Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

Big Lottery Fund

12346»

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Bomber if found sources thats fine but lets move on now shall we, its all getting a teeny-bit tedious.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Rich Kid wrote:
    Well put morrismarina.

    I don't mind funds going to Asylum seekers, you read and agreed with that bit too? :)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It discriminates in favour of Minority ethnics, who do you think are the Majority ethnics.

    Discrimination on grounds of race and ethnicity is racism. :yes:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    No it doesn't discriminate in favour of them. They are one of the six (two if you also include asylum seekers) objectives - so socially disadvantaged whites get four chances.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Discrimination on grounds of race and ethnicity is racism.

    Insisting that there can be a division between different individuals on arbitary, imaginary causality is racist. Every time you use a word like "Asian" you are being racist, it's how you must process the language in order to make sense of it.

    There are no minority or majority "ethnics" the proposition is ridiculous.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Here's the answer I gave NQA about same link.

    "It's not fair - because it's racist! Help Asylum seekers - fine, but if as you claim the aim is to help the most disadvantaged, there should be no reference to BMEs, because the disadvantaged include many more White Majority Ethnics equally deserving. Racist! And into the breach step the BNP!"



    People are not disadvantaged because of their ethnic background, as even Blagsta said, stuff like this racialises problems of inequality, education, opportunity, health and so on (he actually said 'class' ;)). Funding priorities like this necessarily penalise disadvantaged whites on account of their race - if you're poor and Bangladeshi you've got more chance of getting the cash than poor whites - they're quite explicit about that.

    "We have identified particular priority beneficiary groups for funding...Black and minority ethnic communities".

    It's racist. And it's so easy for the BNP to exploit obvious double standards like this and I think they're perfectly justified.


    If you read my post properly, you'll see that I do acknowledge that people are actually disadvantaged because of their ethnic background. There is also a class element too - I do see how white working class people get resentful when they perceive that money is going to help BME (what a horrible term) groups when they have to rely on underfunded statutory services. I'm thinking of a particular situation in my job where there is a specific mental health project for black people with advocacy, fast tracking etc, but white people have to rely on the woefully underfunded and understaffed statutory system. I do see how this can play into the hands of racists. However, there is also a need for mental health services to take into account the specific cultural needs of afro-carribean and african people, as it is (or can be) different from white people. The fact also remains that a disproportinate number of black people are sectioned compared to white people - there are many reasons - the experience of living in what is still a racist society and the institutionalised racism of the mental health system, e.g. black men are perceived as being more violent etc. There is also a big mistrust by some people from this background of the system, based on past experiences.
    This is used as a classic divide and rule tactic - divide people on racial lines and they won't unite on class lines. You have to realise that racism exists and also serves a function within the logic of capitalism.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Rich Kid wrote:
    Bomber if found sources thats fine but lets move on now shall we, its all getting a teeny-bit tedious.


    Move on? I don't follow mine contradict the whole reason you made the thread yet you have no response at all unless you are accepting that you in fact did make up sources with no evidence?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Bomberman444, meet our resident troll. Resident troll, this is Bomberman444.

    Don't hold your breath for answers of any type from this poster.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Here's the answer I gave NQA about same link.

    "It's not fair - because it's racist! Help Asylum seekers - fine, but if as you claim the aim is to help the most disadvantaged, there should be no reference to BMEs, because the disadvantaged include many more White Majority Ethnics equally deserving. Racist! And into the breach step the BNP!"



    People are not disadvantaged because of their ethnic background, as even Blagsta said, stuff like this racialises problems of inequality, education, opportunity, health and so on (he actually said 'class' ;)). Funding priorities like this necessarily penalise disadvantaged whites on account of their race - if you're poor and Bangladeshi you've got more chance of getting the cash than poor whites - they're quite explicit about that.

    "We have identified particular priority beneficiary groups for funding...Black and minority ethnic communities".

    It's racist. And it's so easy for the BNP to exploit obvious double standards like this and I think they're perfectly justified.

    i agree entirely excpet that a charity that deals with helping asylum seeker is the same as helping a charity that help women who have run away from domestic violence, and by your line of argument youre suggsting only one charity should exist for everyone, which is just stupid

    from my opinion theyre not getting too big a grant from the lottery so its perfectly okay, and well its better than many of the films funded by lottery money
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Blagsta wrote:
    If you read my post properly, you'll see that I do acknowledge that people are actually disadvantaged because of their ethnic background. There is also a class element too - I do see how white working class people get resentful when they perceive that money is going to help BME (what a horrible term) groups when they have to rely on underfunded statutory services. I'm thinking of a particular situation in my job where there is a specific mental health project for black people with advocacy, fast tracking etc, but white people have to rely on the woefully underfunded and understaffed statutory system. I do see how this can play into the hands of racists. However, there is also a need for mental health services to take into account the specific cultural needs of afro-carribean and african people, as it is (or can be) different from white people. The fact also remains that a disproportinate number of black people are sectioned compared to white people - there are many reasons - the experience of living in what is still a racist society and the institutionalised racism of the mental health system, e.g. black men are perceived as being more violent etc. There is also a big mistrust by some people from this background of the system, based on past experiences.
    This is used as a classic divide and rule tactic - divide people on racial lines and they won't unite on class lines. You have to realise that racism exists and also serves a function within the logic of capitalism.

    Agree entirely - except about the class thing. :)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Blagsta wrote:
    This is used as a classic divide and rule tactic - divide people on racial lines and they won't unite on class lines. You have to realise that racism exists and also serves a function within the logic of capitalism.

    Astounding irony in that comment.

    Classism exists and also serves as a function within the logic of marxism. Instead of seeing racial divisions in society (like a racist) they just see class divisions. A racist looks at a black person and hates them for thier ethnicity while a marxist hates them due to wealth and success. Marxists are the ones who use class as a divide and rule tactic. Divide society into a class they can control and a class everyone can hate, furthering thier own marxist cause.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Personally I don't hate anyone for wealth and success, its absurd to suggest otherwise. What I do dislike is people (like Rich Kid or Dubversion) sneering at people for their lack of money or people revelling in their exploitation of others. If class doesn't exist, how do you explain capitalism? How do you explain the conflict between bosses and workers? How do you explain the inequality in opportunity? To suggest that Marxists (which is a slippery term anyway as it can encompass a wide variety of views) want to control people is to fundamentally misunderstand what a class analysis is about. I've never suggested that class is the only tool we can use to understand human behaviour and conflict, I think that psychoanalysis can also be a useful tool. However neither of these things claim to be absolute "truth", they are tools to help us understand society and human behaviour.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Just to put the record straight over a comment you made whilst I was away, I don't "sneer" at anyone - its a physical act and as you've never met me, and are highly unlikely to, its grossly inaccurate.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Main Entry: 1sneer
    Pronunciation: 'snir
    Function: verb
    Etymology: probably akin to Middle High German snerren to chatter, gossip -- more at SNORE
    intransitive senses
    1 : to smile or laugh with facial contortions that express scorn or contempt
    2 : to speak or write in a scornfully jeering manner
    transitive senses : to utter with a sneer
    synonym see SCOFF

    http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=sneer&x=0&y=0
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So you can look up words Blaggy, what a clever little Blaggy you are. Can you look up "condescending" and "arrogant" because they're two words that many associate with you and a careful reading and understanding of their definition could, perhaps(?????), begin to temper your rather boorish attitude. Please do that for me Blaggy, you'll be a much nicer person for it I promise you.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    You both want to stop ruining threads. You got anything to say about the Big Lottery Fund? Otherwise find a thread you both actually want to post about.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I haven't said this for a while, but you want a private conversation use the private message system.

    So in future look at the topic, stay on it or send a private message
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Well said Jim. Totally agree.
Sign In or Register to comment.