Jump to content
British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

50 Years of RotographicCoinpublications.com A Rotographic Imprint. Price guide reference book publishers since 1959. Lots of books on coins, banknotes and medals. Please visit and like Coin Publications on Facebook for offers and updates.

Coin Publications on Facebook

   Rotographic    

The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com

predecimal.comPredecimal.com. One of the most popular websites on British pre-decimal coins, with hundreds of coins for sale, advice for beginners and interesting information.

oldcopper

Sterling Member
  • Content Count

    607
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    14

Posts posted by oldcopper


  1. It started off at A$1400, and came down in increments to A$450 (that's on the archive). I don't know how much further it would have come down if no-one had bid for it - but the vendor was presumably already nursing a big loss if they bought it at Baldwin's, so might have withdrawn it. Call it a gap filler! The last I saw of the Nicholson piece was DNW June 2013 in Andrew Scottern's (?) collection, £1200 hammer. I haven't heard of it in LCA - I'll look that up. 

     


  2. Talking of rarities in awful condition, here's a type coin of similar rarity to the above 1695 DEI GRATIA that cost £280 including extras (ex Noble Numismatics - the price kept coming down every time it didn't sell). And as for the edge lettering.....well I think I may be able to make out one letter....possibly. Anyway, it's ex Weightman and Hoblyn and went for £660 hammer at Baldwin's back in 2007. The reverse is worse but the obverse is of course the important side.

    2014a.jpg


  3. On 10/19/2020 at 4:15 PM, JLS said:

    Hello all, 

    Anyone have a copy of the Spink Numismatic Circular, February 2001? 

    I am curious as to what Spink priced the William III GVLIELMVS DEI GRATIA halfpenny at, as I am thinking about selling my own example which is in very similar grade ! 

    As far as I know, the Shuttlewood piece hasn't been on the market since it was sold by Colin Cooke as part of the Nicholson collection: #78 (http://www.colincooke.com/collections/nicholson_part2.html

    Thanks !
    JLS

     

    As well as Mark Rasmussen, Nicholson's/Shuttleworth's coin was also in one of the early St James's auctions.


  4. 25 minutes ago, DaveG38 said:

    Well done Michael-Roo for posting the article. Make of it what you will, though I still feel that the evidence and logic of die production means that the dates are definitely 1695.

    Just two allied points:

    1. My coin is the bottom one on page 2. After this article was published, I gave it the olive oil treatment with the result that the coin is now a lovely chocolate brown without all that surface green caused by being in the ground. As I said in an earlier post, I'd put mine at VF maybe a touch better, but with some patchy corrosion. According to the seller, my coin was dug up in Suffolk. The one offered for sale in the US for $4700 is possibly the one at the top of page 2, which is the property of an American collector - he also was/is the owner of the centre coin on page 2. 

    2. For reasons I don't understand Spink were very reluctant to include this type in their standard catalogue. When I suggested it should be I got a very snotty note to the effect that they couldn't include every minor type in their publication. I get that, but this is scarcely minor - in fact it must be the first obverse of William's reign, which changes the whole view of the copper series of coins of that period. Furthermore, the legend change is far more significant than the existence of an extra curl or berry on Victoria's hair, yet they were happy to include this kind of variety in the 1860-61 penny series, where the differences are truly minor. However, I haven't bought a copy of Spink in recent years so maybe my grumble is unjustified and it is now included.

    Finally, on the question of the recent sale, I was sure it was Mark Rasmussen, but if not then one of the other dealers in rarities. I recall it because my article and name appeared in the description of the coin, which the more I think about it, I'm sure was the Nicholson example.

    I think unfortunately if Spink view it as a pattern they don't put them in, only in exceptional cases such as the Petition Crown. I don't think they list any copper patterns, and none of the earlier proofs. They go to town on the bronze of course, but they don't list any proofs or patterns there either.

    The coin at the top of page 2 is the $4700-priced one from memory, probably from the best metal but isn't as detailed as yours, which I hadn't seen until now. So nice one!


  5. 17 hours ago, JLS said:

    !

    For what it's worth I paid a derisory sum for mine. Maybe I should be in touch with Mark. 

    Mark might have sold one more recently, but the only one in his archive was the Nicholson example, sold on List 9, so during the middle-to-late 2000's. He sold it for £495.

    The best known (~GF+) was for sale by an American dealer some years ago. He wanted $4700 for it; too much for me! Great example though.


  6. On 10/18/2020 at 10:04 PM, 1949threepence said:

    Thanks Ian, useful information as ever - she certainly has a fuller left breast in that example.

    Something I'm curious about - and at the risk of becoming a bore, I'm returning to Bramah. In particular page 109, where he states:-

    There were over 32,000 minted. If they were never issued for circulation, where did they get to, and how come so many have survived? Cope and Rayner only class them from VF upwards, and yet surely many did enter circulation. For instance I bet this one has. Although annoyingly, they don't show the obverse. 

      

     

    On paper 32,000 minted, but how many of those were 1859 as was the usual Victorian practice until Grahame (?) the Mintmaster stopped it in the 1860's or 70's.

    It does look like a makeshift issue, as well as the misaligned dies, the severe die clashing, the lettering isn't good either, for instance the 2 N's of Britanniar are irregular and spindly, and also the blocked date seen on some (but not all) with the bottom of the 6 missing. Though the hair definition on Victoria's head is generally sharp, it is definitely lacking quality control in these other areas, which are not this severe on any other of W. Wyon's pennies as far as I'm aware (though he was long gone by then). Perhaps they had all these blanks left over and a Mint Apprentice was told to get on with it?!

     

     


  7. 13 hours ago, alfnail said:

    Higher grade specimens can have fuller breasts!

    I believe that the 1860/59 is a single die pair.

    Reverses always have the weak legend, especially in BRITANNIAR, and even on higher grade pieces. The clover is also detached from its stalk, although that feature is also seen on other years.

    Obverses, whether full 6 or partial 6, always have identical marks under Victoria's chin, and again under her pony tail. They also have the doubled tie ribbon.....which isn't really a tie ribbon but a clashed die, as explained in Peck Page 404, and better on MG's website.

     

    1860 over 59 Reverse.jpg

    1860 over 59 Obverse.jpg

    For the 1860/59, the die axis is usually askew as well, so if you turn the obverse over sideways, Britannia is leaning approx. 20-30 degrees to the right. I think it's the only Victorian copper penny (or maybe any penny?) with an askew die axis as standard rather than 0 or 180 degrees. 

    I wonder why they did this. It's easy to see on Heritage archives as they show the pictures of the coin in the slab as well.


  8. 12 minutes ago, mick1271 said:

    That might be where I have heard his name from . Something to do with Reading coin club as well .Definitely not me lol.

    Mick Martin, if it's the same one (there are at least two now!), wrote a long article in SNC 2009 working out the relative rarities of the Soho coinage and restrikes - very useful information. I believe I sent it to Secret Santa a while ago. 

    • Like 2

  9. 9 hours ago, Rob said:

    If it was difficult to tell whether bronzed or not, then it was probably a Taylor restrike which are passable to notoriously blotchy in their toning. You never see the even bronzing achieved at Soho, which is also darker than Taylor's.

    There are a good number of ex Boulton pieces in the market now. Obviously MPWB had a good number made of quite a few types which were retained by him and passed to his descendants. They have been coming out in dribs and drabs for the past 15 years or more through a multitude of channels. The one you mentioned in Heritage will have come through the guy who runs the Copper Corner, as he acquired a good number of them. They were also sold through various dealers in this country. I bought some that were listed in the Circular in 2007, which were all ex-Boulton too though not listed as such.

    I should have mentioned that it had an engrailed edge, so was an original, but though of even colour, it didn't quite seem to have the chocolate richness of Soho bronzing. So to see that it was suddenly ex-Boulton after I sold it (and I had an idea of whom subsequently bought it and thus I was less surprised at this "marketing technique") was a reach to say the least.


  10. 2 hours ago, bagerap said:

    You know what Old Copper? I'm giving up and following the advice of Mark Twain. “Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.”

     

    Hope the laundry doesn't lose your white sheets in the wash.

    So you haven't got any specific data on my previous request, I'm not surprised and I've called your bluff on this -  what you said was rubbish - it clearly didn't say that black people get convicted 6x more often than white people for the same offence , it said 6x more blacks than whites go to prison for "drug offenses". Which is a completely different meaning. You don't realize that?  But, like Peckers, just shoot the messenger - that'll hide the embarrassment. 

    Every one of the convoluted points you've made so far can be dismissed in seconds, as  I have done. The sad thing is you're so desperate to prove it's white racism, but you can't make that charge stick. Why are you so desperate to prove that narrative, can't you think for yourself?


  11. 1 hour ago, Peckris 2 said:

    What I've "got" is that the only 'good' statistics or articles are those which bolster your own position. Everything else can be dismissed.

    Well, I'm sorry, but your position in relation to blacks is dreadful. I've had enough of it, I don't have the energy to fight or argue as I'm tired all the time now. You can look in the mirror if you need to carry on this 'discussion'.

    Well, if you can't see the lies you're being fed, that's your lookout. I thought this would happen with you, as I've backed you into a corner of having to discuss my point which lets the police off. So it's flounce off time. That's a shame. All my statistics are official government statistics, and I've drawn the correct conclusions from them. So a bit of thinking and reasoned argument would have been appreciated, but i don't think you had any. 

    I remember you tried this faux-outrage when I pointed out BAME voting patterns. Then when I showed it was in a BBC report, you went a bit quiet.

    Anyway, this is where your dogma has now got you - you support an organisation that wants to defund the police, and the consequences of that mean losing the entire justice system, the prisons, the lot, because the police are the foundation and enforcement of all that of course. So no rule of law - who should be looking in the mirror, now? 

     

     


  12. 3 hours ago, bagerap said:

    Correlation is not causation.

    Blacks are 5 times more likely to be CONVICTED than whites for the same offense. This is particularly true for drug related charges, even more so in states where there are private "for profit" prisons. Under the three strikes and you're out legislation there are thousands of black men and women serving life for possesion of a drug that is now legal in eleven states.

    The following was published by the NAACP

     

    CRIMINAL JUSTICE FACT SHEET

     

     

    Incarceration Trends in America

    Between 1980 and 2015, the number of people incarcerated in America increased from roughly 500,000 to over 2.2 million.

    Today, the United States makes up about 5% of the world’s population and has 21% of the world’s prisoners.

    1 in every 37 adults in the United States, or 2.7% of the adult population, is under some form of correctional supervision.

    CJ_StopFriskRacial Disparities in Incarceration

    In 2014, African Americans constituted 2.3 million, or 34%, of the total 6.8 million correctional population.

    African Americans are incarcerated at more than 5 times the rate of whites.

    The imprisonment rate for African American women is twice that of white women.

    Nationwide, African American children represent 32% of children who are arrested,

    42% of children who are detained, and 52% of children whose cases are judicially

    waived to criminal court.

    Though African Americans and Hispanics make up approximately 32% of the US

    population, they comprised 56% of all incarcerated people in 2015.

    If African Americans and Hispanics were incarcerated at the same rates as whites,

    prison and jail populations would decline by almost 40%.

    Drug Sentencing Disparities

    In the 2015 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, about 17 million whites and 4 million African Americans reported having used an illicit drug within the last month.

    African Americans and whites use drugs at similar rates, but the imprisonment rate of African Americans for drug charges is almost 6 times that of whites.

    African Americans represent 12.5% of illicit drug users, but 29% of those arrested for drug offenses and 33% of those incarcerated in state facilities for drug offenses.

    Effects of Incarceration

    A criminal record can reduce the likelihood of a callback or job offer by nearly 50 percent. The negative impact of a criminal record is twice as large for African American applicants.

    Infectious diseases are highly concentrated in corrections facilities: 15% of jail inmates and 22% of prisoners – compared to 5% of the general population – reported ever having tuberculosis, Hepatitis B and C, HIV/AIDS, or other STDs.

    In 2012 alone, the United States spent nearly $81 billion on corrections.

    Spending on prisons and jails has increased at triple the rate of spending on Pre‐K‐12 public education in the last thirty years.

     

     

     

     

     

    Where's the information about blacks being 5 times more likely to be imprisoned for "the same offence"? What it says is that blacks are almost 6x more likely to be imprisoned for "drug charges". And the same proportions of blacks and whites use drugs. Not the same thing. "Drug offenses" mentioned in the next paragraph is similarly not just "drug use" but presumably more serious drug offenses as well.

    The obvious explanation is there is a much higher proportion of drug dealers among blacks. Recreational use of a drug is the lowest level of drug crime; dealing and distribution are higher: the offenders will more likely have a much greater quantity of a drug as well when arrested. And it will also depend on how hard the drugs are - is there a different profile of popular drugs in both communities?  A small amount of recreational cannabis is probably overlooked, but heroin will be treated differently. You might have some more specific figures, if so let us know, but on the above, you can't tell anything as they are not comparing like to like. 

    Nasty diseases picked up in prison, we won't go into the reasons. Whites have a higher mortality rate in prisons than blacks or Hispanics apparently - if it was the other way round, there would no doubt be a fuss about it.

    That's sad about the criminal record information, but blacks are overwhelmingly over-represented in all violent crime and theft, so I can understand if an employer is going to be wary about that. The trouble is it's a chicken and egg scenario, which will be difficult to break.


  13. 10 hours ago, Peckris 2 said:

    For crying out loud, how many times do I have to say:

    The big fraud is that they aren't factoring in the relative crime rates of the two demographics.

    The last article is a perfect example. I don't even need to look at the first two, because they will undoubtedly be doing the same thing. 

    Now, from the relative prison populations, blacks are 5 times more likely than whites to commit crimes. Thus their interactions with police will be 5 times higher than their demographic ratio would suggest. Police aren't shooting at random members of the public or locking up random members of the public are they. They're shooting mainly at criminals or taking criminals into police custody.

    Hence to get an accurate perspective, we should not only be basing the numbers on the demographic, which will increase the black number by a factor of 4.5. 

    We should also be basing it on the extent of the criminality for each demographic, which will then lower the black number by a factor of 5.

    Got it?


  14. 14 minutes ago, oldcopper said:

    The figures are FBI figures from 2015/2016 I think. I will check, though they are definitely government figures. 

    Interesting, so the statistic that blacks are responsible for 50% of US gun crime, despite being 14% of the population, is a myth? And your statistic, if it exists, is obviously legal gun owners, which I would expect to be predominantly white. So in the UK, compare the percentage of whites owning gun licences with the demographic of gun crime. Do you think these figures are going to be proportional? I don't think so, what a silly argument.

    Actually, the figures are from Washington Post data, which is taken from official data. Pop "465 white 234 black police shootings" into Google and it should come up with "Law-Enforcement - Perpetrated Homicides: Accidents to Murder" click on that and it will give you p68 where the figures are for the last few years. I saw these figures elsewhere which is why I've got 2016 data, but the other years' ratios are pretty similar.


  15. 17 hours ago, Peckris 2 said:

    Excuse me, where are YOU getting your figures from? Even if it's true, the ratio of gun owners white:black is overwhelmingly predominantly white. So if the police are - understandably - more trigger happy towards armed suspects, that's going to be white most times.

    The figures are FBI figures from 2015/2016 I think. I will check, though they are definitely government figures. 

    Interesting, so the statistic that blacks are responsible for 50% of US gun crime, despite being 14% of the population, is a myth? And your statistic, if it exists, is obviously legal gun owners, which I would expect to be predominantly white. So in the UK, compare the percentage of whites owning gun licences with the demographic of gun crime. Do you think these figures are going to be proportional? I don't think so, what a silly argument.


  16. 17 hours ago, Peckris 2 said:

    And there you have it. An equating of 'liberalism' with 'Marxism'. If that is really what you believe, then there's no arguing with you, as you're coming from a position that is demonstrably and provably false, despite certain sections of the American right holding it.

    As for deflecting culpability for the slave trade by putting all the blame on local tribal rulers ... yes, you can safely argue those rulers don't come out smelling of roses but you're not asking WHY they handed over rival tribesmen to the slavers : if the slavers hadn't rocked up on the West African coasts offering goodies in exchange for bodies, there wouldn't have been a slave trade in the first place.

    When you talk about modern Africa, e.g. the genocide in Rwanda, yes that was unspeakably awful, but what point are you making? That people of African origin commit crimes or even atrocities? Of course. Human nature good and bad doesn't change with skin colour. But when you look at the so-called civilised West, the preponderance of white on black violence dwarfs any other kind. And when you look at Africa, where is the generalised racial violence of black on white? Yes, it's there, but it isn't institutionalised as it is in America and, to a lesser extent, in Europe.

    No, you said that black suffering was mostly caused by whites, I was showing you that in fact, both in terms of magnitude and brutality, it is mainly caused by other blacks. Where was the falseness in any of my examples? I'd love to know.

    As for "deflecting blame" form the slave trade I was showing you that other parties who were actively involved in the slave trade and placed no value on African lives, were both African and Arab. And it continues today - apparently a slave in Libya costs ~$200, so I've read. I know nothing must interfere with the narrative of purely white evil against others without original sin.

    You are obviously absolutely not bothered by the easily understandable fact that the whole argument of over-representation with the police is a lie. I watched  YouTube Christo Foufas on Talk Radio smugly try and dismiss a woman who dared support the "white lives matter" banner with his oh so unchallengeable "police stats form the US show they are over-represented. I know the statistics". If only she'd known the truth! Luckily there didn't seem to be any comments that stood up for him. But no-one has spotted the big lie in the comments, or perhaps they had - you'll be glad to know I've posted these facts on 2 youtube channels, but guess what, the posts had mysteriously been removed next time I've checked. 

    I bet you still haven't tried to understand it, have you?


  17. 23 hours ago, Peckris 2 said:

     

    You've had a good sleep, perhaps you can engage with my points.

    Of course it's all cultural Marxism, because all the examples you give are of the white oppression/black victimhood type. Let's take the blood bath that's been post-Colonial Africa, for one. Rhodesia, at the time known as the breadbasket of Africa and one of the most affluent sub-Saharan countries. The Liberal West was only interested in getting rid of the white ruling class, who funnily enough had the ability to run a good economy and a productive farm system.

    They must have thought - we know what to do, let's stick a tin-pot Marxist psychopath in charge instead, but that doesn't matter, because he's....black and lots of blacks support him, apparently, well those from his own tribe anyway. Problem solved, nasty white racists not in charge any more. Byeeeee! Another moral victory.

    Result: tribal war, mass murders, 4000 plus white farmers murdered plus hundreds of thousands of blacks. Farms were given to soldiers form Mugabe's army who had no idea how to run them, after dispatching the original inhabitants, and Zimbabwe quickly turned into a failed state, life expectancy had decreased by about 15 years at one stage and it had become one of the poorest and most brutal countries in Africa with massive abject poverty. What a hellhole and what a tragedy. Who's to blame?

    So the Ruandan genocide (800K +), the incredible violence in South African, also turning also into a failed state with some politicians singing and talking about murdering Boers, and I haven't even mentioned the Congo yet, Uganda or Somalia etc etc. Apparently vigilante necklace killings in SA are still happening, maybe several hundred a year. Winnie Mandela was a firm advocate. One was caught on film in 1986 of an African woman, whom, after being burnt alive, had her head caved in with rocks, and glass shards were then put to use in a sexual mutilation. And I expect a certain chunk of the local townsfolk would have been looking on, taking in the spectacle.

    So it's all relative, isn't it. Anyway, Peckris avers that African suffering has mainly been caused by whites - well, firstly we have no idea of the body counts when African tribes displaced others, a common enough occurrence and judging from modern Africa, extremely brutal and also involving brutalising the women and children, Add the massive slave trade to the Middle East as well as ours and this all implies that the local rulers weren't swayed very much by Liberal ideals. I think Britain probably killed far less black people than at least Belgium or Germany, who were much more brutal, but overall, it is all completely dwarfed by the titanic black on black carnage. So I don't think whites are mainly to blame for African suffering.

    And this is the same in the US. You're only interested in a couple of cop murders of blacks because they might fit your agenda, but the 7000 black on black murders every year you ignore. As I said, the agenda of compassion, the agenda of outrage.

     


  18. 11 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

    Well part of it pretty obviously is, as far more African American and Hispanic people (per million of the population) are shot and otherwise killed by police, than white people. That's hard fact.

    You seem to have completely missed the main thrust of what I'm saying though, which is that the United States police in general, are trigger happy and there are a disturbingly high number of people (of all ethnicities) who are being stopped by the police for spurious reasons. The situation then escalates massively, and the "suspect" is shot dead. These are situation in which absolutely no other person would be adversely affected if the police hadn't got involved at all. For example in the case of Floyd, why was he suspected, and why was a presumption made that even if he had passed on a fake $20 note, that it was deliberate - how many fake £1 coins were passed on unwittingly in this country? In the Brooks case, can you imagine that happening here in the UK? Most normal, civilized people would have gone up to the guy and just asked if he was OK, and tried to help him, including our own police.

    I think the US police need re-educating on their priorities and to be made aware of their responsibilities as that pertains to the safety and well being of the public they purport to protect.

    Although my political instincts are conservative with a small c, I cannot countenance, nor keep quiet, if innocent people are the subject of needless killings by representatives of the state, especially one which describes itself as the "land of the free and the home of the brave". There's nothing brave or free about these dreadful occurrences. Moreover, although I can't prove it, I do get the overriding impression that some of these police officers are looking for any excuse to shoot those they stop. The slightest false move and you're blown away, not even knowing whether you were following the officer's orders or not. That comes across very strongly. 

    It's nasty. it's cowardly and it's breathtakingly idiotic. I make no apology whatever for speaking out against it.  

           

         

    The figures I've seen for armed shooting and unarmed shooting are ~ 2:1 white to black (465:234 armed) and unarmed 20:9, latest Washington Post data 25:14 white to black. Where are you getting your figures from? To be fairly representative, the ratio should be circa 1:1 based on the relative criminal populations of both demographics. Or with Hispanics, 37b to 32w to 22h, if I remember rightly from one year's prison statistics. So the ratio of black and Hispanic incidents with police to white incidents with police should be 59:32 if there is a fair representation. But I'm still waiting for someone to attempt or want to engage with the argument, maybe because that simple factor of criminal proportionality destroys the agenda of racial victimhood being peddled here.

    I have understood what you've said and I haven't disagreed with you on the brutality. I will say it can't be a picnic policing a high number of armed criminals and in some areas there must be a concentration of extremely dangerous people, so mistakes and over-reaction are bound to happen, though fortunately the US has quite a good justice system, so if police are found out to have acted unlawfully, then they will be facing the music. No-one's got a problem with that. But I have said, and you can't dispute this, that the marches mainly have the agenda of race, which I've shown is completely bogus as there is effectively a 1:1 ratio of black to white criminals, extrapolating from the prison populations. If you disagree with that comment, look at the argument and tell me why. I've have asked you before and I'm still waiting.

    I wonder if this lauding of the dishonest BLM and their narrative is an establishment approved tactic to guilt-trip the resident population into accepting millions of African migrants via the UN Global Migration Pact by 2050. Hopefully I'm wrong there, but it's strange that no-one's questioning the uniform and easy-to-spot deception here.


  19. 5 hours ago, bagerap said:

    I keep coming back to this one phrase and its obvious implications:

    "the 5:1 greater proportion of black criminals per capita, which is revealed in the relative prison populations of each demographic"

     

    This does nothing to support your claim of inherent racial criminality, it simply demonstrates the overwhelming racial bias that prevails within American policing.  A black/Latino/Hispanic person is up to five times more likely to be stopped and questioned * than a Caucasian. The stop and search is used as a basis for Probable Cause further investigation. They are more likely to face a misdemeanour charge than a white person and if it goes to court the disparity in sentencing can be seen in the two attached links.

     

    https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/publications/racial-disparity-sentencing#:~:text=type of crime-,Key findings%3A,sentenced than similarly-situated whites.

    https://www.sentencingproject.org/publications/un-report-on-racial-disparities/

     

     

    * this is a geographic variable, not simply South vs North

    So how come there's a pretty similar over-representation in the UK - see "Crime in London" Wikipedia and go to the section on race. I've given you that link before, but you obviously haven't read it. So I think it's a red herring.


  20. On 6/23/2020 at 11:54 AM, Peckris 2 said:

     

    Peckers, yes, yes I have, and we're talking about the police here. It 's just you haven't, like 1949, read or understood what I've written. Police interactions adversely affect whites by the original numerical ratio of circa 2:1, because the demographic effect (timesing the black figure by 4.5) is cancelled out by the 5:1 greater proportion of black criminals per capita, which is revealed in the relative prison populations of each demographic. But, don't worry, you won't understand that either. It's just that funnily enough, the media and everyone else is forgetting to factor in the last bit. And do I have to give you lot a maths lesson every time?

    "White privilege" implies we have an unearned superior status due to our ancestors oppressing BAME people's ancestors. It affects all whites, You're right, all Germans aren't Nazis, but "white privilege" is a universal property of white people, however rich or poor, hard working or otherwise deserving. And here's a couple of comments from Van Jones, a black CNN pundit, talking about racism:

    Even the most liberal and well-intentioned white person has a virus in his or her brain that can be activated in an instant

    and:

    White people are always innocent and that innocence constitutes their crime.

    Now, those words may possibly have been a quote or taken out of context. I've seen the clips, but he hasn't been censured in any way for saying these things, so these views are allowable and unchallenged. So this white privilege or racism sounds pretty intrinsic to white people wouldn't you say. And do you not see where all this now "justified" envy of a whole race might lead? There is a certain parallel from the past.

    Your last list perfectly sums up the weirdly selective cultural marxism of your world view. It's the left's agenda of outrage and agenda of compassion. These emotions can only be felt provided the politics of the situation fit in with the left wing narrative. Otherwise it's crickets and tumbleweed. I'll expand on this tomorrow if you want! But guess what ideology  has been responsible for more deaths and suffering than any other? I'll leave you with that one to ponder.

     

     

     

     

×