Cricket whites

In a letter to the editor of the Royal Gazette last week, Dr. Eva Hodgson wrote:

I am not a sports person but I do know that cricket has been in the hands of the black Bermudian clubs with the Cricket Board being made up of black Bermudians. But I have been made to understand that once they had a $100,000 to pay out they went to look for a white non-Bermudian and created a special CEO role for him despite his history.

Why, after all of the decades that they have been involved in cricket and administering clubs did they need a white non-Bermudian to administer their recently acquired $11 million?

I cannot blame white folks for that decision because it was made by all black men. I cannot even blame the Government as much as I might like to do so. They were all black men, long involved in cricket, who felt that they must have a white administrator now that they had money, even if they had to change their constitution. Most of them probably had not voted for the UBP but they still felt the need “to return, symbolically, to the Plantation”.

I have since been contacted by Marc Wetherhill, a white Bermudian who is the secretary of the Bermuda Cricket Board, who points out a number of errors in Dr. Hodgson's letter:

"Mrs. Hodgson states that on receipt of the recent government grant the Bermuda Cricket Board “went to look for a white non-Bermudian”. This is incorrect, the individual concerned has served on the Board for seven years and has been an employee of the Board for the last 3 or 4 years."

Furthermore,

"Mrs Hodgson states the Bermuda Cricket Board is “made up of black Bermudians” and “all black men”. This is incorrect, the secretary of the Bermuda Cricket Board is white (me) and I am about to start my fourth year of service. In addition and for the record there are actually three women currently on the Bermuda Cricket Board."

As for Dr. Hodgson's comments about the BCB changing its constitution, Mr. Wetherhill says:

"The BCB are working extremely hard to implement changes to bring the BCB up to a certification level for a not for profit organisation. We gave an undertaking to government that a review of the constitution and corporate governance procedures would be undertaken to ensure that Bermuda Cricket Board maintained current best practice for all not for profit organisations and if necessary a revision would be undertaken. In addition the private sector require that organisations that request funds have a minimum level of corporate governance in place, amendments will ensure that the BCB is able to continue to raise money in the private sector."

Comments

[Phil on 14.04.06 at 20:09]

novote

Stimulating debate is not the primary purpose of every post on this site. Some, such as this one, are more about conveying information. If you find the resulting comments uninteresting, don't read them.

[Bill Cook on 14.04.06 at 20:40]

Denis,

Originally it was thought that Bermuda would be suitable for growing Tobacca and possibly Sugar Cane so that would have been the connection with the Plantation idea but it was found that the soil conditions or whatever made that idea unworkable and so we did not have plantations as such just farms and fishing and shipbuilding and various other interesting things Hmmm !!

[J Starling on 14.04.06 at 20:46]

I recommend the book 'Slavery in Bermuda.' It was written in the 70s, but should be available in the library. I forget the name of the author. Jonathan Smith? I know that Calvin Smith - now senator - wrote the foreword to it. Bermudian slaves worked alot in the salt industry as well I believe.

[stuart J Hayward on 14.04.06 at 20:49]

Slavery in Bermuda was written by James Smith,former Clerk to the House of Assembly and an all-round nice guy.

[Bermudian on 14.04.06 at 20:51]

Denis,

i was referring to Dr. Brown's plantation remarks. I was trying to explain to you the extreme nature of using slaves as a reference, the same way Dr. Brown used plantations as a reference in his remarks.

[J Starling on 14.04.06 at 21:43]

James Smith. Thankyou Stuart Hayward for the correction. At least I had it half right. Its a pretty detailed historical account. The Black Jacobins by CLR James is also quite useful concerning Bermuda's history here (names such as Telemaque and Commisiong come to us via san Domingo refugees I believe). Anyone seeking an insight into ruling PLP mentalities might find the works of Frantz Fanton and George Padmore, as well as Micheal Manley, to be of great use. Good reading.

[Bill Cook on 14.04.06 at 22:04]

Denis,

Any time you spend time pointing out mans inhumanity to man your time is well spent do not be deterred from pointing out that which is morally incorrect.

To your own heart be true and let your conscience be your guide and stay strong my friend.

[novote on 15.04.06 at 08:48]

It's up to you whether you listen to feedback, Limey...but I'm certainly listening to yours. Will tune in again when the incessant racism repeat shows end. Over and out.

[No Vote2 on 15.04.06 at 10:04]

Race is only the tool. The actual objective here is getting the UBP back into power by any means necessary. That means running silent about UBP hypocrisy and repeatedly exaggerating the flawed logic of staunch PLP supporters. A classic case of blue tinted glasses.

[Uncle Elvis on 15.04.06 at 11:01]

That's right, NoVote2. That's absolutely the objective.

It's not about actually trying to get the best possible Government for Bermuda, be they UBP or PLP.
Nah. We all have this agenda to get the UBP in because we're all a bunch of white bastards who hate black people.

As for exaggerating, I actually haven't seen much exaggerating when it comes to talking about flawed logic. It speaks for itself.

And.. um... how can it be a "Classic" case of something that isn't a classic? The saying is "Seeing the world through rose coloured glasses", not "blue tinted".

Jesus. If you don't have anything constructive to add, keep it to yourself.

[silencedogood on 15.04.06 at 11:47]

Denis,

I wasn't trying to be critical, just pointing out the irony. I think technically it may have been a poor word choice, but I certainly didn't intend for it to become the focus of the discussion or take away from the overall validity of your well thought out letter.

Bermudian,

You seem to be generalizing quite a bit with your 1-5 list in assuming all expats get at least one.

Try speaking to the east indian chefs at many restaurants, portuguese laborers, or other blue collar/service workers. Or hell, talk to some of the canadians employed in the local market who work over 40 hours per week, get about 40 k per year and two weeks to go home, and no housing allowance. I think they would be better off working at ice queen.

Your comments apply mainly to executives in IB whose skills, education, and off-island opportunities often mandate those perks.

And even if people choose to be here does that make it ok? Exploitation is still exploitation. Would a bermuda-based sweatshop be ok if it was stocked with 12 year old honduran children who chose to be here? Maybe that's how we have so many Gucci bags at Lusso?

Surely a supposedly "labour" party would not want to allow this, but it indirectly encourages it. I'm sure JStarling could tell you better than I how the labour movements of the 20th century attempted to foster a global community among these groups. I guess that got stopped at customs.

The expat/bermudian division is yet another way to create an us/them divide to justify doing unto one group what we wouldn't want to have done to us. For as much as Bermuda touts itself as a hospitable place it's not very hospitable to residents, only foriegners who leave in 21 days.

There are far to many of these divisions and Denis correctly points out that sooner or later it will go too far and then this island's economy is toast.

[tilti on 15.04.06 at 12:59]

Silencedogood,
that was an excellent post, and I would add to Denis' point that while these people do come willingly and are not technicallly slaves, first world countries have economically enslaved the countries that they come from to the point where workers have no choice but to leave thier families and homes to earn US dollars. Unfair trade agreements, trading blocks and impossible immigration requirements have robbed billions of people of their economic autonomy. So I don't think that Denis is off the mark at all. There are no chain gangs, but the situation is a form of slavery that we do little to overturn because we all benefit from it.

[J Starling on 15.04.06 at 13:16]

Silencedogood is of course right in that the labour movement did seek to unify th einternational working class. They continue to do so today. The posion of racism in Bermuda has hampered the full development of this here. As I have said elsewhere, the majority of the working class here is black. The ex-pat working class are currently primarily Asian. Due to the confusion of race and class here the development of an interracial working class consciousness has been stunted here, but it is growing. We see in the States the development of the immigration movement and the call for a "Gran Paro Nacional" (national work stoppage of immigrants) which is being supported the labour movements there for this coming Mayday. The mood there is 'an injury to one is an injury to all.' The immigrants here and there are being exploited. They face low and unpaid wages, dangerous slave-like working conditions and exposure to toxins, violence and extortion by bosses (and in some cases police harrasment), racist and general inhumane treatment, no political and trade union rights and deportations for organising trade unions - these are all very real and I am doing my best to keep accounts of them. To a degree the workers are confused and think that the immigrants are causing a depression of wages, but it is the bosses taking advantage of their isolation from the working class that allows for this exploitation. With the movement in the US, just as we saw with the desegregation movement, it will come here too, it is only a matter of how and when. I am confident that all it will take is for some short-sighted xenophobic reaction by government or a media documented incident of violence against these exploited immigrants to ignite a mass labour movement here in support of these guestworkers. I know that the BIU has gone out of its way to assist with mediation between some immigrants and their employers and is trying to detail the exploitation of thee workers. They shouldn't be afraid to come public with their grievances, even if they choose anomynity at first. This exploitation must be condemned as it allows the exploitation of us all. Working class internationalism hasn't been stopped at customs, but it has been delayed.

[SmokingGun on 15.04.06 at 13:17]

"Try speaking to the east indian chefs at many restaurants, portuguese laborers, or other blue collar/service workers. Or hell, talk to some of the canadians employed in the local market who work over 40 hours per week, get about 40 k per year and two weeks to go home, and no housing allowance. I think they would be better off working at ice queen." - silencedogood

Here here. Although I think the canadians put in more like 60 hours a week if you are talking about those that you see stocking shelves and helping customers at the "GroceryStore". Although no-one deserves the abuse of late night drunkards such as at Ice Queen.

On another note:

"A classic case of blue tinted glasses." - Posted by No Vote2

Actually it's definitely more of a hot pink. Sort of like the colour you would see on a fresh limey that just spent his first day at Mickey's on Elbow beach. Roasted and toasted.

[Bermudian on 15.04.06 at 14:37]

silence,

your examples only further state the difference i was trying to point out. Those Canadians may not get a housing allowance, but they received at least one of the other options. This is the whole point of the argument...the fact that these people are not modern day slaves at all.

Modern day slaves is a very strong term. Expats in Bermuda are not slaves. You further weaken your argument by trying to compare expats to Honduran child labourers. You honestly think that is a valid comparison? If it is, do you think these expats would mind trading positions with these sweatshop employees? Besides that, where are these "bermuda-based sweatshops"?

Come on now, let's be real about this. There is a difference between expats and immigrants. The primary reason for expats coming to a country is to reap some sort of economic benefits. They do not have the long term interest in staying in the country, adopting local customs and local culture. Immigrants on the other hand are something completely different. They migrate to a country with the hope of becoming a citizen of that country someday.

I think that distinction needs to be made.

I'm sorry but the comparisons you are making are not valid. And it's great to see everyone out here patting each other on the back, but that does little to deter the fact that these expats are not slaves...especially the Canadians of all people. If Bermuda is so bad, why dont these Canadians come back to Canada (where I am right now) and get a job at Provigo, IGA, and any of the many grocery stores that litter the nation?

I think you are the ones who should talk to these "east indian chefs at many restaurants, portuguese laborers, or other blue collar/service workers". Ask them how their house back home is working out for their family (you know, the house they bought from their 'slave labour' in bermuda).

The bottom line of all of this is that slavery does not have the element of choice or free will. If you can't understand that, then there is no point trying to debate this or anything else.

[SmokingGun on 15.04.06 at 14:58]

"If Bermuda is so bad, why dont these Canadians come back to Canada (where I am right now) and get a job at Provigo, IGA, and any of the many grocery stores that litter the nation?"

Because what they do earn is tax free?

I think we all realize we are talking about "psuedo-slavery" in Bermuda. There is no real comparison to the harsh realities of true slavery that does exist in many parts of the world. However I have to admit I have seen a lot of Bermudians and some expats (Canadian as well) who feel they have some right to treat people as if they are nothing more than servants placed on earth to heed their beck and call.

Ah, Bermuda: Living in a fantasy.

[silencedogood on 15.04.06 at 15:46]

Bermudian,

I'm not saying every ex-pat is being exploited, but do you honestly believe it is not happening here?

One example: When you get back from Canada go eat at House of India, ask the guys working there about the hours they work, what they get paid, and when was the last time they have been able to go home to see their families.

As for canucks--they are leaving. When the US dollar conversion is not so good it's not worthwhile for them to stay unless they are from places like Saskatchewan or Nova Scotia which have little to no opportunity.

The free will you speak of is a bit more complicated. What do you do when an unscrupulous employer fabricates or glosses over the situation an expat will face upon arriving. Some, not all, find themselves here having gone into alot of debt to move, quit a job, no friends or relatives, etc. They pay all the same outrageous expenses we do but can't change jobs without the government giving them the equivalent of a full cavity search. If you care about your career you don't want to change jobs without working at a company for at least two years. Plus, if you just want to go home you may not have the 5K+ to move all your things back or a job to go to once there. Most will try to ride it out.

Its alot easier than you think to get trapped in a bad situation, maybe not forever, but if you are on a two year permit and are trapped for two years you may not be a slave but you are screwed.

[Bermudian on 15.04.06 at 15:49]

Ok, so now we will change the terminology to our liking.

So maybe the Canadian-psuedo-slave should go back to Canada where they will be taxed? Or stay here and be a psuedo-slave? I think a slave, and even a psuedo-slave, would much rather go back to the country where they aren't a slave (or psuedo-slave), dont you think?

But a slave (or psuedo-slave) wouldn't have that choice at all. These expats do have that choice. They are not being held here against their will... or are they? That would be news to me.

[Bermudian on 15.04.06 at 16:02]

silence,

In your example, I am getting the impression that you are looking at this from your own perspective and not from the perspective of this House of India employee. I have worked with many of these low-level earners and I have talked to these people. I know what they get paid and I know they are not able to see their families as much as they would like to.

The thing you are not understanding is that to them, what they are getting paid is worth very little in Bermuda, but the money they are able to send back to their families at home is worth much more than it does in Bermuda. They are able to build their families a home, pay for their children to have a brighter future. I'm not sure what you are suggesting when you say i should ask what they are paid.

Should they be paid more? The problem with that is once you do that, you will get more people applying for the job and eventually it will be less worthwhile to hire someone from abroad. It's the same line of thinking when companies go to developing nations - they can't pay a factory worker the same wage as someone in their home country because if that happened, the factory worker would be getting paid more than a doctor!

Regarding free will, these expats you describe were tricked into coming to Bermuda and now they're stuck here. Personally, I think $5000 is a small price to pay for my freedom (assuming these people are psuedo-slaves as described above). As for the two years of hell, perhaps they should have figured out what they were getting into before they actually signed their life over to this company for 2 years. That's just poor business skills and decision making capabilities.

I thought that was one of the first thing they taught in business school - understand where your offers are coming from before you determine their actual merit and value.

[SmokingGun on 15.04.06 at 16:04]

Bermudian - it sounds to me that you are either needing to twist the context or you just have a mighty chip on your shoulder when it comes to expats.

OK I'll go with it. Bermuda no longer has any slave masters, we just have a bunch of abusive racist discriminating nationalists.

[Bermudian on 15.04.06 at 16:29]

SG,

Here we go. Yes, dismiss what I've said by insisting I have a chip on my shoulder.

I have not twisted anything - I have simply stated my opinion on what was said regarding slavery and expats in Bermuda.

For the record, I have absolutely nothing against expats, I think that some (not all) are important to the economy and Bermuda's well being, as with any other nation. I think you do not fully understand the concept of an expatriate worker which is why you are having difficulty coming to terms with expatriates and their rights within any foreign country.

[SmokingGun on 15.04.06 at 16:45]

Bermudian - I'm not dismissing what you said earlier, I'm just getting the sense you feel the need to drive home the fact that expats should either lump it or leave it. Which I have a real issue with when it comes to the blatant out-right discrimination and abuse that seems to get heaped on quite a few of them.

Being a Bermudian who has actually been an expat myself I can honestly say a lot of what goes on in Bermuda is pretty shameful considering we tend to hold ourselves in such high esteem.

[Bermudian on 15.04.06 at 17:08]

Like I said, I have nothing against expats. I do not tolerate any discrimination against them and I have not attempted to drive that anywhere from what I have said.

What I have said (and i'll say it again for you) is that there is no valid comparison between slavery / psuedo-slavery and expats in Bermuda.

[SmokingGun on 15.04.06 at 17:22]

The definition of pseudo is "not genuine" so I think we agreed on the use of the word "slavery" by itself was incorrect quite some time ago.
However in my honest opinion "pseudo-slavery" is alive and well in Bermuda. Call it what you will; abuse, entrapment, manipulation, fear-mongering or discrimination, it's just not cricket.

Had to keep it on topic somehow. ;)

[silencedogood on 15.04.06 at 17:24]

Bermudian,

Smoking Gun has really put it better, with more brevity than my response would be. So instead let me ask you this:

1) Why is it ok to exploit someone just because the financial rewards might be better than in their home country?

Does morality and/or a sense of justice factor in at all?

2) Do you think this has any effect on how Bermuda is viewed internationally?

Its ability to attract the best talent when importing labor of any kind?

Tourism as these people tell their families and friends about conditions here?

3) Given that Bermuda relies heavily on expats, is it wise to alienate them so they either don't care about the island's future or are actively hostile to it? See the speech from Fight Club when they have the mayor in the urinal.

This just seems incredibly short sighted. Prove me wrong.

[J Starling on 15.04.06 at 17:34]

Back to the cricket. I think Dr. Hodgson goofed up on this and it just goes to prove we should be careful not to speak authoritatively on a subject when one doesn't know enough of the facts to do so.

[Canuck in Bermuda on 15.04.06 at 18:02]

A lot of sweatshop workers are there because they make more than they would elsewhere. A lot of our old technology goes to 3rd world countries to be "disposed of" - there are a ton of nasty nasty things in high tech equipment, and it's creating environmental wastelands... locals get paid quite well for the "privilage" though. In both those cases, people are much better off financially (in the short term) than they would otherwise be, still doesn't make it right though.

Relativism is a very dangerous path to go down

[Bermudian on 15.04.06 at 18:18]

silence,

1. no it is not ok to exploit anyone. and when it does come to having to face discrimination of some kind, i do not believe that it is warranted (e.g. the workers at ice queen). I, on the other hand, do not believe that a Canadian making $40000 a year is a slave of any kind nor a pseudo slave of any kind (doesn't appear to be a slave when the wages he/she is earning is above the average per capita rate in Canada)

2. yes it does have an effect on tourism and ability to attract talent.

3. no it isn't wise to alienate expats.

You are moving away from what we have been talking about. I dont see why I should try to prove you wrong with the above questions when I agree with them. But I am not disputing any of what you just said. I was disputing slavery and expats in Bermuda

SG,

Cleverly left out the other half of the definition - not genuine..."but having the appearance of".

"abuse, entrapment, manipulation, fear-mongering or discrimination" - sounds like something endemic to the companies that come here rather than the actual faults of the country itself.

Clearly there are varying types of expats in the country. This discussion has become so muddied that it doesn't make any sense anymore.

Just remember this, discrimination is much different than slavery and pseudo-slavery, and that is the distinction you have failed to understand.

[Bermudian on 15.04.06 at 18:21]

"Relativism is a very dangerous path to go down"

Canuck,

you are right with that. And that was drifting away from the original argument when we went onto that tangent.

People should be treated with dignity and respect. But just because this does not occur does not mean it is equated to (pseudo) slavery.

[Canuck in Bermuda on 15.04.06 at 18:25]

Oh, and just so we're clear and we know I'm not complaining... while I don't get anywhere near the package desribed by Bermudian (way way up there), I'm pretty much happy as ya know, maybe not a clam but at least some other sort of mollusk so far ;)

[Bermudian on 15.04.06 at 18:30]

Canuck,

If you actually take the time to read what I wrote then you will understand what I was saying.

I did not say that you (or any expat for that matter) receives the whole package. What I did say though was that a slave would not get any of that and more, including a living wage, which I assume you do get. It may not be the wage you want, but I can almost guarantee Mr. Canuck that it's enough for you to live comfortably in your home country.

[SmokingGun on 15.04.06 at 18:39]

Bermudian - trust me, I'm not that clever. :)

I hope you don't think the only abuse is found in the "companies that come here". It's very much alive in the companies (and even dare I say our government) that have been here all along.

But anyway, you are correct, this subject has become very muddled and as Canuck in Bermuda points out it all seems to be based on relativism.
So relatively speaking I'll simply suggest that discrimination might be considered by some to be psuedo-slavery. Not genuine but having the appearance of.

[silencedogood on 15.04.06 at 18:43]

Right all around that this is straying too far from the original topic so I'll leave my comments as they are.

Thanks for clarifying your views Bermudian.

[Bermudian on 15.04.06 at 18:47]

SG,

Agreed. I would even agree that some discrimination scenarios do have hints of your "pseudo-slavery", particularly workers who receive poor wages, have to live in deplorable conditions, are abused by their employer and do not have the option of leaving.

The $40K+ expat sitting up there in his office working 40+ hours a week who is rarely harassed by a local (often a poorer local)? I dont think that is pseudo-slavery at all. But like you said, I guess some would.

[Phil on 15.04.06 at 18:49]

This thread has gone off topic.

Subsequent comments should be restricted to Dr. Hodgson's remarks about the BCB. All others will be deleted.

[Two Cents on 17.04.06 at 10:29]

Who would like to give odds that assuming it is pointed out to Dr. Hodgson that her remarks about the BCB, were at best incorrect and at worst misleading and written only to stir the pot, that she will apologize in her next column or will she "move the goal posts" and continue her sky is falling, doom & gloom prophecies regardless of the erroneous info that she continues to pass along as the gospel truth.

[Onion on 17.04.06 at 12:09]

Denis,

I read your piece in the RG. I think you need to read Dr, Hodgson's letter in a more multi-dimensional fashion. Your idealism is admirable but you are not giving proper credit to the point that she is making. I did not see her as critisizing white expats. She was criticising blacks for not having enough confidence in themselves to put other blacks in positions of power and responsibility. She was speaking to a slave mentality amongst many blacks who honestly do believe that they are not good enough and that whites are more up to the job. She is speaking to an inferiority complex that still exists amongst many.

[charles on 17.04.06 at 15:12]

Onion,

Is it not possible that they did infact have enough confidence in themselves to know that maybe just maybe the white guy was the better choice? Just because they didn't play up to the home crowd does not mean they did not do the right thing. Maybe Dr. Hodgson ought to have inquired before making this commentary. If she did then she should have made it known.

[Onion on 17.04.06 at 16:31]

Charles,

I have no clue what went into their reasoning in appointing this guy. Maybe they thought he was the best man. However, Dr. Hodgson saw it from another perspective and she was attacking what she saw as the reasoning that went into his appointment. Should she have done more research before speaking? Maybe. I do not pretend to know.

I was responding to Denis Pitcher's assertion that Dr. Hodgson was criticising white expats. He missed the point. I took her comment as being more of an intraracial issue amongst blacks than an interracial attack on white expats. Whether you agree or disagree with her comments is another question. It is merely food for thought.

Denis,

I think it is a shame that you have such a shallow interpretation of Dr. Hodgson's writings. You state in the RG,

"While I cannot confirm or deny that whites may or may not have promoted segregation in the past for I did not live in those days, I can suggest that efforts are being made today to unify our people by at least some, but not those Dr. Hodgson appears to support."

If you want to move forward to promote unity, don't be so naive and ignorant of the past. It is one thing not to dwell on the past. It is another to be ignorant of it. You say you cannot confirm or deny the promotion of segregation in the past but you can confirm quotes from Abraham Lincoln - a former slave master? Go enhance your personal education and read some of her books. You might learn something about Bermuda's history.

You then also make the false assumption that Dr. Hodgson speaks on behalf or in support of the PLP. That could not be further from the truth. She has been one of the biggest critics of the PLP. You may have noticed that this unrelenting and tenacious author and scholar has not been offered any senate seat and you rarely see her sitting on any plum government boards. That is because she speaks her mind fearlessly. She will give credit where it is due and she will criticize where she feels it is warranted, regardless of which party is in power. She has independent wealth and she does not have to run after perks the way that some politicians on both sides of the house operate. This makes her an unsavoury character to have around for some senior politicians who are used to being surrounded by yes men and women.

You may not always agree with her comments but you dismiss them as those made by some Johnny-come-lately upstart who simply wants to stir the pot for personal gain. For the same reasons given above, she has nothing to gain from doing this. Given that, by your own admission, you are too young to understand Bermuda's history why don't ypu show some deference to someone who clearly does, instead of flying off on this tangent as though you are leader of the ELO ("Expat Liberation Organisation").

[SmokingGun on 17.04.06 at 17:00]

I'm with Two Cents. I would like to hear Dr. Hodgson's response to Mr. Wetherhill and explain herself as to why she feels the black members of the cricket board are so dumb as to forget that their decisions should only be based on the colour of skin.

Onion, I do not understand why anyone would try to even come up with a reason as to why to defend her choosing the cricket board's selection as an example of the point she is trying to make. The simple fact is she has totally undermined the whole thing she argues for by questioning a decision made by this group of people. She should apologise to them and come up with some more legitimate examples. She may well have a valid point she is trying to make but it does neither her nor anyone else any good to handle it the way she has.

[silencedogood on 17.04.06 at 17:01]

Come now Onion, you are being unfair to Denis.

Dr. Hodgson writes a racial rant based on poor research and knee-jerk reactions and you say "maybe" she should have dug for the facts more but then you skewer Denis for his youth and honesty while praising Dr. Hodgson as a history expert?

Double standard alert

No one, no matter how old they are can be an expert at everything and to me, Denis admitting that he is young and speaking only to current issues gives him more credibility in my mind than someone holding themselves out as an expert while writing an article for publication who didn't check her facts.

He's offering his opinion and qualifying his statement as such, which makes him a much more credible source than Eva who seems to believe she knows everything. I suppose that's why she didn't do her research.

I'm not saying anyone shouldn't learn history, but I'm sure Denis isn't completely ignorant on the topic either. Maybe he was just not comfortable enough with his readings to not qualify his statements, but he'd have to answer that.

I find it a bit much to start tossing out words like "naive", "ignorant", and "shallow interpretation" based on the facts you have just because you disagree.

[Bermudian on 17.04.06 at 17:20]

Based on what Denis has written before, he has a tendancy to discount what happened in the past simply because he was not alive then.

This is both ignorant and naive - just because you are alive today does not mean you are not being affected by what happened in the past. The past outlines how you got to where you are today.

I understand his frustration in that he does not want to deal with the legacy effects of older generations, but that is something he must come to terms with. I also understand that he wants to move on and feels that the people Dr. Hodgeson supports are not doing that. That is his opinion. I do not agree with that at all. Perhaps Denis should read about how Bermuda has become more of a democracy under their power than under 30 years of UBP rule. Their employment reforms are an extention of their push for equality in this country. I guess he does not think this is important.

[silencedogood on 17.04.06 at 17:38]

Bermudian,

Would you agree that people with Dr. Hodgson's apparent knee-jerk, racial explainations for all of society's real and percieved injustices are not a part of that history?

I agreed with his sentiment simply because I interpreted it as a desire to acknowledge the past but move beyond it.

Being enslaved to history means you are bound to repeat it just as being ignorant of history does.

[Michael Taylor on 17.04.06 at 18:02]

Denis,

I would like to add my voice to those heaping praise on your letter to the editor in response to Hodgson. It was well written, honest and very accurate. Your simile of expats and slaves was a big mistake but I understood what you meant and more than enough words have been devoted to this faux pas already.

I see some have recently decided to throw stones at you from behind masks and frankly, beyond being innacurate, their comments disgust me. I hope you don't let cowards like this affect you one bit.

[Bermudian on 17.04.06 at 18:11]

silence,

I do not think that all of Dr. Hodgson's reactions are explained in that way. Some of the injustices that exist today can be racially explained however and this is what she occasionally tries to do.

I think that we all can agree that we want to acknowledge history and move beyond it. The problem we are having is how we move beyond it. One approach is to talk about the issue in hopes of finding a resolution (these are the people who are blasted for "being enslaved to history"). The other approach is to say yes history happened, 'acknowledge it' and move forward (ignoring the problems of the past in hopes that they will magically disappear).

[Bermudian on 17.04.06 at 18:17]

Mr. Taylor,

Your comments are offensive and cowardice in and of themselves. They are offensive to any and everyone who does not use their true name on the site yet you choose to specify that only the people who do not agree with Denis are cowards.

Maybe you should explain why you are disgusted rather than offering empty pointless statements like the one you just wrote.

Limey, will these types of useless attacks be allowed?

[trebliso on 17.04.06 at 18:38]

at the risk of getting back near the topic at hand...

The one accurate point that the knuckle dragging anachronism Hodgson does stumble across is that Bermudian Cricket is almost smothered by race. Cricket here is such a fascinating microcosm of Bermuda as a whole - potentially it could be far more successful if it was able to take off the racial blinkers and stop blasting away at its feet. Like several expats I have been told to f*** off by premier league teams who would rather play with ten players than have have my particular demographic on board and the poor non Bermudians who make it on to the National team....

[Michael Taylor on 17.04.06 at 18:56]

Bermudian,

If you did not attack Denis (throw stones) you are not a coward. People who attack others (using offensive names, labels etc.) from behind a pseudonyms are cowards. Those who simply disagree are not. I have a very hard time understanding how you can interpret "throw stones" as "not agree". Silencedogood summed it up really well with, "I find it a bit much to start tossing out words like "naive", "ignorant", and "shallow interpretation" based on the facts you have just because you disagree.". In hindsite I could have made it more clear. Sorry if I offended anyone who wasn't engaged in attacks.

I sure hope the Limey does start stopping useless attacks like you ask. I imagine I have a lot less to lose than you given your reponse. As it is now, people like Denis and I have to choose to either ignore the faceless stone throwers or address them which can take some time given the lack of thought required to pen these careless, anonymous comments.

You have now launched an attack on me and unless you have previously revealed your identity I welcome your anger.

[Onion on 18.04.06 at 09:43]

Michael,

I am not personally attacking Denis. It is impossible for me to personally attack someone I don't know, have never known, have never seen, or know nothing about. The fact that he gives the name Denis Picther means nothing to me. He could call himself Chewbacka for all I care.

I did, however, attack his comments. I labeled his comments as naive and shallow and I don't apologize for it. I frankly don't give a damn if you call me a coward. Although I have to ask, who's throwing stones now? I don't recall hearing you come to the rescue of the likes of Rolfe Commisiong when countless bloggers behind pseudonymns really did throw stones at his letter to the editor. Pin head? Bone head? Sh*t head? Too many to remember. There is a difference between throwing stones and attacking someone's position on a subject.

I do not vouch for Dr. Hodgson's opinion of the reasoning that went into hiring this man in this instance. I do understand the point she is making about how such decisions have been made generally in instances like this. In the absence of having any inside knowledge about how and why this hiring decision was made perhaps it was wrong for her to comment in such fashion.

However, I maintain that Denis has missed her point. In my opinion she was not attacking white expats. She was attacking the inferiority complex that many blacks still possess and who still believe that they are best served by whites in power. Again, I am not saying, and have never said she was right in this instance. But her point, at least in a general sense maintains validity. Denis' tangent about cruelty to white expats was inaccurate at worst and irrelevant at best.

[M Wetherhill on 18.04.06 at 11:18]

I have kept abreast of this thread with much interest and I should point out that my primary motivation for writing to Phil was to ensure that the reputation of the BCB was safeguarded. As indicated in the final paragraph the Bermuda Cricket Board is working extremely hard to make changes for the betterment of cricket in Bermuda. Holding the Bermuda Cricket Board out erroneously to further a point does us no favours at all and also undermines the hard work put into cricket in Bermuda by all on the Board including the individual himself. I certainly have no intention of commenting publicly on the views of Dr. Hodgson. Also for the record the Bermuda Cricket Board are not looking for an apology we just wanted the record to be set straight and I believe Dr. Hodgson has been made aware of her error.

On a separate matter raised by one contributor with respect to racism in cricket towards certain demographics I have to say my personal experience has always been positive. I continue to play cricket most weekends and I have never heard any racist remarks from anyone on the field of play. There has often been banter (sometimes good natured, sometimes not) but I can honestly say my personal experience is that this has never been racially motivated. In addition I am not aware of any or my team mates being targeted either. My only negative experience in this regard has come from spectators and this has been very much the exception.