You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Absolutely brilliant bit of polemics from the waspish Professor. From 07:25 in...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01kktms/Any_Questions_13_07_2012/
He was excellent.
generally hes a bit of a dick
but that was quality
He was right on this point.
But so were the thousands of people who marched against the war and the millions who disagreed with the government at the time.
Shame he's an rude, ignorant, unpleasant, spoilt, hateful, nasty, reactionary caricature the rest of the time.
He cannot behave in public and shouldn't be allowed to act like a petulant child at someone elses birthday party.
What RS said
He’s not one for equivocacy, is he!?
I'm drawn to firebrands like that.
Why?
Surely content is more important than the method of delivery?
not really heard any of his shizzle before - can I assume he's a professional grump ?
(that clip was good but I imagine he could get a bit wearing)
Woppo - does he hate baby Jesus ??
I heard that he wasn't even the best drummer in the Beatles.
RS.
Of course - but I welcome his opinion as well as his particular style of patter. I don’t like prevaricators, or those without balls that obfuscate and/or edge around the issues.
allowed to act
Oh dear. Who made YOU Pope? 🙄
I'm of the opinion that those who have lives governed by certainties are very, very dangerous people indeed.
I don’t like prevaricators, or those without balls that obfuscate and/or edge around the issues.
So you prefer those with closed minds who refuse to acknowledge any other point of view apart from their own? 😉
Yeah, like you by the sound of it 😀
Mr Woppit - Memberallowed to act
Oh dear. Who made YOU Pope?
Posted 2 minutes ago # Report-Post
Starkey is incapable of interacting with others in the context of a public debate.
He talks over others, refuses acknowledge any opinion other than his own and does not abide by the usual niceties of social discourse which allow a rational discourse to take place.
If he refuses to obey the rules he shouln't be allowed to play.
That's how we've decided our society should work.
Other right wing polemicists are available - the BBC should not allow his disrespectful atttude any more airtime.
I feel patronised that the BBC would feel that he adds anything to AQ.
At least Kenneth Williams on Just A Minute had the benefit of being funny.
He appeals to the same sort of airheads who voted for Boris - style over content.
He cuts through the pompous, holds politicians to order and entertains during an otherwise dull run-through of party-line treaders and excuse-mongers.
I'm sure you could find something dull to watch elsewhere...
Oh, and by the way:
That's how we've decided our society should work.
We?
RS,
I'm calling good trolling or monstrous irony.
If it's the latter - you're doing the very same thing that you're accusing him of!
He's a dick.
End.of.thread.
druidh - Member
He's a dick.
Are you looking in the Mirror at this point
or would you care to be more specific ?
About time someone stood up and tell the Politicians
our untouchable Gods how how badly they have done and doing
to our Country!
Are you somehow unclear as to what he thinks about him now
FWIW I think he means complete and utter dick
HTH
I met him once before he was famous and merely an 'eminent historian'. I did history A-Level and he was THE guy to read for Tudor history. I went to hear him give a lecture on Henry VIIIs split with the Church in Rome and he was fabulous.
he reminds me of this guy
[img] 
[/img]
moth eaten, objectionable twunt
he was fabulous
😆
So, let's see - eminent historian, expert on the Tudors, regular livener of dull talk shows who seems to carry the audience with him and apparently fabulous lecturer (eyewitness) who knows his subject...
As opposed to... oh, I dunno, purveyor of fake swear words on a little website forum. 😆
I'm sure he'd feel suitably humbled.
Anyone else like to see the olympics buggered, BTW? 😉
grantway - MemberAbout time someone stood up and tell the Politicians our untouchable Gods how how badly they have done and doing to our Country!
People do this all the time. Starkey's doing it years after most of them, and years after it could have made any difference. Hooray for him. it's not "about time" someone stood up over cuts, olympics and wars- it's too late, much too late, and almost 10 years too late.
Though I did enjoy the polemic.
We Just needed Penny Red on to tell us how the Olympics were a symbol of male oppression of the female majority, and how soldiers were all rapists and murderers 😉
Nasty racist bigot.
What exactly has he said thats Racist TJ?
I heard him on question time and thought he was a bit of a bell-end in love with himself.
His insistence on talking over absolutely everyone meant I just switched off, so I've no idea if he made any good points.
Just sounded drunk to me.
why does everyone hate him. I think he's misunderstood. Yes, he's outspoken, and yes he probably should learn to bite his tongue a bit more but he's not afraid of what he thinks and even less of what he says. To that end, I look forward to seeing him on programmes like QT etc.
I can go down the town centre any Friday night at closing time and find plenty of people not afraid of what they think and even less of what they say.
Dr. Starkey is intelligent, well educated, and well spoken. That alone is reason to hate him for many.
Zulu-Eleven - MemberWhat exactly has he said thats Racist TJ?
"The whites have become black", remember?
Actually starkey is a thick nasty bigot - thats why he is hated. he also is deliberately controversial and has no respect for his supposed expertise amongst his peers
Anyone who is a racist looses all respect from me. anyone who downplays the holocaust is beneath contempt
Actually starkey is a thick nasty bigot
Rolling back form what you said earlier then TJ 🙄
"The whites have become black", remember?
Yes, I remember that episode, and exactly what was actually said at the time, rather than the Staggers editorial ... Thats why I'm still waiting to hear what Starkey has [b]actually[/b] said that was racist
He may be all those things but he is not thick.
Commentators lined up afterwards to call Starkey a racist and announce his career was over. Now a group of his fellow historians and academics have sent an open letter to the Times Higher Education magazine in an effort to distance themselves from Starkey. Among them are academics from Cambridge and the London School of Economics – two institutions Starkey taught at.The signatories say[b] Starkey's "crass generalisations about black culture and white culture as oppositional, monolithic entities demonstrate a failure to grasp the subtleties of race and class that would disgrace a first-year history undergraduate.[/b] In fact, it appears to us that the BBC was more interested in employing him for his on-screen persona and tendency to make comments that viewers find offensive than for his skills as a historian".
Starkey's TV manner also comes under fire: [b]"Instead of thoughtfully responding to criticism, he simply shouted it down; instead of debating his fellow panellists from a position of knowledge, he belittled and derided them...[/b] displaying some of the worst practices of an academic."
But it was the BBC's decision to call Starkey a 'historian' that was the group's key frustration. "Starkey has professed himself to be a historian of elites," the letter reads. "His academic work has never focused on race and class." Broadcasters should "think carefully" before inviting an academic unfamiliar with the subject matter, the letter continued.
The academics concluded with a plea: "We would ask that he is no longer allowed to bring our profession into disrepute by being introduced as 'the historian, David Starkey' when commenting on issues outside his fields of expertise." ·
Good hero for the STW reactionaries then I suppose.
Really? I believe he is - I believe all racists and bigots are thick - in the "nous" sense of smart / thick
TuckerUK - MemberDr. Starkey is intelligent, well educated, and well spoken. That alone is reason to hate him for many.
Really? That would be very silly.
Do you have any evidence to support this statement?
I don't hate him - I agree that he is an excellent historian.
I used to quite enjoy listening to him on 'The Moral Maze' and often found his views thought provoking, whether I agreed with him or not.
However, he has now become a caricature of himself - he can no longer engage in debate, refuses to accept that he may in anyway be wrong or that others have views which may be as equally valid as his own.
I described him earlier as rude, ignorant, unpleasant, spoilt, hateful, nasty & reactionary. I think that's a fairly accurate description, to be honest.
Mr Woppit - MemberHe cuts through the pompous, holds politicians to order and entertains during an otherwise dull run-through of party-line treaders and excuse-mongers.
I'm sure you could find something dull to watch elsewhere...
Oh, and by the way:
That's how we've decided our society should work.
We?
Er, yes, 'we', Woppit.
You know, humanity.
We seem to have settled on rational debate as our preferred method of non violent conflict resolution.
You should give it a go sometime, instead of the sneering, superior and condescending attitude you consistently display on here.
crass generalisations about black culture
Ah, so even his detractors accept the discussion was about [b]culture[/b] rather than race... interesting! I'm guessing that [i]intellectuals[/i] like TJ missed the part of the discussion where Starkey specifically stated "it’s not skin colour, it’s cultural” opting instead to jump on the 'racist' bandwagon...
Dr. Starkey is intelligent, well educated, and well spoken. That alone is reason to hate him for many.
Don't forget the gay bit... thats another reason for 'certain people' to hate him!
Zulu-Eleven - Member
Dr. Starkey is intelligent, well educated, and well spoken. That alone is reason to hate him for many.Don't forget the gay bit... thats another reason for 'certain people' to hate him!
Do you have any evidence?
Despite several explanations of why people dislike Starkey you continue to claim that it is his intelligence and education that 'certain people' despise. Oh, and his homosexuality, too.
That's a horrible accusation.
Who are these people?
Let's have some evidence to back up your claims.
Zulu cannot accept we dislike him as an ignorant racist bigot
TJ, I haven't said Starkey is a racist bigot.
I just want an answer and some evidence as to who hates him because of his intelligence, education and sexual orientation.
Still waiting for you to point me towards any proof that Starkey is Racist TJ
[i]racism noun [mass noun]: the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race , especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races[/i]
Asked more than once now.
How about a little segway from the bloke that TJ tells us is a thick, ignorant bigot
Z11:
So you're not providing any evidence of the homophobia & inverse snobbery you accused 'certain people' of then?
Could you at least confirm who these 'certain people' are?
And whilst I'm not accusing him of being racist, could you confirm what you believe he meant by his "the whites have become black" comment?
Thanks.
Oh, as to his comments in the clip above - sexuality is something fundamental to the individual and not subject to change at will - religious belief is merely an opinion.
There is no liberal 'tyranny', just a desire for equality and acceptance.
Perhaps a debate for another time, eh? 🙂
Zulu-Eleven - MemberYes, I remember that episode, and exactly what was actually said at the time, rather than the Staggers editorial ... Thats why I'm still waiting to hear what Starkey has actually said that was racist
Jeezo. What has NS got to do with it? He said it on Newsnight, you can go watch the replays to see "what was actually said". Which was:
"A substantial section of the chavs have become black. The whites have become black. A particular sort of violent, destructive, nihilistic gangster culture has become the fashion."
Violent, destructive, nihilistic gangster culture being a black trait, and something that whites have to "become black" in order to do.
Just in case that's in any doubt, he reinforced it in the Mail:
"I said until I was blue in the face on the programme that I was not talking about skin colour but gang culture. A large group of whites have started to behave like blacks."
I don't buy TJ's theory that racism is inseperable from stupidity, TBH I consider Starkey living proof that you can be intelligent and racist. Either that, or that you can be racist for pay.
Northwind - to me being racist is prima facie evidence of an inability to process information logically.
There are a many different form of intelligence I believe and I know people of very high IQ with no "nous" at all
Yes, I know. Don't agree in the slightest.
Slight digression from the thread - here, Woppit - have you been reissued?
http://www.juno.co.uk/products/456768-01.htm
Z11 - that's a good clip and shows Starkey in a more favourable light. Unfortunately, other clips show his less desirable side - a dogmatic and unpleasant bully who despite obvious intellect cannot restrain himself from behaving likes those he abhors in other contexts (a case of those that are bullied becoming bullies themselves, perhaps?). Imagine putting him and Galloway and Peter Hitchens on the same program!!
RS +1 for the most part!However, he has now become a caricature of himself - he can no longer engage in debate, refuses to accept that he may in anyway be wrong or that others have views which may be as equally valid as his own.
Rather silly to question his intellect IMO. As others have said, people can be clever/intellectual and still hold views that others/most would find objectionable. That is true throughout history - go back to Aristotle and slavery as just one example. But is is funny how his shouting over people, occasional dogmatism, tiresome repetition and general unpleasantness often obscure some sensible points - a bit familiar that!!
Slight digression from the thread - here, Woppit - have you been reissued?
http://www.juno.co.uk/products/456768-01.htm
Yeah, the Warner Bros stuff is still knocking about under sub-contract...
nstead of the sneering, superior and condescending attitude you consistently display on here.
Evidence? (Usual question. Usually followed by silence...).
Pretty much everything you post, tbh 😀
But that's just a personal opinion.
Nowt condescending about that, then...
I said "evidence", not hearsay.
Quick edit there, Rusty. Must have hit a nerve, eh?
Well, as these things are subjective, my previous comment stands.
But it's only my opinion - I'm sure you won't let it upset you.
Oh, the edit was for your benefit!
I didn't want you receiving too much abuse. 🙁
What's your opinion based on, exactly, in this regard?
he can no longer engage in debate, refuses to accept that he may in anyway be wrong or that others have views which may be as equally valid as his own.
Sorry, are you referring to STW or David Starkey here?
On second thoughts, it doesn't matter as it applies equally well to either.
Oh, the edit was for your benefit!
I didn't want you receiving too much abuse.
Interesting that you confess to doing exactly what you accuse ME of, before withdrawing it.
... and still providing no evidence to support your assertions about me...
As stated, my evidence is the content of your posts.
In my opinion, these demonstrate the traits mentioned.
As this is a subjective matter, perhaps we could make it the subject of a weekly poll?
Mr Woppit - I am afraid from the contents of your posts on here "sneering, superior and condescending attitude" is how you often appear if a harsh assessment same as I appear argumentative, pompous and angry and hypocritical even tho I would deny it
As stated, my evidence is the content of your posts.
So the evidence is the "content" ([i]sic[/i]) of my posts, but it's subjective?
Gosh.
I challenge you to trawl through ANY of my posts and show where they are "sneering, superior and condescending" and then justify your interpretation.
Otherwise, you're just blowing in the wind, I'm afraid.
"I challenge you to trawl through ANY of my posts and show where they are "sneering, superior and condescending" and then justify your interpretation."
How about nasty, rude and charmless ?
Yes.
Of course my opinion of your attitude is subjective, how could it not be?
Nice to see we finally agree. 🙂
I challenge you to trawl through ANY of my posts and show where they are "sneering, superior and condescending" and then justify your interpretation.Otherwise, you're just blowing in the wind, I'm afraid.
I'm trying to think how that would work.
Someone posts one of your posts that they think is "sneering, superior and condescending" and then justify their interpretation.
You respond by saying they're wrong, or words to that extent.
And the end of the day the same people will still think you're "sneering, superior and condescending" - a viewpoint they've reached by reading your posts.
You can either ignore them, or take on board what they think.
But trying to demand evidence isn't going to get you anywhere.
Violent, destructive, nihilistic gangster culture being a black trait
Did Starkey say that? If he did then I would agree that it was definitely a racist remark, but I don't think he said that did he?
Surely not, he's too fabulous isn't he?
Referring to last week’s riots, Dr Starkey told BBC2’s Newsnight: “But it was not inter-community violence, this is where he (Powell) was completely wrong.“The whites have become black. A particular sort of violent, destructive, nihilistic, gangster culture has become the fashion. And black and white, boy and girl, operate in this language together, this language which is wholly false, which is this Jamaican patois that’s been intruded in England, and this is why so many of us have this sense of literally a foreign country.
You decide?
Well on that basis I don't think he said anything like it was a trait of black people but it does sound like he was saying it is a trait of black culture.
The term 'black culture' is the problem because it is not homogenous and to suggest that all black culture is of one thing or another, violent or otherwise is incorrect.
But I think it is fair to say that there are elements of 'black culture' that are violent and destructive.
There are elements of all cultures that are like that, but you don't see so many teenagers with pictures of Yakuza/Mafia/Triads on their walls (a metaphor) or trying to emulate their speech whereas the points that Starkey made seem to be pretty close to what I've seen around me.
And the end of the day the same people will still think you're "sneering, superior and condescending" - a viewpoint they've reached by reading your posts.You can either ignore them, or take on board what they think.
It's not my problem if the poor little darling can't muster the minimal intelligence needed to demonstrate that he isn't just, at best, suffering from an unfortunate tendency to confuse his hallucinations with reality.
Oh, hang on...