5433

Hello. I read the linked article, briefly it is true.

Well, I like watermelons, so f*ck Bojo I guess.

5434

I appreciate that you’re answering the question.

However, I do not think that the African children that Boris Johnson referred to as “pickaninnies” were very good friends of his.

5435

Yes, that is because the context and the intent were both different. (see my post above).

5436

Are you saying he was writing in such a way as to imply those racist terms were the views of the Queen/Blair? That’s possible, but it seems a weak line.

5437

Yes, exactly this.

5438

Well, that’s not exactly reflecting well on him either, for a bunch of reasons!

5439

Isn’t this literally projection? (Blame shifting to the Queen?)

5440

I don’t disagree but we must also remember that this was written in 2002. We (as a society) were not as sensitive to such things at that time. It was also an article written for a publication that frequently used satire as a political weapon. So it was just one of many similar types of articles.

5441

Yeah it was way back in 2002, no one even knew any better! We didn’t realize ethnic slurs were bad until what… 2015?

5442

No, that’s not what I’m saying. I’m simply saying that today we live in an environment that is more sensitive to the use of such language.

5443

I too, harken to the days when people knew their place and let their betters speak their minds.

5444

and what about the bygone era of … 13 days ago, when we would casually stereotype an entire culture without thought or care.

Of course all Irish are white men called Murphy and easily pronounceable and memorable names, what a hilarious jape.

5445

I’ve read that article several times and I just can’t come to any other conlusion that it is not merely terribly misjudged, but actually racist. Sure he is trying to conjure up the image of the white colonial masters being cheered by their more colourful subjects, but in that case “flag waving African children” would have been perfectly sufficient.

I get absolutely no hint that this is intended to satirize Blair’s view of these children. What’s being satirized is that this a welcome photo op for Blair, but I get the impression that it’s the author’s own views shining through in his choice of words. This becomes even more obvious when he talks about how “the pangas will stop their hacking of human flesh”. This does absolutely nothing to put Blair in a bad light as far as holding those views is concerned, but I’m afraid I can’t say the same about the author.

I also can’t recall racist language from the 19th century being somewhat more acceptable in 2002 as opposed to now.

5446

Are you saying he was unable to convey this point (that the Queen etc were secretly racists) without using racist slurs himself?

Fuck me with this people were not offended by being called picannies in 2002, that’s a new development bullshit. Can I have an example of another mainstream politician using this language in 2002, please?

Ah, so it will be easy to produce another example then. I’ll wait.

5447

I’ve done my best to explain my reasoning. If you vehemently disagree that’s fair enough.

5448

Ahhh, yes, the halycon days of mid-July! I fondly remember those innocent times.

5449

No, you’ve dragged your feet at every exchange. Now I’m waiting for an answer to this:

5450

How about Jean-Marie Le Pen? Checkmate, Scott!

5451

You are jumping through some remarkable hoops for this guy.

What does he have on you, @draxen? We can help.

5452

All opinions are honest and my own :)