Re: Brendan Nash to play with Doutta Stars
Posted: Tue Oct 04, 2011 9:18 am
there is an obvious, clear, relevant and valid argument I presented to explain my oppostion to sknash
nobyd is dealing wih that argument. all people are doing is presentign catergorical responses with the skimpy comparison between what enmgalnd and australis does being good for the westindies.
the gander argument of what is good for the goose.
but westindindies and our story, conditians and reallty derived there-off is not australi and england... nor new zeland or canada.
they are white with their story, reality there-off, credible in the world because of their powe...r which is greater than ours, derived from that unequal relationship, and like the social difference betwen rich and poor can do as tey plesae while we watch with our hands in our pockets, with the job of reconstructing ourselves and our reality still to be done.
there are several types of westindians, african derived, indo derived, white derived and a host of mixtures in-between. and here are coresponding ideological outlooks as a result of this ethnic realit,y and how the westindian system works according to skin colour and hair consistentcy.
if a westindian hair is straight and he is brown to white they usually are doing far better than darker ones socially and side with staus quo which would be pro the inclusion of all who are not blac, in any aspect of social reality...especially if they are forrin. the forrin aspect seems to re-inforce the senes of strength of westindians who side with the status quo.
yet the westindies is a backward place socially, materially, infrastructurally, economically, the health and welfare of the people, their educaton etc. that 'must' be corrected and can only be corected by the development of a sense of independence of the westindian peopleand action to effect such independence but the social division as described above prevents such development of which the inclusion of nash is emblematic.
a sense of independence recognises westindian reality and puts westindian concerns and
westindians first in the considerations of the people, on way to development, independence and prosperity. nothing of the kind will be achieved given the way westindians operate now. if westindians cannot see my argument in opposition to skansh, cast it aside and include skansh anyway, support it far and wide... that exposes their own state of development clearly. and it is not a good one. it is a terrible state to be in, a condition that westindians themselves do not realise they are in..a clear infirmity - an inability to see their own best interests and to act accordingly
nobyd is dealing wih that argument. all people are doing is presentign catergorical responses with the skimpy comparison between what enmgalnd and australis does being good for the westindies.
the gander argument of what is good for the goose.
but westindindies and our story, conditians and reallty derived there-off is not australi and england... nor new zeland or canada.
they are white with their story, reality there-off, credible in the world because of their powe...r which is greater than ours, derived from that unequal relationship, and like the social difference betwen rich and poor can do as tey plesae while we watch with our hands in our pockets, with the job of reconstructing ourselves and our reality still to be done.
there are several types of westindians, african derived, indo derived, white derived and a host of mixtures in-between. and here are coresponding ideological outlooks as a result of this ethnic realit,y and how the westindian system works according to skin colour and hair consistentcy.
if a westindian hair is straight and he is brown to white they usually are doing far better than darker ones socially and side with staus quo which would be pro the inclusion of all who are not blac, in any aspect of social reality...especially if they are forrin. the forrin aspect seems to re-inforce the senes of strength of westindians who side with the status quo.
yet the westindies is a backward place socially, materially, infrastructurally, economically, the health and welfare of the people, their educaton etc. that 'must' be corrected and can only be corected by the development of a sense of independence of the westindian peopleand action to effect such independence but the social division as described above prevents such development of which the inclusion of nash is emblematic.
a sense of independence recognises westindian reality and puts westindian concerns and
westindians first in the considerations of the people, on way to development, independence and prosperity. nothing of the kind will be achieved given the way westindians operate now. if westindians cannot see my argument in opposition to skansh, cast it aside and include skansh anyway, support it far and wide... that exposes their own state of development clearly. and it is not a good one. it is a terrible state to be in, a condition that westindians themselves do not realise they are in..a clear infirmity - an inability to see their own best interests and to act accordingly
If you feel insecure about your existence thats your problem, nat NASH's or ours. Last I checked, Brendan Nash was eligable to represent the WI in cricket.
