The Boat Race

[Cutter]

You really can't gain a true understanding of how much of a prick act it is unless you've done something similar.

From an Oxford point of view, it has nothing to do with a broken oar. Prior to the dick stopping the race, Oxford were level or slightly infront. This was an huge achievement because Cambridge had the inside corner for all of the race and it was just about to come up to Oxfords' advantage. So Oxford had been busting their balls to nullify Cambridge's advantage and this dick pulls up the race in a vital stage.

Bugger the political agenda, to me its more of a "why do you think you're point of view is better than the 30+ people who gave up 6-8 months of their lives".

For those who want a better insight to what this race is all about, I suggest you read The Last Amateurs - http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Last-Amateurs-Hell-Cambridge/dp/1848310153 (the Author essentially lives and breathes the life of the Cambridge crew throughout their entire preparation).

The Matt Burke theorem. Nice.

As it happens, I've trained 8 times a week for 10 months for a rowing race. To the extent that sort of qualification is required, I have an idea what it's like. It is still my view that the outcome of that race is irrelevant to humanity.

The point is that if this guy had been poor, a war veteran, had disabled children etc and did the same thing to bring attention to the same issue, it would have received a very different reception from the press and the opinionated.

Focus on the issue rather than the personality. Is he right that, in the UK, there is increasing elitism? Is that something that is being ignored? Does it mean that those on the outside don't have a voice?

 

[Bowside]

I totally agree that the issue is a serious one and he may well be somewhat right.

But Cutter can you honestly say that after all that training you wouldn't be spewing if some guy ruined your race.

I fucking would.

 

[Cutter]

Look i know that in the moment I'd be pretty gutted, and I'd probably want to punch someone. I'd also know that, after the race was stopped, I still had the chance towin but that we weren't good enough. I don't think it would take long before I'd probably want to talk to the bloke to find out what he was thinking.

It's easy to jump to conclusions but he's clearly not stupid (entry to the LSE is not for fools). And, even if he is idealistic - we need idealists, we need dreamers, we need people with principles because they're the ones who make sure the world doesn't list too far one way or the other while we're working, raising families and watching rugby.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Look i know that in the moment I'd be pretty gutted, and I'd probably want to punch someone. I'd also know that, after the race was stopped, I still had the chance towin but that we weren't good enough. I don't think it would take long before I'd probably want to talk to the bloke to find out what he was thinking.

It's easy to jump to conclusions but he's clearly not stupid (entry to the LSE is not for fools). And, even if he is idealistic - we need idealists, we need dreamers, we need people with principles because they're the ones who make sure the world doesn't list too far one way or the other while we're working, raising families and watching rugby.

But the race isn't staged so people can make their point about life's unfairness, or for any purpose other than to see which university has the best rowers.
It's not as if there is a shortage of outlets for his views...if he can't get a gig on the mass media then he should check to see if it's him or the message that's holding him back.
He may just as well throw paint over the Mona Lisa - hell perhaps he could swim the channel prior to doing so - to make a point about the sexualisation of renaissance women.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Cutter]

If your a socialite or extremist, you're right, it's harder to stay out of the press than get in it. If you're peddling inequity, it's not such a good news story.

My point is that interrupting sporting and other events is a legitimate form of protest. Sometimes that may be the only way to be heard. As to whether it is the most appropriate means of protest, I think it will depend upon the facts of any given case.

 

[Ignoto]

Focus on the issue rather than the personality. Is he right that, in the UK, there is increasing elitism? Is that something that is being ignored? Does it mean that those on the outside don't have a voice?

Well if we're focusing on the issue, where he deliberately affected the lives of countless others for his own agenda. That's a form of elitism in itself.


There are other avenues to have your message heard and doing what he's done has ruined his credibility. It shows how much of an extremist he is, so why would anyone want to pay attention to that?

It's easy to jump to conclusions but he's clearly not stupid (entry to the LSE is not for fools). And, even if he is idealistic - we need idealists, we need dreamers, we need people with principles because they're the ones who make sure the world doesn't list too far one way or the other while we're working, raising families and watching rugby.

Sure we have those people and everyone is thankful for the work they do. BUT you don't see them all jumping the fence to some sporting event to get their message out there.

 

[Lindommer]

If your a socialite or extremist, you're right, it's harder to stay out of the press than get in it. If you're peddling inequity, it's not such a good news story. My point is that interrupting sporting and other events is a legitimate form of protest.

Like your style, Cutter, and I'm very impressed how well you argue your corner but I couldn't disagree more. In the modern world a media campaign would garner a shitload of positive support, look at the Facebook flurry to capture that murderer in Uganda. This bloke's committed the unforgiveable sin of inconveniencing his fellow man as they go about their legitimate pursuits.

 

[en_force_er]

Like your style, Cutter, and I'm very impressed how well you argue your corner but I couldn't disagree more. In the modern world a media campaign would garner a shitload of positive support, look at the Facebook flurry to capture that murderer in Uganda. This bloke's committed the unforgiveable sin of inconveniencing his fellow man as they go about their legitimate pursuits.

I study Comms (yes yes, say what you will) and it's gotten me pretty bidder about the validity of a predominantly facebook based communication strategy.

We call it clicktivism and it requires minimum commitment; all you have to say is "that sounds bad", click a link, and then your commitment/involvement is over.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Sometimes that may be the only way to be heard.

If so then there's either something wrong with the message or the way it is being presented: there's no barrier to entry into the media anymore - evidently his blogs were not well received or followed and his hoped for groundswell of support did not emerge.
Accordingly its either him or his message: if its him that gives him no rights - he's chosen the wrong career or the wrong path within his evangelical calling.
If its the message well part of living in a democracy, as opposed to a tyrannical state, is that the majority decides what is permitted and what is not. He runs foil of this principle in 2 ways: the majority has decided you cannot do things like this, and; the majority has not decided that boat racing is too elitist.
Now, assuming boat racing is elitist, if elitism truly is the incubator for tyranny then he should be taken out and shot or shipped to the gulag.
Since neither has or will happen it doesn't seem likely that the boat race has contributed greatly to any tyranny or that there is any "tyranny": so what the f*ck is his point?

 

[Karl]

I'm with Cutter on this.

The message he wants to get across is nothing like the Khony situation and the same strategy won't work. In a lot of ways the race, it's participants and supporters are symbolic and relevant to the issues he is trying to draw attention too and in that sense it is not random disruption, but well targetted protest. All protests inconvenience someone, even if it's just because they close streets and cause traffic jams. I feel very sorry for the rowers and their support teams, but the people who "derided his privileged background" are missing the point and should perhaps actually embrace him because of it. It shows that someone from the other side of the tracks can see the inequality and is prepared to do something to draw attention to an underlying injustice.

The race should have been able to be restarted, and it was, then an oar broke after a collision. So it could have been stopped and run again, but it wasn't. The disruption by the protester may have started it, but officialdom and misfortune finished it the way it ended. And it's not like the race is a stranger to contoversy. According to one article I read, there have been sinkings, annulments, at least one dead heat and two crew mutinies, including one 25 years ago by American oarsmen that provided the plotline for the 1996 movie “True Blue.” And every year in recent times, noisy protesters have abounded on the banks.

The competitors will move on with their lives. They are, after all, young and privileged to attend two of the finest and most prestigious Universities in the World. They have a great story to tell about the race and may in fact derive more benefit from the race being so controversial than had it not been. The losers have an excuse and the winners are, well, they’re the winners. For them it’s all about competing and building character right? It’s an amateur event, no-one lost the farm or sponsorship deals or anything economic.

It doesn’t matter much who won anyway. The race was run, interrupted, re-started and eventually won by someone. That should be an end to it and in the greater scheme of things, it’s hardly earth shattering. How many worthy lives and how much promise and potential are beaten down and denied by social injustice and the other insidious effects of elitism? Where lies the greater injustice and harm?

 

[barbarian]

I study Comms (yes yes, say what you will) and it's gotten me pretty bidder about the validity of a predominantly facebook based communication strategy.

We call it clicktivism and it requires minimum commitment; all you have to say is "that sounds bad", click a link, and then your commitment/involvement is over.

Isn't that better than nothing though?

The arguments about so-called 'slactivism' assumes that the best way to protest/take action is still by standing outside Parliament with a placard. The Kony thing was a prime example- the people who do as you say (just click the link and pass it on) would not be likely to protest in a more formal capacity. Yet they are still exposed to the issue and informed of it. Those who want to take further action still can in a variety of ways.

Times are changing, and this is now the way of the world. More people are exposed to these issues and action is being taken in different ways. I struggle to see how that's a bad thing.

 

[Cave Dweller]

If your a socialite or extremist, you're right, it's harder to stay out of the press than get in it. If you're peddling inequity, it's not such a good news story.

My point is that interrupting sporting and other events is a legitimate form of protest. Sometimes that may be the only way to be heard. As to whether it is the most appropriate means of protest, I think it will depend upon the facts of any given case.

I was thinking about the same thing sort off. Thank god he was Australian and not a guy with a middle eastern background. The papers would be all over that with their manufactured headlines to attract more readers.

On the other hand on a light note I wonder how good are those rowers when competing globally. I think they should get the Somalian pirates to compete. They can out pace the US navy

 

[Cutter]

In the modern world a media campaign would garner a shitload of positive support, look at the Facebook flurry to capture that murderer in Uganda.

In response to all those who believe it is easy to get media attention for a legitimate cause, does that then mean that all issues which deserve attention, receive it? Of course they don't.There isn't enough room for what Paris Hilton is up to, One Direction's every move, Labor and the Libs trying to control the news cycle, the US presidential campaign, Iran, Europe etc and serious but boring issues. Unless it's a neat issue to package and sell, the mainstream media isn't interested.

This bloke's committed the unforgiveable sin of inconveniencing his fellow man as they go about their legitimate pursuits.

Is it really unforgivable to inconvenience someone in the interests of a greater good? I hope not, we're all doomed if no one can ever be interrupted.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

In response to all those who believe it is easy to get media attention for a legitimate cause, does that then mean that all issues which deserve attention, receive it? Of course they don't.There isn't enough room for what Paris Hilton is up to, One Direction's every move, Labor and the Libs trying to control the news cycle, the US presidential campaign, Iran, Europe etc and serious but boring issues. Unless it's a neat issue to package and sell, the mainstream media isn't interested.



Is it really unforgivable to inconvenience someone in the interests of a greater good? I hope not, we're all doomed if no one can ever be interrupted.

Fine.
What's his message and what does he want done?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Cave Dweller]

In response to all those who believe it is easy to get media attention for a legitimate cause, does that then mean that all issues which deserve attention, receive it? Of course they don't.There isn't enough room for what Paris Hilton is up to, One Direction's every move, Labor and the Libs trying to control the news cycle, the US presidential campaign, Iran, Europe etc and serious but boring issues. Unless it's a neat issue to package and sell, the mainstream media isn't interested.



Is it really unforgivable to inconvenience someone in the interests of a greater good? I hope not, we're all doomed if no one can ever be interrupted.

Not really. Good example the Trayvon Martin shooting. Media turned it into a complete racial issue by bending information to get the readers attention.

 

[mark_s]

My point is that interrupting sporting and other events is a legitimate form of protest. Sometimes that may be the only way to be heard. As to whether it is the most appropriate means of protest, I think it will depend upon the facts of any given case.

Yes but you have to have a message worth hearing and worthy of the disruption. Protesting against elitism, give me a break. I give him as much credence as someone who protests against people who have egos. Both have existed since the dawn of man and both will be there when the sunsets. This particular case stinks to me and the dickhead factor seems significant.

 

[Cutter]

In some ways, the merits of the cause arent really a concern for me. It was more the "How dare someone interrupt THE boat race!" hysteria that enveloped the story and the reference to his own background as being "elite" rather than looking at the issue.

As you've raised it though mark, how would you describe his views and why, in particular, is he wrong? I know you wouldn't fall into the trap of doing all your research through the press and assuming the media has reported all the salient parts of the story.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

In some ways, the merits of the cause arent really a concern for me. It was more the "How dare someone interrupt THE boat race!" hysteria that enveloped the story and the reference to his own background as being "elite" rather than looking at the issue.

As you've raised it though mark, how would you describe his views and why, in particular, is he wrong? I know you wouldn't fall into the trap of doing all your research through the press and assuming the media has reported all the salient parts of the story.

You have proven the illegitimacy of his method of protest: you do not have any reliable source for identifying what his message is.

 

[Cutter]

What are you talking about Willis?

 

[mark_s]

In some ways, the merits of the cause arent really a concern for me. It was more the "How dare someone interrupt THE boat race!" hysteria that enveloped the story and the reference to his own background as being "elite" rather than looking at the issue.

As you've raised it though mark, how would you describe his views and why, in particular, is he wrong? I know you wouldn't fall into the trap of doing all your research through the press and assuming the media has reported all the salient parts of the story.

Yeah, I flew to the UK (flying economy class to avoid my thinking being contaminated by the elitists who sit up the pointy end) listened carefully to Mr Oldfield's views on a wide range of matters including his concerns that lead to him interrupting this particular boat race. I then formed the vews I have outlined above, and returned to Aus flying first class!