Racism in football Thread.

[Teflon Don]

Italy on a whole has to do something about the racial problem.I was looking for this artical but couldnt find it but i did a little while ago.


Racist chants almost halt Serie A game
MILAN, Nov 27 (Reuters) -
Messina's Ivory Coast defender Zoro threatened to halt a Serie A game on Sunday after suffering racial abuse from travelling Inter Milan supporters.
Zoro picked up the ball in the 66th minute and headed off the field towards the fourth official before other players, including Inter's Brazilian forward Adriano and Nigerian striker Obafemi Martins, persuaded him to continue.

"I was treated badly and can't have that. Away from home they can do what they want, I'm used to that, but not at my home ground. I took the responsibility and took the ball to the fourth official," he told Italy's Sky Sport.
Reports said the Inter fans had made 'monkey noises' when Zoro had touched the ball.
"These are people who don't love this game but they need to learn that we aren't animals and I want some respect. They travel many kilometres to follow their team and then they do these idiocies," said Zoro.
The defender said that Adriano and Martins had apologised for the behaviour of the Inter supporters but asked him to continue the match.
"They apologised to me for the fans and told me that they often have to put up with it as well and asked me not to stop the game," said Zoro.
He said it was by no means the first time he has had to cope with racism during his eight years in Italian football. "It has happened many times, always, wherever I go. But today I couldn't put up with it," he said.
Inter president Giacinto Facchetti apologised for the behaviour of the fans: "Unfortunately these are things that happen often but Inter has always stood against racism," he said.
Parma's Senagalese defender Ferdinand Coly said he wanted the game's governing body FIFA to take stronger action over racism.
"I want to ask FIFA to do something -- we are just players who have to play there isn't a lot we can do, they have to do more," he said.

[dcs]

They ban unruly fans from games in England don't they?
With face recognition software.

Do the same for this.  It will probably be very easy to identify the culprits especially when they are the opposing team's fans.  At the very least throw them out of the stadium....it would be nice to hit them with a baton.

[Cantona007]

Inter president Giacinto Facchetti apologised for the behaviour of the fans: "Unfortunately these are things that happen often but Inter has always stood against racism,"

If they stand against racism then do something about it. Don't bleat on about it being "unfortunate" and "these things happen"

[Cantona007]

it would be nice to hit them with a baton.

  

[ribbit]

DiCanio and others can't pick and choose the interpretation of the gesture... it IS a facist salute TODAY.

cantona, your statement above shows that political correctness has triumphed absolutely in this society.

explain... (forgive me for being dense  )

the salute has more than one interpretation and history from a long time. di canio is saying it's not meant to be racist or even political, but is meant to connect with the lazio fan base. he even got along well with shaka and his family. by a reasonable standard, ppl should give the man the benefit of the doubt and believe that he's not a racist. but with your statement above, it seem like that's not good enough - we have to eradicate his gesture of loyalty to appease the fans that were offended. that's definitive of political correctness - suppress expression so as not to offend anyone.

to me, it's more important that di canio disavows racism (which he has) than how he chooses to connect with his fans. we as a footballing community should keep the lines of communication open and learn to value what people MEAN rather than get offended by things like this. that is the essence of communication. instead we getting taken by symbolism.

all the measures that have been taken so far to combat racism in football have failed and will continue to fail because it's a social problem not a football problem. you could ban di canio, ban inter, give messina 3 pts, give marc zoro the trinity cross, ... that will not solve the underlying problem. they just grandstanding - trying to look like they doing something. if we really think "racism in football" has any meaning - that we could take racism and isolate it to just football - than we on the wrong path already.

[NYtriniwhiteboy..]

Di canio has to know exactly what that salute means these days whether he looking for attention or not is irrelevant.. It is used as a racist salute and if he isnt a racist then he wouldnt be doin it..
Well done for Shaka standing up for what he believes

[JDB]

I have encountered a lot of people who say the wrong thing and defend it by saying that they don't mean it in the bad way that other people do.

They just do it among friends or because its funny.

The problem with this is that you give strength to those with ill-intentions by repeating their actions, NO MATTER WHAT YOUR INTENT IS.

Every repetition of the word/action is a missed opportunity rebuke it as wrong and disgusting. It is even worse than turning a blind eye. It is an admission that you do not see a problem or believe that these things are wrong and so it is oksy to be associated with them.

The origin of the act or word is less relevant than its current accepted meaning or significance. It has been adopted by racists, it is a racist symbol, if there was any debate about this there would be people other than Di Canio doing it and defending it.

[Blue]

As a youth, Di Canio was a member of Lazio's racist and violent Ultras. Lazios ultras are well known for their racist beliefs and the number of black players to represent Lazio can be counted on one hand - and I don't mean at the moment, I mean ever. So for anyone to suggest that the salute was patriotic rather than than racist is silly.

Di Canio is an exhibitionist, he always has been. But by making the gesture he will galvanise lazio's racist element even further. No doubt he will be seen as a martyr by his supporters, even if the rest of us see him as an idiot.

[dcs]

As a youth, Di Canio was a member of Lazio's racist and violent Ultras. Lazios ultras are well known for their racist beliefs.....

What he intended to communicate is less important than the message people interpreted it as especially if the club may have to deal with the subsequent behaviour/attitude of the fans.
If those Ultras see it as some incitement/endorsement of a racist ideology u would be a fool to use the gesture regardless of what you think of it.

Can he claim ignorance of that consequence?
Probably not.

And I disagree with the notion that football is powerless to fight racism.
Any arena that can be used to demonstrate to the public the ideal way to handle racism is of great benefit....especaily when you have millions of young people witnessing what happens when someone makes monkey calls to a player or a player themselves crosses the line.
Of course the punishment must be proportional and yesterday's villain may actually prove to be a valuable asset...especially if they are trying to repair their image with hopefully some new found perspective.

[Cantona007]

DiCanio and others can't pick and choose the interpretation of the gesture... it IS a facist salute TODAY.

cantona, your statement above shows that political correctness has triumphed absolutely in this society.

explain... (forgive me for being dense  )

the salute has more than one interpretation and history from a long time. di canio is saying it's not meant to be racist or even political, but is meant to connect with the lazio fan base. he even got along well with shaka and his family. by a reasonable standard, ppl should give the man the benefit of the doubt and believe that he's not a racist. but with your statement above, it seem like that's not good enough - we have to eradicate his gesture of loyalty to appease the fans that were offended. that's definitive of political correctness - suppress expression so as not to offend anyone.

to me, it's more important that di canio disavows racism (which he has) than how he chooses to connect with his fans. we as a footballing community should keep the lines of communication open and learn to value what people MEAN rather than get offended by things like this. that is the essence of communication. instead we getting taken by symbolism.

all the measures that have been taken so far to combat racism in football have failed and will continue to fail because it's a social problem not a football problem. you could ban di canio, ban inter, give messina 3 pts, give marc zoro the trinity cross, ... that will not solve the underlying problem. they just grandstanding - trying to look like they doing something. if we really think "racism in football" has any meaning - that we could take racism and isolate it to just football - than we on the wrong path already.

I'm sorry my friend, but I cannot agree with your analysis. It has NOTHING to do with politcal correctness when someone is offended by a salute that is effectively racist. You talk about symbolism, but isn't Paolo's very use of the gesture a symolic way of "connecting" with his "people" (by the way, he has overtly said this)?  If you ask me, the PC instantiation here is the idea of "I can do what I want, no matter if the wider society is offended". Believe me, I (and many others on this board) live in a culture that eschews the rights of a just society in favour of the "rights" of the individual. It is all very touchy-feely and nice and theoretical to talk about racism being a societal issuse and all (an obvious and spurious argument), but what are you going to do about it? Nothing or something? It is (again) all well and good to talk about the wonderful societal changes that must be made to fix the problem, but in the meantime, we have a match on Saturday and jackasses on the terraces who want to take advantage of the weakness of the officials that allows ugly racist behaviour.

This is not rocket science, either you act or you don't.

I'm quite surprised at your definition of PC. They have a saying here about being able to ignore the elephant in the room; that my friend is PC and in this case, Paolo is the elephant.
And I'm sorry, we can't give the man the benefit of the doubt, he has already nailed his colours to the mast in a VERY public manner. It is RUBBISH to talk about Paolo publicly disavowing racism. Have you ever heard a racist calling himself racist? I live in the South, where today peolpe talk about "the South will rises again" and when you (a Black person) question them about what they mean, they get very quiet. Anyone can disavow racism with words; ask yourself, will Shaka make that salute (even in joke)?

He(Paolo)  identifies with the jackasses; this is public record. I think JDB spoke about people who do the wrong thing and then justify it by saying that "I didn't mean it that way" disingenious at best, dishonest and dangerous at worst.

Again, this isn't rocket science or a Social Sciences thesis; if you offend society, you have to pay the price. I'm not interested in singing "Kum By Ya" with Paolo and his ilk.

My 2 dinars...

[Jah Gol]

Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi jumped to Di Canio's defence on Wednesday, insisting the striker is not a fascist and simply misunderstood.

"Di Canio is an exhibitionist. His salute didn't have any significance. He's a good lad," said Berlusconi.

These Europeans will never change.

[Filho]

the salute has more than one interpretation and history from a long time. di canio is saying it's not meant to be racist or even political, but is meant to connect with the lazio fan base. he even got along well with shaka and his family. by a reasonable standard, ppl should give the man the benefit of the doubt and believe that he's not a racist. but with your statement above, it seem like that's not good enough - we have to eradicate his gesture of loyalty to appease the fans that were offended. that's definitive of political correctness - suppress expression so as not to offend anyone.

to me, it's more important that di canio disavows racism (which he has) than how he chooses to connect with his fans. we as a footballing community should keep the lines of communication open and learn to value what people MEAN rather than get offended by things like this. that is the essence of communication. instead we getting taken by symbolism.

all the measures that have been taken so far to combat racism in football have failed and will continue to fail because it's a social problem not a football problem. you could ban di canio, ban inter, give messina 3 pts, give marc zoro the trinity cross, ... that will not solve the underlying problem. they just grandstanding - trying to look like they doing something. if we really think "racism in football" has any meaning - that we could take racism and isolate it to just football - than we on the wrong path already.

ribbit...the Swastika was once a good luck sign...read this if you doh believe me
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4183467.stm

i guess if DiCanio tattooed a swastika on his arm and flashed it games and said he wanted to just wish people good luck you would believe that too (he actually has a tattoo of Mussolini...that's close enough)...what Di Canio is doing is wrong. The one arm salute, like the swastika, is NOW a clear symbol of hate. Any pseudo-responsible member of the human race will realize that flaunting these symbols can give impressionable youngsters and racist/violent thugs the wrong message and the consequences can be deadly. What do you think it does to the atmosphere amongst the drunken skinhead ultras when they see a crazed Di Canio salute them like that? This has nothing to do with political correctness. That Roman salute excuse is bullshit...and you fell for it.

[ribbit]

the salute has more than one interpretation and history from a long time. di canio is saying it's not meant to be racist or even political, but is meant to connect with the lazio fan base. he even got along well with shaka and his family. by a reasonable standard, ppl should give the man the benefit of the doubt and believe that he's not a racist. but with your statement above, it seem like that's not good enough - we have to eradicate his gesture of loyalty to appease the fans that were offended. that's definitive of political correctness - suppress expression so as not to offend anyone.

to me, it's more important that di canio disavows racism (which he has) than how he chooses to connect with his fans. we as a footballing community should keep the lines of communication open and learn to value what people MEAN rather than get offended by things like this. that is the essence of communication. instead we getting taken by symbolism.

all the measures that have been taken so far to combat racism in football have failed and will continue to fail because it's a social problem not a football problem. you could ban di canio, ban inter, give messina 3 pts, give marc zoro the trinity cross, ... that will not solve the underlying problem. they just grandstanding - trying to look like they doing something. if we really think "racism in football" has any meaning - that we could take racism and isolate it to just football - than we on the wrong path already.

ribbit...the Swastika was once a good luck sign...read this if you doh believe me
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4183467.stm

i guess if DiCanio tattooed a swastika on his arm and flashed it games and said he wanted to just wish people good luck you would believe that too (he actually has a tattoo of Mussolini...that's close enough)...what Di Canio is doing is wrong. The one arm salute, like the swastika, is NOW a clear symbol of hate. Any pseudo-responsible member of the human race will realize that flaunting these symbols can give impressionable youngsters and racist/violent thugs the wrong message and the consequences can be deadly. What do you think it does to the atmosphere amongst the drunken skinhead ultras when they see a crazed Di Canio salute them like that? This has nothing to do with political correctness. That Roman salute excuse is bullshit...and you fell for it.

filho, i'm not the type to get emotional and worked up over gestures and try to get them banned when people use them. there is a separation between semiotics and semantics that i'm trying to get at. i'm willing to give di canio the benefit of the doubt with regards to the semantic meaning of his salute.

it's interesting that so many people here are saying that the more "recent" public/cultural meaning of the one arm salute takes precedence over what di canio might actually mean to say. on what grounds?  when someone makes statements like this that aren't based in fact or logically arrived at but rather on their own values, i know that i should use my own value system, not theirs. i have confidence in my own assessment of the situation to decide what meaning i will attribute the gesture. perhaps you are a mind reader and "really" know the score with di canio, but perhaps also you are easily lead and have a weak spine, or really believe that you should have the meaning of a gesture dictated to you.

well, i hope i didn't offend your delicate sensibilities too much.

[ribbit]

I'm sorry my friend, but I cannot agree with your analysis. It has NOTHING to do with politcal correctness when someone is offended by a salute that is effectively racist. You talk about symbolism, but isn't Paolo's very use of the gesture a symolic way of "connecting" with his "people" (by the way, he has overtly said this)?  If you ask me, the PC instantiation here is the idea of "I can do what I want, no matter if the wider society is offended". Believe me, I (and many others on this board) live in a culture that eschews the rights of a just society in favour of the "rights" of the individual. It is all very touchy-feely and nice and theoretical to talk about racism being a societal issuse and all (an obvious and spurious argument), but what are you going to do about it? Nothing or something? It is (again) all well and good to talk about the wonderful societal changes that must be made to fix the problem, but in the meantime, we have a match on Saturday and jackasses on the terraces who want to take advantage of the weakness of the officials that allows ugly racist behaviour.

This is not rocket science, either you act or you don't.

very impressive. either "you act or don't act" - to what ends? the only reason FIFA is doing anything is to look good. you act like they should get the f*cking nobel peace prize for their anti-racism campaign. you are right, it's not rocket science. IT'S BUSINESS.

I'm quite surprised at your definition of PC. They have a saying here about being able to ignore the elephant in the room; that my friend is PC and in this case, Paolo is the elephant.
And I'm sorry, we can't give the man the benefit of the doubt, he has already nailed his colours to the mast in a VERY public manner. It is RUBBISH to talk about Paolo publicly disavowing racism. Have you ever heard a racist calling himself racist? I live in the South, where today peolpe talk about "the South will rises again" and when you (a Black person) question them about what they mean, they get very quiet. Anyone can disavow racism with words; ask yourself, will Shaka make that salute (even in joke)?

see my comments to filho on the difference between semiotics and semantics. banning a player, a team, a group of fans or a gesture is a great way for FIFA to "address" the situation to appease vocal anti-racists like yourself. i guess i'm not as sensitive as you are to mere gestures. how the hell do you survive in the Deep South anyway?

He(Paolo)  identifies with the jackasses; this is public record. I think JDB spoke about people who do the wrong thing and then justify it by saying that "I didn't mean it that way" disingenious at best, dishonest and dangerous at worst.

well, JDB is probably getting tips from filho on mind reading. i've made comments in another thread already on the political dimension to this issue in italy but everyone seems to insist it's a racism problem.

[Filho]

the salute has more than one interpretation and history from a long time. di canio is saying it's not meant to be racist or even political, but is meant to connect with the lazio fan base. he even got along well with shaka and his family. by a reasonable standard, ppl should give the man the benefit of the doubt and believe that he's not a racist. but with your statement above, it seem like that's not good enough - we have to eradicate his gesture of loyalty to appease the fans that were offended. that's definitive of political correctness - suppress expression so as not to offend anyone.

to me, it's more important that di canio disavows racism (which he has) than how he chooses to connect with his fans. we as a footballing community should keep the lines of communication open and learn to value what people MEAN rather than get offended by things like this. that is the essence of communication. instead we getting taken by symbolism.

all the measures that have been taken so far to combat racism in football have failed and will continue to fail because it's a social problem not a football problem. you could ban di canio, ban inter, give messina 3 pts, give marc zoro the trinity cross, ... that will not solve the underlying problem. they just grandstanding - trying to look like they doing something. if we really think "racism in football" has any meaning - that we could take racism and isolate it to just football - than we on the wrong path already.

ribbit...the Swastika was once a good luck sign...read this if you doh believe me
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4183467.stm

i guess if DiCanio tattooed a swastika on his arm and flashed it games and said he wanted to just wish people good luck you would believe that too (he actually has a tattoo of Mussolini...that's close enough)...what Di Canio is doing is wrong. The one arm salute, like the swastika, is NOW a clear symbol of hate. Any pseudo-responsible member of the human race will realize that flaunting these symbols can give impressionable youngsters and racist/violent thugs the wrong message and the consequences can be deadly. What do you think it does to the atmosphere amongst the drunken skinhead ultras when they see a crazed Di Canio salute them like that? This has nothing to do with political correctness. That Roman salute excuse is bullshit...and you fell for it.

filho, i'm not the type to get emotional and worked up over gestures and try to get them banned when people use them. there is a separation between semiotics and semantics that i'm trying to get at. i'm willing to give di canio the benefit of the doubt with regards to the semantic meaning of his salute.

it's interesting that so many people here are saying that the more "recent" public/cultural meaning of the one arm salute takes precedence over what di canio might actually mean to say. on what grounds?  when someone makes statements like this that aren't based in fact or logically arrived at but rather on their own values, i know that i should use my own value system, not theirs. i have confidence in my own assessment of the situation to decide what meaning i will attribute the gesture. perhaps you are a mind reader and "really" know the score with di canio, but perhaps also you are easily lead and have a weak spine, or really believe that you should have the meaning of a gesture dictated to you.

well, i hope i didn't offend your delicate sensibilities too much.

haha....nobody is worked up. from what I have read most people here consider DiCanio a sad joke..and so do I. Stick to debating your points, which you did very well, and refrain from the personal insults. Seriously man, all dat wasn't called for and when you drop to the level of insults to make your point...you have lost the plot. If you read what I am saying I am not concerned over what the gesture means to Di Canio. He may very well be doing a 'roman salute'..but the more important issue (imo) is the effect that it will have on those it was intended for. If you believe 'his people' thought that was a roman salute...then so be it. I am of the opinion that most of the morons in the crowd had no idea what a roman salute is. answer my previous question...you would really believe him if he had raised a swastika and said he meant to bring his people good luck?. I don't have to be a mind reader to know that many of the skinhead ultras Di Canio was addressing took it as a fascist/Nazi salute and were incited and felt their ideals validated. And since they are prone to violent acts...well I find the whole incident offensive and potentially dangerous. Sometimes our responsibilities to our fellow man should supercede a personal agenda.......i realize that you are making a good point, but this is a really poor example...

[Filho]

well, JDB is probably getting tips from filho on mind reading. i've made comments in another thread already on the political dimension to this issue in italy but everyone seems to insist it's a racism problem.

dread...you need to stop mentioing me in your posts. like i hit a nerve

I am sorry that  you have such a problem with an opinion different from yours. from your repsonses it is pretty clear that you did not even grasp what I was trying to say. and what minds am I reading? you are too busy trying to win an argument. if you deflate your ego and read a little you will realize that you can stick to your opinion but still realize that otheres have some valid ideas even if they are contrary to yours

btw. it is not unrealistic to believe the 'political dimension' and 'racist diemnsion' are not entirely mutually exclusive in this instance...

[kicker]

Ribbit man yuh sounding like a man who just loves to hear himself.

What DiCanio did is subject to interpretion. Either interpretation may be accurate. In the same way that you discredit "mind reading", someone could discredit your take on the situation as gullible or naive.......

What you're effectively saying is :"Di Canio said he didn't mean to be racist, so I believe him"....what makes your assesment so superior to someone else's that you feel you have to label them as spineless ?

And the self righteous trip you're on talking about your "value system" as opposed to theirs is horse sh*t........(your determination that people are easily lead or spineless)........c'mon man...you could spew that vomit to the illiterate and expect them to eat it, but you and me know that is mess......your value system is as much influenced by ancient interpretations of the gestures (and DiCanio's stated "intention") as "theirs" is influenced by the present interpretation........so it's a matter of choice.....and neither is more noble, "spineless" or "easily led" than the other.......

One of the  differences between human beings and animals is our ability to use judgement and discretion to influence our actions, as opposed to relying purely on instinct. Regardless of whether Di Canio is a racist or not, he didn't exercise the necessary judgement and discretion......and as a result he offended people who looked up to him..........that's not noble....and he knows it. Racist or not he knows he was wrong, which is why he feels the need to explain himself........

In this day and age with people knowing what we know, it is not spineless or weak to be skeptical about Di Canio's intentions or even offended by his actions.......and if you're not open minded enough to see that then it's a waste having a discussion with you.

[Cantona007]

very impressive. either "you act or don't act" - to what ends? the only reason FIFA is doing anything is to look good. you act like they should get the f*cking nobel peace prize for their anti-racism campaign. you are right, it's not rocket science. IT'S BUSINESS.

Wow.... Nobel Peace Prize??? Where did THAT come from  I also said that is is not a Social Sciences thesis, which you are obviously holding on to. BTW, we are not talking exclusively about FIFA, we are talking about UEFA, the Italian FA, the Spanish FA etc... Are you saying that the only reason that any one of these organizations does anything is to look good, and by extension, the only reason any agent of social change does anything (no matter how small or large) is to "look good"? 

see my comments to filho on the difference between semiotics and semantics. banning a player, a team, a group of fans or a gesture is a great way for FIFA to "address" the situation to appease vocal anti-racists like yourself. i guess i'm not as sensitive as you are to mere gestures. how the hell do you survive in the Deep South anyway?


Again, no one is restricting the problem/solution to FIFA. And you still have not addressed the issue of acting NOW to deny racists an avenue to express themselves. Every idiot knows that the first step is immediate action. You spend a lot of time attacking the people on this thread who disagree with your opinion, but

• you have done nothing to advance you own "argument"
• you have done nothing to effectively disprove anyone else's arguments
• you have not addressed the fundamental issue of personal responsibility and responsibility for your actions. You are too caught up in "proving" some airy-fairy Social Sciences drivel about "a societal problem" ... yawn....
• instead you have resorted to wild invective (no one else has personally attacked anyone or even used obcenity to make their point)

All this rubbish about DiCanio's personal interpretation of the salute and "mind reading" and personal value systems.... ugh. At least be original.... Kicker and others have made the (obvious) point about personal responsibility, but I guess you did not get the memo
Oh, and by the way, the reason I "survive" in the Deep South is because the US is a nation of laws, and it is ILLEGAL to openly display racist behaviour, and do you know what, a lot of people actually frown on that sort of redneck behaviour... it all starts somewhere.

well, JDB is probably getting tips from filho on mind reading. i've made comments in another thread already on the political dimension to this issue in italy but everyone seems to insist it's a racism problem.
You are not impressing anyone with your knowledge of the "political dimension" to the problem. To anyone who reads and has a brain, this is obvious. The question is what to do about it... geez.
Anyway, cheers and Merry Christmas to all. 

[/b]

[ribbit]

the salute has more than one interpretation and history from a long time. di canio is saying it's not meant to be racist or even political, but is meant to connect with the lazio fan base. he even got along well with shaka and his family. by a reasonable standard, ppl should give the man the benefit of the doubt and believe that he's not a racist. but with your statement above, it seem like that's not good enough - we have to eradicate his gesture of loyalty to appease the fans that were offended. that's definitive of political correctness - suppress expression so as not to offend anyone.

to me, it's more important that di canio disavows racism (which he has) than how he chooses to connect with his fans. we as a footballing community should keep the lines of communication open and learn to value what people MEAN rather than get offended by things like this. that is the essence of communication. instead we getting taken by symbolism.

all the measures that have been taken so far to combat racism in football have failed and will continue to fail because it's a social problem not a football problem. you could ban di canio, ban inter, give messina 3 pts, give marc zoro the trinity cross, ... that will not solve the underlying problem. they just grandstanding - trying to look like they doing something. if we really think "racism in football" has any meaning - that we could take racism and isolate it to just football - than we on the wrong path already.

ribbit...the Swastika was once a good luck sign...read this if you doh believe me
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4183467.stm

i guess if DiCanio tattooed a swastika on his arm and flashed it games and said he wanted to just wish people good luck you would believe that too (he actually has a tattoo of Mussolini...that's close enough)...what Di Canio is doing is wrong. The one arm salute, like the swastika, is NOW a clear symbol of hate. Any pseudo-responsible member of the human race will realize that flaunting these symbols can give impressionable youngsters and racist/violent thugs the wrong message and the consequences can be deadly. What do you think it does to the atmosphere amongst the drunken skinhead ultras when they see a crazed Di Canio salute them like that? This has nothing to do with political correctness. That Roman salute excuse is bullshit...and you fell for it.

filho, i'm not the type to get emotional and worked up over gestures and try to get them banned when people use them. there is a separation between semiotics and semantics that i'm trying to get at. i'm willing to give di canio the benefit of the doubt with regards to the semantic meaning of his salute.

it's interesting that so many people here are saying that the more "recent" public/cultural meaning of the one arm salute takes precedence over what di canio might actually mean to say. on what grounds?  when someone makes statements like this that aren't based in fact or logically arrived at but rather on their own values, i know that i should use my own value system, not theirs. i have confidence in my own assessment of the situation to decide what meaning i will attribute the gesture. perhaps you are a mind reader and "really" know the score with di canio, but perhaps also you are easily lead and have a weak spine, or really believe that you should have the meaning of a gesture dictated to you.

well, i hope i didn't offend your delicate sensibilities too much.

haha....nobody is worked up. from what I have read most people here consider DiCanio a sad joke..and so do I. Stick to debating your points, which you did very well, and refrain from the personal insults. Seriously man, all dat wasn't called for and when you drop to the level of insults to make your point...you have lost the plot. If you read what I am saying I am not concerned over what the gesture means to Di Canio. He may very well be doing a 'roman salute'..but the more important issue (imo) is the effect that it will have on those it was intended for. If you believe 'his people' thought that was a roman salute...then so be it. I am of the opinion that most of the morons in the crowd had no idea what a roman salute is. answer my previous question...you would really believe him if he had raised a swastika and said he meant to bring his people good luck?. I don't have to be a mind reader to know that many of the skinhead ultras Di Canio was addressing took it as a fascist/Nazi salute and were incited and felt their ideals validated. And since they are prone to violent acts...well I find the whole incident offensive and potentially dangerous. Sometimes our responsibilities to our fellow man should supercede a personal agenda.......i realize that you are making a good point, but this is a really poor example...

filho, from your comments you do not seem to be a lazio fan. a key point in this issue is that di canio is not addressing you or i with his salute. he's addressing some other group of people in the stadium - his fan base. why do you care how he addresses someone other than yourself? i don't feel the urge to moderate or regulate how people communicate to other people. my concern is how people communicate with me.

i'll answer your question: i would give di canio the benefit of the doubt. here's the reasoning. di canio is not addressing me, i'm not a lazio fan or a fan of di canio. i don't care to moderate how other people communicate with each other. to me it's a non-event. if the media chooses to report it and i happen to read the article, i don't feel the need to pass judgement on di canio or the lazio fans. no harm no foul.

[ribbit]

Ribbit man yuh sounding like a man who just loves to hear himself.

What DiCanio did is subject to interpretion. Either interpretation may be accurate. In the same way that you discredit "mind reading", someone could discredit your take on the situation as gullible or naive.......

What you're effectively saying is :"Di Canio said he didn't mean to be racist, so I believe him"....what makes your assesment so superior to someone else's that you feel you have to label them as spineless ?

And the self righteous trip you're on talking about your "value system" as opposed to theirs is horse sh*t........(your determination that people are easily lead or spineless)........c'mon man...you could spew that vomit to the illiterate and expect them to eat it, but you and me know that is mess......your value system is as much influenced by ancient interpretations of the gestures (and DiCanio's stated "intention") as "theirs" is influenced by the present interpretation........so it's a matter of choice.....and neither is more noble, "spineless" or "easily led" than the other.......

One of the  differences between human beings and animals is our ability to use judgement and discretion to influence our actions, as opposed to relying purely on instinct. Regardless of whether Di Canio is a racist or not, he didn't exercise the necessary judgement and discretion......and as a result he offended people who looked up to him..........that's not noble....and he knows it. Racist or not he knows he was wrong, which is why he feels the need to explain himself........

In this day and age with people knowing what we know, it is not spineless or weak to be skeptical about Di Canio's intentions or even offended by his actions.......and if you're not open minded enough to see that then it's a waste having a discussion with you.

kicker, i said "benefit of the doubt". there is still doubt. i'm not trying to rush to a conclusion - on the contrary. others like the football organizations have a need to resolve what di canio means in order to exact a punishment. but i'm willing to leave it unresolved.
from the rest of your speech i see we agree that what di canio means is key.

[ribbit]

very impressive. either "you act or don't act" - to what ends? the only reason FIFA is doing anything is to look good. you act like they should get the f*cking nobel peace prize for their anti-racism campaign. you are right, it's not rocket science. IT'S BUSINESS.

Wow.... Nobel Peace Prize??? Where did THAT come from  I also said that is is not a Social Sciences thesis, which you are obviously holding on to. BTW, we are not talking exclusively about FIFA, we are talking about UEFA, the Italian FA, the Spanish FA etc... Are you saying that the only reason that any one of these organizations does anything is to look good, and by extension, the only reason any agent of social change does anything (no matter how small or large) is to "look good"? 

see my comments to filho on the difference between semiotics and semantics. banning a player, a team, a group of fans or a gesture is a great way for FIFA to "address" the situation to appease vocal anti-racists like yourself. i guess i'm not as sensitive as you are to mere gestures. how the hell do you survive in the Deep South anyway?


Again, no one is restricting the problem/solution to FIFA. And you still have not addressed the issue of acting NOW to deny racists an avenue to express themselves. Every idiot knows that the first step is immediate action. You spend a lot of time attacking the people on this thread who disagree with your opinion, but

• you have done nothing to advance you own "argument"
• you have done nothing to effectively disprove anyone else's arguments
• you have not addressed the fundamental issue of personal responsibility and responsibility for your actions. You are too caught up in "proving" some airy-fairy Social Sciences drivel about "a societal problem" ... yawn....
• instead you have resorted to wild invective (no one else has personally attacked anyone or even used obcenity to make their point)

All this rubbish about DiCanio's personal interpretation of the salute and "mind reading" and personal value systems.... ugh. At least be original.... Kicker and others have made the (obvious) point about personal responsibility, but I guess you did not get the memo
Oh, and by the way, the reason I "survive" in the Deep South is because the US is a nation of laws, and it is ILLEGAL to openly display racist behaviour, and do you know what, a lot of people actually frown on that sort of redneck behaviour... it all starts somewhere.

well, JDB is probably getting tips from filho on mind reading. i've made comments in another thread already on the political dimension to this issue in italy but everyone seems to insist it's a racism problem.
You are not impressing anyone with your knowledge of the "political dimension" to the problem. To anyone who reads and has a brain, this is obvious. The question is what to do about it... geez.
Anyway, cheers and Merry Christmas to all. 

[/b]

sorry cantona i thought you were commenting on the ruling to suspend di canio with your "act or don't act" remark. was that remark directed at a particular action in the article? what action are you referring to?

[Trini_fan]

DiCanio and others can't pick and choose the interpretation of the gesture... it IS a facist salute TODAY.

cantona, your statement above shows that political correctness has triumphed absolutely in this society.

explain... (forgive me for being dense  )

the salute has more than one interpretation and history from a long time. di canio is saying it's not meant to be racist or even political, but is meant to connect with the lazio fan base. he even got along well with shaka and his family. by a reasonable standard, ppl should give the man the benefit of the doubt and believe that he's not a racist. but with your statement above, it seem like that's not good enough - we have to eradicate his gesture of loyalty to appease the fans that were offended. that's definitive of political correctness - suppress expression so as not to offend anyone.

to me, it's more important that di canio disavows racism (which he has) than how he chooses to connect with his fans. we as a footballing community should keep the lines of communication open and learn to value what people MEAN rather than get offended by things like this. that is the essence of communication. instead we getting taken by symbolism.

all the measures that have been taken so far to combat racism in football have failed and will continue to fail because it's a social problem not a football problem. you could ban di canio, ban inter, give messina 3 pts, give marc zoro the trinity cross, ... that will not solve the underlying problem. they just grandstanding - trying to look like they doing something. if we really think "racism in football" has any meaning - that we could take racism and isolate it to just football - than we on the wrong path already.

I'm sorry my friend, but I cannot agree with your analysis. It has NOTHING to do with politcal correctness when someone is offended by a salute that is effectively racist. You talk about symbolism, but isn't Paolo's very use of the gesture a symolic way of "connecting" with his "people" (by the way, he has overtly said this)?  If you ask me, the PC instantiation here is the idea of "I can do what I want, no matter if the wider society is offended". Believe me, I (and many others on this board) live in a culture that eschews the rights of a just society in favour of the "rights" of the individual. It is all very touchy-feely and nice and theoretical to talk about racism being a societal issuse and all (an obvious and spurious argument), but what are you going to do about it? Nothing or something? It is (again) all well and good to talk about the wonderful societal changes that must be made to fix the problem, but in the meantime, we have a match on Saturday and jackasses on the terraces who want to take advantage of the weakness of the officials that allows ugly racist behaviour.

This is not rocket science, either you act or you don't.

I'm quite surprised at your definition of PC. They have a saying here about being able to ignore the elephant in the room; that my friend is PC and in this case, Paolo is the elephant.
And I'm sorry, we can't give the man the benefit of the doubt, he has already nailed his colours to the mast in a VERY public manner. It is RUBBISH to talk about Paolo publicly disavowing racism. Have you ever heard a racist calling himself racist? I live in the South, where today peolpe talk about "the South will rises again" and when you (a Black person) question them about what they mean, they get very quiet. Anyone can disavow racism with words; ask yourself, will Shaka make that salute (even in joke)?

He(Paolo)  identifies with the jackasses; this is public record. I think JDB spoke about people who do the wrong thing and then justify it by saying that "I didn't mean it that way" disingenious at best, dishonest and dangerous at worst.

Again, this isn't rocket science or a Social Sciences thesis; if you offend society, you have to pay the price. I'm not interested in singing "Kum By Ya" with Paolo and his ilk.

My 2 dinars...

This is obviously being blown way out of porportion.

Your argument of act or don't act does not hold water. Do you stop doing something because it is offensive to some people or do you simply use it when among those who do not find it offensive?

It is the same as some American gestures being offensive in other cultures. Do you stop using all together or do you simply use it in the right context when the right audience is present?

The man was using a symbol that would be understood by his fellow Romans. Seeing that it was his main audience at the time, it is understandable.

[JDB]

filho, from your comments you do not seem to be a lazio fan. a key point in this issue is that di canio is not addressing you or i with his salute. he's addressing some other group of people in the stadium - his fan base. why do you care how he addresses someone other than yourself? i don't feel the urge to moderate or regulate how people communicate to other people. my concern is how people communicate with me.

i'll answer your question: i would give di canio the benefit of the doubt. here's the reasoning. di canio is not addressing me, i'm not a lazio fan or a fan of di canio. i don't care to moderate how other people communicate with each other. to me it's a non-event.

This is basically a "right to free speach" argument which is fine but even this right has its restrictions especially in public arenas.

With rights come responsibilities and an individual or group does not exist in a vacuum. You cannot plead ignorance to the significance of your actions in the eyes of society. If the actions are accepted as being "racist" do not expect to be labelled "Roman" by society, whatever your motivations.

If you associate with a racist faction do not expect to be considered an exception who just happens to take solidarity with them because of common identity but not common  ideology.

if the media chooses to report it and i happen to read the article, i don't feel the need to pass judgement on di canio or the lazio fans. no harm no foul.

Well if Di Canio identifies with a group that has racist chants, racist banners, uses an accepted racist salute (but only for tradional reasons) then call me judgemental but I reserve the right to label them as racists.

Shaka should be no different.

[JDB]

This is obviously being blown way out of porportion.

Your argument of act or don't act does not hold water. Do you stop doing something because it is offensive to some people or do you simply use it when among those who do not find it offensive?

It is the same as some American gestures being offensive in other cultures. Do you stop using all together or do you simply use it in the right context when the right audience is present?

The man was using a symbol that would be understood by his fellow Romans. Seeing that it was his main audience at the time, it is understandable.

This argument ignores the main fact that the fans that he was addressing are a racist faction. There is no debate about that, it is well documented.

I am sure that most Romans would disassociate themselves from those actions so to label them as "Romans" is an attempt to not call it what it is.

Also what is his main audience when he is playing football in a televised game in a 60,000 seater stadium? Was he doing it privately among only those who don't find it offensive?

Did he use it in the right context then and are we intruding on the private and personal goings on of Di Canio and company.

The sickening thing is the ongoing attempts of people ignore these groups, looking for justifications and defending indefensible actions. Why is there this desire to give Di Canio freedom to express himself as opposed to doing everything to stamp out the prejudice and hate of the people he emboldens?

[kicker]

filho, from your comments you do not seem to be a lazio fan. a key point in this issue is that di canio is not addressing you or i with his salute. he's addressing some other group of people in the stadium - his fan base. why do you care how he addresses someone other than yourself? i don't feel the urge to moderate or regulate how people communicate to other people. my concern is how people communicate with me.

i'll answer your question: i would give di canio the benefit of the doubt. here's the reasoning. di canio is not addressing me, i'm not a lazio fan or a fan of di canio. i don't care to moderate how other people communicate with each other. to me it's a non-event. if the media chooses to report it and i happen to read the article, i don't feel the need to pass judgement on di canio or the lazio fans. no harm no foul.

it doesn't matter who he claims to be communicating with if he does it in a public forum. When you do something in public, you are communicating with the public....directly, indirectly, intentionally or by accident.....The same way you choose to ignore, other choose not to.

Like I say, whether you choose to label him as a racist or not.....what he did was disrespectful,......and I don't know about you but I can't defend disrespect.

[Filho]

filho, from your comments you do not seem to be a lazio fan. a key point in this issue is that di canio is not addressing you or i with his salute. he's addressing some other group of people in the stadium - his fan base. why do you care how he addresses someone other than yourself? i don't feel the urge to moderate or regulate how people communicate to other people. my concern is how people communicate with me.

i'll answer your question: i would give di canio the benefit of the doubt. here's the reasoning. di canio is not addressing me, i'm not a lazio fan or a fan of di canio. i don't care to moderate how other people communicate with each other. to me it's a non-event. if the media chooses to report it and i happen to read the article, i don't feel the need to pass judgement on di canio or the lazio fans. no harm no foul.

ribbit.....I have no problems with Lazio, and think Di Canio is a very talented, under-rated footballer. I especially liked him at West Ham. Di Canio can and will do as he pleases, but your ideaology of inaction unless it directly affects you is weak and if everyone felt that way...well....we would probably all be speaking German right now   the fact that Di Canio did not address you or me is not a key issue. To also believe that all he did was greet fellow romans is...well...funny. The roman salute died with Rome, just as the Swastika is no longer a symbol of peace and you would not go around telling people you are gay to express what a great mood you are in. I choose to believe that Di Canio is more intelligent than he is letting on and made the gesture to offend....which is why he remarked that the gesture was also a reaction to how badly he was treated during the game by opposing fans. anyhow...I am just staing my opinion. we disagree. no harm no foul there either

[JayTheWrecker]

To ribbit,

you state that there is some doubt as to Di Canio's intent, and that he should be giving the benefit of that doubt

hmm...... i would say that the "Roman" salute to a fan base that has a notorious facist element is very damning, but the clincher for me is the Mussolini tattoo

sorry, in my mind there is no doubt, he's as guilty as a puppy sitting next to a pile of dog poo

[Cantona007]

This is obviously being blown way out of porportion.

Your argument of act or don't act does not hold water. Do you stop doing something because it is offensive to some people or do you simply use it when among those who do not find it offensive?

It is the same as some American gestures being offensive in other cultures. Do you stop using all together or do you simply use it in the right context when the right audience is present?

The man was using a symbol that would be understood by his fellow Romans. Seeing that it was his main audience at the time, it is understandable.

This argument ignores the main fact that the fans that he was addressing are a racist faction. There is no debate about that, it is well documented.

I am sure that most Romans would disassociate themselves from those actions so to label them as "Romans" is an attempt to not call it what it is.

Also what is his main audience when he is playing football in a televised game in a 60,000 seater stadium? Was he doing it privately among only those who don't find it offensive?

Did he use it in the right context then and are we intruding on the private and personal goings on of Di Canio and company.

The sickening thing is the ongoing attempts of people ignore these groups, looking for justifications and defending indefensible actions. Why is there this desire to give Di Canio freedom to express himself as opposed to doing everything to stamp out the prejudice and hate of the people he emboldens?

Well said. I have a really simple question: Why would you, (when given the choice) willingly choose to offend anyone? Choices, people... choices.
Peace to all.

[vibetrini]

Aight fellas - non ah we know d man personally, except for probably Shaka. And Shaka say dat d man pull good with his family, so I wouldn't jump to say d man iz a racist, cuz fascism DOES NOT EQUAL racism. Racism can be a subset of fascist ideas for some who support fascism, just as how some people who support democracy are racist.

And doh be saying that Lazio is a racist club and Lazio fans are racist... you CANNOT generalize like dat.

[JDB]

Aight fellas - non ah we know d man personally, except for probably Shaka. And Shaka say dat d man pull good with his family, so I wouldn't jump to say d man iz a racist, cuz fascism DOES NOT EQUAL racism. Racism can be a subset of fascist ideas for some who support fascism, just as how some people who support democracy are racist.

And doh be saying that Lazio is a racist club and Lazio fans are racist... you CANNOT generalize like dat.

Nobody is genralizing. I have referred to a "factuion" of lazio fans and everybody acknowledges that it is only a group of Lazio fans.

As for Facist vs racist. That is more sugar coating.

When they boo Zorro, the black Roma players and black players that visit from other clubs are they objecting to their political ideology or their skin colour?