Donkey of the Race UAE

[steveaki13]

Personally I think it was Mercedes. To honestly believe that all drivers would except winning that race by 10 seconds when the title slips away is nonsense.

They try and control everything these days after saying the would let them race. Dont get me wrong. I know why they worried, because they had a win on the cards, but they come out afterwards saying we need to speak to Lewis and find out if he had a problem slowing him down?????

I mean come on. Treating people like idiots. They wanted the 1-2 but they cant be surprised that Lewis did what he did. Most drivers would do similar. Albeit not as many would have the guts to go against the team for their championship.

[Tazio]

:stareup: Yup!

[Greasy]

The only thing at the GP that looked more out of place than Mercedes strategy was Paris Hilton looking gormless in the Ferrari pit.

[henners88]

Mercedes for trying to stop Hamilton fighting for the championship. They need to realise fans don't want to see fake results and drivers employing clever tactics is what makes the racing exciting, especially when it's a one team domination.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[N. Jones]

Lewis Hamilton. People complain about Vettel but this guy "I'm in front, I see nothing wrong". "I'm not going to be hailed and fawned over so who cares."
What a chode.

[COD]

Hamilton.

[henners88]

^^ haha... I write that with a rather smug look on my face. :)

It's nice to see a driver like Lewis be recognised as the better driver but whined about for his tactics. Excellent stuff and very positive going into the winter break.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[steveaki13]

Hamilton.

Can I ask why?

Surely his tactics gave us the excitement at the end? Did you not enjoy the tension of the last 10 laps? Or was it something else

[The Black Knight]

Personally I think it was Mercedes. To honestly believe that all drivers would except winning that race by 10 seconds when the title slips away is nonsense.

They try and control everything these days after saying the would let them race. Dont get me wrong. I know why they worried, because they had a win on the cards, but they come out afterwards saying we need to speak to Lewis and find out if he had a problem slowing him down?????

I mean come on. Treating people like idiots. They wanted the 1-2 but they cant be surprised that Lewis did what he did. Most drivers would do similar. Albeit not as many would have the guts to go against the team for their championship.

Well that just sums everything up really within the Mercedes camp. They were more worried about Nico losing the championship than they were Lewis winning it.

Mercedes get donkey of the year for me for costing the best driver the championship.

[BleAivano]

Can I ask why?

Surely his tactics gave us the excitement at the end? Did you not enjoy the tension of the last 10 laps? Or was it something else

Racing is about being the fast driver/rider. Racing/Rally/etc is not about intentionally slowing down (in the way Ham did) to try get an advantage.
Ok if the track/road conditions are really bad but that wasn't the case today.

I have seen this several times before in other motorsport branches like WRC and speedway where the leader intentionally slowed down or even stopping to gain advantages.
That kind of stuff has no place in motorsport and should be considered unsportsmanlike conduct that should be connected to subsequent penalties should anyone try it again.

[henners88]

Racing is about being the fast driver/rider. Racing/Rally/etc is not about intentionally slowing down (in the way Ham did) to try get an advantage.
Ok if the track/road conditions are really bad but that wasn't the case today.

I have seen this several times before in other motorsport branches like WRC and speedway where the leader intentionally slowed down or even stopping to gain advantages.
That kind of stuff has no place in motorsport and should be considered unsportsmanlike conduct that should be connected to subsequent penalties should anyone try it again.
I think F1 fans have gone particularly soft of late to be honest. Is it still ok to back drivers up during a safety car to gain an advantage like they all do, or when drivers help their teammates by backing up opponents to let the other pull away? Or has a precedent been set now by Lewis and it's suddenly unacceptable?

There was never any question Lewis was going to win the race. What he couldn't do was fight with Nico unless he slowed down and that is the epitome of a world champion. It didn't work but he tried it and ended the season as the dominant teammate. You can't blame him for trying to fight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[steveaki13]

Racing is about being the fast driver/rider. Racing/Rally/etc is not about intentionally slowing down (in the way Ham did) to try get an advantage.
Ok if the track/road conditions are really bad but that wasn't the case today.

I have seen this several times before in other motorsport branches like WRC and speedway where the leader intentionally slowed down or even stopping to gain advantages.
That kind of stuff has no place in motorsport and should be considered unsportsmanlike conduct that should be connected to subsequent penalties should anyone try it again.
Then if a driver is in a slower car or doesn't feel comfortable to push his car he should just let a faster driver through?

Also that means Hamilton just had to win and hope for reliability issues which is unlikely this day and age.

Sorry I disagree with your point of view in this case.

Sent from my GT-I9301I using Tapatalk

[steveaki13]

I think the focus on Hamilton is typically hiding the issues. I am talking about any driver.

I fear maybe I am in a minority. However there seems to be so little marginally legal hard racing these days it has gone soft.

Sent from my GT-I9301I using Tapatalk

[Zico]

Is backing up dirty? It is unsportsmanlike but I'd bet more than half the drivers on the grid (inc Nico) would have done the exact same in that situation.

[steveaki13]

Most retired drivers I have heard from so far say it was something that had to be done.

Sent from my GT-I9301I using Tapatalk

[AndyL]

Racing is about being the fast driver/rider. Racing/Rally/etc is not about intentionally slowing down (in the way Ham did) to try get an advantage.

Racing is about winning.

[Greasy]

Racing is about winning.

Championships or races?

[henners88]

Championships or races?

Both. If you can win the final race and beat your closest rival in the process, it tastes sweeter on the podium. Hamilton was always going to win the race, he just needed to get involved with Nico to get both trophies. It was a valiant effort but Nico came out on top, just.

[Nitrodaze]

Racing is about being the fast driver/rider. Racing/Rally/etc is not about intentionally slowing down (in the way Ham did) to try get an advantage.
Ok if the track/road conditions are really bad but that wasn't the case today.

I have seen this several times before in other motorsport branches like WRC and speedway where the leader intentionally slowed down or even stopping to gain advantages.
That kind of stuff has no place in motorsport and should be considered unsportsmanlike conduct that should be connected to subsequent penalties should anyone try it again.

Sorry buddy, racing is about winning. Not necessarily about being the fastest. The cunny ways that drivers use to get ahead in the points is part of the fascination of motorsport. It has always being a thing that happens in the sport. Like Senna taking Prost out in the first corner of the last race or Schumacher taking Hill out or teams using water ballast to have a fake weight and dumping the water during the race to get the car lighter and faster. The list goes on.

What l am getting at is, it is an over reaction to say Hamilton was unsportsmanlike. If he did not try something, he would not be happy that he did not at least try something to see what might happen.

Hence. l have to agree that the Mercedes team were the donkey of the race. To be more specific, Paddy Lowe was the actual donkey of the race.

[CNR]

Lewis Hamilton

all it would have taken is 1.685 Sec + 2 passes for him to have came 3rd
1 Lewis Hamilton - Mercedes 25 1:38:04.013 186.824
2 Nico Rosberg - Mercedes 18 +0.439 Sec 186.81
3 Sebastian Vettel - Ferrari 15 +0.843 Sec 186.797
4 Max Verstappen - Red Bull 12 +1.685 Sec 186.771
if iit had been any one other then Vettel would Hamilton's plan to cheat worked ? kids should be tort not to look up to some one that is prepared to cheat to get what they do not deserve

[Rollo]

Mercedes get donkey of the year for me for costing the best driver the championship.


If Hamilton had finished 7th or higher in Malaysia, he would have won the title.

http://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/37534044
To be fighting for the championship and only my engines are failing just doesn't sit right with me.
- 2nd Oct 2016

Apart from a 7th in China and a 5th in Baku, Hamilton finished 3rd or higher in every single GP.

How do we know that Nico wasn't just more sympathetic to the machinery?

[Starter]

Lewis Hamilton

all it would have taken is 1.685 Sec + 2 passes for him to have came 3rd
1 Lewis Hamilton - Mercedes 25 1:38:04.013 186.824
2 Nico Rosberg - Mercedes 18 +0.439 Sec 186.81
3 Sebastian Vettel - Ferrari 15 +0.843 Sec 186.797
4 Max Verstappen - Red Bull 12 +1.685 Sec 186.771
if iit had been any one other then Vettel would Hamilton's plan to cheat worked ? kids should be tort not to look up to some one that is prepared to cheat to get what they do not deserve
Accusing someone of cheating is a strong assertion. Can you explain what rule was broken resulting in your charge of cheating? I watched the race and I am pretty sure I did not see Hamilton break a rule.

[steveaki13]

When did he cheat? He raced at the front a a pace he chose.

Why would you want him to win by 20 seconds and have the dullest race of the season? I don't get that. I would do the same.

Motorsport is not about being flat out all day. It's about winning the race by 0.1 or a lap. Then it's all about winning the championship. I cannot get anyone who expects a driver to win by 15 to show how good he is but lose the title. What's the point. He didn't push anyone off, make contact. He defended his position to try and get the title after a seasons work.

Pretty sure Vettel, Alonso, Schumacher and Senna would have done the same.

Sent from my GT-I9301I using Tapatalk

[Rollo]

Pretty sure Vettel, Alonso, Schumacher and Senna would have done the same.


Schumacher proved that he was deliberately slow in Suzuka 1999 by putting in the fastest lap at the end to show that the car was capable. Had he bothered to challenge Hakkinen and beat him, then Irvine would have been World Champion and been the first to break the Ferrari drought.

[driveace]

Mercedes manufactured the title for Rosberg German Driver German Team ! Vettel had no intention of passing Rosberg German driver again We have just had Brexit because we don't trust the Germans .
In my thoughts Mercedes realized that without help Rosberg was never going to win a world championship He is 31 Hamilton is also 31 BUT has 3 world titles behind him .Maxy will have 1 or 3 world titles before he is 31 too AND once a driver gets married has children every man and his dog knows that the speed drops with the wifey reminding them "Have a good race BUT remember me and Daisy" So he becomes more cautious and slower Cannot see Rosberg EVER winning another world championship !

[Bagwan]

Merc doesn't deserve any hassle for telling Hamilton he needed to be faster . They were obligated to do so .
As a team , they acted to secure the best result they could , and to do otherwise was to be unfair to one driver .

To add to the idea , it should be understood that they actually had financial incentive to get fewer points in this race , as the entry fee is calculated partially on them , so to have encouraged the move would possibly have resulted in it being seen as a very cynical , and not very sporting idea .

They didn't want to , but they had to .

Looking back now , they told him not to try it early in the race , as they'd have pit strategy to counter it .
But , I think they expected it near the end , as Lewis had no other choice .

If they don't accept a "sorry , but I had no choice" , and actually sanction him , then perhaps they deserve a donkey .

[Nitrodaze]

Merc doesn't deserve any hassle for telling Hamilton he needed to be faster . They were obligated to do so .
As a team , they acted to secure the best result they could , and to do otherwise was to be unfair to one driver .

To add to the idea , it should be understood that they actually had financial incentive to get fewer points in this race , as the entry fee is calculated partially on them , so to have encouraged the move would possibly have resulted in it being seen as a very cynical , and not very sporting idea .

They didn't want to , but they had to .

Looking back now , they told him not to try it early in the race , as they'd have pit strategy to counter it .
But , I think they expected it near the end , as Lewis had no other choice .

If they don't accept a "sorry , but I had no choice" , and actually sanction him , then perhaps they deserve a donkey .

Bagwan, c'mon, save it for something you really care about.

The merc management kind of like to micro-manage things abit. I think they would be much happier with a pair of Androids driving the cars. With the constructor's championship in the bag, Mercedes had nothing to lose if both cars did not win the race. It would not affect prize money or corporate pride or anything worth talking about.

They behaved just as poorly as Hamilton's response to it. It was a real disappointment to hear Paddy get on the Radio to say what he said. Very disappointing!

[Phoenix]

Pedant alert;

Tort = Legal terminology
Taught = to teach.

Thanks. :)

[keysersoze]

Hamilton was so dominant that even slowing down deliberately and for umpteen laps--they couldn't get close to him. Donkey? No way. Driver of the Race--certainly--with MV a close second.

[Greasy]

As long as Nico had 3rd covered he had no need to go anywhere near Lewis. Why put yourself in a position where the possibility exists that he can take you out but carry on himself?

[henners88]

As long as Nico had 3rd covered he had no need to go anywhere near Lewis. Why put yourself in a position where the possibility exists that he can take you out but carry on himself?
From his perspective he did the right thing and stayed out of trouble. From a fan perspective we want to see a fight and the world champion win it in style rather than play it safe from a points deficit obtained from his teammates reliability issues. It was very calculated and very Prost. I don't think any of us can really criticise his approach as he did just enough. It would have been nice to see a spectacular show down though after a rather dull season.

[donKey jote]

We have just had Brexit because we don't trust the Germans
Enough of the xenophobic rants... you've just had your (narrow majority in a referendum for) Brexit . You were never really in in the first place, bunch of whinging trojan poodles.
If it does come to full Brexit, about bloody time and good riddance!
I've already got my Irish passport :D

[henners88]

I do love how some Europeans say good riddance but have been happy with UK money along with France and Germany propping up the money pot for so long lol. I voted Remain but now fully support full Brexit off the back of how childish some nations have been. Good riddance indeed.

[anfield5]

Donkey of the race - Hamilton. Sick and tired of his childish, petulant attitude. His comments about the team costing him his championship, because he was asked not to sabotage his team mates challenge were quite pathetic. Even his fan club i.e. Sky Sport commentary team were unimpressed by this nonsense.

[CNR]

Accusing someone of cheating is a strong assertion. Can you explain what rule was broken resulting in your charge of cheating? I watched the race and I am pretty sure I did not see Hamilton break a rule.
cheat


/tʃiːt/


verb

gerund or present participle: cheating



1.


act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage.
"she always cheats at cards"



•gain an advantage over or deprive of something by using unfair or deceitful methods; defraud.
"he had cheated her out of everything she had"
http://www.foxsports.com.au/motorsport/formula-one/lewis-hamilton-reportedly-facing-the-sack-or-suspension-over-his-abu-dhabi-gp-rebellion/news-story/e400da95a9d42dcae55d1f2a5aca675f

[henners88]

Again so called fans here have gone soft. Controlling the pace from the front is NOT cheating in any respect of the word. I'm embarrassed for those who feel it is and urge them to learn a little more about intelligent motor racing.

The sad thing is, Hamilton driving is the most talked about and exciting thing about Nico's championship.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bezza]

Donkey of the race - Hamilton. Sick and tired of his childish, petulant attitude. His comments about the team costing him his championship, because he was asked not to sabotage his team mates challenge were quite pathetic. Even his fan club i.e. Sky Sport commentary team were unimpressed by this nonsense.

So 21 and the Constructors and Drivers are going to Mercedes, yet they interfere and instruct Hamilton effectively to let Rosberg win the Championship. No wonder Lewis went mad.

Mercedes are so dominant their actions are akin to race fixing and worse than Ferrari team orders in 2002. Toto Wolff et al are unfit to be key leaders in the F1 paddock with their behaviour over the last few seasons.

I really hope Red Bull, Ferrari, McLaren pick up form for the regulation changes and we don't have another Mercedes controlled season in 2017.

[Bagwan]

Bagwan, c'mon, save it for something you really care about.

The merc management kind of like to micro-manage things abit. I think they would be much happier with a pair of Androids driving the cars. With the constructor's championship in the bag, Mercedes had nothing to lose if both cars did not win the race. It would not affect prize money or corporate pride or anything worth talking about.

They behaved just as poorly as Hamilton's response to it. It was a real disappointment to hear Paddy get on the Radio to say what he said. Very disappointing!

Firstly , I don't understand your first line , unless you're actually telling me not to post .
If that is the case , pi$$-off .

In your second paragraph , you are wrong about the money , as the number of points directly affects the entry fees .

Another thing you perhaps need to understand is that Paddy said that the call was about an imminent threat to his own position , as Vettel was approaching very quickly . Lewis needed the win .
You have to remember that (very skillfully , I might add) Lewis was going five seconds slower , but going fast enough in the sections where a following car might get a look in .
That's got to be incredibly hard , but it's a very dangerous game , and his engineer and Paddy needed to remind him what was at stake .

Carefully worded as an "instruction" , and not an "order" , they expected it ignored , but noted .

And , as Lewis said afterwards , he didn't upset the one-two , and didn't cause any crash , so no problem .
And , now Nico is saying put it to bed as well , as he doesn't fault Hamilton at all for doing all he could to stop him .

Any talk of a Hamilton sack is utter garbage , in my opinion .

[Phoenix]

Firstly , I don't understand your first line , unless you're actually telling me not to post .
If that is the case , pi$$-off .

In your second paragraph , you are wrong about the money , as the number of points directly affects the entry fees .

Another thing you perhaps need to understand is that Paddy said that the call was about an imminent threat to his own position , as Vettel was approaching very quickly . Lewis needed the win .
You have to remember that (very skillfully , I might add) Lewis was going five seconds slower , but going fast enough in the sections where a following car might get a look in .
That's got to be incredibly hard , but it's a very dangerous game , and his engineer and Paddy needed to remind him what was at stake .

Carefully worded as an "instruction" , and not an "order" , they expected it ignored , but noted .

And , as Lewis said afterwards , he didn't upset the one-two , and didn't cause any crash , so no problem .
And , now Nico is saying put it to bed as well , as he doesn't fault Hamilton at all for doing all he could to stop him .

Any talk of a Hamilton sack is utter garbage , in my opinion .

If the driver in the other same car (the best car on the grid no less) can't get anywhere near to try to overtake, I'd like to know how the chuff anyone else was gonna do it. If Paddy couldn't work that out for himself, he has no place to be in that team calling those team orders.

Lewis wanted Nico to be overtaken by two cars, then he'd just feck off into the distance and win by 30s or so......

Didn't happen of course, Seb was worried about a German backlash, Danny Ric was nowhere, and Verstappen had other cars to pass which took the best out of the tyres.

Still, Lewis tried something. Win some, lose some.

[Starter]

cheat

/tʃiːt/

verb

gerund or present participle: cheating

1. act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage.
"she always cheats at cards"

•gain an advantage over or deprive of something by using unfair or deceitful methods; defraud.
"he had cheated her out of everything she had"
http://www.foxsports.com.au/motorsport/formula-one/lewis-hamilton-reportedly-facing-the-sack-or-suspension-over-his-abu-dhabi-gp-rebellion/news-story/e400da95a9d42dcae55d1f2a5aca675f
You've got the definition of cheating down, however your application to the situation is lacking. henners has it right.

[Bagwan]

If the driver in the other same car (the best car on the grid no less) can't get anywhere near to try to overtake, I'd like to know how the chuff anyone else was gonna do it. If Paddy couldn't work that out for himself, he has no place to be in that team calling those team orders.

Lewis wanted Nico to be overtaken by two cars, then he'd just feck off into the distance and win by 30s or so......

Didn't happen of course, Seb was worried about a German backlash, Danny Ric was nowhere, and Verstappen had other cars to pass which took the best out of the tyres.

Still, Lewis tried something. Win some, lose some.

It was a little like going through the motions , giving the instruction , but consider the fact that the Merc is well-known to have trouble in dirty air .
Both the Red car and especially the Bull car don't , and weren't far behind .
The red car had a frustrated , mouthy German who had just been out-qualified over the course of the year by some old Finn .
That Bull car behind him had a crazy little Dutch boy who will find grip anywhere , and isn't afraid to try fun , new ideas for overtaking .

Sure , it's easy to say he'd get away without a scratch , but Lewis did as much as he thought he could get away with , and it was a masterful drive , in that respect .

They warned him that he needed to speed up .
He told them he knew what he was doing .

Perhaps if he had started backing him up a few laps earlier , he might have had more chance to make something happen behind , but it was a good try regardless .

Something I didn't like hearing , was the eventual WDC whining about the situation over the radio . Gladly , there wasn't too much of it .

[Nitrodaze]

It was a little like going through the motions , giving the instruction , but consider the fact that the Merc is well-known to have trouble in dirty air .
Both the Red car and especially the Bull car don't , and weren't far behind .
The red car had a frustrated , mouthy German who had just been out-qualified over the course of the year by some old Finn .
That Bull car behind him had a crazy little Dutch boy who will find grip anywhere , and isn't afraid to try fun , new ideas for overtaking .

Sure , it's easy to say he'd get away without a scratch , but Lewis did as much as he thought he could get away with , and it was a masterful drive , in that respect .

They warned him that he needed to speed up .
He told them he knew what he was doing .

Perhaps if he had started backing him up a few laps earlier , he might have had more chance to make something happen behind , but it was a good try regardless .

Something I didn't like hearing , was the eventual WDC whining about the situation over the radio . Gladly , there wasn't too much of it .

I think it is all a storm in a tea cup really. Hamilton just wanted to make Nico sweat really, just make it a little difficult but not difficult enough for him to lose a place. Because he pulled him out of trouble by giving him a tow when it seemed he was going to get into trouble from behind. Vettel said he could not pass Rosberg because Hamilton was at a distance to give Nico a tow which made it hard for him to mount an attack.

If Hamilton really wanted to make the overtake happen, he would have slowed considerably at the corners to really bunch up the cars on the entry to the corner, which would have really given Vettel or possibly Verstapenn a real chance to attack Rosberg.

Hamilton slowed down just enough to make Rosberg and the Mercedes pitwall nervous, just to make a point.

[donKey jote]

I do love how some Europeans say good riddance but have been happy with UK money along with France and Germany propping up the money pot for so long lol. I voted Remain but now fully support full Brexit off the back of how childish some nations have been. Good riddance indeed.
I've been more than happy to prop up the money pot (including Thatcher's rebate) personally all my tax paying life, as a German resident for the last 21 years and more recently as a German national lol :wave:
So good riddance, yes, I'm glad we can agree on something for a change :D

Blaming Hamilton's mishaps solely on "the Germans" is a tad jingoistic in my view, but hardly something I wouldn't expect from certain "true Brits" here. Other true Brits like Jackie Stewart or your Nige weren't so quick to defend his tactics in this race, for example.


Anyway, before I go too far off topic... As for donkey of the race, somewhat predictably I'd say Hamilton: either you do it properly (i.e. back up so much that the -somewhat dirty and unsportsmanlike but perfectly legal and legitimate- tactics work, and take the championship) or you race off into the distance and lap the German buggers to prove your point, with a couple of donuts before the finish line for good measure. :bandit: Unfortunately, the way it ended was neither here nor there.

[Tazio]

Hannibal's ancient battle of Zarma]
where he was routed by the Romans led by Scipio! ;) :angel:

[henners88]

I've been more than happy to prop up the money pot (including Thatcher's rebate) personally all my tax paying life, as a German resident for the last 21 years and more recently as a German national lol :wave:
So good riddance, yes, I'm glad we can agree on something for a change :D

You're the first German I've encountered with such a bitter attitude. If Germany follow us I hope the good relationship between our nations continues despite some of our residents worrying about pride being dented.


Blaming Hamilton's mishaps solely on "the Germans" is a tad jingoistic in my view, but hardly something I wouldn't expect from certain "true Brits" here. Other true Brits like Jackie Stewart or your Nige weren't so quick to defend his tactics in this race, for example.
I don't share the view the Germans wanted Nico to win. The only thing German about the team is it's name.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[The Black Knight]

I think it is all a storm in a tea cup really. Hamilton just wanted to make Nico sweat really, just make it a little difficult but not difficult enough for him to lose a place. Because he pulled him out of trouble by giving him a tow when it seemed he was going to get into trouble from behind. Vettel said he could not pass Rosberg because Hamilton was at a distance to give Nico a tow which made it hard for him to mount an attack.

If Hamilton really wanted to make the overtake happen, he would have slowed considerably at the corners to really bunch up the cars on the entry to the corner, which would have really given Vettel or possibly Verstapenn a real chance to attack Rosberg.

Hamilton slowed down just enough to make Rosberg and the Mercedes pitwall nervous, just to make a point.

I agree with that. I thought he could have slowed more at times and kept position so I was surprised that he didn't.

This incident is not all that different from Japan 97 where Eddie Irvine held up Jacques Villeneuve to enable Michael Schumacher to win the race and bring the title down to the wire. It's the sort of thing that makes interesting (and one of the only things nowadays) so certainly shouldn't be frowned upon. Mercedes got a 1-2 in the end and got their German champ so they can't be that upset.

[donKey jote]

›
You're the first German I've encountered with such a bitter attitude. If Germany follow us I hope the good relationship between our nations continues despite some of our residents worrying about pride being dented.
Bitterness doesn't really describe the sense of loss and betrayal I felt as a EU citizen of British/Irish/Spanish heritage with long time residency in Germany :)
I do admit I tend to overreact to uncalled for expressions of nationalism (from whichever country)...must be the donkey blood in me :p
In fact the main reason for me applying for German citizenship was to counter the xenophobic disguised as nationalistic anti-EU pegidonkeys here... but I digress, as usual...


I don't share the view the Germans wanted Nico to win. The only thing German about the team is it's name.
I take it you mean the Germans (including Austrians :p) in the team... I agree again on both counts :)

[driveace]

Rosberg says its a storm in a teacup ,and he fully understands why Hamilton was trying to do ,and he understands why.He says Lewis has been a brilliant team mate ,and one of the best drivers out there today ,if not the best
As regards Brixit and it being a sore point with dk ,just get used to it as Italy,France and Holland could offer a referendum to their countrymen in the next 2 or 3 years.
And no German F1 race next year why ? Brexit, Trump The world is changing and the people now realize they have been taken for a ride for far too long by the people who promised us what we needed but once elected voted for their personal likes rather than the views and needs of those who elected them .The Donkey was Mercedes and Toto and Paddy They got the both results they wanted For Christs sake let these guys RACE !

[Zico]

Rosberg says its a storm in a teacup ,and he fully understands why Hamilton was trying to do ,and he understands why.He says Lewis has been a brilliant team mate ,and one of the best drivers out there today ,if not the best
As regards Brixit and it being a sore point with dk ,just get used to it as Italy,France and Holland could offer a referendum to their countrymen in the next 2 or 3 years.
And no German F1 race next year why ? Brexit, Trump The world is changing and the people now realize they have been taken for a ride for far too long by the people who promised us what we needed but once elected voted for their personal likes rather than the views and needs of those who elected them .The Donkey was Mercedes and Toto and Paddy They got the both results they wanted For Christs sake let these guys RACE !


Well said.

Off topic- I also don't understand why brexit is a sore point for anyone outside the UK although I can of course see why it has caused divides here.
If any other nation voted to leave instead of us, I wouldn't have taken it personally... and that's coming from someone who's ancestors were French/Belgian.

Bizarre!

[COD]

Had I been Nico, I would have tried the overtake. If Lewis tried to block in stupid way, just punt the ballerina off. Had they both retired, Nico would still be champion. He opted for the gentlemans way, I would not have

[Rollo]

Well said.

Off topic- I also don't understand why brexit is a sore point for anyone outside the UK although I can of course see why it has caused divides here.

For many people of Commonwealth countries who might have the ability to apply for a UK passport, Brexit effectively means the end of the ability to work in Europe as well. It's like all the xenophobes of the UK told the rest of the empire (that they like to bang on about) to jam a pencil up their Article 50 and rotate until they squeal.

[Zico]

For many people of Commonwealth countries who might have the ability to apply for a UK passport, Brexit effectively means the end of the ability to work in Europe as well. It's like all the xenophobes of the UK told the rest of the empire (that they like to bang on about) to jam a pencil up their Article 50 and rotate until they squeal.


I see, that makes more sense to me now, thanks.
I guess you would probably call me a xenophobe but I think the word 'xenophobe' is an oft abused and very negative label. I see myself as more of an anti-multi-culturalist! :D

You may think multiculturalism is benign, respecting all cultures, but it's not. Each region has its culture, that's what binds a country together, what unites the people, something they have in common, something shared.
Multiculturalism says we have to have all cultures in one country, all separate, all with their own values, standards and religion, all with their own idea of how to behave. This then leads to a society full of divisions, ethnic and religious ghettoes, the opposite of integration. Only when outsiders [immigrants] are integrated and adopt their host culture can there be harmony. This isn't to disrespect other cultures, it is to value one's own. What has happened is the European political class got sold on multiculturalism as a creed, and anyone dissenting to it was automatically a racist.

The British aren't racist generally, we just have the same portion of idiots as any other country, but the population are being inexorably driven into the hands of racists, the extreme right, because no one else says this must stop. If no one else defends the British culture and way of life, the product of centuries of development, small wonder people are attracted to the extreme rightwing who appear to be the only ones with the courage to speak out.

Across Europe the far right are gaining ground, and we should be aware that this is how fascism starts and succeeds in capturing a country, this time it could be a whole continent. And when Europeans decide they have had enough, Muslims will be the target, including all the peaceful, law abiding, modern ones as well.

When fascism takes over, the radical nutjobs win, although they will be the first to be hung from lamp posts. It's starting to get nasty already, and the political class hasn't a clue what to do, so they cling to the old doctrine they've learned, and mouth the same nonsense, and the right gains again... and we get Brexit and Trump... woaaaah!

Every country is entitled to its own culture, it's what makes the world fascinating and worth travelling to experience. You can't expect every culture to coexist in one small country without inter-ethnic friction and eventually warfare.

Integration is what Britain has gained from for centuries, people even 'Anglicised' (like mine) their names to become British, and we have a wide range of ethnicites across the board, including in our media.


Anyway... let's get back on topic. :)

[Tazio]

Hannibal's ancient Arse Sorry I skimmed it last time. Ah ha!! España you are referring to....al parecer :stareup:

[Nitrodaze]

I agree with that. I thought he could have slowed more at times and kept position so I was surprised that he didn't.

This incident is not all that different from Japan 97 where Eddie Irvine held up Jacques Villeneuve to enable Michael Schumacher to win the race and bring the title down to the wire. It's the sort of thing that makes interesting (and one of the only things nowadays) so certainly shouldn't be frowned upon. Mercedes got a 1-2 in the end and got their German champ so they can't be that upset.

Incidentally, and Verstapenn holding up Vettel to allow Ricciado to pass him at Mexico this year l think. And consequently took third in a bizzarre stewarding decision.

There are Hamilton haters who would see things differently of course. The whole thing has even deteriorated into a Germany vs Britain confrontation in this thread. It is getting ugly.

Losing is never a great feeling. Especially when one feels they had done an overall better job given the problems that he has faced this year. I think it is daft for anyone to expect anyone in that position to just carry on as if it is all hunkerdory and good. Like Nico and the cap in 2015, Hamilton showed his complete disappointment of losing the title this year.

There is no pretty way to lose unless you are a loser.

[Nitrodaze]

I see, that makes more sense to me now, thanks.
I guess you would probably call me a xenophobe but I think the word 'xenophobe' is an oft abused and very negative label. I see myself as more of an anti-multi-culturalist! :D

You may think multiculturalism is benign, respecting all cultures, but it's not. Each region has its culture, that's what binds a country together, what unites the people, something they have in common, something shared.
Multiculturalism says we have to have all cultures in one country, all separate, all with their own values, standards and religion, all with their own idea of how to behave. This then leads to a society full of divisions, ethnic and religious ghettoes, the opposite of integration. Only when outsiders [immigrants] are integrated and adopt their host culture can there be harmony. This isn't to disrespect other cultures, it is to value one's own. What has happened is the European political class got sold on multiculturalism as a creed, and anyone dissenting to it was automatically a racist.

The British aren't racist generally, we just have the same portion of idiots as any other country, but the population are being inexorably driven into the hands of racists, the extreme right, because no one else says this must stop. If no one else defends the British culture and way of life, the product of centuries of development, small wonder people are attracted to the extreme rightwing who appear to be the only ones with the courage to speak out.

Across Europe the far right are gaining ground, and we should be aware that this is how fascism starts and succeeds in capturing a country, this time it could be a whole continent. And when Europeans decide they have had enough, Muslims will be the target, including all the peaceful, law abiding, modern ones as well.

When fascism takes over, the radical nutjobs win, although they will be the first to be hung from lamp posts. It's starting to get nasty already, and the political class hasn't a clue what to do, so they cling to the old doctrine they've learned, and mouth the same nonsense, and the right gains again... and we get Brexit and Trump... woaaaah!

Every country is entitled to its own culture, it's what makes the world fascinating and worth travelling to experience. You can't expect every culture to coexist in one small country without inter-ethnic friction and eventually warfare.

Integration is what Britain has gained from for centuries, people even 'Anglicised' (like mine) their names to become British, and we have a wide range of ethnicites across the board, including in our media.


Anyway... let's get back on topic. :)

anti-multi-culturalist is another way of saying APATHEID or racist really. You either are or you are not, there is no middle ground.

Probably be an idea to not start this train of discussion as it might lead to unexpected places. Let us just say, a nation decided and we all have to respect the democratic process. There is no decision that one would take that would not have some sort of consequences. These consequences are part of the challenges of realizing the decision made. No point banging on about these things but face forward and move on.

[donKey jote]

You may think multiculturalism is benign, respecting all cultures, but it's not. Each region has its culture, that's what binds a country together, what unites the people, something they have in common, something shared.

When you say multiculturalism, do you really mean "British" culture as opposed to "French" culture or "German" culture? I see us all more as having a "joint European" culture... united in diversity on a supra-national level :-)

"British" culture is also a union of diverse cultures... if Scotland decided to hold a Scexit referendum, would a leave result not be a bit of a sore point to some in the rest of the Britain, even if they don't live in Scotland?

[donKey jote]

Sorry I skimmed it last time. Ah ha!! España you are referring to....al parecer :stareup:
Left over from summer :bandit:

[Starter]

anti-multi-culturalist is another way of saying APATHEID or racist really. You either are or you are not, there is no middle ground.
While it is true that you either are or are not a racist, being anti multiculturism is definitely not the same as being racist.

[Nitrodaze]

While it is true that you either are or are not a racist, being anti multiculturism is definitely not the same as being racist.

Please explain, l would very much like to hear your explanation.

[Zico]

A racist harbours prejudice against other races but someone with anti-multiculturalism views looks at the bigger picture in that it can cause division and fragment society into smaller closed groups, that it should not be encouraged and avoided if possible.

I see the promotion and huge increase of multiculturalism in society through open border policy as divisive, a cause of racial tensions between cultural/religious groups. Why?.. because they are often too different to be able to integrate and rightly or wrongly, on the whole, have no real desire to do so.

If one was cynical, one might suspect alterior motives behind this social experiment. To divide and effectively enslave society under the mass surveillance required to facilitate it? Who knows..

[Bagwan]

I'd like to nominate whomever turned this thread about the donkey of the race into a deep discussion about stuff that has no business in this thread , as the donkey of the thread .
And , I'm not going to bother going back to see who it was .
You know who you are .

Take it to chit chat , whether you're racist or non-racist .
This is more about racing .

[henners88]

Poor Donkey :(

[Rollo]

Take it to chit chat , whether you're racist or non-racist .
This is more about racing.

What if you are... wait for it... motor racist?

I have extreme prejudice against BMW drivers on the basis of everything that they do on the roads. We all know what the W actually stands for.

(It's weird but even BMW has a world championship to its name).

[Nitrodaze]

A racist harbours prejudice against other races but someone with anti-multiculturalism views looks at the bigger picture in that it can cause division and fragment society into smaller closed groups, that it should not be encouraged and avoided if possible.

Now let us break your definition of anti-multiculturalism down a touch or two. If we start with the title anti-multiculturalism, "anti" suggest "opposed to", multi cultures; in the case of multiculturalism, opposed to the existence or practice of the coexistence of multiple cultures in a single social system.

Then you speak of division or fragmentation and the inherent ontological framework for the representation of groups into subcultures. This process is only possible by identifying characteristics of certain groups of individual that reduce the group into a type of culture.

Now the problem here is by making such differentiation you inherently create a subconscious barrier as you would subconsciously think of these people as different. You therefore cannot interact with member of a group you do not see yourself associated with, in the manner that you would with an individual you naturally identify with. This unfortunately creates discrimination on the basis of cultural difference that you perceive in your interactions with other people.

The label Anti-Multiculturalist is a misnomer in a sense. Because if you really want to make such categorization of cultures, even in a social system with a predominant culture, would break down to further sub-categories of cultures within it. So how do you interact with society with this sort of outlook to the world. How do you expect people who would certainly notice your particular mannerism due to your ontological perspective, to react to you. Or do you expect them to be insensitive to your traits.

Also the very concept of division of culture is the very foundation of prejudices. You cannot be insensitive to individuals exhibiting the characteristics of a culture that you do not identify with, if you make such distinctions. Unfortunately, these sort of ontologies are the ingredients of prejudices which take the forms of Nationalism and the various forms of racism.

The fact of the matter, is that this perspective is not new nor does it hold any novelty of any kind. There are tons of literature dating back to the 1800s and beyond that have explored this view. As it goes, it was very central to thinking and movement of the Nazi movement in Germany. It was also instrumental in the labelling of Jews and the need for them to wear a yellow star so that they may be more easily identified as a member of a separate culture at a glance. You know where that led in the end don't you.

Then there was the Apartheid regimes of South Africa which was also essentially based on this very concept. The common theme here is that movements and people that have harbored this particular view have also exhibited intense intolerance for other groups that they did not identify with. Thus the inevitable prejudices and consequentially racisms that were afflicted on these outsider groups.

To conclude, you cannot have a separatist view of the world and not also harbour some level of prejudices as a result of these differences that exist in your society. The very foundation of choice is in the differences of things.

And by the way, what is a race? The British Act of parliament on racism have a much broader view than what you call race.

[Bagwan]

Chit chat , donkey .

[Nitrodaze]

Chit chat , donkey .

I am sorry buddy. Just had to vent.

[Zico]

I am sorry buddy. Just had to vent.


Had to vent? Yes clearly.
Oh the irony that you are intolerant to different views considering you just
came a gnats ball hair away from calling me racist and just for having a different view to yours. Now that is funny!

Sorry Tazio, I won't say any more on the subject on this thread. :/

[Tazio]

Sorry Tazio :confused:
Don't apologize to me bro, I have enjoyed this discussion.
Party on McZico ;)

[Nitrodaze]

Had to vent? Yes clearly.
Oh the irony that you are intolerant to different views considering you just
came a gnats ball hair away from calling me racist and just for having a different view to yours. Now that is funny!

Sorry Tazio, I won't say any more on the subject on this thread. :/

I am sorry you take the view that l have called you a racist. l have not done that and you would not find anywhere in my post where l have called you a racist. I am not intolerant of your views either, l respect that you see your self as an ANTI MULTICULTURALIST. Personally my attitude is everyone to his own. What l have made clear though is what ANTI MULTICULTURALISM is and how it is not devoided of prejudice. I don't know how you practise your views but if you declare yourself to be one, then you have called yourself racist not me.

[steveaki13]

Plenty of Donkeys but few that are of the race :p

[keysersoze]

Now let us break your definition of anti-multiculturalism down a touch or two. If we start with the title anti-multiculturalism, "anti" suggest "opposed to", multi cultures; in the case of multiculturalism, opposed to the existence or practice of the coexistence of multiple cultures in a single social system.

Then you speak of division or fragmentation and the inherent ontological framework for the representation of groups into subcultures. This process is only possible by identifying characteristics of certain groups of individual that reduce the group into a type of culture.

Now the problem here is by making such differentiation you inherently create a subconscious barrier as you would subconsciously think of these people as different. You therefore cannot interact with member of a group you do not see yourself associated with, in the manner that you would with an individual you naturally identify with. This unfortunately creates discrimination on the basis of cultural difference that you perceive in your interactions with other people.

The label Anti-Multiculturalist is a misnomer in a sense. Because if you really want to make such categorization of cultures, even in a social system with a predominant culture, would break down to further sub-categories of cultures within it. So how do you interact with society with this sort of outlook to the world. How do you expect people who would certainly notice your particular mannerism due to your ontological perspective, to react to you. Or do you expect them to be insensitive to your traits.

Also the very concept of division of culture is the very foundation of prejudices. You cannot be insensitive to individuals exhibiting the characteristics of a culture that you do not identify with, if you make such distinctions. Unfortunately, these sort of ontologies are the ingredients of prejudices which take the forms of Nationalism and the various forms of racism.

The fact of the matter, is that this perspective is not new nor does it hold any novelty of any kind. There are tons of literature dating back to the 1800s and beyond that have explored this view. As it goes, it was very central to thinking and movement of the Nazi movement in Germany. It was also instrumental in the labelling of Jews and the need for them to wear a yellow star so that they may be more easily identified as a member of a separate culture at a glance. You know where that led in the end don't you.

Then there was the Apartheid regimes of South Africa which was also essentially based on this very concept. The common theme here is that movements and people that have harbored this particular view have also exhibited intense intolerance for other groups that they did not identify with. Thus the inevitable prejudices and consequentially racisms that were afflicted on these outsider groups.

To conclude, you cannot have a separatist view of the world and not also harbour some level of prejudices as a result of these differences that exist in your society. The very foundation of choice is in the differences of things.

And by the way, what is a race? The British Act of parliament on racism have a much broader view than what you call race.

slippery slope argument

[Nitrodaze]

slippery slope argument

It is probably best for us to park it for good then. I did previously say that we should not pursue this line of conversation.

[Zico]

You only have to look around and observe that when a People/religion/cultures values and way of life are directly opposed to anothers then they have to co-exist and not integrate. In these circumstances there will always be friction and difficulties and so the concept should be avoided if possible That is all I'm saying however you want to try to paint it.

Let's just park it.

[Nitrodaze]

You only have to look around and observe that when a People/religion/cultures values and way of life are directly opposed to anothers then they have to co-exist and not integrate. In these circumstances there will always be friction and difficulties and so the concept should be avoided if possible That is all I'm saying however you want to try to paint it.

Let's just park it.

In Belgium they speak upto 7 different languages, they don't coexist they integrate. The world is getting smaller and the average man is becoming enpowered by information from the internet and television. You probably have not realized, there is a world culture forming and you partake in it daily without effort or notice. Just look at the things you casually do everyday and work out their origin. Or the food you buy in the supermarket or the booze offered in your local pub. The characteristics of the music you listen to as you drive to work or some of the words you use to express yourself etc.

The Anti Multiculturalism concept is outmoded in today's world and very uncool.

[Starter]

In Belgium they speak upto 7 different languages, they don't coexist they integrate. The world is getting smaller and the average man is becoming enpowered by information from the internet and television. You probably have not realized, there is a world culture forming and you partake in it daily without effort or notice. Just look at the things you casually do everyday and work out their origin. Or the food you buy in the supermarket or the booze offered in your local pub. The characteristics of the music you listen to as you drive to work or some of the words you use to express yourself etc.

The Anti Multiculturalism concept is outmoded in today's world and very uncool.
In Canada they only speak two different languages. And, though they operate as a single country, there has always been friction between both sides. To the point that from time to time there have been strong separatist movements. Yet Canada is a strong, thriving country in spite of government attempts at multiculturism.

Cool is in the eye of the beholder.

[Bagwan]

I gave a man a tree yesterday , just to be nice .

[Nitrodaze]

In Canada they only speak two different languages. And, though they operate as a single country, there has always been friction between both sides. To the point that from time to time there have been strong separatist movements. Yet Canada is a strong, thriving country in spite of government attempts at multiculturism.

Cool is in the eye of the beholder.

The beautifull thing about freedom of choice is there would always be situation where there would be a conflict in the exercise of the freedom. Hence in any multicultural social system such as Canada, Belgium, Iraq, UK, USA and anywhere you care to name, there would be some who would seek to exercise there choice to be anti-multiculturalists for various reasons. Hence some sort of friction is expected.

And the characteristics of these anti-multiculturalism would be based on the viewpoint of the anti-multiculturalist which may take the form of how they go about the ontological demographical segmentation they come up with. What l am getting at here is, most people who adopt anti-multiculturalism, do so for different reasons. Unfortunately this is where the basis of the prejudice component of anti-multiculturailism is rooted.

Maybe it would help if we define what we mean by culture. If we adopt the point of view that we are talking about "culture as a way of living", then the Cambridge English dictionary define culture as:-

"the way of life, especially the general customs and beliefs, of a particular group of people at a particular time"

Based on this definition alone, we can see that you can be an Anti-Multiculturalist from a number of perspectives.

1. By dissociation from the way of life of certain group of people in your society.
2. By dissociation from the custom of certain group of people in your society.
3. By dissociation from the beliefs of certain groups of people in your society.

The Anti-Multiculturalist seeks to have acceptance only of people that have the same way of life, the same customs and the same beliefs. Even in any social system that have an overwhelmingly predominant culture, this goal is unattainable. It is shown very strongly in the struggle of the emancipation of women in some Islamic countries in present time.

Anti-Multiculturalism in the western civilization is seeking to go the other way of becoming like these extremist cultures which are very intolerant of other cultures which are different to their own. And the suppression of exhibition of cultures contrary to the predominant culture.

You can call it whatever name you want to call it, its Mode of Operation is similar to these extremist cultures. How l see it is, Anti-Multiculturalists are individuals with difficulty of existing in a world of multiple differences. Partly because they are afraid their culture is being eroded away.

As Heraclitus puts it, "you cannot dip you foot into the same river twice", because the river you dipped you foot into first time would not be the same river you dipped your foot into at the second attempt. Because the body of water in the river has changed between the time the you dipped your foot in it. The river would have changed because of the things it carries in it, on its way to your foot, but also by your foot entering the river and the river washing away things from your foot.

What l am getting at here is, at the point where cultures intercepts, they change each other wittingly or unwittingly. Hence a culture at one point in time is not the same as one when you look back in time. The Anti-Multiculralism paradym is flawed as it is fighting against change. Change unfortunately is inevitable hence a fight against change has lost even before it started. Because you have changed so much yourself without properly appreciating it. The only real solution for the Anti-Multiculturalist is to completely isolate themselves from the rest of the world. Bring back the old ways, get rid of technology etc. Build a great wall around your borders and throw out all cultures different from the predominant culture.

That would be a very small existence to live. We have come such a long way to be heading back to what was really ugly times.

[Bagwan]

The man to whom I gave the tree had a slightly darker complexion than mine , and his facial structure made me think he was perhaps a Mexican .

I didn't ask . I just gave him the tree .

[Bagwan]

It was a white pine .

[Bagwan]

He was cutting it up to make Christmas wreaths for sale , so that he could more afford the season .

[Bagwan]

I didn't see any donkeys in the race .

[Nitrodaze]

The man to whom I gave the tree had a slightly darker complexion than mine , and his facial structure made me think he was perhaps a Mexican .

I didn't ask . I just gave him the tree .

The man to whom l gave the tree had a tan complexion, his facial structure seemed hispanic of the northern american origin, he was perhaps a Mexican.

[Zico]

Yep, Europe's multiculturalism is doing really well. We are all getting on like a house on fire.

[Phoenix]

My house is bigger than yours.....

[Phoenix]

Probably

[Bagwan]

The man to whom l gave the tree had a tan complexion, his facial structure seemed hispanic of the northern american origin, he was perhaps a Mexican.

I also thought of Peru and especially Ecuador , as his face was roundish in shape .
My son thought he was one of our local native Ojibwa .

But , it didn't matter , and I hope you got that point .


So , who did you see as donkey of the race ?

[Nitrodaze]

I also thought of Peru and especially Ecuador , as his face was roundish in shape .
My son thought he was one of our local native Ojibwa .

But , it didn't matter , and I hope you got that point .


So , who did you see as donkey of the race ?

You miss the point my friend, but hopefully you would get it.

[Starter]

What l am getting at here is, most people who adopt anti-multiculturalism, do so for different reasons. Unfortunately this is where the basis of the prejudice component of anti-multiculturailism is rooted.
I would agree with that. because it makes my point. There are a number of different reasons people would not wish to have society go predominately multicultural and to brand all of them as racist because of a few who are is not recognizing reality.


"the way of life, especially the general customs and beliefs, of a particular group of people at a particular time"
Also known as a "comfort zone". The vast majority of people everywhere prefer to spend a majority of their time inside that zone. That's just human nature.


Anti-Multiculturalism in the western civilization is seeking to go the other way of becoming like these extremist cultures which are very intolerant of other cultures which are different to their own. And the suppression of exhibition of cultures contrary to the predominant culture.
Completely disagree. Most countries have a historical pattern of predominance of one culture. Wanting to continue with that as "mainstream" in that country is hardly extremist. Most countries have also been historically tolerant of minorities and their cultures. It's when recent immigrants, or other groups, try to force everyone else to give their (minority) culture equal standing to the predominant one that trouble starts.


You can call it whatever name you want to call it, its Mode of Operation is similar to these extremist cultures. How l see it is, Anti-Multiculturalists are individuals with difficulty of existing in a world of multiple differences.
Existing in a world of different cultures is one thing. Forcing people to embrace cultures they are not comfortable with is a different thing.


What l am getting at here is, at the point where cultures intercepts, they change each other wittingly or unwittingly. Hence a culture at one point in time is not the same as one when you look back in time.
Cultures have always evolved over time. The question is over how much time? It's one thing for people to accept incremental change, which results in large changes over time, and a different thing to try and force large changes over relatively short periods - that goes completely against human nature. What is a natural inertia (and healthy too since it dampens wild swings) becomes active resistance and hostility. That's what you are seeing now. Ignore it at your peril.

[Nitrodaze]

Completely disagree. Most countries have a historical pattern of predominance of one culture. Wanting to continue with that as "mainstream" in that country is hardly extremist. Most countries have also been historically tolerant of minorities and their cultures. It's when recent immigrants, or other groups, try to force everyone else to give their (minority) culture equal standing to the predominant one that trouble starts.

If you read my post carefully, you will see that l have not advocated against the existence of a predominant culture in a single social system. What l have argued against is the predominant culture refusing to accommodate minority cultures within its society. In an anti-multicultural society, the predominant culture would seek to stamp out these minority cultures. I think the saying is; when in Rome act as the Romans. Which is the natural manifestation of things anyway otherwise people from minority cultures would not be able to function in the society. But the reality is, any hint or exhibition of cultures outside the predominant culture by an individual is frowned upon and that person soon finds themselves systematically excluded from society. This affects them when trying to find jobs or use social amenities like hospitals and schools. Their plight is not noticed by anyone and nobody represents their particular circumstances. This is one of the reasons why minority group in society form the poorest groups in most countries.



Existing in a world of different cultures is one thing. Forcing people to embrace cultures they are not comfortable with is a different thing.

But it cuts both ways. Forcing people to abandon their cultures is the other side of your inability to embrace the existence or presence of the minority cultures in the society. This is the face off and where the prejudices emanate.



Cultures have always evolved over time. The question is over how much time? It's one thing for people to accept incremental change, which results in large changes over time, and a different thing to try and force large changes over relatively short periods - that goes completely against human nature. What is a natural inertia (and healthy too since it dampens wild swings) becomes active resistance and hostility. That's what you are seeing now. Ignore it at your peril.

I completely agree. It is natural to push back in this circumstances.

[Mia 01]

Cut this, back to the topic.

[Bagwan]

You miss the point my friend, but hopefully you would get it.

Race discussion , or donkey of the race discussion ?
You choose .

[driveace]

Donkey = Donkey?

[Starter]

No mods around anymore and since I haven't been one for a while I no longer have the permissions to move this part of the discussion to 'chit chat' where it belongs.

[Nitrodaze]

No mods around anymore and since I haven't been one for a while I no longer have the permissions to move this part of the discussion to 'chit chat' where it belongs.

Apologies chaps and gals. I shall not say another word on the topic.

DONKEY of the race is still very much Mercedes in my view.

[donKey jote]

Donkey = Donkey?
The feeling's mutual :kiss: :D

[Tazio]

In the immortal words of René Descartes: :angel:
"I think therefore I am (a donkey)"

[Starter]

In the immortal words of René Descartes: :angel:
"I think therefore I am (a donkey)"
Is that an ass ertion? :D

[Tazio]

I took it more as an ass ignation :confused: :D

[donKey jote]

In the kingdom of the blind asses, the one-eyed donkey rulez :p

[driveace]

Donkey = Donkey?

Well I think most of us all agree the Donkey was Toto and Mercedes
Who have now decided there will be no harsh words spoken to Hamilton over him slowing in the race to enable others to pass Rosberg ,which would have helped Hamiltons Championship
Amen
Lets put this thread to bed
And my post above meant ,should we really call "The Post" Donkey of the race ?
Can we all have a sense of humour ,and not rev up on others when they misunderstand what the poster really means

[Nitrodaze]

Well I think most of us all agree the Donkey was Toto and Mercedes
Who have now decided there will be no harsh words spoken to Hamilton over him slowing in the race to enable others to pass Rosberg ,which would have helped Hamiltons Championship
Amen
Lets put this thread to bed
And my post above meant ,should we really call "The Post" Donkey of the race ?
Can we all have a sense of humour ,and not rev up on others when they misunderstand what the poster really means

Fair comment buddy. It was all light conversation as far as l was concerned. No hard feeling, just jist.

[truefan72]

Well I think most of us all agree the Donkey was Toto and Mercedes
Who have now decided there will be no harsh words spoken to Hamilton over him slowing in the race to enable others to pass Rosberg ,which would have helped Hamiltons Championship
Amen
Lets put this thread to bed
And my post above meant ,should we really call "The Post" Donkey of the race ?
Can we all have a sense of humour ,and not rev up on others when they misunderstand what the poster really means

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/127452/mercedes-regrets-abu-dhabi-radio-instructions

I purposely stayed off this forum for a while to let sanity prevail and I'm glad that mercedes have issued a mea culpa.
The amount of vitriol i read towards Hamilton about the incident, including the likes of Prost, Stewart, and on other forums was kinda ridiculous.
I would hope that mercedes have learned from this, but i fear as long as paddy lowe and toto wolff are sitting at race control on race day, they will always try to interfere with each side of the garage and orchestrate an outcome they (foolishly and in short sight) think the team requires. We shall see

[airshifter]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/127452/mercedes-regrets-abu-dhabi-radio-instructions

I purposely stayed off this forum for a while to let sanity prevail and I'm glad that mercedes have issued a mea culpa.
The amount of vitriol i read towards Hamilton about the incident, including the likes of Prost, Stewart, and on other forums was kinda ridiculous.
I would hope that mercedes have learned from this, but i fear as long as paddy lowe and toto wolff are sitting at race control on race day, they will always try to interfere with each side of the garage and orchestrate an outcome they (foolishly and in short sight) think the team requires. We shall see


I saved the tin foil myself, as I don't find those hats comfortable at all. :laugh:

As much as people like the conspiracy theories, nobody knows for sure the motivations behind the team orders. To me it makes complete sense to preserve both cars even if one of their two drivers would remain WDC. And in that sense alone, Lewis backing Nico up into the mix did allow for more potential for carnage of some really expensive equipment.

I'd have to think that finishing the last race with a 1-2 finish and preserving both cars would be the greater priority for the team. As for all the talk about sacking Lewis and such, I think any team has to realize that if they start sucking the fight out of their drivers it will at some point come back to bite them. I'm glad they seem to see that now.