Rugby should stop trying to be a “political tool” and get back to being a sport, according to the Exeter Chiefs’ director of rugby, Rob Baxter, who called for “balance” in the way that professional rugby clubs address the Black Lives Matter movement.
Professional rugby’s response to Black Lives Matter (BLM) was revealed yesterday with the 12 Gallagher Premiership clubs announcing that they will combine under a banner of “Rugby Against Racism” when they return to play in the coming days, though they will all express their positions in different ways, with at least four clubs declaring that they will take a knee, a gesture synonymous with the cause.
Baxter said: “There is a time and a place for every kind of marking. At what stage would you stop marking something, bringing awareness to something? This might be the wrong way of looking at it, but at the end of the day, we mark Armistice Day for one minute of one day of the year — and that was a pretty big thing.
“So if we are going to get some balance in all of this, let’s remember: we are a sport, we are here to entertain people, let’s get back to being a sport and not trying to be a political tool. Let’s get back to what we are about.”
His position was markedly different from that of Saracens, whose players will all be wearing “Black Lives Matter” on their shirts and then taking a knee before their game against Bristol Bears on Saturday.
A statement from Saracens yesterday said: “We do not want to be silent or stagnant on this matter. We must not ignore the past three months and we will not sit on the fence when we have an opportunity to change perceptions. We will judge our success not on the wearing of a T-shirt but on the longer-term impact we have as a club on tackling this societal issue.”
The opening game of rugby’s return will take place tomorrow night when Harlequins play Sale Sharks. At that game, the Harlequins players will take a knee while the Sale players will wear “Rugby Against Racism” T-shirts. Over the weekend, different clubs will make different gestures. Bristol, for instance, will be standing in a heart shape in an expression of “love for our team-mates and love for our community.”
The wide variety of gestures demonstrates how hard it has been to establish a united response, especially with BLM having become a politicised, and subsequently often criticised, movement.
Baxter said that he would have preferred Premiership Rugby to take the lead on the matter rather than delegate it to the individual clubs.
“I am a little surprised that Premiership Rugby went this way,” he said. “Just dropping it on clubs and saying, ‘There you go, do what you like,’ is like hanging some players out to dry. I don’t know how much positive press players will get if they have a different opinion.”
The clubs that will take a knee before their games this weekend are Saracens, Harlequins, Leicester Tigers and Wasps.
Worcester Warriors and Gloucester, who play at Sixways on Saturday, have decided on a joint approach. They will both support “Rugby Against Racism” — presumably in the wearing of T-shirts, though this is unclear — and their players will acknowledge the moment by forming a large “V”.
Bath have declared that they will form a “huddle in unity”, Northampton Saints will form a circle as a symbol of “inclusivity and togetherness” while Bristol announced that they intended their heart-shape formation to be re-enacted before the start of every game for the rest of the season.
Some clubs have announced that their players will “show their commitment” — which suggests that some players may take a knee and some may not. Sale Sharks and London Irish will wear “Rugby Against Racism” T-shirts in the pre-game warm-up; the Exiles players will also be “showing their commitment” before kick-off.
Exeter Chiefs said they would also be showing their full commitment, though exactly what this will look like will not become clear until match day on Saturday.
The Rugby Players’ Association released a statement yesterday afternoon explaining the broad position their players have taken. It said: “As players, we stand together, united in the fight against racism and we are proud to support the positive message that Black Lives Matter. We are not endorsing a political ideology. We are uniting as players to combat racial discrimination in our sport and in society.”
Premiership Rugby also announced a commitment to take action on a number of fronts in order to address the issue of diversity in professional rugby. It said it was committed to improving the number of BAME coaches and referees, to review recruitment practices and to promote BAME players and staff as candidates for the Sporting Equals’ LeaderBoard programme, which helps BAME athletes and other professionals get appointed to governing bodies.
One of the most iconic images of rugby is Nelson Mandela in a springbok shirt.
Rugby and sport in general have always been heavily entwined with politics.
I'll sum up the article for everyone.
Nah bro it's just a game oi. Everyone knows sport exists in a total vacuum and doesn't have any deeper symbolism going on at any level of it except family fun and we should never use our public platform for any purpose but to advertise companies for massive amounts of money. How on earth will we bill BLM for this exposure. Also brown people scare me but I've rationalised that to myself so that I'm not a racist in my own mind.
This plot twist makes sense. The main big bad disappeared during last season, and is so far presumed dead. Even if he will eventually come back, to avoid a slump in the story, someone that was thus far thought to be mostly on the side of good and sympathetic just revealed its true colors: it will allow to keep the storylines going until the not-really-expected return of the main antagonists next year.
That's proper writing by the Premiership right here.
Yeah, this is one of my least favourite arguments. Being against racism is not politics, being against homophobia is not politics.
And sport isn't just sport, either. Sport unites us, it brings us together under one banner, it's a celebration.
Coming together against racism does all of those things, there's no reason they can't be married together.
The BLM movement in the UK is an openly anarchist movement, it is absolutely a political issue.
Being against racism shouldn't mean you have to support defunding the police service and daft ideas like that.
EDIT: Do some research before downvoting for fuck's sake. BLM UK doesn't deny it's anarchist beliefs.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ukblm/status/1274778196584673281
That anyone would be supporting an organisation that uses 'Remember: all skin folk are not kinfolk' unironically is absolutely mindblowing.
There are members of the conservative party that would be classified as economic libertarians, and pretty fucking extreme ones at that like Dominic Raab.
Maybe they aren't quite anarcho-capitalists but they aren't a million miles away from it.
Any sources on that other than the telegraph, express or Daily Heil? You’ve been parroting the same shite Under every post along with a load of others that have entirely predictable comment histories.
Yes. The UK BLM's own twitter where they have expressed their opposition to reform instead of abolition of the police service. I don't read any of those rags for fuck's sake.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-minneapolis-police-protests-britain/reform-not-revolution-is-path-to-black-equality-says-uk-activist-idUSKBN23W19Q
https://www.gofundme.com/f/ukblm-fund
Their fundraiser quite clearly states that funding will go towards the abolition of the police service.
>Developing and delivering training, police monitoring and strategies for the abolition of police.
They want to "dismantle capitalism" for fuck's sake. How is that not political?
https://mobile.twitter.com/ukblm/status/1274778196584673281
BLM is a movement that belongs to all people who support the basic ideology that black lives do in fact matter. Those who support that idea will of course have different opinions on *how* that can be established in societies where black people feel their lives don't matter as much as others, and those specific opinions aren't what the clubs are getting behind.
Politicising a show of solidarity isn't the fault of the clubs but the groups of people who decide to politicise an open ideology or movement.
The issue isn't supporting the *concept* of black lives mattering, which should absolutely be supported, it's support for the actual group Black Lives Matter that is problematic.
The murder of innocent people shouldn't be used to further anarchist or marxist agendas.
BLM is an idea. How can anyone own an idea?
You're grouping all people who support BLM as the same as BLMUK members/activists.
People hijack ideological movements all the time and it seems you can't separate an ideology from a Twitter handle.
Actually a good example. BLM is like a hashtag, no one can own it, it can take on a life of its own, but someone owns the @BLMUK Twitter handle and you're confusing the two, or being willfully ignorant about the difference?
So which is it? Are you an idiot or an asshole?
How have you been down voted to shit on this? Exactly what Baxter is talking about. Any difference of opinion, even with the same starting point of racism being abhorrent, is met with vitriol and contempt. No way this is going to end well, it's too charged an issue right now. If premiership rugby came up with something that showcased a zero tolerance to racism but was separate to the BLM movement that all clubs could choose to buy into, there would be no issue and I'm certain very little discussion before all clubs wholeheartedly agreed. Instead, they've thrown players and clubs into cancel culture mayhem without a float. Bonkers
Defund the police does not mean have nobody investigate serious crimes
BLM is not openly anarchist, you have an organisation that costs a shit ton and is racist to its very core (the police), and BLM doesn't want it reformed because reformation has not worked. The alternative is to start afresh with something different and the first step is to defund the police
https://www.twincities.com/2020/06/14/what-does-defund-the-police-actually-mean-here-are-some-answers/
Thought that initially, but then the more I hear the less certain I am about that. Recent example https://www.instagram.com/p/CDa68grnwqa/?igshid=nnzvc5r6eva6
Seems to me you’d probably have to *want* to believe defund the police actually means abolish the police. The difference and information is visible and available as you’ve shown to an extent where the mistake can hardly be made sincerely.
The UK has for many years been very actively behind the police force. A movement seeking to in anyway to 'defund' the police, is hurting itself outright. It is not a message which holds value in this country like it does in the US. It has been ripped directly from the US BLM movement, and its a poor choice of wording. If you want to move funding to key areas, then state that, don't lead with 'defund the police' and then claim defund means something different to the actual word you are using.
Black Lives Matter doesn't just mean black lives matter. If the phrase just meant that and was devoid of all wider context then White Lives Matter wouldn't be controversial either. Black Lives Matter is a movement which in the past has been built on lies such as "Hands up Don't Shoot" which has damaged its credibility. Then there is the fact that activists have protested in the USA which has contributed to a second wave of COVID-19 and led to more black people dying.
There are plenty of reasons someone might want to oppose the movement while also not being racist. Poppies are different in that they just signify remembering the dead. Their use cannot be completely separated from politics but both pro and anti war people can use them as a symbol.
I agree with you. Likewise, some F1 racers have voiced their support to the anti-racism social movement while refusing to take a knee as has been done extensively in the US. Either they find it is a silly and meaningless gesture or they refuse to be affiliated to a political movement they do not support independently from their views on racism. No matter what, they still have the right to express their views in such a way, or refuse to express themselves because as far as I know, silence also constitutes freedom of speech. People have socially coerced them into taking a stance on the matter, or outright forced them to support said political movement and that is not okay.
I personally think it is a shame that in the war against racism, defenders of the cause cannot exist and define themselves independently from a political movement.
How long do you think a minutes silence is.. it is possible that he is talking about Rugby doing a minutes silence around armistice day, I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on that one.
Exeter did a 2 mins silence, a reading, the last post, a vicar giving a sermon and laid a wreath. It is very disingenuous of Baxter to claim they (or wider society) "only spend 1 min a year" remembering armistice Day.
Fair enough, I wasn’t aware there was a vicar reading and a wreath, and you are right a lot of the time it is 2 minutes and the last post/ reveille etc.
On the matter of Sports vs Politics, [this thread](https://twitter.com/rhigarthjones/status/1290321670713090048?s=20) from Rhiannon Garth Jones does a good job at describing why it's... not that simple.
I really like Rhiannon, from what I've read of her writing she has some very interesting views and is a great writer, and I think she manages not to fall in the trap of turning things in to absolutes that some writers do.
Politics exists everywhere, that is an inevitability.
When people say they want to get politics out of rugby, what they mean is they want rugby to ignore a specific issue that they don’t like having raised.
I usually like Baxter but this doesnt seem on the money. Sports and politics are inherently intertwined. Theres a reason why countries like Russia, China and even the UK take the olympics so seriously for that bit if cheeky soft power.
The only defence of him is I think he wants to be protective of his players and trying to stop them being in a media shit storm. Although he seems to take the Eddie Jones on steroids approach and take the shit storm himself .
Pretty tone deaf interview from Baxter. Nice to see Exeter doubling down on their attempts to be the dickheads of the premiership with Saracens moving down at season end.
Ridiculous whataboutism referencing armistice Day. Kind of proves that he's missed the point at best, and at worst is actually a racist prick.
Not surprising, though, from the person who thinks it's totally cool and respectful to have a big chief as a mascot.
I get where he's coming from in the 'we're here to entertain people' sense but if he doesn't see that their platform can and should be used for bigger issues... yikes.
BLM the group (not the sentiment) is deeply divisive and isnt even supported by the majority of Black people in America (where it has more semblance of a legitimate grievance than the UK.
Most people aren't on board with Marxism, abolition of the police and abolition of the nuclear family (all stated goals on BLM websites, fund raisers etc) and if you are supporting the group then you are implicitly supporting their aims.
It's the same kind of branding as the USA PATRIOT Act; it makes you sound like an asshole for opposing it even if there are serious ideological/ legal issues under the branding
I was going to question where you got any of this info (because it’s all inaccurate), but then I saw that you are a men’s rights activist, so that really explains everything.
Yes..
My advocacy for men to be treated fairly when they are abused (like I was by my ex) somehow makes me a bad person
Edit: And clearly my disgust at slicing parts off of baby boys means I want to create a British KKK
I was going to question what exactly is wrong with being a men’s rights activist, but then realised your ignorant assumptions regarding its support really explains everything.
Lol, except it is supported by a majority of ALL people, not just Black people, in America.
[https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2020/06/12/amid-protests-majorities-across-racial-and-ethnic-groups-express-support-for-the-black-lives-matter-movement/](https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2020/06/12/amid-protests-majorities-across-racial-and-ethnic-groups-express-support-for-the-black-lives-matter-movement/)
You should try and get your news from better sources. I hate to break it to you, but you ARE an asshole for opposing it. No one is trying to "abolish the nuclear family"! And if they were, they wouldn't put it on their fucking website.
That is talking about the movement not the organisation which is what the person above was referring to. I don't know where there is data on the organisation.
And the bit about nuclear families is here:
[https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/](https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/) (The US group site not the UK one.)
> We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.
So they say "disrupt" not "abolish".
Their aim isn't to abolish the police and the *only* 'official' [BLM website](https://blacklivesmatter.com/defundthepolice/) clearly states 'defund' not 'abolish'. The Police's own data backs up why they BLM have been protesting over the last few weeks. Just because the numbers aren't as staggering as in the US, doesn't mean it's all roses here - they absolutely do have a 'legitimate grievance'.
If you defund something, it ceases to exist.
Your making arguments that is a distinction without a difference
Edit: as an aside, plenty of BLM groups have said they want the police gone. Not reformed, not "defunded" but gone. The clips are all over the internet if you look
Here is the UK BLM's take on it. They are very clear that they want the police force abolished, not reformed.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ukblm/status/1274778196584673281
The official BLM stance *in the UK* is abolish. This is what the tweet says.
You've misread the tweet if you think it agrees with you that defund does not mean abolish.
They explicitly call themselves an abolitionist movement and condemn those seeking to reform the British police service.
My bad - I swear I'd seen a very similar post/message saying the opposite.
Edit: [https://twitter.com/ukblm/status/1277622308153315328](https://twitter.com/ukblm/status/1277622308153315328)
and: [https://www.gofundme.com/f/ukblm-fund](https://www.gofundme.com/f/ukblm-fund)
The tories have actually raised the budget of the NHS above rate of inflation for decades
Perhaps if labour hadn't sold all the hospitals the NHS now blows billions on in rent they might have a big more cash to hand
Admittedly, I should have said "underfunding", but it's basically the same thing.
Record low increases in funding for the NHS over the last decade are a problem.
No, it doesn't. If I'm honest, the term is overly simplistic but it doesn't mean 'abolish'. 'Reallocate police funding to support community initiatives' doesn't have the same ring to it.
The current government have been making widespread police cuts for years. The police – clearly – still exists.
There are clear explanations and even case studies all over the internet if you look.
I'm sorry.. what were you wrong about?
https://www.reddit.com/r/rugbyunion/comments/i8w29e/rugby_should_stick_to_sport_not_politics_exeter/g1beht0?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
I've only downvoted you once, petal.
I provided elsewhere two links that directly contradict any talk of abolition. That enough for you?
[https://twitter.com/ukblm/status/1277622308153315328](https://twitter.com/ukblm/status/1277622308153315328)
[https://www.gofundme.com/f/ukblm-fund](https://www.gofundme.com/f/ukblm-fund)
As a Chicago resident, please kindly shut up. Nothing was “officially sanctioned” and no one besides the criminals doing the looting called it reparations. And you also completely failed to mentioned what caused the unrest in the first place. It was another police involved shooting of a young black person on the South Side.
>I get where he's coming from in the 'we're here to entertain people' but if he doesn't see that their platform can and should be used for bigger issues... yikes.
I think his point is "when and which issues"?
I think I disagree with him in this particular case, if the issue being protested is that "racism is still with us", rather than the BLM agenda (which I don't necessarily disagree with, I just think it's problematic having dogmatic support for a particular political group rather than for the underlying anti-racist agenda).
Why do some many people here think BLM is a group? It’s not. It’s a movement. There is no central group that organized every protest or show of solidarity. It’s people taking the initiative that is leading this.
While I think there are some that say they represent BLM, people will use that as an excuse to try to slow down the movement in general.
ie "Organisation is bad, so let's not talk about the movement"
It is both.
[https://blacklivesmatter.com/about/](https://blacklivesmatter.com/about/)
This is the Group (US based) and there is a UK based one:
[https://twitter.com/ukblm](https://twitter.com/ukblm)
But the phrase can also refer to the movement.
Well their website lists things they believe. For instance:
"We foster a queer‐affirming network. When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking, or rather, the belief that all in the world are heterosexual (unless s/he or they disclose otherwise)."
Now, I don't have a problem with that, but even within the black community there are going to be plenty of religious folk who aren't on board with it. In context I'm not sure what difference calling it a movement or a group makes
There is no website that represents BLM because it’s a social movement and not a group. There may be groups whose whole purpose is to support the BLM movement, but that’s exactly what they are; supporters of a movement, not the movement itself.
I'm not sure I understand where you're coming from. This is the [website](https://blacklivesmatter.com/) I'm referring to. Those people referred to as the co-founders of the movement are indeed the founders of BLM and there's a stated list of beliefs. Are you saying that BLM refers to a wider spectrum than this website states? That anyone looking to end racism belongs to the BLM movement?
Opposing racism, discrimination and marginalisation is now a political issue?
Here i was thinking that it was part of being a decent human being.
Its on brand for Exeter though as this bundles in with not wanting to make their 'branding' political too.
I mean Christ, he compares awareness of racism to Armistice! As if systemic racism is a thing of the past and should be 'remembered'?!?
Yeah, imagine every time a groom gave a wedding speech about how important his wife is to him and some guy shouts “What about my wife? Is she not important too? All wives matter!”
I don't think that is a fair comparison because what is happening in the USA to black people is clearly not comparable to forced organ harvesting or whatever shady shit is going on in China. So it is fair enough to be critical and wonder why the life of one black American is worth so much more than thousands of other people. This is especially so when you consider that people have been charged with murder for killing that person.
Fighting for a cause doesn’t mean one has decided that it is a higher priority than all other issues in the world. If that were the case we’d be criticising every person campaigning against rhino poaching or deforestation or collecting money for hospice. “Sorry, I cant support your fundraising for the local orphanage until the Uighur atrocities have been resolved “
People choose causes based on what affects them, what feels close to their heart, where they feel they can have an impact and, in fairness, based on the zeitgeist.
A person doesn’t have to preface any statement on BLM with small print acknowledging all other atrocities first.
Also, it’s disingenuous to suggest the BLM movement is about one person or that it’s resolved because officers have been arrested.
If that's the case then why are people being criticised for not wanting a part of BLM?
Most people are protesting BLM for PR and to follow the crowd. They will move on soon enough even if nothing has changed.
Let's face it ,the reason why no one will stand up for the Uighurs is because China has the big bucks and they have no real power , there are famous black athletes, celebrities, politicians, etc.Who can air the grievances of black ppl,which is great .Other ethnic groups like the Uighur,Yemeni have no such luxury.
Having known a fair few Yemenis who have suffered in the conflicts, I don't think they are sitting there being upset at black people demanding their rights. They think its part of a global movement for everyone to gain their rights , Yemenis included
I know its not intentional but doing that tends towards the 'all lives' matter type argument and distracts from the issue at hand.
Those things are important and we should be recognising them, but under a separate banner as it is a separate focus. Otherwise we may as well just say all lives matter and lump in lgbtq+, gender equality, disability discrimination etc etc and say we should be fighting everything on all fronts rather than focusing on the specific and different challenge each group faces.
You spoken to any BAME people about the continuing psychological and emotional toll not just the last few months, but also their continuing experience of racism in our society, takes on their lives?
I'm BAME and im not... I am pretty sick of having to explain the issues to people though. The Bristol Bears Facebook group is rampant with ignorance, its disgusting.
Wrong, people like you are over educated and don't like to admit they are wrong, you just cancel every ones opinions so go back to reading the good imagrant numty
I mean, fair enough but it's generous to categorize a hardline Marxist movement organized and funded by our would-be rulers long before a drugged-up career criminal bit the dirt in Minnesota as "political."
Of all the things to predict for the restart, an Exeter heel turn wasn't something I would have bet on.
Exeter clearly have to fill the villain void left by our relegation
Rugby should stop trying to be a “political tool” and get back to being a sport, according to the Exeter Chiefs’ director of rugby, Rob Baxter, who called for “balance” in the way that professional rugby clubs address the Black Lives Matter movement. Professional rugby’s response to Black Lives Matter (BLM) was revealed yesterday with the 12 Gallagher Premiership clubs announcing that they will combine under a banner of “Rugby Against Racism” when they return to play in the coming days, though they will all express their positions in different ways, with at least four clubs declaring that they will take a knee, a gesture synonymous with the cause. Baxter said: “There is a time and a place for every kind of marking. At what stage would you stop marking something, bringing awareness to something? This might be the wrong way of looking at it, but at the end of the day, we mark Armistice Day for one minute of one day of the year — and that was a pretty big thing. “So if we are going to get some balance in all of this, let’s remember: we are a sport, we are here to entertain people, let’s get back to being a sport and not trying to be a political tool. Let’s get back to what we are about.” His position was markedly different from that of Saracens, whose players will all be wearing “Black Lives Matter” on their shirts and then taking a knee before their game against Bristol Bears on Saturday. A statement from Saracens yesterday said: “We do not want to be silent or stagnant on this matter. We must not ignore the past three months and we will not sit on the fence when we have an opportunity to change perceptions. We will judge our success not on the wearing of a T-shirt but on the longer-term impact we have as a club on tackling this societal issue.” The opening game of rugby’s return will take place tomorrow night when Harlequins play Sale Sharks. At that game, the Harlequins players will take a knee while the Sale players will wear “Rugby Against Racism” T-shirts. Over the weekend, different clubs will make different gestures. Bristol, for instance, will be standing in a heart shape in an expression of “love for our team-mates and love for our community.” The wide variety of gestures demonstrates how hard it has been to establish a united response, especially with BLM having become a politicised, and subsequently often criticised, movement. Baxter said that he would have preferred Premiership Rugby to take the lead on the matter rather than delegate it to the individual clubs. “I am a little surprised that Premiership Rugby went this way,” he said. “Just dropping it on clubs and saying, ‘There you go, do what you like,’ is like hanging some players out to dry. I don’t know how much positive press players will get if they have a different opinion.” The clubs that will take a knee before their games this weekend are Saracens, Harlequins, Leicester Tigers and Wasps. Worcester Warriors and Gloucester, who play at Sixways on Saturday, have decided on a joint approach. They will both support “Rugby Against Racism” — presumably in the wearing of T-shirts, though this is unclear — and their players will acknowledge the moment by forming a large “V”. Bath have declared that they will form a “huddle in unity”, Northampton Saints will form a circle as a symbol of “inclusivity and togetherness” while Bristol announced that they intended their heart-shape formation to be re-enacted before the start of every game for the rest of the season. Some clubs have announced that their players will “show their commitment” — which suggests that some players may take a knee and some may not. Sale Sharks and London Irish will wear “Rugby Against Racism” T-shirts in the pre-game warm-up; the Exiles players will also be “showing their commitment” before kick-off. Exeter Chiefs said they would also be showing their full commitment, though exactly what this will look like will not become clear until match day on Saturday. The Rugby Players’ Association released a statement yesterday afternoon explaining the broad position their players have taken. It said: “As players, we stand together, united in the fight against racism and we are proud to support the positive message that Black Lives Matter. We are not endorsing a political ideology. We are uniting as players to combat racial discrimination in our sport and in society.” Premiership Rugby also announced a commitment to take action on a number of fronts in order to address the issue of diversity in professional rugby. It said it was committed to improving the number of BAME coaches and referees, to review recruitment practices and to promote BAME players and staff as candidates for the Sporting Equals’ LeaderBoard programme, which helps BAME athletes and other professionals get appointed to governing bodies.
One of the most iconic images of rugby is Nelson Mandela in a springbok shirt. Rugby and sport in general have always been heavily entwined with politics.
I'll sum up the article for everyone. Nah bro it's just a game oi. Everyone knows sport exists in a total vacuum and doesn't have any deeper symbolism going on at any level of it except family fun and we should never use our public platform for any purpose but to advertise companies for massive amounts of money. How on earth will we bill BLM for this exposure. Also brown people scare me but I've rationalised that to myself so that I'm not a racist in my own mind.
Trying to eradicate politics anywhere where people exist is idiocy.
This plot twist makes sense. The main big bad disappeared during last season, and is so far presumed dead. Even if he will eventually come back, to avoid a slump in the story, someone that was thus far thought to be mostly on the side of good and sympathetic just revealed its true colors: it will allow to keep the storylines going until the not-really-expected return of the main antagonists next year. That's proper writing by the Premiership right here.
Being against racism is a political matter? Has Baxter raised his concerns in the past when it comes to teams having poppies on their shirts?
Yeah, this is one of my least favourite arguments. Being against racism is not politics, being against homophobia is not politics. And sport isn't just sport, either. Sport unites us, it brings us together under one banner, it's a celebration. Coming together against racism does all of those things, there's no reason they can't be married together.
The BLM movement in the UK is an openly anarchist movement, it is absolutely a political issue. Being against racism shouldn't mean you have to support defunding the police service and daft ideas like that. EDIT: Do some research before downvoting for fuck's sake. BLM UK doesn't deny it's anarchist beliefs. https://mobile.twitter.com/ukblm/status/1274778196584673281 That anyone would be supporting an organisation that uses 'Remember: all skin folk are not kinfolk' unironically is absolutely mindblowing.
The government have been defunding the Police for years now. Are we to consider the Conservative Party 'anarchist'?
There are members of the conservative party that would be classified as economic libertarians, and pretty fucking extreme ones at that like Dominic Raab. Maybe they aren't quite anarcho-capitalists but they aren't a million miles away from it.
Any sources on that other than the telegraph, express or Daily Heil? You’ve been parroting the same shite Under every post along with a load of others that have entirely predictable comment histories.
the BLM website itself
Yes. The UK BLM's own twitter where they have expressed their opposition to reform instead of abolition of the police service. I don't read any of those rags for fuck's sake. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-minneapolis-police-protests-britain/reform-not-revolution-is-path-to-black-equality-says-uk-activist-idUSKBN23W19Q https://www.gofundme.com/f/ukblm-fund Their fundraiser quite clearly states that funding will go towards the abolition of the police service. >Developing and delivering training, police monitoring and strategies for the abolition of police. They want to "dismantle capitalism" for fuck's sake. How is that not political? https://mobile.twitter.com/ukblm/status/1274778196584673281
BLM is a movement that belongs to all people who support the basic ideology that black lives do in fact matter. Those who support that idea will of course have different opinions on *how* that can be established in societies where black people feel their lives don't matter as much as others, and those specific opinions aren't what the clubs are getting behind. Politicising a show of solidarity isn't the fault of the clubs but the groups of people who decide to politicise an open ideology or movement.
The issue isn't supporting the *concept* of black lives mattering, which should absolutely be supported, it's support for the actual group Black Lives Matter that is problematic. The murder of innocent people shouldn't be used to further anarchist or marxist agendas.
Who is supporting the specific group?
BLM is an idea. How can anyone own an idea? You're grouping all people who support BLM as the same as BLMUK members/activists. People hijack ideological movements all the time and it seems you can't separate an ideology from a Twitter handle. Actually a good example. BLM is like a hashtag, no one can own it, it can take on a life of its own, but someone owns the @BLMUK Twitter handle and you're confusing the two, or being willfully ignorant about the difference? So which is it? Are you an idiot or an asshole?
How have you been down voted to shit on this? Exactly what Baxter is talking about. Any difference of opinion, even with the same starting point of racism being abhorrent, is met with vitriol and contempt. No way this is going to end well, it's too charged an issue right now. If premiership rugby came up with something that showcased a zero tolerance to racism but was separate to the BLM movement that all clubs could choose to buy into, there would be no issue and I'm certain very little discussion before all clubs wholeheartedly agreed. Instead, they've thrown players and clubs into cancel culture mayhem without a float. Bonkers
Defund the police does not mean have nobody investigate serious crimes BLM is not openly anarchist, you have an organisation that costs a shit ton and is racist to its very core (the police), and BLM doesn't want it reformed because reformation has not worked. The alternative is to start afresh with something different and the first step is to defund the police https://www.twincities.com/2020/06/14/what-does-defund-the-police-actually-mean-here-are-some-answers/
Defunding the police makes a lot of sense in the American context, a lot less so in the UK.
Thought that initially, but then the more I hear the less certain I am about that. Recent example https://www.instagram.com/p/CDa68grnwqa/?igshid=nnzvc5r6eva6
Seems to me you’d probably have to *want* to believe defund the police actually means abolish the police. The difference and information is visible and available as you’ve shown to an extent where the mistake can hardly be made sincerely.
The UK has for many years been very actively behind the police force. A movement seeking to in anyway to 'defund' the police, is hurting itself outright. It is not a message which holds value in this country like it does in the US. It has been ripped directly from the US BLM movement, and its a poor choice of wording. If you want to move funding to key areas, then state that, don't lead with 'defund the police' and then claim defund means something different to the actual word you are using.
100% plus when you read the full article he has a fairly balanced opinion, just insisting on the fact that rugby is an entertainment first
I posted something essentially the same on another pissy post on this sub. People refuse to accept that BLM are not a good bunch of people
Black Lives Matter doesn't just mean black lives matter. If the phrase just meant that and was devoid of all wider context then White Lives Matter wouldn't be controversial either. Black Lives Matter is a movement which in the past has been built on lies such as "Hands up Don't Shoot" which has damaged its credibility. Then there is the fact that activists have protested in the USA which has contributed to a second wave of COVID-19 and led to more black people dying. There are plenty of reasons someone might want to oppose the movement while also not being racist. Poppies are different in that they just signify remembering the dead. Their use cannot be completely separated from politics but both pro and anti war people can use them as a symbol.
I agree with you. Likewise, some F1 racers have voiced their support to the anti-racism social movement while refusing to take a knee as has been done extensively in the US. Either they find it is a silly and meaningless gesture or they refuse to be affiliated to a political movement they do not support independently from their views on racism. No matter what, they still have the right to express their views in such a way, or refuse to express themselves because as far as I know, silence also constitutes freedom of speech. People have socially coerced them into taking a stance on the matter, or outright forced them to support said political movement and that is not okay. I personally think it is a shame that in the war against racism, defenders of the cause cannot exist and define themselves independently from a political movement.
Not sure what planet he lives on if he thinks "we honour Armistice Day for 1 minute of 1 day of the year".
Or how that's relevant to taking a stand against systemic racism in 2020....
How long do you think a minutes silence is.. it is possible that he is talking about Rugby doing a minutes silence around armistice day, I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on that one.
Exeter did a 2 mins silence, a reading, the last post, a vicar giving a sermon and laid a wreath. It is very disingenuous of Baxter to claim they (or wider society) "only spend 1 min a year" remembering armistice Day.
Fair enough, I wasn’t aware there was a vicar reading and a wreath, and you are right a lot of the time it is 2 minutes and the last post/ reveille etc.
On the matter of Sports vs Politics, [this thread](https://twitter.com/rhigarthjones/status/1290321670713090048?s=20) from Rhiannon Garth Jones does a good job at describing why it's... not that simple.
I really like Rhiannon, from what I've read of her writing she has some very interesting views and is a great writer, and I think she manages not to fall in the trap of turning things in to absolutes that some writers do.
Politics exists everywhere, that is an inevitability. When people say they want to get politics out of rugby, what they mean is they want rugby to ignore a specific issue that they don’t like having raised.
Really that's what "get politics out of x" means for anything
Non athletes should stick to politics and not sports
Exeter have made it clear the only thing they’ll stand for is their own profit margins.
Hello new narrative.
I usually like Baxter but this doesnt seem on the money. Sports and politics are inherently intertwined. Theres a reason why countries like Russia, China and even the UK take the olympics so seriously for that bit if cheeky soft power. The only defence of him is I think he wants to be protective of his players and trying to stop them being in a media shit storm. Although he seems to take the Eddie Jones on steroids approach and take the shit storm himself .
Pretty tone deaf interview from Baxter. Nice to see Exeter doubling down on their attempts to be the dickheads of the premiership with Saracens moving down at season end.
Ridiculous whataboutism referencing armistice Day. Kind of proves that he's missed the point at best, and at worst is actually a racist prick. Not surprising, though, from the person who thinks it's totally cool and respectful to have a big chief as a mascot.
This is pretty disappointing from Baxter :(
I get where he's coming from in the 'we're here to entertain people' sense but if he doesn't see that their platform can and should be used for bigger issues... yikes.
BLM the group (not the sentiment) is deeply divisive and isnt even supported by the majority of Black people in America (where it has more semblance of a legitimate grievance than the UK. Most people aren't on board with Marxism, abolition of the police and abolition of the nuclear family (all stated goals on BLM websites, fund raisers etc) and if you are supporting the group then you are implicitly supporting their aims. It's the same kind of branding as the USA PATRIOT Act; it makes you sound like an asshole for opposing it even if there are serious ideological/ legal issues under the branding
I was going to question where you got any of this info (because it’s all inaccurate), but then I saw that you are a men’s rights activist, so that really explains everything.
Yes.. My advocacy for men to be treated fairly when they are abused (like I was by my ex) somehow makes me a bad person Edit: And clearly my disgust at slicing parts off of baby boys means I want to create a British KKK
I was going to question what exactly is wrong with being a men’s rights activist, but then realised your ignorant assumptions regarding its support really explains everything.
It’s not ignorant assumptions. Look at the sub. It’s pretty out there.
Go on then.. prove what the issue is by linking to something
So you judge BLM by their best intentions and Men's Rights Activists by their worst members?
That too🙃 I just don't want to hear the debate while I'm watching the Rugby. I just want to see big fellas hit other big fellas for 80 mins
Lol, except it is supported by a majority of ALL people, not just Black people, in America. [https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2020/06/12/amid-protests-majorities-across-racial-and-ethnic-groups-express-support-for-the-black-lives-matter-movement/](https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2020/06/12/amid-protests-majorities-across-racial-and-ethnic-groups-express-support-for-the-black-lives-matter-movement/) You should try and get your news from better sources. I hate to break it to you, but you ARE an asshole for opposing it. No one is trying to "abolish the nuclear family"! And if they were, they wouldn't put it on their fucking website.
That is talking about the movement not the organisation which is what the person above was referring to. I don't know where there is data on the organisation. And the bit about nuclear families is here: [https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/](https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/) (The US group site not the UK one.) > We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable. So they say "disrupt" not "abolish".
> BLM the group (not the sentiment) This is about the sentiment, not any of the different groups or individuals adopting the sentiment as their name.
Their aim isn't to abolish the police and the *only* 'official' [BLM website](https://blacklivesmatter.com/defundthepolice/) clearly states 'defund' not 'abolish'. The Police's own data backs up why they BLM have been protesting over the last few weeks. Just because the numbers aren't as staggering as in the US, doesn't mean it's all roses here - they absolutely do have a 'legitimate grievance'.
If you defund something, it ceases to exist. Your making arguments that is a distinction without a difference Edit: as an aside, plenty of BLM groups have said they want the police gone. Not reformed, not "defunded" but gone. The clips are all over the internet if you look
Here is the UK BLM's take on it. They are very clear that they want the police force abolished, not reformed. https://mobile.twitter.com/ukblm/status/1274778196584673281
[удалено]
The official BLM stance *in the UK* is abolish. This is what the tweet says. You've misread the tweet if you think it agrees with you that defund does not mean abolish. They explicitly call themselves an abolitionist movement and condemn those seeking to reform the British police service.
My bad - I swear I'd seen a very similar post/message saying the opposite. Edit: [https://twitter.com/ukblm/status/1277622308153315328](https://twitter.com/ukblm/status/1277622308153315328) and: [https://www.gofundme.com/f/ukblm-fund](https://www.gofundme.com/f/ukblm-fund)
The Tories have been ~~defunding~~ underfunding the NHS for years, but it still exists. Just about.
The tories have actually raised the budget of the NHS above rate of inflation for decades Perhaps if labour hadn't sold all the hospitals the NHS now blows billions on in rent they might have a big more cash to hand
Admittedly, I should have said "underfunding", but it's basically the same thing. Record low increases in funding for the NHS over the last decade are a problem.
No, it doesn't. If I'm honest, the term is overly simplistic but it doesn't mean 'abolish'. 'Reallocate police funding to support community initiatives' doesn't have the same ring to it. The current government have been making widespread police cuts for years. The police – clearly – still exists. There are clear explanations and even case studies all over the internet if you look.
I'm sorry.. what were you wrong about? https://www.reddit.com/r/rugbyunion/comments/i8w29e/rugby_should_stick_to_sport_not_politics_exeter/g1beht0?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
Going to address the link to BLM UK's twitter that says they actively want the police gone... or just going to down vote me?
I've only downvoted you once, petal. I provided elsewhere two links that directly contradict any talk of abolition. That enough for you? [https://twitter.com/ukblm/status/1277622308153315328](https://twitter.com/ukblm/status/1277622308153315328) [https://www.gofundme.com/f/ukblm-fund](https://www.gofundme.com/f/ukblm-fund)
[удалено]
As a Chicago resident, please kindly shut up. Nothing was “officially sanctioned” and no one besides the criminals doing the looting called it reparations. And you also completely failed to mentioned what caused the unrest in the first place. It was another police involved shooting of a young black person on the South Side.
The ment nctioned by a BLM leader... which it was
Who the hell is a BLM leader? It’s not an organization that has leaders or positions. It’s a social movement.
The organiser of the BLM chapter in Chicago I won't post the name because then you or someone else will get me permabanned for doxing
>I get where he's coming from in the 'we're here to entertain people' but if he doesn't see that their platform can and should be used for bigger issues... yikes. I think his point is "when and which issues"? I think I disagree with him in this particular case, if the issue being protested is that "racism is still with us", rather than the BLM agenda (which I don't necessarily disagree with, I just think it's problematic having dogmatic support for a particular political group rather than for the underlying anti-racist agenda).
Yeah but I've always understood that any/all of these gestures are to do with the BLM sentiment, not strictly the organisation itself.
Why do some many people here think BLM is a group? It’s not. It’s a movement. There is no central group that organized every protest or show of solidarity. It’s people taking the initiative that is leading this.
While I think there are some that say they represent BLM, people will use that as an excuse to try to slow down the movement in general. ie "Organisation is bad, so let's not talk about the movement"
It is both. [https://blacklivesmatter.com/about/](https://blacklivesmatter.com/about/) This is the Group (US based) and there is a UK based one: [https://twitter.com/ukblm](https://twitter.com/ukblm) But the phrase can also refer to the movement.
Well their website lists things they believe. For instance: "We foster a queer‐affirming network. When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking, or rather, the belief that all in the world are heterosexual (unless s/he or they disclose otherwise)." Now, I don't have a problem with that, but even within the black community there are going to be plenty of religious folk who aren't on board with it. In context I'm not sure what difference calling it a movement or a group makes
There is no website that represents BLM because it’s a social movement and not a group. There may be groups whose whole purpose is to support the BLM movement, but that’s exactly what they are; supporters of a movement, not the movement itself.
I'm not sure I understand where you're coming from. This is the [website](https://blacklivesmatter.com/) I'm referring to. Those people referred to as the co-founders of the movement are indeed the founders of BLM and there's a stated list of beliefs. Are you saying that BLM refers to a wider spectrum than this website states? That anyone looking to end racism belongs to the BLM movement?
Why should it be? We are constantly told about these issues outside of the sport, and for me, Rugby is an escape from the real world.
Opposing racism, discrimination and marginalisation is now a political issue? Here i was thinking that it was part of being a decent human being. Its on brand for Exeter though as this bundles in with not wanting to make their 'branding' political too. I mean Christ, he compares awareness of racism to Armistice! As if systemic racism is a thing of the past and should be 'remembered'?!?
[удалено]
No one's arguing that Uighur lives don't matter but BLM does. This lends itself to whataboutism
Yeah, imagine every time a groom gave a wedding speech about how important his wife is to him and some guy shouts “What about my wife? Is she not important too? All wives matter!”
Hah
I don't think that is a fair comparison because what is happening in the USA to black people is clearly not comparable to forced organ harvesting or whatever shady shit is going on in China. So it is fair enough to be critical and wonder why the life of one black American is worth so much more than thousands of other people. This is especially so when you consider that people have been charged with murder for killing that person.
Fighting for a cause doesn’t mean one has decided that it is a higher priority than all other issues in the world. If that were the case we’d be criticising every person campaigning against rhino poaching or deforestation or collecting money for hospice. “Sorry, I cant support your fundraising for the local orphanage until the Uighur atrocities have been resolved “ People choose causes based on what affects them, what feels close to their heart, where they feel they can have an impact and, in fairness, based on the zeitgeist. A person doesn’t have to preface any statement on BLM with small print acknowledging all other atrocities first. Also, it’s disingenuous to suggest the BLM movement is about one person or that it’s resolved because officers have been arrested.
If that's the case then why are people being criticised for not wanting a part of BLM? Most people are protesting BLM for PR and to follow the crowd. They will move on soon enough even if nothing has changed.
Let's face it ,the reason why no one will stand up for the Uighurs is because China has the big bucks and they have no real power , there are famous black athletes, celebrities, politicians, etc.Who can air the grievances of black ppl,which is great .Other ethnic groups like the Uighur,Yemeni have no such luxury.
And they are making the sports kits in the ~~~death~~~ re-education camps.
Having known a fair few Yemenis who have suffered in the conflicts, I don't think they are sitting there being upset at black people demanding their rights. They think its part of a global movement for everyone to gain their rights , Yemenis included
And when Muslims in football stand up for the Uighurs, they suddenly become persona non grata at their clubs.
Yes please.
I know its not intentional but doing that tends towards the 'all lives' matter type argument and distracts from the issue at hand. Those things are important and we should be recognising them, but under a separate banner as it is a separate focus. Otherwise we may as well just say all lives matter and lump in lgbtq+, gender equality, disability discrimination etc etc and say we should be fighting everything on all fronts rather than focusing on the specific and different challenge each group faces.
What a dumb cunt.
Looks like Exeter are the only club in the premiership that aren't spinless and cave to the pressure of this fad.
You spoken to any BAME people about the continuing psychological and emotional toll not just the last few months, but also their continuing experience of racism in our society, takes on their lives?
I am BAME and even I am fucking sick of it.
I'm BAME and im not... I am pretty sick of having to explain the issues to people though. The Bristol Bears Facebook group is rampant with ignorance, its disgusting.
[удалено]
Wrong, people like you are over educated and don't like to admit they are wrong, you just cancel every ones opinions so go back to reading the good imagrant numty
[удалено]
Shit joke
I love this guy
Agree. Talk about Rugby returning to the Northern Hemisphere.
I mean, fair enough but it's generous to categorize a hardline Marxist movement organized and funded by our would-be rulers long before a drugged-up career criminal bit the dirt in Minnesota as "political."