If you have a physical action or visual symbol that the people making it clearly state indicates that they are doing it to support a cause and then you refuse to take that action it will be presumed that you hold a different view. If it is the case that De Kock is a racist then the South African’s are better off without him. If on the other hand he is against racism but feels that taking a knee is not radical enough then he should just say so and take firmer action. At present, he has not made his position clear.

Now I am aware that you find racism abhorrent and that you are firmly opposed to it, however, you also say that it’s not much of a problem and that we should ignore it. Now I know that many people who experience racism pretty much every day will differ with you on this and as racism is generally, but not exclusively, suffered by people of colour you may have just been lucky and not suffered it yourself. We clearly don’t need to experience suffering ourselves to understand how it might feel and to be empathetic.

As regards symbols that indicate support for causes. In the coming weeks many if not the majority of people in the UK will be wearing poppies both to support the Royal British Legion and to signify their recognition of the debt that they owe to the millions that died fighting in two World Wars and other conflicts.

Now it might be that you do not support the specific political ideologies that brought many of these conflicts about but you do want to honour the bravery and sacrifice of those that fought. Therefore you might decide to wear a poppy, indeed it will be controversial if you appear in a public context without one in the next three weeks. If poppies and other symbolic ‘gestures’ such as minutes of silence or applause are appropriate and important then why not others such as taking the knee?

Race is only a subtext.

This is about power....and forcing compliance.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Yes, I agree racism is a component of broader systemic structural oppression throughout society that seeks to maintain power over people through compliance. You clearly understand this and yet you resist this small action that seeks to highlight a specific but very important aspect of this oppression. Discrimination on the basis of gender, race, sexuality, class or for any other reason is wrong. The cohesive happy society that we all desire is only obtainable if equality is available to all.

Any action that oppressed people make to expose and diminish their oppression will always be resisted by the oppressors. The force with which the racists struggle against the actions is indicative of their weakness.

Racism is wrong, so why oppose fighting against it? If you feel action is unnecessary then it is at most an inconvenience.

You can be against racism and not in favour of taking the knee which is a meaningless virtue signalling gesture which is why Wilf wont do it.

PL players have the power to make a difference instead of lining their pockets with gold and and paying lip service to the issues by taking the knee they should use that power. A few examples where I would support them:

- Racist abuse on social media
- Racist abuse when British teams play abroad
- UEFA and FIFA not recognising each others bans so Hungry allowed supporters in a word cup game.
- UEFA has not agreed to fund racism monitors in its competitions so currently there is no monitoring of racism across Europe.
- Joke punishments by all football authorities FIFA UEFA and the local FA.

This are just some of the issues that footballers could do something about if they wanted to instead they take the knee.

What could they do:

- Come off social media and tell their fans and other celebs to do the same until t***ter and Faces*** sort the problem out.
- As for the rest tell the football authorities that unless they take this seriously and start acting players will boycott interviews, any form of promotion for UEFA and FIFA and ultimately refuse to take part in certain games.

All of the above I would support as practical measures to shame football and the wider public into fixing this.

Still keep taking the knee and the gold, but it isn't getting the job done.

One more point

I fundamentally disagree with you that discrimination on the basis of gender, race, sexuality, class or for any other reason is always wrong....it depends. It's one of those hypocritical statements that all the drones come out with without thinking.

I regard it as an absurd statement as people discriminate on all these things daily as discrimination is what humans are designed to do.

To vilify if goes against how humans naturally behave....and how you and everyone else behaves. Discrimination is even being practiced here. It's just discrimination that you approve of.

People discriminate on gender and sexuality and general genetics when they choose their mates, what they look for and don't...looks they like and looks they don't. No girl can control how long her legs are but that will influence the number of admirers she has.

Egalitarianism is BS....I prefer to think of fairness.

People discriminate on race when they create organisations specifically designed for them....BLM, MoBO, BPO. People discriminate when they fund black only scholarships and refuse white ones....discrimination on race is actually practiced much more by the left than anyone else.

People discriminate on class pretty much all the time....by the bubble of people who are their friends, by their classist attitudes....your middle class attitudes for example.

This cricketer deserves the same freedom that people who took the knee were given when it started. You are against his freedom and agree with punishing him for his conscience.

Once again, when this started I was told that people were free to express their views without fear. This is proving the exact opposite.

Edited by Stirlingsays (27 Oct 2021 9.53am)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Nobody is forced to wear a poppy. Some, Jim Davidson for instance, does not wear a poppy because of issues he has with the British Legion, yet he does a great deal for other armed services charities.

Supporting BLM is a political statement, wearing a poppy is not.

Edited by georgenorman (27 Oct 2021 10.59am)