David Lammy/Stacey Dooley

Oh the old "angry black man/woman" put down.

Easier to just attribute it to a personality flaw than to consider that their anger might be justified....

I have been following this thread but not posted before but would like to comment on the following post

"Why certain countries, such as those in the continent of Africa, need to be taught how to look after and work together with their fellow countrymen and women, heaven knows.
Surely it's an inherent trait that even animals have.
If they need teaching the basics, there is no hope"

The people in these countries DO look after each other. Charities like Comic Relief finance them in order that they can carry out the care needed. Watch the programmes and see the people who are there doing the work. However, without the money from charities they would not have the equipment needed nor would the people be able to afford to work with those who need help.

I haven't expressed myself very well but I hope I have got my point across.

Beckett
If you read the post that I (in the comment you, in part reproduce) responded to, you would realise that I did not agree with the GN who wrote the post to which I refer.
That person wrote that people (in the countries where aid is sent/given) need to be taught to care for others. I disagreed (in the post which someone reported) with that view as I think the vast majority of people, whoever and wherever they are, have a natural instinct to help and work alongside others. I don't think it's for us to presume that they need 'teaching' to care for their fellow men/women.
Had you and others read and understood my comment before waving the race card and mounting your respective high horses and, after taking into consideration the post I was replying to, then you would have better understood my meaning.
It's not a good idea just to copy a portion of the whole conversation and hold it up as an example of my attitude.
That shows as much sense as cherry- picking quotes to back up your reasoning.

Red Nose Day 8 million less raised this year because of David Lammy white saviour comment. Expect he is happy now the white saviours have shut their purses.

How do you know it was just white people who gave to this charity?

Less money donated because we have less money to spare...ever thought of that?

I think the African countries are lucky to get anything, as the chip on the shoulders of some, mark them out as not wanting the generosity of people in countries like the UK.
Besides, billions have been donated over decades yet they are still not able to function on their own, not able to stand on their own two feet.
I wonder why.
Like a sponge, constantly soaking up every drop but still begging for more.

crystaltipps I've never said it was just white people who gave to this charity, but after the white saviour comment they are 8 million down, perhaps black saviours closed their purses as well.

You did say the “white saviours have closed their purses”, which implies an asssumption that it was just white people who had stopped donating - you haven’t any evidence of that.

Stacey is fabulosity a great gal

Yes Andy I love Stacey she's down to earth. Unlike Lammy with a big chip on his shoulder. He's keeping quiet now wonder if he has any comment to give on Red Nose now they are 8 million down. Bet the people the charity were helping didn't mind if they were red, pink, white or black saviors. Lammy loves playing the race card.

When Comic Relief provide safe places for homeless will Lammy complain if black men/women are given shelter .

which implies an asssumption that it was just white people who had stopped donating - you haven’t any evidence of that.
It's a fair assumption to make, though, as people may not want to be accused of being patronising 'white saviours' so have decided not to contribute this year and may donate their money elsewhere.

People who are compassionate and generous want to give to help those less fortunate than themselves of whatever race, colour or creed.

If Lammy sees racist actions everywhere that is his problem - and more people will be suffering because of this because less money has been raised.

Maybe less people watch TV, the whole family viewing thing is on the way out, people have less money to give, the show is burnt out and outdated, there are simply too many appeals.

Nobody really knows.

Why do people persist in using outmoded expressions such as " play the race card" and how can a who country have a " chip on its shoulder"

If it's the case that some people didn't contribute because of David Lammy's remarks, then it doesn't say much for their genuine commitment to improving the lives of people in Africa. It suggests that the main motivation for some donors is to feel good about themselves and unless praise is collectively heaped upon them they immediately withdraw their support.

If any other group of people had to parade their disadvantage/poverty/disability and have other people speak for them in order to garner support, I think they
might also feel demeaned.

Richard Curtis was on The One Show recently and showed a willingness to understand what Lammy - and
other people - were saying and he appeared to accept that perhaps the way Comic Relief is presented needs a re-think.

"Chips on shoulders" and "playing the race card" has always been a way of undermining the genuine grievances and concerns which black people are, in my opinion, entitled to express.

It suggests that the main motivation for some donors is to feel good about themselves and unless praise is collectively heaped upon them they immediately withdraw their support.
Unless someone takes an advert out in the paper or advertises the fact on FB etc or done sponsored fundraising, then how can anyone else know that they have made a donation?

Perhaps being thought of as 'white saviours' made them think twice - Lammy says they are racist and, if they are not, they do not want to be perceived as such.

has done, not done

What a disgrace to blame two people because the funds were down. I couldn't believe it.