party/organisation/group, etc.
any local, regional or national government or any of its departments, offices or functions
any organisation which is discriminatory
any organisation whose aims/actions are likely to offend a notable number of people
any specific political act/event

If you read BLM UK's statement of policy and intentions of defunding and abolition of the Police Force, shutting down prisons, riddance of capitalism and destroying structures etc etc, then the BLM logo on shirts and taking the knee falls into above categories.

Reading various social media sites and speaking to some friends and colleagues from various ethnicities, I can see the BLM movement causing more division than before the tragic death of George Floyd in Minneapolis. I hope this doesn't happen but when you have an idiot of a Cambridge professor (Priyamvada Gopal) stating publicly 'white lives don't matter' then who knows.

I hope this doesn't happen but when you have an idiot of a Cambridge professor (Priyamvada Gopal) stating publicly 'white lives don't matter' then who knows.

Context matters with any quote - especially a partial quote.What she actually said was "White lives don't matter. As White lives". She went on to expalin :
"Whiteness does not qualify someone to have their life matter; the life matters but not the whiteness".

So you see how FULL quote and in the context of what she was talking about i.e. in response to the banner flown over the Burnley game that said "White lives matter"…… how it actually makes perfect sense.

OK – I accept that she has done it in a deliberately provocative way to make a point by twisting a well-known phrase. But that is just a rhetorical technique that has been used for centuries by philosophers, writers, academics, politicians, journalists & even stand-up comedians. The first part “white lives don’t matter” is calculated to shock & grab the attention of the audience…..…but then pause, before adding the punch-line “As white lives”. The listener then absorbs that all-important caveat as the point is developed further – basically saying the bleedin’ obvious i.e. that any life shouldn’t matter just because of the colour of the skin it happens to be wrapped in because - the life is important not the skin. But if you just said something as bland as that it would have zero impact -hence the word play.

Having said all that – my criticism would be that Twitter is definitely not the place to be doing those sort of things. She’s an idiot to not realise the furore that it would cause as the first four words are immediately seized and gleefully re-tweeted with faux outrage across social media and all the consequences that will have. It’s one thing to do it in a speech, a serious newspaper article or even on a TV political panel show like ‘Question Time’ (even that’s a bit dangerous) - but Twitter? WTF was she thinking?

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... ge-support

All lives (should) matter and all lives (should) be valued equally.
All should be treated equally and fairly.
Not an unreasonable demand is it?

All lives (should) matter and all lives (should) be valued equally.
All should be treated equally and fairly.
Not an unreasonable demand is it?

Spot on .Should be ALM,all lives matter end of.

All lives (should) matter and all lives (should) be valued equally.
All should be treated equally and fairly.
Not an unreasonable demand is it?

Spot on .Should be ALM,all lives matter end of.

Yes, agreed - I believe that is the view of the silent majority

All lives (should) matter and all lives (should) be valued equally.
All should be treated equally and fairly.
Not an unreasonable demand is it?

Spot on .Should be ALM,all lives matter end of.

Yes, agreed - I believe that is the view of the silent majority

I don’t think any sane person disagrees that “all lives matter” – it’s like saying “everybody should be nice each other”. But it completely misses the point about the BLM movement. BLM is not saying black lives matter exclusively but the harsh reality at the moment in our predominantly white, western democracies is that the net effect of racism (of both overt and systemic) is that black lives matter less relative to white. You can’t effectively campaign to change that without focussing on where the change is needed – hence BLACK lives matter (too).

If you were to launch a campaign to (say) help blind children you shouldn’t avoid pointing out their particular handicap and their particular problems lest anybody gets upset about you ignoring the (quite different) problems of sighted children.

Imagine two houses – one of which is on fire and the occupants are desperately struggling to contain it and getting badly burned. You don’t call the fire brigade then ask them to turn their hoses on both and ask the medics to treat all occupants of both properties do you? …… All houses matter for sure – but the one that’s on fire needs the attention and indeed the help from the neighbours.

Doesn't miss the point.It really is simple. Instead of discriminating against anybody ALM embraces everybody which presumably is the objective of the BLM movement.

Doesn't miss the point.It really is simple. Instead of discriminating against anybody ALM embraces everybody which presumably is the objective of the BLM movement.

You just dont get it do you or dont want to? Ave it has done a very good explanation. How hard is that to understand?

Doesn't miss the point.It really is simple. Instead of discriminating against anybody ALM embraces everybody which presumably is the objective of the BLM movement.

Yeah, but Black Lives Matter hits home and addresses a specific problem more than All Lives Matter But Right Now The Black Community Needs All Of Our Help More To Address The Inherent Racism Which Exists In Society Against Them.