World cup bid

Is this guy right or wrong? Is it racism?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/may/22/2018-world-cup-launch-wembley-bnp

 

To my mind the less politicians involved in these kinds of things, the better. I don't care if it's Gordon Brown, Dave Cameron or the BNP councillors.

 

Is he the guy who sat in the corner?

 

In my mind what FIFA are suggesting is positive racism and a blight on free speech and democracy. Which is just as bad if not worse. I don't agree with any of the BNP's views or opinions but they still have the right to have them.

It's the age old adage; I don't agree with what you say but i'll die defending your right to say it.

 

The law clearly proscribes some of their views - though you won't find those ones in their election literature.

 

actually it proscribes taking action on those views or inciting hatred etc. The view itself is perfectly legal

 

Yes I'm fully aware of the law ta - the way I presented it initially was maybe a little too broad. But you just said you'd "die defending [their] right to say it" - that implies you disagree with the law (I know it's an old saying but I also happen to think it's bizarre). Do you?

 

I don't disagree with the law at all. I am not saying that i personally would die for defending that view, merely quoting the saying. I do however believe in the right for someone to have whatever view they choose, no matter how ignorant.

I also believe that positive racism is never good.

 

I know you didn't literally mean you would die for it. That's not the point of the saying. The point however is that you would essentially give everything to defend someone's right to say what they want. Not just think it but to say it. The difference is subtle but important I think. You mentioned 'free speech' before yet the law of the land says speech isn't 100% free. So how can you not disagree with it at all? You position is contradictory.

Explain this phrase 'positive racism' if you will - it's not one I've encountered before.

 

hmm i guess then i agree with the right to speech thing, unless it's inciting hatred in others. which is actually a really complicated thing to determine.

and positive racism is when you actively discriminate in order to promote "diversity". ie. if you hire someone because they are black in order to have a more balanced ratio of minorities rather than their skill set.

 

that's positive discrimination rather than positive racism surely?

 

it's pretty much the same thing, but i guess positive discrimination is more commonly used, so yes.

 

semantics really, but discrimination is putting prejudices into practice, whereas racism can only have negative connotations.

 

fair enough

 

plus, i should point out that nothing that jack warner has to say is worth listening to, because he is a corrupt ********.

 

Not that i disagree, but this is based on what?