'It is better to speak' quote by Audre Lorde - M. Central update

It is better to speak - Morrissey Central
April 20, 2018

Regards,
FWD.

 

[Pablo Honey]

Anyone can post a picture of some street in any country where there are homeless people living.

Still, the picture doesn't seem to abnormal considering that England has always been a decaying shit-hole with poverty, and third world-like conditions all around it. In fact, it looks like a bit of an improvement.

Stop acting like immigrants invented homelessness in England.

And stop scapegoating minorities, and immigrants. Blame yourself for your sub-par country that is dominated by the native populace.

This is exactly the kind of shit Nazis spewed to gain power, and you bigots are trying to recreate that environment.

We know your type.

We know your type. Oooh, I am scared.
It's a picture of centre of Paris not a homeless quarter. That wasn't the city I visited 5 years ago.
You say your England look like this? All the more reason to worry about where your tax money are going. Get your head out of sand.

 

[Anonymous]

Both Audre and James B lived through a shameful period in US history and fought to end prejudice by speaking out. Don't know why Morrissey identifies with them if he's supporting an Islamaphobic and divisive party like For Britain.

Because being anti-Islam (for example) is not racist. It is a religion not a race. Anyone can be a Muslim. Having brown skin is not a pre-requisite. Showing disdain for a belief system which has a poor record on animal rights, women’s rights and LGBT rights is a point of view. One I would hope that is shared by many. It’s still not racism. To be racist then M would have to only associate with white catholic English born people. This we all know not to be the case. Any sane person understands that fascism is wrong. Then why is it wrong to say that other extreme belief systems/groups are wrong and ultimately bad for humankind. No ?
Pilgrimupnorth

 

[dirtee rephlex]

Thanks for the civilised reply. People are forgetting how to disagree politely on here and many seem to have totally lost the plot. Yes, he made a choice - but it's my opinion that he chose the images he did because they were the many different things that were important to him, things that had made an impact on his life. In particular, gay icons such as Joe Dallesandro and James Dean, carry on stars and closet gays (at least at the time) Kenneth Williams and Charles Hawtrey, literary heroes like Shelagh Delaney, Oscar Wilde (gay and literary)... these influences are like the map of his early life. To me, there's something very pure and true about them and I don't think they would feel that way if they were created out of prejudice. Or have I missed the point?

Once again I don't disagree with you. Those covers were very thoughtful (and beautiful) and my point is not the covers but the covers LINKED to his statements. My point is everything (what you show, present, say) is a choice when you represent yourself, when you are an artist.

 

[Anonymous]

Yeah, lefty intolerance breeds lefty intolerance I suppose. Funny too how lefties always seem to be moneyed or come from moneyed families - yet they supposedly want to abolish money! It's good for some.

I don't care about your personal inadequacies.

You didn't answer my question. How does it feel?

 

[Anonymous]

We know your type. Oooh, I am scared.
It's a picture of centre of Paris not a homeless quarter. That wasn't the city I visited 5 years ago.
You say your England look like this? All the more reason to worry about where your tax money are going. Get your head out of sand.

It doesn't matter where it's from. My previous reply stands.

Places change. Events occur. Some permanent, some temporary. Time doesn't care what your wishes are, and neither do most people. You will rave. You will die, and countries will get more diverse, regardless of your fist pounding.

Anyone from a hundred years ago would be shocked and outraged by the present society, and anyone a hundred years before them would feel same about their society.

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what part of British culture has been lost; except the privilege of not having to see any brown faces.

I still find the idea that the world's foremost colonizer is now having its society ripped apart over the fear of immigrants. Too rich. It's like some kind of scripted morality fable being played out right before us.

 

[E Scott]

Because being anti-Islam (for example) is not racist. It is a religion not a race. Anyone can be a Muslim. Having brown skin is not a pre-requisite. Showing disdain for a belief system which has a poor record on animal rights, women’s rights and LGBT rights is a point of view. One I would hope that is shared by many. It’s still not racism. To be racist then M would have to only associate with white catholic English born people. This we all know not to be the case. Any sane person understands that fascism is wrong. Then why is it wrong to say that other extreme belief systems/groups are wrong and ultimately bad for humankind. No ?
Pilgrimupnorth

E Scott said: ↑
Both Audre and James B lived through a shameful period in US history and fought to end prejudice by speaking out. Don't know why Morrissey identifies with them if he's supporting an Islamaphobic and divisive party like For Britain.
Sorry don't fully understand what you are trying to say in relation to my quote?
Is Islamaphobia not prejudice to Muslims?
Is supporting Islamaphobia not divisive? It's not different to Anti Semitism just another religion.

 

[dirtee rephlex]

You can't be helped. I give up.

Please give up, I don't need to be helped.

 

[Anonymous]

Yes, I downloaded it last night.

A few points that stood out to me:

- Cut foreign aid
- End Marxist and Islamic indoctrination in schools (having worked in secondary, FE and HE, none of these happen, they are just conspiracies spouted by the far right)
- No welfare for immigrants (I assume even if they have paid taxes etc)
- Ensure law on FGM is enforced (it already is, this is just a dog-whistle used by the far-right)
- Forced deportations of immigrants
- Moratorium on asylum seekers
- End the working time directive (this one is particularly anti-worker, seeing as the directive ensures that workers can't be forced to work more than 48 hours a week and ensures that workers get guaranteed paid holidays)
- Take the UK out of the Paris Agreement (far right parties are often non-believers in climate change, despite the wealth of evidence)
- Teach children of British achievements and restore pride in our country (Children are already taught this, but they are also taught the negatives, which is what the study of history should be about. To me, this policy seems as if it aims to restore jingoistic pride in Britain, ignoring the bad and forgetting about objectivity)

There's more, but these are the ones that stood out the most.

The one that struck me was:
Increase spending in the armed forces to make them great again (or words to that effect). Where does this sit with M’s I Bury The Living and World Peace stance?
This is where my brain switched off. Are we not lovers rather than fighters ?
Pilgrimupnorth

 

[E Scott]

The only religions who have a relatively good reputation with Animal rights off the top of my head is Jainism or Hinduism. Christianity or Catholicism isn't particularly associated with animal rights. Regarding women rights do the Catholic church's still ban women using contraception? I could go on but you get my point.

Because being anti-Islam (for example) is not racist. It is a religion not a race. Anyone can be a Muslim. Having brown skin is not a pre-requisite. Showing disdain for a belief system which has a poor record on animal rights, women’s rights and LGBT rights is a point of view. One I would hope that is shared by many. It’s still not racism. To be racist then M would have to only associate with white catholic English born people. This we all know not to be the case. Any sane person understands that fascism is wrong. Then why is it wrong to say that other extreme belief systems/groups are wrong and ultimately bad for humankind. No ?
Pilgrimupnorth

 

[Charlie Cheswick]

E Scott said: ↑
Both Audre and James B lived through a shameful period in US history and fought to end prejudice by speaking out. Don't know why Morrissey identifies with them if he's supporting an Islamaphobic and divisive party like For Britain.
Sorry don't fully understand what you are trying to say in relation to my quote?
Is Islamaphobia not prejudice to Muslims?
Is supporting Islamaphobia not divisive? It's not different to Anti Semitism just another religion.

It's interesting that you bring up Anti Semitism. A lot on the right have been recently attacking Labour for Anti Semetic people in their ranks. The theory is that attacking Israel is Anti Semetic, personally I don't link the two but for some people it definitely spills over. Either way, on the one hand you've got people who want to attack others for blaming everyone for the actions of a few (e.g. the Israeli government) and at the same time doing exactly the same themselves with Muslims.

To be honest, I think the same types would be back to hating Jews if Islam disappeared tomorrow.

 

[Anonymous]

Because being anti-Islam (for example) is not racist. It is a religion not a race. Anyone can be a Muslim. Having brown skin is not a pre-requisite. Showing disdain for a belief system which has a poor record on animal rights, women’s rights and LGBT rights is a point of view. One I would hope that is shared by many. It’s still not racism. To be racist then M would have to only associate with white catholic English born people. This we all know not to be the case. Any sane person understands that fascism is wrong. Then why is it wrong to say that other extreme belief systems/groups are wrong and ultimately bad for humankind. No ?
Pilgrimupnorth

You're being pedantic. Racism encompasses ethnicities as well. It functions under the same premise.

Whether or not they classify as a race is a minor point. People know what the modern use of the term encompasses. Race is a social construct; not a definitive scientific classification, just like ethnic bigotry.

Remember, Morrissey has come out against the idea of foreign influence changing the British culture, period. His words encompass much more than just Muslims. Certainly, they are his primary target, but if it's about the culture, then the it's about ethnic immigrants in general.

Do you think the KKK thought of the French, and Spanish when they decided on their ideology, and who it represents? No, it was about preserving white protestant Americans.

I don't care if Morrissey is an ideological racist, and I find the word "bigot" is the apt description, but I know what others mean when they call him a racist.

 

[Anonymous]

The only religions who have a relatively good reputation with Animal rights off the top of my head is Jainism or Hinduism. Christianity or Catholicism isn't particularly associated with animal rights. Regarding women rights do the Catholic church's still ban women using contraception? I could go on but you get my point.

precisely my point. If M was to say that he finds the Catholic stance on contraception or abortion abhorrent or Christians eating lamb at Easter disgusting or The Salvation Army’s view on homosexuality a disgrace. Would we even be talking about it?
But because it’s Islam then we all get scared of the reaction. Let’s face it. Halal slaughter is fairly unjustifiable (as is Kosher). It is something that government has to look at and at least bring in line with western slaughter practices. That is until slaughter is seen as unacceptable full stop. If UK law accepts that sentient beings suffer pain and have emotions and suffer stress then what’s the issue?
Pilgrimupnorth

 

[E Scott]

The Alt right are in a quandary about Israel - on one hand they admire Israel's perceived nationalism and self determination but they still have the old issue of deep down hating the Jews. They are willing to overlook the anti Semitism as they now hate followers of Islam even more. Wonderful people in this world...Not.

 

[E Scott]

I think conversily with UK Labour party supporters it's the reverse situation. I although with reservations have a lot of respect for Israel like Armenina they have taken back and given a homeland to dispora of people who for thousands of years have faced so much persucutition. I also admire they took basically a desert and irrigated it. Its a democracy however I don't agree with the displacement of the Palestinian people. Too complex a subject to further comment here about.

 

[Iggy]

Morrissey is the personification of contradiction. He also seems to dislike promotion and says he doesn't do media and here he is with Morrissey Central. It might be someone else keeping the site going, but he's using it for his own good. That's a way of promotion sir! In this case not a good one, for how things are at the moment. He also doesn't give interviews because they edit his words, but at the end of the day, edited or not, he's still screwing it. I wonder if he's preparing another video for YouTube.

 

[marred]

I hope so. Still he made editorial choices. And these choices never included coloured people. Or these choices only included white people. He did not choose Sydney Poitier in "No way out" or in "Blackboard jungle" or Juanita Moore in "Imitation of life" for example. And understand me rightly: he had or has the right to do that but we (I) also have the right to think about it. I love how defending a point is over-thinking it.

Over thinking may be the wrong term. I probably should have said a waste of thinking.

 

[vegan.cro spirit #227]

You're being pedantic. Racism encompasses ethnicities as well. It functions under the same premise.

Whether or not they classify as a race is a minor point. People know what the modern use of the term encompasses. Race is a social construct; not a definitive scientific classification, just like ethnic bigotry.

Remember, Morrissey has come out against the idea of foreign influence changing the British culture, period. His words encompass much more than just Muslims. Certainly, they are his primary target, but if it's about the culture, then the it's about ethnic immigrants in general.

Do you think the KKK thought of the French, and Spanish when they decided on their ideology, and who it represents? No, it was about preserving white protestant Americans.

I don't care if Morrissey is an ideological racist, and I find the word "bigot" is the apt description, but I know what others mean when they call him a racist.

This is what Moz is up against?
"Race" is a social construct? Then there is no such thing as 'brown people' etc? They dont have any real existence!! If they dont exist they can be oppressed!
The "modern" use of the term. LOL Using it to mean what suits the loon agenda despite it means something
else. We can have any word mean anything we like!!
I wish that postmodern stuff applied to jobs but utter the word and everybody on the left jumps
The KKK ideology? Modern or traditional?

 

[vegan.cro spirit #227]

I don't care about your personal inadequacies.

You didn't answer my question. How does it feel?

Like a Rolling Stone.
Marx said No money
Lenin said Yes money.
I call that your basic commie conundrum.

 

[marred]

Or (as I have come to think) he tries to use it to support his sales...

You nailed it. It's all been a carefully orchestrated scam to select only white people for his smiths sleeves in order to boost sales. How do you people come up with this stuff?

 

[marred]

But they are still very far from being a far right party.

Very, very far. What the hell is far right anyway? I haven't heard anything provocative from Anne Marie Waters at all. They're hardly the BNP. Everything she has said re Islam is completely valid. She's not against the actual people, just the ideology.