Quote??
She must have been a OWC lurker to pick up that one.Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
??
What about Sheryl Sandberg?
I'm a bloke,I'm an ocker
And I really love your knockers,I'm a labourer by day,
I **** up all me pay,Watching footy on TV,
Just feed me more VB,Just pour my beer,And get my smokes, And go away
Actually it was moochers.
http://www.theweek.co.uk/us/us-elect...-down-ayn-rand
If I'm not mistaken, the vast bulk of prescriptive communist theory advocates the discriminate and violent overthrow of the bourgeoisie in order to establish a dictatorship of the proletariat, although, in spite of this, and like Stutts, I do still view communism as a morally superior ideology (and greatly admire purely descriptive Marxian thought along with the Marxist critique of capitalist society) to the various brands of fascism in the sense that communism discriminates on a material basis rather than on a natural, ethnic or racial basis like, say, Nazism. Communism is very much egalitarian in theory, but, as you say, realising such doesn't appear compatible with our self-interested human nature. Perhaps communism's rosy theoretical guise is it's fundamental and unwitting danger in that it attempts to convince us that it is possible to put what is essentially a form of straitjacket fundamentalism (even if it is seemingly humane, benevolent and well-intentioned) into practice. It is nigh impossible to impose ideologies upon entire populations without resorting to coercion, systematic violence and the suppression of dissident threats and thoughts.
Seems an odd thought, but to fascism's "credit", at least it is honest. It doesn't attempt to gloss over or cloak its totalitarian ambitions or practical nature with the deception of theoretical spin and faux-liberal sweetness. Not that its brutal honesty or lack of disingenuousness as to its means, methods and aims makes it any more palatable, but take the apparently benign and moderate UK Labour Party as an example of the contrary; seemingly benign and moderate because of their deceptive mastery. A few years ago Tony Blair lied through his teeth to the public in order to wage a war for Middle Eastern oil, yet he's still generally viewed with respect by the British establishment and certainly isn't deemed a disgraced politician by the broad British public in spite of going against the wishes of a majority of the population and the considerable amount of blood on his hands. His and his party's manipulation of the public was done with incredibly dangerous, destructive and reprehensible motives - millions of Iraqis still suffer as a consequence of his lies - but nobody would bat an eyelid if a Premier League manager declared he was a Labour voter. A manager announcing he supported the invasion of Iraq might stir a public response, sure, but I don't think it would be treated as anywhere near as scandalous as Paulo Di Canio having previously declared himself a fascist. And then there's the reverend Catholic Church, despite all its crimes and its exploitation of Christian thought as a cover in order to validate or legitimise its self-fulfilling criminal and morally corrupt endeavours.Men like Mao and Stalin were communists in name but certainly didn't practice what they preach, but then again you could argue if you were using the same viewpoint that all the scumbag priests and bishops in the Catholic Church were only Catholic in name
I'd tend to agree with your second point; that's his private business. However, Di Canio's politics, whatever they may be, make him who he is. His eccentric footballing persona is obviously influenced by his political or overall nature and vice versa. Neither exist in isolation of the other. A footballing appreciation for discipline, order, work ethic and team camaraderie should come as little surprise given what we know about his political self.thing is that ideology and religion is seperate to football and should always be. It shouldn't be important whether Paolo respects Mussolini, but whether the man can manage.
Likewise, McClean's identity politics were pivotal in his decision to declare for us internationally. And what about Trap's faith; his faith in God? Jesus, his faith in thon system?! There is no doubt that Trap's conservative Catholic values influence his managerial decisions and his expectations of players and their behaviour. It would be interesting to ascertain whether or not they bear an influence over his stubborn tactical ways...
Believing in bullsh*t isn't too smart, but what's so reprehensible about Di Canio's bullsh*t that it ought to stir a moral outcry in Sunderland? His dubious comment in relation to Jews was wholly objectionable, I admit, but it's not as if British society doesn't value order and discipline either. Otherwise, there'd be no law; no schools, prisons or institutions of that mould. If he is indeed of a thinking-intellectual political persuasion, although he denies that he is, perhaps he would advocate greater restrictions in civic freedom than what we might expect one to enjoy in a liberal democratic society (don't plenty "liberal democratic" politicians support freedom-restricting legislation too, mind?), but he's not condoned anything as reprehensible as murder or genocide, to the best of my knowledge.
That's dependent upon the intent behind it and our subsequent interpretation of it. A fascist salute performed by an Italian on on Italian soil isn't necessarily the same as, say, a Hitler/Nazi salute performed in front of an audience of Jews.his decision to start flashing fascist salutes in public is another matter entirely and he can't just cower in the corner and hope it goes away as he is currently doing.
Is it though? Is racial theory an inherent necessity of fascist thought?But being a Catholic does not entail an acceptance or approval of the awful actions of the church, whereas endorsing fascism is more or less an admission that you're a racial purist.
Let's make sure we're being historically-factual rather than relying on our Anglophone preconceptions here. Were they wittingly exported by the Italian authorities to death camps for extermination, or perhaps the Italian authorities were under the impression they were being sent to labour/concentration camps? I don't know for sure; just asking whether or not we can say for certain. Not that the latter, if it had been the case, would provide a blessing vindication, nor would it mean one could be classified as "good" whilst the other "bad", but there would be a moral distinction.
In fact, this article suggests the 8,000 Italian Jews who were exterminated in Nazi death camps were deported from Italy after the 1943 fall of the fascist government and Mussolini's re-imposition as nothing more than Hitler's puppet: http://www.jewishjournal.com/los_ang...ims_remembered
If Italian fascists were such suckers for full-blown Nazi racist ideology, why weren't Italian Jews rounded up for extermination when Mussolini held genuine power in Italy between the late 1930s and 1943?
I have no doubt that Di Canio is just a moron with a hard-on for authority, but you can't just whitewash the racist element of fascism to suit an argument.The imposition of most, if not all, ideologies (even the "good" ones like communism) will require coercion because, by their very nature, their stewards must try to fit people around them rather than pragmatically mould the doctrines to fit people.
I agree with both of you though in that I suspect Di Canio's fascistic fellow-travelling may well be a symptom of his rather eccentric nature and hard-man attitude; a result of thoughtlessness as opposed to any significant degree of serious consideration.
Last edited by DannyInvincible; 05/04/2013 at 11:24 PM.
Come on in and join the party; the water's plenty warm!: http://foot.ie/threads/147164-Eligibility-Rules-Okay
On the mixing of the inseparable football and politics - a contentious issue for many, for some reason; "politics" need not necessarily be synonymous with malignancy - neither operate in isolation or within their separate bubbles. Football can never be free from socio-cultural or political influence for the very reason that it is run by, played by and supported by inherently political beings. Politics and ideology pervade footballing rivalries. International football wouldn't exist if it weren't for identity politics. Our lives are politics and politics define our relationships, social interactions and us as people, so it's only inevitable that politics will colour our interest in sport.
If football was mere tactics and strategies, I'm not so sure I'd find it half as compelling or fascinating as I do. Is that a surprise?Politics add colour, humanity and personality to what otherwise would be purely mechanical. I don't see why politics in sport should be shunned as shameful or why some people are so afraid to admit that their own political characters might influence their engagement with the sport. Politics in sport don't necessarily have to be of the nasty breed; communitarian tribalism can do a good job in spicing up matters in a healthy way.
Of course, the latter paragraphs are in no way an apology for racist and homophobic politics in football. Certain supporter behaviours should be rightfully shunned.
Cheers, AB! He has done and said some idiotic things and, upon being accorded an opportunity to explain himself after the salute, that Jewish-related comment quoted in geysir's post #1990 above only dug a deeper hole for himself. I was simply reporting his recent claim that he isn't actually a fascist; that he had been previously misquoted: http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/22017645
My interest was also in ascertaining whether "fascist" means the same thing to Di Canio as it does to the Anglophone public. I'd still imagine not. I am under the impression that fascism is more marginalised, stigmatised, demonised and discredited in the Anglosphere than it would be in Italy, where the word is unlikely to immediately connote notions of racial nastiness or stimulate visions of Hitler saluting to the Aryan masses. I'm not implying it might find itself within mainstream Italian politics, but perhaps it is more tolerable to Italians in their conception of it than it is to us in our conception of it. Perhaps, as Charlie put it, it is something that is seen as being more for hard-men who get a boner for authority, order and regimentation rather than something that is associated with genocidal racial purists?
Last edited by DannyInvincible; 05/04/2013 at 8:55 PM.
Glad you took the time to read those.
Not many seem to take the time;tried having the same argument elsewhere and was dismissed as not allowing PDC his right to express his views. Which would readily accept if it was not the case that the basic ethos of those very views is to deny the right to express such views...
Simon Kuper gives his opinion on what Di Canio's political identification might mean to him from 1:30 onward: http://www.rte.ie/sport/player/813/380013/
You may have to scroll down the page or go to page 2 to select the specific clip depending on new additions to the top of the list.
Last edited by DannyInvincible; 06/04/2013 at 12:23 AM.
...and Simon Kuper in print
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c2ed538c-9...#axzz2PmADE0jL
Football’s little problem on the right wing
By Simon Kuper
In Paolo Di Canio’s autobiography, published in 2000, the Italian footballer says he is “fascinated by Benito Mussolini”. The late fascist dictator is the person he would most like to have a “one-on-one” with. “I own dozens of Mussolini biographies,” Di Canio continues. “I think he was a deeply misunderstood individual.” The footballer admires Mussolini for rallying “an entire country behind him”, and trying to save Italy. Admittedly Mussolini wasn’t perfect: “He deceived people, his actions were often vile or calculated. But all this was motivated by a higher purpose. At stake was the fate of a nation.” Di Canio acquired tattoos honouring Mussolini on his back and right arm, and while playing for Lazio of Rome gave several on-field fascist salutes.
All this has now become a touch embarrassing. After Sunderland appointed Di Canio manager last Sunday, David Miliband, the UK’s former foreign secretary, resigned from the club’s board “in light of the new manager’s past political statements”. Britons have long debated racial issues through football, and The Sun printed a Di Canio salute over its front page.
There is confusion because Di Canio’s fascism means different things in three different contexts: in the UK, in Italian politics and in 1970s Rome where he grew up.
In Britain, politicians subscribe to two basic propositions: fascism and racism are terrible; and immigration is terrible. When the singer Billy Bragg said, “well, I’ve got a message for you, Mr Di Canio: all you fascists are bound to lose”, no one was going to disagree. In the UK, opposing fascism is a no-lose proposition, like opposing cannibalism.
It’s different in Italy. Probably no other European country, perhaps not even the US, is so polarised between right and left. Much of the Italian squabble is over fascism. John Foot, professor of modern Italian history at University College London and an authority on Italian football, says: “The idea that Mussolini was basically OK until the anti-semitic laws in 1938 has quite a wide political constituency in Italy.”
In today’s Italian culture wars, rightwingers often affirm their folksy anticommunist credentials by praising Mussolini. Silvio Berlusconi, speaking at a ceremony on Holocaust Memorial day this January for Jews killed by the Nazis, said that despite the regrettable racial laws, Mussolini “in so many other ways did well”. Gianfranco Fini, Mr Berlusconi’s former deputy prime minister, once named Mussolini as the “greatest statesman of the century” (before disowning the view years later). During this winter’s election campaign, comedian-turned-politician Beppe Grillo flirted with the fascist-inspired “CasaPound” movement. Di Canio’s view of Mussolini as “basically a very principled, ethical individual” seems ordinary in this company.
Yet the footballer’s beliefs go beyond Italy’s mainstream right. Clearly he is a fascist, albeit a fascist in the sense the word had in the Rome of his childhood.
Italy in the 1970s was consumed by far-left and far-right violence. Prof Foot says: “People were getting killed for their beliefs because they were walking down the street with the wrong newspaper under their arm.” Di Canio was a hardcore fan of Lazio, and like most hardcore Lazio fans chose the far-right option. Many of them scarcely distinguished between the words “fascist” and “Lazio fan”. Football symbols were more meaningful than political symbols. Some would not have recognised a real fascist if one had tortured them in a prison cell. Fascism for them was a badge of local macho belonging, like a gang tattoo. Within Roman fan culture, Di Canio’s salutes (to the saluting fans) meant: “I love Lazio, just like you.”
Still, he understood he was using historical fascist symbols. Challenged on this, he once responded: “I’m a fascist, not a racist.” Given fascist Italy’s anti-semitic laws, colonial massacres in Africa and axis with Adolf Hitler, that may appear a hairsplitting distinction. Grumbling about Italian politicians in 2002, he said: “With Mussolini I’m sure we would have had a better situation,” but added that he wasn’t a fascist. This isn’t a coherent political philosophy. It’s just ugly.
Now he is pretending it never happened. He began this week insisting his statements about fascism had been misquoted (including in his autobiography?). He said some of his best friends were black. However, on Wednesday, he said: “I do not support the ideology of fascism.” Prof Foot says: “I would have respected him more if he’d said, ‘I am a fascist’. But he ducked it. It was very unhardmanish.”
Di Canio’s spinning is strangely reminiscent of Woody Allen’s sketch Remembering Needleman, a mock defence of a fictional Jewish philosopher who briefly supported Nazism. “It is easy to criticise his position on Hitler at first,” Allen writes, “but one must take into account his own philosophical writings ... Needleman’s intellectual integrity convinced him that he didn’t exist, his friends didn’t exist and the only thing that was real was his IOU to the bank for 6m marks. Hence, he was charmed by the National Socialist’s philosophy of power, or as Needleman put it, ‘I have the kind of eyes that are set off by a brown shirt’.”
Di Canio’s political thought is about as sensible as Needleman’s. Thankfully this fascist sympathiser is just a harmless football manager rather than, say, a leading politician in a troubled European country.
That more or less hits it on the head. I don't think anyone seriously believes Di Canio is a racist, but he lived outside of England long enough to understand what he was doing, and now he's trying to forget it ever happened.
Whatever about the offensive potential of Di Canio's politics, have you seen his jumper-tie combo today?!
At the risk of dragging the thread away from discussing Nazi theory, Jame McClean started on the bench today
he came on at about 70 mins, Sunderland had been a goal up before than but then went a goal down before
McClean came on.
James has not had much luck so far, not setting the Thames on fire, the right back or whatever is coping well
with him. Sill another 14 mins+ left.
Former Chelsea striker Clive Allen at Stamford Bridge: "I think McClean made a massive impact when he first burst onto the scene but one or two people have worked him out this season. He's a good attacking player and if anyone can get him going again then I'm sure Di Canio can."
Has his court case been sorted yet or is that still pending?
For once maybe someone will call me "sir" without adding "you're making a scene."
Thats fair enough. Alot of players struggle in their second season, just look at Seamus Coleman. But he has managed to turn it around, learn from it and is now one of the very best RBs in the PL.
McClean would some guidance and support could do the same. For me, his performances for Ireland have steadily improved, despite his relatively poor form at club level this year.
I find it supremely ironic and satisfying that she spent the last few years of her life claiming benefits from the government.My God Stutts you must hate Ayn Rand.
Most of these extreme libertarian thinkers have never even worked for the private sector. Some colleagues here in London were asking if Maggie'd have a state funeral. I joked that surely it should be provided by the private sector with a public procurement process to provide security among private providers?
This is the smuggest joke ever. I applaud thee.
DID YOU NOTICE A SIGN OUTSIDE MY HOUSE...?
Ken Loach got there before you, or maybe you know that
I'm a bloke,I'm an ocker
And I really love your knockers,I'm a labourer by day,
I **** up all me pay,Watching footy on TV,
Just feed me more VB,Just pour my beer,And get my smokes, And go away
Maybe I am Ken Loach?
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks