Squarespace are a private company and it is not unreasonable for them to have a policy on racism on the sites they host. And sentences like "I would no more accept the authority of a black Prime Minister or a black Queen than a Hindu would accept a hot roast beef sandwich", as penned by Andrew McCann on ATW, are - whatever else they might be - quite clearly racist.
SS are not obliged to permit such language on their sites. Why should they be?
David Vance can invite whatever guest bloggers onto his site that he wishes, but I don't see why I should be invited to boycott Squarespace for what seems to me an understandable reaction, or perhaps over-reaction, to some pretty strong sentiments.
Oh, sure, a private company can have whatever policies they wish.
But the comment you pick out might be 'prejudice' but it's hardly 'racism' sufficient to breach anyone's (normal) boundaries. No-one's calling for violence to be done to anyone, are they?
And I've a sneaking suspicion that if the positions were reversed, they wouldn't be taking any action against someone who expressed similar sentiments about white 'rulers'.
2 comments:
Well, now, I'm not sure about this at all.
Squarespace are a private company and it is not unreasonable for them to have a policy on racism on the sites they host. And sentences like "I would no more accept the authority of a black Prime Minister or a black Queen than a Hindu would accept a hot roast beef sandwich", as penned by Andrew McCann on ATW, are - whatever else they might be - quite clearly racist.
SS are not obliged to permit such language on their sites. Why should they be?
David Vance can invite whatever guest bloggers onto his site that he wishes, but I don't see why I should be invited to boycott Squarespace for what seems to me an understandable reaction, or perhaps over-reaction, to some pretty strong sentiments.
Oh, sure, a private company can have whatever policies they wish.
But the comment you pick out might be 'prejudice' but it's hardly 'racism' sufficient to breach anyone's (normal) boundaries. No-one's calling for violence to be done to anyone, are they?
And I've a sneaking suspicion that if the positions were reversed, they wouldn't be taking any action against someone who expressed similar sentiments about white 'rulers'.
Post a Comment