Who is the latest addition to your All-Time XI

[Langeveldt]

Mick Lewis is an all time hall of famer, we're just talking about back of the cigarette packet musings here..

 

[Smudge]

FYI, most of my real life friends are white.

That old chestnut?

 

[Blaze]

Shane Bond

 

[Matt79]

\And last but not the least- i would like you to show me a single comment of mine, pertaining to racism, that isnt true.

hmmm... how about this dog turd of an argument?

its a question of white nations being the ONLY nations to practice institutionalised racism. Its a big difference.

Yes, that's so obviously true.
There's no institutionalised racism in countries like, um Japan, where whites, blacks, Koreans, etc, will NEVER be allowed to become citizens, no matter how long they live there.
There's no institutionalised racism in countries like Malaysia, where quotas limiting access to public education for Chinese Malays exist and the government has policies that openly state they aim to redistribute wealth from the Chinese Malay population to the bumiputri population.
There's no institutionalised racism in Afghanistan, where successive governments have embarked on what can only be described as genocide against the Hazara Shia population, based not only on their religion, but their differences in race.
There's no institutionalised racism in countries like Rwanda, where the government which was based upon one tribe, led the genocide against another tribe.
There's no institutionalised religious discrimination in a country like India, where mosques are attacked and destroyed quite regularly. You accuse countries like England and Australia of being racist countries - do you want to compare the number of Muslim properties damaged or Muslims assaulted in those countries and India over the last few years?

You're talking crap, you're hoping nobody will call you on it because to do so wouldn't be "PC", and its offensive and just wrong.

Racism exists everywhere, its horrible, but seemingly stubborn part of humanity. I wish it would disappear and that people who hold these stupid views would grow a brain, but I cannot accept that one "race" should be consider to be the sole purveyors of this hate.

 

[Matt79]

I'd like to add that I don't actually consider India to be a racist country - I don't judge whole countries, populations, or "races" on the stupid acts of a few members of their society.

 

[C_C]

There's no institutionalised racism in countries like, um Japan, where whites, blacks, Koreans, etc, will NEVER be allowed to become citizens, no matter how long they live there.

Who told you this ?
I personally know a Japanese citizen who isnt a born Japanese.( Married to one actually)

There's no institutionalised racism in countries like Malaysia, where quotas limiting access to public education for Chinese Malays exist and the government has policies that openly state they aim to redistribute wealth from the Chinese Malay population to the bumiputri population.

That sounds like quotas and affirmative action to me - every country has that and there aint nothing wrong with that if handled with care.

There's no institutionalised racism in Afghanistan, where successive governments have embarked on what can only be described as genocide against the Hazara Shia population, based not only on their religion, but their differences in race.

That has been there in every culture at one point or another. Whats not been there is the ' anyone who isnt a particular RACE ( do you understand the definition of the word 'race' ? there is a difference between race and ethnicity) is inferior' crap.

There's no institutionalised racism in countries like Rwanda, where the government which was based upon one tribe, led the genocide against another tribe

Nothing racist in that.
India waging war against Pakistan ( or other way round) aint racism. Neither is Britain fighting Napoleon.

There's no institutionalised religious discrimination in a country like India, where mosques are attacked and destroyed quite regularly.

So are temples, gurdwaras and churches. There aint nothing 'institutionalised' in that.

You accuse countries like England and Australia of being racist countries - do you want to compare the number of Muslim properties damaged or Muslims assaulted in those countries and India over the last few years?

I'd also like the figures for Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Christian and Jain properties destroyed.

Racism exists everywhere, its horrible, but seemingly stubborn part of humanity. I wish it would disappear and that people who hold these stupid views would grow a brain, but I cannot accept that one "race" should be consider to be the sole purveyors of this hate.

False.
Discrimination exists almost everywhere. However, there isnt institutionalised racism anywhere else and there was no concept of 'institutionalised racism' before Europe came up with it. That again, is a fact.
You'd note that i didnt slam any nation now- but made a social commentary(which, being a resident of a western nation, i am most certainly entitled to) in the relevant context.
I'd like you to talk to the immigrant communities the world around,who immigrated in the 60s or 70s and ask which areas had institutionalised racism. You'd find that the answer is overwhelmingly pointing towards one geo-political region of this world.
If you wish to contest the accuracy of my claims, i'd be more than game for it. However, contact me on msn as this isnt relevant here ( my msn addy : cyberkingdom@hotmail.com I will remove it soon).

 

[Matt79]

I personally know a Japanese citizen who isnt a born Japanese.( Married to one actually)

There are exceptions obviously, but your wife should be able to describe some of the racist attitudes implicit in much of Japan's culture, attitudes, and yes institutions. I'm basing my comments on my studies on Japan, which constituted a part of my graduate studies, including first hand accounts from several non-Japanese living in Japan.

That sounds like quotas and affirmative action to me - every country has that and there aint nothing wrong with that if handled with care.

Is it affirmative action when its something imposed by a majority of the population on a segment of society that amounts to only 30% of the population? The arguments of 'correcting past imbalances' and 'ensuring fair access for the majority' were also used to justify the anti-Jewish laws brought in by Germany through the 1930s - which is not to equate Malaysia to Nazi Germany (obviously absurd) but rather to point out what a slippery slope such rationales are.

Whats not been there is the ' anyone who isnt a particular RACE ( do you understand the definition of the word 'race' ? there is a difference between race and ethnicity) is inferior' crap.

That's simply incorrect. There are many examples of cultures that have defined themselves as specially chosen or having a special destiny that allows them to dispossess or discriminate against others.

As for the difference between somebody's race and their ethnicity, I have to admit that such a distinction smacks a little too much of social Darwinism to me, and as a consequence I've never paid it much thought. If you're inferring from that statement that the internal conflicts in Afghanistan because they're all 'Afghans', that's simply incorrect. By whatever pseudo-Darwinian criteria you want to consider, the Hazaras are a separate 'race' - descendents of Genghis Khan's army - from the Pashtun majority - and they are considered inferior not because of anything they own that the Pashtuns want, or anything they do, but simply because of those racial differences, the persecution of which has been practiced by successive Pashtun governments. I don't know whether you have any convenient Hazara friends, but I've personally spoken to many Hazaras and Pashtuns, so I'm basing this on my personal experience.

Nothing racist in that.
India waging war against Pakistan ( or other way round) aint racism. Neither is Britain fighting Napoleon.

So war is racist if it involves two sides with different skin colours, but if they have the same skin colour its not. Were Japan's various incursions against Korea, or their invasion of China racist actions by their institutions?

So are temples, gurdwaras and churches. There aint nothing 'institutionalised' in that.

False.
Discrimination exists almost everywhere. However, there isnt institutionalised racism anywhere else and there was no concept of 'institutionalised racism' before Europe came up with it. That again, is a fact.
You'd note that i didnt slam any nation now- but made a social commentary(which, being a resident of a western nation, i am most certainly entitled to) in the relevant context.
I'd like you to talk to the immigrant communities the world around,who immigrated in the 60s or 70s and ask which areas had institutionalised racism. You'd find that the answer is overwhelmingly pointing towards one geo-political region of this world.

I think the issue that you're trying to sustain your claims upon is going to be your definition of what amounts to 'institutionalised' and a narrow definition of 'racism'. In a similar discussion about Australia's cricket culture a few weeks ago, you ended up getting quite pedantic about when some is discriminatory or racist and when it isn't. If you are going to use some extremely specific definition that is designed to only emcompass the kinds of issue you are referring to, of course, by that definition, not much else is going to make the grade. I just happen to think, or at least suspect (since you have spelt out the criteria you are using, only labelled large chunks of the world racist), that your definition is wrong, and in the context of this argument a bit self-serving.

You'd note that i didnt slam any nation now- but made a social commentary(which, being a resident of a western nation, i am most certainly entitled to) in the relevant context.

I think you quite clearly implied which countries you are talking about, and the comments you made here, and have made in other threads do amount to 'slamming', when they are made in such a generalised way. They are certainly offensive to people from those countries who abhor the kind of attitudes you complain about.

I certainly didn't intend to single out or slam any of the countries mentioned - I was only providing some counterbalancing examples to make the point that racism is not a localised phenomenon. Many people would like to think so, because they find it painful to contemplate that people like themselves, or those they are close to are capable of such evil - whereas the uncomfortable reality is that anyone is capable of it - hence the need for vigiliance against it everywhere.

If you wish to contest the accuracy of my claims, i'd be more than game for it. However, contact me on msn as this isnt relevant here.

I'm not interested in getting into a protracted argument about this with you - I think you are approaching this conversation with an entrenched point of view and aren't actually interested in discussing the issue, merely trying to prove you're right. However, I do agree with one thing you said, this isn't the best forum for this discussion. Having responded to what I consider to be the unfair generalisations you've made about several cultures that include many of the posters on this forum, I'm happy to drop this now.

 

[marc71178]

That old chestnut?

Stop being a racist Voltman...

 

[open365]

I don't care what you say, Kevin Pietersen's going in my all time 11

 

[Smudge]

Stop being a racist Voltman...

I'll try - but it's just so damn hard to stop...

Some of my best friends are racist, I'll have you know.

 

[marc71178]

Some of my best friends are racist, I'll have you know.

That'll be an age thing - most over 60s tend to stick to the views prevalent when they were younger...

 

[Sanz]

Matt79 - Dont take the bait and leave the discussion before it turns ugly(I can see the future of this thread).

 

[SA]

My All Time XI

Gavaskar
W.Hammond
Bradman
Brian Lara
Viv Richards
Sobers
Gilchrist (WK)
Imran Khan (C)
Richard Hadlee
Wasim Akram
Muralitharan

So,the latest addition is Adam Gilchrist.I think this team would be an ideal one with five frontline bowlers(Sobers can be considered a frontliner if he bowls medium pace only & not those long spells of his rubbish spin bowling) & batting till no.10

 

[adharcric]

Jack Hobbs
Sunil Gavaskar
Donald Bradman (c)
Sachin Tendulkar
Vivian Richards
Garfield Sobers
Adam Gilchrist (wk)
Imran Khan (vc)
Wasim Akram
Malcolm Marshall
Muttiah Muralitharan

 

[Anil]

hobbs
b. richards
bradman
v. richards
lara
sobers
imran
marshall
knott/marsh/healy
barnes
murali

i.e. no one....

 

[nightprowler10]

A tip Francis.

C_C has a major chip on his shoulder about Whites being racist.

He often spouts crap like that, and accuses things which aren't true.

Just ignore the diatribe and it goes away.

Well its not that he's wrong. But it does seem that he brings it up a lot.

 

[Matt79]

Had a major re-think re my all time XI the other day.

It was:
Hobbs
Gavaskar
Bradman
Hammond
Richards
Sobers
Gilchrist
Warne
Marshall
Lillee
Ambrose

but I've decided to make a couple of changes and now say:
Hobbs
Hutton
Bradman
Hammond
Richards
Sobers
Gilchrist
Imran
Warne
Marshall
Lillee

For a long time I resisted having Imran in as I figured with that top 7, having an allrounder at 8 wasn't necessary, and that there were better seamers than Imran around. Decided that if the theory of an all-time XI is that they have to compete against the 2nd best all time XI, his batting might actually come in very handy after all, against a bowling attack probably featuring Ambrose, Murali, Wasim, Hadlee, etc. Also reexamined his record as a bowler and decided the difference between him and Ambrose was one I can live with - although I hate not having big bad Curtly in my team!

Hutton for Gavaskar is a change I've been contemplating for a while, and decided to go with during Oz_Fan's recent poll. I'll probably undo the change then redo then undo tbh. But for the moment, that's it...

 

[BhupinderSingh]

Had a major re-think re my all time XI the other day.

It was:
Hobbs
Gavaskar
Bradman
Hammond
Richards
Sobers
Gilchrist
Warne
Marshall
Lillee
Ambrose

but I've decided to make a couple of changes and now say:
Hobbs
Hutton
Bradman
Hammond
Richards
Sobers
Gilchrist
Imran
Warne
Marshall
Lillee

You think Lillee was better than McGrath,Wasim Akram,Hadlee,Lindwall,Garner etc?

 

[Matt79]

Yes. I also thought you were banned...

 

[silentstriker]

1. Hobbs
2. Gavaskar
3. Bradman
4. Tendulkar
5. Sobers
6. Gilchrist
7. Imran
8. Hadlee
9. Warne
10. Marshall
11. McGrath

My XI bats until 9, and even #10 can swing it. And a bowling attack of McGrath, Marshall, Warne, Hadlee, Imran is no joke.